3,000

[BTExpress]

Guy on second with no outs... I want a strikeout.

Guy on third with less than two outs, I want a strikeout.

There are SO many ways in which the strikeout is a superior out to a ball in play.

If you'll notice, the "ball in play" in my example was a liner to second base.

And a strikeout is NO BETTER than a lineout to second base.

Hell, a lineout to second MIGHT even get you a double play. A strikeout won't get you one.

 

[Columbo]

buck --
Well, there is no doubt in my mind, though I guess there is in yours.

All of the other people you mentioned are going into he Hall of Fame, though, so I would think that would only bolster his case.

EDIT: Oh, and Clemens is no-brainer HOF'er, but nothing pisses me off more than the notion that he's a big-game pitcher. Because he isn't.

He's pitched great in big games.

Just not the absolute biggest, the WS.

 

[BYH]

And Guy, I don't think Schilling would have been remembered as a goat if not for Rivera's error. Schilling would have been the guy who lost Game Seven 2-1 to the greatest dynasty of the past 35 years. No shame in that at all.

Goat may be a bit much, but the Soriano HR, now all but forgotten, would have been historic & he'd have been the Eckersly (better?).

Actually, I think that's almost as inaccurate. Eck made the rare mistake of walking someone before a crippled Kirk Gibson battled back from an 0-2 count to go deep. Schilling was masterful for seven innings before he gave up a homer to a rookie who would become one of the greatest power-speed guys in the game.

And yes, Hokie (you'll always be Hokie to me you silly ass ) Clemens was great in that game. But Schilling didn't waste any time in becoming a stud postseason pitcher.

 

[wickedwritah]

I'm gonna sound like a Red Sox fanboy looooser here, but I'm on the Schilling bandwagon.

He did something to that team in '04 once he came aboard, and that intangible allowed the streak to be broken and the Sox to sweep the back end of the ALCS.

You could argue that Schilling and Johnson displayed a similar mojo with Arizona in '01.

And I am not a big Pedro-in-big-games fan. The game in '04 (either end of regular season or playoffs) where the Yankees made him their *****, and he said the Yanks were his daddy, is a prime example.

 

[Guy_Incognito]

And Guy, I don't think Schilling would have been remembered as a goat if not for Rivera's error. Schilling would have been the guy who lost Game Seven 2-1 to the greatest dynasty of the past 35 years. No shame in that at all.

Goat may be a bit much, but the Soriano HR, now all but forgotten, would have been historic & he'd have been the Eckersly (better?).

Actually, I think that's almost as inaccurate. Eck made the rare mistake of walking someone before a crippled Kirk Gibson battled back from an 0-2 count to go deep. Schilling was masterful for seven innings before he gave up a homer to a rookie who would become one of the greatest power-speed guys in the game.

Can you take a metaphor-less point & leave me alone?

 

[Cosmo]

BYH, you're on. But that brings us back to the Schilling vs. Clemens big game argument. They faced off in Game 7 and Clemens was the better big-game pitcher that night on the road than Schilling was (but not by much). My feeling on Schilling is like some others. Not a shoo-in by any means, but he has the potential to make it with a couple of more strong seasons. Clemens' success in his 40s kind of pressures Schilling to have at least three more solid years.

And Mussina was better than Schilling that night. & the next year Washburn (or whoever) was better than Mussina. So what?

Fair enough. I understand what you're getting at ... he was awfully good in that big game situation. I still don't think it's enough for Schill to be a shoo-in.

I guess I have trouble with Schill's overall resume. HOFs should be dominant for a long time. Here's what I consider to be his dominant years:

1992 (14-11, 2.35, 147 K)
1997 (17-11, 2.97, 319 K)
2001 (22-6, 2.98, 293 K)
2002 (23-7, 3.23, 316 K)
2004 (21-6, 3.26, 203 K)

He had several other "very good" years, but they weren't dominating. He's in the conversation in my mind for sure, and very seriously so. But I wouldn't guarantee him a spot.

 

[Columbo]

Remembering the Glenn Davis trade.

Harnisch (out of the game), Schilling and Finley have put in 43 ML seasons since the trade.

Wonder if that is a record.

 

[Cosmo]

And if you look at Baseball Reference's page on Schill, his stats comparisons are most like:

1. David Cone (914)
2. Dazzy Vance (906) *
3. Dwight Gooden (902)
4. Kevin Brown (897)
5. Jimmy Key (897)
6. John Candelaria (893)
7. Lon Warneke (890)
8. Mike Cuellar (888)
9. Mike Mussina (888)
10. Bob Welch (880)

Vance is the only HOFer in that group.

 

[Double J]

Hell, I'll give you the exacta today:

I wouldn't vote for Schilling. No way, no how. Although his career's still going, so he's got time to change that ...

But if Schill retires after this year or next year, he doesn't get in. Two World Series triumphs and three 20-win seasons in a five-year span after age 34 (he went 8-9 and 8-8 in the other two years of that span) doesn't excuse 13 other very average years in your career.

What a bunch of media-enhanced bull****, if he gets to Cooperstown. Just because it happens in the ESPN era doesn't mean it's the greatest ever. Schilling's an average pitcher who had three great years and stuck around long enough to get 200 wins. That's it.

The sock games, though, will live forever and it's wonderful that we have TV to thank for their preservation. It's one of those situations where, if you haven't seen either of those games, you'll wish you had because you've heard so much about them. For example, I'd give a month's salary to see a tape of Harvey Haddix's 12-inning perfect game.

I don't have the time to look it up, but he may be the last guy to play for three straight WS champions.

I presume you mean the last guy to play for multiple teams during his WS champion stretch. There were a lot of Yankees who won three in a row from '98-'00. Or maybe you missed that in Northern Bum****, Canada.

I did miss it. Baseball ceased to exist in most of Canada after the Jays started to tank in 1994. It hung around in Quebec for a year or so after because the Expos were still good.

Seriously, I totally forgot that the Yankee My Wankees won three straight.

 

[BYH]

True, Hokie, but look at Schilling's off-the-charts HOF monitor.

That's not a be-all end-all by any stretch, and it takes playoff performances into account. But it's still a pretty resounding number.

 

[wickedwritah]

In fairness, the tick did in Glenn Davis.

 

[Double J]

And if you look at Baseball Reference's page on Schill, his stats comparisons are most like:

1. David Cone (914)
2. Dazzy Vance (906) *
3. Dwight Gooden (902)
4. Kevin Brown (897)
5. Jimmy Key (897)
6. John Candelaria (893)
7. Lon Warneke (890)
8. Mike Cuellar (888)
9. Mike Mussina (888)
10. Bob Welch (880)

Vance is the only HOFer in that group.

With a name like Dazzy Vance, how could he not be a Hall of Famer?

Speaking of Jimmy Key, that guy may have been the most underrated and unappreciated pitcher to ever wear a Blue Jays uniform. He spent most of his Toronto career in Dave Stieb's shadow and was only considered the ace of the staff once in his nine years there.

But he was consistently good, the first great lefty developed by the Jays' farm system, and a hell of a nice person on top of that. And, as Yankee fans well know, he was also a big-game pitcher who always rose to the occasion.

I remember that, as the 1992 season was coming to an end, everybody was pretty sure Jimmy was going to leave as a free agent. During the World Series he got the win as a starter in Game 4 and as a reliever in the Game 6 clincher, and I'll never forget the last time he pitched for the home team at the SkyDome. He pitched into the eighth inning in Game 4 and allowed only one run before giving way to Duane Ward, and he received a monumental standing ovation as he left the field. He made sure to tip his cap to the fans, a classy, classy guy right to the end. It was only fitting that he got to leave Toronto as a world champion.

We still miss you, Jimmy.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

I love baseball-reference.com but you have to take their most similar players comparisons with a grain of salt. For instance - take a look at who they say is most similar to Albert Pujols:

Similar Batters View in Pop-up
Compare Stats

1. Lance Berkman (889)
2. David Ortiz (835)
3. Geoff Jenkins (830)
4. Magglio Ordonez (824)
5. Lefty O'Doul (823)
6. Carlos Lee (822)
7. Zeke Bonura (808)
8. Richie Sexson (807)
9. Matt Stairs (801)
10. Mike Sweeney (799)

Yeah I can see how Pujols would be more similar to Matt Stairs than Joe DiMaggio

 

[Cosmo]

Good point, Chris. I just want to see how the rest of Schill's career plays out before I call him a shoo-in. I hate the rush to proclaim someone a HOFer before his career is over. Hitting 3,000 would definitely put a nice mark on his resume.

 

[Guy_Incognito]

Pujols is an anamoly. They do their comparisons based on age, & Pujols is doing things no one else has. Plus, they factor in the era, though I concede that that's a strange list. Schilling is good, but the reason there are no HOFers in his list is not because he stumped the system, it's because unless you want to factor in things like a bloody sock or SOSH, he doesn't belong there.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

Guy - Schilling will have 3,000 k's with his next strikeout and yet none of the players on the baseball-reference.com list are in the 3,000 k club. Don't you find that in the least strange? That's why I say take those comparisons with a grain of salt.

All the members of the 3,000 k club (with the possible exception of Blyleven) either are in or will be in the Hall of Fame.

 

[Freelance Hack]

Blyleven is the only member of the 3,000 K Club not in the Hall that is eligible.

 

[Double J]

Does anybody think there should be career statistical benchmarks, the passing of which guarantees a guy a spot in the Hall of Fame?

I mean, for years and years and years the unofficial targets were 500 homers or 3,000 hits or 300 wins. Reach one of those numbers, you're a shoo-in. Should these or some other numbers be made official? Or could there be a point system similar to the one now used by the LPGA for its own Hall?

 

[wickedwritah]

Absolutely not. It would encourage too many stat compilers to stick around way past their prime to get in.

In the past, 400 homers definitely got you in. Imagine if we had that benchmark now ... we'd have the Fred McGriffs and Jose Cansecos of the world clogging up the hall.

 

[BYH]

And someone might have let Harold Baines hang on another 10 years to get the 150-odd hits he needed for 3,000. [/shudder]

And Zeke, Schilling's bloody sock is indeed in Cooperstown. Along with the pen he used to mark it up. [/theory floating around baseball and espoused by people who don't like Schilling]