A Realistic View at 2018: Part I

[baseball jones]

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.

 

nah your a victim of it like the rest of us.the owners and agents deserve one another.the fans and players dont deserve either

[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

 

Or "Perhaps" the reason people who could be outstanding teachers aren't going into the field is because they can make more money elsewhere. The reason they can make more money elsewhere is because teacher's pay is tied to something we have little control over - taxation, while what we choose to spend watching baseball is a choice. Given a choice between spending money to encourage and educate better teachers we instead choose to spend our money watching baseball. It's a sad commentary on our society but it's the way it is, and until we have an uprising demanding better pay for teachers that's the way it's going to be.

[S5Dewey]

nah your a victim of it like the rest of us.the owners and agents deserve one another.the fans and players dont deserve either

 

Very, very true. Unfortunately we're "hooked". We've got a "habit".

[Elktonnick]

Yeh an uprising over baseball players making too much money that's a real winning idea.

[Elktonnick]

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.

Hey that's a great idea. I wonder how Norway would handle assimilating 300 million Americans in their small homogeneous little country

[baseball jones]

Hey that's a great idea. I wonder how Norway would handle assimilating 300 million Americans in their small homogeneous little country

 

theres better things out there working was my point.

[harmony]

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.

That was my point. With regard to Scott Boras, many posters "plant a seed of doubt without any real substance."

[Bellhorn04]

That was my point. With regard to Scott Boras, many posters "plant a seed of doubt without any real substance."

 

Posters aren't just pulling stuff about Boras out of the air. Here's a good column on him from 2009:

 

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=21&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiakN3Alb_YAhVF7YMKHUhLB5QQ1ScIjwEwFA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fangraphs.com%2Ftht%2Fthe-truth-about-scott-boras%2F&usg=AOvVaw38mR0UNmvg2O2S3HOlMqvP

[moonslav59]

Or "Perhaps" the reason people who could be outstanding teachers aren't going into the field is because they can make more money elsewhere. The reason they can make more money elsewhere is because teacher's pay is tied to something we have little control over - taxation, while what we choose to spend watching baseball is a choice. Given a choice between spending money to encourage and educate better teachers we instead choose to spend our money watching baseball. It's a sad commentary on our society but it's the way it is, and until we have an uprising demanding better pay for teachers that's the way it's going to be.

 

My family is nearly all teachers, including my wife. I volunteer teaching ESL 4 days a week at a title 1 school nearby. Here in the Houston area, we can't find enough teachers, let alone good ones, even with a starting pay of $55,000 a year. There's never enough ESL, SPED, Math and Science teachers to fill the needs. Some districts have been given the okay to use non-certified teachers to fill the holes. Others use permanent subs.

 

It's a mess. I could go into the many reasons why it got like this, but funding for public schools has not gone up in Texas since 2005, and they have such archaic laws that communities can't up the taxes to pay for the needs.

[moonslav59]

Posters aren't just pulling stuff about Boras out of the air. Here's a good column on him from 2009:

 

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=21&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiakN3Alb_YAhVF7YMKHUhLB5QQ1ScIjwEwFA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fangraphs.com%2Ftht%2Fthe-truth-about-scott-boras%2F&usg=AOvVaw38mR0UNmvg2O2S3HOlMqvP

 

Is this writer, Scott's dad?

[Bellhorn04]

Is this writer, Scott's dad?

 

Did you read the whole thing?

[harmony]

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.

The American Bar Association has promulgated ethical standards for over a century:

 

https://www.americanbar.org/publications/youraba/2016/december-2016/a-brief-history-of-the-development-of-legal-ethics-standards-in-.html

 

The ABA, a voluntary trade organization, cannot enforce the standards but enforcement can come from state or federal judiciaries or bar associations that adopt or amend the ABA standards (or draft their own ethical standards).

 

I suspect Scott Boras offers a prospective client a detailed contract that outlines the respective responsibilities of the agent and the player. I am almost certain that the contract specifically states that the player hires Scott Boras as an agent, not as an attorney. I would not be surprised if the contract has a clause that advises the player to consult an attorney if he need legal advice.

 

Boras maintains an active membership in the State Bar of California:

 

http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/108792

 

... but many ethical standards do not extend to his work as an agent (not as an attorney, although the line can be blurred). I am reminded of my real estate agent, an active member of the state bar, who as a realtor could represent multiple clients with inconsistent interests.

