This just might be true, since: a) I have the impression (though I could be wrong) that Feinsend and Madden are not hacks;

b) I don't see any reason for the Yankees to float this story (since Yankee fandom is largely pissed off at A-Rod anyway).

Now it could be that the NY Daily News is making this up, but who knows....

Despite all of the back-and-forth posturing between the Yankees and A-Rod' camp, the Daily News learned today that the two sides have been discussing a deal for the past few days to keep the two-time MVP in pinstripes, according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

The biggest catch? The Yankees don't want agent Scott Boras involved in the negotiations.

A high-ranking Yankees source told the Daily News that the team is willing to bring Rodriguez back on a below-market contract, one that would make up for the $21 million subsidy from the Rangers that the Yanks lost when A-Rod opted out of the final three years of his contract.

In addition, the Yankees don't want to deal with Boras, who has been Rodriguez's agent since the slugger was 16 years old.

"We will not negotiate with Scott Boras," a Yankees source said. "He cannot be in the room."

This should be entertaining.

Let's say A-Rod signs the 10 year $275 million contract. Who wins?

Let's say A-Rod signs the 10 year $275 million contract. Who wins?

Mrs. A-Rod

Woohoo!!!

Despite all of the back-and-forth posturing between the Yankees and A-Rod' camp, the Daily News learned today that the two sides have been discussing a deal for the past few days to keep the two-time MVP in pinstripes

So, the AL MVP he won while in Texas didn't count?

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*crosses fingers*

Let's say A-Rod signs the 10 year $275 million contract. Who wins?

NY, A-Rod, and Boston, in about that order.

Let's say A-Rod signs the 10 year $275 million contract. Who wins?

The New York sports press corps.

Thinking about this reminds me of the "qui bono / qui gives a f*ck" exchange from The Departed.

So, the AL MVP he won while in Texas didn't count?

No, 2002 + 2005= 2 MVPs. The 2007 one doesn't count...yet.

Well...thats their out face wise...

"If Alex opts out, we won't negotiate....unless of course you fire Boras...then we can talk"

Cool...as long as he stays in NY and away from the Dodgers, I'm happy.

"We will not negotiate with Scott Boras," a Yankees source said. "He cannot be in the room."

I wonder if that means that A-Rod can choose one Yankee executive who is not allowed in the room. Who would it be?

Rick Cerone?

I'd say the big winner is going to be the Marlins. This will get the two Los Angeles teams bidding against each other for Miguel Cabrera (to the extent that they weren't already).

Kemp, Kershaw, and LaRoche would be impossible for the Marlins to pass up but is probably too much. Who else is in that system that could be swapped out for LaRoche or Kemp?

"We will not negotiate with Scott Boras," a Yankees source said. "He cannot be in the room."

Wow. Boras may have burned his last bridge with the wealthiest team in baseball.

Of course, he also provides a great scapegoat for all the posturing by NYY and ARod so they can reconcile. Maybe it's all about saving face...

If Boras can't be involved then ARod should fire him and pocket his share.

A high-ranking Yankees source told the Daily News that the team is willing to bring Rodriguez back on a below-market contract, one that would make up for the $21 million subsidy from the Rangers that the Yanks lost when A-Rod opted out of the final three years of his contract.

Is 10/275 supposed to be below market?

Call me old fashioned, but to me market refers to what someone else would be willing to pay and not some fantasy number Scott Boras dreamt up. If this is true it probably does make sense for the Yankees.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

And as the owners, in the CBA, "recognize the Association as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all Major League Players," can they even make the demand of expelling a duly authorized player-agent?

The fans don't like him, the media doesn't like him and if A-Rod actually accepted this demand, he instantly becomes the players' least favorite person as well.

"We will not negotiate with Scott Boras," a Yankees source said. "He cannot be in the room."

I wonder if that means that A-Rod can choose one Yankee executive who is not allowed in the room. Who would it be?

Rick Cerone?

Nah, just Jeter.

10 more years of Arod in NY? Noooooooooo.

