San Diego Padres v Arizona Diamondbacks

Curt Schilling vaulted himself back into relevance last week when he regaled us all with a tale of how he was encouraged to use performance enhancing drugs back in 2008 when he was out of action with a shoulder injury. Schilling told ESPN’s Colin Cowherd that a former Boston Red Sox employee suggested that he should use a banned substance to help him recover, to which the outspoken right-hander refused.

Now, Gordon Edes of ESPN Boston, citing unnamed sources, reports that Schilling’s claims are “completely baseless”. Edes’ report states that investigations by both MLB and the Red Sox, conducted “within a week” of the alleged incident, concluded that there was nothing to the three-time World Series champion’s claims. Schilling reported the incident to then Red Sox manager Terry Francona and general manager Theo Epstein, who took the neccesary steps under baseball’s joint drug agreement. The PED conversation, while not confirmed, is believed to have been with former Red Sox rehabilitation coordinator, Mike Reinold.

Schilling has disputed the report that his claims are untrue:

“It happened. I informed the club, and there were other players that heard the conversation, who I spoke with after,” Schilling told in an email. “The club immediately informed MLB, and they launched an investigation in which all parties were interviewed. If someone’s saying it didn’t happen, I am not sure why, since the two people in the discussion are gone — I’m retired and the other person was fired last year, I think. But it doesn’t shock me that people would deny it was ‘an event,’ though I am unsure why.”

Curt Schilling says one thing, somebody else says something different… MLB has essentially shut the door on this one, so I’m not even sure what we’re bothering with here.

This is your weekly reminder that nobody self-aggrandizes like Curt Schilling. This Curt Schilling update is brought to you by scary, scary drugs.

Comments (3)

  1. Ugh. Why shouldn’t we care that a team may have pressured a player to do something that could lead to a suspension and exclusion from the hall of fame just because everyone here is a charter member of the ‘PEDs never made anyone better at anything, ever’ club?

    Try imagining it was a drug that we weren’t defending to spite the rest of the media. Like, if the Red Sox had pressured Schilling to take heroin because he was having trouble sleeping and it was affecting his focus during film sessions, that would be pretty serious. Its not a very good metaphor because I’m having trouble understanding why you DON’T think this is a relevant issue, but hopefully I got the point across.

    • I just fail to see what Schilling stands to gain here by going public with this, four+ years after the fact, other than propelling himself back into the spotlight for 14 minutes.

      I don’t agree that PEDs don’t help players, but I believe that the effects they have on those who use them are drastically skewed.

  2. Clearly Schilling is trying to win points with the anti-doping hall of fame voters. “Hey guys, look at me, I’m as anti-juice as all of you. The Schill did it all on hard work and guts”
    I’m betting this actually works and gets him a few more votes next year

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *