Dawson and the HOF

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=74337:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM:name=Rappster)-->QUOTE (Rappster @ Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74335:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->He's in. the only one. How did Alomar not make it? How does Tim Raines only get 30 percent of the vote. How does Dale Murphy only get 11?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't figure Alomar, Blyleven, Raines, and even Larkin...I thought it might be a big class.

Murphy was so awesome...but, he didn't maintain. He did, however, have all-world intangibles. Sort of akin to Mattingly.

Blyleven is a mystery. He has nearly first-ballot numbers. People don't give longevity enough credit.

Alomar must have been crushed because of the spitting incident.

And Raines? I just don't get it...he's ALMOST Lou Brock.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree. Very odd outcome. Can't wait to read Posnanski on this.

[Butcher]

Lou Brock is the most overrated player ever. Next to Ozzie Smith, maybe.

[veryzer]

<!--quoteo(post=74339:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74337:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM:name=Rappster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rappster @ Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74335:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->He's in. the only one. How did Alomar not make it? How does Tim Raines only get 30 percent of the vote. How does Dale Murphy only get 11?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't figure Alomar, Blyleven, Raines, and even Larkin...I thought it might be a big class.

Murphy was so awesome...but, he didn't maintain. He did, however, have all-world intangibles. Sort of akin to Mattingly.

Blyleven is a mystery. He has nearly first-ballot numbers. People don't give longevity enough credit.

Alomar must have been crushed because of the spitting incident.

And Raines? I just don't get it...he's ALMOST Lou Brock.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree. Very odd outcome. Can't wait to read Posnanski on this.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Tim Raines is not a Hall of Famer. Not even close. You can make arguments for the rest, though I'd disagree, but not Raines. He had a few real good years and then was average for a long long time.

[PcB]

<!--quoteo(post=74342:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:28 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 6 2010, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74339:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74337:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM:name=Rappster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rappster @ Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74335:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->He's in. the only one. How did Alomar not make it? How does Tim Raines only get 30 percent of the vote. How does Dale Murphy only get 11?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't figure Alomar, Blyleven, Raines, and even Larkin...I thought it might be a big class.

Murphy was so awesome...but, he didn't maintain. He did, however, have all-world intangibles. Sort of akin to Mattingly.

Blyleven is a mystery. He has nearly first-ballot numbers. People don't give longevity enough credit.

Alomar must have been crushed because of the spitting incident.

And Raines? I just don't get it...he's ALMOST Lou Brock.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree. Very odd outcome. Can't wait to read Posnanski on this.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Tim Raines is not a Hall of Famer. Not even close. You can make arguments for the rest, though I'd disagree, but not Raines. He had a few real good years and then was average for a long long time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree. I vote no on Rock Raines.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=74343:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:30 PM:name=PcB)-->QUOTE (PcB @ Jan 6 2010, 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74342:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:28 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 6 2010, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74339:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74337:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM:name=Rappster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rappster @ Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74335:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->He's in. the only one. How did Alomar not make it? How does Tim Raines only get 30 percent of the vote. How does Dale Murphy only get 11?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't figure Alomar, Blyleven, Raines, and even Larkin...I thought it might be a big class.

Murphy was so awesome...but, he didn't maintain. He did, however, have all-world intangibles. Sort of akin to Mattingly.

Blyleven is a mystery. He has nearly first-ballot numbers. People don't give longevity enough credit.

Alomar must have been crushed because of the spitting incident.

And Raines? I just don't get it...he's ALMOST Lou Brock.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree. Very odd outcome. Can't wait to read Posnanski on this.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Tim Raines is not a Hall of Famer. Not even close. You can make arguments for the rest, though I'd disagree, but not Raines. He had a few real good years and then was average for a long long time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree. I vote no on Rock Raines.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So just to be clear, Dawson is clearly a Hall of Famer, but Raines, who played in the same era, and had a better OPS+ is "not even close" to being Hall worthy?

[PcB]

<!--quoteo(post=74352:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:59 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jan 6 2010, 02:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74343:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:30 PM:name=PcB)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PcB @ Jan 6 2010, 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74342:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:28 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 6 2010, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74339:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Jan 6 2010, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74337:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM:name=Rappster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rappster @ Jan 6 2010, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=74335:date=Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jan 6 2010, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->He's in. the only one. How did Alomar not make it? How does Tim Raines only get 30 percent of the vote. How does Dale Murphy only get 11?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't figure Alomar, Blyleven, Raines, and even Larkin...I thought it might be a big class.

Murphy was so awesome...but, he didn't maintain. He did, however, have all-world intangibles. Sort of akin to Mattingly.

Blyleven is a mystery. He has nearly first-ballot numbers. People don't give longevity enough credit.

Alomar must have been crushed because of the spitting incident.

And Raines? I just don't get it...he's ALMOST Lou Brock.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree. Very odd outcome. Can't wait to read Posnanski on this.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Tim Raines is not a Hall of Famer. Not even close. You can make arguments for the rest, though I'd disagree, but not Raines. He had a few real good years and then was average for a long long time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree. I vote no on Rock Raines.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So just to be clear, Dawson is clearly a Hall of Famer, but Raines, who played in the same era, and had a better OPS+ is "not even close" to being Hall worthy?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dawson had more H, RBI, 2B, and HR. I realize Raines wasn't a power hitter, just saying.

I think the main reason Dawson made the Hall was because of his MVP season, and Raines didn't have one of those.

Raines was a very good player but no, I don't think he's hall worthy. Dawson was borderline and he finally made it, Raines isn't getting in.

[Coldneck]

Raines was one of the best ever at what he did (lead off). Check out his SB % (much better than Ricky) and career OBP. He most definitely is a HOFer in my eyes.

Here is what I don't understand:

Robin Ventura, 7 votes
Ellis Burks, 2
Eric Karros, 2
Kevin Appier, 1
Pat Hentgen, 1
David Segui, 1

Who the fuck votes for these guys?

[PcB]

<!--quoteo(post=74359:date=Jan 6 2010, 03:15 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Jan 6 2010, 03:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Raines was one of the best ever at what he did (lead off). Check out his SB % (much better than Ricky) and career OBP. He most definitely is a HOFer in my eyes.

Here is what I don't understand:

Robin Ventura, 7 votes
Ellis Burks, 2
Eric Karros, 2
Kevin Appier, 1
Pat Hentgen, 1
David Segui, 1

Who the fuck votes for these guys?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People that should lose their votes.

[Runnys]

Veryzer...just curious, what is your rationale behind Blyleven not being a HOFer?

[1060Ivy]

<!--quoteo(post=74359:date=Jan 6 2010, 03:15 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Jan 6 2010, 03:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Raines was one of the best ever at what he did (lead off). Check out his SB % (much better than Ricky) and career OBP. He most definitely is a HOFer in my eyes.

Here is what I don't understand:

Robin Ventura, 7 votes
Ellis Burks, 2
Eric Karros, 2
Kevin Appier, 1
Pat Hentgen, 1
David Segui, 1

Who the fuck votes for these guys?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Writers who these guys got laid.

[CFOrfan]

Rob Neyer wrote one of the worst articles ever.

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Andre Dawson. In his first four appearances on the ballot, he was considered a Hall of Famer by roughly half the electorate. That number rose to two-thirds of the electorate in the past two elections. And this time around, he jumped from 67 percent to 78 percent. Because, you know, he hit all those home runs in 2009.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Kidding. But Dawson did finish his career with a .323 on-base percentage, which means he's wrested the title Hall of Fame Outfielder With the Worst OBP away from Lou Brock ... and it wasn't much of a battle, as Brock's OBP is 20 points higher than Dawson's.

This bothers pointy-headed nerds like me. It did not bother most Hall of Fame voters, who chose instead to focus on his eight Gold Gloves, his MVP award in 1987 and the dynamic power/speed blend that typified Dawson's five best seasons. I wouldn't have voted for Dawson, but his career does (roughly speaking) fall in line with the Hall's historical standards.<b> I mean, he wasn't anything like as good as Tim Raines, but that's an argument for another day.</b> Raines got only 30 percent and deserved better (but at least he's moving up). Alan Trammell got just 22 percent, and deserved much better (he moved up, too, but just slightly).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/i...-one-we-thought

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=74423:date=Jan 6 2010, 10:30 PM:name=CFOrfan)-->QUOTE (CFOrfan @ Jan 6 2010, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Rob Neyer wrote one of the worst articles ever.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Andre Dawson. In his first four appearances on the ballot, he was considered a Hall of Famer by roughly half the electorate. That number rose to two-thirds of the electorate in the past two elections. And this time around, he jumped from 67 percent to 78 percent. Because, you know, he hit all those home runs in 2009.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Kidding. But Dawson did finish his career with a .323 on-base percentage, which means he's wrested the title Hall of Fame Outfielder With the Worst OBP away from Lou Brock ... and it wasn't much of a battle, as Brock's OBP is 20 points higher than Dawson's.

This bothers pointy-headed nerds like me. It did not bother most Hall of Fame voters, who chose instead to focus on his eight Gold Gloves, his MVP award in 1987 and the dynamic power/speed blend that typified Dawson's five best seasons. I wouldn't have voted for Dawson, but his career does (roughly speaking) fall in line with the Hall's historical standards.<b> I mean, he wasn't anything like as good as Tim Raines, but that's an argument for another day.</b> Raines got only 30 percent and deserved better (but at least he's moving up). Alan Trammell got just 22 percent, and deserved much better (he moved up, too, but just slightly).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/i...-one-we-thought
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Neyer is a fucking douche. In fact, ESPN's coverage, as a whole, was disappointing. Far too much about Alomar not getting in and barely anything about Hawk. It's Hawk's day. Leave the bitching about the voting process for another day.

[vitaminB]

Good thing Billy Beane doesn't get a HOF vote. I hate these fucking after the fact stat nerds trying to discredit Andre "Fucking" Dawson's career. The man was/is a legend. 400 HR's, 300 SB's Barry Bonds, Willy Mays, and Andre Dawson. Two of the three didn't use steroids. Plus 8 gold fucking gloves. I don't know how you get to be a more complete baseball player than that. And to compare fucking Rock Raines. Seriously, he never domintated anything. He was an after thought in his era. Fucking OBP mother fuckers. You know what when you carry a team, you can't just go up and look for a fucking walk.

[johnr42]

Raines was a fantastic player. I can understand why people don't think he was as good as Dawson; but the truth in my eyes is they were two different kinds of players, and both were excellent. Dawson obviously was a 5 tool guy in an era were there were not many 5 tool guys. Lots of power and speed, not to mention excellent defense. As mentioned earlier by PCB, he leads Raines in H, HR, 2B and RBI. However, I think that's stat-picking a bit, without recognizing what Raines was good at too. Raines leads Dawson in R, 3B, SB, SB% (one of Raines largest accomplishments, not only was he a beast on the basepaths, he rarely got caught (84.6%)), OBP, OPS, OPS+, and BB. The other argument I have seen on here against Raines is that he was a beast for 6-7 seasons and then just a alright player. I don't necessarily think that is the case either. I think if you look at the numbers, he was a pretty damn good player til 1993. That's 12 good years (1991 obviously wasnt a good year), and he had a couple decent years after that. Perhaps both players are due some credit for what they did, and both should be in the hall.

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=74423:date=Jan 6 2010, 11:30 PM:name=CFOrfan)-->QUOTE (CFOrfan @ Jan 6 2010, 11:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Rob Neyer wrote one of the worst articles ever.

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->Andre Dawson. In his first four appearances on the ballot, he was considered a Hall of Famer by roughly half the electorate. That number rose to two-thirds of the electorate in the past two elections. And this time around, he jumped from 67 percent to 78 percent. Because, you know, he hit all those home runs in 2009.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Kidding. But Dawson did finish his career with a .323 on-base percentage, which means he's wrested the title Hall of Fame Outfielder With the Worst OBP away from Lou Brock ... and it wasn't much of a battle, as Brock's OBP is 20 points higher than Dawson's.

This bothers pointy-headed nerds like me. It did not bother most Hall of Fame voters, who chose instead to focus on his eight Gold Gloves, his MVP award in 1987 and the dynamic power/speed blend that typified Dawson's five best seasons. I wouldn't have voted for Dawson, but his career does (roughly speaking) fall in line with the Hall's historical standards.<b> I mean, he wasn't anything like as good as Tim Raines, but that's an argument for another day.</b> Raines got only 30 percent and deserved better (but at least he's moving up). Alan Trammell got just 22 percent, and deserved much better (he moved up, too, but just slightly).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/i...-one-we-thought
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Rob ignores the fact that nobody - NOBODY - gave a whoop about OBP in Dawson's time. it simply wasn't part of the strategy. You went up to the plate to swing; guys who had a high OBP had it because that just happened to be a part of their approach at the plate. How can we say that Dawson's OBP wouldn't be much higher if he were playing today?