A little chin music, Professor.

[Michael Press]

Curt Schilling has this to say about hall of fame voting.

"If I have to shut up to get in the Hall of Fame, then I don’t
want in. I promise you, if I had said, ‘Lynch Trump,’ I’d be
getting in with about 90 percent of the vote."

--
Michael Press

[Eric Ramon]

what's your point? Schilling is incorrect about that. He's a bum who freeloaded off the state of Rhode Island. So boo hoo hoo. Knowing where you get all your info, though, I can understand why you'd believe stuff like this.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 02:06:12 -0700 (PDT), Eric Ramon
<ramon...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 at 12:59:52 AM UTC-7, Michael Press wrote:
>> Curt Schilling has this to say about hall of fame voting.
>>

>> "If I have to shut up to get in the Hall of Fame, then I don=E2=80=99t
>> want in. I promise you, if I had said, =E2=80=98Lynch Trump,=E2=80=99 I=
>=E2=80=99d be

>> getting in with about 90 percent of the vote."
>>
>> --
>> Michael Press
>

>what's your point? Schilling is incorrect about that. He's a bum who freelo=
>aded off the state of Rhode Island. So boo hoo hoo. Knowing where you get a=

>ll your info, though, I can understand why you'd believe stuff like this.

What percent do you think he would get if not 90?

Hugh


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Michael Press]

In article <a0a5df25-3125-45c0...@googlegroups.com>,

Eric Ramon <ramon...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 at 12:59:52 AM UTC-7, Michael Press wrote:
> > Curt Schilling has this to say about hall of fame voting.
> >
> > "If I have to shut up to get in the Hall of Fame, then I don’t
> > want in. I promise you, if I had said, ‘Lynch Trump,’ I’d be
> > getting in with about 90 percent of the vote."
> >
> > --
> > Michael Press
>
> what's your point?

It's all right that you cannot perceive my point.
It's not your fault.

> Schilling is incorrect about that. He's a bum who freeloaded off the state of Rhode Island. So boo hoo hoo. Knowing where you get all your info, though, I can understand why you'd believe stuff like this.

Dry your tears and be a big boy.

--
Michael Press

[Eric Ramon]

On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 at 11:58:34 AM UTC-7, Michael Press wrote:

>
> Dry your tears and be a big boy.
>

that's right, Schilling. Listen to Press.

[Eric Ramon]

using Colin Kaepernick as an example I'd say 56% or lower.

[plai...@gmail.com]

Schilling got 45% in the last vote, so I'll say 45-50%. If he hadn't wasted millions of Rhode Island tax payer dollars making video games that didn't sell and then declaring bankruptcy, maybe 55-60%. He had some good years in his mid 30s and 1-2 in his 20s, but he had quite a few unimpressive seasons too. He was great in the post season. I'd say he belongs in the Hall of Fame, but it's borderline. Being a difficult personality doesn't help his case.

[Michael Press]

In article <bde58c7f-121a-4f1e...@googlegroups.com>,

In article <rubrum-EF89EC....@news.albasani.net>,

Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:

> It's all right that you cannot perceive my point.
> It's not your fault.
>
> > Schilling is incorrect about that. He's a bum who freeloaded off the state of Rhode Island. So boo hoo hoo. Knowing where you get all your info, though, I can understand why you'd believe stuff like this.
>

> Dry your tears and be a big boy.

Dry yours first. Make a good role model.

--
Michael Press

[tim.vanwa...@gmail.com]

It's not like Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddox are baseball HOF voters. Sports writers may be somewhat concerned over politically toxic candidates, but the real issue here is that a borderline candidate (at just over 200 wins a pitcher most certainly is, fake bloody sock aside or goofball statistics like WAR) relies heavily on the goodwill of those voting. And Schilling had an atrocious relationship with the writers, fellow players, and team management. His personality of aggressive, aggrieved bully is just getting worse. But as the pattern of life continues and he blames everyone else for his troubles, so it goes here, and thus he digs himself deeper into Rule 5 exclusion.

