Erroneous news on a supposed new Matt Holliday offer from the St. Louis Cardinals is amplified all over cyberspace before being pulled.
I opened my mail this morning and checked the Scout.com Cardinals message board to find a number of items asking about the new eight-year offer at $16 million per year supposedly tendered by the Cardinals to Matt Holliday. The source of this information was an MLB.com article posted Tuesday evening.
After dealing with the shock of Cards GM John Mozeliak apparently having lost his cool in bidding against himself after having been so in-control of his dealings with agent Scott Boras for so long, I went to check out the article for myself this morning.
Turns out nothing is said about eight years or any years, for that matter. It says nothing about $128 million. In fact, the short article says nothing new at all, though it does repeat the Tuesday Buster Olney $18 million per year asking price rumor.
I figured I had been given the wrong link, so searched all over MLB.com looking for the smoking gun. There was none.
Broadening my search, I then found several references to the article elsewhere, including this headline from NBC.com, also from last evening, which links back to the same MLB.com post:
UPDATE: Cards reportedly offer Holliday 8-year deal
UPDATE: MLB.com is reporting that the Cardinals have offered Matt Holliday an 8-year contract for about $16 million per season.
The story also speculates that if a mystery team were to enter the Holliday mix it could be the Seattle Mariners.
Wednesday’s apparent re-write of the MLB.com article does not mention Seattle, either.
Here’s my guess at what happened.
Dependable and knowledgeable Cardinals MLB.com beat writer Matthew Leach is out on vacation and “Joe Fill-in Guy” wrote the Holliday article. He cited old information that included a reference to eight years that Joe Strauss mentioned several weeks back. Shortly after, additional information came out that the base proposal may be four or five years with perhaps some options, but nothing more about eight years has been mentioned recently.
Once someone at MLB.com realized the eight years news was older than Thanksgiving’s left-over turkey, it was edited out of the article, as was the writer’s Seattle speculation. By then, this supposed new news was all over cyberspace, as evidenced by the NBC post that summarizes and links to the now-neutered MLB.com article.
Unfortunately, in making their corrections, MLB.com made no reference to the tracks they apparently covered up over night.
What can the reader learn from this? Be careful.
In case you haven’t noticed, it seems like 99 percent of the news being posted is just a rehash of what someone else said, so take the time to check the source. For example, sites like MLB Trade Rumors and Rotoworld do not break news – they just aggregate and re-report what others said. I am not picking on them, as these kinds of sites have a place for those who don’t follow this stuff closely and want a quick fix. My advice is to keep your wits about you, however.
These two sites almost always link back to the original source, which is crucial. I highly recommend you actually click on the original link to be sure something was not lost in translation, because sometimes that is exactly what occurs.
Tuesday’s Felipe Lopez “news” is a great example. Derrick Goold said directly that he had no new information on the players the Cardinals are pursuing now that Mark DeRosa has signed with San Francisco. Goold mentioned Boras client Lopez among a list of names in whom the Cards had reportedly shown previous interest. He also suggested that given how Boras works, it is likely the agent will focus on getting Holliday placed first.
In other words, the Cardinals interest in Lopez was a repeat of old news and was clearly represented that way. Yet others latched onto it and made it headline fodder as if Mozeliak had called Boras about Lopez yesterday morning in his remorse over losing DeRosa.
The Post-Dispatch also updated their report on DeRosa. After having said the player had received an offer from St. Louis earlier in the off-season, they corrected that in later articles as more information that a firm offer was never tendered apparently became available. Certainly, nothing malicious was intended. It just happens as part of the difficult job of reporting on rumors.
The thirst to be first results in mistakes which are quickly amplified in today’s instant news world. Been there, done that. Lessons learned. You should expect it too and act accordingly.
Follow me on Twitter.
I had noticed the same thing in the article. I dont get worked up about msg board stuff for the most part. Heck, even columnists today are so desperate to make headlines they mix supposition with reporting just to be provocative. That is where the real problem lies these days — the use of “could” “possibly” and other similar phrases by even respected journalists blurs the waters between fact and fantasy. There is an assumption that these guys have inside info which I’m not sure is always the case. Worse yet, those qualifiers often get lost in the telephone tag of tweets and internet postings.