 

The Major League Baseball Players Association regulates player agents:

 

http://www.mlbplayers.com/pdf9/4925108.pdf

 

... including a certification system that authorizes disciplinary action for violations.

 

In the highly competitive field of MLB agency, reports of ethical violations might be more likely to come from a fellow agent than from an MLB front office. Because of his celebrity status, I suspect Scott Boras is the most scrutinized agent in baseball.

[S5Dewey]

My family is nearly all teachers, including my wife. I volunteer teaching ESL 4 days a week at a title 1 school nearby. Here in the Houston area, we can't find enough teachers, let alone good ones, even with a starting pay of $55,000 a year. There's never enough ESL, SPED, Math and Science teachers to fill the needs. Some districts have been given the okay to use non-certified teachers to fill the holes. Others use permanent subs.

 

It's a mess. I could go into the many reasons why it got like this, but funding for public schools has not gone up in Texas since 2005, and they have such archaic laws that communities can't up the taxes to pay for the needs.

 

My daughter taught in a school district in Florida for several years without a raise in pay. Every year the teachers would negotiate for - and get - an agreement giving them a raise. However, the City Council refused to fund it in the school budget so the raise(s) never materialized.

 

What the Council did was to play the teachers against the students in the public eye. The teachers were told that if they wanted those raises the money for the raises would come from educational materials, enrichment programs, etc. so if the teachers wanted that raise it would be at the expense of the students. The teachers opted not to take the raises.

[harmony]

Posters aren't just pulling stuff about Boras out of the air. Here's a good column on him from 2009:

 

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=21&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiakN3Alb_YAhVF7YMKHUhLB5QQ1ScIjwEwFA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fangraphs.com%2Ftht%2Fthe-truth-about-scott-boras%2F&usg=AOvVaw38mR0UNmvg2O2S3HOlMqvP

I am 99 percent certain that players do not hire Scott Boras as an attorney. He is hired as an agent. That column fails to make that distinction.

 

Puffery is part of the negotiation process.

 

The media have criticized Scott Boras for his references to a "mystery" team. Please correct me if I am wrong, but while Boras may report that another team is interested I don't think Boras has ever used the term "mystery" team. That is a term coined by the media. That is a shortcoming of the media, not the agent.

 

If Boras has another team or teams interested in a client, it may be unethical for him to publicly identify that team or teams if the clubs have asked that their negotiations be kept confidential. The media may identify interested teams through leaks from the teams instead of through leaks from the agent. Or not.

 

Front offices likely use similar tactics. A general manager may tell an agent that a comparable player is willing to sign a contract that offers more surplus value than the agent's proposed contract for his client. That is an ethical ploy only if the "mystery" player exists.

 

The bottom line is that a front office can refuse to do business with any agent and each player can instruct his agent to refuse to do business with any front office. Boras continues to thrive.

Edited January 4, 2018 by harmony

[Elktonnick]

Did you read the whole thing?

 

To cite one article written over 8 years ago regarding Boras and attempting to lay at his feet an issue that is systematic throughout the entire Sport Agency community is disingenuous and misleading.

 

This issue was raised earlier in a far more detailed and professional analysis in The UCLA Entertainment Law Review. The point of that article written more than a dozen years ago is that this type of conflict of interest is common throughout the sport agency industry including the NBA and NFL and in the entertainment industry.

 

Furthermore to presume that any professional athlete or entertainer is so naïve that he or she is unaware that their agent whether it be Scott Boras or whomever is not representing other players who maybe on the same team is ludicrous. Moreover, it assumes that Boras or other agents of his stature are so sloppy that they are not insulating themselves against any allegation of any ethical conflict by taking the simple step of informing their client that they may be in fact be representing others negotiating or potentially negotiating with the same team etc. and having them sign a waiver. This simple step resolves any potential conflict.

 

Boras can rightly claim that he can represent both clients fairly because of the nature of the baseball market and the results he has achieved throughout his career.

Edited January 4, 2018 by Elktonnick

[a700hitter]

Are we arguing that a lawyer is bound to present evidence that is adverse to his client? That simply is untrue. The attorney's first and foremost duty is to zealously represent his client. An attorney who presents evidence adverse to the interests of his client would quickly find himself in all sorts of ethical trouble with his local bar association. BTW, the ABA has nothing to do with any of this.

 

An attorney presents evidence contrary to the interests of his client only when compelled to do so by a court -- this can be in many forms including pre-trial discovery. An attorney cannot lie about the existence of evidence or suborn perjury. There are ethical rules as to what an attorney must do if he realizes that his client is testifying untruthfully, which is why a defense attorney will almost never ask his client is he committed the crime.

 

The one time when an attorney must voluntarily disclose evidence that is adverse to his client's interests is in a criminal case -- a prosecutor must voluntarily disclose all exculpatory evidence.

 

As for sports agents and their ethics, please don't make me laugh. They are the scum that scum scrapes off its shoes. If people think they are not leaking information regarding the details of existing bids, you are kidding yourself.

[harmony]

To cite one article written over 8 years ago regarding Boras and attempting to lay at his feet an issue that is systematic throughout the entire Sport Agency community is disingenuous and misleading.

 

This issue was raised earlier in a far more detailed and professional analysis in The UCLA Entertainment Law Review. The point of that article written more than a dozen years ago is that this type of conflict of interest is common throughout the sport agency industry including the NBA and NFL and in the entertainment industry.

 

Furthermore to presume that any professional athlete or entertainer is so naïve that he or she is unaware that their agent whether it be Scott Boras or whomever is not representing other players who maybe on the same team is ludicrous. Moreover, it assumes that Boras or other agents of his stature are so sloppy that they are not insulating themselves against any allegation of any ethical conflict by taking the simple step of informing their client that they may be in fact be representing others negotiating or potentially negotiating with the same team etc. and having them sign a waiver. This simple step resolves any potential conflict.

 

Boras can rightly claim that he can represent both clients fairly because of the nature of the baseball market and the results he has achieved throughout his career.

I wish I could review the standard player's contract for the services of Scott Boras.

[cp176]

Are we arguing that a lawyer is bound to present evidence that is adverse to his client? That simply is untrue. The attorney's first and foremost duty is to zealously represent his client. An attorney who presents evidence adverse to the interests of his client would quickly find himself in all sorts of ethical trouble with his local bar association. BTW, the ABA has nothing to do with any of this.

 

An attorney presents evidence contrary to the interests of his client only when compelled to do so by a court -- this can be in many forms including pre-trial discovery. An attorney cannot lie about the existence of evidence or suborn perjury. There are ethical rules as to what an attorney must do if he realizes that his client is testifying untruthfully, which is why a defense attorney will almost never ask his client is he committed the crime.

 

The one time when an attorney must voluntarily disclose evidence that is adverse to his client's interests is in a criminal case -- a prosecutor must voluntarily disclose all exculpatory evidence.

 

As for sports agents and their ethics, please don't make me laugh. They are the scum that scum scrapes off its shoes. If people think they are not leaking information regarding the details of existing bids, you are kidding yourself.

 

good post - i kind of thought that that was the way things worked!

[a700hitter]

good post - i kind of thought that that was the way things worked!

The only thing that keeps an agent from screwing a client is that the agent's compensation is directly tied to the player's compensation, so they always have a self interest in maxing out a player's compensation.

[notin]

Anyone who thinks agents are unethical and owners are the ethical party needs to familiarize themselves with the "reserve clause" and possibly realize the one and only reason the Colorado Rockies, Miami Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks and Tampa Rays even exist. Hint: it had nothing to do with exploring new markets or expanding the game..

[harmony]

The only thing that keeps an agent from screwing a client is that the agent's compensation is directly tied to the player's compensation, so they always have a self interest in maxing out a player's compensation.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

 

The U.S. legal system generally permits contingency fee arrangements in civil cases although England only recently permitted the practice. Proponents would argue the contingency fee discourages an attorney from soaking a client for fees in a meritless case.

Edited January 4, 2018 by harmony

[cp176]

My daughter taught in a school district in Florida for several years without a raise in pay. Every year the teachers would negotiate for - and get - an agreement giving them a raise. However, the City Council refused to fund it in the school budget so the raise(s) never materialized.

 

What the Council did was to play the teachers against the students in the public eye. The teachers were told that if they wanted those raises the money for the raises would come from educational materials, enrichment programs, etc. so if the teachers wanted that raise it would be at the expense of the students. The teachers opted not to take the raises.

