A Call to the Hall for Schilling?

Last Monday Curt Schilling announced on his blog, 38pitches.com, that he was retiring for baseball after a 20 season career.

The past week has brought up much debate on sports television, radio, web sites, and blogs about whether or not Curt Schilling belongs in the Baseball Hall of Fame. There are many statistical reasons why people feel that Schilling should not be a Hall of Famer.

People have brought up different areas in which Schilling's statistics are not adequate enough for the Hall. Some of these areas are not having enough wins, too high of a career ERA, subpar regular seasons, and never winning a Cy Young Award.

Wins: 216

Schill finished his career with a total of 216 wins, currently good enough for 80th all time. At the time of his retirement, he was 7th on the active list.

Schilling's Hall doubters point to this as one of the main reasons why he should not make it. However, people only look at the number and not the intangibles surround the number.

Between the strike shortened 1994 season and 1999, Schilling played for a Phillies team that did not finish the season over .500. It is tough to blame him for not amassing more wins because of the fact he was on a sub par team.

In this category, doubters also do not look at his winning percentage of .597, which is higher than many Hall of Famers including Bob Gibson, Steve Carlton, Catfish Hunter, and Don Drysdale (who won seven less games than Schilling).

ERA: 3.46

When dealing with ERA, era must be considered. Schilling played in the "Steroid Era" of baseball in which hitters were bashing the ball all over the place as a result of steroids. Pitchers also took them in order to combat the widespread use by hitters.

So where does that leave us with Schilling? His high career ERA must be examined with the Steroid Era in mind. At the time of his retirement, he was 11th on the active ERA list. In terms of starters who pitched throughout the Steroid Era, he is tied for 7th in that category behind Pedro Martinez (the only one with an ERA under three), Roger Clemens (who took steroids himself), Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, Kevin Brown, and is tied with David Cone.

In the coming years, Hall of Fame voters are going to have to consider steroids as a reason for inflated ERAs and factor that into their decision, like in the case of Schilling.

Regular Season

Critics have pointed to Schilling's sub par regular season performances noting that they were only made up for by his postseason success.

This discredits a lot of what Schilling has done throughout the years. In a time when pitchers rarely go the full none innings, Schilling has thrown 83 complete games-3rd on the active list. He has also thrown 20 shutouts-5th on the active list. He had the best strikeout to walk ratio among active players and the second best all time behind Tommy Boyd who pitched in the 1800s.

In addition, Schilling has over 3,000 strikeouts and is currently 15th all time and was 8th on the active list in that category.

Just because he does not have the a high total of career wins or a lower ERA does not mean that he was not productive in the regular season. The statistics mentioned above are fairly impressive when comparing Schilling to other players of his time.

Cy Young

Notable Hall of Famers to not win a Cy Young Award:

Nolan Ryan, Don Sutton, Phil Niekro, and Goose Gossage. Granted all of these players have other very significant accomplishments, they do not have that piece of hardware in their possession.

According to baseball-reference.com, Schilling is 16th all time in Cy Young Award shares, meaning total amount of percentages of votes that he received. He has the highest total of anyone who did not win the award.

The significance of this stat is that even though Schilling did not win the award, he was considered for it many times, including finishing second place to his teammate Randy Johnson in consecutive years.

People have also brought up comparisons to other players. The most common is to Jack Morris, stating that they both were average pitchers in the regular season that excelled in the postseason.

Morris has more regular season wins than Schilling, but also has a lower winning percentage (.577), higher ERA (3.90), 638 less strikeouts, and a higher WHIP (1.296). So aside from the wins category, Schilling had better regular season numbers than Morris.

Then comes the comparison in the postseason. Jack Morris went 7-4 in the postseason (including 2 losses in the 1992 World Series) with a 3.80 ERA. Schilling went 11-2 with a 2.23 ERA and was also named co-MVP in the 2001 World Series.

Morris still has not been elected to the Hall and according to these numbers, if it were between him and Schilling; Schill would have to get the nod over Morris.

Come 2013, if Hall of Fame voters are as irrational and irresponsible as people currently examining this situation, if they only look at career wins and ERA, Schilling will not be a Hall-of-Famer.

If they dig deeper into the statistics as I have and see the truth behind the numbers then Schilling's bust will be enshrined in Cooperstown. I do not believe that Schilling will be a first ballot Hall of Famer, that is honor bestowed on a select few greats, but he will in due time receive his call to the Hall.

In my mind there is only question left regarding the Hall of Fame for Schilling. That is what cap will be atop his head in Cooperstown?