Portzline and Dispatch Blow it On Horton

[futurcorerock]

I'm sure it's not going to get answers, but I do not pay for that rag in the first place so canceling is not an option for me and I'm sure many others.

I guess the only option is to send the screencap resetting your cookies or browsing in private mode with the caption "THIS IS WHY I DONT PAY".

 

[Kev22]

Don't expect a protest in Porty's honor any time soon.

The Dispatch sees him as competent enough and cheap enough that there's no real reason to make a change. Keep in mind, the Dispatch owns a stake in the team, so its hardly in their best interest to have a competent reporter who might actually ask tough questions. Someone to publish glorified press releases is just fine and that's all Aaron is.

Respected around the league? Don't confuse the fraternal camaraderie of fellow journalists for respect. If you pay attention to the hockey media, people like Bob McKenzie, Helene Elliott and (before his recent problems) Adrian Dater are truly respected by their peers for a variety of reasons. McKenzie is "the authority." He's the guy that when he says something is so, its so and everyone takes that as a given. This is true to a lesser extent for some of is TSN colleagues, but Bob is probably considered (and, rightly so) the top dog of hockey journalism. Helene Elliott has covered hockey for 30 plus years in two of the biggest media markets in the country and she started at a time when it was unconventional for women to cover sports in general let alone hockey. Personal problems (and personality problems) aside, Dater published two books about the team he covered getting far more in depth on the subject than your run-of-the-mill beat reporter. As a result, these people are held in high regards by their colleagues. Portzline is the guy other reporters hang out with and have a beer with when they are in Columbus and he's their "guy in Columbus" because...well, what's their other choice these days?

Maybe its a generational thing, but the reason it "matters" is because real journalists, not those of us who post on the Internet or on social media, but people who hold themselves out as belonging to the profession of journalism, should be held to a higher standard. That's been one of my problems with the blogification and now Twitterization of traditional media. Guys like Portzline and Arace like to look down their nose at non-professionals (look back to Arace's column prior to Hitch's dismissal as Exhibit A) while at the same time they have become lax in upholding basic standards of journalism. To have such lax standards while continuing along a subscription-based model as The Dispatch has seems particularly offensive--if you are not going to hold your online publication to the same standard that print journalism has held itself to for the last century (ex. multiple sources for a story), what justifies the premium you are charging?

Easy big fella. I understand all of this and I know all of these journalists pretty well. I credit newspapers for helping me learn how to read when I was a kid (I'm in my 40's). Religiously read the baseball box scores every day in Kindergarten. I think what you didn't mention is where journalism is failing in today's society is news has become about who breaks it first and not necessarily about getting it right. That is how Twitter and social media has changed journalism. The days of Grantland Rice are long gone.

That said, are there further questions that need to be answered? Sure. Do these questions need to be answered publicly? I don't think so, but I think that question is better answered by his superiors.

If you want to hear his explanation, listen to Porty on the Fan right now.

 

[1857 Howitzer]

If you want to hear his explanation, listen to Porty on the Fan right now.

What did he say?

 

[5thLiner]

I asked whether his source was a team source, a league source or other on Twitter. No response.

In the comments section of the news report on Puckrakers, I asked why it was reported earlier that the CBJ had insurance on Horton with links to the articles. The comment was removed.

Draw your own conclusions.

I asked him yesterday on Twitter why it was reported that his contract was insured on more than one occasion. Like you, I didn't get a response.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Easy big fella. I understand all of this and I know all of these journalists pretty well. I credit newspapers for helping me learn how to read when I was a kid (I'm in my 40's). Religiously read the baseball box scores every day in Kindergarten. I think what you didn't mention is where journalism is failing in today's society is news has become about who breaks it first and not necessarily about getting it right. That is how Twitter and social media has changed journalism. The days of Grantland Rice are long gone.

That said, are there further questions that need to be answered? Sure. Do these questions need to be answered publicly? I don't think so, but I think that question is better answered by his superiors.

If you want to hear his explanation, listen to Porty on the Fan right now.

There used to be things called corrections and retractions. When you report something incorrectly, I think its worth fessing up to it in public since you made the statement in public in first place.

I don't have the time to tune into Porty's latest cross promotion effort. Let him explain himself in the forum that he initially published his report in.

 

[Kev22]

What did he say?

Nothing new. Just explained how the insurance (or lack of) worked. No public mea culpa's.

 

[DarkandStormy]

"Breaks it first" - he had, oh, four months to correct himself.

 

[CapnCornelius]

The more I look into the league wide insurance, the more I question whether Porty bothered to do any first hand research.

@RedditCBJ looked into the league insurance and it appears to kick in at 30 games, not the mythical 21 games Portzline had stated repeatedly. Now, the Jackets could have had private insurance apart from the league plan (but they didn't) with different terms, but you would have thought before he even interviewed someone about the insurance he might have looked into the league insurance to see what its terms are and then asked follow up when what his mythical source said didn't match his research (ex. "21 games? I thought it was 30. Did the Jackets secure private insurance instead of using the league plan?). This was just a shoddy job all around.

It takes a couple seconds to do a Google search and find another article on the issue with respect to Sidney Crosby's contract.

http://www.foxsports.com/nhl/story/...ract-pittsburgh-penguins-nhl-insurance-062812

The NHL has a league-wide insurance plan that covers the clubs in case a player suffers a long-term injury or is disabled. After a player misses 30 consecutive games for the same injury, a team can apply for insurance and be reimbursed 80 percent of that player’s salary — a program the Pens could have tapped each of the last two seasons to get back much of Crosby’s salary

 

[Jorge]

Don't expect a protest in Porty's honor any time soon.

The Dispatch sees him as competent enough and cheap enough that there's no real reason to make a change. Keep in mind, the Dispatch owns a stake in the team, so its hardly in their best interest to have a competent reporter who might actually ask tough questions. Someone to publish glorified press releases is just fine and that's all Aaron is.

Respected around the league? Don't confuse the fraternal camaraderie of fellow journalists for respect. If you pay attention to the hockey media, people like Bob McKenzie, Helene Elliott and (before his recent problems) Adrian Dater are truly respected by their peers for a variety of reasons. McKenzie is "the authority." He's the guy that when he says something is so, its so and everyone takes that as a given. This is true to a lesser extent for some of is TSN colleagues, but Bob is probably considered (and, rightly so) the top dog of hockey journalism. Helene Elliott has covered hockey for 30 plus years in two of the biggest media markets in the country and she started at a time when it was unconventional for women to cover sports in general let alone hockey. Personal problems (and personality problems) aside, Dater published two books about the team he covered getting far more in depth on the subject than your run-of-the-mill beat reporter. As a result, these people are held in high regards by their colleagues. Portzline is the guy other reporters hang out with and have a beer with when they are in Columbus and he's their "guy in Columbus" because...well, what's their other choice these days?

Maybe its a generational thing, but the reason it "matters" is because real journalists, not those of us who post on the Internet or on social media, but people who hold themselves out as belonging to the profession of journalism, should be held to a higher standard. That's been one of my problems with the blogification and now Twitterization of traditional media. Guys like Portzline and Arace like to look down their nose at non-professionals (look back to Arace's column prior to Hitch's dismissal as Exhibit A) while at the same time they have become lax in upholding basic standards of journalism. To have such lax standards while continuing along a subscription-based model as The Dispatch has seems particularly offensive--if you are not going to hold your online publication to the same standard that print journalism has held itself to for the last century (ex. multiple sources for a story), what justifies the premium you are charging?

This right here.

Absolutely amazed by the way things are going this year. Injuries pretty much doomed us from the start, but now I'm worried about the front office. I want a straight answer regarding the insurance. Huge, long-term deal and no insurance? HUH?

 

[DarkandStormy]

The more I look into the league wide insurance, the more I question whether Porty bothered to do any first hand research.

@RedditCBJ looked into the league insurance and it appears to kick in at 30 games, not the mythical 21 games Portzline had stated repeatedly. Now, the Jackets could have had private insurance apart from the league plan (but they didn't) with different terms, but you would have thought before he even interviewed someone about the insurance he might have looked into the league insurance to see what its terms are and then asked follow up when what his mythical source said didn't match his research (ex. "21 games? I thought it was 30. Did the Jackets secure private insurance instead of using the league plan?). This was just a shoddy job all around.

It takes a couple seconds to do a Google search and find another article on the issue with respect to Sidney Crosby's contract.

http://www.foxsports.com/nhl/story/...ract-pittsburgh-penguins-nhl-insurance-062812

He sounded like he was guessing about the insurance policy as he was answering the question on The Fan.

 

[DarkandStormy]

The moment the team didn't insure Horton, the die was cast. Now we have to simply hope for the least bad outcome.

They couldn't insure Horton....

 

[JacketsDavid]

They couldn't insure Horton....

Yes they could have they couldn't have insured his shoulder but they could have gotten insurance when they signed him on everything else.

 

[DarkandStormy]

Yes they could have they couldn't have insured his shoulder but they could have gotten insurance when they signed him on everything else.

Insurance is year to year. Doesn't help this year, or the next 5.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Insurance is year to year. Doesn't help this year, or the next 5.

Sigh...

If they had used the insurance in Year 1 on Horton, they would have been fully covered for all future years. Somebody decided to insure a player other than Horton instead. That decision is what set the rest of this in motion.

 

[Nanabijou]

It does disappoint me that this wasn't investigated more fully. When we signed him with the shoulder injury, I kind of assumed that he wouldn't be able to be covered, but it all seemed OK from the reports that were coming out later. I questioned it around here in September:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=90058655&postcount=132

When I read Porty's stuff about the 21 games criteria, which Captain posted in the OP, I assumed it had been taken care of. I'm not calling for Porty's head, but an explanation of whether he just pulled that out his ass or if he actually looked into it is warranted.

Someone with a pre-existing injury like that probably had premiums so high that I wonder if any team in the league would have gotten insurance the first year on someone in Horton's situation. I'd like a little more info before deciding whether this was incompetency or really bad luck.

 

[KeithBWhittington]

I would like for him to answer that myself.

I assume he "Brian Williams" it. He was probably told somewhere along the way late last season, late summer 2014 that the team planned to insure Horton's Contract and he took it and ran.

No less damning when you, above all others, are counted on to get the final words to the fanbase as a whole on what's going on within the organization.

I can't see anyone purposefully lying to Dispatch Boy about this, it makes no sense to do so, or to even bring it up unless Aaron broached the topic with them, which, I suspect, wasn't done.

 

[KeithBWhittington]

The new line seems to be that the team was going to insure the contract, but couldn't get it done until Horton was healed from the known shoulder surgery when he signed the contract. When the organization went back to insure him, the back was too far gone for him to be insured.. That's the company line that as spouted yesterday on the FAN all day. I asked for clarification on Twitter and that seemed to be the response I got as well. (As always, it was NOT portzline who responded to me, come to think of it, he never has, even if I ask a genuine question beyond an critique of "news" he "breaks")

Whatever the reasoning was, whatever happened, Portzline blew this one bad. Putting his story and the "company line" together, The Bluejackets had not only failed to insure Horton, the window to actually insure Horton had been up for at least awhile by the time Portzline had written that initial article in October.

This whole thing was a mess. I wish Horton well and I feel bad for him, but Jarmo and Co. Need to exercise a bit more caution before going after a guy that's injured, I know it wasn't his shoulder that has (essentially) ended his career, but this isn't the Leafs or the Rangers, where you find 25 mil sitting in your couch cushions, and, as some have pointed out, While Horton hasn't been "mr. glass", he has had his injuries

 

[MAHJ71]

I think we can all just give up on Portzline ever givng even a remotely decent explaination.

Not enough heat on his seat to really have to give one.

 

[KeithBWhittington]

I think we can all just give up on Portzline ever givng even a remotely decent explaination.

Not enough heat on his seat to really have to give one.

It's not the first time he has been wrong the "Gromley is the pick" comes to mind other smaller tidbits, course that was taken down and fixed almost immediately because it was at the NHL draft.

It won't be the last time Portzline steps in something, trust me.

 

[1857 Howitzer]

It's not the first time he has been wrong the "Gromley is the pick" comes to mind other smaller tidbits, course that was taken down and fixed almost immediately because it was at the NHL draft.

It won't be the last time Portzline steps in something, trust me.

The biggest was Hitch and Button replacing Arniel and Howson.

 

[CapnCornelius]

It does disappoint me that this wasn't investigated more fully. When we signed him with the shoulder injury, I kind of assumed that he wouldn't be able to be covered, but it all seemed OK from the reports that were coming out later. I questioned it around here in September:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=90058655&postcount=132

When I read Porty's stuff about the 21 games criteria, which Captain posted in the OP, I assumed it had been taken care of. I'm not calling for Porty's head, but an explanation of whether he just pulled that out his ass or if he actually looked into it is warranted.

Someone with a pre-existing injury like that probably had premiums so high that I wonder if any team in the league would have gotten insurance the first year on someone in Horton's situation. I'd like a little more info before deciding whether this was incompetency or really bad luck.

The new line seems to be that the team was going to insure the contract, but couldn't get it done until Horton was healed from the known shoulder surgery when he signed the contract. When the organization went back to insure him, the back was too far gone for him to be insured.. That's the company line that as spouted yesterday on the FAN all day. I asked for clarification on Twitter and that seemed to be the response I got as well. (As always, it was NOT portzline who responded to me, come to think of it, he never has, even if I ask a genuine question beyond an critique of "news" he "breaks")

Whatever the reasoning was, whatever happened, Portzline blew this one bad. Putting his story and the "company line" together, The Bluejackets had not only failed to insure Horton, the window to actually insure Horton had been up for at least awhile by the time Portzline had written that initial article in October.

This whole thing was a mess. I wish Horton well and I feel bad for him, but Jarmo and Co. Need to exercise a bit more caution before going after a guy that's injured, I know it wasn't his shoulder that has (essentially) ended his career, but this isn't the Leafs or the Rangers, where you find 25 mil sitting in your couch cushions, and, as some have pointed out, While Horton hasn't been "mr. glass", he has had his injuries

Let's get this straight because there is a lot of misinformation. I don't care what they say on the FAN, we have Jarmo Kekaleinen's own words on this and he said "we" decided not to insure him in part to due to "exceptions" (plural) to that insurance and because he was going to be out half of the season. It wasn't that Horton wasn't insurable, it's that there were exclusions to the coverage. The back would NOT have been an exclusion because no one was aware of the problem. Premiums were not an issue as I explained previously--the team already paid premiums based on the salaries of Horton and the other top 5 contracts amounting to 5% of those contracts--they had to as part of the league's arrangement with the insurance provider.

Now, Porty has mentioned only one exclusion to the policy and that was the injured shoulder. I want to know, whether head injuries were excluded as well given Horton's prior concussions. We also know that the team allocated the insurance to other players in place of Horton and I want to know who those players are. I want to know who "we" was and who had the final decision. I also want to know whether the insurability of Horton was discussed BEFORE he was acquired in the first place.

A competent journalist would look into these things. Let's see if Aaron Portzline can redeem himself and bother to look into this further or if he'd rather have beers with his friends and write press releases for management. If it's the latter, maybe someone else can pick this up and run with it.

 

[NotWendell]

I'm having a change of heart. I actually feel for the guy. The front office apparently lies to him often. He reports it. He looks like a boob.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

He answered.

Question:
@Aportzline help me out.You repeatedlyreported Horton contract was insured and Cam was set to be a RFA.Now report no insurance and UFA. Why?

Answers:
Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 4m 4 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 (1) We asked, were led to believe, and never corrected that Horton's contract was insured. Club very secretive. Only on trade ...

Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 4m 4 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 (2) day did club say that Horton was never insured. As for Atkinson ... never said he was a UFA. RFA for one more year.

Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 3m 3 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 Ah. I see error in today's story. Fixing. Don't know how that happened.

 

[5thLiner]

He answered.

Question:
@Aportzline help me out.You repeatedlyreported Horton contract was insured and Cam was set to be a RFA.Now report no insurance and UFA. Why?

Answers:
Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 4m 4 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 (1) We asked, were led to believe, and never corrected that Horton's contract was insured. Club very secretive. Only on trade ...

Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 4m 4 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 (2) day did club say that Horton was never insured. As for Atkinson ... never said he was a UFA. RFA for one more year.

Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 3m 3 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 Ah. I see error in today's story. Fixing. Don't know how that happened.

Ah, beat me to it lol

 

[Viqsi]

He answered.

Question:
@Aportzline help me out.You repeatedlyreported Horton contract was insured and Cam was set to be a RFA.Now report no insurance and UFA. Why?

Answers:
Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 4m 4 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 (1) We asked, were led to believe, and never corrected that Horton's contract was insured. Club very secretive. Only on trade ...

Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 4m 4 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 (2) day did club say that Horton was never insured. As for Atkinson ... never said he was a UFA. RFA for one more year.

Aaron Portzline @Aportzline · 3m 3 minutes ago
.@jeeco13 Ah. I see error in today's story. Fixing. Don't know how that happened.

So, basically, the front office lied to Portzline.

I'm sure that's somehow Porty's fault too.