5:15pm: Reporter Francys Romero relays that Ronald Acuna Jr. hired Rimas Sports as his agency in recent days.
2:20pm: Rimas Sports, the fledgling baseball agency launched last year by rapper and singer Bad Bunny, is facing sanctions from the MLB Players Association for violating the MLBPA’s agency regulations, as first reported by Britt Ghiroli of The Athletic. ESPN’s Jeff Passan, Alden Gonzalez and Jorge Castillo have also reported on the unfolding controversy. Per the ESPN report, Rimas’ lead agent, William Arroyo, has had his agent certification revoked.
Multiple other agencies have filed complaints against Rimas, alleging that the firm has offered large sums of cash and gifts to players as incentive to leave their prior agencies and join Rimas — a violation of the MLBPA’s code of conduct for agents. Ghiroli writes that some players have allegedly been given new cars. She adds that Rimas has had employees who are not certified as agents but have nevertheless represented themselves as such and acted in that capacity. Those employees had been seeking certification but are now expected to have their requests denied, per both Ghiroli and ESPN.
Rimas issued the following statement on the controversy:
“At Rimas Sports, we uphold the highest standards of professionalism and integrity of our industry. Out of respect for an ongoing process within the context of the MLBPA Agent Regulations, we will refrain from making any comments at this time. We remain committed to continue serving our clients with excellence.”
While decertification of a firm’s lead agent is obviously rare and noteworthy, violations of this manner are hardly unprecedented. Former MLBTR writer Zach Links and I wrote spoke with various agents about client poaching as far back as 2014.
Rimas Sports most notably negotiated the seven-year, $63.5MM extension for Rockies shortstop Ezequiel Tovar earlier this year. Included among their other clientele are Mets catcher Francisco Alvarez, Mets infielder Ronny Mauricio, Nationals outfielder Eddie Rosario (who only hired Rimas this offseason), Giants infielder Wilmer Flores, Guardians shortstop Brayan Rocchio, Reds infielder Santiago Espinal and Dodgers catching prospect Diego Cartaya (among others). The MLBPA has informed all of Rimas’ clients about the purported transgressions, per ESPN and The Athletic.
“You’re a Bad Bunny”
~Red Riding Hood from the first Hoodwinked movie
Silly rabbit, Tricks are for kids
It’s a sad day when you can’t trust a guy named Bad Bunny with your money
In related news, Ohtani just hired had hired Bad Bunny as his new financial manager.
Ohtani was quoted as saying “ year of the rabbit very lucky” as reason for hiring Bad Bunny as his next financial manager. Reports also indicate Ohtani makes many decisions based on star alignment and celestial signs, which also told him to trust ippei with all his finances.
All of the Rimas players listed are Latinos. Taking advantage of the language barrier, perhaps?
Bad Bunny translated to Japanese is Ippei Mizuhara.
It’s a bit distasteful, but is there anything legally or morally wrong with an agent giving a significant financial incentive for someone to sign with them? It really is just an advance against the cut the agent will eventually get from the player.
They are licensed by a union who ruled they repeatedly broke union rules, so I would say at the very least it’s legally wrong.
If a union says it’s unsavory, then we definitely know it must be true.
Aren’t you the smart one. Bet you didn’t get vaxxed thinking it’d give you crotch rot
I didn’t get vaxxed cause I didn’t think it’d work. Turns out I was right. I can’t imagine all the people that did thinking it would work. A lot of buyers remorse, pun intended for this situation about buying clients with gifts.
According to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), up to 2 million rabbits are raised and killed for meat in America each year.
According to the article, Rimas’ employees have.not been certified as agents.
They were caught doing it. That’s why it’s wrong. They were caught doing it by someone who lost out on a deal as a result and decided to be a tattle tale. That’s why it’s wrong.
Other than that there’s nothing going on here that doesn’t happen on some level in almost every business dealing of this magnitude.
It’s the same faux shock as when NCAA folks cry about the integrity of amateurism.
