Getty Images

Angel Hernandez and the umps think Anthony Rizzo is “awesome”

23 Comments

We tend to only pay attention to player-umpire conversations when they’re contentious. When a call is blown or, at the very least, the player thinks a call is blown, and the parties get to shouting at one another. Last night, however, Cubs first baseman Anthony Rizzo had a conversation with home plate umpire Angel Hernandez that was pretty sweet as far as these things go.

Rizzo had assumed a ball four earlier in the game and started to head toward first base. It was called a strike, however, and it was one of those situations where an umpire could have, if he wanted to, assumed that Rizzo was showing him up or whatever it is that umpires get cranky about in those instances. When Rizzo came up later in the game he started to apologize to Hernandez for that, but Hernandez wasn’t having any of it:

Hernandez tells Rizzo that he totally understood, that Rizzo was just in the heat of competition and such things happen. He said, speaking for his umpiring crew, that Rizzo was “awesome with us.”

Hernandez blew a call at home plate last night and, at many points in his career has caused players, managers and fans to tear their hair out because, well, he has blown some other calls as well. It’s good to see, however, that for whatever faults he has an ump, holding grudges and perceiving slights and disrespect on the part of players is not one of them. In that respect he seems pretty chill. Far more chill than a lot of older umps who seem to look for signs of disrespect at every turn.

Donald Trump wants Curt Schilling in the Hall of Fame

Getty Images
22 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.