Infield Shift

Longtime readers are aware of the ferocious negativity with which Shank treats certain Boston athletes, and none of more recent prominence than Red Sox pitching ace Curt Schilling. Imagine my surprise, then, at reading his latest column about the Hall of Fame ballots from yesterday, with Derek Jeter and Larry Walker the only two getting in this year. A positive opening headline:

Curt Schilling misses out on Hall of Fame, but he’ll get in next year

… is then quickly doused with a few splashes of negativity:

If you love the Red Sox and love Curt Schilling, the good news is that Schill is getting into the Hall of Fame one year from now.

As long as he does not do something incredibly stupid.

Take the man’s phone away immediately. Bar him from any form of social media over the next 12 months. Schill is officially on the threshold of baseball immortality. Results of the 2020 election demonstrate that Schilling is a lock for 2021 as long as he doesn’t make it impossible for voters to honor him.
...
Schill’s case for the Hall is complex. The myth of him not getting into Cooperstown — a fable Schilling prefers — is that he is being denied because of his “political opinions.’’

Bogus. Schill’s latter-day, off-the-rails rants and social media posts are not singularly what has kept him out. He is simply not a slam-dunk Hall candidate.

The charge of 'bogus' is, of course, absolute rubbish. Shank is well aware that the printed word, even when emanating from the fetid swamps of the area formerly known as 135 Morrisey Boulevard, carry weight and carry the message as far as it will go. Shank has printed enough negative columns about Curt Schilling that they have a certain momentum that carries on, even to this day. Not to mention that time Shank wanted Schilling thrown in jail because Schilling's software company went tits up after a $75 million loan guarantee from the state of Rhode Island. And Shank definitely didn't like it when Schilling described Shank as 'the second most bitter human I've ever known'. Thus, the battle lines have been drawn for years.

Shank then goes on to make a case that, compared to certain other pitchers, Schilling simply doesn't stack up. Since that part of the column's on much better ground, and perhaps even compelling, do you really need to mention Schilling's political opinion? You bet your ass you do, if you work for the Boston Globe and especially if you've been at war with the other guy for over a decade now.

DHL Dan CXXII - Next Year's News Today!

In the latest extravaganza of the Picked Up Pieces column, I wasn't quite sure what to expect based on this tweet:

Thanks, Chris https://t.co/Ju8XGZv0i7

— Dan Shaughnessy (@Dan_Shaughnessy) January 29, 2021

A few things to point out. Gasper's correct in the sense that being someone's 'foil' can mean 'to prevent something undesireable from succeeding'. That's certainly the case with Schilling, who Shank wanted to put in jail for defaulting on a $75 million loan from the state of Rhode Island. I wouldn't want someone like that as part of the jury pool. Gasper then uses another interesting word to describe part of this column - hilarious'. Unless this is some old inside joke between Globies, does anyone think Shank is funny? Funny how, you may ask? Let's check out the column:

We’re a year away from the wildest Hall of Fame election ever, and other thoughts

Picked-up pieces while daydreaming about how — in a normal year — my JetBlue flight would be landing in Tampa for Super Bowl Week right about now …

Shank whining about not getting a paid vacation from the Globe to go to Florida for a week? That's not funny. Reading about Shank whining about not getting the free vacation? That's fucking hilarious!

▪ Look for David Ortiz to sail into Cooperstown when the Hall of Fame Class of 2022 is announced at this time next year. Big Papi comes on the ballot for the first time in December, and I believe he’ll easily vault over the 75 percent threshold.

It’s going to be the wildest Hall election ever, which is saying something given events of this past week. Ortiz and Álex Rodríguez are the top achievers among the new candidates in 2022, and they will be on the same ballot with Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Curt Schilling (sorry, Schill, you don’t get to withdraw your name), who’ll all be in their 10th and final year of consideration.

Shank thinks Ortiz is a lock (ditto) but Schilling is not:

▪ I’ve sent Schilling’s 1,200-word Tuesday night screed to multiple geniuses and soothsayers, and nobody seems to be able to decode the thing. Curt keeps telling us he’s not a Hall of Famer but anybody who didn’t vote for him is a coward (Schill should have blamed the BBWAA’s Dominion voting machines).

Schilling says he’ll gladly turn his candidacy over to the Veterans Committee, but a quarter of that committee will be media members, and there might also be a few Hall of Famers curious about Curt’s position papers on Black Lives Matter issues.

Let’s also remember that Schilling went out of his way to bury Clemens and Bonds, which never plays well with ex-players.

Nobody can figure out what Curt’s issue is with the Red Sox (”What Mr. Henry and Mr. Werner did to my family and I in my final year …”). In his final season (2008), the Red Sox paid Schilling $8 million for not throwing a single pitch. By this logic, Curt also must be angry at the taxpayers of Rhode Island for what they did to his family.

