Daisuke Matsuzaka -Let The Bidding Begin.

[Guest Iubitul]

Edgy DC wrote: These Japanese teams have reserve rights on these players that are just as valid and invalid as our teams' reserve rights on their players. If they start raiding each other's players without compensating the foreign teams according to agreed-upon market mechanism, it would mean war between the two leagues. Something may have to be done, but declaring war on the Japanese league isn't it. Besides, exactly why would a Japanese star come to the United States only to be able to negotiate with the team that drafted him and paid like a first-year player?

I'm not talking about declaring war on the Japanese league.

I just don't like this bidding process. There is too much room for shenanigans with private bids. Furthermore, MLB teams should not be able to bid at all on these players while they are property of their Japanese team. Once a player has become a free agent, he should be slotted into the draft.

If anyone has a better method to keep these players from filling only a few select teams, I'm all ears.

I

[Guest Edgy DC]

Increase the visitors share of both stadium revenues and broadcast revenues.

Open up expansion and team movement to allow teams to compete for populated areas, thus negating the advantage of teams already situated there.

Two perfectly valid market-driven ways to balance the revenue disparity without doing it on the backs of players.

[Guest Iubitul]

Actually, I think they are doing it on our backs more than the players' backs...

[Guest Mr. Zero]

]Well, one thing is that if the Red Sox didn't bid in good faith but posted a crazy high bid just to keep Matsuzaka out of the Bronx, they'd create bad feelings with the guy and when he becomes a free agent one or two years from now he won't consider them, and may very well end up a Yankee. Now, I really don't think that the Yankees figured heavily into Boston's strategy. But assuming it did, bidding in bad faith would keep him away from the Yankees for one or two years. But signing Matsuzaka will keep him away from the Yankees for considerably longer than that.

Agreed. Though I keep thinking:

Cost of signing Matsuzaka: $110 million.

Cost of keeping him out of the hands of others: $0

[Centerfield]

SteveJRogers wrote: ="metirish"]Orestes Destrada is a great name,not to mention the fact that I have seen his name all over the place since this news broke..never heard of the guy before. From the "Why do these facts remain in my mind" department (if this is the same Destrada that we are talking about) -A Lefty hitting catcher with at least the MFYs during the late 80's -An original Marlin

Orestes Destrade's baseball card was in every pack I purchased as a child.

That may not be true, but it seemed like it.

[Guest Iubitul]

Centerfield wrote: ="SteveJRogers"] ="metirish"]Orestes Destrada is a great name,not to mention the fact that I have seen his name all over the place since this news broke..never heard of the guy before. From the "Why do these facts remain in my mind" department (if this is the same Destrada that we are talking about) -A Lefty hitting catcher with at least the MFYs during the late 80's -An original Marlin Orestes Destrade's baseball card was in every pack I purchased as a child. That may not be true, but it seemed like it.

just to show how old I am, it seemed like I got Tito Fuentes in every pack I opened as a kid.

[Guest patona314]

Mr. Zero wrote: The way I am understandng the situation, if Boston and Matzuzaka can't reach a contract agreement he must stay in Japan. And then Boston is no longer responsible for the 51 mill. So Boston blows everyone away with their outrageous offer, maybe they attempt some sort of contract negotiation. It all falls apart, no one gets Matzuzaka. But even better, it prevents the Wankees from landing him. Sort of brilliant, though I'm thinking there must be a reason why this could or should not be allowed to happen. Maybe this was addressed elswhere in the 11 pages of this topic. If so, sorry.

brilliant move by the bosox. if boras asks for too much... back to japan he goes and the bosox keep $51M. next year there is no bidding process . he's a pure free agent. thanks too the hype that went on this year. his price tag will be astromical. the yankmees will get him and pay a price that will even hurt them financially. That scenario would be a beautiful sight... but...

what if boras knows what the bosox are up to (which i hope he does).... he signs him to a contract similar to the one mussina is about to sign (2yrs $23M) and matzusaka walks at the ripe old age of 28.

either way, yankees lose

[nymr83]

i can't see how the red Sox could let him sign for only 2 years after paying 51 million, you'd think that at that rate they've got 7 years in mind

[duan]

Nymr83 wrote: soccer should either be called "soccer" or "futbol" to stop confusing people.

Leaving aside that 'real football' came way earlier,

If there's one game that's played primarily with the feet and one primarily with the hands, which do you think should be called football.

[nymr83]

call your shit anything you want in your country, here in america THIS is football.

[Guest Edgy DC]

You tell him, John Wayne.

How about, if there's any room for ambiguity --- such as comparing team sports on an international scale like we're doing here --- we use "American Football"?

I don't know how to make the standards based on "we say here" and "you say there" when where we are is a virtual place anyhow, with people posting from here and there.

[Willets Point]

Historically, all games played on foot were called football as opposed to more aristocratic games which were played on horseback, so the term has nothing to do with playing with one's feet. Different countries/cultures have codified different rules of football - association football, American football, Gaelic football, Australian-rules football, Canadian football, rugby - but they're all "football."

[soupcan]

Thanks Dusty!

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

The name "football" seems to be a better fit for the game that we Americans call soccer. Kicking plays a much bigger role than in American football.

Tackleball would probably be more appropriate for the NFL game. It's probably the thing that's most unique about the game. (Yardball would be another possibility.) When you think of it, other games are named after the thing that they share with the fewest other sports: bases, baskets, volleys, dodging.


Also, I've heard small kids get confused about names of sports. Kids sometimes talk about playing "tennisball" or "soccerball."

[seawolf17]

]ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. -- The Tampa Bay Devil Rays won the negotiating rights to Japanese star third baseman Akinori Iwamura on Wednesday, submitting a winning bid of about $4.5 million for the power hitter. On Tuesday, the Boston Red Sox paid $51.1 million for the rights to talk to Japanese star pitcher Daisuke Matsuzaka. The Devil Rays have 30 days to finalize a contract with Iwamura. If he is not signed by Dec. 15, Tampa Bay gets its money back and Iwamura returns to play in Japan. Iwamura, 27, was a five-time All-Star in eight seasons with the Yakult Swallows. A left-handed hitter, he batted .311 with 32 homers and 77 RBI in 145 games last season. Iwamura was Japan's starting third baseball in the World Baseball Classic last spring. He was a six-time Gold Glove winner. Iwamura hit 188 homers with 570 RBI in eight seasons with Yakult. He hit at least 30 home runs in each of the past three years and set a Swallows record for most homers by a Japanese native with 44 in 2004.

So who gets more out of their investment? Nice move by the Devil Rays.

[metirish]

I had to look twice, thought at first $4.5M was $45 million.....isn't there another Japanese pitcher going up for bid soon...plays for Valentines team I think.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I hope he does well for them. It's nice that I have no reason to root against him; if he becomes an All-Star for the Devil Rays it will have no impact on the Mets at all.

And, even though it's a longshot, if it makes the AL East more competitive, all the better.

[Elster88]

]Daisuke (pronounced Dice-K)

???

[Guest Edgy DC]

We've discussed that.

We're halfway through the negotiating period now and Boston and Matsuzaka have no deal. You wonder if Scott Boras doesn't have some mixed interests here.

[metirish]

Boston have made an offer that they call 'fair and comprehensive',what's interesting is this bit from the ESPN article.....

] If the Red Sox don't sign Matsuzaka, his rights returns to the Lions. To avoid that, Seibu could reduce the bid to help the sides reach a deal.

[metirish]

] BOSTON -- 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." Red Sox president Larry Lucchino, in Tokyo to handle the negotiations, said the team has made a formal offer to Matsuzaka and agent Scott Boras that Lucchino called "fair" and "comprehensive." According to the Hartford Courant, it was believed to be in the $7-million to $8-million a year range, with Boras reportedly seeking $15 million.

[Sandgnat]

Starting to seem like the Red Sox never really intended to sign this guy and just ridiculously overbid in the posting process to ensure he didn't go somewhere else (NYY).

[nymr83]

all the Japanese teams are owned by corporations right? couldn't whoever owns the Seibu Lions, if they wanted to give him a kickback, just "hire" him to make a commercial or billboard advertsing their product?

[metirish]

Nymr83 wrote: all the Japanese teams are owned by corporations right? couldn't whoever owns the Seibu Lions, if they wanted to give him a kickback, just "hire" him to make a commercial or billboard advertsing their product?

Interesting article....

