Rob Gronkowski held his 7th annual Citi, Pro Camp for kids. Helping the Boston food bank along with the kids who all brought food for a great cause.
Gronk was his usual happy self on the first day of his camp this year. The future HOF TE was running around playing quarterback, catching passes and teaching kids the importance of teamwork. He’s a great role model and it showed all day.
Everyone Including 800 Children had the same question for Gronk
The Patriots could surely use his services on the football field, but for now he is enjoying retirement. Rob is helping out in the community like he’s always done in the past.
This year the whole Gronkowski gang was out participating and having a blast. The event along with the kids brought in over 6,500 food items for the Greater Boston Food Bank.
Over 6500 items of food for the Greater a Boston Food Bank. (Mike Quilty)
Gronk taking a bow (Mike Quilty)
The greatest TE I’ve ever seen is just as clutch when it comes to the community as his catches were this postseason and Super Bowl.
Gronkowski could potentially come back to the Patriots at some point this upcoming season. The decision will probably be unexpected and a surprise.
The TE had one amazing surprise for two of the Pro Camp participants, what a class act.
Gronkowski always knows how to make someone smile, whether he’s off the field continuing his charities, or suiting up for the Patriots at some point in 2019.
The decision to retire is respected by everyone, but some of his ex teammates said they know he can still play and wouldn’t be surprised by a return. Gronk is going to be Gronk whatever he decides to do, he’s a Champion on and off the field.
Thank you to the Gronkowski’s, Rob in particular and everyone involved in a winning Saturday.
Tom Brady theory’s or “myths” claiming he’s not a great QB make me laugh, so I’ve compiled the first edition of Tom vs Truth. I am a fan, yet I am using facts to end these ridiculous claims.
They Love you Until they Don’t
Once upon a time Tom Brady was America’s golden child, beating the greatest show on turf put him on the map. Fast forward to the present day and many things have changed. Six Super Bowl wins, multiple MVPs and a supermodel wife has had the country turned against the GOAT. Let’s start with these theory’s about TB12.
“Tom Is A Product of the Patriots System”
Haters across the country can’t stop calling Brady a system QB. While every team has a system, and 3/4s of the teams using the same style. Why aren’t they playing in February? The answer is Tom Brady. We know his skill, so let’s look deeper. Brady has had numerous Offensive Coordinators. In the beginning it was Charlie Weiss. Charlie’s offenses in NY and NE before Tom Brady were ranked 12th, 5th, 19th and 25th. Compare those numbers with a very green, backup QB in Tom Brady. Charlie’s 4 years with Tom his offenses ranked 6th, 10th, 12th and 4th. This is what I call the Brady difference. Weiss left after 4 years with Brady to coach Notre Dame, ending with a record of 41-49.
McDaniels Makes Brady
Josh McDaniels makes Tom Brady Great. Well no, not at all. He has had success with Tom just like Weiss, but without Brady his numbers declined drastically. Working with Brady, Josh McDaniels offenses have been incredible. The worst those two finished was 10th in points and 11th in yards. Every other season with Brady, New England’s Offense was ranked top 3 in points, with one top 5 finish. McDaniels in St.Louis and Denver running the same system, ranked 20th, 19th and dead last at 32nd. (Brady Difference.)
Bill O’Brien in 2011 must’ve been the reason Brady and the offense was 3rd in points scored right? I don’t think so, since leaving the Pats O’Brien’s offenses in points scored rank 14th, 21st, 28th, 17th and 11th. Quite the drop off without Brady under Center. So if you say “System QB”, I say it’s the Brady difference.
Well What About Bill Belichick? “He makes Tom Brady”
New England Patriots head coach Bill Belichick stands alone as the greatest HC, he must be why Brady’s so great
First let me say that while Bill is the best coach of all time, that didn’t really start until Brady came into the mix. In Cleveland Bill went 35-55, along with 5-11 his first year in NE without Tom. There’s that Tom Brady difference again.
2008 Same Team No Brady
But Matt Cassel went 11-5 when Brady was hurt
This argument often made by haters really grinds my gears: “If Brady is so good then how did Matt Cassel go 11-5?”
Well let’s break it down. The 2007 and 2008 teams had the same roster minus Donte Stallworth on offense. In 2007 Tom Brady and his offense set records for TDs, Rec TDs and points scored. The team went 18-0 only to lose the SB just missing the perfect season. The 2007 offense with Tom had a 315 point differential, compared to Cassel’s team dropping 214 points all the way down to a 101 point differential. So the same team, with different QBs went from the best offense ever, to average and missing the playoffs.
2007 Brady- 4,806 yards, 50 TD/8 INTs with a 117 Passer rating along with MVP honors.
2008 Cassel- 3,693 yards, 21 TD/11 INTs with an 89 passer rating with the same offense. (Brady Difference)
In 2010 Matt Cassel made the playoffs and the Pro Bowl with KC. He was no stiff, throwing 27 TDs to just 7 INTs, which was the second best ratio in the league that year. Who could’ve been number 1 I wonder? Tom Brady of course, as he won the only unanimous MVP in league history. Sorry to say again but the Brady Difference is quite obvious in this popular theory among haters.
“Tom Isn’t Good without a Great Defense”
The Patriots had a very good defense in Tom’s early years, and certainly was a huge factor in the first 3 Super Bowls. People say Brady was carried by his defenses, which is not the case. From 2001-2004, with Brady coming in as a backup, he put together 10 4th quarter comebacks and 15 game winning drives. The numbers seem to show he did his part and then some, but that’s not what the haters want you to think.
Brady led the NFL in TD passes in 2002, so it’s not a reach at all to say the Patriots may have not won those Super Bowls without Tom Brady. For example, in Super Bowl 38 the Pats defense gave up 29 points to the Panthers. A young QB named Tom Brady going up against a fierce defense threw for 354 yards, 3 TDs and his second clutch SB game winning drive. Without Brady things could’ve been a lot different that day.
Jumping ahead to Patriots Defenses that weren’t as talented. The four year stretch from 2010-2013, New England’s defense was never better than 25th in total yards allowed. But again Brady in 2010 won MVP and got the #1 seed. 2011 the Pats were back in the Super Bowl despite being 31st in yards against, and that’s due to Tom Brady. In 2012 and 2013, Brady and the Pats went back to the AFC Championship but lost. Some people think going as far as possible in sports and losing is worse than not making the championship game at all. Ridiculous.
In 2017 the defense was ranked 29th. Brady and the offense once again were back in the Super Bowl. Bill Belichick shocked Pats nation by benching Malcolm Butler. The defense got shredded by a backup QB, giving up 41 points. Even in defeat Brady put up historic numbers, throwing for 505 yards with 3 TDs with no INTs.
My conclusion on this theory about his Defenses is that Brady always has done his part to win games and make it to the AFC Championship or Super Bowl. I don’t see him being carried by anything, like the haters do. Another interesting stat: In 17 seasons the Pats Defense was statistically better than the offense only 3 times. In 9 of those 17 seasons with Brady as the starter, the defense was ranked 20th or worse in yards allowed. Defensive “myth” shut down with facts.
“Joe Montana Never Lost in the Super Bowl”
Key Number here is 4
The debate over Montana and Brady has many factors. Joe Montana was the Greatest ever in my eyes, up until Brady’s comeback in Super Bowl 49 against the Seahawks. Since Brady tied Montana with 4 Super Bowl wins, he has gone to 3 straight Super Bowls and won 2. The real crime here is the loss to the eagles. Brady had the best Super Bowl performance of all time.
Some people say Brady can’t be better than Montana because Joe cool never lost in his 4 chances. The fact of the matter is that every athlete would tell you getting to the Championship and losing is better than not making it there at all. As we all know, Brady’s been to 9 Super Bowls with 6 wins. Let’s not forget the amount of Hall Of Fame players Montana had on both sides of the ball. He also had a coach in Bill Walsh who came up with an offense no one had ever seen before. It took years for teams to adjust to this new style of football, a great coach and system that Montana thrived in.
Brady on the other hand did not, and still doesn’t have anywhere close to the number of Hall Of Fame players Joe had. The comebacks alone in Super Bowls favor Brady, having 6 in 6 wins. And did his part in the losses too, by getting the lead, only for the defense to break at the end.
Montana has been bounced twice in the divisional round, twice in the Wild Card and three times in the NFC Championship. Montana in 11 seasons has gone one and done in the playoffs 4 times.
