Jan
06

Andre Dawson the sole new Hall of Famer

By

No Roberto Alomar, no Barry Larkin. But Andre Dawson got into the Hall of Fame today, receiving 77.9 percent of the votes. So congratulations to him on the ultimate achievement. Bert Blyleven fans have reason to be optimistic, as he received 74.2 percent of the vote. If those five writers who submitted blank ballots had voted for Bert, he’d have been in. It sounds like next year is a strong possibility.

Also of note, Alomar got 73.7 percent, so he should be in next year. Jack Morris received 52.3 percent, Barry Larking got 51.6 percent, Lee Smith got 47.3 percent, and Edgar Martinez got 32.5 percent. Don Mattingly continues his pursuit with just 16.1 percent of the ballot. Sorry, Donnie, but there is no HOF in your future.

Categories : Asides

132 Comments»

  1. Ansky says:

    Wow I thought for sure Robbie would make it. No love for Rock Raines either? The HOF is a mess.

  2. Whom ever gave David Segui a vote…..SHAME!!

  3. Salty Buggah says:

    WTF? 5 blank ballots?

  4. Randall Pink Floyd says:

    Stupid stupid stupid. Howard Bryant has a subject criteria that Roberto Alomar should be elected (and he will vote for him next year), but he isn’t a “first ballot” HOFer. Moron.

    Just a bad year all around.

  5. Ansky says:

    I think the writers have too much power.

  6. Mike Pop says:

    Edgar only 32 percent I think it was, he might not ever get in.

    • Jersey says:

      Blyleven went from 14 percent last decade to on the verge of rightfully getting in now. Edgar could do the same.

    • Bo says:

      Edgar didnt string enough seasons to get in. I mean if you cant put Albert Belle in for offensive dominance why would you put in Martinez?

      • Chris says:

        Let’s compare:

        Games played:
        Edgar: 2055
        Belle: 1539

        OPS+:
        Edgar: 147
        Belle: 143

        OBP:
        Edgar: .418
        Belle: .369

        Walks:
        Edgar: 1283
        Belle: 683

        So other than Martinez being better and playing longer, I can see why Belle would get in before Martinez.

        • Don says:

          Edgar needs to get in, along with Alomar, Larkin, and Blyleven. Edgar was the best right handed hitter of the 90s, put up 7 straight seasons of an OPS .965 and above, with 6 of those seasons above .990 and 5 of them above 1.000.

          Dawson getting in as almost as much a joke, as the writers who had empty ballots.

  7. Jersey says:

    I’m sort’ve shocked that neither Alomar nor Larkin made it in. Hopefully both make it next year.

  8. pat says:

    Alomar finished with a career .300/.371/.443 12 All Star selections and 11 Gold Gloves. And the people with blank ballots should be shot. Inexcusable.

  9. Jack Morris received 52.3 percent, Barry Larkin got 51.6 percent, Lee Smith got 47.3 percent…

    The fact that roughly the same percentage of BBWAA voters feel that Morris/Larkin/Smith are hallworthy frightens me.

    Larkin: Hells yes.
    Morris: No.
    Smith: Hells no.

    This shouldn’t be a neck-and-neck horserace. That’s sad.

    • Steve H says:

      So glad you put Morris ahead of Smith. If Jack Morris were a closer, could he have had Lee Smith’s career? Very, very likely. Would that make him a HOF? Of course not!

      • I don’t think Morris belongs in the Hall. That being said, I’m not going to go all the way to the other extreme and say he’s got no business even being in the conversation. Morris is firmly in the “Almost but not enough” category.

        Lee Smith, on the other hand, is a clear notch below that. Morris getting 40-50% of the vote and never clearing the Hall hurdle seems right to me. (It’s what should have happened to Jim Rice, btw.) But Lee Smith getting 47% of the vote is shocking. He should never be that high. Half of the baseball writers should not think Lee Smith is a Hall of Famer, especially when guys like Tim Raines never even reach THAT level of acclaim.

        In real life:
        Larkin >>>>>>>> Raines >>>>>>>>>>>> Morris >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith

        For the BBWAA:
        Morris > Larkin > Smith >>>>>>>>>>>>> Raines

        That’s batshit insane.

    • Brooklyn Ed says:

      how about Tommy John? If he has a surgery named after him, then he should be in the hall.

    • Bo says:

      larkin was very good but he wasnt better than Alan Trammel. if hes not in Larkin shouldnt be either.

  10. JGS says:

    correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe everyone who has ever gotten 70+% has gotten in the very next year. With no slam dunks on the ballot in 2011, I would think Alomar and Blyleven are mortal locks for next year

    surprised to see Edgar so low too

  11. Salty Buggah says:

    Morris got 282 (52.3%) votes. This pretty should guarantee Mike Mussina will get in since he’s considerably better in just about every category.

  12. pat says:

    Holy crap, Larkin played 111 games in 2004. I thought he had been retired for like a decade.

    • Thomas says:

      I know it is like that for most guys. I was looking at some of the players yesterday and was like Dawson played in 1996?!?!?!

  13. NCpinstripes says:

    Blyleven should have been in years ago, and how Alomar wasn’t voted in is beyond me.

    Edgar should not be in IMO. I’m not a fan of the almost exclusive DH, piling up numbers, to get into what is supposed to be the home of the best of the best.

    • jsbrendog says:

      edgar martinez. one of the best of the best hitters of the past 25 years.

    • Kiersten says:

      If you’re going to have the DH position, you can’t punish someone for being a DH. They should be held to a higher standard, same with closers vs. starters, but great hitters shouldn’t be kept out just because they were DHs.

      • That.

        In order to get into the HoF as a DH, you need to be a really, really good hitter.

        Edgar Martinez: a really, really good hitter.

        • Steve H says:

          In order to get into the HoF as a DH, you need to be a really, really good hitter.

          Paul Molitor OPS+=122 primarily as a DH
          Edgar Martinez OPS+=147
          Harold Baines OPS+=120

          Molitor is in, and he’s not anywhere near Edgar as a hitter, and probably doesn’t qualify under your really really good guidelines. But the 3000 hits…..

          • I saw Molitor play with my own eyes. That was greatness.

            /JaysonStarkAgain’d

            • RollingWave says:

              yeah but if a guy can vote in the HOF but didn’t see one of those players with his own eyes then something’s seriously wrong

          • Chris says:

            Martinez played roughly 1400 games at DH and 600 in the field. Molitor played 1200 at DH and 1500 in the field. Molitor stayed in the field much longer than Martinez did, which makes a significant difference. Molitor also played 600 more games than Martinez – or roughly 4 full seasons.

            • Steve H says:

              But Martinez’ complete demolishing of Molitor offensively makes up the difference.

              • Chris says:

                You can certainly make that argument.

                However, you can’t argue that Molitor was primarily a DH – or a DH as much as Martinez.

                • Steve H says:

                  Agreed, he wasn’t a DH as much as Edgar, which is why he can get in with a 122 OPS+. Baines was as much a DH as Edgar, and won’t get close with his 120 OPS+. The 147 OPS+ is so ridiculous that it should easily overcome the fact that he DH’d. I agree Molitor is a HOF, and I agree that Baines isn’t, but I don’t think you can leave out someone who dominated offensively for 10+ years like Edgar did.

    • I’m not a fan of the almost exclusive DH, piling up numbers, to get into what is supposed to be the home of the best of the best.

      It’s interesting that DH’s are accused of “piling up numbers” when hitters who play the field are not.

      “Piling up numbers” = hitting, which is what you’re supposed to do and which is what your HoF candidacy should be judged on

      • Bo says:

        Martinez was a really good hitter. But he wasnt a dominant hitter. As you can see by his stats. 2200 hits and 300 homers? Hoe are they HOF #’s?

        Those are not HOF numbers no matter how you spin them. If those are HOF #’s from a position that is only about hitting than Mattingly should be in and scores of others.

        • Steve H says:

          You are looking at counting numbers. He didn’t have an extermely long career because hitting .350 in the minors couldn’t get him a callup. Not his fault. For when he played, he was a DOMINATING hitter.

          Isn’t Ichiro already considered a HOF despite his lack of huge counting stats? Ichiro is obviously a great fielder, but that’s not why people think he’s a HOF. And Edgar was a much better hitter than Ichiro.

  14. Being voted into the HoF isn’t the ultimate achievement anymore.

    After today,I believe a good portion of fans will remember the Jim Rice and Andre Dawson years and say it’s pretty much an arbitrary contest where old men who really don’t know anything significant about baseball picked who they liked and not who deserved it.

    It’s a sad day. I think a lot of us expected more progress. It’s not here yet though.

    • JGS says:

      it’s still the ultimate achievement

      Rice and Dawson have nothing on some of the Veterans’ Committee selections from the first few decades of the last century (Ray Schalk and his career 83 OPS+ comes to mind)

      No one makes a stink about those guys because most people have never heard of them. It’s still the ultimate achievement

      • You lost me an last century.

        Either way, it’s not about looking at the worst player and voting in everyone better than that guy. If so the HoF would be over 500 players deep.

        Baseball evaluation is different than it was last decade much less last century.

        A couple more years of this crap where the Jim Rice’s of the world get in and the Tim Raines’ get no respect and it’s going to be a joke in the community.

    • Bo says:

      How is it a sad day? There are millions out there who think those 2 are two of the greats of the game. It’s subjective. It’s not like the HOF is easy to get into here.

  15. Steve H says:

    Larkin>>Tramell>>>>>>Ozzie

  16. It is really pathetic that there are at least seven players who were better than Dawson, each of whom IMO deserve to be in the HoF, yet only Dawson is elected. It’s utterly ridiculous.

  17. Doug says:

    fwiw (i know, not much), mattingly’s vote total increased the highest percentage from last year (35.9%)

    • Bo says:

      On the bright side for Donnie Baseball. If Dawson can get in with average stats in a long career than Mattinglys period of dominance should be more of a factor. Maybe he gets in down the line.

  18. Mike Pop says:

    I like how Gammons uses some of the crazzzyy!!11!! stats.

  19. Unbelievable that Robbie Alomar isn’t in.

    Here’s the thing. Why do these voters have a problem with electing some guys as ‘first-ballot’ Hall of Famers?

    What’s Alomar going to over the next year to help is cause? Steal a few bases? A few more hits?

    Some of these voters have to get off the high horse they are sitting on.

    • Why does Jon Heyman wear high heels around his home?

    • Bo says:

      Dont really get the whole ‘dont vote on 1st ballot’ thing.

      If a guy is a HOF, hes a HOF.

      The test will come when a guy like Maddux comes up. How he cant be a unanimous choice is beyond me.

    • Late on this but here’s an overview:

      The Hall of Fame was established in 1936, giving them a large back catalog of people to add. Thus, a lot of very worthy guys were left off at first because there was a limit on how many people could be inducted.

      BBWAA writers look back and say “well [guy like Cy Young] didn’t get in first ballot so neither should [Guy like Roberto Alomar]” because they don’t bother to find out why Cy Young went in on the second ballot (only five guys could go in so it was Cobb, Ruth, Mathewson, Walter Johnson, Honus Wagner).

      They whine about history but don’t even appear to know the history of what they are voting on. The 100% vote thing happened for the same reasons.

  20. larryf says:

    I could care less. My favorite all-time Yankee, #12 Ron Blomberg is in the Hall…

    The first Designated Hebrew….walked against Luis Tiant

  21. NJY says:

    Who IS the next player to be 1st ballot HoF???

    Maddux?

  22. Bo says:

    If you’re going to put a guy like Dawson in you have to put Dwight Evans in. Parker in. Raines for sure. Dick Allen. Albert Belle. Mattingly even had more dominant yrs. Baines had better numbers. The Crime Dog. Edgar Martinez a better hitter. Slippery slope time.

    Dawson wasnt dominant. He didnt win titles. He wasnt a winner. He didnt dominate stats wise.

  23. KayGee says:

    What are peoples thoughts on Dawson getting in?

