|
|
|
In a post for NJ.com, Dan Graziano relays details of the heated exchange he has with Carlos Delgado’s agent, David Sloane regarding Delgado’s contract terms.
Graziano, writes back to Sloane:
“The Mets are paying Delgado $12 million in salary this year plus a $4 million buyout on his 2009 option…I won’t hold my breath waiting for your apology”
To which Sloane replied:
“Apologize this retard, he’s making 16 this year WITH an option for next year or a buyout at 4. Nice research by you but then I guess that whole concept of fact finding escapes you huh? They didn’t teach that on the short bus did they?”
…i’m almost speechless…how can someone who represents a professional athlete act like this…
…and sloane, last time i checked, they don’t start teaching until after you get off the bus, i’m just saying…
 |
 |
RSS 2.0 You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
The worst part is that what Graziano said is entirely accurate. The Mets ARE paying Delgado $12 million this year with the Marlins paying the other $4 million in his salary as per the trade agreement.
you hit the nail on the head, Danny. What a weird story.
A heavy part of an Agent’s buisness is based on reputation. It’s one of many ways an Agent picks up clients. So as an Agent you don’t want the contract numbers botched to make people think the player is making less money then he actually is.
Now with that said though, Sloane was completely unprofessional about it and should have been alot more respectful. But I can certaintly see why he would be upset when the media is misrepresenting a contract that his client signed because it doesn’t make him look as good to potential future clients.
However, Graziano isn’t right either because he misrepresented the facts. The least Graziano should have done is specifically mentioned that the Marlins are paying a chunk of his salary in the original article.
It’s not necessary to mention that because it doesn’t really pertain to the Mets. That’s my guess as to why he left it out.
I don’t agree. That’s nitpicking. Graziano was entirely accurate and if Sloane was worried about the story influencing Delgado’s future market value he’s totally nuts. The only thing that will influence Delgado’s market value is his bat.
It wasn’t as much Delgado’s market value as much as he would be concerned about it affecting his ability to pick up future clients. There’s a big difference between 12 and 16 million in any potential client’s eyes.
If you don’t think players around the game don’t know what everyone else is making, you’re nuts. It’s public knowledge.
and i don’t think too many professional players are trolling nj.com looking for an agent or hoping to track salaries. though some might be checking out this story now.
agreed. the blog post in question had one significant omission which made the $12 million assertion incorrect; and apparently judging by the below post was wrong about the no-trade contract. a simple correction was the way to go after truth was verified, imo. and none of the emails either way were very professional.
It’s just another prime example of what’s wrong with Baseball and sports in general today. These agents are as arrogant as they come and don’t think it doesn’t also influence the players attitude towards their “percepion” of their market value. It’s a business first and the game comes in a distant second.
He’s like a 13 year old troll.
Seriously, at the end, he actually tries to diss Graziano’s mom. So ridiculous.
Are we sure he doesn’t post on MetsBlog? His writing style reminds me of a few friends on this site…
Graziano is just like a sleazy paparazzi engaging a celebrity in confrontation in order to sell a picture.
You’re nuttier than Sloane and so is your mom!
Sheds a little additional light on the negotiations (2005? I’m slow on a Monday morning) in which Delgado went to the Marlins after a supposed “slight” from Tony Bernazard and the Mets.
Not saying it didn’t happen just as told, but it seems a lot more possible that wires got crossed with this genius as a middleman.
Yikes.
Supposedly the Mets offered Delgado a similar deal that the Marlins offered and gave him a deadline. After hearing this, Sloane publicly announced that the Mets dropped out of the negotiations. Minaya called Sloane back and “re-entered” the negotiations, with Delgado accepting the Marlins offer the next day. It was then when Sloane publicly said that Delgado was upset with the latin angle Minaya and Bernazard tried to play.
Yeah, that’s accurate. I also remember something about Sloane sending bizarre e-mails out to the New York media weeks and weeks after Delgado had signed with the Marlins. Wasn’t he also responsible for the Al Leiter thing? (Announcing to the media that Al Leiter had personally warned Delgado against playing for the Mets because of Mike and the Mad Dog or something like that…)
you know what’s really funny about all this?
delgado didn’t want to sign with the mets because of tony bernazard’s perceived unprofessionalism!
wow.
i’ll also go out on a limp and suggest that perhaps carlos delgado will be his last client.
also, doesn’t it make you wonder how delgado chose this joker as his agent?
“i’ll also go out on a limp…”
Luis Castillo?
This would’ve never happened if Delgado had Bean Stringfellow as his agent.
Be careful Regis…Sloane will come in here and start calling you names too!!
The whole exchange is priceless. My day is so much better for having read it… and I’m not being ironic. I may be a loser, but at least I’m not Sloane.
Sometimes I struggle with a lack of self-confidence, wondering if I have what it takes “out there,” if my degree will be worth the paper it’s printed on, if I am just wasting my money and my time. How will I stack up compared to “them?”
Then I read something like this, and I realize everything is going to be alright.
David Sloane and Buzz Bissinger must be good buddies
“so’s your mom”… i love it. on mothers’ day, no less!
Regis, you obviously don’t check your facts! I was on the short bus, and they definitely teach lessons on it.
My name was supposed to say David Sloane. That sucked.
Nice effort lol
now everyone knows that Casey S. rides the short bus!
So the Willie confidence poll is back? Funny how it disappears after losses.
What are you talking about? Its been there for quite a few days, if not longer…AND it’s at 58% It’s not like it is glorifying the guy or something. Sheesh, people just like to complain about SOMETHING.
I like to look at exactly how many people vote 1, how many people vote 2, and so on and so forth. I think it’s a lot more imformative than just the percentage we get at the end. When you see the tally for each individual number you can do a lot more meaningful interpretation.
Why? The percentage of irrational fans that are pressing 1 and 2 isn’t indicative of the fan base as a whole….just indicative of how many irrational fans there are.
OK, so how do you know how many “irrational fans” were a part of the “58%” reading? With the individual tallies you can chose to ignore that segment of the voting population. That type of thing is what I was referring to. Hell, I’d go so far as to ignore the 9’s and 10’s, too. Just as irrational IMO. But no matter how you feel about Willie, the “58%” really doesn’t tell you that much about what happened in the poll.
It disappeared as a post-every-game yes-no question, and reappeared as a less-frequent, scale-of-1-to-10 question in an attempt to make it less a case of ‘did we win last night’ and more a case of ‘is Willie making the right moves’, as Matt explained when he first took it down.
I believe Matt’s intention is to put up the poll after every series. No need to look for conspiracies here.
Although I suspect the poll would more closely match Matt’s intention if it only appeared after wins, since the voters in polls on this site have shown that they’re more likely to blame Willie for a loss than credit him for a win.
Anyone whose opinion of Randolph is swayed in either direction by nothing greater than the latest game would be doing a service by abstaining from the vote.