Byrd

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=73610:date=Dec 31 2009, 02:40 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 31 2009, 02:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->And I'm not debating that. This deal made me think about Hendry's backloading proclivities. And because Hendry's legacy will not ONLY be backloading, I mentioned the two main things that people gripe about. The Byrd deal relates, probably, to only the first.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Fair enough. But then let me ask this. Why is backloading something that anyone should gripe about (I'm speaking to everyone, not just Ace)?

In almost every case, backloading is BENEFICIAL to the team paying the contract. In most (not all) cases, a dollar 2 years from now will be worth less than a dollar right now. In most cases (not all), a team's budget will be higher in 2 years than it is now. Furthermore, if the Cubs wanted to, they could take the 2 million they are saving this year (People always seem to bitch about the back end of the contract, yet never seem to celebrate the fact that the front end is very light), invest it, and help defray the cost of the 2012 portion of the contract.

I don't see how backloading is a bad thing, from the team (as opposed to the players) perspective.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Shrug. To me, it's like procrastination. Putting off 'til tomorrow what you should do today. Sometimes, it makes sense. Other times, it punishes future teams. I'm just frustrated with the endless cycle that Hendry has created with backloaded deals. He has to backload today because he backloaded yesterday. He had to backload yesterday because he backloaded the day before.

The Cubs are never actually fielding the team they're paying for. It just frustrates me is all, because it becomes a never-ending cycle. Irrational maybe, but I'd just rather get back to all square.