Tim Raines: Hall of Famer
Recently an ESPN Sportsnation poll stated that approximately 83% of respondents do not believe Tim Raines was a Hall of Fame caliber player. This is extremely unfortunately. Tim Raines was not only a Hall of Famer, but if left out he would clearly stand as the most deserving player left out. On statistics alone, he rates higher than Mark McGwire. In making this argument I am going to attempt to avoid bogging down the argument with too many sabermetrics. Runs Created Above Average and WARP3 might view Raines as deserving, but they are not going to convince the casual fan. My goal is to convince the casual baseball fan that Raines deserves the Hall.
Tim Raines' stat line is not convincing at first glance. A .385 On Base Percentage is good but not among the greats. .425 is quite pedestrian for a slugging percentage. Delving into Raines' value requires more work. Start with his stolen bases (808, 5th all time). The four players with more steals are all in the Hall, and Vince Coleman is the only non-Hall of Famer among the top ten. Of those ten, Raines was caught stealing the least, only 146 times. In fact, Raines' stolen base percentage of 84% is the greatest stolen base percentage of all time. Raines reached base almost 4,000 times in his career, good for 38th all time. When he did reach base, which was often, he was absolute terror on the basepaths. He's 46th all time in runs scored. 32nd in walks.
Tim Raines vs. Jim Rice
Jim Rice seems like an inexplicable Hall candidate. Let's compare the two. Raines played in over 400 more games, collecting more runs, hits, doubles, triples, steals, walks, and less strikeouts and double plays. Those are counting statistics so maybe that is unfair. Raines' OBP is 33 points higher. Rice played in eight All-Star games, Raines played in seven. Rice played left field and DH'ed in Fenway Park, while Raines played left field in Stade Olympique.
But Rice's argument is all about peak. In 1978 Rice won the MVP award, hitting .315 with 46 home runs and 139 RBIs. That is impressive. Compare that with Raines in 1987. Raines hit .330, had a .429 OBP (59 points higher than Rice), walked 90 times, hit 18 home runs, scored 123 runs, and stole 50 bases in 55 tries. Rice was a feared hitter? Raines was intentionally walked 26 times, 14 out of the leadoff slot. In fact, Raines was intentionally walked more than 10 times in a season four times. Rice was intentionally walked ten times in his best season. What all this indicates to me is that managers saw Rice as a power threat, but one they could beat. Raines? No way. (In fact, Raines' prolific on base tendencies earned Tim Wallach 123 RBIs and a 4th place MVP finish.)
Tim Raines vs. Lou Brock
Brock is seen as a good Hall of Famer. 3,000 hits, held the record for stolen bases until Rickey Henderson. Draw up the list, and Raines is clearly a superior player. Raines stole 130 less bases, but was caught 161 less times. Raines had a higher batting average, higher slugging percentage, and a MUCH higher on base percentage. Raines had 400 less hits but over 500 more walks. More impressively, Raines actually appeared in more All-Star games.
Win Shares
Skip this part if you don't believe in the stat at all, but you may find this enlightening. Tim Raines has 390 career win shares. Every player with 400+ win shares is in the Hall of Fame. Two players with more win shares than Raines are out. One is Tony Mullane, who racked up wins pitching in the inferior American Association in the 1880s. The other is Bill Dahlen, an unheralded infielder of the turn of the century. There are 70 players with more than 363 win shares, and all but two who are eligible are in. That's rare company, and Raines is smack in the middle of it.
I hope if you were unconvinced, you are now. If not, I'd like to hear from you.
4 Comments
Recommended Comments