JAWS and the 2020 Hall of Fame Ballot: Curt Schilling
The following article is part of Jay Jaffe’s ongoing look at the candidates on the BBWAA 2020 Hall of Fame ballot. Originally written for the 2018 election at SI.com, it has been updated to reflect recent voting results as well as additional research. For a detailed introduction to this year’s ballot, and other candidates in the series, use the tool above; an introduction to JAWS can be found here. For a tentative schedule and a chance to fill out a Hall of Fame ballot for our crowdsourcing project, see here. All WAR figures refer to the Baseball-Reference version unless otherwise indicated.
On the field, Curt Schilling was at his best when the spotlight shone the brightest. A top starter on four pennant winners and three World Series champions, he has a strong claim as the best postseason pitcher of his generation. Founded on pinpoint command of his mid-90s fastball and a devastating splitter, his regular season dominance enhances his case for Cooperstown. He’s one of just 18 pitchers to strike out more than 3,000 hitters, and is the owner of the highest strikeout-to-walk ratio in modern major league history.
That said, Schilling never won a Cy Young award and finished with “only” 216 regular-season wins. While only one starter with fewer than 300 wins was elected during the 1992-2014 span (Bert Blyleven), four have been tabbed since then, two in 2015 (Pedro Martinez and John Smoltz) and two in ’19 (Roy Halladay and Mike Mussina), suggesting that’s far less of an obstacle than before.
Schilling was something of a late bloomer who didn’t click until his age-25 season, after he had been traded three times. He spent much of his peak pitching in the shadows of even more famous (and popular) teammates, which may have helped to explain his outspokenness. Former Phillies manager Jim Fregosi nicknamed him “Red Light Curt” for his desire to be at the center of attention when the cameras were rolling, while Phillies general manager Ed Wade said, “Schilling is a horse every fifth day and a horse’s ass the other four.” Whether expounding about politics, performance-enhancing drugs, the QuesTec pitch-tracking system, or a cornerstone of his legend, Schilling wasn’t shy about telling the world what he thought.
That desire eventually extended beyond the mound. Schilling used his platform to raise money for research into amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease) and, after a bout of oral cancer, recorded public service announcements on the dangers of smokeless tobacco. In 1996, USA Today named him “Baseball’s Most Caring Athlete.” But in the years since his retirement, his actions and inflammatory rhetoric on social media have turned him from merely a controversial and polarizing figure to one who has continued to create problems for himself.
Normally, that wouldn’t be germane to the Hall of Fame discussion, but Schilling’s promotion of a tweet promoting the lynching of journalists — yes, really — during the tense 2016 presidential campaign brought his momentum to a screeching halt. He had climbed from 38.8% in 2013 to 52.3% in ’16, even while taking a backseat to a quintet of pitchers — Martinez, Smoltz, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, and Randy Johnson — whose hardware and milestones led to first-ballot entries. Due in large part to his social media and political battles, he plummeted to 45.0% in 2017, as several previous supporters left him off their ballots even when they had space to spare, either explicitly or implicitly citing the character clause. Even while maintaining his noxious public persona, he’s recovered his lost ground and then some, reaching 60.9% last year. With any other candidate, that share plus three years of eligibility remaining would equal an inevitable election, but Schilling’s capacity for self-sabotage removes such certainty.
| Pitcher | Career WAR | Peak WAR | JAWS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Curt Schilling | 79.6 | 48.7 | 64.1 |
| Avg. HOF SP | 73.2 | 49.9 | 61.5 |
| W-L | SO | ERA | ERA+ |
| 216-146 | 3,116 | 3.46 | 127 |
The son of a career Army man, Schilling was born in Anchorage, Alaska, on November 14, 1966 into a family that bounced around the U.S. before settling in Phoenix. Though he impressed scouts at a tryout camp held by the Reds after his junior year at Shadow Mountain High School, he didn’t make the varsity squad until his senior year, and went undrafted out of school. After enrolling at Yavapai Junior College in Arizona, he pitched in the Junior College World Series, was chosen by the Red Sox in the second round of the now-bygone January draft in 1986, and signed for a $20,000 bonus.
Schilling put himself on the prospect map in 1987 by leading the Class-A South Atlantic League in strikeouts at age 20, but midway through the next year, he was traded to the Orioles along with outfielder Brady Anderson in a deadline deal for pitcher Mike Boddicker. He debuted in the majors on September 7, 1988, with a seven-inning, three-run performance against the Red Sox, but he was torched in his three other starts, finishing with a 9.82 ERA. After being knocked around during a similar cup-of-coffee the following year, he stuck around Baltimore as a reliever for about half of the 1990 season, putting up a 2.54 ERA in 46 innings. Even so, he didn’t exactly impress Orioles manager Frank Robinson, his first big-league skipper, with his personal appearance. Recounted the pitcher in a 1998 Sports Illustrated profile:
“I walk in, I got the earring and half my head shaved, a blue streak dyed in it. He says, ‘Sit down,’ and then just cocks his head and stares at me for a while. Finally, he says, ‘What’s wrong with you, son?’ I just sit there and act dumb and say, ‘Huh? What do you mean?'”
Schilling lost the earring and the blue streak, but his lack of maturity persisted. Summoned from the bullpen in a September 1990 game, he admitted to not having paid attention to the opposing lineup. “The ‘Who’s Up?’ story spread through the organization until it became synonymous with his name. Million-dollar arm. Ten-cent head,” wrote Thomas Boswell of the Washington Post. That winter, the Orioles sent Schilling to the Astros (along with outfielder Steve Finley and pitcher Pete Harnisch) for first baseman Glenn Davis, a deal that’s still reviled in Baltimore, less for the future stardom of those departing than for Davis’ flop with the Orioles.
