Incredibly, though, since seeing that comparison I have run across a baseball comparison that is driving me even more insane. This comes from my friend Rick Hummel at the St. Louis Post Dispatch, who is one of the great people and great ball writers around. Rick wrote a column in which the lead item says that people who think Curt Schilling should go into the Hall of Fame are missing ?a potload of more deserving candidates.? I like the word ?potload.? His main argument, while I would disagree with it, is certainly a fair one: Schilling?s career record is 216-146, and that would normally not be viewed as Hall-worthy. I disagree with it because I don?t like the use of pitcher?s won-loss records for reasons that are worth about 10 blog posts. But I certainly concede the point ? Schilling only won 216 games and if he does not come back he is very much a borderline Hall of Fame candidate.
BUT ? then Rick makes the big comparison. If he had written that Schilling?s career (216-146, 3.46 ERA, 127 ERA+) wasn?t much different from obvious non-Hall of Fame Kevin Brown (211-144, 3.28 ERA, 127 ERA+) or even pointed out the eerie similarities between his base numbers and Bob Welch (211-146, 3.47 ERA, though Welch pitched in a much, much better pitching era as his 106 ERA+ indicates), then I would have been on -board. I think Schilling has some serious advantages over those guys, but I would have liked the argument.
But no. Instead, Rick compares to others who won a lot more games ? Blyleven, Tommy John, Jim Kaat and so on. OK, those guys pitched a lot longer, OK, still I?m following. But first, before bringing up Bllyelven, Rick dredged up the name. Oh yeah. He compared Schilling to Jack Morris. I swear, I think sometimes that people just bring up Jack Morris in Hall of Fame arguments because they love seeing me lose it.
It?s bad enough that people keep comparing Jack Morris and Bert Blyleven (and some keep voting for Morris and NOT Blyleven), even though Blyleven was better in every possibly way a pitcher can be better. But in many ways this comparison is EVEN WORSE. OK, well, before I get into why, let?s look at some numbers.
Career ERA: Schilling 3.46, Morris 3.90.
Career ERA+: Schilling 127, Morris 105.
Strikeouts: Schilling 3,116, Morris 2,478.
Walks: Schilling 711, Morris 1,390.
WHIP: Schilling 1.137, Morris 1.296.
Winning percentage: Schilling .597, Morris .577.
OK, so all those go to Schilling by wide margins. WIDE margins. I mean, WIDE margins. Morris, however, won 254 games to Schilling?s 216. How about that? Well, even if you take that serious, to me, the argument has no steam. Morris? career record was 254-186. Schilling?s is, as mentioned, 216-146.
That would mean that for Schilling to MATCH Jack Morris? career totals, he would have to go 38-40 with a 6.46 ERA. If that?s the difference between Curt and the Hall, maybe he can come back and pitch left-handed.
But that?s not why I hate the comparison ? after all, Blyleven?s numbers crush Morris to an even greater extent.* No ? what I hate about the argument is this: Morris? case revolves almost entirely around him being a ?clutch pitcher.? Right? I mean, if you don?t buy into all that clutchiness then basically all you?ve got is a rugged pitcher who threw a bunch of innings for good teams, naturally won quite a lot of games and was, all in all, a little better than league average.
*The difference between Blyleven and Morris includes more than 1,200 strikeouts, 32 shutouts and more than 1,100 innings with zero walks and a 1.36 ERA.
But that?s not the Hall of Fame argument. The Hall of Fame argument is that Morris delivered in the big moments, that he threw one of the great games in baseball history (Game 7, 1991, of course) and that game summarized the grit and steel nerve of his career. The Hall of Fame argument is that Morris pitched to the score, lifted his game, came through in the clutch, was best when he needed to be, and true he may not have had a great ERA, and he may not have dominated like other great pitchers, but when the chips were down, and breaks were going against the boys, and backs were against the wall, and there was no tomorrow, well by gosh, that was when Jack Morris stood tall in the saddle.
And this is why this comparison drives me insane. Because it?s bad enough to have to argue with the myths and judgements of Jack Morris? unshakeable character. But hell, if THAT?S your argument, then holy cow, Curt Schilling is a MUCH better example. He was a MUCH better postseason pitcher. He pitched the bloody sock game. He and Unit beat the mighty Yankees. The numbers aren?t close.
Postseason
Jack Morris: 7-4, 3.80 ERA.
Curt Schilling: 11-2, 2.23 ERA.
World Series
Jack Morris: 4-2, 2.96 ERA.
Curt Schilling: 4-1, 2.08 ERA.
And so, yeah, that bugs me. Now the argument is that he was tougher than Blyleven but at the same time he won more games than Curt Schilling? Ugh. Suddenly, Jack Morris has become a two-front war.
Facebook
Twitter