Joc Pederson: 💤💤​​​​​​​💤​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

[GenericUserName]

What, does Hahn want credit for being at the table again? Getting something 90% finished?

Because the way I see it, this is just another instance of them not being able to finish on something. If the deal fell through because of a leak, who's fault is that? A random kid on the internet or your FO that let that info out?

[Chicago White Sox]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

Then what right does little Ricky have to be pissed if he was trying to rip another team off and they got wise to his act?

Is this a serious post?  Dude potentially lost a deal because it leaked out on Twitter and he can’t be mad because it was too one-sided?

[Balta1701]

8 minutes ago, SoxAce said:

Yea I could see Colletti being pretty pissed off.

The one situation I could understand I guess is the Dodgers saying "We need 24 hours to talk to the Marlins about Realmuto and we need you to keep this quiet" and the White Sox leaked it anyway, that would deservedly piss off the Dodgers to the point of a punitive response to the White Sox's unprofessional behavior.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 minute ago, GenericUserName said:

What, does Hahn want credit for being at the table again? Getting something 90% finished?

Because the way I see it, this is just another instance of them not being able to finish on something. If the deal fell through because of a leak, who's fault is that? A random kid on the internet or your FO that let that info out?

He was asked a question from Garfein about all the Twitter leaks this offseason and how that impacted them.  He said most of the leaks weren’t true, but they can’t dispute them without indicating which ones are true.  He then said leaks have impacted multiple deals in the past, including one this offseason.  I don’t think he wants anything other than to make it clear the Sox do much better when operating under the radar.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Is this a serious post?  Dude potentially lost a deal because it leaked out on Twitter and he can’t be mad because it was too one-sided?

Is "The Dodgers are normally idiots but 'came to their senses when it leaked out on twitter'" any more serious? 

[Balta1701]

2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

He was asked a question from Garfein about all the Twitter leaks this offseason and how that impacted them.  He said most of the leaks weren’t true, but they can’t dispute them without indicating which ones are true.  He then said leaks have impacted multiple deals in the past, including one this offseason.  I don’t think he wants anything other than to make it clear the Sox do much better when operating under the radar.

Did he just say "impacted one" or did he say more specifically that the team came back with a higher ask in a trade negotiation? Because "leaks impacting one deal" could be consistent with them thinking they had Machado for a bargain and the Padres coming in once they realized how weak the Machado offers were.

[Chicago White Sox]

9 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Is "The Dodgers are normally idiots but 'came to their senses when it leaked out on twitter'" any more serious? 

Who is calling them idiots?  Maybe the Dodgers were simply high on Fulmer and thought they could return him to 1st round status?  We took a broken Gavin Floyd and a broken Lucas Giolito as centerpieces in major trades.  I really don’t think it’s that far-fetched that teams reached out to the Dodgers after the leak and their front office decided the framework they agreed to wasn’t enough and maybe they had valued Carson too highly.

[elrockinMT]

9 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Is "The Dodgers are normally idiots but 'came to their senses when it leaked out on twitter'" any more serious? 

Because we all know business is conducted through anonymous sources and/or Twitter  

[Chicago White Sox]

6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Did he just say "impacted one" or did he say more specifically that the team came back with a higher ask in a trade negotiation? Because "leaks impacting one deal" could be consistent with them thinking they had Machado for a bargain and the Padres coming in once they realized how weak the Machado offers were.

He specifically mentioned he had a framework for a trade agreed to and that after the leak came out the other GM increased his ask.  He implied that typically this is the result of other GMs entering the mix and causing the price to change.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Who is calling them idiots?  Maybe the Dodgers were simply high on Fulmer and thought they could return him to 1st round status?  We took a broken Gavin Floyd and a broken Lucas Giolito as centerpieces in major trades.  I really don’t think it’s that far-fetched that teams reached out to the Dodgers after the leak and their front office decided the framework they agreed to wasn’t enough and maybe they had valued Carson too highly.

Then why on Earth did the Dodgers not complete one of the other deals for this player? You've just given me the "I was going to sell my car for $3000, but because I got an offer of $4000 I decided not to sell the car" nonsense. 

[CWSpalehoseCWS]

17 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Then what right does little Ricky have to be pissed if he was trying to rip another team off and they got wise to his act?

When you try to buy a car, do you counter the salesman and say, "let me give you more than that. You're being too one-sided in my favor." ? Why wouldn't he be mad if a deal fell through that he felt ultimately made the Sox a better team? I'd be pretty pissed too if something out of my control prevented me from being able to complete something.

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

When you try to buy a car, do you counter the salesman and say, "let me give you more than that. You're being too one-sided in my favor." ? Why wouldn't he be mad if a deal fell through that he felt ultimately made the Sox a better team? I'd be pretty pissed too if something out of my control prevented me from being able to complete something.

No but if the salesman got a better offer for the car from another buyer, he doesn't decide not to sell the car.

[ron883]

I've heard enough excuses out of Hahn this off-season. blaming a Twitter leak is comical. 

 

Hahn - "I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you darn kids and your mangy Twitter leak!"

[Springfield Soxfan]

Are we happy that the trade for Joc did not happen?

[Chicago White Sox]

4 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Then why on Earth did the Dodgers not complete one of the other deals for this player? You've just given me the "I was going to sell my car for $3000, but because I got an offer of $4000 I decided not to sell the car" nonsense. 

Are we actually comparing selling baseball players to selling vehicles?  

Cars are a detoriating asset and the automotive market is unrestricted with numerous buyers & sellers that allow for complete transparency on value.  Baseball players valuations are completely subjective, their markets (and valuations) are limited to / impacted by a small set of buyers and sellers, and their stocks can actually increase by holding on them.  This is an absolutely horrible comparison.

[Chicago White Sox]

6 minutes ago, ron883 said:

I've heard enough excuses out of Hahn this off-season. blaming a Twitter leak is comical. 

 

Hahn - "I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you darn kids and your mangy Twitter leak!"

I probably hate Rick Hahn more than anyone in the world right now and even I can understand the impact leaks can have on a potential trade.  This isn’t unique to just baseball either, leaks in general are dangerous for business deals.

Edited March 23, 2019 by Chicago White Sox

[Chicago White Sox]

2 minutes ago, Tony said:

Even if we were taking Hahn at his word (we shouldn’t) and he’s telling the truth the deal fell apart because of Twitter...who cares? He still didn’t get the deal done that he believed was close. He failed to execute. We can argue all day if Joc was the right fit (In my opinion it only made slight sense if they thought this team could compete for something in 2019 with Machado and other additions) but at the end of the day, Hahn tried to complete a deal, and couldn’t bring it to the finish line. I don’t want to hear excuses out of my GM in March, the same offseason where they failed at pretty much everything else. 

Read the room, Rick. 

Why shouldn’t we take his word on this?

[ron883]

Just now, Chicago White Sox said:

Why shouldn’t we take his word on this?

Tony is spot on. Whether it is the reason the trade fell through or not, enough freaking excuses after you had an all time awful off-season. 

[Balta1701]

 

5 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I probably hate Rick Hahn more than anyone in the world right now and even I can understand the impact leaks can have on a potential trade.  This isn’t unique to just baseball either, leaks in general are dangerous for business deals.

Why is the leak dangerous in this case though? The leak is only dangerous if it causes another competitive bid to appear, or if the Dodgers decide to be punitive based on some belief that the White Sox did behave appropriately. We have a good piece of evidence that better bids did not appear...because the player in the end was not traded at all, and no one is willing to take on the idea that the White Sox organization is leaking like a sieve these days and the other team is punishing them for that unprofessional behavior.

So somehow the way to let little Ricky off the hook in this case is the idea that he had hypnotized the Dodgers into a bad deal and seeing it reported on Twitter broke the spell. 

