"We met with Mr. Teixeira and were very much impressed with him. After hearing about his other offers, however, it seems clear that we are not going to be a factor.Is Henry bluffing? Has Teixeira eliminated Boston from his possible places of employment? Or is this a straight statement of the Red Sox removing themselves from the bidding and moving on?
The Red Sox's offer was approximately 8/184.
72 comments:
I am glad that Henry is drawing a line in the sand. 8/184 is a very rich long contract. If he can get better, good for him. I personally do not want to see the Sox go higher, or bid against themselves.
Don't you get the feeling that Theo and co kind of like sparring with Boras?
Am I the only one who thinks it's a blessing if we don't get Tex and he winds up anywhere but the AL East? I don't know, I just have a gut feeling that he won't live up to the disgusting contract that he's going to get. Yeah, he's good but I'm just not sold.
He's very good both at the plate and in the field, he's a full year younger than Yook, and it's not my money. Get him!
Angels say they also made an eight-year offer. LA Times says LAA's offer was 160-ish and the Sox was "significantly" more dough.
Of course, the final decision is not up to the Sox. Maybe this is their best offer -- these Sox don't often dick around, they usually say this is what we're offering, it's your call -- and Henry got the strong feeling that it wasn't good enough.
If they are offering 23 to play for a contender in Boston and Teixeira wants to take 24 or 25 (or 20) and go hang out in the basement with the Os or Nats for nearly a decade, well ...
Might we not be better off dropping the pursuit of Tex and focus instead on another pitcher and catcher? Peavy is still available and by all accounts wants out of San Diego. We have the players to go after both him and a catcher. Top this our number 1 prospect is a first baseman. Who might be ready to see some major league playing time in '09.
JCal76 said...
Am I the only one who thinks it's a blessing if we don't get Tex and he winds up anywhere but the AL East? I don't know, I just have a gut feeling that he won't live up to the disgusting contract that he's going to get. Yeah, he's good but I'm just not sold.
Why is it not a blessing for us if we get him and also not a blessing for us if an AL East team gets him....He's that good where he will hurt us more than he could ever help us??????????
Even if Henry and Co. are bluffing the whole thing has gotten a little stale, pick a team allready.....
Why is it not a blessing for us if we get him and also not a blessing for us if an AL East team gets him....He's that good where he will hurt us more than he could ever help us??????????
Obviously he's good. Hence "anywhere but the AL East" but last year when A-Rod opted out and there was speculation that he might come to Boston I thought it would be a blessing talent wise but since he didn't I see that as a blessing for obvious reasons. (Geez I sound like Uncle Lewis "The blessing!!!") Tex' bat/glove would be a huge boost but not signing him and using that $$$ for pitching/catching etc. whilst a team in another division pays him would be, you guessed it, a blessing. IMO.
Ken Rosenthal: "For now, though, we're in the familiar Scott Boras Staredown Phase, in which an ardent suitor attempts to call the legendary agent's bluff. The Sox are experienced at this game. ... Wherever Teixeira ends up, and Boston is still the best guess ..."
Alex Speier: "Hours later, Henry and Boras each circulated public messages that vaguely suggested that negotiations had unraveled. Yet there was plenty to read between the lines. ... Sox officials did not respond to follow-up inquiries about whether the team still had an offer on the table to Teixeira. Hence, the statements are open to complete conjecture. ... Boras, meanwhile, offered a response that did nothing to shut the door to continued pursuit of a deal with the Sox."
Jon "Boras Mouthpiece" Heyman: "The Red Sox haven't given up on the idea of signing Mark Teixeira, according to multiple baseball sources. They are just taking a break from the bidding. ... At least a half-dozen baseball executives with some knowledge of the process suggested to SI.com that the Red Sox remain interested in Teixeira and are merely intent on sticking to their last proposal ... Several of these baseball executives suggested Henry and Epstein could merely be engaging in a game of poker with Boras ...
[Henry] is calling Boras' perceived bluff but remaining in the high-stakes game."
Cafardo: "When the Red Sox get on a plane to visit the player and the agent, they do it to get the deal done. Obviously, something Teixeira's agent, Scott Boras, said about the other offers on the table didn't sit well. ... But this morning there is no evidence of any team trumping the Red Sox."
