Gossage Gets In the Hall, No One Else

[DrWood]

Rice's only failing is having his skills erode--he was as dominant as any player at his peak. the worst boston OF in the late 70's? surely you don't value freddy lynn or a decrepit yastzremski higher.

Yeah, I'd put Lynn higher. He played centerfield and was a fine defender as well. Going by WARP from Baseball Prospectus, Lynn had two years, 1979 and 1976, better than Rice's best year, 1978, and won just as many MVPs.

 

I also think Dwight Evans was a better player than Rice, although he didn't really peak until the early 80s. The difference in career hitting statistics is pretty minimal and Evans was a very good defensive player.

 

FWIW, the stats and advanced metrics for them can be found at the following links.

 

Evans

Lynn

Rice

 

FWIW, that has to be as impressive a home grown outfield as I've seen in my lifetime.

 

Robert

 

wow. I don't know what to say. Were you old enough to be a baseball fan back then?

[AdvantageSchneider]

The only problem I have with Gossage getting in is this, if you were to start a team in the 70's/80's and could pick just any pitcher in an expansion draft would you pick Gossage over Blyleven or Morris or Tiant? There's no doubt in my mind you'd want the starter first. I don't think Goose should be in before a starter like Bert.

 

There hasn't been a starter elected since 1999, but they've put in 3 relievers. I'm all for giving the relievers their due, but not before you Blyleven. Seems like the standards for a starter are higher than they are for a reliever. That seems wrong.

[splitterpfj]

This was the result I was expecting.

 

Rice does seem to be well positioned to get in next year.

[Katuluu]

I'm guessing FTJ was thinking of Mike Greenwell.

[RockCoCougars]

Rice did age rather quickly, but Lynn basically was average after 1980 (age 27). No way was Lynn better than Rice, I don't care what WASP says. I've heard that Ted Williams once said that Lynn was one of the biggest wastes of god given talent ever.

 

Evans on the other hand is much closer to Rice- I would say they are neck and neck. Rice was a better hitter, but Evans was one of the best RF ever (that play in the 75 series is mindboggling). I'd give Rice the edge, but not by much.

[TooLiveBrew]

Does the Hawk have a realistic shot at the HOF short of the Vet's ballot? Just about everything I remember about him in his prime was elite, but his body (knees) really wore down.

 

Goose Gossage, concrete proof that Derrick Turnbow is a moustache away from the HoF.

http://www.joesportsfan.com/jsfpics/columns/gossage.jpg

[RobertR]

wow. I don't know what to say. Were you old enough to be a baseball fan back then?

Why don't you lay off the snark? I was there. Rice is exactly the player we think he was. A guy who put up triple crown #s, who had a very high peak from 1977 to 1979, who's rest of his career is pretty comparable to Carlos Lee (consistently good, but not great), who didn't bring much to the table defensively, who grounded into a slew of double plays. and who was done at age 36. His whole case rests on a 3 year peak and, frankly, 3 years isn't much of a peak.

 

Lynn's 75 and 79 are comparable to what Rice did in 77 to 79, there's a reason that Lynn has just as many MVP awards as Rice and he gets bonus points for his batting compared to other centerfielders and his ability to play the position well. There's a reason the Angels threw big bucks at him to come to Anaheim. I agree that he was a disappointment with his talent, but that's partly because he set the bar so high initially. He really was the best Red Sox rookie since Ted Williams (and that's a really good case for Lynn).

 

I don't think either is a Hall of Famer, both careers fell off in the 1980s, but not a lot separates them, IMO, and Lynn isn't even sniffing the Hall of Fame.

 

Robert

 

 

[gregmag]

wow. I don't know what to say. Were you old enough to be a baseball fan back then?

 

 

 

It's pretty embarrassing when the guy you're ripping has taken the time to make a thoughtful argument and you can't think of a single real point to make in response. FWIW, I was a baseball fan back then, and I agree with Robert: Lynn was better than Rice at his best, and Evans had a better career.

 

 

 

I don't mind that some of the bottom-feeder guys get a vote. If you can vote for ten guys, and you think three or four (or none, or eight) are really deserving, why not let Chuck Knoblauch tell his grandchildren he got a HoF vote? It's not like those stray "courtesy votes" dilute the process in any meaningful way.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, as many others have said, the process is hideously screwed up in more important ways. Not a lot separates Rice, Murphy, Parker, Dawson, and Baines, and Raines IMHO is clearly superior to all of them, the only one of the group who belongs in the Hall. But you look at where those six names are on this year's ballot, and somebody might as well have thrown darts at a board.

