Griffin: Jays need to be transparent on Darvish and move on

So if not $50 million then what actually was the Jays' posted offer on Yu Darvish?

If the Jays weren't in fact close to the Rangers' reported winning bid of $51.7 million, which secondary Jays' sources at one time seemed eager to leave teed up as truth for public consumption, when given the chance to correct, then what was it?

People who claim to have inner knowledge of the final bidding are jumping in with finger-wagging certainty that the Rangers won by "a country mile" and it was "not even close". But what exactly does that mean? Even if a new number is presented as fact, is it accurate? If the posting system is working properly then the only people that should know the Jays' actual dollar offer are the Jays and several people at the Commissioner's Office. Only the winning bid is announced. It's up to the Jays to end speculation and move on.

The Jays, in the club's third year under GM Alex Anthopoulos, have had a hard and fast policy of total silence whenever it comes to speculation on anything to do with players and player acquisition. That includes refusal to confirm interest in any trades, in identifying other clubs for discussion and offers to free agents, including the Japanese star, Darvish.

It worked well for them in the cases of Roy Halladay and the Phillies, Cuban free-agents Aroldis Chapman and Adeiny Hechavarria, the contract negotiations with agent Bean Stringfellow and Jose Bautista and last January's dealing of Vernon Wells to the Angels. Wells and Halladay both appreciated the Jays' close-to-the-vest approach.

But that policy sometimes leads to reported Jays participation and in interest being exagerrated and perpetuated, in rumours not being nipped in the bud and continuing to grow. That then encourages media searching out secondary sources, subject to interpretation. There Are even top player agents that will include the Jays as being interested in their client in order to drive up the price, confident that Anthopoulos won't confirm or deny. It's always been clear that there are times when the club would benefit from total transparency. Darvish is one of those times.

On Wednesday morning, Anthopoulos had staged a 15-minute conference call with local Toronto media to say nothing. He coyly deflected questions of what had been Jays' interest in Darvish, of having made any offer at all and of the dollar amount that was reported by national sources said to be runner-up to the Rangers' reported winning bid of $51.7 million.

He must have known that being recognized as runner-up would generate fan support since he would be perceived to have made a sincere effort. In this case the speculation was helping the team's off-season image and interest. But, now, with all the denials of the $50 million bid that had been reported in multiple outlets elsewhere before being confirmed here, angles offered about the plucky Jays being competitive for Darvish, the previous fan and media support is turning to frustration and anger at being played. Are the Jays trying to take unwarranted credit for aggressiveness to curry public support?

It was reported early in the process from important sports souces around baseball since the bidding on Darvish had closed the week before that the Jays were in at $40-50 million and that they were considered front-runners, along with the Rangers. Those sources of a rich Jays offer included the New York Post, the Dallas Morning News, ESPN.com and CBS Sports, among others. Right up until the moment the Hakkaido Nippon Ham Fighters announced they had accepted the winning bid on Tuesday night, the Jays were being hailed in many circles as the likely winners of the posting. The Jays officially remained silent. Did they think they had a chance or were they just smiling and taking in the fan fervour?

Policy is nice, but in this particular case the Jays need to step up and make an exception to their standard opaqueness. If the Jays indeed made a good-faith bid to Nippon Ham, even if it was lower than reported, if the Jays were expecting to have a chance to win the rights to Darvish but underestimated the Rangers' interest, who had claimed publicly that they didn't have much money, then nothing should change with fans in terms of the perceptions of their aggressiveness towards improving and contending in the off-season.

Those who support what the team is doing will now expect them to change direction from Darvish quickly and throw all their resources into adding young controllable talent via trades to make them a contender in 2012. One clear need remains a starting pitcher, the mid-rotation guy that would have been Darvish if they had won the posting.  

But if the posted bid for Darvish was token, just to be on the record as having interest then that changes all perceptions. That means that they sat back in this case, watching the way they were lumped with the leaders for Darvish and smiled knowing that they weren't serious players for the prize, but willing to take fans and media kudos for their efforts. That's wrong and that's why they need to set the record straight.

In either case, a good challenge to throw back at the Jays right now is to give them the same 30 day window that the Rangers have to sign Darvish and check back in with Anthopoulos on January 18 at 5:00 p.m. Challenge the Jays to makes moves in the next month that make the roster stronger than it would have been if they had been putting all their efforts into negotiating with Darvish.

Darvish may well turn into a legitimate #1-2 starter but part of the attraction in chasing him was the sizzle that he brought to the off-season. There is still the likelihood the Jays made a good-faith bid for Darvish, but public sentiment is turning aganst them.

Anthopoulos can only gain back the attention and support of Jays fans by making some smart, aggressive, baseball oriented moves in the next 30 days. Not just for the sake of spending the $52 million that they would have had to win the Darvish sweepstakes to prove they're not cheap, but by staying within the team's philosophy of sustainability.

