Baseball BeatFebruary 02, 2009
Heyman "Breaks" Another Story
By Rich Lederer

"Just a puppet on a lonely string
Oh who would ever want to be king?"

- Coldplay, Viva La Vida

Jon Heyman has done it again. He broke another story on Friday when reporting that Jason Varitek had "reached a two-year agreement with the Red Sox."

In typical Heyman fashion, he wanted to make sure that everyone knew that " was the first to report that Varitek had an agreement with Boston." To that, I say "big deal." OK, maybe I didn't use the word "deal." I mean, this doesn't go down as some sort of exclusive or investigative reporting.

While the signing won't be officially announced until Varitek completes his physical, the Red Sox had placed a Friday deadline on an official proposal that was delivered via registered mail to him and agent Scott Boras on January 23. In other words, it was no secret that something was going to happen that day. Either Varitek was going to accept or reject Boston's offer.

If you're wondering how Heyman got wind of the news before any of the Boston beat writers or columnists, be aware that he had Mark Teixeira going to the Yankees before anyone else and, according to his biography, also "broke the story of Barry Bonds going to the Giants in 1992...Alex Rodriguez going to the Yankees in 2004, A-Rod opting out of his $252-million contract in 2007 and Manny Ramirez going to the Dodgers in 2008."

Varitek. Teixeira. Manny. A-Rod 2x. Bonds, vintage 1992. Do you notice anything in common? Yes, all of these players are or were represented by Boras at the time of their signings. It is plainly obvious that Heyman, known among fellow writers as, is getting fed such stories by Scott himself, which is fine and dandy except there is more going on here than meets the eye.

You see, Boras throws Heyman a bone on a Tek or Tex signing but also uses him to spread rumors about the level of interest and terms in ongoing free agent negotiations to create a false sense of demand. Teams that fall for this trick wind up competing against themselves, which is exactly what Boras desires.

While Boras is no fool, Heyman is a tool for the Scott Boras Corporation. Boras knows how to game the system to get the best deals for his clients and will gladly use Heyman as long as the latter plays along or until the market realizes what is going on. As it stands now, it's almost as if Heyman, who is no stranger to the Boras suites during the winter meetings, is on the SBC payroll.

You can see these shenanigans at work in Heyman's recent stories about a few other Boras clients, including Joe Crede, Oliver Perez, and Derek Lowe. But these are relatively innocent in comparison to following the Boras, Heyman & Co. saga as it relates to Manny.

  • 07/27/08: Manny unlikely to be traded


    Heyman not only is a mouthpiece for Boras but is wrong more often than he is right. Look, if you throw enough mud against the wall, some of it is bound to stick. That doesn't make you a soothsayer or the next Carl Bernstein or Bob Woodward.

    The remaining stories are presented without comment as to let you be the judge (although I took the liberty to add emphasis for ease of reading).

  • 08/11/08: More Ramirez Fallout

    While folks were understandably upset over Ramirez's terrible behavior leading up to the trade, no one could reasonably expect MLB to actually tie Ramirez's childish antics to Boras. Ramirez's lay-down behavior was so outrageous that MLB should indeed investigate him. But there's no belief from anyone credible that they'll find anything, certainly nothing against Boras. The reality is that Ramirez behaved beautifully for half a season under Boras, then became irritated over the club options that could tie him to Boston for two more years. But let's not forget that Ramirez's behavior had been erratic throughout his eight years in Boston, including long before he hired Boras, and Red Sox people have covered up a lot of it in the past. Is it possible that Boras mentioned to him that the club options in his Red Sox contract were not a good thing? It is. Will Boras benefit from the options being dropped? Presumably he will, assuming the erratic Ramirez stays with Boras for the signing of his next contract. But the real question is: Would Boras risk his seemingly excellent relationship with the Red Sox and overall reputation to orchestrate Ramirez's ridiculous behavior? According to one GM, it's just the opposite, that perhaps no agent is better than Boras at dealing with off-field issues of players. Anyway, the orchestration idea is farfetched and nothing more than misguided media musings advanced in some cases by sworn Boras enemies.

  • 10/02/08: Manny's deep impact immeasurable

    It's impossible to calculate the true worth of Manny. Though, I'm quite sure his agent Scott Boras will have an idea or two about that while shopping the good Manny around this winter.

