Originally Posted by 1940757690
LaRoche did what anyone would and should do--tried to get the best deal he could coming off a season where he kept the team going when Zimm and Werth were out and Harper was slumping. From a Reds perspective, it's about depth. In DC, we have three bonafide closers now and two primetime catchers--all sharing time. When you have a chance at real talent at the right price, makes sense to take advantage and then do what you have to do to make the pieces fit. That's good management (general and field). Not saying it would have worked but also saying the January/pieces in place argument isn't the best way to look at it imho.
I don't blame him for trying to get money, but he is the reason why us and several other teams couldn't trade for him. If he came here we would have to sit him or Ludwick every game without a DH unless we sit an even better player, we have Ludwick signed for next year at big money so you aren't going to do that to your investment.
Your Washington examples don't translate because most catchers always share time unless they are stars and neither of then have proven to be that yet. Having Soriano, Storen and Clippard just makes for a deep pen since all get to work the same amount of time as they would if it was just one of them there.
Now that there's a gaping hole its easy to say but if there wasn't any injuries we would have issues getting them AB and keeping them happy. If it was as easy as storing an everyday player who should be starting on the bench while making everyday money the Nats would have held on to him themselves for insurance.