Its That Time Of Year

[Dan Gould]

What's ridiculous is an idiot like Steve Phillips is now declaring that Rice, Gossage and Dawson now have no chance at ever getting elected, all because next year is reserved for Gwynn and Ripken. As if these players are dropped from the ballot now. Yeah, 2007 won't be an easy ballot to crack, but the fact remains that from 2008-2010, the only bona fide new candidate is Rickey Henderson. Now I'll admit I'm a bit disappointed that Rice didn't break 70% this time, but I also note that there are three candidates now resting in the 60% range, and I'll go on record right now:

By 2010, all three, Rice, Gossage and Dawson will be in.

I hate to quote myself, but here's a telling reminder from the past, courtesy of ESPN.com:

There have only been seven BBWAA elections that failed to produce a Hall of Famer _ and only one since 1971. That was in 1996, when Phil Niekro (68.3 percent) fell 32 votes short, followed by Tony Perez (65.7 percent) and Don Sutton (63.8 percent). Niekro was elected the following year, Sutton in 1998 and Perez in 2000.

Three guys broke 60%, three guys made it in the next four years. Same thing will happen now.

[Quincy]

And one more thing:

I'd really like to know who voted for people like Walt Weiss, Gary Gaetti, Gregg Jeffries, hell, anyone who voted for any candidate from Dwight Gooden down. These people have no business casting ballots, they should be banned from any future balloting. They obviously have no clue what it means to be a hall of famer, so I would be curious to see who else they voted for. I wonder what would happen if you eliminated the ballots of fools who think Weiss or Gaetti or Gooden belong, and recalculated the results. I wouldn't be surprised if these are the same fools who refuse to vote for Rice, Gossage, et. al.

That irks me too. Usually guys like Hal Morris get a few votes because they were nice guys to reporters, so it's a thank you for providing quotes and giving insight to the team happenings when other players were surly or didn't talk to the press. I wish they'd have open ballots so we could see how these folks vote.

Seems a shame Goose didn't get in along with Sutter.

I guess now it's time to look for articles about who the Vets' Committee may be favoring this year. Maybe this will be finally be Santo's year.

Edited January 10, 2006 by Quincy

[Dan Gould]

I guess now it's time to look for articles about who the Vets' Committee may be favoring this year. Maybe this will be finally be Santo's year.

As I understand it, there's no Vet committee vote this year, but I understand there's some sort of special committee looking at Negro League stars for reconsideration. And that means (I expect) that this man:

Will get his due.

[Quincy]

As I understand it, there's no Vet committee vote this year, but I understand there's some sort of special committee looking at Negro League stars for reconsideration. And that means (I expect) that this man:

Will get his due.

I have to be reminded that he isn't in. A great picture. I hope you're right and he gets to wear that suit. Um, normally I wouldln't wish a suit & tie on someone in August, but in this case I'll make an exception.

[Dave James]

It's ridiculous that Goose Gossage is not in the Hall. He's the best closer baseball has ever seen. That includes Mariano Rivera. You'll never see the likes of him again. I guarantee it.

For comparitive purposes, this is cadged from the EPSN website:

During his 10-year prime, Gossage allowed fewer hits per nine innings (6.1) than Eckersley (7.5), Rollie Fingers (7.8) and even Mariano Rivera (7). Gossage's ERA in that golden era was a mere 2.03, which is better than Bruce Sutter's 2.62. Gossage averaged 2.1 innings per relief appearance in 1978. In 2005, Rivera averaged just one inning. Only once has Rivera struck out more than 83 batters in a season. Gossage did it eight times, and fanned 100 batters six times. Sutter and Gossage average 4.73 and 4.72 outs per save, respectively, while Eckersley averaged 3.33.

Up over and out.

Up over and out.

[Dan Gould]

There's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that Goose belongs, and as Shaugnessey in the today's Globe suggests, maybe after next year's party for Ripken and Gwynn, Rice and Gossage, two major combatants from the legendary '78 season, will go in together. That would be highly appropriate.

Speaking of Rice, Shaugnessey identified Bill Madden of the NY Post as one writer who can't quite pull the trigger for Rice, and it all seems to boil down for him to the fact that Rice didn't reach 400 homers, which is bullshit. But as Rice himself points out, he reached 382 in relatively few seasons. He's listed as playing 16 seasons, but his first was a 67 at bat cup of coffee, and his last season only saw 200 at bats. So in reality, he played 14 1/2 full seasons. Last point I'll make, someone mentioned Fenway as some major factor in Rice's success. As Kevin Kennedy points out on foxsports.com, of course players do better at home; its part of the reason they're on the roster, because they figure to play well at a particular park. But more importantly, its not at all clear that Rice's homer numbers are inflated by Fenway. The guy was so strong, and hit so many screaming, rising line drives, can there be any doubt that the Green Monster actually took homers away from him? I think anyone who watched Rice at Fenway in his prime decade knows the answer.

[Soulstation1]

my boy george brett HAD the goose's number

[Quincy]

Speaking of Rice, Shaugnessey identified Bill Madden of the NY Post as one writer who can't quite pull the trigger for Rice, and it all seems to boil down for him to the fact that Rice didn't reach 400 homers, which is bullshit.

I agree. And while I think Goose is more deserving that Sutter, I was glad to see that for once the writers looked at player's peak rather than being enamored with a long hanger-on career where "magic" numbers were reached.

Last point I'll make, someone mentioned Fenway as some major factor in Rice's success.

Hello. (Where's the wave emoticon?)

As Kevin Kennedy points out on foxsports.com, of course players do better at home;

He's wrong though. Most hitters from (for example) the Dodgers, Padres and Athelitics do better on the road. Most Rockies and Red Sox hitters do better at home. Park dimensions that are out of whack with the league norm have a tremendous effect on player stats.

But more importantly, its not at all clear that Rice's homer numbers are inflated by Fenway. The guy was so strong, and hit so many screaming, rising line drives, can there be any doubt that the Green Monster actually took homers away from him? I think anyone who watched Rice at Fenway in his prime decade knows the answer.

He was very strong. He may have lost home runs at Fenway because of the wall, but he did hit 54.4% of his career total there. He also lost fly outs to left field as the Monster ate those up & turned them into to hits so his batting average improved.

Here's his home & away HR totals:

Home Away

'74 01 00

'75 12 10

'76 12 13

'77 27 12

'78 28 18

'79 27 12

'80 11 13

'81 10 07

'82 09 15

'83 16 23

'84 17 11

'85 11 16

'86 10 10

'87 07 06

'88 09 06

'89 01 02

Total 208 174

Sorry it doesn't look sharper - I've forgotten how to format tables.

[Matthew]

I don't know if it's true or not, but I've always heard that when Fenway built the "New Press Box" that really cut the the hitter's park character of Fenway. I also agree with everyone: the Goose should've been in -- he just dominated during his prime.

[Dan Gould]

Speaking of Rice, Shaugnessey identified Bill Madden of the NY Post as one writer who can't quite pull the trigger for Rice, and it all seems to boil down for him to the fact that Rice didn't reach 400 homers, which is bullshit.

I agree. And while I think Goose is more deserving that Sutter, I was glad to see that for once the writers looked at player's peak rather than being enamored with a long hanger-on career where "magic" numbers were reached.

Last point I'll make, someone mentioned Fenway as some major factor in Rice's success.

Hello. (Where's the wave emoticon?)

As Kevin Kennedy points out on foxsports.com, of course players do better at home;

He's wrong though. Most hitters from (for example) the Dodgers, Padres and Athelitics do better on the road. Most Rockies and Red Sox hitters do better at home. Park dimensions that are out of whack with the league norm have a tremendous effect on player stats.

But more importantly, its not at all clear that Rice's homer numbers are inflated by Fenway. The guy was so strong, and hit so many screaming, rising line drives, can there be any doubt that the Green Monster actually took homers away from him? I think anyone who watched Rice at Fenway in his prime decade knows the answer.

He was very strong. He may have lost home runs at Fenway because of the wall, but he did hit 54.4% of his career total there. He also lost fly outs to left field as the Monster ate those up & turned them into to hits so his batting average improved.

Here's his home & away HR totals:

Home Away

'74 01 00

'75 12 10

'76 12 13

'77 27 12

'78 28 18

'79 27 12

'80 11 13

'81 10 07

'82 09 15

'83 16 23

'84 17 11

'85 11 16

'86 10 10

'87 07 06

'88 09 06

'89 01 02

Total 208 174

Sorry it doesn't look sharper - I've forgotten how to format tables.

I'm not going to split up your comments, I'll just make several points:

Number one, parks like L.A. and Oakland are pitcher's parks. Naturally players on those teams do better on the road.

Number two, you are simply wrong about the wall eating up "outs' and padding Rice's BA. Undoubtedly he hit a few off the end of the bat that brushed the wall ... but anyone who watched him in those years knows that he hit far more rising line drives that would have gone out anywhere else, including the Bronx' "Death Valley," but became doubles or even singles at Fenway.

Number three, I am fundamentally unimpressed with a split of 54/46 in homers. You act as if Fenway made him what he was ... if the split were even 60/40 I'd almost believe you. But its not. Look at some of those splits, and think statistically for a moment. Would you agree that a difference of three or less in a given year would be negligible and due to chance? Then lets look at his years of dominance, '75 to '86:

Four of those 12 years show a significant difference in homer totals favoring Fenway.

Three of those 12 years show a significant difference in homer totals favoring road homers.

The remaining five years are either split exactly even or within 3 or fewer difference in homers.

That might explain why your overall difference is so negligible.

Hell, even looking purely at your year-by-year break down, I see 8 years that favored Fenway, 6 that favored the road, and 1 that split evenly.

Edited January 11, 2006 by Dan Gould

[Quincy]

Number one, parks like L.A. and Oakland are pitcher's parks. Naturally players on those teams do better on the road.

Just as Fenway was in Rice's day a hitter's park. No it did not completely explain the man. He was a hard hittin' fella he was.

Number two, you are simply wrong about the wall eating up "outs' and padding Rice's BA. Undoubtedly he hit a few off the end of the bat that brushed the wall ... but anyone who watched him in those years knows that he hit far more rising line drives that would have gone out anywhere else, including the Bronx' "Death Valley," but became doubles or even singles at Fenway.

But the cold hard facts of the lifetime batting average suggest that somehow or other, he hit for a higher average at home. And as you know it's not just the Monster that can help the average but it's that delightful right field as well.

Number three, I am fundamentally unimpressed with a split of 54/46 in homers.

And this is why I let it all hang out and didn't cherry pick the numbers. I was just laying out the numbers for all to see. I am not against Rice getting into the Hall as I am not one of those who wants to make it place for just the likes of Ted Williams and those who are so far above everyone else. But I also won't be greatly disappointed if he doesn't get in either. I would rather see Trammell get in ahead of Rice, but that's not going to happen. If Trammell gets in it will be by a vets' committee when he's very old or dead. Although he didn't quite have the home run power of Rice I would love to see Dwight Evans at least get a respectable percentage of the vote as he was a more complete player than Rice. (He may have been dropped from consideration, as I no longer pay attention to the rule changes with voting.) What a glove and a cannon on that guy, plus he was a very patient hitter and hit into fewer double plays (a bug-a-boo for Rice.)

The percent difference knocks maybe 20 homers off Rice's lifetime total if he was in a neutral park, maybe more if he was an Oakland A for his entire career. Or maybe not. After all, he would have be able to face Bob Stanley.

[Matthew]

Hey, seeing the name of Ted Williams made me realize that if Rice ever makes it, that's three left fielders in a row from the Red Sox getting into the HOF. Williams, Yaz and Rice. Nice run there.

[Dan Gould]

Hey, seeing the name of Ted Williams made me realize that if Rice ever makes it, that's three left fielders in a row from the Red Sox getting into the HOF. Williams, Yaz and Rice. Nice run there.

Unfortunately, Greenwell ain't going in, but the streak will start again with Manny.

[Quincy]

Just for kicks I thought I'd list the home & away averages for batting titles won by Red Sox players. Just to note to the Red Sox faithful I am not implying that these guys are less worthy or anything like that. I just thought it might be fun to see (if you're a stathead.) Retrosheet doesn't have splits for Teddy Ballgame's '58 title or any seasons before that. Give 'em time.

Batting titles won by Red Sox players. (Please forgive the primitive formatting.)

Home / Road averages

2003 Mueller-- .342 .309

2002 Manny--- .336 .360

2000 Nomar--- .375 .370

1999 Nomar--- .378 .331

1988 Boggs---- .381 .331

1987 Boggs---- .411 .312

1986 Boggs---- .357 .356

1985 Boggs---- .412 .322

1983 Boggs---- .397 .321

1981 Lansford- .363 .314 (strike year)

1979 Lynn----- .386 .276

1968 Yaz------- .284 .316

1967 Yaz------- .332 .321

1963 Yaz------- .316 .326

As becoming of a "no doubt" Hall of Famer Yastrzemski excelled in any park. Though in this case 2 of 3 years his average was better on the road most of the time he hit better in Fenway. There were at least half a dozen years where there was a about 60 point difference favoring the home park. 1/2 a dozen in 23! years played that is.

I think we all knew Boggs knew how to work Fenway. Obviously he can hit anywhere too.

