LaRussa Says Union Pressuring Pujols
This is what I suspect happened with C.C. Sabathia, who would otherwise have signed a smaller contract to pitch in the Bay Area.
over 1 year ago
odradek
166 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I can’t find the article now, but there was a long interview with the clubhouse guy that used to be a friend/trainer with Manny Rameriz. In it, he talked about how Manny felt immense pressure from the union to get the biggest contract possible.
Now, is that just an easy scapegoat for players/teams to use? You will never be able to tell.
Why’d the union “allow” Clifton Phifer to do his own thang?
by JulioBernazard on Feb 17, 2011 12:54 PM EST reply actions
Because he’s a bad-ass, inbred, stiff-necked, self-destructive et c. hillbilly. Chuck knows a guy whose cousin’s in-laws grew up like 30 miles from Cliff Lee’s uncle’s old farm.a
Come on, four billion!
I wouldn’t trust a thing Tony La Russa had to say about any union, baseball or not.
by Gradyforpresident on Feb 17, 2011 1:10 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
I’m thinking your remark is sarcasm?
The “union pressure” argument is way overblown. The union wants to make sure that players don’t vastly underestimate their own value, but they have no real leverage to influence contract negotiations one way or the other.
In this case, no, this was a rare moment of sincerity. I believe C.C. was pressured by a bunch of rich guys on the Upper East Side, who played the Curt Flood card and told him he would be helping out everybody by signing with the Yankees. Of course they have leverage. As I’ve said before, get six of them to take C.C. to lunch at 21 and tell him how he needs to help. You don’t think these lawyers can’t be persuasive?
I think the extra $50 million is all the persuasion he needed. It was all about ego.
There is no report that any other club went over $110 million.
by Jay on Feb 17, 2011 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Let’s say, just for the sake of argument, that C.C. wanted to sign with Oakland, and damn the money. You don’t think a few lawyers would take Carsten out to lunch—have another lobster, son—and point out that he has to consider his kids, and African American ballplayers in the future? And lay it on thick?
And you think that a man who has been a millionaire for several years already is that persuaded by some stiffs sporting lobster?
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
by USSChoo on Feb 17, 2011 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yep. What do you think these sophisticated athletes do? Read Jean-Jacques Rousseau? They sit in their hotel suites playing video games. Maybe you’re not aware of this, but having money doesn’t necessarily make you worldly. In the case of athletes, it allows them to be insulated from the realities of the world. Most pro athletes are like children, in my experience.
by odradek on Feb 17, 2011 4:11 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
And a lobster dinner is worldly? And everyone is impressed by your definition of what worldly is? Please! I’m saying it is all extravagance and one thing that millionaires of all ilks are familiar with is extravagance. Have you seen the things the drive, the stuff they wear, the houses they buy? You think they play video games and just throw the rest of it in the bank? Maybe you’re not aware of this, but not being a tight pants-ed asshole in an ascot doesn’t mean you’re a sucker for some French wine and seafood. It does probably mean you’re a sucker for an additional $50 million. I think even the tight pants-ed fella is a sucker for that. Given the chance, you would be, too.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
by USSChoo on Feb 17, 2011 4:50 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The persuasion is not inherent in the lobster. It is in the milieu of wealth. C.C. grew up in Vallejo CA, not on Fishers Island. What is your definition of worldly?
Wealth that he already had and was set to expand upon whether or not he even listens to anyone that you say supposedly swayed him the direction he went.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
Perhaps you have idealized athletes, and think them more grounded and autonomous than most of them really are. This wasn’t necessarily presented as being just about money: it was about Curt Flood and solidarity with your teammates and the future of poor black kids in Compton. I don’t understand how you could fail to recognize even the possibility of this being the case.
You throw this poor black kids in Compton stuff around a little too freely with absolutely no basis. Sabathia has always been involved with MLB and inner city youth. And talking about idealizing athletes? The idea that he would have any thought besides the additional millions he stands to make? And I am the one setting them up to high.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
The Compton stuff is speculative, I’ll admit. But if you wanted to make sure C.C. went for top dollar, as a negotiator you probably wouldn’t talk money. You’d talk intangibles, nobility of gesture, legacies, historical precedents. You’d talk about Mom, the Fourth of July and the American way. You’d lay it on thick. Do it for the kids, C.C.!
