There’s been a great deal written about the reasons behind Jonathan Lucroy’s decision to invoke his no-trade clause in order to veto a trade to the Indians, and Lucroy himself has elected to set the record straight, as told to ESPN.com’s Robert Sanchez. The entire explanation is well worth a look for any fan, but Cleveland fans feeling jilted by Lucroy will especially want to take a look to read his own take.
When first informed by Brewers GM David Stearns that he’d been traded, Lucroy said he wasn’t informed which team had struck a deal to acquire him, as medical information needed to be examined before anything could be finalized. He assumed, however, that he’d been dealt to a club that didn’t appear on his no-trade list, as he wasn’t asked about waiving the clause at the time. When Lucroy’s agent, Doug Rogalski, learned it was Cleveland who had the agreement, he called Lucroy to inform him. As Lucroy says…
“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.”
Lucroy stresses that the decision was not because of any negative feelings he harbors toward the city of Cleveland, Indians fans or the Indians organization. He, in fact, was sure to state that he actually respects the organization even more now due to Antonetti’s honesty: “He could have lied to my agent and said I’d play catcher every day next season. … He told the truth. I’m thankful for that.”
Lucroy calls the decision to reject the trade purely economic, believing that teams wouldn’t place as high of a value on him as a free agent if it had been more than a calendar year since he’d regularly been catching games. He also expressed a basic love for the position of catcher — his regular spot on the diamond since he was 12 years old — and spoke about the difficulty he had when thinking of not manning the spot on a near-daily basis in 2017. Lucroy goes on to discuss the uneasiness of waiting to find out if he’d be traded, the impact that the talks had on his wife and young daughter, the emotion he felt in his final at-bat as a member of the Brewers and the relief he felt not only from being traded to a contending club but one that is close to his offseason home in Louisiana. “I know I had nothing to do with the Rangers getting to where they are now, but I want to have a lot to do with finishing the job,” he closes.
Again, readers are strongly encouraged to check out Lucroy’s full statements, as they provide a behind-the-curtain look at the thoughts, emotion and stress that fans and the media alike will often take for granted when discussing trades.
Classy stuff from Lucroy. I wish him all the best.
Lucroy is a class act. I don’t think he wanted to snub Cleveland fans and I believe what he says about how it all went down. I’m hoping he spends the rest of his career as a Texas Ranger.
Says the Rangers fan lol. Nah this comment doesn’t reek of bias, not at all. Give me a break.
Oh, get over yourself.
I am not a rangers fan. I agree with that statement about Lucroy.
I second that
Jealous much?
good point otto, bias is funny
Class.
He didn’t have to do that. This explanation speaks volumes of his character.
I wish him well in Texas even if I wanted him to split even time with Yadi as a catcher in a cardinal uniform.
The fact that he gave some type of explanation about why he vetoed a trade says absolutely zilch about his character. He realized he would be bombarded with questions until he answered thoroughly so that’s what he did. Again, absolutely nothing character revealing about that.
He had the right not to give an explanation and chose to anyways. He applauded the Indians for their honesty and likewise, we should applaud him for his. Sometimes life is better when you choose to see the best in people.
So, Lucroy answers questions from a reporter. He answers truthfully and explains his thought process. His reasoning is logical and is not based out of spite or hatred. Just a little hint of greed. This man is an American Hero!
How many honest people are there any more?? Maybe it should be applauded!!
Just Lucroy and Alex Rodriguez left.
Who is calling him a hero? The commenters have simply a newly gained respect for Lucroy for giving an honest answer. I for one know very little about Lucroy, but have a gained respect for his thoughtfulness in his response, and passion for craft. And as for the “hint of greed”, if your boss came to you and told you to change your job position to a less lucrative position that you enjoy less? Would a person who loves IT take a position in HR, even though it pays less and is less enjoyable? Would a salesperson take a job in HR if again, it pays less and is less enjoyable?
So it’s not a “trade rumor”, but how can you come to a site like this and NOT enjoy insight on players that you wouldn’t have known?
I believe he displayed good character because the expectation of a typical athlete is just the opposite.
Their are many who view athletes as overpaid, playing a game for for fun, chicken and beer indulging on non starting days, domestic abusing, PED using, nightclub brawling, disrespecting of media, child abusing, faking injuries, problem in the clubhouse, betting on a team you manage and play for, DUI for falling asleep at a stoplight, holding out of playing because of their bad agent deal, speeding over 100 mph in a residential neighborhood, getting your car window bashed in because your spouse suspects infidelity, and just generally being a jerk type of people.
Maybe you are right? Lucroy’s decision to be upfront to Cleveland fans about his choices isn’t that big of a deal and some might say it was imperative. I would not.
Just hatin away
Lucroy is a real class act, we will miss him in Milwaukee!
It makes sense why he blocked the trade. Not playing at his position and becoming a FA would not have been in his best interest. He wants to catch and he get to do that with a playoff contender. I hope the Rangers do well one of teams I will be rooting for in the playoffs.
As a 50+ year Cleveland Indians fan (yes, we exist!), while I wish Lucroy had chosen to come and play at the corner of Ontario and Carnegie, I completely understand his decision to block the trade to Cleveland.
He’s got one more opportunity to cash in on a big contract starting in 2018. His prospective suitors very likely would use his lack of playing time behind the plate in Cleveland during the 2017 season as a negotiating tool, to cut down on his bargaining power.
The Indians are in a tough spot, because they’ve got quite a bit of money invested in Yan Gomes, and have had rather diminishing results over the last couple seasons. It’s not likely that they’re going to find ANYONE to take over his contract.
But look on the brightside……Roberto Perez had two hits today, to almost double his batting average……..to .093.
You would think this was Babe Ruth being traded. How many times have players said no to a trade? Isn’t that why they negotiate it? Way to much paper being wasted on Lucroy. Shows there isn’t much else to write about now that the deadline has passed.
Did you actually read the article? It was a really good piece. Baseball players are human, not numbers on your computer screen.
It’s hard to compare different eras. A vetoed trade isn’t something you see everyday. The Trade Deadline, complexities of MLB contacts, press, and social media have changed the way we deal with these subjects. It’s a great piece. Also, stl_cards16’s comment is on point.
As a baseball fan, it is rather interesting to divulge in the reason a player would choose to veto a trade, especially if the reason is as reasonable and thoughtful as Lucroy’s. He could have easily said “Cleveland is on my no trade clause, the end” or “I just don’t the city of Cleveland”, and that would have been enough.
And even though he admitted to the economic benefits of continuing to play catcher – which, you can take that as you will, but before you call him greedy, would you turn down a higher pay rate to NOT change the position you are currently working in?: –
the passion he spoke with discussing his love for catching shows the human side of the player. I’m not even a huge fan of Lucroy, but I am familiar enough with him as a player that this piece piqued my interest (enough to click on the article), and I left satisfied with his response, and respect him more as a person because of it.
Really, why would you not? Honest question, because other than irrational anger, I can’t see a reason to be upset about this.
Not sure why anyone would be upset or surprised that he said no to a team on his “No trade” list.
Generally because said player had come out in the past saying that (if they were traded) they’d like to go to a winning team. And then when said player is traded to a winning team, it looks cockamamie that they’d reject the trade.
Nice piece by Lucroy, and by Steve Adams. His explanation is sensible and rational. And, I think it’s good that sometimes fans get a chance these guys are people with homes and families and not just automatons in uniforms. Lucroy gave Milwaukee great value while he was there, and respect as he left. I’m not sure anyone could ask for more.
This trade should have never been made public knowledge. The Brewers GM dropped the ball by first not going to the player first to see if he would even waive his negotiated right to be traded to Cleveland. Lucroy looked to be the Villain here when in fact he was a innocent bystander. Apparently Stearns missed the Common Sense seminar sessions at Harvard.
It is his first year as GM. I’m sure mistakes will happen.
