Right. Sure.

Two GMs who were involved in the Teixera talks both felt the Red Sox had a leg up.

"They have the highest offer on the table", said one of the GMs.

This Teixeira reporting continues to boggle our minds.  Under what circumstance would a competing GM know another team's actual bid? We're sure Theo Epstein had been in deep, full disclosure discussions with Andy MacPhail and Brian Cashman.  Because Scott Boras told them!?  Or, alternatively, their underlings are spending quality time with each other discussing numbers over instant message.  Or are we back to the days of collusion?  Because to us that's one of the only circumstances under which this kind of information might be freely exchanged between GMs.  And Cafardo has a whistleblower on his hand and doesn't even seem to know it.

Why does Cafardo approach this with zero skepticism?  How can it be taken at face value that a competing GM knows the actual dollar amount of a major free agent contract offer?  

Better question, why are we still reading this stuff?

16 comments… add one

  • I think it boils down to Scott Boras playing all sides to drive up the price. I know he’s doing what’s best for his clients, but the entire process still makes me sick. Can’t stand the man.

    Atheose December 18, 2008, 7:14 am
  • I know he’s doing what’s best for his clients’ wallets
    That’s what I really meant.

    Atheose December 18, 2008, 7:15 am
  • I find much more interesting this quote:
    One of the GMs responded to Red Sox owner John Henry’s comment to the Boston Herald that the Sox would not go 10 years on any player with, “No one’s going there.”
    I tend to believe this because if someone HAD offered a 10-year deal, we all know Boras would be shopping that around to every other team involved in the bidding. In fact, I would have thought Boras would have fabricated a 10-year offer by now in an effort to get another team to bite — so I think it’s safe that no one’s offered 10.
    What I found funny about Cafardo’s anonymous GM quotes was what appeared briefly on the Extra Bases blog yesterday, one GM saying he thought the Sox would win the bidding, but then adding he didn’t even know who had actually made offers. So the GMs know just as little as we do (with the exception of their own offers, of course). Like SF says, shouldn’t Cafardo at least spell that out in his story?

    Paul SF December 18, 2008, 9:09 am
  • Aren’t we just piling on Carfado a little more than necessary? I mean, seriously. It’s not an egregious story. Accountability is one thing, but tearing at guys constantly for minor quibbles like this is bullshit. The entire Hot Stove is engineered to create stories like this so that blogs like this keep talking about baseball. These reporters are puppets: they know it, we know it, baseball knows it. It’s not an easy circumstance, and though this is not an excuse for sloppiness, the idea that we’re sitting hawklike ready to claw these guys just trying to do their jobs under tight deadlines I find a little ridiculous. Seriously, do we really need to parse every sentence of a filler story?

    YF December 18, 2008, 9:30 am
  • This isn’t nitpicking, YF. A reporter offers up a supposed FACT that opposing GMs KNOW the Sox’ offer? With no skepticism? This isn’t a minor quibble, this is just flat-out bad writing and bad critical skills on the part of Cafardo.
    This not “bullshit” as you call it, and I am frankly annoyed that you make this about me and not about the piss-poor reporting. This is what our standards have become: just convey information, no filter needed. Just because these guys are sportswriters doesn’t forgive them the same sins that political journalists have perpetrated over the last 7 years, and this lazy writing is both a result of the yearn for the scoop and a relaxed attitude towards what journalists are supposed to do, which is to convey knowledge, to NOT to spew out any random fact (or non-fact, as it were) just to get “the story”.

    SF December 18, 2008, 9:39 am
  • the idea that we’re sitting hawklike ready to claw these guys just trying to do their jobs under tight deadlines I find a little ridiculous.
    I think it’s more along the lines of us sitting hawk-like ready to discuss and piece together their information, and criticize them only if they deserve it. “Just doing their job” is no excuse for reporting unsubstantiated claims as fact. Sure there is some lee-way during the hot stove season, but again that’s no excuse for essentially making shit up.