  • 10/15/08: Ramirez could be looking for six-year deal on open market

    Ramirez is believed to be seeking a six-year deal for as much as $25 million per year . . . Ramirez's agent, Scott Boras, declined to name a target price in an interview with on Wednesday. That $150 million total price tag is an estimate based on Boras' use of the word "iconic'' to describe the 36-year-old Ramirez, combined with Ramirez's own constant mention of a "six-year deal'' during frequent media interviews this postseason.

    "He pays for himself. You've got a free player with Manny,'' Boras said. "He's an iconic player who's changed the face and fortunes of the franchise.''

    The Manny Derby surely will be limited by the stratospheric price, but at least three teams are emerging as potential suitors. The Yankees' will "take a look at Manny,'' according to someone familiar with their thinking, the Mets are said to be weighing a run despite deep pitching needs, and the pitching-strong Blue Jays are also believed to be considering a run. While it's hard to imagine Ramirez embracing New York after complaining for 7 1/2 years about Boston's fishbowl existence, the Yankees and Mets have an inherent financial advantage over L.A. in owning their own TV networks (McCourt, meanwhile, is said to have a poor relationship with Fox) and introducing new stadiums. It shouldn't be forgotten that Ramirez followed the money when he took $160 million over eight years from Boston before the 2001 season.

    The Orioles are another team that has been suggested as a possible landing spot, but they are more than one player away from competing in the ultra-tough AL East. Besides, new baseball chief Andy MacPhail appears to be getting away from the big-ticket buys of the Orioles past, and if they do go for a major free agent, it's more likely to be Severna Park, Md., native and Angels star Mark Teixeira. The Angels make some sense for Ramirez, but are more likely to try to keep the much younger Teixeira, whom they love.

    Indeed, the pressure to retain Ramirez at almost any price in [sic] intense. As one friend of Manny's put it, "There's going to be a deep depression inside and outside the clubhouse -- among the manager, players, fans, everyone -- if Ramirez leaves.''

    "I don't know how [McCourt] doesn't bring him back. It's got to be as much a business decision as a baseball decision. He's got the Dodgers by the ....'' another AL executive said.

    That same executive predicted a deal for either three years plus an option or four years for $20 to $25 million annually, which would represent a major windfall from the two $20 million option years Ramirez found so onerous before working hard to get those club options dropped from his just-expired contract.

  • 10/28/08: L.A. vs. N.Y. for top free-agents

    The Dodgers' early interest in keeping Ramirez to a short (but rich) deal -- first reported by on Wednesday -- might explain Ramirez's rhetoric following the season in which he professed no special interest in staying in L.A., and candidly added that his only goal was in going to the highest bidder, especially one who'd like to give him a six-year deal. Perhaps by then Manny knew of L.A.'s intentions. In any case, the Manny Derby appears as to have opened up a tad. Though while Philly, the Jays and some others might make for an interesting alternative, it's still entirely possible that the battle for Manny and the other two mega-stars comes down to a competition between the two biggest markets -- New York and Los Angeles.

    The Dodgers' intention to try to keep Ramirez to a short-term deal -- they're expected to make an initial offer of a two-year contract for about $55 million, perhaps a little bit more, as reported on Wednesday -- could leave an opening for one of a few other teams to try for Ramirez. And one of those clubs could be the Phillies, who would lock down baseball's best lineup by adding Manny to a batting order that already includes two MVPs.

    The field may be somewhat limited for a 36-year-old player seeking a six-year deal for $25 million per, but potential Ramirez suitors include the Mets, Yankees, Blue Jays and Orioles in addition to the Phillies, who may have two things going for them: 1) Manager Charlie Manuel was Ramirez's hitting coach in Cleveland, not that Manny ever needed a hitting coach, and 2) Stiff and streaky left fielder Pat Burrell, who is behind Manny in terms of defense and personality (not to mention hitting, of course), is also a free agent.

  • 11/02/08: A rundown of key free agents

    Meanwhile, Manny Ramirez should soon expect to receive a shorter offer at close to a record annual salary from the incumbent Dodgers, perhaps a two-year deal for near the $27.5-million Yankees salary of Alex Rodriguez, as reported several days ago.

    Ramirez. He's not going to like the Dodgers' short-term bid and will play the field. The Yankees, Mets, Blue Jays and Phillies are among those expected to check in. My call: Dodgers, three years, $75 million.

  • 11/05/08 (11:30 AM ET): Manny, Boras looking for long-term offers

    One reason the Dodgers haven't yet made their official offer for superstar free-agent outfielder Manny Ramirez is that his agent, Scott Boras, apparently isn't fielding offers that aren't in the ballpark of the five or six years that Manny wants.

