clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Rox Girl admits to using Hgh before posting so much today....

New, comments

Alright, I just want to warn my readers that this post is going to get way political, way fast. If you don't want that mingled with baseball, you have my permission to skip this post and move on.

First, read Ken Rosenthal's take on what's going on Phoenix. Then, come back here and let's talk about this. According to Rosenthal, Ken Kendrick is witholding Jason Grimsley's salary for one of the following reasons:

  1. To draw attention to Ken Kendrick.
  2. To send a message to the union and maybe get some concessions like blood tests.
  3. To be initiated into a secret inner circle of owners that he currently isn't a part of.
Now keep in mind that since Grimsley hasn't been charged with any crime and since he hasn't tested positive since the inception of baseball's more stringent policies, this is completely against the CBA and Ken Kendrick knows it. For this reason, I say it's none of the above. I think Ken Kendrick is trying to take out the MLBPA completely. Why? Well Ken Kendrick has a history of being anti-little guy when it comes to allowing them (the little guys) to form a collective and stand up to the big money interests. I mean re-read his last quote in the Rosenthal article:
"It shows how absurd the sense of entitlement is," Kendrick says. "It needs to be changed. If I'm going to be critical because I think it needs to be changed, I'll take whatever hits there are for it."

Alright, I've worked in media long enough to know that whenever I hear the words "absurd sense of entitlement" that a Republican is speaking. And not just any Republican, but a big-time follower of the party. So I looked up Ken Kendrick's donations and sure enough, he is all the way over on the side of the corporatocracy here, with over a quarter of a million dollars donated in the last election cycle. Now, I know that many of my readers will be in the same camp as him, and not some pinko-bleeding-heart-liberal like myself who cries over the loss of Grimsley's $875K. Of course, Kendrick talks about the absurd sense of entitlement, but like most MLB owners has no qualms with taxpayer funded stadium projects. Anyway, argue on behalf of Kendrick if you like, but all I'm saying is that this particular debate isn't just about players and owners and about preserving the integrity of the game, but there's a more subtle angle afoot here which it would be foolish to gloss over.