Sox Withdrew Offer to Bay in July Because of MRI

[a700hitter]

Leaked? They weren't a secret' date=' Bay openly admits that the Red Sox seem to believe his MRI's show some damage. Who's to say Bay wasn't the source who told Gammons what happened?[/quote']The Sox MRI was not privileged as I have pointed out several times before, but Bay most definitely didn't leak the MRI information. He responded to the leak putting the Sox in an awkward situation because they can't address the other (Bay's)Doctors reports. Those are subject to privacy.

[Imperial59]

Jacko, the idea that the Red Sox somehow leaked privileged information by saying that Bay failed the team physical is utterly ridiculous. This kind of stuff happens ALL THE TIME.

 

Where was your outrage when it was made public that a prospect in the Halladay deal failed his physical? Team physicals aren't privileged medical information.

[example1]

The results of his MRI were leaked.

 

Can you prove that it was the Red Sox who released this information? It wasnt a lab tech, somebody who types dictation for the doctor, one of Bay's friends or somebody who knew the 3rd doctor who checked Bay's knees? You've checked these sources? You asked Gammons?

 

I love it. You and a700 are sure that your powers of deduction have squarely pointed the finger at the Sox FO because it wouldn't be in anyone else's interest to do so. For you, this fits into a narrative about the Sox trashing every notable FA who comes out of the there, so despite facts you will point your conjecture in that direction. That's fine, but you need to realize its different from proof.

[a700hitter]

Jacko, the idea that the Red Sox somehow leaked privileged information by saying that Bay failed the team physical is utterly ridiculous. This kind of stuff happens ALL THE TIME.

 

Where was your outrage when it was made public that a prospect in the Halladay deal failed his physical? Team physicals aren't privileged medical information.

They did leak the information, but it was not a violation. Have either of you been reading this thread or are you too busy responding to each other? Jacko has been trolling and you are taking his idiotic bait.

[Spudboy]

Lol.

 

The guy is a Met.

 

I don't care anymore.

[a700hitter]

Can you prove that it was the Red Sox who released this information? It wasnt a lab tech, somebody who types dictation for the doctor, one of Bay's friends or somebody who knew the 3rd doctor who checked Bay's knees? You've checked these sources? You asked Gammons?

 

I love it. You and a700 are sure that your powers of deduction have squarely pointed the finger at the Sox FO because it wouldn't be in anyone else's interest to do so. For you, this fits into a narrative about the Sox trashing every notable FA who comes out of the there, so despite facts you will point your conjecture in that direction. That's fine, but you need to realize its different from proof.

A lab tech? You are kidding right. They are not allowed to even read the results, nor would they have any knowledge of the Red Sox doctors' opinion and reports. You are reaching, and for what I don't know. What and who do you think you are protecting with such far-fetched theories? You just are completely denying the only possible source of the leak-- the Red Sox. I don't know who in the Red Sox organization leaked it. I don't think it was Theo. I'll give you that, because he is not the Media Relations guy. They kept it a secret for 6 months and let it out after he signed.

[Imperial59]

They did leak the information' date=' but it was not a violation. Have either of you been reading this thread or are you too busy responding to each other? Jacko has been trolling and you are taking his idiotic bait.[/quote']

 

No one knows whether or not it was the Red Sox that told Gammon that Bay failed his physical. And I never said they didn't leak the information, because no one knows if it was them or not. My exact words were that they didn't leak

privileged information

because

team physicals aren't privileged medical information.

[jacksonianmarch]

A lab tech? Wow, I missed that one. Find me a lab tech who can read subtle MRI findings. I dare you

[example1]

You still have not answered the question why they would chose this time to release it.

Saying that it was just "a brief comment" by Gammons does not negate the fact that his source for the brief comment was almost certainly the FO, which still leaves us with the question why the FO divulged this information now, when they were able to keep it private for 6 months.

 

Read this paragraph again. You use the words "almost certainly" but show nothing to prove it. You dont prove that it was the FO. You don't prove that if it was the FO it was anyone with authority in the FO or an intentional/organizational decision, rather than a maverick with a big mouth. Your belief that the Sox FO spends considerable energy spinning the details of departing FAs has colored your view of the facts.

 

Your story is plausible but you admit there is doubt because you are deducing what happened, rather than knowing.

 

As far as why they waited until now, I don't feel I need to answer that since I disagree with the premise of the question. If the Sox didn't release the information officially then they haven't changed their approach from the previous 6 months.

 

I don't know why you bring up Theo. No one else has, and as far as I know, he is not the only person working in the FO. He is not the head of their media relations, so I don't know how he enters this conversation other than your cultish Theo thing.

 

If there were a pattern of tarnishing departing FAs and Theo didn't want it to happen, it would stop. Organizational discipline is not a problem for this FO. You know this.