I'll believe it when I see it. This story smells fake.

Boras will, however, be in touch with his client by walkie-talkie. Seriously, A-Rod's not the first Boras client to have second thoughts: see Luke Hochevar. But if he goes through with this he'll cost himself more money that Hochevar ever risked. And he'll regret groveling before the Steinbrenners later.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

I think someone posted a link that showed Terry Francona's contract was negotiated under the agreement his agent could not take part, FWIW.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

It's just a source saying some ########. I wouldn't take it seriously.

Kemp, Kershaw, and LaRoche would be impossible for the Marlins to pass up but is probably too much. Who else is in that system that could be swapped out for LaRoche or Kemp?

If that is offered I would not advise the Angels to try and top it. It also wouldn't leave much in the way of upgrade opportunities. I'd hope they pass on the idea of trading for Joe Crede or giving up draft picks and too much money for Mike Lowell - team would be better off long term doing nothing.

But maybe they can add an outfielder like Jones or Hunter. Move Matthews to a corner, and DH Vlad or GA. Willits and Rivera would be out of jobs. It would be an expensive upgrade, but an upgrade nonetheless.

Let's say A-Rod signs the 10 year $275 million contract. Who wins?

NY, A-Rod, and Boston, in about that order.

And don't forget about Texas.

I don't see how it's good for the Marlins if NY's out of the bidding for Cabrera.

Oh, yeah, this sounds like a great idea.

Alienate what little of the fan base that could stand you, and then come back for 7 more years. Sounds like a plan.

I wonder if that means that A-Rod can choose one Yankee executive who is not allowed in the room. Who would it be?

Costanza.

But seriously, ladies and germs, this is just getting stupider and stupider. Boras negotiated the best contract in baseball history for A-Rod. Now A-Rod's trying to get another contract that can reasonably be expected to be of similar size, and he's supposed to dump the guy who negotiated the first one? That's beyond insane. I really hope this isn't the Yankees' idea of public relations spin. Which it might be, and it might even work, because "NO BORA$!!!" will go over well with the beat writer/sports talk caller knuckleheads. But to anyone who takes two seconds to think about it rationally, it makes the Yanks look like complete buffoons.

But seriously, ladies and germs, this is just getting stupider and stupider. Boras negotiated the best contract in baseball history for A-Rod. Now A-Rod's trying to get another contract that can reasonably be expected to be of similar size, and he's supposed to dump the guy who negotiated the first one? That's beyond insane.

And yet, A-Rod seems to be capitulating, if this report can be believed. My guess is there just aren't that many teams out there that are showing an interest.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

Why wouldn't it be? They're not saying he can't have any representation, just not Scott Boars. If he feels that's unfair, he's free to walk away.

"Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate? "

Not A Lawyer, but I think it is. They aren't telling him he can't have representation, just that it can't be Boras.

But to anyone who takes two seconds to think about it rationally, it makes the Yanks look like complete buffoons.

Unless of course, A-rod signs the contract.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

Of course its legal. Its not like he's a defendant in a criminal trial and being asked to foregoe legal representation. Its entirely up to A-Rod and the Yankees as to what conditions they agree to negotiate under.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

Why wouldn't it be? There's no contractual relationship between the two parties, and ARod is free to walk away, so why not? They're not saying "We refuse to negotiate with you if your representation, whoever that may be, is present." They're saying "We refuse to negotiate with Scott Boras in the room."

A player can refuse to negotiate with a team because they employ a particular GM or for any other reason can he not?

I'll believe it when I see it.

agreed. I'm not going to play the Yankee FO Kremlinology game until there's ink on paper.

DS/Margo Addams,

I've been on record as saying that I really don't understand A-Rod as a person, for a number of reasons.

If this story is true, and A-Rod was not obsessed with leaving NY because he couldn't take it anymore (i.e., if he thought was calling the Yanks bluff, screwed up and is now trying to go back to the fold), then A-Rod should be pissed at Boras.

None of us know some of the inside stuff of what went on before A-Rod opted out, but we do know that Boras made some stupid comments (such as throwing Mariano under the bus when he was looking for a way to justify A-Rod's opting out), and I for one have to believe that Boras is the one who masterminded the whole strategy followed by camp A-Rod (case in point - the insanely stupid decision not to have a courtesy meeting with the Yankees before opting out and the opt-out during the WS).

If this is true, why not sign Alex to a 7-year, 202 MM contract extension and save themselves the 21 MM that the Rangers were going to pick up?

Instead of paying him 27.5 MM per season the deal would have averaged out to around 25 MM per season.

I guess in the context of contracts this large, 21 MM is chump change. I have to keep reminding myself this is the same team that just extended an old catcher for 52/4 and has offered their aging closer 45/3.

I think someone posted a link that showed Terry Francona's contract was negotiated under the agreement his agent could not take part, FWIW.

Mangers and players are not covered by the same agreement, so I don't see the relevance.

The legal question is whether the CBA which governs the negotiations allows the player the representative of his choice. So, interpreting the clause Dan S cites above is likely the relevant discussion.

JC, I don't think that NY was ever in the market for Cabrera anyway. Thus, by preventing A-Rod from signing out west, the list of suitors for his services does not shrink (IMHO of course).

But to anyone who takes two seconds to think about it rationally, it makes the Yanks look like complete buffoons.

How does it make the Yankees look like buffoons? Unethical perhaps, but persumably it is to the advantage of any team to meet with a player without their agent present. It's obviously a questionable request, but it seems pretty simple from the Yankees' view, to A-Rod: "You actually want to repair your image? Then get rid of Boras and come back."

What about that is buffoon like?

EDIT: To add, I also don't really buy this. I think A-Rod is going out west with Boras.

Wait...is it legal for the Yankees to bar Boras being briefed by way of his presence in the room?

"We will not negotiate with Scott Boras," a Yankees source said. "He cannot be in the room."

It's brilliant. It's a way for the Yankees and ARod both to save face. ARod gets more money than he could elsewhere. And Boras still gets his 10% and can say he got his client the biggest deal ever.

But to anyone who takes two seconds to think about it rationally, it makes the Yanks look like complete buffoons.

I think it makes A-Rod look awfully desperate, to be told these terms, and not consider it an outrage, and instead seek to negotiate despite the terms.

Tell me you love me. Please tell me you love me!

I have to keep reminding myself this is the same team that just extended an old catcher arguably the best catcher in baseball who is in historically unique territory as far as projecting his performance going forward for 52/4

Fixed that for you.

Wait...is it legal for the Yankees to bar Boras being briefed by way of his presence in the room?

Sure it is. They're not barring any representative, just Boras. ARod can say no.
It's just like Toyota paying their employees more so they won't unionize.

The Yankees are bigger a******* than I thought if this is spin and Alex is a bigger p**** than I thought if it's true.

It's buffoon-like because it's playing to the bleacher fans, and you couldn't expect it to actually happen. It's from the same philosophy that says "let's save face by offering Torre a contract that we know he won't accept," but it's a lot worse. At least the fake Torre contract was plausible in the sense that, ignoring Torre's previous pay history, it was paying him extremely well for a manager. Still, they knew he wouldn't sign it, and similarly, they have to know that A-Rod is not going to negotiate this contract without Scott Boras. It's not at all a reasonable request; therefore, it's a fake offer designed to make the Yanks look good and A-Rod/Boras look bad (to dumb people), rather than to get A-Rod back on the Yankees.

Now, sure, throw this back in my face if A-Rod capitulates and goes along with this; I'll have been completely wrong. But I really cannot imagine such a thing.

If somebody told me "we'll negotiate with you but you can't have legal counsel", it basically means they're trying to screw you.

There are plenty of ways to communicate the requirement that Boras not be involved without it rising to the actual level of a "demand" which might contravene the CBA.

EDIT: To add, I also don't really buy this. I think A-Rod is going out west with Boras.

