RockRaines Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(knightni @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 04:35 PM) It wasn't official though until you posted Rock. And yet, the banter continues......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 SI.com is reporting that the Red Sox offer to Matsuzaka is about half of Borass's request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 27, 2006 -> 02:35 PM) SI.com is reporting that the Red Sox offer to Matsuzaka is about half of Borass's request. On ESPN radio this morning, they stated that Boras may have wanted a 1 year deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Link. If this article is right, and they're offering $7-8 mil, that is absurdly low. Unless it's a one-year deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 27, 2006 -> 03:27 PM) On ESPN radio this morning, they stated that Boras may have wanted a 1 year deal. If that's true, then IMO Boras is trying to bust 30 day window and challenge the posting system. To post the 50+ million, the theory was the Red Sox would tie in Japanese networks, ads... etc, a one year deal probably wouldn't lend itself to those types of deals being very profitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFan562004 @ Nov 27, 2006 -> 05:26 PM) If that's true, then IMO Boras is trying to bust 30 day window and challenge the posting system. To post the 50+ million, the theory was the Red Sox would tie in Japanese networks, ads... etc, a one year deal probably wouldn't lend itself to those types of deals being very profitable It depends what it meant. Suppose he came in around $15 mil and the Sawks stuck at $7.5. Maybe he replies, okay, $8 mil, but only on a one-year deal. Sounds doubtful. The rumor before bidding ended was that he would insist on a 3-year deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 According to ESPN, the Sawks could be getting $$ relief from Seibu. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/ru...atures%2frumors It's an insider article unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 QUOTE(knightni @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 06:41 PM) According to ESPN, the Sawks could be getting $$ relief from Seibu. http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/ru...atures%2frumors It's an insider article unfortunately. Insider is junk. Here is the original article it was referencing/recycling, which is now superseded by this article. The Boston Red Sox cannot reduce their $51.1 million bid for Daisuke Matsuzaka in order to sign him, even if his Japanese team agrees to take less, baseball officials said Tuesday. "There are no side deals in the situation," said Jimmie Lee Solomon, executive vice president of baseball operations in the commissioner's office. "Everybody's been assured that's not allowed, and everybody's been made aware of the rules." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klaus kinski Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 I was watching the Boston Bruins & Maple Leafs on NESN last night-there a constant crawl on screen with news about this possible signing with quotes from team president saying it will get done and the jerk Boras commenting about a fair deal and looking elsewhere if no agreement made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 SI.com has an article up (sorry, didn't copy the link) that basically says MLB will watch closely that no kick backs go from the Lions to the Red Sox. It's one thing to disagree with the posting process, but it is a blind bid, they bid a lot to guarantee the rights, it wouldn't be fair to the Mets (what something like 10m less) who finished second if this happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 So out of curiousity, if things don't work out with Boston, and they do go to the Mets, are the Mets still obligated to honor that posting fee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) So out of curiousity, if things don't work out with Boston, and they do go to the Mets, are the Mets still obligated to honor that posting fee? From what I understand, if things don't work out with Boston, he goes back to Japan for a year and then becomes a free agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 01:19 PM) From what I understand, if things don't work out with Boston, he goes back to Japan for a year and then becomes a free agent. Supposedly if Selig decides that Boston didn't negotiate in "good faith" they can then award Matsuzaka to the next bidder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 11:19 AM) From what I understand, if things don't work out with Boston, he goes back to Japan for a year and then becomes a free agent. If the MLB Commissioner determines that Boston was not negotiating in good faith, the Commish has a right to revoke Boston's bid and let it fall to the next bidder. But I'm not sure what the rules are regarding the 2nd bidder and if they have to honor their original bid now that the process is no longer blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Interesting. So if Boston doesn't think they make a deal with Boras, they can try and undermine the system and have it fall to next bidder. Thereby, making sure the Yankees don't get him because the Mets were next in line. Lovely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Can't the Japanese club also reject the Mets/second highest bidder if the Red Sox don't ink the deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 http://www.progressiveboink.com/dugout/archive/nick92.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Stolen from wizardsofoz at SSS: http://redsox.bostonherald.com/redSox/view...rticleid=169531 Rumor, as of this morning, is still that Boras wants $15 mil, while the Sawks offer $7-8. $7-8 mil is ridiculously low. If it's true, and who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2692964 Dealings would need 'abrupt change' to beat deadline After all the hoopla surrounding the $51.1 million bid the Red Sox posted to talk to Daisuke Matsuzaka, it appears a contract may not materialize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Here's the Herald article the ESPN article's referring to. Lots of vagueries, like However, the well-placed source blamed Boras for stubbornly being unable to get over the flaws in the Japanese posting system, saying that he has been unwilling to negotiate and that he has acted disinterested in even making a deal. and this odd criticism: ...Boras...has hinted repeatedly that the process will end either in Matsuzaka signing with the Red Sox or with Matsuzaka declining and having to go back to Japan. Well...yeah. "Hinted"??? Those are just the rules. The article refers to the starting point in the negotiations (Sawks: $7-8 mil, Boras: $15), but says "It is unclear if counterproposals have been exchanged". Huh? That's kinda important. Very weird article -- it strongly blames Boras without any details. If I were Matsuzaka's agent, I'd be "disinterested" with a $7.5 mil offer, as well. And I'd be calling Selig... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 12:09 PM) Here's the Herald article the ESPN article's referring to. Lots of vagueries, like and this odd criticism: Well...yeah. "Hinted"??? Those are just the rules. The article refers to the starting point in the negotiations (Sawks: $7-8 mil, Boras: $15), but says "It is unclear if counterproposals have been exchanged". Huh? That's kinda important. Very weird article -- it strongly blames Boras without any details. If I were Matsuzaka's agent, I'd be "disinterested" with a $7.5 mil offer, as well. And I'd be calling Selig... Why? This dude is unproven at the ML level. What makes him worth a $15M per multiyear deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 The Red Sox think they can sign Matsuzaka for what Marquis got per year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 01:26 PM) Why? This dude is unproven at the ML level. What makes him worth a $15M per multiyear deal? Whatever made him worth $51 mil. I don't think there's any doubt he'd get something like $15 mil as a fa in this market. He's certainly not only getting Marquis money. Now, players may get less than fair market value because of the posting system. But not this much less -- it's ridiculous to ask someone to accept half their value just because you CHOSE to bid ludicrous amounts of money to talk. Would you advise your client to f himself over just to do the Red Sox a solid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 12:35 PM) Whatever made him worth $51 mil. I don't think there's any doubt he'd get something like $15 mil as a fa in this market. He's certainly not only getting Marquis money. Now, players may get less than fair market value because of the posting system. But not this much less -- it's ridiculous to ask someone to accept half their value just because you CHOSE to bid ludicrous amounts of money to talk. Would you advise your client to f himself over just to do the Red Sox a solid? By bidding that much, the worst that could happen if they don't sign him is they kept him away from the Yankees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 01:58 PM) By bidding that much, the worst that could happen if they don't sign him is they kept him away from the Yankees. If they bid that much and refuse to give anything close to market value, the commish should invalidate the bid. Otherwise, the posting system is pretty much dead. Not to mention that it's a black eye for MLB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts