Remember me
Forgot your username/password?
 
Print
Home>Articles

Five Minutes Inside the Mind of Scott Boras

By Roel Torres
September 2, 2008

 

“I've had enough of scheming and messing around with jerks
My car is parked outside, I'm afraid it doesn't work
I'm looking for a partner, someone who gets things fixed
Ask yourself this question: Do you want to be rich?

I've got the brains, you've got the looks
Let's make lots of money
You've got the brawn, I've got the brains
Let's make lots of money”

          --Opportunities (Let’s Make Lots of Money), Pet Shop Boys (Please, 1985)

 

“Please allow me to introduce myself/I’m a man of wealth and taste.”

          --Sympathy for the Devil, Rolling Stones (Beggar’s Banquet, 1968)

 

Deep Inside, Yes, Deep Inside

The fans don’t like me.  That’s okay.  I don’t work for the fans.

 

The press doesn’t like me.  That’s okay.  I don’t work for the press, either.

 

Major League Baseball doesn’t like me.  And that’s a good sign.  That means I’m doing my job well.

 

My job is very clear.  I will do my best to make sure my clients get paid as much as possible.  Why do people have a hard time understanding this?  Why does everyone get so upset?

 

Our Careless Explanations

I know that my clients want to be rich.  I know they want to get paid.  I know they want to get every single cent they can.  Otherwise, they wouldn’t have hired me.  They would have hired someone else.  Makes sense, right?  When they hire me, they know what they want.  When they hire me, they know exactly what they are getting.  Everybody knows my reputation.  This isn’t a secret.  It’s not a mystery.  I will do everything possible to get a big contract.  That’s my goal.  So when a player asks me to represent him, that player is making a statement.  That player is making a declaration.  He’s saying, I want my money.  Loud and clear.  Which is fine.  We all deserve to make as much money as we can.  I truly believe that.  So should you.

 

You would like me if I worked for you.  You would cheer for me if I represented your kid.  Deep down, inside your heart, you believe that.  Deep down, inside your heart, you know that to be true.

 

Have you ever had to ask for a raise?  Have you ever had to name a starting salary at your job?  Have you ever had to negotiate a mortgage with your bank?  It’s a rough situation, right?  You don’t feel like you have a lot of leverage.  You feel powerless and weak.  It’s not a pleasant circumstance.  And when it happens, do you root for the bank?  Do you suggest that the bank increase their interest rates so that you end up having to pay more?  So that you end up with less money?  You don’t have to answer that.  We both know the answer to that.  Just sayin’.

 

If I worked for you, negotiating for you at your desk job, I would do the same thing I always do.  And you would want me to.  You wouldn’t bring me on board to get your salary cut.  You wouldn’t hire me to take a demotion.  You wouldn’t choose me as your representation in order to leave money on the table, and shortchange yourself.  No.  Of course not.  That doesn’t make any sense.  You deserve to be paid as much as you can get. 

 

The Work Ethic Blues

People don’t like me because I’m a fighter.  People don’t like me because I’m a warrior.  People don’t like me because I don’t make things easy.  People are afraid of conflict.  They are afraid of confrontation.  I’m not.  I am at home standing in the middle of chaos.  I am comfortable in the warm flames of controversy.  Criticism doesn’t bother me.  I have a job to do.  That’s all I care about.  I care about you and your financial future.  You didn’t hire me to care about anything else. 

 

Every dollar is a battle.  Every dollar is a war.  Every dollar has an eventual resting place, either in your wallet, or in the bank account of your employer.  Those are the two destinations.  Either you get paid, or your employer profits.  I believe that dollar belongs to you.  I believe you deserve to get paid.  You are my client.  You hired me.  I work for you.  We both want the same thing.  We both want to make you rich.  And when you bring me on board, when we become a team, we don’t back down.  We fight.  We make a stand.  We make sure you get everything you deserve.  Everything you’re worth.  Why is that a bad thing?  It’s not.  It’s a good thing.

 

Choose Your Heroes Wisely, Son

Do you know that baseball is a monopoly?  Our country is founded on the idea that monopolies are evil.  Did you know that baseball has a draft?  Kids can’t choose their employers.  They are forced to join the franchise that selects them, even if it’s run by an incompetent, selfish, and lazy owner.  During the Vietnam War, kids used to burn draft cards.  Kids used to move to Canada to dodge the draft.  The country of the United States eventually abolished the draft.  Drafts force you to do things you don’t want to do.  They take away your freedom.  We all know drafts are bad for the common man.  And that’s who I represent, the common man.  I represent high school kids and college kids and teenagers in negotiations against billionaire owners.  I do.  You can look it up.  It’s well documented.

 

The color barrier.  The reserve clause.  Collusion.  Listen, when history writes the book on my contract negotiations, it won’t come down on the side of the owners and the monopoly and the big corporations.  History won’t.  Trust me.  It never does.

 

Look, maybe here’s a story that will help explain things a little.  Maybe things will make a little more sense, and maybe they won’t.  Do you ever get angry when you pull up to a gas station?  You look at the prices, see how much they’re charging, think about how the oil industry is getting rich and profiting while you’re out there struggling to make a living and busting your hump trying to make ends meet?  Yeah?  Well, I’m the guy trying to lower those gas prices.  I’m the guy fighting the oil industry.  I’m the guy trying to put more money in your wallet, and not in the bank account of the major corporations.  Symbolically, that’s my fight.  In principle, that’s what I try to do every day.  You can think about that for a second.  I don’t know if it will help.

 

Tonight is a Good Time to Think Things Over

People like to bring up my handling of Manny’s case when he left Boston.  Or J.D. Drew’s case after he got drafted.  Or when A-Rod opted out of his contract in New York.  And now the developing situation with Pedro Alvarez.  They talk about how I ruin people’s lives for my own gains.  And they don’t understand that they have everything backwards.  Completely backwards.  I’m the agent.  They’re the clients.  I work for them.  They don’t work for me.  I’m the advisor.  They’re the decision makers.  People don’t want to see that because they want to be able to put the players on a pedestal and look up to them.  Or people want to root for the team, and the people running it.  But it’s easy to blame the agent.  Nobody’s on my side.  It’s always easy to blame me for all the problems of the world. 

 

You know, I don’t use guns.  I don’t use weapons.  I don’t hurt people or resort to violence.  All I do is ask for money.  I’m an agent.  It’s a negotiation.  I don’t force teams to chase my clients.  That’s up to them.  I don’t force teams to offer up big contracts.  That’s up to them.  All I do is ask for money.  If the team doesn’t want to sign my guys, if they think I’m asking for too much – they should just walk away.  How hard is that?  Like I said, I don’t have a gun.  Just walk away.

 

But if you’re not going to walk away, then pay my guy what he’s worth.  It’s that simple.  Why all the outrage?  Why all the finger-pointing and the accusation?  I’m Scott Boras.  Everyone knows exactly who I am. 

 

I know people are mad out there.  I know.  I hear them.  I’m not deaf.  Fans of the game, baseball writers who report the news.  Listen, I want to ask those guys a question.  This is what makes you mad?  This is what makes you angry?  This is the target of righteous indignation?  Not Rwanda, or Chechnya, or Bosnia?  Not Starvation, or Poverty, or Racism?  Really?  You guys are getting worked up over an agent asking a cheap, greedy owner for more money?  Do you think maybe you’ve missed the point?  Do you think maybe you’re off the mark?  Because, if so, you might want to take a second to look yourself in the mirror.  Frankly, you might want to think about the things that are truly important in life.  I strongly suggest you pick another cause. 

 

If I was bad at this job, you would know.  It would be very obvious.  People would stop hiring me.  I would not have any clients.  None.  But that hasn’t happened.  Every year, the top prospects and free agents ask for my services.  Even though they know it won’t be a popular choice.  Even though they know people will hold it against them.  He’s a Boras client.  It’s like a stigma.  But they don’t care.  They’ll hire me, anyways.

