Schilling announces his retirement

So for you, it's the hall of above average

 

Actually, it's the Hall of Fame. The whole "what's the name of the Hall" thing is really dumb for people who are arguing for a Hall of Great that doesn't exist.

 

And Rick, if you take Game 7, I'll take all the other times he got absolutely pounded in the playoffs.

 

Fine with me. That's making a case. There's certainly an argument either way.

I'm not arguing he was clutch. I'm arguing that when you are electing people to the Hall of *Fame*, being an integral part of one of the most famous games in the history of the sport is a point for you.

 

No, whats dumb is some of the stats you use to make Morris's case.
This argument is so old on this site, Walter's post and the articles he linked sums it up better than I can. I will try my best to stay out of this debate for the 750th time.

 

You aren't doing a very good job of staying out of it

I conceded every single point in those articles (well, except for the idea that a player's clutch is 27-33. You'd think a guy arguing advanced stats would know better), but none of them proved there's no HOF case for Morris. Just that the case usually made is a bad one.

 

Being part of one of the most integral games in history isn't enough of a case. Otherwise we'd be electing Ray Knight, Luis Gonzalez, Joe Carter and Don Larsen. His rank on the strikeout chart isn't particularly relevant either, as ahead of him include Chuck Finley and Frank Tanana.

 

But you are trying to separate them into parts and value each part without valuing the aggregate.

Only 250 wins, only integral moments, only ranking on the strikeout chart, no those aren't enough. But add all three together?

 

Add all three together ... and ignore the fact that he was a mediocre pitcher in almost half of his career postseason starts and was an average pitcher who needed four runs a game from his offense in the regular season to pile up those 250+ wins?

Hmm. Still not a strong case.

 

Is Fill in Player's Name one of the greatest pitchers/players to ever play the game?
Shouldn't that be the ultimate and defining question?

 

No. There's nothing in the HOF criteria that says that. There's nothing in the name that says that. Why should that be it?

Respectfully disagree.

 

If we want to get into advanced metrics, I'll start with his 95th all-time in WAR, better than eight pitchers currently in the HOF (which is way too small, imo, as it is).