Are the Marlins punishing Logan Morrison?

21 Comments

The LoMo demotion continues to confound.

The Marlins’ front office isn’t saying much on the matter, and Logan Morrison kept his comments light on Twitter last evening. So we’re left only to wonder whether his demotion was performance-related or a punishment for an off-field incident.

Joe Capozzi of the Palm Beach Post seems to think it might have been a mixture of both.

Here’s a snippet of Capozzi’s Saturday evening article on the Marlins’ sudden and surprising decision to send the talented and productive 23-year-old outfielder back to Triple-A New Orleans. It seems to go beyond LoMo’s recent slump:

I might be able to clear up the “incident” LoMo referred to when he said he suspected his demotion was related to something off the field.

First, I was told by a person close to LoMo that the matter was not criminal related or even sordid.

Earlier in the day, he refused to participate in a photo session with season ticket holders at Sun Life Stadium. That might sound surprising, given Logan’s outgoing personality and popularity with fans, but apparently there were some hard feelings related to earlier promotional activities.

I know that this past Thursday — a Marlins off day — Logan canceled a charity bowling tournament in Miami because he said the Florida Marlins Community Foundation “dropped the ball” and didn’t sell enough lanes in advance.

Logan wasn’t happy about that. And there apparently were some other events in which players were supposed to participate. There was also an autograph signing earlier Saturday, which Logan participated in. But he put his foot down and did not participate in the photo session with season ticket holders.

Read the rest of Capozzi’s piece for more. It also has a full transcript of quotes from LoMo’s pow-wow with the media after learning that he had been sent to the minors. This story is obviously far from over.

Donald Trump wants Curt Schilling in the Hall of Fame

Getty Images
34 Comments

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.