OmarComing25 Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:36 AM) Yes. It seems to work that way with money. I'm sure there are more than a dozen players who would like more money, and it also seems at least the majority of players had no problem with this kid. It still hasn't come out that the kid did anything to bother anyone. And I still don't understand the it's OK if he's here 3 days a week. People who are bothered by his being there all the time, will be bothered by his being there 3 days a week. I guess I just find it bulls*** that they had a deal that allowed the kid 100% unrestricted access, no matter what. If the deal actually specified that much, then LaRoche has a point. But that just seems like a major stretch. And I still don't understand why you keep arguing the second point. There are plenty of things that I like only a few times a week, but would bother me if I had to experience them every day. My girlfriend for instance. I see her about 3-4 times a week, but if I had to see her every day that would drive me crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 The more I digest this, another thing that annoys me: -The "players should regulate their own clubhouse" trope. I think this is generally true, but this is a case where it clearly favors LaRoche. Tell a guy to knock off loud music, behavior, bringing girlfriend, they probably can regulate that. But telling a guy to stop bringing his kid around, that everyone seems to like, when you are new? That seems tailor made for a situation where you bring it to another party to deal with, one that won't make it a personal issue but an organization decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCsoxfan Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 Wow, I can't believe there's so many people on here who are blaming it on the Sox management. Unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 03:36 PM) Yes. It seems to work that way with money. I'm sure there are more than a dozen players who would like more money,but the Sox can't give them more because they are giving John Danks $15 million. and it also seems at least the majority of players had no problem with this kid. It still hasn't come out that the kid did anything to bother anyone. And I still don't understand the it's OK if he's here 3 days a week. People who are bothered by his being there all the time, will be bothered by his being there 3 days a week. Maybe the Sox should ask guys who have sucked to rip up there contracts and play for less. Things change. Teams and players shouldn't be held to their commitments. Sale's contract is ridiculously team friendly. Things change. The White Sox should rip it up immediately and either give him what he deserves or let him become a free agent. you are flopping around all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:42 AM) Wow, I can't believe there's so many people on here who are blaming it on the Sox management. Unreal. It's really just one person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:40 AM) The kid doesn't have to be an asshole for the other players to not feel comfortable having him constantly around. It seems a lot of players are pretty pissed off he won't be around. Why is it necessary to piss off Chris Sale and Adam Eaton in order to accommodate Jimmy Rollins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 Just to throw a bit of humor into the thread... LaRoche = Eddie Harris Rollins= Pedro Cerrano " Up your butt, Jobu" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 This did work out for the White Sox. The worst thing that could have happened was they pissed of most of the players to keep the ones who alledgedly complained happy and LaRoche complied. At least now they have money to spend, and really only KW looks bad. Maybe JR eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 02:44 PM) It seems a lot of players are pretty pissed off he won't be around. Why is it necessary to piss off Chris Sale and Adam Eaton in order to accommodate Jimmy Rollins? Pedro Gomez said there were coaches who didn't like the kid being around so much as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 07:42 AM) The more I digest this, another thing that annoys me: -The "players should regulate their own clubhouse" trope. I think this is generally true, but this is a case where it clearly favors LaRoche. Tell a guy to knock off loud music, behavior, bringing girlfriend, they probably can regulate that. But telling a guy to stop bringing his kid around, that everyone seems to like, when you are new? That seems tailor made for a situation where you bring it to another party to deal with, one that won't make it a personal issue but an organization decision. Agreed. That is a sensitive subject that doesn't need to be made by anyone on the team. Which is why, if it is true that a group of players went to management and asked them to handle it, at which point management did handle it, I'm not sure they didn't handle it appropriately. Where the problems stem from is LaRoche sort of "taking advantage of" a player-friendly rule by utilizing it to the extreme, and in effect, nearly ruining it for everyone, and then some contingent of the team actually revolting against management's decision. The entire thing is a clusterf***, which is why you had all these GMs meeting with their managers in regards to rules regarding family/friends in team facilities yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 Not sure if this has been posted yet but here's Rosenbloom's take. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosen...318-column.html Can't say I disagree with anything he says here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:44 AM) It seems a lot of players are pretty pissed off he won't be around. Why is it necessary to piss off Chris Sale and Adam Eaton in order to accommodate Jimmy Rollins? I highly doubt that it's just Rollins. Sale and Eaton aren't necessarily leaders. Sale is awesome but he is not a smart human. It seems like the locker room is being taken over by some of the new guys. This is a good thing. They have a manager that doesn't lead. This is fine if there are veteran leaders on a baseball team. Last year there were none of those. Most of these new guys have been around and have won before. It's a good thing that the status quo has been challenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:47 AM) This did work out for the White Sox. The worst thing that could have happened was they pissed of most of the players to keep the ones who alledgedly complained happy and LaRoche complied. At least now they have money to spend, and really only KW looks bad. Maybe JR eventually. JR= The Emperor KW= Lord Vader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:44 AM) It seems a lot of players are pretty pissed off he won't be around. Why is it necessary to piss off Chris Sale and Adam Eaton in order to accommodate Jimmy Rollins? That's on Adam himself, not Sox management. They just told him to dial it back. He's the one that decided to quit instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted March 18, 2016 Author Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:04 AM) If Adam LaRoche had a good year last year, I doubt he'd be retiring. If Adam LaRoche had a good year last year, then maybe the front office wouldn't have had to acquire all these new players that don't like having his son around so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:55 AM) That's on Adam himself, not Sox management. They just told him to dial it back. He's the one that decided to quit instead. Agree 100%. Dude didn't have to retire. That's on him. It is kind of amazing that the players are rallying with him after he quit on them. Edited March 18, 2016 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 09:55 AM) If Adam LaRoche had a good year last year, then maybe the front office wouldn't have had to acquire all these new players that don't like having his son around so much. Funny how that works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Tony @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 03:58 PM) If we are going by what we know, everything was seemingly handled right until the players got in front of media, specifically Eaton. I'm still of the belief players went to management and asked for Williams or someone to step in and have that talk with LaRoche, which I agree was the right course of action. However, if Williams agreed to fall on the sword for the team, after LaRoche announced his surprise retirement, Williams needed to have a meeting with the club and make it clear when media asks about this, you give the standard "This is a tight clubhouse, we don't need to go into what was said or personal feelings, this is a team matter and we dealt with it. We're going to miss Adam, but we have a season ahead of us and that is what we are focused on." Everyone needed to come together and be on the same page. That clearly didn't happen, and to me that's where the biggest PR mistake was made. Isn't this exactly what happened until someone from the LaRoche side leaked the story to the Pitt writer and Rosenthal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Tony @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 07:58 AM) If we are going by what we know, everything was seemingly handled right until the players got in front of media, specifically Eaton. I'm still of the belief players went to management and asked for Williams or someone to step in and have that talk with LaRoche, which I agree was the right course of action. However, if Williams agreed to fall on the sword for the team, after LaRoche announced his surprise retirement, Williams needed to have a meeting with the club and make it clear when media asks about this, you give the standard "This is a tight clubhouse, we don't need to go into what was said or personal feelings, this is a team matter and we dealt with it. We're going to miss Adam, but we have a season ahead of us and that is what we are focused on." Everyone needed to come together and be on the same page. That clearly didn't happen, and to me that's where the biggest PR mistake was made. You raise a good point...but what does Kenny do when the team disagrees with management's decision on the matter? You can't muzzle anyone. All you can do is get rid of them. Do you start looking to move some of the vocal players who don't adhere to the organization's messaging? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 04:02 PM) You raise a good point...but what does Kenny do when the team disagrees with management's decision on the matter? You can't muzzle anyone. All you can do is get rid of them. Do you start looking to move some of the vocal players who don't adhere to the organization's messaging? I hope Eaton is renting, not buying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 03:42 PM) The more I digest this, another thing that annoys me: -The "players should regulate their own clubhouse" trope. I think this is generally true, but this is a case where it clearly favors LaRoche. Tell a guy to knock off loud music, behavior, bringing girlfriend, they probably can regulate that. But telling a guy to stop bringing his kid around, that everyone seems to like, when you are new? That seems tailor made for a situation where you bring it to another party to deal with, one that won't make it a personal issue but an organization decision. and as a reach, can lead to physical confrontation. nah it is better that management is the bad guy in this equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 03:45 PM) Just to throw a bit of humor into the thread... LaRoche = Eddie Harris Rollins= Pedro Cerrano " Up your butt, Jobu" i liiiikkkkkkeeee it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (Tony @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 03:05 PM) The Sox don't have a new management structure. They knew 100% leaks would happen and the story would get out. You have to know that. They should have been prepared for that happening. The quotes from Eaton made things a lot worse, and when more leaks started to surface, as of today no one in that locker room has stepped up and said they aren't true. So to me, there is some blame there. Yeah, the whole thing sucks. It's annoying hearing everyone on the Score talk about how this would never happen in the Cubs clubhouse....but I'm sure they're right. One thing I don't think I've said is that I have a ton of respect for KW for not losing his cool if Sale was verbally attacking him. That could have made things wayyyyyyyyyyy uglier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 10:01 AM) Isn't this exactly what happened until someone from the LaRoche side leaked the story to the Pitt writer and Rosenthal? That's quite an assumption. How do you know it wasn't a White Sox player or coach or manager or executive? Say what you want, but Adam LaRoche himself has been pretty quiet. I'm sure his family and close friends probably wanted to know why he retired and he told them. I don't see where that would be a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 04:07 PM) That's quite an assumption. How do you know it wasn't a White Sox player or coach or manager or executive? Say what you want, but Adam LaRoche himself has been pretty quiet. I'm sure his family and close friends probably wanted to know why he retired and he told them. I don't see where that would be a crime. Nothing in this whole thing is a crime or anyone doing anything wrong to the other person. That's why this whole thing is so freaking stupid. LaRoche was stubborn for quitting and Sale needs to worry more about not letting the Twins make him look like Jim Parque. Edited March 18, 2016 by fathom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts