Portzline and Dispatch Blow it On Horton

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

So, basically, the front office lied to Portzline.

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

Pretty logical explanation.

I'm sure there will be calls for "why didn't he do more to check into this!!!," but if you believe he's insured and its logical he's insured, then what is the impetus to investigate?

 

[CapnCornelius]

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.

This actually still raises questions. "We asked and were led to believe" does not necessarily mean lied to and the choice of wording is interesting. It could be a simple matter of sloppiness in reporting. By way of example, if the question was asked "do you insure players" the person being asked can truthfully answer "yes." The Jackets do insure players. They just don't insure ALL players. Additionally, if you ask the question to the janitor he might say "yeah, I'm pretty sure we insure all of those guys." But the janitor has no basis to have knowledge of such matters, so he isn't a source you should rely on in the first place. The word "we" is also interesting. If Porty himself didn't ask the question and get the answer and instead an intern asked and misinterpreted the answer it changes whether it was a flat out lie or a communication breakdown.

Porty's reporting since the trade has still been riddled with sloppiness enough to make me question whether he was lied to or whether he misinterpreted what he was told in the first place.

Example:

Why no insurance?

Horton arrived with a pre-existing condition -- a chronically separated shoulder -- that could not be covered by insurance, and they knew Horton would miss more than half a season as he rehabilitated following surgery.

The club opted not to buy insurance for the rest of Horton's body and appendages because it would have been impossible for any other illness or injury to cost him half a season. The shoulder had already put him over the threshold.

Lori Schmidt and I have discussed this back and forth as the story didn't make sense. As it turns out, the Jackets couldn't get insurance on "the rest of Horton's body and appendages." What she has been told after asking sources within the team is that the reason that Horton wasn't insured was because of the number and nature of the exclusions from coverage. In other words, it wasn't just the shoulder that was excluded though it is not clear what else might have been excluded. I suspect head injuries were excluded based on Horton's prior history. As such, someone looked at the situation and determined "ah, heck, what would the insurance really cover that could be career ending," or something along those lines.

Portzline incorrectly focused on the shoulder and the fact that Horton was going to be out half the season, etc. The fact that Horton was going to be out half the season was probably brought up in passing in the litany of reasons why Horton went uninsured, but it is a red herring. It was the exclusions from coverage that drove the decision not to insure Horton and instead use the league provided insurance on another player.

None of this answers the bigger question--did the Jackets consider this when they signed Horton in the first place? Knowing that this is a budget team, if you also know a player is effectively uninsurable, the contract is a huge risk when you factor in Horton's age and injury history.

Whether Aaron failed to ask the right questions or he was flat out lied to, it instills no confidence in his reporting. If your sources are trolling you, how can you be relied upon as "the source" for Blue Jackets news? The lack of quality of Portzline's sources was more evident in recent days in how stridently he insisted that Atkinson was a goner who didn't fit the teams plans, etc. leading up to the deadline only to have the team sign him for 3 more years. This goes beyond a team simply keeping its cards close to the vest. Portzline's sources are either too removed from the decision makers or don't respect him enough to avoid putting him a situation that impacts his credibility.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

Wow, many on the board have to feel a little shame this morning.

I guess on to the next witch hunt now. Fire Jarmo? Fire JD? Move the team to California?

 

[Viqsi]

This actually still raises questions. "We asked and were led to believe" does not necessarily mean lied to and the choice of wording is interesting. It could be a simple matter of sloppiness in reporting. By way of example, if the question was asked "do you insure players" the person being asked can truthfully answer "yes." The Jackets do insure players. They just don't insure ALL players. Additionally, if you ask the question to the janitor he might say "yeah, I'm pretty sure we insure all of those guys." But the janitor has no basis to have knowledge of such matters, so he isn't a source you should rely on in the first place. The word "we" is also interesting. If Porty himself didn't ask the question and get the answer and instead an intern asked and misinterpreted the answer it changes whether it was a flat out lie or a communication breakdown.

Porty's reporting since the trade has still been riddled with sloppiness enough to make me question whether he was lied to or whether he misinterpreted what he was told in the first place.

Example:



Lori Schmidt and I have discussed this back and forth as the story didn't make sense. As it turns out, the Jackets couldn't get insurance on "the rest of Horton's body and appendages." What she has been told after asking sources within the team is that the reason that Horton wasn't insured was because of the number and nature of the exclusions from coverage. In other words, it wasn't just the shoulder that was excluded though it is not clear what else might have been excluded. I suspect head injuries were excluded based on Horton's prior history. As such, someone looked at the situation and determined "ah, heck, what would the insurance really cover that could be career ending," or something along those lines.

