He won't be wrong...because someone is going to pay up. There are enough teams that want him that he'll get his 9/270 or whatever.

Boras is counting on increasing major league revenues being more than enough to offset A-Rod's declining value as he ages. I think he'll be making silly arguments that any intelligent and unbiased GM would laugh at, but history shows that Boras has a much deeper understanding of what drives team decisions than I do. He's already got the deal agreed to would be my guess.

i wouldn't be surprised if, once the bosox get over the celebration hangover, they sign rodriguez to something like 8/240. henry has had a taste of something he really likes, and securing the services of an inner-circle hall of famer at a key position for a while will really help towards extending his fix.

After Quatre Bras and Ligny Napoleon was going to lose however he fought.

This looks more like Scott Boras' Leipzig to me.

I know this is a crazy thought, but what if:
1) A-Rod really doesn't want to play in New York anymore;
2) He's made more money than he'll ever be able to spend;
3) Making a crapload more isn't that important to him;
4) Boras won't admit any of that publicly because it will hurt the negotiating value of a guy who doesn't want to play for the team with the most money;
5) Boras isn't going to cut A-Rod loose as a client, because even at a pay-cut, it's a guaranteed 3-5% of 20MM/year.

Maybe the goal isn't to make even more money. Maybe the goal is to go somewhere he'd feel more comfortable. I'm just not sure I see Boras as Mr. All-Powerful with ultimate sway over all of his clients. Then again, the fact that Bill Stoneman made him look like an idiot in the Jered Weaver negotiations is probably still fresh in my mind.

This Brittain fellow can write- hopefully, he'll soon get a regular gig.

i wouldn't be surprised if, once the bosox get over the celebration hangover, they sign rodriguez to something like 8/240.

I see your point, but wouldn't this be very hard to sell? It seems to me that the Red Sox have a higher proportion of a certain type of sentimental fan (by and large a type of fan who doesn't come here) who would be appalled if the Red Sox signed A-Rod to a big contract. I've already spoken to a Red Sox fan who is a friend of mine who said that he would be done with the Red Sox if they did this.

um, no. john henry is hardly going to run a poll of fans to see if they want a-rod on the team. sheesh. the way it would be played is here's a team (NYY) too dumb to keep one of the best players ever. i'd do it in a -- ahem -- new york minute. look, what's getting lost here is the incredible talent this guy is. let's say he's got 3-4 yrs. tops at this level. with the lineup the sox have now? they'll be in the lcs at least 4 out of the next 5 yrs. with a chance to take 2 or 3 more WS rings. further, 30 mil a year is not a problem for the top market teams. there's more money than ever in the game.

I've already spoken to a Red Sox fan who is a friend of mine who said that he would be done with the Red Sox if they did this.

He's lying.

Funny how a few years ago the Red Sox and Red Sox fans were falling all over themselves to get A-Rod. With Manny's contract up next year, and A-Rod worth a lot more than Manny, plus a huge hole at 3B, I really think Boston will be in this one. And, all the Red Sox fans that don't want him will turn if they get him, especially since his success with them would be another jab at the Yankees.

bingo.

As long as it involves Swedish chanteuses in blue sequined pantsuits everything will be A-OK.

He's lying.

Okay, Jimmy P, I'll be sure to tell him that you say he's lying. He seemed sincere to me. I even chided him that I had it in writing (an e-mail).

And, phredbird, we just disagree on this. You see fans as being more rational than I do. If everyone thought like you, who would be the audience for the mawkish sportswriter types -- the Shaugnessys, the Lupicas, the Bob Costas types, the Mitch Albom types? I would guess that fans who like those types of sportswriters do exist, that they are in the market and that, for them, the image of the players does matter.

What if...just what if...

Boston signs ARod and keeps Lowell, getting rid of Lugo? Imagine the lineup next year! Defense might be a little weak but it gives them line-up flexibility with or without Manny for 2009.

Substitute ARod for Lugo, and take away ARod from the Yankees lineup. Imagine what that does to the psyche of Posada and Rivera.

Well, given how this played out, I believe that Arod really wanted out, to the point that he's willing to leave some money on the table.

If he is wrong on either of these counts it could be Scott Boras’s personal Waterloo.

How much downside risk is there, here? A-Rod had a three-year deal left at $27 million a season. How many owners are there who would sign him tomorrow for three years at $25 million a season? Eight? Twelve? More?

This is almost a riskless move. A-Rod just had a better year than anyone else in baseball, and he had his own best season in five years in pretty trying circumstances. There's no better time to take himself public - and the economics of the game are better now than when he signed his last deal. The team that signs him, assuming they get the eight-year deal (or more) A-Rod seems to want, are buying huge chunks of ready-made history. I hate to sound all Boras-y, but investing in A-Rod at this point is not like investing in another superstar.

I figure at absolute worst (barring him injuring a knee playing pickup basketball or something crazy) A-Rod is going to sign somewhere for three years and $75 million, so that essentially he will have taken a small pay cut to engineer his own trade to exactly where he wanted, without his new team losing anything in talent.

But the potential upside, has to be a $300M floor. I know there are a lot of owners who would like to nail Boras and A-Rod to the wall on this one, but I don't see it happening... in the AL in particular there has been an insanely competitive arms race over the last several years, and there are no signs of it abating this coming season. For about nine AL teams, their planning for the coming season doesn't really begin until A-Rod gets done with somebody, and almost all of those teams are going to be doing their damnedest to convince themselves they can afford him.

Meanwhile, I am wondering about one team in the NL in particular who could use A-Rod to transform the entire franchise, the one team where A-Rod would probably have more impact than any other, the one team (other than the Yankees and Red Sox) where he fits perfectly into an already high-powered lineup.

Can the Phillies afford A-Rod?

Fun with endpoints:

Regular season (2004-2007)


Post season (2004-2007)


I wonder how much Scott Boras could get for Big Papi?

Best Regards

John

I know this is a crazy thought, but what if:
1) A-Rod really doesn't want to play in New York anymore;
2) He's made more money than he'll ever be able to spend;
3) Making a crapload more isn't that important to him;
4) Boras won't admit any of that publicly because it will hurt the negotiating value of a guy who doesn't want to play for the team with the most money;
5) Boras isn't going to cut A-Rod loose as a client, because even at a pay-cut, it's a guaranteed 3-5% of 20MM/year.

Maybe the goal isn't to make even more money. Maybe the goal is to go somewhere he'd feel more comfortable. I'm just not sure I see Boras as Mr. All-Powerful with ultimate sway over all of his clients.

I agree with this. In the rush to declare that ARod and Boras personify Evil, many people are overlooking very plausible reasons for the opt-out. Maybe ARod just wants to play shortstop. Maybe he wants to go to a place where he feels he might be more appreciated. Maybe he and his family want to go to a less intense city. Maybe he's happy with New York but just wants to consider all of his options before making a decision.

Maybe money is not the main concern. Not that I understand why that is supposed to be a bad thing.

Can the Phillies afford A-Rod?

Isn't A-Rod like the nuclear option for the NL? With so much parity I can imagine it's like having an atomic monopoly over the rest of the league. Here in the AL he's one more piece (albeit the BEST piece in baseball) but for one of the 7-8 NL teams who could really compete next year he's a monster. If we're to believe the regular season superiority of the AL, Alex moving to say Philly, Chicago or the Mess would make that team the favorite I'd think. Boston would love to have him I'm sure, but they're stacked with or without him.

If we're to believe the regular season superiority of the AL, Alex moving to say Philly, Chicago or the Mess would make that team the favorite I'd think.

100% agreed. Of course, the reason a lot of these teams are weak is that their pitching is patchy, and A-Rod won't do anything about that. But hell, adding A-Rod to that Philly infield probably makes it the best infield in history.

If he goes somewhere for LESS money, I'll believe it.

If he goes somewhere for LESS money, I'll believe it.

Less money than what? What his his opportunity cost (I'm seriously asking)?

Then again, the fact that Bill Stoneman made him look like an idiot in the Jered Weaver negotiations is probably still fresh in my mind.

I think there's a good likelihood of A-Rod just wanting out of the fishbowl, too, though if it were just that, wouldn't he have fired Boras first?

I have been, in general, very skeptical of the Angels signing A-Rod. Arte's public pronouncements aside, A-Rod runs against type for the Angels, who almost never buy superduperstars (Vlad being the obvious exception). There are other reasons to think Arte isn't likely going to go after A-Rod this offseason, one of which is that I seem to recall a lot of Arte's near-billion-dollar net worth is tied up in Arizona real estate, which is rather badly oversold at the moment. Not that I was expecting the Angels to rely on his bankroll to make up payroll deficits, but I'm sure he's looking a little more closely at all his operations' bottom lines these days.

The counterarguments for the Angels making a move are for the same reasons outlined by Jon Weisman today vis-a-vis the Dodgers:

I do want to address three of the chief arguments against signing Rodriguez. These are: 1) adding Rodriguez's salary would put too many eggs in one basket by leaving the Dodgers vulnerable if he were injured, 2) adding Rodriguez's salary to the team would prevent the Dodgers from making other necessary improvements to the squad and 3) adding Rodriguez would encourage a win-now philosophy that would renew the Dodgers' hopeless cycle of exchanging young talent for over-the-hill talent.

Note that all these arguments are fear-based. Fear that Rodriguez will get hurt. Fear that the Dodgers will be stupid. Having been an adult since before 1988, I understand those fears all too well.

As for Rodriguez getting hurt: Yes, it could happen. But he has a healthy track record – he's one of the better bets in the game as far as being in the lineup.

As for the Dodgers being stupid: If the Dodgers are going to be stupid, Rodriguez's presence or absence isn't going to change that. If the Dodgers don't sign Rodriguez (which of course remains the vast likelihood), that won't make them any less desperate to improve the team or any more insightful in their approach.

(3) is a little less likely with the Angels, who seem to be better managed these days than the guys in Chavez Ravine, at least as applies to the kids. (They've got a great AGM of scouting, though...)

Okay, Jimmy P, I'll be sure to tell him that you say he's lying. He seemed sincere to me. I even chided him that I had it in writing (an e-mail).

The issue is not whether he's lying; the issue is why any sane team would factor into its analysis an irrational fan's threats about how he'll react to such a signing.

Brattain:

Now A-Rod has a reputation as somebody who can be problematic in the clubhouse when things don’t go his way.

Huh?

The issue is not whether he's lying; the issue is why any sane team would factor into its analysis an irrational fan's threats about how he'll react to such a signing.

I'm just going by Jimmy P's words about someone he doesn't know.

Of course, much of marketing is based upon getting people to act "irrationally" (emotionally). You'll never go broke underestimating the irrationality of the American "fan."

Boston signs ARod and keeps Lowell, getting rid of Lugo? Imagine the lineup next year! Defense might be a little weak but it gives them line-up flexibility with or without Manny for 2009.

Where are they going to send Lugo? I'm sure Atlanta would be happy to pick up another Boston one-year SS reject if the Sox are paying the salary, but I'm not sure Boston likes that deal.

Ray:

He wasn't the most popular fellow in the Arlington clubhouse: calling pitches from SS, clashing with Showlater, being called 'the cooler' by ex-teammates.

Best Regards

John

edit: I was gonna fix that typo but it's too good not to keep.

I've been saying the whole time that Boras is the agent and A-Rod is the client. If A-Rod wants out of NY, then he'll opt out, regardless of what Boras wants. By the same token, you can't use A-Rod's eventual contract as a barometer of anything.

1. A-Rod wants out of NY.
2. Boras will get A-Rod as much money as possible.

1 and 2 are only peripherally related.

If A-Rod signs for less than $25M, it could mean that he thought he could get $40M, but without the Yankees involved he had to take a pay cut. Or it could mean that he thought he could $30M with the Yankees and $25M elsewhere and decided it was worth it.

The other side of the coin is true, too. If he signs for $35M, it could mean that he just wanted more money, or it could mean that he primarily wanted to be out of NY, and $35 was what he could get.

What would you pay to bring him to your team? The man has put up HOF numbers if he retired today, but why have the teams he has left improved? This isn't fantasy baseball we're talking about, it's the real thing.

When, other than this August and September, has he put a team on his back and led them anywhere?

I fully understand that he was hated from the moment he arrived in NY, but that's what happens when your only goal is to bust the salary structure.

Ray:

He wasn't the most popular fellow in the Arlington clubhouse: calling pitches from SS, clashing with Showlater, being called 'the cooler' by ex-teammates.

Granted I'm not up to speed on the clubhouse issues in Texas while he was there. But regardless, he was not problematic in the New York clubhouse over the last four years despite plenty of opportunity to be problematic if he had so chosen -- in fact, it was his teammates and manager that let him down --and since his time in New York is more recent, I think it's far more relevant.

What I'm getting at is that I think your statement of him being problematic in the clubhouse was a bit misleading, if all you were doing was considering his Texas years.

I know this is a crazy thought, but what if:
1) A-Rod really doesn't want to play in New York anymore;
2) He's made more money than he'll ever be able to spend;
3) Making a crapload more isn't that important to him;
4) Boras won't admit any of that publicly because it will hurt the negotiating value of a guy who doesn't want to play for the team with the most money;
5) Boras isn't going to cut A-Rod loose as a client, because even at a pay-cut, it's a guaranteed 3-5% of 20MM/year.

Maybe the goal isn't to make even more money. Maybe the goal is to go somewhere he'd feel more comfortable. I'm just not sure I see Boras as Mr. All-Powerful with ultimate sway over all of his clients. Then again, the fact that Bill Stoneman made him look like an idiot in the Jered Weaver negotiations is probably still fresh in my mind.

It's not crazy. $440M (career earnings with the Yankees offer) offers almost as much utility as $480M (career earnings with a new $300M contract). He doesn't want to play for the Yankees anymore, period. Soon we'll find out what he does want.

It's not crazy. $440M (career earnings with the Yankees offer) offers almost as much utility as $480M (career earnings with a new $300M contract). He doesn't want to play for the Yankees anymore, period. Soon we'll find out what he does want.

He wants to break all of Aubrey Huff's records to become the greatest slugger in Devil Rays history!

BTW, #4 was brilliant.

This looks more like Scott Boras' Leipzig to me.

I had to look that up in Wikipedia, but I really like the analogy.

No, no. This appears more like Scott Boras's Borodino. It'll be inconclusive as to whether he really won and then he'll have his housing burned. He'll trudge through snow drifts back to his base and then fight his Leipzig.

Spoiler: FRANCES LOSES

And then his Leipzig will be when Kyle Lohse gets a non-roster spring-training invite with the Pirates.

He wants to break all of Aubrey Huff's records to become the greatest slugger in Devil Rays history!

Carlos Pena already did that.

Jimmy P:
"Funny how a few years ago the Red Sox and Red Sox fans were falling all over themselves to get A-Rod."

A lot has happened since the Red Sox tried to sign A-Rod. With A-Rod now having played a prominent role for the Yankees and the BoSox winning two WS, I don't think an anti-A-Rod reaction by the Boston fan base is either "funny" or unwarranted.

As a Red Sox fan, I realize that he would make the Sox a lot better but I still don't want him on my team.

And 12, 23, and 25 seem to imply that a "rational fan" should always prefer that their team be constructed in whatever way wins them the most games. It seems to me that a rational fan should prefer that their team be constructed in whichever way makes them the most enjoyable to follow.

What I'm getting at is that I think your statement of him being problematic in the clubhouse was a bit misleading, if all you were doing was considering his Texas years.

It was an overview without getting into chapter and verse. I generally assume (with all the hazards that brings) that the reader is up to speed on certain things--especially when it comes to the MSM bashing everything A-Rod does.

