Jonathan Lucroy explains why he rejected a trade to the Indians
Instead, Lucroy went from the Brewers to the Rangers
By Chris Bahr
Aug 5, 2016 at 11:27a ET
Indians fans were shocked when Jonathan Lucroy vetoed a trade to Cleveland prior to the nonwaiver deadline. And now Lucroy is detailing that decision.
The Brewers and Indians agreed to a deal for Lucroy this past Saturday, yet Lucroy now plays for the Rangers. He spoke with ESPN’s Robert Sanchez about the whirlwind of his first experience being traded and the tough decisions he had to make:
My agent, Doug Rogalski, found out it was the Indians that traded for me. I was surprised, but I wanted to keep an open mind. Great team. Competitive team. There's a real chance to win. Doug called Chris Antonetti, the Indians' president. There was one thing we wanted to know: What was my future with the Indians? We knew Cleveland already had a good catcher, Yan Gomes, who's injured right now. He's getting paid more than me, and he's younger than me. We knew they'd probably want him catching almost every day next year. Heck, if I were the general manager in Cleveland, I'd want Gomes catching every day.
We were right. Antonetti told Doug that the Indians couldn't make any promises on me catching next season. There was no way they'd drop the team option, either, because I'm pretty inexpensive in 2017. I don't blame them. I would have been mostly at first base and designated hitter. In the end, that was the deal killer. Doug called me. He said, You're not going there.
Cleveland fans don't like that part, but it's nothing against them. it wasn't personal. If anything, I have even more respect for the Indians because of Antonetti's honesty. He could have lied to my agent and said I'd play catcher every day next season. But he didn't. He told the truth. I'm thankful for that. My decision not to go to Cleveland had nothing to do with the team, but it had everything to do with my future in this game. It was an economic decision. Period.
Lucroy then detailed how the trade to the more catcher-needy Rangers materialized – he was in the airport when he got the news – and expressed his excitement about being in a pennant race again.
Who knows, he might even end up facing the Indians in October.
Re: General Discussion
6767Jonathan Lucroy did us all a favor by using his no-trade clause
By Matt R. Lyons
The sting may last for a while, but Lucroy's decision was right for him and it was right for the Indians' future.
In a sort of tell-all with ESPN Friday morning, Texas Rangers catcher Jonathan Lucroy guest wrote a post detailing the events of last weekend when the Cleveland Indians had a deal in place to acquire him from the Milwaukee Brewers but it wound up being vetoed by his no-trade power. There is not a whole lot of new information found in the post, but it affirms something that a lot of Indians fan may already: He did us a huge favor.
In the post, the All-Star catcher touches on the process that went down Saturday night following the Brewers' game against the Pittsburgh Pirates -- what would end up being his final game in Milwaukee -- and how he found out about being traded to an unknown team while the Brewers front office worked out medicals. When he did find out it was the Indians, he writes that he was surprised (really?) and his agent had some bad news. The Indians could not guarantee he would be the starting catcher in 2017.
We knew Cleveland already had a good catcher, Yan Gomes, who's injured right now. He's getting paid more than me, and he's younger than me. We knew they'd probably want him catching almost every day next year. Heck, if I were the general manager in Cleveland, I'd want Gomes catching every day.
Lucroy is, of course, in his right to use the no-trade clause he negotiated into his contract five years ago, but his reasoning still seems weak to me. Essentially, he is saying he does not think he can beat out a rapidly declining catcher who has not hit an average rate in almost two years because the other catcher is "younger" (by less than a year) and "getting paid more" than him (which isn't true in 2017). Yes, Gomes is signed for much longer, but he was already occasionally losing playing time early in the season to Roberto Perez, who started four games between April 14 and April 30 prior to his thumb injury.
Gomes was the everyday starter in Cleveland prior to his own injury, but only out of necessity. The idea that the Indians would not start Lucroy over him in 2017 is insanity.
Demanding the team you are going to say that you are going to be the everyday starter is a slippery slope in the first place. What if Chris Antonetti did guarantee such a thing, then Lucroy suddenly drops off a cliff when he arrives in Cleveland. Would they still need to keep that promise to keep Lucroy happy? The way I see it, Antonietti took the realistic route of not guaranteeing anything, but Lucroy would have had to at least prove he could beat out Yan Gomes in Spring Training next season. And if he did not think he could do that, that's Jonathan's problem. Not the Indians.
Unless something dramatic and explosive happens, I hope to never write about this saga on Let's Go Tribe again, but it felt worth it to say thank you, Jonathan Lucroy. Thank you for vetoing the trade because you didn't think you could beat out the worst-hitting Indians batter in the last century for a starting job next season. Thank you for vetoing the trade and not bringing the clubhouse turmoil that would come if you were not the starting catcher next season, for any reason, and your agent got worried about your value in the offseason.
In the end, Jonathan Lucroy made the right decision for himself, the Rangers, and the Indians.
By Matt R. Lyons
The sting may last for a while, but Lucroy's decision was right for him and it was right for the Indians' future.
In a sort of tell-all with ESPN Friday morning, Texas Rangers catcher Jonathan Lucroy guest wrote a post detailing the events of last weekend when the Cleveland Indians had a deal in place to acquire him from the Milwaukee Brewers but it wound up being vetoed by his no-trade power. There is not a whole lot of new information found in the post, but it affirms something that a lot of Indians fan may already: He did us a huge favor.
In the post, the All-Star catcher touches on the process that went down Saturday night following the Brewers' game against the Pittsburgh Pirates -- what would end up being his final game in Milwaukee -- and how he found out about being traded to an unknown team while the Brewers front office worked out medicals. When he did find out it was the Indians, he writes that he was surprised (really?) and his agent had some bad news. The Indians could not guarantee he would be the starting catcher in 2017.
We knew Cleveland already had a good catcher, Yan Gomes, who's injured right now. He's getting paid more than me, and he's younger than me. We knew they'd probably want him catching almost every day next year. Heck, if I were the general manager in Cleveland, I'd want Gomes catching every day.
Lucroy is, of course, in his right to use the no-trade clause he negotiated into his contract five years ago, but his reasoning still seems weak to me. Essentially, he is saying he does not think he can beat out a rapidly declining catcher who has not hit an average rate in almost two years because the other catcher is "younger" (by less than a year) and "getting paid more" than him (which isn't true in 2017). Yes, Gomes is signed for much longer, but he was already occasionally losing playing time early in the season to Roberto Perez, who started four games between April 14 and April 30 prior to his thumb injury.
Gomes was the everyday starter in Cleveland prior to his own injury, but only out of necessity. The idea that the Indians would not start Lucroy over him in 2017 is insanity.
Demanding the team you are going to say that you are going to be the everyday starter is a slippery slope in the first place. What if Chris Antonetti did guarantee such a thing, then Lucroy suddenly drops off a cliff when he arrives in Cleveland. Would they still need to keep that promise to keep Lucroy happy? The way I see it, Antonietti took the realistic route of not guaranteeing anything, but Lucroy would have had to at least prove he could beat out Yan Gomes in Spring Training next season. And if he did not think he could do that, that's Jonathan's problem. Not the Indians.
Unless something dramatic and explosive happens, I hope to never write about this saga on Let's Go Tribe again, but it felt worth it to say thank you, Jonathan Lucroy. Thank you for vetoing the trade because you didn't think you could beat out the worst-hitting Indians batter in the last century for a starting job next season. Thank you for vetoing the trade and not bringing the clubhouse turmoil that would come if you were not the starting catcher next season, for any reason, and your agent got worried about your value in the offseason.
In the end, Jonathan Lucroy made the right decision for himself, the Rangers, and the Indians.
Re: General Discussion
6768I am pretty sure I heard Antonetti say that he did not talk to Lucroy on TV. So......he may have talked to his agent? I am sure Antonetti would not lie on replayable TV so.........the Agent made the decision most probably. And he might have twisted things to Jonathan in such a way that he (the agent) might make more money on the deal. Is this not plausible? Just MHO.
Re: General Discussion
6769Yes, his statement, quoted in the first article I posted, says the agent talked to Antonetti:
My agent, Doug Rogalski, found out it was the Indians that traded for me. I was surprised, but I wanted to keep an open mind. Great team. Competitive team. There's a real chance to win. Doug called Chris Antonetti, the Indians' president. There was one thing we wanted to know: What was my future with the Indians? We knew Cleveland already had a good catcher, Yan Gomes, who's injured right now. He's getting paid more than me, and he's younger than me. We knew they'd probably want him catching almost every day next year. Heck, if I were the general manager in Cleveland, I'd want Gomes catching every day.
We were right. Antonetti told Doug that the Indians couldn't make any promises on me catching next season. There was no way they'd drop the team option, either, because I'm pretty inexpensive in 2017. I don't blame them. I would have been mostly at first base and designated hitter. In the end, that was the deal killer. Doug called me. He said, You're not going there.
My agent, Doug Rogalski, found out it was the Indians that traded for me. I was surprised, but I wanted to keep an open mind. Great team. Competitive team. There's a real chance to win. Doug called Chris Antonetti, the Indians' president. There was one thing we wanted to know: What was my future with the Indians? We knew Cleveland already had a good catcher, Yan Gomes, who's injured right now. He's getting paid more than me, and he's younger than me. We knew they'd probably want him catching almost every day next year. Heck, if I were the general manager in Cleveland, I'd want Gomes catching every day.
We were right. Antonetti told Doug that the Indians couldn't make any promises on me catching next season. There was no way they'd drop the team option, either, because I'm pretty inexpensive in 2017. I don't blame them. I would have been mostly at first base and designated hitter. In the end, that was the deal killer. Doug called me. He said, You're not going there.
Re: General Discussion
6770He just overplayed his hand.
Looking for a cash buyout of his no trade clause and/or waiving the club option for next season.
Brewers could have satisfied his needs, but they didn't.
Tribe could have satisfied his needs, but they didn't.
Did he get anything from Texas...nope.
Want some advice, Jon?
Fire your agent.
Looking for a cash buyout of his no trade clause and/or waiving the club option for next season.
Brewers could have satisfied his needs, but they didn't.
Tribe could have satisfied his needs, but they didn't.
Did he get anything from Texas...nope.
Want some advice, Jon?
Fire your agent.
Re: General Discussion
6771Actually, the fact that he got nothing from Texas leads me to believe Lucroy's story.
Texas has absolutely nothing at catcher.
Gomes, like him or not, we all know is signed to a multi year deal. And we also know he works well with out pitching staff and is otherwise good defensively.
So there's no doubt that if Lucroy wanted to be a catcher in his walk year, Texas was the place. They are also a contender, so all the better for him of course.
Texas has absolutely nothing at catcher.
Gomes, like him or not, we all know is signed to a multi year deal. And we also know he works well with out pitching staff and is otherwise good defensively.
So there's no doubt that if Lucroy wanted to be a catcher in his walk year, Texas was the place. They are also a contender, so all the better for him of course.
"I've suffered a great many tragedies in my life....most of them never happened". Mark Twain
Re: General Discussion
6772Bottom line in all trades, whether they go through or not actually, is that you never know the outcome until it all plays out.
So, in the Tribe's case we have to see how Mejia turns out. As well, if the Tribe has a successful postseason, they will be damn glad they didn't make that trade.
Hell, we could call up Mejia next season and he goes NAQUIN on the league!
Meanwhile, for Texas, after next season they will have a damn expensive commodity asking for lots of years and money. So if they never get anywhere they are screwed.
Texas, by the way, also gave up 2 very good prospects in the deal.
Bottom line, if we are being honest, we don't know if it was a good thing or bad thing he turned it down. As in life, only time tells.
So, in the Tribe's case we have to see how Mejia turns out. As well, if the Tribe has a successful postseason, they will be damn glad they didn't make that trade.
Hell, we could call up Mejia next season and he goes NAQUIN on the league!
Meanwhile, for Texas, after next season they will have a damn expensive commodity asking for lots of years and money. So if they never get anywhere they are screwed.
Texas, by the way, also gave up 2 very good prospects in the deal.
Bottom line, if we are being honest, we don't know if it was a good thing or bad thing he turned it down. As in life, only time tells.
"I've suffered a great many tragedies in my life....most of them never happened". Mark Twain
Re: General Discussion
6773Bottom line is Milwaukee thought they had a better deal with the Tribe. Settled for Texas' offer.
On Mejia....Tribe willing to trade him once. Should be willing to put him in another deal, if necessary.
On Mejia....Tribe willing to trade him once. Should be willing to put him in another deal, if necessary.
Re: General Discussion
6774Agree on those both seagull, however getting an all star catcher for the season and the next season (dirt cheap) was what got them to offer Mejia.
Highly unusual circumstance.
Highly unusual circumstance.
"I've suffered a great many tragedies in my life....most of them never happened". Mark Twain
Re: General Discussion
6776Lindor and Naquin were on MLB channel yesterday.
http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/7417714/v1 ... r%2BNaquin
http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/7417714/v1 ... r%2BNaquin
Re: General Discussion
6777It seems to me that there is something bothering Lindor. Not sure what, and not sure why I feel that way.
UD
Re: General Discussion
6778Awesome, thanks for posting that HB. Every, every time I hear Lindor, I am so impressed with this kid! What a gift for this team.
"I've suffered a great many tragedies in my life....most of them never happened". Mark Twain
Re: General Discussion
6780I actually think it's underrated how impactful Lindor is on this team. Both on and off the field. A complete superstar, offense and defense at SS is sooooo valuable.
"I've suffered a great many tragedies in my life....most of them never happened". Mark Twain