One of the hottest topics around baseball these days seems to involve Jim Rice and the Hall of Fame – specifically if he should be elected or not. The argument is probably moot as, if history is any indication, Rice will be inducted into the Hall next year. Millions of Red Sox fans will party in the streets. Probably over turn some cars or something. The point is it will be glorious for the city of Boston, evidently.
Anyway, it’s an interesting topic. The arguments for Rice pretty much come down to the following points (though there are certainly others):
a) - “he was the most feared hitter in baseball”
b) – his 12 best years (1975-86) were dominate
c) – he received a large number of MVP votes over his career (furthering the legend of how feared he was)
d) – his 1978 season was spectacular
However, in pretty much all of these areas, Dave Parker was just as good as, if not much better then, Rice was – yet I don’t hear anyone clamoring for Parker to get into the Hall. Parker received only 15% of the vote this last go round. If we are going to talk about Rice getting into the Hall, we probably need to also talk about Parker getting in. I really love the comparison between these two players as their careers spanned virtually the same years and they both played a corner out field spot.
Let’s take the Rice arguments one by one and see how Parker compares:
a) – “he was the most feared hitter in baseball”
There is no doubt that Rice was a feared hitter (though, how one grades who was “most” feared has not been explained to me as of yet). However, if we look at intentional base on balls, which would seem to be a some what of an indicator of how feared a hitter is, Parker wins – and it’s not even close.
Parker lead the league in IBB 2 times – and finished in the top ten 6 other times. This puts him as 24th all time in IBB, with 170. (C’mon, how many of you knew that Dave Parker finished in the top 25 all time in IBB? Put your hands down, you’re all filthy liars!) For the record, Rice finished with 77 for his career (which puts him in a 10 way tie with, among others, Claudell Washington, for 176th place on the all time list) and only finished in the top 10 3 times.
That’s like less then 5 IBB per season for Rice. The most feared hitter in baseball was only really feared 5 times per season? One would think that any middle of the order hitter would get intentionally waked that much just based on situational strategies over the course of a year. Plus, 27 of those 77 walks came in just 3 seasons. Meaning that the other 50 came over the other 13 seasons of his career. That’s about 3.8 walks per season. This does not seem fearsome to me.
b) – his 12 best years were dominate
Rice’s best years are generally considered to be 1975-86. He led the AL in a number of categories over that time period, including at bats, games played, hits, RBIs (can we just stop already?), slugging percentage and total bases – he was very, very good. How did he compare to Parker over that same time?
Batting Average: Parker – .302, Rice – .304
On-Base Percentage: Parker – .351, Rice – .355
OPS: Parker – .952, Rice – .981
EQA: Parker – .315, Rice – .325
So, Rice was a bit better of a hitter over that random, arbitrary period – but not that much better. And when you consider that OPS over values slugging over on-base, the numbers get a little closer. Throw in the fact that Parker was intentionally walked 54 more times, hit into 130 (!) fewer double plays and generally is considered to have played quality defense (he won 3 Gold Gloves over that time period – I know, I know) while Rice generally is considered a very poor defensive out fielder, I think the scales are pretty farking close.
c) – he received a large number of MVP votes over his career
Rice did receive quite a bit of consideration for MVP over his career, winning one. According to baseball-reference.com, he is ranked 29th all time in MVP shares with 3.15 (tied with Mike Piazza), which I must say is pretty friggin’ good. Parker? He is ranked 28th all time with 3.19 shares. If you go with cumulative MVP points instead, Rice wins (22nd overall, Parker 23rd overall). For the record, Parker also only won a single MVP.
d) – his 1978 season was spectacular
This is, of course, very true. Rice’s 1978 year (in which he hit 46 HR and won the AL MVP) was exceptional. Interestingly, Parker won the NL MVP that same year.
While Parker didn’t have as many HR or RBI as Rice, he actually had a higher OPS+ – 166 to 157 – indicating that Parker was, possibly, a better hitter that year, relative to his league. Parker also won a Gold Glove that year, so it wouldn’t be totally crazy to say that Parker’s best year was better then Rice’s best year. Rice did have a nice edge in EQA – .380 to .357, though. All told, I think we are probably talking about a comparable year.
So, I think Parker stacks up pretty well with Rice. Throw in the fact that:
-
Parker is generally considered to be a much superior defensive player over his career (which is highlighted by the fact that Rice played a greater percentage of his games at DH then Parker – 25% to 20%)
-
Parker had a longer career (he threw in a couple nice seasons, with a Silver Slugger, All Star game and MVP votes after Rice was dead and buried)
-
they made about the same number of All-Star games overall (8 to 7 in favor of Rice)
-
they were both about equally crappy in the post-season
-
they won about the same number of Silver Sluggers (3 to 2, in favor of Parker)
-
Rice’s home/road splits (he was kind of a scrub on the road) vs Parker’s home/road splits (Parker was better at home but the split is much more even)
-
Parker has a slight career WARP3 edge (85 to 83.2)
-
Parker has a significant career Win Shares edge of 327 to 282 (!)
I think it’s safe to say that if Parker wasn’t a better player then Rice, he was really close. Rice was probably the better hitter in his prime (but not a whole lot better) but Parker had the longer career and was better with the leather.
So, how many of those Jim Ed supporters are ready to throw a vote Ole Dave Parker’s way? Evidently, not too many, when we look at the voting results.