 

Because I’m good at what I do.  Believe that.

 

You don’t love me or admire me.  That’s fine.  You don’t need to love or admire me.  I’m not here to be loved and admired.  I’m here to get as much money as possible.  That’s the job.  That’s all that matters.

 

(Still, it would be nice if I could do my job well and still be loved and admired.  That would be pretty cool.  But that’s not my life.  I guess I can’t have that life.  I guess that’s too much to ask…)

 

Okay.  Enough talk.  We’ve wasted too much time.  Back to work.  I’ve got a job to do.

 

Let’s make some money. 

 

 

 

 

 

If you have any thoughts you want to share, I would love to hear from you.  I can be contacted at roeltorres@post.harvard.edu.  Thank you.

 

 
 

COMMENTS (34 Comments, most recent shown first)

RoelTorres
Hi spudrph,

Right. I think that people get mad at Boras because he's such a public figure in the negotiating process. But the owners have money, and they certainly have more than the players. I don't blame the agent for asking if they can share the wealth.
10:05 AM Jan 29th
 
spudrph
Very, very well said.

Bill wrote it (I think) in one of his books-whenever people complain about pro athlete salaries, you should ask them, "You'd rather the owner keep it?"
10:49 PM Dec 17th
 
RoelTorres
Hi Chuck,

I guess that rule is only fair. If one side can't collude, then the other side should be prevented as well. Everyone should get equal treatment. I have no problem with that.
5:05 PM Nov 6th
 
RoelTorres
Hi Matt,

I like Bill Simmons, but his quote is full of presumptions. He suggests that he knows what the clients of Scott Boras want. Which I think is wrong. He says that Scott Boras doesn't care about his clients. But he doesn't base it on any evidence. On a site like Bill James Online, where there is a strong push to value the empirical over empty opinions, I think that's really skewed posturing.

Simmons doesn't address a critical point, which I brought up in the essay. If the clients don't want these services, then why did they pick Scott Boras in the first place?

The defense rests.
5:04 PM Nov 6th
 
chuck
Regarding whether players could band together in a free-agent megapackage during the offseason, I read this today:
"Article XX (e) of the collective bargaining agreement states, in part: "Players shall not act in concert with other players and clubs shall not act in concert with other clubs."

Too bad. I'd kinda like to see it happen just once. Guess that means a Koufax/Drysdale style of negotiation with a club in no more.
11:14 AM Oct 17th
 
MattDiFilippo
For a different view, here's Bill Simmons' response to a reader defending Scott Boras as someone who is good at what he does and is making abtter life for his clients and family:

"You're not getting me to feel bad for Boras. He's the most brilliant agent alive, but he doesn't care about people like you and me, and as he proved with the Pedro Alvarez-Pittsburgh saga, it's difficult to tell if he even cares about the welfare of his clients. I don't think he's any different than the greedy jerks who just brought down our economy; Boras does what's best for himself and his client and everyone else be damned. He's like Jerry Maguire crossed with Spencer Pratt. You know who else bent a few rules for the betterment of their families? All the guys who just brought down Wall Street. I'll get off my high horse now."

11:49 AM Oct 16th
 
RoelTorres
Hi keenanj,

I did have a book agent once. She had landed books on the NYTimes best-seller list in the past. We parted ways after I handed her the fourth draft of my 330 page manuscript and she told me it wasn't working out for her, and that she couldn't sell it. I still think the manuscript has some great moments, but it seems like it might be a lost project at this point.

Yes, sometimes agents need to take the needs of the client into account. But I want to emphasize -- players know who they are hiring when they get Scott Boras. Everyone knows his reputation. Everyone knows his working methods, his modus operandi. If you don't want him to go after the big money -- the fault is really yours and not his. You made a mistake and hired the wrong guy.

