Sportsfrog.com

Curt Schilling: 3,261 IP, 216-146, 3.46 ERA, 127 ERA+ (133.3 IP, 10-2, 2.23 ERA, 3 WS titles)
Mike Mussina: 3,562.7 IP, 270-153, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+ (139.7 IP, 7-9, 3.42 ERA, 0 WS titles)
David Cone: 2,898.7 IP, 194-126, 3.46 ERA, 120 ERA+ (111.1 IP, 12-3, 3.80 ERA, 5 WS titles)
Kevin Brown: 3,256.3 IP, 211-144, 3.28 ERA, 127 ERA+ (81.2 IP, 6-2, 4.19 ERA, 1 WS titles)
Andy Pettitte: 2,731.7 IP, 215-127, 3.89 ERA, 117 ERA+ (218.1, 18-7, 3.96 ERA, 4 WS titles)

I really just want some clarity on how this argument works. We’re willing to ignore Mussina’s 50+ win advantage on Schilling because Mussina never won a World Series, right? But what about Cone? He has 5 rings to Schilling’s 3 and a better postseason record. Does that not make up 22 wins? Or what about Kevin Brown? It’s almost impossible to find two pitchers more similar over long careers than Brown and Schilling and yet one will likely get in while the other isn’t given more than passing consideration (and Brown doesn’t even have the Mussina stigma of never winning a ring). Pettitte never seemed to have his name brought up even before a member of the Red Sox board of directors discovered his PED past, but why? More titles, more postseason wins, more regular season wins by this May and the narrative of being the guy who won the must-win games during the Yankee dynasty run … I don’t get it. Does it really all come down to the red sock game and the fact that he’s the only one of the five pitchers above who was brilliant at writing his career narrative as he went along? Really, it’s not even that I’m positive I don’t view Schilling as a Hall of Famer, it’s just that I hate how much different his debate will be than that of similarly credentialed peers.

No, he’s not.

P.S. Note to you, Jayson Stark, and the rest of you star-struck journalists, NOT every player you’ve covered as a baseball writer gets to be in the Hall. Just sayin’…

For the love of all that is holy, Curt Schilling is NOT a hall of famer. STOP trying to sell everyone that he is. Jeebus. It has crossed over to unseemly. Setting aside that Bert Blyleven, a far more worthy candidate, still is not in, look me up when your network bangs a similar drum for the comparable David Cone (bounced from consideration after only garnering 4% on his first ballot) or Jack Morris (equally as strong post-season heroics stuff).

Until that point? STFU.

While perusing the latest Garret Anderson is wonderful update from the AJC, I realized just how far his career has flown under my radar. That would be way under. Anderson is 36 (he’ll turn 37 at the end of June). And in the article was the mention that he has 2368 career hits.

I did not know/realize that.

That’s a lot of hits. He’s 632 short of 3000. And 3000 hits remains an automatic ticket to Cooperstown. Can he average around 150 hits a year until he is 40 or so? Perhaps. It isn’t outlandish to think so (his last four years he has had 163, 152, 124, and 163). His comp list at baseball reference.com of similar players though age 36 is:

Dave Parker
Steve Garvey
Harold Baines
Al Oliver
Tony Perez *
Luis Gonzalez
Bernie Williams
Ruben Sierra
John Olerud
Cecil Cooper

A lot of really good players on that list, but only Tony Perez is in the Hall. And he was a borderline at best inductee.

Still, 3000 hits is in reach for a guy who I guess I have never fully appreciated as his career has unfolded. So, huh.