Portzline incorrectly focused on the shoulder and the fact that Horton was going to be out half the season, etc. The fact that Horton was going to be out half the season was probably brought up in passing in the litany of reasons why Horton went uninsured, but it is a red herring. It was the exclusions from coverage that drove the decision not to insure Horton and instead use the league provided insurance on another player.

None of this answers the bigger question--did the Jackets consider this when they signed Horton in the first place? Knowing that this is a budget team, if you also know a player is effectively uninsurable, the contract is a huge risk when you factor in Horton's age and injury history.

Whether Aaron failed to ask the right questions or he was flat out lied to, it instills no confidence in his reporting. If your sources are trolling you, how can you be relied upon as "the source" for Blue Jackets news? The lack of quality of Portzline's sources was more evident in recent days in how stridently he insisted that Atkinson was a goner who didn't fit the teams plans, etc. leading up to the deadline only to have the team sign him for 3 more years. This goes beyond a team simply keeping its cards close to the vest. Portzline's sources are either too removed from the decision makers or don't respect him enough to avoid putting him a situation that impacts his credibility.

Looks like I called it:

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

 

[NotWendell]

Whether Aaron failed to ask the right questions or he was flat out lied to, it instills no confidence in his reporting. If your sources are trolling you, how can you be relied upon as "the source" for Blue Jackets news? The lack of quality of Portzline's sources was more evident in recent days in how stridently he insisted that Atkinson was a goner who didn't fit the teams plans, etc. leading up to the deadline only to have the team sign him for 3 more years. This goes beyond a team simply keeping its cards close to the vest. Portzline's sources are either too removed from the decision makers or don't respect him enough to avoid putting him a situation that impacts his credibility.

I have to disagree with this assessment. Jarmo was using Portzline to do to Atkinson what Sather did to Zuccarello - using the trade deadline as leverage to get a player to come down on his demands making an extension possible. Having reported on professional sports myself, teams and agents try to use the media (and by use I mean spread their lies) to suit their end-games. Sometimes a reporter can see through it. Sometimes they can't. Sometimes you ask the wrong questions, but sometimes you ask the right ones and have to roll with the answers you are given.

 

[CBJSlash]

Thanks Capn for that. I appreciate your investigative reporting.

That illuminates it to me. While I'm sure only a small pocket of fans follow this sort of thing this closely, it is very useful for those that do. I feel like this pretty well closes the curtain on thinking about it for me.

Lets hope that we can get Clarkson back to his combative game or are able to swallow a chunk to move him.

 

[JacketsDavid]

Thanks Capn for that. I appreciate your investigative reporting.

Agreed great work!

 

[NotWendell]

The fact that Horton was going to be out half the season was probably brought up in passing in the litany of reasons why Horton went uninsured, but it is a red herring. It was the exclusions from coverage that drove the decision not to insure Horton and instead use the league provided insurance on another player.

I suspect you and Lori are right about this.

None of this answers the bigger question--did the Jackets consider this when they signed Horton in the first place? Knowing that this is a budget team, if you also know a player is effectively uninsurable, the contract is a huge risk when you factor in Horton's age and injury history.

THAT is the most important question. This was a needlessly high risk to take for a club like ours. It has certainly shaken my confidence in this front office.

This goes beyond a team simply keeping its cards close to the vest. Portzline's sources are either too removed from the decision makers or don't respect him enough to avoid putting him a situation that impacts his credibility.

Portzline's sources don't give a damn about any reporter's credibility. Most in this business only care about how the reporter can be used to further their own agenda.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Capn -- has Lori reported on this somewhere?
I haven’t seen it on her blog or heard it on the radio if so (though I am an infrequent listener).
If not, I’m curious about why not, if you know.

She’s a reporter too. She has told you she has info from “sources within the team†that seems pretty newsy to me.

 

[1857 Howitzer]

I'll back off Portzline a little bit. He did get the Wiz trade and he was the first to report Cam's contract by a couple of seconds. His reporting of the insurance story was very sloppy/poorly researched and I am not buying that he was out right lied to.

It would be best for him to just stick to reporting and stop with all social media because he fails at it most of the time. He loves pointing out that he is a reporter and not a fan or a columnist, but in the very next tweet he is expressing his opinion and that's fine as long as you don't claim to be something you're not in the tweet before.

He needs stick to doing what he does best and that is stories like the ones on Johnson's family and Horton's health earlier this season.

 

[Nanabijou]

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 ...

So, basically, the front office lied to Portzline.

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

I don't interpret it as the front office definitely lied to Porty based on his response. If he has a direct quote from Jarmo saying something along the lines "Yes, Horton's contract is insured" from the fall, then Porty should share that. If Jarmo (or, even worse, some low-level employee) told him last spring that "Horton's contract will be insured", that is something a little different. That might lead Porty to believe it was this season, even though he wasn't corrected by this person that it later wasn't possible with the emergence of the back injury. But, if it was the latter case, Porty should have followed up on it this season.


Bottom line for me, there's as much evidence supporting Viqsi's post as there is for one like the following:

"So, basically, Porty is incompetent. I'm sure that's somehow Jarmo's fault, too."

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but we can't conclude who was in the right based on Porty's tweet.

 

[MAHJ71]

Wow, many on the board have to feel a little shame this morning.

I guess on to the next witch hunt now. Fire Jarmo? Fire JD? Move the team to California?

Not at all actually. I stand by what I said and I'm sure many others do as well.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Wow, many on the board have to feel a little shame this morning.

I guess on to the next witch hunt now. Fire Jarmo? Fire JD? Move the team to California?

You wanna give 'em bonuses? Or extensions?

 

[MAHJ71]

You wanna give 'em bonuses? Or extensions?

He must.. lol

How many years are left on their contracts? I can't find the specifics.

 

[Viqsi]

I don't interpret it as the front office definitely lied to Porty based on his response. If he has a direct quote from Jarmo saying something along the lines "Yes, Horton's contract is insured" from the fall, then Porty should share that. If Jarmo (or, even worse, some low-level employee) told him last spring that "Horton's contract will be insured", that is something a little different. That might lead Porty to believe it was this season, even though he wasn't corrected by this person that it later wasn't possible with the emergence of the back injury. But, if it was the latter case, Porty should have followed up on it this season.


Bottom line for me, there's as much evidence supporting Viqsi's post as there is for one like the following:

"So, basically, Porty is incompetent. I'm sure that's somehow Jarmo's fault, too."

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but we can't conclude who was in the right based on Porty's tweet.

Probably. Sigh. It's just difficult for me to retain objectivity in the face of Yet Another Glorious Crusade To Get Somebody Fired Because Damnit We Want BLOOD.

I mean, I get those "somebody should be fired" impulses too, but I don't subsequently treat them as gospel.

 

[SuperGenius]

 

[BluejacketNut]

If Horton was not insurable, how that isnt a red flag I dont know! You can certainly take flyer on him, but at MAX 5 years, more realistically 3, but no, we went 7! And if he wouldnt take those terms, good luck somewhere else. The worst case scenario happened, and now what we thought we would hopefully be upgrading that position with, turned out to be Clarkson for the same cost.....ouch. As far as Porty, dont even follow him, the FO has shown its not going to give out much info, and i wouldnt put it past them at all to give missleading info.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

You wanna give 'em bonuses? Or extensions?

Neither. Just a fair chance.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

et al ...
.....

Gracias, SG.
Apologies for missing it.

 

[We Want Ten]

Wait! People are still defending the FO?
How?

 

[SuperGenius]

Wait! People are still defending the FO?
How?

perhaps more of this:

and less of this:

 

[We Want Ten]

Are you *** kidding me?
All i've read is that the FO decided to insure a Honda and not a Ferrari. No excuse whatsoever to sign a guy you can't or won't insure.
ZERO.

 

[SuperGenius]

Are you *** kidding me?
All i've read is that the FO decided to insure a Honda and not a Ferrari. No excuse whatsoever to sign a guy you can't or won't insure.
ZERO.

If you make $50k a year, are you paying 15k in life insurance for your family's sake? What if that life insurance excluded manners of death like drowning, fire, cranial exposions or heart disease? Would you still do it just in case the way you went out was something else? What if your kids and sibling had no exclusions and you could insure all for the same amount?

Probably a terrible example, but I'm trying to explain the macro ideas involved....because honestly, I don't understand how anything the CBJ did here is unreasonable - or for that matter, different than what any other team does outside of possibly TML or MTL.

 

[NotWendell]

If you make $50k a year, are you paying 15k in life insurance for your family's sake? What if that life insurance excluded manners of death like drowning, fire, cranial exposions or heart disease? Would you still do it just in case the way you went out was something else? What if your kids and sibling had no exclusions and you could insure all for the same amount?

Probably a terrible example, but I'm trying to explain the macro ideas involved....because honestly, I don't understand how anything the CBJ did here is unreasonable - or for that matter, different than what any other team does outside of possibly TML or MTL.

If you could afford to buy a McMansion in Dublin, but can't afford to buy insurance for it, do you buy it? Or do you decide to go for something a little more reasonable you can insure?

 

[BluejacketNut]

You could use the Ferrari example, but have to add to the fact that its a salvaged Ferrari. Horton was damaged goods, EVERYONE knew it and not only did we choose not to insure him, we signed him for 7 years when he was already out after surgery! If you were to put together a list of players that could suddenly have a career ending injury, Horton was high on the list. Its a comedy of errors that truly could only happen to this franchise.