I feel like that's an argument FOR putting Schilling in? My point was about character arguments not being a valid reason to deny someone an award about how well they played baseball. I agree Schilling is an asshole. I don't think that's relevant.
And leaving the racism aside, Anson is the only instance I'm aware of of a player refusing to play against a particular person. That's the very definition of "unsportsmanlike" and would have been seen as such in the 1880s. I'm not sure what era supported diva tantrums. Supported taking your ball and going home because the other team had a player you don't like, or a team that was better. The fact that no one has a problem with Slaughter in the Hall indicates we do forgive people for racism.
I can assure you: just because a man who was a vile racist in the 19th century was voted into the Hall of Fame in 1939 in no way obligates us to vote in a man who is vile in countless ways in 2020 into the Hall of Fame in 2020.
I think it's deeper. To be a decent human being is to watch the world reward those who treat the most vulnerable people like shit. You get called an SJW, "woke", politically correct, and other words that mean "stupid silly girl we shouldn't respect". Trump gets treated like a tough, brave, badass. The people who are pissing over democracy are rewarded with more power. Now we have a very rare opportunity to actually hurt Schilling, to deny him something he wants, and we wantto take it.
At best, that's a symptom. It won't make the world worse for him and definitely not for people like him. The left needs to learn how to win, how to beat th right, how to wield power. Keeping Schilling out of the Hall is a weak substitute.
Schilling is human garbage. He should lose every baseball job. The Hall isn't about that. Personally, I think everyone should speak at length about how Schilling is human garbage. The announcement should be about how human garbage had good enough pitching stats and is human garbage. He goes in the Hall, he remains human garbage, other members of the baseball community treat him as such, we aggressively point out when he does things like advocate for the murder or journalists.
I get Craig's point. The world is loaded with garbage people and we're rarely able to punish them. Every Trump supporting Republican is thriving. Now here's one, whom we have the very rare occasion to actually suffer and we want to take it. But it won't solve anything. If the left could actually hurt the right, damage the right, there wouldn't be a need to go after Schilling being in the Hall.
Well, I was skeptical about this this AM, but you’ve convinced me. Although I would bet he makes it, partly for the celebrity his hate has brought him, it will be detrimental to the Hall & The Game.
With reference to Pete Rose, who made his bed in the Bart Giamatti deal, Schilling’s sins are more numerous and quite a few degrees worse than gambling, even on your own games.
He abuses his celebrity regularly & continuously.
Blood on his sock, notwithstanding.
I hope your column becomes contentious & viral; when it does, he will make the case for you, and against his own candidacy.
I don't think you'll be able to forget the man exists for the rest of your years, because when he is voted into the HoF you'll presumably feel obligated to mention it in your newsletter. And it would take great strength of will to ignore and not mention the next vile thing he does as well.
I'm confused by Craig's statement that his 'no' vote on the theoretical HOF ballot isn't because of the character clause then followed by a detailed exploration of Schilling's character defects. Since Schilling is - purely as a player - qualified but as a person repugnant, it seems like a perfect example of the use of that clause.
As I said in the article, I'm not reading tea leaves or isolated incidents in judging Schilling's inherent character the way baseball writers often do when invoking the character clause. I don't think anyone baseball writer is in a position to do that in almost any case. I am saying that we can look at Schilling's plain actions and say that, whatever a person's character -- even if they cheated in baseball or did some other questionable things at some point -- anyone who does what Schilling is doing now is unworthy of a vote.
It still reads to me that you are saying that you are applying the character clause, just not how some others have applied the character clause. But likely that is the fault of *this* reader.
FWIW, if you are not invoking the character clause, unless you are making some really narrow distinction between "character" and and "integrity" or "sportsmanship" your hypothetical vote if you had an actual ballot, would violate the rules of the HOF and BBWAA that, "voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."
A sad thing. Where a criminal, in commission of several crimes, with pre-existing health conditions and under the influence of several intoxicants, chose to disregard orders from the police, who had the right to detain him for acts committed.
This sort of disgusting spin is exactly why police continue to avoid accountability.
And it's regrettable that you have crossed over from HBT. One of the things I was most looking forward to about the new site was that it would be free of the poisonous bile spewed by folks like you.
You can be supportive of the police generally and still call out bad actors. Kneeling on George Floyd's neck for 8 minutes was wrong and those responsible deserve to be punished, regardless of Floyd's criminal history. We could also bring up Breonna Taylor who was killed while doing nothing more than occupying her apartment. It should not be that hard to say the police should stop killing people.
You've certainly given me much to think about, but I will say: Curt Schilling is a complicated figure. If we consider what Schilling was like as a ballplayer: he's among the few players to win the Roberto Clemente, Lou Gehrig, Branch Rickey and the Huch Award. All awards for character and community service. Schilling gave enormous amounts of his time to causes, including ALS, cancer and other causes. After 9/11 Schilling went out of his way to support the city writing:
My first cognizant thought was, “Man, did they pick on the wrong country.” Then, after watching TV, I began to realize that not only did they pick on the wrong country, but they couldn’t have picked a worse target. There is no city on this planet that more represents its nation than New York does in the United States. New York is the true definition of a melting pot. Every race, religion and color are represented in New York, and on Tuesday you saw every race, every religion, every color come together as one nation of people fighting for one common goal — to save lives. I can honestly tell you that I have never been as proud to be an American as I was that day.
None of which excuses Schilling the extremist provocateur. I will not pretend anyone must support him, and for what he became after he ended his career. Not that it matters: but Schilling would not be the worst human being in the Hall of Fame, and I don't think it's particularly close. I further believe baseball writers never fairly applied the character clause, which is what you're doing here regardless of your protestations to the contrary.
For me, I find Schilling the provocateur, political activist, and show host as deplorable a human I've ever read about. Schilling the baseball player? Almost nobody like him, that Schilling belongs in the Hall of Fame, and it's that person I would suggest we honor when he's inducted.
While we're at it, let's take a few guys out of the Hall, starting w Cap Anson.
The fact that Anson's in the Hall is why Schilling has to be.
I feel like that's an argument FOR putting Schilling in? My point was about character arguments not being a valid reason to deny someone an award about how well they played baseball. I agree Schilling is an asshole. I don't think that's relevant.
And leaving the racism aside, Anson is the only instance I'm aware of of a player refusing to play against a particular person. That's the very definition of "unsportsmanlike" and would have been seen as such in the 1880s. I'm not sure what era supported diva tantrums. Supported taking your ball and going home because the other team had a player you don't like, or a team that was better. The fact that no one has a problem with Slaughter in the Hall indicates we do forgive people for racism.
Nice to see you're back, Paper Lions.
I can assure you: just because a man who was a vile racist in the 19th century was voted into the Hall of Fame in 1939 in no way obligates us to vote in a man who is vile in countless ways in 2020 into the Hall of Fame in 2020.
the "both sides" crowd will be happy when he gets in, not *just* b/c of the "W,"
but importantly it pushes the "normalcy" of the things he espouses, and allows those who discount it with phrases like
"diarrhea of the mouth" to say, "see, it's *just* politics!
I think it's deeper. To be a decent human being is to watch the world reward those who treat the most vulnerable people like shit. You get called an SJW, "woke", politically correct, and other words that mean "stupid silly girl we shouldn't respect". Trump gets treated like a tough, brave, badass. The people who are pissing over democracy are rewarded with more power. Now we have a very rare opportunity to actually hurt Schilling, to deny him something he wants, and we wantto take it.
At best, that's a symptom. It won't make the world worse for him and definitely not for people like him. The left needs to learn how to win, how to beat th right, how to wield power. Keeping Schilling out of the Hall is a weak substitute.
Craig busting out the old law school skills for this one. SEE MA I DIDN'T WASTE ALL THAT MONEY!
Schilling is human garbage. He should lose every baseball job. The Hall isn't about that. Personally, I think everyone should speak at length about how Schilling is human garbage. The announcement should be about how human garbage had good enough pitching stats and is human garbage. He goes in the Hall, he remains human garbage, other members of the baseball community treat him as such, we aggressively point out when he does things like advocate for the murder or journalists.
I get Craig's point. The world is loaded with garbage people and we're rarely able to punish them. Every Trump supporting Republican is thriving. Now here's one, whom we have the very rare occasion to actually suffer and we want to take it. But it won't solve anything. If the left could actually hurt the right, damage the right, there wouldn't be a need to go after Schilling being in the Hall.
I disagree with your opinion, though not with any of the substance. In fact, I have nothing of value to add to the discussion. Bye!
Guaranteed he'll one day join hall of failed video game developers.
I take pride in the fact that Curt is the only famous person I'm blocked by on Twitter.
Wow, not even a mention of 38 Studios and his defrauding the state out of $75M in loans.
Reminding Schilling of this was why he blocked me on twitter several years ago.
Me, too!
It was a fun five minutes, that it took for him to block me.
Totally agree. No platform or societal recognition for fascists. None.
Hall Of Famer Curt Schilling would most certainly become Candidate Curt Schilling, and that alone is enough for me to say no.
I don't think it would make a difference either way. We can't predict these things.
Well, I was skeptical about this this AM, but you’ve convinced me. Although I would bet he makes it, partly for the celebrity his hate has brought him, it will be detrimental to the Hall & The Game.
With reference to Pete Rose, who made his bed in the Bart Giamatti deal, Schilling’s sins are more numerous and quite a few degrees worse than gambling, even on your own games.
He abuses his celebrity regularly & continuously.
Blood on his sock, notwithstanding.
I hope your column becomes contentious & viral; when it does, he will make the case for you, and against his own candidacy.
I don't think you'll be able to forget the man exists for the rest of your years, because when he is voted into the HoF you'll presumably feel obligated to mention it in your newsletter. And it would take great strength of will to ignore and not mention the next vile thing he does as well.
I'm confused by Craig's statement that his 'no' vote on the theoretical HOF ballot isn't because of the character clause then followed by a detailed exploration of Schilling's character defects. Since Schilling is - purely as a player - qualified but as a person repugnant, it seems like a perfect example of the use of that clause.
As I said in the article, I'm not reading tea leaves or isolated incidents in judging Schilling's inherent character the way baseball writers often do when invoking the character clause. I don't think anyone baseball writer is in a position to do that in almost any case. I am saying that we can look at Schilling's plain actions and say that, whatever a person's character -- even if they cheated in baseball or did some other questionable things at some point -- anyone who does what Schilling is doing now is unworthy of a vote.
Thanks for the reply!
It still reads to me that you are saying that you are applying the character clause, just not how some others have applied the character clause. But likely that is the fault of *this* reader.
FWIW, if you are not invoking the character clause, unless you are making some really narrow distinction between "character" and and "integrity" or "sportsmanship" your hypothetical vote if you had an actual ballot, would violate the rules of the HOF and BBWAA that, "voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."
Will you also withhold support of those who condone the murder of police officers?
I don't know anybody who has ever done that. And I don't know of anyone who has been murdered by the police this century.
How, exactly, would you describe what happened to George Floyd?
A sad thing. Where a criminal, in commission of several crimes, with pre-existing health conditions and under the influence of several intoxicants, chose to disregard orders from the police, who had the right to detain him for acts committed.
Ahh, the comments section when the newsletter's free... I love the smell of napalm in the morning!
This sort of disgusting spin is exactly why police continue to avoid accountability.
And it's regrettable that you have crossed over from HBT. One of the things I was most looking forward to about the new site was that it would be free of the poisonous bile spewed by folks like you.
Which of those things I listed aren't true? Remember, the world isn't what you want. The world is what is.
You can be supportive of the police generally and still call out bad actors. Kneeling on George Floyd's neck for 8 minutes was wrong and those responsible deserve to be punished, regardless of Floyd's criminal history. We could also bring up Breonna Taylor who was killed while doing nothing more than occupying her apartment. It should not be that hard to say the police should stop killing people.
That wasn't what I asked. You're answering the question you want me to ask. Not the one I did.
I assure you, BS, that Craig will not be supporting Steven Carrillo's case for the hall of fame.
Does he play major league baseball? Because that's what my question was?
Yes, he plays major league baseball. Well, played, anyway. He was great!
Never heard of him. How good he have been? What position did he play?
You've certainly given me much to think about, but I will say: Curt Schilling is a complicated figure. If we consider what Schilling was like as a ballplayer: he's among the few players to win the Roberto Clemente, Lou Gehrig, Branch Rickey and the Huch Award. All awards for character and community service. Schilling gave enormous amounts of his time to causes, including ALS, cancer and other causes. After 9/11 Schilling went out of his way to support the city writing:
My first cognizant thought was, “Man, did they pick on the wrong country.” Then, after watching TV, I began to realize that not only did they pick on the wrong country, but they couldn’t have picked a worse target. There is no city on this planet that more represents its nation than New York does in the United States. New York is the true definition of a melting pot. Every race, religion and color are represented in New York, and on Tuesday you saw every race, every religion, every color come together as one nation of people fighting for one common goal — to save lives. I can honestly tell you that I have never been as proud to be an American as I was that day.
None of which excuses Schilling the extremist provocateur. I will not pretend anyone must support him, and for what he became after he ended his career. Not that it matters: but Schilling would not be the worst human being in the Hall of Fame, and I don't think it's particularly close. I further believe baseball writers never fairly applied the character clause, which is what you're doing here regardless of your protestations to the contrary.
For me, I find Schilling the provocateur, political activist, and show host as deplorable a human I've ever read about. Schilling the baseball player? Almost nobody like him, that Schilling belongs in the Hall of Fame, and it's that person I would suggest we honor when he's inducted.
Yeah, even allowing the “joking” defense a moment of oxygen is a moment more than I will tolerate.
He can go say his 14 words on Parler.