Author Topic: Cubs in '19  (Read 72237 times)

Bennett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7414
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #615 on: November 13, 2018, 06:10:07 pm »
You could have said:  "True".
I don't disagree with that.

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #616 on: November 13, 2018, 06:27:29 pm »
Words can have interruptions which can result in widely different meanings to people.

I highly doubt Buster was getting a blow by blow account of trade discussions. Listen to Jeff Passan on the Effectivley Wild podcast discussing trade rumors.  A lot of trade talk is occurring over text messages and the reporters are getting rumors from people on the fringes of trade talk. You aren’t getting Theo on the phone. I doubt Buster’s sources are any better than than Passan’s.

Ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8430
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #617 on: November 13, 2018, 06:29:37 pm »
Buster is reporting the X fact that Cubs are willing to discuss Bryant with other clubs in a way different than ever before. As he says, nobody has yet refuted that factual assertion.

Buster probably doesn’t know from his sources, as a factual matter, the likelihood of the Y outcome. Yes, he could have said in the story “extremely unlikely” or “very unlikely” or whatever, but he probably doesn’t have the facts here on that point one way or the other. As you say, his sources don’t know that likelihood of Y and so there’s nothing to report on that issue as a factual matter.

In some other trade stories generally, you might see the likely outcome reported.  Why? Because there are facts to draw that conclusion. Club A is close to trading Player B. But, here, no facts on that, so the Buster story is limited to the fact Cubs are willing to discuss in a way different than before. That’s the story.

As to the headline, “willing to discuss” from the story would have been better than “open to”—-it’s pretty close but not identical. Former is a bit softer. Don’t know how ESPN works, but in newspaper business the story writer doesn’t write the headline.... but the story is the story.

Bottom line is that the specific fact that Buster reported is, I think, newsworthy. If we want to know the degree of likelihood of a partcular outcome, we’ll have to wait to see if more facts emerge....or not.

My understanding is that the Olney quote was "the Cubs have indicated to other teams they are willing to discuss trade proposals for almost all of the players on their roster, including Bryant."  That statement does not say anything about the Cubs' position on Bryant having changed.  Did he say something else?

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #618 on: November 13, 2018, 07:45:50 pm »
Twitter.

Still waiting for someone to dispel the information in the piece, that the Cubs have communicated to other teams they are prepared to listen to offers for Bryant -- and that's a shift from previous offseasons, not some general GM operating philosophy.

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #619 on: November 13, 2018, 07:49:58 pm »
Words can have interruptions which can result in widely different meanings to people.

I highly doubt Buster was getting a blow by blow account of trade discussions. Listen to Jeff Passan on the Effectivley Wild podcast discussing trade rumors.  A lot of trade talk is occurring over text messages and the reporters are getting rumors from people on the fringes of trade talk. You aren’t getting Theo on the phone. I doubt Buster’s sources are any better than than Passan’s.

What did Passan report about Bryant that’s different than what Buster said?

DelMarFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #620 on: November 13, 2018, 08:13:39 pm »
Quote
Words can have interruptions which can result in widely different meanings to people.

You meant interpretations, right?

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #621 on: November 13, 2018, 08:27:13 pm »
You meant interpretations, right?

Auto correct on the phone, but yes.

What did Passan report about Bryant that’s different than what Buster said?

Passan was talking about the process of breaking rumors and trades, no one is getting this from the GM level.  Sherman, Passan and even Nightengale have been silent on Bryant/trades.  Heyman agreeing with Mooney's article is the only national guy talking about it.  Buster/Rogers are on an island by themselves.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 08:39:41 pm by CUBluejays »

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #622 on: November 13, 2018, 08:50:11 pm »
Auto correct on the phone, but yes.

Passan was talking about the process of breaking rumors and trades, no one is getting this from the GM level.

So, Passan is not doing any reporting so far about Bryant. Buster IS doing reporting about Bryant. Therefore, it follows that there is no factual conflict about “interpreting” anything regarding Bryant, between Buster and Passan.

No clue about Buster’s actual sources but he’s a professional with a lot of good sources and many years of credibility regardng how to report a story. I think he knows how to report what somebody says to him and whether that source is in a position to know. That’s what journalists do. If it was a non-professional who knows a guy who knows a guy, then I’m with you.

You don’t have to have a source at the very top of the food chain to have an accurate, credible story. Not the way that journalism works when the top guy isn’t talking.

I get the notion that there’s been too much hoopla about this story given the unlikelihood of a trade. But, I don’t get the notion that there’s something inaccurate or not credible about Buster’s story.


JeffH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6154
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #623 on: November 13, 2018, 08:57:59 pm »
Fun hypothetical.

Would you trade Bryant, Quintana/Montgomery (whichever one Colorado wanted), and maybe a small "plus" for Arenado, Dahl, and Gray?

Would your answer change depending upon whether Arenado signed a "Cubs friendly" extension?

Ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8430
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #624 on: November 13, 2018, 09:14:42 pm »
Twitter.

Still waiting for someone to dispel the information in the piece, that the Cubs have communicated to other teams they are prepared to listen to offers for Bryant -- and that's a shift from previous offseasons, not some general GM operating philosophy.

Reb - I'm not trying to be difficult here, but it isn't clear to me that this is any change from the past. "Communicated to other teams" isn't so far as I know how Olney characterized this "news."  If other teams have asked whether the Cubs would be willing to discuss Bryant, and Theo failed to say "no," then Olney's specific statement that"the Cubs have indicated to other teams they are willing to discuss trade proposals for almost all of the players on their roster, including Bryant" 'would both be accurate, and not necessarily represent a change from the past.

Did Olney specifically claim that there was a change in position?  Do we know that Theo has refused to even listen to interest in Bryant in the past.  It's a serious question, as I have no way of knowing one way or the other.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 09:23:59 pm by Ron »

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #625 on: November 13, 2018, 09:23:46 pm »
Reb - I'm not trying to be difficult here, but it isn't clear to me that this is any change from the past. Did Olney specifically claim this?  Do we know that Theo has refused to even listen to interest in Bryant in the past.  It's a serious question, as I have no way of knowing one way or the other.

Buster says a “shift from previous offseasons.”

Ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8430
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #626 on: November 13, 2018, 09:24:51 pm »
Buster says a “shift from previous offseasons.”

OK. Thanks.

guest61

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #627 on: November 13, 2018, 09:24:55 pm »
I'd do it if Arenado signed an extension.

I read a story a week or so ago that said the Cubs coveted Arenado and favored waiting on him over Harper or Machado.

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5086
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #628 on: November 13, 2018, 09:56:49 pm »
Ron- One more on Twitter/Facebook:

Bruce Levine (to Buster):

The question is who would trade real market value for a player who is coming off a shoulder injury and missed 70 games.

Buster (to Levine):

Guess you'll never know unless you encourage other teams to make offers, if interested. Which is what they've done.

As an aside, the notion that silence by some other national reporters about Buster's report is somehow a refutation of Buster's report is misplaced. Lot of reasons why that might happen:   they have nothing to add or subtract from Buster's report; or Buster has different sources or maybe they don't think it's worth reporting about in the first place, or other reasons.  And Mooney doesn't really contradict anything in Buster's story factually, as Buster never said Bryant will or won't be traded. 


CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17347
Re: Cubs in '19
« Reply #629 on: November 13, 2018, 09:58:43 pm »
So, Passan is not doing any reporting so far about Bryant. Buster IS doing reporting about Bryant. Therefore, it follows that there is no factual conflict about “interpreting” anything regarding Bryant, between Buster and Passan.

No clue about Buster’s actual sources but he’s a professional with a lot of good sources and many years of credibility regardng how to report a story. I think he knows how to report what somebody says to him and whether that source is in a position to know. That’s what journalists do. If it was a non-professional who knows a guy who knows a guy, then I’m with you.

You don’t have to have a source at the very top of the food chain to have an accurate, credible story. Not the way that journalism works when the top guy isn’t talking.

I get the notion that there’s been too much hoopla about this story given the unlikelihood of a trade. But, I don’t get the notion that there’s something inaccurate or not credible about Buster’s story.



IF the Cubs were actively listening on Bryant it would be a much bigger story.  Passan, Heyman, Nightengale would all be writing and tweeting about it.  The local Cub reporters would be going nuts. 

The non-professional guy with an acutal source might have better info.  Reporters aren't getting a blow by blow account of trade talks.  They are getting bits and pieces and they are getting it from people down the food chain. 

To tag onto a later post it would be more accurate to say another team(s) believe the Cubs have a change in their approach to talks about Bryant.  As no Cub source has deviated from we have no untouchables.