1. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    66523
    09 Jan '08 06:31
    It is about damned time too!! It has been a travesty that he wasn't in already.

    Jim Rice and Andre Dawson get close, but no entry. I am middle of the road on Rice, but I think Dawson should be in. Bert Blyleven should also be in. Maybe the voters will get it correct someday. If not, it will be the veterans committee that wll get them in.
  2. Joined
    28 Jun '01
    Moves
    36847
    09 Jan '08 15:23
    Andre Dawson quickly became my favorite player once we got WGN down here in SC in the late 80's. Nothing better than watching a baseball game as soon as you get home from school. Montreal's turf took a toll on his knees though or he would have achieved 500 HR's. Hopefully, he'll get in next year.
  3. Account suspended
    Joined
    24 Jul '04
    Moves
    26871
    09 Jan '08 16:15
    The Goose belongs in the Hall he was a great closer and there should not be a bias against closers. I'd put Rice in before Dawson. Rice, George Brett and Eddie Murry were the premier hitters in the AL in the 70s and although he lacked the longevity, in their primes Rice was the best of those three and the best in the league.
  4. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    66523
    09 Jan '08 21:08
    Originally posted by poundlee
    The Goose belongs in the Hall he was a great closer and there should not be a bias against closers. I'd put Rice in before Dawson. Rice, George Brett and Eddie Murry were the premier hitters in the AL in the 70s and although he lacked the longevity, in their primes Rice was the best of those three and the best in the league.
    Whoops, you made a major mistake when you said Jim Rice was a better hitter than George Brett....not on Brett's worst day could Rice out hit him.

    Eddie Murray had better power numbers than Rice and I believe Murray was a better hitter as well. Jim Rice, to me, is about like George Foster. They both had moments of glory, but they were surrounded by talented lineups that got them opportunities. A guy that gets no acclaim, which is a travesty, because he played for lowly team, but was a stud, multiple all star, excellent defensive outfielder, a feared power hitter, never got into any kind of trouble and never called attention to himself and ABSOLUTELY deserves to be in the HOF ahead of Rice, Dawson, Foster. I am speaking of Dale Murphy.
  5. Account suspended
    Joined
    24 Jul '04
    Moves
    26871
    09 Jan '08 21:32
    In prime of his career Rice was a better hitter than Brett. Rice's 1978 year is probably the best offensive year in the era. Brett was a great hitter too, but he was hurt too often. George Foster had ONE good year. Rice's years in the later half of the 1970s were great and not just in the homerun category either. Seven times Rice was in the top 5 in the MVP voting while Brett was in the top 5 four times.
    I was really talking about AL hitters, but Dale Murphy, played in a great hitters park and although he had the back to back MVP years (he never finished in the top in MVP voting in other years) and I would put him behind Rice, Brett and Murray.
  6. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    66523
    09 Jan '08 22:39
    Originally posted by poundlee
    In prime of his career Rice was a better hitter than Brett. Rice's 1978 year is probably the best offensive year in the era. Brett was a great hitter too, but he was hurt too often. George Foster had ONE good year. Rice's years in the later half of the 1970s were great and not just in the homerun category either. Seven times Rice was in the top 5 in the ...[text shortened]... ed in the top in MVP voting in other years) and I would put him behind Rice, Brett and Murray.
    Ok Here is a comparison of George Brett's career numbers versus Jim Rice's career numbers. Because this thread won't allow me to do chart format, I will list the topic, Brett's figure then Rice's figure. You can verify the numbers if you like...I already have. I also stand by my earlier statement. These are career numbers.

    Batting avg... .305_____ .298
    Home Runs ... 317_____ 382
    RBI............... 1595____1451
    Stolen bases... 201_____ 58
    On base %...... .369____ .352
    Slugging %...... .487____ .502
    win ROTY?....... yes ....... no
    win MVP? ........ once ..... once
    MVP top 5 ...... four ....... six
    All Star team.... nine ...... eight
    Gold Glove ...... one ....... none

    I believe Brett was the better ball player, or at least the evidence would seem to indicate it. Brett also played the hot corner on defense while they hit Rice's brick in LF.
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    24 Jul '04
    Moves
    26871
    10 Jan '08 05:01
    In fairness Rice had an excellent rookie year and would have won had his teammate Fred Lynn not also had an excellent one. Brett is a great player and when you figure fielding and longevity probably had a better career. Brett's 3 batting titles in 3 decades is amazing. I only said that in their prime I thought Rice was the best hitter in the AL. In the second half of the 1970s Rice is just unmatched.
  8. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    10 Jan '08 15:30
    Goose Gossage made some interesting comments on the news yesterday regarding PEDs including stating that if they were around in his day, he likely would have done them himself.

    I encourage anyone who can find it to watch the complete interview. I saw it on TV this morning but I haven't been able to find the video online yet. He makes some very frank and insightful remarks, many of which were omitted (for whatever reason) from most newspaper articles. Check it out.
  9. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    66523
    10 Jan '08 17:09
    Originally posted by darvlay
    Goose Gossage made some interesting comments on the news yesterday regarding PEDs including stating that if they were around in his day, he likely would have done them himself.

    I encourage anyone who can find it to watch the complete interview. I saw it on TV this morning but I haven't been able to find the video online yet. He makes some very frank a ...[text shortened]... , many of which were omitted (for whatever reason) from most newspaper articles. Check it out.
    Did anyone happen to notice the incredibly high number (140+) of 2+ inning saves that Gossage had in his career? It is front page news today when a closer goes two innings and they have to give him a day off.

    Anyone remember that prior to the closer, starting pitchers used to go 9 innings in games. Now a days, if they go 6 innings it is a quality start. What a joke!!
  10. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    10 Jan '08 17:14
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Anyone remember that prior to the closer, starting pitchers used to go 9 innings in games. Now a days, if they go 6 innings it is a quality start. What a joke!!
    Not for Roy Halladay!
  11. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    66523
    10 Jan '08 17:54
    Originally posted by darvlay
    Not for Roy Halladay!
    True, or Roy Oswalt or Jake Peavy. But there are very few that got the route much anymore.
Back to Top