The GOAT Tom Brady in 16 playoff runs is 13-2 in the divisional round, 2-1 in the WC round and 9-4 in the AFC Championship. Brady in 16 seasons has gone one and done just twice in the playoffs.
Is 4-0 better than 6-3 in the Super Bowl? If you’ve never played sports then maybe you’d say yes. The ultimate goal of any athlete is to go as far as you can. That is something Brady’s done better than Montana. Doing so with less talent, an offense that has been seen before (unlike the 49ers), all while getting better with age. Brady wins this round, the numbers don’t lie.
“Montana Played in a Tougher and Better Era”
Again, not taking anything away from Joe Montana, I’m just telling it how it is. Sure the rules for QBs have changed over the years, but Brady played in a tough era of football himself. Rule changes to help offenses didn’t make an ounce of a difference until 2011. QB numbers didn’t go up or benefit Brady for an entire decade. From 2000-2011 only two players had a season with great numbers, Brady in 2007 and Manning in 2004. Since 2011 pretty much every QBs numbers are inflated like never before.
Defining the toughness of different eras contains a few different things:
Free Agency -Montana played when teams didn’t change and Hall Of Fame players typically stayed together. Brady has had a revolving door of players throughout his entire career, mostly castaways who were turned into Champions.
Defensive players -Tom Brady has played and shredded some of the best defenders and all time defensive units and coaches. The 2000 Steelers and Ravens, 2003 Buccaneers, The LOB Seahawks were no match in the Super Bowl, 2015 Broncos, 2017 Jags, the two Giants Super Bowl teams and the 2018 Rams. Just think of the players on those teams, and how if it weren’t for Brady most of them would have Super Bowl rings.
Geography – Joe Montana Played in a sunny warm climate, while Brady’s been playing in the Northeast. Freezing temperatures, snow and rain in a division where he plays in Boston and New York. No problem for #12.
This is the first of my 3 part Myth Busting Brady Hate. Next up will be topics like “The AFC Least”, “Deflategate, “Brady has no records” and my personal favorite: QBs like Rodgers, Marino, Brees and Manning being on Tom Brady’s level. Starting to feel like I’m writing a book, so these next topics plus more will be coming out soon. Hope you Pats fans can use some of these facts when arguing with Brady hating friends.
Tom Brady is the only Quarterback in NFL History to win 200 regular season games. He has been a part of great teams throughout his career, which have contributed to this milestone. Brady would be the first one to deflect this achievement and speak about all the great players who have helped him get to this point.
On the other hand, Brady has put this team on his back many of times and won in spite of poor defensive play. That is something Tom would never say, so I’ll say it for him. He’s done more with less than any QB in history.
Via hubwav
Brady already held the record for most regular season wins for a quarterback. He passed Peyton Manning and Brett Favre last October, winning his 187th game, passing the previous record of 186 in a win against the Jets.
NUMBER 200 WAS A SHOOTOUT
Number 200 came against the hottest offense in the NFL through 5 games, the undefeated Kansas City Chiefs. Because of Tom’s age, the media wanted this game to be a passing of the torch. A loss for Brady and a win for the young gun slinger.
Brady, just as he started his career, drove his offense down the field like he has, well 199 other times. His 39 yard strike to Rob Gronkowski set up Stephen Gostkowski’s game winning field goal. New England won 43-40 in this week 6 track meet, as the offense stepped up and traded punches with the Chiefs.
Tom Brady went 24 of 35 for 340 yards, with one TD and zero interceptions. He also got his team the lead back in the fourth quarter by scoring a rushing TD to add to his stat line.
THIS ISN’T OVER
For a quarterback to be able to achieve a record like this, it takes talent and longevity. Tom Brady is arguably the greatest quarterback to have ever played in the NFL, and he’s not done yet. His relentless desire to win combined with the way he takes care of himself, has allowed him to be an extremely durable piece for the Patriots.
As Brady has said many times before, he plans to play until he is 45. But I can assure you it’s not for records like this. He is chasing that sixth Super Bowl Championship that New England fell short of last year.
Tom is a walking Hall of Famer and he still isn’t satisfied. He is on a different level compared to other quarterbacks. Brady will look to win number 201 next week against a dominant Chicago Bears defense.
At the end of the day Brady has records stacked on top of records, but all he wants is more Super Bowl Rings. His dedication and love for the game makes everyone around him better. His Patriots are now 4-2, despite some writing this team off. Focusing on one game at a time, Brady is already studying the Bears defense to see where he can exploit them next week.