    Atheose December 18, 2008, 10:10 am
  • Sports journalism offers a lot of leeway for mixing reporting and commentary. Cafardo himself does it quite a lot. So what keeps him from printing the GM quotes — arguably newsworthy — with attending commentary pointing out the problems inherent with the situation?
    Also, I doubt Cafardo had much of a tight deadline. As he says in the story, he got the initial quote at 10 a.m. and called back to make sure there were no updated at 6 p.m. I think in eight hours he might have found time to add a paragraph noting that the GMs, like the rest of us, are really just speculating. I don’t question making a story out of the quote. I do question not placing that quote in context, particularly given the wide latitude sports reporters now have to offer opinion in their news stories.

    Paul SF December 18, 2008, 10:10 am
  • Hug it out

    Brad December 18, 2008, 10:12 am
  • Your response is hyperbolic. This is not a Judy Miller situation. It’s hack writing on a manufactured subject, which is lamentable, but par for the course. I can’t imagine why this draws such outrage. And in any case, “how does one GM know what another is offering” is only one aspect to this story, and if it’s not the ouroboros Cafardo chose to engage, it’s really not worth becoming outraged.

    YF December 18, 2008, 10:17 am
  • Paul: I don’t disagree. I think you’re correct. And you, too, Atheose, and also SF. It’s just the tone I’m responding too, I suppose. Like everyone here is shocked–SHOCKED–by this stuff.

    YF December 18, 2008, 10:23 am
  • Of course GMs talk to one another. It helps all of them. It also keeps the agents honest. The agents are forced into owning up to the offers on the table and everyone settles into the same ballpark.
    Besides, how else does someone like Furcal get the same exact offers from both Atlanta and LA?
    And might I add, he’s getting $6.5 million for the first year, and $8.5 million for the second. Nah, the Sox don’t need an upgrade at SS. Lowrie is going to do just fine OPSing .643 against right-handed pitching and .696 on the road.
    Actually, that’s the perfect solution! They can play Lowrie at home and only against southpaws! Then Lugo the rest of the time! Perfect!!!11111!!!!!

    Dave SF December 18, 2008, 10:31 am
  • It’s hack writing on a manufactured subject, which is lamentable, but par for the course.
    Isn’t that what we’re doing? Lamenting?
    I’ve always taken news during the hot-stove season with a grain of salt, but it feels like in the last 2-3 years things have gotten exponentially worse. There has always been some speculation that has been passed off as fact by these guys, but recently it has become a larger problem. Cafardo has become one of the worst offenders, and it’s getting tiresome.

    Atheose December 18, 2008, 10:34 am
  • Your response is hyperbolic. This is not a Judy Miller situation.
    No, it’s not. But the principles aren’t that different. It’s not hyperbole to compare the two, it is hyperbole to say that the consequences of the actions are similar, to create an equivalency in their impact. This I have not done.

    SF December 18, 2008, 10:38 am
  • Just because it’s “par for the course” doesn’t mean it should be. Why should we cease being appalled by bad reporting/writing — and saying so — just because too many people do it?

    Paul SF December 18, 2008, 10:41 am
  • Also Cafardo’s job is to report what he hears. He’s a reporter for a reason. If the only reason it seems to be out of bounds is because of some mysterious force called “collusion”, then there’s no case to be made. He heard something. He reported it. His editors agreed. Everyone felt their readers would be interested. End. Of. Story. Print.
    Where’s the drama exactly?

    Dave SF December 18, 2008, 10:48 am
  • A fellow blogger, who wants to remain anonymous as they are involved in the internet, has told me that there’s a low-life who won’t stop visiting YFSF. He uses all sorts of handles and acts as both a SF and a YF, depending on the week.
    You know, I heard something. I reported it. The moderators of this site might agree, I have no idea.
    End. of. Story. Post.

    A SF December 18, 2008, 11:20 am

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: