MacPhail: Deal is dead (p. 297), stop posting, go outside

[CubinNY]

it's funny that the only ones advocating derosa to stay as a starter & as soriano to stay in the leadoff spot are message board posters. Steve Stone, Jim Hendry, Len Kasper & Piniella all are in favor of derosa being a super sub w/ soriano moving down the lineup as he is not a good fit at leadoff in this lineup. This is not so much about adding roberts as about adding a natural leadoff hitter. Len Kasper on the score even hinted today that fuko may be looked at to lead off if roberts or another leadoff hitter is added. That's the first i've heard this so it is very clear that people in the know (not message board posters) are advocating for soriano to move down in the order.

 

Oy veh.

 

Leadoff hitter is not a position.

In emoticon

 

](*,)

 

I'll have my super sub with pepperchini's and swiss!

[DenverCubs]

it's funny that the only ones advocating derosa to stay as a starter & as soriano to stay in the leadoff spot are message board posters. Steve Stone, Jim Hendry, Len Kasper & Piniella all are in favor of derosa being a super sub w/ soriano moving down the lineup as he is not a good fit at leadoff in this lineup. This is not so much about adding roberts as about adding a natural leadoff hitter. Len Kasper on the score even hinted today that fuko may be looked at to lead off if roberts or another leadoff hitter is added. That's the first i've heard this so it is very clear that people in the know (not message board posters) are advocating for soriano to move down in the order.

All posters are saying is that what we're giving up is too much for Roberts, since we already have DeRosa. We would all rather have Soriano bat fifth and Roberts lead-off than Soriano leading off and DeRosa batting 6th or whatever, but it's the other things we'd be giving up to accomplish the former that make the deal unappealing.

[David]

it's funny that the only ones advocating derosa to stay as a starter & as soriano to stay in the leadoff spot are message board posters. Steve Stone, Jim Hendry, Len Kasper & Piniella all are in favor of derosa being a super sub w/ soriano moving down the lineup as he is not a good fit at leadoff in this lineup. This is not so much about adding roberts as about adding a natural leadoff hitter. Len Kasper on the score even hinted today that fuko may be looked at to lead off if roberts or another leadoff hitter is added. That's the first i've heard this so it is very clear that people in the know (not message board posters) are advocating for soriano to move down in the order.

 

 

I don't know why I'm even gonna bother, but I can't help myself. A lot of "baseball people" aren't very intelligent minds and are only in baseball circles because they were good at playing it at some point in their lives and were able to move up the ranks when they were done. That's not to say that that is the case with all of them, but many of them. Why some people refuse to understand this is beyond me.

 

I'm not even saying it (necessarily) about the names you mentioned, but CHRIST, is it that hard to believe that some people in the general population who happen to post on baseball message boards just might be smarter people or better at analyzing the game than this fraternity of former players? Is it also that hard to believe that some of these smarter individuals (although the tide is starting to finally turn a bit) have a hard time getting into the game's upper ranks because this fraternity has historically generally only allowed its own in?

 

Joe Morgan is "in the know," too. Yep, you basically just touched on my biggest pet peeve ever.

 

BTW, you seem pretty certain that Piniella and Hendry think Soriano leading off is a bad idea, considering the fact that they did it all year last year.

[JGalt73]

Hendry continues to work on possible trades, but informed insiders say no renewed talks are under way for a blockbuster with the Baltimore Orioles that would bring pitcher Erik Bedard and second baseman Brian Roberts to Chicago.

 

Bruce - a shot at Rogers?

[VanceJergins]

it's funny that the only ones advocating derosa to stay as a starter & as soriano to stay in the leadoff spot are message board posters. Steve Stone, Jim Hendry, Len Kasper & Piniella all are in favor of derosa being a super sub w/ soriano moving down the lineup as he is not a good fit at leadoff in this lineup. This is not so much about adding roberts as about adding a natural leadoff hitter. Len Kasper on the score even hinted today that fuko may be looked at to lead off if roberts or another leadoff hitter is added. That's the first i've heard this so it is very clear that people in the know (not message board posters) are advocating for soriano to move down in the order.