Thanks for the nice words. I appreciate it.
9:48 PM Oct 14th
 
keenanj
What is the role of an agent?
One might think (hope is truly the term) that the agent is trying to get the best deal, highest salary etc... for the client. My book agent, for example, tells me this. However, having just bought a house, and dealing with some 'characters', it is clear that many agents have their own salary in mind. While this may be, and often is, the same thing (i.e., the higher price the client gets in salary, the more money the agent makes), it is not always in the best interest of the client.
My real estate agent pushed us to buy a more expensive house. Why? She gets more money. My book agent pushed me to sign a bigger contract for the same reason.
However, in each case, my needs were not necessarily served such that I may have been happier in a smaller house and I may have been happier writing a book that didn't sell, but was 'important' academically... In other words, the agent works for the agent. I know this counters, in part, one of the most eloquently written pieces by a very gifted writer (you should get an agent :)). Yet, the point is clear. Agents make their rent by signing bigger deals. Even if the deal is detrimental to the client, I have seen more often than not, agents across all different businesses push for this.

Great work!
9:27 PM Sep 20th
 
RoelTorres
Hi jhpchun,

I think that's probably the best approach -- not to see this as a defense of a man, but as a way to understand him. More literally, because I tried to write this from his internal first-person point of view and not my own, this is a way that he might understand himself.

My declaration at the end that he is neither loved nor admired was not a plea nor a suggestion that you should admire him. Rather, I was hoping to point out that even when we achieve great success in our chosen fields, sometimes it comes with a price, and maybe that price is isolation and loneliness.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
9:57 AM Sep 6th
 
jhpchun
Great job, Roel:

I'll take from this not a defense of Scott Boras, but a way to understand him—to see things from his perspective. I've often try to do the same thing and come up with much of the same that you write, albeit not nearly succinct or eloquent.

There's no doubt, he's a brilliant man. I think I understand him and what he does and how he does things and why he does his things (only as far as I can see, admittedly), but somehow I can't quite bring myself to even admire him, never mind like him. I can't even claim, with much conviction, that he's a bad man or that he's bad for anything—baseball, society, his clients, etc. Nor can I offer any concrete, objective reason. I see him and simply don't like what I see. I see him and I would never be able to say to a young person, "you see Scott Boras over there? You should be just like him."
4:41 AM Sep 6th
 
RoelTorres
Oh, and THBR, it's nice to see that you're not as annoyed as you were before. Phew...
10:34 AM Sep 5th
 
RoelTorres
Chuck seems full of good ideas when he's not busy confusing us with his name.

It seems to me that one field where this type of package deal reverse collusion is already in effect is Hollywood, where stars are often represented by the same agency, and studios are offered package deals -- if you want the big star, you have to pony up the cash for everyone else. You can't just sign one individual.

Of course, there are many reasons why the Hollywood model doesn't translate well into baseball terms. But it is fun to imagine a scenario where a critical mass of superstar players tries to turn the tables in the negotiating process.
10:34 AM Sep 5th
 
THBR
Chuck-is-Torgo has a FINE idea: "reverse collusion". It's my memory that the Koufax/Drysdale holdout achieved its aim: increases for both players. (My memory is that they asked for $125K for Koufax and $115K for Drysdale.) If it were tried today, and the owners screamed, it would be SO much fun to hear their arguments against, because every one of them could be turned against the owners themselves. Then maybe we'd see an end to the monopoly.
7:57 PM Sep 4th
 
RoelTorres
Chuck,

Oh, okay. That's fine. That makes sense. I'm glad I'm not delusional. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't misidentifying the people responding to my essays -- I'd like to be more conscientious than that.