If you don’t think Curt Flood is a powerful symbol, especially to someone who already is a multimillionaire, I don’t know what to say.
I persist in my belief that C.C. was pressured by the union to sign with the Yankees. He was told it was good for the game, good for the unions, good for the kids, good for him.
And, remember, this is a guy what eats Captain Crunch for breakfast. That’s not a silk-stocking repast.
My impression is that C.C. would be more moved by an argument along the lines of, “think of the good things you can do with the money.” So to that extent, I’d agree with you. Where you lose me is the union people weighing in, when his agent has already told him all that stuff.
Is there any reason to believe that the money itself isn’t what moved him? This all seems like speculation for a hidden motive that ignores the really obvious one.
The persuasion is not inherent in the lobster.
Absolutely. All I’m saying is that even if he had wanted to pitch for less money in Oakland—pure speculation on my part—the union would have put a lot of pressure on him to sign with the Yankees.
There are reports of several teams making offers to Sabathia, but no such reports regarding Oakland or even San Francisco. So this was really about going to the Yankees compared with Milwaukee (or staying in Cleveland in the first place). I don’t think even the Dodgers really made a big push.
if a bunch of stiffs invited me for lobster, I’d order breadsticks and make snide remarks the whole time. Ew, lobster…
"I want to be playing at the end of October or the end of September -- not just at the beginning of April." —Grady
So I’m guessing oysters on the half shell are out of the question. Slurp!
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Feb 20, 2011 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
Ordinarily odradek I’m a strong supporter of many of your more controversial positions, but I think you’re a little off here. I’m pretty sure that not all baseball players "sit in their hotel suites playing videos". I imagine that many are, but not all. The problem I have with this whole discussion is that seems to center around one, and only one, level of sophistication in all of baseball. Certainly we can say that a player like Craig Breslow is a bit more educated than many of us –and by extension more erudite and worldly. Similarly there are guys like Ross Ohlendorf, a graduate of Princeton with a degree in operations research and financial engineering (really? they give engineering degrees in finance?) And I won’t be surprised if our own Jody Gerut did read Rousseau upon occasion when he was on the road. So it appears what we are doing here is arguing about stereotypes.
I imagine you’d be a little more accurate if you’d consider the players as individuals and not stereotypes when you are attempting to define their motives.
So am I surprised that Lee didn’t sign with the Yankees for more money? No, because I’ve watched his actions with the Indians plus I know a guy whose cousin’s in-laws grew up like 30 miles from Cliff Lee’s uncle’s old farm. Am I surprised that Sabathia signed for the biggest available contract? No again, just like I’m not at all suprised he had knee surgery this off season.
These guys are individuals not stereotypes
Our best players wear suits.
by mauichuck on Feb 19, 2011 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Lee may have gotten a bit more if he signed with the Yankees, but lets not pretend he left any sort of serious money on the table. If that option vests, he got the 3rd largest pitcher ever for a contract, just 5th if it doesn’t. His AAV is 4th all-time if the option vests, 2nd if it doesn’t. The Yankees offer was 6/140, if that option vests and he gets his 6th year in Philly, he’ll make only . . . 135 million. The difference in money is pretty small, unlike the reports from the Sabathia negotiation.
I did. 5 million. The Yankees offered 6/140, He’s going to make 135 over the next 6 years. If the Yankees topped the 2nd best reported offer by about 50 million, like they did with Sabathia, I’d be willing to be that he’s in NY.
And I’m sure that Lee didn’t and wouldn’t have any serious talks with the Yankees. His agent might negotiate with them, but only to set the bar. Lee never had any real interest in going to NYC.
Both your position and mine are purely speculative.
Our best players wear suits.
My position – that Lee passed upon a raise of less than 4%, he didn’t leave a noticeable amount of money on the table, thus his situation isn’t comparable to Sabathia’s – isn’t really speculative.
Here’s where we will have to “agree to disagree”. I don’t think Lee or his agent gave the Yankees enough time to come up with their best and final offer. There are two things I am absolutely sure of: 1) the Yankee’s starting rotation is a mess. 2) the Steinbrenner’s will pay any price for one of the four or five best pitchers in all of baseball. Why? because they have to. If you believe that the Yankees wouldn’t offer a mere $5M a year more for six years you and I have very different perceptions of Yankee economics.
Our best players wear suits.
If we’re just going to draw up scenarios that we aren’t going to be asked to prove, I’ll say the Phillies offered him his whole island of unicorns and leprechauns. Hey, maybe you’re right. And I’m not going to argue that the Yankees can’t throw a bunch of money around at whomever they please, but that the number of teams that are willing to throw around contracts that get close enough should include Philly too.
“If the option vests” logic is not logic at all. Few if any pitchers in their 30s are likely to vest that option, five years into the future.
The guarantee is almost always the only number worth examining.
I thought the option vesting was only dependent on him not ending the 2015 season on the DL with a left arm injury. As I see, he has to get 200 IP in 2015 or 400 in 2014/15. Still, he makes 120 million and is the highest paid pitcher by AAV.
They’re not all dumb. Doug Glanville is another smart and sophisticated ballplayer. But more of them are hicks, contemporary versions of Ring Lardner characters. It comes with the territory—a pro athlete doesn’t have time to spend hours reading or sitting in classrooms. He spends his summers on the diamond, not at the National Archaelogical Museum in Athens.
The differences between Lee’s and Sabathia’s characters were conspicuous, from Lee tipping his hat to the crowd to C.C.’s frequent unravelings on the mound.
I’m also reminded of C.C. being held up in an elevator on Public Square and being removed of his jewelry at gunpoint by Cleveland State ballers. Now, those guys were worldly and sophisticated.
Are you suggesting C.C. was outwitted by his assailants?
That if you yourself got mugged, that would show that the muggers were more worldly than you?
I don’t entirely disagree with your general opinion of ballplayers. Sabathia is not the typical ballplayer, however. He’s an elite player, one who has had multimillion-dollar business dealings for more than a decade, and on multiple occasions. I’m also basing my opinion on his public statements and conduct in this specific matter.
So, good idea or bad? Going to a Stouffer’s party wearing a lot of bling? A lot of bling? Putting yourself in a position to be mugged in an elevator?
He was just a kid then, and his father moved in with him, supposedly to straighten him out. So maybe he’s learned a few things. It happens.
C.C. may be more sophisticated than I’m giving him credit for, but based on what I’ve seen on TV, he’s no Gorman Thomas.
This is dangerously close to a “she was asking for it” kind of argument.
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2011 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Meh, hindsight is 20/20.
Sabathia was 21 when that happened and 28 when he signed with the Yankees. I certainly learned a few things from age 21 to 28, and I didn’t even move in with my father.
Lots of very smart people don’t come off well on TV. I’m not saying that Sabathia is very smart nor that he doesn’t come off well on TV, I’m just saying, it’s not much of an argument.
You’re reaching. You’ve been reaching.
I don’t think it was lack of intelligence that drove Sabathia to sign with the Yankees, it was greed.
By the way, the Yankees should pray that Sabathia opts out of his contract – I think his knees are starting to come apart. He’ll be through as an elited pitcher by the end of 2012.
Our best players wear suits.
I think you’re forced to conclude that you don’t have a real, solid idea about what Sabathia’s level of intelligence is.
The persuasion is not inherent in the lobster.
Real or solid? Of course not. Just what I’ve seen on TV. But the default—even if you knew nothing about him—would be to assume he’s not exceptionally intelligent. Or even barely intelligent.
Because most people aren’t intelligent. Give him a few points for being a professional athlete, but the naked assumption should be that he is borderline intelligent or less.
No, most people are of average intelligence. Plot this on a bell curve and then explain to me why I should assume, with literally no evidence, that CC is on the left.
Average intelligence=not very smart.
I think it’s more likely a person is not intelligence for the same reason I would assume a person has no talent. People with talent (or intelligence) are rarer than those without talent (or intelligence).
I think the average ballplayer has above-average all-around intelligence. He may not be especially well educated, but I believe that the intellect required to achieve that level of success probably is a bit underestimated. I guess it depends largely on how we’re going to define intelligence.
I think C.C. is more intelligent than the average ballplayer. He certainly is more accomplished, more experienced with business affairs, and more worldly than the average ballplayer.
I believe, in sum, that C.C. is a ballplayer of above-average intelligence.
I would say that a major league pitcher who has had sustained success against major league hitters knows how to prepare, read scouting reports, read in-game situations, evaluate batters and evaluate his own daily abilities, all in a very short amount of time. That would be a precursor to intelligence.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
Have you? And did you have a discussion with him longer than 2 minutes?
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
Honestly, I resent the idea that playing video games makes one less worldly and sophisticated than reading Rousseau.
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2011 3:00 AM EST up reply actions
Tell you what Turk, walk down to your nearest Gamestop and see if you can find anyone there who knows who wrote Das Kapital.
Our best players wear suits.
by mauichuck on Feb 20, 2011 9:26 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I won’t argue with that, Chuck, but I would argue that you’d find just as un-wordly a crowd at any store in the mall. Video games have little to do with it. Hell, I’m at least worldly enough to get into and, at least for the time being, succeed in graduate school.
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2011 6:04 PM EST up reply actions
I am confident that Sabathia is quite a bit more worldly than the average crowd at a video game store at a mall. At the very least, I am confident that he’s had sex with more women than the entire population of the average video store at peak business hours.
You realize this is the equivalent or worse of “mom’s basement” blogger jokes, right?
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 20, 2011 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
Fair enough. The implication is clear, though, that these are two extremes in terms of sex-getting prowess.
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 22, 2011 3:40 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, although I was not the one who brought up video game stores. It was just right there in front of me.
Yes, I think gamers have no game. There, I said it.
by Jay on Feb 22, 2011 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, that’s just like, your opinion, man/
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 23, 2011 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
It’s well established that people who have never played video games lack respect for people who do.
Just like any other group, gamers are diverse. Not all of us sit around in our own filth and lack social skills.
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 24, 2011 6:26 PM EST up reply actions
Who hasn’t played video games? I once played Atari Space Invaders for eight hours without interruption, very possibly before you were born.
I once had a long session on my Commodore 64 trying to beat Impossible Mission. Turned out the title of the game was very apt.
I haven’t touched a video game in several years. I’m a video game perfectionist, so if I don’t have a block of time planned out to fully complete a game, I don’t bother.
I’m a video game perfectionist, so if I don’t have a block of time planned out to fully complete a game, I don’t bother.
Grad school has forced me further toward this mentality
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 25, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
I’m impressed
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 25, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
I get tired of dying, so I tend to play sports games. COD, however, has had me up until 2 am a few nights here and there.
For the most part, I don’t play games that replicate things I can do in real life. I can’t play football at a pro level, but I can play football. I cannot, on the other hand, scale the side of a roaming Titan with a labyrinthine temple chained to his back.
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 25, 2011 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
Have you ever heard of LeBron James?
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Feb 21, 2011 7:14 PM EST up reply actions
You’re going to have to explain how LeBron applies to this situation. LeBron is an egotistical, self-serving athlete who has nobody’s interest in mind but his own. Unless of course you know something about him that nobody else in this world does. Or you are part of his entourage and are delusional.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
LeBron James was persuaded by Pat Riley to change his number. He was persuaded by ESPN executives to make the Decision. I don’t agree with odradek on the CC thing, but sometimes superstars do weird things because someone in a suit tells them it’s a good idea.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Feb 22, 2011 9:37 AM EST up reply actions
My understanding is that The Decision was his nitwit friend Maverick’s idea.
When a ballplayer listens to Pat Riley, it isn’t because of the suit.
This whole guy-in-a-suit line of discussion is pretty dumb.
It wasn’t Maverick’s idea. Maverick and James were approached by the guy who ended up doing the interview, who works for ESPN.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Feb 22, 2011 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
Except that Jim Gray doesn’t work for ESPN. It’s part of why it was such a journalistic debacle.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Feb 22, 2011 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
Also, amidst all of this, we shouldn’t forget that there is a huge divide between agreeing to do something suggested by an outside party and being persuaded to something you didn’t want because you lack intelligence. Even the most intelligent people in the world do things at the suggestion of others.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
This whole guy-in-a-suit line of discussion is pretty dumb.
Good thing Sandy Koufax and John Elway didn’t listen to Bernie Madoff.
by odradek on Feb 22, 2011 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Most ballplayers are rubes. Especially young ones with high school educations (if that). By you standards Gary Sheffield would be a sophisticate.
I think you are vastly overestimating the degree of erudtion required in order to not be a rube. It doesn’t take any erudition at all; it takes a fifth grade level math ability and an average amount of street smarts.
Sophisticate is your (odd choice of) word. I’m just saying he’s not a rube.
Incidentally, you can be remarkably self-centered while still not being a rube. And I don’t just mean the general “you.”
It seems this form of critique relies on ad hominem attack, which really doesn’t do you justice. Gary Sheffield has, I imagine, a fifth grader’s sense of arithmetic. If you think that makes him not a rube, you have generous standards.
One needn’t be self-centered to disagree with you.
But is there not a spectrum from rube to educated (rather than sophisticate)
I’ve known some well-read folks who are pretty dumb otherwise.
The fifth grade math level alone does not make him not a rube.
As I’ve already made clear.
We can pick this up once you’ve decided to reply to my actual points. The need to restate my points constantly to you is not a good use of my time.
Merriam-Webster:
1: an awkward unsophisticated person : RUSTIC
2 : a naive or inexperienced person
If I interpret your obdurate position correctly, you’re saying the money alone was sufficient reason for him to sign with the Yankees. Hence the fifth-grade math: $161 million is larger than $140 million (or whatever Milwaukee or someone else offered). That’s sufficient motivation for most people who have attained that fifth-grade level of comprehension.
Had C.C. decided, for whatever cornpone reason, that he preferred to pitch in Milwaukee rather than the Bronx, and damn the $20 million, and he relayed this decision to his agent, and told his agent to go forth and sign the lesser deal with the Brews—because, after all, what is more important: happiness or money?—what do you suppose would have happened?
A frantic agent would have been on the phone to the MLBPA in a New York second. And the union would have used its full powers of persuasion to make sure Carsten signed with the Yankees and left no money on the table. And, if you don’t believe New York lawyers can be extremely persuasive in such matters, you haven’t met the right NY lawyers.
It is in the interest of the Players Association to have Sabathia sign with the Yankees, just as it is in the interest of the Players Association to have Pujols sign for $300 million with the Yankees.If you wish to persist in the ideal of the yeoman athlete, standing strong and rugged in the harsh light of Madison Avenue, a cowboy who tells the bankers to go stuff it, a noble man with a fifth grade education who lets no man tell him what to do, well okay then. All I can say is: You could be right.
by odradek on Feb 18, 2011 10:30 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I really think this whole fifth grade eduction business has run its course. Unless you come up with some actual fact as to how dumb these guys supposedly are, come up with a different way to prove your point. It is rude and inflammatory and I’m frankly sick of reading it.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
by USSChoo on Feb 18, 2011 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
How do I prove that baseball players are dumb? Personal observation. Spend a few minutes talking with Pete Rose, or Jim Bunning, and tell me what you think.
In no way am I intending to be rude, and I fail to see how you think I am being so. I’m not the one calling names or using rude language. If you feel I’m being inflammatory by disagreeing with you, I think you’re being too sensitive.
You aren’t being these things towards me, you can disagree with me all you want, that is sort of the point here. I think you are making unfair judgments on people that you have never met or had a conversation with. And to make classifications on a whole based on what you assume to be the intelligence of the few is wrong.
I agree that the people you claim persuaded CC are probably very persuasive people. But to make the claim that this whole series of events happened because A) They have money B) They talk a good talk C) CC is supposedly an idiot and extremely impressionable, is just no way to make your case. You can’t even prove that this meeting took place, let alone that it had the effect you estimate it had.
"Spring Training wins are good for the soul."
by USSChoo on Feb 18, 2011 2:52 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
because, after all, what is more important: happiness or money?
Do we have any compelling evidence that CC even thought he was making a decision between money and happiness? Is there anything saying he’s not happier in the place that offered him far and away the most money?
The persuasion is not inherent in the lobster.
Just that he talked about wanting to play near home. If you want hard evidence, like a record of phone calls or transcripts of talks between C.C. and his agent, I’ll have to get back to you.
As to your second question: Where would you rather play—on your home team or with the New York Yankees? If C.C. opts out it might suggest he’s not absolutely happy in NYC.
I was hot on the trail of “wants to play at home” at the time, but again, the reports are that those offers just never materialized.
Thome likewise pitched his services to the Cubs before signing with the Phillies. The Cubs were nice about it but declined to make a serious offer, because they had a no-doubt future star about to take over at first base.
If you told me I was going to keep doing the same work I am now and offered me the same wage to do it here or fifty million more to do it in New York, that wouldn’t be a hard decision. Whoever said money doesn’t buy happiness wasn’t spending it on the right things.
The persuasion is not inherent in the lobster.
I would do what is the best situation for me and my family. Even if you say the $ is even, there is a legitimate argument that NY is the superior choice.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
I submit to you that if C.C. opts out, it suggests absolutely nothing, because the default economic choice is to opt out.
If he declines to opt out, it suggests that he likes his current situation enough. Declining to opt out is, in essence, giving the Yankees a hometown discount.
These comments assume he has no significant injury in 2011, of course.
Hence the fifth-grade math: $161 million is larger than $140 million (or whatever Milwaukee or someone else offered).
Again, the difference apparently was $50 million, not $21 million. It’s now unclear whether you have a fifth grade math comprehension level. There are no reports that any team went above $110 million. Team Sabathia convinced Cashman that he was going to get a six-year offer, which is questionable, and that Cashman would have to add a seventh year, set a new AAV record for a pitcher, and offer the opt-out clause, in order to get him to pitch where he didn’t really want to be. Fifty million.
Had C.C. decided, for whatever cornpone reason, that he preferred to pitch in Milwaukee rather than the Bronx, and damn the $20 million, and he relayed this decision to his agent, and told his agent to go forth and sign the lesser deal with the Brews—because, after all, what is more important: happiness or money?—what do you suppose would have happened?
I know what would have happened — he’d have signed with Milwaukee, just as Cliff Lee signed with Philadelphia in more or less the exact scenario you describe. What is it, I wonder, that could make you so sure that Sabathia is a rube, while Lee obviously is someone who overcame that condition?
I don’t deny that it’s in the interest of the MLBPA for every player to go to the highest bidder. I am denying that they have any leverage worth mentioning with regard to the game’s elite players.
Incidentally.
We have no way of knowing what would have happened had Sabathia gotten (a) and offer from an L.A. based team (or Milwaukee or Cleveland) in the range of $130-$140 million, or (b) an offer from a Bay Area team in the range of $110 million. Based on all available reports, none of six possible offers materialized. Your argument would be a bit stronger — still kind of dumb, but a bit stronger — if we had even a single reliable report that he got (a) an offer within $50 million from any team at all, or (b) an offer within $80 million from a Bay Area club. But as far as we know, he didn’t.
First of all, education isn’t everything. There are people who have bachelors degrees who still are complete rubes (and people who didn’t just go there for the parties/getting into pro sports).
CC comes off as an intelligent guy and really, thats all we can go on. our own perception. And the “(if that)” part is a bit ridiculous and stupid. Especially when you consider he had a scholarship offer from UCLA and you have to be at least decent at school, even as a sports player, to get in there.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
Gee, that sounds pretty naive. I knew soccer scholarship guys at Penn who were pretty ordinary intellects. And that was just soccer, at a school where few care about athletics.
I am not saying that guys have to extraordinary. they can be perfectly ordinary. However even for athletes for many highly touted academic schools like UCLA, there are significant academic standards that most guys who are a complete dunce (like odarek makes out CC or any athlete with “barely” a HS education) would not meet. I am not saying that CC had to be Hawking, but he probably had to know higher than 5th grade math.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
by bross09 on Feb 21, 2011 1:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I’ve known a lot of division 1 athletes in my time, and even the ones that went to Ivy League schools weren’t always the sharpest tool in the shed. Heck, at case, a D3 school where nobody is technically on scholarship, many of the athletes seem like they probably failed 9th grade algebra.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Feb 21, 2011 7:28 PM EST up reply actions
I can personally corroborate that
Where's your crown, KIng Nothing?
by Turkmenbashi on Feb 22, 2011 3:41 AM EST up reply actions
By persuasive, I mean manipulative, knowing what to say to a young athlete—an athlete not previously known either for his worldliness or his sophistication, e.g., a rube—to get him to play their game. It’s a mismatch.
