Dec 18, 2009, 9:55 AM EST
That’s what Mark Feinsand of the Daily News reports, however it still wasn’t enough to get a deal done for Damon as the Yankees wouldn’t pay him $13 million per, even for two years.
Assuming this is true, this is a case of Boras seriously misreading the market for his client, and ultimately doing him a disservice. Damon wanted nothing more than to play for the Yankees, telling Feinsand “I’m not quite sure what I’m going to do. I know there
are some teams interested, but the Yankees are the best organization
I’ve been a part of so far in my career.” No one, outside of Scott Boras, believed that Johnny Damon was worth more than a two year deal. While it was too much to expect the Yankees to negotiate hard on a two year basis at the 11th hour, isn’t it highly likely that something could have gotten worked out if Boras had gone to Brian Cashman talking about two years a week or two ago?
Now it’s almost certainly elsewhere for Damon. Maybe he’ll get that $13 million. I doubt it, but it could happen. But that’s cold comfort when he so obviously wanted to stay in pinstripes.
- Hector Olivera’s camp denies any damage to ulnar collateral ligament 3
- UPDATE: Hunter Pence out 6-8 weeks with fracture in left forearm 22
- MLBPA: leaks are from people “who want to see Josh Hamilton hurt personally and professionally” 26
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene 145
- Report: MLB panel split on rehab for Josh Hamilton; one-year suspension is in play 45
- Joc Pederson goes 2-for-2 in Cactus League debut 6
- Braves scratch Mike Minor from start with more shoulder problems 6
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” 374
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” (374)
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene (145)
- Curt Schilling lowers the boom on some men tweeting threats against his daughter (137)
- That facts of Josh Hamilton’s case should not be a matter of public record (94)
- Billy Bean responds to Daniel Murphy’s comments (90)