Thanks again.
2:13 PM Sep 4th
 
chuck
Hey Roel,
You didn't screw up- chuck is Torgo is chuck. When I joined BJOL and was asked to provide a username, I did like I do for all other sites: tried to pick some name that wouldn't be in use already. At the time, I also didn't foresee that I would actually be contributing to the site. When I finally wrote something in the posts and hit submit, then saw the name come up Torgo, I thought: "ahh s**t; now I've got two names." But I figured I might as well keep writing the posts under that name once I'd started. Today I got sick of the alias and changed the username, and voila! everything from the past now shows up as chuck. Wish I'd done this sooner.
11:35 AM Sep 4th
 
RoelTorres
Um, I don't know what happened there, but apparently I addressed my last comment to Torgo, when it should have been to Chuck. My reading comprehension skills need work. Huh.

Thanks, Chuck. Sorry about my confusion.
11:14 AM Sep 4th
 
RoelTorres
Hi Torgo,

That's a fascinating idea. I think that there is actually a similar effect in college recruiting, at least in NCAA football and basketball. Top high school stars who know each other from the recruiting trail all reach decisions by consensus. "Hey, if you go to this school, I'll go with you and I'll bring my buddy. We can build a pretty good team!" I subscribe part of this effect to the innocence and optimism of youth. Also, there are fewer multi-million dollar contracts to take into consideration.

Thanks for the fun hypothesis. Glad that the essay made you think.
9:13 PM Sep 3rd
 
chuck
I was musing about this today after reading this column: I sure would love someday to see a reverse-collusion. Can you imagine an offseason which has some top free agents- say, two A-level starters, an A-level power hitter and a good leadoff man... players who want to win a world series or be part long-term great team even more than they want that extra 2 or 3 million dollars? No? Well, try to imagine it, anyway.
They either share the same agent, get together under one agent, or jettison their agents; then declare themselves a package. They could pick 4 or 5 interested clubs they think are closest to winning a championship, negotiate the best 4-year deal they can for each person involved, and dramatically improve their chances of playing on a world series winner, not to mention immediately win the love of the hometown fans.
Sort of like the Koufax-Drysdale joint negotiation, but as free agents. If it didn't work, then fine, they could split up and just go their separate ways. Even if it was just two or three starting pitchers selling themselves as a package, I could see them getting close to if not the going rate, making themselves a package.
5:59 PM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Matthew,

Thanks so much. I've been a big fan of your work as well. I appreciate the note.
4:40 PM Sep 3rd
 
enamee
Roel, that was brilliant.
4:34 PM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi THBR,

You raise a good point. No, these are NOT quotes from Scott Boras, but rather my fictionalized attempt to extrapolate a defense for the man. A very important distinction to draw. (And now, I'm wondering how I can make that clear within the body of the piece...)

On points # 2 and 3, I think that you raise some issues that I also touched on. Basically, baseball has set up its rules and structures, and it seems odd to rail angrily at a man who uses those rules and structures to the best of his ability. Many of the problems people have with Scott Boras stem from Big Market/Small Market Inequity. And that seems to be a problem beyond the scope of a single agent.
3:40 PM Sep 3rd
 
THBR
#1 Is this your paraphrase of what he's said, or your edited (i.e. pick-and-choose) version of what he's said? Because if it's the former, we should be careful of thinking this is Scott Boras. If it's the latter, the man knows how to say what he's about.

#2 If the owners don't like it, too damn bad. They kept the players in what amounts to slavery for more than 100 years, and they're now screwing the taxpayers for new stadiums. If they don't like it, let THEM get out of the game. We don't have monopolies anymore even in the places where it makes sense (communications); why do we allow a monopoly in what is basically entertainment?

#3 If the small-market teams don't like it, let them set up a revenue-sharing agreement whereby 90% of the gross income is divided equally among ALL teams. There were more small-market than big-market teams the last time I looked.
3:20 PM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi Chuck (Chuck),

Whew. Thanks so much for the exhaustive response. I appreciate the thought you put into your comments. Let me see if I can offer up some form of a response:

Scott Boras doesn't always do the right thing. And his tactics may be counter-productive in several notable instances. But he is consistent in his approach. Yes, Tim Belcher and JD Drew would have been helped by a year of development. But in a complicated negotiation with multiple contingent factors, it seems like Boras puts on the blinders. He doesn't try to figure everything out. He does what he can to make the most money on a contract. Well, at least that's what it seems like to me.

