Jump to content

USAToday: Boras Quotes


weams

Recommended Posts

Boras is looking at it through the lens of an agent and his one and only motivator is money. I don’t care what he has to say. If there was a spending cap things would look a whole lot more even but we all know that’ll never happen so teams must adapt and work within the construct of mega teams vs teams developed through a rebuild of some sort. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You can be bad without tanking.

Heck you can trade off expiring assets while being bad without tanking.  Yankees did it, worked out really well for them.

Taking a team and tearing it down to a bare framework is not the only way to build a winner, even if you don't have unlimited payroll.

 

I agree. But of course the Orioles organization was a complete mess and really did need to be taken down to the bare framework. Organizations like St. Louis are among the very best top to bottom. Organizations like the Orioles were marginally or run to to bottom. The Tigers organization ran itself into the ground. I think the Orioles and a few other organizations were best served with a complete organizational rebuild. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ohfan67 said:

I agree. But of course the Orioles organization was a complete mess and really did need to be taken down to the bare framework. Organizations like St. Louis are among the very best top to bottom. Organizations like the Orioles were marginally or run to to bottom. The Tigers organization ran itself into the ground. I think the Orioles and a few other organizations were best served with a complete organizational rebuild. 

Sure, I'm on board with that view.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristotelian said:

Could do a lottery system like the NBA. I'm not convinced it would change anything since the MLB draft is so unpredictable, but Boras is not wrong.

NBA teams still tank with the lottery system in place. MLB would have to think about any plan to implement a draft lottery carefully if the goal is to end tanking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, luismatos4prez said:

I agree with Boras. Tanking is detrimental to the league.

I'm a broken record. But the fact that some think non-tendering Villar (or similar moves) is good strategy is frustrating to me. What does that ~$10M saved do for the club? What do they do with that money that's more productive than having a good baseball player play for the baseball team?

Winning 62 games instead of 58 means something to the fans that attend/watch those 4 games. And the payroll is already plenty low enough for a rebuild. About $65M without deferred money this year. About $80M lower than it was 2 years ago. Good for 29th in the majors last year, maybe low enough for 30th this year. And that's with Villar, Givens, Mancini, etc.

Non-tendering Villar is an awful idea. Trading him is fine, but I don't want to see a cash dump trade like Jim Johnson for Weeks. Villar's a valuable asset even with a high salary.

Unless he has a bad year, and then everyone will complain about not dumping him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

I don't think your suggestion is quite the fix-all that you believe it to be. It doesn't eliminate this so-called incentive to lose.. you'd still have to be a bad team. It doesn't incentivize winning, imo. It would create a tank war between the last and next-to-last teams within most divisions for the last part of each season. It gives hope to many more teams of stealing that no. 1 overall pick.

That’s a valid point, but remember that every solution comes with its own set of problems, and I think this particular solution solves more problems than it creates. I don’t think it would create a sudden losing war between the  last two teams in every division,  because for most of them, losing enough to be the best of the worst would involve taking a step back, And they are already going to have a high pick anyway, so it is unlikely to be worth it.

 I do see your point, but I don’t think that is a major Impediment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Orioles actively prepped themselves for tanking by trading their top pitching prospects, not participating internationally in a meaningful way and by forfeiting their top draft picks to sign less than stellar free agents. Boras was probably just as happy with their dependence on the free agent market then as he is upset with their tanking. Can't have it both ways. If you're going to help the Chris Davis and Ubaldo Jimienez types get out of this world contracts, don't complain when the teams that signed them fall to earth and have to start over. No, Boras doesn't make the owners sign the deals, but he plays the system hard one way. He shouldn't be surprised when the inevitable reckoning comes.

Note:I don't know who Ubaldo's agent was. if it wasn't Boras, it doesn't matter; he's just an example.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Brewers lost 94 games in 2015 and managed to win 96 and make the playoffs last year without tanking.  The Cardinals have never tanked.  Giants built their mini dynasty without tanking (unless you count 90 and 91 loss seasons as tanking).

I think the strategy depends on the team’s situation.    When your team wins 47 games while trying to win, is stuck with a $23 mm/yr contract for a terrible player, has a poor minor league system and has several of its better players reaching the end of their productive years for the team (due to age or looming free agency) — it’s time to tank.   I literally don’t think the Orioles had any other rational choice.     Hopefully Elias can put them into a position where, once they become good again, they can be better at keeping a stream of good talent in the pipeline and not have to resort to putting all the chips in the center of the table and then tanking when that hand has been played.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think the strategy depends on the team’s situation.    When your team wins 47 games while trying to win, is stuck with a $23 mm/yr contract for a terrible player, has a poor minor league system and has several of its better players reaching the end of their productive years for the team (due to age or looming free agency) — it’s time to tank.   I literally don’t think the Orioles had any other rational choice.     Hopefully Elias can put them into a position where, once they become good again, they can be better at keeping a stream of good talent in the pipeline and not have to resort to putting all the chips in the center of the table and then tanking when that hand has been played.   

I'm in agreement.   I had issue with the statement "Tanking is really the only way to go ".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corrupt system and yet he's not shy about telling the Yankees they need to open their checkbook (for his clients)

Quote

“Each franchise has windows of opportunity. I think everybody, when they talk about the Yankees, I think everyone views them as a now team. They view them as a club that is very capable of being really, really successful over a four-year or so period. And certainly, they’re in a great place to take advantage of that."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thezeroes said:

$25 to $30 Million GOOD???  with three to four years remaining on the same dollar amount???

The idea is the early years are at a surplus, which subsidizes the later years.    Nobody thinks a guy is going to be worth $30 in his last few years, but if he’s worth $50 mm in the early years and is only being paid $30 mm then it can be worthwhile.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's so much more than just "losing to get draft picks". That's selling a true rebuild a little short IMO. 

Teams aren't to blame, MLB is, obviously. I don't really have a problem with it. Rebuilding/tanking can be quicker than digging yourself out of multiple years of stupid spending in the guise of competing. Fooling yourself into competing can sink a team for decades, as we know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, I can't get mad at Boras for getting the most amount of money for his clients that he can.  That is the job of any agent.  People act like it's a bad thing but that's what he's hired to do.

Second, there's no reason to win 70 games.  Billy Beane said it best...I can't remember the exact words, but he said either you're contending or rebuilding and anything else in the middle is a waste.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...