A Realistic View at 2018: Part I

[Kimmi]

If they ask, why not? (Unless another team says don't tell anyone what my offer is.)

 

Can teams do that? I would think that no team wants the other teams to know what their offer is, if that's the case.

[Kimmi]

Although Damon did well for the Yanks, we were right to let him go.

 

We've actually had a very good track record on big- named we let go to free agency-- just before the sucked or got hurt.

 

Beltre hurt, but we did get JBJ and Swihart as comp picks for letting him go.

 

I agree with all of this.

[S5Dewey]

Obviously I don't know Mr Boras personally nor do I know anyone who does, but clearly Mr Boras has an excellent reputation in baseball that's why he is so successful. Agents who aren't honest with the parties with whom they negotiate tend not to last long. Remember Boras has to treat the ballclubs with whom he deals ethically and fairly. That doesn't mean that he tells them everything he knows but it does mean he can't deliberately deceive them.

 

I'm afraid I don't share your opinion of Mr. Bora$$, or even lawyers in general, although I have to admit that I've never met one I didn't like personally. Lawyers are hired to do one thing - represent their client's best interests - and Bora$$ has usually done that very well. Good ones are very good at raising doubt by saying things like 'I can't divulge what other teams have offered but there may be other teams with deep pockets making offers to my client'. Notice that he didn't say there ARE.. he said there "might be" which could be followed by "or there might not be".

In the case of Bora$$, he gets paid by his clients to represent them and he's very good at what he does but that doesn't mean he's the epitome of forthrightness. My guess is that he doesn't have a great reputation among owners but they respect him for what does and how he does it. But that doesn't mean they trust him.

 

I was involved in a few labor negotiations in my lifetime and something I learned was to listen to the exact phraseology that's used and to infer nothing. Take everything a lawyer says literally and exactly at face value, then try to pin them down as to exactly what they meant. That's usually a lot like trying to nail Jello to a wall.

Edited January 4, 2018 by S5Dewey

[Elktonnick]

I'm afraid I don't share your opinion of Mr. Bora$$, or even lawyers in general, although I have to admit that I've never met one I didn't like personally. Lawyers are hired to do one thing - represent their client's best interests - and Bora$$ has usually done that very well. Good ones are very good at raising doubt by saying things like 'I can't divulge what other teams have offered but there may be other teams with deep pockets making offers to my client'. Notice that he didn't say there ARE.. he said there "might be" which could be followed by "or there might not be".

In the case of Bora$$, he gets paid by his clients to represent them and he's very good at what he does but that doesn't mean he's the epitome of forthrightness. My guess is that he doesn't have a great reputation among owners but they respect him for what does and how he does it. But that doesn't mean they trust him.

 

I was involved in a few labor negotiations in my lifetime and something I learned was to listen to the exact phraseology that's used and to infer nothing. Take everything a lawyer says literally and exactly at face value, then try to pin them down as to exactly what they meant. That's usually a lot like trying to nail Jello to a wall.

 

That is what I call ethical and being honest. I once worked with for a guy who was tremendously well respected and trusted in his field. He would frequently tell some one that he "could" do this or that. Inevitably, his interloculator would say to me that my boss agreed to his proposal. I would reply no he hadn't. He said that he could do what you proposed. He never said that he would do that.

 

I think all the GMs that Boras deals with are big boys and understand how baseball negotiations are conducted. Precise use of language isn't the same as deliberate misrepresentation.

[Elktonnick]

There are several teams, I believe, that will not do business with Bore-A$$. I'm not sure his "reputation" with GMs/owners is all that high.

 

Then why does Boras get so many clients The answer because he is successful. Obviously those alleged GMs who boycott Boras clients don't seem to have either adversely affected Boras's attractiveness to players nor to his ability to deliver for his clients.

[oldtimer]

That is what I call ethical and being honest. I once worked with for a guy who was tremendously well respected and trusted in his field. He would frequently tell some one that he "could" do this or that. Inevitably, his interloculator would say to me that my boss agreed to his proposal. I would reply no he hadn't. He said that he could do what you proposed. He never said that he would do that.

 

I think all the GMs that Boras deals with are big boys and understand how baseball negotiations are conducted. Precise use of language isn't the same as deliberate misrepresentation.

