Mets getting a crack at Matsuzaka?

spnited, I brought up the Mets because I know that is your team and I think it is fair to judge your statements on this subject with that in mind.

I'm a Pirates fan, so my team was out of this before it even started. Actually, the fact that the bid doesn't count toward the luxury tax is just another reason baseball's system of revenue sharing leaves much to be desired...but that's off topic.

The point is they should be basing their offer on what they think the guy should be paid based on his ability and track record and the market. In this case, they are a market of one. If Boras wants to be stubborn, fine. I never said it was a brilliant move by Boston. I just think the accusations of not bidding in good faith are crap.

The size of the bid should take into account the fact that they expected to be bidding only against themselves.

 

Do you know of a single one of his clients who has ever expressed such a sentiment?

 

Let's wait and ask Matsuzaka if he gets stuck going back to Japan for another year.

 

DMat as Bora$$$ calls him, will get paid and big and Bora$ will not leave a nickle on the table. But Bora$ wants a 3 year contract so DMat can become a free agent ASAP and reap more money from a bidding war. The Redsox don't want to pay $51 million for a 3 year rental.

Bora$ is great for his client's financial health, but if ARod merely signed the largest contract in history by a 10 million, he would be a happier player, and perhaps a better player. ARod's contract has not served his game well. Now, ARod would probably pay 25 million if he could be on a World Series winner in New York, while still in is prime

 

If Matsuzaka gets stuck going back to Japan, Boras failed his client. There is even some risk that the ownership of the Lions could torpedo his chances at being posted again next year (something about sending him to the minors for a month). And, he would have just cost them $51 million, so....

 

DMat has no fair market value because he has never pitched in the major leagues for a full season. The Red Sox bid 51 million not just to negotiate with him but to sign him. Part of that 51 million has to be considered part of his salary from a Red Sox stand point. Image for a moment if he fails or gets injured and the Red Sox paid 51 million plus 10 million a year for 3 or 4 years totalling 90 plus million for a failure. That is a huge risk and one clearly the Red Sox accounted for. At the same time DMat wants to pitch in the majors (as it has be a life long dream). Clearly, Boras is trying to get the most money for his client (and himself) but he doesn't have the leverage he normally has and this is changing the game plan he normally uses to extract extra money from team. In the end I highly doubt that DMat returns to Japan. I could see a 3 year deal for 8-9 million per plus incentives and a mutual 4th year option. Whether he is worth market value mean nothing until he pitches one full season.

 

wow thanks indiansnetwork for re-hashing the first 2 1/2 pages of this thread in one bite-sized graph. Now we all understand what's going on.

 

Of course, idiotsnetwork starts with 3 faulty premises:
1. Matsuzaka has no fair market value (what value do you place on a top of the rotation starter, a 1 or 2, regardless of whether he has pitched in Japan or the US? That's what the Red Sox consider him)
2. Part of that $51 mill has to be considered part of his salary from the red Sox standpoint (Totally fucking wrong. Who told the assholes to outbid everybody by more than $15 million. You wanna be stupid, you suffer)
3. This is a huge risk (no more so than giving JD fucking Drew $70 mill for 5 years---half of which will be spent on the DL)

Other than that, great post idiot.

 

Lay off him, Spnited. He's about as stupid as Hondo.

 

Sorry, dickhead, he makes Hondo look like a goddamn genius.

 

Actually that is a little wrong. While they obtained the rights to negotiate, the reason the Red Sox went up to $51 million was to enter the Japanese market. Without that aspect the Sawx probably only bid in the mid-20's.

 

That is an ulterior motive.

Let's say I am in a store with my 3-year-old and we see a large, stuffed Dora the Explorer doll that costs $20. My daughter loves Dora, so I buy it for her. I am paying $20 for the doll. The ulterior motives are making my daughter happy and giving me some peace and quiet on the way home.

Now say some girl who is still young enough to like Dora, but old enough to have her own money buys the same doll. She is paying the same price, but she doesn't get the added bonus of making her child happy or a more peaceful trip home.

By your argument, should I have to pay more for the same doll because I am getting more out of the deal than the other buyer?

Wow, that almost makes sense...except for the part where I spent $20 for a stupid doll...