With Ricky Henderson and Jim Rice getting elected to the Baseball Hall Of Fame this week it’s time to take a look ahead to next year’s voting, most notably will Andre Dawson finally get the votes required for induction?
Dawson received 67.0 % of the required 75.0 % for induction in 2009 and should, once again, be the top vote-getting among the carryovers. The only obstacle that I can see in his way are the first-timers on the ballot who could take away some of his crucial votes.
The list of first-timers in 2010 include Roberto Alomar, Ellis Burks, Andres Galarraga, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Kevin Appier, Robin Ventura, Eric Karros, and Todd Zeile.
I can see Alomar being a first-ballot hall of famer, but other than him I see no one on the list who deserves that honor. Larkin will definitely get into the hall eventually, but I can’t see him getting in on the first try. Others who may get in eventually, but not on the first try, are Edgar Martinez, Andres Galarraga, and Fred McGriff.
I don’t see much in the way of vote stealers that will take away from Dawson’s numbers next January. Although a 9% increase is a very strong move, getting Jim Rice out of his hair will definitely help The Hawk’s cause considerably.
I could drop a whole lot of stats in this space (HRs, RBIs, MVP) but the only stat that should be needed for any voter to check the box next to Andre Dawson’s name is that he is one of only three players in major league history to hit over 400 home runs and steal over 300 bases in his career. The other two players to accomplish the feat are Barry Bonds and Willie Mays. ‘Nuff said.
With Ricky Henderson and Jim Rice getting elected to the Baseball Hall Of Fame this week it’s time to take a look ahead to next year’s voting, most notably will Andre Dawson finally get the votes required for induction?
Dawson received 67.0 % of the required 75.0 % for induction in 2009 and should, once again, be the top vote-getting among the carryovers. The only obstacle that I can see in his way are the first-timers on the ballot who could take away some of his crucial votes.
The list of first-timers in 2010 include Roberto Alomar, Ellis Burks, Andres Galarraga, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Kevin Appier, Robin Ventura, Eric Karros, and Todd Zeile.
I can see Alomar being a first-ballot hall of famer, but other than him I see no one on the list who deserves that honor. Larkin will definitely get into the hall eventually, but I can’t see him getting in on the first try. Others who may get in eventually, but not on the first try, are Edgar Martinez, Andres Galarraga, and Fred McGriff.
I don’t see much in the way of vote stealers that will take away from Dawson’s numbers next January. Although a 9% increase is a very strong move, getting Jim Rice out of his hair will definitely help The Hawk’s cause considerably.
I could drop a whole lot of stats in this space (HRs, RBIs, MVP) but the only stat that should be needed for any voter to check the box next to Andre Dawson’s name is that he is one of only three players in major league history to hit over 400 home runs and steal over 300 bases in his career. The other two players to accomplish the feat are Barry Bonds and Willie Mays. ‘Nuff said.
I agree he will probably get in, but I think it just represents the bar being further lowered. Dawson is almost as good as Jim Rice who was almost as good as a real Hall of Famer etc..............................
Where does it end? He was VERY good, not great imo.
I agree he will probably get in, but I think it just represents the bar being further lowered. Dawson is almost as good as Jim Rice who was almost as good as a real Hall of Famer etc..............................
Where does it end? He was VERY good, not great imo.
If 400HR/300SB is your standard you will regret that standard before too long. A list of those with that combo will be littered with mediocre players before long. Heck, Reggie Sanders and Steve Finley are 300/300 players. Whoopdeedoo.
.323.
.323.
That's Dawson's OBP. I just can't get over that. That would be the lowest OBP of any HOF'r, not just OF's. No OF in the Hall has an OBP within 20 points of Dawson. That's huge.
And hit batting avg is .277. There are two HOF with lower BA's: Reggie Jackson and Ralph Kiner.
Not to mention, Dawson was worthless whenever he hit the postseason. IN fact, he never hit a single postseason HR (59 AB).
Inducting Dawson would represent a huge downgrade of Hall-worthiness. There are many who are not even on the balot an longer who are far more deserving.
I think Rice was pretty marginal, but easily more deserving than Dawson.
If 400HR/300SB is your standard you will regret that standard before too long. A list of those with that combo will be littered with mediocre players before long. Heck, Reggie Sanders and Steve Finley are 300/300 players. Whoopdeedoo.
.323.
.323.
That's Dawson's OBP. I just can't get over that. That would be the lowest OBP of any HOF'r, not just OF's. No OF in the Hall has an OBP within 20 points of Dawson. That's huge.
And hit batting avg is .277. There are two HOF with lower BA's: Reggie Jackson and Ralph Kiner.
Not to mention, Dawson was worthless whenever he hit the postseason. IN fact, he never hit a single postseason HR (59 AB).
Inducting Dawson would represent a huge downgrade of Hall-worthiness. There are many who are not even on the balot an longer who are far more deserving.
I think Rice was pretty marginal, but easily more deserving than Dawson.
Oh, let me amend, there are 5 HOF with lower OBP's....Bill Mazeroski, Joe Tinker, Luis Aparicio, Rabbit Maranville and Brooks Robinson -- none are in the HOF for their bats.
Oh, let me amend, there are 5 HOF with lower OBP's....Bill Mazeroski, Joe Tinker, Luis Aparicio, Rabbit Maranville and Brooks Robinson -- none are in the HOF for their bats.
Nobody really gave a crap about OBP until Bill James came along in what, the early 80s, and pointed out that, duh, the more times you're on base, the more runs you will score.
I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS AN INVALID STAT!
Just that nobody gave a crap about it until then. So, we've only been grading HOFers w/obp these last 30 years. Nobody ever said, "that Mickey Mantle, what a great on base percentage he's got" or "you know, that DiMaggio guy would be a better player if he would just walk more"
In regards to Dawson, 10 Gold Gloves is pretty damned good. So is winning an MVP playing for a last place Cubs team. I remember the crying when that happened. How valuable can you be playing for THE CUBS? But his stats were that good. And sometimes, that's how these fickle writers are. I remember when Kirk Gibson won it. I hate the Dodgers, so I admit my bias, but jesus, an 80-rbi guy is the most valuable? How is that possible? So, it all depends on which way the BBWAA wind is blowing...............
Nobody really gave a crap about OBP until Bill James came along in what, the early 80s, and pointed out that, duh, the more times you're on base, the more runs you will score.
I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS AN INVALID STAT!
Just that nobody gave a crap about it until then. So, we've only been grading HOFers w/obp these last 30 years. Nobody ever said, "that Mickey Mantle, what a great on base percentage he's got" or "you know, that DiMaggio guy would be a better player if he would just walk more"
In regards to Dawson, 10 Gold Gloves is pretty damned good. So is winning an MVP playing for a last place Cubs team. I remember the crying when that happened. How valuable can you be playing for THE CUBS? But his stats were that good. And sometimes, that's how these fickle writers are. I remember when Kirk Gibson won it. I hate the Dodgers, so I admit my bias, but jesus, an 80-rbi guy is the most valuable? How is that possible? So, it all depends on which way the BBWAA wind is blowing...............
Hawk, that was his one big season, really the only one. He never came close again. Hit 49 HR and his next high total was 32. That's a slugger? He generally hit 25-30 HR. Pfft. So it's not like he was a 40-50 HR guy year in year out. He wasn't. Who cares if people talked about OBP or not. His avg was low also. .277 is hardly a standout. You gotta be a Reggie Jackson to get in with that kind of avg. Andre Dawson is no Reggie Jackson.
Dwight Evans won 8 gold gloves too...why isn't he in? By my way of thinking he is more deserving than Dawson and I don't think he's ever sniffed the HOF. His avg was .272 and OBP .370. HR total a bit lower but he had fewer years of service. So that's pretty close. I fail to see where Dawson stands out from Dwight Evans.
Hawk, that was his one big season, really the only one. He never came close again. Hit 49 HR and his next high total was 32. That's a slugger? He generally hit 25-30 HR. Pfft. So it's not like he was a 40-50 HR guy year in year out. He wasn't. Who cares if people talked about OBP or not. His avg was low also. .277 is hardly a standout. You gotta be a Reggie Jackson to get in with that kind of avg. Andre Dawson is no Reggie Jackson.
Dwight Evans won 8 gold gloves too...why isn't he in? By my way of thinking he is more deserving than Dawson and I don't think he's ever sniffed the HOF. His avg was .272 and OBP .370. HR total a bit lower but he had fewer years of service. So that's pretty close. I fail to see where Dawson stands out from Dwight Evans.
Dawson and Evans' slugging are within 10 points. HR per AB is almost the same. AVG is within 5 points. Both were excellent fielders. Evans had 47 points more OBP and Dawson was a better base stealer. Evans had a much better postseason career.
Looks like a tossup to me. I can't really favor one over the other for the HOF. Given that Evans never really came close, I don't see why Dawson should, though he may well get in next year anyway.
Dawson and Evans' slugging are within 10 points. HR per AB is almost the same. AVG is within 5 points. Both were excellent fielders. Evans had 47 points more OBP and Dawson was a better base stealer. Evans had a much better postseason career.
Looks like a tossup to me. I can't really favor one over the other for the HOF. Given that Evans never really came close, I don't see why Dawson should, though he may well get in next year anyway.
There are plenty of HOF'ers with lower BA's like Harmon Killebrew. You didn't specify position, so I'm confused. Additionally there has been considerable stat inflation through the steroid era. Almost all of Dawson's #'s were put up before that time frame. His numbers look good when compared to his contemporaries. I think it is pretty clear that he is a historically significant player than the two guys you mentioned.
I think Dewey got a really raw deal though. That fact though does not mean that Dawson should not be in.
There are plenty of HOF'ers with lower BA's like Harmon Killebrew. You didn't specify position, so I'm confused. Additionally there has been considerable stat inflation through the steroid era. Almost all of Dawson's #'s were put up before that time frame. His numbers look good when compared to his contemporaries. I think it is pretty clear that he is a historically significant player than the two guys you mentioned.
I think Dewey got a really raw deal though. That fact though does not mean that Dawson should not be in.
Another part of HOF is did he bring home the hardware? He won the NL MVP in 1987, and finished second in two other years. He made eight All-Star teams. He won eight Gold Gloves (I was wrong when I posted 10). He won the NL Rookie of the Year. He had more RBIs (1,591) than all but 33 players in history; he had more than Willie McCovey, Willie Stargell or Al Kaline. Which is not bad for a guy that you do not consider a slugger.
Dewey Evans was lost at the plate until Walt Hrniak got ahold of him at age 29. He hit .300 ONCE, at age 35. But the problem with Evans is his how he was viewed in Boston, IMHO. They look at Evans, and go "He's no Williams (who is?) He's no Yaz. Wasn't even considered the best of on his own team behind Rice and Lynn. (please don't reply with a "Lynn is better than Evans?" reply, it's beneath you.
Another part of HOF is did he bring home the hardware? He won the NL MVP in 1987, and finished second in two other years. He made eight All-Star teams. He won eight Gold Gloves (I was wrong when I posted 10). He won the NL Rookie of the Year. He had more RBIs (1,591) than all but 33 players in history; he had more than Willie McCovey, Willie Stargell or Al Kaline. Which is not bad for a guy that you do not consider a slugger.
Dewey Evans was lost at the plate until Walt Hrniak got ahold of him at age 29. He hit .300 ONCE, at age 35. But the problem with Evans is his how he was viewed in Boston, IMHO. They look at Evans, and go "He's no Williams (who is?) He's no Yaz. Wasn't even considered the best of on his own team behind Rice and Lynn. (please don't reply with a "Lynn is better than Evans?" reply, it's beneath you.
Hawk, what about postseason production? In his two LCS's he hit 5-39 (.128). Never hit a postseason HR. I saw enough of Dawson. He was NOT a clutch hitter.
Hawk, what about postseason production? In his two LCS's he hit 5-39 (.128). Never hit a postseason HR. I saw enough of Dawson. He was NOT a clutch hitter.
I didn't say it decides, but it is a factor. Regardless of the teams he played for, he sucked in the two years he did reach the playoffs.
HR's are very overrated anyway. Getting on base in the name of the game in scoring runs. If you do both, great, but a .323 OBP hitter is not a great hitter, let alone a HOF'r.
I didn't say it decides, but it is a factor. Regardless of the teams he played for, he sucked in the two years he did reach the playoffs.
HR's are very overrated anyway. Getting on base in the name of the game in scoring runs. If you do both, great, but a .323 OBP hitter is not a great hitter, let alone a HOF'r.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.