 

 

I don't know why I'm even gonna bother, but I can't help myself. A lot of "baseball people" aren't very intelligent minds and are only in baseball circles because they were good at playing it at some point in their lives and were able to move up the ranks when they were done. That's not to say that that is the case with all of them, but many of them. Why some people refuse to understand this is beyond me.

 

I'm not even saying it (necessarily) about the names you mentioned, but CHRIST, is it that hard to believe that some people in the general population who happen to post on baseball message boards just might be smarter people or better at analyzing the game than this fraternity of former players? Is it also that hard to believe that some of these smarter individuals (although the tide is starting to finally turn a bit) have a hard time getting into the game's upper ranks because this fraternity has historically generally only allowed its own in?

 

Joe Morgan is "in the know," too. Yep, you basically just touched on my biggest pet peeve ever.

 

BTW, you seem pretty certain that Piniella and Hendry think Soriano leading off is a bad idea, considering the fact that they did it all year last year.

 

Ummm...Joe Morgan PLAYED baseball. Therefore, he is smarter than anyone who hasn't played major league baseball. How hard is THAT to understand?

[nilodnayr]

If we'd subsitute Marmol for Hill I'd like the Bedard deal. Otherwise you are just screwing yourself down the road.

[nilodnayr]

I hope we can get all 3, that would be amazing! Here is what I would propose:

 

A) Cubs get Bedard and Roberts

Orioles get Pie, Hill, Gallagher, Cedeno, Patterson, Veal, and Dempster

 

B) Cubs get Marlon Byrd

Rangers get Murton and Marquis

 

C) Sign Lofton

 

Cubs rotation: Zambrano, Bedard, Lilly, Lieber, Marshall

Lineup: Roberts, Fukudome, Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Soto, Byrd/Lofton, Theriot

 

Our rotation is only slightly better, our lineup is only slightly better, we've sold out 3 years of a #2 pitcher, given up our best position prospect (if you can call pie a prospect), our 2 best starting pitcher prospects, and 2 of the remaining top 5 position prospects. That is God awful. Ohh and I totally missed giving up Murton.

[Vanilla Ice]

Bedard and Roberts for Pie, Marshall, Hart, Murton, Veal, Cedeno, Dempster/Marquis,

 

Burnett for Dempster/Marquis and DeRosa

 

Greene for Gallagher, Patterson, Theriot

 

Bedard, Zambrano, Hill, Burnett, Lilly

 

Sign Lofton

 

Roberts

Fukudome

Lee

Ramirez

Soriano

Greene

Soto

Lofton/Fuld

 

There is no way anybody in the NL could compete with that rotation

 

Can anybody tell me why this would never happen other than Hendry not wanting to pull the trigger on tha tmany moves, but are there any of the proposals that are unrealistic.

[nilodnayr]

Bedard and Roberts for Pie, Marshall, Hart, Murton, Veal, Cedeno, Dempster/Marquis,

 

Burnett for Dempster/Marquis and DeRosa

 

Greene for Gallagher, Patterson, Theriot

 

Bedard, Zambrano, Hill, Burnett, Lilly

 

Sign Lofton

 

Roberts

Fukudome

Lee

Ramirez

Soriano

Greene

Soto

Lofton/Fuld

 

There is no way anybody in the NL could compete with that rotation

 

Can anybody tell me why this would never happen other than Hendry not wanting to pull the trigger on tha tmany moves, but are there any of the proposals that are unrealistic.

 

Because the Orioles would want more, the Blue Jays would want more, and the Padres would want more?

[98navigator]

Cubs GM Jim Hendry said Sunday that he was not pursuing both Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts in a deal with the Orioles.

 

Hendry didn't deny discussing a Roberts deal with Baltimore, but Bedard wasn't on the table and he said there was no truth the rumored nine-player deal supposedly killed by Orioles owner Peter Angelos.

And Phil Rogers has a source that says we are trying to get Bedard and Roberts. The deal would include Pie among others.

 

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/01/fast-food-for-t.html

 

Who knows what to think anymore.

 

More on this:

 

By Phil Rogers, 1:43 p.m.

 

It's barely noon on a school holiday and already I've heard something intriguing. It came from a very highly placed source, which means it is making the rounds of baseball's decision-makers, but officials with both of the teams involved have either downplayed or denied it -- this would be that big bag of Cubs-for-Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts trade.

 

According to the source, Orioles owner Peter Angelos did shoot this deal down at the end of last week, but the source said that the talks were back on again. Interesting. Very interesting.

 

So what's up with the supposed 7-for-2 deal with Bedard and Roberts? The read here is this involves a lot of both posturing and face-saving as the Cubs try to do the impossible -- that is, make a significant trade with the Orioles for players whom owner Peter Angelos has not ordered dumped (i.e., Miguel Tejada).

 

It makes total sense for the Cubs to pursue both players, not just Roberts. I believe Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has tried to soft sell his interest in hopes of expanding a possible Roberts deal. If Andy MacPhail couldn't get Angelos to sign off on the deal at the end of last week, a combination of frustration and gamesmanship could have led Hendry and Lou Piniella to declare the deal dead at the Cubs' convention. I trust the source who has said it has been revived -- something that could not have happened if Hendry had revealed that Angelos was undercutting MacPhail's authority, which he pledged not to do -- so the question is whether Hendry can balance the needs of the Orioles and Rangers and somehow land Bedard, Roberts and Byrd, maybe even in a three-way deal.

 

And there's still the question of what to do with Mark DeRosa, if Roberts arrives. Some have said the Cubs are worried about Bedard's "medicals,'' but others around baseball believe he should be fine after being shut down at the end of the season with a strained muscle in his side.

 

At the very least, this sounds like Rogers believes his source... I think there's something to this but that doesn't mean that Angelos is going to allow the trade.

[anabiono]

make the bloody trade already...lets go!

[Post Count Padder]

Just seems like more of the same. I refuse to be optimisitic.

 

And if this is all true, and Angelos is shooting down the deal, MacPhail should hand in his resignation papers and spit in Angelos's face on the way out.

[RammyFanny]

Cubs GM Jim Hendry said Sunday that he was not pursuing both Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts in a deal with the Orioles.

 

Hendry didn't deny discussing a Roberts deal with Baltimore, but Bedard wasn't on the table and he said there was no truth the rumored nine-player deal supposedly killed by Orioles owner Peter Angelos.

And Phil Rogers has a source that says we are trying to get Bedard and Roberts. The deal would include Pie among others.

 

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/01/fast-food-for-t.html

 

Who knows what to think anymore.

 

More on this:

 

By Phil Rogers, 1:43 p.m.

 

It's barely noon on a school holiday and already I've heard something intriguing. It came from a very highly placed source, which means it is making the rounds of baseball's decision-makers, but officials with both of the teams involved have either downplayed or denied it -- this would be that big bag of Cubs-for-Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts trade.

 

According to the source, Orioles owner Peter Angelos did shoot this deal down at the end of last week, but the source said that the talks were back on again. Interesting. Very interesting.

 

So what's up with the supposed 7-for-2 deal with Bedard and Roberts? The read here is this involves a lot of both posturing and face-saving as the Cubs try to do the impossible -- that is, make a significant trade with the Orioles for players whom owner Peter Angelos has not ordered dumped (i.e., Miguel Tejada).

 

It makes total sense for the Cubs to pursue both players, not just Roberts. I believe Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has tried to soft sell his interest in hopes of expanding a possible Roberts deal. If Andy MacPhail couldn't get Angelos to sign off on the deal at the end of last week, a combination of frustration and gamesmanship could have led Hendry and Lou Piniella to declare the deal dead at the Cubs' convention. I trust the source who has said it has been revived -- something that could not have happened if Hendry had revealed that Angelos was undercutting MacPhail's authority, which he pledged not to do -- so the question is whether Hendry can balance the needs of the Orioles and Rangers and somehow land Bedard, Roberts and Byrd, maybe even in a three-way deal.

 

And there's still the question of what to do with Mark DeRosa, if Roberts arrives. Some have said the Cubs are worried about Bedard's "medicals,'' but others around baseball believe he should be fine after being shut down at the end of the season with a strained muscle in his side.

 

At the very least, this sounds like Rogers believes his source... I think there's something to this but that doesn't mean that Angelos is going to allow the trade.