    As reported two weeks ago, the Dodgers intended to offer Ramirez a short-term deal at a high annual salary, perhaps $55-$60 million for two years. (Dodgers GM Ned Colletti confirmed their interest in a shorter deal here the other day and also expressed his belief that they any possible deal would take time.)

    But Boras pointed out that he and Colletti negotiated a five-year deal for Barry Bonds back in 2001 when Colletti was the Giants' assistant GM, when Bonds was 37 years old (Ramirez is 36). Ramirez has said publicly that he wants a six-year deal (but probably would take five, or perhaps four) after hitting .396 with 17 home runs and 53 RBIs for the Dodgers. It apepars [sic] that if the Dodgers don't change their stance, the Yankees and others (the Phillies and Blue Jays are possibly interested) may battle for Ramirez without them.

  • 11/05/08 (07:43 PM ET): Dodgers show Manny the money

    Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti met with agent Scott Boras on Tuesday night and made an offer for Manny Ramirez. Colletti revealed in a meeting with reporters Wednesday that the offer would be the "second-highest average annual value in baseball."

    While the Dodgers' proposal for Ramirez calls for a high annual salary, the issue appears to be the number of years. The Dodgers' offer is believed to be a two-year deal in the neighborhood of $50 million.

  • 11/06/08: Dodgers lose ground in Manny derby

    The sides are so far apart that the Blue Jays, Orioles and perhaps the Yankees and other teams likely have moved ahead of the Dodgers in terms of their chances to win the services of the mercurial superstar.

  • 12/01/08: Yankees haven't ruled out Manny

    Manny Ramirez still could have one chance to come home. While the Mets have all but decided they will not pursue the slugging savant from Washington Heights, in Upper Manhattan, the Yankees clearly have not ruled out a run at Ramirez.

    The other obvious possibility for Ramirez would appear to be the Angels, whose owner, Arte Moreno, has said publicly that they may turn to Ramirez if they can't sign Teixeira, their top target. Besides the obvious advantage of adding one of the greatest righthanded hitters of alltime, if the Angels sign Manny, they'd be tweaking the crosstown Dodgers. The same could be said if the Yankees sign Ramirez. Only they'd be tweaking the Red Sox.

  • 12/06/08: Behind in Teixeira Derby, Yanks could target Manny

    There are those suggesting the Yankees are only in the running for Teixeira to either monitor the rival Red Sox or drive up the price for the switch-hitting slugger. But while it's true the Yankees don't appear as eager to sign Teixeira as the Angels and Red Sox, they do appear willing to sign him at the right price. After already signing CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett for $243.5 million combined, the Yankees appear disinclined to offer $200 million for Teixeira, which is what it may take to get him.

  • 12/07/08: Manny won't accept Dodgers' arbitration offer

    He seeks a deal for at least five years, and while that seems like a tall order for the 36-year-old star, even after hitting .396 with 17 home runs and 53 RBIs in 53 games in Los Angeles, four years could be a possibility.

    The Dodgers, who have multiple infield needs (shortstop and third base) and could use a starting pitcher as well, remain interested in Ramirez and can resume negotiating with him if they choose to do so.

    He is also a strong fallback option for two teams that are pursuing star free agent first baseman Mark Teixeira -- the Angels and Yankees. As a matter of fact, if the Yankees aren't able to convince CC Sabathia to come to New York, the Yankees may pursue both Ramirez and Teixeira.

  • 12/10/08: Hank the Yank wants Manny

    Yankees co-owner Hank Steinbrenner is said by people close to him to want Manny Ramirez in pinstripes. Unlike his father, who dreaded dreadlocks, Steinbrenner the junior is said by a Yankees person "not to give a (hoot) about his hair.'' . . . the Yankees are mulling a run at Ramirez. The Dodgers have been pursuing Ramirez, and if the Angels miss out on Teixeira, they might join the Manny fray as well.

  • 12/17/08: 'No way' Manny will retire, says friend

    Teixeira, though, has said he intends to try to do a deal by Christmas, which means Manny's market should take off thereafter.

    At least two potential losers in the five-team Teixeira Sweepstakes are likely to pursue Ramirez (Yankees and Angels), and perhaps a third (Nationals) would, too. The incumbent Dodgers remain interested. All of which should cheer Manny's spirit if he's just a little more patient.