 

BTW: The Sox are not happy with Bay's response to their leaked information, but they are afraid to go he-said, she-said, because they are concerned about possible liability for violating Bay's HIPPA privacy rights. From today's Boston Globe:

 

 

 

Bay turned the public relations table on them a bit with his response, and now their hands are tied a bit.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2010/01/24/protection_has_become_part_of_the_package/

 

The Sox don't discuss negotiations as a general rule. Their silence in this case is not indicative of having released the first part of the story.

[a700hitter]

A lab tech? Wow' date=' I missed that one. Find me a lab tech who can read subtle MRI findings. I dare you[/quote']You are just trolling on this issue. What happened here was obvious, except to Example. There was no HIPPA violation by the Sox. However, you and I know that if they discuss the reports of Bay's Doctors they will be in dangerous territory and could be in violation, which is why they are not countering Bay's response.

[a700hitter]

Read this paragraph again. You use the words "almost certainly" but show nothing to prove it. You dont prove that it was the FO. You don't prove that if it was the FO it was anyone with authority in the FO or an intentional/organizational decision' date=' rather than a maverick with a big mouth. Your belief that the Sox FO spends considerable energy spinning the details of [i']departing FAs[/i] has colored your view of the facts.

 

Your story is plausible but you admit there is doubt because you are deducing what happened, rather than knowing.

 

As far as why they waited until now, I don't feel I need to answer that since I disagree with the premise of the question. If the Sox didn't release the information officially then they haven't changed their approach from the previous 6 months.

 

 

 

If there were a pattern of tarnishing departing FAs and Theo didn't want it to happen, it would stop. Organizational discipline is not a problem for this FO. You know this.

 

 

 

The Sox don't discuss negotiations as a general rule. Their silence in this case is not indicative of having released the first part of the story.

There is no other plausible explanation. Were you an O.J. juror?

[Imperial59]

You just are completely denying the only possible source of the leak-- the Red Sox. I don't know who in the Red Sox organization leaked it. I don't think it was Theo. I'll give you that' date=' because he is not the Media Relations guy. They kept it a secret for 6 months and let it out after he signed.[/quote']

 

If we're reasonable about this, the Sox weren't the only possible source of the information to Gammons. They may be the most likely, but no one actually knows how Gammons got the information. And it's not like the information was a secret that the Sox were going to keep if they signed Bay. It probably would have come out if he signed or not, just like information about Drew's shoulder came out after he signed.

[Imperial59]

A lab tech? Wow' date=' I missed that one. Find me a lab tech who can read subtle MRI findings. I dare you[/quote']

 

Jacko's a nurse, he would know.

[a700hitter]

You're in denial if you think the Red Sox were the only possible source of the information to Gammons or if you think the information was a secret. It would have come out if he signed or not. Just like information about Drew's shoulder came out after he signed.

The fact is that the information was not made public for 6 months, so it was a secret for 6 months. Bay said in his interview that Theo was concerned that if it got out it would hurt Bay in his negotiations with other teams. In January, the information which had been kept from the public for 6 months, became public. Curious timing. Who other than the Sox would have wanted this to become public. It would only hurt the Mets. Bay wouldn't want to piss off his new team by releasing it. So, who could have benefited from releasing the info?

[jacksonianmarch]

logic isnt his strong suit

[Dojji]

The fact is that the information was not made public for 6 months' date=' so it was a secret for 6 months. Bay said in his interview that Theo was concerned that if it got out it would hurt Bay in his negotiations with other teams. In January, the information which had been kept from the public for 6 months, became public. Curious timing. Who other than the Sox would have wanted this to become public. It would only hurt the Mets. Bay wouldn't want to piss off his new team by releasing it. So, who could have benefited from releasing the info?[/quote']

 

Disregarding the fact that we have no evidence at all that the Sox even put this information out, there's nothing in particular about this timing that is curious -- the facts made it to the media not long after the point where it would do little damage to any of the parties involved, should this info appear in the media. Once Bay had his contract there was simply no reason to hold it out of the papers anymore. Bay had his contract at that point, and if the Mets didn't know already about Bay's medical issues, they only have themselves to blame. The worst case scenario involved a bit of personal embarrassment for one or more of Theo, Minaya or Bay's agent, and all of them took that risk with the decisions they made this offseason anyway.

 

The ONLY reason to even hold a witch hunt over this is disappointment that Jason Bay is no longer a Boston Red Sox, and that issue was decided WELL before anything was released to the public. In fact the info was likely held back specifically to AVOID interfering with Bay's hunt for a contract, DESPITE the possibility that revealing it may have helped deter other suitors and bring Bay's price down. Which when you think of it, is a case or "erring on the side of classy" which I wish more teams emulated.

[a700hitter]

Disregarding the fact that we have no evidence at all that the Sox even put this information out' date=' there's nothing in particular about this timing that is curious -- the facts made it to the media not long after the point where it would do little damage to any of the parties involved, should this info appear in the media. Bay had his contract at that point, and if the Mets didn't know already about Bay's medical issues, they only have themselves to blame.[/quote']So who had the motive to leak it? Did it crawl out of someone's desk drawer by itself and fax itself to Gammons?

[jacksonianmarch]

a700, you might be the only red sox fan with levity on this site. Logic people.

[Imperial59]

The fact is that the information was not made public for 6 months' date=' so it was a secret for 6 months. Bay said in his interview that Theo was concerned that if it got out it would hurt Bay in his negotiations with other teams. In January, the information which had been kept from the public for 6 months, became public. Curious timing. Who other than the Sox would have wanted this to become public. It would only hurt the Mets. Bay wouldn't want to piss off his new team by releasing it. So, who could have benefited from releasing the info?[/quote']

 

It sounds like the Sox did Bay a favor by making sure the information didn't become public until after he signed so as not to hurt his signing value.

[jacksonianmarch]

a700 brought up the why though. If Bay lost money due to that disclosure, they could have been liable for his lost wages

[Imperial59]

So who had the motive to leak it? Did it crawl out of someone's desk draw by itself and fax it to Gammons?

 

Why do the Sox have to have a motive to release non-privileged information? They release information about a player's health when they do sign the player as well. Drew's shoulder issues were made public when he signed, Schilling's weight clauses were made public as well. The only one who has a motive to release it is Gammons because it gives him a story.

[Spudboy]

You are just trolling on this issue[/b]. What happened here was obvious' date=' except to Example. There was no HIPPA violation by the Sox. However, you and I know that if they discuss the reports of Bay's Doctors they will be in dangerous territory and could be in violation, which is why they are not countering Bay's response.[/quote']

 

 

 

a700' date=' you might be the only red sox fan with levity on this site. Logic people.[/quote']

 

Obviously, he is.

[Imperial59]

a700 brought up the why though. If Bay lost money due to that disclosure' date=' they could have been liable for his lost wages[/b']

 

That's as much bull as when you claimed the Sox violated HIPPA. You're just sensationalizing what actually happened at this point. You've thrown any resemblance of logic or objectivity right out the window.

[jacksonianmarch]

Really? Are you trying to argue logic here, cause hiding your head in the sand and ignoring the obvious isnt logical

[a700hitter]

It sounds like the Sox did Bay a favor by making sure the information didn't become public until after he signed so as not to hurt his signing value.

As I pointed out in prior posts, they had to be careful not to make the info public. If they did and teams backed away from Bay, they could have been facing a huge lawsuit. Yes, they did Bay a favor, but it was also in the Red Sox best interests. I never asserted that the Sox were trying to damage Bay with this information. I asserted that after he signed and it couldn't have a negative effect on Bay it was leaked. IMO it was leaked as an explanation to the fans why they didn't re-sign him. It was the Red Sox putting their spin on the story. It happens all the time-- business as usual. I don't know why this would surprise anyone.

[jacksonianmarch]

BUT THE RED SAWX DONT HAVE A SPIN MUCHINE!!

[a700hitter]

The only one who has a motive to release it is Gammons because it gives him a story.

Someone had to give the story to Gammons. That was the leak. It didn't come to him out of thin air.

[Imperial59]

As I pointed out in prior posts' date=' they had to be careful not to make the info public. If they did and teams backed away from Bay, they could have been facing a huge lawsuit.[/quote']

 

What would they be charged with? Realeasing factual, non-privileged information? Hurting his feelings? Being a bully?

[Spudboy]

As I pointed out in prior posts' date=' they had to be careful not to make the info public. If they did and teams backed away from Bay, they could have been facing a huge lawsuit. Yes, they did Bay a favor, but it was also in the Red Sox best interests. I never asserted that the Sox were trying to damage Bay with this information. I asserted that after he signed and it couldn't have a negative effect on Bay it was leaked. [b']IMO it was leaked as an explanation to the fans why they didn't re-sign him. It was the Red Sox putting their spin on the story. It happens all the time-- business as usual.[/b] I don't know why this would surprise anyone.

 

Interesting observation;)

[Imperial59]

a700' date=' you might be the only red sox fan with levity on this site. Logic people.[/quote']

 

Really? Are you trying to argue logic here' date=' cause hiding your head in the sand and ignoring the obvious isnt logical[/quote']

 

 

BUT THE RED SAWX DONT HAVE A SPIN MUCHINE!!

 

And this is why people call you a troll.