Submitted by Larry Israelson, Jan 4, 2008 16:18

...as an all-around ballplayer. Rice was a productive hitter in his prime, but consider these:

1) Fenway Park apparently inflated his stats, as his slugging percentage in road games was roughly 90 points lower than it was in home games. The home/road variance for Trammell was only 15 slugging points.

2) Rice was an average fielder at probably the second-easiest position, while Trammell was usually excellent while playing a critically-important position.

3) After his rookie year, Rice never stole more than nine bases in a season, while Trammell accomplished this 13 times.

4) Rice was a perhaps-unprecedented double-play machine, grounding into about 20 per year compared to fewer than half that for Trammell.

There are several holes in Trammell's case as well. He wasn't particularly durable, appearing in more than 151 games only once in 20 seasons. He never once led the American League in any key offensive category, and his best sustained run of above-average hitting lasted just three seasons (1986-88).

I have my doubts about Trammell as a Hall of Fame candidate, but I believe he was a more valuable player than Rice overall, so probably neither deserves enshrinement.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.