RICKEY~ and Jim Rice elected to HOF

[Boon 0]

Personally, I'm just glad that Jim Rice is in so he'll stop bitching about it.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I will echo that I think Rice getting in should get Parker some more consideration. Why he isn't mentioned more as a possible realistic candidate, I don't know. He was certainly a "feared hitter" for much of his career, like we discussed in another thread.

[Precious Roy 0]

It pisses me off that Jim Rice is in and Don Mattingly probably has to wait for a veterans committee vote 30-40 years from now to even sniff the Hall.

 

I think Raines, Trammell and Dawson should probably be in, but I grew up watching baseball in the 80's and early 90's so I'm probably biased. I wouldn't have a problem with Jack Morris getting in, I acknowledge the arguments for and against and don't really have a strong opinion either way.

 

The more years that go by the more I feel like McGwire should be in. I kind of hope he makes it eventually. A legitimate (I guess) question is does Bonds make it in first ballot. I think that obviously he should, and if he does that will probably help the case for Big Mac.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I will echo that I think Rice getting in should get Parker some more consideration. Why he isn't mentioned more as a possible realistic candidate, I don't know. He was certainly a "feared hitter" for much of his career, like we discussed in another thread.

What I fear is that this will spur quite a few "he was better than Rice" arguments. Take a look at Frank Howard for example. Take a look at every pro-Rice argument and tell me it doesn't apply there. 48 home runs when the league slugging percentage was .373?! And then there's Boog Powell. George Foster. Will Clark. Fred Lynn. Dwight Evans. Darrell Evans. Don Mattingly. I looked at the list of win shares leaders and came up with 40 players higher than Rice that aren't in the Hall, only from 1950 onward.

[Bored 0]

In case anyone was wondering the biggest names to join next year's ballot are Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, and Fred McGriff. Out of the four I think only Alomar has a shot next year but I don't think he'll get in on the first ballot.

Really? He's a shoo-in in my mind. Do you think the spitting incident will keep him out next year? Seems kind of silly in light of all the guys not getting in because of PEDs.

With the arbitrary nature of why a writer does or does not vote for a guy makes me think without a doubt that some will not vote for him, at least on the first ballot, due to the spitting incident. It won't matter them about him becoming friends with the umpire later, baseball writers never let facts get in the way of their own perceptions or opinions. Also I don't think Alomar will be looked at as an "inner circle" candidate like RICKEY~ was or Cal Ripken and Tony Gwynn were in 2007. For a recent example of a second baseman and how they faired, Ryne Sandberg didn't get in on the first ballot (barely got in on the second) and he was a former MVP with a squeaky clean image.

 

Now I wouldn't be surprised if Alomar does it get in on the first ballot but it will be close. In fact there's an outside chance the writers will fail to elect someone next year. Dawson is the only other player who has a shot but the 40+ votes he needs is a lot to make up in one year.

[Grenouille 0]

Baseball Reference's Black/Gray Ink tests and other rankings for the possibility of the Hall are pretty interesting. Here are a few examples.

 

Jim Rice

Black Ink: Batting - 33 (Average HOFer ≈ 27)

Gray Ink: Batting - 176 (Average HOFer ≈ 144)

HOF Standards: Batting - 43.0 (Average HOFer ≈ 50)

HOF Monitor: Batting - 144.5 (Likely HOFer > 100)

 

Andre Dawson

Black Ink: Batting - 11 (Average HOFer ≈ 27)

Gray Ink: Batting - 164 (Average HOFer ≈ 144)

HOF Standards: Batting - 44.1 (Average HOFer ≈ 50)

HOF Monitor: Batting - 117.5 (Likely HOFer > 100)

 

Don Mattingly

Black Ink: Batting - 23 (Average HOFer ≈ 27)

Gray Ink: Batting - 111 (Average HOFer ≈ 144)

HOF Standards: Batting - 34.2 (Average HOFer ≈ 50)

HOF Monitor: Batting - 133.5 (Likely HOFer > 100)

 

Tim Raines

Black Ink: Batting - 20 (Average HOFer ≈ 27)

Gray Ink: Batting - 114 (Average HOFer ≈ 144)

HOF Standards: Batting - 46.6 (Average HOFer ≈ 50)

HOF Monitor: Batting - 89.5 (Likely HOFer > 100)

 

How they break it down is explained here.

