Sox in on Marcell Ozuna? I mean, maybe. Or not.

[caulfield12]

In the end, this "teasing" of fee-based sites is always going to be piss people off, no way around it.

Just like charging a fee for SoxTalk, for example, to provide a higher quality product, more paid/compensated writers, etc.  You'd find half would appreciate it and support the idea...and you'd also lose the other 50% who would be turned off.

It's likely a game of driving traffic to his site, at least partially (assuming it's his SECOND job or hobby and not primary source of income).

If he gives those "nuggets of wisdom" away for free, then why would someone pay a subscription to such content?

Granted, there's always going to be posters across all sports message boards who want to take that paywall content...bring it to other sites, or maybe they even want to claim it as their own...making them "board experts" dispensing wisdom to the masses.

 

 

[Balta1701]

17 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

I still don’t see the problem.  It’s a part of the game.  And did they not damage their relationship with Joc anyways?  He now knows that the Dodgers were willing to trade him and apparently tried to...

It was RH covering his tail with a BS statement that made no sense but was still enough to leave some people satisfied. 

Which makes one wonder how many other tail-covering-statements might have been similarly BS. (Some of their statements about money to Machado? The supposed higher offer to Wheeler maybe?)

[maloney.adam]

After reading all the tweets and reports something isn’t adding up. It may be that Ozuna’s side doesn’t want to leak anything until it becomes official hence why the media and all these insiders don’t know anything about it yet. Nobody from Ozuna’s side is telling them anything so they have no choice to say nothing is imminent or the reports from DR are false. Who knows. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by maloney.adam

[Chicago White Sox]

41 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

I seem to remember some of the names were Carson Fulmer, Aaron Bummer, and Bryce Bush.

I still don’t understand how a leak of the trade rumor could cause the trade to fall through.

You play fantasy football?  Think about that trade each year in your league where you go “Holy fuck had I known I would have topped that”.  Basically word got out, the Dodgers heard from some other teams, and they quickly had second thoughts about the Sox’s offer.

[Moan4Yoan]

18 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You play fantasy football?  Think about that trade each year in your league where you go “Holy fuck had I known I would have topped that”.  Basically word got out, the Dodgers heard from some other teams, and they quickly had second thoughts about the Sox’s offer.

Wouldn’t that scenario only make sense had Joc then been traded to another team that topped the Sox offer?  The Dodgers ended up keeping him.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Moan4Yoan

[Chicago White Sox]

5 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

Wouldn’t that scenario only make sense had Joc then been traded to another team that topped the Sox offer?  The Dodgers ended up keeping him.

Not necessarily, in this case I think they realized they weren’t getting full value for Joc and decided to hold off.

[caulfield12]

In retrospect, getting Bummer for 2 years of Pederson wasn't going to be such a great deal for the Dodgers.

Bummer might have ended up recording 5-6 fWAR with the Dodgers, but they would have had to replace that outfield production...and it usually cheaper to find a couple of veteran from the LH side rather than giving up core pieces on the position side via trade.

UNLESS they had a magical way to unearth Fulmer's "potential," but that train has long left the station.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

In the end, this "teasing" of fee-based sites is always going to be piss people off, no way around it.

Just like charging a fee for SoxTalk, for example, to provide a higher quality product, more paid/compensated writers, etc.  You'd find half would appreciate it and support the idea...and you'd also lose the other 50% who would be turned off.

It's likely a game of driving traffic to his site, at least partially (assuming it's his SECOND job or hobby and not primary source of income).

If he gives those "nuggets of wisdom" away for free, then why would someone pay a subscription to such content?

Granted, there's always going to be posters across all sports message boards who want to take that paywall content...bring it to other sites, or maybe they even want to claim it as their own...making them "board experts" dispensing wisdom to the masses.

 

 

I don't read Barstool, but assuming that's what you're referring to, they don't have a paywall as far as I know. Obviously traffic matters though. So if he doesn't want to be vague on a "free forum", he can be vague on post on Barstool and then post the link here to generate 100+ or whatever clicks.

It's really not that serious. But either way, I just hope this Winter Meetings is excited and we see a bit of chaos. Fun to think about all the action we aren't hearing about.

[smellysox]

17 minutes ago, ChiliIrishHammock24 said:

I don't read Barstool, but assuming that's what you're referring to, they don't have a paywall as far as I know. Obviously traffic matters though. So if he doesn't want to be vague on a "free forum", he can be vague on post on Barstool and then post the link here to generate 100+ or whatever clicks.

It's really not that serious. But either way, I just hope this Winter Meetings is excited and we see a bit of chaos. Fun to think about all the action we aren't hearing about.

I hope so too! I love this time of year. Everytime I get a yahoo sports update or bleacher report updates across my phone I start thinking that the Sox have made a move!

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

3 minutes ago, smellysox said:

I hope so too! I love this time of year. Everytime I get a yahoo sports update or bleacher report updates across my phone I start thinking that the Sox have made a move!

I used to actually take Monday through Wednesday off work for the winter meetings every year. Last year was the first year that I didn't do it because they had become stale over the last couple years prior.

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, ChiliIrishHammock24 said:

I used to actually take Monday through Wednesday off work for the winter meetings every year. Last year was the first year that I didn't do it because they had become stale over the last couple years prior.

You're going to get a Greg775 Optimistic Sox Fan Certificate (copyright pending) for that level of dedication.

(Bearer entitled to one large soft drink, one Jumbo hot dog and a souvenir Sox mini-pennant.)

Edited December 9, 2019 by caulfield12

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

35 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

You're going to get a Greg775 Optimistic Sox Fan Certificate (copyright pending) for that level of dedication.

(Bearer entitled to one large soft drink, one Jumbo hot dog and a souvenir Sox mini-pennant.)

I used to take it off to follow all the MLB transactions, not just the Sox. Wall to wall coverage. Inject it in to my veins.

[bmags]

6 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Not necessarily, in this case I think they realized they weren’t getting full value for Joc and decided to hold off.

Andrew Friedman is one of the best GMs in the league. 

[Chicago White Sox]

2 minutes ago, bmags said:

Andrew Friedman is one of the best GMs in the league. 

Which implies what?  That he’s in capable of having second thoughts?

Edited December 9, 2019 by Chicago White Sox

[Bob Sacamano]

3 hours ago, ChiliIrishHammock24 said:

I used to take it off to follow all the MLB transactions, not just the Sox. Wall to wall coverage. Inject it in to my veins.

Love that I work on a computer all day. Getting paid to read rumors all day is the way to go.

[bmags]

32 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Which implies what?  That he’s in capable of having second thoughts?

The odds of him being that far off on evaluating his own players value is far more unlikely than rick Hahn blaming Sox fans for things (which he does all the time).

[Balta1701]

9 minutes ago, bmags said:

The odds of him being that far off on evaluating his own players value is far more unlikely than rick Hahn blaming Sox fans for things (which he does all the time).

"I'm employed as the Dodgers GM. I've made 2 world series appearances in 3 years and my teams keep winning 100 games, and we are doing it without paying the luxury tax any more."

"Sir, twitter is telling us that the leaked deal with the White Sox is bad and we shouldn't do it."

"What? I never would have thought of that. How on Earth could we let this happen? Quick, ask the magic 8 ball if this deal is fair or not, that's how we make all other personnel decisions but maybe a twitter poll should be added".

[Chicago White Sox]

5 minutes ago, bmags said:

The odds of him being that far off on evaluating his own players value is far more unlikely than rick Hahn blaming Sox fans for things (which he does all the time).

Valuation is completely subjective and GMs over/under value players all the time.  It doesn’t take a large gap in valuation to rethink a potential trade.

[Chicago White Sox]

7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

"I'm employed as the Dodgers GM. I've made 2 world series appearances in 3 years and my teams keep winning 100 games, and we are doing it without paying the luxury tax any more."

"Sir, twitter is telling us that the leaked deal with the White Sox is bad and we shouldn't do it."

"What? I never would have thought of that. How on Earth could we let this happen? Quick, ask the magic 8 ball if this deal is fair or not, that's how we make all other personnel decisions but maybe a twitter poll should be added".

Lol...Balta you really are something.  I’m going to tell you right now that the #1 fear when doing any real life business deal is word getting out.  Not only because it can bring new competitors to the table, but also because it can make light of new info.  When doing valuation, all it takes is one variable changing to blow up the entire calculus.  Say the Indians found out about a possible Joc trade and had a scout who knew one of the players had injury or character concerns.  If the Dodgers are made aware of that info, suddenly the package isn’t worth what it once was.  The fact you think this is about Twitter reactions shows a compete lack of business acumen.

[Dick Allen]

6 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Lol...Balta you really are something.  I’m going to tell you right now that the #1 fear when doing any real life business deal is word getting out.  Not only because it can bring new competitors to the table, but also because it can make light of new info.  When doing valuation, all it takes is one variable changing to blow up the entire calculus.  Say the Indians found out about a possible Joc trade and had a scout who knew one of the players had injury or character concerns.  If the Dodgers are made aware of that info, suddenly the package isn’t worth what it once was.  The fact you think this is about Twitter reactions shows a compete lack of business acumen.

One thing to keep in mind is if the leak made the Dodgers walk away, it came from the White Sox. So if they want to blame the leak and for not getting a deal done, they have only themselves to blame.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 minute ago, Dick Allen said:

One thing to keep in mind is if the leak made the Dodgers walk away, it came from the White Sox. So if they want to blame the leak and for not getting a deal done, they have only themselves to blame.

And that’s a totally fair take, just trying to explain how a leak could blow up a deal.

[SCCWS]

8 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

One thing to keep in mind is if the leak made the Dodgers walk away, it came from the White Sox. So if they want to blame the leak and for not getting a deal done, they have only themselves to blame.

Couldn't the agent also be a possibility?

[bmags]

24 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Lol...Balta you really are something.  I’m going to tell you right now that the #1 fear when doing any real life business deal is word getting out.  Not only because it can bring new competitors to the table, but also because it can make light of new info.  When doing valuation, all it takes is one variable changing to blow up the entire calculus.  Say the Indians found out about a possible Joc trade and had a scout who knew one of the players had injury or character concerns.  If the Dodgers are made aware of that info, suddenly the package isn’t worth what it once was.  The fact you think this is about Twitter reactions shows a compete lack of business acumen.

And the white Sox knee the Indians traded information in this scenario...how.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

8 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Because, like most people with sources, whether real or not, flaunting it gets them attention.

And rightly he wants that attention to go to barstool not here. He owes us nothing. It's just silly expecting him to somehow treat Soxtalk better than the rest of the internet.

[bmags]

44 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Valuation is completely subjective and GMs over/under value players all the time.  It doesn’t take a large gap in valuation to rethink a potential trade.

It’s subjective...but there is also a process around it and owned within the franchise. Friedman gets outside info and overrules his own massive team below him?