I find this (bold) idea bizarre. Why would an agent mock an employer for preferring to reach agreements with their clients? How could that possibly be a negative. If agents previously thought the Twins' wouldn't draw a firm line, isn't that a good thing for their clients? To nitpick, I'd happily go to court if it meant I could get "a fairly small amount, just $355,000." In any economic realm, that's still a 7% difference of income, which is a pretty big deal. Though in this case, it would probably just cover agent fees for the process.