Does your team subscribe to a "No-Boras" policy?

[_sturt_]

In Astro-dom, it's a commonly but quietly known policy that Drayton McLane has been once-bitten by the Carlos Beltran cherade, and that the franchise will likely never negotiate another contract that involves a Scott Boras client. While he won't be going to arbitration anytime soon, Willy Taveras' exit this off-season did nothing to discourage that thinking.

So, I got to thinking... is it possible that, if a number of teams "quietly refused" to get involved with a Boras client, that it would effectively put the squeeze on the man's scruples/tactics... if players feel like some number of teams for whom they would be interested to play firmly but quietly would not negotiate with Boras, what would be the outcome?

And, I got to thinking... that there are probably some other teams' braintrust that subscribe to the same "no-Boras" policy... but if so, who are they? Is your team one? (Caveat... northeastern fans need not respond... answer is already well-established :rolleyes: )

[BoofBonser26]

I read, by someone here on BBF, and I agree, that it takes 2 to sign a contract. Every team is equally as guilty as Boras for whatever crime you want to say he's committed.

That said, I can't stand the guy. :evil

[digglahhh]

I believe that Joe Crede is the only Boras player on the White Sox and that's it is not a coincidence.

[_sturt_]

I read, by someone here on BBF, and I agree, that it takes 2 to sign a contract. Every team is equally as guilty as Boras for whatever crime you want to say he's committed.

That said, I can't stand the guy. :evil

Sooooo... how do you answer either of the questions posed, Boof?

[Williamsburg2599]

Jim Abbott (retired)
Rick Ankiel
Steve Avery (retired)
Carlos Baerga
Rocco Baldelli (former client)
Josh Bayne (former client)
Tim Belcher (retired)
Jay Bell (retired)
Carlos Beltrán
Adrián Beltré
Andy Benes (retired)
Ian Bladergroen
Barry Bonds (former client)
Chris Bootcheck
Taggert Bozied
Kevin Brown (retired)
Bobby Brownlie
Jay Bruce (former client)
Miguel Cabrera (former client)
Bill Caudill (retired)
Bruce Chen
Ed Caesar
Chris Coghlan
Anthony Cozzette
Joe Crede
Colin Curtis
Gary Daley
Johnny Damon
John Danks
Jimmy Delgado
Jason Donald
Darren Dreifort (retired)
J.D. Drew
Stephen Drew
Alex Fernandez (retired)
Prince Fielder
Eric Gagné
Tyler Greene
Jeremy Guthrie
Mark Hamilton
Craig Hansen
Robert Harper
Matt Harrington
Keith Hernandez (retired)
Ramón Hernández (former client)
Jose Hernandez
Bobby Hill
Luke Hochevar
Matt Holliday
Frank Hullings
Andruw Jones
Scott Kazmir
Ian Kennedy
Sun-Woo Kim
Danny Kolb
Matt LaPorta
Jeff Larish
Travis Lee
Kyle Lohse
Felipe Lopez
Rodrigo Lopez
Derek Lowe
Matt Lungariello
Ryne Malone
Greg Maddux
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Seth McClung
Mark McCormick
Ben McDonald (retired)
Kevin Millwood
Zach Miner
Xavier Nady
Robb Nen (retired)
David Newhan
Magglio Ordóñez
Chan Ho Park
Corey Patterson
Eric Patterson
John Patterson
Mark Pawelek
Mike Pelfrey
Carlos Pena
Oliver Pérez
Guillermo Quiroz
Anthony Reyes
Alex Rodriguez
Iván Rodríguez
Kenny Rogers
José Rosado
Rey Sanchez
Dane Sardhina (former client)
Max Scherzer
Scott Schoeneweis
Bobby Seay
Gary Sheffield (former client)
Kurt Stillwell (retired)
Dennis Tankersley
Julian Tavarez
Willy Taveras
Brien Taylor (retired)
Taylor Teagarden
Mark Teixeira
Chin-hui Tsao
Jason Varitek
Ron Villone
Jarrod Washburn
Jeff Weaver
Jered Weaver
Matt White
Brad Wilkerson
Bernie Williams
Carlos Zambrano (former client)
Barry Zito

[SamtheBravesFan]

Andruw has said that he wants to finish his career in Atlanta, but he also wants money, obvioiusly.

Los Angeles and New York teams, your long-term risk is manning center field in Atlanta. ;)

[Chisox73]

I believe that Joe Crede is the only Boras player on the White Sox and that's it is not a coincidence.
You're right about that.

White Sox brass has a hands-off policy on Boras' potential free-agents after getting burned one too many times.

[ChrisLDuncan]

Nope...I'm a Yankees fan, we want the good players ;)

[Mattingly]

I presume it'll likely be the teams with payrolls in the $60-80m range that will refuse to deal with a $cott Bora$ client. When you have the Yanks, Red Sox, Mets, LA Dodgers, Giants, I think you'll find an exception.

I wouldn't mind seeing more teams refusing to deal with the man. However, when you have a big-name pitcher or position player, so long as he's highly desired, I don't see Bora$ being squeezed out altogether. I just presume that he won't be getting Texas' Tom Hicks or other prior victims on the phone in winters to follow.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

Well, there are only two former Jays on that list, Schoenweis and Quiroz. So it looks like JP is anti-Boras. For now...

[hubkittel]

the cardinals have dealt with boras before (ankiel, drew, etc), are dealing with him right now (weaver), and will, if it's in their best intrest, deal with him in the future. to the best of my knowledge, the cards have never had any boras related problems.

i understand that boras is an agent and normal people generally hate agents but specificly what has boras done to draw the wrath of anyone here at bbf? his job is to get the best deal he can for his client and it looks like he's good at that. if you were a player, wouldn't you want somebody like that representing you?

[_sturt_]

Hub, I could get into it, but won't... this thread isn't about Boras horror stories. Suffice it to say that the great majority of us are fans of our team, not of a particular player, and so when he scores a monster contract using the aggressive tactics he's known to use, it's easy to feel "taken," and especially when your team was victimized by those tactics. He clearly is not an honest person... ask Tom Hicks.

[redlegsfan21]

I only see one Red and two former Reds on that list (that I know, quick glance). That one Red hasn't even been here a year.

[Captain Cold Nose]

At present the Tigers have a good relationship with Boras, with I-Rod, Ordonez and Kenny Rogers coming through for them. One bad signing is all it takes to sour a team, though. How do the Dodgers feel?
The former clients (Cabrera and Zambrano) probably don't make Boras too happy, but he's doing well enough.

[KCGHOST]

The main thing you have to understand about Boras and his clients is that it is all about the money. If you want to sign one of his guys you must pay more than anyone else. This tidbit even implies to clients of his who are under contract to you. When they become FA's don't even think about getting a hometown discount.

That's their prerogative, so don't get bent when it happens.

[SamtheBravesFan]

The main thing you have to understand about Boras and his clients is that it is all about the money. If you want to sign one of his guys you must pay more than anyone else. This tidbit even implies to clients of his who are under contract to you. When they become FA's don't even think about getting a hometown discount.

That's their prerogative, so don't get bent when it happens.

Don't worry, I expect it.

[digglahhh]

Hub, I could get into it, but won't... this thread isn't about Boras horror stories. Suffice it to say that the great majority of us are fans of our team, not of a particular player, and so when he scores a monster contract using the aggressive tactics he's known to use, it's easy to feel "taken," and especially when your team was victimized by those tactics. He clearly is not an honest person... ask Tom Hicks.

Let's save our tears for the jilted Tom Hicks. $252M less for him to donate to the Carlyle Group... Where did that money come from anyway? I know he's been accused of raiding Texas University's public funding. Anyway, I'll digress before I go too deep into one of my sociopolitical rants that endear me to the mods so... I mean, I'll still go, but not too deep...

Boras plays dirty and he's less than honest. That's his job, sturt. And most of the time he's dealing with dirty, dishonest owners who made their money in less than ethical ways. George Carlin said it best (as he always does) when he said that at the beginning of a business deal the first thing a businessman assumes is that the other side is attempting to screw him six ways from Sunday. If, and if being the operative word, I'm in a scenario like that, I want a guy like Boras on my side for self-defense.

The game ain't the problem, the rules are. The economic relationship between worker and owner doesn't change because there is a lot of money being thrown around.

[Mattingly]

^^ Thanks for the restraint, diggs. :)

============

I'll just add a hypothetical:

If Player A is highly desired, fans feel he should command $13m x 3-4 years, but Boras gets $15-16m x 5-6 years, how would fans feel about this?

To myself, I feel that's one less player that the team would be able to sign, such as a reliever, weak-hitting starter, bench player, etc, so I wouldn't really be in favor of the move.

