I promised another column for today about Major League Baseball's economic woes, real and imagined, but after watching all three-plus hours of the hearings in Washington yesterday, I hope you'll allow me a few more days to review the testimony and the numbers that MLB released. I will write on this subject Monday, but for now I'd like to touch on other matters which, while less important, are quite a bit more fun ...

Hey Rob,

First, I have to say that I was a big critic of yours back in the day, but the more I read your columns the more I understand where you're coming from. Anyhow, all this Hall of Fame talk has me wondering about Mark Grace. Assuming he retires after this next season, what chance does he have of making the Hall? Great fielder, great hitter, lifetime average over .300 (I think) and some postseason heroics. And perhaps the greatest chain-smoking first basemen of all time.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on Grace. Thanks and keep up the good work.

peace,
Hua Hsu
Cambridge, Mass.

I get this questions many times each year, and frankly my answer is the same today as it was five years ago ... No, Mark Grace is not a Hall of Famer. He has been a very good player for a long time, and in fact it may reasonably be argued that he's never had anything approaching a bad season. That's impressive.

However, Mark Grace has never been a great player, not even once.

In 1989, when his Cubs won a division title, Grace finished 14th in the MVP balloting, behind teammates Ryne Sandberg, Mitch Williams and Jerome Walton.

In 1992, when his Cubs finished fourth, Grace finished 16th in the MVP balloting, behind teammates Greg Maddux and Ryne Sandberg.

In 1993, when his Cubs again finished fourth, Grace finished 18th in the MVP balloting, which was the best showing on the club.

In 1995, when his Cubs finished third, Grace finished 13th in the MVP balloting, behind teammate Sammy Sosa.

In 1998, when his Cubs finished second but won the Wild Card, Grace wasn't listed on a single MVP ballot. Grace's teammate Sammy Sosa won the award, closer Rod Beck got a few votes, and even Mickey Morandini picked up a 10th-place vote ... but not a single mention for Mark Grace.

And that's the entire MVP story for Mark Grace. Granted, Grace hasn't generally played for good teams, but 1) doesn't he bear some responsibility for his team's performance? and 2) that's not much of any excuse anyway. In his long and productive career, Grace has earned MVP consideration only four times, and the best he did was come in 13th on the ballot, in 1995.

The point, again, is that at no time in his career has Mark Grace been considered great, nor was he ever great. There are, to be sure, ballplayers in the Hall of Fame who lack a certain greatness, but if you're a fan of the Hall of Fame, then you should be arguing against enshrining those sorts of players rather than arguing for it.

Rob, Enjoyed your article on the five players you would support for 2002 induction into the Hall of Fame. I was wondering if you had a top 10 of Hall of Fame players already inducted that you would vote out if given the choice? Bill Navarro
Southern CA

This is a touchy subject for a lot of people -- I once received e-mail from an angry man whose father's Hall of Fame qualifications I had questioned -- so let me first say that all of the players in the Hall of Fame were, in fact, good ballplayers. That said, every time you elect a player who was less than great, then you quite obviously diminish the institution itself. And as a baseball fan, my interest lies in the institution rather than any particular player or players.

So while I might be repeating myself, here's a quick list of 10 players who don't really meet the standards of their fellow Hall of Famers:

George Kelly (1B, Giants)
Travis Jackson (SS, Giants)
George Kell (3B, Tigers)
Fred Lindstrom (3B, Giants) Chick Hafey (LF, Cardinals)
Lloyd Waner (CF, Pirates)
Hack Wilson (CF, Giants)
Ross Youngs (RF, Giants)
Rick Ferrell (C, Senators)
Ray Schalk (C, White Sox)

If you discerned a running theme here, you're right: there are far too many old New York Giants in the Hall of Fame. George Kelly, for example, wasn't half the ballplayer that Mark Grace is. Travis Jackson wasn't half the player that Dave Concepcion was, Fred Lindstrom wasn't half the player that Ken Boyer was, etc.

Not coincidentally, all 10 of these fellows were elected by the Veterans Committee, which of course has been responsible for the great majority of the questionable selections.

I have written, at least a few times, something like, "The BBWAA has done a fine job over the years. Sure, they've missed a few guys they should have elected, but they've elected very few (if any) they should not have elected."

And the BBWAA has done a fine job ... collectively. But that's due in large part to the system. With the hundreds of voters essentially making their picks independently, it's relatively difficult for a candidate to reach the 75-percent threshold. The BBWAA voters do some strange things, though. Harvey Kuenn, who's nobody's idea of a Hall of Famer, garnered as many as 188 votes (in 1988, when 321 votes were needed for election). Marty Marion, who was a brilliant defensive shortstop but, again, is nobody's idea of a Hall of Famer, picked up 127 votes in 1973 (when 285 votes were needed for election).

The point being that BBWAA voters are perfectly capable of making odd decisions, but unlike the Veterans Committee for most of its history, the BBWAA voters aren't encouraged to conspire on their oddities. The result? If you make a list of marginal (or worse) Hall of Famers, you'll find that virtually all of them were elected/selected by a small group of old men sitting in a smoke- or gas-filled room.

Mr. Neyer,

First, let me say that Jim Rice was my favorite player of all time, so I'm definitely biased. But in your recent column, you wrote that Jim Rice was helped tremendously by his home park. I'd have to disagree with you. Sure, Fenway definitely helps right-handed hitters, and it probably did help his batting average. But as someone who watched Jim Rice play every day, I think Fenway hurt his home-run totals significantly. Rice had tremendous power to straightaway CF, and hit many doubles or triples to the CF triangle that are home runs in most parks. And Rice was a line-drive hitter who did not hit many cheap home runs. The Green Monster turned many potential home runs into doubles or singles for Rice. It was quite common to see Rice hit line drives off that wall that would be home runs anywere else, more so than any other player I can remember. Just my thoughts,
Mark Harriman

This is like one of those urban legends that just won't go away. Every time I write about Jim Rice, I get at least a few e-mails just like this one, and so I patiently respond with something like the following ...

Dear Red Sox fan,

That's just flat-out wrong.

Here are Rice's home and road stats from 1978 to the end of his career, including home runs (courtesy of Total Baseball):

       OBP  Slugging    HR
Home  .379    .539     156 
Road  .327    .456     139

Convinced? You see, while it's true that Rice undoubtedly hit many line drives off the Monster, don't you think it's also true that he hit at least a few routine fly balls that dropped into the netting.

-r

Even taking Fenway Park into consideration, Rice was obviously a fine hitter for a number of years. But he was not a particularly good defensive left fielder, and in the 1980s he lost his speed and began grounding into an immense number of double plays. And those things count, too.

Rob, I agree with you on Smoltz. Love the guy as a ferocious competitor but the Braves just got duped. Later on in the season we will hear how they spent so much money on pitching they had nothing left for a few players who can actually hit playoff-type pitching. I think it was a game of chess with the rest of the teams and their ludicrous interest in paying him the kind of money rumored.

Rick Marcin
Atlanta

I didn't make this point in Monday's column, but I certainly should have. In 2001, the Atlanta Braves ranked 13th in the National League in runs scored, ahead of the Expos, Pirates and Mets and behind everybody else. And a runs-starved team that's supposedly suffered "mammoth" financial losses simply doesn't have the luxury of spending $30,000,000 over three years on a closer with 10 career saves. The Braves are lucky, because they play in a division with a bunch of messed-up teams. And they do have some solid minor-league talent. But one of these days, management's inability to make wise financial decisions is going to leave them in second or third place.

Rob can be reached at rob.neyer@dig.com, and to order his books, including the just-published Feeding the Green Monster, click here.