Point taken however.

Best Regards

John

And 12, 23, and 25 seem to imply that a "rational fan" should always prefer that their team be constructed in whatever way wins them the most games. It seems to me that a rational fan should prefer that their team be constructed in whichever way makes them the most enjoyable to follow.

You're right about the concept of rationality, Jittery. We agree. I wasn't trying to knock the "non-rational" fan. I guess by using "rational," I was referring to a certain type of vaguely sabr-friendly fan who comes to this site. From a winning baseball viewpoint, A-Rod would be a great addition to the Red Sox. But, outside of that, from the perspective of probably most of their fans' enjoyment, A-Rod would be a disastrous addition. The same applies generally to Barry Bonds for any team.

I fully understand that he was hated from the moment he arrived in NY, but that's what happens when your only goal is to bust the salary structure.

He was a <u>bargain</U> to the Yankees. <u>A bargain.</u>

I wonder how much Scott Boras could get for Big Papi?

Not nearly as much, which I know you know, Mr. Trouble Maker. 8-)

Not nearly as much, which I know you know, Mr. Trouble Maker. 8-)

(bats eyelashes innocently)

Moi?

Best Regards

John

He was a bargain to the Yankees. A bargain.

You're right about that. I would guess that maybe 90% of Yankee fans never realized that or understood that.

I understand how much A-Rod was worth. But, still, looked at retrospectively, from my utilitarian standpoint, the sum total of the pleasures and pains of the A-Rod era in NY was right around 0. We have the individual great baseball achievements and the four post-season appearances on the positive side. On the negative side, you have the constant irritation of A-Rod stories in the media, A-Rod's phoniness, the post-season failures of him, the post-season failures of the team, and the effort that I compulsively expended to defend him (and attack Jeter's behavior) on various blogs.

Let's say I had a choice right now of two alternative 2008 futures for the team:
1. A-Rod signs a big contract extension with the Yankees, A-Rod has a season with production somewhere between his 2006 and 2007 seasons, the Yankees win the wild card, and again lose the ALDS with A-Rod having a mediocre ALDS.
2. A-Rod opts out, the Yankees compete for the wildcard while the young arms develop, but they do not win a slot in the post-season.

For me, personally, an analysis of the sum total of pains and pleasures would lead me to pick 2.

He was a bargain to the Yankees. A bargain.

$18m/yr, plus the loss of a player who was able to fetch $17m/yr on the open market. Actually, that's a bit expensive.

$18m/yr, plus the loss of a player who was able to fetch $17m/yr on the open market. Actually, that's a bit expensive.

WSAB = Win Shares Above Bench (Player); 3 win shares = 1 win
Soriano's WSAB 2004-2007: 5, 4, 16, 10 35 total
A'Rod's WSAB 2004-2007: 17, 24, 12, 26 79 total

From a baseball standpoint, the Yankees made out like bandits with that deal. Of course, that's not saying that the Yankees were more "fun" from 2004-2007 because they made the A'Rod deal. "Fun" is in the eye of the beholder.

Actually, that's a bit expensive.

Sometimes even expensive things are bargains.

I understand how much A-Rod was worth. But, still, looked at retrospectively, from my utilitarian standpoint, the sum total of the pleasures and pains of the A-Rod era in NY was right around 0.

You're confused.

We have the individual great baseball achievements and the four post-season appearances on the positive side. On the negative side, you have the constant irritation of A-Rod stories in the media, A-Rod's phoniness, the post-season failures of him, the post-season failures of the team, and the effort that I compulsively expended to defend him (and attack Jeter's behavior) on various blogs.

Those things don't begin to balance each other out. Just because you listed some things on each side of your equation does not mean that the things on each side are of equal value. "Individual great baseball achievements" does not begin to be offset by "irritation," "phoniness" (whatever the hell that means), and SOME postseason "failures" of his.

Let's say I had a choice right now of two alternative 2008 futures for the team:
1. A-Rod signs a big contract extension with the Yankees, A-Rod has a season with production somewhere between his 2006 and 2007 seasons, the Yankees win the wild card, and again lose the ALDS with A-Rod having a mediocre ALDS.
2. A-Rod opts out, the Yankees compete for the wildcard while the young arms develop, but they do not win a slot in the post-season.

For me, personally, an analysis of the sum total of pains and pleasures would lead me to pick 2.

Of course, there aren't only two possible outcomes, but a myriad of them. And they're not limited to 2008. So I'm having trouble understanding the value of your exercise.

Your two options don't even make much sense to me. For example, the young arms will develop (or not develop) regardless of whether ARod is there.

Ray,
You don't understand what "utilitarian" means. I'm weighing my subjective experiences as a Yankee fan over the last four years. By and large, the pleasures that A-Rod gave me are roughly equal to the pains. Under my 2008 scenarios, option 2 would overall make me happier than option 1.

Ray,
You don't understand what "utilitarian" means. I'm weighing my subjective experiences as a Yankee fan over the last four years. By and large, the pleasures that A-Rod gave me are roughly equal to the pains. Under my 2008 scenarios, option 2 would overall make me happier than option 1.

Well, "utilitarian" has more to do with practicality rather than aesthetics. Nevertheless, I understand that your opinions were subjective; I still don't think they make much sense.

But since your comments were subjective I probably shouldn't have fought you on them.

But since your comments were subjective I probably shouldn't have fought you on them.

Having A-Rod on your team is really something that you have to experience to understand. In that regard, a part of me wants to see him go to the Red Sox just so that I can talk to all my Red Sox fan friends about their experience. Of course, another part of me realizes that is crazy -- that A-Rod would make the Sox overwhelming favorites next year and strong favorites in 2009 and 2010.

From a baseball standpoint, the Yankees made out like bandits with that deal.

They got 44 WS, or 11 WS/year, or just under 4 wins a year, over and above what Soriano would have produced.

They paid A-Rod $18m/yr, after the TEX subsidy, or about $10m/year over what Soriano got paid in that time.

$2.5m per marginal win is not a bargain; it's a little high, but reasonable.

And none of that takes into account that Soriano was relatively underpaid in that time, and in theory could have fetched more in trade than they got in return. Soriano was "worth" $17m/yr on the open market. He received around $8m per year over the last 4 years, suggesting that they could have traded him for a return of $9m per year to be generous (assuming trade value and free agent value are the same thing), or let's say $6m per year to be more appropriate (the trade market being a bit more, er, rational).

That puts the cost at $16m/year for 4 wins/year, or $4m per marginal win. That's not a bargain.

That puts the cost at $16m/year for 4 wins/year, or $4m per marginal win. That's not a bargain.

Geez, you may be right. I have to think about it more. That's not even taken unknowns into account. I think that Soriano might have played better if he had stayed in NY; his numbers seem to show that he played below his potential there.

And, phredbird, we just disagree on this. You see fans as being more rational than I do. If everyone thought like you, who would be the audience for the mawkish sportswriter types -- the Shaugnessys, the Lupicas, the Bob Costas types, the Mitch Albom types? I would guess that fans who like those types of sportswriters do exist, that they are in the market and that, for them, the image of the players does matter.

this isn't about fans or idiot sportswriters, its about front offices. the red sox will sign a-rod in a minute if they can agree on a contract. and really, i wonder how much the ny media experience is informing a-rod's decision. scott boras is all about testing the market, he's just giving his client the best advice he thinks he can give him, and a-rod has decided to agree on that.
further, if rodriguez did sign with boston, there would be almost no backlash, i guarantee it. one of the characteristics of these irrational fans who are the market for the mawkish sportswriters is their inability to be consistent in their opinions.

further, if rodriguez did sign with boston, there would be almost no backlash, i guarantee it. one of the characteristics of these irrational fans who are the market for the mawkish sportswriters is their inability to be consistent in their opinions.

It would certainly be interesting to find out.

Would Ben Affleck be able to say this if A-Rod were on the team (from today's NYT):
“The team still has a real underdog, motley, likable gang feel,” he added. “To me that’s what the Red Sox were about as a kid, and what they’re about now, and they actually happen to win.”

i'd be willing to bet he could find a way to rationalize the presence of rodriguez in the lineup.

I give the Red Sox credit for their successes, and they are a terrific team, but no franchise with the second-highest payroll in baseball can be the underdog.

Soriano was "worth" $17m/yr

You previously said $2.5M per win was a little high for A-Rod, but now you say that Soriano is worth $8.5M per win?

Soriano got $17M per year on the "open market" from a desperate to save his job GM who snuck an awful deal by a clueless ownership group. He was never worth $17M per year to anyone, not even to the Yankees. Knowing the difference between price and value is what makes both successful investors and GMs.

Boras complaining that the Yankees won't negotiate.

Link

By JOEL SHERMAN

October 30, 2007 -- Alex Rodriguez is a free agent now after opting out of his contract and the Yankees have reasserted they will not negotiate further with the slugger. Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera likely will file for free agency, and the Yankees will negotiate with them.

"Intellectually, Alex is tying to understand the difference between his free agency and that of Mariano and Posada," Boras said by phone yesterday. "Alex Rodriguez has never said he does not want to be a Yankee. Filing for free agency doesn't mean that. Because Rivera and Posada are free agents doesn't mean they don't want to be Yankees."

Boras also noted that after the 1998 season, another of his clients, Bernie Williams, filed for free agency and the Yanks ultimately re-signed him.

However, Hank Steinbrenner said: "There is a little difference there. When you take in Alex's salary, comparing that (to Rivera and Posada) is like comparing apples and oranges. They are all great players. There is a huge difference in Alex's contract."

Alex Rodriguez has never said he does not want to be a Yankee. Filing for free agency doesn't mean that.

I think they made it pretty clear that if he wanted to be a Yankee he shouldn't opt out.

Alex Rodriguez has never said he does not want to be a Yankee. Filing for free agency doesn't mean that.

I think they made it pretty clear that if he wanted to be a Yankee he shouldn't opt out.

That's what they said. And say. But even if we believe them (*), I'm not clear on why ARod should let the Yankees decide for him how he wants to exercise the rights under his contract.

Note that there is no difference between ARod's situation and Posada's: Posada has a 2008 player option. And yet, the media is not in a frenzy over it.

In any event, if we're going to blame ARod for opting out before he needed to, we should also blame the Yankees for trying to threaten him in advance by saying that if he opted out, they wouldn't negotiate with him. It's a two-way street. The Yankees basically took a contractual right of his -- something he had bargained for, and effectively paid for -- and painted him as Evil for daring to exercise it. That's childish.

(*) I think the Yankees would be silly from a business standpoint if they refuse to negotiate with him. Even with him opting out (and them losing the Texas money), if they can still sign him to a deal that makes sense for them, they should do it. To declare that they are no longer negotiating with him is questionable business practice; by doing that they shoot themselves in the foot for no reason.

And I love how when the club declines its option on a player, nobody accuses the club of being money grubbing and disloyal. We don't get 12 Mike Lupica columns on the subject, decrying the greedy owners.

I think this is really pretty simple. By opting out, it costs the Yankees and additional 21 million over the next 3 years, (due to not getting the Texas contribution) on top of whatever they would have been paying him in an extension. Rightly or wrongly, the Yankees looked at that Texas money as money that was theirs....should they keep Rodriguez.

By their calculations, they had A-Rod for 18 million a year, 54 million total for the next 3 years. If they "negotiate" with Boras, the next 3 years are probably going to cost them a minimum of 75 million, and maybe as much as 90 million. They could conceivably be looking at paying 36 million more over the next 3 years over and above what they originally thought they were going to pay.

And that does not even take into account what happens after the next 3 years. Really, for the Yankees, they had a deal, A-Rod WAS a bargain at what they were paying for him. At the new rate, not only would he not be a bargain, he would be a major drain and an albatross. If not right away, certainly within a few years. He's not worth 27 or 30 million now, why would he be in 3 or 4 years from now?

