Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
|
Originally Posted by Kirk Tsai
I expect Rice to get in next year. Of the new candidates, Ricky Henderson should be a first ballot HOFer, but there are no other that are close. David Cone and Mark Grace don't have much of a chance. That means even if Rice is voted in, there will only be two new inductees, and that isn't out of the norm for the writers.
I am convinced that Bert Blyleven and Tim Raines (only 24%?) are better candidates than Rice, but Rice has the momentum. He made a big jump of 9% votes received from last year, and there are plenty of people advancing the myth of his "most feared batter" status, many years after he ever played big league baseball. |
|
Originally Posted by Patrick_S
Now time for my yearly rant about the Hall of Fame:
All the current voters should be rounded up and shot for stupidity. If a player is good enough to be voted in on the last time he is eligible he should have gotten in on the first ballot. It’s not as if his stats suddenly improve after the first year of eligibility. Since you can vote for up to ten players I doubt a voter has every run out of votes and had to skip a worthy candidate. (When was the last time ten worthy candidates ever appeared on the ballot at the same time?) |
|
Originally Posted by Marvin
So you think players should be eligible for induction for only one year?
|
|
Originally Posted by Kirk Tsai
It's really great that everyone sees Henderson as a slam dunk HOFer, but that doesn't mean there aren't other truly great leadoff men as well.
|
|
Originally Posted by Kirk Tsai
Robert, your view is similar to many of the sportswriters' views. But I don't know exactly where these conclusions come from. Statements such as "Rice was the most feared hitter in the game" don't mean that much to me personally, because another guy could easily say Andrew Dawson was equally as feared, or more so.
|
|
Originally Posted by Kirk Tsai
Robert and Jeff, this is a discussion that I can't win, but I'm trying to argue that a player's candidacy can be, and should be measured by things beyond one's gut feeling. The problem is that we simply do not hear about all players at the same frequency. Many people who have watched baseball during Craig Biggio's whole career didn't contemplate his HOF case before achieving him getting 3000 hits, and a guy like Barry Larkin may be completely off of many voter's radar; for these voters, Biggio or Larkin probably would not have passed the gut feeling test, but that's not an accurate whole picture of the players. Stats matter, because our personal perception is limited.
If we say Williams, Bonds and Ruth were the most feared hitters during their eras, or McGwire was during his astounding run, we can look to empirical data to support such a proposition. That's not necessary true for Rice. When I say a personal opinion doesn't matter much to me, I really mean to say an opinion without support does not become an argument, and I thought that's what we should be looking for when debating a player's Hall worthiness. |
In the meantime, I would encourage you to read The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract for Biggio's career, written in 2001, before Biggio even had 2500 hits.
|
Originally Posted by Kirk Tsai
Robert, I apologize for painting you in a broad stroke. Certainly the criteria you've mentioned are valid ones that all of us should look to, but that doesn't exactly tell me how you come to your conclusion, hence it's hard for me to have an opinion about your opinion. I'm not necessarily trying to "win" the argument with your either, but to talk about the case for the players in a baseball discussion thread.
I look forward to the Biggio case in a few years. In the meantime, I would encourage you to read The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract for Biggio's career, written in 2001, before Biggio even had 2500 hits. |
|
Originally Posted by Patrick_S
Now time for my yearly rant about the Hall of Fame:
All the current voters should be rounded up and shot for stupidity. If a player is good enough to be voted in on the last time he is eligible he should have gotten in on the first ballot. It’s not as if his stats suddenly improve after the first year of eligibility. Since you can vote for up to ten players I doubt a voter has every run out of votes and had to skip a worthy candidate. (When was the last time ten worthy candidates ever appeared on the ballot at the same time?) One last thing, this whole “first ballot” mystic is ridiculous. It’s not as if you get a better plaque or something by being a first time. Of course I do know of one Famer who used to insist on being introduced as “First ballot Hall of Famer…..” He’s a second baseman who has an ego the size of the Grand Canyon. |
|
Originally Posted by Ed Moroughan
Totally agree with you Patrick, if you're good enough to get in then you should be in immediately. They've retired after all and are not improving with age like wine, they don't become MORE worthy with time. I'm curious, as a Yankee fan I have a soft spot for Donnie B., but can't shake the feeling he doesn't have enough creds...thoughts anyone?
|
|
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
What conclusion are you talking about?
As far as Bill James, he's a source of information, but that doesn't mean he's the only source a person should use in these type of evaluations. Also, after Biggio's 2500th hit, he wasn't that good of a player to me without any outstanding seasons. |
|
Originally Posted by Kirk Tsai
Robert, I am talking about your conclusion that Rice should be a HOFer, and more peripherally, that Raines and Blyleven shouldn't. As to your James point, of course I agree. My recommendation of his book certainly does not mean it's the only relevant evaluation. When James had written his section on Biggio, it was a surprising entry for most readers, and it can easily generate discussion and ask us to look at Biggio more carefully.
Agree with the Mattingly exclusion. |
| if you're good enough to get in then you should be in immediately. They've retired after all and are not improving with age like wine, they don't become MORE worthy with time. |
|
Originally Posted by Brian Perry
If it were that simple, why have the mandatory five-year waiting period after retirement? While it is true that a player will not be getting any more hits, homers, wins, or strikeouts, the context of the game's history continually changes. The prestige or impressiveness of a player's accomplishments can grow or diminish over time.
|
|
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
Rice had 8-9 outstanding seasons in his relatively short career while Blyleven and Raines came up short in those number of outstanding years. Just look at Rice's stats versus his peers from 1975 to 1985. They might not look so good now after the juice ball and steroids era, but they were very good in comparison to the players that played the game in those years.
|
|
Originally Posted by Marvin
The mid-70s-80s weren't a juiceball/steroid era, but they were hardly a deadball era. It was certainly a more offensive (baseball-wise) era than the 60s.
I agree that Rice was a dominant player in that era but I wouldn't agree that his lifetime numbers (382 HRs for an outfielder) are quite enough to merit HoF election. There have been plenty of players from all eras who have dominated at their position for a relatively short time (as previously mentioned, Mattingly, Dwight Gooden, Ron Guidry, Mo Vaughn, Albert Belle, Tony Oliva) but whose lifetime stats fall short. I'd put Rice in that category too. Here's a column on this topic from yesterday's SI.COM: SI.com - MLB - BP: Rice doesn't measure up to Hall of Fame - Wednesday January 9, 2008 5:05PM |
|
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I feel a dominate player from each era that has at least 8-10 outstanding seasons would have a good case for inclusion into the HOF. By the way, other than Belle, those players you've mentioned wouldn't make it because they don't have the 8-10 outstanding seasons I require for their consideration. If Belle wasn't such an ass, he would probably make the HOF, but he's hated by the writers just like Rice.
|
