Rosenthal: Murton for Byrd dead & trade status update

[CubinNY]

And why is that? It's not like any of those players are going anywhere unless a trade is done. I fault Hendry for a lot of things, trying his best to make a trade isn't one of them.

 

Negotiation 101. If Hendry made an offer 3 months ago and kept it on the table, he's a bigger moron that I thought.

 

Yeah, but once again, I don't think we really know that sort of thing. We're just hearing media jabber, it doesn't necessarily match up with the details of what happened behind the scenes.

 

Well I'm not the one who said this is what happened. Cubinny seems to think all the Roberts talk is fan/media nonsense, and that Hendry made one offer a few months ago and left it on the table. I'm saying I doubt that is the case because it would be incredibly stupid.

Why do you doubt it is the case? It's Hendry's exact MO. During the Maddux nonsense a couple of years ago that is exactly what Hendry did. He gave Maddux an offer and let it set until Maddux found a better one or signed with the Cubs. I don't have any more knowledge than the next fan (this side of BigBird) but it seems to me (by reading the actual news reports) Hendry hasn't significantly changed his offer, nor has he walked away. You may call it stupid, but that doesn't make it so.

 

What good does walking away do for Hendry? I guess he can say that he really showed MacPhail by walking away, but then he doesn't get the player he wants. MacPhail may be shopping Roberts but can't get the deal he wants. He'll either come back to Hendry or Roberts won't be traded. In either case Hendry is not stupid for leaving the offer out there. It's only a stupid strategy if doing it precludes doing anything else he'd want to do. That doesn't seem to be the case.

 

Or it's only a stupid thing to do if one has a false sense of manhood. You could call it the "man up" argument.

[jersey cubs fan]

Or it's only a stupid thing to do if one has a false sense of manhood. You could call it the "man up" argument.

 

Okay, next time you want to buy a house, put an offer down and let them sit on it as long as possible.

 

It has nothing to do with manning up. It has everything to do with not being a fool in negotiations.

[UBlink]

Or it's only a stupid thing to do if one has a false sense of manhood. You could call it the "man up" argument.

 

Okay, next time you want to buy a house, put an offer down and let them sit on it as long as possible.

 

It has nothing to do with manning up. It has everything to do with not being a fool in negotiations.

 

If you are the only viable buyer it can be a good strategy. Here's my offer, I'm in no hurry, if you find a better offer take it and good luck to you, but I'm not bidding against myself.

 

At that point whether you say the offer is on or off the table is irrelevant. Sometimes the other party needs more time to realize there's not going to be a better offer.

[jersey cubs fan]

Or it's only a stupid thing to do if one has a false sense of manhood. You could call it the "man up" argument.

 

Okay, next time you want to buy a house, put an offer down and let them sit on it as long as possible.

 

It has nothing to do with manning up. It has everything to do with not being a fool in negotiations.

 

If you are the only viable buyer it can be a good strategy. Here's my offer, I'm in no hurry, if you find a better offer take it and good luck to you, but I'm not bidding against myself.

 

At that point whether you say the offer is on or off the table is irrelevant. Sometimes the other party needs more time to realize there's not going to be a better offer.

 

A couple days, maybe a week, sure. 3 months?

[brinoch]

Hendry also gets criticized for bidding against himself, too. Personally, I don't see huge a problem with this strategy other than the waiting; it's more or less just walking away (without saying you are walking away). In part I agree with you, Goony. Baseball is different than a house or a job. Excellent players are extremely limited commodities that have no agreed upon value or even a common value basis among the various teams, so making a deal is hard and the importance of moving with celerity is obvious.

 

Still, as long as you aren't increasing your deal, leaving a deal on the table for consideration is fine. But don't let the other side draw more out of you and don't cease looking for other options. In short, don't let it distract you or your team.

[Springfield_CUBBY]

Baseball is different than a house or a job. Excellent players are extremely limited commodities that have no agreed upon value or even a common value basis among the various teams, so making a deal is hard and the importance of moving with celerity is obvious.

 

Still, as long as you aren't increasing your deal, leaving a deal on the table for consideration is fine. But don't let the other side draw more out of you and don't cease looking for other options. In short, don't let it distract you or your team.

Great point! It's like buying a car that I think has 60,000 miles on it, but Jim Hendry thinks it's a 4 bedroom house . . . Our offers are going to be quite different . . .

[CubinNY]

Or it's only a stupid thing to do if one has a false sense of manhood. You could call it the "man up" argument.

 

Okay, next time you want to buy a house, put an offer down and let them sit on it as long as possible.

 

It has nothing to do with manning up. It has everything to do with not being a fool in negotiations.

 

If you are the only viable buyer it can be a good strategy. Here's my offer, I'm in no hurry, if you find a better offer take it and good luck to you, but I'm not bidding against myself.

 

At that point whether you say the offer is on or off the table is irrelevant. Sometimes the other party needs more time to realize there's not going to be a better offer.

Funny you should mention that. That is exactly what happened with us. We went looking for a house (this is when houses were still selling quickly). We found one on a fishing pond but the house needed some updating and we would have had to install a fence for our dogs. We made an offer to the lady. She said she didn't like it. We thought it was fair and said that was our offer. I told the agent that we would keep it there. The agent got kind of pissed as asked if we were going to counter. I told him no. I told him to call me if they reconsider.

 

A month later he called me back, but we'd already put money down on some property.

[UBlink]

Or it's only a stupid thing to do if one has a false sense of manhood. You could call it the "man up" argument.

 

Okay, next time you want to buy a house, put an offer down and let them sit on it as long as possible.

 

It has nothing to do with manning up. It has everything to do with not being a fool in negotiations.

 

If you are the only viable buyer it can be a good strategy. Here's my offer, I'm in no hurry, if you find a better offer take it and good luck to you, but I'm not bidding against myself.

 

At that point whether you say the offer is on or off the table is irrelevant. Sometimes the other party needs more time to realize there's not going to be a better offer.

 

A couple days, maybe a week, sure. 3 months?

 

Suppose you put that offer down on a house with a 2 day ultimatum and the seller doesn't accept it. You move on and continue looking, but can't make a deal on anything you like. Now suppose 3 months later the sellers' agent calls and says the seller has reconsidered and wants to make a deal around your original offer. You've since spent 3 months looking without success for a better deal. Do you reject the deal because it has passed your artificial deadline?

 

Edit; posted before seeing CubinNY's eerily similar response.

[jersey cubs fan]

Suppose you put that offer down on a house with a 2 day ultimatum and the seller doesn't accept it. You move on and continue looking, but can't make a deal on anything you like. Now suppose 3 months later the sellers' agent calls and says the seller has reconsidered and wants to make a deal around your original offer. You've since spent 3 months looking without success for a better deal. Do you reject the deal because it has passed your artificial deadline?

 

Edit; posted before seeing CubinNY's eerily similar response.

 

If I still want the house, not necessarily. But I might consider coming in lower, considering the reason they came back to me was because they couldn't find anything better.

 

 

The point of contention was "leaving an offer on the table." That is quite different from saying, "hey, if you ever decide to sell, keep me in mind."

[Abe Frohman]

Why put down an ultimatum? How does that benefit you? CubinNY had a good bargaining chip by leaving the offer on the table. Did CubinNY lose anything? No. Still found a property by expanding his options.

 

Hendry may have left an offer on the table that the Orioles may take. He has already given up too many prospects for guys like Juan Pierre, Steve Trachsel, etc. Roberts will make this team better, but the Cubs are in good shape with DeRosa in the meantime. No need to push the issue.

[jersey cubs fan]

Why put down an ultimatum? How does that benefit you? CubinNY had a good bargaining chip by leaving the offer on the table. Did CubinNY lose anything? No. Still found a property by expanding his options.

 

Hendry may have left an offer on the table that the Orioles may take. He has already given up too many prospects for guys like Juan Pierre, Steve Trachsel, etc. Roberts will make this team better, but the Cubs are in good shape with DeRosa in the meantime. No need to push the issue.

 

So you make an offer. If it isn't accepted, you say "I still have interest, so if you ever figure out what you're going to do, give me a call."

 

You don't leave the offer on the table.

[Abe Frohman]

So you make an offer. If it isn't accepted, you say "I still have interest, so if you ever figure out what you're going to do, give me a call."

 

You don't leave the offer on the table.

 

Why not? I would say you don't leave an offer on the table AND expect it to work out. Nothing wrong with leaving an offer on the table and searching elsewhere.

 

What's the worst thing that could happen if you leave it on the table? You don't have to honor it later on down the line.

[CubinNY]

Why put down an ultimatum? How does that benefit you? CubinNY had a good bargaining chip by leaving the offer on the table. Did CubinNY lose anything? No. Still found a property by expanding his options.

 

Hendry may have left an offer on the table that the Orioles may take. He has already given up too many prospects for guys like Juan Pierre, Steve Trachsel, etc. Roberts will make this team better, but the Cubs are in good shape with DeRosa in the meantime. No need to push the issue.

 

So you make an offer. If it isn't accepted, you say "I still have interest, so if you ever figure out what you're going to do, give me a call."

 

You don't leave the offer on the table.

If you said that to MacPhail and he came back at the end of ST and said "ok we agree to (whatever it is that you offered)". Do you say, "not so fast, we are now only offering this (a lessor package")? Or do you say we have a deal?

[Tracer Bullet]

Why put down an ultimatum? How does that benefit you? CubinNY had a good bargaining chip by leaving the offer on the table. Did CubinNY lose anything? No. Still found a property by expanding his options.

 

Hendry may have left an offer on the table that the Orioles may take. He has already given up too many prospects for guys like Juan Pierre, Steve Trachsel, etc. Roberts will make this team better, but the Cubs are in good shape with DeRosa in the meantime. No need to push the issue.

 

So you make an offer. If it isn't accepted, you say "I still have interest, so if you ever figure out what you're going to do, give me a call."

 

You don't leave the offer on the table.

 

This is pretty much it. You don't leave the offer out there for months. You don't slam the door or play games (if they call back a week later ready to accept, you don't change the offer just to be a jerk). But you don't just say, here's our open-ended offer. If you do that, what motivation do the Os have for accepting it? They can look around and talk to other teams. See if someone's 2B gets hurt in ST and suddenly there's a bigger market, etc.

 

As jersey said all along - that's essentially negotiating 101.

[brinoch]

Look, I seriously doubt that Hendry left an offer on the table for three months. But, so what if he did? Leaving a trade offer on the table is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same as walking away and telling them to call if they are interested in resurrecting the deal. You are going to start from the same spot in negotiations regardless.

 

I mean, think about it... if you say "That's my final offer, take it or leave it," and they say no and you break off negotiations, only to resurrect them two months later, is: "That's my final offer. Let me know if this will work. Take as much time as you need," so very different?

[CubinNY]

As jersey said all along - that's essentially negotiating 101.

In what business school would such a useless strategy be taught? Only someone trying to sell something that is hot or who is desperate does such a thing.

[Guest]

Look, I seriously doubt that Hendry left an offer on the table for three months. But, so what if he did? Leaving a trade offer on the table is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same as walking away and telling them to call if they are interested in resurrecting the deal. You are going to start from the same spot in negotiations regardless.

 

I mean, think about it... if you say "That's my final offer, take it or leave it," and they say no and you break off negotiations, only to resurrect them two months later, is: "That's my final offer. Let me know if this will work. Take as much time as you need," so very different?

Yes, actually.

 

There's a significant school of thought in negotiation theory that says the ONLY power in a negotiation comes from the willingness to walk away from the deal. When the original offer is not accepted and you demonstrate your willingness to walk away, you increase your power. By leaving it on the table, you are demonstrating your lack of desire to walk away and weaken your position.

[UBlink]

Why put down an ultimatum? How does that benefit you? CubinNY had a good bargaining chip by leaving the offer on the table. Did CubinNY lose anything? No. Still found a property by expanding his options.

 

Hendry may have left an offer on the table that the Orioles may take. He has already given up too many prospects for guys like Juan Pierre, Steve Trachsel, etc. Roberts will make this team better, but the Cubs are in good shape with DeRosa in the meantime. No need to push the issue.

 

So you make an offer. If it isn't accepted, you say "I still have interest, so if you ever figure out what you're going to do, give me a call."

 

You don't leave the offer on the table.

 

To me that's the same as leaving the offer on the table. You're saying I'm not bidding against myself, and if I find a different second baseman or trade the same pieces I was offering for Roberts to somebody else then it's clear the deal is no longer on the table. But if I'm still looking and you change your mind, give me a call.

 

I have no doubt that if someone had come along and offered Hendry a better deal on a leadoff/second baseman (his emphasis, not mine) he would have been happy to take it and thumb his nose at the O's.

Edited March 25, 2008 by UBlink

[Guest]

As jersey said all along - that's essentially negotiating 101.

In what business school would such a useless strategy be taught? Only someone trying to sell something that is hot or who is desperate does such a thing.

Ever read a book on negotiation theory? It would seem you haven't. I'd recommend "Getting to Yes" by a group of authors representing, iirc, Harvard.

[CubinNY]

Look, I seriously doubt that Hendry left an offer on the table for three months. But, so what if he did? Leaving a trade offer on the table is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same as walking away and telling them to call if they are interested in resurrecting the deal. You are going to start from the same spot in negotiations regardless.

 

I mean, think about it... if you say "That's my final offer, take it or leave it," and they say no and you break off negotiations, only to resurrect them two months later, is: "That's my final offer. Let me know if this will work. Take as much time as you need," so very different?

Yes, actually.

 

There's a significant school of thought in negotiation theory that says the ONLY power in a negotiation comes from the willingness to walk away from the deal. When the original offer is not accepted and you demonstrate your willingness to walk away, you increase your power. By leaving it on the table, you are demonstrating your lack of desire to walk away and weaken your position.

That's only the case where the two opponents are in an equal position. This is nothing like that case. I can see no way Hendry's position is weakened by saying this is what we have to offer, see if you can find a better one.

 

when someone is making a high pressure pitch, most of the time the right thing to do is walk away.

[CubinNY]

As jersey said all along - that's essentially negotiating 101.

In what business school would such a useless strategy be taught? Only someone trying to sell something that is hot or who is desperate does such a thing.

Ever read a book on negotiation theory? It would seem you haven't. I'd recommend "Getting to Yes" by a group of authors representing, iirc, Harvard.

I've read plenty.

Edited March 25, 2008 by CubinNY

[Guest]

Look, I seriously doubt that Hendry left an offer on the table for three months. But, so what if he did? Leaving a trade offer on the table is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same as walking away and telling them to call if they are interested in resurrecting the deal. You are going to start from the same spot in negotiations regardless.

 

I mean, think about it... if you say "That's my final offer, take it or leave it," and they say no and you break off negotiations, only to resurrect them two months later, is: "That's my final offer. Let me know if this will work. Take as much time as you need," so very different?

Yes, actually.

 

There's a significant school of thought in negotiation theory that says the ONLY power in a negotiation comes from the willingness to walk away from the deal. When the original offer is not accepted and you demonstrate your willingness to walk away, you increase your power. By leaving it on the table, you are demonstrating your lack of desire to walk away and weaken your position.

That's only the case where the two opponents are in an equal position. This is nothing like that case. I can see no way Hendry's position is weakened by saying this is what we have to offer, see if you can find a better one.

 

when someone is making a high pressure pitch, most of the time the right thing to do is walk away.

Okay...

 

when you enter the negotiations from roughly equal bargaining position, that basically simply means that each party is equally willing to walk away. How else do you gain power in a negotiation?

[Guest]

As jersey said all along - that's essentially negotiating 101.

In what business school would such a useless strategy be taught? Only someone trying to sell something that is hot or who is desperate does such a thing.

Ever read a book on negotiation theory? It would seem you haven't. I'd recommend "Getting to Yes" by a group of authors representing, iirc, Harvard.

I've read plenty.

Then you should know better. ;)

[CubinNY]

Look, I seriously doubt that Hendry left an offer on the table for three months. But, so what if he did? Leaving a trade offer on the table is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same as walking away and telling them to call if they are interested in resurrecting the deal. You are going to start from the same spot in negotiations regardless.

 

I mean, think about it... if you say "That's my final offer, take it or leave it," and they say no and you break off negotiations, only to resurrect them two months later, is: "That's my final offer. Let me know if this will work. Take as much time as you need," so very different?

Yes, actually.

 

There's a significant school of thought in negotiation theory that says the ONLY power in a negotiation comes from the willingness to walk away from the deal. When the original offer is not accepted and you demonstrate your willingness to walk away, you increase your power. By leaving it on the table, you are demonstrating your lack of desire to walk away and weaken your position.

That's only the case where the two opponents are in an equal position. This is nothing like that case. I can see no way Hendry's position is weakened by saying this is what we have to offer, see if you can find a better one.

 

when someone is making a high pressure pitch, most of the time the right thing to do is walk away.

Okay...

 

when you enter the negotiations from roughly equal bargaining position, that basically simply means that each party is equally willing to walk away. How else do you gain power in a negotiation?

In a real sense that is exactly what Hendry has done (if he's done that). Here is what I have to offer. If you can beat it good for you, if not come and see me. It's his MO, give the best offer and see if they take it.

[UBlink]

For all we know Hendry's been involved in lots of discussions that start out "Now keep this quiet so it doesn't turn into a circus like the Roberts fiasco". So far we don't know about them, but maybe that's a result of more discretion rather than lack of interest.