Jim Rice

[Slipknot]

I still have a ball I caught from Rice in 1978

he should be in the hall
he was famous

[BigFish]

Originally Posted by vineyardblues

And I will go out on the limb and say that most of the voters have their head up their arse

That limb is about to break Peter cause I am coming out there with you!

[BassDawg]

Either that are they are smoking from the same crack pipe as

Jerkury Morris!!

What is there some sort of unwritten code between the baseball writers of today to 'have the backs' of the writers of Rice's time, simply because he was a shathead to the media back then?

Guess if you haven't played the game on that level you cain't appreciate the "most feared hitter of the day" as ALL of his contemporary pitchers will attest.

Even Gossage knows, and so don't those nincompoops with pens!
What's it gonna take for Jim Ed and Charlie Hustle to get in. Both deserve a spot in Cooperstown.

[ThomCat]

Originally Posted by wrikerjr

Oh yea Mickey Mantle won the triple crown, remember that before you compare anybody to him. Jim Rice and Mickey mantle you guys make me laugh

First of all, I was speaking strickly about numbers. There is no doubt that MM was a terrific athlete and a great hitter. But I wonder how well he would have held up to the scrutiny under which Rice and later players were placed. Although his baseball credentials are undeniable, he wasn't exactly the ideal role model ( out of respect, there is no need to expound on that). In his era there was an unwritten bond between players and the media as to what was "off the record" and very few crossed that line. He was cannonized by the NY writers of his time but in the last decades of the 1900's, the later band of NY scribes would have ate him alive, surly deminished his legend and loved doing it.

I've been around a while and seen a few innings myself including the highlight film of Teddy Ball Game's last shot to right the day it happened. Not for nuttin'...........

[wrikerjr]

Originally Posted by ThomCat

First of all, I was speaking strickly about numbers. There is no doubt that MM was a terrific athlete and a great hitter. But I wonder how well he would have held up to the scrutiny under which Rice and later players were placed. Although his baseball credentials are undeniable, he wasn't exactly the ideal role model ( out of respect, there is no need to expound on that). In his era there was an unwritten bond between players and the media as to what was "off the record" and very few crossed that line. He was cannonized by the NY writers of his time but in the last decades of the 1900's, the later band of NY scribes would have ate him alive, surly deminished his legend and loved doing it.

I've been around a while and seen a few innings myself including the highlight film of Teddy Ball Game's last shot to right the day it happened. Not for nuttin'...........

Thom Cat - My apologies we were not on the same page. You will never know how Mickey Held up under the scrutiny that rice had, but you have a lot less scrutiny when you win championships.

There is a reason that Mickey Mantle is a 1st ballot hall of famer and a reason he is always listed on top 100 athletes of all time by fans and sportswriters. in 1956 mantle was a stud, his numbers during that year are unmatched by anyone as far as dominating the league. He won the ML triple crown not just the Al triple crown. I can't remember anyone even contending for the ML triplecrown since him (could be incorrect - but i don't remember).

With that said Rice definetly deserves to be in the hall

I just can't wait to see what happens when some of today's players are eligable.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by BassDawg

What's it gonna take for Jim Ed and Charlie Hustle to get in. Both deserve a spot in Cooperstown.

For Rice, being named on 75% of the ballots next year, or being named by the Veterans Committee sometime in the future (and the Veterans Committee WILL vote him in eventually).

Rose has to deal with having his lifetime ban lifted by the Commissioner first. And to do that, he has to finally and unequivocally admit that he bet on baseball games, and act like he's sorry.

And just as an aside---Rose accepted the lifetime ban and disqualification from HOF eligibility knowingly and willingly as part of a deal to keep the evidence of his gambling private.

From the day you sign a ML contract, one rule above all is reinforced--you cannot bet on a baseball game.

[BassDawg]

While I totally agree with what you've stated, Mike P, to be the facts and the legalisms involved with Pete Rose, my question was more of a rhetorical one and directed to the broader point that the landscape of baseball has undergone the equivalence of a full scale stripmining since Pete's unfortunate set of circumstances.

I DO NOT condone his gambling and am fully aware that he chose one of the worst paths he could have chosen as a person and a player. Just wish that he had not, and really believe that on stats alone he deserves a spot in the hallowed Hall.

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by ThomCat

Check out Jim Rice's stats against Mickey Mantles, aside from the big difference in HR's, in just about every offensive catogory his numbers are at or better than the Micks. Mantle's numbers were the product of several more seasons. Rice's exemption from the Hall thus far is sad testiment to cedibility of the voters.

I don't know about that. Rice had more career AB's and wasn't half the ballplayer Mickey was. Rice hit into over 200 more Double Plays then Mickey and scored 200 runs less. Mickey did it all. Rice was good but no HOFer.

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by Strike_King

And Tony Perez's numbers were worse than Rice yet he's in the hall. What's your point? Perez got in because he hung around way too long. Including getting paraded around like a mascot from the Big Red Machine his last few years with the Reds. And Rice put up his numbers with 1500 less AB's than Perez. And his last 7 years were abysmal.Again..What's your point?