Ok, there's a chance that this is all a big lie made up by the Daily News, but if it is a lie, the Yankees would almost have to make a big public statement denying this.

If there's no public statement, I'm not discounting this story just yet.....

And BTW - I don't see how the Yankees are buffoons by saying Boras is out of the negotiations (to begin with, we don't know if that's true or not, but I have to believe Boras has other people in his firm who can sit at a meeting with A-Rod). Being able to say that Boras was kept out is brilliant PR (as pointed out by Snapper), and allows both A-Rod and Yankees to save face here (again, if any of you care to read my previous writings on the matter, I railed at B/R's stupid decision not to at least save face while opting out).

RTFA:

Rodriguez apparently approached the Yankees through a third-party intermediary. "He went to them," said the source.

if that third party isn't Boras (and I can't imagine it is), than it sounds like he's not completely adverse to going around his agent.

Of course its legal. Its not like he's a defendant in a criminal trial and being asked to foregoe legal representation. Its entirely up to A-Rod and the Yankees as to what conditions they agree to negotiate under

Ditto.
There's no rule that says that AROD has to deal with the Yankees or they with him.
AROD is perfectly free to have Boras as his agent and to say that the Yankees have to deal with Boras. The Yankees are perfectly free to respond by saying, "ok, have a nice life".

And as the owners, in the CBA, "recognize the Association as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all Major League Players," can they even make the demand of expelling a duly authorized player-agent?

One doesn't have anything to do with the other. The MLBPA is "the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all Major League Players," with respect to the CBA. The MLB cannot bargain with or enter into any CBA with any entity other than the MLBPA*. If the Yankees want to negotiate with AROD they have to deal with whoever ARIOD tells them to deal with- but they don't have to negotiate with AROD and they are free to tell AROD that they will not deal with Boras.

Also, it's sounds like posturing anyway- if they insisted that Boras' Agency cannot be involved- that'd be more interesting.


*Unless and until the MLBPA is decertified- which I don't see happening in my lifetime- the NFL Player's Union on the other hand really should be decertified, unless Upshaw can be overthrown, and the players really should form a new one.

C'mon, this is ridiculous. Nobody's a buffoon in this yet b/c nobody's committed themselves to anything yet. This is all just part of the process when you're bidding for the services of the best FA available and when Boras is involved. For all we know, this is just BS from Boras himself to get the other teams antsy. Just enjoy the show and allow time to settle the issue.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

I think it is, only an agent has no legal standing and that isn't a court of law. A bit of history.

When I was at Chico State, the California State University Board of Directors had a rule in place that stated students who were up for disciplinary manners could not be represented by a lawyer during the hearing. The reasoning (or the excuse) was if the student "lawyered up", the school would have to as well, and the school didn't want the expense.

At the time, there had been a drug bust in one of the dorms involving a couple dozen students, and the police used an undercover agent to live in the dorms. The agent, fresh out of the academy, also started sleeping with one of the students, and bought beer for underage students and brought it into the dorm as well. The police had made a big deal about the bust, but when this stuff came to light, they dropped the charges against the students, and the officer was fired. The school, however, tried to coerce the students into signing froms that would voluntarily suspend them the rest of the school year, as opposed to outright expulsion. The students, who had retained lawyers for their now defunct court cases, were told their lawyers would not be welcome at the meetings as it was not a legal proceding.

If somebody told me "we'll negotiate with you but you can't have legal counsel", it basically means they're trying to screw you.

Whatever, since that's not what the story says the Yankees are asking.

Focus people!

I posted something like this a week or two ago.. everyone involved is more or less a rational actor; if the "market" isn't what Boras thought it would be, then Rodriguez was gonna go to the highest bidder -- apparently the Yankees -- and everyone would find a way to save face. Boras can say his client got a raise and the richest contract in the game. The Yankees can see thay backed Boras off his $300M++ demand and they plug a gaping hole at 3B w/o sacrificing the untouchables. win/win.

