NSBB HOF Ballot- Jim Rice

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Next, up: Jim Rice.

 

Rice is in his twelfth year on the ballot after receiving 59.5% of the vote in 2005.

 

Here's the Baseball Hall of Fame's excerpt on Rice.

 

JIM RICE: 12th year on the ballot… Played 16 seasons, all with the Boston Red Sox… Named AL MVP by BBWAA and The Sporting News Player of the Year in 1978… Finished in top five MVP voting five other times: 1975 (3rd), ’77 (4th), ’79 (5th), ’83 (4th), ’86 (3rd)… Finished 2nd in 1975 AL Rookie of the Year voting… Eight All-Star teams (1977-’80, ’83-’86); batted .200 in 20 ASG at-bats… Led AL in HR three times (1977, ’78, ’83), RBI twice (1978, ’83), slugging percentage twice (1977, ’78), hits once (1978) and triples once (1978)… Ranks 41st in career RBI, 51st on all-time HR list, and 41st in sacrifice flies… Seven .300 seasons, four 200-plus hit seasons, three 100-plus run season (consecutively from 1977-’79), 30-plus doubles three times, 20-plus HR 11 times, 30-plus HR four times, 40-plus HR once, and 100-plus RBI eight times… Two three-HR games (Aug. 29, 1977 and Aug. 29, 1983)… Led AL in total bases four times in 1977 (382), ’78 (406), ’79 (369) and 1983 (344); his 1978 total of 406 total bases was the most since Stan Musial’s 429 in 1948…One of 29 players with 350+ home runs and a .290+ career batting average…Only player in history with three straight seasons of 35+ home runs and 200+ hits…Two AL Championship Series (1986, ‘88); batted .159 with seven RBI, two HR, and eight runs scored in 44 ALCS at-bats… One World Series (1986); batted .333 with six runs scored in 27 WS at-bats.

Edited December 23, 2005 by vance_the_cubs_fan

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Rice has an interesting case. He has one MVP. He was top ten six times in batting average (highest finish third), eight times in slugging (1st twice), and top ten in OPS six times (highest finish 1st). His 502 career slugging is 85th on the all-time list.

 

I think sometimes it is relevant to compare a candidate's numbers to other HOFers. In this case, I'll compare him to Billy Williams. The two have extremely similar numbers.

 

Batting Average

Rice: 298

Williams: 290

 

SLG %

Rice: 502

Williams: 492

 

OBP

Rice: 352

Williams: 361

 

HR

Rice: 382

Williams: 426

 

RBI

Rice: 1451

Williams: 1475

 

Williams has better numbers in the counting stats like HR and RBI, but Rice has a better batting average and slugging percentage. I'd put Rice in, but I think it is border line. He was a feared hitter in his day.

 

To most Hall voters, Rice falls in the group with Dale Murphy, Andre Dawson and others. A very, very good player that doesn't meet the standards of the Hall. Sometimes I wonder if Rice is being penalized because of his icy relationship with the media.

[imb]

Are we talking, according to our own personal standards, or according the standards already set?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I say we do it based on our own standards, it'll be much more fun that way.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I guess you can vote anyway you want...see the thread in baseball discussions for a broader explanation.

 

Personally, there really is no standard other than don't vote for more than 10 total, but you don't have to vote that many.

[ConstableRabbit]

I say yes

[DonnieD]

I feel it is unfair to a player to exclude him from the Hall of Fame when there are inferior players to him already enshrined. Now I wouldn't go crazy finding the worst statistical player enshrined and demand that every player that has better stats than him belongs. I would say especially if a player is significantly better but even if they are extremely comparable to several people that are already in, I believe they should be elected.

 

I don't like the inclusiveness of the Football and Hockey HOF's, so I don't want to see the Baseball HOF start letting in players that were just all-stars, but the donminant players of their generation deserve to be in. In my opinion Rice is one of those.

[CubinNY]

Anyone who says Jim Rice doesn't belong in the HOF better speak up.

 

The guy was one of the premire power hitters for his era. The only thing keeping him out of the real HOF is he was a dick to the sportswriters when he played.

[UK1679666180]

I voted No.

 

Very good player, not good enough to get into the HoF.

 

As far as comparing him to Williams, Williams played in more of a dead ball era, Rice never faced a pitcher coming off the higher mound, etc. The 60's were more of a dead ball era than the 70s-80s.

 

EqAs Williams .298 Rice .287

 

Batting Runs Above avg. and Pitching Runs Above Avg.

 

Williams-469

Rice-309

[Transmogrified Tiger]

No. IMO, the Hall should be a very exclusive place.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

No. IMO, the Hall should be a very exclusive place.

 

Is there anyone on this year's ballot you'd vote in?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

No. IMO, the Hall should be a very exclusive place.

 

Is there anyone on this year's ballot you'd vote in?

 

Dunno, I'll have to look at the numbers for the candidates as the polls come up. Definitely won't be voting 10 in though.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The players most similar to Rice:

 

Orlando Cepeda (911) *

Andres Galarraga (893)

Ellis Burks (882)

Duke Snider (880) *

Joe Carter (864)

Dave Parker (856)

Billy Williams (854) *

Luis Gonzalez (847)

Willie Stargell (843) *

Gary Sheffield (839)

 

 

There's four HOFers on the list...and another (Sheffield) who may become a HOF. I think the mix of the list shows how much of a bubble candidate Rice is. I'd put him in...and I definitely can't see how someone supports Dawson and not Rice other than bias or a dislike for Rice because he was surly to the media and others.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Here's a great article supporting the enshrinement of Rice.

 

For a period of 12 years -- 1975-86 -- Rice led all American League players in 12 different offensive categories, including home runs (350), RBI (1,276), total bases (3,670), slugging percentage (.520), runs (1,098) and hits (2,145).

 

In that span, his typical season looked something like this: 29 homers, 106 RBI, 91 runs scored and an average above .300.

 

But what really elevates the case for Rice is context. He led every player in his league in virtually every significant offensive category for a dozen years. And when you add in all of the National League players from the same era, Rice still leads in five categories and finishes second in three others.

 

First or second in eight different categories for a dozen years? That sounds plenty dominant enough for me.

 

 

I still can't fathom how someone votes for Dawson and not Rice. I loved Dawson as much as anyone, but to look at his career and say HOF and to not say the same for Rice destroys all credibility that you can look at baseball objectively.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Here's a great article supporting the enshrinement of Rice.

 

For a period of 12 years -- 1975-86 -- Rice led all American League players in 12 different offensive categories, including home runs (350), RBI (1,276), total bases (3,670), slugging percentage (.520), runs (1,098) and hits (2,145).

 

In that span, his typical season looked something like this: 29 homers, 106 RBI, 91 runs scored and an average above .300.

 

But what really elevates the case for Rice is context. He led every player in his league in virtually every significant offensive category for a dozen years. And when you add in all of the National League players from the same era, Rice still leads in five categories and finishes second in three others.

 

First or second in eight different categories for a dozen years? That sounds plenty dominant enough for me.

 

 

I still can't fathom how someone votes for Dawson and not Rice. I loved Dawson as much as anyone, but to look at his career and say HOF and to not say the same for Rice destroys all credibility that you can look at baseball objectively.

 

I agree Vance, the problem with Rice is he did lots of things really, really well but wasn't dominating in any one area. HOF voters love guys like Lou Brock (base stealing) or Ozzie Smith (defense) who dominate in at least one particular area. It's a shame guys like Rice get overlooked.

[CubinNY]

Here's a great article supporting the enshrinement of Rice.

 

For a period of 12 years -- 1975-86 -- Rice led all American League players in 12 different offensive categories, including home runs (350), RBI (1,276), total bases (3,670), slugging percentage (.520), runs (1,098) and hits (2,145).

 

In that span, his typical season looked something like this: 29 homers, 106 RBI, 91 runs scored and an average above .300.

 

But what really elevates the case for Rice is context. He led every player in his league in virtually every significant offensive category for a dozen years. And when you add in all of the National League players from the same era, Rice still leads in five categories and finishes second in three others.

 

First or second in eight different categories for a dozen years? That sounds plenty dominant enough for me.

 

 

I still can't fathom how someone votes for Dawson and not Rice. I loved Dawson as much as anyone, but to look at his career and say HOF and to not say the same for Rice destroys all credibility that you can look at baseball objectively.

 

I agree Vance, the problem with Rice is he did lots of things really, really well but wasn't dominating in any one area. HOF voters love guys like Lou Brock (base stealing) or Ozzie Smith (defense) who dominate in at least one particular area. It's a shame guys like Rice get overlooked.

 

HOF voters let their voting status go to their friggen heads.

 

Here are my thoughts.

 

The HOF is a museum of baseball as such the best players of each era should go into the HOF. It is a much about the history of the game as it is about any ridiculus notion of only the best of the best should get in. If that is the case then there should be eight position players and four or five starters in, and they can get voted out if somebody better comes along.

 

The museum is plenty big enough to accomidate new inductees. And IMO the new inductees help to keep the museum alive, so to speak. What I mean is I don't really care about some pitcher who pitched for the Boston Braves in the 1920s but I can see Sandberg, Yaz, Yount and other players from childhood and youth.

 

Players like Rice, Trammell, Santo, and Blyleven should be in becasue they were the best players of their generation at their positon.

 

End of story.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

If Rice had topped 400 HR's, it would be a much easier decision. As it stands, I say no.

[NewUserName]

for about 10 yrs Rice was the best hitter in the American League. I dont know how old you guys are but I remember him being great. At one time he was considered a lock for the Hall. Like Dale Murphy. It is funny how a player from Boston doesnt get the media support to get in. One more thing, I dont think that Andre Dawson at the time he was playing was considered as dominant of player as Jim Rice when he was playing. I know the numbers are similar but the perception wasnt the same. Just something else to add to the arguement

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Ken Rosenthal has an article in support of Rice.

 

Link

 

Actually, Rice was dominant for 12 years, from 1975 to '86. During that period, according to research by Red Sox vice-president/historian Dick Bresciani, Rice led the American League in games, at-bats, runs, hits, home runs, RBIs, slugging percentage, total bases and outfield assists.

 

More from Bresciani: Rice is one of only nine retired players with at least 382 homers and a career average of .298. The others are Hank Aaron, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Babe Ruth and Ted Williams — all Hall of Famers.

 

[RynoRules]

for about 10 yrs Rice was the best hitter in the American League. I dont know how old you guys are but I remember him being great. At one time he was considered a lock for the Hall. Like Dale Murphy. It is funny how a player from Boston doesnt get the media support to get in. One more thing, I dont think that Andre Dawson at the time he was playing was considered as dominant of player as Jim Rice when he was playing. I know the numbers are similar but the perception wasnt the same. Just something else to add to the arguement

 

Agreed. And I do not think the fact that he did not top 400 HRs should matter. There are OFers that did not but are in the HOF. Different era, different standard, IMO.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Dayn Perry not in favor of Rice.

 

Rice certainly has some Cooperstown bona fides: 2,452 hits, 382 homers, .502 career SLG, eight-time All-Star, MVP in '78, three home run titles. On the downside, Rice, by corner outfielder standards, produced at a "very good but not great" level for his career. Also, Fenway has long been a haven for right-handed batters, and Rice's numbers reflect that. For his career, Rice hit .320 AVG/.374 OBP/.546 SLG at home and only .277 AVG/.330 OBP/.459 SLG on the road. Most players tend to hit better at home (save for those playing in extreme pitcher's environments), but that doesn't explain away Rice's splits. There's really a better case to be made for Dwight Evans, Rice's longtime teammate in Boston.

[CubinNY]

Dayn Perry not in favor of Rice.

 

Rice certainly has some Cooperstown bona fides: 2,452 hits, 382 homers, .502 career SLG, eight-time All-Star, MVP in '78, three home run titles. On the downside, Rice, by corner outfielder standards, produced at a "very good but not great" level for his career. Also, Fenway has long been a haven for right-handed batters, and Rice's numbers reflect that. For his career, Rice hit .320 AVG/.374 OBP/.546 SLG at home and only .277 AVG/.330 OBP/.459 SLG on the road. Most players tend to hit better at home (save for those playing in extreme pitcher's environments), but that doesn't explain away Rice's splits. There's really a better case to be made for Dwight Evans, Rice's longtime teammate in Boston.

 

Dayn can't even spell his name correctly. The guy is a friggen moran. Punishing Rice for playing his career in Boston? Then he talks about home road splits? They guy was the premier power hitter of his generation. For an 8 year stretch Rice was the most feared hitter in the AL. If I ever see Daynny boy on the street I'd treat him to a knuckle sam'ich.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Rob Neyer doesn't believe Rice belongs and here compares him to two first time eligibles, Will Clark and Albert Belle.

 

Well, let me ask you Rice supporters: What exactly does Rice have that Belle and Clark don't?

 

 

You're not going to like this, Red Sox fans, but Clark was a better, more dangerous hitter than Rice. Clark's career OPS+ -- that is, his OPS adjusted to account for his leagues and his ballparks -- was significantly better than Rice's. He might not have been feared like Rice. He was simply better.

 

I wouldn't vote for Clark or Belle. But if you think Rice is a Hall of Famer, then you've got to explain why Belle and Clark are not. Similarly, if you think Sutter is a Hall of Famer, you've got to explain why Gossage is not, and if you think Don Sutton is a Hall of Famer (actually, he is), then you've got explain why Blyleven is not. I don't envy you those tasks.

 

[GaryWoods]

I haven't decided on Rice, yet, but just wanted to point out the fact that his lack of speed was legendary back in the day. Rice is sixth all-time in GIDP. That's not all bad in and of itself, as the five guys ahead of him are in the Hall. But, Rice made it to #6 with significantly fewer ABs than the guys ahead of him. Dave Winfield (#4) is closest to Rice; he was doubled up four more times in 2778 more ABs.

 

Again, I don't think that keeps him out of the Hall, just pointing out a fairly significant negative aspect of his game.