Yes, the player would be getting more, but this would come at the expense of the fans. I think that the word "reasonable" can come from all sides per the team's overall payroll.

[Elvis]

There are rumors that Ne Colletti is soured on Borass**** clients after the Nancy Drew thing. This is rumored to be why Maddux wasn't resigned. None of the Dodgers offseason signings involved Borass**** clients, although a reasonable offer was made to Gagne, but he went with the ca$h. :waving

D-lowe is the last remaining Borass**** client on the Dodgers now.

[BoofBonser26]

Sooooo... how do you answer either of the questions posed, Boof?
The Indians negotiate with Boras (Jeremy Guthrie, just designated for assignment. Got the largest signing bonus, $3 million, in team history).

As to black-listing him, his clients are too good.

[StanTheMan]

I think Scott Rolen is still a Boras Client.... didn't see him on the list.

I for one, am sick of the Owners crying about salaries...... and blaming the players/agents, or in the case posters blaming the players' agent.

Last I knew, the OWNERS sign the contracts too..... Let's not go "NHL" and cry economic suicide, all the while ignoring the fact the both OWNERS and PLAYERS sign contracts. Scott Boras, or any other agent, does NOT hold a gun to an owners head and force a pen into his hand..... EVER.

If you are on owner/GM, and think Jeff Suppan is NOT worth 10-12 million per year (like I believed he wasn't and apparently the Cardinals believed as well) then you say thanks but no thanks when his agent makes such an offer or counteroffer.

If another team agrees to that kind of money.... then how is it the agents' fault? It is not even 1% of the economic problems in baseball, imo. The players should make every penny the agent can get them, WITHOUT you and I judging them.

Period.

[StanTheMan]

^^ Thanks for the restraint, diggs. :)

============

I'll just add a hypothetical:

If Player A is highly desired, fans feel he should command $13m x 3-4 years, but Boras gets $15-16m x 5-6 years, how would fans feel about this?

To myself, I feel that's one less player that the team would be able to sign, such as a reliever, weak-hitting starter, bench player, etc, so I wouldn't really be in favor of the move.

Yes, the player would be getting more, but this would come at the expense of the fans. I think that the word "reasonable" can come from all sides per the team's overall payroll.

I would 100% blame the TEAM, not the player or agent, in this situation.

[_sturt_]

Okay, I guess I have to "go there" after all. Misappropriate application, kids. It's simplistic to argue about the salaries... it's really not about salaries, it's about tactics. It certainly wasn't about the salary in the Astros' case. It was about trying to negotiate in good faith, only to find a sudden flurry of new and complex demands at, literally, 11:00 before a midnight deadline. Blame Drayton for being played for the fool once (Boras and Beltran obviously never had any intent to allow the Astros bid to be anything more than a negotiating tool). Don't blame the Astros' owner for refusing to be played ever again (, or at least, I don't). Boras' games have and should earn him a few less teams willing to talk about players under his services... and though his list is long, it's not like there aren't other worthwhile players... in fact, the length of that list might just catch up with the guy... some of those players appear to be getting very little attention by their agent this off-season.

[ReignInBlood]

Does anyone have lists or teams with the most or less Boras's clients? :D

[Cubsfan97]

Cubs have 3 Boras clients, all in the minors, however a few could be up in the majors as soon as next year (Eric Patterson). I cant remember if we still have Brownlie, if we dont then we only have 2, Mark Pawelek being the other. I hope Jeff Samrdzjia dont sign with Boras.

[hubkittel]

Okay, I guess I have to "go there" after all. Misappropriate application, kids. It's simplistic to argue about the salaries... it's really not about salaries, it's about tactics. It certainly wasn't about the salary in the Astros' case. It was about trying to negotiate in good faith, only to find a sudden flurry of new and complex demands at, literally, 11:00 before a midnight deadline. Blame Drayton for being played for the fool once (Boras and Beltran obviously never had any intent to allow the Astros bid to be anything more than a negotiating tool). Don't blame the Astros' owner for refusing to be played ever again (, or at least, I don't). Boras' games have and should earn him a few less teams willing to talk about players under his services... and though his list is long, it's not like there aren't other worthwhile players... in fact, the length of that list might just catch up with the guy... some of those players appear to be getting very little attention by their agent this off-season.

all's fair in love, war, and business. i understand how you feel but it's the nature of the beast to play one team against another and drive the cost of your player up. i don't see anything unethical in what boras did in the beltran deal. if the astros choose not to deal with him again, that's fair but it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

in the end, the blame has to be placed with beltran. he's an adult and is responsible for his own decisions. he's the one who chose not to return to houston. if he wanted to play for the astros, he'd be playing for the astros regardless of who his agent is and what his agent wanted for him.

