Adam Lind - Not on waivers according to BlueJays.com

baulderdash77 · Post #1 » by **baulderdash77** » Thu May 24, 2012 2:34 am

I guess so much for Wilner's source. Lind is not on waivers.

Contrary to a series of online reports last week, as of Wednesday there were no indications that the Blue Jays placed veteran first baseman Adam Lind on outright waivers.

Reports surfaced on May 18 that Lind had been placed on irrevocable waivers one day after being optioned to Triple-A Las Vegas. However, a baseball source on Wednesday said there is no evidence of that happening.

http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/news/ar ... r&c_id=tor

Post #2 » by **LittleOzzy** » Thu May 24, 2012 2:45 am

Sad that it took this long for someone to find out what was happening.

Do journalists even use phones anymore or is it all just twitter?

baulderdash77 · Post #3 » by **baulderdash77** » Thu May 24, 2012 2:49 am

LittleOzzy wrote:Sad that it took this long for someone to find out what was happening.

Do journalists even use phones anymore or is it all just twitter?

Reminds me of the Twitter reports that the Jays won Yu Darvish. One media report (which I admit fooled me and got me excited) and suddenly everyone's reporting it.

He would have been off the 40 man roster by Monday and it too until Wednesday for the contrary report to surface.

Skin Blues · Post #4 » by **Skin Blues** » Thu May 24, 2012 10:46 am

Why do the Jays do this stuff? I understand they didn't start the rumour but why don't they release a statement saying "this rumour is false"? Obviously not for every rumour out there but for the ones that aren't inside secrets, at least. How does it hurt them to let the fans know that Lind isn't on waivers? Or that they only bid twenty bucks on Darvish? I don't get it.

Hamyltowne · Post #5 » by **Hamyltowne** » Thu May 24, 2012 10:58 am

Skin Blues wrote:... why don't they release a statement saying "this rumour is false"? Obviously not for every rumour out there... How does it hurt them to let the fans know that Lind isn't on waivers?

Maybe they saw it as a lucky opportunity to test the waters for when they eventually have to place Lind on waivers.

From what I saw over the weekend, the reaction was either apathy or outright rejoice.

satyr9 · Post #6 » by **satyr9** » Thu May 24, 2012 1:30 pm

Skin Blues wrote:Why do the Jays do this stuff? I understand they didn't start the rumour but why don't they release a statement saying "this rumour is false"? Obviously not for every rumour out there but for the ones that aren't inside secrets, at least. How does it hurt them to let the fans know that Lind isn't on waivers? Or that they only bid twenty bucks on Darvish? I don't get it.

Well, I can make up scenarios where AA can use this stuff to his advantage. Say he's got a deal on the table for another GM to think about and that GM sees that Lind's pushing through waivers, wouldn't that set his mind churning that AA has other things in the works and he better come to a decision quick? As long as he's in active negotiations with other teams, no matter how preliminary a stage, all speculation and rumourmongering can help put doubt in their mind and maybe force them to a decision they might not otherwise have made.

Now, maybe that's got nothing to do with it. Maybe it's just policy and he won't break it for any reason. It's easier to stand on principle later on something that actually matters that you won't comment on if you choose not to comment on rumours you could clear up to perhaps your own benefit previously. Say AA denied this rumour and said it was untrue, then refused to comment on the some trade rumour involving a core player in the future. Any journalist can now, kind of slimily IMO, infer that since AA denied a falsehood, his failure to comment on another rumour implies a certain legitimacy.

Now, I'm not even certain I agree with the general policy, but I can respect that there are definite angles to keeping it consistent.

Post #7 » by **LittleOzzy** » Thu May 24, 2012 4:35 pm

What I find scary is the story was reported on Sportsnet Connected.

Should they not have the ultimate connections for the right information?

Skin Blues · Post #8 » by **Skin Blues** » Thu May 24, 2012 5:08 pm

satyr9 wrote:
Skin Blues wrote:Why do the Jays do this stuff? I understand they didn't start the rumour but why don't they release a statement saying "this rumour is false"? Obviously not for every rumour out there but for the ones that aren't inside secrets, at least. How does it hurt them to let the fans know that Lind isn't on waivers? Or that they only bid twenty bucks on Darvish? I don't get it.

Well, I can make up scenarios where AA can use this stuff to his advantage. Say he's got a deal on the table for another GM to think about and that GM sees that Lind's pushing through waivers, wouldn't that set his mind churning that AA has other things in the works and he better come to a decision quick? As long as he's in active negotiations with other teams, no matter how preliminary a stage, all speculation and rumourmongering can help put doubt in their mind and maybe force them to a decision they might not otherwise have made.

Now, maybe that's got nothing to do with it. Maybe it's just policy and he won't break it for any reason. It's easier to stand on principle later on something that actually matters that you won't comment on if you choose not to comment on rumours you could clear up to perhaps your own benefit previously. Say AA denied this rumour and said it was untrue, then refused to comment on the some trade rumour involving a core player in the future. Any journalist can now, kind of slimily IMO, infer that since AA denied a falsehood, his failure to comment on another rumour implies a certain legitimacy.

Now, I'm not even certain I agree with the general policy, but I can respect that there are definite angles to keeping it consistent.

I'm sure the other GMs across the league knew that he wasn't on waivers. I realize it's not like ESPN Fantasy Baseball where you can view all players on waivers and just push the "claim" button, but they must have a way of definitively knowing who is on waivers. As opposed to submitting waiver claims to the commisioners office based on a report they saw on MLBTR. The only people that are fooled are the fans. Just like when the Darvish bidding had already ended and they still wouldn't temper expectations for over a week. If it's a policy, then it's a ridiculous one. And they respond to rumours all the time... AA is occasionally open about who and what they're looking for.

And I don't even care about this specific incident; Lind is gone as far as I'm concerned and I'm glad. It just projects an untrustworthy image where the fans are going to get into a habit of thinking their GM is lying and deceiving them. Like JP lying about BJ Ryan needing TJ surgery and then admitting it after the fact. That did a lot of damage to his reputation and trustworthiness. Right now all is well in Bluejayland, but when things go south, suddenly people start making more noise about things that irk them.

torontoaces04 · Post #9 » by **torontoaces04** » Thu May 24, 2012 5:31 pm

LittleOzzy wrote:Sad that it took this long for someone to find out what was happening.

Do journalists even use phones anymore or is it all just twitter?

SHAME. The 13-year-old twitter warrior is KING!

Attonitus · Post #10 » by **Attonitus** » Thu May 24, 2012 6:43 pm

Continuing AA's policy of not commenting on something until it's created a complete **** storm first.

Parataxis · Post #11 » by **Parataxis** » Fri May 25, 2012 1:12 am

Skin Blues wrote:Why do the Jays do this stuff? I understand they didn't start the rumour but why don't they release a statement saying "this rumour is false"?

Because at that point, you lose secrecy for other things. "This rumour is false" "That rumour is false" No comment on that third one" tends to give it away.