PDA

View Full Version : Gammons unloads on Boras


Fenway
01-08-2009, 05:30 PM
Listen to Peter Gammons's appearance on WEEI here. (http://audio.weei.com/m/audio/21737852/peter_gammons_mlb_analyst.htm?pageid=967)


partial transcript

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/01/gammonss_take.html

cards press box
01-08-2009, 05:53 PM
I remember when A-Rod was dealt to the Yankees. A-Rod, like Jason Giambi and others, made a big deal about coming to play for the Yankees because "they wanted to play for a winner." At the time, Jim Bouton said that he grew up hating guys like that. Bouton said that he preferred players who wanted to be the guy who makes the team competitive, when it was previously not competitive. Teixeira sounds like another guy who wants the team around him to make him better and not the other way around.

Teixeira has never finished in the top five in MVP voting and, really, has never had a big at bat in his career. At the end of the day, the Red Sox might be glad he went to the Yanks.

As for Boras, he is, I suppose, effective for guys at the very top (e.g., A-Rod, Teixeira) who are going to do well anyway. In a tough economy, Boras' knee-jerk hardball tactics might hurt some his clients like Varitek who is no longer a star.

turners56
01-08-2009, 06:00 PM
I remember when A-Rod was dealt to the Yankees. A-Rod, like Jason Giambi and others, made a big deal about coming to play for the Yankees because "they wanted to play for a winner." At the time, Jim Bouton said that he grew up hating guys like that. Bouton said that he preferred players who wanted to be the guy who makes the team competitive, when it was previously not competitive. Teixeira sounds like another guy who wants the team around him to make him better and not the other way around.

Teixeira has never finished in the top five in MVP voting and, really, has never had a big at bat in his career. At the end of the day, the Red Sox might be glad he went to the Yanks.

As for Boras, he is, I suppose, effective for guys at the very top (e.g., A-Rod, Teixeira) who are going to do well anyway. In a tough economy, Boras' knee-jerk hardball tactics might hurt some his clients like Varitek who is no longer a star.

Tex hit pretty damn well last year in the playoffs. Wasn't his fault the Angels lost.

Craig Grebeck
01-08-2009, 06:46 PM
I remember when A-Rod was dealt to the Yankees. A-Rod, like Jason Giambi and others, made a big deal about coming to play for the Yankees because "they wanted to play for a winner." At the time, Jim Bouton said that he grew up hating guys like that. Bouton said that he preferred players who wanted to be the guy who makes the team competitive, when it was previously not competitive. Teixeira sounds like another guy who wants the team around him to make him better and not the other way around.

Teixeira has never finished in the top five in MVP voting and, really, has never had a big at bat in his career. At the end of the day, the Red Sox might be glad he went to the Yanks.

As for Boras, he is, I suppose, effective for guys at the very top (e.g., A-Rod, Teixeira) who are going to do well anyway. In a tough economy, Boras' knee-jerk hardball tactics might hurt some his clients like Varitek who is no longer a star.
I will take Teixeira any day of the week. His position on MVP ballots is arbitrary and worthless.

cards press box
01-08-2009, 07:35 PM
I will take Teixeira any day of the week. His position on MVP ballots is arbitrary and worthless.

Yeah, Teixeira is a good player but he is not a superstar. Albert Pujols is a superstar. Teixeira is not.

And, no, the voting in the MVP does matter. Frank Thomas was a two-time MVP and should have won a third in 2000 . Roger Maris won two MVP awards. Yogi Berra won three. These are dominant players, the best of their respective eras.

Is Mark Teixeira the best first baseman of his era? Pujols is certainly better. Lance Berkman is at least as good, if not better. Miguel Cabrera is a better hitter and better run producer. In their primes, Jason Giambi and Carlos Delgado were better power threats. Heck, Paul Konerko has had better years than Teixeira.

If Teixeira is not unquestionably the best first baseman of his era and has not come close to winning an MVP, what is so special about him? Scott Boras has masterfully marketed him and the gullible Steinbrenners fell for it but so what? No one is saying that Houston is a lock for the NL pennant because they have Lance Berkman. Adding Teixeira to the Yankees does not make them a mortal lock for the AL pennant, either.

Craig Grebeck
01-08-2009, 11:47 PM
Yeah, Teixeira is a good player but he is not a superstar. Albert Pujols is a superstar. Teixeira is not.

And, no, the voting in the MVP does matter. Frank Thomas was a two-time MVP and should have won a third in 2000 . Roger Maris won two MVP awards. Yogi Berra won three. These are dominant players, the best of their respective eras.

Is Mark Teixeira the best first baseman of his era? Pujols is certainly better. Lance Berkman is at least as good, if not better. Miguel Cabrera is a better hitter and better run producer. In their primes, Jason Giambi and Carlos Delgado were better power threats. Heck, Paul Konerko has had better years than Teixeira.

If Teixeira is not unquestionably the best first baseman of his era and has not come close to winning an MVP, what is so special about him? Scott Boras has masterfully marketed him and the gullible Steinbrenners fell for it but so what? No one is saying that Houston is a lock for the NL pennant because they have Lance Berkman. Adding Teixeira to the Yankees does not make them a mortal lock for the AL pennant, either.
Teixeira is absolutely the second best first baseman in baseball. There's really no question.

jabrch
01-08-2009, 11:57 PM
If we locked Gammons and Boras in a room together, I wouldn't care if either ever made it out alive.

Nellie_Fox
01-08-2009, 11:59 PM
Teixeira is absolutely the second best first baseman in baseball. There's really no question.Not in any world that contains Pujols.

DSpivack
01-09-2009, 12:00 AM
Teixeira is absolutely the second best first baseman in baseball. There's really no question.

Not in any world that contains Pujols.

Nellie, who else is better than Pujols?! Or in between Pujols and Tex.

Nellie_Fox
01-09-2009, 12:04 AM
Nellie, who else is better than Pujols?! Or in between Pujols and Tex.I misread Grebeck's post. I thought he said Texeira was the best first baseman in baseball. :redface:

I think Pujols is clearly #1.

Craig Grebeck
01-09-2009, 12:05 AM
I misread Grebeck's post. I thought he said Texeira was the best first baseman in baseball. :redface:

I think Pujols is clearly #1.
No doubt.

pmck003
01-09-2009, 02:39 AM
Yeah, Teixeira is a good player but he is not a superstar. Albert Pujols is a superstar. Teixeira is not.

And, no, the voting in the MVP does matter. Frank Thomas was a two-time MVP and should have won a third in 2000 . Roger Maris won two MVP awards. Yogi Berra won three. These are dominant players, the best of their respective eras.

Is Mark Teixeira the best first baseman of his era? Pujols is certainly better. Lance Berkman is at least as good, if not better. Miguel Cabrera is a better hitter and better run producer. In their primes, Jason Giambi and Carlos Delgado were better power threats. Heck, Paul Konerko has had better years than Teixeira.

If Teixeira is not unquestionably the best first baseman of his era and has not come close to winning an MVP, what is so special about him? Scott Boras has masterfully marketed him and the gullible Steinbrenners fell for it but so what? No one is saying that Houston is a lock for the NL pennant because they have Lance Berkman. Adding Teixeira to the Yankees does not make them a mortal lock for the AL pennant, either.

Very good statement IMO. Teixeira is very good, no doubt about it. Rather have a few than him on the Sox if I could chose anyone though (think converted OF such as Vlad), and I think Konerko could have a close year production wise (Edit: strong emphasis on could). Honestly, I think Manny at first would be almost equal to Teixeira in terms of wins (dunno, Manny could be brutal at 1B d and I wouldn't be angry if you wanna rip this argument apart)

Konerko05
01-09-2009, 04:56 AM
Very good statement IMO. Teixeira is very good, no doubt about it. Rather have a few than him on the Sox if I could chose anyone though (think converted OF such as Vlad), and I think Konerko could have a close year production wise (Edit: strong emphasis on could). Honestly, I think Manny at first would be almost equal to Teixeira in terms of wins (dunno, Manny could be brutal at 1B d and I wouldn't be angry if you wanna rip this argument apart)

Manny Ramirez is definitely a better a hitter than Teixeira, but the thought of Manny playing 1B is frightening.

Teixeira is a very good player. I'm just not sure a 1B with a .919 OPS is worth 180 mil.

RedHeadPaleHoser
01-09-2009, 07:08 AM
Did Gammons "unload" on Boras because Scott played bait and switch with the Texiera signing at Boston's expense?

I wonder what he'd say if Boras did this to New York, with MT signing with the Red Sox. Would Gammons laud him as being shrewd?

I'm sorry - no disrespect meant to Fens, but Gammons sounds like he's crying foul because HIS team (remember, he "ran" for president of that damn Nation) didn't get Texiera.

CashMan
01-09-2009, 07:11 AM
Teixeira is absolutely the second best first baseman in baseball. There's really no question.

Are we just talking about hitting? If so, I guess Manny is the best LF ATM.

Craig Grebeck
01-09-2009, 08:34 AM
Are we just talking about hitting? If so, I guess Manny is the best LF ATM.
No. Teixeira's glove is only eclipsed by Pujols, in my opinion.

Rocky Soprano
01-09-2009, 09:49 AM
Gammons sounds like he's crying fould because HIS team (remember, he "ran" for president of that damn Nation) didn't get Texiera.

DING DING DING, we have a winner!

asindc
01-09-2009, 10:06 AM
DING DING DING, we have a winner!

Whether that was Gammons' motive or not, he confirmed a lot of suspicions I've had about Boras. The planting of misinformation with certain "news outlets" is probably practiced by many, but Boras' clients' seem to benefit most from this practice.

There is an NBA version of Boras, David Falk. Falk is famous for playing one team against the other when in reality, he knew all along where he wanted his client to go.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-09-2009, 08:46 PM
If we locked Gammons and Boras in a room together, I wouldn't care if either ever made it out alive.

Good one.
:thumbsup:

I vote we pump in a few cannisters of nerve gas just to make sure of it.

Oblong
01-10-2009, 09:23 AM
I don't really see what the problem is with what Boras did. If it's true that Mark wanted to go New York all along then Boras did what any agent is supposed to do. Get the best possible deal. How much more did they get than if they just went straight to New York all along? Probably quite a bit. The suckers are the Yankees.

Craig Grebeck
01-10-2009, 01:22 PM
Peter Gammons is one of the best baseball journalists of our time. He's never, ever shied away from the fact he loves Boston.

4 points
01-11-2009, 06:16 AM
Very good statement IMO. Teixeira is very good, no doubt about it. Rather have a few than him on the Sox if I could chose anyone though (think converted OF such as Vlad), and I think Konerko could have a close year production wise (Edit: strong emphasis on could). Honestly, I think Manny at first would be almost equal to Teixeira in terms of wins (dunno, Manny could be brutal at 1B d and I wouldn't be angry if you wanna rip this argument apart)

Paulie is in total decline, if you believe that he even has a sliver of a chance of matching Tex's numbers, you, my friend are living in a dreamworld.:gulp:

Boondock Saint
01-11-2009, 06:49 AM
He's never, ever shied away from the fact he loves Boston.

That fact makes him slightly more credible than the morons that claim to have no bias, despite their obvious bromance with everything Boston. But with that being said, it makes him no less annoying.