[_sturt_]

i don't see anything unethical in what boras did in the beltran deal.

Knew this post was coming... just didn't know how long it would take to get posted nor by whom.

Suffice it to say, if it's not "unethical," it is out of the ordinary bounds of how the vast majority of agents operate... otherwise, one would find it to be more common practice, and as such, Boras would not stand out.

I'd go a step further and say that it is clearly "not negotiating in good faith," and how you see that -- "ethical" business or "unethical" business -- is your call.

[digglahhh]

This is 21st century, misapplied Smithian America; "ethical business" is an oxymoron.

Boras's "good faith" lies between him and his client; not between him and his opponent at the bargaining table.

Now Gary Sheffield on the other hand....

[hubkittel]

Knew this post was coming... just didn't know how long it would take to get posted nor by whom.


glad to oblige. :waving i don't have any love for boras or agents in general. the guy i really dislike is drew rosenhaus but that's a subject for another day.

playing one team against another is a comman tactic for agents. they do it all the time. that's not negotiating in bad faith-that's just business. if somebody offered me 20% more than i'm making right now, i'd gleefully take that offer to my boss and see if he wanted to match it. if he didn't or couldn't, i'd probably take the better offer.

i still stand by my statement that if beltran wanted to play in houston, he'd be playing in houston. also, what drove up beltran's price was not so much boras playing one team off another but beltran's post-season performance. if beltran had hit .120 in the playoffs with no home runs, he wouldn't have gotten the huge contract that he did. fewer teams would have been interested in him and the astros would have had a better chance of resigning him.

another reason beltran isn't in houston anymore is omar minaya. the mets, under their new gm, went on a spending spree, getting both beltran and pedro. if the mets had had a less aggressive gm, beltran probably wouldn't be with the mets right now.

the astros also have to take some of the blame. you say that boras negotiated in bad faith and that may be true but there were no guarantees that the astros would have been able to keep beltran. he was a rent-a-player. they should have been much more aggressive in pursuing a contract with beltran then they were. they should have made a stronger push during the season.

maybe there was never a chance that beltran was going to sign with the astros after the season. maybe he was always going to test the market and look for the best deal his agent could make. if that's the case then the astros were in a no win situation and did nothing but drive up beltran's price for the mets (or whoever else would have signed him). it sounds to me that this is the most likely scenario and that the astros have made boras the bad guy in order to save face. didn't the astros also get burned on a randy johnson rent-a-player deal a few years earlier? that's twice they gave up prospects and had nothing to show for it. did beltran and boras get a lot of heat in houston after the deal went down? where there a lot of anti-boras stories in the media quoting "high level officials in the astros organization"?

like i said, i really don't care about boras one way or the other. but your position is basicly that teams shouldn't deal with boras or his clients because houston was unable to resign beltran. you say that boras negotiated in bad faith but we don't know that for certain. neither you nor i were in the room. the only people who can be saying with any degree of certainty that boras was negotiating in bad faith are the people in the astros organization and, because they lost beltran, they have an ax to grind. their statements should be taken with a grain of salt.

[sandlot]

Takes two to tango, doesn't it? Stands to reason that if you don't like the music, don't dance. As for tactics, well, there are a lot of dodgy electronic and photo stores I could show you where any guy at the counter could take Scott Boras to the cleaners. Bait and switch? Last-minute changes in the deal? Hidden charges? Misrepresentation? These guys are pros among pros. C'mon, people have been doing this stuff since the first time somebody uttered the words, "Hmm, and how much is that one?" This is all stock in trade for wheeler-dealers.

Anybody who dislikes this kind of bargaining would certainly be well advised to avoid negotiating for anything in Asia, where It's not until the last minute of the 11th hour that the other side even lets you know what it is they really want (ask Theo about dealing with the Japanese). It's not until you're pushing the chair to get up from the table that negotiations can actually start. And they might not start then, just in case you're bluffing.

As for an agreement not to deal with a specific agent, in this case Boras: The lawyers on BBF could comment better, but I believe that if he could prove the existence of a tacit agreement among owners to boycott him and the clients he represents, Boras could probably bring a whopping restraint of trade suit.

[Elvis]

I retract my previous post. On the radio today Ned Colletti said that he has no problem with Scott Boras. He explained that he's always looking for the best deal (risk wise) and Boras rarely offers it.

Of course, that's what he said publicly... :lookitup

[_sturt_]

the astros also have to take some of the blame. you say that boras negotiated in bad faith and that may be true but there were no guarantees that the astros would have been able to keep beltran. he was a rent-a-player. they should have been much more aggressive in pursuing a contract with beltran then they were. they should have made a stronger push during the season. maybe there was never a chance that beltran was going to sign with the astros after the season. maybe he was always going to test the market and look for the best deal his agent could make. if that's the case then the astros were in a no win situation and did nothing but drive up beltran's price for the mets (or whoever else would have signed him). it sounds to me that this is the most likely scenario and that the astros have made boras the bad guy in order to save face. didn't the astros also get burned on a randy johnson rent-a-player deal a few years earlier? that's twice they gave up prospects and had nothing to show for it. did beltran and boras get a lot of heat in houston after the deal went down? where there a lot of anti-boras stories in the media quoting "high level officials in the astros organization"? like i said, i really don't care about boras one way or the other. but your position is basicly that teams shouldn't deal with boras or his clients because houston was unable to resign beltran. you say that boras negotiated in bad faith but we don't know that for certain. neither you nor i were in the room. the only people who can be saying with any degree of certainty that boras was negotiating in bad faith are the people in the astros organization and, because they lost beltran, they have an ax to grind. their statements should be taken with a grain of salt.

Hub, thanks for the consideration. All I can do is promise you that I (and many Astros fans) followed that story from beginning to end, as it was reported both by Houston admin and the media... and if the reports were askew, then we'll never know because they went without any challenge either from the Boras/Beltran camp nor from other reporters in the media.

So, you're at liberty to believe what you want from who you want, and some of your statements above are completely consistent with the commonly accepted facts of the situation: Boras and Beltran, indeed, evidently, never intended to sign with the Astros in the first place. Other comments are completely inaccurate: to suggest that the Astros should have went after Beltran more aggressively, for instance... the embarrassing thing is that they went after him like a pubescent male might fall all over himself for a Dallas Cowboys cheerleader... and at that, since he never intended to sign in the first place, it makes little sense for you to suggest that it would have been valuable to be more aggressive... right?

Takes two to tango, doesn't it? Stands to reason that if you don't like the music, don't dance.

Contrary to the assertion that I'm lobbying for teams to not compete for Boras clients... as if I'm under the illusion that there are people on an internet board with that kind of influence in the first place (???)... I just brought up the topic to find out if there are others, like Houston, who have been "once bitten," and are now refusing to dance (per sandlot's analogy). That's all.

[bigtime39]

You can count the Orioles among the teams reluctant to deal with Boras. Going into 2006, they had the following players on your list:
Rodrigo Lopez (traded to Colorado)
David Newhan (non-tendered)
Bruce Chen (allowed to leave as FA)
Corey Patterson (currently playing under his old Cubs contract, will be interesting to see what hapens when he hits the FA market).

[Mattingly]

another reason beltran isn't in houston anymore is omar minaya. the mets, under their new gm, went on a spending spree, getting both beltran and pedro. if the mets had had a less aggressive gm, beltran probably wouldn't be with the mets right now.
From what I remember, the Yanks were offered $100m/6 yrs for Beltran but passed. They were too busy trying to sign Randy Johnson.

Pitching, like CF, were too extremely vital needs at the time. With the luxury tax kicking in, even the Yanks couldn't afford to have signed both. They chose the older pitcher, since traded away.

By this, Beltran could've been been a Yankee. Then again, Jason Giambi had the Cards chasing after him with a contract in hand, but some things never worked out.

Anyway, count the M's as being off the "no-Bora$ policy" teams, since they're trying to get Bora$ client, regular-season journeyman, postseason 2006 stud Jeff Weaver aboard.

Mariners close to adding Weaver, bring back Rhodes (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2743140)

[rwolfe09]

The Red Sox reluctantly jumped off of the "no-Bora$$ policy". I love calling him Bora$$ well because he loves money (who doesnt) and he's well..you get the picture.