wow, this was the last, best chance for Rice, Morris, Dawson and Blyleven. More than likely none will ever make it. There was an interesting article about Rice on espn a week or so ago. Rob Neyer wrote it in his blog, don't really agree, but it is interesting nonetheless:
Rice doesn't belong in Hall
posted: Thursday, December 27, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry
filed under: MLB
Dan Shaughnessy's revealed his Hall of Fame ballot. He's voting for Rich Gossage and Bert Blyleven, which is mighty enlightened of him. I wish Alan Trammell and Tim Raines were on the list, too. But Shaughnessy apparently hails from the less-is-more school, and I wish there were more voters like him.
He's also voting for Jim Rice and believes (as I do) that Rice will finally be elected this time.
Two years ago, Rice received more votes than any player who didn't earn enshrinement, but last year his chances diminished because of the introduction of new candidates Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn. The best new names on this year's ballot are Tim Raines and David Justice. Rice beats both. ...
Writers looking at the new ballot want to vote for somebody and it's clear that Gossage and Rice -- so close in recent years -- have better resumes than any of the new names.
The presence of second-year candidate Mark McGwire helps Rice, too. With 583 career homers, Big Mac would have been a slam dunk for Cooperstown if not for the steroid scandal. His name came up for the first time last year and voters categorically rejected him. With memories of his de facto congressional confession still fresh, only 23.5 percent of the electorate went for McGwire.
It can only help Rice. He was a dominant power hitter before steroids polluted the game and skewed the numbers. Rice hit 46 homers in a season back when it meant something -- before 50 became the province of guys like Brady Anderson and Luis Gonzalez. People who played and watched major league baseball from 1975-86 know that Rice was the most feared hitter of his day. Managers thought about intentionally walking him when he came to the plate with the bases loaded. He played hard and he played hurt. His managers loved him. Opponents feared him.
Let me return to something I wrote about a few weeks ago: the Morris Test. Named after Jack Morris, the test simply asks: If we take a player's two prime Hall of Fame credentials and downgrade them just a little, does he still have a solid case?
Actually, I don't believe the Morris Test even applies to Rice, because I don't believe he has two prime Hall of Fame credentials. Nobody cites his 382 career homers, because 382 is paltry for a player whose best-known attribute was power. He wasn't a "dominant power hitter" (as Shaughnessy says); he did lead the American League in home runs three times, but finished in the top five in his league only twice more. Mike Schmidt led the National League in home runs eight times. That's dominant. Yes, Rice hit 46 homers in a season. This was not an exceptional figure in his time. The year before Rice hit 46, George Foster hit 52. The year after Rice hit 46, Dave Kingman hit 48. Rice never hit as many as 40 home runs in another season.
Nobody cites his other career stats, because by the standards of Hall of Fame outfielders they're nothing special.
Turns out Rice has one credential: As Shaughnessy and so many others have said over the years, he was "the most feared hitter of his day" ... but was he, really? I'm still waiting for someone, anybody.
Shaughnessy cites intentional walks: "Managers thought about intentionally walking him when he came to the plate with the bases loaded." Well, that's an interesting bit of untestable trivia, but for the moment let's ignore all those imaginary intentional walks and talk about the real ones. Because yes, a great number of intentional walks would suggest that a player really was feared.
Rice's 12 best seasons -- 1975-1986 -- are usually mentioned because the rest of his career was not good. Did Rice draw more intentional walks than anyone else over those 12 seasons? From 1975 through 1986 -- remember, that range of seasons has been chosen specifically to make Rice look his best -- 32 major leaguers drew more intentional walks than Jim Rice.
Yes, he batted right-handed, and right-handed batters generally are intentionally walked less often than left-handed batters. So let's be fair. Let's ignore all those left-handed batters. Did Rice draw more intentional walks than every other right-handed batter over those 12 fearsome seasons?
Twelve right-handed batters were, by this standard, more feared, including (but far from limited to) George Foster, Ron Cey, Greg Luzinski, Jack Clark and Dale Murphy.
I've run through other stats before. Even if we limit ourselves to Rice's 12 good years, we still find that he doesn't look good next to non-Hall of Famers Keith Hernandez and Fred Lynn and is dead even with Ken Singleton. If we include the massive edge he gained from Fenway Park and his lack of defensive value, he falls farther down the list. Rice not only fails the Morris Test, he fails it spectacularly. His Hall of Fame case rests solely on an argument that wouldn't be particularly compelling even if it were true. Which it's not.
You know what? I get it. I understand that Shaughnessy and nearly every other writer in Boston have to support the local guys. With Rice clearly lacking objective Hall of Fame credentials, they're forced to fall back on the ill-founded, untestable notion that he was the "most feared" hitter for more than a year or two.
What I don't understand is why so many voters in so many other cities believe it.