Ehh, while I really want to believe this from Rogers, i've got to stick with Bruce's guns.

[98navigator]

Cubs GM Jim Hendry said Sunday that he was not pursuing both Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts in a deal with the Orioles.

 

Hendry didn't deny discussing a Roberts deal with Baltimore, but Bedard wasn't on the table and he said there was no truth the rumored nine-player deal supposedly killed by Orioles owner Peter Angelos.

And Phil Rogers has a source that says we are trying to get Bedard and Roberts. The deal would include Pie among others.

 

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/01/fast-food-for-t.html

 

Who knows what to think anymore.

 

More on this:

 

By Phil Rogers, 1:43 p.m.

 

It's barely noon on a school holiday and already I've heard something intriguing. It came from a very highly placed source, which means it is making the rounds of baseball's decision-makers, but officials with both of the teams involved have either downplayed or denied it -- this would be that big bag of Cubs-for-Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts trade.

 

According to the source, Orioles owner Peter Angelos did shoot this deal down at the end of last week, but the source said that the talks were back on again. Interesting. Very interesting.

 

So what's up with the supposed 7-for-2 deal with Bedard and Roberts? The read here is this involves a lot of both posturing and face-saving as the Cubs try to do the impossible -- that is, make a significant trade with the Orioles for players whom owner Peter Angelos has not ordered dumped (i.e., Miguel Tejada).

 

It makes total sense for the Cubs to pursue both players, not just Roberts. I believe Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has tried to soft sell his interest in hopes of expanding a possible Roberts deal. If Andy MacPhail couldn't get Angelos to sign off on the deal at the end of last week, a combination of frustration and gamesmanship could have led Hendry and Lou Piniella to declare the deal dead at the Cubs' convention. I trust the source who has said it has been revived -- something that could not have happened if Hendry had revealed that Angelos was undercutting MacPhail's authority, which he pledged not to do -- so the question is whether Hendry can balance the needs of the Orioles and Rangers and somehow land Bedard, Roberts and Byrd, maybe even in a three-way deal.

 

And there's still the question of what to do with Mark DeRosa, if Roberts arrives. Some have said the Cubs are worried about Bedard's "medicals,'' but others around baseball believe he should be fine after being shut down at the end of the season with a strained muscle in his side.

 

At the very least, this sounds like Rogers believes his source... I think there's something to this but that doesn't mean that Angelos is going to allow the trade.

Ehh, while I really want to believe this from Rogers, i've got to stick with Bruce's guns.

 

I have to disagree. I have no idea where Bruce stands on this issue right now (especially since it is very fluid) but there is something to this and more than one media person believes this to be true. I can understand the Cubs denials but where there's smoke there's fire. Angelos' interference is making a lot of credible people look bad.

[mdwilla]

I can't remember seeing this much trade speculation in the media about one trade for so long that really doesn't have any big names in it. I know Roberts is an all -star but he really isn't a household name .

[WilcoFan]

it's funny that the only ones advocating derosa to stay as a starter & as soriano to stay in the leadoff spot are message board posters. Steve Stone, Jim Hendry, Len Kasper & Piniella all are in favor of derosa being a super sub w/ soriano moving down the lineup as he is not a good fit at leadoff in this lineup. This is not so much about adding roberts as about adding a natural leadoff hitter. Len Kasper on the score even hinted today that fuko may be looked at to lead off if roberts or another leadoff hitter is added. That's the first i've heard this so it is very clear that people in the know (not message board posters) are advocating for soriano to move down in the order.

 

Considering the Cubs have won as many World Series with me as GM as they have with any of the people you mentioned, I think my opinion is equally valid.

 

Apparently, unless you have a connection that can get you into a front office or a manger's job, you're not smart.

[RammyFanny]

Cubs GM Jim Hendry said Sunday that he was not pursuing both Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts in a deal with the Orioles.

 

Hendry didn't deny discussing a Roberts deal with Baltimore, but Bedard wasn't on the table and he said there was no truth the rumored nine-player deal supposedly killed by Orioles owner Peter Angelos.

And Phil Rogers has a source that says we are trying to get Bedard and Roberts. The deal would include Pie among others.