That being said, is there proof that Stearns was the one who said anything to the media about the trade before going to Lucroy?
Which part did you not read? I’m guessing the website name. MLB Trade RUMORS. This isn’t 2004. We have websites dedicated to this. Reporters have insiders in every organization. Word gets out, especially since deals have to go through the league office and onto the other teams.
Cleveland’s GM CAN’T negotiate with Lucroy until they trade for him. The only way Lucroy gets to talk to Chernoff is if Chernoff pulls off a trade first.
I can’t believe Indians fans are mad at him, what’s the point of a no trade clause if you’re not allowed to use it?
Logic, or being impartial, is a foreign concept in fandom.
Why on earth would they NOT install him as the starter?
Yan Gomes? If the Indians reason for losing. Lucroy because they wanted to make the starting C job in ’17 am open competition they deserve to lose him to Texas.
Yan Gomes um…u dunno….can’t hit a baseball good.
Exactly, but the didn’t want to go on record and make promises. Lucroy shows his insecurity, because he could’ve came in and proven his worth and taken hold of the starting job. Worst case scenario he splits duty behind the plate and picks up PT at 1B and DH and saves a bit of wear on his knees and then goes back into the free agency market and the bidders go in with the intent to make him a full time catcher again.
It’s not insecurity. There is no reason for a catcher to go to a team where he isn’t going to be guaranteed a job as the starting catcher. He’s getting older and coming off some injury concerns, any team looking to lock him up long term is going to want to see how he handles the daily wear and tear of catching. Splitting time at C/1b/dh does nothing to benefit his bargaining power as a FA unless he gets hurt or deteriorates down the stretch as a catcher. If anything, this is him showing faith in himself, his body, and his skill set to carry him through an entire season as a catcher.
If you’re the Indians you’re paying Gomes a lot of money to catch and he’s proven he can catch and hit at a high level. He obviously isn’t now, but they don’t want to just give up on their investment. Moving Lucroy to 1B or DH says them money on a Napoli type in the offseason (mind you this is a small market clue) and gives the a shot at turning around their Gomes investment.
Great stuff
I’m kool with Lucroy makes perfect sense why he excercised his no trade clause. Class move by Lucroy with explaining his reasons why he said no to Tribe. My beef is the Indians are 9-10 since the Gomes injury. R. Perez should of been moved in the offseason. Indians should of upgraded R. Perez by moving him with SS Erik Gonzalez ( has no shot to play, sad to see him promoted & sit 2 weeks) who’s blocked for a better #2 catcher. Conger was available (yes an overpay but his personality would fit with us better then T.B.). Rene Rivera was available after Rays got Conger from the Astros. Both those Catchers would have been better. The thing with R. Perez is game calling & our pitchers PACE is slower thus the bad results last week. Today Carrasco was having issues w/ Perez & threw FIVE pickoff attempts to a non stealing threat in Refsnyder. Mickey Calloway had to come out to get R. Perez & Carrasco on the same page. Also losing T. Wolters to sign T. Hunter cheap looks really bad now. I actually think the Indians should option R. Perez, purchase Quiroz (can’t be worse then Perez) from AAA & DFA Mcalister/Aguilar. Then purchase Josh Martin (who S.D picked in rule 5) really anyone is better then Mcallister at this point (WHIP is closing in on 2.00). Indians won’t find catcher on the waiver wire (Holaday to Boston Wilson to T.B.) so try fixing it within. I’d like to see Indians go Quiroz/Gimenez then add Gomes when fully healthy in Sept. & not promote Perez.
Problem with your thinking is the Tribe thought Perez was a top flight backup catcher. They actually entertained offers for him as others thought he could start. He hasn’t been healthy all season and was pressed back into duty without being fully healed.
The thing is Gomes can handle a pitching staff and from what I’ve seen he can throw a runner out, also I wouldn’t want Gomes and Lucroy on the same team, they are 2 capable starting catchers with their alternate positions blocked, 1B and DH, so it would just be useless when Gomes got back and beyond that.
We all knew why he did it. Most people in Cleveland and milwaukee(til we got a better package from Texas). We’re annoyed cause it’s hard to believe in the last 6 months of trying to trade him there hasn’t been a convo between Stearns and or Doug Melvin with luc about why these teams were on his list and what he’d veto. They should have talked to him of course but he or his agent should have made it clear if the team has an established catcher and they are in his list he’ll veto it.
He balked because he had leverage with the trade to Cleveland thinking he’d cash in when they came back and paid him or made him a free agent at the end of the season. When they called his bluff now he tries to justify it.
It makes plenty of sense for someone at a premium position (catcher) not wanting to give it up. If a player is a great 1B/Dh he’ll still be paid; if his passion is catching and he’s an average (or worse) defender at 1B it becomes a no-brainer.
Ask a starting pitcher to be a reliever for a year before free agency; if he has a choice, why would he?
Why are people mad that he exercised a right he bargained for in his contract? Milwaukee could have, in the first place, traded him to a team that wasn’t on his no-trade list and there would be nothing to talk about. They looked around, decided what they best offer was, regardless of no-trade, and then tried to make the deal. He said no. How many of us, in the same situation, wouldn’t have acted similarly?
Interesting story from Lucroy. What’s interesting about it is that a high-ranking Indians baseball operations person said on the radio in Cleveland that story is completely made up by Lucroy. He said that anti-tampering rules actually forbid the Indians from discussing anything with Lucroy (since he was under contract with Milwaukee) and that Milwaukee told them that they had assurance that Lucroy wanted to go to Cleveland.
However, when the trade happened, he tried to leverage his no-trade into more $$$ by asking Cleveland to decline his 2017 option.
Either way, somebody is lying and it sounds much more likely it’s Lucroy.
Your “high-ranking Indians Baseball Ops Guy” is mistaken. Exercising (or not exercising) extensions, guaranteeing bonuses, positional changes; teams trading for a player can chat with them about all of these things, with permission. It’s actually common.
Your mystery man on the radio seems far more made up.
the guy was Antonetti himself. he did an interview during a game I believe the Thursday after the deadline saying that it was against the rules for them to talk to lucroy. anybody with mlbtv can find it
they also released a statement on the beginning of the Monday or Tuesday game saying they recognized him as one of the top 3 catchers in baseball and had no intention of moving him to 1st. but like the guy said up top he’s not babe Ruth.
it was Antonetti. he did an in game interview and said they weren’t allowed to talk to lucroy. they also said they never intended to have him play 1st.
Gomes has been on a downward trend the last two years… Any serious look at the statistics will tell you exactly why Cleveland was willing to trade for Lucroy. Lucroy’s clearly the better player, and his excuse about about being worried about playing time is a flat out lie. Lucroy’s claiming to be worried about playing time when you’re (1) competing against an inferior player, and (2) would be on showcase this year and the next in order to either trade you or make you more attractive for a qualifying offer. I would respect Lucroy if he just flat out said “I don’t want to play in/for Cleveland”.. Be honest about how you feel, and that’s that. Don’t give us a bullshit explanation that anyone with common sense can see through.
Great. Now, can we finally put this story to rest?
There is no gallantry in this situation. This was about a player trying to use the little bit of leverage that he had trying to get next years contract either renegotiated or torn up. Plain and simple.
You work in construction as a certified welder, and you LOVE welding; it makes you happy and fills you with purpose. You’re contracted with a company with a non-compete clause. Another company buys out your company, but they already have a certified welder and only need one. They want you to be a carpenter. You don’t like carpentry; you’re not that great at it and it makes you feel lousy. The new company both refuses to release you from your contract so you can do the work you love and refuses to pay you more to make up for the situation. At the end of your contract new employers look at your recent work and see only shoddy, average carpentry and are concerned that you’ve lost the ability to do stellar welding. Your contract offers reflect this. Now, are you happy?
It wasn’t about next year’s compensation, it was about not playing his position and not being compensated for it. There’s a difference.