The Voters Have Spoken!

Congratulations to Rickey Henderson and Jim Rice on their election to the Baseball Hall of Fame this week. Both votes were widely expected. Henderson was a shoo-in during his first year of eligibility, given his 3,000 hits and record number of stolen bases. Rice’s election is certain to help the case of many borderline-or-better Hall of Fame candidates. In the short term, that should aid Andre Dawson, whose numbers are superior to Rice’s in many key categories (HRs, hits, RBIs). He's also the owner of multiple Gold Gloves and 300+ steals.

Of course, today’s selections have implications for years to come. Does that mean Fred McGriff and his 493 scandal-free HRs will gain entry, at some point down the line? Discuss.

The Rice Question

Jim Rice is a borderline Hall of Famer. He was a feared hitter with a number of impressive seasons, but his career numbers – including 382 HRs – fall a little short of immortality. After rejecting him for 14 consecutive years, however, baseball writers appear poised to vote him in during his last year on the writers’ ballot. But let’s compare his record against several other Hall candidates of the same era who generate little or no support.

Dwight Evans: Rice’s teammate on the Red Sox, Evans has more career HRs than Rice, more runs scored, a higher on-base percentage and nearly as many hits and RBI. Oh, and Evans won eight Gold Gloves to Rice’s zero. But you can’t vote for Evans anymore, since he was dropped from the ballot in 2000 for lack of support.

Now, you may argue, Rice did much better in annual MVP voting, winning the award once. So I would offer for your consideration….

Dave Parker: The 1978 National League MVP, Parker has more career hits, runs and RBI than Rice. Cobra also won three Gold Gloves and two batting titles (none for Rice), and he was a valuable player on two world champion teams. Yet Parker is stuck far down the Hall ballot, winning only about 15 percent support a year.

Now, you may argue, his fine for recreational drug use might tarnish his candidacy even today. So I would offer for your consideration….

Dale Murphy: Winner of two NL MVP awards, Murph had a squeaky-clean reputation and the perfect combination of power, speed and defense in the 1980s. One argument for Rice is that, at his peak, he was perhaps the best in the game. But Murphy can make that claim, too, just in a different league. Even though his career tailed off considerably, Murphy still finished with more homers than Rice. Yet, like Parker, he also barely generates enough support to stay on the ballot each year.

So should the writers change course and vote all four of these guys in? Not necessarily. But it’s clear there is a huge difference of opinion on how to judge the merits of borderline candidates. What’s more, the writers have a perfect out on this one – to turn Rice’s candidacy over to the Hall of Fame Veterans Committee. Much has been made of the fact that this is Rice’s last year on the ballot, but it’s not the end of the road at all. If he again falls short of election, he’ll go to the Veterans Committee, where people who actually played the game can pass judgment on his record. Sure, past Vet committees made some poor decisions. But they’ve set pretty high standards now for a few years. Sending them Rice, another borderline candidate, sends a message that the writers haven’t lowered their standards – and that the veterans can play an increasingly vital role for an important, and growing, group of players.