Jump to content
LittleHurt05

Adam LaRoche retires

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 12:27 AM)
Maddon said he wants no part of a kids in the clubhouse policy. He said it is up to the players to police it themselves.

 

Same with Ventura. Too bad for KW that he's the bad guy cause LaRoche wouldn't adhere to the wishes of a few teammates/coaches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 04:53 PM)
This should be an easy case, either it is in the contract or its not. Unless this is some sort of bizarro world where they had junior high school students drafting the contract there will be something called a integration/merger clause so either its in the contract or its not.

 

Id be willing to bet its not in the contract so this wont go far.

 

Not necessarily. Custom and practice and unwritten "rules of the shop" play major roles in labor relations cases, particularly grievances. However, as I said previously, the fact that he quit effectively dooms any meaningful remedy for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't see how LaRoche would want this becoming a lawsuit. Does he really want to have his ex-teammates giving statements about if they do/don't like his son in the clubhouse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 06:28 PM)
Same with Ventura. Too bad for KW that he's the bad guy cause LaRoche wouldn't adhere to the wishes of a few teammates/coaches.

KW is the bad guy because he din't care that his GM and manager gave their OK for this arraingment when signing the player, and made their word worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 06:31 PM)
I just can't see how LaRoche would want this becoming a lawsuit. Does he really want to have his ex-teammates giving statements about if they do/don't like his son in the clubhouse?

 

Oh, I agree. But I don't think it would be a lawsuit by LaRoche, but instead a grievance from MLBPA challenging management's right to unilaterally change a past practice, generally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:33 PM)
KW is the bad guy because he din't care that his GM and manager gave their OK for this arraingment when signing the player, and made their word worthless.

 

Who's to say in all of this the agreement wasn't "he's welcome as much as he wants in the clubhouse unless it's a distraction to teammate(s)". No one in that pathetic clubhouse says a word last year, and the new guys come in and say something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 06:34 PM)
Who's to say in all of this the agreement wasn't "he's welcome as much as he wants in the clubhouse unless it's a distraction to teammate(s)". No one in that pathetic clubhouse says a word last year, and the new guys come in and say something.

For all this speculation about new players coming in and complaining, there is not one report the kid was nothing but a well behaved quiet class act who stayed out of the way.

 

If the players have a problem with it and can't discuss it with LaRoche who is supposed to be the nicest guy in the world, they are p*****s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (raBBit @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 04:34 PM)
It was. Alex Rios, of all people, went outside the Royals clubhouse and pleaded with Sale to come to his senses.

yikes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 12:38 AM)
For all this speculation about new players coming in and complaining, there is not one report the kid was nothing but a well behaved quiet class act who stayed out of the way.

 

If the players have a problem with it and can't discuss it with LaRoche who is supposed to be the nicest guy in the world, they are p*****s.

 

if you don't mind, i am going to play the devil's advocate here.

 

lets say you were a player that had a problem with a players kid being there, maybe b/c you want to cuss, say raunchy girls jokes or what ever. but you feel restraint in saying anything, or for this discussion, the player says watch your mouth b/c of the kid. you ask that player the next day to not bring in the kid in the clubhouse as a favor and that player say go screw yourself side ways.

 

what is or would be your next response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Condor13 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 02:02 PM)
I go back to what I said yesterday. KW looks like a complete *** and is destroying this teams chemistry. I mean what other organization would let a VP destroy **** the way KW has done. The players apparently we're all opposed to KW, and Sale (your damn prized possession) was so furious with KW that he told him to get the **** out of the locker room and stat out. Sale is right, KW is the VP but thinks he is the Manger and the GM. Stay the **** out of the locker room cause all he has manged to do is **** things up year after year.

 

He might have even cost the sox a future with sale as thir ace.

 

KW has to ******* go and now!!!

 

Rant over.

Technically this is not true; it's been reported that there were also players who complained about the 24/7 access. Doesn't make anyone involved look like less of an ass tho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (LDF @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 06:47 PM)
if you don't mind, i am going to play the devil's advocate here.

 

lets say you were a player that had a problem with a players kid being there, maybe b/c you want to cuss, say raunchy girls jokes or what ever. but you feel restraint in saying anything, or for this discussion, the player says watch your mouth b/c of the kid. you ask that player the next day to not bring in the kid in the clubhouse as a favor and that player say go screw yourself side ways.

 

what is or would be your next response.

I wouldn't go running to Kenny. But it would take an awful lot for me to be bothered by a kid in my workplace. It is pretty rare in my line of work but it happens occassionally, and usually they are a lot of fun, or just keep to themselves. And If someone did complain to Kenny, he should have said as a condition of him signing, the GM and manager green lighted his access. There is nothing he can do now, he can change the rules next year. The kid is a good kid, just deal with it, and do your job.i

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 12:54 AM)
I wouldn't go running to Kenny. And If someone did complain to Kenny, he should have said as a condition of him signing, the GM and manager green lighted his access. There is nothing he can do now, he can change the rules next year. The kid is a good kid, just deal with it, and do your job.i

 

ok, you are not going along with the question but that is ok, the point i am trying to make is, whom ever went to upper management was trying to not get into a confrontation that may have been worst. people get really defensive about their kids and people saying anything that may come across as a cautionary advise to correct themselves.

 

your mind is made up and i respect that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 06:54 PM)
I wouldn't go running to Kenny. And If someone did complain to Kenny, he should have said as a condition of him signing, the GM and manager green lighted his access. There is nothing he can do now, he can change the rules next year. The kid is a good kid, just deal with it, and do your job.i

You keep using this as an argument when its been stated time and time again that nobody credible has confirmed if this kid was guaranteed 100% access at all times as a condition of LaRoche signing here. Youre making an enormous assumption because it fits your narrative but in reality if it isnt in the contract or if LaRoche doesnt publicly state that this was guaranteed to him and by whom your argument is pretty much useless. Hell, even if LaRoche tries to make the claim and Kenny denies it then we will never know the truth, but if it isnt in the contract (which I severely doubt it is) then its not gonna matter anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 07:02 PM)
You keep using this as an argument when its been stated time and time again that nobody credible has confirmed if this kid was guaranteed 100% access at all times as a condition of LaRoche signing here. Youre making an enormous assumption because it fits your narrative but in reality if it isnt in the contract or if LaRoche doesnt publicly state that this was guaranteed to him and by whom your argument is pretty much useless. Hell, even if LaRoche tries to make the claim and Kenny denies it then we will never know the truth, but if it isnt in the contract (which I severely doubt it is) then its not gonna matter anyway.

I think the guys dad an ex big leaguer and coach is a pretty reliable source.and the report that Hahn and Ventura didn't agree with KW lines up with that as well.

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to hear more tomorrow. Kinda spinning wheels.

 

Also, Danks is starting tomorrow, so there's that to get pissed about too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 07:06 PM)
I think the guys dad an ex big leaguer and coach is a pretty reliable source.and the report that Hahn and Ventura didn't agree with KW lines up with that as well.

Unless his dad was there when the contract was signed on what planet is that a reliable source? Wtf is his dad gonna say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 07:10 PM)
Unless his dad was there when the contract was signed on what planet is that a reliable source? Wtf is his dad gonna say?

Rosenthal mentioned Kaplan and said 2 other sources said there was a verbal agreement.

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 07:12 PM)
Rosenthal mentioned Kaplan and said 2 other sources said there was a verbal agreement.

The only credible sources are likely KW, LaRoche and probably LaRoches agent. People making assumptions is why this is such a mess in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 06:58 PM)
Purdue lost!!!!

 

BIg 10 sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent interview with Scot Gregor on the Score on the insides of the clubhouse. I suggest you seek that out on podcast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (flavum @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 01:24 AM)
Excellent interview with Scot Gregor on the Score on the insides of the clubhouse. I suggest you seek that out on podcast.

 

Cliffnotes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Tony @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 07:28 PM)
So if you we are going by sources and rumors, which is a lot of what we have here unfortunately, then the reports of Rollins and others going to management about the issue is just as credible.

 

I went back to read some early posts in this thread just for the hell of it to see what reaction was to this before anyone really started making statements to the press about this, and you mentioned you thought it was weak to give LaRoche an ultimatum when it comes to his son. I don't really think that's the case. The story we have is this issue was brought up a week ago, I believe on a Sunday, and LaRoche didn't change anything, Drake continued to be with the team. At that point, another conversation was had with LaRoche, saying to scale it back from 100%, not completely remove him from the clubhouse. At that point, LaRoche MADE THE CHOICE to walk away. Almost everyone is agreement that the decision by LaRoche caught everyone off guard, including the Sox management.

 

And that also goes back to the verbal agreement. Things change. It seemingly wasn't any issue to anyone last year. Nor this off-season. I agree the timing on this is very weird, and the reason for that is newcomers in the locker room, seemigly guys that have influence, seemed to have an issue with it. So like any reasonable business, management sits down with it's employee, and tries to work out a soulition. By Williams own quotes, he gave LaRoche options. Drake did not have to leave the clubhouse cold turkey and never return. Adam didn't like what he heard, and took his ball and left. I just can't wrap my head around the talk of "They had a verbal agreement, that seals the deal on everything."

 

JR had a press conference ripping Horace Grant for backing out of a verbal deal. He didn't mention things change. To me a verbal agreement whether legally enforceable or not is your word. I believe your word should mean something.This is a windfall for the White Sox, and it will eventually blow over, but if they did make this verbal agreement what they did was wrong, unless there is something somewhere, anywhere that shows this kid was being disruptive. There isn't anything stating anything remotely like that. Everywhere you look, Rosnethal, Passan, Hayes, whoever else, it is reported there is no better behaved kid in any clubhouse, and the kid actually worked. He cleaned spikes, flipped balls to the fungo guy etc. if he was acting poorly, you can change the arrangement the team allegedly agreed upon. The fact that it pissed a lot of players off so much tells you the kid was obviously not an ass. Eaton tweeted the team is as solid together as ever. He could be saying that to say that or this could be true.

 

Think about the spot Robin is in right now. He is either with his players or with the guy who determines if he gets another contract. Either way he is screwed. So the Robin haters probably have reason to rejoice. This is it for him.

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (TheTruth05 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 02:51 PM)
Would the vet players who complained had really said something if they didn't think and see LaRoche was more focused on playing coach to his son then actually prepping for the season. I wouldn't even doubt some last year guys said something since they figured he'd sharpen up this ST since last year he was downright terrible.

 

 

Tom Shaer was just on with Laurence Holmes and mentioned that guys complained last year as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I wonder if a player wants to bring his 14 year old daughter into the clubhouse , would that be okay as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×