How you measure blemishes against distinguished characteristics is a good question--when I was reading all the past winners, and writing reviews for goodreads, it was easier to point out flaws than to explain why I thought a book was a worthy winner. I don't know if this is an allowable-by-the-guidelines way of judging, but I think in terms of "how distracting is this from the overall goodness of the book"--kind of like how illustrations are only considered if they distract. After I'm done, am I left thinking "This book is so good, except for ____"? or do I think "What a great book! It isn't perfect, but it's definitely distinguished!"?

For me, the "distinguished characteristics" (as you say, the well-drawn characters and rich details) paled next to the clunkiness of the message about racism. Schmidt's books read like books that adults think or want students to like. While I know that's not a Newbery criteria, for me it distracts and, as with other books with this problem, I couldn't begin to explain the Newbery Medal or Honor.

Don't forget Black Dog, hands-down my favorite character in the book. Sanborn was wonderful as well, keepin' it real in his wry, dry way. Fabulous writing - but I felt that too many unlikely events were crammed into the second part of the book, and this detracted from what was otherwise a really powerful book. But as Nina pointed out once, no book is perfect. My review - evasbookaddiction.blogspot.com/2008/07/trouble-by-gary-d-schmidt.html

Don't forget Black Dog, hands-down my favorite character in the book. Sanborn was wonderful as well, keepin' it real in his wry, dry way. Fabulous writing - but I felt that too many unlikely events were crammed into the second part of the book, and this detracted from what was otherwise a really powerful book. But as Nina pointed out once, no book is perfect. My review - evasbookaddiction.blogspot.com/2008/07/trouble-by-gary-d-schmidt.html