Nov 29, 2010, 3:30 PM EDT
Last week we spent a lot of time talking about the loan Scott Boras gave to his client, Edward Salcedo. You’ll recall that the New York Times portrayed it as something nefarious. Boras’ subsequent comments about it, however, combined with some of my own deduction, lead me to believe that there was nothing really wrong with the loan and that the story was evidence of an agenda at work. Possible agendas? To paint the Dominican Republic as a lawless land in desperate need of tighter MLB control. Or, at the very least, to slam Scott Boras, because we know how fun that is to do. My final assessment last week: at worst we have a violation of union rules which, while serious in and of itself, is not a dire thing.
Turns out we don’t even have a violation of union rules. Keith Law runs it down today and it seems that even if everything we read in the initial article was true, no MLBPA rules were violated by the Boras-Salcedo loan.
So the question is this: who’s out to slam Scott Boras? It’s gotta be somebody, or else this should have registered as a non-story.
- A’s designate $10 million reliever Jim Johnson for assignment 12
- Everything you need to know about next week’s trade deadline 16
- Impending free agent Jon Lester won’t talk contract with the Red Sox until after the season 12
- Ten years ago today the Alex Rodriguez-Jason Varitek brawl changed the narrative of the Sox-Yankees rivalry 74
- And That Happened: Wednesday’s scores and highlights 29
- Tigers acquire closer Joakim Soria from the Rangers 58
- Phillies officials “have contemplated the possibility of paying off” and releasing Ryan Howard 42
- The dizzying intellect of Tom Glavine 21
- Verducci: baseball should think about an “illegal defense” rule to combat shifts (162)
- Luke Scott released from Korean team after calling coach a “liar” and a “coward” (108)
- Yankees acquire Chase Headley from Padres (108)
- Who is the next Face of Baseball? (97)
- David Ortiz passes Carl Yastrzemski on the all-time home run list — is he a Hall of Famer? (92)