1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    I agree with you that the outside numbers are more compeling for Morris, more wins, decent ERA and lets face it a big time post season pitcher and played on a great Tiger team that was always in the mix. Then delivered big in Minnesota . . .that 10 inning shut out was every bit as good as the bloody sock,  even better because he completed the game.   

    Inside the numbers Schilling is better, so/bb walk ratio, whip, the adjusted era ect. Really it isnt that close. Schilling has some great numbers.   

    BUT . . . Morris was one of those guys who gave up numbers to pitch innings and that hurts him on the inside numbers. All the stat only guys will look at his numbers and say he gave up to many hits, HR's higher ERA if that is the case you dont understand history . . .when the tigers were up 10-2, he throw it right in there hit it if you can and pitched to contact and he played on alot of good teams. Because he was expected to finish the game. He completed 175 games almost 30% of his starts and until his last 3 seasons he was closer to 40%. . . . .Schilling completed 83 which in his time was considered very good but weak when you look at history of the game comparing him to say Koufax who completed 25+ a season or even a steriod free Clemens who completed half his starts in 86 thru 90. . . when you get into history of the game it becomes jumbled.

    That is why the most important number is wins for the HOF, Cy Youngs, MVP's, to degree rings and here is most important percention of greatness or actually greatness.  

    Going back to Catfish, until the last 15 ~ 20 years pitchers, staff ace's were expected to complete games or go deep. Which is why strikeouts got alot bigger as the need for them to complete games lessoned. Go balls to the wall until you get 100 pitch's then your done. Added the extra day or so rest and you have guys who are asked to do much less now then ever before making there job easier and allowing the inside numbers to improve. Baseball from mid to late 80's going back to the beginning of time was a whole lot different then that. Relief pitchers were bit players on teams maybe one or two guys were a big deal but in ended fast after that.

    Can you remember when a Gossage or Radatz or Fingers pitched 100+ innings and got 2 or 3 inning saves? It shows you how much the game has changed. Willie Hernandez on the 1984 Tiger team 130 IP, I dont think Pap has throw 130 innings in 2006/2007 season combined.  (126).



     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Since I started watching baseball in 1975, I would say Morris was one of the hardest pitchers to beat for the Sox. He always looked hittable, gave up dinks and dunks but always got the outs he needed a few solo hommers and the score was 6-3 final. It was almost automatic.  
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Morris  was a fine workhorse pitcher.  But at his best he is no match for Schilling.


    Someone said Catfish 's ERA was better then Schilling.  Well by wins, IP, and ERA  all of the best pitchers came from 1880-1920.   Obviously you have to look at guys in thier time.  A park, league, and year adjustment shows Catfish at 104 which isn't even in the top 500 all time, maybe not even in the top 1000 all time.  Schillings 127 is 42nd all time.  What is hard to  understand about that?

    You can't compare a 4 man to a 5 man rotation.  You can guess all you want as I did to bait some debate, but its a parlor game.  All I could say for sure is that Pedro would have  been an Elroy Face type, because he could not have started 43 games a year year in and year out.  Clemens,  Schilling,  RJ,  Maddux - they may have been able to.  Of course you guys  have yet to pick up  on the other advantage of the  post 1987 guys -  pitch counts and  5 man rotations.  In this era, as I have written, Schilling is behing Clemens, RJ, Maddux,  Glavine, and Pedro.  He is very similar to Brown, Smoltz.  Mussina is close behind.  I probabl y forgot someone - lets say 10 elite pitchers in the 22 year slice since 1985 - even if Schilling fits into the #6-8 spots, that is HoF material.  Just go back in history, very few get slighted with those numbers.  I find the HoF voters to be a confusing and generally uninformed bunch, but they should get this right at some point - especially with his non drug improved physique winning the day compared to others.

    As for  Santo  I have him at #7.  Boyer is  at #14.  Darrell Evans was a better player then Boyer, and himself should be in the HoF, and he got no support because of low BA - look at the rest of his game.


    You guys see a 25-12 pitcher (Hunter in 74)  on a WS winner (90-72) with a n  ERA of 2.49 (134+ 4th in the league) and say he is better then a guy from '98 with a 3.25 ERA (134+ 6th in the league)  and a 15-14 record (team was 75-87)

    He is better because he threw more innings (48.1), the raw ERA cannot be compared failry, the adjusted ERA is identical.  The records are largely the by product of the team.

    That was Hunter's 2nd best season IMO, and Schilling's 7th best season.  
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Morris was a stud for 11 out of 13 years in terms of innings, and over 140 in 3 other years.


    It's generally held that Cy Young seasons start with ERA+ years over 140.  Morris never had one, and he never finished higher then 3rd in voting 3(2) 4(1) 5(2).  H e did finish between ERA+ 122-133 six times which are very good seaons.

    He has less of almost everything then Schilling but IP, Wins and Losses , WP, BB allowed, (counting stats), but cannot touch Schilling in rate stats (ERA, ratios of K/BB, etc.), Schilling got more K's too.

    Nice pitcher.  One of the better ones for sure, just not great enough for the HoF.

    Morris 74th in HOF Standars; Schilling 49th

    Morris tied for 461st ERA+, Schilling tied for 42nd

    who is kidding whom?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Yeah I remember relief aces that pitched 2-3 innings a game like Marshall and Radatz.  How long did they last?

    Think about it.  If you can get a pitcher to go 105 pitches, and throw 212 IP at a  ERA+ rate of 140, and have a strong relief corps, and have this SP pitch for 15 years at that rate why wouldn't you?

    On the other side was the fine young pitcher Cal Eldred.  11-2 at age 24 with a 1.79 ERA (216+).  The next year he pitched 258, including 6 games over 140 pitches.  Arm dies.   Hangs on for 11 more years as a reliever and broken SP.  Finished his career at 86-74 w/ a 103+.  THere are hundreds of guys like  him in the history of the MLB.

    Todays way of handling pitchers ushered in during 1987 by Dave Duncan and LaRussa is the way it is done.  You can rail against, call them names, pine for the days of yore.  But the horses have left the yard guys, time to adjust to reality.

    5 man rotations and pitch counts hold sway now.  Schilling is one of the greats from the first 20 years of this change.  Period.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from gibsonsg. Show gibsonsg's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    The 216 wins is a big negative, but will they take into account all the years spent languishing on a mediocre Phillies team? A pitcher cant win games single-handedly. If he had played for a contender all those years his wins total would probably be a much different story.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]The 216 wins is a big negative, but will they take into account all the years spent languishing on a mediocre Phillies team? A pitcher cant win games single-handedly. If he had played for a contender all those years his wins total would probably be a much different story.[/Quote]

    That is true, also the 4 vs 5 man rotation must be factored in.  It does not matter if you do not like it.  It is a fact.

    After all there are 85 different man years in which pitchers pitched over 482 innings, all before 1894 when the pitching distance went from 50 feet to 60' 6".  I submit there hasn't been one real man amongst the pitchers since.... it's that silly to argue against the need to adjust expectations for 5 man rotations.


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from A-Nan25. Show A-Nan25's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Curt Schilling will go down in baseball as one of the greatest pitchers ever, wether or not he makes the hall of fame. He had a great turn around from his horrid years in Baltimore. Curt is a true warrior. He is also one of the many sox players who have heart. I agree with 00chief00, if the hall was based on heart, he would get in easily. Writers chose the guy, not the fans. Just because he deserves to get in, doesnt mean he will. His playoff numbers are terrific, but anything can happen in October. Schill should get in, period. 3oo wins isnt the only thing that should get a pitcher into the hall of fame. Strikeouts, ERA, attitude, and heart should also count towards getting in. If the writers dont like him, he wont get it. This is a message to all the sports writers across the country:
    - Did you seen him pitch in '04? Pitching through pain and blood? One who hours before couldn't get out of bed? He's a cy young winner, a world series mvp, and he's like the santa claus of baseball. No one cares as much. Look past the stats, and look into the heart.
    Curt Schilling deserves to be in the hall of fame, and he doesnt need 300 wins to prove it. Winning isnt everything.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]

    luis tiants,jack morris and bert blyeven should all be considered for the HOF before curt schillings nomination is even discussed.Schillings career didtn take off until after an offseason workout with roger clemens which ncluded an verbal tongue lashing did curt get serious about baseball and get his career in order.He didnt do squat in baltimore and houston and didnt get going until he went to philly and then arizona.No he is at best an marginal HOF because he wasnt consistent from day 1 like the three other pitchers previously mentioned in this commentary

    [/Quote]

    Nonsense.  Blyleven was done being a great/near great pitcher after his 3rd year, after that he just hung around.  Tiant had some great years, but they were widely spaced.  Morris was a horse, but, Schilling in his time was just such a horse.

    It's what the guys did in thier time that matters.  What Clemens said or didn't say doesn't matter.  How do you know the other guys didn't have similar conversations?

    As I have amply demonstrated, Schilling is in the higher end of the middle of the pack of HoF pitchers.  You can't toss him for drugs, or bad post seasons.  You can't toss him for being an annoying big mouth - although some will try.

    Too many of you are victims of the mentality that the past is better then today and/or the HoF isn't fussy enough.  Well it is what it is.  HOF Monitor which is the closest thing to a ranking system says he is 33rd all time, which is higher then dozens and dozens of other guys.  Those are the standards to use, not some revisionist half thought out chuff in your own minds.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from typisttoday. Show typisttoday's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Are the sportswriters who believe Schilling is a first ballot Hall of Famer also the ones who don't elect Jack Morris?  Morris has 254 career wins (more than Schilling), 3-20 game seasons (as Schilling), and a no-hitter to his credit.  In the postseason, he's won 4 World Series rings (Schilling three) and was named MVP of the '91 World Series (one of the best ever played).  Morris was truly clutch in the post season.  So how can a thumbs up be given to Schilling and not Morris?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Are the sportswriters who believe Schilling is a first ballot Hall of Famer also the ones who don't elect Jack Morris?  Morris has 254 career wins (more than Schilling), 3-20 game seasons (as Schilling), and a no-hitter to his credit.  In the postseason, he's won 4 World Series rings (Schilling three) and was named MVP of the '91 World Series (one of the best ever played).  Morris was truly clutch in the post season.  So how can a thumbs up be given to Schilling and not Morris?[/Quote]

    I think Schilling will not be a 1st ballot, and he may have to wait until the old timers committee.