Schilling was not a big hit in Houston, either. After spending the 1991 season in the bullpen, he was traded to Philadelphia for Jason Grimsley just before Opening Day the following year. Six weeks into the season, he finally got another shot to start and was outstanding, completing 10 of 26 turns with four shutouts. He finished the 1992 season 14–11 with a 2.35 ERA in 226.1 innings; his ERA and 5.9 WAR both ranked fourth in the league.
Schilling’s ERA ballooned to 4.02 (99 ERA+) in 1993 as a full-time member of the rotation, but his 186 strikeouts ranked fourth in the league. More importantly, he helped Philadelphia win its first division title in a decade, then earned NLCS MVP honors against Atlanta with two strong, eight-inning starts in which he allowed a combined three earned runs and struck out 19, though he received a no-decision in both. Roughed up in the World Series opener against the Blue Jays, Schilling rebounded to throw a 147-pitch, five-hit shutout in Game 5 to stave off elimination, though the Jays won the Series on Joe Carter’s homer in Game 6 nonetheless.
The combination of the 1994–95 players’ strike and a trio of surgeries — for a bone spur in his elbow, torn cartilage in his left knee and, most seriously, a torn labrum and frayed rotator cuff — limited Schilling to just 56 starts from 1994-96, but he returned to action with improved velocity and continued to miss bats. He whiffed 182 hitters in 183.1 innings in 1996, and though he made just 26 starts overall, his eight complete games led the league. Both his 3.19 ERA (134 ERA+) and his 4.9 WAR cracked the top 10.
Despite the fact that the Phillies had suffered three straight losing seasons, including a 95-loss campaign in 1996, Schilling chose to sign a below-market, three-year, $15.45 million extension in April 1997. While the hapless team went 68–94, he went 17–11 with a 2.97 ERA (143 ERA+) in 254.1 innings and a league-leading 319 strikeouts, the highest total in the majors since Nolan Ryan‘s 341 in 1977 and the most in the NL since Sandy Koufax’s 382 in 1965. He made his first All-Star team and placed fourth both in WAR (6.3) and in the Cy Young voting, losing out to Martinez, who struck out 305 with a 1.90 ERA for the Expos.
The next year, Schilling became the first pitcher since J.R. Richard in 1978 and ’79 to notch at least 300 strikeouts in back-to-back seasons. He finished with a league-leading 300, and his 268.2 innings and 15 complete games — still the highest total since 1992 — paced the circuit as well; his 6.2 WAR again ranked fourth. The mileage soon caught up to him. Though he earned All-Star honors for the third straight year in 1999 — starting the game for the NL squad, even — Schilling made just three starts after July 23 due to shoulder inflammation, underwent off-season surgery to tighten his shoulder capsule, and didn’t make another regular-season appearance until April 30, 2000. Though not as dominant as in 1997 and ’98, he pitched reasonably well. With the Phillies en route to a 97-loss season, he agreed to waive his no-trade clause and was sent to Arizona for a four-player package on July 26. The Diamondbacks, tied for first place in the NL West at the time of the trade, ultimately fell short of a playoff spot.
With Schilling and lefty Randy Johnson forming the league’s best one-two punch, Arizona won the division in 2001. Schilling set career highs with 22 wins and 8.8 WAR and struck out 293 hitters in 256.2 innings, walking just 37 for an eye-popping 7.5 strikeout-to-walk ratio. He would have waltzed home with the Cy Young award had Johnson not struck out 372 and won 21 games himself en route to the third of four straight Cy wins; Schilling placed second in the vote.
More importantly, the Diamondbacks won the NL West, and Schilling built on that dominant regular season by sparkling in the playoffs. In the first two rounds against the Cardinals and the Braves, respectively, he threw three complete-game victories and struck out 30, allowing just three runs. In the World Series against a Yankees team seeking its fourth straight championship, he yielded one run in seven innings in a Game 1 win, then duplicated that performance on three days’ rest in Game 4. He was in position to get the win in that game too, until Diamondbacks closer Byung-Hyun Kim allowed a game-tying, two-run homer to Tino Martinez in the ninth, then Derek Jeter’s walk-off solo shot in the 10th.
The Series wound up stretching to a Game 7, with Schilling again taking the ball on three days’ rest. He held the Yankees scoreless for the first six innings but departed in the eighth, trailing 2–1 after surrendering a homer to Alfonso Soriano. Johnson came out of the bullpen in relief, and Arizona rallied for two runs in the bottom of the ninth inning against Mariano Rivera to win the title. Schilling shared co-MVP honors with Johnson (and soon enough, Sports Illustrated’s Sportsmen of the Year honors as well). For the postseason, he had put up a 1.12 ERA, setting records for innings (48.1 innings, surpassed by Madison Bumgarner in 2014) and strikeouts (56), and walking just six.
Schilling was nearly as outstanding in 2002, with 8.6 WAR, 23 wins, and 316 strikeouts with a 9.6 strikeout-to-walk ratio, the second of five times he’d lead his league in that category from 2001-06. “He’s Picasso with a machine gun,” marveled Blue Jays pitcher Dan Plesac, adding, “The command of his fastball, to all four quadrants of the plate, [is] like no power pitcher in years.” Schilling’s WAR, wins, strikeouts, and Cy Young vote total took a back seat only to Johnson.
