Jul 23, 2012, 5:20 PM EST
I get the idea that the Dempster deal was reported somewhat prematurely — though, notably, no one reported that the deal was finalized — but this seems a bit much:
Sveum also denies a deal. “Fabrication.” Says it’s unfair to Dempster to have to deal with this.
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) July 23, 2012
Sveum: “The Twitter, the Facebook, the things that get produced and published that aren’t true is just off the charts.”
— Patrick Mooney (@CSNMooney) July 23, 2012
Many different reporters — good reporters — with many different sources were hearing that a deal was basically in place. Even the Braves own home page at MLB.com was reporting the deal. There is clearly not any Dempster sign-off yet so no, there is no deal with a capital D, but it does not appear to be a “fabrication.” To say so seems pretty bush league and insults a lot of people who are not sitting here and making this up from whole cloth.
For whatever reason, be it logistics on the Cubs end or Dempster taking his time to consider it, there is no trade yet. But that’s something totally different than saying it’s all made up. And if and when the deal is done on the terms generally reported, I think Sveum owes some reporters an apology.
- Merry Christmas from HBT! 74
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year 86
- The Yankees are treating Alex Rodriguez differently than they treated Derek Jeter. So what? 40
- Braves sign setup man Jason Grilli to two-year contract 15
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot 120
- Phil Hughes signs a three-year extension with the Twins 27
- The Padres have talked to the Phillies about Cole Hamels 23
- Why is John Smoltz a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame? 63
- Curt Schilling goes after Obama, says Ronald Reagan would watch “The Interview” (225)
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot (120)
- Today’s specious anti-Mike Piazza-for-the-Hall-Fame argument (96)
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year (86)
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” (85)