    Wins are a team stat - why doesn't anyone understand that?  Only in a no hitter with no contact being made is it a 3 man game - catcher, pitcher, and a least one hitter to hit a HR.  Tell me how many of those there have been?

    Pedro and Clemens did not have no hitters and they are both much better then Morris and much better then Ryan who had 7.  Useless stat.  Schilling was co-MVP of the WS, and his overall post season record trumps Morris's easily.

    If you have bothered to read what I wrote previously in this thread, Morris had a number of fine seasons (120-130 range ERA+) those are very fine, but not elite.  He never had an elite season in terms of keeping runs from scoring, Schilling did.  Preventing runs from scoring is THE job of a pitcher - K's, K/BB ratio's and all the rest is nothing in comparison.  Morris was much closer to league average over his career then Schilling.  The heart of Schillings 200+ IP seaons and Morris's are quite close, so using that doesn't show much advantage.

    You say Schiiling wasn't the best pitcher in his time - true.  Neither was Morriss.  Again what does that prove.




     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Also 133 of Schillings 568  appearances were in relief (22 saves). 

    From 1992 through 2004  he leads all pitchers in CG - by 15.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ct-pitcher. Show ct-pitcher's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Not guaranteed by a long shot with his win total.  Does Curt measure up to his company?

    300 Game Winners: Roger Clemens, Steve Carlton, Greg Maddux, NolanRyan, Don Sutton, Phil Neikro, Gaylord Perry,  Tom Glavine, RandyJohnson

    Non 300 Game Winners: Bob Feller, Jack Morris, Bob Gibson, JuanMarichal, Whitey Ford, Catfish Hunter, Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez,Sandy Koufax

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Morris was a stud for 11 out of 13 years in terms of innings, and over 140 in 3 other years.


    It's generally held that Cy Young seasons start with ERA+ years over 140.  Morris never had one, and he never finished higher then 3rd in voting 3(2) 4(1) 5(2).  H e did finish between ERA+ 122-133 six times which are very good seaons.

    He has less of almost everything then Schilling but IP, Wins and Losses , WP, BB allowed, (counting stats), but cannot touch Schilling in rate stats (ERA, ratios of K/BB, etc.), Schilling got more K's too.

    Nice pitcher.  One of the better ones for sure, just not great enough for the HoF.

    Morris 74th in HOF Standars; Schilling 49th

    Morris tied for 461st ERA+, Schilling tied for 42nd

    who is kidding whom?[/Quote]

    Mr Curt Schilling Fan/rump swab:

    Here are you post season stats:

    All Time WORLD SERIES Schilling is not ranked in any of the top 10 stats, in Wins, ERA, SO, WHIP, ect. He ranks as tied for 5th with a dozen other guys with a 800 winning percentage. But isn't wins a team stat so say you? In everything else he is no where.

    Anyway, ALL TIME POST SEASON, since the extra Round of Play Off's who are the only Two Pitchers who are still in the Top 10 in wins, non other then MR CATFISH HUNTER(9) I guess he was pretty good huh? and Whitey Ford(10).

    Schilling was 10-2, 4-0 in DS with 0.93 ERA, 3-1 CS 2.06 ERA, 4-1 in WS 3.47 ERA. He pitched good to great on great teams.

    The Extra Round created alot of stats for guys to pile up in a few post seasons. His 3.47 WS ERA is not that good. I doubt it places him in top 100 forget top 10. The top ten all start 1.16 or lower. All TIME post season they all start at 0.95 or lower and again he is not there either. He has 133 IP and 120 K's his % isn't top 10.  

    Your the same guy or type that says the HOF monitor says Rice should be in but in your opinion he isn't HOF worthy but Evans was a better player when HOF monitor says he isn't, but you dismiss it.

    If Wins are a team stat toss away the 10-2 post season and you have a decent pitcher but as far as all time not even close to the best. He is not top 10 look at the stats they are just not there.

    He pitched with great guts for us in 04 and 07 but lets face it in 2007 you seen the best post season pitcher in a Red Sox uniform ever, Josh Beckett, he took the ball went 8+ everytime and totally shut the other team down. He ranks all time WS Stats in ERA, Wins, SO Per 9 innings BTW. In 04(post ankle) and 07 he was a 6 inning pitcher basicly not a horse who went 8+ and lead team to victory.


    My argument for him being in the Hall is simple:

    Was he every the best at his position? No. He was a brides maid a whole lot and there is no other way to look at it. In his generation he was NOT the best pitcher of the 5 man rotation as claimed. Not even close. Is he better then SMOLTZ, GLAVINE, MADDUX, CLEMENS, JOHNSON, PEDRO? He did not have a better career then any of them. I will say yes he was a Top Ten pitcher but he was never the best. Schilling is more Mussina, Morris catagory like it or not.
     
    He was a CO MVP in Series, Johnson went 3-0 with a 1.04 ERA, Schilling left game 7 losing and was 1-0 with a 1.69 ERA he pitched great but again who was really better?  


    My last comment to you is Wins is a team stat, that is what guys say who lose games 3-2. There is one reason you play the game and that is to win or lose. There can be no greater stat for a pitcher then wins, they take the mound to win the game. Morris was better at winning the games then Schilling and Morris played on some bad teams too. Secondly, Morris gave up stats to complete the game again, something you fail to see. Bottom line is this, Schilling didnt pile up wins because he was not commetted to the game until his famous Clemens talk. So is it not his fault for wasting his talent and under performing the first few years? Yes it is. I would agree his overall body of work EXCEPT wins makes him very close. However, once emotions are put aside 216 Wins over a 20 year career, lets face it he admits to not wanting it his first 3/4 years are just not good enough. It was Curt Schillings fault he didnt do more when he had the body to do so therefore he ended up short.  

    In the number one most important stat he came up short, you can call it a Bill James team stat but overall that is crap. His job is to out pitch his oppenent and he didnt do it enough over 20 years.

    I agree he will find a way but his numbers dont back it up.



     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Consistent
    14-11 avg TIANT 3x 20wins
    14-12 AVG Blyleven 1 x 20 wins
    16-11 avg Morris 3 x 20 wins
    12-9 avg Schilling 3 x 20 wins
    all thes guys belong in the hall of fame[/Quote]

    I dont see it, it is really all or none . . . .if they all get in it isnt the HOF it starts becoming the Hall of The Very Good . . .who really wants that?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Mr Curt Schilling Fan:

    Here are you post season stats:

    All Time WORLD SERIES Schilling is not ranked in any of the top 10 stats, in Wins, ERA, SO, WHIP, ect. He ranks as tied for 5th with a dozen other guys with a 800 winning percentage. But isn't wins a team stat so say you? In everything else he is no where.

    [/Quote]

    WHere did you get your stats?  Were they EQ'd for era?  Koufax and Gibson both pitched at times much more favolrable for pitchers then Schillings time. 

    [Quote]
    Anyway, ALL TIME POST SEASON, since the extra Round of Play Off's who are the only Two Pitchers who are still in the Top 10 in wins, non other then MR CATFISH HUNTER(9) I guess he was pretty good huh? and Whitey Ford(10). [/Quote]

    Catfish Hunter as I have proven again and again is a low tier HoF pitcher, below Tiant even.

    [Quote]
    Schilling was 10-2, 4-0 in DS with 0.93 ERA, 3-1 CS 2.06 ERA, 4-1 in WS 3.47 ERA. He pitched good to great on great teams.

    The Extra Round created alot of stats for guys to pile up in a few post seasons. His 3.47 WS ERA is not that good. I doubt it places him in top 100 forget top 10. The top ten all start 1.16 or lower. All TIME post season they all start at 0.95 or lower and again he is not there either. He has 133 IP and 120 K's his % isn't top 10.  
    [/Quote]

    That's nice, I addressed the post season in total, you can do it your way.

    [Quote]
    If Wins are a team stat toss away the 10-2 post season and you have a decent pitcher but as far as all time not even close to the best. He is not top 10 look at the stats they are just not there.
    [/Quote]

    Repeating yourself.

    [Quote]
    He pitched with great guts for us in 04 and 07 but lets face it in 2007 you seen the best post season pitcher in a Red Sox uniform ever, Josh Beckett, he took the ball went 8+ everytime and totally shut the other team down. He ranks all time WS Stats in ERA, Wins, SO Per 9 innings BTW. In 04(post ankle) and 07 he was a 6 inning pitcher basicly not a horse who went 8+ and lead team to victory.
    [/Quote]

    Yes that's true.  But that is only a segment of his career, and his last year as it turns out (likely) let's see what Beckett is doing at the same age.

    [Quote]
    My argument for him being in the Hall is simple:

    Was he every the best at his position? No. He was a brides maid a whole lot and there is no other way to look at it. In his generation he was NOT the best pitcher of the 5 man rotation as claimed. Not even close. Is he better then SMOLTZ, GLAVINE, MADDUX, CLEMENS, JOHNSON, PEDRO? He did not have a better career then any of them. I will say yes he was a Top Ten pitcher but he was never the best. Schilling is more Mussina, Morris catagory like it or not.
     [/Quote]

    Whoa pal, I never claimed he was the best.  I claim in fact that he is the 6th best in his 20 year slice (including Clemens w/o HGH/steroids issues).  Given study of the SP of baseball since 1880, the 6th best guy in any 20 year segment is a HoF.  Look it up.  The best two CF's IMO played at the same time, does that mean only one goes in, and one does not?  There are a lot more pitchers then any other position, so a best guy filter is far too selective.

    Morris, Mussina, Tiant, Hunter should all go in the HOF, but all have lesser credentials then Schilling in his time.  That's all I have said.  Schilling is not the equal of Randy or Maddux, but those guys are probably in the top 6 all time.  That's all the HoF has room for?  Go look who is in it, I provided the lists.  The HOF is not for the ultra elite, sorry, maybe you need to study who is in first.

