Wabs said:

---

dlance said:

---

He turned down 10/300 with the Nats. Did he think he was going to do better?

---

Yep, turns down $300M, yet the players seem to think this all "unfair". What a joke. The market pays what the market pays, just like any job.

They're pissed that the owners/GMs have finally stopped signing these stupid long term, guaranteed contracts.

---

Yep. Then you hear the "owners are pocketing all the increased revenues!" complaints... which to me is easily defeated because owners would line up out the door to pay Harper $30-35mm per year over 5-7 years. They just won't do it for 10. And rightly not.

Deluxe said:

---

Wabs said:

---

dlance said:

---

He turned down 10/300 with the Nats. Did he think he was going to do better?

---

Yep, turns down $300M, yet the players seem to think this all "unfair". What a joke. The market pays what the market pays, just like any job.

They're pissed that the owners/GMs have finally stopped signing these stupid long term, guaranteed contracts.

---

Yep. Then you hear the "owners are pocketing all the increased revenues!" complaints... which to me is easily defeated because owners would line up out the door to pay Harper $30-35mm per year over 5-7 years. They just won't do it for 10. And rightly not.

---

Plus, the last time I checked - the OWNers own the team. So they can do whatever the **** they want. If the player(s) don;t like it, then find another team, accept less money, or find another profession.

I don't understand why he doesn't just accept the nationals 10/300 unless they have pulled that offer because they know the market softened.

The players union has a problem; the vast majority of players are grossly overpaid and teams now have ways to attach dollar amounts to production. So now only 3-4 teams will grossly overpay for long term deals. Everyone else can demonstrate that its wiser to go young or journeyman.
I'm expecting a huge strike as players will demand even more money when the data shows 70% or more are not worth it.

Agnzona said:

---

I'm expecting a huge strike as players will demand even more money when the data shows 70% or more are not worth it.

---

Hopefully they know that a strike would be detrimental to the game. It took steroids to bring them back after the last one.

Man I hope Miley is better than this projection. But if all others are that good then we could still be in good shape

Establish a more player-friendly salary structure for pre-arb players and move arbitration up a year. That's about all I'd be willing to do as an owner.

I've never understood the hate for him. He's absolutely nails at his job. What's wrong with that?

I guarantee you wouldn't think that way if you were a player, part of a player's family, or a fellow agent.

I bet you like lawyers too

I feel like Harper turned down 10/300 from the nats to go to a contender. He tried and failed with the nats and it's time to move on.

You bring up fair points. At the end of the day, his job is to maximize value for his clients. The game and free agency are certainly changing and players would love for the contracts to be what they were just 2-3 years ago. Given what we knew then, I don't think it's unreasonable for Dallas to turn down the deal he was offered because he had no leverage at the time and the free agency changes weren't yet upon us. There were signs, but there were still deals bigger than his going to top tier pitchers.

Marwin is an interesting one. I really don't think there's a comp out there to him - maybe the closest was Zobrist, but even that is a poor comparison. This may be a case of player and agent misjudging the market for a super-utility player.

Boras is playing catchup to the new market conditions, just like his clients. Knowing his successful past, I'd suggest it is his clients that may be pushing for/holding out for contract offers that aren't coming more than Boras. At the base level, the agent is still just the advisor, trying to maximize value. I don't think one agent is the cause of much of the problems or should be run out of the sport, personally.

It's a really fascinating drama to watch in a game theory/dynamic market with imperfect information type of scenario.

I almost like the drama of the hot stove as much as I like pitchers and catchers reporting. Almost.

Good points. Agreed.

SlimAG2 said:

---

I feel like Harper turned down 10/300 from the nats to go to a contender. He tried and failed with the nats and it's time to move on.

---

You can either take the big contract from any team or take the best offer you get from a contender. The reason that they are a contender is probably because they are good without Harper. If they are already a contender, then what is the benefit of adding Harper to the team? The cost vs benefit analysis would dictate that the amount of expenditure be less from the team that is already a contender vs. the team that needs more players to be in contention.

But what do I know. I don't work in a front office.

This sort of flies in the face of all my "Harper to the Astros!" advocating on this thread, but what do the following players have in common:

Tommy Pham
Eugenio Suarez
Joey Wendel
Starling Marte
Ben Zobrist
Travis Shaw

They all had a higher fWAR than Harper last year. No one really talks about this but it could be that Harper isn't getting his big 10 year megadeal is because teams question if he's truly an elite player.

Thriller said:

---

I've never understood the hate for him. He's absolutely nails at his job. What's wrong with that?

I guarantee you wouldn't think that way if you were a player, part of a player's family, or a fellow agent.

---

The business side of sports ruins things for the casual fan who just like to watch sports, and isn't a pro athlete and not related to one. Probably at least partially why college sports are really popular, despite often being a lower skill level (but probably also the loyalty of 'hey i went to a&m, go a&m!')

However, regarding the "nails at his job. What's wrong with that?" People also hate Nick Saban and Bill Belichick for the same reason

Agreed.

It's easy to hate the best at any profession. I don't particularly hate Saban, Belichick, the Yankees, etc. I like to read as much as I can about them because there's usually some secret inefficiency in their sport/industry that they have found that lets them dominate. By the time others have caught up, they've spent the interim time finding the next inefficiency.

I'm really hoping the Astros are doing something similar, though we have a ways to go to get to that level.

I kinda hope we offered him the an interesting deal. If he signs with us part of me is feeling that he would be more protected in a lineup with Springer, Bregman, Altuve, and Correa. Those first 5 ABs would be incredible.

Thriller said:

---

Agreed.

It's easy to hate the best at any profession. I don't particularly hate Saban, Belichick, the Yankees, etc. I like to read as much as I can about them because there's usually some secret inefficiency in their sport/industry that they have found that lets them dominate. By the time others have caught up, they've spent the interim time finding the next inefficiency.

I'm really hoping the Astros are doing something similar, though we have a ways to go to get to that level.

---

Like I told my wife after the Super Bowl, I would absolutely love it if the Astros were hated as much as the Patriots or the Yankees. Because that would mean they're winning consistently and doing something right.

That's his job though. He's an attorney and an advocate. He'll make use of any tools, press, or exposure he can get to make more money for his client (now or the next one up).

Let's not forget the 5% of those contracts he earns as well. I think that's the number.

I agree he's a whiny dude when things don't go well, but he's incredibly effective.

Thriller said:

---

You bring up fair points. At the end of the day, his job is to maximize value for his clients. The game and free agency are certainly changing and players would love for the contracts to be what they were just 2-3 years ago. Given what we knew then, I don't think it's unreasonable for Dallas to turn down the deal he was offered because he had no leverage at the time and the free agency changes weren't yet upon us. There were signs, but there were still deals bigger than his going to top tier pitchers.

Marwin is an interesting one. I really don't think there's a comp out there to him - maybe the closest was Zobrist, but even that is a poor comparison. This may be a case of player and agent misjudging the market for a super-utility player.

Boras is playing catchup to the new market conditions, just like his clients. Knowing his successful past, I'd suggest it is his clients that may be pushing for/holding out for contract offers that aren't coming more than Boras. At the base level, the agent is still just the advisor, trying to maximize value. I don't think one agent is the cause of much of the problems or should be run out of the sport, personally.

It's a really fascinating drama to watch in a game theory/dynamic market with imperfect information type of scenario.

I almost like the drama of the hot stove as much as I like pitchers and catchers reporting. Almost.

---

I think the simple explanation is

In the past, Boras much smarter than most MLB front offices.

In the current, almost all MLB front offices are smarter than Boras.


And yes the market will adjust. Boras will have lots of things to say during the next CBA and will likely be a big catalyst for the changes that have to be coming (more money in the early parts of the MLB careers)