 

I worked as the main representative in technical negotiations and meetings with large Japanese firms, mainly in Tokyo. You needed to learn that a Yes answer did not mean Yes as we understand it, but yes they got the meaning of our point. So you not only have to listen carefully to what is being said, but also understand the culture of the person that is saying it. Agents, Lawyers and the like also have their own culture but as others have said, it centers on the best interests of their clients.

[S5Dewey]

Obviously those alleged GMs who boycott Boras clients don't seem to have either adversely affected Boras's attractiveness to players nor to his ability to deliver for his clients.

 

Those two things go hand in hand. If you commit a crime your lawyer's secondary goal is to get you the lightest sentence possible. His primary goal is to get your acquitted. The ethics of having a guilty person going free isn't something a good attorney is worried about.

 

It's the same with Scott Bora$$. His only worry is getting the best deal he can for his client. He's not worried about the ethics of how he gets that deal. At least not beyond the damage he can do to his own reputation with the owners.

[Bellhorn04]

Those two things go hand in hand. If you commit a crime your lawyer's secondary goal is to get you the lightest sentence possible. His primary goal is to get your acquitted. The ethics of having a guilty person going free isn't something a good attorney is worried about.

 

It's the same with Scott Bora$$. His only worry is getting the best deal he can for his client. He's not worried about the ethics of how he gets that deal. At least not beyond the damage he can do to his own reputation with the owners.

 

I agree with you, and I don't like Boras. It must be inferred, though, that whatever ethical infractions he has committed, he has not crossed the line into illegality, or we would know about it.

[dgalehouse]

When you get lawyers and agents involved in sports ( or anything else for that matter ) , this is what happens. Boras is just doing what he does , what he always has done , what he is very good at and what has made him rich and famous. His loyalty is to his clients and his business , not to the teams and certainly not to the fans. Fortunately , the Sox have the means to deal with the reality of this and to be successful .

[Elktonnick]

I agree with you, and I don't like Boras. It must be inferred, though, that whatever ethical infractions he has committed, he has not crossed the line into illegality, or we would know about it.

What ethical infractions has he committed? Do you know of any or are you just making an inference because you don't like the man. I for one believe sports agents like Boras are good for sports both in general and baseball in particular.

 

Prior to free agency and the eventual rise of the sport's agent and sports attorneys, professional athletes were exploited and most major league baseball teams struggled to make a profit. Today professional athletes in general and professional baseball players earn fantastic sums and professional baseball has never been more profitable nor more successful. Sports agents such as Boras have played a large role in that success.

[harmony]

Those two things go hand in hand. If you commit a crime your lawyer's secondary goal is to get you the lightest sentence possible. His primary goal is to get your acquitted. The ethics of having a guilty person going free isn't something a good attorney is worried about.

 

It's the same with Scott Bora$$. His only worry is getting the best deal he can for his client. He's not worried about the ethics of how he gets that deal. At least not beyond the damage he can do to his own reputation with the owners.

On the other hand, perhaps players flock to Scott Boras because he ethically keeps unethical front offices in check.

 

Just because Pedro Martinez was the best at what he did does not mean we should assume Martinez was unethical.

[Elktonnick]

Those two things go hand in hand. If you commit a crime your lawyer's secondary goal is to get you the lightest sentence possible. His primary goal is to get your acquitted. The ethics of having a guilty person going free isn't something a good attorney is worried about.

 

It's the same with Scott Bora$$. His only worry is getting the best deal he can for his client. He's not worried about the ethics of how he gets that deal. At least not beyond the damage he can do to his own reputation with the owners.

 

Here are parts of a the ABA's Canon of Ethics. Based on your above post I presume you are not an attorney.

 

dvocate

Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;

(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or

(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

( A lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding and who knows that a person intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal.

© The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and ( continue to the conclusion of the proceeding, and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6.

(d) In an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse.

[S5Dewey]

What ethical infractions has he committed? Do you know of any or are you just making an inference because you don't like the man. I for one believe sports agents like Boras are good for sports both in general and baseball in particular.

 

Prior to free agency and the eventual rise of the sport's agent and sports attorneys, professional athletes were exploited and most major league baseball teams struggled to make a profit. Today professional athletes in general and professional baseball players earn fantastic sums and professional baseball has never been more profitable nor more successful. Sports agents such as Boras have played a large role in that success.

 

Yep. What's going on now is great for everyone... except the fans who'd like to take their families to more than a couple of games a year.

 

We've taken a bunch of people, many of whom have no skills other than being able to hit a baseball, and turned them into millionaires while millions of Americans are trying to eek out a middle-class life for themselves and their families.