[Eric Ramon]

you're getting sloppy in your attributions. You just replied to yourself.

[Michael Press]

In article <05ead10c-ccd2-43fb...@googlegroups.com>,

tim.vanwa...@gmail.com wrote:

> It's not like Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddox are baseball HOF voters. Sports writers may be somewhat concerned over politically toxic candidates, but the real issue here is that a borderline candidate (at just over 200 wins a pitcher most certainly is, fake bloody sock aside or goofball statistics like WAR) relies heavily on the goodwill of those voting. And Schilling had an atrocious relationship with the writers, fellow players, and team management. His personality of aggressive, aggrieved bully is just getting worse. But as the pattern of life continues and he blames everyone else for his troubles, so it goes here, and thus he digs himself deeper into Rule 5 exclusion.

I do not what you say is the real issue is the real issue.
If it takes the good will of the voters to get in, then I
believe even more so Curt Schilling's take. He was fired from
ESPN for speaking politically when ESPN speaks politically
all the time. Plenty of players in the HOF that were not nice guys.

--
Michael Press

[Michael Press]

In article <83269d8b-3407-43b6...@googlegroups.com>,

Eric Ramon <ramon...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 11:29:48 AM UTC-7, Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <bde58c7f-121a-4f1e...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Eric Ramon <ramon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 at 11:58:34 AM UTC-7, Michael Press wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Dry your tears and be a big boy.
> > > >
> > >
> > > that's right, Schilling. Listen to Press.
> >
> > In article <rubrum-EF89EC....@news.albasani.net>,
> > Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> > > It's all right that you cannot perceive my point.
> > > It's not your fault.
> > >
> > > > Schilling is incorrect about that. He's a bum who freeloaded off the state of Rhode Island. So boo hoo hoo. Knowing where you get all your info, though, I can understand why you'd believe stuff like this.
> > >
> > > Dry your tears and be a big boy.
> >
> > Dry yours first. Make a good role model.
> >
> > --
>
> you're getting sloppy in your attributions. You just replied to yourself.

So I did.

--
Michael Press

[tim.vanwa...@gmail.com]

He was fired from ESPN for being an offensive jerk. But ESPN actually does have a policy against political stances by their staff. One of their hosts was suspended for arguing with Schilling in favor of evolution. That isn't even really political.

Again, it's the baseball writers that are slagging him. Especially any that ever dealt with him as a player. He was a Jerk as a player and it's coming back to bite him. Multiple players say he was their worst teammate ever. A lot of players are jerks, but the writers tend to soften on them as the glow of nostalgia creeps in and players mellow out in retirement. However, His complete lack of class has just amplified when you give him a microphone and twitter account and thus he is a constant reminder to others of what a rule 5 exception he really is. Heck, Pete Rose has more class than this clown.

[RoddyMcCorley]

On 7/8/2017 2:06 AM, tim.vanwa...@gmail.com wrote:
> He was fired from ESPN for being an offensive jerk. But ESPN actually does have a policy against political stances by their staff. One of their hosts was suspended for arguing with Schilling in favor of evolution. That isn't even really political.
>
> Again, it's the baseball writers that are slagging him. Especially any that ever dealt with him as a player. He was a Jerk as a player and it's coming back to bite him. Multiple players say he was their worst teammate ever. A lot of players are jerks, but the writers tend to soften on them as the glow of nostalgia creeps in and players mellow out in retirement. However, His complete lack of class has just amplified when you give him a microphone and twitter account and thus he is a constant reminder to others of what a rule 5 exception he really is. Heck, Pete Rose has more class than this clown.
>

Frankly, he does not have the numbers. Plenty of good pitchers with
better numbers ahead of him - Andy Pettite, Mike Mussina, Jack Morris, etc.

--
False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul
with evil.

Pennsylvania - Tá sé difriúil anseo.

[Michael Press]

In article <b28513a9-c9fb-4b22...@googlegroups.com>,

tim.vanwa...@gmail.com wrote:

> He was fired from ESPN for being an offensive jerk. But ESPN actually does have a policy against political stances by their staff. One of their hosts was suspended for arguing with Schilling in favor of evolution. That isn't even really political.
>
> Again, it's the baseball writers that are slagging him. Especially any that ever dealt with him as a player. He was a Jerk as a player and it's coming back to bite him. Multiple players say he was their worst teammate ever. A lot of players are jerks, but the writers tend to soften on them as the glow of nostalgia creeps in and players mellow out in retirement. However, His complete lack of class has just amplified when you give him a microphone and twitter account and thus he is a constant reminder to others of what a rule 5 exception he really is. Heck, Pete Rose has more class than this clown.

I see what you mean. CS does not have a great record. I figure
only unequivocally great records should go in, and that would
mean some years without inductions. Therefore Barry Bonds who was
club house poison and a steroid user and a convicted felon goes
in unopposed. I'm fine with that. Pete Rose does not go in
because he was thrown out of baseball.

So sportswriters have latitude to make a deal: play ball with us
now and maybe later after I'm retired maybe you'll get a gold star.

I take exception to Pete Rose having more class. Pete Rose bet on
baseball games he played in. Not classy. Bart Giamatti threw Pete
Rose out of baseball after Pete Rose had warnings. Pete Rose
threatened Bart Giamatti with a federal lawsuit and when Giamatti
said "Bring it on" Pete Rose caved in. Not classy. Pete Rose is a
felon. Not classy. Pete Rose never acknowledged, much less
apolgized for, his transgression againt the entire game of
baseball. Not classy. Pete Rose tore up Bob Fosse's knee coming
in with spikes high In An All Star Game. Not classy. Charly Hustler.

--
Michael Press

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 11:01:27 -0400, RoddyMcCorley
<Roddy.M...@verizon.net> wrote:

>Frankly, he does not have the numbers. Plenty of good pitchers with
>better numbers ahead of him - Andy Pettite, Mike Mussina, Jack Morris, etc.

Marginal candidates are at the mercy of the voters - it's human
nature.

In my mind if you break the rules you don't get in the HoF. Both Bonds
and Rose broke the rules. At the same time no one can doubt that they
were among the greatest who ever played.

[Ken Olson]

They need a section for guys that had the stats to get in, but had other
factors that stopped their admission.

[michael anderson]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 10:01:09 AM UTC-5, RoddyMcCorley wrote:
> On 7/8/2017 2:06 AM, tim.vanwa...@gmail.com wrote:
> > He was fired from ESPN for being an offensive jerk. But ESPN actually does have a policy against political stances by their staff. One of their hosts was suspended for arguing with Schilling in favor of evolution. That isn't even really political.
> >
> > Again, it's the baseball writers that are slagging him. Especially any that ever dealt with him as a player. He was a Jerk as a player and it's coming back to bite him. Multiple players say he was their worst teammate ever. A lot of players are jerks, but the writers tend to soften on them as the glow of nostalgia creeps in and players mellow out in retirement. However, His complete lack of class has just amplified when you give him a microphone and twitter account and thus he is a constant reminder to others of what a rule 5 exception he really is. Heck, Pete Rose has more class than this clown.
> >
> Frankly, he does not have the numbers. Plenty of good pitchers with
> better numbers ahead of him - Andy Pettite, Mike Mussina, Jack Morris, etc.

ummm no jack morris certainly doesn't have better numbers. And please dont cite something ridiculous like win-loss as a meaningful metric.

[tim.vanwa...@gmail.com]

Neither belong in the hall. The only HOF (or HOF bound) pitcher in the top 10 in similarity scores to Schilling is Smoltz (10th) and he got in on a gift to an interrupted career and a resurrection as a closer.

the top five are

Kevin Brown
Bob Welch
CC sabathia
Tim Hudson
Orel Hershiser

All candidates for the Hall of Very Good, not candidates for the HOF.

