Jim Rice is a no show again

FavreFan1971 · January 10, 2006 7:12AM

I never expect him to make it in anyway. This is as close as he is ever going to get. There is no way they will put him in with the three studs next year. Glad to see Sutter made it.

RonBurgundy · January 10, 2006 7:21AM

He was a nice player, but doesn't deserve the HOF. Had he played for Milwaukee or Kansas City, he wouldn't even be given a second thought.

TheVon · January 10, 2006 8:00AM

<< He was a nice player, but doesn't deserve the HOF. Had he played for Milwaukee or Kansas City, he wouldn't even be given a second thought. >>

I disagree. I think that had he played for Kansas City or Milwaukee he wouldn't have ticked off so many sports writers. I think that one of the biggest strikes against Rice is that some writers still don't like him as a person and they let that obscure their view of him as a player. Maybe if he had played in a small market team there'd only be 4 or 5 writers out there that begrudge him rather than a host of writers.

I think another strike against Rice is that his career wasn't as long as many other HOF players. However, during his productive years I think that Rice was the premier power hitter. He was an all-star 8 times, had over 100 RBI in a season 8 times and in 1978 he became the first player to get 400 total bases since DiMaggio. I could go on and on with various stats but my point is that he's got better stats than a lot of players already in the hall and from '75 to the mid to late 80's he was one of the most feared hitters in baseball. That's got to be worth something, especially when you consider that guys like Gregg Jeffries and Walt Weiss are getting HOF votes.

RonBurgundy · January 10, 2006 8:23AM

I'm not trying to diss Rice, but what HOF'ers do his stats surpass? I can't think of any off the top of my head. His numbers resemble Frank Howard's. Very, very good player, great for 2-3 years, but not enough longevity to put up HOF caliber numbers. One could argue he is the American League's Dale Murphy.

softparade · January 10, 2006 8:53AM

<< I'm not trying to diss Rice, but what HOF'ers do his stats surpass? I can't think of any off the top of my head. His numbers resemble Frank Howard's. Very, very good player, great for 2-3 years, but not enough longevity to put up HOF caliber numbers. One could argue he is the American League's Dale Murphy. >>

No way, Rice DOMINATED the American league for 10 years. Rice was a great player for ALOT more than 2-3 years. The Al's Dale Murphy? That is ridiculous and certainly laughable. Sorry....

TheVon · January 10, 2006 8:58AM

<< I'm not trying to diss Rice, but what HOF'ers do his stats surpass? I can't think of any off the top of my head. His numbers resemble Frank Howard's. Very, very good player, great for 2-3 years, but not enough longevity to put up HOF caliber numbers. One could argue he is the American League's Dale Murphy. >>

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Rice should have been a first ballot HOFer, but a quick peek at the all-time stats shows that he has more career home runs than Fisk, Berra, Brett, Dimaggio, Brooks Robinson and Foster to name a few (not to mention Pete Rose but that's another story). He's also got more RBI than Berra, McGwire (who'll be in the hall next year), Yount and Foster and his career batting average of .298 happens to be higher than those players as well.

And here's a compelling piece of trivia submitted by Dick Bresciani: Other than Rice, the only other retired players with at least 382 home runs and a career average of .298 or higher are Hank Aaron, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Babe Ruth and Ted Williams. Rice is also the only player to ever hit 35 home runs and compile 200 hits in three straight seasons. And, rather than just 2-3 good years, Rice led the American League in the 12 seasons between 1975 and 1986 in games, at-bats, runs, hits, homers, RBI, slugging, total bases, extra-base hits, multi-hit games, and outfield assists. To me, that's domination.

SOM · January 10, 2006 12:58PM

I agree with Von. The reason Rice isn't in is because (some of) the writers hate him.

Which I can only hope is still the protocol when jerkoff Bonds comes up for a vote. I'd like to see Bonds become the first player to hit 700 HR that isn't inducted in his first year of eligibility.

Wondo · January 10, 2006 1:02PM

Rice is just below the HOF line IMHO. He certainly does not rank as the AL's Dale Murphy, because Murph won two MVPs.

His 1978 year was monster, but the DHing hurts him. Freddie was a better ballplayer, a teammate, and he isn't going in.

Dawson, Baylor, Allen, Howard, Cash, Hodges are all good comps, but they aren't my idea of rock solid HOFs.

Southerncards · January 10, 2006 7:28PM

I'd vote Mattingly in before Rice

lostdart58 · January 10, 2006 8:07PM

Did someone mention Foster??? .....only Fosters in the HOF are negro League players.

kcballboy · January 10, 2006 11:43PM

I think that HOF voters are inconsistent at best. Looking down the list of HOFers and at their stats, I am absolutely floored how some of these guys are in it and guys like Rice, Dawson, Murphy, Morris, Blyleven etc. who put up better numbers are not. I will say that a lot of those guys are from way before my time so I don't know of them very well, but it seems that there is quite a bit of inconsistency between who is all ready in and who is repeatedly shunned.

beach64 · January 11, 2006 1:03AM

I think the voters compare newly eligible players to even more recent statistics. Rice hit about 400 home runs. In today's world that is hard to seem like that was a great career. His career best for home runs was 46 and 39. Again in today's game that isnt a hall of fame player. I think the voters are having a hard time going back and seeing how Rice and others did dominate during their time period. We will see that more and more as players put up numbers that until the past 10-15 years were unthinkable.
In my opinion next year you will see the first 500 home run player not voted in. McGwire may get in but I think the voters will try to prove a point in not electing him the first year. In 5 years you will see the first man with 500 homers and 3000 hits not elected in Rafael Palmeiro. Who knows what the voters think is the bar to reach to get in to the hall but it has been raised quite a bit and if any doubt you did anything you will be punished for it.
In a few years you will see a lot of players with great numbers almost ignored by Cooperstown. Fred McGriff 493 homers, 1550 rbi and .284 average wont come close to getting elected. Harold Baines the same way. Im not saying these guys should get in but what does a player have to do to get in the Hall with the current voting? Soon the Hall of Fame will be a hall of old timers in which very few current fans can relate.

TheVon · January 11, 2006 1:50AM

I guess what bothers me about Rice not getting into the Hall of Fame is that you have players like Kirby Puckett, whom the media adored, getting into the Hall with arguably inferior numbers. Rice had higer total runs, hits, triples, home runs, RBI, total bases, walks, and slugging percentage than Puckett. You can make the counter argument that Puckett was a different kind of player so it's not a fair comparison, but it's not exactly like comparing a slugger with a base stealer/contact hitter type of player. Puckett only stole 134 bases in his career and finished only .020 batting average points higher than Rice. If Rice's numbers aren't good enough for the Hall why are Puckett's? It certainly seems like a media bias to me.

RonBurgundy · January 11, 2006 1:51AM

George Foster is in the HOF?

beach64 · January 11, 2006 1:51AM

It would be interesting if the media voted now after everything that came out after his election. Would they still be in love with him?

Bosox1976 · January 11, 2006 2:18AM

While I am a Rice fan, I am against the argument that if a player is better than the worst player in the HOF he should therefore be in the HOF.

Any group with Ruth, Gehrig, Mays, Foxx, etc. should be exclusionary. Only legends belong in the hall - the top few from each era. Number crunching should never replace the question of "Am I watching true greatness?". Numbers piled up over time can accumulate and seem impressive, but if they are just a collection of moderately above average years, than they rise to the level of above average only - not true greatness. Koufax pitching a shorter more brilliant, awe-inspiring career is more impressive to me than somebody with 20 15-win campaigns. Longevity is a plus, but not a replacement for greatness.

If people don't come to see a player play - if it is not an event - like when Pedro pitches, I am not sure theat they belong. While you must be an afficianado (sp?) to appreciate the nuances of a game caught by Varitek vs. another catcher, or the understated brilliance of some of the best fielders - because they are in position always - like Edmonds, you can spot greatness. If enough people can spot it, HOF is merited.

When numeric arguments must be presented to demonsrate something that should be inherently obvious, something is amiss. Puckett had a short career, but you knew you were watching true greatness. I lived and breathed the Red Sox in the 1970's and 1980's. While Lynn's greatness was apparent (and squandered), Rice's greatness was there too - as a hitter (for power and average) - there is room in the HOF for specialists (occasionally), and Rice is definitely a borderline specialist candidate. I guess with borderline candidates numbers can tip the scales, but looking over the list of top vote getters this year - there are no true legends.

Sutter in the same Hall as Koufax? Rice in the same Hall as Mays? Albert Belle being discussed? Baines? Steroid Monsters?

Cam Neely got into the Hockey HOF because everyone knew that he was true greatness, redefining the position and brilliant like Puckett. There are dozens of guys with more impressive career numbers, but would you have traded Neely or Puckett for them?

Don't dilute the Hall (s)! We don't need to elect "somebody" every year!

Just one misanthrope's humble opinion.

TheVon · January 11, 2006 3:40AM

<< When numeric arguments must be presented to demonsrate something that should be inherently obvious, something is amiss. >>

I guess that watching "greatness" is subjective because I never felt like I was seeing greatness in action when I watched Puckett. I liked him, I thought he was a great part of baseball, but if I were a pitcher I'd rather pitch against Puckett in his prime than Rice in his any day. By contrast, I loved watching Rice . . . so maybe I'm too biased to be making this argument. So I'll let another biased person add this thought: "The numbers show what our eyes told us: Rice was the dominant slugger of his time." -Boston Globe writer Dan Shaughnessy

mikeschmidt · January 11, 2006 3:53AM

<< 
Sutter in the same Hall as Koufax? >>

Of all your arguments - I find this one by far the weakest. In my mind, Sutter is *precisely* the type of candidate that Koufax was.

Koufax's career was 12 seasons - only ten full ones. He had only five seasons that he was truly dominant [1961 was a good year - but not really dominant]. I certainly grant you that his five-year stretch from 1962-1966 was absolutely phenomenal. But, at the end of the day - that's his whole argument. Five years where he was the most dominant starting pitcher in baseball.

Sutter's career was 12 seasons - but only ten count [1986 and 1988 weren't full]. Same number of seasons as Koufax. From 1979-1984, Sutter was phenomenal. Six straight years as the dominant reliever in MLB. He was truly scary during those few years. Much like Koufax, his MLB career was short. Much like Koufax, he was exceedingly dominant at his position for a 5 year period of time.

You can make all the arguments you want about relief pitchers in general and their ability to be in the Hall. But if Hall presence is measured by a 5-6 year period of dominance at a position, Sutter is every bit the candidate that Koufax is.

beach64 · January 11, 2006 4:06AM

If Sutter was dominating what was Gossage? IF the Hall elected a reliever but they picked the wrong one.

mikeschmidt · January 11, 2006 4:32AM

<< If Sutter was dominating what was Gossage? IF the Hall elected a reliever but they picked the wrong one. >>

You have no argument from me there. I don't think that over a 5-year period, Gossage was as dominating as Sutter was. [Fingers and Quisenberry had their moments in the AL during Gossage's time]. That said, Gossage was consistently great in my opinion, and was overall dominant for a decade or so. I think he should have gone in before Sutter - but who I am? I certainly don't get to vote.

pebblyjack · January 11, 2006 5:08AM

Here is Jim Rice's home/road split for his entire career (Avg/OBP/Slg):

Home: .320/.374/.546
Road: .277/.330/.459

I think that says it all. Rice was a fine hitter who was helped tremendously by playing half of his games in Fenway Park. Regardless, Rice will eventually go in. No player has received the vote total he has received and not been elected. And, he definitely won't be the worst player there.

Ironically, if one uses objective measures, Dwight Evans is the 1970s-80s Red Sox outfielder who got shafted:

WARP3 Win Shares
Rice 89.6 282
Lynn 89.4 280
Evans 113.5 347

WARP3 is Baseball Prospectus' creation to rate players' careers objectively and Win Shares is Bill James' method for rating players' careers objectively. Dewey's career outstrips Rice's and Lynn's careers by a fair margin.

For a point of reference, here are some others:

WARP3 Win Shares
Puckett 91.9 281 (a fair comp for Rice value-wise)
Whitaker 121.3 351
Trammell 117.6 318
Dawson 99.4 340
Murphy 90.1 294
Parker 78.8 327
Da.Evans 110.5 363
Santo 105.8 324
Blyleven 138.6 339
Gossage 84.0 223
B.Bell 103.2 301
Grich 115.4 329
Nettles 101.3 321
Sutter 55.2 168
Q'berry 56.2 157

I guess now that Sutter is in we (Royals fans) can start clamoring for Dan Quisenberry's election.

Thanks

Randy

thesplendidsplinter · January 11, 2006 12:51PM

<< I'd vote Mattingly in before Rice >>

Funniest post I ever read! Mattingly should only be allowed in if he buys a ticket. Talk about one of the most overhyped players EVER! He couldn't hold Vada Pinson's jock strap, (look up the stats) much less HOF's. Because Mattingly played in a time where the Yankees were not very good they looked to him for everything. Including a player to be idolized. He never even played in a playoff game til his final year. Ever notice the Yankees won the first WS since 78 the year AFTER he retired? Hmmmmm This does not make him Hall material, he was to the 80's what Bobby Murcer was to the 70's. Jim Rice is a HOF, no if's ands or buts. Ron Burgandy, no offense, but I would guess you are too young to know the fear he put into the American League. I will never forget The Sporting News had a poll in the late 70's, early 80's for pitchers to whom they would not want to pitch to. Jim Rice was the overwhelming answer. That says volumes.

"And here's a compelling piece of trivia submitted by Dick Bresciani: Other than Rice, the only other retired players with at least 382 home runs and a career average of .298 or higher are Hank Aaron, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Babe Ruth and Ted Williams. Rice is also the only player to ever hit 35 home runs and compile 200 hits in three straight seasons. And, rather than just 2-3 good years, Rice led the American League in the 12 seasons between 1975 and 1986 in games, at-bats, runs, hits, homers, RBI, slugging, total bases, extra-base hits, multi-hit games, and outfield assists. To me, that's domination."

uh, last time I checked, those names are pretty good. And Rice isn't in? Don Mattingly, puh-lease

PS Bosox1976 Cam Neely was one of the top 3 greatest hockey players I ever saw & him & Bourque will always be my favorites! Damn Edmonton! Saw Neely PUMMEL Bernie Nichols in LA, center ice, one year & the rest of the Kings did not want to help him up because Neely was going to go after them! Talk about priceless memories. Can still see it.

I'm rambling

gmoneystyles · January 11, 2006 1:10PM

His acting is quite compelling as well.

thesplendidsplinter · January 11, 2006 1:11PM

Kick his ass, Sea Bass!!

cosyn · January 12, 2006 10:21AM

<< Other than Rice, the only other retired players with at least 382 home runs and a career average of .298 or higher are Hank Aaron, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Babe Ruth and Ted Williams. >>

As an Al Kaline fan, those numbers kind of jumped out at me. Kaline finished with 399 home runs and a .297 average. The .001 difference in career batting average means in the 1891 more at-bats Kaline had than Rice (3 years younger than Rice's start and 3 years older than his finish), he only had 555 more hits (.293) to lower his career average below that "magical" .298 number.

Just kind of reminded me about Bud Selig (cringe) noting in his All-Star game interruption (idiot) that Cal Ripken was one of only 7 players with 400 home runs and 3000 hits. Kaline finished one HR short of that club, and now he's .001 out of this "club"... although the .298 club isn't one you usually mention, but I guess we had to drop .002 points off the .300 level to include Jim Rice. Kind of like the 382 HR, instead of 400.

Anyway, back to the argument. I'm one of those who thought Rice was going to be a HOFer earlier in his career and then I think he lost it. Longevity and consistency do count. Put Alan Trammell in the Hall!

dakota · January 12, 2006 5:01PM

Neely was one bad mofo!!!! How about his rookie card in the flyin "V" Canucks Jersey. Now thats a classic.Anyone with a scan?? Ill try and dig out mine.
Oh yeah, Rice should be in.

Davalillo · January 12, 2006 8:22PM

Rice is certainly more deserving than the worst members of the HOF.

He is even more deserving than Mattingly.

But he is not deserving of entry. Just because mistakes were made in the past is no reason to cheapen the institution.

Jim

shagrotn77 · January 13, 2006 1:52AM

Cam Neely is in the HOF. Dino Ciccarelli still is not. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I think Neely got in because of a lot of his off-ice contributions. But if you're judging him solely by his stats, it doesn't say Hall-of-Famer to me, and certainly not first ballot. And you Mattingly naysayers speak like he was an average ballplayer or something. The guy won an MVP Award and got robbed of winning a second in a row when the votes went to a pitcher. And if your argument for Neely deserving the Hall is that he was great, but got hurt and had to cut his career short...then look at Donny Baseball because it's the same story!!!

thesplendidsplinter · January 13, 2006 2:14AM

<< Cam Neely is in the HOF. Dino Ciccarelli still is not. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I think Neely got in because of a lot of his off-ice contributions. But if you're judging him solely by his stats, it doesn't say Hall-of-Famer to me, and certainly not first ballot. And you Mattingly naysayers speak like he was an average ballplayer or something. The guy won an MVP Award and got robbed of winning a second in a row when the votes went to a pitcher. And if your argument for Neely deserving the Hall is that he was great, but got hurt and had to cut his career short...then look at Donny Baseball because it's the same story!!! >>

Zolio Versailles & Willie Hernandez won MVP's too. Do we put them in because they won an MVP? Didn't think so. The name Donny Baseball is an insult to Ted Williams, always thought that & always will. (One of his forgotten nicknames was Teddy Baseball) I would vote Vada Pinson, Al Oliver, Dwight Evans & Tony Oliva in before thinking of Mattingly & they will never get in. Trammel still has a punchers chance. He was awesome! The AL East at one time had Yount, Ripken & Trammell as their SS's.

Stats are sometimes the most telling & untelling barometer to judge HOF's. Gale Sayers, Pete Maravich, Sandy Koufax do not have the telling career numbers we have grown to expect from our HOF's. But for their brief time, they shined like no other. Cam Neely did just that for the Bruins. Fore checking, back checking, digging in the corners, toughness, leadership, goal scoring & do you think anyone could move him from the crease? Not a chance. Only cuz he was cheap shotted by a defenseman on Pittsburgh who shall remain nameless, did we truly get robbed of his greatness. And Dino should be in too.

shagrotn77 · January 13, 2006 3:24AM

<< Didn't think so. The name Donny Baseball is an insult to Ted Williams, always thought that & always will. (One of his forgotten nicknames was Teddy Baseball) >>

Are you kidding me??? His nicknames were The Splendid Splinter, The Kid and Teddy Ballgame (not Teddy Baseball). Until this I thought you were up on your Boston knowledge. I don't care that you like your Boston players, but there's no reason to hate on Mattingly. You guys won your World Series. Let it go already.

pebblyjack · January 13, 2006 5:26AM

Drawing exclusionary arguments based on arbitrary numbers like .298 and 382 HR for a selected player are always dangerous. One can make a similar argument for almost any player of merit, of which Jim Rice decidedly was. And, you can even use round numbers to do it. For example, only one player in major league history has 3000 hits, 600 doubles, 100 triples, 300 home runs, and 200 stolen bases: George Brett. Obviously, George Brett is the best baseball player in the history of the game.

By the way, Larry Walker is retired and he clubbed 383 HR and batted .313 for his career, so you can add him to the list.

Also, active players Mike Piazza, Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, Frank Thomas, and Barry Bonds all fit into the magical .298-382 club. Additionally, Jeff Bagwell and Gary Sheffield, who have both hit 449 career homers, fall into the just-short-Al-Kaline-outside-looking-in category with .297 lifetime batting averages.

And, just a quick and objective comparison between Jim Rice and Don Mattingly:

WARP3 WinShares
Rice 89.6 282
Mattingly 92.4 263

Not much to distinguish Rice and Mattingly. Rice has better counting stats because he played a little longer and because he played half his games at Fenway. Mattingly closes the gap because he was a better defender and got on base a little more. Neither player would be the worst player in the Hall of Fame, but neither is the best player eligible for the Hall of Fame who is not in.

Thanks

Randy

thesplendidsplinter · January 13, 2006 6:30AM

Nicknames also were The Thumper & Teddy Baseball as well as Teddy Ballgame.

Peace

Blyleven gets in before anybody!!

Jim Rice is a no show again

Comments