Idiot argument of the year: Tracy Ringolsby, baseball writer for the Rocky Mountain News,
said he voted against Tim Raines because he likened Raines to Vince Coleman:
Quote:
The biggest debates for me were Tim Raines, who obviously was overshadowed by Rickey Henderson, but also if you take Vince Coleman's five top years, I would say he outperformed Raines, too, and I don't see Coleman as a Hall of Famer.
The interviewer quickly sets him straight:
Quote:
I would be remiss if I let the comparison to Coleman go by without comment. Yes, they both played left field, led off, and stole a lot of bases. But, other than that, the difference between Raines and Coleman is like night and day. Raines hit .294/.385/.425; Coleman, .264/.324/.345. That's 141 points of OPS. Over the course of their careers, Raines got on base twice as often and had twice as many total bases as Coleman.
I know you referenced their top five years, but the truth is that Raines (.334/.413/.476 with an OPS+ of 151) was a much better player than Coleman (.292/.340/.400 with an OPS+ of 104) at their respective peaks, too.
Ringolsby's response:
Quote:
Raines will have to get in line for me, behind Dawson and Murphy and Rice, while I still try and sort those three out.
That makes no sense whatsoever.[/quote]