Brian, I saw the same things you did and had the same confused reaction. Don’t know if it has been changed, but when I looked at that MLB.com article last night, if you play the video, Harold Reynolds does say they’ve offered 8 years, but doesn’t say anything about a source or give any reason to believe it’s anything other than wild speculation or old information as you suggest.
Good point, PHE. Harold does mention eight years, but not specifically at $16 million per. He also did not name Seattle (or any other club) as a possible future mystery bidder. That reference has also disappeared from MLB.com.
Any views on the reliability of reports that Boras’s asking price is now $18M per?
bb, the $18M came directly from ESPN’s Buster Olney yesterday, a person I consider a good source. He reported it in the context of Boras looping back around to other clubs, probably trying to stir up interest in his after-Christmas mark-down. No word on number of years or if that is the Cardinals price, too.
What is news is that it is far less than $180 million divided by eight, the Teixeira contract that was Boras’ stated Holliday benchmark. (Unless Boras increased his demand to ten years, he won’t get $180!) Still, if Boras is holding to eight years, an $18 million per price tag ($144 million total) would remain out of most if not all teams’ willingness to ante up.
So, all I take from it is that Boras is finally admitting he isn’t going to get his Tex deal for Holliday. First sign of weakening toward reality. For all we know, Boras could still be a long way from Mozeliak’s offer or the optimist might read it as Boras checking his hole cards one last time before folding to Mo’s winning hand. Despite other rumors yesterday suggesting the latter, I am not there personally.
Today’s FoxSports article seems like a good example. All kinds of stuff reported as fact wihtout direct quotes or attribution. Cards offer worth up to $140M ???? Orioles offered $130M???? Better download it quick before it majically changes.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Ringolsby-Holliday-contract-123009
That FOX article doesn’t pass my sniff test. If the Cardinals were really only $500,000 per year away from Boras times eight years or $4M total over the life of the contract, I bet the deal would already have been done.
Orioles president Andy MacPhail “vehemently denied” their supposed eight-year offer, saying they have “no interest in Holliday unless the price drops significantly”… Here we go again… Boras has to be loving this… I hope he calls me soon to plant a rumor…
Update: ESPN’s Buster Olney hammers in the nails on this coffin. “The (FOX/Ringlosby) story is not accurate in any respect.”
I don’t mean to pile on a guy when he is under fire, but I checked on Ringolsby’s past FOX work and found another major factual error in the first article I read. On the 15th, he wrote an article entitled, “Did Boras misjudge the market?”. In it, he refers to Mark Teixeira’s “eight-year, $140 million deal with the Yankees”. Problem is, it is actually $180. Hello, FOX fact-checkers….
Now Olney is joining in the vague game, saying the Cardinals offer is greater than $100 million. He neglects to mention years, so what is that worth?
Sources: The Cardinals’ offer to Holliday is believed to be over $100 million.
11 minutes ago from web
Buster_ESPN
By Tim Dierkes [December 30, 2009 at 3:20pm CST]
3:20pm: ESPN’s Buster Olney tweets that the Cardinals’ offer to Holliday “is believed to be over $100MM” (guaranteed, he tells me). Additionally, Ringolsby replied to my email and clarified that he’s been told the Cards’ eight-year, $140MM offer is guaranteed both in years and dollars.
(This last is a guy on mlbtraderumors
If Mo actually guaranteed 8/140, then it would seem that Boras has managed to get him to bid against himself. Then again, this is the same guy that said Baltimore offered 8/130, so you have to wonder about his source in this case…
Does anyone around here have a Boras Corporation phone directory?
I’ve got one in the bathroom, but there’s only a few pages left.
Goold has an article up now on stltoday where ‘multiple sources’ say Cards-MH negotiation is “gaining momentum and potentially is the largest ever offered by the franchise”. (meaning bigger than Albert’s 7/100 he says)
“Sources with knowledge of the negotiations said progress is “strong” and a resolution could come as early as next week”.
