Monday, January 12, 2009

Congratulations to Jim Rice

Jim Rice was finally elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame after a 15 year wait.  This was Rice's last year on the regular ballot.  The argument against his induction was that his good years, while very good, were too few.  He also failed to amass any of the statistical benchmarks that Hall voters love so much.  However, there were a number of compelling reasons to vote him in.

It was no surprise that Rickey Henderson was accepted in his first try.   How did he not get 100% of the vote?  It must be these dunderheads that don't vote for anyone on the first ballot.  Anyhow, I can't wait to hear his speech.


Peter said...

When I look at Rice's numbers I don't see Hall of Fame at all. He might be in the Hall of Really Good Players, but when I think of greatest of all-time I don't think Jim Rice. My argument is simply really: does the name Rice belong in the same context as Ruth, DiMaggio, Williams, Mays and Aaron? I think not.

There was one player on the ballot who deserved to get in and it was Rickey. It is supposed to be exceptionally difficult to get in to the Hall and if you have to think twice about a guy he probably doesn't deserve to be there. Not only that but if he wasn't a hall of famer 15, 10 or even 5 years ago then he isn't one now.

Dennis said...

I agree with Peter, Rice was a very good player for several years, and that is a great accomplishment, but I would not have voted for him.

I also think Blyleven should get in, but he doesn't have the east coast hype machine behind him, so it is probably unlikely that he will.

Dan said...

I certainly have no real recollection of Rice playing. I have to agree with you guys for the most part. His great years were great, but I don't think there were enough at that high level. I think he benefited from sympathy and the fact that other than Henderson, this was not a very strong Hall ballot. That being said, I'm happy for him.

What's the problem people have with Blyleven?

Peter said...

Mostly the fact that he had no cy youngs and only one 20 win season. Like Mussina he was always good but never great. Although, unlike Mussina he was a prolific k-machine and is 5th all-time with 3701.

Also, like Dennis said, he played for a lot of bad non-east coast teams too.

Dennis said...

The sad thing is if he had stuck around for one extra mediocre season he would have reached 300 wins and got in years ago.

What would you guys have done if you had a ballot?

I would have voted for Henderson, Blyleven, and possibly McGuire.

Dan said...

I find it difficult to really have a sense of the older players that I haven't seen play, unless the statistical dominance is too great ignore. In light of that I think I would only vote for Henderson.

Peter said...

I would agree with Daniel on that. Henderson might be the only person I would vote for. It would be tough for me to ignore Blyleven as he kind of feels like a Roy Halladay to me. Great pitcher and everyone knew that during his era but as time passed he sort of fades because he was forgotten in Toronto.

Yea Henderson may be the only one for me.