PDA

View Full Version : Lovullo to Cubs blocked?



bagwell368
11-05-2013, 01:42 PM
Heyman writes:

Lovullo remains in limbo as dispute arises between Cubs, Red Sox

Red Sox bench coach Torey Lovullo remains in limbo and the Cubs' managerial search is temporarily on hold as a dispute over his availability to them is being waged between the Red Sox and Cubs.

The Cubs have been denied permission to ask about Lovullo's availability for their managerial job, at least for now, as Red Sox higher-ups are claiming their agreement to allow Theo Epstein to leave to become Cubs president prohibits him from hiring away Red Sox employees.

Lovullo, the Red Sox bench coach, would appear to be a serious managerial candidate for the Cubs -- if only he was given a chance by his current bosses. But at this point, Red Sox management isn't allowing Epstein to ask for permission to interview Lovullo.

The Cubs were hoping to have a manager in place by the GM meetings next week in Orlando, so the goal was to hire a manager this week. If they believe it's worth waiting for Lovullo, that may not happen.

The Cubs are said to have been impressed with a few of the men they've already interviewed, and it's believed that Padres bench coach Rick Renteria and Padres executive A.J. Hinch are among those being most strongly considered. They are "in the mix," said someone familiar with the situation.

The sticky situation involving Lovullo was first mentioned by Ken Rosenthal of Foxsports.com.

Lovullo, Epstein, Red Sox GM Ben Cherington and Red Sox president Larry Lucchino didn't immediately return texts.

It isn't known whether there is a time frame by which the Red Sox can prevent hires by Chicago. But it has been two years since Epstein left.

Technically, Epstein wouldn't be poaching one of the employees who was with the Red Sox when he left for Chicago, as Lovullo moved to work for John Farrell in Toronto after Epstein left. But it's possible the Red Sox could try to invoke the letter of the agreement.

The other issue, of course, is Lovullo. There are only 30 major-league managing jobs, and the one with the Cubs is one of the most coveted in many circles. Would Boston ownership stick to its guns regarding an agreement with a team in the other league, and risk upsetting Lovullo?


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++

If you ask me this makes the Sox FO above GM look like morons. Let the man go.

RaginRondo17
11-05-2013, 01:45 PM
Lets see if we can get some compensation out of him before we let him go. (alert sarcasm meter)

RedSoxtober
11-05-2013, 01:51 PM
If you ask me this makes the Sox FO above GM look like morons. Let the man go.

It does, but it does not surprise me at all. 99.999% certainty that all this is coming from Lucchino and that it's no more than him trying to assert himself over the eminently more popular Epstein one more time.

Lovullo deserves better.

-Lavigne43-
11-05-2013, 02:02 PM
That's ridiculous and has Lucchino written all over it. You don't block a coach from the possibility of becoming a manager. I can't remember a team doing that, embarrassing.

Melo15
11-05-2013, 03:10 PM
If you ask me this makes the Sox FO above GM look like morons. Let the man go.

Completely agree.

todu82
11-05-2013, 05:10 PM
Yeah, I hope the team allows Lovullo to go to Chicago or wherever else he wants to go to. As others have said this makes the team look bad.

EEasyA
11-05-2013, 05:59 PM
I really can't blame the front office on this decision. It's easier to over look the front office side on this whole situation. If theo couldn't hire any Red Sox employees for a couple of years, then it applies here. Screw Theo. he can hire another manager. It mustn't be Luvollo.

EEasyA
11-05-2013, 06:01 PM
I never get why other teams think that they can poach other teams managers or front office employees anytime they want too.

RaginRondo17
11-05-2013, 06:10 PM
I never get why other teams think that they can poach other teams managers or front office employees anytime they want too.

Because if another organization thinks your worth a promotion to a higher spot then you should be allowed the chance.

-Lavigne43-
11-05-2013, 06:26 PM
There's a difference between blocking lateral front office moves and blocking a possible promotion to a prolific job. You don't block coaches from becoming managers, and front office people from becoming GM's. It's ridiculous. Those jobs are very hard to get. This is totally Luchhino trying to get one over Theo. If Luchhino wasn't in the organization there is no doubt in my mind we let them interview Lovullo


I never get why other teams think that they can poach other teams managers or front office employees anytime they want too.

The irony of this is that we just did this last year when we took half of Toronto's coaching staff.

Bo Sox Fan
11-05-2013, 07:17 PM
Lets see if we can get some compensation out of him before we let him go. (alert sarcasm meter)

Don't laugh, Mike Aviles was the most important trade piece last offseason bringing in Jon Farrell, and a World Series title.

Lackeyfan41
11-05-2013, 09:02 PM
I don't know the agreement between Theo and hiring Red Sox coaches... but you have to let the guy go and take the promotion, you can't stop him from doing that. That is pretty sad if they are doing that.

bagwell368
11-05-2013, 09:14 PM
I really can't blame the front office on this decision. It's easier to over look the front office side on this whole situation. If theo couldn't hire any Red Sox employees for a couple of years, then it applies here. Screw Theo. he can hire another manager. It mustn't be Luvollo.

I believe you are uninformed.

The unwritten, but very strictly honored rule (for decades) is that teams don't block coaches (or FO guys) from taking higher slots in other organizations.

Lovullo wasn't even here when Theo left. He came here later.

It's bogus.

ciaban
11-05-2013, 10:11 PM
I never get why other teams think that they can poach other teams managers or front office employees anytime they want too.

That's why the redsox should give farrel back to the blue jays?

I mean if not allowing a coach to try for a bigger role is against this teams policy, then they shouldn't have pouched Toronto's manager.

ciaban
11-05-2013, 10:13 PM
There's a difference between blocking lateral front office moves and blocking a possible promotion to a prolific job. You don't block coaches from becoming managers, and front office people from becoming GM's. It's ridiculous. Those jobs are very hard to get. This is totally Luchhino trying to get one over Theo. If Luchhino wasn't in the organization there is no doubt in my mind we let them interview Lovullo



The irony of this is that we just did this last year when we took half of Toronto's coaching staff.But it's wrong when someone wants to do it to the RedSox cause Luchhino doesn't like Epstein.

AI
11-06-2013, 01:28 AM
But it's wrong when someone wants to do it to the RedSox cause Luchhino doesn't like Epstein.

Everybody in here hates Lucchino buddy.

Celtic AL
11-06-2013, 05:28 AM
Typical Luchhino. Just end this hostage situation and let Torey go to the cubs.

bagwell368
11-06-2013, 06:49 AM
Typical Luchhino. Just end this hostage situation and let Torey go to the cubs.

Obviously the way the players and the team performed this year are the main stories, but the secondary stories are how the culture of the team changed from '11 and '12 - AND - how the three amigos: Henry, Warner, and Lucchino retreated from their stance as the center pieces/talking heads of the franchise. This episode is to remind us that it might have been dumb luck/PR weariness that made them retreat, and not sage judgement.

Lucchino is still the same scheming Jesuit educated meddling power broker he always has been, and his animus towards Epstein is again made blatantly obvious by this gauche move.

I think the proper counter would be for Epstein to meet Lovullo, offer him the job unofficially, have Lovullo quit, and 72 hours later take the Cubs job after an official interview. I'd love to see LL fulminate his way to a failed law suit and public humiliation while Epstein plays Cheshire Cat. Also in deference to my long suffering Cubs fan wife, I'd like to see the Cubs in the WS in say two years beating the Skanks after they go down 3-0, and LL's blood pressure spikes over 160/130, as the Cubs win it with Lovullo at the helm.

RedSoxtober
11-06-2013, 10:26 AM
I don't know the agreement between Theo and hiring Red Sox coaches... but you have to let the guy go and take the promotion, you can't stop him from doing that. That is pretty sad if they are doing that.

The agreement between the Sox and Cubs was put in place to prevent Epstein from poaching the Red Sox entire staff (or at least the key pieces) when he moved. If I recall, they negotiated a list of personnel from which he could select potential Cubs candidates; I'm sure most of the Carmine staff was blocked. At any rate, no one could reasonably argue that the agreement applied into the future ad infinitum... and certainly did not include members of the present staff who were not part of the organization at the time Epstein left.

In a tangentially related story, LL's childishness may have cost the Sox. Gary DiSarcina was a likely candidate to join the staff if Lovullo left but now this little pissing contest has allowed him to leave. **** like this always blows up in your face.

Pawtucket Red Sox manager Gary DiSarcina has been hired by the Los Angeles Angels as their third base coach.

DiSarcina might have stayed in the Red Sox organization had a position opened up on the major league staff. But general manager Ben Cherington said Monday he expected all of the coaches to return.

Bench coach Torey Lovullo was seen as a candidate to manage, but Cherington said no teams sought permission to interview him. The Cubs may be blocked by an agreement with former Red Sox GM Theo Epstein not to hire Red Sox employees for a period of three years.

DiSarcina, 45, played for the Angels from 1989-2000. He was with the Red Sox from 2006-10 managing in the minors before becoming infield coordinator. He rejoined the Angels in 2011 as a special assistant to the general manager before becoming their minor league field coordinator in 2012.

TragicallyHip
11-06-2013, 01:25 PM
It's altogether possible that Lovullo isn't interested in the position.

AI
11-06-2013, 01:50 PM
It's altogether possible that Lovullo isn't interested in the position.

Highly doubt that.

Melo15
11-06-2013, 04:01 PM
Thursday the Cubs will introduce their new manager, probably Rick Renteria, and be faced with this embarrassing scenario: the first question is “are you disappointed you didn’t get to interview Torey Lovullo.” And on Renteria’s day, the story becomes Lovullo.

The three year window agreed upon by the Red Sox and Cubs when Theo Epstein went to Chicago remains in place. Now, had Epstein called Ben Cherington when he began his search for a manager and indicated Lovullo was one of his top choices, Cherington would have at least tried to see if the wounds between Red Sox ownership and their former general manager had abated enough to at least get a sympathetic ear.