 

 

 

At least Blyleven picked up a little steam.

 

 

 

Greg.

[Tbadder]

I just think that when you put marginal players in the Hall of Fame like Gossage, who lost 11 games in relief in his best year (!), you really insult the truly great players. So what if he was truly outstanding in his era for a three or four year run, follow by a long period of being merely good. How does that compare to a guy like Clemens who obviously would've dominated in any era, and for more than just a few years.

At the very least the Hall should adopt an inner sanctum per Bil James' suggestion.

 

No, the Hall of Fame reminds me of a reverse discrimination federal prison. What's the percentage of predominantly Yankee players in the Hall compared to the general populace? It smacks of media bias.

 

P.S. as concerns Gossage, he was so good he played for 9 different teams. I wonder how many Hall of Fame players can say that.

[endaround]

Rickie Henderson played for 10 teams, he must have really sucked

 

Oh yeah, Gossage was better in 75 and 77 than 78.

[RobertR]

Does the Hawk have a realistic shot at the HOF short of the Vet's ballot? Just about everything I remember about him in his prime was elite, but his body (knees) really wore down.

Yeah, I think Hawk's vote total puts him close enough that he'll pick up the necessary votes before his time on the ballot expires. He'll probably help Raines's case as well.

 

I do think that Rice, Dawson, and Blyleven are all on track to get in. With turnover and younger voters coming in I think Raines's and Trammell's vote totals will rise as well. I don't know if those two will get in, but I think they're going to come a lot closer than we think. Those five, Morris, and Smith are the only ones I think have a reasonable chance that are still on the ballot.

 

Robert

[RU Rah Rah]

wow. I don't know what to say. Were you old enough to be a baseball fan back then?

 

It's pretty embarrassing when the guy you're ripping has taken the time to make a thoughtful argument and you can't think of a single real point to make in response. FWIW, I was a baseball fan back then, and I agree with Robert: Lynn was better than Rice at his best, and Evans had a better career.

I don't know whether I agree 100% or not, but I certainly wouldn't dismiss the Lynn v. Rice v. Evans comparisons as ridiculous.

 

[Fatter than Joey]

FTJ, Evans never played LF, did you mean Rice?

 

No.. I was either thinking of Greenwell, or that the Green Monster was in RF -- My bad, -- Getting old is a crazy drug.

 

I don't think Goose should be in before a starter like Bert.

 

I do. Goose was a higher quality pitcher for what he did than Tiant and Morris and Blyleven.

 

P.S. as concerns Gossage, he was so good he played for 9 different teams. I wonder how many Hall of Fame players can say that.

 

Gossage was the first pitcher to represent 4 teams in an AS game -- I don't think any HOFers can say that.

[Brian the Automator]

wow. I don't know what to say. Were you old enough to be a baseball fan back then?

Comments like this don't belong on the site.

 

[Big Reed]

I have never understood why lee Smith gets so little HOF support. i realize his ERA was never the best. But if you watched him pitch, he was always in command of the situation. if he came in with a 3 run lead, he'd give up a solo hr and then close out the game and his team would usually win by 2. I also feel bad for Evans. His career was just as good as rice and lynn, but their great seasons always overshadowed his consistancy.

 

 

 

I realize it's a subjective vote where you try to look at longevity verses injury shortened careers. Guys like Yount, Yaz and Ripken put up some great career numbers because they played a lot of seasons. All three are deserving of their election.

 

 

 

But what about Julio Franco verses Robbie Alomar? the same criteria and statements made about Dawson and rice apply to both Alomar and franco. Alomar was the best second baseman for over a decade. but his career all of a sudden tailed off. And he'll be remembered best for spitting at an umpire. What happens if Franco plays another 5 years and gets 3,000 hits? A lot of people laugh at franco because he keeps playing and playing and playing. But he also was one of the top shortstops for more than a decade. Does the fact that he keeps playing diminish the fact that he was once the best in the game? if he had retired 4-5 years ago, would we have a higher opinion of him?

 

 

 

The guy I feel sorry for is Vizquel. he's a guy whose offensive stats just do not tell the entire story of how great a player he actually was. looking at stats alone, one would think Renteria and Garciaparra were far superior to Vizquel.

 

 

 

I realize the hall of Fame can't include everybody, just like every year some good player (Rollins) gets left out of the all star game. But I will give them credit the players that have been voted into the hall are deserving of inclusion.

[TooLiveBrew]

P.S. as concerns Gossage, he was so good he played for 9 different teams. I wonder how many Hall of Fame players can say that.

Many HoF players played on numerous teams. Probably largely due to the fact that they were good enough to play for roughly 20 years in many cases. Number of teams you play for means nothing about talent.

[snyttri]

I agree that Lee Smith has been overlooked so far due to his dramatic save style and that he will get in. Given the number of relievers in the HOF I think it's hard to say they're overrepresented unless you consider that all the old-time greats pitched in relief in addition to starting. Mathewson, Feller and Spahn pitched in relief several times a season, though in their 20 and 30 win seasons they peaked at three to five saves.

[brewerjamie15]

I don't really know if he should be in or not. I remember seeing him pitch. I remember him being pretty good. I think the HOF voting system is pretty flawed. I think that if you have to ask for it, you probably don't deserve it. Gossage whined quite a bit.

Perhaps HOF voting could go to people that are actually -in- the hall? I'm just spit balling here.

[LouisEly]

Rice is exactly the player we think he was. A guy who put up triple crown #s, who had a very high peak from 1977 to 1979, who's rest of his career is pretty comparable to Carlos Lee (consistently good, but not great), who didn't bring much to the table defensively, who grounded into a slew of double plays. and who was done at age 36. His whole case rests on a 3 year peak and, frankly, 3 years isn't much of a peak.

 

Yep, and he has also benefitted from playing in the Boston market with greater media coverage. There isn't anything Rice has done that Dawson hasn't, but Dawson has won eight Gold Gloves and stole 260 more bases in his career. Had Dawson played pepper with the Green Monster for most of his career (or at least played on grass and not the hard turf of Olympic Stadium) he would have vastly eclipsed Rice's numbers and HOF votes.

 

And if McGwire shouldn't get inot the hall, then Raines shouldn't either. Look at pictures of Raines in the early 90's. Nahhh... he wasn't juicing. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/eyes.gif

 

 

[jaybird2001wi]

Rickey Henderson may be eligible for the Hall of Fame in 2009, but does any believe he will try to come out of retirement and end up having to wait yet another 5-6 years? I can honestly see it happen.

[DrWood]

ok, beat me up some more.

 

rice was a guy that every pitcher feared. (OK, gossage said he "almost" feared him). There are guys that change the dynamics of the game in ways that don't show up in stats. His influence was palpable to anyone who watched games back then, or at least it should have been. If a guy's stats are borderline, such an impact should clearly put him over the threshold.

[DrWood]

Rice is exactly the player we think he was. A guy who put up triple crown #s, who had a very high peak from 1977 to 1979, who's rest of his career is pretty comparable to Carlos Lee (consistently good, but not great), who didn't bring much to the table defensively, who grounded into a slew of double plays. and who was done at age 36. His whole case rests on a 3 year peak and, frankly, 3 years isn't much of a peak.

 

Yep, and he has also benefitted from playing in the Boston market with greater media coverage. There isn't anything Rice has done that Dawson hasn't, but Dawson has won eight Gold Gloves and stole 260 more bases in his career. Had Dawson played pepper with the Green Monster for most of his career (or at least played on grass and not the hard turf of Olympic Stadium) he would have vastly eclipsed Rice's numbers and HOF votes.

 

Rice didn't really benefit much from the media since he was an irascible so and so (which is a persona I think he actually cultivated). The discussion wasn't Rice vs. Dawson, who I think should also get in, but Rice vs. Lynn and Evans, one of whom occasionally put up great numbers in spite of himself, and the other who was a consummate professional and peaked at a relatively old age and maintained his productivity, but was never really an elite hitter.

[iluvlamp]

Robert is one of the best posters there is. Thoughtful and insightful is what you lack I guess. Terrible.

[DrWood]

Robert is one of the best posters there is. Thoughtful and insightful is what you lack I guess. Terrible.

 

and what value did you add with THIS post? just think about that. tact, I've been accused of lacking. thought and insight, never. I thought jumping on guys without having any content to offer was against internet etiquette, not having an extremely divergent opinion.

[splitterpfj]

Thoughtful and insightful is what you lack I guess. Terrible.

 

Guys, comments like these are not acceptable on this board. Disagreements can always happen, but being flat out rude to other posters is over the line.