The rest,
Freddie fitzsimmoms
Milt Pappas
Mark Buehrle
Bartolo Colon

So once again, Schilling is not a first ballot HOFer being held out by evil liberals at the NYT because he is an outspoken conservative. He isn't in the hall because no one else like him pitching wise is in either.

[Michael Press]

In article <af4faf9c-2295-4f56...@googlegroups.com>,

Poisoning the well fallacy.

--
Michael Press

[michael anderson]

or accurately anticipating a bad argument
>
> --
> Michael Press

[michael anderson]

On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 10:34:02 PM UTC-5, tim.vanwa...@gmail.com wrote:
> Neither belong in the hall. The only HOF (or HOF bound) pitcher in the top 10 in similarity scores to Schilling is Smoltz (10th) and he got in on a gift to an interrupted career and a resurrection as a closer.
>

his time as a closer didnt have a lot of value overall. We're talking about a season's worth of really quality starting pitching there.

And I would argue that Smoltz actually got in because he has so many big postseason moments. He was known as a huge big game/postseason pitcher....now how much that rep should count in getting a pitcher into the hof is a fair argument? But that was what got smoltz in.

And schilling is the *one* contemporary to smoltz who was also known as an equally huge big game pitcher with the same level of postseason/huge moment success. Maybe even more.

Jack Morris has this as well of course, but morris isn't close to a true peer in terms of performance to smoltz and schilling. He has an era+ of 105 for god sakes(if you dont like era+ pick some other metric)

Would I vote Schilling in? Probably, although it's not a huge tragedy if he doesnt get in.

But do I think the writers are kinda screwing him over based on *their own standards*? Sure....by the numbers he is a bubble hof guy, and his intangibles that HOF voters love(like smoltz) are off the charts good.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 22:21:07 -0400, Ken Olson <kol...@freedomnet.org>
wrote:

Now that's an interesting concept. We know who they are but they don't
have a group name.

Hugh

[agavi...@gmail.com]

I love arguments about the baseball hall of (sometimes) statistics, (sometimes) fame, (sometimes) friendliness to writers, (sometimes) <insert other issue>, & Fame

[Michael Press]

In article <6d2458f6-ab36-437d...@googlegroups.com>,

Once again: poisoning the well.
W-L is an accurate metric along with all the other statistics.

--
Michael Press

[Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger]

You want a poisoned well? He's a fucking Red Sock! Ban him! :-)

[plai...@gmail.com]

>Once again: poisoning the well.
>W-L is an accurate metric along with all the other statistics.

There are many ways for W-L records to be influenced other than how well a pitcher pitched. Are you a better pitcher if your team scores 6 runs per games than if it scores 2 runs per game? Or if it averages 1 error per game instead of 3 errors per game? What if your team has a great closer versus a closer that blows half if his saves?

[michael anderson]

W-L is an accurate metric in the sense that it accurately tells us how many times a pitcher was given a 'win' or 'loss' according to the way baseball rules tabulates such things.

It doesn't particularly tell us a great deal(relative to other metrics) about how effective a pitcher was or how much value he brought to the team.

That's why making a big deal out of W-L record is a bad argument.


>
> --
> Michael Press

[Michael Press]

In article <a2ca856a-b648-4ff2...@googlegroups.com>,

"Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger" <damon...@gmail.com> wrote:

> You want a poisoned well? He's a fucking Red Sock! Ban him! :-)

That's a poisoned _wall_.

--
Michael Press

[Michael Press]

In article <fceb7571-2b8e-44a4...@googlegroups.com>,

Is W-L a meaningful statistic?

--
Michael Press

[Michael Press]

In article <94599d95-1379-4e15...@googlegroups.com>,

I need a close, well reasoned, argument and tons of data before
entertaining your assertion. Until then, W-L is a meaningful statistic.

> That's why making a big deal out of W-L record is a bad argument.

You keep saying that.

--
Michael Press

[dotsla...@gmail.com]

Maybe he'll get lucky and breitbart will post one he can copy n paste.

Cheers.