There were a lot of links at SoSH early last night saying a Sox deal was close to being done.
I still feel good about signing him.
AP:
"Country singer Mindy McCready was in stable condition in a hospital Thursday after police said she cut her wrists and took several pills in an apparent suicide attempt. A Nashville police report said McCready's brother discovered the singer in her bloody bed several hours after she returned Wednesday morning from a night out. ...
I'm wondering if the sticking point might be something like an opt out clause. I don't think the Sox would accept one under any circumstances.
JCal76 said...
Tex' bat/glove would be a huge boost but not signing him and using that $$$ for pitching/catching etc.
You make it sound like there is a salery cap or a budget constraint the Red Sox are working with .I believe both of these to be untrue..
Boras like Ben mentioned loves these opt out clauses and the Red Sox despise them .
I'm not so sure the O's'll be in the basement for that much longer. If they got Tex, they'd have a lineup featuring Adam Jones, Nick Markakis, Mark Texiera, and Matt Wieters, and Brian Roberts which is a pretty good foundation.
Plus, in a few years they could have a rotation anchored by Chris Tillman, Brian Matusz, Jake Arrieta and Jeremy Guthrie.
With intriguing players like Nolan Reimold, Bill Rowell, and Radhames Liz, don't be surprised if they pull a Rays by 2010.
Just saying. This division is going to be fucking rough for the next few years.
The division has been rough the last five years, at least. Even with Baltimore, Toronto, and Tampa Bay fighting for the basement for the majority of the time, but every single one of those teams played the Red Sox tough. Not to mention New York.
Wake me up when Teixiera signs somewhere. Boras is a douche bag, plain and simple. But he's not stupid. No way.
You make it sound like there is a salery cap or a budget constraint the Red Sox are working with .I believe both of these to be untrue..
Why didn't they sign CC, Burnett, Peavey, Sheets, Tex, Abreu for the bench, K-Rod to set-up etc then? There's absolutely a budget restraint. That term is relative but it's still there. It's just larger than most teams.
I hate to see someone called a douchebag for doing his job.
What if your job was to be a douche bag?
I think we ought to match LA's offer at 160/8 and say take it or leave it. If he wants to play for a crap team for more money (which I doubt he does) he can be my guest.
I expect to see Tex a Red Sox before Christmas.
Is he doing his job morally/ethically?
He has a history of walking, and occasionally crossing, that line. Does that make him a douchebag?
*shrug*
I do think that MLB is worse off because of him. And I do think it is possible to work for the betterment of players in general than employing Boras' tactics.
What would another top-notch agent do differently from Boras? I don't see how Boras's actions are unique to Boras.
ESPN: "Red Sox executives flew to Texas on Thursday believing they were close enough in negotiations to complete a deal with Mark Teixeira. But after they arrived, they were informed that their offer to Teixeira -- something in the range of $165 million to $170 million -- was short by upwards of $20 million."
***
So if Boston is really $20 behind either what Boras wants or another existing offer, that works out to a couple million per season -- not so much money at this point.
I'll be very surprised if Teixeira takes a little bit more money to play in Washington or Baltimore.
Boras does his job better than most people in his field. His job is to get the most money possible for his clients, and that's what he does.
Morals have nothing to do with it. But re ethics, you'd have to give examples of what you think is unethical about how Boras goes about his work. Specifically him - not your feelings about how the system is set up, or if players make too much money, or you think ticket prices should be lower, or you dislike free agency, or any other factors over which Boras has no control.
How does Scott Boras cross an ethical line?
I'd be interested in hearing the case for that.
I should add that I have no idea if Boras does or doesn't perform his job ethically. I don't follow his deals closely enough to know. (No interest.)
But I think people who claim to despise him, call him names and such, are just reacting reflexively because the players he represents get such big contracts. I'm curious if there's really a case beyond a knee-jerk reaction to dollar figures.
JCal76 said...
Why didn't they sign CC, Burnett, Peavey, Sheets, Tex, Abreu for the bench, K-Rod to set-up etc then?
I believe come opening day the roster still only holds 25 guys, so unless you are unloading Drew , Beckett, Lester,and Dice-K.....And I am sure the guys you mentioned don't have any options to be sent to Pawtucket...You can't sign everyone....
