Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PFSIKH

Jim Rice.....Hall of Fame?

Does Jim "Ed" Rice get in?  

1 member has voted

  1. 1. Does Jim "Ed" Rice get in?

    • Yes
      6
    • No
      11


Recommended Posts

2,400 hits, less than .300 career batting average, less than 400 home runs = pass.

He had some good seasons. But all in all it just isn't good enough. If there were some World Series championships in there you could make the case that he was a winner.

But it is what it is so that case simply can not be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The old Jeter condition.;) Rice career avg is .298 and I think he just misses but don't ever argue Mattingly either.

Mattingly doesn't belong in the hall of fame. And he is probably my favorite player of all time.

Jeter gets in if he retires today. 4 rings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are wrong as two boys fu...well you know. Yes, it is this argument again until he gets in, I will beat this horse until it dies. Deal with it.

Rice was the most dominant AL player for 10 years. There is no disputing that. I tore up every argument the naysayers had last year.

Arbitrary numbers like Max bring up means nothing after the roid era. Rice dominated his ERA. He deserves the Hall.

He dominated all the way to no championships. He dominated all the way to a bazillion less home runs than Reggie Jackson.

Rice may have dominated. He didn't do it for long enough to be a Hall Of Famer. No worries though, Manny will get in some day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not saying it's right, but when you start letting the likes of Kirby Puckett in, by comparson, in every way spare BA, Rice was superior.Ironic that they let Puckett in because he was supposedly a wonderful guy(douchebag Costas named one of hsi sons after him!), which turned out to be not true at all.

Again, I understand the idea that the HoF should be for superior no brainers. But once the writers started putting in good players they liked, they opened the floodgates with comparisons that define HoF greatness down. Rice was a better player than Puckett, and further once you let Puckett in how do you deny Mattingly? Not saying I agree with any of that, but once you allow Puckett is, you open the floodgates.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/puckeki01.shtml

A agree 100%. No way Puckett should be in. He really shouldn't even be close. I think Rice may deserve it more than Puckett. It is just that neither player really deserves it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True. It is nice to harken back to an era when players were juiced with amphetamines instead of roids. ;)

Please show me in the Hall of Fame charter where rings are a prerequisite? It is not.

While Rice may have been almost 200 HRs behind (he also played around 700 less games), he was by far a better hitter.

Your argument is dumb. You want to knock him for his limited PS experience fine, but if you hold that as a measure. How many people are giving up plaques because they played during ERAs when two teams made it. Going to kick Ernie Banks out because he did not get any rings?

You said he dominated. Players that dominate a sport often win rings. Doesn't always happen but I was responding to the word dominate.

My argument is dumb but the Hall Of Fame voters seem to agree with me. But my argument is dumb. Excellent point.

Like I said he was a good hitter. He played in the major leagues for 16 years and had 14 full seasons so that means his average season is 25 home runs, .298 average 100 RBIs and 20 plus doubles.

I can't find it but I would be curious to see what his stats look like away from Fenway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He hit .320 at home and had a .546 slugging percentage.

On the road he hit .277 and slugged .459.

Thank you.

I should probably lock this thread since that officially ends this discussion but I will be a sport and leave it open, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PF --

I am sorry, maybe you missed it but this debate is basically over. Rice was a good player who had inflated stats at Fenway.

Eventually he will get in though. He will be in the Puckett, Rizzuto, Sutton wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't realize that Rice played all 9 positions on the field. That argument is beyond weak.

Apart from the NBA, MLB is a sport driven by individual stats.

Which is why he isn't in. His stats aren't good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...