Jim Rice in the Hall?

Who needs the blue font?

 

Bernie Madoff had me buy a bunch of them.
Nine percetn return.
Guaranteed.

 

Stat I noted while looking at Rice's numbers:

In his MVP season in 1978, he played in all 163 games. And hit a ton.

Just one year, though.

 

I can't believe Jim Rice has all sorts of people in his corner, but Albert Belle doesn't.

Albert Belle was much more "feared" than Jim Rice ever was. But the baseball writers like people who are nice to them. That's why Belle never won an MVP and that's why he's not getting a Hall of Fame sniff and probably never would've, even if he got 5 more good years with a healthy hip.

 

His degenerative hip issue screams steroids.

 

Don't forget about his corked bat.

 

Oh, I don't agree with that at all.

And saying that, I still don't have a clue what being "feared" actually is supposed to mean.

 

Whenever his name comes up, the strongest argument against is generally, "Fuck Albert Belle."

I'm OK with that.

 

If Belle would have had just five more healthy years, he would have been damn near impossible to keep out.

 

I'm not sure I ever met/interviewed a pro athlete who "feared" a fellow competitior.

 

Oh come on. "Feared" is not a difficult concept. Obviously it's not meant to be taken literally, as in being truly afraid to compete against another athlete. It has to do with how dangerous the player is considered, in a competitive sense. Matt Holliday might put up great numbers, but I'm pretty sure most people would say that Albert Pujols is more feared, for instance. It's essentially another way of saying, "who would you rather face?" It's a completely subjective question, of course, and in the case of Rice and Belle, I don't think it's a slam dunk as to who was more feared in his prime. But it's not a difficult idea to understand.

 

So how do you measure "fear," joe? If that fear truly exists, what measurable impact -- statistically or otherwise -- does it have? Show me, on the field, how that fear manifests itself.

Because someone can say it all they want, but it doesn't necessarily make it true. I'd like to be shown, not told. (And yes, it's subjective -- but if it's all in someone else's head, why should I believe them? Offer some support for your claim.)