Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

http://deadspin.com/5443162/presenti...-of-fame-voter

Because this logic deserves to keep you as a vote :rolleyes:

Quote:

I didn't vote for anybody in the baseball hall of fame this year. Ya know why? To me…the first ballot is sacred. I think Roberto Alomar is an eventual Hall of Famer, not the first time. Edgar Martinez, designated hitter, eventually, but not the first time. Same goes for maybe Fred McGriff. As far as Blyleven and Dawson…if they haven't gotten in for years and years I cannot vote them in now."

Especially when the ****er voted for Blyleven, Dawson, AND Rice last year, all of them had been on the ballots how many times at that point in their careers? come on! No one can be this stupid.

And that Lisa girl really seems to appreciate having a vote

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenny1234

I had never paid much attention, and had never realized that Blyleven actually made much comment on the issue over the years. To be honest, it knocks him down a step in my eyes. I wish he would just say, thanks, it is an honor to be considered and thank those people that did vote for him. Complaining about Hall of Fame votes just bugs me a bit.

Uhhh....really?

Every year he gets snubbed by assholes and every year other assholes bug him about it. He has earned the right to be ornery about it.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

And that Lisa girl really seems to appreciate having a vote

Did you read the disclaimer thing? That was a mistake. She has simply NOT voted, which is different from sending in a blank ballot.

I think Bill Conlin's logic is the most tortured. I'll vote for Tim Raines because I think he deserves to be in the HoF, but since he only got 20% of the vote, I won't vote for him in the next 2 years, but now that he's over 30%, I'll vote for him again. :rolleyes:

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I think Bill Conlin's logic is the most tortured. I'll vote for Tim Raines because I think he deserves to be in the HoF, but since he only got 20% of the vote, I won't vote for him in the next 2 years, but now that he's over 30%, I'll vote for him again. :rolleyes:

I think the HoF really needs to look at the ballots and start revokeing voting privileges.

Lisa Olsen obviously has no interest in voting for the HoF .. while suppose he stance is a "no harm, no foul" type thing, And she had basically already done that herself.

Mariotti, despite everything and the absoluelty insane reasons at least in his twisted small minded world, he's trying ...

And Conlin ... His simple quote about his Tim Raines voting proves that he has no interst in taking his vote honestly... The simple fact that he ADMITS that he is not making his own decsions and is voting for people based solely on how others voted should mean that he should be removed.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

Mariotti, despite everything and the absoluelty insane reasons at least in his twisted small minded world, he's trying ...

Is he? He's challenging the BBWAA to revoke his privileges! He's using his privilege to be an attention whore.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Is he? He's challenging the BBWAA to revoke his privileges! He's using his privilege to be an attention whore.

which is what he uses everting in his life for .. he isnt treating his vote any differently that anything else....

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Best 35 Offensive (Batting + Base Stealing) Second Basemen of All-Time based on wRC+ (min. 6000 PA)

Code:

Name BB% K% BB/K AVG OBP SLG OPS ISO Spd BABIP wRC wRAA wOBA wRC+ Rogers Hornsby 11.3 % 8.3 % 1.53 .358 .434 .577 1.010 .218 5.6 .365 2015 896 .459 175 Eddie Collins 13.1 % 3.9 % 4.23 .333 .424 .429 .853 .096 6.9 .343 2090 751 .414 156 Nap Lajoie 5.1 % 4.3 % 1.07 .338 .380 .467 .847 .128 6.3 .295 1797 610 .399 148 Joe Morgan 16.7 % 10.9 % 1.84 .271 .392 .427 .819 .156 6.5 .281 1796 569 .382 146 Rod Carew 9.9 % 11.0 % 0.99 .328 .393 .429 .822 .101 5.7 .361 1576 436 .370 136 Larry Doyle 8.8 % 5.1 % 1.96 .290 .357 .408 .765 .118 6.5 .295 1037 265 .370 133 C. Gehringer 11.8 % 4.2 % 3.19 .320 .404 .480 .884 .160 6.0 .320 1790 509 .404 133 Bobby Grich 13.6 % 18.5 % 0.85 .266 .371 .424 .794 .158 4.1 .299 1163 258 .359 131 Tony Lazzeri 12.1 % 13.7 % 1.01 .292 .380 .467 .846 .174 5.8 .316 1170 250 .386 130 Cupid Childs 15.0 % 3.9 % 5.26 .306 .416 .389 .805 .083 6.6 .328 1304 294 .394 129 Joe Gordon 11.7 % 12.3 % 1.08 .268 .357 .466 .822 .197 4.7 .269 964 208 .377 129 H. Richardson 6.3 % 7.9 % 0.85 .299 .344 .435 .779 .136 7.5 .316 1151 276 .359 128 Jeff Kent 8.6 % 17.9 % 0.53 .290 .356 .500 .855 .210 4.0 .316 1463 283 .366 125 Roberto Alomar 10.2 % 12.6 % 0.91 .300 .371 .443 .814 .143 6.2 .326 1573 323 .365 125 Bobby Doerr 10.2 % 8.6 % 1.33 .288 .362 .461 .823 .173 4.3 .290 1180 254 .377 122 Davey Lopes 11.6 % 13.4 % 0.98 .263 .349 .388 .737 .125 6.9 .284 981 163 .348 122 Lou Whitaker 12.3 % 12.8 % 1.09 .276 .363 .426 .789 .150 4.6 .294 1385 252 .352 121 Miller Huggins 15.3 % 11.4 % 1.83 .265 .382 .314 .696 .049 5.6 .303 898 187 .353 121 Craig Biggio 9.6 % 16.1 % 0.66 .281 .363 .433 .796 .152 5.8 .314 1796 278 .355 120 Frankie Frisch 7.4 % 3.0 % 2.68 .316 .369 .432 .801 .116 6.4 .318 1528 270 .377 120 Johnny Evers 11.3 % 5.1 % 3.44 .270 .356 .334 .690 .064 5.9 .284 904 154 .344 119 Ryne Sandberg 8.3 % 15.0 % 0.60 .285 .344 .452 .795 .167 6.2 .307 1309 242 .355 118 Julio Franco 9.6 % 15.5 % 0.68 .298 .365 .417 .782 .119 5.1 .337 1346 208 .349 117 Buddy Myer 12.1 % 6.1 % 2.25 .303 .389 .406 .795 .103 5.8 .318 1199 173 .369 117 Del Pratt 7.0 % 5.8 % 1.33 .292 .345 .403 .748 .111 5.9 .305 974 135 .353 116 Chuck Knoblauch 11.2 % 11.5 % 1.10 .289 .378 .406 .783 .117 6.8 .314 1075 169 .357 116 Billy Herman 8.7 % 5.6 % 1.72 .304 .367 .407 .774 .103 4.5 .318 1206 174 .362 116 Jimmy Williams 8.0 % .275 .337 .397 .733 .122 6.5 837 150 .347 116 Dick McAuliffe 12.5 % 15.7 % 0.91 .247 .343 .403 .746 .156 4.4 .266 898 142 .336 116 Ron Hunt 9.6 % 7.3 % 1.45 .273 .368 .347 .715 .074 3.8 .289 746 105 .331 115 Tony Phillips 14.8 % 19.7 % 0.88 .266 .374 .389 .763 .123 4.8 .313 1226 151 .345 115 Willie Randolph 13.4 % 8.4 % 1.84 .276 .373 .351 .724 .076 5.4 .296 1198 136 .337 115

I kinda like setting a minimum number of plate appearances (I chose roughly 10 full years) and then looking at rate stats.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

which is what he uses everting in his life for .. he isnt treating his vote any differently that anything else....

Yeah, and he's a giant blowhard everywhere in life. He should have his voting privileges stripped more than anybody, imo.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

What about the possibility of David Ortiz getting in after he retires? I was just looking at his stats in comparison to Edgar Martinez's, and they're quite similar. 11 points difference in OPS (edge to Edgar), 13 point difference in OPS+ (edge to Edgar), and if you care about counting stats Ortiz has a few more homers and about 800 less hits (in five less seasons). Plus he gets the bonus of having a reputation as being a great clutch hitter, from the voters anyways.

I've never really thought of Ortiz as a possible future Hall of Famer, but if Edgar is worthy then why not Ortiz? Their stats, at least the ones I can find, are extremely comparable. Of course it depends on how Ortiz finishes his career and if he continues his epic downward decline or if he can still be an average to above average bat.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

I am doubtful on Ortiz, and my first response is, faithful Bo Sox fandom.

But I think you have pretty good points and they are at least worth giving merit to.

I have always thought similarly with Jim Edmonds.

I feel Edmonds would be a hall of famer if he could have had two more productive seasons. But I don't think his sabr, nor counting stats are quite enough. Two more of those 40 homer, .300 average, gold glove seasons, and he is in I think.....so basically, skip his injury seasons and replace them with his highest productive seasons

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by YEAH DAAAAWG

What about the possibility of David Ortiz getting in after he retires? I was just looking at his stats in comparison to Edgar Martinez's, and they're quite similar. 11 points difference in OPS (edge to Edgar), 13 point difference in OPS+ (edge to Edgar), and if you care about counting stats Ortiz has a few more homers and about 800 less hits (in five less seasons). Plus he gets the bonus of having a reputation as being a great clutch hitter, from the voters anyways.

I've never really thought of Ortiz as a possible future Hall of Famer, but if Edgar is worthy then why not Ortiz? Their stats, at least the ones I can find, are extremely comparable. Of course it depends on how Ortiz finishes his career and if he continues his epic downward decline or if he can still be an average to above average bat.

I really don't think it's close at all. Edgar had 11 full seasons of an OPS+ of 130 or better, 8 of those being 150 or higher. Ortiz has 5 seasons higher than 130 and 3 higher than 150. Edgar, for over a decade, was consistently one of the top hitters in the league. Ortiz had a run half as long.

A 13 point OPS+ difference is huge, to say nothing of the 2,600 difference in plate appearances. Ortiz needs about 4 full seasons more to match Edgar in playing time, and barring a miracle, that will mean his OPS+ will drop even further from Edgar since he's clearly in his decline phase.

WAR sees the difference as about as large as the difference between..oh..Bret Boone and Bobby Grich ;). Ortiz totals 27.4 WAR with 5 seasons above 2 (which is roughly an average season) - four of those above 4 and three above 5. Edgar totals 67.4 WAR with nine seasons of 5 WAR or better and another four seasons between 2 and 5 WAR.

I do think Ortiz will get support disproportionate to his actual value, though, because of the "clutch" reputation.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

I am doubtful on Ortiz, and my first response is, faithful Bo Sox fandom.

But I think you have pretty good points and they are at least worth giving merit to.

I have always thought similarly with Jim Edmonds.

I feel Edmonds would be a hall of famer if he could have had two more productive seasons. But I don't think his sabr, nor counting stats are quite enough. Two more of those 40 homer, .300 average, gold glove seasons, and he is in I think.....so basically, skip his injury seasons and replace them with his highest productive seasons

I've always been doubtful too. I'm not really pining for him to get in, I'm legitimately curious as to what the more statistically educated people on this board think of his chances, because I've never thought he had a legitimate shot at it.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

while I am on it, how close is Rolen to a hall of famer? If it wasn't for Jones and A-Rod he would have been the best third basemen of the decade. Seems like he has had some really productive years with the bat, while being great with the glove.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by YEAH DAAAAWG

What about the possibility of David Ortiz getting in after he retires? I was just looking at his stats in comparison to Edgar Martinez's, and they're quite similar. 11 points difference in OPS (edge to Edgar), 13 point difference in OPS+ (edge to Edgar), and if you care about counting stats Ortiz has a few more homers and about 800 less hits (in five less seasons). Plus he gets the bonus of having a reputation as being a great clutch hitter, from the voters anyways.

I've never really thought of Ortiz as a possible future Hall of Famer, but if Edgar is worthy then why not Ortiz? Their stats, at least the ones I can find, are extremely comparable. Of course it depends on how Ortiz finishes his career and if he continues his epic downward decline or if he can still be an average to above average bat.

Ortiz' body is exactly the kind that's about to break down. However, he'd have to keep up his well above average numbers for another ~8-10 years because his peak is nowhere near Edgars.

Edgar had 8 years with an OPS+ over 150 while Ortiz has had 3. He'll have to have one hell of a mid-late 30 career to even be in the discussion.

I honestly don't think he'll be a useful player by the time he's 36, though.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I really don't think it's close at all. Edgar had 11 full seasons of an OPS+ of 130 or better, 8 of those being 150 or higher. Ortiz has 5 seasons higher than 130 and 3 higher than 150. Edgar, for over a decade, was consistently one of the top hitters in the league. Ortiz had a run half as long.

A 13 point OPS+ difference is huge, to say nothing of the 2,600 difference in plate appearances. Ortiz needs about 4 full seasons more to match Edgar in playing time, and barring a miracle, that will mean his OPS+ will drop even further from Edgar since he's clearly in his decline phase.

WAR sees the difference as about as large as the difference between..oh..Bret Boone and Bobby Grich ;). Ortiz totals 27.4 WAR with 5 seasons above 2 (which is roughly an average season) - four of those above 4 and three above 5. Edgar totals 67.4 WAR with nine seasons of 5 WAR or better and another four seasons between 2 and 5 WAR.

I do think Ortiz will get support disproportionate to his actual value, though, because of the "clutch" reputation.

Fair enough, I was just curious :).

Also I wholeheartedly agree with the bolded statement. I think it'll be even moreso if Edgar actually does get in, because the writers will also look and see that they do have similarities in certain stats.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I really don't think it's close at all. Edgar had 11 full seasons of an OPS+ of 130 or better, 8 of those being 150 or higher. Ortiz has 5 seasons higher than 130 and 3 higher than 150. Edgar, for over a decade, was consistently one of the top hitters in the league. Ortiz had a run half as long.

A 13 point OPS+ difference is huge, to say nothing of the 2,600 difference in plate appearances. Ortiz needs about 4 full seasons more to match Edgar in playing time, and barring a miracle, that will mean his OPS+ will drop even further from Edgar since he's clearly in his decline phase.

WAR sees the difference as about as large as the difference between..oh..Bret Boone and Bobby Grich ;). Ortiz totals 27.4 WAR with 5 seasons above 2 (which is roughly an average season) - four of those above 4 and three above 5. Edgar totals 67.4 WAR with nine seasons of 5 WAR or better and another four seasons between 2 and 5 WAR.

I do think Ortiz will get support disproportionate to his actual value, though, because of the "clutch" reputation.

and isn't Martinez criticized for not having enough playing time?

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

I am doubtful on Ortiz, and my first response is, faithful Bo Sox fandom.

But I think you have pretty good points and they are at least worth giving merit to.

I have always thought similarly with Jim Edmonds.

I feel Edmonds would be a hall of famer if he could have had two more productive seasons. But I don't think his sabr, nor counting stats are quite enough. Two more of those 40 homer, .300 average, gold glove seasons, and he is in I think.....so basically, skip his injury seasons and replace them with his highest productive seasons

I think Edmonds is easily deserving. He's a top 10 all-time center fielder. Career WAR of 66.6 (:eek:), with his best 5 years totaling 36.5.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

while I am on it, how close is Rolen to a hall of famer? If it wasn't for Jones and A-Rod he would have been the best third basemen of the decade. Seems like he has had some really productive years with the bat, while being great with the glove.

Statistically Rolen is a HOF.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

while I am on it, how close is Rolen to a hall of famer? If it wasn't for Jones and A-Rod he would have been the best third basemen of the decade. Seems like he has had some really productive years with the bat, while being great with the glove.

Rolen's deserving too, in my opinion, but the HoF has historically been brutally tough on third basemen for some reason.

I don't think Edmonds or Rolen will get into the HoF, at least not through the BBWAA, but both will sail into HoM! :)

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Rolen's deserving too, in my opinion, but the HoF has historically been brutally tough on third basemen for some reason.

I don't think Edmonds or Rolen will get into the HoF, at least not through the BBWAA, but both will sail into HoM! :)

HoM?

Wow, kind of surprised to hear this from both of you guys, I didn't think either would ever make it, I FELT like their peaks just ended a season or two too early for them to be considered in the all time greats.....

I don't think writers will give them the heads up either.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Edmonds > Rolen for HoF merit

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

HoM?

Hall of Merit
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/...hall_of_merit/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

Wow, kind of surprised to hear this from both of you guys, I didn't think either would ever make it, I FELT like their peaks just ended a season or two too early for them to be considered in the all time greats.....

I don't think writers will give them the heads up either.

Edmonds had his excellent six year peak with the Cardinals, but he also did fine work in the late 90's with the Angels - not Hall of Fame itself but combine that work with his HoF caliber peak and it adds up to deserving.

Rolen didn't have much of a "peak", per say, but from 1997-2004, eight years, he was consistently a 4-5 win player, and he put up another similar season in 2006. 62.2 career WAR for him and he isn't done - he just put up a 4.8 WAR season.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Rolen's deserving too, in my opinion, but the HoF has historically been brutally tough on third basemen for some reason.

This was my recollection, but I wanted to see how true it was - so I took a look at the numbers. To get the list of "unfairly" excluded players, I set the following criteria:

1) Retired before 2000 - Hall eligible, and have been up for at least 5 years
2) At least 55 WAR - roughly the borderline where the majority of players get in
3) Hall eligible (excludes Jackson and Rose).

There are 18 position players that fit this criteria, and 10 pitchers. Of the 18 position players, there are players from all positions, but fully 7/18 are third-basemen (Santo, Nettles, Allen, Bell, Bando, Boyer and Darrell Evans).

If you restrict it to players with 60 WAR, 5/13 excluded are third basemen (as compared to 2 outfielders or 1 first baseman). Just looking at the list of all 13 - it is a very good defensive list:
Reggie Smith 63.1
Dwight Evans 61.7
Bill Dahlen 75.9
Alan Trammell 66.8
Ron Santo 66.4
Graig Nettles 61.3
Dick Allen 61.1
Buddy Bell 60.7
Sal Bando 60.5
Lou Whitaker 69.5
Bobby Grich 67.6
Willie Randolph 60.4
Keith Hernandez 61

As a further note, it appears that the Hall of Merit is similarly hard on third basemen as the only two position players in baseball history(retired by 2000) with 60 WAR that are not in the Hall of Merit are Buddy Bell and Sal Bando.

As others have pointed out before, after catcher, third base is probably one of the more difficult positions at which to judge defense.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

By the time the voting rolls around for both of these absolutely deserving candidates (Rolen and Edmonds, not Boone and Ortiz), hopefully we'll have even better statistical measurements of defense which the idiot writers can willfully ignore in favour of the "I don't think HOFer when I think of either of them" BS which passes for some of the justifications these days and that's not even accounting for the Mariottis and Conlins of the BBWAA cabal. Or maybe the fact that Rolen "quit playing" (I wish every player could play that well when they "quit playing") for three different managers :rolleyes: , one of whom's a surefire HOFer, or the fact that Jim Edmonds wasn't a typical CF in that he only stole 65 bases and didn't reach any of the milestones that BBWAA boobs tend to salivate over. :rolleyes:

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

I haven't made up my own mind on guys like Edmonds, and Rolen is still active so it is too early with him. A quick look at the Hall has been that between 50 and 55 WAR was borderline, and most above that get in. Looking at the current crop of players, that is going to admit way too many people. There are 43 players that are either active, or retired since 2000 with that sort of career accumulation, and I can't see the Hall of Fame growing by 4-5 players per year.

My feeling is that a variety of factors have led to players playing longer careers, and thus we need to judge the accumulation of value differently than we did 50 years ago. Borderline for me is now jumping to the group with between 60 and 70 wins. The group over 70 wins seem to be locks for the Hall - with Mussina being the bottom of that group. The group between 65 and 70 includes guys that will get in immediately (Glavine, Pudge), and some that will wait or not get in - Lofton, Edmonds, Walker, Martinez. There are 25 guys with over 65 WAR - that is a more reasonable number to me. Between 60 and 65, there are more questions, and below 60 WAR my initial feeling is that most should miss out.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenny1234

This was my recollection, but I wanted to see how true it was - so I took a look at the numbers. To get the list of "unfairly" excluded players, I set the following criteria:

1) Retired before 2000 - Hall eligible, and have been up for at least 5 years
2) At least 55 WAR - roughly the borderline where the majority of players get in
3) Hall eligible (excludes Jackson and Rose).

There are 18 position players that fit this criteria, and 10 pitchers. Of the 18 position players, there are players from all positions, but fully 7/18 are third-basemen (Santo, Nettles, Allen, Bell, Bando, Boyer and Darrell Evans).

If you restrict it to players with 60 WAR, 5/13 excluded are third basemen (as compared to 2 outfielders or 1 first baseman). Just looking at the list of all 13 - it is a very good defensive list:
Reggie Smith 63.1
Dwight Evans 61.7
Bill Dahlen 75.9
Alan Trammell 66.8
Ron Santo 66.4
Graig Nettles 61.3
Dick Allen 61.1
Buddy Bell 60.7
Sal Bando 60.5
Lou Whitaker 69.5
Bobby Grich 67.6
Willie Randolph 60.4
Keith Hernandez 61

As a further note, it appears that the Hall of Merit is similarly hard on third basemen as the only two position players in baseball history(retired by 2000) with 60 WAR that are not in the Hall of Merit are Buddy Bell and Sal Bando.

As others have pointed out before, after catcher, third base is probably one of the more difficult positions at which to judge defense.

I set automatic induction at 60 WAR, which is a minimum of 15 seasons with an average of 4.0 WAR, or 20 with an average of 3.0 WAR or 12 with an average of 5.0 WAR etc. It just seems reasonable to me to demand an average of 4.0 WAR over at least 15 seasons in order for induction. Guys that are below that, I look at on a case by case basis and pro-rate their WAR to 9750 PA (15 * 650 PA per season) so that George Wright, Buck Ewing, Roger Bresnahan or a little later Mickey Cochrane can shine, or the guys interrupted by war like Joe Gordon and Hank Greenberg. It really shows off guys like John McGraw, who probably should have two plaques in there: one as a player and one as a manager. I'm trying to decide whether to set the induction bar in the prorated guys higher or not, like 70 or 75 WAR, but probably 60 is high enough as Jeff Kent barely squeaks in. The only issue I see is that it knocks out guys like Dave Winfield, Richie Ashburn, Bid McPhee, Zack Wheat etc. Then again it's always sad to see a guy like Winfield hurting his teams like he did over the final 3 seasons of his career while chasing Cooperstown. Still trying to figure out pitchers though. It just doesn't seem like a 60 WAR pitcher is as good as a 60 WAR position player, but maybe I'm just acting like a BBWAA member and determining HOFers by "feel". Thoughts, suggestions, comments my fellow WARriors?

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

comments my fellow WARriors?

Rec'd.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by 200tang

Rec'd.

:confused: Forgive my lack of familiarity with texting/interwebs shorthand, but WTF? :confused:

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

:confused: Forgive my lack of familiarity with texting/interwebs shorthand, but WTF? :confused:

recommended. For being so awesome.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Looking back, three groups seem to deserve consideration beyond their value. First, are those that missed time due to war or racism. Second, are catchers who tend to have relatively short careers. Third are relievers, where I think they are rated against each other, and only the very best get in regardless of value.

And the WAR levels that I'm talking about above are for the current crop of eligible players - basically I think that WAR-inflation has occurred, and therefore a WAR of 65 is not as impressive as it used to be.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

Then again it's always sad to see a guy like Winfield hurting his teams like he did over the final 3 seasons of his career while chasing Cooperstown.

Well, I think it's fair to "ignore" those seasons for the purposes of Cooperstown, if the player's body of work outside of it is impressive enough. Basically, I don't think a player can "play his way out" of the Hall. I don't blame players for hanging on...I blame the teams for continuing to play them at their detriment.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Well, I think it's fair to "ignore" those seasons for the purposes of Cooperstown, if the player's body of work outside of it is impressive enough. Basically, I don't think a player can "play his way out" of the Hall. I don't blame players for hanging on...I blame the teams for continuing to play them at their detriment.

Agreed. I can't blame Gary Sheffield for wanting to take $27m for playing at a replacement level for the last two seasons. I can blame the Tigers and Mets for paying him.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

The Tigers gave him that money when he was well above a replacement level. The Mets didn't pay him at all.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

How can I see the career WAR numbers for players?

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by haveacigar

The Tigers gave him that money when he was well above a replacement level. The Mets didn't pay him at all.

The Tigers gave him that money in the hope that he'd be above replacement level - but that wasn't a great bet.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

How can I see the career WAR numbers for players?

At this stupendously awesome amazing site. Bookmark it and you'll find you visit it as much as baseball-reference, which it links to for individual players. :cool:

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

makes me sad to see that my fav player of all time probably didn't earn enough to be a true hall of famer.

Red Schoendists

Thanks AJ...it is Bookmarked!

65-70 is a fair spot for borderline hall of famer's id say

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Basically, I don't think a player can "play his way out" of the Hall.

I'm not so sure of that. Earlier in the thread, when Scott Rolen's name was brought up, I was thinking that he won't get in unless he sticks around to pad his counting totals, and if he does stick around that long, he'll probably kill his percentages badly enough to keep him out anyway.

Of course, that might not be the same situation you had in mind; I supposed you can say that Rolen can't "'play his way out" of the Hall if he wasn't already good enough to be considered likely to get in in the first place.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by dps

I'm not so sure of that. Earlier in the thread, when Scott Rolen's name was brought up, I was thinking that he won't get in unless he sticks around to pad his counting totals, and if he does stick around that long, he'll probably kill his percentages badly enough to keep him out anyway.

Of course, that might not be the same situation you had in mind; I supposed you can say that Rolen can't "'play his way out" of the Hall if he wasn't already good enough to be considered likely to get in in the first place.

It's possible for a player to 'play himself out" in the sense that it ruins his ACTUAL chances of getting in, but my post was regarding my personal opinion of whether or not a guy belongs.

Re: Andre Dawson - lone HoF inductee

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

It's possible for a player to 'play himself out" in the sense that it ruins his ACTUAL chances of getting in, but my post was regarding my personal opinion of whether or not a guy belongs.

Ah. That's different--I thought you were talking about his actual chances.