 

What you say may be true, that agents and the like are "good for baseball" but it's a sad commentary on American priorities when good teachers are making $50,000 a year and the worst MLB players are making half a million.

[S5Dewey]

On the other hand, perhaps players flock to Scott Boras because he ethically keeps unethical front offices in check.

 

Just because Pedro Martinez was the best at what he did does not mean we should assume Martinez was unethical.

 

This is what I meant in a previous post about listening and taking things literally. This is another "lawyer word" - "PERHAPS". Perhaps not, too. Perhaps Bora$$ uses totally unethical methods to rape ethical front offices but this sentence, "perhaps players flock to Scott Boras because he ethically keeps unethical front offices in check is intended to plant a seed of doubt without any real substance.

[S5Dewey]

Here are parts of a the ABA's Canon of Ethics. Based on your above post I presume you are not an attorney.

 

dvocate

Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;

(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or

(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

( A lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding and who knows that a person intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal.

© The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and ( continue to the conclusion of the proceeding, and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6.

(d) In an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse.

 

All fine, but it does nothing to refute what I said.

 

No, I'm not a lawyer, but I understand English. To take a part of your point #3, " A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false". At no point does it say that a lawyer WILL refuse to offer that evidence... It only says that he MAY, which leaves open the option of the lawyer's own discretion.

 

I'm friends with several lawyers and they all say the same thing regarding defending people. THEY DON'T WANT TO KNOW if someone is guilty or not. As one of them told me, "I don't care if my client is guilty or not and I certainly don't want him to tell me if he is. I'm charged with making sure the State has enough evidence to convict him."

This absolves them of the canon of ethics.

[Bellhorn04]

Just because Pedro Martinez was the best at what he did does not mean we should assume Martinez was unethical.

 

Of course Pedro was unethical. He threw at guys all the time.

[moonslav59]

Then why does Boras get so many clients The answer because he is successful. Obviously those alleged GMs who boycott Boras clients don't seem to have either adversely affected Boras's attractiveness to players nor to his ability to deliver for his clients.

 

I'm not saying he doesn't have a good track record of getting his clients top dollar. I'm just saying some GMs shy away from dealing with him over past experiences.

 

Others have listed some players who avoid BorA$$ as well.

[S5Dewey]

Of course Pedro was unethical. He threw at guys all the time.

 

But my favorite "unethical" pitcher will always be Ryan Dempster.

[moonslav59]

Yep. What's going on now is great for everyone... except the fans who'd like to take their families to more than a couple of games a year.

 

We've taken a bunch of people, many of whom have no skills other than being able to hit a baseball, and turned them into millionaires while millions of Americans are trying to eek out a middle-class life for themselves and their families.

 

What you say may be true, that agents and the like are "good for baseball" but it's a sad commentary on American priorities when good teachers are making $50,000 a year and the worst MLB players are making half a million.

 

Look what Oprah Winfrey makes. If she makes that much, every baseball player deserves every penny they make.

[S5Dewey]

Look what Oprah Winfrey makes. If she makes that much, every baseball player deserves every penny they make.

 

No. That just proves that Oprah is overpaid too.

[moonslav59]

No. That just proves that Oprah is overpaid too.

 

So many people are overpaid in our society and around the world.

 

It seems the most bitching about comes over "common people" who make it big via sports, entertainment or some illegal manner.

 

I'm all for a fairer way to even out income disparities, but I would not start with sports and entertainment industries. Their work brings billions of dollars to many people. They happen to share in those profits at a higher percentage than the average person, but the problem is not with the percentage entertainers make; it's with the percentage the average worker makes.

[S5Dewey]

So many people are overpaid in our society and around the world.

 

It seems the most bitching about comes over "common people" who make it big via sports, entertainment or some illegal manner.

 

I'm all for a fairer way to even out income disparities, but I would not start with sports and entertainment industries. Their work brings billions of dollars to many people. They happen to share in those profits at a higher percentage than the average person, but the problem is not with the percentage entertainers make; it's with the percentage the average worker makes.

 

IMO the "solution" is somewhere in between. While some make too little others make too much, and I'm basing "too little/too much" on how much what they do contributes to society. As I've said here before, if a researcher today came up with a single cure for every type of cancer he/she wouldn't make as much money in his lifetime as David Price will.

[Elktonnick]

Yep. What's going on now is great for everyone... except the fans who'd like to take their families to more than a couple of games a year.