 

I have had fun reading this thread today. Not a whole lot of baseball to talk about. I guess I was one of the lucky ones - I taught for a long time and I am happy that I did. I grew up wanting to teach and coach. I'm pretty sure that I made a difference. My wife taught as well so we ultimately did ok but we for sure knew what we were getting into. Not much $ but a whole lot of really feeling like you made a difference. My choice was to teach. Could have gone in to administration and doubled my salary - no thanks. A majority of the principals that I worked for could not do my job. Degrees =jobs. I was fortunate to work for some very good dedicated people but there were plenty of dubs in there as well. I would love to see good teachers be paid better but who gets to decide who is good. Administrators? - sorry . Test scores - nope. Advanced degrees - not necessarily. As long as teacher salaries are tied to tax payer dollars it just kind of is what it is. The beauty of this country is that if you are intelligent and are willing to work, which really is the rub these days I'm afraid, then you can just about be what you want to be. I don't begrudge professional athletes one bit - it is capitalism. What I begrudge are the people who want someone elses money that they don't have to work for. My career choice was the right one for myself and my family. Great profession.

[a700hitter]

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

 

The U.S, legal system generally permits contingency fee arrangements in civil cases although England only recently permitted the practice. Proponents would argue the contingency fee discourages an attorney from soaking a client for fees in a meritless case.

There are negatives to contingency fee arrangements, so there is a lot of disclosure that is required.

[Elktonnick]

I have had fun reading this thread today. Not a whole lot of baseball to talk about. I guess I was one of the lucky ones - I taught for a long time and I am happy that I did. I grew up wanting to teach and coach. I'm pretty sure that I made a difference. My wife taught as well so we ultimately did ok but we for sure knew what we were getting into. Not much $ but a whole lot of really feeling like you made a difference. My choice was to teach. Could have gone in to administration and doubled my salary - no thanks. A majority of the principals that I worked for could not do my job. Degrees =jobs. I was fortunate to work for some very good dedicated people but there were plenty of dubs in there as well. I would love to see good teachers be paid better but who gets to decide who is good. Administrators? - sorry . Test scores - nope. Advanced degrees - not necessarily. As long as teacher salaries are tied to tax payer dollars it just kind of is what it is. The beauty of this country is that if you are intelligent and are willing to work, which really is the rub these days I'm afraid, then you can just about be what you want to be. I don't begrudge professional athletes one bit - it is capitalism. What I begrudge are the people who want someone elses money that they don't have to work for. My career choice was the right one for myself and my family. Great profession.

 

A wise man once said that if you enjoy what you do for a living, you'll never work a day in your life.

[a700hitter]

Anyone who thinks agents are unethical and owners are the ethical party needs to familiarize themselves with the "reserve clause" and possibly realize the one and only reason the Colorado Rockies, Miami Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks and Tampa Rays even exist. Hint: it had nothing to do with exploring new markets or expanding the game..

Is anyone taking up the argument that owners are ethical? I must have missed that part of the thread.

[moonslav59]

Did you read the whole thing?

 

Yes.

 

All agents have conflicts of interest. BorA$$ has more, because he has more clients.

Edited January 4, 2018 by moonslav59

[Bellhorn04]

Yes.

 

Well, OK, if the writer was Boras's father he probably wouldn't be accusing him of being unethical due to conflict-of-interest.

 

How much do you hate Boras? A lot, it sounds like.

[Elktonnick]

Well, OK, if the writer was Boras's father he probably wouldn't be accusing him of being unethical due to conflict-of-interest.

 

How much do you hate Boras? A lot, it sounds like.

 

Actually that was a pretty lame accusation based on pretty thin grounds considering that the author presented no evidence that Boras's clients were unaware of any possible conflict or that Boras had failed to produce a waiver. BTW since the article was written how many complaints against either Boras or any other baseball attorney agent for alleged conflict of interest? How many complaints against agent representing athletes in other professional sports?

 

The article has seemed to have been stunningly unsuccessful at inhibiting Boras' ability to attract new clients.

[Spudboy]

I blame all this on Curt Flood and Marvin Miller.

 

[S5Dewey]

I blame all this on Curt Flood and Marvin Miller.

 

 

Yes. And it's why I believe Curt Flood should be in the HOF. Not as a player, but as someone who changed the entire face of the makeup of teams. (and I know someone [Notin?] is going to chime in here with the player who came before Flood, but whose name I can't think of at the moment).