Tuesday, April 7, 2015
WHY DOES CURT SCHILLING GET A PLATFORM?
Curt Schilling is a gamer. There is no doubt about it. Winning with the Diamondbacks and Red Sox, there is no question he was a great competitor. What I don't get though is why the guy gets press for things he says about other players. Who cares? And why does it even matter what Schilling thinks?
Apparently Curt Schilling thinks Pete Rose shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame. OK... and my mom thinks he should be. So what gives? I was reading Comcast Philly and here's what they wrote:
"...does Schilling believe Rose deserves to be in the Hall after his checkered gambling history?
'Not in my book,' Schilling told the Breakfast on Broad crew. 'What he did, how long it took him to tell us, and admit to what he did, and knowing him, I'm not sure he didn't bet on baseball. I'm not sure he didn't bet on his own team. Given how competitive he is, I think that he did bet on his team, I think he might have bet on his team to do both, to win and to lose. That to me goes to the heart of the game. I'm sure I'm in the minority but that wouldn't be the first time.'"
Curt "thinks" Pete did a lot, but there's no confidence in that answer, is there? It seems like bluster.
Now if you're asking me, Pete Rose deserves to be in the Hall of Fame for his playing ability. There was no one tougher in his time. No one played harder. When I was a kid, I wanted to be Pete Rose!
Now, did he bet on baseball? Of course he did, but as a manager. Should it count? It should if Pete Rose was just a manager like say Jack McKeon or a Buck Showalter. Guys that never really ever played pro, but tried to get there and only ended up as managers. Here's the difference... Pete played for a long, long time before that, becoming the All-Time Hits King.
Sure, you can look at Rule 21 in the Handbook all you'd like, but there is something to be said about his competitiveness and ability on the field, BEFORE his "gambling" days as manager that should definitely be considered.
That, my friends is alittle bit more specific than Curt Schilling's uneasiness of whether or not Pete Rose should be in the Hall... and I'm a nobody!
Then Schilling was on the Michael Kay show talking about Masahiro Tanaka. Apparently Schilling doesn't think Tanaka will last. If you check out Kay's site, it simply reads: "Curt Schilling says Tanaka will not make it through the season because his pitches are flat."
True. Now think about what BYB said:
"Something isn't right about Masahiro Tanaka. I've been suspicious about the whole thing for months now. How could a guy like Tanaka be pitching for 8 years in organized ball, and while he's in the US, gets hurt, and suddenly heals over time. I mean, he's got a tiny tear in his UCL, right? That just gets better? Really?
Now look, Tanaka pitched "OK" this spring. Not wonderful... I mean, he had great moments, but I wasn't exactly blown away. Now though, the elbows healed... and everything is back to normal? Do you really believe that? DO YOU? Because I don't."
What's my point, you're wondering? Simply, you don't need Curt Schilling telling you stuff you already know. You, as fans, are smart. Many of you voice what I think about Tanaka. Curt Schilling is not a genius.
You know when he's a genius? When he goes after trolls on Twitter for attacking his daughter! (Read CURT SCHILLING: A NEW KIND OF CHAMPION.) That, my friends was incredible work by a dad... gotta love him for that.
But for baseball analysis... I've never been impressed. That's nothing against Curt Schilling personally. The guy was an incredible pitcher. It hurts me to say it. But to be honest, I don't need the guy giving me opinions on stuff he's unsure of, or just plain obivous about. We can handle that on our own as fans... can't we?
Yes we can. We're kind of smart.
You've made BYB the fastest growing Yankees fan site in history. Now shop at the Bleeding Yankee Blue store! Follow me on Twitter @BleednYankeeBlu and LIKE Bleeding Yankee Blue on Facebook! Also, don't forget to check out the BYB Hub!