Limited to 24 starts by appendicitis and two fractured metacarpals (courtesy of a pair of comeback shots in the same game) in 2003, Schilling waived his no-trade clause for a deal to the Red Sox, who were fresh off their agonizing ALCS loss to the Yankees on Aaron Boone’s walk-off homer. As part of the five-player trade, Schilling signed a three-year, $37.5 million extension with a $13 million vesting option contingent on the Red Sox winning the World Series, something that hadn’t happened since 1918 (the clause actually ran afoul of MLB’s contract rules).
Pairing with Martinez as Boston’s co-ace, the 37-year-old Schilling put up another banner season, with 21 wins, a 3.26 ERA (148 ERA+ in hitter-friendly Fenway Park), and 203 strikeouts. He earned All-Star honors for the sixth time, but a torn tendon sheath in his right ankle hampered him as the postseason came around. Following an unexceptional Division Series start against the Angels, he was chased by the Yankees after just three innings in Game 1 of the ALCS. It didn’t appear as though the injury would matter once New York built a 3–0 series lead, but when the Sox clawed their way back, Schilling took the ball for Game 6 in the Bronx.
The day before the start, doctors performed an experimental procedure — first tried on a cadaver — to secure a tendon in place using three stitches; TV shots that night routinely captured the blood in Schilling’s ankle seeping through his sock. Nevertheless, his body held together long enough for him to turn in a seven-inning, one-run performance, helping the Sox force a Game 7, which Boston won handily. He threw six innings of one-run ball against the Cardinals in Game 2 of the World Series, helping Boston to its first world championship in 86 years.
Despite off-season surgery, Schilling’s ankle continued to trouble him well into the following year. Splitting his time between the rotation and closing — something he’d done regularly only in early 1991 — he finished with an ugly 5.69 ERA in just 93.1 innings. He rebounded to throw 204 innings of 3.97 ERA (120 ERA+) ball in 2006, striking out 183 and finishing with a stellar 6.5 strikeout-to-walk ratio, but the Red Sox missed the playoffs. Following a strong start in 2007, his season unraveled after he fell one out shy of no-hitting the A’s on June 7; he lost six weeks to shoulder inflammation. Schilling struggled before mustering some semblance of his old form in the postseason. He threw seven shutout innings in the Division Series clincher against the Angels, rebounded from an ALCS Game 2 pounding by the Indians to yield two runs over seven innings in Game 6 and wobbled through 5.1 innings in Game 2 of the World Series against the Rockies — another sweep, as it turned out.
He never pitched a competitive game again. Schilling signed an incentive-laden one-year, $8 million deal to return to Boston in 2008, but further shoulder problems that winter led to a public battle with the team over his treatment. He didn’t undergo surgery to repair his biceps tendon and labrum until June, and couldn’t rehab in time to rejoin the team. The following spring, he announced his retirement.
…
Schilling finished with 216 wins, a lower total than all but 17 of the 65 starting pitchers in the Hall of Fame, only four of whom (Halladay, Koufax, Smoltz, and Don Drysdale) pitched in the majors during the post-1960 expansion era. The BBWAA voters have taken a long time to accept the idea that pitcher wins aren’t the ideal measure of success in a modern era where it’s understood that offensive, defensive, and bullpen support are major factors in the compilation of those precious W’s. After electing Fergie Jenkins (284 career wins and seven 20-win seasons) in 1991, it took until 2011 — when Blylelven (287 wins) was elected — for another starter with fewer than 300 victories to gain entry via the writers. Only in the past decade, with the writers electing Mussina (280 wins), Martinez (219 ), Smoltz (213), and Halladay (203) and the Modern Baseball Era Committee adding Jack Morris (254), has the tide appeared to turn. Morris aside, those starters pitched in the highest scoring era since the 1930s, and more than held their own against lineups much deeper than their predecessors faced, working deep into counts to rack up high strikeout totals before yielding to increasingly specialized bullpens. The shape of their accomplishments may be different than the even larger cohort of pitchers from the 1960s and ’70s who helped set that 300-or-bust standard, but they belong alongside them in Cooperstown just the same. Martinez, Smoltz, and Halladay went in without a fuss, while Mussina took six years, but all of them should open the door for Schilling and today’s top starters, whose diminishing workloads may preclude runs at milestone totals.
Even so, Schilling’s candidacy has far more than his regular season win total going for it. He was 11–2 with a 2.23 ERA in 133.1 postseason innings covering 19 starts, helping his teams to four pennants and three championships; in the World Series alone, he was 4–1 with a 2.06 ERA in seven starts totaling 48 innings. Other pitchers of his era racked up more postseason appearances and wins, but among starters from the post-1960 expansion era with at least 100 postseason innings, only Bumgarner (2.11) has a lower ERA. Among post-1960 pitchers with at least 40 innings in the World Series, only Koufax (0.94) and Bob Gibson (1.89) have lower ERAs, albeit from lower-scoring eras, making Schilling’s accomplishments all the more impressive.
