RIP Pete Rose

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Baseball writers who vote on the Hall of Fame is the biggest group of bundle of sticks in the world. Those pecker heads are stuck on themselves like no other group.

Curt Schilling says hi.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Frazod

Curt Schilling says hi.

Curt schilling is probably a bubble hall of famer. So there could be a merit argument here. But a lot of his case seems personal which is dumb

But if there was ever a true snub this is probably it because he is probably being blackballed for his opinions versus conduct.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Curt schilling is probably a bubble hall of famer. So there could be a merit argument here. But a lot of his case seems personal which is dumb

But if there was ever a true snub this is probably it because he is probably being blackballed for his opinions versus conduct.

There's nothing 'bubble' about Schilling's case.

It's as good or better than Verlanders and he'll get in first ballot. He has more WAR than any pitcher eligible for the Hall who isn't in by a LOT. Kevin Brown is in 2nd and has 68 to Schilling's 80 (and Brown was also an asshole).

That's a massive gap. Meanwhile Jim Palmer, Smoltz, Glavine, Kaat, Morris and a slew of others are in and those guys had nowhere near the career of Schilling. At least Brown's 68 is below the average HoFer's 73, but Schilling's sure as hell isn't. And we're not talking about Schilling vs. the worst HoFer - that's the AVERAGE. He's clearly better than the middle of the pack HoFer -- by any definition that's not a bubble guy.

Oh, and he was a MONSTER in the post-season. 10-1 with an ERA of 2.23 and the 2001 World Series MVP (1993 NLCS MVP as well).

He's above the average HoFer in black ink and gray ink standards and WRECKS the HoF monitor (a 171 w/ a 'likely' HoFer set at 100). He has the peak, the duration and the post-season accolades to stand up to anyone short of maybe the 10-15 best pitchers to ever live.

No, there's nothing borderline or bubble about Schilling's HoF candidacy. He's a guy that probably should've gone in 1st ballot and definitely by the 3-5 range.

The BBWAA didn't let him in because they're petty bitches.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

There's nothing 'bubble' about Schilling's case.

It's as good or better than Verlanders and he'll get in first ballot. He has more WAR than any pitcher eligible for the Hall who isn't in by a LOT. Kevin Brown is in 2nd and has 68 to Schilling's 80 (and Brown was also an asshole).

That's a massive gap. Meanwhile Jim Palmer, Smoltz, Glavine, Kaat, Morris and a slew of others are in and those guys had nowhere near the career of Schilling. At least Brown's 68 is below the average HoFer's 73, but Schilling's sure as hell isn't. And we're not talking about Schilling vs. the worst HoFer - that's the AVERAGE. He's clearly better than the middle of the pack HoFer -- by any definition that's not a bubble guy.

Oh, and he was a MONSTER in the post-season. 10-1 with an ERA of 2.23 and the 2001 World Series MVP (1993 NLCS MVP as well).

He's above the average HoFer in black ink and gray ink standards and WRECKS the HoF monitor (a 171 w/ a 'likely' HoFer set at 100). He has the peak, the duration and the post-season accolades to stand up to anyone short of maybe the 10-15 best pitchers to ever live.

No, there's nothing borderline or bubble about Schilling's HoF candidacy. He's a guy that probably should've gone in 1st ballot and definitely by the 3-5 range.

The BBWAA didn't let him in because they're petty bitches.

I don’t disagree with you but fair or not, wins and ERA are the shiny object lots of people attach themselves to. But yes I agree he absolutely belongs and unlike drugs or gambling, schilling is being blackballed simply because there are sportswriters who don’t like him which is a horseshit reason