Should Jim Rice be in the Hall of Fame?

via www.courant.com
There has been a lot (A LOT) of discussion here at Over The Monster about whether or not Jim Rice should have been elected to baseball's Hall of Fame. So I figured, why not poll the community? Rice earned more than 76 percent of the vote, but would he earn the same in a diehard Red Sox community?
I figured that'd be a no-brainer, but not after reading all the comments in this thread. So here's the poll. I'm not going to make a case for yes or no, but I figure the supporters of each can reply in the comments and say why or why not Rice should be in the Hall of Fame.
0 recs |
133 comments
|
Comments
It is all about context.
When evaluating a player, one has to take into account every aspect of what makes him a player. It is after all the Baseball Hall of Fame not the Hitting a ball with a Bat hall of Fame.
If you look at Rice’s number alone, it is possible to come to the conclusion that he was a good enough hitter for a Hall of Famer (i didn’t but i could understand that someone did). But it is important to note that he wasnt a hitter alone. He was a left-fielder, this group of players called left-fielders are usually stronger offensively than the average ballplayer, which makes his numbers look not so good. Besides, he was a very poor fielder according to most, statheads and MSM included. He wasnt a good baserunner either.
If you think Rice is a Hall of Famer then so are Murphy, Evans, Dawson, Raines(who should be) and a bunch of others.
H
by gemf89 on Jan 14, 2009 12:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Depends what you want in a player...
I would bet that if you ask scouts about LF, 9 out of 10 would tell you they don’t care at all about the glove or the wheels, just the bat. I say this because it’s a tough argument to say after the fact that Insert Player Here was a bad defender/baserunner, etc and it’s a disqualifier for anything when the club didn’t give a damn about that in the first place. Let’s face it, LF is an offensive position. And in his time, Rice was one of the best if not the best bats in that position. If Rice were a CF/C/SS/2B…even a 3B, I can see it. But LF????
Are you really saying that you’d toss a pure bat out of left because of defense?? Who cares if they can hit 40-50 bombs and drive in 100-120??
Now, personally, I’d throw about 20-30 guys out of the Hall and have a new set of criteria if you could start over but that ship sailed and I’m perfectly happy for anyone who gets in.
by Danno11 on Jan 14, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
His point was that LF is a easier position to play, therefore good hitter who are bad fielders play in left. So the average from the LF is higher than the one in CF.
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 14, 2009 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you think Burrell, Dunn and Abreu are struggling for work this year?
They are bad fielding corner outfielders. In past years they might be getting big contracts, but in recent years fielding has become more important and so these guys are making $8mil per instead of twice that.
Also, it seems that you are saying that bad defense at SS would keep someone out of the Hall, but bad fielding in LF should not. This makes absolutely no sense. A bad fielding SS would be moved to 2b or 3b. If they can’t field there they might go to 1B or to LF. So a mediocre or bad fielding SS is often more valuable than an excellent fielding LF becuase LF is so much easier to play. If someone is as bad a fielder as Manny Ramirez (or Jim Rice, though I admittedly know little about his defense), the only way he can stay in the majors is if he is a truly incredible hitter. This does not necessarily make him a better baseball overall than a mediocre hitting SS. It is this thinking that has left us with almost no second basemen in the HOF.
by BTLove on Jan 14, 2009 7:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Burrell got signed by the Rays, btw.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 14, 2009 7:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For peanuts, btw
The Rays got a fucking steal there.
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 14, 2009 7:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah I know, but for less than Julio Lugo makes per year
by BTLove on Jan 14, 2009 7:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And he'll likely DH
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 14, 2009 7:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RF, maybe.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 14, 2009 7:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No
He will DH. If he plays RF I hurt myself.
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
by SRQman on Jan 14, 2009 10:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fernando in right then?
After BJ gets over his cold-phobia?
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 15, 2009 7:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget about Matt Joyce.
I think he’ll get alot of playing time.
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 15, 2009 7:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I personally don't see Perez starting in RF.
I think they want him in the minors to work on things. I think we will start with a Gabe/Gabe platoon and then Joyce will eventually be the starter.
Top Josh Paul Pornos- Big Navi Stroking, 2pitchers1cup, BJ to the Balls, Riggans Your Thingans
by SRQman on Jan 15, 2009 7:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 16, 2009 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Umm.....no.
You’re kidding right? The reason Dunn and Abreu aren’t signed is because of defense??
Could it be that:
1. There’s been a glut of the same type of outfielder on the market this year. Griffey Jr., Floyd, Abreu, Ibanez (PHI), Dunn, Manny. Not all these players have the same power or upside, they all play the same positions (corner OF/DH), giving teams more options and driving prices down. Also, the Yankees are shopping Nady. That has an effect too.
2. This just in: The economy bites. Teams are being cautious about their expected revenue streams and player agents have, for the most part, badly misread this fact. For example, Burrell turned down 2 yrs, $21 million during the summer from Philly. And Manny’s people made a big deal of turning down 2 yrs, $45 million from the Dodgers. Oops.
Whenever something seems fishy in baseball, the money is usually the reason. I hear an echo of Mo Vaughn saying “It’s not about the money, Dale!!” Ok…back to my points.