How about Manny in 2002! He slugged a wee bit better at home.

Fred Lynn (a favorite of mine) was born to hit in Fenway. Throwing out his 43 AB season of '74:

Home / Away

1975 .368 .294

1976 .360 .272

1977 .313 .215

1978 .312 .283

1979 .386 .276

1980 .345 270

I think he had a terrific career as he got on base, had a good glove in centerfield and gave you mid-20s home runs consistently. And had he been less fragile many of those seasons where he was hitting 20-25 HR he would have come closer to popping 30 (when it meant something.) But you can see the Angels should not have been disappointed when Lynn hit in the .270s for them. And actually in the 1st full (as in non-strike) season with them in '82 he hit .299.

This post has been brought to you by Retrosheet, a Hall of Fame time-wasting site.

[Matthew]

Holy Crap!! Found the box score for the very first MLB I attended! Rotsheet is cool

San Diego Padres 3, Los Angeles Dodgers 0

Day

Game Played on Thursday, September 4, 1969 (N) at San Diego Stadium

LA N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 4 0

SD N 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 x - 3 7 0

BATTING Los Angeles Dodgers AB R H RBI BB SO PO A

Wills ss 4 0 2 0 0 1 1 1

Mota lf 1 0 0 0 3 0 2 0

Davis cf 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Parker 1b 3 0 0 0 1 0 8 0

Kosco rf 4 0 1 0 0 1 1 0

Valentine pr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sudakis 3b 3 0 0 0 1 0 3 2

Sizemore 2b 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 4

Torborg c 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0

Haller ph,c 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

Singer p 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2

Crawford ph 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Lamb p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Totals 30 0 4 0 5 4 24 10

FIELDING -

DP: 1.

BASERUNNING -

SB: Wills (39,2nd base off Kelley/Cannizzaro).

San Diego Padres AB R H RBI BB SO PO A

Arcia 2b 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

Pena ss 4 1 2 0 0 2 1 0

Dean ss 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

Brown rf 4 1 1 0 0 2 3 0

Ferrara lf 3 1 2 3 1 0 0 0

Stahl pr,lf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Colbert 1b 4 0 0 0 0 0 13 1

Kelly 3b 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 4

Gaston cf 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0

Cannizzaro c 3 0 0 0 0 3 4 0

Kelley p 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Ross p 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 3

Totals 30 3 7 3 1 8 27 14

FIELDING -

DP: 1.

PB: Cannizzaro (13).

BATTING -

2B: Ferrara (19,off Singer).

HR: Ferrara (13,6th inning off Singer 0 on, 0 out).

HBP: Arcia (2,by Singer).

Team LOB: 5.

BASERUNNING -

SB: Gaston (4,2nd base off Singer/Torborg).

PITCHING Los Angeles Dodgers IP H R ER BB SO HR

Singer L(17-9) 6 7 3 3 0 6 1

Lamb 2 0 0 0 1 2 0

Totals 8 7 3 3 1 8 1

San Diego Padres IP H R ER BB SO HR

Kelley 2.2 2 0 0 1 1 0

Ross W(3-11) 6.1 2 0 0 4 3 0

Totals 9 4 0 0 5 4 0

HBP: Singer (8,Arcia).

Umpires: Augie Donatelli, Mel Steiner, Bob Engel, Dick Stello Time of Game: 2:27 Attendance: 6917

This was the game that ended Willie Davis' 29 game hitting streak.

Edited January 12, 2006 by Matthew

[Brad]

It would look like 2008 would be the year for Rice and Goose. If they don't get in then, then that might be it for them.

[Matthew]

I still can't believe Sutter in, Goose out -- it just doesn't make any sense. Goose was just as good, for a longer period of time. Could you imagine the stats he would have put up if he was used just for one inning? Baseball writers

[Dan Gould]

It would look like 2008 would be the year for Rice and Goose. If they don't get in then, then that might be it for them.

Except that 2009 doesn't exactly have a full new class either. And if Rickey somehow manages to play a game in the majors, he won't even be on the list either.

[Quincy]

It would look like 2008 would be the year for Rice and Goose. If they don't get in then, then that might be it for them.

Except that 2009 doesn't exactly have a full new class either. And if Rickey somehow manages to play a game in the majors, he won't even be on the list either.

And as much as he loves the game he'd probably play for free if anyone would take him.

Not that he deserves to be in the Hall, but Julio Franco is going to be at least 52-53 before he is eligible. Maybe older! He makes me feel so young!