 

We've taken a bunch of people, many of whom have no skills other than being able to hit a baseball, and turned them into millionaires while millions of Americans are trying to eek out a middle-class life for themselves and their families.

 

What you say may be true, that agents and the like are "good for baseball" but it's a sad commentary on American priorities when good teachers are making $50,000 a year and the worst MLB players are making half a million.

 

It is called the free market. Bad Major League Baseball players are in higher demand than good teacher because there are so few people who can play baseball at the major leaguers compared to the number of people who can be good teachers. If you have a problem with the free market system but still want to watch baseball you may wish to try Venezuela or Cubal

[Bellhorn04]

So many people are overpaid in our society and around the world.

 

It seems the most bitching about comes over "common people" who make it big via sports, entertainment or some illegal manner.

 

I'm all for a fairer way to even out income disparities, but I would not start with sports and entertainment industries. Their work brings billions of dollars to many people. They happen to share in those profits at a higher percentage than the average person, but the problem is not with the percentage entertainers make; it's with the percentage the average worker makes.

 

As far as what pro athletes and entertainers make, it is what it is.

 

But I do have a feeling that for MLB at least, a correction has to be coming at some point.

 

Maybe MLB itself is headed for a...you know, one of those things it's not a good idea to fall off.

[moonslav59]

IMO the "solution" is somewhere in between. While some make too little others make too much, and I'm basing "too little/too much" on how much what they do contributes to society. As I've said here before, if a researcher today came up with a single cure for every type of cancer he/she wouldn't make as much money in his lifetime as David Price will.

 

I totally agree, but why pay baseball players peanuts while the owners make even more "sick" money than they make now?

 

Do you want to mandate they lower ticket prices and sports cable packages, so all in baseball make less?

 

I'm not sure how workable and fair any "solution" to lowering player salaries can possibly be.

 

If you think restricting salaries will lower ticket prices, I think you are mistaken. Owners will always charge what people will pay.

[Spudboy]

But my favorite "unethical" pitcher will always be Ryan Dempster.

 

Yup.

 

I will never forget what he did.

[Elktonnick]

IMO the "solution" is somewhere in between. While some make too little others make too much, and I'm basing "too little/too much" on how much what they do contributes to society. As I've said here before, if a researcher today came up with a single cure for every type of cancer he/she wouldn't make as much money in his lifetime as David Price will.

The example you give is both fanciful and inaccurate. Patrick Soon-Shiong is just one example.

[S5Dewey]

It is called the free market. Bad Major League Baseball players are in higher demand than good teacher because there are so few people who can play baseball at the major leaguers compared to the number of people who can be good teachers. If you have a problem with the free market system but still want to watch baseball you may wish to try Venezuela or Cubal

 

Ahhh... yes. The old argument that always pops up when everything else fails. "If you don't like it here, move out."

 

There are other more constructive options like recognizing what's wrong with something. Recognizing something is the first step toward changing it.

[baseball jones]

It is called the free market. Bad Major League Baseball players are in higher demand than good teacher because there are so few people who can play baseball at the major leaguers compared to the number of people who can be good teachers. If you have a problem with the free market system but still want to watch baseball you may wish to try Venezuela or Cubal

 

or you could go to norway where theirs a free market with a conscience.the country owns all the oil found there and use it to help their people.a few years back they had a one million dollar per resident surplus in their ecomony.

[S5Dewey]

I totally agree, but why pay baseball players peanuts while the owners make even more "sick" money than they make now?

 

Do you want to mandate they lower ticket prices and sports cable packages, so all in baseball make less?

 

I'm not sure how workable and fair any "solution" to lowering player salaries can possibly be.

 

If you think restricting salaries will lower ticket prices, I think you are mistaken. Owners will always charge what people will pay.

 

I think that horse has now left the barn. There is no good solution to it. As you say, owners have found out how much people will pay to watch baseball and they're going to charge it.

I believe we got this way through an unintended collusion between the players and the owners. IMO neither of them believed how badly the escalating salaries would spin out of control nor did they believe how much J.Q. Public would pay to see baseball. They got involved in a salary-based game of Chicken and neither side backed down. That's how we got where we are. Someone (Notin?) mentioned a couple of days ago that someday this bubble may burst, and when it does there will be some owners who are responsible for more salaries than they can afford to pay. Of course that won't happen as long as I'm willing to pay $75-$100 per seat and pay for my NESN subscription. See? I'm a part of it too.