The Boras-Salcedo loan didn’t even violate MLBPA rules
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.