OK OBP Raines .385 Rice .352 Runs Scored Raines 1571 (102 per 162 avg) Rice 1249 (97 per 162 games) Steals Raines 808 Rice 58 (told ya Rice didn't steal) Doubles Rice 29 per 162 Raines 28 per 162 Triples Raines 7 per 162 Rice 6 per 162 SLG% Rice .502 Raines .425 Total Bases Rice 320 per 162 Raines 244 per 162 All Star appearances Rice 8 in 16 years Raines 7 in 23 years if these are my 2 choices for left field, give me Rice all day long. no hesitations that's 11 categories, and Rice is better in 7 of the 11
Hardly much of a distinction when many of those categories Rice leads in are marginal at best. Raines total body of work is comparable to Rice but yet Rice gets 75% and Raines gets 22%? Does not compute.
Rice more than doubles Raines in the power categories, won an MVP, finisehed top 5 in MVP voting 5 other times. In 16 seasons, Rice finished top 10 in HRs 7 times (led league 3), RBI 9 times , BA 6 times, and Runs 6 times, Slg % 8 times. Dude was one of the absolute best of his era. Raines on the other hand only finished top 10 in BA 4 times in 23 seasons, and runs 8 times, and Slg % 1 time. Quality ballplayer? definitely great base stealer? hell yeah one of best of era? IMO, not quite
Im not saying Rice doesnt deserve to be in and Raines does. Im old enough to remember both in their prime and both were great players. Raines had a much longer career and was a significant contributor even in his twilight. I just dont see the reason for the huge voting difference.
I'm not old enough to have seen or remembered the prime of Rice's career, so I can only go off his stats, and listening to other ballplayers from his era talk about him. Raines on the other hand, I saw a sh!tload of his career. And I don't ever remember thinking of him as being the best player on his own team, let alone in the league. Andre Dawson was easily a better player in Montreal. Robin Ventura was a solid player in early 90s and Big Hurt took over in early-mid 90's for the White Sox. Half the Yankees roster was better than him late in his career.