Turning back to the regular season: Schilling’s 3,116 strikeouts rank 15th all-time, and his 8.6 strikeout-per-nine rate ranks third among pitchers with at least 3,000 innings, behind only Johnson and Ryan, and just ahead of Roger Clemens. It’s true that Schilling pitched in an era when strikeout rates were almost continually on the rise, but he was still ahead of the curve: his trio of 300-K seasons puts him in the company of Johnson, Ryan, and Koufax as the only pitchers with more than two such seasons during the expansion era, and he finished in his league’s top five in strikeouts eight times. His K%+ — his league-normalized strikeout rate — of 139 (39% better than average) ranks 16th among pitchers with at least 2,500 innings. What’s more, he demonstrated impeccable control while doing so, leading the league in strikeout-to-walk ratio five times and placing in the top five another four times; his 4.4 ratio is the highest of any pitcher with at least 2,500 innings since 1893, when the pitching distance was first set at 60’6′.
Schilling never won a Cy Young award, but he placed second three times during the 2001-04 span. Because he’s all over the leaderboard in key pitching categories, he scores very well by Bill James‘ Hall of Fame Monitor metric, which gives credit for awards, league leads, postseason performance and so on; on a scale where 100 indicates “a good possibility” of making the Hall of Fame and 130 indicates “a virtual cinch,” his 171 points clear the bar by a mile.
Schilling’s ability to miss bats and prevent runs led to eight top five finishes in WAR and nine seasons of at least 5.0 WAR; among his contemporaries, only Clemens (14), Johnson (11), Maddux (11), and Mussina (10) had more of the latter, while Martinez had as many. Schilling’s 79.5 career WAR ranks 26th all-time, about six wins above the standard for Hall of Fame starters. His peak score of 48.6 WAR is 1.3 wins below the standard — a couple runs per year, spread out over seven seasons. His overall JAWS, however, is 2.6 ahead of the standard, tied for 27th all-time, ahead of five 300-game winners (Glavine, Ryan, Mickey Welch, Don Sutton, and Early Wynn) as well as 35 other enshrined starters. That’s a Hall of Fame pitcher.
After debuting with 38.8% of the vote in 2013, Schilling lost and then regained around nine points over the next two cycles before climbing to 52.3% in 2016. The 50% threshold is significant. Leaving aside those on the current ballot, only Gil Hodges received that much support from the writers and never gained entry. However, over the next two Hall of Fame election cycles, Schilling’s public persona, which may have already had an impact upon his support, began to overshadow his candidacy.
Schilling’s politics have been a significant part of that persona going back to when he stumped for George W. Bush on Good Morning America just hours after the Red Sox won the 2004 World Series — an unpopular move in a state that voted heavily for Massachusetts senator John Kerry during that year’s presidential election. But to the point that he surpassed 50%, his candidacy had withstood numerous controversies and efforts to alienate voters, including but not limited to:
- His longstanding public feuds with high-profile writers such as ESPN’s Pedro Gomez, Newsday’s Jon Heyman, and the Boston Globe’s Dan Shaughnessy.
- The demise of his video game company, 38 Studios, which received a $75 million loan from the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation to relocate from Massachusetts but went bankrupt and laid off its staff of 379 people without notice, violating federal law. The state of Rhode Island filed suit and recouped just $16.9 million in two partial settlements.
- A fall 2015 suspension from his job as an ESPN analyst for posting a Twitter meme that compared Muslim extremists to German Nazis.
- His January 2015 claim (later repeated) that his conservative political views were costing him votes.
That last claim was belied by back-to-back double-digit gains on the 2015 and ’16 ballots. Despite his surge, Schilling continued to run afoul of ESPN until being fired in April 2016 for “unacceptable” conduct stemming from his posting of an offensive Facebook meme about transgender bathroom laws, and publicly commenting on the 2016 presidential election. While I can understand the reticence some may have over an employer disciplining an employee over their public expression, employment in such a high-profile job doesn’t come without certain expectations and conditions, and Schilling repeatedly chose to violate those conditions with offensive sentiments that obviously crossed the line and rankled ESPN viewers.
Schilling’s rhetoric grew increasingly inflammatory after his firing. On Twitter, days before the 2016 presidential election, he praised a photo showing a pro-Donald Trump t-shirt that advocated lynching; “So much awesome here,” he said of a shirt that read, “Rope. Tree. Journalist. Some assembly required.” While Schilling later claimed his comments were “sarcasm,” by that point, several BBWAA voters proclaimed that they were withdrawing their support of Schilling’s candidacy at least for 2017, citing the same character clause that many voters use to justify not voting for players connected to PED use. Wrote former BBWAA president Susan Slusser, “I’ve voted for him previously. But seems to me like advocating murder goes against character clause.” Wrote another former BBWAA president, Jose de Jesus Ortiz, “[P]roposing lynching pretty much sinks his chance on my ballot on character clause.” Wrote Shaughnessy, “[Schilling] has transitioned from a mere nuisance to an actual menace to society.” Said Heyman in a radio interview, “There is a line there to me and he crossed that line by espousing lynching.”
They weren’t the only voters who shied from Schilling. According to Ryan Thibodaux’s Hall of Fame Ballot Tracker, which collects the published votes of every voter willing to share (71.0% did in 2017, either before or after the election), Schilling was dropped from the ballots of 35 voters who had supported him the previous year. While 18 returning voters and 12 out of 15 new voters added him to their ballots, presumably on the strength of his statistical credentials rather than his offensive rhetoric, he was the only one of 34 candidates to lose significant ground — 7.3 percentage points — relative to 2016. In the 2018 cycle, even as he continued to polarize the electorate, he regained most of that lost support. Via the Tracker, 25 returning voters included him where they hadn’t the previous year, but another 11 dropped him; meanwhile, nine out of 13 newcomers included him as well, en route to a 51.2% share.
That happened even while Schilling worked to undermine his own candidacy. In mid-December 2017, by the time many voters had sent off their ballots, Schilling did a podcast interview with Paul Nehlen, a white supremacist Congressional candidate from Wisconsin who was dropped as a contributor from Breitbart News — a far-right website the Southern Poverty Law Center has called a “white ethno-nationalist propaganda mill” — for a string of anti-Semitic messages. The podcast, which featured Schilling endorsing and promoting Nehlen’s campaign and describing himself as “a fan,” was taken down by Breitbart soon afterwards. Elsewhere in 2018, Schilling stayed busy by retweeting a conspiracy theory suggesting that one of the survivors of the Parkland massacre was a paid crisis actor, called climate change “a hoax,” and used his Facebook page to promote the pro-Trump QAnon conspiracy theory.
Such views appear to have led the Red Sox to distance themselves from him. During the 2018 World Series, the team declined to invite Schilling to join ceremonial first pitch festivities that included 2004 teammates Martinez, Alan Embree, Keith Foulke, Kevin Millar, David Ortiz, Jason Varitek, and Tim Wakefield. “We did not reach out to him, but it is not out of spite,” an unnamed Red Sox executive said. “It was originally just going to be Pedro and David and Wake and Millar, but we heard from a few others and they are included.” Schilling himself confirmed that he had not been invited, but said on Twitter, “No worries though.”
His 2019 has been comparatively quiet, aside from a brief flirtation with a potential run for Congress and an unsuccessful campaign to interview for the Phillies’ open managerial job.
In all, Schilling has refused to temper his views for the benefit of his candidacy. Just before the 2016 voting results were announced, he told Boston radio station WEEI, “I’m not going to change who I am to make people think differently of me … If my mouth keeps me out of the Hall of Fame, then it’s a flawed process.” He made similar comments before the 2017 announcement, calling the voters “some of the worst human beings I’ve ever known… scumbags all across,” and adding, “I promise you if I had said ‘lynch Trump,’ I’d be getting in with about 90 percent.”
While I can’t blame anyone for thinking less of the man given his conduct and his increasingly corrosive public persona, my study of the history of the character clause for The Cooperstown Casebook leads me to conclude that it’s a mistake to connect Schilling’s words to the “integrity, sportsmanship, character” portion of the Hall’s voting instructions. His comments had no bearing on his playing career, and I don’t believe that the clause — which, for starters, was introduced by Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who spent his 24-year tenure upholding the game’s color line — is worthy of increased investment by voters. What’s more, if there’s some definition of “integrity, sportsmanship and character” that can be applied in a positive manner to a commissioner — 2017 Today’s Game honoree Bud Selig — who colluded against free agents and turned a blind eye to the proliferation of PEDs, then the clause should be regarded as even flimsier and more meaningless than anyone has previously considered it. This isn’t the time to further imbue it with greater importance.
Having said that, I’m not alone in believing that Schilling’s pro-lynching tweet went beyond the pale as far as public discourse is concerned, in that it moved from his personally held beliefs (however noxious) to a condonation of violence, and his claim of “sarcasm” doesn’t wash given his failure to apologize or repudiate the post. At a time when the type of right-wing rhetoric Schilling has repeatedly trafficked in has fueled the United States’ inclusion among the most dangerous countries for professional journalists, I don’t blame any journalist for eliminating Schilling from consideration. I’m done telling anybody to hold his or her nose and vote for such a candidate just because of stats and a highlight reel. From a baseball prospective, Schilling is as qualified for the Hall of Fame as any candidate on the ballot. He ranks among the all-time greats based on his run prevention skill, his dominance in the game’s most elemental battle of balls and strikes, and his repeated ability to rise to the occasion when the on-field stakes were highest. Nonetheless, a voter is as free to ignore that conclusion as he or she is my conclusions about the baseball achievements of Bonds, Clemens, Scott Rolen, Larry Walker, and so on.
At this juncture, it’s too soon to get a read from the electorate regarding whether Schilling can make the 14.1-point leap to 75% in one cycle. As I noted in my introduction to this year’s series, those who make the leap from low-60s to 75% in one fell swoop tend to be early in their candidacies, such as Barry Larkin (from 62.1% in year two to 86.4% in year three) or Ryne Sandberg (from 61.1% in year two to 76.2% in year three). Of the four candidates since 1966 who received 55-65% of the vote in year seven, none gained entry in the next year, but two (Andre Dawson and Rich Gossage) were elected two years later and a third (Don Drysdale) three years later. Ordinarily, the move to a 10-year window of eligibility would speed that up, but given Schilling’s volatility amid the current political climate, all bets are off. He could make it to 75% this year, and probably will before his eligibility expires. Or he could continue to sabotage his own progress. Would anything he does surprise anybody at this point?
Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.
He’ll get Baines’d into the HoF, as he should.
That’s unfair on Schilling the baseball player.
And unfair on Baines the man.
Sadly, Harold has a cross to bear, which from my observation, he’s doing with dignity.
Look, I despise Schilling as much as anyone. He blocked me a while ago on Twitter for calling him a “world-class a-hole”. (I meant it as a compliment).
But I can’t agree with keeping him out of the HOF just because I find his beliefs noxious. Part of the problem is that he’s very vocal about what he believes. But I guarantee you that there are lots of players that agree with his beliefs. but are less vocal about it. So it becomes a bit like the steroid witch hunt…we’ll keep out those that we’re sure about but otherwise you’re good to go.
