Happened across this Rocky Mountain News item this morning in which Bernie Lincicome has these to offer.

“As for the next Hall of Fame, as flawed as it may turn out to be, my vote is as follows: Sandberg, Dawson, Mattingly, Goose Gossage, Jim Rice, Bruce Sutter, Steve Garvey, Tommy John and Jack Morris.”

“As for Boggs, the one I may vote for, but not this year (I am not going to reargue my position on first-time honorees being the elite of the elite) the old slap hitter was no Rose. His cheating did give us a new medical term, sexual addiction. This led to a whole string of bad-conduct alibis, talk show themes and very probably Jerry Springer.”

Nine votes, five position players, no Boggs. But Lincicome, beacon of morality he is, explains that because Boggs had an affair and because he was “no Rose”, Boggs does not deserve first-ballot status. I am not so much interested here in the moral tinge of his argument though I do find it reprehensible. It’s just par for the course these days and doesn’t differentiate this guy in any way. What I want to point out is another example of a mainstream baseball writer, with a Hall vote no less, who seems to have little idea of what constitutes a good baseball player. Consider the list of hitters Lincicome selects ahead of Boggs and I will throw in Charlie Hustle, since Bernie asserts that Boggs was “no Rose”, for good measure.

Sandberg: .285/.344/.452 – 114 OPS+
Dawson: .279/.323/.482 – 119 OPS+
Mattingly: .307/.358/.471 – 127 OPS+
Rice: .298/.352/.502 – 128 OPS+
Garvey: .294/.329/.446 – 116 OPS+
Rose: .303/.375/.409 – 118 OPS+
Boggs: .328/.415/.443 – 130 OPS+

You could make a case, a good one in fact, that Boggs was the very best hitter of the lot, regardless of what position he played. When you consider that Boggs played third base and did so quite well, there is no question that Wade Boggs is the best player on this list. I think, in general, it is a good rule of thumb to be measured when you issue criticism, especially when your contention is not fully supported by the data. I think Mr. Lincicome may have inspired a new rule that all who write about baseball must henceforth adhere to. Consider it Dewey’s House Rule 1.1:

When player A’s slugging average is less than player B’s on-base average and player B also has outslugged player A, rerardless of context, one can never say that Player B “is no” Player A.

People ought to wake up to just how good Wade Boggs was.

Comments are closed