3. Bobby Abreu is 35 this year and he’s on the decline. Career OPS: .902 Last two years OPS: .814 & .843. Will he get signed? Of course. For big money? I doubt it. For 3+ years, good luck with that.
As mentioned, Burrell is signed in Tampa. He’ll probably DH, The option, if Upton plays CF, is to take Crawford off the field to play Burrell. Not gonna happen and it’s not fair to criticize Burrell for not being in Crawford’s league defensively…never even crossed the Rays mind to play Burrell in LF regularly, so defense wasn’t a concern for them at all, price was. And since they got a deal on Burrell, he’s signed to DH. Burrell can go back on the market at age 34 and see if things are better then.
As for Dunn, he’s looking for big money over a number of years and he’s not getting anybody near his price range. Manny’s on the market too, that also clouds Dunn’s situation. And neither of them will get as much as they want. If the Dodgers tack to Dunn instead…Manny is up creek sans paddle.
And I didn’t state that bad defense at CF/C/2B/SS/3B would keep someone out of the Hall. I said I could see the argument popping up. LF, I can’t see that being valid at all. Different positions have different responsibilities. Now, Derek Jeter’s defense has been the subject of a lot of talk. Think that keeps him out of the Hall or the lineup? Hell, no. Mike Piazza’s D? Of course not. Ted Williams?? Harmon Killebrew?? It’s a minor factor in most voters opinions in most cases. Mostly, defensive arguments are used to pump up a player when they play outstanding defense and it’s their calling card (i.e. Ozzie Smith).
And for the record, there is virtually no criteria for the writers to go on. If a writer wants to keep a player off their ballot that ends up with 96 percent of the vote for wearing ugly ties on road trips, he/she can do so.
by Danno11 on Jan 15, 2009 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think you quite get it...
You say they are all “the same type of outfielder.” What type is this? Oh yeah, poor fielding corner outfielders/ DH’s. If these guys could still play the field effectively they would all be signed right now and for much bigger money. Just because you expect a guy to be a bad fielder does not mean that he does not hurt his value when he is in fact a bad fielder.
Yes, the economy hurts, but not for Mark Teixeira, who is not that much a better hitter than some of these guys, but he is one of the best fielding 1B in the league. If he was a DH, he would not have gotten that money.
Maybe defense does not keep guys out of the HOF, but it definitely should. Go to Fangraphs and look at guy’s tot win value as a compilation of batting, fielding and position. For example, last year Jacoby Ellsbury was almost a full win more valuable than Pat Burrell because of his fielding ability and ability to play a more difficult position in CF. Poor fielding is not going to keep the players you list (i.e. the best of all time) out of the HOF, but maybe it should keep a borderline player out.
Again, to say that a LFer’s defense is unimportant because you don’t expect good defense from that position is absurd. A good fielding LF’er is better than a poor fielding one, so why not take that into account when evaluating a player?
by BTLove on Jan 15, 2009 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, they should.
Last bit isn’t much of a point either way. But Rice should be in, because he was the best player of a decade.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 14, 2009 7:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was?
I’ve heard that he was “the most feared”, but never actually the best player of the decade.
by BTLove on Jan 14, 2009 7:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By perception anyways.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 14, 2009 7:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was behind Schmidt and Brett.
At least.
But the HOF is big enough for at least the top 4-5 hitters of any era.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 14, 2009 7:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about these guys?
Rod Carew (1967-1985) .328 AVG/.393 OBP/.429 SLG (131 OPS+)
Reggie Jackson (1967-1987) 563 HR .262 AVG/.356 OBP/.490 SLG (139 OPS+)
Dave Winfield (1973-1995) 465 HR .283 AVG/.353 OBP/.475 SLG (130 OPS+)
Eddie Murray (1977-1997) 504 HR .287 AVG/.359 OBP/.476 SLG (129 OPS+)
Paul Molitor (1978-1998) .306 AVG/.369 OBP/.448 SLG (122 OPS+)
Also, Willie Stargell, Pete Rose, and Johnny Bench played when Rice did. In terms of “fear,” George Foster and Greg Luzinski matched Rice in the late 70s (before they faded).
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 14, 2009 8:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
restrict yourself to a decade, please
It’s 1981, who would a pitcher rather face, Jim Rice, Eddie Murray, Dave Winfield, or Paul Molitor?
Rice is probably the last on that list.
Carew was not a power hitter. Comparing Rice to Carew does not make sense.
I will concede that Reggie Jackson has a stronger candidacy than Rice. But Reggie is a no-brainer first ballot candidate.
During their primes, Rice was considered the better hitter than Murray. Murray did a better job with longevity, though.
Winfield didn’t even do that.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rice's prime ended with a wrist injury in 1980
He only had one very good year after that. His reputation was made from 1977-1979.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 17, 2009 6:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bill James called Rice a "pretty good defensive left fielder."
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 14, 2009 7:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bill James called Prince Fielder the best young player these days
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 14, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Funny how maybe the same number of people who posted at the other thread were pro or against, it was more balanced than this
I blame Florida.
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 14, 2009 4:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hey, I voted for him.
I’m on the record.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 14, 2009 7:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I had to vote no.