For all we know, this is just BS from Boras himself to get the other teams antsy

the source quoted was a "high-ranking Yankee," so it can't be Boras. Not saying he's completely out of the picture, but this isn't his spin.

Is this even legal? Telling someone that they can't have their legal representation in the room if they want to negotiate?

While I don't that there's a legal distinction, to me it's not all that different than a player agent telling a team that they may not meet with a player they wish to hire.

Boras will, however, be in touch with his client by walkie-talkie.

I'd think of it as exactly analogous to a manager being ejected from a game. He walks a few steps down the tunnel towards the clubhouse, and tells his bench coach what to do from there.

but, Sotapop, wouldn't this be incredibly damaging for Boras's future negotiations. I see how the Yanks and A-Rod save face, but Boras looks weakened if this, in fact , happens. And probably this won't happen.

If somebody told me "we'll negotiate with you but you can't have legal counsel", it basically means they're trying to screw you

Except that isn't what the Yankees said. The Yankees (supposedly) didn't say you can't have any representation period. They said we don't want to negotiate with you while Roy Cohn sits on the other side of the table. Pick Johnny Cochran or Clarence Darrow anybody, we don't care, just not Cohn.

If somebody told me "we'll negotiate with you but you can't have legal counsel", it basically means they're trying to screw you.

From my own experience I can tell you that the presence of specific individuals as legal counsel can scuttle a deal- because they are impossible to deal with and/or one side doesn't trust said individual. Generally speaking it's a bad idea to make deals with someone you don't trust, but sometimes you have no choice, Company A may have to deal with Company B in order to stay in business. Contrary to what people seem to believe the Yankees don't "have" to deal with AROD, they don't "need" him. They'd like to have him, and making the playoffs in the next few years would certainly be easier if they had him, but there are always other options in baseball.

No one is saying anything about saying AROD can't have legal counsel, what they are saying is we (The Yankees) will not deal with Scott Boras.

HAPPY ####### DAY

Isn't it illegal for A-Rod not to be allowed to have his representation present?

but, Sotapop, wouldn't this be incredibly damaging for Boras's future negotiations. I see how the Yanks and A-Rod save face, but Boras looks weakened if this, in fact , happens. And probably this won't happen.

Doubt it. It isn't like Boras won't be involved period. But secondly future players are going to judge what Boras can do based on what he can get them. Did players leave him when Jones negotiated his own contract? ARod even if he is doing his own deal is still going to get the greatest contract in the history of the sport and the reason he is going to get it has largely to do with Boras, the previous contract he worked out, and Boras' posturing in this round of contract talks. Boras set the bar at ten years 350 million and everything is now being based off of that. If Boras had set the bar at say 6 years 175 million would the Yanks offer ARod 10 years 275 million?

Isn't it illegal for A-Rod not to be allowed to have his representation present?

How many times are we going to ask this question?

Nobody's a buffoon in this yet b/c nobody's committed themselves to anything yet. This is all just part of the process when you're bidding for the services of the best FA available and when Boras is involved. For all we know, this is just BS from Boras himself to get the other teams antsy. Just enjoy the show and allow time to settle the issue.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have a winner.

They said we don't want to negotiate with you while Roy Cohn sits on the other side of the table. Pick Johnny Cochran or Clarence Darrow anybody, we don't care, just not Cohn.

You can have any dead lawyer you want, Alex. Just no living lawyers. OK?

If Boras is not present, the deal will not happen. Boras simply has too much influence over his clients. Plus he'll throw the "I'm a lawyer and they're screwing you" stuff at Rodriguez.

Luke Hochevar tried to fire Boras, and agreed to a contract with the Dodgers using another agent. Boras talked (intimidated) Hochevar out of it. Granted Rodriguez has more stuff in him than an amateur free agent. But I'm betting that Boras will not allow the "not in the room" thing to happen.

So I think I'm betting that he doesn't sign with the Yankees.

The Times just picked up the story. Evidently, the same source talked to them.