Tell me where I said Tony Perez belongs in the HOF. One thing Perez was that Rice wasn't was a winner.

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by Strike_King

It's a comparison..Just like you comparing Mantle's numbers to Rice's ..

Mantle and Rice is no comparison. I was just responding to a post that said Rice had the same or better numbers than Mantle.

[BigFish]

Kirby Puckett is in the hall?

Winning a Championship does not get you in the Hall SK70! If that were the criteria then we would have to throw out guys like Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, etc.

That last line was in regards to your comment about Perez being a winner and that Rice was not! Guess that makes Ted Williams, Ernie Banks and others losers too?

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by BigFish

Kirby Puckett is in the hall?

Winning a Championship does not get you in the Hall SK70! If that were the criteria then we would have to throw out guys like Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, etc.

That last line was in regards to your comment about Perez being a winner and that Rice was not! Guess that makes Ted Williams, Ernie Banks and others losers too?

Kirby Puckett doesn't deserve to be in the hall. Williams and Banks were 10 times better than Rice or Perez. Maybe Perez is in because he was a winner and Rice never won.

[BigFish]

Just had to review Pucketts "Hall of Fame" credentials??? I think he got in on the pity vote!!! His numbers are no where near HOF numbers......yet he is in and Rice is not!!!??? 1085 RBI....2305 Hits.....a .318 BA.....207 Homers???? He never won an MVP award??? Other than playing on a Championship team what did he ever do???? There is the travesty!

[BigFish]

Again with the winning?? Is that what you believe a HOF'er is??? They are elected based on their individual career numbers and performance....not whether they won a championship or not! Nolan Ryan never won a championship.....I think we should rescind his HOF status! Oh sorry.....Ryan did win one...as a member of the 69 Mets....I think he was waterboy or something!

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by BigFish

Again with the winning?? Is that what you believe a HOF'er is??? They are elected based on their individual career numbers and performance....not whether they won a championship or not! Nolan Ryan never won a championship.....I think we should rescind his HOF status! Oh sorry.....Ryan did win one...as a member of the 69 Mets....I think he was waterboy or something!

Again I didn't vote. I think maybe the voters voted for Perez because he was a winner and played on winning teams. I think that if a player is on the bubble they take that into consideration. Mattingly should be in since Puckett is in. You could make a case for alot of players that are in who shouldn't be. I don't think Rice, Perez, Puckett, Dave Parker,Phil Rizzuto, Billy Williams, Richie Ashburn deserve to be in either. I could name more but those are the ones that come to mind.

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by BigFish

Again with the winning?? Is that what you believe a HOF'er is??? They are elected based on their individual career numbers and performance....not whether they won a championship or not! Nolan Ryan never won a championship.....I think we should rescind his HOF status! Oh sorry.....Ryan did win one...as a member of the 69 Mets....I think he was waterboy or something!

Your going to compare Rice to Nolan Ryan

[wrikerjr]

Jim Rice does not belong in the same sentence as:

- Mickey Mantle
- Ted Williams
- Ernie Banks

period. full stop. end of story

if your a winner, that helps you get into the hall of fame. regardless of its correct or not.

[ThomCat]

Originally Posted by striperking70

Kirby Puckett doesn't deserve to be in the hall. Williams and Banks were 10 times better than Rice or Perez. Maybe Perez is in because he was a winner and Rice never won.

Rice did win a few things. One MVP, 3 HR titles, several RBI titles. He did have more hits, 2Bs and 3Bs than the Mick. He also had 4-200 hit seasons, while Mick never reached that plateau and 7-100 RBI seasons to Mick's 4. Surely no one who has a clue about baseball would consider putting Rice in a class with Mantle. But then again, it's hard to believe that anyone familiar with the game would fail to realize and acknowledge the talent Rice displayed and instead portray him as a slub and a loser. The list of players in the HOF that never got the ring is as long as my arm so that point is moot at best. I'm getting the increasing vibe of a bitter Yank fan/Sox hater in our midst.

[wrikerjr]

ThomCat,

Did you ever think that maybe if Rice had a championship that he would already be in the hof?

I believe that Rice should be in the hall, but people comparing Rice to Mantle and Banks and Williams.

Do we really need to list the accomplishments of these 3 players vs. Jim Rice?

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by ThomCat

Rice did win a few things. One MVP, 3 HR titles, several RBI titles. He did have more hits, 2Bs and 3Bs than the Mick. He also had 4-200 hit seasons, while Mick never reached that plateau and 7-100 RBI seasons to Mick's 4. Surely no one who has a clue about baseball would consider putting Rice in a class with Mantle. But then again, it's hard to believe that anyone familiar with the game would fail to realize and acknowledge the talent Rice displayed and instead portray him as a slub and a loser. The list of players in the HOF that never got the ring is as long as my arm so that point is moot at best. I'm getting the increasing vibe of a bitter Yank fan/Sox hater in our midst.

You're right Rice had 37 more hits in a 125 more AB's. 150 less Home runs, 400 less runs scored, less RBI's, less stolen bases and a lower slugging percentage. Rice was a very good player , just not a HOFer.

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by wrikerjr

ThomCat,

Did you ever think that maybe if Rice had a championship that he would already be in the hof?

I believe that Rice should be in the hall, but people comparing Rice to Mantle and Banks and Williams.

Do we really need to list the accomplishments of these 3 players vs. Jim Rice?

If Rice was on a World Series championship team in his career he probably would be in the HOF.

[Saltheart]

I probably attended 40 or more games a year from 75 to 77 and then not as many but regularly until about 1980 when tickets became hard to get and prices went way up. At that time , Rice was not even one of the biggest stars on the Red Sox. They had Lynn , Fisk , burleson , yastremski , Tiant , so many other guys who were that much better than Rice. Hell IMO even Dwight Evans was a better all around player.

I liked him cause he was a good hitter but just an average fielder and not a clutch hitter IMO. So , I'm not too surprised he is not in and think it could go either way as far as him ever getting in. .

[ThomCat]

Originally Posted by wrikerjr

ThomCat,

Did you ever think that maybe if Rice had a championship that he would already be in the hof?

I believe that Rice should be in the hall, but people comparing Rice to Mantle and Banks and Williams.

Do we really need to list the accomplishments of these 3 players vs. Jim Rice?

I thought I had clearly expressed that I didn't put Rice in Mantle's class. Somehow I don't get the connection between a team winning a championship and an individual getting into the HOF. TEAMS win championships in baseball. BTW I don't consider Mantle in the same class as Ted Williams by any stretch either.

[BigFish]

Originally Posted by striperking70

If Rice was on a World Series championship team in his career he probably would be in the HOF.

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF! I am pretty much done with this conversation.....SK70 and Wrikerjr....you guys are New Yawkers ain't cha?

[Raider Ronnie]

[QUOTE=BigFish;553923]That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF!


It's the only reason Joe Namath is in the football hall of fame !!!
His career stats suck but he had a big mouth with his prediction and his team (Buddy Ryan's defense) won the most important super bowl !

[striperking70]

Originally Posted by BigFish

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF! I am pretty much done with this conversation.....SK70 and Wrikerjr....you guys are New Yawkers ain't cha?

It's a fact. If he won a championship or 2 he would probably be in. I am not saying it's right because I don't think he belongs in either way. Championship or not.

[striperking70]

[QUOTE=Raider Ronnie;553939]

Originally Posted by BigFish

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF!


It's the only reason Joe Namath is in the football hall of fame !!!
His career stats suck but he had a big mouth with his prediction and his team (Buddy Ryan's defense) won the most important super bowl !

Exactly! Joe Namath was very overrated. Actually he really wasn't good just avearge.

[Mike P]

[QUOTE=Raider Ronnie;553939]

Originally Posted by BigFish

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF!


It's the only reason Joe Namath is in the football hall of fame !!!
His career stats suck but he had a big mouth with his prediction and his team (Buddy Ryan's defense) won the most important super bowl !

He also gave the AFL instant credibility and put it on an equal footing with the old guard. Without the Jets' win, and that of the Chiefs the next year (and they were almost as big an underdog to the Vikes as the Jets were to the Colts), it's very unlikely that Pete Rozelle would have convinced the Steelers, Colts and Browns to switch over to the new AFC. You would not have the divisional structure you have today.

[Raider Ronnie]

[QUOTE=Mike P;554009]

Originally Posted by Raider Ronnie

He also gave the AFL instant credibility and put it on an equal footing with the old guard. Without the Jets' win, and that of the Chiefs the next year (and they were almost as big an underdog to the Vikes as the Jets were to the Colts), it's very unlikely that Pete Rozelle would have convinced the Steelers, Colts and Browns to switch over to the new AFC. You would not have the divisional structure you have today.

So that made him a hall of famer???

[Mike P]

[QUOTE=Raider Ronnie;554025]

Originally Posted by Mike P

So that made him a hall of famer???

His stats are as good as Aikman's. And he had a bigger impact on the game. The merger was agreed upon, but the structuring of the league wasn't settled. If the AFL hadn't shown it could compete with the big boys, the 9 AFL teams would have been scattered around the NFL divisions. The Pats wouldn't be playing in the AFC east--they'd be playing in the eastern division of the NFL, along with the Jets and Bills, joining the Giants, Eagles, Redskins, and whatever other original eastern division NFL team that would be left in that division. He allowed the AFL to retain its basic identity as the new AFC.

Just as an FYI--he threw for roughly the same number of yards, and slightly fewer TDs, as Stabler in a shorter career. Without a Warren Wells, or a Fred Bilitnikoff, or a Dave Casper to throw to. Don Maynard was a good receiver, but his other targets were guys like George Sauer Jr and Richard Caster. He never had a speed merchant WR to throw to. And he missed more than half of 4 seasons due to injuries. Imagine what he could have done with only one good knee, let alone two.