Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What about Dawson?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Chancellor
    1. Dawson is Hall-worthy.
    2. Dawson has been one of the 10 most worthy players on the BBWAA ballot every year he's been eligible.

    Hence...Dawson should already have been elected by now.
    Amen!

    Comment


    • #47
      I know the strikeouts are high, and the OB% is a bit low, but the relative power for his era, the speed and the eight Gold Gloves have to stand for something. I like Dawson for the Hall of Fame, but can understand the other side's reasoning as well.
      1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

      1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

      1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


      The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
      The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

      Comment


      • #48
        I've written about Dawson a number of times. I don't think he deserves to get in. He was a horrible on base guy and his defensive reputation was overblown (he started off as a very good fielder but got injured with the artificial turf in Montreal and wasn't very good the rest of his career. Fortunately for him, he never lost the great defensive rep).

        Here are two posts I made on Dawson:

        http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpo...1&postcount=13

        http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpo...1&postcount=15

        Comment


        • #49
          I thought at the time of Dawson's retirement that he was pretty much a shoo-in. Boy, was I wrong. I still believe he deserves to be there and am frankly amazed that he's not. I am sure, though, that some day he will be enshrined. True, he didn't walk a lot. I don't see that trumping his HR and RBI totals, though.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by The Commissioner
            I thought at the time of Dawson's retirement that he was pretty much a shoo-in. Boy, was I wrong. I still believe he deserves to be there and am frankly amazed that he's not. I am sure, though, that some day he will be enshrined. True, he didn't walk a lot. I don't see that trumping his HR and RBI totals, though.
            His HR and RBI totals really weren't all that great. Only three years over 30 HRs? One over 35? He only finished top 5 in HR four times and RBI twice. His one huge HR/RBI year was mostly a function of him moving into the friendly confines of Wrigley Field. Look at his home/road splits that year:

            Code:
                    G  AB   R   H  2B  3B  HR RBI  BB IBB  SO HBP  SH  SF  XI ROE GDP  SB  CS   AVG   OBP   SLG
            Total 153 621  90 178  24   2  49 137  32   7 103   7   0   2   0   7  15  11   3  .287  .328  .568
            
            Home   74 292  45  97  13   2  27  71  16   5  47   3   0   0   0   3   3   6   3  .332  .373  .668
            Away   79 329  45  81  11   0  22  66  16   2  56   4   0   2   0   4  12   5   0  .246  .288  .480

            Comment


            • #51
              I don't know how to respond to that. 400+ HRs and 1500+ RBI are great totals no matter how they were accumulated.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by The Commissioner
                I don't know how to respond to that. 400+ HRs and 1500+ RBI are great totals no matter how they were accumulated.
                They're not all that great when you didn't post great numbers in those categories season to season, you played in a big hitting era, you played in favorable parks, you were a corner OFer, and you just flat out couldn't get on base throughout your career.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by 538280
                  They're not all that great when you didn't post great numbers in those categories season to season, you played in a big hitting era, you played in favorable parks, you were a corner OFer, and you just flat out couldn't get on base throughout your career.
                  It amazing how there existed a confluence of all of those mitigating factors throughout his career. If people didn't know any better, they might mistakenly look at his numbers and think he had a great career.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by 538280
                    They're not all that great when you didn't post great numbers in those categories season to season, you played in a big hitting era, you played in favorable parks, you were a corner OFer, and you just flat out couldn't get on base throughout your career.
                    So many inaccuracies, so little time:

                    "(Dawson) didn't post great numbers in those categories season to season"

                    --That must be why he has 20 more gray ink points than the average Hall of Famer (164 vs. 144). [cf. Baseball-Reference.com]

                    "(Dawson) played in a big hitting era"

                    --Dawson's career spanned 1976-1996. His last season as a full time player was 1992 or 1993. The fireworks didn't start until 1994. The meaningful part of Hawk's career was played in a relatively low run-scoring environment. (Notably, his MVP year in 1987 was an anomalously high scoring year in that era. Ozzie probably should have won instead.)

                    "(Dawson) played in favorable parks"

                    --Wrigley, yes. Fenway, yes. But Montreal was generally a little tougher than average for hitters -- and that's where he played most of his prime seasons. (Not to mention how the atrocious Montreal turf was killing Hawk's knees.)

                    "(Dawson) was a corner OF"

                    --He played almost half his career in CF, and won half his GG there.

                    "(Dawson) just flat out couldn't get on base throughout (his) career."

                    --His BA is OK for a slugger, but he didn't walk enough. I guess you got one here.

                    But basically, the only valid part of your objection is Hawk's OBP.

                    I concur with Commish, the OBP is a demerit, but taking his career in totality, it's clearly still a HOF career despite that.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Dawson is a tough one for me. Sometimes I think he belongs in the HoF sometimes I don't. His career .323 OBP and his career 119 OPS+ is rather low for a potential HoF outfielder.
                      Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by cougar
                        --Wrigley, yes. Fenway, yes. But Montreal was generally a little tougher than average for hitters -- and that's where he played most of his prime seasons. (Not to mention how the atrocious Montreal turf was killing Hawk's knees.)
                        And he only played 196 games at Fenway.

                        If he had played his entire career in Chicago, we would even be having this discussion.
                        "I think about baseball when I wake up in the morning. I think about it all day and I dream about it at night. The only time I don't think about it is when I'm playing it."
                        Carl Yastrzemski

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          He could slug. In some ways it doesn't look like it and .482 isn't that great on its own, but he's 24th in TB with his 25th rank in AB. That's quite good. It just probably isn't HOF worthy.
                          (fantasy football)
                          JM: Only did that for a couple of years and then we had a conspiracy so it kind of turned me sour. Our league's commissioner, Lew Ford(notes) at the time, was doing some shady things that ... I'd rather not talk about [laughs].
                          DB: Isn't he in Japan right now?
                          JM: I don't know where Lou is right now. He's probably fleeing the authorities [laughs].

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by plask_stirlac
                            He could slug. In some ways it doesn't look like it and .482 isn't that great on its own, but he's 24th in TB with his 25th rank in AB. That's quite good. It just probably isn't HOF worthy.
                            I dunno. His .482 still beats out Winfield's .475 and Murray's .476, both of whom were contemporaries and already enshrined.
                            Last edited by rsuriyop; 01-16-2006, 02:29 PM.
                            "Age is a question of mind over matter--if you don't mind, it doesn't matter."
                            -Satchel Paige

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              He's a HOF'er in my book. He was considered the 2nd best overall player in the NL behind Mike Schmidt during the early 80s. He was a true 5 tool player. He had the MVP season in 1987 but he also came in 2nd twice. In 1981 he would have hit 35 plus homers had it not been for the strike.

                              If he played the bulk of his career in the 90s he would have likely been a sure 40/40 guy a couple times. His balky knees from playing on Astroturf made him fairly immobile late in his career but for most of his career he was a helluva' player.
                              "Batting slumps? I never had one. When a guy hits .358, he doesn't have slumps."

                              Rogers Hornsby, 1961

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I wouldn't vote for Dawson, for some of the reasons already discussed.

                                His MVP was a function of Ozzie and Jack Clark splitting the vote.
                                THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

                                In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X