L-girl said...
How does Scott Boras cross an ethical line?
I hear ya.......
I would like someone to define where that ethical line exists today....It may be somewhere between Bullshit and Horseshit..
Example of Boras acting unethically:
Both JD Drew and Varitek (I think it was them, I'm too lazy to check) played a year in independent leagues, costing them millions of dollars each, because Boras didn't feel their signing bonus was adequate.
This is to Boras' benefit, because it showed he was willing to advise his clients to sit out a year, which made teams more likely to pay the prices he was demanding. Considering that Drew and Tek were both young men, likely easily influenced, and that it certainly cost them millions of dollars down the line, it certainly seems like that might be towing the line.
Another example is the Landon Powell situation where Boras convinced a kid to drop out of high school and get his GED, and then didn't announce that the kid would be eligible for the draft so that the kid would be an undrafted free agent.
Something strange happened with Bobby Seay, too, I think, where Boras tricked some of the teams into not offering Seay a deal, but I don't really remember the specifics.
The guy skirts the line of good ethics, at the least.
Both JD Drew and Varitek (I think it was them, I'm too lazy to check) played a year in independent leagues, costing them millions of dollars each, because Boras didn't feel their signing bonus was adequate.
This is to Boras' benefit, because it showed he was willing to advise his clients to sit out a year, which made teams more likely to pay the prices he was demanding. Considering that Drew and Tek were both young men, likely easily influenced, and that it certainly cost them millions of dollars down the line, it certainly seems like that might be towing the line.
I see absolutely nothing unethical about this.
I know many people believe Boras makes all the decisions for his clients and they are mere blobs of clay who will do whatever he says, but I don't buy it.
James, you don't make much of an argument when you admit you're too lazy to check facts and don't know the details. It sounds like you're regurgitating the usual media line on Boras and anyone he represents.
There's no reason to assume players are under some kind of mind-control. Players seek his representation for a reason, and they take his advice for a reason. You're saying he did such-and-such because it was to his advantage - but what's to his advantage is also to the player's advantage, financially.
Boras really does his players a great service that is seldom noted. In the example you used, fans can still like and approve of Drew and Varitek by believing that it was Boras's influence that caused them to hold out for more money, rather than their own wishes. He plays the bad guy, deflecting at least some of the heat, and the players get the larger contracts.
I'm not sure why you think any of those examples are unethical. He "tricked" the team? I guess you mean he outsmarted them?
That deflecting of heat did not work with Drew. There are still fans who harbour some type of grudge against Drew because he lived his life the way he wanted to (you can sense the anger in the work of some writers, too) and did not sign with the Phillies way back when.
I think what people are getting at is these examples should be unethical, but I don't see Boras actually breaking any rules, etc. He plays the game and he plays it damn well. If there are no rules, how can you break them? (I know there are rules to this sort of thing, but not as many as I'm sure people would like)...
I'm about at the end of my rope regarding the off-season wheeling and dealing. As Redsock said in an earlier post... Tell me when a deal actually happens. When Spring Training starts, I'll watch. Opening Day. Give me a list of the players and I'll watch.
Here's a question for everyone: How would you feel if the agents, players, and organizations couldn't reveal how much a player's contract is worth anymore? How would you feel if you didn't know how much money each player was making?
The end of your rope? Wow. I don't pay any attention to any of this, I never have, so I don't understand the frustration. I just wait til the team is in place, then that's the team I get.
How would you feel if the agents, players, and organizations couldn't reveal how much a player's contract is worth anymore? How would you feel if you didn't know how much money each player was making?
I have always argued that players' salaries should be confidential. It's ridiculous that their salaries are public, but the owners don't have to open their books.
Either make it all public - show us what the owners really make, with merchandising, cable deals, everything - or don't show us any of it.
Publicizing players' salaries is just another form of player bashing, IMO - a way for the owners and the media to build fan resentment against players.
That deflecting of heat did not work with Drew.
That's for sure. Michael Kay beat that drum til it was a dead horse. (Pardon the mixed metaphor there.) He led a war on Drew, making sure fans loathed him before they ever saw him play.
How would you feel if you didn't know how much money each player was making?
I would love it. LOVE IT!!!!!!!! I'd be all over that idea like Andy on FY.
Then maybe fans and media would STFU about high salaries.
Eh, I'm not all that invested in this whole thing. Boras doesn't bother me all that much, but sometimes it seems like he goes a little too far.
I don't even know where I'd got to check the facts on these situations. The Landon Powell one stuck out to me as particularly unethical, and in the case of the Drew and Tek situations, it certainly seemed like he was giving them bad advice so that he could get more money for other clients in the future.
That said, I think he was in the right with the Pedro Alvarez situation, and on the whole I don't have a huge problem with him. But I don't think you're right in painting him as just someone who is merely doing his job, because he is absolutely not doing what the majority of other baseball agents do. He dances on the line of ethical business behavior in the ways that other agents do not.
I'd be all over that idea like Andy on FY.
:>)
But I don't think you're right in painting him as just someone who is merely doing his job, because he is absolutely not doing what the majority of other baseball agents do.
I'm not saying that Boras does what everyone else does. I'm saying he does his job better than anyone else does, and that's why people hate him.
Ish called it, I think. It's not that Boras breaks rules - it's that people want some of Boras' tactics to be against the rules, but they're not.
He dances on the line of ethical business behavior in the ways that other agents do not.
Well, we really don't know that. That's an assumption.
I don't know how one would check this stuff either, and I'm not trying to put you on the spot. I'm just pointing out that we're going by little snippets of what people remember here and there, and a man's reputation.
We all know reputations are created and sold in the media, and are often not based in fact.
The Sox offered 8/184 (or 23 per). Boras said, "We want 8/200." And Henry, having got on a plane to Texas thinking a deal was pretty much done, got pissed and walked out.
(Olney and Gammons say Boras wants 8/195.)
Sounds like Teix can pick from the Nats at 25 or the Red Sox at 23.
184 vs 195
Would Teix actually say No to Boston and take a higher offer from the Nats over a mere 11 million?
Boras is a douchebag by trade. It's nothing personal, it's business.
L-girl said...
I'm not saying that Boras does what everyone else does. I'm saying he does his job better than anyone else does, and that's why people hate him.
I saw where the braves will no longer do business with Tellem's agency because of the Furcal mix up, to my knowldege no team has ever turned away Boras.....
It was wierd that when bringing up stories about Boras no one brought up the A-rod fiasco during the world sereis...
If it was me and I was the player I wouldn't give 20% to anybody....so remember when he is trying to get his player the most money he is also working to get himself the most money....i am sure he has never lowered his commmison to get a player the deal they wanted...
so remember when he is trying to get his player the most money he is also working to get himself the most money....
That's no different than any other agent. And all the owners.
If I recall correctly, at one point the Braves decided they would no longer negotiate with Boras... Pretty soon they'll be out of agents to deal with. Maybe it was the Astros, though.
Also, the Padres took Matt Bush so they didn't have to deal with Boras. But they signed Maddux after that, so I guess it's not an issue anymore.
(Apropos of nothing, after Damon went to the Yankees, I had a dream where Scott Boras came to me and told me not to worry, that A-Rod was going to break his wrist in the first month of the season. Needless to say, it never ended up happening.)
The WaPo says the Nats offer is 8/160.
Would it have been smart business for boras to encourage his client to become uncooperative or somehow insubordinate because he just took on this client and it is close to the end of this clients career?
In this hypothetical boras cannot get a commission if the player stays in his current contract. The only way for boras to get a commission is for a new contract to be signed. If the team exercises the two years of options they have then it is likely that this player will not be as valuable in two years if they are even healthy anymore since they do have some nagging injuries.
So would it be a good smart agently move to encourage this player to discourage his team from picking up the two years of options?
Why then did he take on this client who really has no chance to get a big payday if they keep performing at their current level because of a contract? If boras had no chance of getting paid why would he take this player on?
Im not stating any facts but i am arguing around the issue and asking you to make a logical choice here.
Somebody in this hypothetical was the bad guy.
Very off topic: I hope the Angels suck hard next year. I'm talking 80 wins suckage. That would kick ass.
carry on.
It sounds like Tex wants to play in Boston and is dragging his feet even in light of higher offers.
If all he is about in money then let him go. If he is about winning then he will sign.