But the Cubs did not call. Cherington approached Lovullo, who indicated that he wasn’t certain what he wanted at this point in time; he also did not know the Cubs’ intentions. Cherington and Lovullo worked out a three year deal at a sizable raise, and that was that. But by the sixth and clinching game of the World Series, the Red Sox general manager was dealing with those questions, and now the chasm between ownership and its insecurities and Epstein has likely widened.

Epstein made it clear Tuesday night that he wanted to move on, and so did Cherington Wednesday afternoon. “When relationships devolve there are issues that eventually have to be resolved,” says Cherington. “I hope somehow this works out, and that this is just a bump in the process.”

http://www.gammonsdaily.com/epstein-red-sox-agreement-restricting-lovullo-possible-opportunity-with-cubs/

grandsalami
11-06-2013, 04:13 PM
http://www.gammonsdaily.com/epstein-red-sox-agreement-restricting-lovullo-possible-opportunity-with-cubs/


But the Cubs did not call. Cherington approached Lovullo, who indicated that he wasn’t certain what he wanted at this point in time; he also did not know the Cubs’ intentions. Cherington and Lovullo worked out a three year deal at a sizable raise, and that was that. But by the sixth and clinching game of the World Series, the Red Sox general manager was dealing with those questions, and now the chasm between ownership and its insecurities and Epstein has likely widened.

So two things
1. This whole "blocked" thing was a whole lot of nothing "they didn't call"
2. This issue was taken care of durring the world series?

3. why is this a story now if this took place a while ago?

grandsalami
11-06-2013, 04:16 PM
SO this IS the cubs just being *******s
Peter Gammons ‏@pgammo 3m
Held back from what?

Peter Gammons ‏@pgammo 51s
No one asked to speak to him


Love the news stories about nothing

RedSoxtober
11-06-2013, 04:26 PM
Wow. Pretty strong words from Gammons.

grandsalami
11-06-2013, 04:33 PM
Wow. Pretty strong words from Gammons.

I wonder who "planted" this non story

grandsalami
11-06-2013, 04:49 PM
Im getting sick of these non stories

Pittz
11-06-2013, 05:18 PM
SO this IS the cubs just being *******s
Peter Gammons ‏@pgammo 3m
Held back from what?

Peter Gammons ‏@pgammo 51s
No one asked to speak to him


Love the news stories about nothing

The first line is you, not Gammons, correct?

grandsalami
11-06-2013, 05:24 PM
The first line is you, not Gammons, correct?


RedSoxtober
11-06-2013, 06:11 PM
FWIW, Gammons may have missed a subtlety here. The original story indicates that the Cubs were "blocked from asking" based on the 3yr agreement between the Sox and Cubs. He may be technically correct that "they never asked" even while the meat of the story is also factually correct -- they were blocked by the FO who pointed to an agreement that did not allow them to ask.

JMP83
11-06-2013, 07:50 PM
FWIW, Gammons may have missed a subtlety here. The original story indicates that the Cubs were "blocked from asking" based on the 3yr agreement between the Sox and Cubs. He may be technically correct that "they never asked" even while the meat of the story is also factually correct -- they were blocked by the FO who pointed to an agreement that did not allow them to ask.

On the other hand, if they technically didn't ask, then the FO technically couldn't reject them.

GrkGawdofWalkz
11-07-2013, 08:41 AM
Lovullo being blocked is sort of funny and petty if true.

RedSoxtober
11-07-2013, 10:28 AM
On the other hand, if they technically didn't ask, then the FO technically couldn't reject them.

Sort of, but only if you're playing semantic games and that is EXACTLY what I think probably happened. Epstein, as president of baseball ops, approaches his counterpart at the Sox to ask about talking to Luvollo. That happens to be Lucchino. Theo has already intimated that Luvollo is on his personal short list of managerial candidates so Lucchino knows exactly what the call is about and he cuts the conversation short by simply saying, "Don't forget that we have a three year agreement prohibiting you from ASKING to talk to any more of our employees."

I think any reasonable person would say that LL/Sox blocked the Cubs. They did so by citing an agreement they had. That may have been within their right (it was) but it's no less "blocking" the Cubs than if Theo had been allowed to officially ask to talk to Luvollo.

Being "technically right" in this case (yes, they did not reject a question that was not asked) only serves the Sox in a legal perspective. They cannot be sued or anything like that and the Cubs cannot reasonably appeal to MLB or any other independent arbiter because of the agreement.

The problem is that the (likely) scenario reflects poorly on them in a social light. It reinforces the negative images of Lucchino. It chills interest of other coaches coming to Boston because they could be blocked (legally) from pursuing other opportunities. I'd also suggest that it violates the spirit of the agreement -- Theo was blocked from taking people with him but Luvollo had already left the Sox before Theo did. Overall, it's an embarrassing way to "win".

These are the kinds of things that happen when you play semantic games, answering questions based on technicalities while avoiding the clear and obvious intent of the question. It's this semantic game that I'm betting that Gammons missed.