▪ Got an e-mail from a Hall of Famer who was not buying Schill’s response or his logic. The thrust of this missive was that Schilling is copping out, taking his ball and going home instead of letting voters who have ruled on the Hall since 1936 make a decision on his candidacy.

Schilling always wanted the ball in the big games, so where is that now? This e-mail from a Hall of Famer doesn’t bode well for Schill’s hope to gain points with the Veterans Committee.

Schilling’s request to be removed from the ballot presents as an attempt to avoid a 10th rejection. He doesn’t make the rules, and the Hall should reject his request.

So if anything was hilarious with this column, it's purely inadvertent. That said, this is a pretty good column.

Before and After

Dan, on Roger Clemens, Dec. 14, 1996:

But on this day of new beginnings and inestimable wealth, there was no glory, no grace in either Toronto or Boston. Clemens bolted Boston and he spit on Fenway on his way out the door.
... Let the record show that The Rocket is 34 years old and went 40-39 over the last four (injury-filled) seasons while earning $20 million. Despite those numbers, he's now the highest-paid pitcher in baseball (Atlanta's John Smoltz got $31 million for four years). ...He didn't take any lumps yesterday. He took $31.1 million. And he dumped all over the Boston Red Sox, who were good to him for 13 big league seasons.

Dan, on Roger Clemens, following the Red Sox-Yankees playoff game/beanball war:

Which one would you rather have now, Sox fans? Roger Clemens -- who kept his composure and behaved like a professional Saturday night, winning the game for his team despite his obvious anger? Or Pedro, the baby who hits a guy after he blows a lead, then points at his head and at Yankee catcher Jorge Posada, threatening "you're next"?

And on May 13, 2005:

Roger Clemens is the greatest pitcher in the history of baseball. The Red Sox should do whatever it'll take to bring him back home for the stretch run in 2005.

On Pedro Martinez, Aug. 26, 2003:

He's the greatest pitcher we've seen since Sandy Koufax. ... Too bad he got it in his head that we don't respect him. Too bad he wants to leave.

On Pedro, Feb. 21, 2004:

... the Dominican Diva ...

On Curt Schilling, Nov. 29, 2003:

Schilling is back with the Red Sox. Oh, happy day. Son of Tito can leave Schilling on the mound to pitch the eighth and ninth and no one will call for the manager to be fired.

On Schilling, Feb. 21, 2004:

The day he signed with Boston he said, "I guess I hate the Yankees now." He has already looked at the schedule and concluded it'll be his turn to pitch when the Yankees first come to Fenway April 16. He spends time in cyberspace, conversing with Red Sox fans. ... Any wonder Curt Schilling is a hit with Red Sox Nation?

On Schilling, Nov. 9, 2005:

It's not a suggestion from Curt Schilling or any of his little late-night, on-line friends. ... It's just something that makes sense. ...

On Nomar Garciaparra, July 10, 2000:

In Boston, there never has been a ballplayer like him. Red Sox manager Jimy Williams said it best two years ago when he observed, "It’s like he’s been here before." True. Sometimes it seems as if Garciaparra is the reincarnation of Tris Speaker or Rogers Hornsby - an old hardball soul in a young man’s perfect baseball body.

On Nomar, June 10, 2004:

By any measure, Garciaparra is one of the most popular Sox players of all time. He's the fourth-leading hitter in franchise history, trailing only Ted Williams, Wade Boggs, and Tris Speaker. He has played hard for every inning of every game since he first got called up at the end of the 1996 season.

On Nomar, Aug. 1, 2004:

Thank the baseball god, he's gone. We no longer have to watch Nomar Garciaparra pretend that he cares about the fortunes of the Boston Red Sox.

Now that the Red Sox need a shortstop, will Dan next write about how they need to bring back Nomar? Stay tuned.

Don't Get Mad - Get Even!

That's what Curt Schilling did last week when Shank went on Mike Felger's show on Comcast Sports New England to talk about his firing from ESPN:

"He got what he was asking for, and I don't have a lot of sympathy for him right now," said Shaughnessy, with whom Schilling has feuded from almost the day the pitcher arrived in Boston. "I'm just going to miss him. He's good on TV."

Didn't take long for Schilling to respond . . .

@CSNNE Not even a contest, the 2nd most bitter human I've ever known. Doesn't make him bad or wrong many times, just bitter. #CHB

— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) April 22, 2016

I want to know who's #1 in your book, Curt!

But wait - there's more!

And then he added a comment on CSN's Facebook page, under a link to the video . . .

“Don't need the advice of a bitter human who only remains relevant because of that coif and his desire to take opposing views, regardless of their factual truths. CHB was irrelevant the day we won game 4 and the World Series, ending something he made a career out of inventing, the "Curse". It was a curse of talent, nothing else. People like this need a boogeyman to create content, original thought escapes them”

Then, this one out of deep right field:

@dawsonoot two things, I didn't ask for your opinion and Mike Felger is about as large a know-nothing douche as ever existed.

— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) April 22, 2016

You could accuse Felger of a lot of things; a lack of knowledge is not one of them. This looks like a shot at Felger inviting Shank on for the express / implied purpose of Schilling bashing, knowing full well Shank would deliver. In that case, the charge of douche is correct. Not like Felger gives a rat's ass either way...

DHL Dan CXLVXIII - Last At-Bat For Curt Schilling

A man who Shank can't stand has one more shot at the Baseball Hall of Fame:

Sunday is the judgment day Curt Schilling wanted, and other thoughts

Picked-up pieces while remembering when the Red Sox used the Hot Stove season to announce something better than advertisements on their uniforms …

▪ Curt Schilling could be named a Hall of Famer Sunday night. Same goes for Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds.

Baseball’s 16-person Contemporary Era Committee convenes at the Winter Meetings in San Diego Sunday, and just after 8 p.m., white smoke will likely emerge from the conference room, indicating that one or more new Hall of Famers have been chosen from a list of eight candidates who failed to gain election in 10 or 15 tries on the writers’ ballot.

Sheer math ensures that we won’t have a large class from this vote. A candidate needs 12 of the 16 votes to gain admission, and each voter can select no more than three. I’m expecting to see Fred McGriff elected. Schilling is a possibility. The other six men on the ballot are Clemens, Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro, Don Mattingly, Dale Murphy, and Albert Belle.

It’s a potentially explosive night for MLB. This is the first opportunity for Schilling, Bonds, and Clemens to be judged by their peers. Seven Hall of Fame players — Chipper Jones, Greg Maddux, Jack Morris, Frank Thomas, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, and Alan Trammell — are on the committee. Others on the committee are executives Theo Epstein, Paul Beeston, Arte Moreno, Kim Ng, Dave St. Peter, and Ken Williams, plus media reps Steve Hirdt, La Velle Neal, and Susan Slusser.

McGriff has considerable support, including some former teammates who are members of the committee.

We'll see how much support the others on the ballot receive, including Schilling.

Why He's Hated: A DSW Flashback

In honor of the ongoing Boston Phoenix poll asking whether Dan Shaughnessy is the most hated person in Boston, we bring you this landmark post from Dec. 13, 2005:

"I always say I look at the bright side." (ESPN Outside the Lines, Oct. 22, 2000)

And yet ...

"Imagine a 2-0 lead and Pedro Martinez hasn't even started yet? However, if you are old enough to remember 1986 or 1978, maybe you are not so certain." (Boston Globe, Oct. 26, 2004)

"Personally, I already miss the old Red Sox a little. ... They never again will be the cuddly team on a near century-long, quixotic quest. ... Buckner and Friends are off the hook. All of them." (Boston Globe, Oct. 29, 2004)

"In my mind there's no question that the O'Donnell group was the way to go." (to USA Today, Jan. 22, 2002)

"[T]he bag job of a major league franchise sale..." (on the Henry group, Boston Globe, March 27, 2005)

"[David Ortiz is] a giant sack of you-know-what ..." (on WWZN, Jan. 4, 2003; link unavailable)

"I don't care." (quoting Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive, to Marjory Eagan on 96.9 FM, when asked how he felt when the Sox recorded the final out of the World Series. Dan replied he had a perfect analogy, referring to Jones' glib response to Harrison Ford when the erstwhile "Han Solo" says he didn't kill his wife; Oct. 28, 2004)

"Why does this stuff always happen with the Red Sox? Why can't it just be about the baseball? Even for one day." (on Pedro Martinez leaving a game early, Boston Globe, April 6, 2004)

"It is therefore no surprise that [Dr. Charles] Steinberg took an interest in the young Theo Epstein. By 1992, he was the Orioles' director of public affairs, overseeing four departments. He'd reviewed 10,000 resumes and interviewed more than 1,000 young candidates when Epstein went to see him during spring break in 1992." (Boston Globe, March 27, 2005. Ed. note: Ten thousand resumes, at one minute per resume, comes to 166.67 hours, or a little more than four workweeks. One thousand interviews, at roughly 30 minutes per candidate, comes to 500 hours, 12.5 workweeks. Combined, that equals nearly 17 workweeks -- one-third of the working year -- devoted to finding a single unpaid intern. No wonder the Orioles were such a mess. Or maybe Dan just made it all up.)

And this post, from Dec. 12, 2005:

On Roger Clemens, Dec. 14, 1996:

But on this day of new beginnings and inestimable wealth, there was no glory, no grace in either Toronto or Boston. Clemens bolted Boston and he spit on Fenway on his way out the door.
... Let the record show that The Rocket is 34 years old and went 40-39 over the last four (injury-filled) seasons while earning $20 million. Despite those numbers, he's now the highest-paid pitcher in baseball (Atlanta's John Smoltz got $31 million for four years). ...He didn't take any lumps yesterday. He took $31.1 million. And he dumped all over the Boston Red Sox, who were good to him for 13 big league seasons.

Dan, on Roger Clemens, following the Red Sox-Yankees playoff game/beanball war:

Which one would you rather have now, Sox fans? Roger Clemens -- who kept his composure and behaved like a professional Saturday night, winning the game for his team despite his obvious anger? Or Pedro, the baby who hits a guy after he blows a lead, then points at his head and at Yankee catcher Jorge Posada, threatening "you're next"?

And on May 13, 2005:

Roger Clemens is the greatest pitcher in the history of baseball. The Red Sox should do whatever it'll take to bring him back home for the stretch run in 2005.

On Pedro Martinez, Aug. 26, 2003:

He's the greatest pitcher we've seen since Sandy Koufax. ... Too bad he got it in his head that we don't respect him. Too bad he wants to leave.

On Pedro, Feb. 21, 2004:

... the Dominican Diva ...

On Curt Schilling, Nov. 29, 2003:

Schilling is back with the Red Sox. Oh, happy day. Son of Tito can leave Schilling on the mound to pitch the eighth and ninth and no one will call for the manager to be fired.

On Schilling, Feb. 21, 2004:

The day he signed with Boston he said, "I guess I hate the Yankees now." He has already looked at the schedule and concluded it'll be his turn to pitch when the Yankees first come to Fenway April 16. He spends time in cyberspace, conversing with Red Sox fans. ... Any wonder Curt Schilling is a hit with Red Sox Nation?

On Schilling, Nov. 9, 2005:

It's not a suggestion from Curt Schilling or any of his little late-night, on-line friends. ... It's just something that makes sense. ...

On Nomar Garciaparra, July 10, 2000:

In Boston, there never has been a ballplayer like him. Red Sox manager Jimy Williams said it best two years ago when he observed, "It’s like he’s been here before." True. Sometimes it seems as if Garciaparra is the reincarnation of Tris Speaker or Rogers Hornsby - an old hardball soul in a young man’s perfect baseball body.

On Nomar, June 10, 2004:

By any measure, Garciaparra is one of the most popular Sox players of all time. He's the fourth-leading hitter in franchise history, trailing only Ted Williams, Wade Boggs, and Tris Speaker. He has played hard for every inning of every game since he first got called up at the end of the 1996 season.

On Nomar, Aug. 1, 2004:

Thank the baseball god, he's gone. We no longer have to watch Nomar Garciaparra pretend that he cares about the fortunes of the Boston Red Sox.

Now that the Red Sox need a shortstop, will Dan next write about how they need to bring back Nomar? Stay tuned.

Picked Up Pieces

Shaughnessy returns to a format that he has not invoked in months - it is a picked up pieces special. All in all, I wouldn't call it overly interesting....but at least it was not as objectionable as past picked up pieces columsn save yet another shot at Curt Schilling....

Shaughnessy says

Shawn Chacon must have been channeling his inner Curt Schilling when he grabbed Astros general manager Ed Wade and threw him to the floor last week. When Schilling and Wade worked in Philadelphia, it was Wade who said, "Curt's a horse every fifth day. The other four days, he's a horse's ass."

Come on what the hell does this mean? Has Schilling ever physically attacked his general manager? How does Shaughnessy make the leap from Wade calling Schilling a horse's ass to Chacon "channeling his inner Schilling" when he physically accosted his employer? Shaughnessy saw a venue for getting yet another shot in at Schilling and it is unjustified. If there is a horse's ass in the room, it is Shaughnessy.

Shank the Sham and His Pharisees

All of us blog boys (and girls) over the age of fifty certainly can identify the above play on words -- based upon the Sixties band Sam the Sham and the Pharoahs (who could forget Little Red Riding Hood or Wooly Bully?).

What brings it to mind is Dan's over-the-top, self-serving, self-imposed appearance on Dan Patrick's radio program on Tuesday. In the words of my DSW compatriot, Dave M. ...

"Shaughnessy was on the Dan Patrick Show ... and man, what an absolute joke ... all the pettiness revealed itself ... First, it was Shaughnessy who forced his way ... on the ... show - calling in to offer his opinion. Unfortunately, Patrick seemed all [too] willing to oblige. All the typical crap [concerning Curt Schilling] - complaints about the blog; complaints about the politics; complaints about being unethical for accepting [$8 million] while injured; and complaints about being … a big lug. Shank claims to be brave enough to call Schilling out on his inconsistencies but that Schilling always picks one member of the local media to pick on and it was poor little Shaughnessy."

What a surprise! First, to don the cape of a super hero! The maligned defender of all thing true and just. Yep, that's our boy!

OK, let's see. Why don't we go through Dave's points sequentially, shall we?

First, imagine Schilling's temerity to establish his own blog so he can offer his own opinion and bypass the media-imposed filters. That, in itself, should warrant a prison term, eh? Oh, and the guy's a right winger who openly, vehemently and vocally supported John McCain? Well, that should warrant the electric chair.

As far as the unethically obtained $8 million? I seem to recall Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein's public pronouncement thereafter that Schilling passed his physical with flying colors before the "big lug" signed his 2008 contract. But, naturally, Shank never bothered to correct his previous scurrilous claim. Guess Theo (backed by his minions, of course!) should've saved his breath.

(Sort of reminds me of Dan's identification of one of the three black Negro League players who tried out for the Sox back in 1945, Marvin Williamson. Uh, Dan, his name was Marvin Williams. Yet, twenty printings later, Dan's fairy tale "Curse" book continues to misidentify the man. Surprise! Surprise! Now that's responsible reporting!)

Inconsistencies? Boy, Dan, you are just such a pillar of integrity. Not!!!

Granted, I think Shank deliberately writes inflammatory columns and makes ridiculous assertions simply to attract attention and generate buzz. I also believe that the CHB goes out of his way to insert himself into the story, to become a play-AH in his own right. That said, I am outraged that the man has so little self-perspective that he constantly perceives himself as a victim.

I don't think I could put it any better than Roger Bournival who posted the following:

"In other words, intentionally pissing off fans and readers (let's assume, for argument's sake, they are one and the same) is a testament to the noble columnist's objectivity and perspective (whatever the latter's supposed to mean). Criticism of said columns by 'basement-dwelling blog boys' (a rough, but accurate portrayal of well, us! by yourself, Shank and other defenders of the ever-shrinking, dying, dead-tree media) is thus minimized and summarily dismissed. Failure to incorporate self-analytical and self-correcting procedures in one's work product results in a recursive process that reduces the eventual answer to zero."

Whatever one thinks of Schilling's faith, politics or outspoken persona, the man is genuine. And without his presence in 2004 and 2007 the Red Sox would still be seeking the Holy Grail of another world championship.

It's deliciously ironic that a Philadelphia Inquirer scribe (who apparently disagreed with much of what Curt vociferously stands for) penned a wonderful column entitled Curt Schilling has a lot of detractors, but belongs in the Hall of Fame reprinted in the Boston Herald. Kudos to the Herald for having the guts to print it. And shame on the Globe editors for allowing this vocal version of Harpo Marx to continue to spew his venom without any constraints!

DHL Dan - XIV

Shank writes his first picked-up pieces column in seven weeks; would you care to guess what the first subject is?

Shame on Curt Schilling

Picked-up pieces while wondering who’ll be next to be “sacked’’ by John Henry and Tom Werner . . .

■ There are parts of Rhode Island where failing to make good on million-dollar loan payments gets you more than a bloody sock. Red Sox adviser Jeremy Kapstein was out front on the 38 Studios loan scam two years ago when he ran for Rhode Island Lieutenant Governor and told WPRO-AM, “I have serious questions about the viability of that kind of offer to a company that is full of questions.’’

Kapstein was not alone. Massachusetts officials scoffed at the notion of loaning Curt Schilling’s company $75 million. The following appeared in this space in July 2010: “Hats off to the ship of fools known as the Rhode Island Economic Development Corp. The RIEDC yesterday pledged a $75 million loan guarantee to lure Curt Schilling’s game company (the one with no games) to the Ocean State. It’s the best demonstration of sports sycophants gone wild with public money since the yahoos in Connecticut promised to give Bob Kraft the world to move his team to Yo Adriaen’s Landing in Hartford.’’

RIEDC director Keith Stokes resigned yesterday.

No thinking person wants to see a company fail (unless it's the NYT - ed.). There are hundreds of jobs at stake. But it’s hard to believe that Schilling, who earned $114 million during his baseball career, can’t make a $1.1 million loan payment.

Schilling is the man who railed about government spending, then had his hand out for corporate welfare, and now asks for more help from the confederacy of dunces in Rhode Island. This is not the Rhode Island Enron, and Schill is not Jeffrey Skilling, but it is bad, and it was avoidable if not for public officials losing all common sense in the aura of a baseball player who delivered on a promise to bring us a championship.

No Shows

This theme includes a couple of items, chief among them not reporting Shank's heart surgery from last month. I've been there myself, so I'm not exactly sure why I didn't post on this when it originally happened, but there it is.

In other no shows, Red Sox ace Curt Schilling won't be at Opening Day 2024 to commemorate the 2004 Boston Red Sox championship:

Curt Schilling will not attend Red Sox’ 2004 World Series celebration at home opener

Former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling has declined the team’s invitation to be part of the April 9 Opening Day ceremonies at Fenway Park, a source with direct knowledge told the Globe.

The Sox on Monday announced plans to honor the 20th anniversary of the 2004 champions, who are famous for ending the team’s 86-year World Series drought.

Schilling was a key part of that team, forever earning his place in Red Sox lore by pitching with a surgically repaired ankle in Game 6 of the ALCS against the Yankees — known as the “Bloody Sock” game.

The Sox also plan to honor the lives of Tim and Stacy Wakefield that day. Tim, who started Game 1 of the 2004 World Series against the Cardinals, died in October from brain cancer. His wife Stacy died from a different type of cancer in February.

Schilling came under fire in September for revealing the health diagnoses of the Wakefields in the days before Tim’s death.

Schilling Obsession Kicks into High Gear

I wonder if Curt Schilling sleeps well at night? I wonder if in the middle of the night he wakes up and sees two beady little eyes in the corner and asks himself, "Is that a rat?" "Oh no, " he mutters to himself, "that's just Dan Shaughnessy."

Shaughnessy's hyper obsession of the Big Lug kicks into high gear this morning as he questions the breakdown of of Schilling's shoulder just months after Schilling signed an $8M contract. While Shaughnessy raises some legitimate questions, in its whole, it is a totally irresponsible and reckless piece of journalism. At its core, there is the hallmark of Shaughnessy: a failure to do a lick of research....Schilling won't talk to him; there is no insight offered by the team; there is no analysis offered by the medical community....but that doesn't stop Shaughnessy from putting this piece of garbage together. Shaughnessy just fills the gap by pontificating, speculating and ripping...

- He hints that Schilling knew his shoulder was hurt before he even signed the contract because he so readily grabbed the Sox lowball offer. This is a really cheap shot--just to casually question someone's ethics like that

- He complains that Schilling has been shaking hands with politicians and cutting ribbons at supermarkets but that he can't throw a ball across the infield.

- He suggests that Schilling hurt his shoulder after signing the contract by doing something non baseball related (blogging or reaching for a doughnut...oh that's a good one, Dan)

- Of course, Shaughnessy is critical of Schilling's methods for communicating to the public...between the blog and paid appearances on the radio.*

(*Is it not ironic that this comes one day after the NESN article in which Shaughnessy complains about the media exposure of the Red Sox but only to be feasting like a pig from the trough himself? Schilling is no more of a media whore than Shaughnessy is. Seriously, how nice it must be for Shaughnessy to moonlight like this--he should be focused on his primary job as columnist but he is too busy filling the airwaves himself. Maybe if he took time to research instead of finding new ways to collect a paycheck, we would not be treated to this crap day after day. )

Shaughnessy lays this whole bloody mess at the feet of Schilling. No blame for the Red Sox? After all, they are the ones who signed him to the contract knowing that his velocity was down; they did not insure his contract; they did a physical and pressed ahead anyway. They had to know it was a gamble and they pressed ahead anyway. There are two parties to a contract and because one side is Schilling, Shaughnessy puts his blinders on and fires away.

In the end, this was an amateurish hack job. In the ultimate irony....Shaughnessy, the media whore himself, is spread too thin with writing books and showing up on TV to be capable of writing a legitimate piece. I wonder if Shaughnessy wakes up in the middle of night and sees the beady eyes of a monster in the corner and thinks to himself "That must be the Big Lug" before he realizes that he is just looking in the mirror.

Skip the Middleman

Faced with threats of irrelevancy, one might expect Dan to work harder and produce work that provides a unique perspective for his readers. Instead, Dan either lashes out with vitriolic attacks or produces columns that are little more than transcripts of press conferences.

Today, in a tribute to his capitulation, Dan combines the vitriol with the laziness.

The column is ostensibly about John Henry, but Dan manages to twist it around to his white whale, Curt Schilling, leading with a couple of shots at Schilling and a Patriots/Matt Walsh reference. Just the type of stuff you would expect.

What is most striking about the column, though, is how unnecessary Dan is. You can skip the middleman and decide for yourself. Boston.com has a video of the Curt Schilling interview session, which the Boston Globe was not invited to. The reader can watch the video and make her mind up about Schilling's attitude. No longer does she need to rely on Dan's dubious characterization that Schilling is "mad at the ball club." Further, outside of the shots at Schilling, the column is just a straight rehash of Henry's statements. A transcript posted on a blog could easily take the place of most of Dan's column. It would probably be a whole lot cheaper for the struggling NY Times Empire, too.

Where have I seen this column before?

When I read this morning's piece on Schilling, I thought to myself "Where have I read this before?" I only had to go back 12 days to find this fine effort in which he says virtually all the same things.

Both the Oct 8 and 20th pieces are odes to the playoff hero, Curt Schilling (you know, the "Big Lug", the "Blowhard")

- In the Oct 8th piece, he calls Schilling the "Mr October of Moundsmen"; sure enough he dusts that little nugget off and today again calls him "Mr October of Moundsmen"

- In the Oct 8th piece, he says Schilling has had to reinvent himself because he can't hit 90 miles per hour on the radar gun anymore. In today's piece, he talks about Schilling's reinvention and his 89 mile per hour fastball

- In the Oct 8th piece, he says Schilling cant throw much harder than John Burkett and that he has gone from being Roger Clemens to Greg Maddux. In today's piece, he says Schilling throws more like Al Nipper than Roger Clemens.

- In the Oct 8th piece, Shank says "you might remember [the game] in which he pitched with a bloody sock. Today he says "you might remember that he also did OK in 2004....with blood oozing from fresh sutures"

- They are not identical articles and in fact, today Shaughnessy makes up for not following his standard formulaic recipe to a T on Oct 8th. You see, in the Oct 8th piece, Shank must have forgotten the cook book requirement to throw in a Patriots/Celtics comparison. We just need to give Shank another chance because he does not forget that key ingredient today---the Great Schill is compared to Bird, Russell and Brady.

Now a little prediction, if Schill gets bombed tonight, the Shank claws will come out in full force
-- he will talk about Schilling no longer being the pitcher he once was; he will talk about Schilling reporting to camp 40 pounds overweight; he will talk about Schill's blog and video game empire; and he will wish Schilling well...in Tampa Bay.

DHL Dan CXIX - Au Contraire

Shank's been a critic of Curt Schilling, to put it mildly. And in another Picked-Up Pieces column, Shank leads off with criticizing Schilling for supporting the 'mostly peaceful' protestors in our nation's capital on Wednesday:

Picked-up pieces while nestling into the couch for the best pro football weekend of the year …

▪ Curt Schilling would help himself if he’d stop spewing hate and claiming he’s being punished by Baseball Hall of Fame voters because of his “politics.” Supporting a racist (really, Shank? - ed) mob that stormed the Capitol is not being “political.” Advocating for lynching journalists, calling Adam Jones a liar when he said he heard racist slurs at Fenway Park, bilking Rhode Island out of $75 million, collecting Nazi memorabilia, and posting anti-transgender material … these are not “political” stands.

Do you think Shank could articulate just what, precisely, was 'racist' about the protestors, aside from them being majority Caucasian? Does that also make Shank, a pasty white Irishman, racist as the dickens? This cheap eight grade name calling, initiated by him in this article and used far and wide by leftists across the land since time immemorial, detracts from the weight of his argument, or it should for most people. I've said before that Schilling has given his opponents plenty of ammunition and he seems to have done so again here. It's much easier to simply point out the massive rank hypocrisy of the Democrats and Shank-type media dorks (by and large the same thing) like this guy does, at least with respect to the local scene.

By the way - I have an English and a German copy of Mein Kampf. Does that mean I collect Nazi memorabilia? Shank wouldn't care unless my last name was Schilling. From there, the rest of the column's okay.

I Was Expecting Ten Columns By Now

Former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling, an ESPN baseball analyst, is now a former ESPN baseball analyst.

A couple of years ago, when ESPN2’s unctuous chat show, First Take, was finding itself in hot water on a weekly basis, a high-ranking ESPN official told me it was becoming too big a headache for the company and something needed to be done. This is often the ESPN way: There comes a breaking point for the company when the headache exceeds the value. First Take, because it makes the company millions of dollars (it’s cheap to produce given they own the studio space), was spared more drastic measures beyond additional executive oversight.

Curt Schilling was not as lucky.

On Wednesday evening, ESPN announced it had terminated the MLB analyst following repeated political discourse on his feed, which some tabbed as hate speech. Said the company in a statement: “ESPN is an inclusive company. Curt Schilling has been advised that his conduct was unacceptable and his employment with ESPN has been terminated.”

Inclusive - except when you have an opinion that's different from the corporate suits at ESPN, apparently.

Does Shank mount his Shetland pony on this one? I'm guessing no - hot potato!

You're Bloody Predictable, Shank

God forbid that Dan Shaughnessy, Boston Globe hack extraordinaire, be gracious.

As predicted yesterday by Bruce Allen of Boston Sports Media Watch, the CHB used his post as Globe columnist (of sorts) to slam Curt Schilling in the wake of Schilling's retirement announcement.

Shank's March 24th column, with the headline He Was Bloody Good Here, featured few platitudes to the pitcher without whom the Red Sox would still be without a post-1918 World Championship. Instead, he calls Curt "Schill," a "big lug" and an "uber-blowhard."

"I'm going to miss the big lug. In the past 30 years in Boston sports, there haven't been many guys more fun to write about than Curt Schilling. And it's nice to know he's not really going away. The uber-blowhard still will be part of our lives in cyberspace, on the airwaves, and probably at every town meeting and polling place in Suffolk, Middlesex, and Norfolk counties."

Look in the mirror, Dan! Agree or disagree, at least Schilling doesn't sway in the wind with every other paragraph. If there's an uber-blowhard in the room, methinks he might have a big red Afro. And, in my mind, anyway, you should alter your terminology. Change the word "write" to "slander."

You're not only predictable, you're pathetic.

Dan Shaughnessy, Wrong Again

Shank jumps on Curt Schilling for being 100% right:

What a guy. He so deserves to be honored https://t.co/opO4PKmrrm

— Dan Shaughnessy (@Dan_Shaughnessy) June 24, 2020

Two things - anyone faintly familiar with recent history can recall many / dozens of these fake noose hoax crimes, and that's precisely what l'affaire Bubba Wallace has turned out to be. It should be standard practice to require proof of a 'crime', unless you're a leftist trying to score points against racist redneck NASCAR fans.

Secondly, I mentioned months ago that for Curt Schilling to get into the Baseball Hall of Fame, all he has to do is lay low and not give his critics any ammunition to use against him. Aside from the fact he was right in making the Smollett 2.0 call, this is not how you lay low. It's another unforced error for Curt in my book and it's all but guaranteed Shank won't vote for him next time around, which I believe is Schilling's last chance.

Hello, Dan ... You Must Be Going

The above title is an offshoot of a quote from the mouth of the inimitable Groucho Marx.

Although I never envisioned becoming a part of this site -- aside from entering my comments regarding other postings -- I've changed my mind, essentially because Dan has berated me for "being unfair" to him in my book, It Was Never About the Babe: The Red Sox, Racism, Mismanagement and the Curse of the Bambino.

I find that accusation both amusing and ironic since Dan has acquired the nickname "Shank" through his relentless and seemingly vindictive attacks on others. Perhaps the best example of this is Curt Schilling, whom Shank continues to shamelessly refer to in his columns. Apparently Curt (another abrasive personality who can easily get under one's skin) upset Dan after his trade to Boston in November, 2003, when he refused to cuddle up to the Shankster.

So, even though Dan lauded Schilling's acquisition by the Boston Red Sox, Curt quickly gained Shank's enmity. From that point onward, Schilling became a moving (and, sometimes, a stationary) target of Dan's. Dan has accused Schilling of "channeling" through a psychotic Astros pitcher who physically attacked his general manager, and of taking millions from the Sox last year even though he knew his shoulder was blown out and couldn't pitch.

Despite the fact that the Red Sox braintrust refuted those claims, Shank never saw it fit to correct that particular charge. I'm sorry, but, Dan, that's unfair! In subsequent postings I'd like to endeavor to illustrate how Dan never saw fit to correct the many, many pieces of misinformation in his tome, The Curse of the Bambino, even though it's in it's 21st printing (at last count), and Shank's gotta know that much of his fairy tale is flat out wrong!

I personally have been pilloried by at least one Dan apologist for refuting the so-called "Curse" even though it's been done before by other authors, albeit in much shorter form. Be that as it may, the myth needed to be buried once and for all.

And Dan really ought to send a "thank you" letter to my publisher, Skyhorse Publishing, Inc., of New York City, since its editor seriously watered down my chapter on the Boston sports media. Otherwise, Shank might have sent a Holy Cross hitman after me.

Finally (for now), I'm using my real personal information to back up my involvement on this website. For one thing, I think that's only fair and proper. A secondary reason, frankly, is I've got a book to promote. And, just for the record, since Dan loves to slam bloggers and Internet addicts, I'm not some cretin holed up in my basement -- we don't have a basement ... we live outside of Atlanta -- endlessly logged on. Our office is off our living room, and that's where our computer is!

Prediction Made

Shank seems pretty sure former Red Sox pitcher (and Shank bete noire) Curt Schilling will finally make it into the Baseball Hall of Fame this time around:

The ballot is out and Curt Schilling will be voted into the Hall of Fame when results are announced in January.

— Dan Shaughnessy (@Dan_Shaughnessy) November 17, 2020

This is the next to last year Curt can make the HOF. Like I mentioned last year, all Curt has to do is not say anything political from now until mid-January and he's a shoo-in, because Shank and a good swath of other HOF voters hate conservatives.

Sports, Politics And Revenge

That's how Shank sums up the attitude in Massachusetts in his latest CNN / SI column. It's a good enough article, but we now start to see the seeping in of elements that make Shank one of the best in the business.

Add one teaspoon of condescension:

That's right boys, and girls. She said that Curt Schilling was a Yankee fan. And that closed the curtain on her bid for the U.S. Senate.

...a few shots at Curt Schilling:

Most recently Schilling has mixed sports and politics in Boston. A dedicated Republican, never shy about giving his opinion, the big Blowhard actually considered running for Kennedy's seat in the early weeks after the congressional lion passed away. Ever the glory hound, he announced he wasn't running on HBO's Joe Buck Live.

...throw in a few misspellings:

...Celtics owner Steve Pagliacu (should be Pagliuca)...
...Fred Smerles (should be Smerlas)...

...add overstatement that could easily get past a chin-stroking, head-nodding Boston Globe editor:

Oh, and then there's this fellow named Tom Brady.

Brady has it all. He's got the looks, the charisma, the fame and he's remained politically neutral on just about everything. He got into a little hot water when he accepted an invitation to one of George Bush's State of the Union addresses, but has otherwise steered clear of polarizing issues.

And we have what resembles your standard Globe product.

Question for Shank: are Republican presidents the only kind of president whose issues are polarizing?

The Great Column Convergence begins...