Apparently J.D. Drew and his agent believe that this is 1999 and baseball’s free agency money grows on trees. How else to explain Drew’s decision to opt out of a contract that would’ve paid him $11M a season for the next three years?
What I find particularly silly about this decision is how blissfully unaware Drew must be about the state of baseball’s free agent marketplace. Yes, this is a winter with fewer big-name stars which could work to Drew’s advantage. But it’s also an era where the top contracts being signed don’t get much higher than $10-$15M per season. David Ortiz, Vlad Guerrero, and Paul Konerko all signed roughly the same deal over the past three winters and it’s not a shot in the dark to say that those three guys are far more highly-regarded in the game than J.D. Drew is.
Of course, J.D. Drew’s agent has a hand in all of this. As Scott Boras said of this decision, “‘It was a business decision,’ Boras said. ‘The demand for a five-tool defender, a 25-homer guy, a guy who can drive in 100 runs is pretty clear in today’s marketplace.’” Naturally, reading that, I had to consult the stats. Drew has driven in 100 runs one time in his nine-year career. He has topped 25 homers only twice. And, most importantly, he’s never played a full season in the big leagues. While there is no mistaking his talent (career OPS+ of 133), his spotty injury history will likely turn off several GM’s who can’t necessarily absorb payroll without the guarantee of getting an everyday player.
This brings up a point I’ve debated many times with a very good friend of mine. To understand the nature of this debate, one must first know that this friend of mine had a dream of one day becoming a sports agent. We’ll call him Boris, just to make it simple (and amusing). Anyway, I’ve always believed that sports agents are one of the segments of the population that live by no particular code of professional ethics.
Politicians, doctors, lawyers, members of the financial services industry, even auto salesmen have specific laws that apply to their particular areas of expertise. And yes, sports agents do have rules they have to submit to. But I’ve long believed that many sports agents act in self interest and sometimes forget that their job is to represent the interests of their clients first. After all, the primary definition of agency is “a person or business authorized to act on another’s behalf.” And in that definition, I presume that such authorization carries the implicit directive that any action on the part of the agent would be in the best interests of the party they’re representing. Yet, so many times, I see players signing deals in bad markets and I just can’t help but wonder how much of that choice was made by the player and how much influence the agent had on the decision.
Boris would always say that every player has final say and that agents were only giving their clients all the choices they could come up with. And, in theory, Boris is right. But when I look at this question – what motivated J.D. Drew to pass up the security of three years and $33M – I can’t help but think that Scott Boras wanted another payday. After all, he’s already made his 10% of the $55M deal he negotiated for Drew two seasons ago. Even if Drew gets less money, that’s still another 10% for Boras to put in his bank account. Why do I feel like maybe Boras whispered into J.D.’s ear one too many times and got him to pick a decision that might not be as good for the Drew family as it will be for the Boras clan?
Here’s the bottom line; I don’t doubt that J.D. Drew will find a new home next season. I think there are several teams that will be interested in him – Oakland, San Francisco, both New York teams, the Red Sox, Houston, Cubs, and a few more, I’m sure. But I would be shocked if Drew is able to meet or exceed the $33M he was guaranteed from Los Angeles. And for that reason, I cast doubt on the ethics of Scott Boras and the institution of sports agency.
What I find particularly silly about this decision is how blissfully unaware Drew must be about the state of baseball’s free agent marketplace. Yes, this is a winter with fewer big-name stars which could work to Drew’s advantage. But it’s also an era where the top contracts being signed don’t get much higher than $10-$15M per season. David Ortiz, Vlad Guerrero, and Paul Konerko all signed roughly the same deal over the past three winters and it’s not a shot in the dark to say that those three guys are far more highly-regarded in the game than J.D. Drew is.
Of course, J.D. Drew’s agent has a hand in all of this. As Scott Boras said of this decision, “‘It was a business decision,’ Boras said. ‘The demand for a five-tool defender, a 25-homer guy, a guy who can drive in 100 runs is pretty clear in today’s marketplace.’” Naturally, reading that, I had to consult the stats. Drew has driven in 100 runs one time in his nine-year career. He has topped 25 homers only twice. And, most importantly, he’s never played a full season in the big leagues. While there is no mistaking his talent (career OPS+ of 133), his spotty injury history will likely turn off several GM’s who can’t necessarily absorb payroll without the guarantee of getting an everyday player.
This brings up a point I’ve debated many times with a very good friend of mine. To understand the nature of this debate, one must first know that this friend of mine had a dream of one day becoming a sports agent. We’ll call him Boris, just to make it simple (and amusing). Anyway, I’ve always believed that sports agents are one of the segments of the population that live by no particular code of professional ethics.
Politicians, doctors, lawyers, members of the financial services industry, even auto salesmen have specific laws that apply to their particular areas of expertise. And yes, sports agents do have rules they have to submit to. But I’ve long believed that many sports agents act in self interest and sometimes forget that their job is to represent the interests of their clients first. After all, the primary definition of agency is “a person or business authorized to act on another’s behalf.” And in that definition, I presume that such authorization carries the implicit directive that any action on the part of the agent would be in the best interests of the party they’re representing. Yet, so many times, I see players signing deals in bad markets and I just can’t help but wonder how much of that choice was made by the player and how much influence the agent had on the decision.
Boris would always say that every player has final say and that agents were only giving their clients all the choices they could come up with. And, in theory, Boris is right. But when I look at this question – what motivated J.D. Drew to pass up the security of three years and $33M – I can’t help but think that Scott Boras wanted another payday. After all, he’s already made his 10% of the $55M deal he negotiated for Drew two seasons ago. Even if Drew gets less money, that’s still another 10% for Boras to put in his bank account. Why do I feel like maybe Boras whispered into J.D.’s ear one too many times and got him to pick a decision that might not be as good for the Drew family as it will be for the Boras clan?
Here’s the bottom line; I don’t doubt that J.D. Drew will find a new home next season. I think there are several teams that will be interested in him – Oakland, San Francisco, both New York teams, the Red Sox, Houston, Cubs, and a few more, I’m sure. But I would be shocked if Drew is able to meet or exceed the $33M he was guaranteed from Los Angeles. And for that reason, I cast doubt on the ethics of Scott Boras and the institution of sports agency.
No comments:
Post a Comment