Skip to content

Adam LaRoche and the Nationals “are at a stalemate”

Dec 17, 2012, 10:47 AM EDT

Adam LaRoche Reuters

Last week the Nationals were said to be sticking with their two-year, $25 million offer to Adam LaRoche and now Bill Ladson of reports that the two sides “are at a stalemate” in negotiations.

LaRoche continues to want a three-year deal–which would be similar to Mike Napoli‘s contract with the Red Sox–and the Nationals aren’t budging on two years, no doubt due in part to having Michael Morse as a pretty nice fallback option at first base should LaRoche go elsewhere.

If they do re-sign LaRoche it could lead to Morse being traded, which might suggest the Nationals want to know one way or another soon, but according to Ladson’s source “nothing has changed since the season came to an end.”

  1. historiophiliac - Dec 17, 2012 at 10:57 AM

    Clearly here, someone is not talking to God.

    • paperlions - Dec 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM

      In fairness, Greinke didn’t talk to god either, he just signed at the place that offered him the most money.

  2. lphboston - Dec 17, 2012 at 11:30 AM

    I’m liking the Nats’ position here.
    Looks like any teams that wanted ALR might be having second thoughts, so the market might be drying up a bit.
    That said, if I was Rizzo I’d tighten the noose a bit by setting a deadline so things can be settled heading into spring training.
    Morse at 1B is a little scary, especially considering Zimmerman’s throwing problems late in the year. But he’ll hit, and if he’s healthy he could do a lot of damage at 5 or 6 in the lineup.
    Plus, the overall defense is excellent (Span is a huge upgrade), and unless injuries take a heavier toll than usual, Washington’s offense will compensate for anything lost in the ALR/Morse swap at 1B.

  3. dwrek5 - Dec 17, 2012 at 11:32 AM

    Apparently LaRoche has a poor Nattitude.

  4. Charles Gates - Dec 17, 2012 at 12:30 PM

    Stalemate: (noun) person you’ve slept with for awhile so it’s somewhat routine and less exciting but you’ll go back because it’s better than nothing and it’s not that bad.

    LaRoche will resign at the Nats’ price.

  5. kkolchak - Dec 17, 2012 at 12:34 PM

    Doesn’t sound like the Rangers have pounced on the chance to get LaRoche as some thought they might if they lost out on Hamilton. This is one of those cases where both sides have good reasons for not budging.

  6. shawndc04 - Dec 17, 2012 at 12:44 PM

    It wouldn’t surprise me now if ALR’s pride prevents him from resigning with the Nationals under their terms.

  7. dcfan4life - Dec 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

    I think Laroche is more or lesses surprised at the lack of interest in him. He always wanted to resign with the Nats, and the Nats want him, especially Davey Johnson. But no other team has offered him a 3 year deal, which he would have used as leverage against the Nats. Hence the stalemate.

  8. bravojawja - Dec 17, 2012 at 1:38 PM

    Call it two years for $26.6 million and a mutual option for a third. Roachey doesn’t lose money, Nats get their man, nobody loses face or respect.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. B. Crawford (2864)
  2. C. Correa (2672)
  3. Y. Puig (2595)
  4. G. Stanton (2574)
  5. G. Springer (2546)
  1. H. Pence (2420)
  2. H. Ramirez (2273)
  3. J. Hamilton (2253)
  4. M. Teixeira (2211)
  5. J. Baez (2129)