    [Quote]
    He was a CO MVP in Series, Johnson went 3-0 with a 1.04 ERA, Schilling left game 7 losing and was 1-0 with a 1.69 ERA he pitched great but again who was really better?  
    [/Quote]

    Schilling won the TSN pitcher of the year twice.  He won the Co MVP, so those voters thought he earned it, and he was the 93 NLCS MVP as well.

    [Quote]
    My last comment to you is Wins is a team stat, that is what guys say who lose games 3-2. There is one reason you play the game and that is to win or lose. There can be no greater stat for a pitcher then wins, they take the mound to win the game. Morris was better at winning the games then Schilling and Morris played on some bad teams too. Secondly, Morris gave up stats to complete the game again, something you fail to see. Bottom line is this, Schilling didnt pile up wins because he was not commetted to the game until his famous Clemens talk. So is it not his fault for wasting his talent and under performing the first few years? Yes it is. I would agree his overall body of work EXCEPT wins makes him very close. However, once emotions are put aside 216 Wins over a 20 year career, lets face it he admits to not wanting it his first 3/4 years are just not good enough. It was Curt Schillings fault he didnt do more when he had the body to do so therefore he ended up short.  
    [/Quote]

    Morris was in a 4 man rotation most of his career.  He didn't have 133 relief appearances as Schilling did either (or the 22 saves Schilling amassed).  The HoF requires 10 years of big league service.  Taking away the cup of coffee he had his first few years and his relief seasons, its more like 15.5 as a SP - 4 of those were generally injury plauged (less then 180 IP).  But in the 11.5 years left over he amassed better rate stats then Morris by far, its not even up for debate.  As for Schilling wasting his shot, it doesn't matter.  He did what he did.  According to who is in the HOF for pitchers he belongs, and he belongs in at an above average spot, not some pity case.  You can rail all you want, the 5 man rotation is here, and Schilling was one of the aces of his time.

    [Quote]
    In the number one most important stat he came up short, you can call it a Bill James team stat but overall that is crap. His job is to out pitch his oppenent and he didnt do it enough over 20 years.

    I agree he will find a way but his numbers dont back it up.[/Quote]

    The number one job of a pitcher is to prevent runs.  He cannot field or hit the other players positions, or manage the games.  He has a specific job, and he was better at it then all but 32 guys in the history of MLB - and if you take out dead ball guys and relief pitchers, he is 17th.  That is quite enough for the HOF.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]but lets face it Catfish was expected to complete the game and did half the time during his 10 year run. Who is to say Schilling could of done that? He has 83 CG's, 100 less. What people need to understand is how pitching has changed so much the last 25 years and pitchers gave up more hr's, hits because they pitched to contact. I dare to say I bet alot of those runs and homeruns came when game was decided. I can recall Schilling being gased for several starts after a 130 pitch performance in Cleveland . . .how many 130 pitch performances do you think the Fish had then went out 3 days later and did it again? He completed half his games over a 10 year period. Being in a 5 man rotation totally benfits a pitcher in every stat except wins. I do not believe wins is a team stat, if it was a pitcher would never get credit for a win or lose it is a stat within the team but a pitcher by in large(more times then not) wins or lose's the game on there own merritt.  It might swing 2~3 games but it goes both ways when a team is good or bad.

    I am not saying the fish belongs in the hall . . .but I am also saying his career was not all that different and he did it in less time. Just because he is in does not mean Schilling should be in. Each guy is his own case. Fish won more, completed more, more shut outs and innings pitched and had better ERA and won a Cy Young and pitched 5 less years. Oh and won 2 more rings . . .

    Tiant was a very good pitcher at times dazzling and I wish I understood more why he is not in and others are and how a medicore pitcher who hung arung pilling up 14 win years but was never great gets in and others don't. Same with hitters hanging in to get 3000 hits or 400 homers but you can argue there greatness.

    Stark thinks he gets in so for HOF Voters I have read it is 12 yes, 11 no. He says no slam dunk. I hope he gets in but that 216 looms large although the other numbers are in place.   

      [/Quote]

    I must disagree.  Baseball hitters as a group have never been better.  Many lineups are 9 deep.  The mound is low.  The strike zone is tiny (esp in the AL).  Hitters that can muster HR's are paid huge sums of money so almost everybody is trying to crank the ball in the AL, and about 4 of the hitters in a typeical NL lineup.

    In 1915 a great pitcher like Walter Johnson might throw 8 balls a game over 90 - when he needed an out.  Today how many easy pitches does a pitcher get?  Maybe on 0-2, or against a pitcher or bad hitting catcher.  The rest of the time the effort on every pitch is maximum.  The reason the staffs went to 5 is not some communist crackpot scheme, it was to protect pitchers from this terribe enviornment so they might last.  Same with relief pitchers and pitch counts.  3rd time through the order the SP is tired, the hitters are timed to him, so throw in another pitcher to lower the success of the hitting team.

    This is what MLB is today.  As I posted 108 seasons before 1893 pitchers threw 466 - /> 640 innings, in the past 50 years only one guy got to 330 IP once.  So what is wrong with modern pitchers>  Nothing!! The game changed.  You take Clemens in 97 or Pedro in 99 and give them the NL mounds/parks of 1968, and you can kiss Gison's 1.12 ERA away, they would have been flirting with .50 - why?  Because they were so tuned to a harder enviornment then Gibson/Koufax had to deal with.  Or 1905, I'm thining .30 ERA for both.

    Schilling has 15 more CG then all pitchers from 92 - 04.  I don't care if some guy from 1882 had 48 CG in one year, but I do care that in Schillings time he had more then the rest.

    Talk about adjusted stats - Schilling is 42nd all time in ERA+, do you have any idea how high up that is?  Go  look it up. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Not guaranteed by a long shot with his win total.  Does Curt measure up to his company?

    300 Game Winners: Roger Clemens, Steve Carlton, Greg Maddux, NolanRyan, Don Sutton, Phil Neikro, Gaylord Perry,  Tom Glavine, RandyJohnson

    Non 300 Game Winners: Bob Feller, Jack Morris, Bob Gibson, JuanMarichal, Whitey Ford, Catfish Hunter, Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez,Sandy Koufax

    [/Quote]

    Schilling was a better pitcher then Sutton for sure.  While he axed Ryan in ERA+, Ryan does have a big innings advantage.  He's pretty close to Perry, Ford,  and Niekro.  Well ahead of Morris, Hunter, Marichal. 

    Schilling is no match for Gibson, Pedro, Sandy, Clemens, Carleton, Maddux, Randy
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Consistent
    14-11 avg TIANT 3x 20wins
    14-12 AVG Blyleven 1 x 20 wins
    16-11 avg Morris 3 x 20 wins
    12-9 avg Schilling 3 x 20 wins
    all thes guys belong in the hall of fame[/Quote]

    So, worth your time to post these number, but not post them right?

    Schlling was a SP 15 1/4 years of his career in that time he was 13.4 - 8.4.  He is the only pitcher on the list to be a 5 man only rotation SP. 

    His HOF Numbers:

    Black Ink - 42 - (~40 average HOF)
    Gray Ink - 205 - (avergae HOF ~185)
    HOF Standards - 46.0 (average HOF ~ 50.0)
    HOF Monitor - 171 (average 100)

    Schilling has the best of the lot I am afraid.
    Blyleven:

    Blyleven had the last 15% of his in a 5 man rotation.
    Blyleven is 98th in Cy Young Award Shares, Schilling 16th.  Pretty bad showing for Blyleven since the award is 51 years old, and he pitched 22 years.
    He is 5th in K's, but 13th in IP.
    His adjusted ERA is 118 (tied for 134th all time)

    Black Ink - 16 (way short of the 40 average HOF has)
    Gray Ink - 237 (more then the 185 needed to be average)
    HOF Standards - 50.0 (average HOF number)
    HOF Monitor - 120.5 (over average)

    About 3 years ago I wrote a lot on Bert getting in, I was right, he is HOF material, but by longevity and health only, he had 4 prime years, and a lot of not so prime years.

    Morris:

    Morris had the last 3rd of his career in a 5 man.  BTW Morris has the pitiful ratio of 1390 BB's to 2478 K's and 105 ERA+ (I guess all those HR's he gave up to save his arm and his staff really hurt him, hunh?)  He is 66th in CY Young Award Shares compared to 16th for Schilling. He led his leagues twice in Wins, just like Schilling.

    Black Ink 20 (average HOF ~ 40) (way under)
    Gray Ink 193 (Average HOF ~ 185) (barely over)
    HOF Standards 39.0 (likely HOF 50.) (well under)
    HOF Monitor 122.5 (likely HOF /> 100) (decently over)

    If Morris goes in, he, not Schilling or Blyleven will be dragging the HOF down.  I wouldn't put him in, but he's close.

    Tiant had 0 % of his career in a 5 man.

    Tiant is the weakest I looked up here tonight.  He's very similar to Hunter, except in HOF Monitor where Tiant is behind.  As much as I am a fan, he doesn't belong, and Hunter is questionable.

    So:

    IN:

    Schilling
    Blyleven

    Out, but close:

    Morris

    Out (or should be out):

    Hunter (those wins help him a lot, sometime you guys should actually look at a pitchers record vs. his teams, a guy like Pedro is a monster, a guy like Hunter is very very average)
    Tiant

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote] Consistent
    14-11 avg TIANT 3x 20wins
    14-12 AVG Blyleven 1 x 20 wins
    16-11 avg Morris 3 x 20 wins
    12-9 avg Schilling 3 x 20 wins
    all thes guys belong in the hall of fame [/Quote]

    Schlling was a SP 15 1/4 years of his career in that time he was 13.4 -8.4.  He is the only pitcher on the list to be a 5 man only rotationSP.

    On top of that if you adjust the other 3 to 5 man rotations.  Then it is more like:

    12 - 10.5 for Blyleven
    14.5 - 10 for Morris
    12-9.5 for Tiant

    all who had lesser ERA+ marks
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Okay Mr Schiling Voice of Reason:

    First off everyone says Curt is the greatest post season pitcher ever, or one of the greatest, disproved. He was very good, but not at the top or the greatest. . . the stats dont lie. You cant argue the facts or numbers.   

    Where do you get 42nd all time? He is 391st all time in ERA. Is this another James stat or something else?  

    MORRIS was not in a 4 man rotaion he topped 35 starts 3 times total. He was consistant at 35 through much of his career. They were in 5 man rotations except, if there was a off day the ace goes to the hill every 5th day. If 4 guys start 35 games that leaves 22 other starts and 20 some odd days off. Which means they didnt give the extra day rest ect. The point is a 5 man rotation helps the pitcher when they get 4 to 5 days off between stats. . .what exactly are you arguing? If he was in 4 man he would have 40 starts and he never did that. What you should do is look at Schillings stats and see he only made 30 or more starts 7 times so in his 9 other seasons as a starter he failed to stay healthy thus not helping his team during a time when they "Protect the pitcher". Durability is part of this. It is one thing to be Koufax at age 30 and walk away while dominating the sport for 6 years. It is another thing to miss 100 starts because you were not in great phyiscal condition. You want to quote Cal Eldred, what about Glavine, Maddux, Johnson all guys with big innings? Just as many guys today could do what was done in 1960 if allowed. Fact is the investment into them is so high and each guy is a business now, it is all about trying to stay healthly. I doubt arm injuries are no more or less then 40 years ago. The diiferences is guys can be fixed easier now. Another fact is some guys bodies are never going to hold up but there is no way to tell until they do it.

    Morris was healthier thus pitched more innings and won more games. He helped his team by being on the field. Basicly he pitched 16 years, he started more games, completed more games, won more games, was just as good in post season, never missed a start.Because he wasnt a strikeout pitcher he gets punished? Please his job was as is every pitchers job to win the game or put team in position to do so. He did what he had to to win the game and did it ALOT better then Schilling. To the tune of 50 more wins over 16 years. 3 per year.

    I 1000% disagree with your Bill James thought process, a pitchers job is to win the game thus why wins are the biggest stat allowing pitchers in HOF. Proof in point, people talk about wins for HOF pitchers most people have no clue what a guys life time or current career ERA is but they do know how many wins they have. This type of thinking is why teams sign Matt Clement. Good numbers but a 500 pitcher. Yes they are asked to prevent runs, prevent a team from scoring more runs then your team did it doesnt matter if it is 8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1.   Last I checked no teams were in the Hall on players. If wins were a team stat why do pitchers get credit for them?

    When the game becomes about all the other numbers and stops being about wins will be a sad day. The 2002 Red Sox have probably some of the best numbers for a team that didnt make playoff's does anyone care or even remember? probably not.

    I dont know how they come up with the Monitor Stat, there are other guys not in with similar HOF monitor right around his so he wouldnt be the first guy not in with a 171.

    3.46 Career ERA when most of his career was in the NL which we all know helps ERA and K's ect. 216 wins in 20 years not great (in 16) it isnt either. If you squashing it to sixteen whip out 14 wins so now you are at 202 over 16 seasons, 12.65, 12.65 wins per season over 16 years is that HOF? Pedro averages 16.23 for example.   

    I know Morris is not a HOF player BUT he was every bit as good as Schilling even better based on WINS over the same time frame. The HOF voters are comparing them to BTW. Knowing this then how can you justify schilling getting in? He won less, completed less, was the same post season pitcher, why is he in? Because he had more k's and better whip? What does it matter how many K's a guy has if he lose's the game?

    Sorry Stat geeks for pitchers it is about wins and saves, every other stat is second place.




     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    Quote VOICE OF REASON
    "Schilling won the TSN pitcher of the year twice.  He won the Co MVP, so those voters thought he earned it, and he was the 93 NLCS MVP as well"

    I am sorry where are the Cy Youngs? I couldnt tell you another guy who won TSN Pitcher of the year. I dont care either, where is this award in Cooperstown? I could bearly tell you who finished second either in Cy Youngs. There is no chart showing 2nd,3rd or 4th places finishs. No one cares if your the brides maid sorry.

    Do you realize, not to dimish the award Jeff Suppan was a NLCS MVP? I MVP for a 7 game series is not the same as a Full Season.  
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Schlling was a SP 15 1/4 years of his career in that time he was 13.4 -8.4.  He is the only pitcher on the list to be a 5 man only rotationSP.

    On top of that if you adjust the other 3 to 5 man rotations.  Then it is more like:

    12 - 10.5 for Blyleven
    14.5 - 10 for Morris
    12-9.5 for Tiant

    all who had lesser ERA+ marks[/Quote]

    Yah lets just adjust the history of the game while your at it . . . . Schilling won 202 Games as a starter. That is what counts and had a 3.46 Career ERA, it is very good but by no means great. Shouldnt a HOF player be great?  

    This is the problem people want to try to look inside these numbers to create a greator or lessor value. It all comes down to who won the most games, who hit the most homeruns, who had best BA, SLG, OBP and RBI's. To a degree Saves and stirkeouts.  