If you’re not caught doing something it’s very hard to be caught doing something.
While the Union apparently frowns upon the P Diddy School of Management tactics with respect to closing deals, the preferred Stanford Business School methods are indeed functionally similar and generate similar levels of remuneration. The numbers of suitcases containing unmarked bills employed by the respective enterprises are, however said to be considerably different…
Code of conduct…
You mean the bit about bringing loaded weapons to business meetings? I don’t think they embraced all of Diddy’s “Best Practices”. Some of them may have been “industry specific”, after all.
To be very very clear, I am joking about all of this. There are decades-old stories that involve Diddy strategically employing locked rooms, suitcases of cash and loaded .38 Specials in business negotiations. Urban legend or not, they worked wonders for his street cred…
I can see why it’s against their code of conduct. It confuses the interests of the player, which is the opposite of what the agent is supposed to do. Ideally, guys are choosing agents based on capabilities and comfort, not some materialistic sugar high
Talk about a sloppy shop.
It sounds more so like the old guard is doing what they can to keep competition out of the club and the league is more than happy to enforce outdated rules with the sole design of protecting that old guard.
The same old guard the league was accused of conspiracy against?
Come again?
I agree that the complaint could come from a competing agent, but I do not think the huge gifts rule/ban/kickback is outdated or inappropriate.
What exactly is wrong with an agency telling a player they will give them a car if they switch agencies? This is how business is done all across the country. T Mobile will give you a new cell phone for switching providers. Verizon isn’t suing T Mobile for this.
The only wrong part is violating the agreements set forth by the MLBPA and powers that provide licensing to do such business. There are stipulations regarding what happens in such a case.
If the agreement in place doesn’t support fair competition it’s not a legit agreement. This is basic stuff here.
I’m assuming they failed to pay the MLB protection fees and now Jose Canseco is taking a bat to their new offices.
They also failed to pay the agent certification fee, regional business license fee, administrative service fee, and executive leadership kickback fee.
” and the league is more than happy to enforce outdated rules”
The league does not certify or set rules fore agents, the Players Association does. The MLBPA polices agent, the certify them and they discipline them. MLB has at times banned agents and former agents from clubhouses etc if the violate MLBPA rules but that is pretty much as far as it goes.
Doesn’t sound like that at all.
The only rules are there are no rules unless you get caught
Like the Domino’s commercial:
Customer: “They’re no rules!!!” (Guy takes off shirt in Domino’s)
Worker: “Put your shirt back on, man!”
Customer (putting shirt back on): “There’s one rule!”
Doesn’t this apply to every rule and law ever?
“ At Rimas Sports, we uphold the highest standards of professionalism and integrity of our industry.”
Well, you convinced me!
If this is a crime who is the victim?
If someone is willing to give the players more money or gifts with a monetary value just for switching agencies then what is the problem?
This is total nonsense. This is a capitalistic society and therefore we are supposed to have fair and free competition for goods and services. I understand why the people who run the monopoly called MLB might not understand that but that’s how our country operates.
Blankpink……..
If your employer has a rule that says no drinking on the job, but you do and get fired that is no crime….yet you were punished for violation of the rules.
MLBPA governs agents, they have rules and rules were broken. This is not a hard concept .
No drinking on the job is a rule because people who are drunk don’t do their job.
What is the purpose of this rule? To say “well it’s a rule and they broke it” is lame.
Perhaps the union doesn’t want agents bribing players with gifts. Kickbacks are generally frowned upon because it gives those agencies an unfair competitive advantage.
I can explain it again, if you’d like, but I can’t understand it for you.
That’s not bribery at all. If agencies can afford to give their potential clients gifts then that’s fair competition it is not bribery.
When a new internet service provider pops up they offer you a discounted rate to try and convince you to switch companies. That’s capitalism not bribery.
Like i said just saying “it’s a rule” is as lame as it gets. It sounds like a rule put in place to keep the people in the club happy and to not let anyone else in the club and that’s not right. And like I said i understand why MLB, which is a monopoly itself, would have a hard time understanding how free competition works but that doesn’t make it ok.
Show us which rule you disagree with (not to be confused with show on the doll where the bad person touched you)
agent.mlbplayers.com/regulations
This rule is very similar to NCAA refusal to pay student athletes and let them receive gifts and financial stuff cause NCAA didn’t get a piece of the $$$. Which makes sense cause MLBPA doesn’t get a cut of brand new cars or other physical gifts. So course they don’t want agencies using those tactics. Only tactics MLBPA can get a cut of from players.
@blackpink
You don’t have to like or even agree with the notion it is breaking a rule, and you can gesture at imagined hypocrisy because MLB is a monopoly. But that does not mean they cannot create rules to prevent certain behaviors from their agents to protect other agents. In this case, it looks like the rule was put in place to incentivize players picking agencies that do good work and represent themselves well, as opposed to giving the agents the potential ability to stockpile players by offering them gifts to lure them in.
So because it’s a rule it’s a good thing and it should be blindly agreed with and enforced. That seems to be the sentiment by quite a few people which exemplifies the sad state of our society.
@terry
What do you mean “blindly agreed”? There is nothing “good” or bad about it. MLB offered the contract that agents must adhere to, and it was up to the agent to agree to those rules. If they break the rules, there are consequences.
And if they disagree with a rule and MLB is unwilling to compromise, then they will not be offered the opportunity to act as an agent.
A rule that doesn’t allow for free and fair competition isn’t a good rule.
Why would it be bad that another agency would “stockpile” players by giving them gifts? Why is that a bad thing?
You are making no sense at all.
@blackpink
I’m not making the rule, only offering my understanding of what I believe the rule is saying. I think I did a pretty good job laying it out, and frankly believe you don’t want to understand it, or disagree to the point you are unwilling to understand it. But let me try again.
Let’s start with what you yourself said: “fair competition”. Fair competition is agents competing based on their ability to advocate for their players and ultimately land them the best possible contract.
MLB seems to believe one way to incentivize that is to prevent agents with deeper pockets from using gifts as leverage. The player must then decide between the two agents based on their personality, track record, etc.
Maybe you disagree! Maybe you think if Agent1’s track record and genuine care for his players isn’t enough to beat out Agent2’s offer of a Rolls Royce. But MLB enforces a rule, and if agents disagree, they are not allowed to offer their services, or face the consequences for breaking the rule.
Why on earth would we want to prevent agents from hiring clients just because they have deep pockets? Thats communism dude. This is a capitalist society.
@blackpink
I’ve tried answering you in good faith, but you’re clearly being obtuse or unwilling to understand.
This has nothing to do with communism or capitalism. In fact, I recommend you stop throwing those terms around until you do some research on what they actually mean.
A better explanation for the rule is integrity. MLB is ensuring the agents they allow into the league adhere to certain standards. In the end, that allows them to provide better agents for their players.
You clearly do not agree with those rules, which is perfectly fine. But maybe do a better job understanding those rules (even if you don’t agree with them) before trying to bend over backwards using terms you do not understand to try to explain how it is a bad rule.
I’ll give you an example. I think it’s unfair companies can levy a non-compete clause with their salespeople, which allows that SP’s clients to stay with the company if the SP leaves. The SP did earn those clients, after all. However, even though I disagree with it, I understand the company’s incentive to push that clause, and it is up to the SP to decide whether or not they agree to the terms.
@blackpink. All forms of capitalism have rules. Some of these rules constrain trade, e.g. patent laws and property laws. There’ is no single form or universal form of capitalism. Different societies adopt different set of rules. Having rules does not make something communist nor does not having rules make something capitalistic.
This is a rule that doesn’t make sense and doesn’t benefit anyone except the people already in power making the rules.
This is nonsense guys. And of course there is a racial element to this as well. Latinos start representing other Latinos and here we are.
@blackpink
“…doesn’t benefit anyone except the people already”
At this point, you are clearly intentionally misinterpreting the rule. If you dislike rules that benefit the most powerful, then you would realize the rule to prevent cash or gift incentives is in place for that exact reason.
I’ve done enough explaining simple concepts to you, though. Now please explain to me how the rule is (1) communism, (2) helping the powerful, and (3) racial. Explain it like I’m 5, because that is something I do not understand.
Why wouldn’t we want people with money to enter the space of sports agents and give more to the players? Who exactly doesn’t want this besides the agents already in place?
“But that does not mean they cannot create rules to prevent certain behaviors from their agents to protect other agents.“
They’re called the Major League Baseball players association not the Major League Baseball agent association. Their job isn’t to regulate and protect agents and agencies. It’s to protect players.
Agencies offering gifts for changing agencies in no way shape or form hurts players. In fact it promotes a better atmosphere of better offers for players, more competition breeds better offers for a limited client pool.
Which, players have the choice of switching and signing. And in the event the service isn’t up to par players can find new agencies that are.
It’s an outdated expectation to say the least.
If agencies want to offer gifts so be it. Let the players decide who they want to sign with. Cause players can always switch agencies. Happens every off season.
@whitesox
“In fact it promotes a better atmosphere of better offers for players, more competition breeds better offers for a limited client pool.”
You know what else does that? Being a really good agent.
Part of their role in protecting the players is creating certain standards for agents. The rule creates an environment where agents compete on their ability to sell themselves and their their track record, among other things.
If an agent could stockpile players by offering cars and houses and cash, but then isn’t communicative or does a lousy job of representing his client, how is that good for the players? And if the agent is really good, they wouldn’t have to offer incentives in the first place.
And if you still disagree with the rule, I suggest you write a letter to MLB, as arguing your interpretation of it or disagreeing with me will not prevent agents from having to follow that rule in the future.
This rule is not even unique. I work for a major company, and it is against policy to offer cash or gifts to clients. I am a software engineer, so the rule doesn’t really affect me, and yet I am still required to watch a presentation and answer a quiz pertaining to the rule every year.
Who said the new agent wouldn’t do a good job? It’s just like when a new business shows up in the field of cars or internet or whatever else. They need to offer deals to entice customers to switch and that will end once their business becomes established. That’s how business works. It doesn’t work if you don’t allow new competitors in the space.
Does offering gifts make someone a worse or bad agent? I’d assume no.
So you’re essentially saying to new agencies “let your track record speak for you” but they can’t cause they don’t have a track record. So it’s a catch 22 and actually offers less opportunities for players.
@whitesox
“Does offering gifts make someone a worse or bad agent?”
– Not inherently, but it does give a leg up to an agent with more capital than baseball sense. Removing capital from the equation levels the playing field to how well an agent can represent themselves.
@blackpink and @whitesox
I’d have to imagine becoming a sports agent is pretty difficult. It would require garnering some name recognition, whether building up a rapport working with an established agent and deciding to strike out on your own, knowing a player personally, or being a celebrity (in Bad Bunny’s case).
In a world where MLB allows gifts as incentives to represent a player, the talent of the agent becomes less important if they can offer other incentives. It would also allow agents to more easily poach players from another agent.
I’d also speculate that, like most policies, it was put in place after a technicality occurred that became an issue, so MLB took action to correct it.
I’m not seeing the “leveling the playing field” portion cause someone just entering the agency market doesn’t have the experience and track record of better known agencies and agents. So what incentive is there for clients to leave their current agencies and agents and try new ones? And for new clients to pick up and coming ones instead of going with established agencies? You’re limiting a market for really no reason other than “I don’t like gift giving”.
Again end of the day players make the decisions. They decide who represents them and which agent.
Offering gifts like a car really only appeals to up and coming players who may not have as much financial stability like established players. And I’m actually fine with agencies offering cars cause we already know the MLBPA does a piss poor job looking out for minor league players and has for years. The fact minor league players have to be roommates making ends meet has been inexcusable for decades.
So if they want to recruit minor league players, represent them, offer them a paid off car in exchange for signing with the agency I’m totally fine with that. More benefits we can give minor league players the better. Cause the way mlb and MLBPA has treated them has been atrocious for a long time.
@whitesox
Yes, there likely is a high barrier to entry into becoming an agent. So why poison that by having up and coming agents not only compete with similarly talented agents, but also agents with deeper pockets that can just simply throw in a Ferrari to incentivize a player. So not only is there already little incentive for players to up and coming agencies, but imagine now if that up and comer now also has to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars just to be relevant. Not to mention, you are completely ignoring what I referenced earlier – that agents need to make a name for themselves. It’s unlikely an agent with zero experience and no connections has any chance to land a player.
It’s also unlikely a gift would benefit minor league free agents in the way you suggest. If the player is good, he’ll have no trouble finding himself an agent that will represent him well. And if the player is not as good, then it’s unlikely agents would be offering up cash prizes and cars to jockey for his attention if he’s far from a sure thing. Or, going back to my original point, that player would run the risk his agent offers him a Lambo (if the agent has that sort of capital), then is inadequate when the player needs him most.
Couple things
1. I doubt an agency is giving young players a 500,000 or more car like a Ferrari. And I doubt a 500,000 or more car is incentive for guys already making millions and big bucks to switch agencies. Guys making millions already are looking for ways to keep more of their own money with lesser agent fees. That appeals more to higher paid clients
2. Really you don’t think giving a minor leaguer a car helps them financially? You know what the average salary is for minor leaguers? Less than 75,000 a year. Some down in the 10,15,20 thousand a year. So yes I do believe giving them a paid off car actually does help them significantly when they’re also expected to pay for rent, food, and things like you and me.
@whitesox
1. We’re getting in the weeds now. The dollar amount the agent would spend is irrelevant. The idea I have been keying in on is that agents should compete based on their merit as an agent, and not how tempting they can be by offering more lucrative gifts up front.
2. I never said that giving minor leaguers a car doesn’t help them financially, but I think I see why it was unclear. The point I was trying to make was that most minor leaguers are not a safe bet. The higher profile minor leaguers have already likely received a signing bonus, but even if not, are much likelier to make money through arb or a contract. A car would still be of value, but not to the degree it would be for a player with less certainty. Which was the point I was trying to make – in a world where agents can use gifts to lure players, the minor leaguers that would be most positively affected by the car in the way you had described, probably won’t get one, because what incentive would the agent have to bet a brand new car that this player might become something? So by saying it doesn’t help minor leaguers, I meant it as it would not help minor leaguers across the board, nor would it help the ones that need it most.
What does bad bunny sing about? Getting good grades?
I have no idea. I don’t speak spanish…..
“The MLBPA has informed all of Rimas’ clients about the purported transgressions…”
Somehow, I think they already knew.
I wouldn’t be surprised if none of this were true.
Boras is just bitter that he didn’t get any big contracts this winter so he just made up the story and told MLBPA. If this is true, Boras is a liar and a snitch.
I guess you could say Bad Bunny has taken his agency down the rabbit hole
Rapper’s baseball agency get in trouble because they were caught “pitching” cash and gifts instead of strikes!
Bad bunny’s innocent
Its his interpreter’s fault
I’m wondering if these “gifts“ are actually gifts or an advance against earnings. If it’s an advance against earnings situation, there might be some conflicts with the MLBPA agreement with agents.
“At Rimas Sports, we uphold the highest standards of professionalism and integrity of our industry”… Ok, sure, you have “integrity”. LMAO!
The National Association of Realtors just found out their business model (which involved tactics to restrict competition) is illegal. Not saying this is exactly the same, but whenever you try to gain or maintain an unfair advantage, you run the risk of litigation.
Baseball has some antitrust exemptions, but not sure they extend to agents.