Also, Boras would probably argue that it's not his fault that there is a big market/small market disparity. It's not his responsibility to make sure small market teams thrive. Baseball has chosen not to have a salary cap in its Collective Bargaining Agreement. Baseball has chosen not to collectively bargain for a draft pick salary slotting structure. Baseball has established the rules of player acquisition. Scott Boras merely looks to use the rules to his best advantage. Which, really, is what EVERYONE should be doing.

The baseball draft certainly doesn't compare to the military draft in terms of consequences. But it does compare in terms of structure. In both cases, people are robbed of freedom of choice. I was not drafted by my employer. And I would hate to imagine a situation where my job options were reduced to a single option -- a single option not of my choosing. Clearly, it would be absurd to claim that the baseball and military drafts are identical. But they accomplish the same results.

I would argue that small-market teams should go ahead and spend top dollar on their draft picks. Take the best player and pay them what they are worth. In the end, that would actually be a cost-efficient way to build a team. Signing draft picks and developing them is exponentially more affordable than chasing free agents.

And, finally (!) the advisors for all draft picks are common knowledge before a draft. For example, five of the top prospects for next year's 2009 draft are Boras clients, including consensus top prospect, college ace Steve Strasburg. So be warned. I might be writing this essay all over again next year...

Thanks, Chuck. Thought-provoking to be sure.
1:37 PM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi Nick,

Well, I'm sure "little guy" is always a matter of perspective. But when you compare the resources of your average high school kid with a Major League owner, then you could make a case. (Basically, almost anybody compared to your average Major League owner is going to be at a disadvantage.)

And while it's true that it seems excessive "to fight and claw to add an extra half mil on top of an enormous contract", you have to remember -- if the client insists on getting top dollar, then that means you have to fight and claw for that extra half mil.

You know, half a mil is not an insignificant amount. You can do a lot with half a mil. And if it seems excessive to make such a big deal over it -- then why doesn't management just hand it over? That's the other side of the coin.

I appreciate your thoughts, Nick. Thanks and take care.
12:41 PM Sep 3rd
 
chuck
Scott (Roel),
I applaud you for doing your job better than anyone else. And yes, there are many things in the world that deserve greater outrage than a ballplayer getting money out of his employer.
I think there are a couple things that result from you doing your job well that do piss off some fans. One is when you and the team fail to reach an agreement and the player ends up not joining the team. In the case of a free agent, so be it: someone else offered more. But in the case of a draft pick, fans get understandably disappointed/irritated when a number one pick by their team goes unsigned and back into the draft pool. (The J.D. Drew case comes to mind, but the Phillies were warned not to draft him unless they were prepared to cough up. Phillies fans will boo Drew forever, but then again they booed Mike Schmidt mercilessly.)

But your shot across the bow was Tim Belcher, the number one pick of the Twins. He ended up signing the next year with the richer Yankees, for $50,000 more than the Twins were going to pay. Number one, I'm not sure the holdout tactic actually serves the player's development; what's more important- that $50K, or the year of playing? In Drew's case, if he could have had an $8M bonus instead of $10 and been up in the majors earlier, wouldn't that have benefited his career and ultimate earning potential more?
I know. That's not your concern. You're hired to get top dollar, now, period.

