Schilling, Manny, Again

[a700hitter]

Yeah' date=' a lot more things would have changed than that. Hard to really tell.[/quote']No, when you are giving up 13 runs in a game, one thing definitely needs to change-- the pitcher. Schilling has been money in post season. A bad game from Schilling would have given the Red Sox a good chance of winning game 4. The Sox only lost 4 games to 3.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

a700hitter, I respect you, and your opinion, but really this is kinda ridculous. Wake may have given up 13 runs, but other pitchers had bad games. 3 other games were lost. I doubt just having Schilling pitch would of made a difference. Who knows how he could of done? He's a man, not a machine, and in all honesty he is an old man(by baseball standards). At 41 and the way he pitches anything could of went down.

[Cocos Disciples]

Well are we talking about Schilling over Wakefield for the entire year? If so, then yes, there are a ton more variables. Maybe Schilling gets us a couple extra wins and gets us the division. Maybe the rotation is set up differently. Too many variables.

[a700hitter]

a700hitter' date=' I respect you, and your opinion, but really this is kinda ridculous. Wake may have given up 13 runs, but other pitchers had bad games. 3 other games were lost. I doubt just having Schilling pitch would of made a difference. Who knows how he could of done? He's a man, not a machine, and in all honesty he is an old man(by baseball standards). At 41 and the way he pitches anything could of went down.[/quote']First of all we are assuming a Schilling at least as healthy as the 2007 post season. In his entire post season career he has never had a game where he got torched for 8 or 9 runs. The worst game he had was the game that he pitched with the torn tendon sheath. Even an old, but healthy Schilling would not have given it up like Wakefield did. His track record speaks for itself. You mention that three other games were lost. I don't see how that counters my argument that Schilling only had to win 1 to get the team to the next level. Based on his career post season record of 11-2, the Red Sox would have had an 85% chance of winning that Wakefield game. The 5-7 Wakefield gave them only 41% chance of winning.

[ORS]

Tampa's bats were smokin' hot right then too, though. Everything Upton hit was hit hard, same thing for Longoria. An injured Beckett is about as good as an old Schilling, and they torched him in game 2 when they got hot. He was more effective in game 6. Part of that is Josh, but another part of it is them cooling down a bit. I don't know what confidence level I can assign to a statement that Schilling changes the outcome of that game. The offense still couldn't find any clue as to how to hit the King of Scrubs Andy Sonnanstine.

[a700hitter]

Tampa's bats were smokin' hot right then too' date=' though. Everything Upton hit was hit hard, same thing for Longoria. An injured Beckett is about as good as an old Schilling, and they torched him in game 2 when they got hot. He was more effective in game 6. Part of that is Josh, but another part of it is them cooling down a bit. I don't know what confidence level I can assign to a statement that Schilling changes the outcome of that game. The offense still couldn't find any clue as to how to hit the King of Scrubs Andy Sonnanstine.[/quote']He had to be better than Wakefield.

 

The point of my posts in this thread was not to get into an in depth hypothetical post mortem analysis of the series. My point is that it annoys me when Red Sox fans are quick to tell Schilling to shut his pie-hole. This guy delivered for the Red Sox BIG TIME-- twice. He did it when he was ravaged by injury and advanced age. In his post-season career, he never gave it up like our pitchers did in this last series, and even though the Rays were hot, Schilling face some pretty good offensive teams throughout the years and shut them done in the post season. I also don't agree with the premise that an injured Beckett is about as good as an old Schilling. Beckett has had one outstanding year (2007). I think it is more accurate to say that Beckett, at his best, is as good as an old Schilling. Schilling has had some pretty good years from his mid-30's on. I am not going to debate all the what ifs and variables presented by a hypothetical argument. I am just saying that the guy deserves the utmost respect (if not gratitude) from Red Sox fans. If he pops off about our players (past or present) or other teams, he has earned the right.

[BoSox21]

He had to be better than Wakefield.

 

The point of my posts in this thread was not to get into an in depth hypothetical post mortem analysis of the series. My point is that it annoys me when Red Sox fans are quick to tell Schilling to shut his pie-hole. This guy delivered for the Red Sox BIG TIME-- twice. He did it when he was ravaged by injury and advanced age. In his post-season career, he never gave it up like our pitchers did in this last series, and even though the Rays were hot, Schilling face some pretty good offensive teams throughout the years and shut them done in the post season. I also don't agree with the premise that an injured Beckett is about as good as an old Schilling. Beckett has had one outstanding year (2007). I think it is more accurate to say that Beckett, at his best, is as good as an old Schilling. Schilling has had some pretty good years from his mid-30's on. I am not going to debate all the what ifs and variables presented by a hypothetical argument. I am just saying that the guy deserves the utmost respect (if not gratitude) from Red Sox fans. If he pops off about our players (past or present) or other teams, he has earned the right.

 

I agree with you but his on-field performance is irrelevant. The only thing would take away his right to speak out about Manny is if he pulled some of the same s*** the f***bag did.

 

Schilling wasn't associated with the team, really, in any way the past season other than being on the payroll and Schilling admitted as such. He has just as much right to an opinion as any columnist or message board poster.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I just can't understand the "Schilling needs to shut up stuff" from Red Sox fans. He pisses off Yankee fans whenever he opens his mouth. That's enough for me to want to see him with a microphone. Until the Red Sox win a Championship without Curt' date=' no Red Sox fan should speak ill of him for anything short of committing murder.[/quote']

I personally don't mind when Curt speaks up, however controversial he may sound, but I can see how others could be bothered.

 

 

I think Schilling is in the right on this particular thing, but for those who said that Schilling was heavily responsible for 2 world championships in Boston and didn't win this year without him... the exact same applies to Manny, IMO.

[BoSox21]

I think Schilling is in the right on this particular thing, but for those who said that Schilling was heavily responsible for 2 world championships in Boston and didn't win this year without him... the exact same applies to Manny, IMO.

 

So that gives Manny the right to pull the s*** he did? He was being paid $20 mil a year to be heavily responsible for 2 world championships

[ORS]

He had to be better than Wakefield.

 

The point of my posts in this thread was not to get into an in depth hypothetical post mortem analysis of the series. My point is that it annoys me when Red Sox fans are quick to tell Schilling to shut his pie-hole. This guy delivered for the Red Sox BIG TIME-- twice. He did it when he was ravaged by injury and advanced age. In his post-season career, he never gave it up like our pitchers did in this last series, and even though the Rays were hot, Schilling face some pretty good offensive teams throughout the years and shut them done in the post season. I also don't agree with the premise that an injured Beckett is about as good as an old Schilling. Beckett has had one outstanding year (2007). I think it is more accurate to say that Beckett, at his best, is as good as an old Schilling. Schilling has had some pretty good years from his mid-30's on. I am not going to debate all the what ifs and variables presented by a hypothetical argument. I am just saying that the guy deserves the utmost respect (if not gratitude) from Red Sox fans. If he pops off about our players (past or present) or other teams, he has earned the right.

I agree, and I have no problem with Schilling when he opens his mouth as long as it isn't about something that could have future impact on the clubhouse. In this case, here's your megaphone, Curt. I wish more athletes would say more than the trite cliches they are all so trained to give to the media.

 

That said, if you aren't interested in hashing out the hypotheticals, why bring them up in the first place? You introduced Schilling pitching in game 4 to this thread. Whether or not he wins that game has no bearing on this issue. And, this is coming from a person who agrees with you, he did a lot at his own personal sacrafice to bring home a title to Boston. Hell, the guy should be teflon in New England.

[a700hitter]

I agree, and I have no problem with Schilling when he opens his mouth as long as it isn't about something that could have future impact on the clubhouse. In this case, here's your megaphone, Curt. I wish more athletes would say more than the trite cliches they are all so trained to give to the media.

 

That said, if you aren't interested in hashing out the hypotheticals, why bring them up in the first place? You introduced Schilling pitching in game 4 to this thread. Whether or not he wins that game has no bearing on this issue. And, this is coming from a person who agrees with you, he did a lot at his own personal sacrafice to bring home a title to Boston. Hell, the guy should be teflon in New England.

My initial posts were to express the fact that Schilling should have Carte Blanche with Red Sox fans who I reminded that the Sox haven't won a Championship without him. That post was met with a response that Schilling wouldn't have made a difference this season. I didn't know how that conclusion could be reached, so I pointed out that Schilling had never been trashed like the Sox pitchers were trashed in those 3 straight games. I used game 4 as an example where I thought he could have made a difference. Substituting Schilling for Wakefield in a post season game seemed to be the no-brainer example of a game where he could have made the difference. I don't think anyone would ever start Wakefield over Schilling in a post season game, and I don't think it is a stretch to say that Schilling probably would have fared better than Wakefield who was gave up a few nitro-shots. Schilling for Wakefield is a no-brainer. Would it guarantee a game 4 win? No, but it is not a big stretch to say that he might have made the difference in that game. He's shut down better hitting teams in big games. You really don't need to analyze all the variables. He's a much better big game pitcher than Wakefield, and Wakefield stunk up the place on that night.

[Gom]

Ortiz was booed this playoff. No one in Boston is teflon. Same as NY.

[Dojji]

Remember who batted after Ortiz this entire postseason.

 

Was that really booing? Or just the fact of life for everyone who makes an out ahead of Kevin Youkilis?

[Cocos Disciples]

Yeah I'm pretty sure he was not booed.