Congratulations are in order for Jim Rice, who, after 15 long years of waiting, was finally elected to the Hall of Fame Monday. Rice's candidacy has been debated ad nauseam the last few years, with rigid statistical analysts citing his mediocre on-base percentage and poor numbers away from Fenway Park as cause to keep him out and equally rigid supporters, most of them writers who covered Rice when he played, lauding his presence in the batter's box and status as the "most feared" hitter in the American League for much of his career.
Regardless of where you come down in the Rice debate (Personally, I would not have cast a vote in his favor), it's impossible not to feel good for him. Getting as close as he did on the previous 14 elections, and then being forced to wait another year had to be tougher in many respects than falling off the ballot right away.
Now, wherever he goes and whenever he's introduced, the adjectives 'Hall of Fame outfielder' will always precede his name. "I don't think it matters what ballot I was on as long as I got in," Rice told the Associated Press. "That was the key thing right there."
Rice might not be a Hall of Famer to some, but there is no question that his career is worthy of awe. In an era where steroids and even legal over-the-counter supplements and intense workout regimens were not a part of the culture of baseball, Jim Ed was one of the top power hitters around. He clubbed 40 home runs in a season only once, but hit 39 three times, and finished his career just 18 shy of the 400 plateau.
His AL MVP campaign in 1978 is the stuff of legend. Rice hit .315, with 46 home runs and 139 RBI. He led the junior circuit in OPS, slugged an even .600 and totaled a whopping 86 extra-base hits.
ESPN's Rob Neyer -- one of Rice's most vocal detractors over the years -- makes the case that his induction will have little impact the quality of player in the Hall of Fame going forward because, in short, voters don't usually lower the bar for election even when they make a mistake.
It's hard to argue with Rob. Slippery slope arguments are often unsound, and he knows more than almost anyone about the patterns of the Hall voters. I do find it hard to believe, though, that Rice's induction will not, at bare minimum, give some of his contemporaries a sizable boost in coming elections.
With over 60 percent of the vote, Andre Dawson's election is a fait accompli anyway, but even if you're one of the voters who didn't support Rice this year, how can you not put an X next to Dawson's name in 2010? Matt Snyder laid out a compelling case this morning that Dawson was every bit Rice's equal. I'll go one step further: He was a superior all-around player.
Tim Raines' case is certainly stronger today than it was yesterday, with a vocal minority of analysts believing Raines' case dwarfs Rice's.
There might even be more widespread support for someone like Dale Murphy. He's gained very little traction in 10 years on the ballot, with his support gradually sliding backward. But now? Murphy has two MVP Awards to Rice's one, and while he wasn't quite the offensive force that Rice was, his defensive prowess easily closes the gap between the two players.
Rice's election should be celebrated, first and foremost. He deserves his day in the sun, and then some.
But he should also serve as a beacon of hope for Hall candidates nearing the end of the line as well as players who are simply worthy of a second look.



















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
1-12-2009 @ 7:47PM
Fres said...
Bert Blevenen and Tommy John. What's wrong with the voters? Shame on them......
Reply
1-12-2009 @ 8:00PM
Dave said...
Sounds like Jim Rice belongs in the Hall of Very Good.
Reply
1-12-2009 @ 8:06PM
JIM said...
Time for Davy Concepion and Tony Perez
Reply
1-12-2009 @ 8:25PM
jetfan said...
Tony Perez was inducted in 2000
Reply
1-12-2009 @ 10:17PM
George said...
Not many perfect players in the Hall. Rice was an impact player during his playing days, because he kept to himself and did not talk much to reporters is not a valid reason to hold him or anyone out that deserves it. He was a great offensive player and had the Sox won a World Series he would have been in before this...shame on the writers
Reply
1-12-2009 @ 10:42PM
Carl said...
As far as I'm concerned sports writers souldn't vote the players going into the hall of fame. I Think there a bunch of self serving MORONS that have only there best intrest at heart. Rice should of been elected on the first ballet not the 15th
1-12-2009 @ 10:44PM
georgejr said...
the writers couldn't hit a base ball .i will never under stand how
come they are the one's to vote.they probably never even played sports on any level.
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 1:29AM
Andrew said...
I'm not one to jump to the defense of the writers, but if not them, who? Managers and coaches have proven completely incapable of selecting Gold Gloves in any rational manner and the players aren't much better with their annual All-Star picks.
For all their flaws, it's hard to carve out a group of people who should vote, barring creating an all-new HoF panel.
1-12-2009 @ 10:48PM
Sue said...
Congratulations Jim. It's about time. We are all very happy. He has always been a classy guy. And a sharp dresser too. I agree. If the Sox had won a W.S. during that time then it would have been a "no brainer". Again, Congratulations......We are all very happy tonight in Red Sox Nation........
Reply
1-12-2009 @ 11:05PM
Glenn said...
If Dawson had more longevity, he should have been in more All-Star games, right? Rice and Dawson were each chosen for 8 All-Star games. This tells you something about how each player stacked up with the players at the time. Considering years played, Rice was regarded as All-Star caliber more often than Dawson.
Also, how odd that no one mentions their career batting averages -- Rice .298, Dawson .279. Sorry, but this is no contest.
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 1:32AM
Andrew said...
Why should anyone care about something as fickle as All-Star appearances?
And why should we care about batting averages either? Yes, that's one way Rice is better than Dawson. There are others. He was a better hitter than Dawson. But Dawson did other things like run and play the field that boost his overall value.
1-13-2009 @ 5:34AM
JB said...
FINALLY!!! There should never have been a debate. Ask anyone who played in that era and they will tell you the most feared hitter in the American League for a DECADE(!) was Jim Rice. It should not matter to sportswriters whether the player was nice to them or not. Compare his stats to anyone else who played from 1975-85 and this arguement should have been over 15 years ago. Congratulations Jim Ed Rice you deserved it.
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 7:38AM
bob said...
i GREW UP WATCHING THE RED SOX IN THE 70S AND JIM RICE WAS ONE OF THE BEST HITTERS IN THE GAME BACK THEN ITS ABOUT TIME CONGRADS JIM ED.
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 9:34AM
ken said...
Andrew you sound like a ANTI RED SOX'S guy to me. How can you not think Jim Rice Deserves to be in the H.O. F. ? He was a great hitter and in 1975 if he did not get hit in the arm the RED SOX YES THE RED SOX would have walked away with the WORLD SERIES !!! HANDS DOWN !!!
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 12:24PM
Grapost said...
The HOF voting has officially become a JOKE! It's all POLITICAL now! Statistics can be twisted one way or another to make a case. Only NO BRAINER'S should be elected. This electing of "close by no cigar" type players is an insult to all the REAL HOF'S who playered and achieved what was necessary to be a 'no brainer" selection. Henderson was a "No Brainer". Rice was only elected by "political lobbying" by others on his behalf. His stats are the same for the last 15 years. Why is he worthy now? When are the Writers gonna show some gut like the (New) Old Timers Committe and say "Hey look, none of these guys were overlooked, they're just not HOF material" and NOT ELECT ANYONE! Beause these "close but no cigar" types get in, arguments start being made that others of this kind should be included. So one mistake justifies another mistake. I can see 100 years from now the argument will be made the Bat Boys and Trainers be included in HOF voting since what they did has be "overlooked" for 200 years. The present idiocy could eventually de-evolve to that level.
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 2:14PM
shawn said...
I think that if you have to go look at stats to consider someone for the hall of fame, then hes not a hall of famer. There are ALOT of great players with GREAT numbers, but the HOF is supposed to be for the best of the best. Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Koufax. People like that should have statues of themselves. Not the Jim Rice or Bill Mazeroski's of the world. And no im not 60 and saying baseball isnt like it used to be, im 27. Now i never saw Jim Rice play as i was only 5 when he was in the 86 world series on the downside of his carear. But I cant imagine he was any more or less feared than Albert Belle, and Belle would never get the consideration I think he deserves.
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 2:44PM
Dave said...
Once again the baseball sports writers have made a strong (read: SLAM DUNK) case for not only taking the right to vote (elect) Hall of Fame members out of their hands, but also the right to vote for post season awards. A prime example is the block of writers who, regardless of the candidates overwhelming credentials, refuse to vote for said candidate in their first year of eligibility. Throw in the writers who waste one (or several) of their votes on the likes of: Jesse Orosco (1 vote), Matt Williams (7 votes), Jay (who?) Bell (2 votes). Regardless of our suspicions and doubts, Mark McGwire has never been convicted of using any illegal substance, the 1 suppliment (Andro) he was known to use (BTW: no one would have ever known about that if some reporter wasn't snooping around in his locker where he had no right to be) was an approved over the counter suppliment by MLB. To keep out the likes of Bert Blyleven, Louie Tiant (compare his stats to Drysdale, Hunter, Newhouser), Andre Dawson, Gil Hodges ( in fairness I have to put this one on the veterans comittee also), Lee Smith & Tim Raines is more the adequate proof that the system needs to be changed. Lets go back in history a bit, it was the "sports writers" who prevented the likes of Joe Dimaggio & Harmon Killebrew from being elected in their first year of eligability, and also by leaving him completely off his ballot, cost Ted Williams the MVP the year he batted .406. It was also these same writers who voted Rafiel Palmiero the gold glove at first base after playing approx. 40 games at the position that year. It is time to allow those who have the most direct knowledge of those who deserve these honors to vote, "THE PLAYERS". Put the HOF vote(s) into the hands of a select group of retired players every year (example: 50 with 10+ years MLB time from each decade dating back to the 1940's) and allow all current players to vote for ALL post season awards. While there are many good and impartial sports writers, there are more (eligable to vote) who have grudges against a certain player, and also agendas related to their own misinformed standards. Only those who work and play in the game have the proper knowledge and understand of what it takes to be a Hall of Famer or to achieve the level of excellence it takes to deserve post season awards. And while I am on a roll, I read the sports pages to see how my favorite teams and players performed ON THE FIELD, I could care less who they are sleeping with, how many strip clubs they went to or how much they may have spent on their 12 luxury automobiles and 5 mansions. If your a "Sports Writer" write about sports, if you care more about tearing down someone for their personal lifestyle, get a job with the National Enquirer!
Reply
1-13-2009 @ 5:13PM
dj said...
doyoucare.info
Congrats to Rice !
Reply
1-14-2009 @ 4:14AM
jef said...
an other red sox, in the hall......... now how about tony c
talk about talent
Reply
1-14-2009 @ 8:51AM
David said...
Don Mattingly certainly deserves as much or more consideration than several players already in the Hall. He was arguably the best hitter in baseball for a time and one of the best all-around players for virtually all of his career. Another is Roger Maris, who held the home run record longer than even Babe Ruth and was a terrific outfielder. I am glad Jim Rice got in even though he was a hated Red Sox. He was a great player.
Reply