While saying that the Sox fan in me is glad he got in, I’m what you would call a “small Hall of Fame” guy, and would kick out some of the less luminous names if given the chance.
"Are you a real doctor, or a doctor like Dr. Pepper is a doctor?"
by Allen Chace on Jan 14, 2009 4:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
+1
I agree entirely.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 14, 2009 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+2
Glad to see him in, but would rather boot out all the marginal inductees. If your not in the Williams, Mays, Ruth, Henderson category then in my hall you ain’t getting in.
The best quote I ever read about all this was, if you need to argue for someones induction then they probably aren’t a HOFer. Henderson was a slam dunk, easy.
Maddux, slam dunk. Clemens, Bonds, F. Thomas, slam dunks. Too easy.
by sydneysox on Jan 14, 2009 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
are you a "smart Hall of Fam" guy?
Wait, I thought I was the “smart Hall of Fame” guy, and I support his inclusion.
Who gets to decide which position is “smart” and which isn’t?
If we want a smarter Hall, I think we need to do something more than simply look at statistics compiled over a long career.
Here’s a question for you: how many players in the past 50 years have had a season with over 400 total bases?
Now, how many have done so without the whiff of steroids about them and without getting to play home games at Coors Field?
I count one.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"small" not "smart"
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 17, 2009 6:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Posed this on another thread -
Should Yaz be in the Hall?
His numbers are pretty comparable to Big Jim’s.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 14, 2009 4:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yaz was also an excellent defender in the outfield, and got to
the 3000 hit mark. Whether it should or not (Garret Anderson, potentially), that pretty much guarantees HoF induction.
For me where Yaz really reaches about Rice is with the defense taken into consideration. Couple that with the growing ? idea that health and longevity are skills, and Yaz really leaps ahead.
"Are you a real doctor, or a doctor like Dr. Pepper is a doctor?"
by Allen Chace on Jan 14, 2009 5:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. Yaz is a no doubter Hof’er in my opinion.
by Randy Booth on Jan 14, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no argument
Yaz is a slam dunk and managed alot of those numbers during some serious down years where run scoring is concerned.
by sydneysox on Jan 14, 2009 6:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When the pitcher's mound was higher
They lowered it before the 1969 season.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 14, 2009 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Defense
I cited this in a thread below, but using defensive Win Shares, Yaz and Rice aren’t that far apart defensively. Yaz averaged 2.65 per 1000 innings in LF, Rice 2.63.
Or are Win Shares passe now?
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 14, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
excellent rebuttal!
Stats be damned, full speed ahead!
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He forgot the /sarcasm tag.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 17, 2009 7:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yaz was better for longer
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 14, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no, he wasn't
Rice’s career is pretty similar to Yaz’s, except lacking an 8-year period at the end where he produced poorly like Yaz did.
Rice’s peak also lasted longer, and aside from 1967 Yaz was hardly ever considered one of the best hitters in the game.
The idea that Yaz should get in and Rice shouldn’t solely because of defense is preposterous.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah
Rice’s “prime” is considered to have ended after ‘86, then he fell off the page. During this 12 year period he sported an OPS+ of 132. Yaz’s 12 year period from the ages of 23 to 34 he had an average OPS+ of 144. You can say all you want about who was or was not considered “one of the best” but you cannot argue that Yaz was not the better offensive player. The same holds for Schmidt, who was a far better offensive player than Rice during the mid/late 70’s into the 80’s.
In fact, Schmidt had 10 OPS+ years above 150, Rice had 3. You are overrating Rice’s offense.
by Buzzy on Jan 17, 2009 8:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I really believe the Hall is too selective.
This is not national security or something really important. Its the Hall of Fame. Rice, Blyleven, Lee Smith, Dawson… whomever, too me they should all be in.
But then you have the ole if we expand the NCAA BBall tourney to 100 teams, 101 will bitch and complain.
So, no idea, I think all of the border guys were excellent and they should let em in just because it would be great for their families who supported the players.
by SoxAcumen on Jan 14, 2009 5:59 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
It'd make for funny national security, though.
Narrator: The following takes place between 4:30pm and 5:00pm.
[Close up on numbers of a digital clock]
CLICK CLICK
4:31 CCU HQ (Counter Cooperstown Unit)
Jack: “I got the information out of Dan Shaughnessy. It wasn’t easy, but I broke him.”
Male Who Will Get Killed Off In Several Hours: “How did you know that reading The Elements of Style to him would do it, Jack?
Jack: "Just call it intuition. I found out the Australian drug traffickers’ secret plans – to undermine the Hall of Fame.”
Sneaky Woman Who Is Actually A Mole for the Enemy: “What makes you so sure? He could be covering for someone else.”
Jack: “Trust me. I need to warn the Commissioner immediately. I just hope it’s NOT TOO LATE…”
CLICK CLICK
4:47 An Office Building in New York
MLB Commissioner Bud Selig: “I do love dropping diamonds out the windows of forty-story buildings. It’s so relaxing.”
Commissioner’s Scheming Spouse Sue: “Have you looked over the Hall of Fame candidates at all?”
Selig: “Of course not. As a responsible manager, my duty is to spend money, not earn it. Besides that’s not my purview.”
Scheming Spouse [to herself]: “Excellent…”
Phone Rings
Scheming Spouse [picking it up]: “The Commissioner’s Office.”
Jack [over the phone]: “Sue, is the Commissioner there? I’ve got to speak to him. CHB finally cracked.”
Scheming Spouse [looks at Selig, who is now tossing bunches of hundred dollar bills into the air]: “I’m sorry, but he’s indisposed at the moment.”
Jack: “You don’t understand, I NEED TO TALK TO HIM. We have the Perth Cartel’s plan. They want to insert one of their agents into the Hall of Fame, to destroy it utterly from within. The man’s name is Rice, James Rice… And he’s one of the most feared men of his generation. Pitchers still cower in terror at the mention of his name.”
Scheming Spouse: “Yes, I already know… And you’re too late to stop us.”
Jack: “Oh my god.”
[Spouse hangs up.]
Selig: “What was that honey?”
Scheming Spouse: “Nothing. Nothing at all.”
[Splitscreen into Jack, ferociously driving through traffic and Sue Selig, hovering over a childish Bud and talking on her cellphone. Then it branches out into four screens, showing the above, as well as the Mole covertly calling Sue, and Dan Shaughnessy, beating his head against the wall of a padded cell.]
CLICK CLICK
[Digital Clock turns from 4:59 to 5:00]
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
by 0157H7 on Jan 15, 2009 12:30 AM EST up reply actions 7 recs
I wish.
It’s assisted suicide, also known as retail. It’s only a temporary position, and I’m working 35 hours a week. After work, I can barely mount enough energy to do anything.
I also do some SAT tutoring, but that’s been wicked slow the past few months.
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
by 0157H7 on Jan 15, 2009 8:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm taking the SAT in a week...
Any advice off the top of your head?
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
by BoSox415 on Jan 16, 2009 5:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 16, 2009 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Duke prep program?
Skipped it. And still getting perfect or -1 scores on every test from previous years.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 16, 2009 8:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's see
One good idea is to make sure you’re in a proper state of mind / body to take the exam. Get enough sleep, eat moderately (neither too much nor too little) on the morning of the exam. Don’t do anything else that might hinder your performance.
You can often prepare for the essay a little beforehand. Just take a widely known and loved figure from history (Martin Luther King, Abe Lincoln, Mohandas Gandhi). Do a little research on them, find out what challenges they faced and obstacles they overcame. Then use that person as an example on the essay. Good essays all have a Strong Thesis (Papelbon is an awesome baseball player) and supporting examples / arguments (he got over 35 saves in his first two years as closer; he gets lots of Ks; he rarely walks batters; and his ERA is consistently low). Finally, end the essay with a strong conclusion (because Papelbon is such a great player, he helped the Sox to win a World Series).
There’s a guessing penalty on the SAT (blank answer = 0 points, wrong answer = -.25 pts), so don’t guess unless you can eliminate one or two answers. The exception is the “Grid Ins” on Math, where there is no guessing penalty.
On the critical reading passages, read the descriptive blurb and consider the context. As you’re reading, ask yourself questions about the passage, like why was the writer so interested in this. This is a way to stay focused and avoid boredom. Don’t get bogged down by long descriptions of facts, or unfamiliar words. Don’t read the questions before the passage.
On Math, always try to answer all the first few questions in a section (i.e. the easiest); don’t waste time by skipping ahead to the harder questions. Also, remember that SAT Math is basic high school math that is structured in confusing ways. Therefore, with each question, ask yourself, “What am I looking for?” The last thing you want to do is miss a step or go too far, and get the answer wrong because it asked for 4a instead of just a, or for w instead of a.
Finally, don’t stress too much about the exam. For 99% of us, SAT scores only count once in our lives – in applying to college. In the workforce, no one cares about your SAT scores – they’re much more concerned with how you do in college, and how good you are at your job.
Hope these suggestions are helpful. Good luck!
"It's just a tiny little nick, but it hurts when I get champagne in there."
- Jason Bay, on getting spiked scoring the winning run in ALDS Game Four.
by 0157H7 on Jan 16, 2009 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
It is the Duke Tip program, where I scored high enough on the school standardized test (ITBS – a 99) to be able to take the SAT.
Plenty of sleep and eat right – I have the stomach bug, and can’t keep anything down for more than a few hours. The test is 3 hours 45 minutes long. The test is scheduled at 7:45 in the morning – on a Saturday.
Hmm, widely known and loved figure from history… Pedroia?
Guessing Penalty. That’s handy.
Also handy. I do get bored easily.
Math is my strong point, but a calculator is required.
Don’t stress. Okay. Check.
Thanks again, ecoli. This is way better than any of the pamphlets we got for the test.
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
by BoSox415 on Jan 17, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They didn't teach you that in the classes?
See, we learned that through friends or teachers when bored. That’s why everyone aces the Semantics class – because it’s basically SAT prep and we have been taught everything previously before being forced to take the class.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 17, 2009 8:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd.
Even for a parody of my favorite show.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 15, 2009 7:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Does this mean?
Jim Rice’s number will be retired?
Anyone know what the criteria is for your number to be retired at Fenway?
by SoxAcumen on Jan 14, 2009 10:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yes, his number will be retired
It should have been retired a long time ago.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 14, 2009 10:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Need to be in Cooperstown and have played at least 10 years with the Sox. Check and check.
by Randy Booth on Jan 14, 2009 10:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Funnily enough
One assumes that most posters here are die hard Sox fans and yet Rice would not have been elected if our 200 or so votes were the ones that counted as here he is only currently running a 63% approval rate. So from a non-objective, Sox obsessed fan base he still doesn’t get inducted….hmmm.
Is that because our poster base here is younger and more SABR inclined? probably.
by sydneysox on Jan 14, 2009 10:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to see the same poll ran with Lynn and Evans.
by R.J. Anderson on Jan 14, 2009 10:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tough call.
Lynn’s peak wasn’t long enough and Evans is in that Jack Clark/Darrel Evans category for me. Very, very close. But I’m a small hall guy, so probably not.
by sydneysox on Jan 15, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts exactly. If a Red Sox community doesn’t elect Rice, how do the BBWA?
by Randy Booth on Jan 14, 2009 10:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
mostly b/c,
we are all stat-oriented and read a lot of Rob Neyer. Also, a lot of us never saw Rice play and have no emotional attachment to the guy.
by BTLove on Jan 15, 2009 11:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
morons
people who judge baseball by statistics are morons
it is about heart
it is about what people do in the clutch, and what people do when the team just seems to be languishing, and needs a jump
Rice carried the Sox for years
Yaz did not (1967 was an aberration)
in the early 1970s, listening to the games on the radio, the guy I hoped would come up in the clutch was Rico Petrocelli — not Yaz
most of the blowhards on this sight, with such firm impressions of Jim Ed, did not see him play
He was a fantastic player
by Frank Malzone on Jan 15, 2009 12:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I am
starting to think you comment solely for comedic effect. I for one did see him play, and he was a very good player, but that is not the point. BTW-I seem to recall that “heart” was not really a mentioned attribute of Rice. He was a feared power hitter, considered “clutch-neutral” and no one talked about his heart. They did say he was a surly bastard, though. For all of his “heart” how many WS wins did he carry the Sox to? BTW-baseball games are not won by “heart,” they are won by talent, which is measured by statistics.
by Buzzy on Jan 15, 2009 8:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I saw him play
I still think he is a borderline pick for the Hall, at best. Intelligent people don’t call those they disagree with morons. Baseball has always been about statistics. Otherwise, I could argue that Alex Cora was better than Babe Ruth. Who could argue? There aren’t many who saw the Babe still around to disagree with me.
Perhaps they should judge players based on what we thought while listening to the radio when we were kids. Would that make you happy, Frank?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 15, 2009 8:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm 44
And saw him play…many, many times. I grew up in the Boston area and had a cousin who had season tix, so yeah, I saw him play heaps. He was fun to watch but one never got the impression that you were watching greatness.
by sydneysox on Jan 15, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed completely.
David Eckstein has carried two teams to World Titles thanks to his abnormal heart that stunted his growth. That’s really what baseball is all about, Eckstein has a baseball in place of his heart. It doesn’t pump blood too well though. It’s pretty amazing that he’s still alive.
by R.J. Anderson on Jan 15, 2009 7:08 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
ONLY 2 WS?
What the fuck is wrong with you? David Eckstein won every single WS up to this date, sir, the media lies to us. There never have been a team winning any fucking thing at all without David Eckstein, or at least without a couple of players wearing underwears with his face on. That’s fact.
Mother---- him and John Wayne!
by MerryGoByeBye on Jan 15, 2009 8:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Eckstein would have won 'em all
But the other 24 players held him back.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 15, 2009 9:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes Rice should be in the hall. And its because of the numbers he put up for that time period. Sure his stats dont look great, but its not about his stats compared to active players, its about his stats compared to people he was playing with. And he was a dominant force in that time frame.
by spinz on Jan 15, 2009 2:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I’d also like to add, i think Rice getting into the hall is an effect of the aftermath of the rising steroid controversey. In times like these the sportswriters became much more open to putting in rice symbolically to show what they think of the incoming steroid class. He nearly got in last year during mark mcguires first ballot.
by spinz on Jan 15, 2009 2:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
sorry i havent checked in since the first post.
Look, the thing about the position he played is simple.
I agree that LF is a offense-first position, but that is precisely what mskes Jim Rice undeserving. He just wasnt a good enough hitter when you take into consideration that he played LF. To be a Hall of Fame LFer with bad defense and bad baserunning to boot you would have to be such a force at the plate in the Manny mold, because otherwise you simply didnt contribute much compared to the average LFer.
To put it another way. Adam Dunn is probably gonna end up with with more HRs than Jim Rice, and a similar OPS+ altough Adam’s is more driven by OBP than SLG and you know OPB is more important. So, do you think of Adam Dunn is a Hall of Famer? I sure don’t and he could be also labeled as a Feared Hitter or whatever because he can hit that ball as far and as hard as anybody.
It makes it unfair to so many great player to have Rice in and them not.
by gemf89 on Jan 15, 2009 12:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Well, the argument the Rice folks make is in the right place...
