I restrained myself the first time I saw someone arguing against Curt Schilling's Hall of Fame candidacy, as I figured the writer was probably just an outlier. But here comes another one, this time from St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Rick Hummel. And I think it's time to say something. Hummel:
If you're stumping for now dead-armed Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling as a Hall of Famer, you're overlooking a potload of more deserving candidates. Schilling gets plenty of publicity, none of which he tries to douse, for his "Bloody Sock" game in the 2004 American League Championship Series, for his sparkling postseason record of 10-2 (he was on three World Series champions) and for his 3,000-plus strikeouts.
But, in the ultimate sport of regular-season numbers, is Schilling's victory total of 216 more deserving than, say, the 254 of Jack Morris? Morris, if you watched Game 7 of the 1991 World Series when he pitched a 10-inning shutout for Minnesota, was a pretty good postseason pitcher, too, playing for two World Series champions. And how about Tommy John (288 wins), Bert Blyleven (287), Jim Kaat (283)? Or Orel Hershiser, a decade or so ahead of Schilling, who won 204 games and lost 149, which compares favorably to Schilling's 216-146 mark?
What all the aforementioned have in common is that none of them is in the Hall of Fame; only Blyleven, after many elections, came reasonably close at 61.9 percent of the vote (75 percent is needed for election) last winter. Morris garnered only 42.9 percent of the vote, and John was even lower at 29.1. Kaat's 15-year eligibility with the writers elapsed without him even getting a sniff.
|
Schilling obviously doesn't stack up in career regular-season wins. Not to most of these guys, at least. But let's check a couple of other metrics that Hummel references (if somewhat obliquely). First, postseason performance:
Schilling: 11-2, 2.23
Hershiser: 8-3, 2.59
Blyleven: 5-1, 2.47
John: 6-3, 2.65
Morris: 7-4, 3.80
Kaat: 1-3, 4.01
You might rank them a bit differently than I have, but I think you'll have to agree with who's on top.
Next, winning percentage:
Schilling: .597
Morris: .577
Hershiser: .576
John: .555
Kaat: .544
Blyleven: .534
Again, not much to argue about here. And yes, 20 points over the course of a 20-year career is significant.
Hummel didn't mention ERA, but just for fun let's take a look at ERA+, which is a measure of ERA that's adjusted for league context and home ballparks:
Schilling: 127
Blyleven: 118
Hershiser: 112
John: 110
Kaat: 107
Morris: 105
I'm a big Blyleven supporter, as you probably know. His combination of durability (287 wins) and ERA make him the most qualified Hall of Fame candidate in this group. But Schilling has the most impressive ERA, by a lot. Schilling has the most impressive winning percentage, by a lot. Schilling has the most impressive postseason numbers, by a lot (especially if adjusted for times and places).
The funny thing is, I'm not wild about Schilling's Hall of Fame candidacy myself. As I remember, a couple of years ago I said Schilling fell a bit short. Since then he's gone from 190 wins to 216, and went 3-0 during Boston's championship run October 2007. Put it all together -- the 216 wins, the incredible postseason numbers and the excellent career ERA -- and I think he's a worthy Hall of Famer.
I'm fairly sure there's a rational argument to be made against Schilling. But I'm still waiting to see it.
Rob Neyer