And what do we do when someone’s beliefs come out AFTER they’ve been elected? And who gets to decide which beliefs are approved and which aren’t. For example, Mariano Rivera is very pro-Isreal. Some people would see that as a positive, others as a negative.
So as much as I despise Schilling personally, I would vote for him.
I would vote for him now, I’d leave him off if there were more than ten worthy, because of his actions (not views), including the white supremacist and journalism violence endorsement. I bet there are white supremacists in there (we know there are), but if any played recently, they knew enough to shut it. But once he goes in, it’ll be fine. I just wish I never had to hear about him again.
I think if it wasn’t for the lynching post that would probably be the consensus and he might well be in right now. But I would argue there is a difference between beliefs that are held and spoken when those beliefs include the support of violence.
So now we’re going to punish beliefs (or what we think someone’s beliefs are) instead of actions?
Again, sticking with my Mariano Rivera example….he’s not just a supporter of Israel, he’s a supporter of the IDF. So if I had a vote would it be okay for me to say something like: “I’m not going to vote for Mariano Rivera because he supports the IDF, an organization that is responsible for acts of violence against Palestinians.”?
He is being punished for his actions – he tweeted a message calling for journalists to be lynched. Maybe the lesson here is if you want to be in the HoF, don’t be a dick to the people who can vote you in.
“He is being punished for his actions”
Yes and no. Yes, sending a tweet is an action. But he’s really being punished for what people believe his underlying belief is by sending that tweet,
Well… I believe that you believe he’s being punished (or not honoured as befitting his playing career) because some journalists believe that Schilling would be happy for some journalists to be murdered. Do you know that for a fact? Or are you inferring from what journalists have said – but is the reason they said actually their true motivations? I know this is being facetious (and maybe Schilling was as well with his tweet) but you can only judge people by what they say and do.
Personally, I would vote for him. But he’s also never said, jokingly or not, that he wanted me or a group I belong to dead. Maybe that would change mind. Perhaps I should care more about the misuse of state funds as a reason to not vote for him.
Here’s the problem with the emh argument. We baseball nuts have decided baseball is independently important in a vacuum. So even Adolf Hitler would be elected if he won 300 games, as long as he only wrote about needing to exterminate all Jewish people as opposed to actually murdering them.
The IDF are as responsible for the orders they receive as the US Army is.
Schilling’s shit is more akin to being a vocal supporter of Israeli Settlers in Gaza, that would be a different matter altogether.
Jaysus, are these downvotes because I said that the members of Israel’s Army are no more responsible for the orders of their elected leaders than any other soldier serving a representative democracy (and possibly less so, given that service is mandatory in Israel, just like in Singapore and South Korea), making yer man’s analogy absolutely laughable?
Or have I pissed off some Netanyahu fans?
I’ll happily take them either way, but I wouldn’t mind a reply.
I found the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) to be very professional and disciplined in my dealings with them. The RoK Army (Republic of Korea – South Korea) soldiers I worked with were also very professional and disciplined. I don’t have any experience with Singapore’s army. But, I have worked with some Malaysian soldiers that I thought were pretty sharp.
I feel like the guy who thought that “supporting Israel” and “supporting the IDF” are two meaningfully distinct things is POSITIVE that the (Provisional) IRA was officially sanctioned by the Irish Free State.
The downvoters were probably the lads bitching about the SPLC below, upset that I’d called out a regime that legitimizes the murderous settlers stealing Palestinian land.
Why are you roping in the IRA? I think most people on this site are aware of what the IRA has done.
Especially since there are no “Israeli settlers in Gaza”. Israel pulled completely out of Gaza almost 15 years ago, and have been the victims of missile launches and terrorist tunnels from there ever since.
the thing is….. the PLO isn’t voting for Rivera’s membership onto the board of the “School for kids who want to infiltrate American University of Beirut and do other things good too.” It makes sense to me that writers wouldn’t vote for someone who wanted them dead, even in jest, which this definitely wasn’t.
It’s very difficult weighing performance and character. I think the thing with Schilling is that he isn’t a slam-dunk Hall of Famer. AND, he’s a first-ballot, unanimous, Hall of Fame ASSHOLE.
He’s a repeat offender. He was known to be an asshole in the 1980’s. He was known to be an asshole in the 1990’s. He’s kinda like an Old Faithful of assholishness.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: STEROIDS. Look at Schilling’s numbers pre-1997. 1992-1996 Curt Schilling, from the ages of 25-29, was not a Top Five starter. He wasn’t a Top Ten starter. He wasn’t a Top Twenty starter.
So, after spending what should have been prime years of his career averaging 7.3 K/9 IP, Schilling shot-up to 11.3 K/9 in 1997.
HOW DOES THAT NOT JUMP OUT AT PEOPLE? At the age of thirty, he adds four strikeouts per nine innings pitched. At the age of thirty, he’s striking out over one hundred more batters than he had ever K’d before.
C’mon.
He always threw hard, and he had a 300k season with PHI. I believe though it was the development of another pitch that really allowed him to take it to another level for a few years, but I cannot recall. I think it was a splitter but maybe someone could tell me?
I’d vote for him after he dies. His career deserves the honor, but the man does not.
Ah, nothing like some light pre-thanksgiving reading. I’m sure the comments on this article will be just as illuminating as the conversations I’m going to have with my wife’s uncles tomorrow!
