2015 Hall of Fame Inductees

[Roy's Outlaws]

Schilling belongs in the HOF.
* 20 years in the majors
* Excellent postseason pitcher and a World Series winner
* 15th all time in strikeouts
* One of only 4 pitchers in MLB history with more than 3,000 K's and less than 1,000 walks. P. Martinez, G. Maddux and F. Jenkins are the others
* Every pitcher ahead of him in strikeouts is in HOF except Clemens
* Played half of his career with bad Phillies teams yet career W-L record is still good
* 3.46 career ERA, in the steroid era, is pretty darn good.

Really ,so all it should take to get in the Hall of Fame is to Play 20 years in the majors. If you play 20 years you should be high up in career stats(k's, wins). What more important than WINNING? that's why they play the games! So by your rules why haven't Jim Kaat or Tommy John made it into the Hall? Both played over 20 years and have won a lot more game than Schilling. You can always twist stats to what you want them to say(Ask any good Accountant).300 wins is the magic number. .That how Phil Niekro and Don Sutton both got in, they where pitcher than put together good number by playing for ever. I would not put either on them in the Hall of Fame. Maybe the hall of Longevity. or the Hall of 20+years.

[TOXIC ASSETS]

As Jackal said --- there is no legitimate argument to keep Schilling out using stats. Bingo.
Roy -- You commented on only 1 of my 7 points. What about the other 6?

As for the other 4 guys you mentioned...you could spend an hour on each one just looking at the stat sheets. All of these guys rank very high in career IP (as you would expect).....

* Phil Niekro --- more than 300 wins and the best knuckleball pitcher ever. Three 20 win seasons. Not even an argument here, he belongs in.

* Don Sutton -- The classic compiler. This guy is close and the argument could go either way. Only ONE 20 win season in almost a quarter century. Career WHIP of 1.142 is really good. 324 wins can't be ignored.

* Tommy John -- not in my book --- nice career and hung around for a quarter century but I wouldn't put him in.

* Jim Kaat - same thing. He's close, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

[Yah Mule]

Don Sutton threw 58 shutouts, which is 10th all time. Everybody with more than 48 except Tiant (49) is in the Hall. Sutton is a no-brainer, IMO. Tommy John would be a tougher call, but I might lean yes. I would be more inclined to enshrine Dr Frank Jobe to be honest.

[Brian Jenner]

Sutton was good for a really long time. You can't look at shutout totals of a guy that pitched in the 1960s and compare it to modern players. The game is different. It's like saying Todd Jones was better than Hoyt Wilhelm because he had more saves. Sutton led the league in shutouts once. Career ERA+ of 108. He was really good, for a really long time, but his ERA relative to the league he played in was not that great. He's really more of a Tommy John, Jim Kaat, Frank Tanana, Jack Morris compiler type, rather than a HOF shoe-in. And for the record, being compared to Jack Morris is not meant to be flattering, haha. But Sutton is a borderline case. He's already in so debating it doesn't matter all that much.

[Yah Mule]

Sutton was good for a really long time. You can't look at shutout totals of a guy that pitched in the 1960s and compare it to modern players. The game is different. It's like saying Todd Jones was better than Hoyt Wilhelm because he had more saves. Sutton led the league in shutouts once. Career ERA+ of 108. He was really good, for a really long time, but his ERA relative to the league he played in was not that great. He's really more of a Tommy John, Jim Kaat, Frank Tanana, Jack Morris compiler type, rather than a HOF shoe-in. And for the record, being compared to Jack Morris is not meant to be flattering, haha. But Sutton is a borderline case. He's already in so debating it doesn't matter all that much.

Sutton is 10th all time, so that compares him to everybody who ever played.

It took Sutton five ballots to be inducted with 81.6% of the vote. Steve Carlton, whose career almost perfectly overlapped Sutton's, sailed into the Hall on the first ballot with 95.6% of the vote.

Sutton: GS 756, 324-256, ERA 3.26, ERA+ 108, WHIP 1.142, K 3574, SHO 58, CG 178

Carlton: GS 709, 329-244, ERA 3.22, ERA+ 115, WHIP 1.247, K 4136, SHO 55, CG 254

Carlton holds a clear edge, but I think their peripheral numbers are a lot closer than most people remember. I certainly don't think the gap between them is so vast that one is first ballot and the other is borderline. IMO, Sutton never should have had to wait as long as he did.

I don't think compiler is a dirty word even though it has been cast as such. As a roto player, I most definitely consider durability to be a skill and a valuable one at that. Don Sutton compiled numbers over 23 years in MLB. He started at least 31 games in 20 of those seasons. I think that's a pretty remarkable feat in its own right.

I guess I'm what some people would refer to as a big Hall guy. There are players in the Hall of Fame whose careers date back to 1871. So, you've got 240 enshrined players in 144 years of Major League Baseball. That doesn't seem like a huge ratio.

[Red Sox Nation-]

Schilling belongs in the HOF.
* 20 years in the majors
* Excellent postseason pitcher and a World Series winner
* 15th all time in strikeouts
* One of only 4 pitchers in MLB history with more than 3,000 K's and less than 1,000 walks. P. Martinez, G. Maddux and F. Jenkins are the others
* Every pitcher ahead of him in strikeouts is in HOF except Clemens
* Played half of his career with bad Phillies teams yet career W-L record is still good
* 3.46 career ERA, in the steroid era, is pretty darn good.

Really ,so all it should take to get in the Hall of Fame is to Play 20 years in the majors. If you play 20 years you should be high up in career stats(k's, wins). What more important than WINNING? that's why they play the games! So by your rules why haven't Jim Kaat or Tommy John made it into the Hall? Both played over 20 years and have won a lot more game than Schilling. You can always twist stats to what you want them to say(Ask any good Accountant).300 wins is the magic number. .That how Phil Niekro and Don Sutton both got in, they where pitcher than put together good number by playing for ever. I would not put either on them in the Hall of Fame. Maybe the hall of Longevity. or the Hall of 20+years.

He wasn't on some bad teams, he was on some wretched teams. Hence the win pct or total win stats. From 1992-2000 (longest tenure with any team) the Phillies were above .500 just ONE YEAR. I don't believe in these magical numbers like 300. If a pitcher ends up with 299 wins is he not a hall of famer? 2,999 hits vs 3,000? I agree that winning is important. That's why I'll look at 2001 and 2004 and to a lesser extent 2007(remember those years?) if I want to see winning. His teams would have never made the post season, never-mind won the title without him in 01 and 04.

[EWeaver]

"Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."

In other words, no usable criteria - no standard. Nobody can say who does or doesn't belong (including the BBWAA). Can a guy get in on integrity and character alone? Is that how Eckstein got a vote this year?

I couldn't disagree more with Roy's Outlaw's standard, but at least everybody would know who does and doesn't belong, and why (300 Wins - presumably to include even chickenshit players who try to blow smoke up our asses ). Would need to figure out the one stat to judge hitters by, though.