Scott Bores and clients

The hearing was 9/10. Will the Pirates and the royals lose their 1st round draft picks? If so can the players play college ball or will they be free agents???

This is an interesting situation. Apparently Alvarez never signed his contract. We'll have to wait at least until Sept. 23 to find out what happens with this.
Pedro Alvarez grievance hearing begins

I would think that if MLB approved Hosmer's deal, that deal will stick. The union might seek some sanction against management, but that should not upset Hosmer's deal. The fact that the Commissioner's office may have breached the labor agreement by allowing Hosmer's deal does not make that deal illegal and should not stop it from being enforceable by both sides. At most it allows the union to seek some sanction against the Commissioner's office, but not against Hosmer.

If Alvarez never signed, though, I don't see how he can do much at this point except go to indy ball. He obviously has hired an agent, so I would think his NCAA eligibility is gone.

With that, Boras' reputation (and ability to recruit young clients) will suffer a major hit. But beyond that, it seems to me that MLB is out to break Boras' kneecaps if it can. In the end, if Alvarez didn't sign, he made the decision, no matter who gave him what advice. For MLB to hold up Hosmer to try to pressure Boras over the Alvarez situation, though, is despicable and an aspect of this that has not gotten enough attention if you ask me.

Hosmer didn't ask for this and he did nothing wrong, so this really bugs me that Selig's office is pulling this stuff on him.

Certainly sounds like they are in NO HURRY to resolve this issue. Meanwhile Alvarez (and Hosmer?) are in limbo. Boras, however "brilliant" of a lawyer he may be, is synonymous with greed, ego and a lack of scruples. I don't understand why the top dogs continue to employ him when there are other good agents out there that come without the drama. There are even some that actually have the best interest of the player in mind when they negotiate. Imagine that!!!

boras could still be his advisor.not his agent.usually no money changes hands untill the bonus is given,players don't sign untill they have to.but it is boras.

Allow me to shed a lil light to.... '...breaking knee caps....& "I don't understand"

“First and foremost,” says former Ga Tech catcher & Boston Captain Jason Varitek, a Boras client, “he represents the player and not the club. Always.”

Enough said.

Thus, Boras could be credited with adjusting the dynamics of the MLB amateur draft. Whether the advise, [to turn down a deal if the signing bonus was below an amount, or continue with either college-ball/independent ball], is sound, has promoted some MLB GM and owners to steer clear of signing/drafting Boras's clients.

(i.e. WSox owner Reinsdorf and Boras probably won't go fishing in the same boat, any time soon.

Best and Worst - Boras)

Will S. Boras [as the history books will write] have more business impact for the MLBPA (vs the MLB Owners) than.......Marvin Miller?

How about:
Marvin Miller, and Scott Boras, along with Babe Ruth and Jackie Robinson, is one of the three or four most important men in baseball history?

Regards
Bear

I thought I read somewhere that Hosmer went against Boras' advice and signed anyway.

The first workout for the Royals instructionals begins Monday. Will the MLB keep Hos' out of that, too?

quote:

Marvin Miller,& Scott Boras, along with Babe Ruth and Jackie Robinson, is one of the three or four most important men in baseball history

The Almighty Boras with his name in lights forever...that is why he gets out of bed in the morning.

I find this all sad. Hosmer got caught in a mess.

I think in Alvarez's case there is more to this than we know. Was Boras angry that Alvarez tried to negotiate on his own in the end? Why didn't he just sign? Does 200K make that much difference when you are getting 6M? Not in our house it wouldn't.

What irks me is MLB allowing top picks and their agents to do business after the date imposed by the collective bargaining agreement. I am not sure if this will really hurt Boras in the end.

While it seems unfair to the kids he represents, they know his reputation when they choose him. If getting the top dollar is your number one priority in baseball/life, then Boras is your man and the drama and hold-outs that go along with it, are your choice.

There are a few people on this site whose sons have been approached by Scott Boras but chose other representation as their advisors or ageents. There are also a few whose sons are clients.

While we may not understand all that goes on, most make out pretty well.

I hate to burst your bubble, but when you're drafted, there's nothing else for an "advisor" or agent to do except get you the most he can get for you. That is his job. He is not there to uphold "the best interests of baseball", especially given that most who use that phrase really only mean that they wish ownership could keep more money for themselves.

Boras has drawn the enmity of MLB management for one reason: He does it very, very well. I would think any player in whom Boras shows interest would normally want to let him do what he can for him.

What's deeply troubling here is MLB's seeming willingness to injure an innocent player as a way of "getting even" with Boras. Remember, Hosmer signed, and he didn't do anything that MLB and the Royals didn't agree to.

While the union is often uninterested in the draft (its job after all is to represent guys already in the majors, and many of them resent guys getting big bucks without even being proven yet), I would think the union would be very, very concerned about MLB taking retaliatory action against any agent (and/or his clients) just because he's been successful. Especially given that Scott Boras represents so many players already, and even those he does not represent benefit when they hit the market and Boras has driven up the market price for them.

Seeing as how Alvarez and Hosmer are not playing baseball right now, it seems that he is not taking care of the "best interests" of his clients either. There are "advisors" out there that manage to get the best for their players while keeping their own names out of the headlines. Alvarez commanded top dollar without Boras. Let Boras take a non ranked nobody and get them a seven figure contract and then he can put a feather in his cap.

Was JD Drew hurt by his Boras led holdout? What is the downside for these players of being out even as much as a year? Sure they want to play and get their careers going, but what do they lose if they are top tier talent?

What do they gain?

I do beleive Hosmer was playing this summer in a league.
Alvarez hasn't signed, and most likely couldn't return to school anyway. I am not so sure if it is the extra $$, he could go all next year and still get drafted extremely high by another team. Is he looking for a ML contract for his client? If so, might be worth the wait, your MLB clock begins to tick immediately and an automatic roster spot.
As to what Superball has posted he is right and Boras' players who don't sign don't sit idle. They are top talent and will go pretty far, pretty fast anyway.
Why would Boras take on a non ranked player when he can have the best for his clients?

In Drew's case, as I recall, he gained about $7 million, at a time when there was no guarantee he would ever make it to the bigs. All it cost him was a year in indy ball, instead of in someone's farm system. See also: Luke Hochevar.

Could other advisors/agents get these deals? Maybe, but if you were one of the guys with that capability, would you take the chance on someone unproven? And if you were Boras, having earned the rep to recruit the guys capable of commanding top dollar, why would you go looking for the lower tier guys?

Boras would probably tell you, the players create their value. He simply tries to capture if for them, instead of letting management keep it. He's not in a position to take a 10th round guy and get him millions. But not every top-10 pick gets what Alvarez was offered (and apparently declined). So you have to wonder, why is it that Boras can get these offers, while others just sign their clients up for slot money and then take 5% of what they might've gotten on their own?

Just remember, most of the grumbling you hear about Boras comes from ownership and the Commissioner's office (which represents ownership). The rest comes from people who think it's ridiculous that A-Rod makes $27 m/year.

Though why people find it absurd that A-Rod makes half what Brittney Spears makes, I don't know. I guess they'd rather see the Steinbrenners, whose $10 m original investment is now worth billions, do even better, and at A-Rod's expense?

Meaning, there's an unfathomable money stream running through MLB right now, and everyone is trying to enlarge their share of the pie. Both sides are fighting over it. For a disinterested observer to attack Boras to me indicates lack of understanding of what's going on.

I completely understand that the Commissioner's office is trying to cut Boras off at the knees, as part of its pro-owner role. I think what they're doing is wrong, but I understand why they're trying it. Why anyone would think this is fair play, given the impact on someone like Hosmer, I cannot understand.

Let's face it: There's not one of us out there who, if we had the chance to make the A-Rod deal for ourselves or our sons, wouldn't do it. (Go ahead, tell me how you'd take $10m instead of $27m "for the good of the game.")

For a lot of players, their shelf life is short and they may never get another chance to cash in beyond the one immediately in front of them. This is even more so for draftees, who have no guarantee of ever playing a single game in MLB, much less accruing enough time to become free agents.

P.S.

I do think Alvarez made a dumb final decision, and I seriously doubt Boras advised him not to take that last offer. He was offered near-record money, and the odds of his staying at that level in the future are not terribly good.

Finally, while I truly am a disinterested observer, I guess my un-businesslike romantic vision of players actually playing for "the love of the game" is not realistic? $$ can't buy you love and anyone signing up with Boras gets whatever comes their way whether its sitting, playing for un-enamored fans, riding the storm becasue of anothers signing complications as in Hosmer's case, or banking more money than they can spend in a lifetime. Tho I may not be happy that my son will never generate the interest of someone as "esteemed" as Boras, I am pleased that greed is not in his vocabulary.