iamshack

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 06:58 AM) If getting less money and staying in one place is what you want, and one agent is better at that, you should hire that agent. If you want to know what all the offers are and where the highest money is, than hire that agent. Actually, why get an agent? Frank Thomas negotiated his own deals with JR. If you are too weak to stand up to your agent and have them do what you want, you need a different agent. Maybe Jay-Z will be that agent and he just may corner the market on players wanting to earn less money but stay with their teams. (your example not mine) And that may sell in a MLB locker room. Boras will just force you to accept $250 million, but Jay-Z can get you $215 million and you get to stay with your current team. I guess there is a market for that service. What endorsements did Jordan lose playing baseball and then playing for the Wizards? I honestly can't think of any, but I am certain there may have been a couple. Did Lebron lose a beat moving to Miami? Again, I'm not certain. For most of these guys, their contracts are where they make their money. Take most team sports and most of the guys on the roster are not endorsement machines. You are probably right, they would make more staying in one market and developing local endorsements, but those aren't bringing in millions like playing. And thinking about this I am inclined to agree, if Jay-Z is willing to call a local car dealer to have his client endorse "Pete Smith Downtown San Antonio's Favorite Pontiac Dealer, Home of the Best Deals!" he may have an edge over Boras. The point wasn't that Jay-Z wants clients to stay put so they can reign in money from local endorsements. The point is that he recognizes the media opportunities in NY and believes he is better-suited to capitalize on them for his clients than other agents. If we were talking about Kansas City, I think he'd be trying to get the client into a larger market rather than keeping him in KC.

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 07:14 AM) Nailed another one. Haha

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 06:50 AM) Yes, he is involved in other business ventures which have been immensely successful. Which is why I asked do you want a part time or full time agent? One is branching out, starting a new business, the other has a thirty year track record as a sports agent. Which argument hinges on Jay-Z being popular with a lot of endorsements? Mine or yours? I will be more than happy to discount he is popular and suggest it has nothing to do with his future success as a sports agent if you will. I am not getting your arguments whatsoever...why does it matter whether the CEO wants to hang out with Jay-Z or Scott Boras? Do you really think this comes down to which agent the CEO wants to play golf with? This is about out of touch white CEOs thinking Jay-Z knows what the black demographic wants more than they do, and thus signing Jay-Z's client to endorse their companies' products. It's as simple as that.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 12:13 AM) Yeah, I don't think the broadcast was off. Oregon was dominated in every facet of the game for 50+ minutes. Got a couple lucky breaks to get back in it, which you could argue cancel out the lucky breaks against them earlier that you referenced. I said it while I was watching the game and I still think it, but why doesn't Oregon kick that early field goal? Always try to score the first points on the road. Gives you some confidence, a lead, gives the home team a chance to doubt itself. In the middle of the game I might go for it there, but situationally I think that was bad. They ran 58 plays on offense for 312 yards...they fumbled the ball in the Stanford red zone twice, once on the five. That's not domination so much randomness. The lack of plays and possession time is more attributable to the Stanford offense than the Stanford defense.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 09:31 PM) They only had 2 turnovers, right? Yes, but Stanford punted only once. 14/21 on 3rd downs is insane. Stanford outplayed them, this just wasn't the impressive Oregon offense that many thought they'd see. Stanford had the Oregon offense completely out of sorts. I'm not arguing that Oregon was the better team. Just that the reason Stanford dominated the game was because of Oregon's failure to get off the field on defense, not so much because of Oregon's offense getting shut down by Stanford's defense, which was much more the case last year.

Thought the broadcast of that game was pretty rotten. They kept acting as though the Stanford defense was dominating the game and kept circling the time of possession, etc. Oregon turned the ball over on fumbles that are entirely random football plays, and their defense refused to sell out against the run until the 4th quarter. I get that Stanford manhandled Oregon in the running game, but Oregon had enough success on offense to win this game, they just kept turning the ball over. Oregon punted what, 3 times? Only when Oregon put the outcome in doubt briefly did these idiots begin backpeddaling. And this nonsense Jessie Palmer is using trying to discount Stanford's loss to Utah by claiming they didn't "play Stanford football." Then the comments about DeAnthony Thomas are pretty rough as well.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 08:40 PM) You bet Oregon, Shack? Nope, they're just my favorite college team. I actually thought the Stanford money line was an incredible bet at +325, but couldn't bring myself to do it.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 08:19 PM) Gotcha, my eye has mostly been on the epic Redskin/Viking showdown, but I think Stanford has figured something out. If their strength is their O & D lines, makes you think that Bama would do the same thing to Oregon. Yeah, hard to argue with that. Really disappointed in Oregon tonight. They've basically acted like they're just entitled to beat Stanford by virtue of their fancier uniforms or something.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 07:48 PM) Good point. Sometimes you have to play for points or field position, don't always be so aggressive but it's not in their gameplan. From what I remember Bell was always a running QB, never much of a passer. Wasn't he their goalline QB last season? They passed up points once. That has absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of this game. They've fumbled twice on drives in Stanford territory and their defense hasn't stopped Stanford since the first series.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 02:58 PM) Oregon routinely blows out teams all season but then faces a defense that stops them entirely. It's strange. They just seem unable to adjust when things go wrong...

