Curt Schilling: HOFer?

[countdemoney]

Originally Posted by zbromer

I already declared I'm a Braves fan, so I'm biased, but the whole point of Glavine was that he was a dominating type of pitcher. As for his postseason performances, in 17 NLCS starts, he has a 3.31 ERA. In 8 World Series starts, he has a 2.47 ERA. The win-loss record may not be stellar, like Smoltz's, but that's pretty damn good pitching. His ERA in the NLCS and World Series combined is 2.99 in over 160 innings, which is roughly 80% of a full-season. That's not good enough?
Maybe I just couldn't stand the TBS broadcasts, but I just can't remember a time when I watched a game and said, "Goddamn, Tom Glavine shut them down!" I've always seen him as a guy who worked the outside corner and got help from the umps. If you had hitters disciplined enough to go the other other way, he was toast. I give him lots of credit for taking advantage of hitters that were not disciplined, but I've never thought of Glavine as the guy who says - "you're not getting on base. If you do get on base, you're not scoring". He's done wonders with his limited physical tools.

 

[Brian278]

All of the Braves' big 3 were pitchers' pitchers. I don't see how you can take anything away from any of them, they all won Cy Youngs, all were dominant at one point, all had amazing longevity in this day and age, and all are headed for the hall, no doubt in my mind.

 

[Stu]

Originally Posted by interlockingny

I disagree. Wins have become less relevant as more and more pitchers are getting wins throwing 5 innings. However there was nothing cheap about them before the 90s when you usually had to throw 7 or 8 innings to earn a win

As long as I can recall it's been 5 innings to qualify for a starter. When was it 7 or 8?