Rice’s defense was probably well below average too, so calling him a 3 win player is generous. You could come up with a list of dozens of minor stars from 1974 – who were better players than Rice.
Beltre’s 2004 was the best (in terms of wins) non-Bonds season in the last 7 years. A-Rod and Pujols’ best seasons in that time-span barely come within a win of it. Wow.
I also think that if the Red Sox Nation had never emerged then Rice would not have made the hall. He was pretty stagnant in voting % until after the Red Sox won the World Series
Defense has never been a qualification for Hall of Fame. If I were deciding between which guy to have on my team, I’d probably go for Beltre, but if I’m deciding who’s going into the Hall its gonna be Rice. Actually, if I’m deciding who’s going in the Hall of Fame it’d probably be someone like RA Dickey because I don’t really give a damn about the hall and it’d probably make him happy or something.
like I said I don’t care much about it, wouldn’t go there if I ever had the misfortune of ending up in Cooperstown and haven’t followed the induction process. Based on what I’d read here and elsewhere I thought it was all about players arbitrary milestones (20 wins, 3000 hits, 100rbi/season x times) with little regard for actual player impact on a team.
So yeah, whatever. If they care about defense bully for them and I stand corrected.
if you give Adrian 4 more seasons (to catch up to Rice’s total of 16) of his career average .270/.330/.460, then he would have very similar numbers offensively; more doubles and stolen bases, fewer homeruns, rbis, and runs. But then I think Adrian will play well beyond his age 33 season. Plus, he’s played most of the last 2 seasons with a bad thumb/shoulder and been unlucky BABIP-wise, so his offensive numbers could still improve over the next couple years. But does anybody think he’ll end up in the hall of fame unless he does something like end up in the top-10 in doubles? (30 per year through his age 39 season would give him 621, 3 behind Hank Aaron at 10th place)
Jim Rice going into the HOF is just par for the course, considering:
Fred Lindstrom
George Kelly
Chick Hafey
Jim Bottomley
Frank Chance
Basically, the HOF is kind of like Gold Glove voting- some good choices, and then every now and then they do the “WTF?!?!?” equivalent of giving Raffy Palmeiro a Gold Glove for playing mostly at DH.
Morneau reminds me of a sort of modern-day Jim Rice
He’s a good hitter and has almost no defensive skills, but somehow the press has taken a liking to him, he’s gotten some ridiculous MVP voting finishes, and has a reputation that seems to outstrip his actual value. If Morneau manages to improve just a little at the plate, it seems like we could be looking at a similarly erroneous “most feared hitter” argument. Never mind that there are better hitters than Morneau, just chant “most feared, most feared, most feared” and then compare him to Jim Rice, Hall of Fame Inductee.
because I have Morneau pegged for a big year next year. Strikeouts were down, walks were up, hit a lot of doubles. I think he is going to hit next year like Teixiera did this year
Is the intentional walk a bigger part of the game nowadays than it was in the ‘70s and ’80s? I would assume yes, but I’m sure Bonds throws all the numbers out of whack.
He must've been a true gamer.
Like Ibanez and Willie Bloomquist.
Fin - January 15, 2009
Positional adjustments!
Rice’s defense was probably well below average too, so calling him a 3 win player is generous. You could come up with a list of dozens of minor stars from 1974 – who were better players than Rice.
JI - January 15, 2009
You're forgetting Beltre's 1998-2001
not that they were all that much worse, but anyway.
Jeff Sullivan - January 15, 2009
I didn't forget them, I just didn't really care that much
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
Whoa.
Beltre’s 2004 was the best (in terms of wins) non-Bonds season in the last 7 years. A-Rod and Pujols’ best seasons in that time-span barely come within a win of it. Wow.
Terminator_X - January 15, 2009
Depends who's doing the calculations
JI - January 15, 2009
Right, which is why you don't get into the hall of fame for a single season
philosofool - January 15, 2009
Because Beltre
has yet to go through the decline phase of his career that will dilute his career wins/seasons
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
Yes his decline phase will make him 66% as valuable per season as he is now.
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
It's part of it
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
"Because Beltre has yet to go through the decline phase of his career that will dilute his career wins/seasons"
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
I'm confused
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
To come down to Rice's level Beltre would have to see his career win value decline by 66%.
That would have to be one hell of a decline phase.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
So what would Jim Rice's
average career wins/season through age 29 be?
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
I don't have the info I need to calculate it myself but I'd bet it's not anywhere close to 4.55.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
About 3.6
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
Yeah thats about what I was getting too
(you beat me)
Edgar for Pres - January 15, 2009
I think that is a better comparison
I also think that if the Red Sox Nation had never emerged then Rice would not have made the hall. He was pretty stagnant in voting % until after the Red Sox won the World Series
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
Fear
Apparently the idea that a hitter scares a pitcher makes him HOF-worthy.
tait644 - January 15, 2009
Are Beltre's numbers assuming average defense as well?
Bearskin Rugburn - January 15, 2009
No, we actually have his defensive numbers
Jeff Sullivan - January 15, 2009
Why are you assuming average defense for Rice?
He played left field and DH, doesn’t that indicate below average at best? Or are you guessing average just to be as fair as possible?
Malcontent1 - January 15, 2009
Guessing average for his position in the absense of reliable data pointing either way
Jeff Sullivan - January 15, 2009
Absence god dammit
Jeff Sullivan - January 15, 2009
Conservative is always best when arguing a position
Also ‘average defence for left field’ is the assumption
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
Why do they matter though?
Defense has never been a qualification for Hall of Fame. If I were deciding between which guy to have on my team, I’d probably go for Beltre, but if I’m deciding who’s going into the Hall its gonna be Rice. Actually, if I’m deciding who’s going in the Hall of Fame it’d probably be someone like RA Dickey because I don’t really give a damn about the hall and it’d probably make him happy or something.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 15, 2009
Wrong.
JI - January 15, 2009
Incredibly wrong in fact.
Matthew - January 15, 2009
really? well, OK
like I said I don’t care much about it, wouldn’t go there if I ever had the misfortune of ending up in Cooperstown and haven’t followed the induction process. Based on what I’d read here and elsewhere I thought it was all about players arbitrary milestones (20 wins, 3000 hits, 100rbi/season x times) with little regard for actual player impact on a team.
So yeah, whatever. If they care about defense bully for them and I stand corrected.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 16, 2009
Everytime you have a guy similar Ryne Sandberg or Gary Carter
he’s being elected in large part for his defense, because that player certainly does not have a the offensive resume to gain entry.
JI - January 16, 2009
.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
this was
mostly a special case no? other wise why isn’t this guy in?
RollingWave - January 16, 2009
Most people think only the most spectacular of defensive players make a difference
and they are wrong.
JI - January 16, 2009
It also occurred to me that
if you give Adrian 4 more seasons (to catch up to Rice’s total of 16) of his career average .270/.330/.460, then he would have very similar numbers offensively; more doubles and stolen bases, fewer homeruns, rbis, and runs. But then I think Adrian will play well beyond his age 33 season. Plus, he’s played most of the last 2 seasons with a bad thumb/shoulder and been unlucky BABIP-wise, so his offensive numbers could still improve over the next couple years. But does anybody think he’ll end up in the hall of fame unless he does something like end up in the top-10 in doubles? (30 per year through his age 39 season would give him 621, 3 behind Hank Aaron at 10th place)
Malcontent1 - January 15, 2009
Because he was feared, he was good and the writers thougth he deserved it
The hall is a joke anyway, we all know this.
Smegmalicious - January 15, 2009
Doesn't make it any less annoying.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
I agree, Adrian Beltre is a Hall of Famer!
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
Now the question is
Will Beltre be wearing a Mariners cap?
Fin - January 15, 2009
Graham did you make a math error and then delete your post
Come on, I was about to prove you wrong for once.
Edgar for Pres - January 15, 2009
Well this way I don't make fun of you getting 78 from 48+22.5-7.5
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
Hah ok lets both agree that this never happened.
Edgar for Pres - January 15, 2009
Positonal adjustments and replacement level
from year to year and era to era would vary wouldn’t it?
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
Well, yes.
Replacement level was worse when Rice played.
Then again, so was ‘average’.
Graham MacAree - January 15, 2009
HOF voters are distracted by shiny objects
such as MVP award trophies and car keys.
eponymous_coward - January 15, 2009
Also:
Jim Rice going into the HOF is just par for the course, considering:
Fred Lindstrom
George Kelly
Chick Hafey
Jim Bottomley
Frank Chance
Basically, the HOF is kind of like Gold Glove voting- some good choices, and then every now and then they do the “WTF?!?!?” equivalent of giving Raffy Palmeiro a Gold Glove for playing mostly at DH.
eponymous_coward - January 15, 2009
All 5 of those were veteran's committee inductees.
Matthew - January 15, 2009
Morneau reminds me of a sort of modern-day Jim Rice
He’s a good hitter and has almost no defensive skills, but somehow the press has taken a liking to him, he’s gotten some ridiculous MVP voting finishes, and has a reputation that seems to outstrip his actual value. If Morneau manages to improve just a little at the plate, it seems like we could be looking at a similarly erroneous “most feared hitter” argument. Never mind that there are better hitters than Morneau, just chant “most feared, most feared, most feared” and then compare him to Jim Rice, Hall of Fame Inductee.
ubelmann - January 15, 2009
It's funny you say that
because I have Morneau pegged for a big year next year. Strikeouts were down, walks were up, hit a lot of doubles. I think he is going to hit next year like Teixiera did this year
Trenchtown - January 15, 2009
Fear
Number of intentional walks in Rice’s five best years: 29
Adrian Beltre in the last five years: 31
Doesn’t mean much (read: anything), I know, but I thought it was funny.
Teej - January 15, 2009
Which brings me to a question:
Is the intentional walk a bigger part of the game nowadays than it was in the ‘70s and ’80s? I would assume yes, but I’m sure Bonds throws all the numbers out of whack.
Teej - January 15, 2009
1980 vs. 2008
1980, PA per IBB: 112
2008, PA per IBB: 143
Jeff Sullivan - January 15, 2009
Well I'll be damned. Thanks.
Teej - January 15, 2009
I must be said though
That Adrian Beltre acquired 10 walks last year while batting ahead of the likes of Brad Wilkerson, Jose Vidro, Jose Lopez, and Jeff Clement
Malcontent1 - January 15, 2009
Yup.
I’m not trying to imply that it means anything. Just laughing.
Teej - January 16, 2009
Spring Training can't start soon enough.
Kermit. - January 15, 2009
I believe it's spelled d-e-f-e-n-s-e
JI - January 15, 2009
I'm amazed we got this far without a comment like that.
Teej - January 15, 2009
I'm assuming Graham and Jeff are English and would also spell Theater
Theatre
Malcontent1 - January 15, 2009
That's actually the correct spelling no matter what nationality one claims.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
As a common noun, theater is far more common in American English.
But many theaters spell it theatre in their names. So . . . it’s a clusterfuck.
Teej - January 15, 2009
Theatre looks way cooler.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
less phonetically correct
JI - January 15, 2009
Phonetics are for commoners and mongoloids.
Aaron Campeau - January 15, 2009
Just say fags like a normal person would
JI - January 16, 2009
I can't believe people don't get angry at comments like this
JI - January 16, 2009
LL has desensitized me to the point that I'm more offended by mongoloids.
Teej - January 16, 2009
I post homopohbic, sexist, and racist comments on a daily basis
and I’m happy most everyone understands the subtext.
JI - January 16, 2009
There's that fag talk we talked about.
Aaron Campeau - January 16, 2009
Yeah, otherwise you sound like a douche.
Sentinel - January 16, 2009
In a proper name, I agree. I like having both spellings.
But I can’t help but laugh when someone (who isn’t from the UK) says that he went to watch “I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry” at a “theatre.”
Teej - January 16, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.