  • 01/02/09 (12:03 PM ET): Resetting the market: The Top 20 remaining free agents

    Manny Ramirez, OF. The Dodgers remain the favorite to keep Ramirez, but the rival Giants loom as a major threat. L.A. wants to keep it to two years but eventually gave in on a third year for Rafael Furcal, and will probably have to do the same with the man who saved the franchise last season. All along, San Francisco has said it might take a stab at one of the "big three'' (and the other two, Sabathia and Teixeira, are gone already), so it stands to reason that they're in for Ramirez, the perfect antidote for their moribund offense. The Angels say they're out, but he'll still be tempting for them as well. Then there's always that so-called mystery team to contend with.

  • 01/02/09 (01:53 PM ET): Giants enter Manny race; Don't write off Angels yet

    The Giants have entered the bidding for free-agent superstar Manny Ramirez, has confirmed.

    KPIX-TV reported Friday that the Giants have made a three-year offer with an option for a fourth year.

    The Dodgers remain interested in Ramirez, and a bidding contest between the two great West Coast rivals could loom. The Dodgers originally offered the slugging savant $45 million over two years, but later withdrew that offer. They will have to do better than that to have chance to retain his services.

    While the Angels have suggested publicly that they won't be bidding for Ramirez, some baseball people aren't writing them off. There also appears to be one or two other American League teams on the periphery of the bidding. The Yankees, after signing Mark Teixeira to an eight-year, $180-million contract, are not among them.

  • 01/05/09: Rangers mull Manny pursuit

    The Texas Rangers, who are capable of bold moves and would like to replace Milton Bradley's offense, are considering a pursuit of superstar free agent Manny Ramirez.

    The Rangers have been quiet this winter -- their big move has been signing reliever Derrick Turnbow -- but are looking at a number of ways to improve. Owner Tom Hicks has shown a willingness to make big signings in the past (Alex Rodriguez for $252 million is the prime example), and the Rangers were the one team who showed interest in Ramirez five winters ago when the Red Sox were shopping him (discussing a Ramirez for A-Rod deal at the time). With the Rangers about to lose the free agent Bradley, who was one of the best offensive players in the game last year (.999 OPS) to free agency, their interest in Ramirez has increased.

  • 01/22/09: These teams are the most likely to get free-agent deals done

    Ramirez is said to be working out in Pensacola, Fla., a few hours north of where he makes his winter home in Miami -- and patiently (yes, that's the word a friend of his used) waiting for a job. The Dodgers and Giants still look like the most logical landing spots, with L.A. still seen as the favorite. The Angels and Mets are still showing no signs of joining the fray, and Yankees partner Hal Steinbrenner is thought to be against signing Ramirez, so it's still possible it'll come down to a battle of West Coast rivals.

    One final push from Hall-of-Fame manager Joe Torre could do the trick. Torre just returned from vacation in New Zealand and could certainly stump for Manny. Eventually, the guess here is that the Dodgers get to three years.

  • 01/26/09: Manny, Dodgers remain miles apart

    While the Dodgers have held to their two-year, $45 million offer for Manny Ramirez, the star slugger is still seeking a deal of at least twice that in length.

    Word is, Ramirez has told the Dodgers that he wants a deal for four or five years, and it's believed that he's looking to be paid in the range of $25 million a year. Going by those numbers, and assuming Ramirez would take a four-year contract, the sides appear to be at least $55 million apart.

    No surprise, this could take a while. One executive whose team is interested in Ramirez said that he believes the Dodgers and Ramirez are no further along than the "fourth inning'' of the negotiations.

    The Dodgers and Giants are currently seen as the two most active pursuers of Ramirez. The Dodgers have been viewed as the favorite to land the slugger who helped turn their season around last year, but the Giants are showing signs of serious interest, as well.

  • 01/28/09: Market watch: The latest on the best remaining free agents

    1. Manny Ramirez. The Man-child and the Dodgers appear to be in a stalemate, with the team holding at $45 million for two years and Ramirez wanting a deal for four or five years for between $25 million and $30 million per. The Giants, who are in excellent financial position, look like the biggest threat; although at least publicly they're saying they won't go crazy for Manny after diving into the market early. San Francisco already signed Edgar Renteria, Randy Johnson, Bobby Howry and Jerremy Affeldt, a commitment of more than $20 million for 2009, but if they don't get Ramirez the question has to be asked: Wouldn't that $20 million-plus have been better spent on Manny? The Angels and Mets say publicly that they won't go for Manny, while the Yankees already have upgraded their offense immensely with Mark Teixeira. So until further notice the two great West Coast rivals look like the favorites.

    Now, if I can just convince Boras that Blyleven is worthy of the Hall of Fame...


    Correction: Dennis Gilbert was Barry Bonds' agent in 1992, not Scott Boras.