We don't need him as much as he wants us.
Sign Tek and get Peavy and it will be fine with me.
Yeah, sign me up with the anti Boras camp. I know that most of the world's about the cash.....but at some point don't you just do what's best for your player. I just feel Boras feels it's more important for the players to ALWAYS drive the price up and tke that bid. Weather it's for his own pocket or for what he feels is right for the union I don't know. A great case in point seems to be C.C. He passed up his own state for a few more million.....hope it's worth it too you C.C.
With CC, the Yankees blew everyone else out of the water. By a wide margin.
Does anyone else think the Padres might be willing to part with Adrian Gonzalez?
I agree with your point accudart, but players know what they're gonna get when they hire Boras. If they're going to make their decisions based first on something other than money, they probably won't be hiring Boras.
players know what they're gonna get when they hire Boras. If they're going to make their decisions based first on something other than money, they probably won't be hiring Boras.
Right. And in that sense, he takes the heat for them, at least some of it.
The players are grown men making their own decisions. They sign with him for a reason.
I also don't think players trying to get the most money for their talents are necessarily "all about cash". Careers are short, the pie is massive, and people want a big slice of it. So would everyone here, and you'd all be entitled to try for it.
Fans can be so sanctimonious. People act like if they were in the players' shoes, they'd be so different. If that's true, why aren't many of the players so different?
I just feel Boras feels it's more important for the players to ALWAYS drive the price up and tke that bid.
I'm sure he does feel that way. It's his job.
A pitcher might have a 2.50 ERA. That's amazing, but I'm sure he'd like to get the lowest fucking ERA he can get. Can he get it down to 2.20? 2.00???
Same deal with an agent. Working to get the absolute best deal -- maybe a deal everyone thought could not be had -- is a source of professional pride.
That does not mean the player will take the most $, though. Tek was happy to sign for 4/40 after 2004. But Boras's work puts the best offers on the table for players to choose from. Then it's up to them. (Whether Tex takes 160 or 185, Boras's commission will still be pretty fucking hefty.)
Most (all?) players are not as invested in a team as we are in the Sox. So they often don't much care *where* they play.
If there was a law firm across the street that was not quite as nice as where I am now, and they offered me $75/hour, I'd take it. I would not waste a minute thinking about how lawyers here might miss me and my good work or if anyone talked about my low sense of loyalty after I was gone. Come on -- are you fucking kidding me?
redsock said...
If there was a law firm across the street that was not quite as nice as where I am now, and they offered me $75/hour,I'd take it.
I don't know about that , that maybe true for you , but in the world today many people choose a company's stabilty over money...Baseball players and us are vastly different...Say a firm in NYC offered you a $200 per hour would you leave?
Say a firm in NYC offered you a $200 per hour would you leave?
That doesn't make any sense, as we have no place to live in NYC, and we spent thousands of dollars and many years of our lives to get to Canada. That's why Allan said "across the street".
Baseball players and us are vastly different
How so?
Their careers are shorter, and a very small percentage of them make a lot of money. (Most never make it to the majors, and never earn much money.)
Other than that...?
Heyman says Tex talking to LAA and MFY. Which means Boras is saying that. It may or not be happening. Leaked to make Henry increase Boston's offer.
L-girl said...
Baseball players and us are vastly different
How so?
Their careers are shorter, and a very small percentage of them make a lot of money. (Most never make it to the majors, and never earn much money.)
Other than that...?
Speaking only of major leaguers I beleive the min. is somewhere around 400,000 thousand a year I believe the average family income is 50,000 a year so if a player stays making the min. for 4 years it will take that average family 32 years , the average family also pays for food 365 days a year , most likely if they have job with a uniform , they pay for that as well......The lives of the lowliest ballplayer is vastly different than the average person...I also beleive they have good healthcare....
I don't know maybe you are a millionaire and your life isn't that different, mine is.....
Come on now. Take into account the cost of living and extrapolate that out over his entire lifetime. Does 20 mil really make a bit of difference in all that? It is bordering on greed. By driving up salaries to astronomical amounts which is what Boras does do well, he is making teams like the hankees over charge for their seats and push the everyday common man fan out of the park. The salaries players receive are kind of like the bubbles that the US has been going through. It is bound to pop and player will not continue to get these amounts and the overall league and sport will suffer. I want to be a fan into my twilight years. I may not be able to realize that.
