Keith Foulke Tells It Like It Is

[BoSox21]

In 2007, after passing a physical, Foulke signed a one-year, $5 million deal with the Cleveland Guardians. But on Feb. 16, just one day before pitchers and catchers were due to report to spring training, he announced his retirement, citing injuries. All he had to do was cross the foul line to collect his money.

 

"It's not the right thing to do because they gave me an opportunity," says Foulke. "Why would I go in there knowing I wasn't going to pitch for them?"

 

Guardians general manager Mark Shapiro was shocked.

 

"It was one of the most honorable things I have ever seen in 18 years," says Shapiro. "He didn't have to do it. It says a lot about his character and sense of integrity."

 

Foulke says he doesn't want to compare himself with Curt Schilling, who accepted $8 million from the Sox last year and never pitched an inning because of shoulder problems.

 

"He's got to wake up and look himself in the mirror every day," says Foulke.

 

Save Opportunity - by Stan Grossfeld - Boston Globe

 

THIS

 

seriously, has Schilling ever given an explanation as to why he stole $8 million from the Red Sox?

[Dojji]

Schilling didn't steal $8M. When pitchers and catchers reported both Schilling and the team still thought he was going to pitch at some point, it was a calculated risk that didn't work. In Foulke's case he knew he wouldn't pitch at all. That's a small but significant difference.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

Because he's obviously a pick, and doesn't care.

 

also, inb4 500 posts saying "BUT HE WON US OUR 1ST WORLD SERIES SINCE CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS LANDED IN AMERICA AND HE DID IT WITH A TENDON ATTACHED TO HIS LEG WITH A STAPLE FROM LARRY LUCHINO'S OFFICE STAPLER HURRRRR"

[castigs850]

nice post bigpapienfeugo, my sentiment exactly

[a700hitter]

Who cares what the players steal from team owners. Team owners and management made a bad deal. Too bad for them. Did they give Pedroia a retroactive raise for 2008 commensurate with his MVP year? No, they didn't. Business is business. Caveat emptor-- let the buyer beware. As for Foulke, he did not want to report to camp, get in shape and attempt to pitch. He didn't want to make the effort to show up. It would have been a bit ridiculous if he didn't show up but demanded his check... don't you think?

[BoSox21]

All he had to do was show up to get his check

[a700hitter]

All he had to do was show up to get his check

He would have had to go through camp, drills etc. His injuries were nagging, but not disabling. He pitched the following season without undergoing surgery. He was worn down and his body needed the rest. The team was not going to give him his check and let him go home because his knees hurt. He would have had to go for treatments etc. When he improved, he would have been required to go for a rehab assignment etc. He wouldn't be able to show up and say he didn't feel like playing and get a check. Yes, he could have gone through the motions, but they weren't going to just let him go home with a check. He didn't want to go through the motions, so he forfeit the check.

[Dojji]

So if Smoltz can't come back is that money 'stolen' too?

 

Theo did due diligence on Schill. If he didn't he should probably be fired on the spot. He knew the risk he was taking, so Schill "stole" nothing. It was a calculated risk that didn't work out the way either party wanted to.

 

Both of them agreed that health was a big part of the risk of Schilling pitching again, and after multiple cortisone shots required to limp through the postseason it was a legitimate concern. That's why the 13M deal contained $5M of incentives.

 

I think both parties knew Schilling was a big risk to miss the season or at least part of it. I certainly don't begrudge Schilling from trying to come back for one last hurrah as long as he actually thought at the time he signed that contract that he could play for us.

[a700hitter]

So if Smoltz can't come back is that money 'stolen' too?

 

Theo did due diligence on Schill. If he didn't he should probably be fired on the spot. He knew the risk he was taking, so Schill "stole" nothing. It was a calculated risk that didn't work out the way either party wanted to.

 

Both of them agreed that health was a big part of the risk of Schilling pitching again, and after multiple cortisone shots required to limp through the postseason it was a legitimate concern. That's why the 13M deal contained $5M of incentives.

 

I think both parties knew Schilling was a big risk to miss the season or at least part of it. I certainly don't begrudge Schilling from trying to come back for one last hurrah as long as he actually thought at the time he signed that contract that he could play for us.

Agreed. That's why the contract was only for $8 million and not $16 million.

[BoSox21]

So the FO knew Schilling's shoulder was completely shredded when they signed him to that deal? If thats the case, then I retract my statements cause my understanding of the situation is that he underwent a physical, passed it, signed the deal then announced he had the shoulder problems and since the FO wanted some kind of bang for their buck, they made him try and rehab it.

 

The whole thing about whether or not he would get surgery was figured out after he signed the deal, why wasn't that a negotiating point before the deal was signed?

 

Smoltz is completely different, his physical status was/is well-known to everyone while he was a free agent.

[Teddyballgame10]

What a guy. I love Foulke, his post season in 04 was unbelievable. I think he should have been the WS MVP.

[a700hitter]

Personally, I think Foulke was a schmuck in this regard. As long as someone is willing to pay you exorbitant amounts to play baseball, you should do it. When being paid to play, you should also give a 100% effort to play. The career of a major league ballplayer is limited even for the best players, so they should maximize their earning potential. To do otherwise is financially irresponsible. The "he wanted to go out on top" argument makes me sick. There are very few icons who have public images and legacies that need protecting. Babe Ruth got cut by the Yankees. Mantle was a shell at the end. Most players (even the greats) have the uniform torn off their backs and that's the way it should be. Does it tarnish their image? If it does, it is does not do so in any meaningful way. It's hard to find a better paying job.

 

Edit: The biggest schmuck of all time IMO was Ryne Sandberg who walked away from the last 2 years of his biggest contract to spend more time with his family. Within 3 weeks of walking away in midseason, his wife filed for divorce, and the next spring he was back begging for his job. They gave him his job back at an 85% cut in pay. No wonder that his wife divorced the moron.

[a700hitter]

So the FO knew Schilling's shoulder was completely shredded when they signed him to that deal? If thats the case, then I retract my statements cause my understanding of the situation is that he underwent a physical, passed it, signed the deal then announced he had the shoulder problems and since the FO wanted some kind of bang for their buck, they made him try and rehab it.

 

The whole thing about whether or not he would get surgery was figured out after he signed the deal, why wasn't that a negotiating point before the deal was signed?

 

Smoltz is completely different, his physical status was/is well-known to everyone while he was a free agent.

The Sox should have fired their doctor's. They didn't do their job. Schilling did his job. He maximized his earning potential.

[TheKilo]

Keith Foulke is the man, and will forever be the man for what he did in 2004. This just adds to his character.

[a700hitter]

Keith Foulke is the man' date=' and will forever be the man for what he did in 2004. This just adds to his character.[/quote']He is the man for what he did on the field in 2004, but I am not sure about his character. Larry Bird retired the day before his multi million dollar option would have kicked in, and he wouldn't have had to show up to get the money. Is he a man of character? He has denied the existence of his own child. He was a great basketball and an okay coach, but as a person....? Well, who is to say. Foulke did the right thing, but it was nothing so great and honorable. He didn't want to play. He was able, but not willing.

[TheKilo]

Would you have the character to leave $5 million on the table? I don't think I could have made that decision...

[a700hitter]

Would you have the character to leave $5 million on the table? I don't think I could have made that decision...

If they paid me $5 million to play, I'd show up and try my hardest to play. If I was physically unable to perform, I'd have lived up to my end of the contract. If I decided not to show up and try to play, I wouldn't expect a check, nor would I ask for one. The Sox signed Juan Gonzalez a few years ago. He never showed up. Do you think the Red Sox paid him. Foulke didn't want to play, so he didn't show up. If he wanted the $5 million, he would have had to show up and go through the Guardians program (i.e, treatment, physical therapy, rehab assignmentsetc.) for the entire season. That's work, not stealing. He didn't do the work so he wasn't entitled to get paid. If he showed up for his check without doing the work, the Guardians would have told him to get lost.

[a700hitter]

Foulke was lazy. I've got nothing against being lazy. That's okay, but let's not elevate it to an honorable quality. He came back the next season and sucked.

[Dojji]

So the FO knew Schilling's shoulder was completely shredded when they signed him to that deal? If thats the case, then I retract my statements cause my understanding of the situation is that he underwent a physical, passed it, signed the deal then announced he had the shoulder problems and since the FO wanted some kind of bang for their buck, they made him try and rehab it.

 

The whole thing about whether or not he would get surgery was figured out after he signed the deal, why wasn't that a negotiating point before the deal was signed?

 

Smoltz is completely different, his physical status was/is well-known to everyone while he was a free agent.

 

So was Schilling's. It was, quite frankly, bloody obvious that you would at least have to be very careful of Schilling's shoulder even if he did pitch in '08. We were all talking about pitch and innings limits even before we learned the worst.

 

What the FO knew on Schilling was that he was at risk of what actually happened -- career-ending shoulder surgery. He made it through his final 2007 playoffs on the three C's -- Command, Courage, and Cortisone. They couldn't have NOT known. They couldn't have even not known the magnitude of the risk, considering that Schilling was i teetering on the edge of a significant shoulder injury for pretty much the entire 2007 season.

 

Read 38 pitches. The physical didn't turn in a clean bill of health. What it turned in was a thought that they might be able to coax one last year out of Schilling's battered ligaments. Much like an inspected car doesn't mean a perfect car, just one that's not likely to fall apart on you within the next 15 minutes unless you do something really stupid.

[Teddyballgame10]

700 I think you are being a little harsh. For all we know maybe it was physicaly impossible for him to pitch. Maybe the doc told him "yea your arm and shoulder are no longer attached" I'm all for playing until they drag you off the field but if Foulke knew it was 110% impossible for him, not only be able to pitch in the bigs, but minors as wel how can you blame him for not ripping off the FO. Maybe when he signed the contract with the Guardians there FO and Foulke both thought he could make it back. Then a few days before he finds out he just cant do it. I'm sure the reason why he walked away wasn't because he really didn't just feel like trying.

[a700hitter]

700 I think you are being a little harsh. For all we know maybe it was physicaly impossible for him to pitch. Maybe the doc told him "yea your arm and shoulder are no longer attached" I'm all for playing until they drag you off the field but if Foulke knew it was 110% impossible for him' date=' not only be able to pitch in the bigs, but minors as wel how can you blame him for not ripping off the FO. Maybe when he signed the contract with the Guardians there FO and Foulke both thought he could make it back. Then a few days before he finds out he just cant do it. I'm sure the reason why he walked away wasn't because he really didn't just feel like trying.[/quote']Here are a couple of quotes from this article. http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2007/02/foulke_to_retir.html

 

You decide:

"Over the last few weeks, while preparing for the 2007 season, my body has not responded as it has in years past," Foulke said in a statement released today. "I feel strongly I will not be able to perform at the level where I need to be to help the Guardians this season. They are a class organization and I wish them the best of luck in 2007."

 

Foulke spoke to the Globe's Amalie Benjamin about the possibility of retirement last September. "I might retire. I don't know. It's a big option," said Foulke. "If I can't have fun playing this game, if I don't have the motivation to prepare, you know, as far as strength and training and all that. I'm not going to be a middle bullpen, 5 ERA guy. Either I can come back and be a dominant pitcher, or I'll take it to the house."

 

He pitched in 2008 for Oakland.

 

I'm not being harsh to Foulke. I think he is great. I am not saying that he is a bad person or that he has bad character. I am just saying that walking away from the game in 2007 was not an honorable act worthy of any note. If Foulke is a folk-hero, it is because of his onfield accomplishments. The way he left the game in 2007 was nothing special.

[Teddyballgame10]

I guess but he still could have "stole" money from the Guardians then stunk it up for the year. Maybe in 08 he thought he could contribute, who knows. I still think its hard to walk away from 5 million when all you have to do is show up.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

This is stupid. Foulke did nothing wrong here, he couldn't play and decided to retire. That's good of him. Most other people wouldn't do that. How is he some big lazy jerk for doing so? But what would I expect from a Schilling apoligist anyway? That man could punch your own mother in the face and you'd find a way to justify it.

[Dojji]

This is stupid. Foulke did nothing wrong here' date=' he couldn't play and decided to retire. That's good of him. Most other people wouldn't do that. How is he some big lazy jerk for doing so? But what would I expect from a Schilling apoligist anyway? That man could punch your own mother in the face and you'd find a way to justify it.[/quote']

 

Very nice. You guys picked this fight by bashing Schilling, and when you meet a response you can't deal with directly while still masking your bashing behind "the good of the team" or outrage against some kind of personal selfishness on Schill's part, no matter, just dismiss it as Schilling apologism. Let me know if you have something relevant to say. For extra credit, you could try for a bit of intellectual honesty.

 

Not to mention that it's you and your partners in crime who started this nonsense by finding an excuse to bring an article about Keith Foulke around somehow into an attempted Schilling kvetchfest in the first place.

[a700hitter]

I guess but he still could have "stole" money from the Guardians then stunk it up for the year. Maybe in 08 he thought he could contribute' date=' who knows. I still think its hard to walk away from 5 million when all you have to do is show up.[/quote']That would have required some effort. He chose to sit on his couch. If he had made the effort to try to play, i.e, took the medical treatments, physical therapy and the rehab stints and still couldn't play and then he decided to give back the money, that would be honorable. His act was not honorable. He did nothing and that's what he got paid for.

[a700hitter]

This is stupid. Foulke did nothing wrong here' date=' he couldn't play and decided to retire. That's good of him. Most other people wouldn't do that. How is he some big lazy jerk for doing so? But what would I expect from a Schilling apoligist anyway? That man could punch your own mother in the face and you'd find a way to justify it.[/quote']You are right. He did nothing wrong, but he did nothing honorable either.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

Very nice. You guys picked this fight by bashing Schilling, and when you meet a response you can't deal with directly while still masking your bashing behind "the good of the team" or outrage against some kind of personal selfishness on Schill's part, no matter, just dismiss it as Schilling apologism. Let me know if you have something relevant to say. For extra credit, you could try for a bit of intellectual honesty.

 

Not to mention that it's you and your partners in crime who started this nonsense by finding an excuse to bring an article about Keith Foulke around somehow into an attempted Schilling kvetchfest in the first place.

 

oh god. Boo hoo, cry me a f***ing river

[TheKilo]

Look, it boils down to me for this:

 

Foulke made the decision that he couldn't pitch. He gave up the $5 million.

Schilling made the decision that he couldn't pitch. He didn't give up the $8 million.

 

Foulke allowed Cleveland to recoup the sunk cost, Schilling didn't extend that same privilege to the Sox.

 

Whether you deem that right or wrong is your own call. Those are the facts.

[a700hitter]

Look, it boils down to me for this:

 

Foulke made the decision that he couldn't pitch. He gave up the $5 million.

Schilling made the decision that he couldn't pitch. He didn't give up the $8 million.

 

Foulke allowed Cleveland to recoup the sunk cost, Schilling didn't extend that same privilege to the Sox.

 

Whether you deem that right or wrong is your own call. Those are the facts.

Those are the facts as you want them to be, but they are not the facts. The quotes from Foulke in the article that I linked belie your version of the facts with regard to Foulke. There's nothing wrong with the actions of either and there is nothing particularly honorable about the road that Foulke took, and I will always be a huge Foulke fan.

[TheKilo]

Foulke could not pitch in 2007, he gave up the money.

Schilling could not pitch in 2008, didn't give up the money.

 

Whether or not either can make a comeback after those dates is irrelevant.