The no-trade clause has been a big factor in conversations about Roy Oswalt and Dan Haren, but Ted Lilly has some veto power too: Jon Paul Morosi reports that Lilly can block a trade to the Rays, but not to the Tigers or Mets, who are also looking for starting pitching.
Some day I’d love to see a big story about no-trade clauses, especially limited ones, and hear players talk about why they chose certain teams and not others. Sometimes they makes sense based on geography and stuff — Javier Vazquez famously wants to stay in the east because it’s an easier flight home to Puerto Rico — but others seem kind of random.
We’ve talked a lot about Curt Schilling’s Hall of Fame candidacy over the years.
Bill has argued that, if voters are going to use the character clause to keep certain players out, they should keep Curt Schilling out. I’ve differed on that, not because I think Schilling is a good person — he’s loathsome, actually — but because I find the character clause to be illegitimate and would never, if I had a vote, use it to impact my vote. So, yes, I’d put Schilling on my ballot if I had one.
I’m not alone in this, of course. At the moment Schilling has support on about 72% of ballots which have been made public. My guess is that he’ll fall a tad short when results are announced tomorrow — non-public ballots tend to include fewer players on them — but we’ll see.
I am not the only non-BBWAA member who would vote for Schilling. He’s got some top level support too. From the President of the United States:
Ballots had to be submitted by December 31, so it’s not like this is gonna have any impact on the vote totals. If it came earlier, though, one wonders if it would. And one wonders if that’d help Schilling or hurt him.