Hall of Fame Ballot Announced

[G1911]

Schillings 79.5 WAR is pretty deep into obvious Hall territory.

Some voters were writing opinion pieces specifically stating they weren’t voting for him for social politics, as I recall.

I find it difficult to pretend he got a fair shake and is kept out on statistical grounds.

[rand1com]

None of them get in IMO.

[Frank A]

I hope clemens and bonds never get in.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by G1911

Schillings 79.5 WAR is pretty deep into obvious Hall territory.

Some voters were writing opinion pieces specifically stating they weren’t voting for him for social politics, as I recall.

I find it difficult to pretend he got a fair shake and is kept out on statistical grounds.

He deserves to be in based on his numbers. I just looked at his stats and he had some really good years. His 2002 year was incredible, 23-7 with a 3.23 ERA in 259 innings, and amazingly 316 strikeouts and only 29 walks. Of course he might be in the hall already if he didn't tell the sportswriters not to vote for him.

"I will not participate in the final year of voting. I am requesting to be removed from the ballot," he wrote. "I'll defer to the veterans committee and men whose opinions actually matter and who are in a position to actually judge a player. I don't think I'm a hall of famer as I've often stated but if former players think I am then I'll accept that with honor."

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

He deserves to be in based on his numbers. I just looked at his stats and he had some really good years. His 2002 year was incredible, 23-7 with a 3.23 ERA in 259 innings, and amazingly 316 strikeouts and only 29 walks. Of course he might be in the hall already if he didn't tell the sportswriters not to vote for him.

"I will not participate in the final year of voting. I am requesting to be removed from the ballot," he wrote. "I'll defer to the veterans committee and men whose opinions actually matter and who are in a position to actually judge a player. I don't think I'm a hall of famer as I've often stated but if former players think I am then I'll accept that with honor."

Have a quote for the 9 years before that? Every time Schilling comes up, his tenth year ‘screw it’ is brought up in a vacuum as if the writers just politely respected his wishes all along. The context of how and why that quote was made are never brought up with it.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by G1911

Have a quote for the 9 years before that? Every time Schilling comes up, his tenth year ‘screw it’ is brought up in a vacuum as if the writers just politely respected his wishes all along. The context of how and why that quote was made are never brought up with it.

Schilling looked sure to get in until the whole "sharing a meme about hanging journalists" thing a few years prior. His vote total still went up every year after that, but I feel like the last year thing didn't really cost him as much as the meme a few years earlier did.

I don't know if that's factual or not, but that's my take. Open to other interpretations.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Schilling looked sure to get in until the whole "sharing a meme about hanging journalists" thing a few years prior. His vote total still went up every year after that, but I feel like the last year thing didn't really cost him as much as the meme a few years earlier did.

I don't know if that's factual or not, but that's my take. Open to other interpretations.

I agree with this, and I think it's what the record suggests is the case. He was unpopular for being outspoken in the opposite direction of the media (some of the claims about his positions are true, and some were just completely false htitpieces. I remember the fake news push that he was a Nazi with a huge collection of nazi memorabilia, as it turned out he collects World War II memorabilia from across the world, as do many people. He was in trouble shortly before this for comparing Islamic extremism to Nazism) and sometimes a dumbass. The meme gave the writers the reason to block an enemy, which they took. His frustration over it and the request sunk his last chance, but it's fairly clear what the actual problem is for at least 9/10 of the saga. I wish I didn't know athletes political views, hot takes, and triggering memes, and they could simply be evaluated on reasonable grounds of actual merit, instead of tribalism.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by G1911

I agree with this, and I think it's what the record suggests is the case. He was unpopular for being outspoken in the opposite direction of the media (some of the claims about his positions are true, and some were just completely false htitpieces. I remember the fake news push that he was a Nazi with a huge collection of nazi memorabilia, as it turned out he collects World War II memorabilia from across the world, as do many people. He was in trouble shortly before this for comparing Islamic extremism to Nazism) and sometimes a dumbass. The meme gave the writers the reason to block an enemy, which they took. His frustration over it and the request sunk his last chance, but it's fairly clear what the actual problem is for at least 9/10 of the saga. I wish I didn't know athletes political views, hot takes, and triggering memes, and they could simply be evaluated on reasonable grounds of actual merit, instead of tribalism.

Yes, I do miss the "good old days" of Hall of Fame debates, before steroids, politics, crime, gambling, sexual abuse, and all those other nasty things came into the equation.

As we've seen in the threads here, it's hard enough to find consensus on who should be in and out without all those outside variables.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Yes, I do miss the "good old days" of Hall of Fame debates, before steroids, politics, crime, gambling, sexual abuse, and all those other nasty things came into the equation.

As we've seen in the threads here, it's hard enough to find consensus on who should be in and out without all those outside variables.

The stats debate is plenty contentious, has no easy line to draw, and is good fun. I like that debate.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by G1911

Have a quote for the 9 years before that? Every time Schilling comes up, his tenth year ‘screw it’ is brought up in a vacuum as if the writers just politely respected his wishes all along. The context of how and why that quote was made are never brought up with it.

I thought I was clear with what I said. Schilling's numbers are good enough for the Hall of Fame and if he had kept his mouth shut he probably would have been voted in his last year. He chose to make a statement and blow up the process. Maybe you respect him for that, maybe you don't, but it was his decision.

We know the BBWAA is a fraternity and while many writers are stat-based and analytical, some are not. Players with positive attitudes that are good with interviews have always gotten bonus points for that, and likewise those with sour personalities get deducted for it. Nothing very insightful there, that is just the way it is. Rock Raines had to wait a long time to get in the Hall, Dick Allen is still not in.

My focus when looking at HOF credentials has always been to look at a player's value on the field. But if you are an ambassador to the game, like Ernie Banks maybe, that should count for something too. Certainly Jackie Robinson would deserve his spot in the hall even if he put up Rabbit Maranville numbers.

And on the other side, those who lessen the game by cheating, or otherwise putting the game in a bad light, should have that counted against them. Personally I don't think the controversial things Schilling has said since he retired from baseball should be much of a deduct, but on the other hand they sure don't help.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

He deserves to be in based on his numbers. I just looked at his stats and he had some really good years. His 2002 year was incredible, 23-7 with a 3.23 ERA in 259 innings, and amazingly 316 strikeouts and only 29 walks. Of course he might be in the hall already if he didn't tell the sportswriters not to vote for him.

"I will not participate in the final year of voting. I am requesting to be removed from the ballot," he wrote. "I'll defer to the veterans committee and men whose opinions actually matter and who are in a position to actually judge a player. I don't think I'm a hall of famer as I've often stated but if former players think I am then I'll accept that with honor."

He admitted he is not a Hall of Famer and he is 100% correct!

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by rand1com

He admitted he is not a Hall of Famer and he is 100% correct!

Care to give a reason, based on his playing career, why?

Schilling is a no brainer HOFer. He also happens to be a loud mouth, but based on his play he belongs and if we are all being honest is pretty obvious.

[ejharrington]

Schilling checks all the boxes for being a HOFer.

[jayshum]

When Ed Wade was the Phillies GM, he described Schilling something like this - He's a horse every 5th day and a horse's ass the other four. Not sure if it's a direct quote, but apparently he wasn't beloved during his playing days. However, he did come up big in the postseason.

[G1911]

Let's compare to his direct contemporaries.

Tom Glavine - 80.7 WAR - Elected first year of eligibility with 91.9% of the vote

Mike Mussina- 82.8 WAR - Elected his sixth year of eligibility.

John Smoltz - 69.0 WAR - Elected in his first year of eligibility with 82.9% of the vote.

Curt Schilling - 79.5 WAR - Not a Hall of Famer at all.


Schilling is closer to Pedro Martinez the he is John Smoltz by WAR, but Martinez is an all-peak kind of guy and generally held in a different tier. While his career overlaps significantly with Halladay, I would not consider them the same generation. Including Halladay would further bolster Schilling's case. I have cut out the roiders, Clemens and Kevin Brown as they are not looked at for statistical performance, but for an on-the-field problem. Maddux and Randy Johnson are obviously and undeniably in the top tier of HOF greatness and blow everyone else out of the water.

I can't see a reasonable case that Schilling isn't a Hall of Famer. I can see a reasonable case that the Hall shouldn't include so many players and be much smaller, and Curt shouldn't be in that small hall, but that's not the Hall that actually exists. He clearly meets the standard of his generation. I will never understand the apparently numerous people who will deny anything if it doesn't suit their favored political narrative.

[jayshum]

Glavine is a 300 game winner which is basically an automatic entry to the HoF. Mussina won 54 more games than Schilling and was considered a questionable pick by a lot of people (from what I remember) when he was elected. Smoltz had almost the same win total as Schilling but also spent time as a closer and also has 154 saves. Glavine and Smoltz also won Cy Young awards which Schilling never did. I think his low win total compared to most starters already in the HoF worked against him with a lot of older voters even though several pitchers with comparable win totals have been elected more recently. He certainly didn't help himself with some of his comments, but I don't think that's the only reason he didn't get elected by the writers.