Skip to content

No, Ian Kinsler, you were not taken out of context

Mar 5, 2014, 3:30 PM EST

Ian Kinsler Tigers Getty Getty Images

It’s laughable that Ian Kinsler said that his disparaging comments about Jon Daniels and the Rangers — in which he called Daniels a “sleazeball” — were “kind of taken out of context.” I mean, if just doesn’t make sense because there’s no context in which “sleazeball” really looks good. But if you’re inclined to give him even a little benefit of the doubt, do so no longer.

Buster Olney talked to Robert Sanchez, who interviewed Kinsler and wrote the article about him. Sanchez explains that the “out of context” defense is pretty laughable:

“When I heard that I thought to myself, ‘I have dozens and dozens and dozens of pages of transcripts, of which about a quarter of it is Ian complaining about the Texas Rangers, how things went down, how upset he is about it and just blasting away at Daniels.’ And at some point in the interview, when you’re listening to this and you’re listening to the recording of it and then when you’re reading the transcripts of it, it’s overwhelming. You can’t avoid that part of it. So Ian might think it’s drama. To me, I saw it as Ian being Ian and Ian showing his true feelings.”

Sanchez said Kinsler brought up Daniels “over and over and over again” and that part of Kinsler’s m.o. over the course of his career has been to use slights, perceived or otherwise, to provide motivation for himself. That maybe he was doing that here.

Which, if that’s what he needs to do, great. But man, stand behind what you say. If you’re going to call someone out, don’t pretend you didn’t the day after the interview comes out. The “out of context” thing is beyond weak.

  1. largebill - Mar 5, 2014 at 3:36 PM

    Out of context often means did not include every darn thing I said. People being interviewed don’t get that writers have space limitations and will cut stuff to fit. Not that adding everything would make “sleazeball” seem nice, but the player probably thinks it stands out more because the other names he called him were omitted.

    • bendover09 - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:31 PM

      This is the thing … Ian has not denied any of it. Just the fact that his own word was taken out of context. If you are man enough to say it behind a fence then you should be man enough take on the responsibility.

      Ian has been in the league far long enough to know that you should just keep your mouth shut. Here is a saying from my grandfather, ” think of the catfish, if he just kept his mouth shut he wouldve never been caught.”

  2. doctornature - Mar 5, 2014 at 3:47 PM

    Most ballplayers are simple minded, not very deep or complex. Many would not even understand ‘taken out of context’

    But hundreds of players, over the years, have used ‘taken out of context’ as an excuse, after opening their mouth and making a horse’s A$$ out of themselves.

    It never was a good excuse, and still isn’t. If you call someone out, stand behind it. Otherwise, keep your trap shut, comprende?

    Didn’t think so.

    • nothanksimdriving123 - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:00 PM

      Yes, but in this case it was taken horribly out of context. What he very clearly says on the tape is: “Some other people might unfairly call Daniels a sleazeball, but I most assuredly never would, as he’s a prince of a fellow who I’m proud to call a dear friend.”
      Now, you see how that changes the meaning a little?
      PS, I might have misquoted him in this comment.

      • billybawl - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:26 PM

        Next blog post: Kinsler claims that the unedited recording of the interview Olney played on his podcast is taken out of context because you can’t see his air quotes or him grinning and silently mouthing “I’m joking”.

      • Old Gator - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:30 PM

        Crash. Okay, now write this one down: I was taken out of context….
        Nuke: Taken out of….?
        Crash: Write it down, write it down!
        Nuke: Uh – taken out of contest….
        Crash: Context!
        Nuke (scribbling) Connnn…text…..

  3. clydeserra - Mar 5, 2014 at 3:52 PM

    the thing is, Daniels made great moves and gave the rangers the best chance to win. Even if he is a sleazeball, he is good at what he does.

  4. nivardes - Mar 5, 2014 at 3:52 PM

    Reblogged this on CiaraNadia.

  5. baberuthslegs - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:21 PM

    Makes me think of the time Charles Barkley said he was misquoted in his own autobiography.

    • Old Gator - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:31 PM

      Well, that was his unauthorized autobiography.

    • raysfan1 - Mar 5, 2014 at 5:42 PM

      Damn those ghost writers!

      • historiophiliac - Mar 5, 2014 at 6:38 PM

        God bless ‘em.

      • raysfan1 - Mar 5, 2014 at 7:13 PM

        Bless their hearts!

  6. tywebb76 - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:32 PM

    He misuses the phrase “out of context”. His “sleazeball” comment is specifically in reference to the Daniels dealings with Nolan Ryan, for whom all of the players in the Rangers locker room had an immense amount of respect. We all saw the thing play out between teh Rangers and Nolan Ryan and it was pretty ugly. In that type of circumstance, everyone shooses a side. Players that are currently employed by the team cannot discuss their feelings about this, but a player who is no longer with the team would most certainly spout about those feelings given the opporunity. His comment is being generalized by the public.

    • clydeserra - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:55 PM

      And?

      Jon Daniels took over in what 07? 06? and brought the rangers to consecutive world series in 2010 an 11. they continue to win, 2012 WC and just missing in 2013. they have a very strong farm system and a great ML team. So in those years that he has had control, the team won on the field and they look like they are strong in the future.

      As the owner, I am looking to the guy building a great team, rather than the guy who is a great former ball player

    • paperlions - Mar 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM

      Except, of course, that Kinsler has no knowledge of Daniels’ dealing with Ryan. Kinsler’s opinion is based totally on his perception from afar and no actual information. No doubt a perception colored sharply by admiration for Ryan’s playing career and the fact that Daniels traded him to Detroit.

      Listening to Kinsler, he certainly seems to have an ax to grind and he sounds bitter…he also sounds like someone that has no understanding whatsoever of what it is like to be the one that is responsible for making decisions and that when you have to make decisions, and what it is like to weigh pros and cons in order to make hard decisions (as opposed to basing all decisions on personal preference and nostalgia).

      • rangersfan3025 - Mar 6, 2014 at 3:00 AM

        Ian wasn’t the only one who was upset about what happened to Nolan Ryan and everyone knows Daniels was behind it. Ian just said what everyone was thinking

      • Jonestein - Mar 6, 2014 at 11:38 AM

        @rf3025 – “Everyone knows Daniels was behind it…”

        Ray Davis and Bob Simpson made the decision to reduce Nolan’s role, not JD. Daniels was just trying to do his job, which he does extremely well, without having The Legend shoehorn in crappy, good ole boy moves like the Roy Oswalt fiasco. Try reading baseball opinions outside the moronic Galloway/Engel/Fraley Fellowship of Hack Sports Writers for a change.

  7. chip56 - Mar 5, 2014 at 4:40 PM

    Admitting that I don’t care about this story at all can we take a minute to reflect upon the fact that an ESPN writer interviewed an ESPN writer about a story in ESPN.

    At what point do writers stop faking it and just admit that the fact that they’re more interested in being part of the story than telling the story.

    • Bryz - Mar 5, 2014 at 6:32 PM

      Deadspin did show once how ESPN manufactures their own stories. One person on ESPN says something, another reports it, then a third comments on it, and by the end of the day it’s a full blown controversy, all on ESPN.

    • forsch31 - Mar 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM

      Except this one isn’t “faking it”. The writer interviewed the player. The player then publicily said he was misquoted (what “taken out of context” used to be). So is the writer supposed to stay silent? When a subject of a story questions the legimatacy of a story, then that person makes it part of the story, and the writer has to step from behind the keyboard.

      And when the subject of a story drags the credibility of the reporter into the public, that isn’t manufacturing a story. Yes, the original writer could have published his defense with Olney asking him on his radio show, but you still would have had the exact same criticism, that the writer is more interested in being part of the story than telling. He’s only in it to defend it.

      At what point do readers actually stop and think before they climb on the soapbox?

  8. therooneyskilledwebster - Mar 5, 2014 at 5:02 PM

    I think he meant to say “sleeze ball”.

  9. themanytoolsofignorance - Mar 5, 2014 at 5:15 PM

    Im not at all certain that Ian Kinsler even knows what “out of context” means. judging from how he’s used it here, he must think it means “I wish you weren’t reporting to the world what I said (sad face)”

    How does he get to be a pro athlete NOT know that words said on the record to a REPORTER will be published? He needs to repeat Crash Davis’s Clubhouse Interview Lesson 101 (with Lab 102) and then write a paper on the subject for Buck Showalter

    • historiophiliac - Mar 5, 2014 at 6:35 PM

      I think he means that it was 1/4 of the whole discussion and 100% of what everyone is freaking out about (by Sanchez’ own admission). It makes it sound like he’s still burnt up about it or fixated on it and he isn’t. He’s playing ball. Had two RBI’s today, by the way — for the RBI types out there. Meanwhile, on the internets, we’ve made 3-4 posts out of one word, and it isn’t even a good dirty word or a funny made-up one. Douchenozzle is probably worse, and we have a whole list of people we call that on here. Move along, people. This is not the worst thing a ball player ever said — or will say.

      • indaburg - Mar 5, 2014 at 7:02 PM

        It’s the first week of March, there’s no meaningful baseball going on, and someone said something interesting. Good or bad, it was something other than the typical sound bite. Of course, everyone is going to freak out about it. They’ll move along when the next guy to mistake media for their friend comes along.

      • historiophiliac - Mar 5, 2014 at 7:21 PM

        Well, I’m done. I asked for a post where we could discuss the games days ago. I’d much rather hear about that. You know this crowd would love to do scouting reports. lol

      • clydeserra - Mar 5, 2014 at 9:00 PM

        but it is so far beyond what a regular person would say publicly about another public person. One that is very good at his job. The funny thing is, the worst thing Jon Daniels did as a GM was sign Kinsler to a player friendly deal.

        It doesn’t matter if it as 1/2. 1/4, 1/8 or 1/32 of the conversation. he said something really really dumb. and apparently went on and on about it. Its news and perfect fodder for a sports blog like this.

      • themanytoolsofignorance - Mar 6, 2014 at 8:16 AM

        You are a Tiger’s fan, so I expect some partisan viewing of this little teapot tempest. As for me, please ignore my harping on the subject. There really isn’t much else going on right now and I’m bored. Ian Kinsler is a welcome break in the routine.

  10. xjokerz - Mar 5, 2014 at 6:21 PM

    All Craig does is hate on the tigers. Unless of course it’s about his lover boy brad Ausmus

    • Kevin S. - Mar 6, 2014 at 7:33 AM

      Is there any way to get an automated tracker of all the teams Craig does nothing but hate on?

      • Alex K - Mar 6, 2014 at 8:38 AM

        Duh. It’s every team but the Braves. Craig is such a hater.

    • granadafan - Mar 6, 2014 at 11:48 AM

      “All Craig does is hate on the tigers. Unless of course it’s about his lover boy brad Ausmus”

      Yeah, it’s all Craig’s fault Kinsler called Jon Daniels a sleazeball. Never mind Craig didn’t conduct the interview. He’s jsut calling out Kinsler for trying to backtrack and spin his comments. Get a clue next time. No one cares about your Tigers.

  11. metrocritical - Mar 5, 2014 at 9:33 PM

    And so the Ian Kinsler era begins here in Detroit. We haven’t even had the ceremonial first pitch and he’s already making a poor impression. Although the fans were overjoyed with unloading Fielder’s onerous contract, there’s not much to be jubilant about with what we received in return. Prior to spring training, Kinsler was known as a plus second baseman with some skills and hustle but on the downside of his career, with a history of dodging leadership responsibility and refusing to be flexible for the betterment of his team. On top of that, we now find him to be a mouthy whiner and coward, too. Coupled with question marks concerning production at catcher, right field, third base, shortstop, the bullpen and overall depth, this ought to be a very curious season for the Tigers.

  12. xjokerz - Mar 5, 2014 at 9:47 PM

    Left field was a black hole last year … We had Iglesias as ss for half the year… As for 3rd base.. I’m excited to see castellanos out there. As for the bull pen it’s much better this year. #troll

  13. grim7839 - Mar 5, 2014 at 10:13 PM

    Ok so because he makes a valid point about the tigers not being nearly as good on paper as they have been last few years after losing infante peralta fister fielder etc etc hes a troll?i understand supporting your team but your a moron.hes not trolling hes telling the truth.with verlander scherzer and sanchez pitching an cabrera hitting still have great chance to win central but what ge said was right.your the only one trolling here

  14. markofapro - Mar 6, 2014 at 6:27 AM

    Kinsler just popped up again with men on base.

  15. zdravit - Mar 6, 2014 at 2:56 PM

    Welp, let’s give it a try. I hate reading the crap that Craig posts every day.

    • zdravit - Mar 6, 2014 at 2:56 PM

      I was taken out of context. I love Craig.

  16. dubyad3 - Mar 12, 2014 at 1:51 PM

    I’m a Ranger fan and formerly a huge Kinsler fan until the past few years. I’m disappointed to be a fan of a guy like this. The point of a TEAM is that we all do what we need to do to WIN. Basically Kinsler said “F$&@ you JD this is all about número uno”. I can’t get behind that. So…..good riddance Kinsler. May want to watch your mouth a little more in Detroit.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Maddon has high hopes for Cubs
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. P. Sandoval (4987)
  2. H. Ramirez (4288)
  3. Y. Tomas (3899)
  4. J. Lester (2964)
  5. C. Headley (2549)
  1. Y. Cespedes (2153)
  2. M. Kemp (2058)
  3. A. LaRoche (1739)
  4. C. Hamels (1718)
  5. J. Upton (1672)