However that does not also mean they should not step up in the next week and make an announcement on the Darvish bid coming clean and moving on. Stay tuned.

 

Comments

[Chris]

Quite honestly, I don't think it is important for us to know the bid. I just want to let AA do his work and make the team the best he can.

[JDS]

Give me a break. The Jays never mentioned Yu. What do they have to come clean on? The only people who made this a big deal are the sports writers themselves. They're the ones that need to come clean on how they made no story at all news, usually on the basis of nothing more than one sports writer whispering "Maybe!" or "Could be!" to each other. 50 million just to talk, btw, is an outrage.

[Moe]

This whole fiasco is very reminiscent of the Riccardi era: lying, half-truths, silence and canned responses about "the process."

Many Jays' fans were turned off by the arrogance of the previous regime. I hope AA doesn't make the same mistake.

[Mitch]

Griffin, I hear you...as a fan (and media in your case), it would be much more interesting if AA was more transparent. However, think of other business negotiations. If you strike out on one bid, you do everything you can to prevent other potential targets from knowing anything about your offer. That puts you in a compromising position. Maybe AA should give us a little something, but I'm on his side in terms of not disclosing exactly where they landed in their bid to land Darvish. 99% of other businesses are behind closed doors and not in the media during negotiations and business deals...thus, no one is pressuring them for details etc. on our various pitches, partnerships and negotiations. In this case, AA is doing what any other smart business person would do while looking to build the value of their company (team). While note a popular decision now...I think you'll look at it positively in the future when this strategy pays off...

[michael]

Sorry, Grif, the Jays do not have to come clean, and show their cards, so to speak.

The fact is they put in a bid, and your suggestion they did it just for the publicity is not acceptable. Rogers, via AA is running the baseball business, and if they were to show their cards to have people admire them then you've never played high stakes poker. People throw in their cards all the time without showing what they had because they have no obligation to do so, and if they did they would be giving their opponents an idea of how they play and what their limits truly are. This can be a detriment on the next hand played. No, I support this action by the Blue Jays.

[Mark]

Richard, I have no doubt that YOU would benefit from total transparency. And I understand how it would personally annoy you to have someone give you a confidential indication of a 50+ million bid only to have others shoot it down the day after you report it.

But transparency is NOT in the interest of the Jays here whether they bid or not. If they weren't seriously in it, you and other Toronto media will jump on it as proof of "payroll parameters" and eviscerate Rogers. If they were seriously in on it, releasing the number confirms both that AA really wanted Darvish and misread the market, and it also leads Jays fans to want that 100+ million earmarked for Darvish now spent elsewhere, whether someone is worth it or not.

No comment may be annoying and difficult for you. But as a fan, I just care that we didn't get him. Knowing the dollar figure is irrelevant to me. Keep trying to improve the Jays any way you can, Alex. I'm still on board even if the media are jumping ship.

[Peter]

No offense, but I think Mr. Griffin would like this bid to matter more than the average fan would care to know. I hear your argument, but is that really the feelings of the average Jays fan? It's not mine. I feel that Alex, is doing a good job as GM, and don't need the "number" to convince me. Publishing that number, in the off season, when only true Jays fans are paying attention to Jays news, isn't going to put any more bums in the seats. The Jays need to get their casual fans back, and this number isn't news to the casual fan, whatever it is.

[Bob Walterhouse]

I would like to suggest to AA (not that he needs the help) that he ignore everything you have suggested in this article. A good poker player knows that you never show a losing hand unless there is a very good reason to do so. There is no good reason here. The Blue Jays owe the media nothing. They also owe nothing to the rabid fans that want any tidbit of information whether or not it hurts the organization in the long run. In my opinion, the Blue Jays front office has it exactly right. They understand what they do owe to all of us. Do what it takes every day to put the very best team possible on the field, while staying within the business framework of the Toronto Blue Jays. Keep doing what you're doing Alex, and continue to ignore the whiners.

[Kevin]

Disagree entirely.

People who feel "duped" by this whole process (including writers) have only one place to look: themselves.

The Jays put none of this out there, and if people believed "buzz", well... that's their own fault. As you noted the Jays silence policy has worked many times before. Why change what's working? Because *you* got duped and reported a false number?

Sorry, the Jays have nothing to apologize for here.

[Charles B.]

I have been a Jays fan since the early eighties, when I was just old enough to know what a baseball was. I was at Game 7 in 85. I was at the parades in 92 and 93. The last month or so, with the new (old) logo and all of the excitement surrounding Yu Darvish, convinced me that the management of the Jays really CARED for the first time in 20 years. I wasn't really too disappointed when they lost the bidding. However, I have been really unhappy with the aloofness, vagueness, and, seemingly, the disdain for the many fans they brought back into the fold. I am not a bandwagon guy. I have always watched and cheered for the Jays. It was only with the recent Yu chase that I have been proud to say that in mixed company. Now I am not so sure. So far as I can tell, the most noted accomplishment for AA has been to get rid of Vernon Wells. Woohoo.

[Paul]

No need to show your hands and pockets to the next potential free agent. Good job on AA to hide his hand.

[Jonathan, Montreal]

Jays need to be transparent and move on? Sounds like the media needs to move on. Or were you just too spoiled with this easy off-season news and just want to keep beating a dead horse? Maybe you cynics should be transparent in how you manipulate fans by fabricating controversy and relish in being little crap-disturbers. Why don't you do us long-suffering fans a favour and try to spin a positive buzz for once? Winners are made in positive environments. Losers are perpetuate resent and spite.

MOVE ON!

[Tabber]

Okay, so if all you commenters think the Jays shouldn't let out info, I'll go along, as long as they also don't tell us who the next day's starting pitcher is, who's playing that day, who they brought up from the minors, etc. No information should be given out. In fact, they shouldn't even broadcast the games on TV or radio or let people into the park. Just go about their business and see how much money they make that way. I'll let them do what they want, it won't bother we, because I won't care any more. I've been a fan since day 1 in 1977, in fact I was one of those there with my bottle of rum in the snow, but if they don't want to keep me informed, then I'll stay uninformed, be uninterested, and send absolutely no money their way. Rogers, do you want to lose my cable, internet and cell phone accounts? You're going about it the right way with your cone of silence. Don't let another word cross my path about your precious baseballl team and I won't slam you. This is your official notice. I know you can trace this, so make damn sure you adhere to the terms of our new agreement, initiated by your behaviour. Failure to do so may result in fraud charges.This is your official notification.

[francesco gucciardo]

What a an absolutely ridiculous article and notion, particularly given the conflict of interest position of the writer. I especially liked the following passage:

"That then encourages media searching out secondary sources, subject to interpretation."

I don't think AA needs to tell me anything and he can continue being silent if in his own opinion it is the best policy in order to further the interests of the baseball club; both in terms of quality on the field and on the business side. The only people that create and perpetuate falsehoods and rumors are the sports writers.

Sorry Mr. Griffin, but I couldn't care less that you feel that AA could stand to be more transparent out of what appears to be for your own self-interest in presenting more accurate content as part of your job and notwithstanding an attempt on your part to suggest that transparency would be for the benefit of the fans. Fans can choose to either watch or not watch games. If on the business side and as a result of his policy AA determines that transparency would better support the business then I'm sure he will consider that when deciding whether to maintain or lift the policy. Given that such a natural check and balance exists vis-a-vis the fans, I don't buy any attempt at using the interests of the fans as a justification for more transparency.

[sam]

Richard, you're off the mark here. There are those who want to know if and what the Jays bid for Darvish. In reality it's none of our business. I'm certain the situation AA finds himself in now is mostly media driven - How many times did we read or hear the Jays were certain winners of the Yu sweepstakes? During that time period how mant times did Alex come out and say the Jays were in the hunt. I'm not sure I ever saw that - But I did see "according to sources" many times. The media's knee jerk reaction to Toronto not having the winning bid and demand to know the details is ridiculous.

[C Wade]

Would be worried if the comments were in complete agreement with the article, glad to see the readers can see the difference between policy and principle. As mentioned, AA has not changed his approach and this has served him well. Trading VW, the Lawrie deal, Morrow, all of these happened w/out an web hype that likely would've killed the deals. Can you imagine if rumours had circulated prior to VW being traded?

Just because the principle (policy) is not working well for the media and part of the fan base on the Darvish bid, it doesn't mean it needs to change because it could end up hurting you more in the end.

With the changes in the CBA, there are fewer and fewer advantages that GM's can exploit. Information, in this case, might be worth more in $ terms and win terms than we might believe

[O.A.]

As someone who was once passionately interested in the Blue Jays (season ticket holders), I was engrossed by the Yu Darvish story. I can easily live with the disappointment--heck, in the last decade, I've learned to live without the Blue Jays, period. But I am waiting for an on-field product that is worth my while.

AA is not obliged to tell me the secrets of the Blue Jays bid, but if the team wants to sustain my interest (and the many thousands of people like me), there has to be some sign that the Blue Jays are going to do more than tread water and play .500. Acquiring assets and getting value in trades and signings is not the same as fielding a winning team. AA and the owners of the Blue Jays have yet to show that they can make that next step. Until then, I will spend my time and money elsewhere.

[Johnny One Note]

I don't much care if they talk about whether they bid/amount of bid but i do need to take issue with the idea than anything to do with the Halladay fiasco "worked well". We traded away the best player in baseball for some possibly good prospects AND we ended up paying about half his salary for the privilege of doing so. Was and remains one of the most ridiculous deals in the recent memory.