If Boras is not present, the deal will not happen. Boras simply has too much influence over his clients. Plus he'll throw the "I'm a lawyer and they're screwing you" stuff at Rodriguez.

Boras is an excellent agent. If I were a player of any caliber, I would probably hire him. But come on, "too much influence over his clients"? He's not some Svengali yanking the strings on A-Rod.

If Boras is not present, the deal will not happen. Boras simply has too much influence over his clients. Plus he'll throw the "I'm a lawyer and they're screwing you" stuff at Rodriguez.

Luke Hochevar tried to fire Boras, and agreed to a contract with the Dodgers using another agent. Boras talked (intimidated) Hochevar out of it. Granted Rodriguez has more stuff in him than an amateur free agent. But I'm betting that Boras will not allow the "not in the room" thing to happen.

I think it would be a lot tougher to intimidate a 32 year old man with $100M in the bank. Also, ARod must hav a dozen other accountant/banker/lawyer types advising him. If he thinks the NYY offer is the best, and his lawyers give the contract their OK, he'll ditch Boras in 0.1 seconds. And if Boras still gets his cut, and can claim he got his client the biggest deal ever, Boras won't care.

At the time, there had been a drug bust in one of the dorms involving a couple dozen students, and the police used an undercover agent to live in the dorms. The agent, fresh out of the academy, also started sleeping with one of the students, and bought beer for underage students and brought it into the dorm as well. The police had made a big deal about the bust, but when this stuff came to light, they dropped the charges against the students, and the officer was fired. The school, however, tried to coerce the students into signing froms that would voluntarily suspend them the rest of the school year, as opposed to outright expulsion. The students, who had retained lawyers for their now defunct court cases, were told their lawyers would not be welcome at the meetings as it was not a legal proceding.

Heh. That's funny; I wonder who drafted the "voluntary suspension" forms. The Agreement Fairy? The Waiver Elves? In my jurisdiction, a lawyer advising the university to call such a meeting where such an agreement was proffered, and advising the university not to allow the students to be represented, would be sailing dangerously close to a professional conduct hearing. ####### with the other side's right to counsel is not the done thing here...

If true then this really will be Boras' Waterloo.

The process of this A-Rod contract would be exactly like the Andruw Jones contract with Atlanta. The impact of being fired by A-Rod is much more severe than being snubbed by Andruw though.

I don't get how people in this thread are still talking up Boras. There is no way A-Rod actually goes through with the negotiation with the Yankees without firing Boras. There is no way this wouldn't be a mortal blow to Boras' reputation and influence.

If the Daily News report is true, of course.

And of course, this is very different from the Yankees saying, we won't negotiate a contract with you if Boras is at the table, which is perfectly all right.

If Boras is not present, the deal will not happen. Boras simply has too much influence over his clients. Plus he'll throw the "I'm a lawyer and they're screwing you" stuff at Rodriguez.

Tell that to Andruw Jones.

I hear you Zuvella.. I should have emphasized the "if..." part of my comment. we still have no clue what's going on under the radar. maybe LAA, LAD, BoSox and Mets are still talking to Boras and thus the market value is still shaking out. But I think a master spinner like Boras still could say to future clients, "look, I floated 10/$350 as a ploy, drove up Alex's value AND got the mighty Yankees to cave and come back to the table when they said publicly they wouldn't." and even if you don't buy that, he's still Boras and has the best and longest-lived rep (for working a deal) than anyone else out there.

Yeah, I'm skeptical that A-Rod has already decided that the market has been misjudged. It's been, what, two days that teams can make offers to free agents?

When I was at Chico State, the California State University Board of Directors had a rule in place that stated students who were up for disciplinary manners could not be represented by a lawyer during the hearing. The reasoning (or the excuse) was if the student "lawyered up", the school would have to as well, and the school didn't want the expense.

I think that probably would be illegal, violating your due process rights.

A-Rod on the other hand, is negotiating a contract he is free to walk away from. But I think Dan's point was that it violates the CBA, which I still have a hard time seeing.

Eh, all A-Rod has to do is use Boras' top negotiator (outside of himself) then everyone wins. Odds are anyone Boras has high up will be very solid and able to do the contract. They'd put it together, do a handshake, take it outside the room so Boras could review it, bring it back in and sign.

Simple solution.

Of course, I'd still love for the Jays to recognize that they are a big market team and go out and sign A-Rod instead but that ship has sailed (Jays instead are going for a big profit year, I'd estimate $40-60 million in profits for '08).

If true then this really will be Boras' Waterloo.

The process of this A-Rod contract would be exactly like the Andruw Jones contract with Atlanta. The impact of being fired by A-Rod is much more severe than being snubbed by Andruw though.

I doubt it. Waterloo was basically the complete end of France's dominance in Europe or I should say last chance for one since the Russian campaign finished them off earlier.

If Boras gets fired, which is a big if, it doesn't spell the end of Boras in baseball and his dominance. It probably wouldn't even be ranked up their with the Spanish Campaing in terms of setbacks for Boras. Boras has the talent and he has the commissions coming in from that talent. Secondly revenue is rising in baseball which means salaries are going to be rising as well. All baseball players are going to be getting some serious pay raises soon. Everything favors the agents and players right now in the short term and unless all of the teams band together to deny Boras and his company access to negotiations then is days on top are not numbered.

can it really be legal for the yankees to demand that boras not be present?

A-Rod on the other hand, is negotiating a contract he is free to walk away from. But I think Dan's point was that it violates the CBA, which I still have a hard time seeing.

Well, it was two parts. First, is it legal? And second, even if it is legal, can they do it under the CBA?

I think there's a difference between simply saying to the media "We're not going to negotiate with Scott Boras clients" and saying to an individual "We'll negotiate with *you*, so long as you sever your arrangement with Scott Boras."

Let me clarify that if the meeting consists of the Yanks telling A-Rod "tell Scott this...", then that's a different story. (Kind of like one of those sitcom scenes where the family is sitting around the dinner table and the son goes "Mom, I'm not talking to Sis, so tell her...") That would just be making "the meeting with A-Rod" into a meaningless part of the process. (And actually might be a good PR move, since dumb people might buy that the Yankees put one over on Boras, and smart people will know the real story.) But if they aren't trying to deliberately leave loopholes open, but legitimately are asking that Boras not ultimately be involved in the negotiation of this contract, that is IMO what would make this a "purely for show" offer.

Taking your Jays Payroll Protest van on the road John?

I, for one, commend you
Not to hi-jack (come on, be honest...Jays speculation is far more interesting than this Alex Rodriguez fellow, whoever he is) but I think it will be a huge missed opportunity if the Jays don't do something big this off-season (ie. Tejada at the least). My anticipation for the 2008 season will be marginally damaged.

Here's what happens: the Yanks offer arbitration (and this extra offer if he accepts).. He accepts arb and says I love NY too much. Saves face, the fans are ok with this. Then the work out the long term deal with Boras, that was already basically offered. Boras has his large deal. The NYY didn't negoitate with him when he was on the free market so they save face.

It's of course possible that it's not about A-Rod misjudging the market, but rather that all that stuff that A-Rod said during the season about "it feels like home", and "I can't imagine playing anywhere else" was actually true -- he wanted to stay with the Yankees, but he wanted to get the best contract possible.

The only way A-Rod can come back to the Yankees is on their terms. And if he does it now, before there are any other offers on the table, he might get more from them.

Heck, it already appears he'll have "won" in a way -- the contract he'd be signing would be more than the contract the team was going to offer before the opt out.

The Daily News article says that the Yanks would let Boras advise him; they just wouldn't negotiate directly with Boras. I have no idea what that looks like or really means.

Also, I wonder about the legality of the Yankees demanding that Scott Boras not be present.

