|Curt Schilling calls Kirk & Callahan to battle New Jersey writer who called him ‘scumbag,’ won’t give him Hall of Fame vote||01.05.17 at 2:48 pm ET|
Another day, another Curt Schilling meltdown over Hall of Fame voters questioning his character.
On Thursday’s Kirk & Callahan Show, NJ.com writer Randy Miller called in to defend his column declaring Schilling a scumbag. Citing his behavior as a teammate, and not some recent questionable internet memes, Miller said he decided to stop giving Schilling a vote for the Hall of Fame.
Miller, who covered Schilling for five years in Philadelphia during 16 years on the Phillies beat, was in the midst of explaining his reasoning when Schilling called in to let him have it.
“I have a problem with people that lie and don’t have a spine to stand up for the things that they say when they get confronted on them,” Schilling said.
Schilling went on to note that he never liked Miller when he was a player, while Miller countered that when they had a very loud argument during BP, Phillies players commended him for standing up to the Big Schill. They also spent a lot of time arguing over underachieving Phillies right-hander Garrett Stephenson for some reason, whom Schilling called, “Clay Buchholz before Clay Buchholz.”
“If Schilling is such a good teammate, then why was it when we had that argument and he’s yelling at me during team stretch when he should be working on his body, he’s yelling at me in the dugout saying I should be a movie critic, why was it afterwards players were coming up to me patting me on the back like I hit a home run, or saying oh my God, we love that, we love seeing you give it to him,” Miller asked.
Responded Schilling: “The guys that had problems with me were the guys that didn’t do their job.”
Miller contended that in numerous off-the-record conversations, former teammates and executives who knew Schilling said he was a terrible teammate, which prompted the scumbag line, which was really just a repurposing of an adjective Schilling has used to describe writers.
“Should I really put this guy over the top who is a scumbag?” Miller asked. “I’ve never really used the character clause. I thought to myself, you know what, he doesn’t deserve my vote, because of the way he was as a teammate.”
Countered Schilling: “This is why I don’t lose sleep over this. When you understand human beings like this guy have a control over the Hall of Fame vote … they invoke the character clause randomly. This is why I don’t lose sleep.”
|Curt Schilling on Hot Stove Show: Would rather make Hall of Fame than win Senate seat||12.01.16 at 10:39 am ET|
Forget about Mr. Schilling goes to Washington. He’d rather be in Cooperstown.
In an appearance on Wednesday’s Hot Stove Show on WEEI, former Red Sox great Curt Schilling was asked if he’d rather make the Hall of Fame or win a Senate seat. His answer was mildly surprising.
“Oh, Hall of Fame,” he said. “The Senate seat thing is something that when you look down into it . . . one of the things I’ve tried to do and want to do is make a difference. And I’m not sure that happens on the floor of the Senate as much as it could happen now with the talk show, or being involved and around young athletes. Going to the Hall of Fame opens doors for our ALS and the SHADE Foundation and the ability to reach out and talk to more young people, and that’s something I’m very, very passionate about.”
The topic arose because two Hall of Fame voters — the Globe’s Dan Shaughnessy and national writer Jon Heyman — have suggested they won’t vote for Schilling anymore because of an offensive meme involving lynching journalists that he posted to social media.
Schilling, who received 52.3 percent of the vote in his fourth year on the ballot last winter, said he doesn’t care.
“The people that know me know that I was a good teammate, and I’m a nice guy, and I love to debate and have fun,” he said. “To say that I don’t care is not to put it in proper context, but to say that I think about it for one second outside of the process when it happens and when it’s announced would be a lie. I don’t. I have no control over it.”
Getting back to the issue of the Senate, Schilling was pressed on why he believed he couldn’t effect change in Washington.
“Being a Senator is about taking the concerns of your constituents to Washington and trying to get those things fixed and worked on,” he said. “And so I don’t know what the voters of Massachusetts would want taken to Washington. I don’t know how much of a difference I could make. I do know that free education is laughable and not possible financially for anybody, which is one of Elizabeth Warren’s tax-and-spend platforms. I do know that I would be as representative of the people as anybody that ever served, because I would not have a problem taking my constituents’ voice to D.C. even if I was the outlier.”
As for whether he should be in the Hall of Fame, Schilling said he doesn’t believe he makes the cut, despite his postseason greatness.
“In my Hall of Fame, no,” he said. “My Hall of Fame criteria is very simple. Someone is either blatantly easily a Hall of Famer or not. That doesn’t work in the current Hall of Fame, because there’s this nebulous gray area that has allowed people to get in that I don’t think should be in, but it has also kept people I think should definitely be in out, like a Dale Murphy or a Fred McGriff. Those guys were Hall of Famers to me.
“Pedro Martinez is a Hall of Famer. Randy Johnson is a Hall of Famer. I think in October, there was no better pitcher in the history of the game, ever, than I was. But I don’t know that the criteria for the regular season that I did it enough, the bulk numbers people look for.”
Schilling won 216 games and went 11-2 in the postseason.
Asked if he believed his political stances have cost him votes — he hosts a daily talk show on the right-wing Breitbart network — he didn’t hesitate. Would any of this be an issue if he leaned left?
“Absolutely it wouldn’t be an issue, and I’d still be working at ESPN,” he said. “But it is what it is.”
|David Ortiz is optimistic he will get into Hall of Fame, and he should be||01.07.16 at 11:53 am ET|
“I am,” said the Red Sox designated hitter when asked if he was optimistic he would eventually be inducted into Cooperstown. “I think I did, and still do, what I’m supposed to. So, that’s all I can control.
“Numbers-wise, it shouldn’t be a problem because that’s what the Hall of Fame is all about. Numbers and not being someone being part of controversy, so I guess on that side of it I think I’m doing OK. Getting in the Hall of Fame is not an easy thing to do. There is always going to be someone who has something to say, so we’ll see how that plays out.”
He’s right, numbers probably won’t be Ortiz’s roadblock.
Starting with my very unscientific approach to starting the Hall of Fame conversation for position players — charting how many times they finished in the Top 10 in MVP voting (showing a dominance in their era) — the DH passes muster, accomplishing the feat six times. Conversely, new-inducted Mike Piazza reached such levels seven times, while the guy just missing out this time around, Jeff Bagwell, was a five-timer.
We also know about the 503 homers, and, of course, the historic postseason success.
Ortiz’s hurdles will be his link to performance enhancing drugs (the 2003 survey test) and the position he plays, designated hitter.
Wednesday’s results offered some additional clarity when analyzing Ortiz’s chances.
Even though neither Piazza or Bagwell have no direct link to PEDs, the suggestion that they might have dipped into that well certainly has been the reason it took them so long to get this far in the voting. But here they are.
And even the guys Curt Schilling recently called the “poster children” for the steroid era, Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds, saw jumps after staying fairly stagnant in their first three years on the ballot. Each jumped about eight percent.
But, perhaps most important for Ortiz’s candidacy, was how Edgar Martinez was viewed by voters.
Frank Thomas is the only semblance of a designated hitter in the Hall of Fame, although he played almost as many games at first base. That has left Martinez — the player the award for best DH each season is named after — as the position’s current hope to crack the Hall.
But, for Martinez, it hadn’t been going well.
In six times on the ballot, he had yet to crack 36.5 percent, dropping to 27 percent last year. And this is a guy who carried a career .312 batting average and .933 OPS over an 18-year career.
But, presumably thanks to weeding out of some of the older voters, Martinez and the DH position took a big, 16.4 percent leap forward. He now stands at 43.4 percent. That, along with closer Trevor Hoffman getting a whopping 67.3 percent on his first try, was an enormous step toward silencing positional bias.
Here’s a guess: If Martinez cracks 50 percent — which it would seem a very real possibility — Ortiz isn’t weighed down by the position and he is in.
“I don’t know,” said Ortiz when asked if there would be another designated hitter to come along like himself. “They said the same thing about Edgar Martinez, that there wasn’t going to be another guy born to be that good and God blessed me for being who I am. So I don’t doubt that some point in baseball somebody else pops up like me, or better than me. That’s something that nobody can dictate.”
|Bradfo Show: Five things learned talking Hall of Fame (and other things) with Curt Schilling||01.06.16 at 9:34 am ET|
He knows the drill, and that’s why the waiting process leading up to the announcement hasn’t exactly turned the Schilling household inside-out.
“It’s colder and I’m worried my chickens are getting frostbite on their combs,” he said on the Bradfo Show podcast when asked how this year might be different. “Honest to God, that’s what I’m worried about.”
But when it comes to the Hall of Fame, Schilling will be a name many continue to keep a close eye on. There is a strong case to be made that the former Red Sox pitcher belongs in Cooperstown. And then there are the debates that surround his debates.
(Case in point: Will Leitch’s recent story, “Are Curt Schilling’s GOP politics keeping him out of the Hall of Fame?”
It is all why narrowing down the wide-ranging interview with Schilling to five things we learned is challenging, but we’ll give it a shot:
SCHILLING IS AT PEACE WITH POTENTIALLY NOT GETTING THE CALL
“The hard part for me is I don’t want to say the things I say and diminish what I think the Hall of Fame represents. But it is the most subjective things I’ve ever been around. I read an article the other day about a writer that didn’t vote for me, and he didn’t vote for me because I only had 216 wins. And John Smoltz he voted for because he had 214 wins. I made peace with it a long time ago.
“Ultimately, I say they can’t take away the memories and the three rings, and those are the things I was able to walk away with. If it happens it would be great. I don’t expect it to happen. I’m not going to make a mistake this year and say it’s because I’m a Republican because I joked around about that last year and it became it’s own article when I called John Smoltz a Democrat knowing full well he’s as conservative as I am if not moreso, and I took heat for that for six months.
“If I don’t have a plague in Cooperstown, nobody can take away everything I had. I think Cooperstown and getting in is a recognition of all the people that were in your life, not of you.”
HE WON’T BE QUIET FOR THE SAKE OF HIS CANDIDACY
“I don’t care. I’m not going to change who I am, do what I do, or say what I say to make people think differently of me. For better or worse, and my wife would say there’s a lot of worse ‘ and some of the GMs I played for, well, all of the GMs I played for would say the same ‘ but I’m passionate with what I believe in. If my mouth keeps me out of the Hall of Fame then it’s a flawed process, if that’s the reason people don’t vote for me. If they don’t vote for because they don’t think I belong, then that’s absolutely a valid point.”
THERE IS A FRUSTRATION WITH THE HALL OF FAME VOTING PROCESS
“Tim Raines is the second greatest leadoff hitter of all-time and he’s a first-ballot Hall of Famer, and he’s still not in. That’s a joke. I think if a guy receives 85 or 90 percent of the votes and you don’t vote for him you should lose your ballot.”
“I think Bonds and Clemens were first ballot guys before I think they started cheating. What they did ‘¦ as a player and a member of the player’s association it’s my fault as much as anybody ‘¦ but what they did to my generation, it’s labeled the steroid era forever and they’re as symbolic of the era as anything, and I don’t think they should be recognized in a good way for that.”
HE BELIEVES PED GUYS WILL GET IN (HE JUST HOPES THAT DOESN’T INCLUDE BONDS AND CLEMENS
“Listen, this is like anything else. We don’t’ have staying power. We don’t have the ability to hate forever. No matter how bad a person anybody is at some point ‘ with the exception of guys like Jeffrey Dahmer and Charles Manson ‘ everybody kind of gets that second chance. The only guy in my lifetime who hasn’t really gotten it is Pete Rose. I love the man. I’ve known him for a long time, but he made his own bed. But these guys, I think at the end of the day they lost the one thing they could never buy which was legacy.
“Bonds and Clemens will go down as the poster children for my generation of players and they both will do so for the wrong reason. I’m not a fan of recognizing that.”
OH, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF BASEBALL TALK, INCLUDING AN INTERESTING NOTE ABOUT THE ROLE OF RED SOX OWNERSHIP
“There’s meddling and there always has been. It goes back to when I was here [in Boston] I know the [ownership] meddled with the lineup, not just the roster. The other thing is that you have some guys not just in baseball, but football, who are fantasy baseball playing rich people. It’s not a bad thing until it gets down into clubhouse, and it has and it does.”
|Pedro Martinez: ‘Boston, I don’t have enough words to say how much I love you’||07.26.15 at 5:40 pm ET|
From 1998 to 2004, Martinez pitched for the Red Sox. In 1999 and 2000, Martinez authored two of the greatest seasons in baseball history on the mound, going 41-10 with a 1.90 ERA and a 0.830 WHIP in 58 starts. He won back-to-back Cy Young awards.
In seven seasons with the Red Sox, he was 117-37 with a 2.52 ERA and a 0.978 WHIP in 201 starts.
“Boston, I don’t have enough words to say how much I love you,” Martinez said during a 30-minute speech that began in English and ended in Spanish, as he addressed a huge Dominican audience that showed up with flags and shirts to honor one of the country’s greatest athletes.
“It’s great honor to be here. It’s great moment not only for me, for my family, it’s a great moment for the Dominican Republic and Latin America,” he said.
Martinez was as grateful to those writers who voted him in on his first year of eligibility as he was the fans who cheered him on.
“In ’99, I had a little stretch when I felt you didn’t like me, but you made it up and showed me you cared when it really matters,” Martinez quipped with his trademark charismatic smile.
|Jonathan Papelbon thinks both Pete Rose, Alex Rodriguez ‘100 percent’ belong in HOF||07.13.15 at 5:55 pm ET|
He thinks both should eventually have a place in Cooperstown.
The subject of Pete Rose and his 1989 lifetime ban from baseball for betting on games as a player-manager is again front and center this week here in his hometown. This past March, Rose formally reapplied for reinstatement. MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said he was open to sitting down with Rose to discuss it. Some took that willingness to reopen the case as a sign that reinstatement might be around the corner.
ESPN’s “Outside The Lines” reported two weeks ago that there was new evidence that Rose bet on Reds’ games in 1986. Still, there is speculation that Manfred might be willing to listen to the argument for reinstatement and maybe, just maybe, that will lead to a discussion on whether he should be inducted in Cooperstown, which would have to come via the Veterans Committee.
The last time the All-Star Game was here in Cincinnati (1988), Rose was the manager of the Reds. Just over a year later, he was banished from the game in Aug. 1989 by then-Commissioner Bart Giamatti. Tuesday night, he will be permitted to take part in ceremonies in the park he never played or managed in.
“Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, 100 percent, 100 percent,” Papelbon said. “If you don’t want to put him in as a manager, put him in as a player. He made mistakes as a manager but didn’t make mistakes as a player. Personally, I don’t think there’s no reason whatsoever why he shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame.”
Rodriguez was banned from baseball for the entire 2014 season for his role in the Biogenesis PED scandal. A-Rod is 5-for-17 in his career against Papelbon, including two home runs.
Papelbon, who will be in the bullpen for the National League on Tuesday night, was asked who should make the Hall first, Rose or Rodriguez?
“I would hope Pete Rose because he’s already waited long enough and Alex is still playing,” Papelbon said, before adding, “Alex is definitely a Hall of Famer for sure, 100 percent.”
|Curt Schilling to D&C on Hall of Fame balloting: ‘I can’t spend my time being concerned about people’s opinions of me that I’ll never meet’||01.07.15 at 10:46 am ET|
Former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling checked in with Dennis & Callahan on Wednesday, after falling short of election to the Baseball Hall of Fame, and the former Red Sox star said he believes some writers won’t ever vote for him because of his political leanings. To hear the interview, go to the Dennis & Callahan audio on demand page.
Schilling received 39.2 percent of the vote, well short of the 75 percent needed for election. Four players were elected: Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, Craig Biggio and former Sox star Pedro Martinez, whose surprisingly low 91.1 percent result was more evidence to Schilling that something is wrong.
“The process isn’t flawed; stupid people do stupid things,” Schilling said. “I’ve seen so many in the past, voters making their vote into a news article, protesting this or protesting that, except just voting the player on his playing merits. And that’s normal, I guess, because we’re human, we all have bias, we all have prejudice. When Pedro gets 91 percent, that tells you something’s wrong.”
A case could me made that Schilling’s statistics are comparable to those of Smoltz, yet the Braves legend received 240 more votes. Schilling said Smoltz deserves enshrinement, but he noted that Smoltz’s political views are more consistent with many media members.
“I think he got in because of [Greg] Maddux and [Tom] Glavine. I think the fact that they won 14 straight pennants. I think his ‘Swiss army knife versatility,’ which somebody said yesterday, I think he got a lot of accolades for that, I think he got a lot of recognition for that. He’s a Hall of Famer,” Schilling said. “And I think the other big thing is that I think he’s a Democrat and so I know that, as a Republican, that there’s some people that really don’t like that.”
A proud conservative, Schilling has been outspoken in his support for Republican candidates. He also received heavy criticism when he moved his video game company from Massachusetts to Rhode Island to take advantage of government assistance and then the company went bankrupt.
Schilling said there’s no question that he would have received more votes had he been more mainstream in his beliefs and less outspoken and controversial.
“Absolutely,” he said. “Listen, when human beings do something, anything, there’s bias and prejudice. Listen, 9 percent of the voters did not vote for Pedro. There’s something wrong with the process and some of the people in the process when that happens. I don’t think that it kept me [out] or anything like that, but I do know that there are guys who probably won’t ever vote for me because of the things that I said or did. That’s the way it works.”
|My not-so-super secret way to start any Hall of Fame conversation||01.06.15 at 11:41 am ET|
This is what we’ve learned after the annual round of Hall of Fame discussion leading into Tuesday afternoon’s big announcement: it is an unbelievably flawed process.
The uncertainty and fragility that goes into deciding who will be next to enter into the MLB Hall of Fame is what makes the dead-of-winter baseball conversation so spicy. There are a lot of good solutions surfaced, yet none have offered any definition as to how these guys should be elected going forward.
Different eras and performance-enhancing-drug suspensions have clouded a world that is almost always driven by statistics. That’s why I prefer to start — that’s just start, not finish — any conversations with a simple (and probably somewhat flawed) mechanism:
– For hitters, how many times did they finish in the Top 10 in MVP voting.
– For pitchers, how many times did they receive Cy Young votes.
Here is the reason for this approach: it shows a dominance in a player’s era, no matter what the era is. The stats will go up and down (the MLB average OPS this past season dipped to .700 from .782 in 2000), but perceived elite status during that particular time span is what it was.
(Yes, I am one who is mostly in favor of voting in those formally and informally tied to PEDs.)
To me, the dominance in the era argument was a key talking point when looking at Jim Rice‘s candidacy. Six times Rice finished in the Top 5 in MVP voting. Six! Craig Biggio? Twice. Frank Thomas? Six. Barry Larkin? Once.
Let’s stop for a second and remind everybody: this is just to start the debate, not to punctuate it.
Pitchers? Randy Johnson received Cy Young votes 10 times, winning the award five times. Pedro Martinez got votes seven times, claiming the Cy on three occasions. Curt Schilling got votes four times, the same as Hall of Famer Burt Blyleven. Schilling finished second for the award three times, with Blyleven’s highest finish maxing out at third during a career that ran 22 seasons.
I do believe longevity with consistent performance puts somewhat of a dent in this philosophy, but shouldn’t wash away the theory.
Carl Yastrzemski belongs in the Hall of Fame, but he also finished in the Top 10 in MVP voting the same number of times as Dwight Evans (4), who deserves a closer look.
Of the candidates on the current ballot, perhaps one of the most interesting when looking at Nomar Garciaparra. Five times Garciaparra finished in the Top 10 in MVP voting, with one 11th-place finish. He only managed one Top 5 showing, placing second in 1998.
Garciaparra, however, just wasn’t quite dominant enough for a long enough stretch. Realistically, he played about the same amount of seasons as a regular as Rice did while totaling a higher OPS (.882-.854). But, using the aforementioned formula, Garciappara wasn’t nearly as dominant during his era.
Don Mattingly has been compared to Garciaparra when surfacing the former Red Sox shortstop, although Mattingly, while also playing for 14 seasons, had three Top 5 MVP finishes (winning once), and four Top 10’s. The former Yankees first baseman has been voted on since 2001, totaling 28.2 percent in that first year of eligibility. In ’14, he received 8.2 percent of the vote.
Some other on-the-bubble candidates: Mike Piazza finished Top 10 seven times, with four Top 5 showings; Tim Raines had three Top 10’s and one Top 5; Jeff Bagwell notched five Top 10 finishes, with two Top 5’s.
Flawed? Yes. As good a conversation springboard as anything else we’ve dug up? Absolutely.
|Red Sox Hall of Fame inductees Pedro Martinez, Roger Clemens and Nomar Garciaparra talk Jon Lester, Cooperstown and more at Fenway Park||08.14.14 at 2:13 pm ET|
It was a blast from the past Thursday morning at Fenway Park, as three new members of the Red Sox Hall of Fame — Pedro Martinez, Roger Clemens and Nomar Garciaparra — discussed a variety of topics with the media in the EMC Club.
While the hour-long press event mostly revolved around prior experiences and memories, Martinez took the time to discuss the present, focusing mostly on the departure of Red Sox ace Jon Lester, who was traded to the Athletics at the July 31 trade deadline.
“I hope he comes back, because he’s a perfect guy to actually have in the clubhouse, influence kids and I think [Lester] is a guy that I’m against seeing him leave,” Martinez said. “Openly, I’m going to say that I’m not happy that Lester is not here anymore. I would like him to come back and we had that talk in the outfield and during bullpen sessions, during games. I hate to see that Lester is gone because he’s a workhorse, he’s a good example in the clubhouse, he’s a role model in society … He’s everything you need for a young group of guys that are developing.”
Clemens, as he did earlier during his interview with Middays with MFB, remained mostly mum on his opinions regarding whether or not he will eventually get enshrined in the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, but added that his preference, if he does get elected, would be for his plaque to feature him donning a Red Sox cap.
“I don’t think you have any control over that, I made light of it and said I was going to wear a [University of Texas] Longhorn visor,” Clemens joked, adding: “I don’t think you have any control over that. … Obviously, [the preference] would be Boston, because I spent most of my time here.”
Martinez also commented on the debate regarding Clemens’ chances of one day getting the call to Cooperstown, stating that players such as Clemens and Barry Bonds should be voted into the Hall due to the fact that they compiled enough accolades before PED accusations began to sprout up.
“I think Roger, with all due respect to everybody that votes, I’ll have to say Roger and Barry Bonds are two guys that I think had enough numbers before anything came out to actually earn a spot in the Hall of Fame,” Martinez said. “I’m not quite sure, 100 percent, how close they will be before all the things came out, but in my heart, if you ask me before any of that, I would say yes - 100 percent - without looking back. … I believe they have a legit chance and I think, with time, the voters will take into consideration what they did previously.”
Following are more highlights from the media session:
Clemens on whether he identifies himself as a Red Sox above all of the other teams he played for: “Sure. I spent 13 years here and I worked hard. Like I said, this is where I got my start, I got my nickname here and the kids today still call me ‘Rocket’ more than they do ‘Roger,’ so it’s pretty cool. At home, I probably have more Red Sox stuff that I do any other club that I played for.”
Garciaparra on the 2004 season: “Obviously, it was devastating being traded, no question about that. But I was happy for them winning the World Series. For me, that my teammates made feel like a part of it, which was great. I was grateful. When they were going through the playoffs, I was getting calls from them when they were on the bus, like, ‘Hey, did you see that? Did you see what we’re doing?’ … They were saying, ‘We’re thinking about you,’ and I was like, ‘I’m watching.’
“I never watched the World Series when I played. I didn’t want to watch where people were that I wanted to be. I’ve only really watched two World Series when I played. One was the Yankees and Mets when they were in the World Series, only because Jay Payton was my roommate in college and one of my dearest friends was playing in the World Series. … And then in ‘04, because I knew they were going to do it. … I realize here that the World Series is bigger than you. It’s about these people and these fans and the tradition here and what it meant. I’m glad, in ‘04, that it was finally accomplished, because these great fans deserved it.”
Martinez on the atmosphere at Fenway Park: “I’ll tell you what, the aspects of Fenway Park and the tradition, the uniqueness that we have here in Fenway, I can’t see it happening in any other place. … You can feel the heat from the bodies from the field. It’s so close. … This is the closest to a winter league game that you can probably feel. I always describe Fenway as the only place where you can feel like you’re pitching winter ball, because it’s loud, you have people right on top of you. … It’s a unique feeling that you get at Fenway.”
Garciaparra on Martinez’s tenure in Boston: “Watching him, there were times where I found myself like the fans, in awe of what he’s doing. So much so that when they finally hit the ball off him, I would be like the fans and go, ‘Ugh.’ I would do so the same thing and then I’d realize, ‘Oh, they hit it at me and I need to got to go make the play.’ … There were so many moments that made you feel that way and I’m grateful that I’m his teammate and friend.”
|David Ortiz on The Bradfo Show: ‘I only think about the Hall of Fame when you guys talk to me about it’||06.12.14 at 1:26 pm ET|
Red Sox designated hitter David Ortiz joined Rob Bradford on The Bradfo Show podcast to discuss his future candidacy for the Hall of Fame. To listen to the interview, go to The Bradfo Show audio on demand page.
Ortiz has compiled an impressive track record during his 17-year career, with three World Series titles, a World Series MVP award, nine All-Star nods and 445 home runs to his name. While Ortiz has heard Hall of Fame talk from the media for years, his teammates called him “Cooperstown” during the 2013 World Series, when Ortiz posted an otherworldly line of .688/.760/1.188 in six games en route to the team’s eighth championship.
While the debate over whether Ortiz will one day have his name enshrined in Cooperstown continues, Ortiz stated that he tends to not think about it.
“I’m going to be honest with you, it’s literally nothing. Like, I don’t think about it. I haven’t sat down and acknowledged my numbers to go to the Hall of Fame or anything like that,” Ortiz said. “I just keep on trying to have fun and try to keep on winning. I know this career is not forever, but I’m just trying to keep on having fun and keep people smiling and try to put on a good show, because at the end of the day, the time to worry about the Hall of Fame, it’s going to come.
“I’m going to have plenty of time to think about it and say whatever I want to say or think whatever I want to think about it, but to be honest with you, I only think about the Hall of Fame when you guys talk to me about it.”
The Hall of Fame has been historically been rough on designated hitters, as All-Star sluggers such as Edgar Martinez and Harold Baines have been consistently snubbed year after year. The Hall finally welcomed its first DH this year, as Frank Thomas — who spent 58 percent of his career games at designated hitter — was elected on Jan. 8 with 83.7 percent of the vote.
Latest from Bleacher Report
- What Chris Sale Can Learn from David Price's Letdown Red Sox Debut Season
- Boston Red Sox: 5 Key Questions That Need Answering in Spring Training
- Boston Red Sox: 4 Last-Minute Moves They Should Consider
- David Ortiz's No. 34 to Be Retired by Red Sox: Details and Reaction
- Boston Red Sox: Ranking the Top 10 Prospects Ahead of Spring Training
- Red Sox Spring Training 2017 Preview: Predictions, Players to Watch and...
- Fall/Winter Roundup: Castillo and Puerto Rico capture Caribbean Series title
- Former top 20 prospect Acosta returns to camp with Red Sox in DR
- January Notes: Devers invited to camp; Benintendi gets press
- Fall/Winter Roundup: Castillo leads Caguas to PR championship
- Fall/Winter League Roundup: Castillo, Vazquez impress in PR finals
- Scouting Report Update: Groome, Shawaryn lead first Lowell updates
- Scouting Report Updates: GCL updates from Fall Instructs
- Fall/Winter League Roundup: Castillo, Vazquez meet in PR finals
- Fall/Winter League Roundup: Leon debuts, Elias strikes out seven
- SoxProspects.com's Top Posts of 2016