GrimsleyGate

by Jim McLennan on Jun 7, 2006 2:26 PM EDT

I suspect this one will run and run, so figure a diary is a good way to keep discussion on the front page.

Here are some more interesting links, etc.

The affidavit in full [880K, PDF] - highlights apparently [my version of Acrobat coughts up a hairball at the file!] include Grimsley paying for his season supply with a personal check, confirming that he distributed HGH, and letting the Feds record a phone-call to verify his statements. Ouch.

New York Daily News - Underscoring the most obvious gap in baseball's drug policy, Grimsley admitted to Novitzky that he started using HGH exclusively once baseball began testing for steroids, according to the affidavit. Grimsley also said he was told that he tested positive in 2003 during baseball's supposedly anonymous "survey" testing program.

All-Baseball.com - "In 1999, Grimsley's name popped up again in the media. This time, he outed himself as the once-unnamed Cleveland Indians pitcher who crawled through the vents in Jacobs Field to retrieve Albert Belle's corked bats and replace them with bats of the uncorked variety. Where Grimsley goes, scandal, it seems, has a way of following...."

Piecoroblog - "Pitcher Jason Grimsley's locker has been cleared out and he is apparently off the team. Melvin will most likely make the official announcement during the 11:30 press conference. More to come."

That conference will be starting in a few minutes. I'm hoping KTAR will cover it live; stay tuned...

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Still waiting for word from the press conference.

They're talking to the author of Game of Shadows on KTAR. Apparently, there is a blood test available for HGH - it's used at the Olympics - but not a urine one. Baseball authorities won't impose blood tests on players, because they feel it's "too intrusive".

by Jim McLennan on Jun 7, 2006 2:41 PM EDT reply actions

Grimsley has gone

KTAR has confirmed Grimsley has been released. No word on who'll replace him.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 7, 2006 3:01 PM EDT reply actions

According to Josh Byrnes

Grimsley asked for his unconditional release in meetings yesterday with team officials. Whether he jumped voluntarily, or was encouraged - subtly or otherwise - to go, will likely never be known.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 7, 2006 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions

The affidavit...

Mrs. SnakePit found a non-PDF version at The Smoking Gun. It includes Grimsley's home address: anyone up for a candlelit vigil tonight?

by Jim McLennan on Jun 7, 2006 3:12 PM EDT reply actions

Blessing

Good riddance, too bad for him that's gone down this way. Him being gone is better for this team on the field and off.

by nihil67 on Jun 7, 2006 4:09 PM EDT reply actions

Investigating the D-Backs? I don't know ...

I'm the last person to justify blatant cheating, and I know that the MLB needs to solve these issues themself. But, most likely he just needed an edge to keep his job. That's one of those missed points in Steroid Era investigations. These guys are often competing with Juiced up guys that are using the extra 4 to 6 miles per hour to get an edge of the competition with their fastball.

It's interesting to note the following, before anyone in D-Backs nation assumes he's been naming names on our roster: He was cooperative with the federal invesitigation untill April, when he'd maybe been with guys in the club for 2 months, and he spent the last two season's with Baltimore. If anything says the D-Back's club is in the clear, that's it for me. It would seem obvious they were investigating the Palimero, Sosa and Tejeda probe. he also spent three years with KC, and in my opinion, if you were looking for a way out of KC, your probably looking for an additonal edge.

"Pepper needs new shorts!"

by npineda on Jun 7, 2006 4:57 PM EDT reply actions

Why did the D-Backs get Grimsley....

if they knew he had this kind of controversy? Didn't we learn our lesson with Wally Backman?

This makes me pine once again for the days of Iron Fist Colangelo.

by micmac99 on Jun 7, 2006 6:36 PM EDT reply actions

But I hope Gonzo isn't implicated

There have been rumors for a while Gonzo is a user of banned substances. If that comes out what a blow that would be to the franchise as Gonzo is one of the few remaining heroes the D-Backs have from the early glory days.

Say it ain't so, Gonzo!

by micmac99 on Jun 7, 2006 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Horrible Implications for MLB ...

If that is the case, can you imagine how the East Coast media would be all over MLB to overturn the 2001 World Series? The whole series is predicated in memory on that moment when Gonzo knocks the blooper off Mo Riveria. I hate the stigma that this gives the NL West, with Balco Barry and Gimsley coming forth as the big notables.

"Pepper needs new shorts!"

by npineda on Jun 7, 2006 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions

On the other hand...

Where was Grimsley during the 1999 and 2000 seasons? Playing alongside Jeter, Martinez, Brosius, O'Neill, Pettitte and Clemens on the New York Yankees. And there have been whispers about Clemens for quite some time. So, if anything, the 2001 Yankees must be more scared about what Grimsley has coughed up than the 2001 D'backs. Don't forget, even including spring training, Grimsley had been with the team less than two months when got busted. He was with New York for two years. Wonder if they had a "leaded" coffee-pot in the Yankees clubhouse during that series...

by Jim McLennan on Jun 7, 2006 8:26 PM EDT up reply actions

The Great Clemens Connudrum

Clemens has been given the benefit of the doubt where Barry Bonds has been dragged through the dirt regaurding being an older guy that who's still dominant. The other thing, Clemens held out on everyone for more money, an old guy who wasn't sure about the grind of the season, etc ... When Brett Farve did it, Brett Farve was thrown under the bus by everone for being a crappy teammate. Stardom does a lot to hide a blackeye.

"Pepper needs new shorts!"

by npineda on Jun 7, 2006 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Luis Gonzalez 2001

Jim: You talk about the 2001 Yankees as though they are guilty, but let's also consider the 2001 Diamondbacks. First, amphetamines have been available in EVERY SINGLE MLB clubhouse. The Diamondbacks - just because they are "your" team - doesn't make them any less guilty.

Second, you can discuss some of the names that are Yankees...but the guys associated with steroids on the 2000 team - the one with Grimsley on it - will end up being Glenallen Hill, Jose Canseco, and maybe Knoblauch.

Third, if you're going to bring up 2001 as a benchmark year, that's not forget Luis Gonzalez and his Brady Anderson-like season of 57 home runs. He had never approached that number before and hasn't done so since. That's some coincidence.

by Benjamin Kabak on Jun 8, 2006 12:06 AM EDT reply actions

Gonzo did blow down some doors ...

But he didn't roid out like Sosa did at the 2002 Home Run Derby. Does anyone else remember watching him up there with the backwards hat, pouring sweat down his face and muscels and tendon's in his face just twitching with every swing of the bat? I'm not taking away from your argument at all, Ben. I aggree that his numbers that year may have been nothing short of suspious. You also look at the injuries in the following seasons and the Tommy John surgery ... not typical things for a well constructed body.

"Pepper needs new shorts!"

by npineda on Jun 8, 2006 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions

You misinterpret me...

Hi, Benjamin - appreciate you dropping in, and taking the time to comment. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't particularly accusing the 2001 Yankees, just pointing out that if damage comes out of whatever players Grimsley named (and I think it's inevitable the names will leak), then sheer numbers suggest the 2001 Yankees are more likely to be harmed than the 2001 D'backs. That's simply because far more of them played with Grimsley: if this had been someone who was on the 2000 D'backs, it'd be the other way round.

I certainly don't think any team has a monopoly on substance abuse, but it does appear likely that certain organizations seem more tolerant of it than others. Which ones you feel rank higher or lower does seem pretty subjective at the moment; myself, I tend to look at things like the number of minor-league positive results, but your mileage may vary.

As for Gonzo, if performance-enhancing drugs had such an effect in 2001, why did he apparently stop in 2002? There was still no testing at that point, yet his HR numbers went right back to the level before. If all the evidence you have against Gonzalez is, "He had a career year," then I'm afraid I'm not buying it. Find me someone who was in the 2000 D'backs clubhouse, coughing up furballs like Grimsley has, and then I'll think differently...

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions

Grimsley's lawyer says feds targeted Bonds

"The attorney for Jason Grimsley said Wednesday that federal agents tried to pressure the former Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher into wearing a listening device to lure other major league players into confidential conversations in an effort to find incriminating evidence against superstar Barry Bonds. "It was a specific effort to target Bonds," said Edward F. Novak, one of the pre-eminent criminal attorneys in Arizona. "We were told that Jason's cooperation was necessary to their case." Novak said Grimsley "was outed by the feds" because he refused to cooperate."

From USA Today, but credited to Reaves and Harris of the Republic. There's more interesting stuff in there:

After cooperating with the investigation in April, Grimsley hired Novak and refused to work with the agents. That refusal, the attorney said, led to the six-hour raid Tuesday. Novak said Asst. U.S. Attorney Matt Parrella phoned about 9:30 Tuesday morning and told Novak that agents were searching Grimsley's house and "based on what they were finding," the pitcher should reconsider his refusal to cooperate. Parrella requested an 11 a.m. meeting with Grimsley.

Novak tried to contact his client, but Grimsley and his wife were shopping. When they returned home, they said they found the agents there and the front door broken. "They told us when no one answered the door and they saw Jason's truck outside they thought he was inside refusing to answer so they knocked down the door," Novak said. Grimsley told Novak he no longer wanted to cooperate and the attorney relayed that message to Parrella. "He told us we had until 1 p.m. and if Jason didn't agree to cooperate by then, they'd release the affidavit to MLB and the media," Novak said. Grimsley continued to refuse and late that afternoon the previously sealed affidavit was released."

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 4:10 AM EDT reply actions

Also, check out the Piecoroblog

For a transcript of Melvin's, Kendrick's and Byrnes' pre-game comments. Not an enormous amount of new stuff there - everyone is very clearly being careful about what they say - but it's interesting to see a little more than the snippets on radio and in the press. I appreciate Nick taking the time to transcribe and publish them.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 4:19 AM EDT reply actions

Amphetamines

Note the discussion of amphetamines and this article in the NY Times today. While he cops to steroids, to me some of the most interesting stuff is about amphetamines. The long-standing acceptance of greenies ("for decades" they have been "like asprin") makes for a slipperly slope to other illegals.

Also, I think we're going to get a clearer picture of how and why enhancers were used -- not only just a few guys juicing up to hit bombs (and I have to side with the people suspicious of Gonzo here, sorry), but the guys that took something once when they tweaked their back in order to heal faster, or who were on the cusp of being cut as a middle reliever because their fastball dipped below 90mph.

There appears to be much more to come, alas.

by andrewinnewyork on Jun 8, 2006 10:36 AM EDT reply actions

Small ray of sunshine

From the Republic

One source, who insisted on anonymity, said that he had been read an unredacted copy of the affidavit and that none of the named players were Diamondbacks. That, however, could not be confirmed, and an official of Major League Baseball in New York said even the commissioner's office had yet to see an unedited version. [IRS special agent Mark] Lessler said he could neither confirm nor deny whether any Diamondbacks were named.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 1:07 PM EDT reply actions

Although...

Imagine how he'd have been without performance-enhancing drugs... I suspect Grimsley felt that without them, he wouldn't be roster-worthy. He'd been using them since 1989, by his own admission, and were probably as much a psychological crutch as having any actual effect. His post-raid (presumably clean) performances certainly suggest their real effect was not all that great.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 1:13 PM EDT reply actions

Who He Named

I think the best way to figure out who he named is to look at what the response among players to the affidavit is.

For example, based on his comments to the Times, I doubt that Derek Jeter is named:

"Talking to authorities, I don't know if you can lie about it, can you?" Jeter said. "That's when you get in trouble. That's completely different from Canseco. Canseco was writing a book."

However, when I read the following in NewsdayI get suspicious:

White Sox pitcher Jeff Nelson, who played with Grimsley on the Yankees in 1999 and 2000, called his former teammate "a jackass."

"You play in this game a long time, and just because you get caught, you're going to spill the beans with the other guys?" Nelson said in a phone interview. "He can name as many guys as he wants, and it'll never be proven."

by andrewinnewyork on Jun 8, 2006 2:38 PM EDT reply actions

If I was a betting man...

That quote from Nelson does sound more than a little suspicious. My money, however, would likely be on members of the Baltimore Orioles, with whom Grimsley played from June 2004 through the end of 2005. Last year's roster included Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa and Miguel Tejada, all names about whom whispers have been heard in the past - of varying reliability, from sheer speculation to a confirmed, positive test for steroids. No particular evidence though, just circumstantial evidence and gut hunch.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Grimsley affidavit names

Deadspin reckons to have some of them. [As an aside, does Deadspin kill anyone else's IE? Or is it just me? Probably the latter, given this computer uses Windows ME...which does, however, basically make it virus-proof, since I don't think anyone bothered writing any for that operating system. I can see it in Firefox though] They aren't official, but to use their quote, "If Bud Selig issuing a press release naming the names is a 10, and picking a player at random out of the Baseball Encyclopedia is a 1, we're at an 8."

The one of most interest is "a personal fitness trainer to several Major League Baseball players once referred him to an amphetamine source." Later, this source provided him with "amphetamines, anabolic steroids and human growth hormone." The trainer's name - again, according to Deadspin - is Chris Mihlfeld. If that hasn't knocked you off your feet, sit down for the bombshell:

Mihlfeld has been Albert Pujols' personal trainer since before he was drafted by the Cardinals.

I stress once more, there is no proof this is accurate - but if it is, then the impact need hardly be spelled out.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 6:01 PM EDT reply actions

Will Carroll = Voice of Reason

While everyone freaks out over GrimsleyGate - including, let's be honest, us (though since he was on our roster, we kinda have good reason) - Will Carroll addresses the issue with rather more detachment on Baseball Prospectus

When I heard the Jason Grimsley story on Tuesday afternoon, the first thing that came to mind was...no, the first is unprintable. The second thing that came to mind was "good people are going to get sucked into this." Logic escapes the performance-enhancement zone with perfect consistency. No one cares that some have been busted--some twice or three times--but everyone is told that Barry Bonds is baseball's Antichrist.

No one cares that more pitchers have tested positive than hitters since tests became public record--and that even before, hitters weren't getting the advantages credited them. The home runs some tried to take away due to steroids might need a couple tacked on for the juiced-up pitchers they faced. "Give us more speculation!" the public cries. "Feed us a big name that we can wail and gnash our teeth. Feed us someone we once worshipped and let us melt down his Hall of Fame plaque as an offering to the sainted Ruth and Maris. If Barry Bonds used and Jason Grimsley used, then everyone in between must have used, right?"

Wrong. For every one of you that called for testing, you were right to do so. HGH (human growth hormone) and other recombinant versions of naturally occurring chemicals are the next shadow the game will confront, this time with no easy solution, no test on the horizon, and no shady chemist to blame. My position, both before and after writing "The Juice," was not strong enough and I acknowledge that. But by calling for testing, you must then accept the results and only the results. That leaves us with the moral grey areas, such as Jason Grimsley having not tested positive since results came public. It leaves some wondering if his miraculous comeback from Tommy John surgery wasn't so miraculous after all.

I spoke with his surgeon, Tim Kremchek, this morning. Dr. Kremchek hadn't heard the news and was dumbfounded. "I don't prescribe [HGH], I don't recommend it, and I would never have one of my patients use it," he told me. It leaves us staring at the abyss of the non-analytic positive or just throwing up the collective hands of the game and handing over the wand to WADA. With the Grimsley case just beginning, and names--in the words of Dan Patrick, "shocking names"--hiding behind the black marker of Jeff Novitzky, we're only at the beginning of this story. Novitzky's pen is likely to get more use in the coming months, checking names off the list he's working from of implicated players with past positive tests and connections to the illegal use of performance-enhancing drugs.

We just cannot jump to conclusions. We must remain grounded in fact and science rather than wild speculation. The truth is bad enough and getting worse.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 6:20 PM EDT reply actions

Obscure Jason Grimsley trivia

He only has nine toes. He lost the big ome on his left foot in a motorcycle accident at age 12. The relevance of this to GrimsleyGate? Pretty slim. But I was amused by the irony that I first saw this titbit on a page at MLB.com, whose first paragraph reads, "As Rafael Palmeiro attempts to return to normalcy, he continues to have to defend or reserve comment on various reports regarding his steroid use or his legacy in baseball." The omens were, it seems, everywhere, if only we had looked for them. :-)

by Jim McLennan on Jun 8, 2006 6:36 PM EDT reply actions

Weird little piece...

In USA Today, quoting the Republic's Joseph Reaves, which discusses the rumblings regarding Pujols' trainer being one of the blacked-out names in Grimsley's affidavit. It starts off factually enough, but by the end is almost entering the realm of the poetical. Here it is in full: spelling ("reailty" and "ampehtamines") and paragraphing are as in the original:

PHOENIX -- The other night, Arizona Diamondbacks General Partner Ken Kendrick pursed his lips, cocked his head ever so slightly and, like the shrewd executive he is, summed up succinctly the Jason Grimsley circus:
"This is a black mark on a great game," Kendrick said.

No one who loves baseball would disagree.

But there are 29 more black marks out there.

And until they are wiped clean, no one can rest easy.

Not Grimsley. Not Kendrick. Not the media. Not the fans.

And most certainly not anyone who's put on a major league uniform in the plast 15 years.

That includes -- and it's horribly sickening to say, but that includes -- the greatest player in the game today: Albert Pujols.

This is the price we pay for all the lying and cheating. This is the price Pujols pays.

Late Wednesday night, while a broken-down Barry Bonds rested in San Francisco and the Diamondbacks were proving again that HGH kills, the Internet started buzzing about Pujols.

Anonymous bloggers linked him to the Grimsley investigation.

Maybe it's unfair. Unquestionably it's a nightmare. But it's hardly surprising.

Nothing is sacred any more. No one is above suspicion, not even the sweetest-swinging piece of art to step into a batter's box. Pujols, the clean-cut antithesis of Bonds, has always chuckled in the past when skeptics dared suggest his staggering achievements were chemically enhanced. And only the black hearts among us doubted him.

Pujols has a longtime personal trainer, who also happens to have worked with Grimsley.

No big deal.

But hold on. A now-famous affidavit by a federal agent that The Arizona Republic obtained this week has a troubling paragraph that begins: "Grimsley stated that ... "

The word after that is redacted, one of 29 black marks between pages 12 and 15 of the affidavit that have created a world of suspicion and angst.

"Grimsley stated that ----, a former employee of the ----- and personal fitness trainer to several Major League Baseball players, once referred him to an amphetamine source," the affidavit reads. "Grimsley stated that after this referral he secured amphetamines, anabolic steroids and human growth hormone from ---- (the redacted trainer's) referred source."

Now that could be a big deal.

Pujols' personal trainer, a guy Grimsley once credited with helping him recover rapidly from Tommy John surgery, is Chris Mihlfeld, a Kansas City-based strength and conditioning guru who also happens to be a former strength and conditioning coordinator for the Royals.

See where the bloggers are going?

It might not be fair, but it's reailty.

You want to convict Bonds without real proof he ever used steroids? You want to let players lie and cheat?

We all pay the price. And now it looks as if Pujols will be paying.

Jimmy Buffett has a line in one of his songs, quoting Mark Twain: "Be good, and you will be lonely."

Bonds knows the feeling. Pujols might be about to find out.

Let's hope not. But the whispers have started. And by this morning, sports radio will be filled with screams.

The Grimsley circus has been a black mark on the game.

And now the 29 others in the Grimsley affidavit that hide the truth are making things worse.

Baseball doesn't deserve this. We don't deserve this.

But this is what it's come to.

Nobody is above suspicion.

Trust is hard won. And once lost, almost impossible to regain.

Steroids. Ampehtamines. Human Growth Hormone. The experts tells us they kill.

We're finding out it's true.

They've killed our trust in the most beautiful game ever played.

It's a black mark on us all.

And who knows how many more black marks are still to come?

Nobody is resting easy these days.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 9, 2006 1:31 AM EDT reply actions

The hypocrisy of the press

The above piece - with the typos corrected and better formatting - appears in this morning's edition of the Republic. Which is a surprise, because it reads more like a junior-high essay than something I'd expect from a paid professional.

Spelling errors and the apparent issue with paragraphs aside, the line that gets me is "Anonymous bloggers linked him to the Grimsley investigation." Hardly. Deadspin, which initially published the allegations is not exactly anonymous: it's edited by Will Leitch (who, incidentally, is a Cardinals fan). And, believe me, if I know who someone is, they're really not trying hard to be "anonymous".

Sure, Deadspin's sources are anonymous, but how, exactly, is that different from the same source which the Republic used, quoted earlier in this diary, which said that no D'backs were named in the affidavit? Answer: it isn't. All writers have private sources (well, except me - I just ramble on in my own little world. But, as the T-shirt says, it's okay, because they know me here), and anonymity tends to decrease their credibility, regardless of whether it's big media or a blog. Deadspin generally has a good rep, and I am inclined to feel that they believe their source, just as I believe Reaves and Piecoro believe their ones.

We'll just have to wait and see what transpires. However, until then, having one arm of the media fling inaccurate accusations at another arm with an air of superiority, seems to me to be part of the problem, not the solution.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 9, 2006 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions

No D'backs named in affidavit

The Tribune reports as follows:

D-Backs officials said they asked and were assured by federal agents that no one on their roster is among the players Grimsley is alleged to have named during a two-hour interview with Internal Revenue Service agents April 19 in Scottsdale. The pitcher was released by the Diamondbacks Wednesday morning after he became the focal point of the federal investigation.

The names -- believed to be four current players and two former players -- were blacked out in court documents released Tuesday, but the D-Backs made a point of discovering if they needed to have any further concerns. "Absolutely not," D-Backs managing partner Ken Kendrick said. "I know that as far as Jason Grimsley's point of view, which is one player's point of view, that he does not have any knowledge related to the Diamondbacks' players." Furthermore, "I don't have any knowledge or any suspicion'' from any other sources, Kendrick said.

by Jim McLennan on Jun 9, 2006 2:34 PM EDT reply actions

Grimsley NOT getting paid

Says Ken Kendrick, "It's the moral thing to do. It isn't right to compensate him into the future when he's not playing for the team any longer and he left under the circumstances as negatively as he did." He then addressed the player's union, saying "Come and have a go, if you think you're hard enough." Well, almost: the line was "The union may very well claim that the player's rights may have been abused, but at this point, we feel it incumbent upon us to do what is right."

A good decision by the Diamondbacks, I think - I doubt the union will exactly be pushing the boat out on this one, even though Grimsley was, for a long time, 'one of them.' He has now also decided to retire, according to his agent; frankly, he might as well, since no other team will touch him with a ten-foot bargepool.

With Grimsley now gone, Kendrick was rather more forthright in his condemnation: "He knew he did wrong. He tried to cover up. He hoped it wouldn't become public. He hoped he would avoid it. But on Tuesday, when his house was under siege, his door is broken down and 13 agents are there all day and told him they were going to make it public, what does he do? He comes to the ballpark, puts on his uniform and went out to play without telling his manager, without telling anybody. He acted in complete disregard to his team."

by Jim McLennan on Jun 10, 2006 2:50 PM EDT reply actions

And he's fighting it...

Agent: Grimsley will fight team's decision

"The whole thing is already in process," agent Joe Bick said Saturday. "We haven't filed anything yet, but the players' association is aware of it." The Diamondbacks released the reliever Wednesday, one day after they learned federal agents had searched his home in an investigation into performance-enhancing drugs. At that time, Bick said "there was no negotiation" over Grimsley's remaining salary and that "released players get paid."

But Bick said he received a call Friday from Arizona general manager Josh Byrnes, who told him the club had decided not to pay Grimsley, signed as a free agent last winter. "All I know is that one day we were told one thing, that they were going to release Jason and pay him, and the next day they changed their minds," Bick said in a telephone interview. "Josh called me Friday and said that after internal discussion, they had elected to pursue this route, and they're free to do that."

by Jim McLennan on Jun 10, 2006 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions

But watch out for breach of contract

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Grimsley's contract said he gets paid no matter what, Kendrick does not, unfortunately, have a choice but to pay out the salary or some sort of buyout clause. Take Ortiz for example. If we release him if he keeps pitching poorly, I understand that he WILL still get paid. Kendrick can't say, "Russ is no longer a good pitcher, so we shouldn't pay him." Contracts are written the way they are for a reason.

I would expect the player's union to make at least a statement in the coming days on this one.

by micmac99 on Jun 10, 2006 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions

An interesting test case...

I imagine the Diamondbacks will be invoking the clause in the Uniform Player's Contract [p.218 - *large* PDF!] which says:

Loyalty
3.(a) The Player agrees to perform his services hereunder diligently and faithfully, to keep himself in first-class physical condition and to obey the Club's training rules, and pledges himself to the American public and to the Club to conform to high standards of personal conduct, fair play and good sportsmanship.

They'll claim it was Grimsley who broke the contract, and is thus not eligible for his pay. It could be quite nasty...

by Jim McLennan on Jun 10, 2006 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Players' Union

I pretty much despise the players' union (although its inception brought much needed and fair economic change to the game, its existence today makes me want to barf) -- so having them in the precarious situation of deciding of whether or not to fight for one of their own who:

admitted to using THREE illegal substances;
ratted out several of his teammates;
and then ASKED to be released

just strikes me as pure poetry. Go Josh Byrnes. You just jumped up three notches in my book.

by johngordonma on Jun 10, 2006 11:00 PM EDT reply actions

The above two points are well taken

It does sound like the D-backs have the upper hand. I'm listening to the KTAR postgame show and some callers are saying kudos to Kendrick for taking a stad for the integrity of the game.

BTW, the game program I purchased tonight has a little feature on Grimsley ("The Tough Guy", p 44-52).

Irony is a tough mistress.

by micmac99 on Jun 11, 2006 1:00 AM EDT reply actions

This may very well get ugly

Top story on the 10pm local news on KTAR: Grimsley's agent will file a grievance with the player's union.
The D-Backs will file termination papers on Monday to try to avoid paying the salary. Kendrick is sounding like Condoleeza Rice does when she talks about Iran.

This could be big, folks.

by micmac99 on Jun 11, 2006 1:07 AM EDT reply actions

More from Kendrick

Over on the McManamanblog

Kendrick said the team is using a bylaw in the MLB collective bargaining agreement to get out of having to pay Grimsley, citing the pitcher was "unfit to play" after the Tuesday raid at his Scottsdale home and his admitted use of illegal drugs, including steroids, human growth hormone, and amphetamines. "He acknowledged that he was unfit to play. He asked for his release. ... Was he fit to compete? No, we don't think so."

"The reality to me is, I can't imagine how a person with any kind of sense of responsibility could spend a day with federal agents, going through their home, report to work and not informing your boss or your co-workers that you had been through this, and you were told, specifically (by the agents), that this was going to become a public matter. I think the guy was acting frankly, out of impairment. I'm sure he was in denial from then until now, hoping it wouldn't become public and when it did, he acted in a very irrational way."

"I think they'll see, as he admitted, that he essentialy cheated for the bulk of his playing career. And I don't think our sport needs people like that. I don't think we should condone that, and I don't think our fans and the public expect us to, so I think he'll be branded as a person he acknowledged, as a cheater throughout his playing career. This guy did no less than steal from us... It's a shame we brought him here."

by Jim McLennan on Jun 11, 2006 5:39 AM EDT reply actions