Skip to content

Damon turned down Yankees' offer last week

Jan 29, 2010, 12:23 PM EST

SI.com’s Jon Heyman reports that the Yankees made a final offer to Johnny Damon last week that would have paid him $6 million for 2010, although half the money would have been deferred without interest.
Damon turned that down and the Yankees quickly signed Randy Winn for $2 million instead, so now he’s searching for a new team. Damon’s agent, Scott Boras, is said to have told the Yankees early in the offseason that he’d accept nothing less than a two-year deal worth $26 million and after it became clear that wasn’t happening they reportedly turned down a two-year, $14 million offer.
Shooting for the moon early and then having too much pride to accept a lesser-but-still-good offer is one thing, but turning down $6 million in mid-January is flat-out foolish for a guy who’s repeatedly said he wants to stay in New York. My guess is that Damon won’t get $6 million from wherever he winds up, and even if he gets around that same money from his new team was it really worth leaving the Yankees?

  1. Dan Whitney - Jan 29, 2010 at 12:44 PM

    This is appearing more and more like Damon was being reasonable but Boras was trying to weasel out a hard-line negotiation to pad his own ego, and ended up screwing his player out of a solid job in the city he wanted to play for.

  2. YankeesfanLen - Jan 29, 2010 at 12:49 PM

    This seems, reading between the lines for two months, like what really happened. And regardless of Lupica’s take on any of this, it is a shame, but I don’t think Cashman was at all behaving unreasonably.

  3. JudyJ - Jan 29, 2010 at 12:51 PM

    Looks like Johny will have to make that call himself – and soon. I’m not sure Boreass is to blame here – I think Damon has always been a money man and goes where the money is – which I cannot hold against him. However, when you have made so much isn’t it time to play where you can have endorsements and work in a place where you like to live? Sorry, Johnny, can’t hold the Yankees hostage – just ask A-Rod.

  4. moreflagsmorefun - Jan 29, 2010 at 1:03 PM

    The more I hear the more I realize this really was Damons call and he was craZy, he can’t blame anyone when he is Oakland this summer.I wish I had the STONES to turn down 14 Million for two years work, especially if I just pocketed 52 Million and a Yankee World Series ring.
    Aye Caramba!!

  5. moreflagsmorefun - Jan 29, 2010 at 1:07 PM

    Judy, A-Rod robbed Hank with a sparklin smile, he gave A-Rod 300 million with no other bidders in sight and all Hicks money gone, I love A-Rod as a Yankee, but really, 300 million.

  6. Shely - Jan 29, 2010 at 2:33 PM

    I find this story very hard to believe. How would Damon expect to get a better deal than that? He will end up getting much less from any other team, and nothing is guaranteed he will be on a winner.

  7. Chris Simonds - Jan 29, 2010 at 2:34 PM

    I weighed in on one of Craig’s threads that I thought Cashman was being an a-hole, but it’s looking like I was wrong. How much of these bad decisions were Damon’s and how much Boras we’ll never know – at least until the tell-all book by one or the other of them comes out – and probably not even then. Both player and agent seem to be really out of touch with the market and with…. reality. Maybe Damon lost big bucks to Robert Stanford and the financial crash and he felt he had to get as big a contract as he could.

  8. YANKEES1996 - Jan 29, 2010 at 2:53 PM

    I like Damon, he is a good player and a good presence in the clubhouse, but I am glad to finally see the Yankees call out that jacka@@ Boras. Boras has used the Yankees at his leisure over the years to do everything from drive up salaries to unload talent that the Yanks should not have spent money on. I say BRAVO to the Yanks for sticking to their guns here and telling Boras and Damon to take the train. Damon should have handled his own business when Boras blew him off to take care of Holliday. Turning down a contract worth $14 million over two years and $6 million for one year at 36 years of age is right nervey however.

  9. Son of Shane Mack - Jan 29, 2010 at 3:12 PM

    This is what happens when you have an ego-maniacal @#$munch as your agent. Sometimes he gets what he deserves. The player is just collateral damage.
    Too bad Johnny. Enjoy the boonies!

  10. sjp - Jan 29, 2010 at 3:26 PM

    As much fun as it may be to blame Boras, the fact is that the player is the one that turned down the offers. Boras has the luxury of not caring what people think about him; therefore, he can take all the PR bullets for his client making bad decisions.
    If the Yankees made an offer, Boras MUST take that offer to the player, and the player makes the decision, not the agent.

  11. moreflagsmorefun - Jan 29, 2010 at 3:42 PM

    Yeah but if your guy is whispering sweet nothings in your ear, maybe that i what is happpening too. Who knows, that sure is a
    large stack of cheese to turn down, I promise you if someone offered me that I would at least consider it.The fact is alot
    of these GM’s want to get some of the power back, especially when you have the check book like the big boy’s.Stay tuned, this is getting interesting and remember until Damon has signed or the Yankees give away his number he could come back, you never know.

  12. JudyJ - Jan 29, 2010 at 4:10 PM

    I agree with you on both posts. I just watched Damon being interviewed by Francessa. Even Francessa is a little rattled by the situation – and what I got was that Francessa thought Damon was being stupid. I still think Damon will sign with the Yankees -because as MF said – do you really want to play in a small market town since you fit in so well here and in Boston. I think Damon’s opinion of himself has a lot to do with this – he mentioned in the interview how much he felt he contributed in the clubhouse as well as on th field. Damon also said he made an offer in December to come back to the Yankees for two million dollars less per year and the way he said it I think he believed he was giving them a real good discount. The three parties seem far apart, but I still think something can be worked out. About A-Rod – well, yes, 300 million is huge amount of money. But I am a working class person and a believer that you should get the most you can upfront for your services and A-Rod certainly did that.

  13. J. McCann - Jan 29, 2010 at 6:03 PM

    After seeing Boras and the Yankees operate for the last few years, I am STILL not convinced Damon will definitely not be back.
    Let’s wait until he signs. If he gets more than 6M with half deferred, then it wasn’t so stupid to turn it down.

  14. Clementelegend - Jan 30, 2010 at 1:34 AM

    of course you don’t think Cashman was acting unreasonable. You and Judy are Yankee homers.

  15. Clementelegend - Jan 30, 2010 at 1:41 AM

    How is Johnny Damon’s situation with Nu Yawk any different from his past move with Boston?
    Damon fit in perfectly with the Sox. Damon was caveman, long hair, could be wild with the Cowboy Up/Curse Busting Red Sox.
    Was even featured in a silly Red Sox-influenced movie flick, Fever Pitch.
    Johnny Damon even said he couldn’t see himself with the Yankees, his wife said to the Boston Globe that she couldn’t see it either. Damon loved the Sawx, blah blah blah.
    Damon is a mercenary. So are many athletes.

  16. JudyJ - Feb 2, 2010 at 2:21 PM

    So, now Damon is thinking about the Tigers. He is a money guy = and I still hold no animosity toward him, they loved him in Boston and they will love him in Detroit. The worst thing that can happen to him is to land in Pittsburgh. Otherwise, adios Johnny – it’s been fun.

  17. Pharmacy - Feb 11, 2010 at 3:27 PM

    yea nice Work

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (2249)
  2. D. Ross (2178)
  3. J. Kang (2095)
  4. C. Gonzalez (2074)
  5. J. Shields (1935)
  1. J. Grilli (1931)
  2. M. Scutaro (1914)
  3. D. Haren (1858)
  4. T. Tulowitzki (1814)
  5. S. Smith (1784)