Skip to content

The New York Times continues its assault on Scott Boras

Nov 29, 2010, 11:20 PM EST

Boras sulking AP

Earlier today Keith Law posted his analysis of the relevant MLBPA rules regarding agents making loans to players and found nothing that would appear to make the loan Scott Boras made to Braves’ prospect Edward Salcedo improper.  This followed Scott Boras’ explanation of the loan and rather convincing (in my view) denial that anything improper took place. This also followed a week during which I hashed out the issue and, like Law and Boras, struggled to find any problem with the loan whatsoever.  Case closed?

Hardly. In Tuesday’s New York Times — published to the web this evening — Michael S. Schmidt writes about the “scandal” as if no one has questioned his initial report. Indeed, he writes it as if he has conducted no additional research into the matter at all. The story: last week Major League Baseball sent a letter to the union asking it to determine if Boras broke any rules.  There is no mention of what possible rules were broken. There is no new information other than the fact the letter was sent seven days ago. A letter which we all knew would be sent last week when, in Schmidt’s original story, anonymous Major League Baseball officials voiced concern. The letter is just another means of concern-voicing.

But there is plenty of additional hand-wringing. There is the obligatory “these allegations come at a time,” sentence, which is a time-tested way to cast something in a negative light when there are no actual connections between the complained-of activity and some perceived evil.  There’s the obligatory “the loans raised questions” sentence, when in fact, no one who has yet identified themselves by name has raised a question, let alone identified a violation of any rule or ethical norm. Seriously: someone name a rule Boras has violated. MLB-source guy: name the rule. Schmidt: report what rules you think were violated. Because thus far, there’s nothing.

I carry no brief for Scott Boras, but this is starting to look like a witch hunt. This latest story completely ignores Law’s analysis of the rules in question.  It puts out a single piece of information — the letter — that is a week old and essentially meaningless.  It quotes numerous agents who happen to compete for business with Scott Boras and whose interest would be served by having his reputation damaged, all waxing disapprovingly of the loan and saying how they themselves would never do such a thing.  Of course, none of them suggest that the loan was improper either.

I found Schmidt’s initial report on the Boras-Salcedo loan to be interesting but slight. In light of what we’ve learned about the loans in the past week, however, I am more firmly convinced than I ever have been that there is no story here at all.  Or rather, not the story that the Times is struggling to tell. Rather, this is a story about an all-out assault on Scott Boras.  And unless someone can point to a single rule that was broken, it’s one that needs to cease now.

  1. Andrew - Nov 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM

    Calcuterra: “What makes you think he’s a witch?”

    Schmidt: “He turned me into a newt!”

    Calcuterra: “A newt?”

    Schmidt: “I got better…”

    Other Agents: “BURN HIM!!!”

    • Kevin S. - Nov 30, 2010 at 9:56 AM

      Win.

      • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Nov 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

        Win? How about fail? General rule of thumb: spell the blogger’s name correctly on said blogger’s post, especially when it’s spelled out for you on the very same page.

      • Kevin S. - Nov 30, 2010 at 10:33 AM

        You know, I totally missed that.

        Sans misspelling the Shyster, win?

  2. Bob Timmermann - Nov 30, 2010 at 12:06 AM

    I did not know Wikileaks covered Scott Boras.

  3. scottsimkus - Nov 30, 2010 at 1:16 AM

    I sent Boras an email to see if he could lend me twenty bucks to buy some smokes. Thus far, no response. Scandal? No. But very, very rude.

  4. Jonny 5 - Nov 30, 2010 at 8:23 AM

    “Rather, this is a story about an all-out assault on Scott Boras. And unless someone can point to a single rule that was broken, it’s one that needs to cease now.”

    Silly, silly, Man. The Media will villify and assault who they want, when they want. And nobody will do a damn thing about it. We are living in an era here where something as important as the oval office can be won or lost through an all out media Bitzkrieg. Every political position uses this method. Until “Journalists” are held accountable for the lies they spew, or “non-issues” they throw gas and a match on, this will continue, unabated.

  5. mrznyc - Nov 30, 2010 at 9:13 AM

    To quote Tommy Lasorda – “Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the gallon.”

    • Kevin S. - Nov 30, 2010 at 9:57 AM

      I’m pretty sure that was Casey Stengel. At least, that’s who the Medill School of Journalism attributed the quote to.

  6. Old Gator - Nov 30, 2010 at 2:29 PM

    I’m going to run up behind Scott Boras, kick him in the ass, and then run away. The Times will hide me.

    • Kevin S. - Nov 30, 2010 at 3:06 PM

      You could also pretend you interviewed him and say he admitted to being the anti-Christ. We know for a fact NYT will give you some run there.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Maddon has high hopes for Cubs
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. P. Sandoval (5728)
  2. Y. Tomas (3938)
  3. H. Ramirez (3739)
  4. J. Lester (3272)
  5. A. LaRoche (2254)
  1. J. Upton (2226)
  2. J. Bruce (2206)
  3. T. Hunter (2035)
  4. I. Davis (2028)
  5. M. Scherzer (1834)