This is a wonderfully written article: sprawling yet cohesive and succinct, consistently fair and well-tempered. It’s simply a pleasure to read. And *easy* to read, which is superior achievement. Great work, Jay. Thank you for this.
I think I said this last year when this article came out, but it’s perfectly consistent to argue on the one hand that Schilling deserves enshrinement in the Hall while at the same time penalizing him for a year or two for condoning the murder of journalists, something that crosses a line none of us realized even needed to be described until about ten years ago.
He served his time, so to speak. The sooner he gets voted into the HOF, the sooner we can get back to giving him the attention he richly deserves – which is zero.
My thoughts exactly.
Wouldn’t even mind making him wait until Year 10 – he’s THAT much of an asshole, but he absolutely merits enshrinement.
No argument on Schilling’s personality. But. Will you be mentioning Bonds being a domestic abuser and Clemens being an “alleged” paedophile when you do your pieces about them? If we’re talking character, and I absolutely think we should, then we should talk about the extremely unpleasant aspects of those two mens’ lives too.
Jay’s not so much talking ‘character’ as he’s covering the basis other folks have for unvoting Schilling. Other folks aren’t having those issues re Bonds/Clemens, leastwise in any numbers.
I actually find Clemens far more offensive than Schilling. Schilling is an egoist with views that differ from mine. But Schilling is a BASEBALL cheater and an unrepentant liar who paid a lawyer to stonewall for him rather than admit culpability.
The sex scandal is also disturbing.
Or Marvin Miller as a Communist. If being a communist is okay, where do you draw the line?
As much as I hate communism, being an advocate for it is nowhere near as bad as being a child molester
There is a lot of noxious stuff on Twitter. I don’t agree that it’s acceptable for voters to base their decisions on personal dislike for a candidate . . . for actions unrelated to a player’s career, “crossing a line” from a character standpoint would have to be really, really bad in order to be justifiable grounds for omission, based on the HoF rules and the historical precedents.
If the activity isn’t a crime, that’s an objective indication that it wasn’t bad enough. And even if a candidate did commit a crime, it would need to be a serious one – I can’t imagine a rational justification for excluding a candidate because they wrote a bad check or something. Schilling’s civil law issues related to the gaming company aren’t enough, and his other stated activities were not illegal.
Overall this article has a lot of good content, but a bad take on the legitimacy of omitting Schilling from ballots.
Jay’s more questioning than affirming that legitimacy.
When we debate Selig and the alleged steroid users, or Landis and the color barrier in relation to the character clause, we are still debating baseball. How was the game affected and how do we memorialize the era?
When we debate Schilling, we are debating his noxious politics, defiant grandstanding and promotion of right wing violence. It’s not a baseball debate and it’s not fun. He’s not such a vitally important baseball figure that this debate is necessary. When we readers turn in our fake Fangraphs ballots, Schilling won’t be on mine.
Don’t forget the steroids, though, because Schilling was probably on those, too.
“a far-right website the Southern Poverty Law Center has called a ‘white ethno-nationalist propaganda mill’ ”
And the SPLC should know all about propaganda mills …
Didn’t you get the memo? On Fangraphs, left-wing propaganda is to be treated as gospel. Right-wing propaganda is to be treated as “hate speech” that amounts to physical violence, and must be stomped out no matter what it takes.
Well-written article, but I would note that the Southern Poverty Law Center is an extremely unreliable source for determining the validity of other sources. It’s overly partisan, tending to label anyone with a significant right-wing bias in the ‘white supremacist’ camp and has been frequently sued for defamation, often successfully.
They overused the slanderous label of “racist” and now the slanderous label of “white supremacist” is more effective.
When “white supremacist” loses its effect, I wonder what slanderous they will turn to next.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has a billion times more credibility than Fox “news” Channel or racist lowlifes like Curt Schilling.
It’s quite an extra -ordinary career. I assume he will be in soon if he can keep his mouth shut
Hall of Fame weekend in Cooperstown is such an awesome event. Schilling getting a platform to cosplay Trump‘s worst impulses would ruin it for so many fans. I wouldn’t vote for Schilling unless he agreed to not give a speech.
Good piece. Just will add that although the SPLC is correct in this example and in many others, they’ve also shown themselves to be hopelessly delusional when it comes to who they call extremists. I urge you and other writers to find another go to organization for these sort of things.
He’s deserving as a player. But, he’s also a horrid self entitled egoist too. Still, who has been any better in post season (Gibson, bumgarner)?
I don’t like Curt Schilling, and I would not vote for him. Performance-wise, his numbers are borderline.
There are two things about Curt Schilling.
One is that he’s a bigot and a racist. His viewpoints are disgusting and unacceptable, and I do not believe the National Baseball Hall of Fame should be a platform for Curt Schilling’s bigoted, misogynistic, white supremacist agenda.
I also have suspicions that Curt Schilling cheated. Look at his strikeout rate from 1992-1996. It was 7.26K/9. It was twenty-first in baseball, below Andy Benes, Melido Perez, Shane Reynolds, Jeff Fassero, Sid Fernandez, Jason Bere, Kevin Appier.
Then, we hit 1997, the year Curt Schilling turned 30-years-old. And playing on a team with known juicers, like Lenny Dykstra and Darren Daulton. And wouldn’t you know it, Curt Schilling’s K/9 jumped to 11.29 K/9.