  • Comments

    Not sure if Jon Heyman is more of a tool or a douchebag.

    Can't he be both?

    What's up with you & Jon Heyman?

    u do realize that heyman is a national baseball writer who writes a daily column/blog and discussing mannys situation is pretty much a big story this off season?

    what do u want him to do? not talk about it? then u would be killing him for that. please your petty thing against him hurts your credibility

    Spot on piece, Rich. This Heyman-Boras connection has been the subject of discussion among myself and other fellow Dodger fans this off-season. Sorry to disagree with you Bob, but the evidence is pretty overwhelming that Heyman is a mouthpiece for Boras, and has been for years; and I know several other sportswriters who think of him the same way, not just Rich. This off-season is just the piece de resistance. Look back to all his Manny related pieces this off-season, each one was disproven, all the teams he mentioned as jumping in the fray fell by the wayside one by one. The Giants "offer" was quickly debunked as a myth. They've merely shown interest, if Manny fell in their lap but have stated they can't afford the level of contract they were mentioned with, that Boras seeks. One by one it's been clear that the Dodgers are the only team talking to him and the only to have made an offer, yet he continues to post pieces that puff up his value and demand. I just can't take Heyman seriously anymore. Thanks for nailing this one.

    Barry Bonds was represented by Dennis Gilbert and the Beverly Hills Council in 1992. Not Scott Boras.

    "While Boras is no fool, Heyman is a tool..."

    Do you see the first period after the word "tool"? That's where your sentence should've ended.

    In case I haven't mentioned it, I LOVE this site. I check it everyday. You guys are on my shortlist of daily required readings (with Law, Neyer, Posnaski, Shysterball, and the Hardball Times. FJM used to be on there before they went dark.) Keep writing!

    To back up your Heyman/Boras connection, WFAN in New York just reported:

    WFAN: According to Jon Heyman, The New York Mets and Oliver Perez are close to signing an agreement.

    Jon Heyman is the only writer, out of any publication I have ever read, disparage a player because he fired an agent (the agent in question was Scott Boras).

    He called Gary Sheffield a "knucklehead" for doing so, and also, Kenny Rodgers.

    I don't know any reporter who has said something negative about a player just for the simple act of firing an agent.

    I like how he has the Dodgers' offer going from 2 yrs/$55-60M to 2yrs/$50M to 2yrs/$45M.

    Isn't it also true that Boras represents many of the top free agents this year, and Heyman's job is to get info on those free agents? And what about Heyman's New York background as an explanation for all his info on NY players this year? Isn't it possible that he has a great Yankees source? And, are you claiming that in the last few years all of Heyman's big breaks have been Boras-related? Did you do a comprehensive study?

    Let's say Heyman has a good relationship with someone at Boras Corp. How is this a negative? I have to think Heyman talks regularly to many agents, as do Rosenthal, Olney, Stark, and all the rest. If Rosenthal posted tons of Arn Tellem info, would anyone be making a stink of it?


    P.S. I guess this is why there so few stories about Dunn weighing huge offers, when the blogosphere is on file about Dunn.

    I just remembered another story that was total B.S. written by Heyman after A-Rod resigned with the Yankees, it was a total spin job.

    In it, he had the tigers supposedly as being interested, even though the timeline would have made it after the Tigers got Cabrera, as well as listing the mets (who had wright and reyes) as going after a-rod.

    It was an after the fact spin job that was terrible.

    This wasn't exactly breaking news. However, there's 7,000 reporters who use relationships (and are used) to get scoops and to push stories. When is the story about Gammons and the Red Sox front office going to be posted here? Did anyone see his stories about Teixeira before and after he signed with the Yankees?

    No one can argue that Heyman does a piss-poor job of not making the stories completely benefit Boras.

    There are people debating this? Heyman is obviously a Boras puppet. He's been extra terrible on the MLB Network's Hot Stove show. When they ask him about the Boras clients, he says they're great players who will get the money they deserve from somebody. When asked about the players not represented by Boras, he says that they're flawed players and he just doesn't see them getting the big dollars in this market. It's really amazing when he's asked about a Boras client immediately after being asked about a non Boras client or vice versa.

    Add in heavy doses of ignorance and arrogance and Jon Heyman is the worst of "baseball people", at least as far as I'm concerned.

    Rich, I agree with Bob, above. Heyman is a national baseball writer with a well-placed source. It happens to be Boras. Should he refrain from writing about the information he gets from Boras, who happens to represent the lion's share of the big-name free agents on the market?