They don’t compare Rice to modern-era players such as Dunn or Bonds. Why would they? They’re from different eras. They compare Rice to the guys Rice played against. I know I’ve heard that stat about Rice leading the majors in hits, RBI and total bases from `75-`86 a number of times. They used it on MLB Network the other day.
Look, if I had it my way, I’d take guys out too and start over with better criteria. I just don’t agree with your methodology.
That said, I’m happy for Jim.
by Danno11 on Jan 15, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
comparison to Adam Dunn is irrelevant
Look at the MVP voting, fer chrissakes.
Adam Dunn has gotten a smidgen of votes a couple of times.
Rice was consistently near the top of the balloting several times, in the top 5 six times, and won it once with the best offensive season of the past fifty years (minus steroids).
Comparing offensive statistics from different eras without making some kind of context adjustment is plainly idiotic.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think we should leave it alone.
I think all of these arguments are going in circles now. Basically, we need to accept that the HOF is not an objective measure of anything. It is based on many things baseball and many things not (eg perceptions, politics, etc). It turns out that Rice played in a particularly stinky era compared to the ones before him, and the one after him is tainted by drugs and the perception of drugs. So, if you think that Rice was one of the top 10 guys in his era, and that should get you in, that’s fine.
All of this discussion has kind of made me ill. In my field there is something like a HOF. I realized that these arguments are the same as those my colleagues have every year when the election to that “HOF” happens. I have seen people end up in therapy over their fear of never being elected (I kid you not). Better to just move on.
by Buzzy on Jan 15, 2009 12:33 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
What field?
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 15, 2009 11:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Scientist
(field withheld), in academia. That’s what allows me the “freedom” to waste my time posting on OTM while my students slave away!
The “Hall” here is called the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). You are elected by other members, it it is made up of people in all fields (Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Applied Sciences…) and even has elected foreign members. It is very hard to get in, and the average age at election is probably 55 or so. To say how selective, I would say that in a given department at an average state university (out of say 35 people) there will be 0 or 1 members in that department at any time. At a place like Berkeley or Harvard maybe one third of the tenured faculty in departments like Physics or Chemistry are in. It is very political, a lot of angst and lobbying, and people often judge their entire careers by it. Like the Hall, there are sometimes special committees, and the standards do change over time to a degree.
I have a colleague tell me a crazy story. He is seeing a therapist due to his worries about “getting in.” It turns out that the therapist he is seeing used to be the therapist of another faculty member here. When that guy got in, he didn’t need the therapist anymore, and passed on the recommendation to my friend. Oh well.
by Buzzy on Jan 16, 2009 9:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well OBP+ is measured against his own peers and Rice’s is only ~130, same as Dunn, who is also compared to his own era.
And the argunment about leading the league in a 10-year period to me seems a bit ridiculous b/c you could fin many good but not great players leading the league for 10-year periods. If you take a good player, like Rice’s 10 best years he is gonna lead many things b/c those years dont correlate with all of his peer’s best years. Some of them may have faded or retired by the fifth year, some other may have broke out by the fifht and started a 10 year run of dominance.
Thats just nitpicking statistic to make him look good. Take the 30 best players of his era, and compare everybody’s 10 best years and see where Rice ranks and you may have a better or a weaker (but at least objective) argument.
by gemf89 on Jan 15, 2009 12:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
you mean
OPS+. Yes, but for whatever reason, the Hall has always looked at an era by itself, and players get in by sort of an unwritten rule of era quota. As for OPS+, I have made the same argument here in the last 2 days about 30 times, but so what. It is even true there are other OPS+ guys from Rice’s era (Evans and others). Anyway, I am not sure it corrects the way you think; I don’t think it normalizes to the average of the era. By that I mean that I think the aggregate OPS+ of the current era is higher than that of Rice’s, as strange as it sounds. At least the OPS+ leaders have a much higher OPS+ now than the did then. In part, this must be because “good hitters didnt take walks” then, and a BB is an era-independent thing.
by Buzzy on Jan 15, 2009 12:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Evans versus Rice
I’m a big fan of Dwight Evans, but I see little purpose served by comparing him and Rice. Rice was a much better hitter and Evans was a much better fielder. Anybody who doesn’t concede that point simply wasn’t watching baseball in the 70s and 80s.
If Dwight Evans had hit as well in his 20s as he did in his 30s, he would already be in the Hall.
Rice was an eight-time All-star. Evans? A three-time All-Star.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By OPS+
which is adjusted for ballpark and year (thus, by era), Jim Rice’s best year was 1978, the year he won his MVP. In 1978, Jim Rice had an OPS+ of 157.
Between 1960 and 1980, I found 92 better individual seasons than Rice’s best. There would have been more. But I generally limited it to 500 AB, unless the player was a catcher or they had 480+ AB and 100+ BB. These are the best seasons between 1960 and 1980 (Red Sox players in bold):
1969 – Willie McCovey – 209 (OPS+)
1961 – Mickey Mantle – 206
1980 – George Brett – 203
1961 – Norm Cash – 201
1972 – Dick Allen – 199
1966 – Frank Robinson – 198
1971 – Hank Aaron – 194
1967 – Carl Yastrzemski – 193
1969 – Reggie Jackson – 189
1961 – Jim Gentile – 187
1967 – Frank Robinson – 187
1976 – Joe Morgan – 187
1973 – Willie Stargell – 186
1971 – Willie Stargell – 185
1965 – Willie Mays – 184
1966 – Dick Allen – 181
1970 – Willie McCovey – 181
1971 – Bobby Murcer – 181
1963 – Hank Aaron – 179
1969 – Frank Howard – 178
1977 – Rod Carew – 178
1969 – Hank Aaron – 177
1970 – Carl Yastrzemski – 177
1979 – Fred Lynn – 176
1963 – Willie Mays – 175
1973 – Dick Allen – 175
1967 – Harmon Killebrew – 174
1968 – Willie McCovey – 174
1962 – Frank Robinson – 173
1964 – Willie Mays – 172
1980 – Reggie Jackson – 172
1967 – Roberto Clemente – 171
1971 – Joe Torre – 171
1980 – Mike Schmidt – 171
1962 – Hank Aaron – 170
1968 – Carl Yastrzemski – 170
1968 – Frank Howard – 170
1970 – Frank Howard – 170
1960 – Frank Robinson – 169
1972 – Bobby Murcer – 169
1975 – Joe Morgan – 169
1967 – Hank Aaron – 168
1969 – Roberto Clemente – 168
1975 – John Mayberry – 168
1961 – Roger Maris – 167
1969 – Rico Petrocelli – 167
1974 – Willie Stargell – 167
1977 – Reggie Smith – 167
1969 – Rusty Staub – 166
1972 – Johnny Bench – 166
1974 – Reggie Jackson – 166
1978 – Dave Parker – 166
1979 – Dave Winfield – 166
1960 – Eddie Matthews – 165
1962 – Willie Mays – 165
1963 – Orlando Cepeda – 165
1968 – Willie Horton – 165
1969 – Frank Robinson – 165
1977 – Ken Singleton – 165
1977 – George Foster – 165
1964 – Ron Santo – 164
1966 – Willie McCovey – 164
1967 – Orlando Cepeda – 164
1961 – Frank Robinson – 163
1964 – Bob Allison – 163
1969 – Willie Stargell – 163
1970 – Boog Powell – 163
1964 – Dick Allen – 162
1972 – Carlton Fisk – 162
1972 – Cesar Cedeno – 162
1974 – Jeff Burroughs – 162
1960 – Roger Maris -161
1961 – Hank Aaron – 161
1961 – Harmon Killebrew – 161
1963 – Willie McCovey – 161
1966 – Ron Santo – 161
1973 – Reggie Jackson – 161
1975 – Fred Lynn – 161
1960 – Mickey Mantle – 160
1964 – Frank Robinson – 160
1965 – Hank Aaron – 160
1968 – Dick Allen – 160
1969 – Boog Powell – 160
1970 – Roberto Clemente – 160
1960 – Willie Mays – 159
1961 – Willie Mays – 159
1971 – Harmon Killebrew – 159
1973 – Tony Perez – 159
1974 – Joe Morgan – 159
1968 – Jimmy Wynn – 158
1970 – Tony Perez – 158
1974 – Mike Schmidt – 158
Can someone please explain to me how Dick Allen isn’t in the HOF?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 18, 2009 5:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
An All-Star with Detroit. He played from 1963-1980, ending his career on the Mariners. 1968 was his best year.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 18, 2009 11:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What do you mean with good hitters didnt take walks???
I think you are wrong on that one.
OTOH, i found out that the average OPS+ for the league leader during Rice’s carreer is lower than it is now. It was 170 during Rice’s 16 seasons while it has been 183 for the 19 seasons since.
by gemf89 on Jan 15, 2009 1:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
I mean, before the current era, BBs were not as valued for dumb reasons, so hitters were not taught to be patient. In “Boys of Summer” you can read how Duke Snyder was made fun of for walking, as if it were a cowardly thing. Hank Greenberg retired on a year when his OBP was .408 and said himself that he “didn’t have it anymore.”
by Buzzy on Jan 15, 2009 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, thank you
I appreciate those who appreciate Hank Greenberg. He’s one of the most underrated players of all time.
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 15, 2009 7:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the best jewish hitter.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 15, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
cough cough
ADAM STERN
"no1 has time to read your long comments, are you writing a book?"
by britsoxfan on Jan 16, 2009 3:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Um
Rod Carew?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 16, 2009 7:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Youk? Ryan Braun? Ok-not close to Greenberg.
by Buzzy on Jan 16, 2009 8:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gabe Kapler could kick Greenberg’s ass!
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 16, 2009 8:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I gotta believe there have been better Mormon
baseball players than Jewish baseball players. Perhaps.
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 16, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good question.
I found a website called Famous Mormons in Baseball by googling. There are some good ones (Jack Morris, Roy Halliday, Harmon Killebrew, and I didn’t know Ellsbury is Mormon). Overall it looks about the same. It is hard to beat Koufax and Greenberg at the top, but it is close (there is another list of Jewish ballplayers on another site).
by Buzzy on Jan 16, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not many good Jehovah's Witnesses
Lou Whitaker and Chet Lemon were the only two I could find.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 16, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
Yeah I found out Ellsbury was…but not really. I think his Mom was and I think he was raised Mormon, but I don’t think he really goes anymore.
Also, Dennis Eckersley was apparently Mormon.
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 17, 2009 12:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Eck
Before or after the alcohol and cocaine?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 17, 2009 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
It said that he was on one site, but I didn’t see that he was anywhere else.
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 17, 2009 9:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and's it's Duke Snider.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 16, 2009 8:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well that maybe…. but if you see the bb/pa rates in every decade the change is minimal so while maybe it wasnt valued it didnt mean that players didnt walk on porpuse or anything. In fact, they walked at the same pace they do now.
From Joe Pos blog:
"But it’s simply a fact. I’m sticking with the American League for now — here’s a chart of walk percentages over the last six decades:
1950s walk rate: 9.7% (approximately … the entirely awesome Baseball Reference does not have sac flies for some early years in the 1950s so I had to guess on those, though I tried to guess high to keep the number fair).
1960s walk rate: 8.7%
1970s walk rate: 8.7%
1980s walk rate: 8.5%
1990s walk rate: 9.2%
2000s walk rate: 8.5%"
So the fact is walks were as common then as they are now.
by gemf89 on Jan 15, 2009 4:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
good find.
ok-I have no idea why guys from the 70’s-85 seemed to stink w/r to OBP+, but they do seem to.
by Buzzy on Jan 15, 2009 5:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not all
See our own D. Evans, see Darrell Evans, see Will Clark. All great players, all more hall worthy than Rice. All great fielders and playing a far more demanding position AND all guys I would have rather had on my team. Do you consider these 3 guys HOFers? I don’t. Worth a few votes sure, maybe a few years on the ballot at 10-20% to reward them for long term excellence.
However, they are more than welcome into the hall of very good…in front of Rice.
by sydneysox on Jan 15, 2009 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I mean
in the aggregate sense. There are guys like Schmidt, but many of the top players of the era seem to end up with career OPS+’s that are underwhelming. That is why I said “stinky” era. Also, I have chimed in on the other thread regarding this point. I agree with you entirely.
by Buzzy on Jan 15, 2009 5:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Easy.
Because dudes weren’t hitting 40 homers with regularity.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 15, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Except
Schmidt, 40, 45, 48, 31 in the strike year, and 38 a bunch of times. So it was possible.
by Buzzy on Jan 16, 2009 8:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But that's Mike Schmidt.
I’m talking Brady Anderson. And Luis Gonzalez hitting 54.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 16, 2009 9:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brady
Anderson is a funny case he hit 50 (not 54), but never had more than 24 in any other year. Since that includes many years where steroids were not talked about, do you think he was just juicing for that one year, then stopped? It is a very strange case, even in the 90’s. I wonder about it.
by Buzzy on Jan 16, 2009 9:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that seems to be the explanation
For one year, what used to be long fly balls turned into HRs.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 5:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
PEOPLE
HE IS IN THE HALL. THERE IS NO CHANGING THAT. LET’S MOVE ON.
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
by BoSox415 on Jan 15, 2009 6:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Phil Rizzuto is in the Hall of Fame, and Johnny Pesky isn’t. But that’s just the way things go.
It’s also kind of like how some people talk/write about how they hate that Barack Obama won the election. You can’t cry about it, all you can do is support him.
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 15, 2009 7:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm mad about Obama, but I'd go to war if he instituted a draft.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 16, 2009 8:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We discuss things here at OTM. It’s the point of the blog :)
by Randy Booth on Jan 16, 2009 12:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah,
seriously though. Can we discuss why Johnny Pesky is not in the hall but Phil Rirruto is? Poor Pesky, getting thrown out of the dugout…
The rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble
by DirtySouthSox on Jan 16, 2009 2:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rice in the Hall is fine.
I’m one of those Luddites who thinks that more guys should be in-Black Jack Morris, Lou Whitaker, Tommy John, Kaat, Andre Dawson, heck I can see a decent argument for Dave Parker(!) whom NEVER seems to get the kinda ink that you’ve seen for Rice or Blyleven here lately.
It's the Sawks. They'll be good. We're gonna watch.
by Manush on Jan 17, 2009 1:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
who should be in
Jack Morris — definitely
Lou Whitaker – certainly
Tommy John – no way
Jim Kaat – doubtful.
Andre Dawson – possibly
Dave Parker? – no way
and, FWIW, I’m anti-Blyleven.
I think that a player should be at the top of the profession for a significant number of years, rather than simply accumulating good stats over a long period of time.
by RickD on Jan 17, 2009 6:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You had me til Blyleven
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 17, 2009 6:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
More of a HOFer than Morris
Not even close.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 17, 2009 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Morris is overrated
He had a career ERA of 3.90. If you look at the league ERAs whan he pitched, he was a only a bit better than league average. Eating innings is important, but it shouldn’t get you into the HOF.
Morris was never once the top pitcher in the AL. He was in the top 5 in ERA only twice in his career (both times 5th). Morris led in strikeouts one year( the year he led th AL in IP). In short, he was a good pitcher who was lucky enough to play on some very good teams.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jan 17, 2009 6:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why does no one like Tommy John?
The surgery being nicknamed for him should account for something.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 17, 2009 8:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 















