Comments on: The Curious Case of Matt Harrington http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/ Curiously Long Posts Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:46:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: CL http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-85072 CL Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:44:21 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-85072 I'm not a baseball expert but I had a friend who played for the Cats & I met Matt. This was in 2004, when he still had prospects. He is a genuinely nice guy. One of his teammates explained to me that his contract with his agent did not allow him to sign with a team without his agent's consent. And that since then, he actually won a lawsuit against the agent for lost wages. I do know in lawsuits of this type, you often can't comment on them. So Matt & his family probably couldn't mention this in these articles. But I hate to see the ESPN article put such a negative spin on a great guy. I’m not a baseball expert but I had a friend who played for the Cats & I met Matt. This was in 2004, when he still had prospects. He is a genuinely nice guy. One of his teammates explained to me that his contract with his agent did not allow him to sign with a team without his agent’s consent. And that since then, he actually won a lawsuit against the agent for lost wages. I do know in lawsuits of this type, you often can’t comment on them. So Matt & his family probably couldn’t mention this in these articles. But I hate to see the ESPN article put such a negative spin on a great guy.

]]> By: Royals and Aaron Crow | Mellinger's Blog on the Royals and Baseball (aaron crow) | Today's Hot Stories http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-70361 Royals and Aaron Crow | Mellinger's Blog on the Royals and Baseball (aaron crow) | Today's Hot Stories Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:22:17 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-70361 [...] Meanwhile, the Royals are waiting for Crow’s side to say, hey, $3 million (or $2.5 million, or $3.25 million, or…whatever) is a lifetime worth of wealth and this is an organization we’re comfortable with, and who are we kidding? There’s no way we want to sit out another year, delay our big league debut and potential free agency two years and risk becoming the next Matt Harrington. [...] [...] Meanwhile, the Royals are waiting for Crow’s side to say, hey, $3 million (or $2.5 million, or $3.25 million, or…whatever) is a lifetime worth of wealth and this is an organization we’re comfortable with, and who are we kidding? There’s no way we want to sit out another year, delay our big league debut and potential free agency two years and risk becoming the next Matt Harrington. [...]

]]> By: beast g http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-70283 beast g Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:52:30 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-70283 wat a douche...aha thats wat he gets... wat a douche…aha
thats wat he gets…

]]> By: matt harrington | Fooner http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-69100 matt harrington | Fooner Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:23:23 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-69100 [...] Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » The Curious Case of Matt HarringtonA brilliant reader mentioned, in reference to agents and the A-Rod case, the tale of Matt Harrington. This immediately made me go back into the archives … and find this story I wrote in The Kansas City Star about Harrington back in 2006 …Read More [...] [...] Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » The Curious Case of Matt HarringtonA brilliant reader mentioned, in reference to agents and the A-Rod case, the tale of Matt Harrington. This immediately made me go back into the archives … and find this story I wrote in The Kansas City Star about Harrington back in 2006 …Read More [...]

]]> By: Jerk http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-66736 Jerk Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:11:55 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-66736 I am surprised no one has mentioned the obvious...he has a huge fastball in high school (no steroid testing) and then sits out the year MLB starts testing and THEN goes to minor leagues and loses his fastball??? Isn't this a legitimate question? I just find it strange how he loses 10 miles off a fastball in one year as a kid. I feel bad for the kid and I hate these agents for what they did to him but.... Doesn't anyone question his insane decline in speed? I guess we don't have baseball people here. I am surprised no one has mentioned the obvious…he has a huge fastball in high school (no steroid testing) and then sits out the year MLB starts testing and THEN goes to minor leagues and loses his fastball???

Isn’t this a legitimate question? I just find it strange how he loses 10 miles off a fastball in one year as a kid.

I feel bad for the kid and I hate these agents for what they did to him but….

Doesn’t anyone question his insane decline in speed?

I guess we don’t have baseball people here.

]]> By: cucamonga http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-62806 cucamonga Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:58:21 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-62806 And Boras apparently wants $50 million for Stephen Strasberg, who wasn't even drafted out of high school three years ago. Um, um -- better take the $12 million of $15 million that is offered Strasberg and read about Todd Van Poppel, David Clyde and our boy Harrington! And Boras apparently wants $50 million for Stephen Strasberg, who wasn’t even drafted out of high school three years ago. Um, um — better take the $12 million of $15 million that is offered Strasberg and read about Todd Van Poppel, David Clyde and our boy Harrington!

]]> By: San Francisco Giants Draft Preview, Part II: Aaron Crow http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-62225 San Francisco Giants Draft Preview, Part II: Aaron Crow Mon, 01 Jun 2009 07:52:09 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-62225 [...] thing. Oh, it’s not a rational reaction. Just because I have reverse-sugarplum nightmares of Matt Harrington, doesn’t mean that Crow’s path is indicative of a prospect who’s more likely to [...] [...] thing. Oh, it’s not a rational reaction. Just because I have reverse-sugarplum nightmares of Matt Harrington, doesn’t mean that Crow’s path is indicative of a prospect who’s more likely to [...]

]]> By: David in NYC http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-60473 David in NYC Thu, 14 May 2009 19:07:37 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-60473 Kirk #15 -- Agree with you 100%; couldn't have said it better. If you need things to add (not that you do), there is Lew Alcindor (pre-name change) at Power Memorial HS, where they had a 71-game winning streak and an overall record of 79-2; the freshman UCLA team (with him) beating the defending NCAA champion varsity UCLA team in the first-ever game at Pauley Pavilion, 75-60; the no-dunks rule enacted primarily (if not solely) to hamper his game; and the "Game of the Century" that pretty much made college basketball a national sport. Isiah Thomas notwithstanding, Larry Bird was one of the greatest players in NBA history. Nevertheless, he is only the 2nd-best #33 in the poll. Kirk #15 –

Agree with you 100%; couldn’t have said it better.

If you need things to add (not that you do), there is Lew Alcindor (pre-name change) at Power Memorial HS, where they had a 71-game winning streak and an overall record of 79-2; the freshman UCLA team (with him) beating the defending NCAA champion varsity UCLA team in the first-ever game at Pauley Pavilion, 75-60; the no-dunks rule enacted primarily (if not solely) to hamper his game; and the “Game of the Century” that pretty much made college basketball a national sport.

Isiah Thomas notwithstanding, Larry Bird was one of the greatest players in NBA history. Nevertheless, he is only the 2nd-best #33 in the poll.

]]> By: a different Brian http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-60429 a different Brian Thu, 14 May 2009 11:19:10 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-60429 Ray Ansbro's a jerk. He's sadly not unique amongst his colleagues, but I can't help but wonder what he could have been had he not done something ill-advised along the way? Reporters: What God gives them in arrogance,...well, you know the rest. Thank you, Joe, for showing them what they could be. Best. Sportswriter. In America. Seconded. Ray Ansbro’s a jerk. He’s sadly not unique amongst his colleagues, but I can’t help but wonder what he could have been had he not done something ill-advised along the way?

Reporters: What God gives them in arrogance,…well, you know the rest.

Thank you, Joe, for showing them what they could be.

Best. Sportswriter. In America. Seconded.

]]> By: Richard Aronson http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-60354 Richard Aronson Wed, 13 May 2009 21:08:09 +0000 http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009/05/12/the-curious-case-of-matt-harrington/#comment-60354 The problem with baseball drafting, and especially drafting pitchers, is the risk. If you wind up spending too much money on the Matt Harringtons, you won't keep your job long enough to draft Alex Rodriguez. Now maybe I'm just weird (okay, no maybe) but as a professional computer game maker, my thinking is like this: Rockies: We'll give you $4M. Harrington: I want $4.95M. Rockies: We can't risk that much on a high school pitcher. Harrington: Okay, lets work it like this. You give me a $2M signing bonus, half of what you want to pay me. And the contract has in it that I get a $700,000 bonus for each promotion I earn: low A (from Rookie League), high A, double A, triple A, majors. One day on the roster at the next level (and if I skip a level, the skipped level gets paid too) qualifies me for the bonus. If I make it to the major leagues, you wind up paying me (and my agent) a little more, although you save some float (maybe several years of float).* But if I wash out, you wind up paying me less, maybe much less. <i>* And if there's mistrust, make half of the bonus payable by the original team no matter which teach owns Harrington when he makes a level. It's the same as a player being cut and then his old team paying most of his salary after he signs for the minimum somewhere else. Yes, some other nasty team might sign a bonus baby and promote him just to cost you some money. But what goes around comes around. And you can put in a clause like the original bonus baby clauses that if you promote a bonus baby you must keep him on the roster at that level the entire season. It isn't rocket science.</i> It would work similarly for the Luke Hochevars. Say he wanted $8M (I don't remember how much he wanted). Pay him $3M up front, and $600K/promotion, and $2M extra for his first day on the 25 man roster. The team limits its risk, Hochevar gets his full amount (or maybe a smidge more) if he makes it to the majors, win win all around. The problem (IMO) is that everybody wants to win the negotiation. The agent won't get paid based on that bonus unless the kid earns his way to the majors. The team will take the $2M as the new starting figure. Hardball ensues, and both sides lose. Geeze, maybe I should become an agent ;-). Or an arbitrator. The problem with baseball drafting, and especially drafting pitchers, is the risk. If you wind up spending too much money on the Matt Harringtons, you won’t keep your job long enough to draft Alex Rodriguez.

Now maybe I’m just weird (okay, no maybe) but as a professional computer game maker, my thinking is like this:

Rockies: We’ll give you $4M.
Harrington: I want $4.95M.
Rockies: We can’t risk that much on a high school pitcher.
Harrington: Okay, lets work it like this. You give me a $2M signing bonus, half of what you want to pay me. And the contract has in it that I get a $700,000 bonus for each promotion I earn: low A (from Rookie League), high A, double A, triple A, majors. One day on the roster at the next level (and if I skip a level, the skipped level gets paid too) qualifies me for the bonus. If I make it to the major leagues, you wind up paying me (and my agent) a little more, although you save some float (maybe several years of float).* But if I wash out, you wind up paying me less, maybe much less.

* And if there’s mistrust, make half of the bonus payable by the original team no matter which teach owns Harrington when he makes a level. It’s the same as a player being cut and then his old team paying most of his salary after he signs for the minimum somewhere else. Yes, some other nasty team might sign a bonus baby and promote him just to cost you some money. But what goes around comes around. And you can put in a clause like the original bonus baby clauses that if you promote a bonus baby you must keep him on the roster at that level the entire season. It isn’t rocket science.

It would work similarly for the Luke Hochevars. Say he wanted $8M (I don’t remember how much he wanted). Pay him $3M up front, and $600K/promotion, and $2M extra for his first day on the 25 man roster. The team limits its risk, Hochevar gets his full amount (or maybe a smidge more) if he makes it to the majors, win win all around.

The problem (IMO) is that everybody wants to win the negotiation. The agent won’t get paid based on that bonus unless the kid earns his way to the majors. The team will take the $2M as the new starting figure. Hardball ensues, and both sides lose.

Geeze, maybe I should become an agent ;-) . Or an arbitrator.

]]>