I can’t even follow what the point is. Is it so hard to figure that a player goes for the money, significant piles of money, or that the union tries to persuade its members of said benefits. Nothing at all insidious about this. So what if union officials button hole the player to realize that he and his family, never, ever, ever, ever will likely be in a position to seed the next 5 generations with more luxury and opportunity than they ever dared believe. And that family and friends and cousins and their barber would kill for an extra $50 grand in their lives. The value of money in a once in a lifetime opportunity before their very eyes.
I mean really, the system is totally rigged to underpay a star player for six of his prime playing years. Guess what, the Indians just paid Shin Soo Choo under $500 K for $20 million worth of performance. And we’ll likely underpay him another $15 million this year.
And if the player decides there is more value for his life in living or playing somewhere else for less money when he has the choice to to do so, after considering all the arguments, so what.
I mean, who even listens to LaRussa’s silly point. Flip the argument around. “Management wants to pay employees as little as possible so they can pocket the money for themselves!!” Oh, my Lord, they’d do that?! Allegedly so.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Feb 18, 2011 9:15 AM EST reply actions
The reason unions would like a top-tier player to go for that last cent is that it creates a precedent for future contracts, or even arbitration deals. Nothing shocking about it. The players association is trying to maximize their members’ take, the owners are trying to minimize it. But ultimately the decision should rest with the player; if he wants to take a few million less a year to play closer to home, then that’s his call.
But ultimately the decision should rest with the player; if he wants to take a few million less a year to play closer to home, then that’s his call.
This is the gist of it. It should be his call, but it often isn’t. If a player wants to play closer to home, he has a lot of people telling him: Take the money! Take the money! Have some lobster! It’s naive to think a young athlete has his head on straight enough to resist such pressure.
Of course it’s the player’s call. They made me take the money? Stop me before I kill again.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Feb 18, 2011 11:08 AM EST up reply actions
So if a player’s wife is telling him to sign with a team close to home, that’s not going to have just as large an effect as the agent or union? Most guys are in their late 20s or early 30s by the time they have a chance to sign that first big contract, and have family needs to take into consideration. And, God forbid, they themselves might have a preference where they’d like to play, be it because of family or a manager, the odds of winning, or whatever else.
I honestly don’t think the union really cares about where a player goes unless it’s a standard-setting contract.
I honestly don’t think the union really cares about where a player goes unless it’s a standard-setting contract.
I agree with this, though of course the union won’t let you work for minimum. But C.C.‘s was a standard-setting contract, as will be Pujols’. In such instances, I’m not surprised the union is in cahoots with the Steinbrenner family.
Cahoots is rather strong. Let’s just call it a marriage of convenience. Their interests align for each other’s separate benefit. They probably diverge on most everything else.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Feb 18, 2011 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
I would say this: the union would prefer that high-profile players sign their contracts via free agency, whether they stay with their current clubs or not. The deal that Pujols turned down may turn out to be close to what he eventually gets as a free agent, but I doubt it.
I’d agree with this. The union wants an auction of many parties where the highest bidder pushes up prices to the max.
by Bogalusa Bomber on Feb 19, 2011 8:03 AM EST up reply actions
The shellfish of choice in this discussion should really be clams, no?
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Feb 20, 2011 11:10 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Brett Lawrie hits umpire with line drive totally by accident (VIDEO)
- The Juice: Bryce Harper’s triple against Halladay keys Nats win, Dodgers roar back
- Heather Nabozny of Tigers, Nicole Sherry of Orioles: Women groundskeepers in MLB
- 10 notable team reps for MLB’s upcoming draft
- Rays’ gladiator helmets: Fernando Rodney, Joel Peralta do as Romans do (VIDEO)
