Let's Go Tribe!: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Network Bar & Login
Section Navigation
Main Blog Content
Secondary Sidebar: Links to Recent Stories, FanPosts and FanShots
Masthead

Around SBN: Has Kentucky Improved Since the Non-Conference Season?

Schilling's interest

by CaptainPenny on Oct 31, 2007 11:46 AM EDT Comment 115 comments

Boston Globe is reporting that Schilling is unlikely to reach a deal with the Red Sox. Apparently he has a blog on which he has listed 12 teams that he is interested in (because they have off-the-field things he & his family are interested in and they could win). The first team listed in the Globe article is the Tribe. Sorry, I don't have the links to the Globe article or the blog as I am just looking at the hard copy over a bowl of Wheat Chex. Maybe someone could add them in the comments - I have to get to work!!

0 recs | Comment 115 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Re: Schilling's interest

Currently mentioned in two different threads before this one.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 11:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

eh, thats ok. This probably deserves its own thread anyways.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

How much is he making? I'd say give him one year, $5-7 mil and it might be worth it. Especially if we don't pick up Byrd's option. It wouldn't cost too much more for better production.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 11:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

He's been making roughly $13MM/year for the past four years.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Ah, ok.

/inserts foot firmly in mouth

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

In a market where Bartolo Colon could get $10 million, Schilling won't come cheap.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

If it's a one year deal, Schilling will want at least the 13 he made last year.

by Roger Dorn on Oct 31, 2007 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Here's the source, his blog. He does indeed mention the tribe first on that list. He been making about 13m/yr

http://38pitches.com/2007/10/30/free-agency-weird/#more-110

by wooglin on Oct 31, 2007 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

I would say more like half full of s$#@ all of the time.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 12:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

9/10 full of #$%& 9/10 of the time.

by jeremy on Oct 31, 2007 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

Well, no one ever sais I was good at math.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

Sorry, had to delete the comment you were replying to (Ground Rules).

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

sorry. Is it because I said s#@#? Just want to make sure. Thanks.

by crazymoloh on Oct 31, 2007 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

Yes.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

i've got to say it would be a little harder to root for the team on days when he's pitching... but i'm pretty sure i'd still be able to do it.

really not certain he's worth the dough, though, unless he's willing to take over pie duty as part of his contract.

by jeremy on Oct 31, 2007 12:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Can we.....

We have two aces that could use some postseason mentoring, but not for $13M/yr.

by JulioBernazard on Oct 31, 2007 12:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

It's amazing how un-douchey a guy becomes when he's playing for your team. That said, I'd probably decline Byrd's option and go for it.

by ASP on Oct 31, 2007 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

We'd be in quite a bind if we declined Byrd's option and Schilling signed with someone else. I just don't feel like we can win bidding wars.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 12:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

when do we have to make a decision on Byrd's option?

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Ten days after the World Series ends, which is one week from today.

Barring further revelations in the hGH situation, we're picking it up, no doubt.

A 50-day suspension could make it interesting, but I think we pick it up anyway. One-year deal, see below.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

So, there's the potential that Byrd could get suspended 50 days for past HGH use? Not to defend Byrd if he used the HGH as a performance enhancer, but doesn't that seem like MLB would be playing a little fast and loose with the rules?

If MLB had their act together years ago when they could have at least attempted to police PED use I wouldn't be so hard on them now.

by emd2k3 on Nov 2, 2007 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

There's just no way that happens. You're right - they can't justify that, legally, morally, ethically, etc.

by Voltaire on Nov 2, 2007 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I think the theory is that Selig may issue suspensions based on these cases even knowing that he'll lose in arbitration when the union challenges it. Making a statement, or something.

by Jay on Nov 2, 2007 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Didn't the USOC pop Marion Jones in a similar fashion - without a positive urine test but with sales records?

"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay

by mauichuck on Nov 3, 2007 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I think so, but I don't believe there's a collective bargaining agreement governing their actions.

by Jay on Nov 3, 2007 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I responding to the "ethically and morally" part of Voltaire's "they can't justify that, legally, morally, ethically".

If a high minded organization like the IOC has no problem with stripping a champion of her medals without a positive urine sample or any other physical evidence, I figure a spineless twerp like Selig would have no compunction doing the same to Byrd. Although I'm sure that the Players Association - the co-conspirators in this sordid affair - will block that action.

Bud-Lyte will have no problems with the morals or ethics involved cuz, you know, he's got the M&E's of a used car salesman. Which, of course, he is.

"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay

by mauichuck on Nov 3, 2007 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I would have no problem with Bud suspending Byrd with out a positive urine test. One reason would be there isn't a reliable urine test for HGH. And secondly if he broke a federal law or MLB law by buying it with out a medical clearance from MLB he deserves to be suspended.

My wish list. Jhonny Peralta to 3rd Cabrera to SS and go get Jason Bay. LGT resident kinesiologist

by E5 on Nov 3, 2007 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I don't believe its a federal crime to buy it, "without medical clearance from MLB". Granted you owned your opinion that you have no problem with Byrd being suspended without a urine test (or may I assume any concrete physical evidence of actual ingestion of hGH), I, myself, would have a problem with that.

I wonder what your motive is here E5? I'll be blunt and say that Byrd represents a valuable commodity to the team that I root for, whether as the 4th starter or as a trading chip, assuming that they pick up his option. Would you prefer it that they don't pick up his option? From what you have written before, you have indicated (to me, at least) that you do not think he has any value as a trading chip, you have not come out and directly stated that we would be better served with starting another pitcher (if so, whom?) and simply not picking up the option, but I wonder if you do believe this.

by hans on Nov 3, 2007 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Yes, I do believe we would be better off with some one else. I think we should trade for a starting pitcher but we do have options in house if need be. Byrd is a decent number five but if he is gone for 50 games or at least 10 starts he would not be worth it.

My wish list. Jhonny Peralta to 3rd Cabrera to SS and go get Jason Bay. LGT resident kinesiologist

by E5 on Nov 4, 2007 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

one thing to note, is that we wouldn't have to pay him during his suspension.

I guess where you and me don't see eye to eye, is in Byrd's percieved value. I think he is valuable, I think we could trade him, even if he is handed the suspension, we could trade him during the season after his serves his suspension. I just don't see how it would serve us to not pick up the option.

by hans on Nov 4, 2007 6:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

we wouldn't have to pay him during his suspension

Great point, that hadn't even occurred to me.

That reduces the option cost to $5.5 million -- arguably, we should actually root for this to happen.

Missing all those games can't be a good thing, but we have starting depth. Possibly, we even get to set up an extended competition between Lee, Sowers and Laffey, maybe rejuvenate Lee's trade value, etc. And once Byrd gets back, he's seven weeks more fresh than everyone else for the stretch rn and October.

I'm just saying ... it's not all bad. Every team in the league would take 4.2 months of Paul Byrd for $5.5 million.

by Jay on Nov 4, 2007 6:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

E5- listen to yourself. We know that Byrd had a prescription for hGH - right? So he wouldn't be in violation of any laws. And when he purchased the hormone it wasn't banned by MLB - true to. So there's no indication that he used hGH after it was banned by MLB. So he neither violated the law or MLB's rules. So, exactly what is he guilty of?

As to a urine test for hGH - this is gonna be real tough. This is a polypeptide, not a steroid, and is physiologically active at much lower serum levels than steroids. Couple that with the fact that the metabolites of the various hormones are present at differing concentrations in the urine, depending on hydration, and you've got a real challenge developing a urine test for hGH.

Nope, the best possibility for detecting hGH is a direct blood test for the hormone or maybe a physiologic marker. So, it's no conspiracy - just the difficulties in detecting low concentrations of polypeptide hormones in the renal filtrate.

"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay

by mauichuck on Nov 5, 2007 7:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

First thing is, you don't decline Byrd. You pick up the option and then trade him if necessary. That's a great one-year deal, and someone will want it. Second thing is, if Byrd is worth $8 million -- and he's worth at least that much -- then Schilling obviously is worth $13 million if not more.

One-year deals can't be compared to multi-year deals, because not only is the risk multiplied by the number of years, but the risk is much greater in each successive year -- because a career-ending injury not only kills the year when it happens but every year after that as well. You give C.C. $18 million over five years, but you should think of that as 22 + 20 + 18 + 16 + 14.

If you can get Schilling on a one-year deal for $16 million, you do it.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 1:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

That would basically put the final nail in the coffin on resigning CC, right?

But seeing as how that's the likely reality anyway, I'd be all about Schilling.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Why do people think things like this?

C.C.'s extension would start in 2009. Schilling's salary would be paid in 2008 -- the Indians have always seemed averse to deferred contracts.

It is true that the Indians gave money in 2007 to Westbrook and Hafner for extensions starting in 2008 and 2009, but that was a unique situation where our 2007 payroll came in significantly under the amount budgeted -- we had spare money lying around. If we didn't do the same with C.C., it would not be unusual, and there's no reason to think it would be a deal-breaker.

I would not expect a Schilling signing to have any effect on C.C.'s contract. However, if they sign Schilling and fail to extend C.C., it would open the door for a team to try to knock us over with an offer for C.C. Far more likely, though, we trade Byrd and/or Lee.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Good points. I feel like I've just been scolded and put in time-out.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

That's what they call the gavel.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Sorry, man, didn't mean for it to sound so harsh. This is a pretty common misconception, even for people with a lot of management or business experience. It's as though people think all that goes out the window when it comes to their sports team, that there's just this big pile of amorphous cash lying around.

Almost all organizations operate based on annual budgets, and sports teams of course are no different. The Indians -- with their focus on tying spending to revenue and avoidance of deferred money in deals -- seem even more inclined to think that way than your average team.

So I really do think, yes, that 2008 deals have nothing to do with C.C.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Ha ha, no worries. I'd rather be corrected and get things right than spout off about things with no factual basis.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

If anything you sign Schilling for 16mm and then in 2009 when trying to re-sign CC tell yourself, "Hey we have 16 + Byrd's 8mm (22mm) coming off the books. Let's use that money to extend CC." It's not that simple obviously because of the later years of the contract, but you are right, a one year deal has no impact on CC.

by Roger Dorn on Oct 31, 2007 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I'd take him at ~$13-14 million...he's no lock to stay healthy, but he's certainly worth the risk.

Picking up Byrd's option is a no-brainer, IMO. However, part of me wonders if we should spin him somewhere. Regardless of what happens with the HGH situation, he's a very valuable trading chip since he's a one year, $8 million #3ish pitcher.

There are a ton of teams who could use him, and the one that's been jumping out at me for a month is the Padres. He fits great in that park behind Peavy, Young, and Maddux, and they have plenty of relievers we could use. I've had a man-crush on Heath Bell for awhile, but he's probably too expensive, so someone like Cla Meredith would make a lot of sense. If we could make both of these moves, you're basically looking at an upgrade at SP plus a solid young reliever for $6 million. In this market, that's an extremely small price to pay.

by Kos on Oct 31, 2007 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Byrd has not trade value at all, especially when he will be suspended for 50 games. Secondly the Padres are not going to be trading pitching for pitching. If anything they would take a bat but we don't have anything to offer them for Meredith or Bell and if we did, we would have made it part of the Barfield trade last year.

My wish list. Jhonny Peralta to 3rd Cabrera to SS and go get Jason Bay. LGT resident kinesiologist

by E5 on Oct 31, 2007 9:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Oh my god E5, you're right! Byrd has no trade value at all! I can't take supporting this loser franchise, I'm becoming a Boston fan.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

E5, there are so many things wrong with what you just said.

Are you clairvoyant?
We have nothing to offer, but incredible depth in the outfield. I'm sure they'd love to get their hands on Francisco.
How would the Barfield trade have any relevance on this situation? Seriously! It's a whole different year!

Gator fans have so much in common with Yankee fans. Minus the history and championships, of course.

by gahnki on Oct 31, 2007 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Yes
No
The Padres knew they needed more bats then and would have traded for another one of our bats if they felt they would give up equal value. In other words one of our bats (that we were willing to trade) does not equal one of their bullpen guys.

My wish list. Jhonny Peralta to 3rd Cabrera to SS and go get Jason Bay. LGT resident kinesiologist

by E5 on Oct 31, 2007 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

No
Why not?
Things change over the course of a year. Francisco and Gutierrez both did a lot to help themselves. Sowers hurt himself. I know you saw this coming since you are the smartest person ever/clairvoyant, but it is possible the Padres did not. Not to mention you still missed the point of that entire conversation.

A move with them is possible. We have what they need, offense/starting pitching in some way, and they have what we may need. Don't just dismiss it because you don't like the idea. Wishing will not make it so.

I swear, next year is it.

by fwembt on Oct 31, 2007 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

They don't need a starting pitcher Justin Germano is young and already better the Byrd. Certainly Tomko is as good or better then Byrd.
Peavy, Young and Maddux are way better then Byrd so I fail to see their starting pitching needs. If they resign Bradley which they are likely to do they don't have a need in the outfield. They currently have an opening at 2B so maybe Barfield could be traded back for something but it would not be for a relief pitcher, one of the teams strengths.

My wish list. Jhonny Peralta to 3rd Cabrera to SS and go get Jason Bay. LGT resident kinesiologist

by E5 on Oct 31, 2007 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Milton Bradley is incredibly injury prone and, in general, a nightmare. I'm pretty sure the Padres would love some alternatives.

by Voltaire on Oct 31, 2007 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Mike Cameron is gone. but don't let that get in the way of your rant.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

"Certainly Tomko is as good or better then Byrd."

Brett Tomko, 2006 ERA+ 95 in 112 in.
2007 ERA+ 80 in 131 in.

Paul Byrd, 2006 ERA+ 93 in 179 in. 2007 ERA+ 100 in 192 in.

by ClarkM on Nov 1, 2007 1:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I know you rarely respond in a discussion but here goes anyway.

Brett Tomko is not now, and never will be, better than Paul Byrd. Tomko is a below league average pitcher and always has been, by no measure is he better than Byrd. That a is patently absurd claim to make. It simply cannot be supported by fact.
Justin Germano is also not better than Paul Byrd. It is possible he could develop into a better pitcher but, as of right now, he is not. Again, look up some stats or something. Germano has a bright future but right now he is not as good a major league pitcher as Paul Byrd.
The starting ages across the Padre out next year: 30 for the essentially worthless Termell Sledge, 37 for league average Brian Giles and 30 for Milton Bradley, the only decent player in the lot. Mike Cameron (31) is suspended, no better than league average and a FA.

Bradley is also a FA and will get good money if they go to arbitration. Add to this the fact that he was hurt for more than half of the games for which he could have played for San Diego and you have a compelling case for his being elsewhere next year. So why again is Ben Francisco not a fit there? Their outfield is abysmal, old and on the way out. Please explain, with some factual basis, why Byrd or Ben Francisco make no sense in San Diego.

I swear, next year is it.

by fwembt on Nov 1, 2007 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

You're in midseason form, E5.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Quick quiz: name all the players MLB has retroactively suspended for substance abuse.

by Voltaire on Oct 31, 2007 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

And how is it that he'll be suspended, E5? A really old urine sample they've been holding on to just in case?

So Byrd, a league-average starter who approached 200 IP last year, has no value. No one would want him. Yet you've been in support of trading Barfield for a week now. What do you expect in return for one of baseball's worst everyday players last year?

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Hey man, E5 said it...what are trying to say that E5 doesn't know what he's talking about, that he doesn't support his claims...puhleease! Byrd has no trade value, I didn't know it either, but when E5 wrote it, my eyes were opened up.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

1. He can be suspended very easily.
http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/119356031689940.xml&coll=2#con tinue
2. I have never supported trading Barfield. I in fact want him to be our starting second basemen next year so I am not sure where you are getting that from.

My wish list. Jhonny Peralta to 3rd Cabrera to SS and go get Jason Bay. LGT resident kinesiologist

by E5 on Oct 31, 2007 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Baseball's leadership wants to see whether even if players such as Byrd stopped using HGH before MLB banned it in January of 2005, they still may have broken the law depending on why they used it.

The key here is your wording, "he can be suspended very easily." MLB, as far as I know, has never been able to prove anything like this (how many players have been suspended that didn't fail a drug test?), and certainly not retroactively. He technically can be suspended. Odds are against it.

The problem here is your abrasive nature. Instead of saying, "It's entirely possible that MLB could find a way to suspend Byrd," you went Miss Cleo on us and decreed, "Byrd has not[sic] trade value at all, especially when he will be suspended for 50 games." You can see where people take issue with this. Just don't be like that.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

ah, but he uses the word "especially" which indicates that what is presented preceding the use of the word is sufficent (ala, even without the 50 game suspension, Byrd's value is 0, zero, nada, opposite of something).

So E5 does not think Byrd is valuable at all. Like we couldn't trade him for Nefi Perez is we tried. That's some cold sauce E5 just poured on Byrdy.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Everything about this post is hilarious.

by Kos on Nov 1, 2007 4:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Jay said:

"If you can get Schilling on a one-year deal for $16 million, you do it."

Maybe if you're the Yanks, Red Sox, Angels, Dodgers, etc; but definitely not if you're the Indians. That's crazy jack for a 4th starter.

by SpringTrainingFun on Oct 31, 2007 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Who pitches when is all just meaningless details.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

"if Byrd is worth $8 million -- and he's worth at least that much -- then Schilling obviously is worth $13 million if not more."

I wouldn't necessarily, based on this year's performance compared with Byrd, say Schilling is WORTH that much, but it is what he will DEMAND and GET. You are definitely right though, Byrd is worth $8 mil.

But I definitely agree that you pick up Byrd's option. Not so sure about a 41 year old pitcher with DL time in 3 of the last 5 seasons for $16 mil though....

by joecardsfan on Nov 1, 2007 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

From a complete irrational emotional front, I still hate Schilling for spurning us when he was leaving the Phillies. The Indians were on his "do not want" list back when we were desperate for a #1 pitcher.

So, poo to him.

by Toxicadam on Oct 31, 2007 1:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

In Curt's defense, the Indians were ten games out of first place the week he was traded, and the D'backs were only three games out.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

How do you leverage the negative impact Schilling's advice would have on CC's numbers when considering how much he's worth?

by Brick. on Oct 31, 2007 1:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Schilling is not exactly a character guy, is he? His "me first" approach wouldn't exactly fit the Shapiro/Wedge model.

That said, as Jay said, if you can get him on a one year deal at $15 million, the Indians should seriously look into it.

CC
Fausto
Schilling
Westbrook
Byrd (if option), Laffey, Sowers, etc.

Leaves the door open for Lee to be traded (which I'm desperately hoping for).

Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.

by Gradyforpresident on Oct 31, 2007 1:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

He indulges himself by speaking his mind, constantly, but never at the expense of a teammate, not that I can remember. I think he's considered a good teammate.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Ah, guess I just allowed my personal views to influence my feelings towards him.

Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.

by Gradyforpresident on Oct 31, 2007 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Do people dislike Schilling because he is loud about his political views or because his loud political views are Republican? Don't mean for this comment to create an aside into political discussion.

by Roger Dorn on Oct 31, 2007 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Without getting too political, I feel like he runs his mouth for the sake of running it, akin to a 24 hour news network talking head. Doesn't matter which side his views fall on.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Oct 31, 2007 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Agreed, in fact I was hoping that I could say something like: "I think the best place for him to sign is in Washington or Texas." Hint, hint.

-Bo

by bodiaz74 on Oct 31, 2007 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Yeah, he seems to think a) a lot of people want to hear his views and b) they want to hear them often, but I doubt either of those things is true.

by JulioBernazard on Oct 31, 2007 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I think my all-time favorite quote about Schilling and his penchant for not shutting his trap came from the Phillies GM from their '93 WS team. I think it was Gillick, but could be wrong, someone please correct me if I am.

The GM said, "Every fifth day Schilling was a horse, the other four days he was a horse's a$*."

by denvertribefan on Oct 31, 2007 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Gillick was in Toronto in '93.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I definitely think it's because, as Jay said above, he indulges himself constantly into speaking his mind. I don't dislike him because he's Republican. I don't dislike Tom Brady because he's Republican; I dislike him because he went to Michigan.

by CU Adam on Oct 31, 2007 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Well said.

Gator fans have so much in common with Yankee fans. Minus the history and championships, of course.

by gahnki on Oct 31, 2007 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Dang that rotation looks sweet. But at $15 mill, do we have the money (for just next year)? We'd pretty much be directly adding $15 to the payroll, wouldn't we? Even if we could trade a large contract like a Lee ($6), I see very few teams willing to take on a questionable starter, a large contract, and trade pure prospects to get him.

by Voltaire on Oct 31, 2007 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect Schiling and Byrd to pitch very similar next year to how they did in 2007.

So you've got Byrd:
192.3 innings with a 4.59 ERA
Or Schilling:
151 innings with a 3.87 ERA

Byrd is at least $5 million cheaper, but there's always the option of trading him for good value. If the trade was for bullpen depth, that would make it easier to survive a loss of 40 innings from a starter.

Hmm.

It would make reading 38 Pitches a lot more interesting.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 1:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Yeah its pretty simple in that signing Schilling would allow us to trade a SP (Byrd/Lee) and SP's value are already at premium, so its likely we would come out with a nice return.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I retract this statement, as E5 has clearly pointed out that Byrd "has no trade value". I don't know what I was thinking.

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

question: why is it that Boston seems specifically not interested in resigning him?

i understand that they feel confident that Matsuzaka will be a bona fide #2 guy next year and that Wakefield and Lester will probably do just fine in two of the other slots.

but isn't this the team that started the 2007 season with Julian Tavarez in their rotation? and then traded Kason Gabbard for Eric Gagne? do they have another starter in the high minors that they're planning on using next year or what?

by jeremy on Oct 31, 2007 2:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

You mean, like, that guy who pitched a no-hitter two months ago? Someone like that?

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Well he has that going for him, which is nice.

I swear, next year is it.

by fwembt on Oct 31, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Plus that's $13 million they can use to go after A-Rod and solidify their status as the New Yankees. $13 million from Schilling, plus whatever Lowell was going to make...

"Nice shooting. Don't get cocky." - Han Solo

Pronk Needs You

by woodsmeister on Oct 31, 2007 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

completely forgot about him, somehow. thanks.

by jeremy on Oct 31, 2007 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I vaguely recall an earlier time when we were trying to sign Schilling (I think back in the early 2000s, in the "chuck finley" era. My memory is that he played us big-time -- acted interested, said great things about Cleveland, then followed the money. So, my guess is he'll do the same. If he's leaving Boston, it's probably because they won't pay him the big bucks for another year and/or because he has had expressions of interest from someone else at big money. I wouldn't waste my time if I were Shapiro. He's a good pitcher, but not worth the money at this point. Focus on the bullpen.

by peter m on Oct 31, 2007 2:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Played us?

Peter, the guy has never been a free agent -- ever -- before now. He's got drafted by the Phillies, traded to the D'backs who extended him, then traded to the Red Sox who also extended him. Meaning, we could never at any point have acquired him without striking a deal with another team, and I'm not aware that he was ever asked to approve any deal.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Hey man, its his memory,

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Actually Jay, you got Schilling's history only partially correct.

He was actually signed by the Red Sox in 86 (39th rounder). Then traded to the Orioles in 88 with Brady Anderson for Mike Boddicker. Then in 91 (in one of the most lopsided deals ever in my opinion, which coincidentally helped my fantasy team immensely) he was dealt with Steve Finley and Pete Harnisch to the Astros for Glenn Davis. Yes Glenn Davis.

In 92, the Astros sent him to the Phillies for Jason Grimsley. He did become a free agent after 95, but resigned with Philly. Then in 00, he was dealt to Arizona for Vicente Padilla, Travis Lee, Nelson Figueroa, and Omar Daal.

And lastly in 03, traded by Arizona to Boston for Michael Goss, Jorge De La Rosa, Brandon Lyon, and Casey Fossum.

So yes he was a free agent once, but I don't think we bid for him in 95/96. I think the bidding wa accurately described by you in hte deadline deal in 00.

by talonk on Oct 31, 2007 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Well, you nailed me. I totally forgot that he didn't come up with the Phillies.

That said, the details still aren't right. For one thing, Curt couldn't have been a free agent before the end of 1996, since he pretty clearly hadn't spent a total of one full year in the majors prior to 1991.

Curt's last deal with the Phillies covered 1998-2000, and it was signed in April 1997, so he was never a free agent over that period. Based on this, I am assuming he was never a free agent at the end of 1996 -- at the very least, that he never filed for free agency. It wouldn't make much sense to do a one-year deal in November (or so) and then do another three-year deal just five months later, before a single game had been played.

Also, Curt himself says he was never a free agent.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/comsite5/bin/pdinventory.pl?pdlanding=1&referid=2930&purchase _type=ITM&item_id=0286-5779997

Even though he wasn't a free agent. It was pretty public that he was dictating where he wanted to go, which is pretty unprecedented for any player to decide.

by Toxicadam on Oct 31, 2007 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

It's not the least bit unprecedented for a player to say he'd like to be traded to a contender.

Schilling acquired 10/5 trade veto rights in May of that season -- one of Ed Wade's many stupid moves, allowing it to get to the point where Schilling could dictate where he'd be traded. That automatically gave him a strong say in where he'd be traded, as it does for any player in that situation.

You're trying to make this into some kind of exceptional case. It simply wasn't.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 9:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I never, never fault a player for wanting to win.

by emd2k3 on Nov 2, 2007 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Not that I am nitpicking Jay, but could his cumultive time in 88, 89, and 90 given him that extra year? Looks like he had a half season in 90 and two Sept call ups in 88, 89. Maybe he fell under the Super 2?

I don't know, I was just going by what the Cube said for the free agency thing.

Even if he wasn't a free agent, he must have signed some sort of extension with the Philliees since he was up to stay in 91 and that deadline deal was in 00. No way tose 9 years weren't negotiated somehow.

by talonk on Nov 1, 2007 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I'm pretty sure the Cube is wrong on that detail. He didn't have a full year at that point, and Super Two affects arbitration but not free agency. Best I can tell, he agreed to a one-year deal for 1997 at some point in 1996. I know that he did a three-year extension in April 1997 that covered 1998-2000.

by Jay on Nov 1, 2007 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Two things to add to this conversation. First off, Buster Onley makes a commentary today about ARod possibly headed to LAA even though they've said in the past they don't want to pay that much for any player. The reason cited that the LAA suddenly have the mulah to pay for ARod's services? An estimated yearly check to every MLB team from the success of MLB.com. This is good news for the Indians financials as a whole and gives me, at least, hope of signing CC to a long term deal at some point.

It also leads me to be more inclined to want to include Schiling for a one year deal. Let's face it, we'd be getting a part time pitcher for the season followed by (hopefully) a truly experienced post-season guy. I like the potential trickle down affect as well. This gives us additional depth at SP which might push Shapiro to finally trading Lee (thankfully). This would also allow a hole to be filled from the trade (Lee plus Francisco/Choo plus others? [Peralta?]). I would love to get a first rate closer or maybe Crawford from TB. And of course, as Jay points out, this doesn't have to impact our ability to resign CC - which is a good thing, although I don't necessarily see him as the completely dominant Ace. And no, I didn't just come up with that because of the Boston Series, I've thought that for years. Regardless, I still think we have to do everything we can to resign him.

Apparently headed towards a solid 2nd and 3rd in the LGT Fantasy Leagues. Eh...

by mjmarble on Oct 31, 2007 2:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

P.S. - That yearly check from MLB.com is estimated at a cool $30mil.

Apparently headed towards a solid 2nd and 3rd in the LGT Fantasy Leagues. Eh...

by mjmarble on Oct 31, 2007 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

MLB.com brings in over $900M/yr?!?! WOW!

by JulioBernazard on Oct 31, 2007 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I've read estimates of around 800,000 subsribers to mlb.tv at around $100/y...plus ad revenues of course.

by supermarioelia on Oct 31, 2007 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Also! Don't forget to factor in Gameday Audio subscriptions.

Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.

by Gradyforpresident on Oct 31, 2007 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Do merch sales from there get split evenly among all teams, or go to individual clubs based on sales of individual team gear?

by JulioBernazard on Oct 31, 2007 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I am seriously going to add "no Carl Crawford talk" to the Ground Rules.

by Jay on Oct 31, 2007 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

forward to anthony castrovince, paul hoynes, shocker eldon, terry pluto, etc.

by Brick. on Oct 31, 2007 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

You might as well make it the banner.

So if we sign Schilling, and this adds depth to the SP ... would Texas take a guy like Lee for Benoit+whatever? At first I'd say no because of Lee's flyball tendencies, but that didn't stop them from acquiring Brandon McCarthy. There. Then you let Byrd go (something I don't like, but if we need the money...) and Benoit adds the depth needed to cover the loss of SP innings. I would hope Texas is desperate enough for pitching to do this.

But I'm getting ahead of myself.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

What about Laffey and then ask for Beniot + another decent player?

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

Do they have one?

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

touche

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I was only being partially facetious. I seem to remember, after the Max Ramirez deal, someone at Lone Star Ball asking, "Is he our best prospect now?"

If there's someone glaring that I've overlooked, anyone let me know. I know Volquez(sp?) really dropped off.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I realize now you may be speaking of any decent player, not just a prospect. In that case, I don't know. If they signed someone like Mike Cameron or Geoff Jenkins ... maybe Botts becomes available? He's alright, I suppose. A switch hitter, I think. But then you'd have to sweeten the pot, and the simpler deals are usually the more likely ones to be made.

Lone Star Ball just informed me that Benoit has just signed a two-year deal, buying out his arbitration year and first free agent year. So I suppose that makes this all less likely. Poo. I have to find another reliever man crush.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

damn, killed my dream there. .

by hans on Oct 31, 2007 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

The article itself is okay, but it's the comments section of this FJM post that still makes me laugh when I think of Schilling.

by nickjs21 on Oct 31, 2007 4:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I saw a TV piece (I think on ESPN's E:60) that Schilling OWNS a video game company. He's a total game 'head!

by JulioBernazard on Oct 31, 2007 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

In addition to the video game company (I can't remember the name, but I think it's linked from his blog), he also owns a board wargame company, Multi-Man Publishing.

It's a wonder he has time to actually play baseball.

by Jackdaw on Oct 31, 2007 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I don't want that conceited a-hole on my team. If there is one guy in sports has HAS to always hear himself talk its Curt Schilling.

by mikebrowns26 on Oct 31, 2007 8:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Schilling's interest

I'm glad you're not the Cleveland GM.

Let him talk. As long as he pitches, too.

by emd2k3 on Nov 2, 2007 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

User Tools

Constantly updated Indians news, lots of in-depth analysis, live in-game discussions — and more fanatical and thoughtful Indians fans than every other web site combined.

Start posting about the Indians »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Narrow
Wide

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

39135485-59af19dbb26654095f910f34176af094_4ae8a81e-scaled_small

Predictions Group

by Brandon C. 2 days ago

23 comments | 0 recs

I think we found our utility infielder

by datrain021 14 days ago

37 comments | 0 recs

Baseball in Japan

by Chemo 14 days ago

38 comments | 0 recs

3444ant_black_small

Spring Training Trips

by APV 24 days ago

50 comments | 0 recs

Trade Peralta?

by hans 25 days ago

136 comments | 0 recs

3444ant_black_small

Beware the year of the Ox

by APV about 1 month ago

66 comments | 0 recs

award-winning independent baseball documentary released

by princemilo about 1 month ago

0 comments | 0 recs

Create your own 2010 BA Top Ten list (then sign Grady to an extension)

by fleerdon 2 months ago

201 comments | 2 recs

Jason Grilli Signs Minor League Deal?

by Eric Stephen 2 months ago

92 comments | 6 recs

Mariahcareyglitter_medium_medium_small

2009 AL Central Off-Season Transactions and Rumors

by Toxicadam 2 months ago

137 comments | 2 recs

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Recent Posts

Featured Poll

Poll

Who would you like to see hired to manage the Cleveland Indians?

Bobby Valentine

106 votes

Travis Fryman

41 votes

Manny Acta

113 votes

Don Mattingly

78 votes

Torey Lovullo

30 votes

Other

51 votes

419 votes | Poll has closed

Featured Stories

Dosequisman_small

Fire Everyone! - An Overture

by Jay 5 months ago

25 comments | 1 recs

47b8dd28b3127cceb64839d9746800000026102bauwjrq3za_small

What Cliff Lee's Not Reading

by afh4 6 months ago

28 comments | 14 recs

3444ant_black_small

Trade Profile: Justin Masterson

by APV 6 months ago

75 comments | 0 recs

Dosequisman_small

Too Soon, the Victor Martinez Era Ends

by Jay 6 months ago

112 comments | 25 recs

3444ant_black_small

Minor League Overview: The Hitters

by APV 6 months ago

30 comments | 4 recs

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Lee has Foot Surgery

by afh4 18 minutes ago 0 comments | 0 recs

Jamey Wright Signed to Minor League Deal

by woodsmeister about 1 hour ago 0 comments | 0 recs

2010 Cleveland Indians draft preview

by JP_Frost about 4 hours ago 0 comments | 0 recs

Jim Ingraham Angers You.

by afh4 3 days ago 100 comments | 0 recs

BP Calls John Hart One of the, STRIKE THAT, BEST GMs of the 90s

by afh4 4 days ago 68 comments | 0 recs

Sizemore Addresses Offseason

by afh4 4 days ago 20 comments | 0 recs

Can we reach 1,000 on a post about Adam Kennedy?

by Ockus_NYC 5 days ago 438 comments | 0 recs

"At this time, we're looking to make the biggest impact possible on the...

by afh4 5 days ago 17 comments | 0 recs

Casey Blake shaved his beard

by TheDanimal 5 days ago 16 comments | 0 recs

ICBWDSTGFO550K

by westbrook 7 days ago 130 comments | 0 recs

+ New FanShot All FanShots >