 

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/01/fast-food-for-t.html

 

Who knows what to think anymore.

 

More on this:

 

By Phil Rogers, 1:43 p.m.

 

It's barely noon on a school holiday and already I've heard something intriguing. It came from a very highly placed source, which means it is making the rounds of baseball's decision-makers, but officials with both of the teams involved have either downplayed or denied it -- this would be that big bag of Cubs-for-Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts trade.

 

According to the source, Orioles owner Peter Angelos did shoot this deal down at the end of last week, but the source said that the talks were back on again. Interesting. Very interesting.

 

So what's up with the supposed 7-for-2 deal with Bedard and Roberts? The read here is this involves a lot of both posturing and face-saving as the Cubs try to do the impossible -- that is, make a significant trade with the Orioles for players whom owner Peter Angelos has not ordered dumped (i.e., Miguel Tejada).

 

It makes total sense for the Cubs to pursue both players, not just Roberts. I believe Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has tried to soft sell his interest in hopes of expanding a possible Roberts deal. If Andy MacPhail couldn't get Angelos to sign off on the deal at the end of last week, a combination of frustration and gamesmanship could have led Hendry and Lou Piniella to declare the deal dead at the Cubs' convention. I trust the source who has said it has been revived -- something that could not have happened if Hendry had revealed that Angelos was undercutting MacPhail's authority, which he pledged not to do -- so the question is whether Hendry can balance the needs of the Orioles and Rangers and somehow land Bedard, Roberts and Byrd, maybe even in a three-way deal.

 

And there's still the question of what to do with Mark DeRosa, if Roberts arrives. Some have said the Cubs are worried about Bedard's "medicals,'' but others around baseball believe he should be fine after being shut down at the end of the season with a strained muscle in his side.

 

At the very least, this sounds like Rogers believes his source... I think there's something to this but that doesn't mean that Angelos is going to allow the trade.

Ehh, while I really want to believe this from Rogers, i've got to stick with Bruce's guns.

 

I have to disagree. I have no idea where Bruce stands on this issue right now (especially since it is very fluid) but there is something to this and more than one media person believes this to be true. I can understand the Cubs denials but where there's smoke there's fire. Angelos' interference is making a lot of credible people look bad.

Bruce's "stance" on this is posted on this page. He basically dispelled Rogers and his "source". I'd like it to be true, but I don't really know.

[inari]

it's funny that the only ones advocating derosa to stay as a starter & as soriano to stay in the leadoff spot are message board posters. Steve Stone, Jim Hendry, Len Kasper & Piniella all are in favor of derosa being a super sub w/ soriano moving down the lineup as he is not a good fit at leadoff in this lineup. This is not so much about adding roberts as about adding a natural leadoff hitter. Len Kasper on the score even hinted today that fuko may be looked at to lead off if roberts or another leadoff hitter is added. That's the first i've heard this so it is very clear that people in the know (not message board posters) are advocating for soriano to move down in the order.

 

I can't tell you how annoying it is that you make the same argument over and over and over. Yes, no one here is a part of an MLB organization. Stop trying to discount their opinions because of it. It doesn't even matter if I agree with Soriano or DeRosa or anything, but this argument you continue using is getting old.

[C.C.]

Deal gets done Thursday or Friday or it never will.

[PrimeTime]

FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal says the Padres are now targeting Matt Murton as they continue to try to fill their hole in left field.

 

Murton is available, but the Cubs don't know if they'll need him later to pull off a bigger deal. He's also in play in the Marlon Byrd talks with the Rangers.

Source: FOXSports.com

 

 

Give us Khalil!!

[anabiono]

i say it gets done tonight...during the midnight hour...booze plays its part...and...whammo...

 

cubs are contenders!

 

:pig:

[inari]

FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal says the Padres are now targeting Matt Murton as they continue to try to fill their hole in left field.

 

Murton is available, but the Cubs don't know if they'll need him later to pull off a bigger deal. He's also in play in the Marlon Byrd talks with the Rangers.

Source: FOXSports.com

 

 

Give us Khalil!!

 

Actually, I could see it happening. We obviously need more than Murton, but that would make a lot of sense

[anabiono]

FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal says the Padres are now targeting Matt Murton as they continue to try to fill their hole in left field.

 

Murton is available, but the Cubs don't know if they'll need him later to pull off a bigger deal. He's also in play in the Marlon Byrd talks with the Rangers.

Source: FOXSports.com

 

 

Give us Khalil!!

 

Actually, I could see it happening. We obviously need more than Murton, but that would make a lot of sense

 

so...then we can forget about roberts and just go after bedard?!?!?

 

\:D/

[C.C.]

FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal says the Padres are now targeting Matt Murton as they continue to try to fill their hole in left field.

 

Murton is available, but the Cubs don't know if they'll need him later to pull off a bigger deal. He's also in play in the Marlon Byrd talks with the Rangers.

Source: FOXSports.com

 

 

Give us Khalil!!

 

Actually, I could see it happening. We obviously need more than Murton, but that would make a lot of sense

 

so...then we can forget about roberts and just go after bedard?!?!?

 

\:D/

 

Why not have Khalil and Roberts\Bedard?

[98navigator]

Cubs GM Jim Hendry said Sunday that he was not pursuing both Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts in a deal with the Orioles.

 

Hendry didn't deny discussing a Roberts deal with Baltimore, but Bedard wasn't on the table and he said there was no truth the rumored nine-player deal supposedly killed by Orioles owner Peter Angelos.

And Phil Rogers has a source that says we are trying to get Bedard and Roberts. The deal would include Pie among others.

 

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/01/fast-food-for-t.html

 

Who knows what to think anymore.

 

More on this:

 

By Phil Rogers, 1:43 p.m.

 

It's barely noon on a school holiday and already I've heard something intriguing. It came from a very highly placed source, which means it is making the rounds of baseball's decision-makers, but officials with both of the teams involved have either downplayed or denied it -- this would be that big bag of Cubs-for-Erik Bedard and Brian Roberts trade.

 

According to the source, Orioles owner Peter Angelos did shoot this deal down at the end of last week, but the source said that the talks were back on again. Interesting. Very interesting.

 

So what's up with the supposed 7-for-2 deal with Bedard and Roberts? The read here is this involves a lot of both posturing and face-saving as the Cubs try to do the impossible -- that is, make a significant trade with the Orioles for players whom owner Peter Angelos has not ordered dumped (i.e., Miguel Tejada).

 

It makes total sense for the Cubs to pursue both players, not just Roberts. I believe Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has tried to soft sell his interest in hopes of expanding a possible Roberts deal. If Andy MacPhail couldn't get Angelos to sign off on the deal at the end of last week, a combination of frustration and gamesmanship could have led Hendry and Lou Piniella to declare the deal dead at the Cubs' convention. I trust the source who has said it has been revived -- something that could not have happened if Hendry had revealed that Angelos was undercutting MacPhail's authority, which he pledged not to do -- so the question is whether Hendry can balance the needs of the Orioles and Rangers and somehow land Bedard, Roberts and Byrd, maybe even in a three-way deal.

 

And there's still the question of what to do with Mark DeRosa, if Roberts arrives. Some have said the Cubs are worried about Bedard's "medicals,'' but others around baseball believe he should be fine after being shut down at the end of the season with a strained muscle in his side.

 

At the very least, this sounds like Rogers believes his source... I think there's something to this but that doesn't mean that Angelos is going to allow the trade.

Ehh, while I really want to believe this from Rogers, i've got to stick with Bruce's guns.

 

I have to disagree. I have no idea where Bruce stands on this issue right now (especially since it is very fluid) but there is something to this and more than one media person believes this to be true. I can understand the Cubs denials but where there's smoke there's fire. Angelos' interference is making a lot of credible people look bad.

Bruce's "stance" on this is posted on this page. He basically dispelled Rogers and his "source". I'd like it to be true, but I don't really know.

 

I like Bruce as much as everyone else but he was the one who said initially, and I believe somewhere in this thread, that the Cubs had expressed no interest in Bedard at all (or something to that effect). Now, he's basically acknowledging that they had talks that, according to his "informed" sources, have not been revived. So there seems to be some kind of disconnect. Unfortunately, this isn't something that can be proven either way because only a small number of people are privy to both sides of the negotiations.