    I know you (and many others) vehemently disagreed with his comments re the HoF and Bert Blyleven. Fine. But this post smells of the kind of ad hominem attack that was criticized earlier in these pages.

    A reporter's job is to disseminate timely, accurate information. It's fair game to criticize him for being untimely or inaccurate -- that part of your post is fair. But I think it's unfair to criticize his reporting in general just because he has a well-placed source that he relies on. Every national baseball writer has agents, GMs, or players they rely on for information. I don't think Heyman is outside the norm in any way.

    I don't think the problem is his source or the subject of his articles, but that he appears to be a tool in the Boras agenda instead of an impartial reporter. That's what I took from this piece.

    You know what the most amazing thing about Heyman is? Look at how many venues where he's drawing paychecks...MLB Network, SI, WFAN, SNY...that's four different media outlets cutting him paychecks, and that's not even counting residuals from Scott Boras, Inc. I'd be mad, but to be honest, I'm jealous, he's figured out a way to get four different places to pay him for repeating the same news. If he hadn't been so stubborn about not voting for Blyleven, I'd think he's a genius.

    The hits just keep on coming...

    "The Dodgers say they are still talking to Ramirez and hopeful to get something done with him. But it won't be anything quick, apparently. Ramirez is a very patient man, and he is thought to be willing to go into spring training to get the deal he wants, if need be."

    "The Dodgers have announced both offers they made, which could mean they are serious and trying to do their best. Or it could mean they are trying to create the impression they doing their best. The Dodgers would appear to badly need Ramirez, but the club-owning McCourts appear intent on getting a bargain after Ramirez saved their 2008 season while still being paid by the Red Sox."

    Great post MT. You are credited with "breaking" Heyman's latest rant. In stark contrast to the article linked above, check out Ken Rosenthal's article which gives a much more unbiased review of the Dodger's options going forward.,-but-Manny-may-not

    Heyman doesn't even skim the surface on other options for the Dodgers. I am wondering if he has any original thoughts or opinions. Oh yeah, just one: no Hall for Bert.

    I think it is plain to see that Heyman is Boras's mouthpiece and his charge is to front Boras's interests at all costs.

    Reporters need to have sources, and it is their job to get "scoops" or whatever. And for whatever it's worth, being the first to break a trade or signing or whatever during Hot Stove season has becomes something of a competition amongst sports writers.

    But at the same time, real reporters need to be able to tell when they're using a source and when a source is using them. I'll buy the bit that Heyman isn't particularly good at this last thing. But I bet he's also found that repeating whatever Scott Boras tells proves beneficial to ones career. In exchange for failing to censor the drivel, Boras rewards Heyman by giving him real scoops, which people actually care a lot about (for whatever reason).

    So I guess I'm saying, don't hate the player, hate the game. :-/

    Heyman breaks a story, Heyman breaks wind, it's all the same...

    Is it fair to say that at this point it's personal between you and John Heyman?

    I get that he's a Boras mouthpiece, just like I get that Gammons is Red Sox focused and that Jayson Stark leans on his Phillies sources and so on. But your attacks on Heyman are getting increasingly shrill and personal, and IMO it decreases the credibility of all the other great stuff on here.

    Unless Mr. Lederer has actual evidence that such an arrangement exists between Heyman and Boras, his posting here qualifies as the work of a rank amateur. His accusation says more about him than it says about Heyman.

    Anybody read today's Boras inspired Heyman article about how it's wasn't A-Rod's fault he tested possitive but Orza's fault because he didn't destroy the records of the test. What a load of CRAP, I can't and accredited journalist like Heyman would actually write a story like that and not place one bit of the onus of blame upon the player.

    It's interesting to see all of the defenses of a "reporter" who isn't really doing any reporting on these stories. If a reporter can use Boras as a source and then verify the story with other independent sources, then he has won the scoop and should report it. But it's pretty clear that Heyman isn't getting any independent verification, which makes these stories PR, not news. Why would anyone want to read Boras propaganda disguised as actual reporting?

    Any reporter who passes off such propaganda as news deserves to be called out on it, and Rich deserves your thanks for doing the calling out. Crap like this gets passed off as journalism all the time, and we need more credible reporters bringing the sunlight when it happens.

    This makes sense. As a Phillie fan, I noticed Heyman always mentioned the Phils as a potential landing spot for Derek Lowe, when I knew there was absolutley no shot of that happening. This was when it was understood that the Mets were the only team bidding on him. I always wondered why he would bring up the Phils. Now I know.