Old Hickory:
"Most free agents probably read Red Sox owner John Henry's cryptic e-mail in regard to the Teixeira negotiations, which probably was a rewrite of something he wrote to Frank McCourt when Henry was negotiating to buy McCourt's house outside Boston, which, roughly translated, might have read, "If you can get $30 million for the house, you'd be wise to take it." McCourt didn't, and Henry got the house for considerably less.
One source close to Teixeira on Friday claimed the two sides are not that far apart, and the conciliatory and civilized nature of the words made it obvious that Teixeira likes Mr. Henry's neighborhood, he just wants the kitchen and heating system remodeled as part of the deal. ...
For two years, it has been the Red Sox baseball operations' plan to sign Teixeira. That plan remains. What remains to be seen is whether the Red Sox can quantify what Boras does or does not have in offers. ...
***
Speaking only of major leaguers
I wasn't. And you really can't. Part of the reason MLers make so much money is because they are the tiny percentage of players overall who are good enough - talented enough, dedicated enough, healthy enough, all at the same time. That's why they can command the money they do. But most professional baseball players earn very little.
I don't know maybe you are a millionaire and your life isn't that different, mine is....
We're talking about different things, then. You're saying people who are very rich are different than average people. To me that's irrelevant - a different conversation.
I'm saying baseball players - minor leaguers, major leaguers and also-rans - are no different than anyone else, no different than people in any other field. They want to make the most money they can for their talents, they want some job stability, they want to be respected and valued. Just like you, me, and everyone else I know.
Like Allan said, if any of us were suddenly offered twice as much money to do the same job, unless there were some huge extenuating circumstances, we'd jump at the chance. When fans whine about players' "greed", I think they're a bunch of raving hypocrites.
By driving up salaries to astronomical amounts which is what Boras does do well, he is making teams like the hankees over charge for their seats and push the everyday common man fan out of the park.
You're buying into the myths the owners are selling.
Until the owners open their books - their real books - to the public, we don't know if player salaries are actually driving up ticket prices.
No one holds a gun to the owners' heads and makes them pay those prices. Everyone freaked out over A-Rod's contract, as if that idiot Hicks was forced to pay that much.
I'm not sure I buy the no one is holding a gun to their head argument. Someone must have had a gun to Pat Gillick's head for that stupid Ibanez contract.
There is a difference between being forced to overpay for shit and being as dumb as a fooking post.
I'm not sure I buy the no one is holding a gun to their head argument. Someone must have had a gun to Pat Gillick's head for that stupid Ibanez contract.
I know. Sometimes I doubt it myself!
I'm not a major league player (damm)....but I'm quite sure if I was going to get over 100 million that I would leave millions on the table to get what was important to me and my family. Personally a few of things I would consider would be what team I liked (The Sox), is it a Red state....so sorry St. Louis, the weather and the community etc.
What about taxes? I never hear that they figure into it, but I'd assume someone making 100 million dollars, the difference between, say, Kansas (6% personal income tax) and Texas (no personal income tax) is 6 million dollars. I wonder if teams have to compensate for that.
Do rich people pay taxes in the US?
No.
Good point.
Baseball seems so damned far away on icy days like today. At least the Celtics are playing their guts out, and the Testament of Dr. Mabuse was on TV this morning.
So you are saying that increased salaries are no factor in the price of a ticket? I know a lot fo the new yankees stadium price has to do with the cost to build and they need to pay it off while the draw to the park is still there. If they hit a patch like the 80's when they sucked or a strike year they will be down money and have to pay more interest. But just taking into account all the other recent "bubbles" this one will likely break just like all the others.
So you are saying that increased salaries are no factor in the price of a ticket?
Nope. I'm not saying that.
I'm saying it's an assumption, created by the owners and disseminated by the media, but untested.
We don't know how much money the owners have, because they don't have to tell us.
In order to know how much salaries affect ticket prices - I'm sure they must be a factor, but how much of a factor, we don't know - we'd have to see the owners' real, total income. And we don't.
You see salaries go up, you see ticket prices go up, you assume cause and effect. But it's not necessarily the case.
Post a Comment