Why Puckett is In - and Rice Isn't | Mario Soto's Blog

Have you ever connected two unlike objects in your mind and you can't explain why? Like Pavlov's dogs that were conditioned to associate bells with food, my brain has conditioned me to associate Jim Rice with Kirby Puckett.

Anyone old enough to remember both Rice and Puckett probably couldn't come up with two more dissimilar players - but it's the strength of the dissimilarities that help to explain the connection.

If you're wondering why some worthy players make the Hall of Fame while others don't, you might find an answer by comparing Rice and Puckett. The word we're looking at here is "peripheral." The sum of all of the little things surrounding players often explains our perception of them. Our perceptions lead to acceptance - or rejection.

First, there are the statistics. Voters want players to exceed certain numbers - a .300 average, 3,000 hits, 500 home runs, etc. But these aren't the real standards when it comes to the Hall of Fame, where close definitely counts. For example, all the eligible players with 2,800 hits are in the Hall of Fame. 400 homers goes a long way to getting a man elected unless other gaps in his game cause voters to shy away (at one time all the eligible players with 400 home runs were in the Hall of Fame, then Dave Kingman became eligible and...). All the players with 1,600 RBIs are also in the Hall, whether r not the voters are actually using that stat as a standard.

Jim Rice had the unique talent of falling just short of many Hall of Fame benchmarks. He hit .298 lifetime. He stroked 382 home runs and knocked home 1,451 runs. When the Red Sox let him go after the 1989 season Rice tried to continue his career, but no one was interested in picking him up. He gets no bonuses for coming close to the "close counts" statistics.

Kirby Puckett's career was cut short due to glaucoma, but he did obtain one Hall of Fame number - a .300 average (.318, actually). Strangely, his illness may have helped his numbers - at least in our minds. We all like to play the "would have done" game. What if Herb Score doesn't get hit by the line drive, what if Lyman Bostock doesn't get into that car in Gary, what if Darryl Strawberry had "just said no."

We tend, I think, to overestimate what "would have" happened, which is probably why I've credited Puckett with 3,000 hits in my mind. I've convinced myself he would have reached the number without the illness. He could just have easily fallen well short of the number, but I'm not budging. Although Jim Rice came closer to more Hall of Fame standards, it's Kirby Puckett who gets credit for the gap between what he did and what he might have done.

But there's more to gauging a player's electability to the Hall than simple statistics.

Jim Rice broke into the Red Sox' starting lineup in 1975 but missed the opportunity to play in the greatest World Series of all-time due to injury. He also had the misfortune of being part of three historic collapses - both the 1977 and 1978 Red Sox who squandered leads and lost the A.L. East to the Yankees and the 1986 team that couldn't put the Mets away in the World Series. Although Rice was an outstanding player for all of these clubs - and he hit well in the 1986 Series - he is identified with failure, a member of a team that couldn't win when it should have.

Kirby Puckett played in Minnesota where no one expects the team to win. Regardless, the Twins put together a good club - although not a great one - and managed to win two World Series titles. The Twins were always underdogs who played well at home, won when they had to, and beat better teams to collect their rings. Tom Kelly's Twins were regarded as overachievers, and Puckett was a big reason they accomplished so much. Puckett is perceived as a winner even though Rice's teams posted better records (between 1975-88 Rice's Red Sox were 1203-1004 and Puckett's Twins from 1984-95 went 924-953).

Then there's fielding. Jim Rice was a good left fielder - but he wasn't Yastrzemski. To complicate matters, Rice was a designated hitter 530 times in his career and this only reinforces the opinion that he wasn't an accomplished outfielder. Kirby Puckett was a gifted center fielder. He replaced Darrell Brown in the Twins outfield, which isn't quite the same as replacing Carl Yastrzemski. Puckett rarely served as designated hitter and won six Gold Gloves - so more extra credit goes to him.

The Hall of Fame, whether voters admit it or not, can also be described as a beauty contest. Jim Rice was surly. He was unpleasant. He gave a poor interview. It never appeared as though he enjoyed playing baseball.

Even Rice's name sounds cold. Jim Rice - two syllables, straight and to the point. A name that warrants respect, not love.

Kirby Puckett was pure joy on the field. I saw him on Opening Day in 1984 and I immediately sensed he was special. He looked fun, with a peculiar body shape that never suggested "athlete." He always seemed happy to be playing baseball. His name sounded like it belonged to a cartoon character not an outfielder.

I always pulled for Kirby Puckett. When my hometown team (the Tigers) was well behind or comfortably ahead I hoped Puckett would get a hit. It didn't matter what the score was when Jim Rice batted. I wanted him to strike out.

The greatest players will always make the Hall of Fame regardless of the little things that complete their images in our minds. However, when we consider players on the edge of the Hall of Fame, the peripheral perceptions matter a lot more. What happens when we combine the peripheral information with the stats? Kirby Puckett is elected to the Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility. Jim Rice continues to wait his turn.

Tomorrow, we'll speculate how Rice would do in Hall of Fame voting had he been with another team. We'll use the Rangers as an example.

By Don Ehrke of www.DugoutCentral.com