Curt Schilling: HOFer?

Schilling was 11-2 with a 2.23 post-season ERA in 133 innings. Smoltz was 15-4 and 4 saves with a 2.65 post-season ERA in 207 innings. Both among the best ever.

Easily.

Originally Posted by thekunk07

Click to expand...

^gives a lot to charity, presumably to balance the wheel of Fortuna.

i still put him ahead of smoltz. never felt like, "oh ****, smoltz is in. game over."

From 01-04 Smoltz's save percentage was 91.7%, second only to some guy name Eric Gagne.

"never felt like, "oh ****, smoltz is in. game over."

As an Astros fan, I have said this unfortunately.

Originally Posted by Sid

Click to expand...

As an Astros fan...

You have my deepest sympathy.

Originally Posted by Slopho

Click to expand...

Ws do matter and they define a pitcher. Say for example a pitcher has a 1.03 ERA but is only 10-9 on the season with 10 no-decisions. He will be considered a good pitcher but not a money or great pitcher. The quality of the team is normally a reflection of the perception of the pitcher.

Remember when Clemens pitched for the Astros a few years back........he had at least 10 no-decisions in games he was winning. No one remembers your ERA when your wins aren't there.

No way re: Clemens. I definitely remember how Clemens dominated in ERA a few years back. He was in the running for the Cy Young, lost it to either Webb or Willis (oh, Willis... ).

Although I do agree, the majority of baseball fans will look at wins as some kind of measure of a pitcher's talent. But then there are pitchers like Pavano and Ming-Wang...

Originally Posted by Baron

Click to expand...

My original comment was more to you saying that you "didn't think of Schilling" when thinking of the best pitchers in the league. I think most people did think of him this way, and for good reason.

In retrospect I think the "****" thing actually is part of it. After the whole bloody sock affair and subsequent canonization, then the stupid blog posts and campaigning for W, as I'm not a sox fan most of the time I heard about him it was in connection to some stupid media issue rather than as a great pitcher. So I suppose I underrate him, but I still feel his regular season body of work is underwhelming. I'm sure he'll get in after a few years if only because the electors will want to reward someone for "doing it the right way" in the roids era.

he might be a dick in the media but he is a really nice guy. he's the head of his own gaming company and I've talked to him a couple times about the future of MMOs and he's been nothing but polite and friendly

Schilling didn't even have a signature pitch. Rivera has a great cutter, Johnson an incredible slider, even Mussina has a knuckle-curve. If you base getting into the HOF because of the sock, Bob Gibson pitched with a broken leg.

Originally Posted by Slopho

Click to expand...

Schilling didn't even have a signature pitch. Rivera has a great cutter, Johnson an incredible slider, even Mussina has a knuckle-curve. If you base getting into the HOF because of the sock, Bob Gibson pitched with a broken leg.

Basing HOF qualifications on whether or not they have a signature pitch is beyond dumb. What was Greg Maddux's signature pitch, again? Whatever your answer, Curt Schilling's splitter was at least as much a signature.

Schilling is in, IMO. Dominance is one of the things they look for. And he was dominant, especially on the biggest stage. Bert "be home" Blyleven is a much under appreciated pitcher, but he was also next to Jack Morris who always overshadowed him in the publicity department.

That WS win with Big Unit and schilling combining because the d-back bullpen sucked pretty much put both guys in.

Glavine may get in, but I really don't consider him a HOF pitcher. He never had the dominant stuff - never had the ability to take over a postseason game. This repeatedly showed in the playoffs. To me, the dominant pitcher of his era was Hershiser until injury.

Rivera is one of the few I was amazed to see pitch. That bat busting cutter was something else.

CC is one of the few younger guys who can just put a team on his back to victory. Such heart.

Originally Posted by countdemoney

Click to expand...

Schilling is in, IMO. Dominance is one of the things they look for. And he was dominant, especially on the biggest stage. Bert "be home" Blyleven is a much under appreciated pitcher, but he was also next to Jack Morris who always overshadowed him in the publicity department.

That WS win with Big Unit and schilling combining because the d-back bullpen sucked pretty much put both guys in.

Glavine may get in, but I really don't consider him a HOF pitcher. He never had the dominant stuff - never had the ability to take over a postseason game. This repeatedly showed in the playoffs. To me, the dominant pitcher of his era was Hershiser until injury.

Rivera is one of the few I was amazed to see pitch. That bat busting cutter was something else.

CC is one of the few younger guys who can just put a team on his back to victory. Such heart.

Glavine won 2 Cy Youngs in the Smoltz/Maddux era and you don't think he was dominant?

Originally Posted by Brian278

Click to expand...

Glavine won 2 Cy Youngs in the Smoltz/Maddux era and you don't think he was dominant?

Check out his WHIP. Check out his WHIP in post season.

Originally Posted by countdemoney

Click to expand...

Check out his WHIP. Check out his WHIP in post season.
His postseason era was still 3.42, and he pitched in the playoffs for 20 years. You want to penalize him for getting out of jams and giving up less HRs? Smoltz was obviously far more dominant in the posteason, but he's probably the best postseason pitcher of the last 2 decades. Tough comparison. Glavine does have a World Series MVP, so he was clearly dominant at points in his career.

none of these guys hold a candle to old hoss radbourne or jack chesbro.