MLB.com Braves beat writer Mark Bowman stated earlier Monday that:
“Before the start of Friday’s game, many of the Braves players were asking about Bay. Some were under the impression that they were going to walk into the clubhouse that day and find him to be their newest teammate.
“But a proposed deal, which would have brought Bay to Atlanta in exchange for four Minor Leaguers, was killed when presented to the Pirates owners for approval.”
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette responded:
“Also yesterday, a high-level source within the Pirates emphatically rejected an account on MLB.com — reported by no other outlet — that the Pirates and Braves had agreed to a Bay-for-four-prospects trade, only to have it vetoed by the Pirates’ ownership. No aspect of it was accurate, the source said, and ownership, while informed of pending trades, has not vetoed any since team president Frank Coonelly took over last summer.” — Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, July 29, 2008
So, does MLB.com have liars working for them? Is Bowman’s story a fabrication?
Or, are the Pittsburgh Pirates so out of it one hand doesn’t know what the other hand is doing and their response has now tarnished a writer’s good name?
Or, perhaps this is nothing more than a Post-Gazette Pirates beat writer trying to protect his own credibility since he got beat to the draw, if Bowman is accurate? And, did the Post-Gazette beat writer contact a valid source within the Pirates who would even have direct knowledge? I mean, “high-level source” within the Pirates could mean anything.
It’s MLB.com’s turn to respond to their credibility beatdown.
Related posts:
Too bad this is a presidential election year or Matt Drudge would get to the bottom of this.
His motto is “the truth is out there” or is that X-files?
The MLB.com writers are the lowest rung on the reporting ladder. I’ll take DK over any of them any day.
I don’t doubt Bowman was told that by someone in the Braves front office; that doesn’t mean it was ever true.
It’s unfortunate to see this type of credibility bashing. Bowman could have identified his sources better (someone in Wheeling, a baseball executive, something), the Post-Gazette could have eased up attacking Bowman, and the Pirates could have articulated a better response. Now all three are being questioned, and rightfully so.
Bowman didn’t identify his source and only speculated on the players involved.
I see this being leaked by someone in the Braves front office to satisfy their fickle fanbase that they are “trying”.
Coming this September, a new reality theme show: Battle of the Beat Writers!
Bowman: The Braves did this yesterday
Kovawhatever: No they didn\’t
Bowman: Yes they did, don\’t talk to me like that
Kovawhatever: Biatch, I KNOW what I\’M talking about. They didn\’t
Bowman: You ignorama, ^ slap slap ^ YES THEY DID!
Kovawhatever: oh, yes! ohhwwwwww ^ chop chop ^ Take THAT! no they didn\’t
Mark Bowman has always been a conservative, reliable writer so it’s not likely he would publish something without having the facts in hand.
The below is the full thing written in the post gazette…notice the last line which was omitted from this site “An Atlanta Soure Also Disputed The Report” looks like Dejan went to both teams and both denied it. Bowman doesnt mention much he is just guessing I think.
A high-level source within the Pirates emphatically rejected an account on MLB.com yesterday — reported by no other outlet — that the Pirates and Braves had agreed to a Bay-for-four-prospects trade, only to have it vetoed by the Pirates’ ownership. No aspect of it was accurate, the source said, and ownership, while informed of pending trades, has not vetoed any since team president Frank Coonelly took over last summer.
An Atlanta source also disputed the report.
This site, like any other news source, picks and chooses what they want their readers to read. Typical…
No offense, but people question your sources all the time Jake. DK made a point to ask both teams and I highly doubt that Bowman did the same. Take what you want from it, this time of year all types of stories are floated around for whatever reasons.
Trying to be fair here, there’s nothing in DK’s writing that suggests he talked to the Braves, only somebody in Atlanta. That could be his grandmother.
Bowman = Kovacevic = crap. Did the Pirates not just trade away the player Kovacevic said would be non-tendered? Both of these guys are lamers.
Was DK really calling anyone a liar? Was Bowman doing anything else than reporting something he heard, and then speculating on the 4 players the Bucs would have interest in? Doesn\\\\\\\’t seem like there is any bashing going on here between MLB.com and the PG. All DK did was ask both teams if there was any validity to what Bowman heard. The sources he accessed said that it wasn\\\\\\\’t true. Big deal. DK did what real writers do. Go to the source when he hears a rumor worth checking on. And Bowman just wrote about something he heard. Maybe the teams\\\\\\\’ sources aren\\\\\\\’t telling the truth, but DK just reported the answer he got when checking into the rumor. Doesn\\\\\\\’t seem like much of a spat to me. Just two writers doing their jobs and getting conflicting stories. Happens all the time this time of year, doesn\\\\\\\’t it?
I am a relatively new visitor to Bucco Blog, but so far am rather disappointed regarding its writers’ reliance upon their “sources.” What turns me off to most MLB reporting by the conventional media is that they are just a bunch of gossips that run with whatever franchise sources say. Blowhards like Bustner Olney and his ilk fancy themselves talent evaluators and MLB insiders because they propagate the hearsay and innuendo of front offices and tend to bend their analyses to the popular perception at any given moment. It all comes off as transparent, false, and generic. I thought Bucco Blog might be an interesting alternative, but really it is the contributors googling scouting reports and the blogosphere for information and relying on their MLB “sources,” which are not just any sources, but often “very solid sources.” So these guys on Bucco Blog have better connections than the professional print and online media? And who cares anyway, since such coverage is a sham. There is nothing alternative about this site. There isn’t any kind of new, fresh angle being pursued. This isn’t any kind of check or balance to the traditional baseball media, just a pettier version of it. I do like seeing posts from knowledgeable Pirates fans and also enjoy reading the laughably misinformed opinions of whiney locals. So that’s nice, but otherwise, who cares about a fabricated dispute between a couple of writers or what overwrought “doomsday” comments some Fox Sports reporter has to provide. Not that anyone asked my opinion, but it’s a let down.
Jake-
Seriously do the Bucs do anything you don’t attempt to pile on about? Did you not see the ‘Atlanta denies’ part also?
#13 above is correct I highly suspect your ‘sources’ are simply google and yahoo.
Ahhhh DC and Mickley – at one point I felt the same way as you too. If you stick around and read Jake long enough, you will know what you are asserting is simply not true. I hate about half of the entries posted on here, but you’re allowed to disagree.
Hate it or love it, Jake is right more often than not. Does he slant things? Sometimes. Does he truncate? Yep. Does he present a different and better perspective? Yes.
But what keeps me coming back is the statistical depth that is often presented. I know I will get flamed for saying that, but if you understand stats, you can appreciate what Jake presents. Its not always the complete picture, but it is up to the reader to recognize that.
The rumor was 100% false. We know how badly you want to rail against the Pirates beat writer, but unfortunately for you he got it right.