Jim Rice and the Hall of Fame - Page 5

JamesI · 10-11-2002, 05:30 PM

Singleton was a great player for the beginning of his years in Baltimore. Through 1980 he was one of the best outfielders in the AL. For those years, I would call him superior to Rice. (Rice does win the comparison for whole careers)

Jim Rice · 10-11-2002, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SmedIndy
From 1975 - 80 George Foster had a better OPS and RCAA than Rice.

And from 1981-1986, half of the time frame being examined, even after adjusting for era and ballpark Rice averaged more plate appearances, runs, hits, doubles, triples, home runs, RBI, walks, and Runs Created than Foster, while playing more games and striking out about 35 times per year less. He posted a higher average (.298 - .278), OBP (.354 - .339), slugging percentage (.491 - .466) and OPS (.845 - .805). Rice also threw out 76 runners in that time frame compared to Foster's 51, and had a better range factor (their fielding percentages were almost identical). Rice was an All-Star four of those six years - Foster was once. Rice was in the top 5 in MVP voting twice in those years - Foster was once. Rice's team reached the World Series in 1986. Their opponent that year dumped Foster in mid-season. George Foster was NOT a better left fielder than Jim Rice.

pwdennis · 10-11-2002, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SmedIndy
OBP is much more important than slugging. The actual OPS formula that is even more accurate is (OBP*1.4) + SLG.

Here I agree with you - in fact I made a comment on another thread to the effect that simply adding OBP & SLG together was inadequate because of the greater degree of variability in the SLG component

VNV Nation · 10-11-2002, 06:38 PM

Rice was the best hitter in baseball over a three-year period, 1977-79. That's a distinction normally reserved only for true Hall of Famers.

SmedIndy · 10-11-2002, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jim Rice
And from 1981-1986, half of the time frame being examined, even after adjusting for era and ballpark Rice averaged more plate appearances, runs, hits, doubles, triples, home runs, RBI, walks, and Runs Created than Foster, while playing more games and striking out about 35 times per year less. He posted a higher average (.298 - .278), OBP (.354 - .339), slugging percentage (.491 - .466) and OPS (.845 - .805). Rice also threw out 76 runners in that time frame compared to Foster's 51, and had a better range factor (their fielding percentages were almost identical). Rice was an All-Star four of those six years - Foster was once. Rice was in the top 5 in MVP voting twice in those years - Foster was once. Rice's team reached the World Series in 1986. Their opponent that year dumped Foster in mid-season. George Foster was NOT a better left fielder than Jim Rice.

George Foster was better than Jim Rice when both were at their relative peaks (1975-80). I was supporting my contention that Rice wasn't the best LF during his peak, and I don't think he was. Foster was.

Rice only had two more great seasons, 1983 and 1986, but those weren't in his peak years.

VNV Nation · 10-11-2002, 10:59 PM

Your peak value consists of your best seasons, whenever they occur. In any event, Jim Rice was 30 in 1983 and 22 in 1975, so I can't see how 1975 is a peak season but 1983 isn't, other than the fact that it's an edit in favor of Foster.

sweaver · 10-12-2002, 12:05 AM

Rice's actual peak was 1977-79, which includes the years Smed used. He had some other good years, but they were scattered and not consecutive. 1986 was actually Rice's 3rd-best year, but is widely separated from the others.

Digger, as I said earlier, the differences that we perceive between Rice's offense and Singleton's are accounted for by their home parks.

Alan Smithee · 10-12-2002, 12:05 AM

not to be a winshares junkie but rice's three best win shares seasons total up to 92 and fosters three best total to 87. in WS over the five best seaons foster has 132 and rice 127. rice has more ws because he played longer( 282 to 269)

anyway havent we beat this horse into the groud? Jimrice you waned to know what the board thought and aside from extreme hair splitting you have an answer. people think he ranks somewhere between the bottom third of the hall to just outside of the hall. in other words " if he goes in thats ok with us but noobody's gonna sell their kidneys to get him in."

VNV Nation · 10-12-2002, 12:17 AM

to split more hairs...if Foster is on the Red Sox and Rice on the Reds, then Rice is playing left field every day and Foster is DHing 40-50 games a year and Rice picks up an extra two Win Shares per year because of no DH.

James' rating of Rice is frankly way too low and is due to, as he might put it, a quirk of the system. In particular, the system has a big blind spot on the contextual value/cost of double plays, which is the point he keeps hammering on about Rice.

SmedIndy · 10-12-2002, 01:08 AM

Explain to me how making two outs in one play isn't such a bad thing?

Rice would probably be a seven inning player with the Reds, as they'd have a defensive replacement in LF toot sweet.

And of course, if you expand the time frame, you run into Rickey Henderson and Tim Raines, which dilutes the argument for Rice even more.

Skip · 10-12-2002, 06:49 AM

I'm with Alan Smithee here. At what point to we stop splitting hairs and agree to disagree. Alan summed up what seems to be the consensus of the thread well ... I just reread it to be sure, although I dozed off twice in the process. Is there anything else substantive to say?

Edited for clarification - rereading the entire thread was a the cause of my dozing, not Alan's particular posting!

moose · 10-12-2002, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skip
I'm with Alan Smithee here. At what point to we stop splitting hairs and agree to disagree. Alan summed up what seems to be the consensus of the thread well ... I just reread it to be sure, although I dozed off twice in the process. Is there anything else substantive to say?

thank you for doing this, ellen.

(i agree... closin' time)

Jim Rice · 10-12-2002, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SmedIndy
Explain to me how making two outs in one play isn't such a bad thing?