Baseball Reference

[snuffbox 0]

Jim Rice is a very proud man.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Rice's totals of course inflated from playing in Fenway Park, and the Black/Gray ink tests aren't intended to adjust for that. Most fans don't realize how much of a hitters park Fenway was at the time. Almost every other team was playing in a huge stadium, the Red Sox had a bandbox. Now most teams play in a park closer in design to Fenway, so the effect is not so obvious.

 

I need to crank up the Dick Allen for the Hall campaign. You think Rice's prime is good? Check out Allen's

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/DNFr

 

And most of those guys are outfielders. Allen played his first four seasons at third base.

[jimmy no nose 0]

Rice's totals of course inflated from playing in Fenway Park, and the Black/Gray ink tests aren't intended to adjust for that. Most fans don't realize how much of a hitters park Fenway was at the time. Almost every other team was playing in a huge stadium, the Red Sox had a bandbox. Now most teams play in a park closer in design to Fenway, so the effect is not so obvious.

I actually had thought about this recently, not in relation to Jim Rice, but with Carl Yastrzemski. He hit a similar number of homers on the road, but if you look at every other number you can make a pretty good argument that his impressive totals are largely a product of Fenway Park.

[Guest Czech please!]

Homers are what got Jim Rice in, but the prominently-employed-in-sports kind, not the into-the-seats kind.

[King Kamala 0]

Now if McGriff gets elected into The Hall of Fame, what are the chances of him wearing the Tom Ermanski Baseball World cap on his plaque?

 

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Rice's totals of course inflated from playing in Fenway Park, and the Black/Gray ink tests aren't intended to adjust for that. Most fans don't realize how much of a hitters park Fenway was at the time. Almost every other team was playing in a huge stadium, the Red Sox had a bandbox. Now most teams play in a park closer in design to Fenway, so the effect is not so obvious.

I actually had thought about this recently, not in relation to Jim Rice, but with Carl Yastrzemski. He hit a similar number of homers on the road, but if you look at every other number you can make a pretty good argument that his impressive totals are largely a product of Fenway Park.

There are several counters to that argument.

 

1. His prime came during the 1960s, when offense was absolutely pitiful. When he hit .301 in 1968, he LED THE LEAGUE. Four times in six years he led the AL in OPS+. So when looking at his raw road numbers, remember that the league OPS in his era was once lower than .700.

 

2. Yaz played an awfully long time. The problem with Rice is that he has three seasons of a Hall of Fame peak, and was otherwise merely good. Yaz was productive into his 40s. In fact, the only player in history to play in more games than Yastrzemski is Pete Rose, and only Rose and Hank Aaron have more at bats.

 

3. Yastrzemski was an excellent fielder, winning seven gold gloves.

 

So while Yastrzemski benefitted from Fenway, he also had to play a full decade in the 1960s, and that hurt him.

[cabbageboy 0]

Jim Rice really isn't a HOF player, though it was likely the very thing that hampered his popularity during his playing days (his chilly relations with the media) that caused writers now to take pity on him and put him in. But really....382 HRs? 2452 hits? .298 lifetime average? There are a ton of solid pros from the 70s and 80s that have similar numbers.

 

I wish my boy Grace could get in, but that's more of a sentimental deal than his actual numbers deserving it. Someone like Grace would almost have to get 3000 hits to be in, but he only ended up at 2445.

 

A few years ago when I went to L.A. I had a baseball talk with an older guy and the subject of base stealing came up. I rightly noted that Henderson was the best of all time at it, but he insisted on Maury Wills being the best he'd ever seen because "He could steal bases easier and was faster." Since Wills played before I was born, I didn't quite know how to refute that except for the actual stats.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

A few years ago when I went to L.A. I had a baseball talk with an older guy and the subject of base stealing came up. I rightly noted that Henderson was the best of all time at it, but he insisted on Maury Wills being the best he'd ever seen because "He could steal bases easier and was faster." Since Wills played before I was born, I didn't quite know how to refute that except for the actual stats.

 

No one really stole bases in the 1950s, except for Luis Aparicio. Maury Wills came along and in 1962 stole 104 bases in 117 attempts. That's really incredible, and drawing up a quick list it was 40+ more than anyone had stolen in the last 30 seasons. If you're a fan and see that, obviously it's going to make a hell of an impression. Of course, the reason Wills could run at will was because with the lack of base stealing, teams didn't need to worry about their catchers' throwing arms.

 

Henderson wasn't THAT much more prevalent of a basestealer than Wills. What sets Rickey apart is that he stole bases for 25 seasons.

[MFer 0]

Obviously I'd like to see Trammell get in one day, but I doubt that'll ever happen. Speaking of former Tigers, how about Jack Morris, Al? Seems like his numbers are a little under par, but he's got other things going for him (such as his playoff resume).

[TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe 0]

Will Don Mattingly ever have a shot? Could he be a veteran's committee selection years from now, maybe?

[bob_barron 0]

Will Don Mattingly ever have a shot? Could he be a veteran's committee selection years from now, maybe?

 

I would hope not. He's not a Hall of Famer

[the max 0]

Obviously I'd like to see Trammell get in one day, but I doubt that'll ever happen. Speaking of former Tigers, how about Jack Morris, Al? Seems like his numbers are a little under par, but he's got other things going for him (such as his playoff resume).

 

If someone like Bert Blyleven isn't in, Jack Morris has no business in.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Obviously I'd like to see Trammell get in one day, but I doubt that'll ever happen. Speaking of former Tigers, how about Jack Morris, Al? Seems like his numbers are a little under par, but he's got other things going for him (such as his playoff resume).

I'm not a Morris booster. He did not have a HOF peak, his career best ERA+ was 127. His postseason heroics really boil down to a single game. The combination of wins and winning percentage though will eventually get him in the Hall.

 

Trammell should absolutely make the Hall of Fame. During an eight year stretch, Trammell topped a 130 OPS+ five times. By comparison, Derek Jeter has topped that figure twice. And Trammell won four Gold Gloves.

 

Lou Whitaker should probably be in the Hall of Fame as well. If you look at that 1984 Tigers team, there are no Hall of Famers apart from manager Sparky Anderson. The idea that a team won 104 games and obliterated the postseason without a single Hall of Famer is hard to swallow.

[Guest Czech please!]

Mark Grace isn't a Hall of Famer; neither is Harold Baines. I don't get the whole Harold Baines thing, tbh, but if Juan Uribe gets a statue, then I guess Baines can.

 

Do you think voters [wrongly] hold Trammell's managerial career against him? That he can't be in the Hall because of the 2003 Tigers? That's a completely retarded line of thinking, which is why I didn't immediately rule it out.

 

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Mark Grace isn't a Hall of Famer; neither is Harold Baines. I don't get the whole Harold Baines thing, tbh, but if Juan Uribe gets a statue, then I guess Baines can.

 

Do you think voters [wrongly] hold Trammell's managerial career against him? That he can't be in the Hall because of the 2003 Tigers? That's a completely retarded line of thinking, which is why I didn't immediately rule it out.

I doubt they even remember Trammell managed the Tigers. Many HOF players have been terrible managers. Ted Williams comes to mind.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

The only argument I've heard against Blyleven is that he played for 22 years, which is stupid, since that should be considered somewhat of an accomplishment itself. He should be in.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I will say that if Rice is in, there is no reason why Edgar Martinez should be denied next year.

[Dandy 0]

In honor of Rickey making the Hall:

 

http://100percentinjuryrate.blogspot.com/2...-henderson.html

[BruiserKC 0]

Mark Grace isn't a Hall of Famer; neither is Harold Baines. I don't get the whole Harold Baines thing, tbh, but if Juan Uribe gets a statue, then I guess Baines can.

 

Do you think voters [wrongly] hold Trammell's managerial career against him? That he can't be in the Hall because of the 2003 Tigers? That's a completely retarded line of thinking, which is why I didn't immediately rule it out.

 

I would put Baines and Trammell in the HOF before Grace, although Grace has a higher batting average. (.303 for Grace, .289 Baines, and .285 Trammell)

 

Baines had 2866 hits, 1628 RBI's (compared to 2452 hits and 1451 RBIs for Rice), and was a 6 x All-Star.

 

Trammell had 2365 hits but is much more known for his defense. Trammell might have had better numbers but the end of his career saw a ton of injuries. Otherwise he would have better numbers. It will eventually be like Bill Mazeroski who ultimately got into the HOF because of his glove.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Looking over next year's ballot, I'd put all four of the major candidates in. My 2010 theoretical choices would look like this.

 

Alan Trammell

Mark McGwire

Tim Raines

Bert Blyleven

Andre Dawson

Roberto Alomar

Barry Larkin

Fred McGriff

Edgar Martinez

 

And I'd be awfully tempted to throw a vote towards Doug Glanville.

[naiwf 0]

I'd be perfectly content if Clemens, McGwire, Palmeiro & Sosa never got in. It won't happen, but a guy can dream.

[bob_barron 0]

Looking over next year's ballot, I'd put all four of the major candidates in. My 2010 theoretical choices would look like this.

 

Alan Trammell

Mark McGwire

Tim Raines

Bert Blyleven

Andre Dawson

Roberto Alomar

Barry Larkin

Fred McGriff

Edgar Martinez

 

And I'd be awfully tempted to throw a vote towards Doug Glanville.

 

Just curious, what makes Edgar Martinez a HOFer?

 

I'd be perfectly content if Clemens, McGwire, Palmeiro & Sosa never got in. It won't happen, but a guy can dream.

 

McGwire and Palmeiro have no chance I think at this point. Not sure about Clemens or Sosa.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Just curious, what makes Edgar Martinez a HOFer?

 

Basically my argument is that he was one of the ten best pure hitters of this generation. Had a .418 career OBP, as well as 514 career doubles. In a seven year stretch from 1995-2001, he hit .329/.446/.574. That's unquestionably a Hall of Fame peak. The two arguments against him are fielding and career length. I'd argue that 2,000+ games is not too few for a Hall of Famer. As for defense, no one else with those kind of numbers is kept out regardless of their defense.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Was looking at the numbers and thought I'd see what others thought.

 

Jim Rice (1974-1989): 2,452 Hits - 382 HR - 1451 RBI - 670 BB vs. 1423 K - .298/.352/.502

Other Notes: Career 128 OPS+ - 4,129 Total Bases - Finished inside the Top 5 in MVP voting in 6 seasons, Won in 1978. Hit over .300 in 7 seasons and had 6 seasons over a 130+ OPS.

 

Negatives: Lack of a peak and his home park factor. In regards to the peak, I'd say from 1977-1983 was his peak (5 seasons over 130+ OPS with the 2 others finishing at 116 and 122). He had a .920 OPS at home vs. a .789 OPS on the road (Also hit .320 for his career at home). Was he aided by Fenway? Of course he was... He still hit .277 and slugged .459 for his career on the road. Andre Dawson hit .278 and slugged .483 on the road for comparison and plenty are vouching he should make the HOF.

 

Let's put Rice into context in regards to the era he played in. He led the AL in HR in 1977, 1978 (46 vs. 34 at 2nd), and 1983. He tied for 2nd and 3rd in 2 other seasons. This during a time when hitting 35 HR could get you the top spot in the AL in any given season. He finished in the Top 5 in BA 4 times and finished at 6th and 7th in 2 other seasons. Finished Top 5 in hits in 5 seasons and led in 1978.

 

He's an iffy choice at worst (Exceeds in Black Ink, Gray Ink, and HOF Monitor. Just shy on HOF Standards at 43 vs. average 50) and I'd argue, deserving of his place in the HOF.

 

Other Guys from that era... with home vs. road splits

Fred Lynn: 1906 Hits, 306 HR, Career 129 OPS+ (.911 vs. .780) BA = .299 vs. .267

Dwight Evans: 2446 Hits, 385 HR, Career 127 OPS+ (.885 vs. .798) BA = .283 vs. .261

Don Baylor: 2135 Hits, 338 HR, Career 118 OPS+ (.757 vs. .797) BA = .253 vs. .267

Harold Baines: 2866 Hits, 384 HR, Career 120 OPS+ (.829 vs. .812) BA = .290 vs. .289

Lou Whitaker: 2369 Hits, 244 HR, Career 116 OPS+ (.817 vs. .762) BA = .279 vs. .274

Andre Dawson: 2774 Hits, 438 HR, Career 119 OPS+ (.811 vs. .800) BA = .281 vs. .278

Alan Trammell: 2365 Hits, 185 HR, Career 110 OPS+ (.785 vs. .749) BA = .292 vs. .277

 

If we penalize Rice, we'll have to penalize anybody who's played in a hitter's park or had predominantly "great" numbers at home. Larry Walker will be an interesting case (very similar career totals to Rice) and he hit .348 at home with a 1.068 OPS but still hit .278 and slugged .495 on the road in his career. How much will he be penalized (should he?) for being with Colorado to play in Coors Field? He still hit .289 with St. Louis at age 38 so it wasn't all just Coors.