^If what Curt Schilling did in the postseason didn't make him elite, then there has never been an elite pitcher in the history of the game.

 

1 great World Series isn't enough for me.

1 great World Series isn't enough for me.

 

Just one? I'll have what he's having bartender.

Pitched 19 post season games with 11-2 record...that's enough for the HoF? He was really good in those games but is that enough to call him an all time Elite Player?

 

Nope, but you couple what he did in his entire career with the fact that he was dominant when it counted most, and yes, that makes a pitcher elite.

Just one? I'll have what he's having bartender.

 

He was GREAT in 2001.

 

1 game in 2004. 6 IP 0 runs.

 

1 game in 2007. 5 innings 1 run.

 

Again, really good but ELITE? Ehh.

He was GREAT in 2001.

 

1 game in 2004. 6 IP 0 runs.

 

1 game in 2007. 5 innings 1 run.

 

Again, really good but ELITE? Ehh.

 

His entire postseason career....

His entire postseason career....

 

He had 5 or 6 really good seasons. Again, really good.

So the guy with a better ERA, more CG, more SO's, a better WHIP, a better ERA+, and dominant in the postseason is just good, while a guy like Mussina is great? Your logic is baffling.

So the guy with a better ERA, more CG, more SO's, a better WHIP, a better ERA+, and dominant in the postseason is just good, while a guy like Mussina is great? Your logic is baffling.

 

I said they were both struggles for me. Notice I didn't vote Mussina in. Really good but not elite.

I said they were both struggles for me. Notice I didn't vote Mussina in. Really good but not elite.

 

Outside of wins, which you've long admitted is a horrible way to measure a pitcher's value, what makes Mussina better in your eyes? Because it sure isn't anything statistical.

Outside of wins, which you've long admitted is a horrible way to measure a pitcher's value, what makes Mussina better in your eyes? Because it sure isn't anything statistical.

 

More on the intangible side. Close. More years in the AL during the steroid era facing 9 hitters. Seemed to be more consistent.

 

Just a tad short of a HOF vote though.

More on the intangible side. Close. More years in the AL during the steroid era facing 9 hitters. Seemed to be more consistent.

 

Just a tad short of a HOF vote though.

 

So what it boils down to for you is you just liked Mussina better, numbers be darned?

So what it boils down to for you is you just liked Mussina better, numbers be darned?

 

I just explained it to you. More consistent. Faced better lineups for a longer period of time.

 

But not HOF...like Schilling.

 

I'm not putting a guy in the HOF with 5 or 6 strong seasons.

Somebody has a man crush on Curt Schilling! Just sayin' :whistling:

More on the intangible side. Close. More years in the AL during the steroid era facing 9 hitters. Seemed to be more consistent.

 

Just a tad short of a HOF vote though.

 

If you're going on intangibles Schilling wins that in a landslide. Musica was never known as a big game guy or really a clubhouse leader. Schilling came up big time after time in big games and, with Varitek, was the leader of the Boston clubhouse from 04-07. The ONLY thing that isn't impressive about his resume is his win totals. His ERA and WHIP totals compared to the league averages are elite--that is undeniable.

I just explained it to you. More consistent. Faced better lineups for a longer period of time.

 

 

But not HOF...like Schilling.

 

I'm not putting a guy in the HOF with 5 or 6 strong seasons.

 

Clyde, would you have voted for Koufax because if so you would have voted for 5 or 6 strong seasons. Granted, they may be the 5 or 6 strongest in history of game. If you look at his numbers though, very ordinary first 6 seasons or so.