Scott Boras: What's next?

[Rorschach88]

Nobody likes Scott Boras.

I'd imagine anyone lucky enough to have him as their agent loves Scott Boras. If he got me 35 million for 10 years, heck i'd name my first born after him.

[Team Canada]

It's been so ridiculous for so many years that we think it's okay to pay these idiots more than important people like doctors and teachers and the military; there's really no rational sense behind it other than indulgence and stupidity.

 

Although I don't disagree with the heart of your argument, in all fairness millions of people don't pay to watch teachers work. If the money wasn't there, players wouldn't get paid so much.

[Patrick425]

As stunned as I get at some of these player's contracts and the payroll disparity between the big markets and small markets, I sometimes wonder how much payroll and salaries have to do with it at all. You always see big name players and their "approved trade lists" or big name FA's and who they are interested in talking to. You never see Milwaukee on these lists. People will say that has to do with money and success of the team. I don't think that's neccesarilly true. I don't think Arod, Ortiz, or any of the big name guys would ever play in Milwaukee even if the Brewers won 3 straight WS titles and offered just as much or more than NY, LA, SF, or Chicago. I think the "big star" players just view themselves as being way to big of stars for a "rinky-dink" town like Milwaukee. Heck, these guys couldn't find Milwaukee on a map.

[sheethead]

Scott Boras is just doing his job... making the players realize how much they love money while pitting them against the evil, wealthy owners. I don't blame Boras, I blame America. Its the same thing as a big corporation 'signing' another corporation's CEO away from them for $30 million a year. All you need is someone (GM) to justify the expenditure. A-rod will be breaking the HR record during his next deal. That figures deep into the equation, as does the merchandise. He will get $30M per year easy. $35 might be tougher, but I can see it happening. Still better money spent than giving Santana $22M per year to pitch every fifth game.

Based on what? A starting position player gets what 25-30 PAs every five games. A starting pitcher will face 25-30 players in a given start. Seems pretty even to me.

 

 

 

 

It is even, if you decide to not qualify 45 innings of defense every 5 games as a contribution.

Edit: Not to mention the risk of injury to a pitcher is greater than that of a positional player.

[crewcrazy]

Last I've heard the Cubs WILL be looking to give him a lot of money if he opts out of New York. I really like A-Rod, but I hope that doesn't happen. I think A-Rod would break up any "curse" there is.

Yep, after the unprecedented success he's brought the Yankees in his time there.

 

http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif

I shudder to think what A-Rod's teams could accomplish if they actually had competent pitching staffs.

 

[M Skjellyfetti]

It is even, if you decide to not qualify 9 innings of defense as a contribution.

The pitchers play about 6-7 innings of defense, so it's really not that big of a deal.

[moofnelson]

Last I've heard the Cubs WILL be looking to give him a lot of money if he opts out of New York. I really like A-Rod, but I hope that doesn't happen. I think A-Rod would break up any "curse" there is.

 

A-Rod has the same amount of World Series rings as I do.

[sheethead]

It is even, if you decide to not qualify 9 innings of defense as a contribution.

The pitchers play about 6-7 innings of defense, so it's really not that big of a deal.

 

Extrapolate 6-7 innings vs 45 innings over the course of a 162 game season and you may find it quite significant, and in fact a big deal.

[jeffy]

Very little. Actually thats not true, because of MLB's weird revenue sharing set up the Yankees will get revenue sharing money since they will be taking on the full debt of the stadium. but in genreal stadium revenue pales in comparison to TV revenue. And its not like Yankee tickets are cheap now anyway.

2006 Revenue Sharing Numbers

Not only will the Yankees suddenly be freed from $76 million dollars in revenue sharing payments, they will now receive money. At a minimum, that's 2 Arod contracts at $35 million per year, with $6 million in change. Plus, if that ever changes, they can just sign a "bad" TV deal with the YES network and pocket that money too.

 

 

 

 

 

Sounds like Steinbrenner found a way to poke Selig in the eye over the hated (by him) revenue sharing. Didn't I hear that the Brewers will begin paying in instead of recieving???...if so, that sounds just great the Brewers giving money to the Yankees http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/mad.gif.

[Invader3K]

Baseball is in a big boom era, but it can't last forever. In a few years, baseball but lose popularity again, and you will see salaries level off a bit. Until then, things are just going to keep going up, because baseball is making money hand over fist, and expanding into new international markets only helps them.

[Thurston Fluff]

Last I've heard the Cubs WILL be looking to give him a lot of money if he opts out of New York. I really like A-Rod, but I hope that doesn't happen. I think A-Rod would break up any "curse" there is.

Yep, after the unprecedented success he's brought the Yankees in his time there.

 

http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif

I shudder to think what A-Rod's teams could accomplish if they actually had competent pitching staffs.

 

 

 

Any team who shells out that kind of money for one player will shudder to think how much payroll they would need for competent pitchers. It goes hand in hand. Which is why if A-rod really wants to win a WS he's going to have to rethink how much money he's worth.

His value is one that crossed the point of diminishing returns. He may be worth the money if you judge worth in a vacuum vs other players. He's not worth it when you have to account for that much being spent on such a small part of the whole team. One player cannot hit two run homeruns with no one on base. One player can't win even if he hits 4 homers every night if the team gives up 5 runs every night. The A-rod legacy will be one of great individaul accomplishments and no rings unless he rethinks his value to a WS team.

 

I don't really have a problem with it if he feels he'd rather get paid than win it all. That's his choice. I don't even think athletes get overpaid for what they do. They certainly earn their money more than actors do. Tom Cruise makes more for one movie than A-Rod does for several seasons.

[sheethead]

Backupcatchers[/b]]Any team who shells out that kind of money for one player will shudder to think how much payroll they would need for competent pitchers. It goes hand in hand. Which is why if A-rod really wants to win a WS he's going to have to rethink how much money he's worth.

His value is one that crossed the point of diminishing returns. He may be worth the money if you judge worth in a vacuum vs other players. He's not worth it when you have to account for that much being spent on such a small part of the whole team. One player cannot hit two run homeruns with no one on base. One player can't win even if he hits 4 homers every night if the team gives up 5 runs every night. The A-rod legacy will be one of great individaul accomplishments and no rings unless he rethinks his value to a WS team.

 

I don't really have a problem with it if he feels he'd rather get paid than win it all. That's his choice. I don't even think athletes get overpaid for what they do. They certainly earn their money more than actors do. Tom Cruise makes more for one movie than A-Rod does for several seasons.

 

Great post!! Especially considering how mediocre Tom Cruise's acting is.

[endaround]

Last I've heard the Cubs WILL be looking to give him a lot of money if he opts out of New York. I really like A-Rod, but I hope that doesn't happen. I think A-Rod would break up any "curse" there is.

Yep, after the unprecedented success he's brought the Yankees in his time there.

 

http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif

I shudder to think what A-Rod's teams could accomplish if they actually had competent pitching staffs.

 

 

 

Any team who shells out that kind of money for one player will shudder to think how much payroll they would need for competent pitchers. It goes hand in hand. Which is why if A-rod really wants to win a WS he's going to have to rethink how much money he's worth.

His value is one that crossed the point of diminishing returns. He may be worth the money if you judge worth in a vacuum vs other players. He's not worth it when you have to account for that much being spent on such a small part of the whole team. One player cannot hit two run homeruns with no one on base. One player can't win even if he hits 4 homers every night if the team gives up 5 runs every night. The A-rod legacy will be one of great individaul accomplishments and no rings unless he rethinks his value to a WS team.

 

I don't really have a problem with it if he feels he'd rather get paid than win it all. That's his choice. I don't even think athletes get overpaid for what they do. They certainly earn their money more than actors do. Tom Cruise makes more for one movie than A-Rod does for several seasons.

Yes after paying ARod the Yankees only had another $180 million to spend! How can you put a pitching staff together with that little bit of money? ARod does not make that much more than other top talent. The Yankees are paying more to Giambi and Jeter this year than to ARod.

 

[RyDogg66]

It is even, if you decide to not qualify 9 innings of defense as a contribution.

The pitchers play about 6-7 innings of defense, so it's really not that big of a deal.

Extrapolate 6-7 innings vs 45 innings over the course of a 162 game season and you may find it quite significant, and in fact a big deal.

Especially if the person playing 45 innings of defense is Ryan Braun or Johnny Estrada. When you factor in that some players dont make a difference on defense, and some actually hurt you on defense, it is all evened out.

 

[sheethead]

It is even, if you decide to not qualify 9 innings of defense as a contribution.

The pitchers play about 6-7 innings of defense, so it's really not that big of a deal.

Extrapolate 6-7 innings vs 45 innings over the course of a 162 game season and you may find it quite significant, and in fact a big deal.

Especially if the person playing 45 innings of defense is Ryan Braun or Johnny Estrada. When you factor in that some players dont make a difference on defense, and some actually hurt you on defense, it is all evened out.

 

 

With all due respect, I'm pretty sure I was talking about A-Rod the whole time. Not the rook or Estrada. While Braun may one day command serious dough, I think we can all agree Estrada will not. I get it though, you guys are saying the money is being spent for the player's offense, not their defense.

[Thurston Fluff]

Yes after paying ARod the Yankees only had another $180 million to spend! How can you put a pitching staff together with that little bit of money? ARod does not make that much more than other top talent. The Yankees are paying more to Giambi and Jeter this year than to ARod.

 

First off A-Rod will not be making less than Giambi and Jeter next year. Second A-rod has played with pitchers like Randy Johnson, Roger Clemons, Mike Mussina, and Chein Ming Wang. To a lesser extent Carl Pavono (around a 4.50 era when healthy for the Yankees I believe), Phil Hughes. Of course the bullpen, anchored by Rivera, has always been good for the Yankees during the time A-Rod was around. Don't you think a team will need to pony up anywhere from $20-$30 million per season for quality starting pitchers? So if the Yankees need two more starting pitcehrs that means around $75 million for three players. Now it's down to roughly $100 million for the rest of the team. While that sounds like a lot for us it's not a whole heck of a lot for a team that will have to rely on expensive free agents in the next few years. Not to mention the only team that has $180 after A-Rod's contract is the Yankees.

[TooLiveBrew]

The Yankees are paying more to Giambi and Jeter this year than to ARod.

 

The Yankees do not pay all of A-Rod's annual salary, which was part of the deal they made with the Rangers. I'm not sure of the exact dollar amount, but it is indeed less than they pay to either Jeter or Giambi. Found it - gotta love Cot's Baseball Contracts. For example, if A-Rod were to not opt out of his contract (he undeniably will, esp. given Aramis Ramirez's success in doing so), in '08 the Yanks would pay Alex roughly $15.9 mil., while the Rangers would still be on the hook for $8.1 mil. This makes the trade even better, and was overlooked at the time, and continues to be overlooked. This may well be in the company of the greatest trades in baseball history - to be fair, the Yanks simply preyed upon a franchise that bit off more than it could chew. Yankees on Cot's

 

To a lesser extent Carl Pavono (around a 4.50 era when healthy for the Yankees I believe)

 

Carl Pavano has pitched a whopping 19 games from 2005-2007 (111 1/3 IP). In those scattered appearances, his ERA is approximately 4.75. Why is it that it seems to me the most erroneous assumptions (esp. regarding contracts) come when people are talking about the Yankees?

[Thurston Fluff]

ToliveBrew I probably shouldn't have added Pavano to the list without checking closer at his contribution to the Yankees. He was a last minute example that shouldn't have been included. But to say the Yankees didn't have any pitching while A-Rod was with them is off base. They have had as much pitching as any team and certainly paid more for that pitching than most teams did. The fact that things didn't pan out as planned only gives more reason not to invest so much money in one player. Overall I think a large chunk of payroll given to a small number of players is a great way to sabatoge a season and even a franchise. See Ken Griffey Jr for example.

[TooLiveBrew]

But to say the Yankees didn't have any pitching while A-Rod was with them is off base.

 

I never said this...granted you may not be pointing that directly at me, though.

[Thurston Fluff]

I never said this...granted you may not be pointing that directly at me, though

 

Nope someone earlier in the tread said it.

[1Badgerfan]

I shudder at the thought of how much he is going to get Seth McClung (another Boras Client) in a few years. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

 

[brettac1]

The one reason I like Scott Boras is because he has attacked the amateur draft system, and gets those guys their money. Players get totally screwed from the time they get drafted all the way until they hit arbitration (and often during arby, as well). Though, I know this system is pretty good for the Brewers, I still think it sucks and isn't fair.

[homer]

They should make each player a free agent every year. Scott Boras would hate that.

[GenoSeligPrieb]

"Scott Boras didn't force any owner to sign. They did it freely."

This is not entirely true, Jim.

Boras has cobbled together quite a collection of the best players in the game. He represents them, and if a team objects to his underhanded tactics, he can freeze them out of a chance to sign one of his guys. A communication from a black-balled team might get misplaced, or their offer will be ignored outright. The Mets were led to believe Boras had a better offer than the Rangers did, for Alex Rodriguez, and it has been documented by then-Mets-GM Steve Phillips, that no such Mets offer existed. Boras told the Dodgers that Kevin Brown was going to take the offer from Atlanta, forcing the hand of the Dodgers. Again, the Braves DID make Brown an offer, but not at the lucrative terms Boras falsely claimed they were. Boras controls and manipulates the market every winter, and if an owner dares cross him, he'll guide his player to a divisional rival. So the hands of owners are often forced, through lies in most cases, by Boras.

And then, there's the issue of Collusion, After years of new salary records being broken every winter, with contracts spiralling out of control, in the mid-80's, the owners apparently agreed to limit these ridiculous salary costs, by not budging, by not blinking first, by not giving in to the Borases of the world, and they stopped making big money offers to free agents like Andre Dawson, Kirk Gibson, Jack Morris, Tim Raines, Ron Guidry and dozens of others.

So what happens when the OWNERS smartened up about salary costs? The union filed 3 separate grievances, forcing litigation to vacuum even more money from the owners, and ultimately, after ticket price hikes, the fans. Arbitrator George Nicolau voted in the favor of the union, which meant that player salaries would never stop rising, since a precedent had been set.

If Nicolau had employed some interpretation to the law, figured in the cost to the greater good, to baseball fans all over the country, he would have and should applied the intent of the law differently, and today, we wouldn't have clowns like Alex Rodriguez and JD Drew opting out of already-ludicrous contracts, signed in good faith, to grab an extra few million elsewhere. The price of these exorbitant contracts would remain somewhat reasonable, and we wouldn't have $200 box seats, advertisements plastered to every uncovered corner of the ballpark, no TV deals with Fox (which leads to 4 hour playoff games finishing at midnight, and, just as significantly, no Tim McCarver!), no $7 beers, no $20 parking spots, and a family of 5 could go to a game without taking out a loan to afford it.

If the owners refused to sign a much-needed upper-tier player, one of Boras's favored teams would get him, and the competitive imbalance alters the game.

What choice DO the owners have?

Not much...

[endaround]

The one reason I like Scott Boras is because he has attacked the amateur draft system, and gets those guys their money. Players get totally screwed from the time they get drafted all the way until they hit arbitration (and often during arby, as well). Though, I know this system is pretty good for the Brewers, I still think it sucks and isn't fair.

Not really. Its a lot like the music industry. Bans make relatively little on their first albums, even if they hit big because teh music company takes on all the risk. Once established is when they sign their huge record deals. Basically because of the high failure rate of prospects, the teams have the ability to pool risk. And its not like the top talents don't get paid. Hart and CV are likely the only ones not yet millionaires.