No sources are named of course, and the rest of the article re-hashes old info. Let’s hope it’s not just planted spin to offset somebody elses planted spin. Sounded pretty legit to me, but I’m hardly a neutral observer on the MH issue. Maybe Westy will come out of hibernation just in time to see the glorious vindication of the power of positive thinking.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/BD256B912DF26E4C8625769D0017B0DF?OpenDocument
Let’s recap the environment in which the P-D article ran. In the last 24 hours,
1) FOX/Ringlosby had already said the Cards offered 8/140 GUARANTEED.
2) ESPN/Olney had already said the Cards offered over 100 GUARANTEED.
3) SI/Heyman had already said the Cards offered at least six years and 100 plus.
4) Even the in-house mouthpiece MLB.com said something, though they apparently got cold feet and took it down.
The local paper had to say SOMETHING. From the above, it already seemed pretty obvious that the talks were heating up, but I guess it is more assuring coming from the in-town writers. Other than that, bets have been properly hedged so just about any deal would fall somewhere within the prediction range of 5/75 through the open 8/100+. Unless/until the actual contract is decided, what more can be said other than to repeat what has already been said? Still, the beast has to be fed daily.
Bernie M at the Post talks about the range of rumored offers to MH and then says:
“The sabermetric analysts think this is a very risky (read: stupid) deal for the Cardinals. ”
Is there any truth to that, and if so, could somebody provide a bit of explaination or commentary.
First, how can anyone say that if they don’t know what the deal is?
Second, most estimates puts Holliday around 4 WAR. I believe a WAR is valued about $4.5 million these days (not sure) so that would make it about right. Some analyst would say the age drop off could be an issue but, again, since we don’t even know how long the deal is for how can one evaluate that.
As usual Bernie is talking just to talk. The bright side is that he’ll change his take several times over the next few years no matter what – that you can count on.
Thanks CC. Whould’ve been nice if he had mentioned which analysts said it. Where is Walter Cronkite when we need him??
The possible mystery variable here is a collusion agreement between Boston and NY, in the style of Johan Santana 2008. That would explain many of their moves here. That would also leave Scottie working a high profile negotiation with MH and SL to attract any other interested teams. His last hope at a runaway number…………..I would guess he is being pressured by MH at this point on pain of dismissal of he punks the whole deal.
Did Lohse fire Boras – no
Did Weaver fire Boras – no
Will Holliday fire Boras – no
My $100 to charity bet is still open Westie.
Bling, Boston supposedly offered $16.MM per year. So if the Cards are near this, this will be a well reasoned number.
One way an unsophisticated sabremetrician could claim the Cards are doing something reckeless is to make comparisons to players with under 6 years seniority. They will always be cheaper than an open market player. Thus Holliday has to be compared to men like Soriano or Carlos Lee or Jason Bay, left fielders who became free agents and commanded long term deals.
I could see the Cards having bid of about 16.75MM/yr for six, with performance vesting options for years 7 and 8.
The teams have their own data analysts and will know all the numbers.
I am willing to believe that the Holliday saga is approaching a conclusion in the next week or so. Even though Boras is known for sometimes holding out for a long time, in this case it is possible that there are some other players who would like Holliday to settle, so their negotiations can proceed with less uncertainty. While there is not command and control by the Union over individuals and their agents, there must be a considerable amount of collusion among agents and the Union. They do not have as many legal restraints as does management, so they can scheme and coordinate together. And the Union may want some top deals like Bay and Holliday concluded, to help other players. This may be a subtle force that can only be guessed at and certainly not proven, unless some agents write “tell all” autobiographies.
TLR post on Twitter: “Giants were smart to sign 1st class winner Mark DeRosa. Soon the Cards will be smart too”
Whatever happened with Tony’s lawsuit against twitter.
Settled out of court. Since then, Twitter has established a program where celebrities can have certified identity ids. Interestingly, TLR does not appear to be using it, despite that having been the subject of his complaint – someone else assuming his identity on Twitter.
“Former Cardinals outfielder Chris Duncan is reportedly drawing plenty of interest on the free agent market.”
This was on Scott Wuerz’ blog called Cheap Seats at the Belleville News Democrat, 12/26, its pretty mutch like mlbtraderumors except often without any attribution at all however vague. There is no hint where this info came from. He says at least four teams have interest.
