Poll

Who would you rather keep?

Adam LaRoche
68 (60.7%)
Michael Morse
44 (39.3%)

Total Members Voted: 112

Author Topic: Morse or LaRoche  (Read 25294 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 16448
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #725: December 27, 2012, 07:50:14 AM »
There was a deal in place (pending physical) so what does that mean, "can't work out anything"?

That he failed the physical or that the team had second thoughts and used it as an excuse to get him to take less and he's refusing

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 5753
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #726: December 27, 2012, 07:58:35 AM »
That he failed the physical or that the team had second thoughts and used it as an excuse to get him to take less and he's refusing

Really?  They can get away with that?  The league should not let them, if a deal is pending a physical, it should be pass/fail.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 19785
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #727: December 27, 2012, 10:54:22 AM »
There's supposed to be hip damage, which scared away Seattle when they saw it.  The Sox have worked out injury clauses in past contracts (JD Drew, Lackey, maybe others).  They will walk away from a deal if they don't get something that either let's them drop the last year of the contract or get a year at MLB minimum if the preexisting condition leads to significant lost time.  This is why they  did not bring back Jason Bay.  Mind you, if I'm Napoli, I get this stuff worked out within one week of the agreement in principle so I'm not left looking for a job in January with a questionable health tarnish. 

Offline imref

  • Posts: 19135
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #728: December 27, 2012, 11:33:08 AM »
MLBTR:

Quote
The Red Sox are talking with free agent Adam LaRoche, two sources tell Jen Royle of SB Nation Boston (via Twitter).  LaRoche is seeking a three-year deal and a third source tells Royle that he's still not willing to compromise on contract length.

LaRoche would be the alternative to signing Mike Napoli, but major league sources tell Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports that Boston would prefer to complete their deal with the backstop.  The Red Sox haven't given any official word on why the deal with Napoli hasn't been completed, but sources say that an issue with one of Napoli's hips has given the club pause.  There's an agreement in place for a three-year, $39MM deal, but the Red Sox could simply walk from it since it has not been finalized.

If the Red Sox did sign LaRoche, Rosenthal writes that Napoli would go back into the market and likely accept a shorter, cheaper deal, possibly from the Rangers.  The Nationals would fill the void internally by moving Michael Morse to first base and go with an outfield of Bryce Harper in left, Denard Span in center, and Jayson Werth in right.  However, Napoli remains Boston's preference in part because signing LaRoche would cost a second-round pick.

The Napoli problem is familiar territory for Boston as they put language in the contracts of right fielder J.D. Drew and right-hander John Lackey to protect from pre-existing medical conditions.  According to sources, the Red Sox are working to get Napoli to agree to similar protection in his deal.
Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#RYx3zPqSqGF1GGTJ.99

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #729: December 27, 2012, 11:40:42 AM »
The second round draft pick thing really doesn't make sense to me.  Any team with a protecting pick could go and sign Bourn and LaRoche right now at the cost of a 2nd and 3rd round pick.  And they would likely come at a reduced cost since it's kind of late in the game now and the draft pick cost has reduced demand.  Small market teams couldn't do this but a team like the Red Sox - how does it not make sense to do this instead of signing Victorino and Gomes? 

Offline Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 4820
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #730: December 27, 2012, 11:43:36 AM »
The Nationals' offer to LaRoche is off the table now anyway, right?

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 19785
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #731: December 27, 2012, 12:11:21 PM »
A little research on Jen Royle shows she's a friend of Napoli.  This could be a strategic leak from his camp to prompt a response.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 19785
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #732: December 27, 2012, 12:13:12 PM »
The second round draft pick thing really doesn't make sense to me.  Any team with a protecting pick could go and sign Bourn and LaRoche right now at the cost of a 2nd and 3rd round pick.  And they would likely come at a reduced cost since it's kind of late in the game now and the draft pick cost has reduced demand.  Small market teams couldn't do this but a team like the Red Sox - how does it not make sense to do this instead of signing Victorino and Gomes? 
Losing the 2d round pick costs $1MM from the pool available to sign draft choices.

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 9824
  • Hockey season can't get here soon enough
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #733: December 27, 2012, 12:51:15 PM »
The Nationals' offer to LaRoche is off the table now anyway, right?

While I hope you are right, where did you get that information?

I just hope Rizzo doesn't eventually cave on this...career year / contract year = bad juju...

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #734: December 27, 2012, 12:58:35 PM »
Losing the 2d round pick costs $1MM from the pool available to sign draft choices.

Isn't that worth it for a player like Bourn it you are the Red Sox?  Signing Bourn and trading Ellsbury for more than the value of the 2nd round pick would make sense, wouldn't it?  And then they could sign another undervalued free agent like LaRoche or Swisher or someone else at only the cost of a third round pick.  There seems to be an overvaluing of draft picks developing or an inefficiency that a team could exploit. 

Offline mimontero88

  • Posts: 4926
  • #FireMattWilliams
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #735: December 27, 2012, 05:02:12 PM »
Isn't that worth it for a player like Bourn it you are the Red Sox?  Signing Bourn and trading Ellsbury for more than the value of the 2nd round pick would make sense, wouldn't it?  And then they could sign another undervalued free agent like LaRoche or Swisher or someone else at only the cost of a third round pick.  There seems to be an overvaluing of draft picks developing or an inefficiency that a team could exploit. 
Probably not Swisher.

Offline Jordanz Meatballz

  • Posts: 4820
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #736: December 27, 2012, 06:02:26 PM »
While I hope you are right, where did you get that information?

I just hope Rizzo doesn't eventually cave on this...career year / contract year = bad juju...

I don't have any info except for the Christmas "deadline" I've heard rumored. Normally once the deadline passes the offer is off the table, especially when you consider if they raise their offer it'll set a precedent.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 18839
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #737: December 27, 2012, 07:29:44 PM »
I don't have any info except for the Christmas "deadline" I've heard rumored. Normally once the deadline passes the offer is off the table, especially when you consider if they raise their offer it'll set a precedent.
I interpreted it as a preference, moreso than a deadline.  Nats won't go to three years.  They've got options, they can afford to wait and not move off their spot.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 5753
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #738: December 28, 2012, 09:21:51 AM »
Nats won't go to three years. 

That seems fairly clear. The question is, is the two-year offer still on the table.  There is no evidence that it is not, however, if LaRoche went to Rizzo today and accepted the offer, it wouldn't surprise me if Rizzo said, "sorry Adam, we're going in a different direction.  A month ago, I could have gotten a big haul for Morse; today he's not worth close to his value in trade, so we're going with Michael at first base and there is no longer any room for you."

Offline NationalHeat

  • Posts: 502
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #739: December 28, 2012, 09:23:44 AM »
I've never seen a player (I think) overplay his hand so much like ALR has this year. I hope he gets left out in the cold and signs a one year deal with Seattle  :rofl:

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 9824
  • Hockey season can't get here soon enough
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #740: December 28, 2012, 09:28:09 AM »
I've never seen a player (I think) overplay his hand so much like ALR has this year. I hope he gets left out in the cold and signs a one year minor league deal with Seattle  :rofl:

Fixed it for ya...  ;)

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 28899
  • FREE TURNER
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #741: December 28, 2012, 09:38:39 AM »
Come on guys, don't be like that. ALR did a great job for us last year. He's trying to get the best contract for him. It's just business. No reason to wish ill on him.

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 9824
  • Hockey season can't get here soon enough
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #742: December 28, 2012, 09:45:29 AM »
Come on guys, don't be like that. ALR did a great job for us last year. He's trying to get the best contract for him. It's just business. No reason to wish ill on him.

You are, of course, right...

My beef was him was breaking out Latrell Sprewell-like "logic", that his stand on a 3 year deal was "for the kids."  Lame...totally lame...

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #743: December 28, 2012, 09:46:32 AM »
That seems fairly clear. The question is, is the two-year offer still on the table.  There is no evidence that it is not, however, if LaRoche went to Rizzo today and accepted the offer, it wouldn't surprise me if Rizzo said, "sorry Adam, we're going in a different direction.  A month ago, I could have gotten a big haul for Morse; today he's not worth close to his value in trade, so we're going with Michael at first base and there is no longer any room for you."

I think, if we're not at this point already, we are rapidly approaching it.  Maybe the Rays would part with one of their top 10, maybe top 12 prospects for Morse.  Maybe the Indians or Yankees.  Not sure who else out there needs him enough that they'd trade something of significant value for him.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 18839
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #744: December 28, 2012, 09:50:57 AM »
That seems fairly clear. The question is, is the two-year offer still on the table.  There is no evidence that it is not, however, if LaRoche went to Rizzo today and accepted the offer, it wouldn't surprise me if Rizzo said, "sorry Adam, we're going in a different direction.  A month ago, I could have gotten a big haul for Morse; today he's not worth close to his value in trade, so we're going with Michael at first base and there is no longer any room for you."
That would shock me.  If the deal is no longer on the table, that has been communicated to Adam.

Offline raleighnat

  • Posts: 158
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #745: December 28, 2012, 10:39:57 AM »
I don't blame LaRoche or Nats for anything.  Nats have position laid out and no incentive to budge given options.  LaRoche is looking for a longer term deal and completely his right to wait and see if he can get it.  I'm glad that both sides are handling it so professionally.  As for "his kids", anyone is concerned about their legacy...not just to their children but their grandchildren.  He is trying to set himself up to bequeath his family as much long-term financial security as he can.  Nothing wrong with that.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 5753
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #746: December 28, 2012, 10:52:37 AM »
As for "his kids", anyone is concerned about their legacy...not just to their children but their grandchildren.  He is trying to set himself up to bequeath his family as much long-term financial security as he can.  Nothing wrong with that.

Not to speak for Mr. varoadking, but I don't think that's what he was referring to. I think LaRoche has spoken about not having to move his family every one or two years, disrupting his kids schooling, etc.  Which is a bunch of pure hogwash, given that he has a permanent residence somewhere in the midwest on some farm, or ranch, or something, which is where his kids go to school (as far as I know).

Offline expos1994

  • Posts: 112
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #747: December 28, 2012, 10:57:19 AM »
I'm a lefty, which makes LaRoche and Harper two of my favorite players. I get what you all are saying about holding out and dropping Morse's trade value, but I'd love to see LaRoche back at first for a few more years. I'm still hoping the deal gets done soon and he kicks ass for us again in 2013. I know last year was a contract year, but I still expect 25 HRs, 80 RBIs and a consistent if not stellar glove.

I like Morse too, but it was frustrating watching him lumber around in left field.  We are a stronger team with LaRoche at 1st base.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 16448
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #748: December 28, 2012, 10:58:46 AM »
I like Morse too, but it was frustrating watching him lumber around in left field.  We are a stronger team with LaRoche at 1st base.

if morse is at first, you dont have to watch him lumber

Offline expos1994

  • Posts: 112
Re: Morse or LaRoche
« Reply #749: December 28, 2012, 11:11:29 AM »
if morse is at first, you dont have to watch him lumber

How is his glove at first? Has anyone seen enough to get a good read on that?
LaRoche saved a lot of runs and made a lot of plays that an average 1st baseman wouldn't have made.

I will say no matter what happens I still feel confident we're winning the East again. That's a nice position to be in.