200 wins is quite the achievement, especially when he has 27 postseason wins on top of that. Bill Belichick and Tom Brady are on to Chicago, trying to keep these wins coming.
Rob Gronkowski was almost traded to the Detroit Lions during the offseason, leading up to the Draft. After Sunday’s loss to Detroit, Rob Gronkowski was asked about all the rumblings of the trade. Gronk casually answered saying, “Yeah it happened, Tom Brady’s my quarterback, that’s all. Wasn’t going anywhere without Brady.”
Staff photo by John Wilcox.
Before the 2018 NFL Draft, Bill Belichick was looking to deal Rob Gronkowski. Rumors of talks with the Lions and Titans were being thrown around. Bill was talking with his ex Patriot friends in an attempt to move the All World tight end. Adam Schefter went on WEEI’s morning show ‘Kirk and Callahan’ Monday for an interview about the situation. According to Schefter “It would’ve been a trade involving draft picks, that was the basic trade.” He continued on about Gronkowski, “He was the only player involved in the trade and it would’ve been a combination of picks.”
HOW GRONKOWSKI NIXED THE TRADE
During the offseason Rob Gronkowski was uncertain about things, he made that clear minutes after the Super Bowl. Since Gronk showed signs of uncertainty, Bill had to keep thinking about the team and its future. Bill has never been one to wait and see about a player, he makes the necessary moves for the team. Apparently, he did and the trade was pretty much done until Gronkowski caught wind of the situation. Schefter again noted, “Basically the deal was all but agreed to, he was going to go to Detroit, and when he found out he called the Patriots.”
Now, this is coming from an NFL insider, not the Patriots or Rob Gronkowski, yet it does seem to line up with the offseasons timeline of events. Gronk and the Patriots did have a meeting before the draft, which was newsworthy because it ended the trade speculation. As Rob Gronkowski said Sunday night, he wasn’t going anywhere without Tom Brady. So what was said during the meeting is unknown to the public, but the end result is clear. New England was the only team Rob Gronkowski would play for, it did not matter if it was the defending Super Bowl champion Eagles. If Brady wasn’t throwing him the ball, he was ready to retire.
Via USA Today
NO TRADE WITH A HAPPY ENDING
For Patriot fans, the meeting between the Patriots and Gronkowski’s camp, right before the draft worked out. Rob was adamant about what he wanted, which led to Bill Belichick and the Pats agreeing to keep the tight end. I’m sure Bill had his own demands for Gronkowski as well, in the end, it all worked out.
Rob Gronkowski wasn’t traded, his deal was reworked with incentives again. If he reaches those incentives he will receive $4.3 million this season. New England doesn’t have to worry about the cap hit because of Gronkowski’s new deal, it barely changes. So, in the end, both sides seem to have benefited from that meeting before the draft. For fans of the Patriots, everything turned out great. If it wasn’t for Gronk calling the team to have a meeting, a lot of things in New England could’ve changed not just the TE. Luckily this is in the past, everyone has one goal in 2018 and that’s bringing home the Lombardi.
Fred McGriff is a victim. He is a victim of an overcrowded ballot, causing writers to leave players off their ballot they find worthy of a vote. He is the victim of the era he played in; his numbers overshadowed by players who were juicing, making McGriff’s numbers look more run-of-the-mill than they should have. It is time to start giving the “Crime Dog” the respect he deserves.
500 Home Runs
Remember when 500 home runs used to gain someone automatic induction into the Hall of Fame. The steroid era hit and that all changed as baseballs started flying out of parks at historic rates. How come the standards shouldn’t remain the same for someone who played the game clean though? If they never used steroids, they weren’t getting that extra help in hitting home runs and 500 should remain a significant threshold.
McGriff didn’t hit 500 home runs, but his 493 is tied with Lou Gehrig for the most home runs by a player with less than 500. Would hitting seven more home runs change the kind of player Fred McGriff was? Of course not. If falling seven home runs shy of 500 is helping keep his votes down, that is just ridiculous. That would be saying if McGriff had hit one more home run every two years, he was more worthy of being a Hall of Famer.