What he failed to say was that it was the minor league free agent market. Even at that, 4 teams hardly amounts to ” plenty” in my book.
Sounds like it came from the same article that quoted Duncan’s agent about 10 days ago.
Another fine example of how information likely gets warped – reminds me of the old game of telephone we used to play as youngsters. Next we will probably see it back around of one of the rumor sites.
Agent/ player relationships are complicated CC A Scott Boras/player relationship is even more diabolical. A good example is the A-Rod negotiation. It got personal, mainly because of the opt-out move. A-Rod saved himself and his agent by retaining and paying him allot of money in the end. Why? …………….. It is very difficult to prove malfeasance, where the end result is as subjective as market potential. If A-Rod had not pulled that off, he surely would have fired Boras. As it is, Boras, while out of the negotiation was doing all the structuring and prompting. Because the contract went through, if Scottie had been fired, he would have went after his 4.5%, and got it. He has a bus load of attorneys on salary. Easily the cheapest way out was to work with him. Deciding when he is working against a clients best interests is a legal night mare.
Trying to sell Weavers world series notoriety above his skill set was a job that I wouldn’t have taken.
Lohse showed Scottie the light. It turned into a big year for Boras as he killed with all his other clients that winter. It could easily been different.
There are signs that the Holiday family is influencing his current negotiations. Enough there.
The Yankee/Boston agreement to stay out of the Santana bidding, is still on the union grievance list. Lohse could profit by that if it ever comes to a hearing.
Something that I’m learning from the Holiday/Cardinal negotiations is centered on the baseball culture as a whole. With no apparent competition, the Cardinal bid has apparently escalated. I’ve heard that a no trade clause is on the table, a real sign of a Scottie based negotiations with a family boot on his ass. As the lower salary threshold becomes apparent, why no action from teams that clearly could benefit from having Holiday as a player. The Yankee/Boston moderation isn’t fueled by competitive aggression here. I think they both realize that these long term deals can entrench you in a loosing chemistry for years. It looks allot like they recognize how an understanding between them could really control the current inflation in the market place. They may both agree to spend less this year……………..so they can snap up Mauer and Pujols in 2011. Yanks will want a catcher, Boston would love Albert. I’m watching what they do spend after Holiday is tucked away in St Louis. Only BD/Mo could blow this gimme.
Ah, the sound of Westie Backpedaling.
Here are some humorous tweets from SB during the winter meetings. He hasn’t been such a comedian lately.
I just had a GM offer me 3 yrs for Damon, and a dinner at Red Lobster
10:24 AM Dec 7th, 2009 from web
6 years and Sizzler, I’d listen to
10:25 AM Dec 7th, 2009 from web
Only had one GM walk out of a meeting today. He won’t have a job in about 2 months anyway. Will not confirm or deny if NL East is involved.
3:26 PM Dec 7th, 2009 from web
These cashews are terriblle
8:48 PM Dec 8th, 2009 from web
These are teh Jason Bay of hotel mini bar nuts
8:49 PM Dec 8th, 2009 from web
Around the same time Boras cozied up to the P-D for that heartwarming expose.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-freeagents010210&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Do a review on this article CC. Try to contribute something here as opposed to winning the most troll worthy “sport” in perpetuity. . Think, breathe……..now doesn’t’ that feel better.
The 130 Baltimore offer was likely a Boras ploy, residue from a conversation about offers that might impress. Seattle, with Ishiro and Figgins standing on base all the time really could use a basher least that investment tunnels.
Or I could just contribute a bunch of non sourced thoughts presented as fact and then contradict myself when it doesn’t happen as I assure people it will. Oops, that role is taken.
Benched again.
I’m heart broken. But just Bradley, I’ll still get paid more than the guy benching me
..just “like” Bradley…
Carefull CC lest you get traded to a Cubs blog for an illiterate and cash.
If you did a cost analysis of Boston and NY Brian, at the rate Boston is out spending NY this year, any chance there is some sort of parity reached by March? Epstein and Cashman were holding hands in 2008……………… the MT blow up showed signs of one-up’s man-ship that may have been more about Steinbrenner and Red Sox ownership, than hostile GMs. LA, Cubs, Angels, all licking their wounds. NY and Boston seemingly acting in concert against market demands. Is this to save money this year, or creating a very important president for 2011? Once Mauer squats down in that ballpark at 25 degrees, he will be thinking something.
Interesting subject………………what AA or AAA pitchers make the starts in Minnesota in the early April exhibitions?.
We see in the FA market conservatism and avoidance of long term commitments, and the risk and lack of flexibility that goes with it. It’s the same in every other business and industry these days. Every business, including MLB clubs I’m sure, have to deal with their bankers, and bankers are profoundly risk averse these days. A flat market keeps things short term in every type of business. Why hire a 30 year old who is in his prime now, and pay him top dollar for eight years as he declines, if stable prices will allow you to replace him with a fresh 30 year old for the same price every few years. It does not take collusion or holding hands to figure that out. Sellers who saw their friends and neighbors get top dollars a year or two ago cannot accept that ‘irrational euphoria’ based prices are not there anymore, time on market goes up. Sellers wait for a miracle that’s not happening. Many sellers’ agents who where top guns in a booming market find their skills ans strategies useless. Like the French in 1938, Scottie is exceedingly well prepared to fight the previous war.
All true BB…………………..But it is a competition. Or its suppose to be. Owners set this table for themselves. Inflation always serves its creators. The victims are the fans. The owners benefit from the hero’s they promote and create, but hey have to dangle that big sweet carrot contract to make them larger than life…………….and the longer they make the stick, the more they keep for themselves.
I’m laughing at the Twins. Their owner was a ruthless business man. They had X amount to spend every year and they had to make it work. He was in league with the commissioner about Minnesota losing its team in the downsizing movement. It was all designed to gain support for the new stadium, to enhance his investment. They designed it with a dome, but couldn’t get it by the politicians.
They went ahead and built it without knowing that the league would eventually mandate a roof or lose the franchise again. The Cardinals don’t have any pitchers they would us up there. I doubt Albert does more than make a curtain call appearance.
Jim Bowden (former Cin and Was GM) now with MLB Home Plate and FOX tweets this:
“The Holliday may be over for most, but not St.Louis……Cards – Holliday closing in on 98.5m dollar deal”
Could imply six years averaging just under $16.5M per. That would be less than Bay, but five years at that total would be just under $20M per season – too high.
At that price, most likely includes an opt out – but after how many years?
I tend to give this number some credence as it appears it is not simply a regurgitation of previous numbers repeatted elsewhere.
He is saying that because that’s what Boras is leaking through the usual channels. That number would have an opt-out and no trade protection. Boras is notifying all party’s to speak up or forever hold you peace. I hope this gets done. Then the fun begins. Matt Holiday’s St Louis Cardinals. As funny as that sounds, it is the best possible gauntlet for AP to negotiate a contest with his personal demons. I wish him well.
$98.5M is conspicuously less than Pujols’ $100M. Though surely fewer years, it keeps Albert’s deal as the largest. Maybe coincidence, maybe not.
Westy makes a good point that Boras could have leaked a tantalizingly low number to try and scare up interest. Not that anyone will find it tantalizing or low. Maybe Bay has passed his physical, Scottie’s last hope.
If true, there would probably be incentives on top of the 98.5.
This number, 6/98, is screaming at the Boston/NY alliance. I dare say its rattling the Cubs a bit too. Anaheim has Matsui asking to play some left. I’m sure they’re content to stay with the east coast austerity program.
This maneuver by the young GM’s in the AL East, reinforces something I’ve come to suspect for some time. The president set by their Santana agreement in 2008 was not broken by last years Mark T. fiasco. It seems apparent that by this years behavior, that Boras went over Cashman directly to Steinbrenner to make that deal in an embarrassing one day turn around. I’m sure apologies were exchanged between the two. Something tells me that Scottie thought that door was still open with Holiday. Apparently not. It will take at least 10+ million to get around this deal.
The East Coast coalition rules appear to be some sort of parity right around the Luxury Tax boundary. Boston got back to even with the Lackey move. All other speculations seem to include trades of established players for replacements.