[ QUOTE ]
No, I do not undervalue walks. However, walks are not the tipping point in putting McGwire in the HOF. Not when he's still only a .263 career hitter whose biggest feat is an alarming number of home runs -- and this is even before considering the potential taint to his home run totals.
I dunno whether you're old enough to actually remember Dave Kingman, but when he retired, his 442 home runs were something like 10th all time.
McGwire was certainly a better batter than Kingman -- I'm not saying the two are *exactly alike*. However, Kingman is the most comparable career stat line to McGwire of those who are out there, and given the controversy, I just don't see him getting in.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am quite aware of Mark McGwire and Dave Kingman's stats. The fact of the matter is you believe that the most apt comparison to Mark McGwire is a guy who walked half as much as he did in the same amount of at-bats. The only thing they have in common was that Dave Kingman hit a lot of home runs. Dave Kingman was a decent MLB player because he was a historically good home run hitter. Mark McGwire was an amazing player, mostly because he was a historically great home run hitter, but also because he had a career OBP of nearly .400. Mark McGwire is Dave Kingman if Dave Kingman could hit .260, walk 700 more times, and hit 140 more home runs.
[ QUOTE ]
Jim Rice compiled his numbers in a far less offensive era than Raines, and still piled up almost 400 HRs, over .350 OBP, and nearly 2500 hits. Raines' career was 7 years longer, and he only had 150 more hits. A ton of walks, sure, but in a 23 year career?
[/ QUOTE ]
Jim Rice played in Fenway his entire career. Tim Raines played in pitcher's parks his entire career.
Yes, Jim Rice piled up "almost 400 home runs." Congratulations, he hit less home runs than Dale Murphy, Joe Carter, Jose Canseco, Andre Gallarraga, Juan Gonzales, Andre Dawson, Johnny Bench, Dwight Evans, Harold Baines, Larry Walker, Chipper Jones, and Frank Howard.
His .352 OBP is nothing to be proud of. The league average OBP over his career (Adjusted for Fenway) was .337. Compare that to Tim Raines, who had an OBP of .385 (to a league average of .331).
Jim Rice's 2500 hits are a function of the fact that he never walked! Jim Rice posted a .298 BA against a league average of .271. Tim Raines put up a .294 BA against a league average of .263. Their batting averages are nearly indistinguishable.
Also, using their years in the league is
extremely disengenuous. Jim Rice retired after he was 36 and only had 2 years of less than full-time playing. Tim Raines got called up for a couple cups of coffee stuck around for quite a while after he was no longer playing full time. Jim Rice's sudden retirement masked a decline phase. Had he kept playing until he was 42 he certainly would have had a lower batting average and OBP.
In fact, let's look at Tim Raines' career vs. Jim Rice's career, look at their EqAs. EqA includes stolen bases, values walks correctly, and adjusts for both era and park.
Unsurprisingly, both players have similar plate appearances. Tim Raines has 8648, while Rice has 8755.
Here's a chart of their EqA at different ages.
And here's a chart of their EqAs sorted from highest to lowest.
Tim Raines ends up as a much better hitter by this metric, which should be no surprise since the SLG advantage of Jim Rice is wiped out by park adjustements and Tim Raines' OBP, and the it adds in base-stealing.