Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Schilling, Per Schilling, Out a Good Long While but Hopefully Back in 2008. Maybe.


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
213 replies to this topic

#1 pedro1918

  • 2593 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 12:52 PM

According to Boston.com:

Breaking News 12:48 PM
Schilling may not be ready for spring
Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling is not expected to be ready for the start of spring training because of shoulder issues, much like the ones that caused the club to shut him down for seven weeks last season, according to sources.



Not much info yet.

EDIT: Changed title to reflect current status.

Edited by pedro1918, 09 February 2008 - 11:02 AM.


#2 Caspir

  • 3321 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 12:57 PM

So I guess he won't be getting that fitness bonus then?

Losing him probably means Josh/Daisuke/Lester/Buchholz/Wakefield. How much of a drop off is 2008 Buchholz from 2008 Schilling? I don't know, but I would guess not much. I'm sure a lot of people will be coming out of the woodwork to say the Red Sox should have gone the extra mile to get Santana now though. The real concern is going forward. His shoulder wasn't right at the end of last year, won't be right in the Spring. It's not a huge leap to think that it won't be right all year. That could be a tough loss given the questions surrounding most of the guys in the rotation.

Edited by Caspir, 07 February 2008 - 12:59 PM.


#3 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23181 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:00 PM

Oh fuck. Well, if the Curtis Montague Schilling ain’t ready for the start of the season then I’d still rather have Buchholz start off in Pawtucket. Let Julian stretch himself out much like last ST and have him make a handful of starts.

EDIT:Spelling.

Edited by rembrat, 07 February 2008 - 01:01 PM.


#4 TheGoldenGreek33

  • 1934 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:01 PM

So I guess he won't be getting that fitness bonus then?

A shoulder injury has nothing to do with losing weight.

I'm now wondering how long the FO will be willing to keep Buchholz in Pawtucket.

#5 JimD

  • 4600 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:07 PM

I'm sure a lot of people will be coming out of the woodwork to say the Red Sox should have gone the extra mile to get Santana now though.


Anyone who says that would only be showing their ignorance.

#6 kartvelo

  • 3749 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:11 PM

Too bad those shoulder issues weren't addressed starting last October. Last spring we heard Ortiz had a problem that hadn't been dealt with in the offseason, this year it's Schilling.
Or maybe I'm jumping the gun. Maybe they've been working on it like crazy all offseason and just haven't had the success they'd hoped.

#7 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:17 PM

A shoulder injury has nothing to do with losing weight.

I'm now wondering how long the FO will be willing to keep Buchholz in Pawtucket.


I would assume that he would start the season in the rotation now if Schilling is going to miss some time right?

#8 Let it Flo

  • 605 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:18 PM

@#$%.

Countdown to the CHB column blaming it on excessive blog word counts in 5... 4... 3...

#9 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:20 PM

Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling is not expected to be ready for the start of spring training because of shoulder issues, much like the ones that caused the club to shut him down for seven weeks last season, according to sources. His availability for Opening Day could also be in question, though one source familiar with Schilling's condition said it was premature to speculate.

Details remain sketchy, but Schilling recently went to see Dr. Craig Morgan, the doctor who performed his shoulder surgery in 1995. Morgan, citing HIPPA regulations, referred all questions to Schilling, who has not yet responded to e-mails sent to him and his publicist seeking confirmation. Red Sox GM Theo Epstein e-mailed a "no comment" when asked about Schilling's condition.

If he is not ready to take his spot in the rotation at the start of the season, rookie Clay Buchholz is the logical candidate to replace him. Pitchers and catchers are due to report to Fort Myers for spring training on Feb. 14.


Yikes I hope it's nothing major..

Yet another "what do we do with 6 starters?" issue settled

http://www.boston.co...houlder_issues/

Edited by Cuzittt, 07 February 2008 - 02:40 PM.


#10 TheGoldenGreek33

  • 1934 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:21 PM

I would assume that he would start the season in the rotation now if Schilling is going to miss some time right?

Well we've heard countless rumors trying to limit pitch count, so I guess it wouldn't be a horrible idea to throw Tavvy out there for a few starts.

#11 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:22 PM

Well we've heard countless rumors trying to limit pitch count, so I guess it wouldn't be a horrible idea to throw Tavvy out there for a few starts.


Looking at their schedule in April makes the idea of Tavarez starting every 5th day very unappealing.

#12 pedro1918

  • 2593 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:23 PM

I would assume that he would start the season in the rotation now if Schilling is going to miss some time right?


I would bet, and hope, that the front office makes that decision independently of Schilling's status. If they don't think he is ready for the rotation, he should go to Pawtucket. If there is doubt about Buchholz, I would hope Tavarez gets the spot.

Of course, we don't know how long Schill will be out.

#13 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 16130 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:42 PM

If Buchholz starts at the minor league or major league level, couldn't you just do the same program and give him 5 IP starts with Tavarez backing him up? With the early season schedule, I would think having Clay in there would be an advantage over Tavarez. Let Tavarez get stretched out and have him ready for long-relief and Buchholz can still have his innings limited.

Edit: After seeing that he might be done for the year and possibly forever I say we give Buchholz his shot and take over the #5 slot if CS can't go.

Edited by RedOctober3829, 07 February 2008 - 01:55 PM.


#14 mascho


  • SoSH Member


  • 14130 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:45 PM

According to the Herald, this may be very serious.

http://news.bostonhe...position=recent

While the precise nature of Schilling’s injury is not known, it is believed that the right-hander is suffering from an injury to the rotator cuff and/or labrum that might require surgery. It is possible that the sides disagree on how to treat Schilling’s ailment and that a course of treatment, too, is a part of their disagreement.


I could see why the possibility of Schilling missing the season would cause "some disagreement."

#15 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28142 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:47 PM

This is a really strange time for this issue to come up....was he given a physical when he was re-signed? If the Sox were aware of this, it would seem odd to guarantee him $8M. This is pontentially a pretty massive blow to the team, re-signing Curt seemed like a great move but not if he was damaged goods.

#16 SoxFanPJ


  • call me Chester


  • 3857 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:47 PM

The Boston Herald reports that Curt Schilling may need surgery for what's likely either a rotator cuff or labrum injury.
Schilling is done after this year, so we don't see why he'd undergo surgery. Unless he's reconsidering and wants to extend his career beyond 2008, then he'll have to try to pitch through the problem. According to the Herald, the Red Sox are already exploring the possibility of voiding Schilling's contract. They could decide to make a run at Kyle Lohse or take a flier on Bartolo Colon or Freddy Garcia if they don't think Schilling will make it back.


http://www.rotoworld...g...MLB&id=1519

Is there any way they could/would void his contract?

#17 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25466 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:52 PM

Mazz: Schilling may be lost for season.

If it's a rotator cuff he's definitely done.

#18 Oil Can's Liver


  • Wants a Sammich


  • Pip
  • 665 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:00 PM

Why in the world would we need to take a flier on anyone>? Clay is a better pitcher than Schilling at this point anyhow. It would have been nice to have Schilling this year but there is no need to go out and overpay for someone like Lohse or Garcia when Clay is much better than either one of them.


Start the year with..

Beckett
Matsuzaka
Wakefield
Lester
Buchholz

if there is another injury.. insert Julian or Snyder and call up Breslow. If someone wants to sign for dirt cheap to play for the World Champs than depth cannot hurt..but we really don't need to make a move here.

#19 941827

  • 3334 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:01 PM

Is there any way they could/would void his contract?


Unfortunately, we have no idea what the contract says about what events or circumstances would permit the team to void it. Depending on the contract language, something as minor as having shoulder pain and not reporting it to the team within x days could constitute a breach that permits the team to void the deal. There could even have been language that said that if Schilling sustained an injury prior to the season, the team could void the deal.

Edited by 941827, 07 February 2008 - 02:04 PM.


#20 NickEsasky


  • Code Name: Duchess


  • 6818 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:06 PM

Rptator cuff or significant labrum tear and he's done. Physicals are tough as MRIs often won't show a tear. When I had my MRI last year they injected the dye and my tear was still almost imperceptible to the eye on film. Of course when the surgeon got in there my shoulder was a mess.

A significant shoulder injury would definitely explain the decrease in velocity.

#21 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:06 PM

Frankly, this may have been the best thing that could've happened. Sure, it hurts the overall depth of the club, but it eliminates the possibility of Buchholz being held back in AAA.

In 2008, I think the Sox would've been lucky to get 150 IP and a 4.00 ERA out of Schilling. I'm fairly certain we'll get that (or better) from Buchholz. Unfortunately, this means Wakefield will remain a starter throughout the season, should he remain healthy.

However, Buchholz being thrust into a full-time role is really the best thing that this team could've hoped for. He's ready.

#22 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:13 PM

If this team is hoping to sign someone, it has to be someone willing to take over the Tavarez role. If the Sox can get a half-way decent return for Julian, then it makes sense to sign someone.

Here are the remaining free agent starting pitchers:

Tony Armas Jr. (30)
Kris Benson (32)
Shawn Chacon (30)
Roger Clemens (45)
Bartolo Colon (35)
Josh Fogg (31)
Freddy Garcia (32) - Type B
Livan Hernandez (33) - Type B
Byung-Hyun Kim (29)
Kyle Lohse (29)
Rodrigo Lopez (32)
Mike Maroth (30)
Eric Milton (32)
Tomo Ohka (32)
Russ Ortiz (34)
Odalis Perez (31)
John Thomson (34)
Steve Trachsel (37)
Jeff Weaver (31)
David Wells (45)


At the very least, Shawn Chacon has had some mild success out of the bullpen.

#23 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28142 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:13 PM

I don't see any way that this can be a good thing....it is a big blow to the team's depth which was a major strength.

Now, you're down to: Beckett, Dice K, Wakefield, Lester, Buchholz.

Wakefield has some health issues of his own, so while you've got Tavarez, Bowden, and a few others down the depth chart you really don't want to have to use those guys.

If Schilling is really going to miss significant time, than I think the Sox need to go after another starter.

(Ugh, those FA starters suck. Maybe you don't go after a pitcher!)

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 07 February 2008 - 02:14 PM.


#24 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:13 PM

Getting his contract voided would be a pretty lousy way for Schilling to end his career in Boston. Hopefully he'll chime in here or on his blog relatively soon.

Edit: I agree with Rudy that the Sox probably need another starter as we really have no idea how healthy Wakefield is at the moment.

Edited by Foulkey Reese, 07 February 2008 - 02:15 PM.


#25 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:15 PM

Schilling's shoulder woes are more serious than the ones that caused the club to shut him down for seven weeks last season.

Source: http://www.boston.co...-- Red Sox news

#26 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:18 PM

From MLBTR:

Check out this new Ken Rosenthal video (hat tip to MetsBlog). The video is all about Joe Blanton.

* One Rosenthal source suggests a 50/50 chance Blanton is traded (presumably before the season starts).
* Two teams are showing significant interest. Rosenthal believes the Reds are one, and the Twins or Rays could be another. He rules out the Dodgers, Yankees, Rockies, and Indians. The Reds have had preliminary discussions for Blanton already. How about the Phillies? They came calling in July.
* Rosenthal notes that the bounty for Blanton will be less than that of Dan Haren, because Blanton is slightly more expensive and an inferior pitcher.
* On January 14th, an A's source suggested to MLB.com's Jim Molony who expected Blanton to be the A's Opening Day starter.


Well?

Edited by Corsi Combover, 07 February 2008 - 02:19 PM.


#27 dcmissle


  • SoSH Member


  • 12152 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:20 PM

I was really looking forward to his continued evolution and big game contribution. Sad.

One silver lining is not having to bear the "we got seven staaaaa-tas" refrain of 2006, when they had to hand the ball to Jason Johnson after Wells and Clement hit the DL. If they get someone else, they're still not going to have a surplus because Wakefield is 41.

This is instructive. Given Manny's age, Drew's history, and Ellsbury's relative inexperience, Coco isn't burning a hole in my pocket to trade him.

Edited by dcmissle, 07 February 2008 - 02:20 PM.


#28 LahoudOrBillyC


  • Indian name is Massages Ellsbury


  • 3855 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:20 PM

I can't buy the idea that losing a pitcher who won 3 post-season games last season is a good thing. Its a very, very bad thing IMO. To say that Clay Buchholz can step in and replace Curt Schilling in 2008 is wishcasting. The Red Sox have upgraded nowhere and lost their second best pitcher from October? There is plenty of time until April, but at this moment this is bad news.

#29 ragecage

  • 3987 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:22 PM

Edes on XM just now:
- "Red Sox looked into voiding contract."
- Schilling believes he needs surgery (after meeting with Dr. Morgan) and Red Sox "don't want to go down that route."

#30 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 16130 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:23 PM

From MLBTR:
Well?

Would a package built around Coco Crisp get it done? It's much easier to go along and pick up another OF like we did with Hinske(or Moss from within) than to find a quality SP like Blanton. If CS is done for the year, then quality depth is needed.

#31 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:28 PM

Would a package built around Coco Crisp get it done? It's much easier to go along and pick up another OF like we did with Hinske(or Moss from within) than to find a quality SP like Blanton. If CS is done for the year, then quality depth is needed.


Would a package of Coco, Masterson, and Someone Else do anything for the A's?

#32 TheYellowDart5


  • Hustle and bustle


  • 8597 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:30 PM

Would a package of Coco, Masterson, and Someone Else do anything for the A's?

Given the returns that the A's have been getting on their deals so far this winter, I'd assume that any Blanton package will consist solely of prospects, centered on a major-league ready one.

In other words, Ellsbury is probably the starting point.

#33 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:30 PM

Edes on XM just now:
- "Red Sox looked into voiding contract."
- Schilling believes he needs surgery (after meeting with Dr. Morgan) and Red Sox "don't want to go down that route."


I don't blame the Red Sox. If you let Schill get surgery, they have to pay him his 2008 salary and get shit out of it, then he's gonna go on campaigning to play in '09, when you know he'll officially be worthless.

#34 The Hot Corner

  • 221 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:32 PM

Blanton would be an excellent addition. Thing is, what is Billy Beane going to ask for? You would think/hope that Coco could be used as a major part of the deal, but after that I wonder if the Sox would be willing to part with someone like Lowrie (knowing that Oakland annually has major issues with Bobby Crosby). Considering that both are major-league ready, it might not be a terrible deal.

EDIT: Distracted before hitting "Add Reply".

Edited by The Hot Corner, 07 February 2008 - 02:33 PM.


#35 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:33 PM

Blanton would be an excellent addition. Thing is, what is Billy Beane going to ask for? You would think/hope that Coco could be used as a major part of the deal, but after that I wonder if the Sox would be willing to part with someone like Lowrie (knowing that Oakland annually has major issues with Bobby Crosby). Considering that both are major-league ready, it might not be a terrible deal.


Why would a team like Oakland who is in complete and total rebuilding mode want a 28 year old $5mill a year player like Crisp?

#36 Oil Can's Liver


  • Wants a Sammich


  • Pip
  • 665 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:34 PM

Would a package built around Coco Crisp get it done? It's much easier to go along and pick up another OF like we did with Hinske(or Moss from within) than to find a quality SP like Blanton. If CS is done for the year, then quality depth is needed.


I would love to add Blanton, yet again, I think Buchholz going down to AAA is a mistake. He is probably the 3rd best pitcher on our staff and I would not be surprised, if given the innings, that he outperforms even Dice-K in 2008. I understand all of the arguments for Clay going down yet I still believe in putting the best team on the field to start the season. Should we coddle Clay and watch his innings..YES....but sending him down is counterproductive in my estimation.

#37 TheYellowDart5


  • Hustle and bustle


  • 8597 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:35 PM

Why would a team like Oakland who is in complete and total rebuilding mode want a 28 year old $5mill a year player like Crisp?

This is what people need to keep in mind if they're considering Blanton as a target: Billy Beane's only going to give up assets in return for young, cost-controlled players who are years away from arbitration and free agency.

#38 JimD

  • 4600 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:35 PM

This is very disappointing, but I'd hesitate before I'd term it a 'massive' blow. The Red Sox FO had to have known that there was a good possibility that Schilling would miss some games in 2008 and also might continue to decline - if they were counting on anything more than 20-25 merely decent starts at the number 3 position, that was dumb.

#39 The Hot Corner

  • 221 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:42 PM

Why would a team like Oakland who is in complete and total rebuilding mode want a 28 year old $5mill a year player like Crisp?


At the risk of sounding silly (because it's Oakland), Lowrie is definitely ML ready, and though Coco isn't cheap he can definitely considered a known return. If you added another prospect to this deal I think it wouldn't be totally unacceptable to Beane.

#40 glennhoffmania


  • Miracle Whipper


  • 8383610 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:42 PM

Anyone who says that would only be showing their ignorance.


Why is that, exactly? Some of us were saying that the whole idea that the rotation was in such great shape that we don't need Santana was a ridiculous argument since there were several question marks. One of those question marks was Schilling's health. This isn't hindsight.

#41 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 25333 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:43 PM

The only time this hurts is in October. For the rest of it, as Corsi suggested, better to have this happen now than in July and be held for ransom out of some sort of desperation. I'm not sure many people thought Curt was a 20-game winner possibility at this stage, and I'm sure most of us were expecting a DL stint or two this year.

I think the approach is to expect nothing from him this season. You get anything, it's a bonus.

#42 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:45 PM

At the risk of sounding silly (because it's Oakland), Lowrie is definitely ML ready, and though Coco isn't cheap he can definitely considered a known return. If you added another prospect to this deal I think it wouldn't be totally unacceptable to Beane.


Yes Oakland would probably love to have Lowrie, Masterson, Ellsbury and other young players. But they have no need for a 28 year old $5mill player when they aren't going to be contending for the next several years.

Like Yellowdart said....Beane is only going to give up a player like Blanton in return for young, cost-controlled players who are years away from arbitration and free agency.

Edited by Foulkey Reese, 07 February 2008 - 02:45 PM.


#43 5belongstoGeorge


  • Left Coast


  • PipPipPip
  • 8013 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:45 PM

For some reason I can't even fathom there has always been a enormous amount of Schilling hate around SoSH. Dude was/is a Red Sox hero of the highest order regardless of what happens going forward. I am curious about what was known and when it was known by all the principles involved. I know business is business, but the talk of voiding a contract seems to imply that there is more than meets the eye here.

In any event this is not good news at all. #38 could have really been an asset this year. As always and forever, I wish him well.

#44 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:47 PM

The Reds and Los Angeles Dodgers are talking with Oakland about a deal for starting pitcher Joe Blanton.

Source: http://news.enquirer...PT04/302070036/

#45 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20078 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:48 PM

Source: http://news.enquirer...PT04/302070036/


You're just happy to be put back to work huh?

#46 Cuzittt


  • Bouncing with Anger


  • 17314 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:51 PM

Probably time for a look at who we do have in the minors...

Sox Rotation:

Beckett
Dice-K
[Schilling]
Wakefield
Lester
Buchholz
[Tavarez]
[Snyder]

In Minors:
Hansack - On 40-man roster
Pauley - On 40-man roster
Haigwood
Zink
Masterson
Bowden
[Chris Smith]
[Abe Alvarez]

Non-Roster Invitees
Michael Tejera

#47 SaveBooFerriss


  • twenty foreskins


  • 6096 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:54 PM

This is bad news. The Sox are not going to be able to find a suitable replacement for Schilling on the FA market. A healthy Schilling would have been a great asset.

The good news is the Sox still have six starting pitchers if you include Tavarez.

Masterson could be on the fast track to Fenway too.

#48 NomarRS05

  • 3298 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:57 PM

The improvements we should see from Daisuke Matsuzaka and Jon Lester should be able to cover this loss. Maybe pick up Rodrigo Lopez to split 5th starter duties with Clay Buchholz and Julian Tavarez and I don't see this as a crushing blow. Schilling was by no means stellar last season. He inspired zero confidence against the good lineups. Anoyone expecting more out of him than 3rd-starter production this season was fooling themselves.

And he isn't the lights-out playoff starter he used to be either. This is the same Schilling who posted a 5.40 ERA in the ALCS against Cleveland, right? I love the man and always will, but he hasn't been reliable for a while now.

#49 JimD

  • 4600 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:57 PM

Why is that, exactly? Some of us were saying that the whole idea that the rotation was in such great shape that we don't need Santana was a ridiculous argument since there were several question marks. One of those question marks was Schilling's health. This isn't hindsight.


Maybe 'ignorance' is a strong word - sorry. I just never considered Schilling's health as being a factor in the Santana trade question. I knew that passing on the Twins ace meant that 2008 would be less of a certainty and I was OK with that. I never looked at it as a matter of 'Oh, we have plenty of starting pitching - we don't need Johan Santana'.

#50 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5252 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 02:57 PM

In Minors:
Hansack - On 40-man roster
Pauley - On 40-man roster
Haigwood
Zink
Masterson
Bowden
[Chris Smith]
[Abe Alvarez]

Non-Roster Invitees
Michael Tejera


Looking at this list, I gotta think there's no way that Theo would pick anyone up in trade who would require a return of either Masterson or Bowden. That's low-upside....