I'm not removing the accomplishments he made in Boston, just saying if he has the same career and it's all in Arizona, he's not even in the discussion. Let's be real, everyone wants to talk about what he did on the field needing to be the only criteria for getting in the HOF, well let's not act like he would get the same evaluation if he had those later success somewhere other than Boston.
Schilling with no bloody sock is on the ballot and gets 20% of the vote is my point. The numbers just aren't there.
I don't think you'll find anyone passionately arguing for either guy, or anyone coming up with conspiracies about either guy being blocked out of the HOF by writers who don't agree with their political views. What if Schilling had only pitched in Philly and Arizona and never went to Boston? Would anyone be beating this drum right now? I don't think so.
I don't think Schilling should get into the HOF because I don't think he had a HOF career. My contention isn't saying those guys aren't worthy, it is if Schilling is a HOF, then don't we have to accept Kevin Brown and Mike Mussina as HOF pitchers too?
Numbers aren't deceiving when you make two legit comps. The world knows Mo C played 1 season, and was banged up a lot of that one season, so of course Pittman would have inflated numbers if you compared the 2. That's not what I did in my comps.
Your aren't making a point at all is the problem. I didn't just throw out 3 names, I picked to legit comps to Schilling who I think it's pretty widely accepted neither guy will get in. I didn't throw a couple names and numbers against the wall to see what would stick. Schilling pitched in 569 games, Kevin Brown pitched in 486 games, and Mike Mussina Pitched in 537 games in their regular season careers. If anything that strengthen's Brown and Mussina's case.
To me the biggest comp to Schilling is Pitcher A, Pitcher A is Kevin Brown
Pitcher C is Mike Mussina
Pitcher D was my throw in just because, Dennis Martinez.
No because post season stats have never been a make or break consideration in baseball. The HOF is littered with first ballot guys who never won a title.
It can be a bad way if you do just focus on one guy having one stat significantly better than a guy in the HOF. That's not what I did here . I took 4 guys, who aren't in the HOF, who were all on the ballot at one time or another, and picked a wide range of stats to show how similar their careers really were.
So, I have here, 4 guys who aren't in the HOF, but on the ballot, who never won a Cy Young, and 3 of which had post season experience/success who had very similar numbers. I limited it to these stats, because well we could go on all day with everything. I think Wins and losses don't mean a whole lot but some people do. I still like ERA and love WHIP as a stat, and well K's are something everyone uses so I threw them in as well.
PItcher B is obviously Schilling, my contention is, if he is a HOF. Pitcher A and C should absolutely be HOF too and a case could be made for D.
All these comments and so many people are commenting that his play on the field should dictate if he's a HOF pitcher and not his opinions on Twitter or if he's a nice guy etc. Only one person has brought up a stat in his defense and that was WAR (which is a narrow view in my opinion). No one is giving any kind of valid defense of what he actually did on the field. I'll say you could make a case for him if Smoltz is in there, but after Tommy John, Smoltz went on to be the best closer in the game for 3 years or so. So let's do some fun with numbers. Give 4 stat lines and you tell me who the hall of famer is. I'll pick 3 random pitchers from the last 30 years who I think are comparable and you tell me who the HOF is.
Pitcher A: 214 wins 144 losses; 3.28ERA; 2397K; 1.222 WHIP; 8.5 H/9, 0.6 HR/9; 2.63 SO/W;
Pitcher B: 216 wins 146 losses; 3.46 ERA; 3116K; 1.137 WHIP; 8.3 H/9; 1.0 HR/9; 4.38 SO/W; 6 all star games
Pitcher C: 270 wins 153 losses; 3.68 ERA; 2813K; 1.192 WHIP; 8.7 H/9; 0.9 HR/9; 3.58 SO/W; 7GG, 5 All Star
Pitcher D: 245 wins 193 losses; 3.70 ERA; 2149K; 1.266 WHIP; 8.8 H/9; 0.8 HR/9; 1.84 SO/W; 4 All Star Games and Perfect Game
If Curt Schilling had 500 wins (which is about the same as over 4000 hits) then yes, he would be in the hall of fame no matter what kind of douche people thinks he is. I don't necessarily think Cy Young is a be all end all, but statistically, Curt Schilling was never the best pitcher in the MLB (or his league at all ) for one complete season.
My answer would be who cares if the batters he was facing were clean. I'm not sure he was ever even one of the 5 best pitchers in the league when he played. I absolutely would have taken Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro, Glavine, and Maddux over Schilling at any point in his career. I probably would have taken Josh Beckett and Mike Mussina, over Schilling at his best as well. I also saw someone mention Johan Santana above and when he was on his game, again Schilling just wasn't as good.
No one is questioning him as a gamer, and yes he pitched a really good in the World Series, but baseball isn't a game that a guy's whole career is judged by rings like QB's in the NFL or basketball players are. At the end of the day, Schilling was a really good pitcher, but it's not the Hall of above average, it's the hall of fame.
Specifically what stats????? Because if you compare him to Randy Johnson, Pedro, Greg Maddux, and Tom Glavine who are 4 of the last 5 starting pitchers inducted, his career doesn't come close. What stats specifically, do you see that say Schilling is definitely a hall of famer?
He didn't get hit in the face before, it's part of his theatrics
Duke or not, he's a guy who is easy to hate. When he's caught on camera repeatedly tripping people, flopping, acting like he's getting hit when he's not, then throwing tirades on the bench it's going to be a story. He could play for NC State and would be a big story for the shit he pulls. At the end of the day Coach K is kind of an enabler. He's had a history of guys pulling bullshit on the court and he would be basically silent about it until one of his guys would get punched or knocked down by another player who has lost patience for their nonsense. Then his guy is the victim.
I completely disagree, it may have been a big deal the first time he did it last year because it was a Duke player, but when said player continues to do the same thing over and over, then throws an embarrassing tantrum because the ref had the audacity to call a foul on him, it becomes a big deal because we have a clearly unstable person doing stupid things on the court all the time. It didn't help any when he was suspended indefinitely, they lose, he's re-instated, and Coach K leaves the team immediately thereafter. I know he had a back issue, but it's not a good look all around for Duke.
I remember seeing a guy make sportcenter from some small program because he punched another guy in the nutsack so he could get open on an out of bounds play late in the game. It was all over sports media. So yeah, when someone pulls the bush league shit Allen does, it doesn't matter who the program is, it's going to be a big deal.
I heard Kiper say last Saturday, Lattimore is his number 1 CB in this draft class. That means Lattimore is going to be drafted quite high. There's no way he's coming back. It's fun that he and a buddy were bullshitting around on social media, but he's gone. I have no proof, or supporting documentation or any of that. I'm just a realist with common sense. This kid got a healthy year where he tore it up after a career of injury to this point. He's not coming back.
I never understood the Elflein love, the dude hasn't been able to do a shotgun snap all year. Every game there are several snaps that were too high or damn near hit the ground. That shit has driven me crazy all season long.
That was part of the demise at Florida. Couldn't keep up with the coaching talent losses and replaced great coaches with not so great coaches.
Probably has more to do with Urban saying no thanks to Notre Dame only to go on and win 2 titles at Florida.
Joe Public is always wrong. Mostly because they act emotionally. It's the same with investing. There's a theory that says the small/individual investor (Joe Public) is always wrong, therefore you should do the exact opposite. Again, because individuals act emotionally. If the public is betting Clemson, I'm betting Buckeyes
I think it's impossible to compare players from different eras because things are so much different. I also think it's unfair to discount what older guys did because the game was different. In my honest opinion, Zeke is the best RB Ohio State has ever had, and (Hot take alert) I don't think it's that close. He absolutely did it all at an elite level. He had break away speed, he was agile and could make a guy miss, he could run a guy over to get 2 or 3 yards when needed, he was an elite blocker, and he could catch a ball and create a lot of YAC.
I do wonder how players like Babe Ruth may have played in today's game where everyone throws 95+ and all of the population is allowed to play in the game, but it's impossible to say. Lebron may have averaged a Triple Double for his career playing when Oscar did (maybe hyperbole there) at the same time it doesn't mean Babe Ruth and Oscar wouldn't have themselves in today's playing shape, being even that more dominant in today's game. Just impossible. I like to compare a legendary player by how they dominated the game during their era and compare it to how a modern guy or a someone from a different era dominated while they played.
This will be a long post so bear with me. Let's separate Zeke and Hyde, they aren't in the same category. Zeke is not in the same category as many RBs. So let's just say Zeke was a homerun threat every time he touched the ball and was honestly Urban's best recruit, maybe ever (yes I'm aware of Tebow). Zeke had had 8 over 50, 7 over 60, and 3 over 80 yards. He also played 2 fewer games than Hyde.
I think there's some revisionist history here about Carlos Hyde being a game breaker. He only had 3 TD's in his career that went over 50 yards, and only 2 others after that which were over 30. So in his career, he was a game breaker for a 30+ yard TD all of 5 times. 2 of those 50+ yarders came in one game against a bad Illinois team. This isn't a knock on Carlos, but when he played here many people said he wasn't a game breaker like Beanie and others. That doesn't mean he didn't rip a bunch of 15 and 20 yard runs off while he was here, but Hyde was much more likely to run a bunch of 7-12 yard rushes than he was a home run threat every time he touched the ball.