But in regards to the draft itself. It hardly compares to the idea of the military draft. No one is forcing these guys to either play baseball for hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars or face going to jail. The baseball draft is one of the best ways small market teams can compete with the likes of the Yankees, at least in terms of building a talent base. So when players refuse to sign after being drafted because they or their agents don't feel they're being paid top dollar for their potential, what is a small market team supposed to do? Sign the not-so-talented players? I guess you might say: "Well, those teams just have to do a better job of scouting and hiring people who can evaluate talent." That's true, to an extent. We've seen teams like Oakland do better than others recently. And often the best players come from later rounds in the draft. But you should be able to understand small market fans getting irritated when their first round draft pick's agent and team can't come to agreement. Especially when that huge multi-million signing bonus represents money that could be spent on other needs for the team. Fans are just not going to feel that the first place team millions should go is to a player who will be in the minors.

This is the other thing that doesn't put fans on your side. Your top dollar free agent deals preclude small market teams from signing top talent. And when a you and a team DO reach a deal, your excellence in helping your client, either draft pick or free agent, takes away dollars that the team could have spent elsewhere to improve itself. It isn't always that the dollar either goes into the player's pocket or the owner's; it could also go into other players' pockets and help to build a stronger team. It would be an interesting poll to take among your clients: What would you choose, if you could- A) having your $20 million and being on a team that doesn't get into or win the world series, or B) getting only $10 million but being part of a world series champion and possible dynasty? If it's the latter, I'm sure you could set them up.

I think this is really more the cause of the fans' ire- that the players don't seem to share fans' number one goal of having their team be a champion. For much of the past century, when players were bound to their teams with no leverage, the best way they had of bettering their pay was for their team to win the Series or finish in the top division. Thus, (though unfair to the players) the fans and players had the same prime goal- winning. After free agency, though, that goal (as goal #1) is no longer shared, and fans are understandably disillusioned by it and reminded of it when your demands or deals are announced.

p.s. Fine writing, Roel, as usual. Keep the articles coming. A question for you, or anyone else... Do players usually have agents in place prior to the draft, as Drew did, or are teams commonly playing Russian roulette with draft picks, not knowing who may end up choosing a Scott Boras to represent them?
12:31 PM Sep 3rd
 
nickblakeley
Does Boras actually work for the "little guy", though? I really don't know. Does he have other clients besides the mega-stars and the high draft picks? Somehow I can justify him fighting and clawing for every dollar when the guy is making the league minimum (which is still probably 10x my salary), but to fight and claw to add an extra half mil onto an already enormous contract? It just seems excessive.

12:17 PM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi elricsi,

Thanks for your comments. You makes some very valid points.

We can certainly debate whether Boras would be better served signing shorter contracts in some instances. But one thing that stays consistent is his primary motivation.

We might not always agree with everything he does. But it's usually pretty clear why he does it.
9:48 AM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi monahan,

Thanks for the note. Glad you liked the article.

I think as a general rule, all of my readers should cut and paste my work and keep it on their desks at all times. Just to be safe.
9:43 AM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi Aaron B.,

Thanks for the comments. I appreciate it. Boras definitely draws strong reactions from people. There's no doubt that he's a polarizing figure. Glad the article struck a chord for you.
9:32 AM Sep 3rd
 
elricsi
How do you know Boras doesn't already have this framed on his wall?

I have no problem with him getting all the money he can for his boys. But if he were to make promises and not keep them, then that would not be cool. Also, sometimes it's better to take a lesser job you can do well, then to take on too much and flame out.

I think he also may be doing his clients a disservice by asking for very long term deals. A few years down the road the chosen team may suck, or just not be the place to be. Many times people would be better off if the deals were shorter, but for a higher annual salary.
2:23 AM Sep 3rd
 
monahan
Good stuff. If I was Boras I'd cut and paste this or print it and have it sitting on my desk.
12:52 AM Sep 3rd
 
aaronB
Roel, maybe it's because you so eloquently and beautifully put into words what I feel about Boras, but man, this is some good... stuff. Great writing.
12:12 AM Sep 3rd
 
RoelTorres
Hi Richie,

Thanks, man. I appreciate the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the article.
10:53 PM Sep 2nd
 
Richie
Very good stuff.
10:26 PM Sep 2nd
 
 
©2024 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Powered by Sports Info Solutions|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy