Red Sox: Curt Schilling worthy of Hall of Fame induction
By Tracy Katzke
Some of the voting electorate appear resolute in denying former Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling an honor long overdue.
On January 18, the fate of one-time Boston Red Sox pitcher, Curt Schilling, per his membership into the National Baseball Hall of Fame will be determined.
Much like an onion, there are numerous stratums to this narrative, many entirely irrelevant to the game of baseball. In this piece, I would like to analyze some of the issues affecting Schilling’s candidacy, provide sustenance to my case regarding Schilling as a Hall of Famer, and elaborate upon the hypocrisy, discriminatory voting practices, and indefensible behavior exhibited by some members of the voting electorate.
This year marks Schilling’s fifth year on the ballot. To receive baseball’s greatest honor, he will require approval by 330 of the 440 voters.
Schilling made some outstanding advances from 2015 to 2016, as those deeming him worthy of the Hall of Fame rose from 39.2% to 52.3%. It should be noted that 75% of the voting electorate is required for enshrinement.
A three-time champion and, perhaps the greatest postseason pitcher in baseball history, Schilling should be welcomed into Cooperstown, as few hurlers are more deserving. Unfortunately, no different from most occurrences in this world, things are not that simple. When a group of people in which most, although not all, of its membership are ill suited for properly carrying out an assigned task, and said group is granted the enormous responsibility of determining the fate of others, sans a reasonable safeguard of checks and balances, the results are often unjust. I would be pleasantly shocked were that not the case in 2017.
In a December 22, 2016 article by ESPN Senior Writer Jerry Crasnick, “Schilling is leaking oil in his quest to reach the 75 percent barrier…. 80 writers who have made their ballots public in advance of the Dec. 31 deadline. Among that group, Schilling has picked up four votes from last year while losing 14, for a net difference of minus-10.”
As noted in Crasnick article, “With about 18 percent of the electorate accounted for, Schilling is trending in the wrong direction.”