Tempest in a Clubhouse

Johnny Damon and the usual gang of self-described idiots in the Boston Red Sox clubhouse are concerned that Curt Schilling doesn’t deserve to be the team’s closer, a role management has chosen for him in the wake of Keith Foulke’s knee injury. Damon worries that Schilling, who takes forever to warm up, will be an ineffective closer.

Schilling, meanwhile, can’t return to the starting rotation at the moment because he can only pitch an inning at a time. He has dreams of being John Smoltz, a guy who became a standout closer upon returning from injury that prevented him from being a starter. He claims that he just wants to help the team however he can.

They’re both wrong. Schilling’s Messianic complex (give him props: he was the difference between the 2003 wild card team that lost to Aaron Boone and 2004 world championship team) prevents him from continuing to pitch in Pawtucket until he’s healthy enough to start again. And Damon’s public criticism of management eats away at the notion of the Red Sox as a 25-man team.

Schilling can be a pill, but he delivers in big situations. If he has the stuff to be a closer, why not let him try. If he’s terrible, the front office will learn that soon enough.
Then again, if Schilling had any humility, he would accept a role other than closer, especially since Mike Timlin has been a closer before and has had a stellar first half.

In fact, Schilling might even invent a new role: The stopper. Not a reliable starter, not a closer, but a guy who comes in in the middle innings and makes sure no more runs are scored until the closer comes on to finish the job. This was a role Mariano Rivvera filled for the Yankees in 1996, and a key reason they won the world series.

A stopper is the first guy out of the bullpen, not the last. He does what relievers were originally called upon to do when they were invented half a century ago: put out the fire. Schilling could pitch the sixth and seventh innings of any close game, ensuring that the bullpen didn’t blow it before the closer even had a chance to come in.

SMOLTZ V. SCHILLING
The comparisons between Smoltz and Schilling are extremely interesting. Both pitchers started their careers in 1988; Smoltz has pitched 2/3 of an inning more than Schilling. Schilling’s record (185-125) is slightly better than Smoltz’ (172-126) but Smoltz’s ERA is 3.25 compared to Schilling’s 3.35. Schilling has more strikeouts (2,765 to 2,496) but Smoltz of course has more saves (154 to 13). Schilling has two World Series rings compared to Smoltz’s one.

But Smoltz leads in Cy Young Awards. He has one, Schilling has none. Despite putting up seasons of 23, 22, and 21 wins, Schilling has never been the best pitcher in the league. Randy Johnson bested Schilling in 2001 and 2002 (Schilling wasn’t even the best pitcher on his team!) and Johan Santana outpitched him last year.

So who gets into the Hall of Fame? My guess is both, even if they both retired right now. (Schilling turns 39 in November; Smoltz in May of 2006). Schilling is the Juan Marichal of his era, always second to Gibson or Koufax, but never the best. Still, his numbers are impressive and his two rings will push him over the top. Smoltz has the ring, the award, the ERA, and a unique combination: 150 wins and 150 saves. The only other pitcher with that mix is Dennis Eckersley, just recently elected to the Hall.