User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.3431 seconds
40 querie(s) executed

Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Thanks, Chico!
1. The BBWAA is changing rules on award voting based on MLB incentive compensation, such that the only players to be eligible for awards are those who are not being given financial incentive to compete for them. IOW, the criteria for winning an award will be, in descending order of importance:
a. Will the player explicitly make more money based on our vote?
b. How did the player perform during the season?
2. The stated rationale is that they want to remove any appearance of impropriety in the voting process.
3. There's so much impropriety in the voting process already, and this does nothing to correct it.
- - - -
If that's an accurate summary, he's correct on all counts.
If anything, the move by the BBWAA to disqualify players from awards based on explicit financial incentives in their contracts is a signal that their membership cannot be trusted to do the right thing. Players and teams are using the BBWAA awards as a good measure of player performance, and the BBWAA is pretty much saying, "No, they're not, stop using our awards that way." They're worried that someone might vote for Schilling only to allow him to collect $1 million; how shallow do they think their membership is? Apparently, they agree with many of us on that point.
True. One example is that voters for gold gloves should not be allowed to vote for a guy who played 1/10 of his teams games at the position. The Palmeiro rule. Of course that's coaches not sportswriters.
Curt's too close to the issue to see it this way, but this decision by BBWAA is totally appropriate. No, it doesn't solve all the problems, but it prevents a foreseeable problem from occurring. Schiling said something about buying a car for a sportswriter when he signed his contract. Curt, if you read this I have no doubt you were just kidding. But they are right to remove possibility of impropriety in future votes, at least on this issue.
Its an easy issue to correct, they are right to do so. Other types of impropriety are tougher to correct. Doesn't mean they don't exist, but there's no good way of stopping a writer from voting against a player just because he doesn't like him, which cost Albert Belle the 1995 MVP award.
I don't think so. It has more to do with the appearance than the actuality. If Schilling were to receive one Cy Young vote next year, fans who already have low opinions of sportswriters (I think there are a few here) will openly wonder/speculate why? Was he doing it to curry favor with Curt, or worse, was there some kind of payoff. Even if the vote was entirely merit-based (in the writer's view), there will be no way for that writer (and Schilling) to frame the argument that will convince every fan/reader. The BBWAA's decision removes that potential for conflict, and I'm certain their publishers support that stand. I don't think Schilling and Theo thought of the ramifications from the BBWAA's perspective when they inserted the clause, but if Curt does receive one Cy vote next year, he surely will.
Now, did I miss Schilling's Naked and the Dead? Why are his editors so hands-off? The man is a Strunk and White study away from a decent blog. Why must he write so many words. They make my head spin.
I enjoyed Schilling's rant -- hey, who doesn't enjoy reading a good rant? -- but I agree that it wasn't his most coherent effort. But that's the thing about blogs -- sometimes posts aren't particularly well-constructed. I'm still glad he wrote it, and I like reading his stuff.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main