[Chicago White Sox]

Just now, ron883 said:

Tony is spot on. Whether it is the reason the trade fell through or not, enough freaking excuses after you had an all time awful off-season. 

Lol...did you or Tony even listen to the interview?  He wasn’t making excuses, he was answering a question.  FWIW, Hahn thinks they had a great offseason other than the Machado miss (which I fully disagree with).

[Dick Allen]

If the Dodgers didn’t do the trade because it was leaked, wouldn’t that make the White Sox the leakers? So apparently RH should have a problem with his own house.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

 

Why is the leak dangerous in this case though? The leak is only dangerous if it causes another competitive bid to appear, or if the Dodgers decide to be punitive based on some belief that the White Sox did behave appropriately. We have a good piece of evidence that better bids did not appear...because the player in the end was not traded at all, and no one is willing to take on the idea that the White Sox organization is leaking like a sieve these days and the other team is punishing them for that unprofessional behavior.

So somehow the way to let little Ricky off the hook in this case is the idea that he had hypnotized the Dodgers into a bad deal and seeing it reported on Twitter broke the spell. 

You make everything way too black and white.  Just because the Dodgers didn’t take a deal now, does not mean they don’t plan on trading him at some point in the future.  Based on the calls they received after the leak, the Dodgers may have reason to believe that they’ll have a much bigger market come June or July.

Also, the White Sox had a deal in place for Jose Quintana in Decemeber of 2016, saw it fall through, and decided to wait seven months before ultimately dealing him.  These guys aren’t selling assets that are automatically depreciating in value, sometimes holding for a period of time is the best course of action.

[Balta1701]

2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

If the Dodgers didn’t do the trade because it was leaked, wouldn’t that make the White Sox the leakers? So apparently RH should have a problem with his own house.

Nothing that makes the White Sox look bad can possibly be right. Rick Hahn was conducting business correctly in every way. The Dodgers had to leak the deal to WhiteSoxDave and others, and when they did that the Dodgers increased their ask vindictively because that totally makes sense, and that just left Rick Hahn nothing he could do.

[Balta1701]

2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You make everything way too black and white.  Just because the Dodgers didn’t take a deal now, does not mean they don’t plan on trading him at some point in the future.  Based on the calls they received after the leak, the Dodgers may have reason to believe that they’ll have a much bigger market come June or July.

Also, the White Sox had a deal in place for Jose Quintana in Decemeber of 2016, saw it fall through, and decided to wait seven months before ultimately dealing him.  These guys aren’t selling assets that are automatically depreciating in value, sometimes holding for a period of time is the best course of action.

Really, the Dodgers think he might have a much bigger market come June and July and yeah that makes sense for a competitive team, to give up an asset to one of their competing teams in the middle of the season? This is nonsense. The Dodgers are not this dumb.

[Chicago White Sox]

7 minutes ago, Tony said:

Because I believe they completely misread the Machado situation and believed they were going to be the power players during negotiations. No one believed it would go that long, and the Sox clearly had some dumb idea they were going the highest bidder. The same Rick Hahn told reporters in January “We have a few more moves we’d really like to make, not just one.”

After Machado didn’t happen, everything changed. I believe that included acquiring Joc. The Sox finally realized they are going to be BAD in 2019 and probably pretty bad in 2020, and Joc didn’t really make sense with 2-3 another additions. 

You want to take Rick at his word, go nuts. I don’t buy it. 

Tony, you seem like a pretty smart guy, but this is straight up a ridiculous post that’s clearly driven by your anger over the Machado trade.  There is no doubt in my mind that Hahn, KW, & Jerry fucked up when it came to Machado and that could have long-term repercussions to the franchise (I literally b**** about this daily).  That being said, them being incompetent does not mean they are disingenuous.  There is zero reason for Hahn to lie here, he has no track record of lying, and an agreed upon Joc deal was hinted at (or outright stated) by multiple Sox insiders.  I find it pretty wild so many people are unwilling to accept this, as I’m sure people back out of deals all the time for all sorts of reasons.