Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Couple more random Dawson quotes. Not saying they mean anything...I just like them. :)

I saw Andre Dawson. And let me tell you something. There were only two players in my lifetime whose teammates held them in awe. One was Mickey Mantle. The other was Andre Dawson. If you were around, if you saw them play, you know that. But the numbers don't tell you that.
Jerome Holtzman

When you hit a home run off Nolan Ryan, he meets you at third base. But when Andre hit one, he stayed near the mound and waited for the ball. That impressed me a lot. That's respect.
Shawon Dunston

Andre Dawson, the Hawk. No player in baseball history worked harder, suffered more or did it better than Andre Dawson. He's the best I've ever seen. Stand up Hawk. The Hawk. I watched him win MVP for a last place team in 1987 and it was the most unbelievable thing I've ever seen in baseball. He did it the right way, the natural way and he did it in the field and on the bases and in every way, and I hope he will stand up here someday. We didn't get to a World Series together but we almost got there, Hawk
Ryne Sandberg (HOF induction speech)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cfeedback

And if he'd played the best part of his career for Boston, rather than the no man's land that was Montreal, he would've been a first ballot guy.

---

Not when Boston had Clemens as their MVP player. ;)

About seeing people playing in person, thats a bunch of mularky. I remember arguing with Coach Owens about Deion Branch a while back. Just because you watched a guy doesnt make him better than he actually is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cfeedback

I'm sorry, but seeing someone play is definitely a consideration when it comes to defense IMO. Even today the best defensive metrics are a bit lacking? When it comes to Gold Gloves, I believe Dawson's were earned and not built solely on his reputation as is the case sometimes with other players. Seeing the respect base runners showed his arm not advancing to third or home, day in and day out is something that the numbers don't always tell you.

---

I think he earned the Gold Gloves early in his career as a center fielder. I think his two as a right fielder probably weren't deserved but weren't terrible. And, btw, the stats generally back up Dawson's reputation and follow the trend that the "story" would tell - his range was very good while in Montreal and center field, but dropped off to about average in Chicago as a right fielder after the knee injuries started to take their toll and his arm was always worth a couple runs above average (which is good).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cfeedback

And if he'd played the best part of his career for Boston, rather than the no man's land that was Montreal, he would've been a first ballot guy.

---

I think that might be an exaggeration. It took Jim Rice 15 years to get in (and yes, as I've said, Dawson is [much] better than Rice, but still).

I notice too, when it takes an entire essay to explain why a player should be in the HOF, he usually doesnt belong.

Randy Johnson - Best power pitcher in baseball for two decades.

Mark McGwire - Best power hitting 1B in baseball for most of his career.

Bert Blyleven - Best curveball in the game, great pitcher for lower market teams.

Andre Dawson - Uhhh, [insert essay here]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

And, btw, the stats generally back up Dawson's reputation and follow the trend that the "story" would tell - his range was very good while in Montreal and center field, but dropped off to about average in Chicago as a right fielder after the knee injuries started to take their toll and his arm was always worth a couple runs above average (which is good).

---

My only question is how do you judge how many runs he saved by runners not even bothering to try to advance because of his arm? I don't see any accurate way to gauge that other than by watching someone play and seeing how base runners held up rather than take a chance against him.

Andre Dawson seemed very un-excited at his press conference today. I mean obviously he must be excited but he just didn't show it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

I notice too, when it takes an entire essay to explain why a player should be in the HOF, he usually doesnt belong.

Randy Johnson - Best power pitcher in baseball for two decades.

Mark McGwire - Best power hitting 1B in baseball for most of his career.

Bert Blyleven - Best curveball in the game, great pitcher for lower market teams.

Andre Dawson - Uhhh, [insert essay here]

---

Are you aware that it's taken repeated long essays from guys like Rich Lederer to boost Blyleven's vote total? :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cfeedback

My only question is how do you judge how many runs he saved by runners not even bothering to try to advance because of his arm? I don't see any accurate way to gauge that other than by watching someone play and seeing how base runners held up rather than take a chance against him.

---

Take how many times a ball was hit to Dawson with, say, a runner on first base. Then find out how many times that runner advanced to third base (or home) and was successful and compare it to the average percent of time that a runner advances on that type of hit (deep, short, etc.). If Dawson's reputation caused less runners to attempt to go for the extra base, a below average percentage of players would've reached third or home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Are you aware that it's taken repeated long essays from guys like Rich Lederer to boost Blyleven's vote total? :p

---

Which is odd, because its pretty easy to tell he is a HOFer.

BTW I just want to make it clear that I dont feel like Dawson is just a terrible, terrible, pick. Hes not. But with all the other players out there that were obviously better than him, its hard for me to understand why those guys are pushed down in favor of Dawson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cfeedback

My only question is how do you judge how many runs he saved by runners not even bothering to try to advance because of his arm? I don't see any accurate way to gauge that other than by watching someone play and seeing how base runners held up rather than take a chance against him.

---

If I'm reading it correctly, CHONE rates Dawson's arm as 32 runs above average for his career. That is less than the 83 runs for Clemente, or the 50 for Griffey or Dwight Evans, but it is pretty good. As a comparison, Raines was 7 runs above average. Dawson's fielding is valued at another 37 runs - again, pretty good. It is the hitting that drags him down in total value, as compared to most other outfielders, and particularly after he moved to right field - and that is primarily because of the low OBP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

Bert Blyleven - Best curveball in the game, great pitcher for lower market teams.

---

Except that neither of those arguments is actually a reason to put someone in the Hall of Fame. I think Blyleven belongs, but I can see the case that is often made about him never being a dominant pitcher in the league. His Black Ink total is ridiculously low, and he was arguably never the best pitcher in the league. He just spent a ridiculously long time hovering around the 4th to 7th best pitcher in the American League. That adds up to huge career value, but just isn't that impressive to voters.

The way I see it with Dawson, he was good enough at many of the facets of the game that I can overlook his OBP deficiency to say that he is a hall of famer. You don't have to be perfect to be in the hall of fame.

I don't really agree with the requirement that you have to be the "best" at any one thing or during any one period of time to be in the hall of fame. Sam Crawford was one of the top 30 hitters ever. He also spent a large portion of his career being the second best outfielder on his own team.

If you produce at an exceptional level, you belong in the hall, regardless of who else was also being exceptional at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haveacigar

I don't really agree with the requirement that you have to be the "best" at any one thing or during any one period of time to be in the hall of fame. Sam Crawford was one of the top 30 hitters ever. He also spent a large portion of his career being the second best outfielder on his own team.

If you produce at an exceptional level, you belong in the hall, regardless of who else was also being exceptional at the time.

---

At some point, you're not really exceptional. Blyleven was exceptional for the ability to remain very good for much longer than most other pitchers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kenny1234

At some point, you're not really exceptional. Blyleven was exceptional for the ability to remain very good for much longer than most other pitchers.

---

so you agree he's exceptional?

There are many facets of the game, longevity is one of them. His longevity was exceptional. His pitching wasn't so bad either; with a 118 ERA+, he wasn't just consistently pitching, but consistently pitching at a pretty high level. A much higher level than Morris, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Disappointing that Blyleven and Alomar were so close, but they're basically locks to make it in next year. Larkin's vote total is also disappointing. It's encouraging that Trammell and Raines saw an increase in votes, but they've still got a long way to go....Jack Morris also seems to be gaining traction...another disappointment.

Can't say I'm pleased here. Dawson isn't a terrible selection....he's better than Jim Rice and borderline overall...but I wouldn't vote for him. I'd be more pleased with this if Blyleven and Alomar made it over the hump.

---

See, that's the thing about these village idiots: there's no such thing as a "lock". If there was, Blyleven would have gotten in right away. As for the Jack Morris lovers, Dave Stieb was the pitcher of the '80's biatches. Stieb should be in the Hall, where Jack could visit his exhibit. You're going to seriously put Jack in for being a league average innings eater and pitching a 10 inning shutout in a World Series Game 7? Wow. It's one moment - all be it a big one. You're falling under the same spell that people in this market are under for Joe Carter's "HOF candidacy" (I admit putting Carter and Morris in the same discussion is tantamount to hyperbole, but I digress). Don't. The only pitcher from that Game 7 that truly belongs in Cooperstown is John Smoltz.

Saying Dawson is better than Jim Rice does nothing to justify the selection, but you already know that. It's like putting in the 50 or so (again possible hyperbole here) first basemen that are better than Tony f**cking Perez because the writers were stupid enough to put him in. If a guy belongs he belongs, regardless of the idiocies of the past. Not really talking to you HGM, because you already know this, but I get sick of the ridiculous "Well so and so is in the HOF and my favourite player has better numbers, so he should get in" arguments. Just because the writers were idiots in the past, and evidently continue to be, does not mean they should be idiots again. Although, judging from this year's results nothing has changed. Absolutely no love for Robin Ventura or Kevin Appier. Why? :confused:

I can't wait for next year when Jeff Bagwell, Larry Walker, Rafael Palmeiro, John Olerud (borderline, but IMHO a better overall player than Dawson), and Kevin Brown get added. The ballot will be swimming with legitimate HOFers and one borderline case. By my count there will be 11 legit HOFers plus Olerud on the ballot and the writers have nobody to blame but themselves for the mess that they created. Who loses out? The players on the ballot and the fans that rooted for them. Thanks a$$holes. Traveshamockery I say...Traveshamockery. :rolleyes: