When Jonathan Lucroy vetoed the trade to the Cleveland Indians on Sunday morning, fans were understandably upset.
Some felt that Lucroy would put the Indians “over the top” and make them the favorites to at least reach the World Series out of the American League.
It’d be impossible to say the team is better off without Lucroy, but let’s look at a few of the positive takeaways from the Brewers catcher’s decision to reject a trade to Cleveland. Here are five reasons why the Lucroy deal falling apart could be a blessing in disguise for the Tribe
4 Comments
Leave a Reply
Soccer
MLS Playoffs are underway!
Nick Lauren
August 1, 2016 at 11:11 am
This could quite possibly be the dumbest article I’ve ever read. Lucroy vetoed because he was told he would be a part time backup next season…
To say Gimenez or the other jokers behind the plate are even close to Lucroy’s talent is ridiculous…when you have guys batting .165 at a position you have a serious problem. Lucroy is not only clutch, but hits over 300 consistently and also hits for power…not to mention his pitch framing and defense.
I get being a hometown homer…but comeon man
Matt Medley
August 1, 2016 at 11:16 am
Thanks for reading! Did he really veto because of that or was that what his agent fed reporters? More than one side to every story!
If you misread any point in the article that you thought said Giminez and Perez were more-talented or close to as talented as Lucroy, that’s unfortunate. But it never says that at any point. Direct quote: “This is not to say Perez and Giminez are better or even close to as talented as Lucroy, but perhaps Perez and Giminez are just the right guys when it comes to this situation.”
Also he has hit above .300 in 2 out of 7 seasons… so saying he hits above .300 consistently is not true at all. Lucroy’s career-high in home runs was 18 in 2013. Aside from that he has never hit more than 13 home runs in a season. This season he might hit 20 if he keeps up at the pace he’s going.
Matt Medley
October 19, 2016 at 11:12 pm
So what do you have to say for yourself buddy?
Matt Medley
October 19, 2016 at 11:12 pm
So what do you have to say for yourself, buddy?