Yeah, I’m sure that happened completely naturally. From 1992-1996, aged 25-29, Curt Schilling averaged 7.26 K/9. From 1997-2004, aged 30-37, Curt Schilling averaged 9.6 K/9, trailing only Kerry Wood, Pedro Martinez, and Randy Johnson among pitchers with 500+ IP over that time-frame.
When MLB was called in front of Congress in 2005, the other players with whom he testified were Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, and Jose Canseco. Mark McGwire was a juicer. Sammy Sosa was a juicer. Rafael Palmeiro was a juicer. Jose Canseco was a juicer.
But I’m supposed to believe that Curt Schilling, a known liar and bullshit artist, was subpoenaed to testify before Congress because everyone REALLY CARES what Curt Schilling has to say, and there weren’t enough avenues at the time for Schilling to run his mouth.
I believe Curt Schilling is a borderline case to begin with. That he’s such an unapologetic bigot is reason enough for me not to vote for him. If we were looking at just his baseball performance, yes, I could make a case for him. But I have reason to believe that his on-field performance wasn’t legit, either.
i find your argument unpersuasive in the extreme.
To you and everyone who downvotes me, I don’t care.
I love baseball. I love statistics.
What’s the probability of a pitcher at the age of thirty gaining velocity and strikeout ability like Schilling did? It’s very low.
Rafael Palmeiro, Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, and Curt Schilling were all dragged in front of Congress to talk about steroids.
Why was Schilling there. huh? Why? Because they really wanted to hear Curt Schilling’s opinions because he’s so awesome?
Or, he’s a cheater just like the rest.
And you look at the character and there is none. So, why would he be above cheating?
Something I’ve never forgotten from Schilling’s playing days that no one else seems to remember: Garrett Stephenson had a year where he was failing miserably in Philly, said something was wrong with his ankle, and the Philly docs couldn’t find a problem. Schilling went to the press and called him out, publicly called his teammate a pussy. Soon after, Philly sent him to St. Louis, where their docs found a torn ligament in that ankle. It was, for me, the flashpoint at which I realized “wow, that guy is kind of a dick.”
He always has been a dick. It’s not for no reason that the Red Sox, Orioles, and Astros all gave-up on him. He’s an insufferably stupid and arrogant asshole.
That said, he was a great competitor. You can’t take that away from him. It’s just a matter that if character counts for anything, then Curt Schilling doesn’t belong in the Hall of Fame. Plus, he’s not a slam-dunk case. He’s not Roger Clemens or Nolan Ryan where you just can’t argue with the numbers.
He’s more like Kevin Brown or Tommy John. These are all great pitchers, but not stand-out Hall of Famers.
Nice piece. I’d probably vote for the loudmouthed, crude, boorish, jerk. And I’d probably feel lousy about it for a long time after doing it. On numbers, he belongs in, and, to my way of thinking, absent some utterly disqualifying conduct (we can imagine what that might be) players should be judged by what they’ve done on the field. I’d imagine there are a lot of no votes from writers who cannot stand having to “do the right thing” and then hear Schilling go off on them. I can’t blame any of them.
“Cancel Culture” is a disease. Don’t go down that road.
Schilling is not a criminal. He was a great pitcher. Please don’t let the Hall of Fame become a purity test.
It’s not just a matter of it being a purity test. It’s a combination of skill and character. Some people have Hall of Fame numbers no matter what the character: Barry Bonds, Ty Cobb, Pete Rose, Roger Clemens.
Curt Schilling is not anywhere near that level. There are people better than Curt Schilling not in the HOF. There are people worse than Curt Schilling in the HOF.
He’s your consummate ‘on the bubble’ candidate. So, you’re on the fence about it. And he’s hugely racist. And he’s a total asshole who never shuts the fuck up. And he might have used PED’s.
If he’s not in the HOF, it’s his own fault.
The “good character” clause is on display here, and there are as many interpretations as there are voters. I don’t think being a dick should keep a player out of the hall, but it should make him sweat a little. Schilling and the all-steroid team would get my vote in their last year of eligibility. I wonder how many voters are of that mindset?
My bet is he gets in next year, on his 9th try. 60.9 – 75 is a big leap for 1 cycle, so i think he gets somewhere between 68 and 72.
The 2021 ballot is rather weak. The top new guys are Torii Hunter, Tim Hudson, and Mark Buehrle. All fine players, but not one of them will come close to getting in on a 1st ballot.
I think that is Schilling’s best shot, so long as he doesn’t say anything to outrageous leading up to the election.
Then Bonds and Clemens make it on their final try in 2022, when A-Rod and Ortiz are on the ballot. I think Ortiz has enough PED suspicions to make him wait a year or two.
Curt should have been a first ballot HOFer. His ERA plus is the same as BOB GIBSON. HE was money in the postseason….11-2!!!!!! In WAR he is ahead of Glavine, Feller, Halliday, and Palmer. He has helped raise over 10,000,000 dollars for ALS…..no brainer.
He was never going in 1st ballot. Great career, but he was always overshadowed by teammates like Pedro and Johnson. When you talk about great pitchers of the 90s and 2000s, there are a whole bunch of guys who come up before him. Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Clemens, Halladay, Pedro, and Johnson; all were better than Schilling. Yes, he should, and probably will get in. 1st ballot was never gonna happen.
I think Schilling deserves to be in the Hall, and I think in general we are too quick to judge and dismiss people we disagree with or don’t like. But, I can understand journalists not supporting a candidate who even in jest advocated lynching journalists. It is easier to take the high road against abstract assholism than it is when you make it personal.