You avoided that didn’t you? Made a new comment thread to do that did you?

Here is where I got the bad Info…
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/2012-roster.shtml

What does it say happened to Inge?
I corrected it when I went to see his actual transaction page!

And I also pointed out that they still paid his option it just isn’t counted towards the luxury tax this year just next which is why it is in a different column but they paid him all of it!

From the Detroit Tigers own presser – April 26th

http://detroit.tigers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120426&content_id=29734424&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

DETROIT — Brandon Inge’s 12-year tenure as a Tiger, and the more recent question about his future wearing the old English D, is over. The team released the veteran infielder on Thursday, parting ways with one of the last remaining players from their rise from league also-ran to perennial contender.

The decision came about during a Thursday pregame meeting between the club’s front office and the coaching staff. Dombrowski and Leyland broke the news to Inge after Thursday’s game.

“We talked long and hard about it, and this is what we came up with,” Leyland said. “It’s not my happiest day, obviously, but that’s the way it is. You have to make tough decisions, and at the end of the day, I think this was the decision we felt we had to make.”

Inge will be on waivers for the weekend. Assuming no team claims the remainder of his contract — he’s making $5.5 million this year, plus a $500,000 buyout — he’ll become a free agent Monday, free to sign with any team for the minimum salary, with the Tigers picking up the rest of his deal.

April 29, 2012 – Third baseman Brandon Inge has agreed to sign with the Oakland Athletics, a person with knowledge of the negotiations said Sunday.

Inge was released by the Tigers on Thursday after batting .100 (2 for 20) with one home run and two RBIs in nine games this season. Inge, who turns 35 on May 19, joins his first new team in his 12th major league season. In Detroit, he played mostly third base, but he has also caught, played the outfield and second base.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7870967/report-brandon-inge-sign-oakland-athletics

Or here, from Ken Rosenthal

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Oakland-Athletics-As-Brandon-Inge-waivers-cleared-contract-042912

The Oakland Athletics, continuing their search for an adequate third baseman, signed free agent Brandon Inge on Sunday, according to a major-league source.

Inge, who was released by the Detroit Tigers last week, cleared waivers at 2 p.m. ET.

— Metsie: Let me know if this is enough “proof” for you to move on and say “oh sorry I was wrong.” or if you want to continue telling me he was traded?

Running around to answer to avoid answering MY question in favor of answering your own I see….

CAN THEY CUT WRIGHT! Lickey or not YES OR NO?

If they cut Wright do they have to pay him 16 Mil? YES OR NO?

If NO Are they committed to pay him 16 MIL? YES OR NO?

And if not then apply all that to Dickey as well, Add up the numbers and tell me how you got to 70 or 80 Mil here!

I see where our getting tripped up though…

The Option amount on BRef shows up under the 2013 column but they already paid that!
It isn’t counted towards the Luxury Tax but they still paid him everything he is owed!

He was traded not released….
Thats why that Option is counted next year because they didn’t actually terminate the contract!

If you want to try and argue differently, that is up to you and the guy you see in the mirror. I’m not interested in arguing that point with you because you KNOW they will take the option regardless of what they do with Wright past 2013. So all you’re doing is arguing to argue.

Next you’ll tell me the Mets may decline Dickey’s option and choose to buy him out also.

So you think a trade is the ONLY way possible to not pay Wright 16 Mil?
They couldn’t not pick up the option too?

And as you said if they could trade him and not owe him 16 Mil the THEY ARE NOT COMMITTED to wright for 16 mil are they?

However, in a general sense a 2014 buyout whether the player is cut in 2012 or 2013 does not need to be paid until 2014. The Detroit Tigers are a perfect example.

Brandon Inge was released by them and signed with Oakland.

Detroit is currently paying his $5.5 million salary. He had a $500k buyout for 2013 which is currently under the Tigers *2013* payroll obligations. However, there is language in contracts that if the player does sign with another team often times part of if not the entire buyout get voided.

Oakland saved Detroit over $400k (most of the buyout) on their 2013 payroll.

You’re arguing with us that the Mets won’t pick up David Wright’s option? The only way David Wright doesn’t make $16mil in 2013 paid by the Mets is if they trade him and somebody takes his salary. That’s it.

The 54million is a deceiving and unreasonable number. The only way the Mets go into the winter with $54mil in contracts is if they totally just clean house. Nobody has any evidence that will happen. Trying to act like the Mets will use the $1m buyout on Wright is ridiculous. The ONLY way they’d do that is if they totally re-structured his deal based on an extension and frankly, that makes 0 sense. Any new contract he gets will be 2014 and beyond.

Here is what the Mets payroll/budget will look like before Arbitration

Johan Santana will get paid $25.million
Jason Bay will get paid $16million
David Wright will get paid $16million
Frank Francisco will get paid $6.5million
RA Dickey will get paid $5million
Jon Niese will get paid $3million

That is $71.5million. Then you have players like Ike, Ramirez, Murphy, Parnell, Gee, Duda etc who will either get a slight raise or go through arbitration

That’s it. You can ASSUME all you want that RA Dickey is getting $300k and his walking papers via a buyout, but LOGIC dictates the Mets will pick up his $5million option.

If you want to make an argument about their payroll in 2013. Start with $71.5million and go from there. Any other # suggests you either ignore facts or cover your eyes when something makes too much sense.

You really should just stop ACTING like you know what the hell your talking about!

I do find it funny how both of you are arguing we have a 80 Mil in commitments when the article clearly states we are only committed to 54!

I guess everyone on the planet sucks at math except guys who like Sandy?

As for Bay your STILL COMMITTED TO THE BUYOUT ARE YOU NOT?

DO you NEVER have to pay that if you cut him?
You DO have to pay it before the next season starts don’t you?

Accounting semantics to argue with me simply for the sake of arguing and coming up with BAD MATH to argue it to boot!

Both of you should just give up!

You just better hope Wright is extended or Bye Bye Sandy!

And what will the two of you do then?
Talk about how in 10 years from now Sandy set us up to win by getting Wheeler?

Thats should be fun to see!

They have to pay his 2013 salary in full, and then the $ owed to him in 2014… in 2014.

So you can take that for whatever its worth to ya. It literally makes no sense to pay somebody $ in 2013 if they wouldn’t be owed it until 2014.

If they cut Bay they owe him 2013 payment. In 2014 they owe him the buyout total which is $3m. So you still don’t pay him his buyout until 2014.

What happens with Bay at the plate doesn’t matter. The Mets are not on the hook for the performance part of his option any longer.

But if he’s owed $16mil in 2013 and he’s cut before Opening Day – the Mets pay him $16mil. The language of the contract would dictate whether they also have to pay the $3mil 2014 buyout at that time or if they wait til 2014 to pay it.

The option can still be guaranteed IF he meets the requirements elsewhere. Which is why you won’t see Jason Bay in another uniform until the Mets are sure he can’t get 600 PA in 2013.

Just stick to the facts and try to use logic.

In fiscal year 2013 the Mets will pay
Johan 25.5
Bay 16
Wright 16
Francisco 6.5
Dickey 5
Niese 3

Which is $72 million. You don’t count buyouts etc in the fiscal budget if they don’t apply in 2013. If you’re going to try to argue with me that the Mets may not pick up Wright’s 2013 option then I guess we are on 2 different planets.