Maybe A-Rod will meet with the Yankees while bringing along someone else from Boras's firm instead. And maybe A-Rod will step out of the room from time to time to call Boras on his mobile phone. Really, even with all our Kremlinology, it's impossible to parse what the yankees and A-Rod really may have agreed to from the sparse details in this article. I'm not knocking the article, just noting that all our talk about A-Rod's representation is speculation.

In the slightly bigger picture, I think it's a good sign that the Yankees and A-Rod are open to some kind of meeting. I continue to believe that overpaying A-Rod is the least worst strategy for the Yankees that allows them to keep most of their prized prospects/young players.

Of course, I'd still love for the Jays to recognize that they are a big market team and go out and sign A-Rod instead but that ship has sailed (Jays instead are going for a big profit year, I'd estimate $40-60 million in profits for '08).

U.S. or Canadian?

I wonder if it's against the law for Boras not to be present at the negotiating table.

If Boras gets fired, which is a big if, it doesn't spell the end of Boras in baseball and his dominance. It probably wouldn't even be ranked up their with the Spanish Campaing in terms of setbacks for Boras.

At least to me Boras had lost his reputation of invincibility a while ago, ever since the Andruw Jones contract. The Matsuzaka negotiation just cemented it. I don't think Boras is going destitute if A-Rod fires him. You can be an agent if you are a player's beer buddy with a law degree. But he would be just another agent, not Scott Boras the hoodwinker of all teams and svengali of free agents. He wouldn't act as if the players are working for him.

Who knows what A-Rod wants though. Maybe he wanted to stay in New York and followed the Boras strategy. Maybe Boras misled him on the Yankees' resolve. Maybe Boras misread the Yankees or the market. Maybe A-Rod changed his mind from "10 year contract anywhere" to "I rather like the Yankees now I think about it" in the last week. Whatever he thinks, Boras works for him and can be fired at his pleasure.

Heck, it already appears he'll have "won" in a way -- the contract he'd be signing would be more than the contract the team was going to offer before the opt out.

FWIS, in that column that Madden wrote about A-Rod and the Mets, he mentioned that the Yankees pre-opt-out would have gone to 10 years/$294 million.

When asked if the rumor is true that the Yankees have told A-Rod that they don’t want to deal with Scott Boras, Madden replied, “They are not interested in having face-to-face negotiations with Scott Boras in the room...He can bring his attorneys, he can have Boras advising him. But they do not want Scott Boras in the room if they do this kind of a deal.”

“From what I know about this situation, there are intermediaries involved here who both sides have the highest respect for.

So if this is at all accurate, "Boras can't be in the room" just means that Boras can't be in the room, which shouldn't be too big a deal, what with cell phones and all.

Also, I figure the intermediary must be Doug Mientkiewicz. Both sides have demonstrated that they have way too much respect for him.

I'd like to see A-Rod move to another team (preferably the Phillies) only because I think that makes for a better story, but the silver lining for me if these reports are true is that I said in some prediction thread that he'd sign for 10/$275.

I wonder if it's against the law for Boras not to be present at the negotiating table.

Boras has actually been lobbying to make it against the law for him to not be present at any negotiating table.

Boras works for him and can be fired at his pleasure.

Yes and Boras works for all his baseball players and can be fired by all of them. That was always the case, but his clients for the most part don't do that because Boras treats his players like gold and gets them great deals. Sure ARod could fire him but he won't. There is no reason to fire him.

There's no way Boras being banned from the room holds up under legal scrutiny, is there?

Would someone be arrested if Boras was not allowed to chime in during any negotiation?

The Matsuzaka negotiation just cemented it.

I'll never get this POV. In a situation where he had exactly zero leverage, he got the Red Sox to more than double their initial offer. And that shows that he's lost his mojo?

Would someone be arrested if Boras was not allowed to chime in during any negotiation?

George would end up with his second conviction if Boras is barred from talks. Maybe the President could make like Reagan and pardon him.

I bet the fan reaction on Mike and the Mad Dog will be so vehemently against this that either ARod or the Yankees will have to drop this. This would be a PR nightmare for both sides.