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 07:08 PM) Im going to NY on Saturday for some family stuff(not the most exciting trip but I'll make the best of it) and am flying Spirit. I've heard some horror stories about Spirit, anyone ever used them before? Anything I should know ahead of time? Hold on tight! Nah, I've just heard they nickel and dime you for everything.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 05:12 PM) Link usually these type of fluffs don't start until spring training. Odd. I like your title

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 04:43 PM) Anyone who thinks he is in the same world as Boras is selling Scott Boras short, over way over estimating a guy who has never done this before. Well keep in mind he isn't going to be like negotiating these things all by himself. He's hired some pretty sharp agents to work for him...basically, he's going to leverage his contacts and reputation to try and offer some things Boras can't or doesn't.

I think there is plenty of money for both to be extremely successful. Not sure a "war" is required, as much as just a bit of unfriendly competition. It'll be difficult to unseat Boras, and I think the demographics of baseball might give him an advantage, but I wouldn't underestimate Jay-Z.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 11:43 AM) They are a player the team will not want to pay who are still under team control but not contractually obligated to their remaining salary. Dan Hudson won't be non-tendered. He's far too valuable a commodity for the DBacks. Flowers could be, but there's not a lot of harm in bringing him back considering he's going to make close to the league minimum and is one of 2 "major league" catchers the White Sox have. The most likely candidate is probably Beckham, but in this day and age, there's not a lot of use in non-tendering players because someone will almost always give something for a player like that. Perhaps a marginal player in arbitration years who no long has an option that had a serious injury would be non-tendered to save money (Gavin Floyd if he qualified would fit this criteria). Other candidates are guys that really have no future in the organization that the team will no longer want to pay. This pertains very well to Brent Morel, but there are others as well. Right, so to expand, they are usually guys who have yet to reach free agency, and therefore, do not have guaranteed contracts but are making enough money through arbitration to warrant not tendering them a contract because they suck. As Wite implies, the money most teams have at their disposal right now has outstripped the salary considerations most of these guys are entitled to, so it isn't very common if the player is worth anything at all.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 11:36 AM) How does a player qualify to be a non tender canidate? I see Tyler Flowers is a non tender canidate for the Sox and there are some pitchers I would be interested in on cheap one year deals with option years. Johnny Venters, and Daniel Hudson I could see the Sox go after I they do get non tendered. Basically, by sucking.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 11:01 AM) Cool any place in particular? There's a bunch...you'll be able to find what speaks to you in particular just by walking around. I liked Cyclone Anaya's.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 11:12 AM) So Jay Cutler is playing Sunday. Jay Cutler (groin) has been cleared to start Sunday's game against the Lions. Bears coach Marc Trestman made the announcement after Cutler did "everything" in Thursday's practice. It's a major surprise after Cutler was expected to miss at least four weeks after going down in Week 7, but speaks to the opportunity the Bears are spying in the Aaron Rodgers-less NFC North. Sunday's game could go a long way toward determining the division winner. It's a near must win for Chicago after Detroit won the sides' first meeting in Week 4. The line has moved from +2.5 to -1 or -1.5 in favor of the Bears. Kicking myself a bit since I was planning on betting them tonight.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 10:55 AM) I wasn't sure if there was a thread for this already, but if there is, I'm sure a mod will bring swift justice. I'm going to Houston next weekend. Has anyone been there before? If so, what recommendations do you have? Go to Midtown and eat some of the great Tex Mex and enjoy some of the nightlife...

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 10:44 AM) I trade professionally so my commission fees are thankfully a lot better than that. Stuff like Twitter today is a dream thanks to how volatile it is. There was a lot of free money to be had. Good work!

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 09:50 AM) I'm too risk averse for this...simply because of the lay. To keep numbers low and simple: Buy 100 shares of Twitter at 47 = 4705$ including trade commission (let's be generous and say the trade commission was only 5$) Sell 100 shares of Twitter at 50 = 5005$ including the same trade commission. That's a quick profit of 300$ Now, subtract 30+% on short term cap gains, so let's call it a profit of 210$. So, you essentially laid 4705$ to win a bet of 210$. I simply cannot do this type of trading. Edit: Of course, I understand that it's not like Vegas where it's a zero sum game, either win the 210$ or lose everything, but it does have a potential loss into the thousands. I expect Twitter to draw back much like Facebook did after it's buzz wears thin, and unlike Facebook, Twitter is quite far from posting any sort of profit. Right...your edit is key, but still...this is the type of thing that a lot of people are doing in Vegas right now, using in-game lines...they are "scalping" the moneylines and point spreads by taking advantage of moving numbers resulting from the live action. It's become very, very similar to playing the stock market.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 08:37 AM) I just keep looking back to last year's game. It was in Eugene and Stanford held the Ducks to 14 points. Obviously these aren't the same teams, but they are close and I can't get that out of my mind. Yeah, but you could just as easily say the same thing about 2010 and 2011...those games were blowout Duck victories with similar teams/schemes, except Stanford had Andrew Luck still... Obviously last year Stanford seemed to make adjustments and finally stop the Duck running attack...I guess we will see how Oregon adjusts.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 08:57 AM) What kind of share count are we talking here. 7...

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 05:34 AM) I think there's potential for some profit in the very short term but it will pull back rather quickly. They have not proven to be able to make money yet or take advantage of advertising. I was going to invest if the IPO price was closer to 20 but at that price I'd rather put the money I had earmarked for it into a Biotech I've been watching. Probably a good long term stock to own if you're willing to hold on for a while. Aren't these similar concerns that Facebook had?

MLB Future Salary Obligations by Team This is a nice graphic for displaying each team's future salary obligations for the next ten years.