Rice would probably be a seven inning player with the Reds, as they'd have a defensive replacement in LF toot sweet.

And of course, if you expand the time frame, you run into Rickey Henderson and Tim Raines, which dilutes the argument for Rice even more.

I'll claim the final note since it's my thread. Three responses to the points above.

1. It isn't such a bad thing because there's quite literally no evidence that the number of DPs a team or player grounds into has any negative impact on that team's overall ability to score runs or win games in any given year. Beyond that, it's unfair to look at a player's GIDP total without looking at the number of GIDP situations his teammates and manager put him in. Rice faced more GIDP opportunities - BY FAR - than any player in baseball during his career.

2. According to James, Rice was a better defensive player than Foster (2.63 WS/1000 innings compared to 2.50). How is it that Rice would be pulled after seven innings if Foster wasn't?

3. And by including Henderson and Foster - admittedly better overall players - you are bringing in players who were teenagers during about half of Rice's prime years in the bigs. Even if you want to argue that both of them were immediately better than Rice upon their arrival, you would still have a gap at the end of the 1970s without defining who the game's best left fielder was. To me, it sure looks like that was Rice. People can argue for Foster, but the reality is that based upon Win Shares (which has factors that work AGAINST Rice) Foster was really only better in 1976 & 1977. For '78-'79 Rice was better by 12 total WS and for 1975 it was essentially a dead heat (21 Foster - 20 Rice). TPR totals agree. Since Foster didn't contribute much before those years and became very average after 1981, it's clear Rice was the better overall player. FYI - Rice totaled more career WS than Foster not because he played longer as someone claimed earlier - actually Foster played more years. The fact is Rice has a higher total because he played better and more regularly. Listing their respective seasons in descending order of WS reveals that Rice "won" 8 seasons to Foster's 4 when compared side by side (there were also four ties).

I agree that the subject matter seems to be exhausted. I would love to use some of your comments in the book if they fit. Please let me know if that would be a problem for any of you.

Skip · 10-12-2002, 10:57 AM

And we'll leave it at that.

View Poll Results: Should Jime Rice be in the Hall of Fame
Yes	5	22.73%
No	17	77.27%
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll

10-12-2002, 06:49 AM	#71
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	I'm with Alan Smithee here. At what point to we stop splitting hairs and agree to disagree. Alan summed up what seems to be the consensus of the thread well ... I just reread it to be sure, although I dozed off twice in the process. Is there anything else substantive to say? Edited for clarification - rereading the entire thread was a the cause of my dozing, not Alan's particular posting! Last edited by Skip : 10-12-2002 at 10:56 AM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

10-11-2002, 05:30 PM	#61
JamesI Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Potsdam, N.Y. Posts: 3,723	Singleton was a great player for the beginning of his years in Baltimore. Through 1980 he was one of the best outfielders in the AL. For those years, I would call him superior to Rice. (Rice does win the comparison for whole careers)

10-11-2002, 06:38 PM	#64
VNV Nation Membership Suspended 11/19/02 Join Date: May 2002 Location: VNV Nation Posts: 2,952	Rice was the best hitter in baseball over a three-year period, 1977-79. That's a distinction normally reserved only for true Hall of Famers.

10-11-2002, 10:59 PM	#66
VNV Nation Membership Suspended 11/19/02 Join Date: May 2002 Location: VNV Nation Posts: 2,952	Your peak value consists of your best seasons, whenever they occur. In any event, Jim Rice was 30 in 1983 and 22 in 1975, so I can't see how 1975 is a peak season but 1983 isn't, other than the fact that it's an edit in favor of Foster.

10-12-2002, 12:05 AM	#67
sweaver Netshrine Cleanup Hitter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Mountain State Posts: 8,883	Rice's actual peak was 1977-79, which includes the years Smed used. He had some other good years, but they were scattered and not consecutive. 1986 was actually Rice's 3rd-best year, but is widely separated from the others. Digger, as I said earlier, the differences that we perceive between Rice's offense and Singleton's are accounted for by their home parks.

10-12-2002, 12:05 AM	#68
Alan Smithee Guest Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 152	not to be a winshares junkie but rice's three best win shares seasons total up to 92 and fosters three best total to 87. in WS over the five best seaons foster has 132 and rice 127. rice has more ws because he played longer( 282 to 269) anyway havent we beat this horse into the groud? Jimrice you waned to know what the board thought and aside from extreme hair splitting you have an answer. people think he ranks somewhere between the bottom third of the hall to just outside of the hall. in other words " if he goes in thats ok with us but noobody's gonna sell their kidneys to get him in."

10-12-2002, 12:17 AM	#69
VNV Nation Membership Suspended 11/19/02 Join Date: May 2002 Location: VNV Nation Posts: 2,952	to split more hairs...if Foster is on the Red Sox and Rice on the Reds, then Rice is playing left field every day and Foster is DHing 40-50 games a year and Rice picks up an extra two Win Shares per year because of no DH. James' rating of Rice is frankly way too low and is due to, as he might put it, a quirk of the system. In particular, the system has a big blind spot on the contextual value/cost of double plays, which is the point he keeps hammering on about Rice.

10-12-2002, 01:08 AM	#70
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	Explain to me how making two outs in one play isn't such a bad thing? Rice would probably be a seven inning player with the Reds, as they'd have a defensive replacement in LF toot sweet. And of course, if you expand the time frame, you run into Rickey Henderson and Tim Raines, which dilutes the argument for Rice even more.

10-12-2002, 10:57 AM	#74
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	And we'll leave it at that.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)