    FYI on ERA, there are 7 pitchers with a ERA above Schillings 3.46. 7 Total which means if he got in he would have the 8th WORST ERA to give you perspective. Again his 3.46 is not great, it is very good.

    Who cares if Wade Boggs hit .425 against sub 500 teams and 300 vs over 500 teams? Only the haters or guys on end of losing argument.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]So, worth your time to post these number, but not post them right?

    Schlling was a SP 15 1/4 years of his career in that time he was 13.4 - 8.4.  He is the only pitcher on the list to be a 5 man only rotation SP. 

    His HOF Numbers:

    Black Ink - 42 - (~40 average HOF)
    Gray Ink - 205 - (avergae HOF ~185)
    HOF Standards - 46.0 (average HOF ~ 50.0)
    HOF Monitor - 171 (average 100)

    Schilling has the best of the lot I am afraid.
    Blyleven:

    Blyleven had the last 15% of his in a 5 man rotation.
    Blyleven is 98th in Cy Young Award Shares, Schilling 16th.  Pretty bad showing for Blyleven since the award is 51 years old, and he pitched 22 years.
    He is 5th in K's, but 13th in IP.
    His adjusted ERA is 118 (tied for 134th all time)

    Black Ink - 16 (way short of the 40 average HOF has)
    Gray Ink - 237 (more then the 185 needed to be average)
    HOF Standards - 50.0 (average HOF number)
    HOF Monitor - 120.5 (over average)

    About 3 years ago I wrote a lot on Bert getting in, I was right, he is HOF material, but by longevity and health only, he had 4 prime years, and a lot of not so prime years.

    Morris:

    Morris had the last 3rd of his career in a 5 man.  BTW Morris has the pitiful ratio of 1390 BB's to 2478 K's and 105 ERA+ (I guess all those HR's he gave up to save his arm and his staff really hurt him, hunh?)  He is 66th in CY Young Award Shares compared to 16th for Schilling. He led his leagues twice in Wins, just like Schilling.

    Black Ink 20 (average HOF ~ 40) (way under)
    Gray Ink 193 (Average HOF ~ 185) (barely over)
    HOF Standards 39.0 (likely HOF 50.) (well under)
    HOF Monitor 122.5 (likely HOF /> 100) (decently over)

    If Morris goes in, he, not Schilling or Blyleven will be dragging the HOF down.  I wouldn't put him in, but he's close.

    Tiant had 0 % of his career in a 5 man.

    Tiant is the weakest I looked up here tonight.  He's very similar to Hunter, except in HOF Monitor where Tiant is behind.  As much as I am a fan, he doesn't belong, and Hunter is questionable.

    So:

    IN:

    Schilling
    Blyleven

    Out, but close:

    Morris

    Out (or should be out):

    Hunter (those wins help him a lot, sometime you guys should actually look at a pitchers record vs. his teams, a guy like Pedro is a monster, a guy like Hunter is very very average)
    Tiant[/Quote]

    Dude now we are punishing guys for being on a winning teams? and crediting them for being on losing teams? Wait here is a thought, maybe Hunter was a huge part of them winning? Maybe his pitching allowed them to be so good?  Hunter has 9 Playoff Wins oh, is that a team stat? He is one of two guys in top 10 who didnt have advantage of Divisional round and the ALCS was 5 games for a while too . . . .

    Blyleven is like Sutton about numbers over long career. However not a force in the game.

    Cy Young Share, I never heard of something so stupid. It is like being awarded for second place. I am 16th all time in Shares of a award but was never good enough to win it. It is yet another stat put in to value marginal guys. If you need to look inside all these numbers to say yes or no, it has to be no. When i see this in Cooperstown I will take note.

    Ask yourself one question I mean this, dont you think a player should get a 5 year window? If after 5 years it is no, then it is no. If Schilling had the 5 would he be in? Probably not. 

    I dont care what his other numbers were he didnt win enough games according to HOF cryteria. People will look at 216 wins, 20 years. Long time to win so few.



     
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from voice-of-reasons. Show voice-of-reasons's posts

    Schilling HoF Chances

    [Quote]Quote VOICE OF REASON
    "Schilling won the TSN pitcher of the year twice.  He won the Co MVP, so those voters thought he earned it, and he was the 93 NLCS MVP as well"

    I am sorry where are the Cy Youngs? I couldnt tell you another guy who won TSN Pitcher of the year. I dont care either, where is this award in Cooperstown? I could bearly tell you who finished second either in Cy Youngs. There is no chart showing 2nd,3rd or 4th places finishs. No one cares if your the brides maid sorry.

    Do you realize, not to dimish the award Jeff Suppan was a NLCS MVP? I MVP for a 7 game series is not the same as a Full Season.  [/Quote]

    That's just one stat.  If winning Cy Youngs iis the sole criteria, then I reckon Saberhagen is a lock since he has two.  Tiant, Morris, and Blyleven who have been tossed around as more deserving have less Cy Young Shares the Curt.  Curt is 16th all time.  Two guys ahead of him are not (or will not go into the HOF) Guidry and Saberhagen and both of those guys had shorter and less valualbe careers then Schilling by a good amount - go look up the numbers.
     

Share