] Talk of Misconduct Is Swirling Around Red Sox By MURRAY CHASS Published: December 8, 2006 The Boston Red Sox might think of the Yankees as the Evil Empire, but other people in baseball now seem to view the Red Sox as a team that feels it can operate outside the rules. Schedule/Results Individual Stats | Team Roster | History Discuss the Mets According to executives of several clubs, the Red Sox were a hot topic of private conversation at the general managers� meeting last month and at the winter meetings this week. Several officials who work for Major League Baseball said there appeared to be good reason for the talk. Many of those interviewed did not want to be quoted by name because of what they viewed as the sensitivity of talking critically about another team�s conduct. � Exhibit A for the disgruntled is Boston�s signing of J. D. Drew, who walked away from the final three years of his contract with the Los Angeles Dodgers, a move that his agent, Scott Boras, said was aboveboard and precipitated by the marketplace. The signing of Drew could lead to an investigation by the commissioner�s office into possible tampering by the Red Sox; one baseball official said the commissioner�s office would vigorously investigate the matter if it received a complaint, but added that no complaint has been forthcoming. One general manager said that many people at the general managers� meeting, after hearing that Drew would sign with Boston, urged the Dodgers to file a tampering charge. �We haven�t reached a decision yet,� Ned Colletti, the Dodgers� general manager, said by telephone yesterday before leaving the winter meetings in Orlando, Fla. Others described Colletti as angry about the Drew development and said that relations between Colletti and Theo Epstein, Boston�s general manager, had become strained to the point where Colletti wasn�t returning Epstein�s telephone calls. Epstein denied tampering with Drew, whom he tried unsuccessfully to sign two years ago and then signed earlier this week to a five-year, $70 million contract. �That�s not true,� Epstein said by telephone yesterday. �There�s nothing to that.� Epstein said he had no conversations with Boras before Drew became a free agent. That occurred when Drew opted out of his Dodgers contract Nov. 10. Skeptics suspect that the Red Sox let Drew know that if he exercised his right to leave the Dodgers, he could get a more lucrative contract from them. An executive of one club said the Dodgers� owner, Frank McCourt, was certain tampering had occurred. McCourt�s office said he was traveling yesterday and was not available to comment. Two years ago, Drew signed a five-year, $55 million contract with the Dodgers with a clause that allowed him to terminate the deal after two years. At various times last season, Drew displayed what appeared to be positive feelings about playing in Los Angeles, and uniformed members of the Dodgers told people in the front office that Drew had told them he intended to stay with the team. Six days before the end of the season, Drew told Bill Plunkett of The Orange County Register that he was happy in Los Angeles and had not thought about the opt-out clause. He said he did not plan to use it. �At some point,� he remarked, �you make those commitments and you stick to them.� Even closer to the opt-out deadline, several days before it, Drew told Rich Donnelly, the Dodgers� third-base coach, how much he was looking forward to the 2007 season and talked about what the Dodgers needed to do for the season, saying he couldn�t wait for it to arrive, according to a baseball executive. A few days later he left the Dodgers, walking away from a guaranteed $33 million. Drew is a talented but fragile player who has been on the disabled list seven times in his eight-year career and has never played as many as 110 games two years in a row. �I don�t think he�s the kind of player who would walk away from $33 million without some idea of what was out there,� a baseball official said. Boras said Drew walked away from the contract because he had told him what the market was for a player of his caliber. �I did my due diligence,� Boras said in a telephone interview. �There were a number of teams that need a 3, 4 or 5 hitter, and J. D. was the only center fielder. I went to the Dodgers a week before the opt-out date and had lunch with Colletti. I had not yet met with J. D. I said if you want to talk about it, we are prepared to talk because J. D. has enjoyed his time in L. A.� The Dodgers, though, were not prepared to extend the current deal, so Drew decided to become a free agent, Boras said. �This is nothing other than a standard, customary free-agency evaluation for me,� Boras said. �I thought it was a very easy decision.� Boras said he had no discussion about Drew with the Red Sox before Nov. 10. �We adhere to the rules,� he added. But others remain skeptical. Club executives and baseball officials are also watching the Red Sox negotiations with Boras for Daisuke Matsuzaka, the Japanese pitcher, for whom Boston bid $51.1 million just for the right to talk to him. They have observed as Larry Lucchino, the Red Sox chief executive, recently went to Japan to meet with Matsuzaka�s team, the Seibu Lions, for the stated purpose of establishing a working agreement between the teams. They have read with interest Boras�s view that there is no rule barring the Lions from sharing part of the posting fee with the player, thus making it easier for the Red Sox to sign him for less of their own money. �No one can enter into an agreement that would circumvent the posting process,� said Lou Melendez, major league baseball�s vice president for international operations. �What I read would seem to be a way of getting around the posting process. The commissioner�s office would investigate. If you speak to the Japanese commissioner�s office, which we have, any kind of arrangement, this or any other, would not be allowed.� The commissioner�s office wouldn�t allow it for another reason: it would be a way for the Red Sox to try to avoid paying the luxury tax, since giving Matsuzaka a smaller contract would diminish the overall Boston payroll. � Several executives of other teams have also cited the four-year-old Kevin Millar case, in which the Red Sox signed Millar after the Florida Marlins sold him to a Japanese team. Contrary to accepted practice, the Red Sox then won the right to have Millar play for them, with Millar helping their cause by saying he had changed his mind about playing in Japan. The next year, he helped Boston win the World Series. That ended the famous Red Sox curse, but now the team seems to be the subject of resentment.

[Guest sharpie]

I think the Red Sox are just being smart here. Boras has no leverage other than letting him go back to Japan for a year, which he doesn't want to have happen.

[Frayed Knot]

RE: the Drew case:
Tampering - it seems to me - would have to be one of the more difficult things to prove.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I agree. The Boras and Drew and Epstein's stories all sound like they could be perfectly legitimate. Doesn't mean they're not guilty, but their stories don't seem fishy.

What would be the penalty for tampering anyway? Fines? Or could Selig void the Boston contract and reinstate the LA contract?

[Frayed Knot]

]What would be the penalty for tampering anyway? Fines? Or could Selig void the Boston contract and reinstate the LA contract?

Selig would have the power to do either - although the further it gets away, time-wise, from the Boston signing the more difficult it would be to negate the new contract and then return him to LA (would they even want him?) or make Drew a FA again as teams would have their rosters more filled out reducing the market for Drew, etc.

[metirish]

I imagine if Selig tried to void a contract he'd have the players union filing all sorts of lawsuits.

[nymr83]

i doubt he could reinstate the LA contract, he could probably void the BOS one, though i doubt he'd have the balls to do it.
is "tanpering" an "offense" that the player would get fined for at all or is it only the tampering club that suffers?
Personally I think if there was tampering the club and the agent should be fined.