Gossage in, No Rice!
 

Congrats to Goose Gossage. I'm a Sox fan, but "The Goose" is well deserving.
He was one of the old time relievers where he pitched more than 3 outs to earn a save. On the other hand, it's a crime that these weasal sports writers who probably never played the game could not come up with enough votes for Jim Rice. Rice was a blue collar player in the non-steroid era. He deserves to be in. What a joke! Oh well, maybe next year.

Rice will get in next year, 16 votes is nothing in 365 days. I also think the Hawk and Dale Murphy will get in also, maybe the Hawk in two years and Dale in three years.

Rice will get in next year. I have no doubt about it. Put him in on his final year. What a crime to these players. These guys want to be rewarded in front of their families. Most don't get the luxury, some players themselves may not be alive to celebrate it. Just check out the Goose's story.

Numbers are one thing and how one fares against his contemporaries is another. I wouldn't care if baseball went through a stretch where the top home run hitter hit only 10 per year. If those 10 were enough to lead the league and over the course of a decade, the top home run hitter only hit 100 homers, he's getting my vote. That's what Rice was. He was the most feared hitter in the game for over an extended period of time. So what if he didn't play long enough to reach the so called "magic" numbers. He played long enough to prove that for what was at least an eight-year stretch, he was the most feared hitter in the game. To me, that means more than the final numbers.

Two other guys who showed class and dignity, not to mention the fact they could hit the shiat out of the baseball.

Very well-said King!

His stats.....

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/alltim...d=11569&type=0

he WON"T get those votes. still has to many enemies in the press. he was not liked by the media in boston or ny.

There is no way that Dawson or Murphy should or will get in. Neither is or was as good as Dave Parker who played longer and has better stats and he has no chance. They simply did not do it high enough for long enough. I think the more I think about Rice he probably shouldn't get in either. These guys need to be compared to other Hall of Fame outfielders and when you do so, they just aren't up to it. The writers got it right for a change. I still believe that the biggest injustice is that Buck o'Neill wasn't voted in at least in a special capacity while he was alive. He may not have been quite good enough as a player but he certainly has contributed more to the game than Bowie Kuhn, among others.

Plus he wasn't really good enough. This is hardly a great injustice.

But then again he was probably as good a hitter as Cepeda who is in, though mostly as a 1st baseman.

Using this logic Dick Allen belongs too because his 8 year stretch is better than Rice's especially in light of the fact that some of it was accomplished in the modern day deadball era.

Blyleven belongs.

He wont get in.
Switched teams too many times.
Always whining.
Somewhat of an a-hole.

But the guy had one of the best curves
ever. And he was a big game player.

He had the misfortune to play for mostly bad teams. He has the numbers but W/L is such a big stat for thw writers that they dont see the rest. If he played now he would be a $18 million a year pitcher. He had 242 complete games. Lifetime ERA of 3.31 despite pitching an average of 245 innings a year. Hell if he only knew he had to pitch 6 or 7 like todays guys his ERA would probably be under 3.00. He did strike out 3700 guys. Like you said he was a great post season pitcher for the few good teams he did pitch for.

And I guarantee he believes more than
everything you wrote and is
bitter.

But I can still see the huge hook
that guy could throw.

True Story!!

# of top five finishes in the MVP voting:
Allen-2 (won once)
Rice-6 (1)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in HR's:
Allen-4 (2)
Rice-5 (3)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in RBI:
Allen-3 (1)
Rice-7 (2)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in extra base hits:
Allen-6 (3)
Rice-5 (1)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in total bases:
Allen-3 (1)
Rice-5 (4)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in hits:
Allen-1 (0)
Rice-5 (1)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in batting average:
Allen-3 (0)
Rice-4 (0)

# of seasons finishing in the top five in slugging %:
Allen-7 (3)
Rice-5 (2)

I don't know that Allen's stretch was better than Rice's was. I rank them more among their peers than among players from different years. Perhaps Allen's standings, while very good, weren't higher because he competed against better players. That could be. But I don't think that Allen was more dominant among his peers than Rice was over his and that's what I look at.

his best seasons were the late 70's with the pirates.

NO way murphy was close to parker as a player. dawson and parker are close, dawson always played for bad teams.

Dawson actually played for some pretty good Expos teams in the early 80's including one that may have made the WS if not for the strike. Murphy was really only a top player for 5 or 6 years. Parker surely would have had a better career if not for the drug issues and various injuries that took away parts of his prime.

I believe that was in '81

You made my point because there is very little difference between the 2 and Allen is not a Hall of Famer. The "feared" hitter crap is just that. Albert Belle was "feared" and not just because he may run you over in his SUV, and no one is stumping for him. Rice's numbers were aided by the Park he played in and they are barely passable as is. The fact that some questionable guys got in shouldn't just open the floodgates anymore than the fact that modern guys were taking steroids makes older players any better or more worthy. Pretty soon some nutjob will be saying that Steve Garvey should be in. The inclusion of Rice may make him correct.

Yeah I think so. Gary Carter, Steve Rogers, Tim Raines...

good point on Belle. From '93 to '99 he was most likely the best offensive player in the game for a 7 year period. Because he was completely insane, people forget how good he really was. Not a hall of famer or even close though. MO Vaughn getting the MVP in 1995 instead of him was one of the biggest crocks in MLB award history and there have been many of them. Rice never had 7 years like Belle however.

Well, for me, it's not about just the numbers. It's more important to me how a player fares against his peers. As I mentioned earlier, if next year, the leading HR hitter in baseball finishes with only 10, nobody will be rushing to call it a great season. But if the runner up only comes up with four, it would show that the guy with 10 was completely dominant. That's what Rice was to me. If he had only one or two seasons, even three, where he was the best hitter in the game, that would be different. His stretch was long enough for me though, to be convinced that he earned his spot.

What I will say though is that while he would get my vote, Rice probably shouldn't be in the Hall. I know that sounds inconsistent but here's why. Just as in horse racing or any other hall of fame vote, I think that if a candidate has to be debated on this much, he shouldn't be in. I think the only entrants to any hall of fame should be candidates that there is no need for debate over. If a 75% level can't be reached the first time, that's it. When Gwynn and Ripken finished, there was no debate. When Alex Rodriguez finishes (assuming no steroid stuff comes out about him), there will be no debate. If there has to be debate and convincing to get to the required level of votes, chances are that you shouldn't be in.

Side note. Isn't it interesting that if the steroid stuff keeps Clemens and Bonds out, it would mean that arguably the best hitter (Rose), the best power hitter (Bonds) and the best pitcher (Clemens) in major league history.......would all NOT be in the hall?

I dont' think anyone would call rose the "best" hitter. Hitting wise you have a plethora to choose from...Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Lou Gehrig, Babe ruth, even Tony Gwinn were all better "hitters" than Rose. Rose was simply unique...in my opinion the best complimentary player of all time is how I would describe him. He was never even the best player on his own team in his entire career. When he came up...Frank Robinson was certainly the team's headliner...then in the big Red machine days I would certainly argue that Bench and Morgan were "better" players than him...and in his Phillie days, Mike Schmidt was certainly the headliner. It is certainly a shame what happened to him as I don't think there is a better example of anyone in any sport who got more out of himself than Pete Rose. HE has the most hits...but no way is he even arguably the best hitter. Certainly one of the best ever despite all that.

And he likes to send it in at Turfway...how bad can he be?