Schilling should talk to Drew about it, then Varitek, then tell us about their immense grief.

Maybe Schilling will follow his man's lead and suspend his blogging until we can find a way out of this.

3. kevin Posted: September 26, 2008 at 09:35 AM (#2956542)

Schilling should talk to Drew about it, then Varitek, then tell us about their immense grief.



You think he hasn't already, vi?

I would bet my 401K he has.

i just wanted to make sure this got quoted, because i for one doubt schilling has, he is just that stupid, and two, i am interested in hearing more about the terms of said bet.

Maybe Schilling will follow his man's lead and suspend his blogging until we can find a way out of this.

To follow McCain's lead, he would have to say he is suspending blogging and then continue blogging, while perhaps skipping a game.

You think he hasn't already, vi?

I think he hasn't, at least not in much detail to really know their thoughts on the matter.

Schilling already has an opinion on agents that is strong enough that he doesn't use one. Schilling was with the Phillies team that Drew rejected after being drafted, and had threatened to bean Drew when he subsequently faced the Phillies. He's backed off that since then, saying his beef was with Boras, not Drew. (So, then, Boras should wear a helmet with double earflaps?)

I think he is using the Alvarez case to justify his own stance, one that probably was formed with a little assistance from the Drew/Boras thing way back when. And I think he's doing so based more on how he thinks he would've felt in Drew's shoes than on how Drew actually feels about it.

I mean, Drew hated it so much that he switched his representation to... wait, he didn't switch. He's still with Boras. Varitek, on the other hand... no, he's still with Boras, too. If Drew and Varitek think that Boras causes more harm than good, and that his antics aren't worth the grief, they'd surely have dropped him by now, right?

I'm generally OK with Schilling, and I like that he gives us insight we wouldn't normally have. I just don't get the impression here that he's giving us info straight from Drew and/or Varitek; rather, I think he has a long-held opinion and is merely using Alvarez as a chance to share it. I think this post reflects his opinion, not Drew's, not Varitek's.

You can keep your 401(k); I'm not a gambling man. (Though I suppose that, given the state of the financial industry, we're all gambling.)

But if these players are what he claims they are, what is the difference at the end of that HOF career between what they wanted, and what they got?

Of course, if these players AREN'T what he claims they are, they will be very grateful for getting as much as they can before the truth becomes apparent.

how could #2 not have ended this thread?

Of course, if these players AREN'T what he claims they are, they will be very grateful for getting as much as they can before the truth becomes apparent.

Right. When the player tears his labrum in A ball, he'll be pretty happy to have that extra million.

Schilling should talk to Drew about it, then Varitek, then tell us about their immense grief.

Yeah, Curt Schilling needs to lose his naive idealism about baseball players. Does he think they're dumb guys who should be grateful for what they have? This is the kind of attitude that gets me really annoyed at people in the media. Maybe he should put himself in the shoes of a professional athlete for a few minutes. If he was offered an extra 5% on his signing bonus and an early route to free agency, wouldn't he take it? He should actually meet some of the guys he's blathering about and see if they act like the hypothetical baseball players he seems to identify with so much.

Crispix - Thanks for the irony.

Schilling doesn't give any indication that he's done what you suggest. He might be accurately assessing what's in their heads. And maybe he's projecting onto them what's in his head. But he doesn't give any indication that he's spoken with them and know their feelings. He knows his feelings, and he's had these same feelings for the last 15 years. Yeah, maybe it came from Drew, but I think it came from Schilling's Philly-centric observation of Drew.

How did Varitek feel about what Boras did? Well...

Varitek had not picked up a bat while the Mariners and agent Scott Boras battled over a difference of $300,000 (Varitek's $800,000 demand vs. the Mariners' $500,000 offer). This was in addition to his refusal to sign with Minnesota after the Twins made him their top pick in 1993.

"It was a matter of principle," Varitek said. "It was a tough thing to do. I thought I'd go insane not being able to play. But I'm glad I did it. The only regret is that it lasted as long as it did."

If he decided to make a stand, he had the agent who would back him up all the way, Scott Boras, Mr. Eyeball-to-Eyeball. Most baseball people feel it's far better to sign and start playing.

"In a couple of years if you're any good," Piniella said, "you'll make $100,000 with three at-bats. His agent may have done him a disservice."

Varitek thinks not.

"Scott only did what I wanted," he said. "He was great. He kept me sane through it all."

Whatever impression of immense grief Schilling got, I doubt it came from Varitek.

I bet my 401k that Schilling has not spoken to these guys about their supposed grief. I also bet my 401k that Grady Sizemore ends up having a better season this year than Jacoby Ellsbury (there are two more games and Ellsbury's hot, so maybe that's a crazy proposition).

Is it enough to have to wear that tag around for at least the first year or two of your career when fans are going to wear you out. It adds IMMENSE pressure ON TOP of the already unimaginable pressure of arriving and performing in the major leagues.

Schilling is talking as if he knows anything about this.