Yesterday there was a lot of focus around Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. Both should have made the Hall of Fame, and the fact that they didn't is extremely disappointing. There's one player who deserves to be talked about, but for whatever reason he is not. That player is Curt Schilling. Grant Brisbee of Baseball Nation looks at this and attempts to answer why Schilling did not make the Hall of Fame, and his chances going forward.
Schilling was the archetype of the plus-control, high-strikeout pitcher, which makes him something of a snapshot in time. If you wanted to be successful in the '90s and '00s, you pitched like Curt Schilling, missing bats and limiting walks. Few did it better. Or, rather, no one did it better. He pitched long enough to win more than 200 games, and he dominated in a high-offense era.
From 1997-2001 Schilling was about dominant as a pitcher can be. He struck out 26% of batters, and walked only 5% of batters. His 139 ERA+ was also about as dominant as it gets. Oh, and this was all done during the "steroid era". Schilling has never been suspected to have used steroids, and even volunteered to testify to Congress about them.
Next to Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling has the most wins above replacement among Hall of Fame eligible pitchers. Things won't be getting any easier for Schilling though. Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, Pedro Martinez, Mike Mussina, John Smoltz, and Randy Johnson will all be eligible for the Hall of Fame in the next few years.
Eventually Schilling's time will come, but it doesn't look like it will happen any time soon.
Question for the community:
1) When do you think Curt Schilling will get elected to the Hall of Fame.