Comparing the Hall of Fame cases for both popular outfielders.

In yesterday’s Inside The Box, I made a comment that I thought Jim Edmonds was a more deserving Hall of Fame candidate than Jim Rice. It’s been brought to my attention that this may not be a sure thing in other people’s minds, so I thought I would focus a little bit more on each candidate.

In 16 seasons in the majors, Rice had a .298/.352/.502 line in 8,225 at-bats. Meanwhile, Edmonds has a .285/.377/.529 mark in 6,544 at-bats in his 16 seasons. Rice has an advantage in both playing time and average, while Edmonds beats him in on-base percentage and slugging.

Here are the two players ranked by OPS+ in their best 10 seasons with at least 100 games played.

It seems very hard to argue that one player is better than another when he trails in OPS+ in all 10 of their best years. Neither was a particularly good baserunner and the OPS+ figures do not take into account the insane number of double plays that Rice hit into. Rice has 315 career GDPs compared to 117 for Edmonds. Supporters of Rice will point to his gaudy RBI totals, where he enjoys a healthy 1451-1169 edge, but the flip side of the coin are the GDPs.

Rice was an offensive force from 1975-1979 and then started to tail off. But his numbers spiked back up for a couple of seasons beginning in 1983. Suddenly, Rice had OBP king Wade Boggs and Dwight Evans batting in front of him and his RBI output jumped 29 from ‘82 to ‘83. Those RBIs are real, and they count, but it’s important to understand that Rice didn’t change - his opportunities did.

Another thing to remember about Rice is that he was a product of his home ballpark. Rice played in Fenway when it was one of the best hitting parks in the league, before the 600 Club was constructed behind home plate which changed how the park played. Here are his career home/road numbers:

There’s nothing wrong with posting better numbers at home than on the road. Most players do this. But if you’re trying to make the Hall of Fame as a hitter, you really should do better than a .789 road OPS. Here are the same numbers for Edmonds:

Rice supporters, unable to back their case with enough statistical evidence, often fall back on how he was the most feared slugger in baseball. The problem is: what makes a “feared slugger”? Is this something we can measure, or is this just something that people can say post-hoc, with no chance of being proven wrong?

Between 1975 and 1986, Rice was in the top 10 in the AL in slugging eight times out of 12 seasons, including two first-place and three second-place finishes. That is very impressive.
But does that put Rice above George Brett, who had seven top 10 finishes, including three first-place finishes? Fred Lynn led the league in slugging twice in that time frame. Don Mattingly had a first-place finish, two seconds and a seventh. Reggie Jackson, despite not being his prime seasons, had six top 10 seasons, including a first, second and third.

In the National League, Mike Schmidt had 11 top-10 finishes, including four first-place finishes, two seconds and two thirds. Dave Parker had seven top-10 finishes, including two first-place showings and a second. George Foster had six top-10 finishes, including a first, second and three third-place showings. Dale Murphy had two first-place finishes.

So, even cherry-picking the best seasons in Rice’s career, we still find him just among the best in the game, not clearly the best. There are some Hall of Famers in this group, like Schmidt, Brett and Jackson. And there are just as many non-Hall performers, like Foster, Lynn, Mattingly, Murphy and Parker.

Rice is closer to the non Hall of Fame members on this list in overall career marks than he is to Brett, Jackson and Schmidt. Both Jackson and Schmidt topped 500 career home runs, while Rice had less than 400. And Brett had 3,154 hits while being a Gold Glove at third base, a much tougher defensive position.

Meanwhile, Edmonds was more of a complete player than Rice. Edmonds was an eight-time Gold Glove Award winner as a center fielder. Rice played left field only because older players like Carl Yastrzemski and Don Baylor filled the DH spot.

In my opinion, neither player belongs in the Hall of Fame. But if you had to pick one, I’d take the guy who could play center field, was a better all-around hitter and who wasn’t a product of his home ballpark. Ultimately, injuries and a lack of plate appearances will keep Edmonds from serious Hall of Fame consideration. But when the writers vote in Jim Rice next year, make sure to put Edmonds on the huge list of players more deserving of the honor.