delgado for HOF??

[metsandfinsfan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rice was one of the best hitters of his generation and he is not in

[/ QUOTE ]

Rice was one of the most overrated hitters of his generation. He only had 3 excellent years (

The best hitters of that "generation" were Mike Schmidt, George Brett, Wade Boggs, Pedro Guerrero, Reggie Jackson, Dave Winfield, and Eddie Murray.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Guerrero could not hold Rice's Jock
2) Compare him only to other AL outfielders like i asked
3) Compare him to Jackson - and look at their times on leaderboard

[metsandfinsfan]

[ QUOTE ]
Rice was one of the most overrated hitters of his generation. He only had 3 excellent years (


[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Rice belongs in

8 time all star
1 time mvp
6 times top 5 mvp
6 times top 10 batting avg
2 times 1st and 3 times 2nd slugging pct
3 times 1st in Hrs, 1 time 2nd, 1 time 4th
2 times 1st in rbi, 9 times in top 10

52nd place all time in HR and RBI

Possibly the best offense outfielder in the AL from 75 to 85

[/ QUOTE ]

Please dispute anything i posted

[jjp]

[ QUOTE ]

1) Guerrero could not hold Rice's Jock
2) Compare him only to other AL outfielders like i asked
3) Compare him to Jackson - and look at their times on leaderboard

[/ QUOTE ]

okay. Adjusted OPS+ (adjusted for park effects). Jim Rice, 5 times, won once. Reggie: 11 times, won four times. That's the difference between a great hitter and a hall of famer.

Seven seasons Rice was in the top ten in Home Runs, but only 3 times in doubles. That's because of the effects of Fenway.

Dave Winfield, HoF'er. 7 times top 10 OPS+, 7 times top 10 HRs. 3100 career hits (a benchmark), 460 career HRs.

Rice is short on hits (less than 2500) and short on HRs (less than 400). His power dropped at age 31 (50 points of ISO slugging), and lost it completely at age 35. He needed a couple more great seasons thrown in there to be a HOF'er. The career longevity just isn't there, and he doesn't get any bonus points for a tragic injury ala Kirby Puckett (whose election IMO was a travesty).

As for Pedro Guerrero, 6 times OPS+ leaderboard (won once), at his peak was similar to Rice at his peak (although he played in a HR dampening environment), but lost it even sooner than Rice (3000 fewer plate appearances) and isn't in the HOF discussion.

[jjp]

[ QUOTE ]


Please dispute anything i posted

[/ QUOTE ]

Played half his games in Fenway Park as a right handed hitter, increasing his home run production.

I discount top 5 MVPs, as that is always a HR/RBI popularity contest.

He only had 3 HOF caliber years, 77-79, maybe 83.

You missed a stat though. For 4 straight years, he led the league in Ground Into Double Play (82-85). I don't fault him that much for that, he was a product of his environment, lots of men on base to bat in, thus the gaudy RBI totals (and thus the perennial MVP votes).

[metsandfinsfan]

[ QUOTE ]
Dave Winfield, HoF'er. 7 times top 10 OPS+, 7 times top 10 HRs. 3100 career hits (a benchmark), 460 career HRs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rice was 5 times top 6 in OPS+. Career OPS+ is 128. Dave Winfield's is 129.

Winfield may have been better ... but they should both be in the hall of fame

Rices hall of fame monitor numbers
Black Ink: Batting - 33 (49) (Average HOFer ≈ 27)
Gray Ink: Batting - 176 (56) (Average HOFer ≈ 144)
HOF Standards: Batting - 42.9 (122) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)
HOF Monitor: Batting - 146.5 (82) (Likely HOFer > 100)

Winfield's
Black Ink: Batting - 4 [censored] 4 (401) (Average HOFer ≈ 27)
Gray Ink: Batting - 152 (83) (Average HOFer ≈ 144)
HOF Standards: Batting - 55.4 (51) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)
HOF Monitor: Batting - 148.0 (80) (Likely HOFer > 100)

So Winfield wins in hof standards but is behind Rice in the other 3.

The fact that Winfield's Black Ink is 4 shows he was NOT the dominant player in the league in any year. Rice had more dominant years. Winfield stayed good longer.

I am not arguing against Winfield. He is a hall of famer

Rice should be too

[metsandfinsfan]

[ QUOTE ]
You missed a stat though. For 4 straight years, he led the league in Ground Into Double Play (82-85). I don't fault him that much for that, he was a product of his environment, lots of men on base to bat in, thus the gaudy RBI totals (and thus the perennial MVP votes).

[/ QUOTE ]

Dave Winfield. 7 times top 10 in grounding into double plays. 4th place all time (319) Jim Rice is 6th place all time (315)

So if you are gonna add a stat, at least make it one that helps your case ... jeeez

[metsandfinsfan]

Let's try this

[jjp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You missed a stat though. For 4 straight years, he led the league in Ground Into Double Play (82-85). I don't fault him that much for that, he was a product of his environment, lots of men on base to bat in, thus the gaudy RBI totals (and thus the perennial MVP votes).

[/ QUOTE ]

Dave Winfield. 7 times top 10 in grounding into double plays. 4th place all time (319) Jim Rice is 6th place all time (315)

So if you are gonna add a stat, at least make it one that helps your case ... jeeez

[/ QUOTE ]

My point of using GIDP as a stat was to show that AS games and MVP top10s are often overrated, the guys with the big RBI numbers always get in the mix. But RBIs are a function of batting a lot with runners on base. So is GIDP.

Now lets talk "career" OPS. From 1975 to 1988, Rice was a full time player. His average OPS (simple average, I didn't do a weighted average) was 128. During that same time period, Winfield had an OPS of 136. Clearly, Winfield was better during that time period. Throw in 7 Gold Gloves (I know they are overrated, but it does show the guy could play some defense) and the difference gets bigger. Winfield added five full seasons and some partial ones to that total, all but one were good (but not great).
Winfield's peak was better (3 best seasons 159 vs 153), his peak was longer (7 best seasons 149 vs 142) , and his career was longer. And he was better in the field.

[metsandfinsfan]

Again: Winfield may have been better, but their weighted OPS is the same, and Rice led the league in many more characters

I would say Winfield is better but that they are both worthty of the Hall of Fame

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
Again: Winfield may have been better, but their weighted OPS is the same, and Rice led the league in many more characters

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only is Winfield's weighted OPS higher, he had the advantage on OBP (undervalued by OPS), and 33% more plate apperances. That's huuuuuuge.

Jim Rice is closer to Andre Dawson, Dale Murphy, Dwight Evans, and Dave Parker than Dave Winfield.