McGriff would have surely reached 500 career home runs if not for the strike. When the strike happened in mid-August, McGriff had 34 home runs. With a month and a half to go he would surely have hit seven more homers. The strike lasted until late April the following season, costing him even a few more games. It is likely that without the strike he would have wound up right around Eddie Murray’s 504 career home runs.
Speaking of Eddie Murray, who coasted into the Hall of Fame on his first ballot, check out their career numbers. Besides the hit totals, McGriff’s career statistics compare pretty well to Murray’s. Murray had nearly 3000 more at-bats, so he gained more counting numbers. The home runs are similar and McGriff has the better on-base percentage and slugging percentage, topping him by 50 OPS points. I am not saying Fred McGriff was better than Eddie Murray, I do not believe that. The distance between the two might not be as large as you think though.
In 1994-95, McGriff averaged a HR every 15.6 at-bats. He would have surpassed 500 home runs if not for the strike costing him 2 months.
The Difference in Eras
When McGriff first came up with Toronto in the eighties, he was one of the biggest power hitters in the game. He hit 20 home runs in only 295 at-bats in 1986. He proceeded to eclipse 30 home runs in each of the next seven seasons. McGriff led the league in home runs in both 1989 with the Blue Jays and 1992 with the Padres. In the late 80’s and early 90’s hitting 35 home runs meant you led the league or came close. By the mid to late 90’s his 30 home runs were lost in the shuffle of steroid hitters. Illustrating this point, McGriff finished in the top five in the league in home runs all seven seasons from 1988-1994. He never finished in the top 10 again.
If McGriff had come along a decade earlier he would already be in the Hall of Fame. Instead, over eight years he has yet to accrue even 25 percent of the vote. Based on what he did prior to the steroid era, he would be a Hall of Famer. Explain to me how the steroid era is counted against him when he never used steroids? Not only did he not benefit from steroids, he was going against stiffer competition, playing on an uneven field. Once all the steroid facts came out my opinion of McGriff went up. There is no proof, or even any evidence that he ever used, he just had the misfortune of being a power hitter in that era.
Fred McGriff of the Toronto Blue Jays bats against the Chicago White Sox during a Major League Baseball game circa 1986 at Comiskey Park. (Photo by Focus on Sport/Getty Images)
No Steroids
As I said previously, there is no reason for anyone to suspect McGriff of steroid use. First off, he never got bigger. Check the pictures of McGriff through the years, he looks the same in Atlanta as he did in Toronto, and he looks the same in Tampa Bay as he did in Atlanta. His head never grew larger, his neck never got huge, and his upper body never became strikingly larger. He was always a tall, slender first baseman.
Secondly, McGriff’s home runs never spiked. In fact, he hit more home runs in the first half of his career before the steroid era really struck than he did during the peak of steroid use. From 1987-1994 he averaged 33 home runs per season, 38 per 162 games played. From 1992-2002, his last good season, he averaged 27 home runs per season, 30 per 162 games. If you want to cut a couple years off earlier in his career, he still averaged 36 home runs per 162 games played the first six seasons of his career.
23 Apr 1998: Infielder Fred McGriff of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays in action during a game against the Texas Rangers at The Ball Park in Arlington, Texas. The Devil Rays defeated the Rangers 12-5. Mandatory Credit: Stephen Dunn /Allsport
The Postseason
Fred McGriff has a large collection of playoff data to his resume. He was traded for by Atlanta prior to the trade deadline in 1993 to help fortify their lineup. He caught fire for Atlanta, hitting 19 home runs and posting a 1.004 OPS after the trade. The Braves went 50-17 after the trade and edged out the Giants for the division title by one game. McGriff then batted .435 with a 1.214 OPS in the playoffs that year.
The Braves would have made the playoffs if not for the strike in 1994. McGriff then made three consecutive postseasons with the team before heading to Tampa Bay. In 1995 the Braves finally got their World Series title, with McGriff belting two home runs during the series. For that postseason he batted .333 with four home runs. In total, McGriff played in 50 postseason games, batting .303 with 10 home runs and a .917 OPS. Postseason results are taken into account for other players, and McGriff certainly proved to be a good postseason performer.
Advanced Metrics
The new age “statistics” don’t help McGriff get votes from the writers who buy into those more than actual statistics. Those “new age statistics” are not fair to someone who played clean during the steroid era though. WAR and OPS+ take into account the average player’s numbers and adjust a players OPS or calculate their value comparatively. In an era matched up against juiced players, how is it fair to use a juiced players totals against a clean player? Everyone wants to vilify steroid users and pretend they weren’t a part of the game, keeping them out of the Hall of Fame. So let me get this straight, if you used steroids it is counted against you, but if you didn’t use steroids…it’s counted against you?
From 1988-94, the first seven full seasons of his career, McGriff posted a 155 OPS+. With those unfamiliar with the stat, that is a very high number. To put things into perspective, Hank Aaron, Joe DiMaggio and Mel Ott had career OPS+ of 155. Those are three of the greatest to ever play the game. McGriff twice had an OPS+ of 165 and never dipped below 144 during those seasons. From 1995 on he was typically between 106-120, good, but not outstanding. However, that is because he was being judged against a large number of performance enhancers. Posting those same numbers several years earlier likely would have resulted in an OPS+ of 140 or better each season.
Conclusion
It is clear that going onto his ninth ballot McGriff will not earn induction during his voting window. My belief is he will eventually get recognized by the Modern Era Committee and earn enshrinement down the road. You cannot hold steroid use against players who used but then use their numbers as an argument against someone who played the game clean. The Hall of Fame needs to fix the voting system, the ballot is a total mess. The writers also need to do a better job of looking at someone who played the game clean and not using their era against them. Not to mention, the “Crime Dog” moniker is worthy of the Hall of Fame in itself.
In our continuing series of articles on this year’s Baseball Hall of Fame ballot, we now turn our attention to two guys who didn’t enhance their stats through the needle. Unlike the greatly debated case of Roger “the HGH was for my wife” Clemens, Mike Mussina and Curt Schilling have never been linked to PEDs. Each deserves induction.
As I mentioned here, neither Moose nor Schill have Clemens numbers, but they also don’t have his PED baggage.
The Standard for the Hall
We used to believe that the standard for Cooperstown was 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts. That is actually far from the truth.
There are 75 pitchers in the Hall of Fame. Taking away those who were exclusively or predominantly relief pitchers, including Eck, Rollie Fingers, Gossage, Bruce Sutter, and Hoyt Wilhelm, we’re left with 70. We should also take out Babe Ruth, Satchel Paige, and John Smoltz from the sample.
Ruth only pitched a couple of years and is in the Hall for his bat. Paige, certainly an all-time great, only pitched in the major leagues for part of six seasons after Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier. Smoltz earned induction based on a balanced career of excellence as both a starter (213 wins) and closer (154 saves).
Thanks to our friends at www.baseballreference.com, we know what the average starting pitcher in Cooperstown looks like. They pitched for 18 years, went to four All Star Games, won 253 games, lost 176, had an ERA of 2.98 and struck out 2,153. And, for those readers who appreciate modern, second-order stats, they have a WAR (wins above replacement) of 70 and a WHIP (Walks/Hits per Inning Pitched) of 1.197.
Mussina by the Numbers
Mike Mussina was a great pitcher, but he meets none of the traditional marks for Cooperstown. His 270 career wins are below the magic 300 but are above the Hall average. He also lost fewer games than the typical HOFer.
The five-time All Star struck out 2,813 and had a career ERA of 3.68. His career WAR (83.0) was better than the average Cooperstown pitcher and his WHIP (1.192) is nearly identical. Mussina won seven Gold Gloves, but he never finished higher than fourth in Cy Young award voting.
Schilling Beyond the Numbers
I won’t pretend to be entirely objective about Curt Schilling. I’ve known him for years since his retirement and know that he’s not the caricature some in the media portray him to be. His Hall candidacy ceased resting on his baseball resume a few years ago. His numbers are beyond Hall worthy except for his wins total.
Schill (216-146, 3.46 ERA, 3,116 Ks, 79.9 WAR and 1.137 WHIP) finished second in the Cy Young award three times, and was a six-time All Star. His low win total is often used as an excuse for those who keep him off their ballot. There are 18 starting pitchers in the hall with fewer than 216 wins.
No pitcher in the Hall has Schilling’s post season resume. The three-time world champion is universally understood as the greatest post-season pitcher of the modern era.
In 12 post season series, Shilling went 11-2, had an ERA of 2.23, a WHIP of 0.968, and was a League Championship Series (1993) and World Series MVP (2001). You would need a Pentagon super computer to calculate Schilling’s post season WAR. When the weather turned cold and the competition heated up, against the best hitters in the game, Curt Schilling was the best in baseball.
Tomes have been written about Schilling’s off the field activities. His failed company, his departure from ESPN, his political positions, and his social media presence. Some writers, including Boston’s “favorite” curly-haired boyfriend, have used one or more of these things to justify keeping Schilling out of the Hall. Many of these same writers ignore Curt’s long and substantial charitable work and his Roberto Clements award, but have no issues voting for steroid users who cheated, like Bonds and Clemens.
The Case For Both
If the Hall is really about baseball, and voters truly care how pitchers performed within the context of their era, than both Schilling and Mussina must be inducted. That these two pitchers accomplished what they did, in an era when juiced hitters were breaking every offensive record and when new and smaller ballparks popped up every year, is simply amazing.
To compete clean in the steroid era and achieve to their standard cannot legitimately go unrewarded. Of the pitchers who faced Barry Bonds, the poster child of the steroid era and the most prolific power hitter in history, at least 100 At Bats, Schilling held him to a lower batting average (.263) than both Greg Maddux (.265) and John Smoltz (.275). Both are in the Hall. Both were elected on their first ballot.
Clemens clearly used after leaving the Red Sox so his stats and awards are greatly inflated by the help of foreign substances. Over his final four seasons with the Red Sox he had a 3.77 ERA and 8.7 k/9. In the next two seasons he had a 2.33 ERA and 10.2 k/9. He was 34 years old in 1997 and struck out a career high in batters. I mean, come on. There is no argument about what he did. The argument comes over what to do with him and the others. Honestly, there is no wrong answer, and that is the problem. It is an individual’s opinion over how to treat steroid users, and many people have differing opinions. As a result, guys like Clemens and Barry Bonds have been stuck in ballot purgatory.
Steroids
Steroids very clearly affect statistics in a huge way. Two people have ever hit 60 home runs in a season, and then it happened six times in four years during the height of the steroid era. It hasn’t been done since. The record book was left in shambles. It’s a shame. All of these players have better stats due to using, but some of them were Hall of Famers anyways, and that’s where my argument for Clemens (and some others) comes into play. I could care less about the character clause quite frankly. The Hall of Fame should be a place to celebrate the greatest players to play the game, everyone has faults.
Pre-Steroid Accomplishments
With 192 wins after 1996, Clemens’ win total wouldn’t have screamed Hall of Fame. At 34 he would have still pitched for a couple more seasons and gotten to maybe 220-230 wins? But that’s not the case for him. Clemens was already a three time Cy Young Award winner and an MVP winner by this time. Three Cy Young’s and an MVP get you in the Hall. He had led the league in wins twice, ERA four times, and strike outs three times. He also had two different games during which he had struck out 20 batters. No one else had ever accomplished this at the time. His career strikeout total still would have eclipsed 3000 and placed him in the top 15 of all-time in that category. If he had never touched anything and just played out what was left of his career naturally, he’d be enshrined. That is why I would vote for him.
Mike’s Argument Against Clemens
Roger Clemens is the greatest pitcher in Red Sox history. He should not, however, be in the Hall of Fame. Clemens is, as much as Mark McGwire or Barry Bonds, the poster child for the steroid era of baseball.
It is commonly accepted that the Rocket began taking steroids after leaving the Red Sox following the 1996 season. He was so offended by then-GM Dan Duquette’s “twilight of his career” speech that he committed himself to proving everyone wrong.
Like Bonds, many people will argue that the Rocket was a hall of fame pitcher before he left Boston. His 13 seasons with the Sox were indeed excellent and at least borderline for the hall. He finished with 192 wins, an ERA of 3.06, 2,590 Ks, three Cy Young awards and a league MVP.
In 11 seasons after leaving Boston, between the ages of 34 and 44, Roger compiled 162 wins, 73 losses, a 2.91 ERA, 2,082 Ks, and four more Cy Young Awards. A 2.91 ERA. Most telling about the immediate positive impact that steroids had on Clemens is the fact that in his final year in Boston he was 10-13 with a 3.63 ERA and 257 Ks. In his two seasons in Toronto, he went 41-13 with an ERA of 2.33 and averaged 281 Ks. He won the Cy Young both years.
Great Pitcher, Bad Guy
Source for the picture: https://sportanalyst.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/gal_front_12_14-745624.jpg
Clemens was more than just a juicer. He was a bad guy who in the second half of his career folded like a lawn chair in some of the biggest moments. In The Yankee Years, Joe Torre explained in detail Roger’s diva nature, his feigning of injuries when he was getting shelled in games, and his relationship with Brian McNamee.
Clemens not only took steroids for the better half of his career, he lied to Congress about it. The Rocket’s defenders argue that Clemens was found not guilty of perjury and that McNamee was a slime-ball witness trying to become famous. But nobody with any intellectual integrity believes that Clemens competed clean.
Roger Clemens was a great pitcher. He was a better science experiment. Everyone recognizes that this rocket was fueled by HGH, Winstrol, and litany of chemicals to extend and enhance his career. The question for Cooperstown voters is simply: do you care?
I believe that they do not. Clemens will eventually be elected to the Hall of Fame. That said, you cannot allow Roger Clemens and others like him in the Hall without opening the doors to guys like McGwire, Manny, A-Rod, and others. Voters cannot hide behind the façade of the Hall’s “character clause” to exclude players they don’t like while inducting cheaters like Roger Clemens.
Anyone interested in the real Roger Clemens, beyond the impressive stat line, should read American Icon: The Fall of Roger Clemens and the Rise of Steroids in America’s Pastime. This well-documented book by the New York Daily News Sports Investigative Team, published in 2009, puts his career and the entire steroid era into the proper perspective.
The Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) released their Modern Era committee Hall of Fame ballot yesterday. Over the next few weeks Boston Sports Extra will make our case for who should and who shouldn’t, and who will and won’t, get elected.
The Process
In order to walk into Cooperstown as anything other than a paid visitor, a player must be on at least 75% of the ballots. Last year, there were 442 ballots cast, so a player must have been on 332 ballots to be inducted.
Voting for induction to baseball’s greatest shrine has no more integrity than voting for homecoming queen at your high school. Writers, who weren’t good enough athletes to actually play baseball, check the box next to the names of the players they like. It’s a popularity contest. Some writers are more objective than others. Some are comically biased.
Last year Tim Wakefield, Jason Varitek, and Edgar Renteria all received votes for the Hall of Fame. That’s not just ridiculous, it demonstrates that we should reassess who is allowed to vote. Every ballot should be made public. Any writer so obviously out of step with reality should have their voting privileges suspended.
For now, BBWAA Hall voters can keep their ballots private. Those who do simply lack the intellectual integrity to defend their stances on certain players.
This year’s ballot includes fourteen pitchers. Trevor Hoffman, Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina, Curt Schilling, and Billy Wagner are all hold-overs from previous years. There are nine pitchers being considered for their first time: Johan Santana, Carlos Zambrano, Jamie Moyer, Chris Carpenter, Livian Hernandez, Kevin Millwood, Kerry Wood, Jason Isringhausen, and Brad Lidge.
We will get into the details of a number of candidates in the coming weeks, but it is a safe bet that Hoffman will get the additional 1% he needs for induction. He will be the only pitcher elected this year.
Still Have a Shot
Clemens, Mussina, and Schilling will not only stay on the ballot next year, but should all eventually get elected. By the numbers, Rocket is a no brainer. But, as we’ll discuss later, his situation is more complicated than that.
Moose and Schill don’t have Clemens’ numbers, but they also don’t have his PED baggage. Mussina is safer bet than Schilling. His 270 wins are more in line with starting pitchers already in Cooperstown, and he hasn’t been nearly as controversial off the field. Much more on that later.
Good but Not Great
Of the newbies on the ballot, none of the starting pitchers are likely to make it, though some will stay above the 5% cut line for a couple of years. Moyer has more wins than the average Hall pitcher, but he has 209 loses and a career ERA almost a run and a half higher. Johan Santana was brilliant for a short time, but he wasn’t Pedro Martinez. He will eventually fall well short.
Similarly, none of the other four predominantly relief pitchers on the ballot will make it. This includes Kerry Wood, who due to injuries had his gifted career cut short. Billy Wagner is the most other Hall-worthy candidate, but when judged against Trevor Hoffman’s candidacy you can easily see how far he is below the standard.