The Yankees are absolutely correct to not negotiate. Boras screwed up here if he was really counting on the Yankees to move from that stance.

Would Ben Affleck be able to say this if A-Rod were on the team (from today's NYT):
“The team still has a real underdog, motley, likable gang feel,” he added. “To me that’s what the Red Sox were about as a kid, and what they’re about now, and they actually happen to win

.”

Chris Jenkins, a San Diego writer, wrote his "Red Sox are the new Yankees" column today (apparently this is a requirement to be a newspaper baseball writer) and in it he said that "Lucchino clings to the role of underdog the way Stallone clings to the role of Rocky Balboa."

Lucchino will be very unintentionally humorous as he continues to deny the Red Sox new status.

if rodriguez did sign with boston, there would be almost no backlash, i guarantee it

.

Depends on how you define "backlash." There would be roughly one zillion more "Red Sox=new Yankees" articles. There would be many Red Sox fans expressing angst over the Red Sox "selling out", etc. There would be many Yankee fans saying ARod would \"#### up the Red Sox" the way he \"###### up the Yankees." There would be some Yankee fans playing victim/"we are the underdogs now", etc. And so on.

The thing is, if the Red Sox do not keep Lowell and Schilling, Rodriguez makes baseball sense as the replacement for Lowell, because in 2009 he also in effect replaces Manny Ramirez. Having a cleanup hitter at 3b would enable the Red Sox to get a cheaper OF if they so wished. EDIT: And of course, however much one might hate ARod, a 3-4-5 of Ortiz/Ramirez/Rodriguez would be lethal. But letting Lowell and Schilling go to sign Alex Rodriguez would be an issue from a PR standpoint, even with the almost limitless credibility the current management team in Boston has. It would not affect ticket sales or anything, but it would make a lot of Red Sox fans twitchy as hell.

I think, though, that the Red Sox, IF they want to make a play for Rodriguez, will not go much past what they currently are paying Ramirez. At this point, I assume Boras believes he can get much more than that. I think he is wrong, actually--I do not think ARod will get 8/240 or some such, but obviously we would trust Scott Boras' judgment on this issue a hell of a lot more than we would trust mine. We will see.

But letting Lowell and Schilling go to sign Alex Rodriguez would be an issue from a PR standpoint, even with the almost limitless credibility the current management team in Boston has.

That credibility is far from limitless, I fear. This time last year it was all Alex Gonzalez this and Matt Clement that, and Coco Crisp this and Edgar Renteria that, and "Oh why did we trade Hanley Ramirez and the No-Hit Boy for this Beckett bust". Two months ago it was all Lugo this and Drew that, and the signing/waiving of Joel Pineiro was held up as the sort of thing that a functioning front office simply would not do, not to mention the embarrassment of finally admitting that the Wily Mo Pena trade was a total zero. There was hardly even a grace period after 2004. Bill Simmons got all up in arms about not re-signing Orlando Cabrera and Dave Roberts, for goodness sakes.

There's so much revenue floating around in MLB at the moment that, as far as I can tell, many posters concept of what is "fair market value" is so off the chart that if they were throwing darts at Albuquerque they would actually be hitting Minsk.

But letting Lowell and Schilling go to sign Alex Rodriguez would be an issue from a PR standpoint, even with the almost limitless credibility the current management team in Boston has. It would not affect ticket sales or anything, but it would make a lot of Red Sox fans twitchy as hell.

I don't see why this should be a big factor in the decisionmaking. There might be some initial unrest, but at the end of the day, this is Mike Lowell, not George Brett. (And everyone understands that Schilling is nearing the end.) Lowell is a good player and a class act, but he's also 34 years old, has never been a star, and is coming off of a .324 batting average that is 30 points higher than his previous best. Given that, I doubt he'd be someone the Red Sox would want to re-sign at market value in the first place, let alone if a replacement like ARod is available for a price they can live with.