    • Steve H says:

      He’s not the worst player in, but there are several much better candidates. Personally I don’t think him and his .323 OBP belongs. The old “his job was to drive in runs” is the most craptastic theory ever. His job was to hit, and to have success hitting is not making outs. He made a TON of outs. And as far as OBP not being emphasized, why did Williams/Ruth/Gehrig all get on base so much, if it wasn’t their jobs?

  24. Geno says:

    Kirby Puckett (1st ballot hall of fame) – 1783 At-bats
    .314 Avg
    .360 on-base
    .477 slugging
    1071 runs
    2304 hits
    414 doubles
    207 home runs
    1085 RBI’s
    450 Walks
    965 K’s
    6 gold gloves
    MVP runner up 1 year
    10 time all-star

    Don Mattingly (zero hall of fame chance) – 1785 At-bats
    .307 Avg
    .358 on-base
    .471 slugging
    1007 runs
    2153 hits
    442 doubles
    222 home runs
    1099 RBI’s
    588 Walks
    444 K’s
    9 Gold Gloves
    MVP Winner 1 year
    MVP runner up 1 year
    6 time all-star

  25. I literally screamed when I saw this voting. Awful.

  26. BringBackWillieRandolph says:

    You cannot possibly expect the BBWAA to use stats like OPS+ to evaluate HOF prospects. These guys still fill their ballots out with crayons, and still think the most important categories are batting average for hitters and wins for pitchers. (over-generalization, I know).

    That being said, I do think more than just pure stats have to be part of the equation for the hall. Winning should count for something as should a player’s contribution to the good of baseball. That certainly seems to be a factor for guys like Gwynn and Puckett and plays against guys like Belle (I’m not commenting on the hall worthiness of any of these players).

    I’d love to see Mattingly get more support, but is that just because I’m a Yankee fan and he’s one of my all time favorites?

  27. Renny Baseball says:

    Am glad there were blank ballots. Good for them. Hall has got to mean something. Spitting on an umpire is inexcusable and undeserving of a first ballot election. He did discover it was wrong, developed a close relationship with the umpire, but that’s after the fact. Not everyone HoF-worthy deserves to get in on the first ballot. Also, I believe big-game pitching means more than win totals (in the Mussina and Jack Morris comparison). You can argue, but won’t change my opinion.

    • Steve H says:

      Ty Cobb stabbed a guy. Oh, and Kirby Puckett was a women beater. And it’s nice that your mind is completely made up and cannot change your opinion. Very open minded.

      • Ivan says:

        And Cobb killed a man and was racist too. This is not the HOF of good behavior people.

      • Renny Baseball says:

        Steve H, Not that I am not open-minded, in fact, am a sucker for a good argument, just that it seems, on this spirited topic, prior posts state opinions that appear to be more the consensus (fine) but then frame it with such certainty as if there can be no other reasonable differing views. That’s to explain the tone of my last sentence.

        It fascinates me that all of us who love the game can have such contrasting views on who should be in or out of the HoF, and draw all sorts of different distinctions meaningful to the proponent but that can reasonably seem arbitrary to others. Cobb was a racist and a miserable man; if Puckett was a woman beater, that’s conduct that’s not even lawful. But personally, I draw the line at sportsmanship — because while it is true that it is not the “Hall of Good Behavior,” an act as disrespectful as spitting in an umpire’s face disrespects the game. So that’s my perspective. Can agree to disagree, no?

  28. Don says:

    Better hitter:

    Edgar Martinez
    or
    Jeff Bagwell (2011 HOF candidate)

    Wow thats a tough one!

  29. Joseph M says:

    Mattingly belongs in the Hall of Fame before Andre Dawson. Dawson had one great season, the rest of his career misses the boat. Mattingly on the other hand was the best all around player at his position for 5 years.

    • Mattingly on the other hand was the best all around player at his position for 5 years.

      I agree, and that’s great.

      I doesn’t make him a Hall of Famer, though.

      Brett Boone was the best all around player at his position for 5 years. Look it up.

      • Joseph M says:

        He is if Andre Dawson is a Hall of Famer. Look at Dawson’s career at any point was he anything more than a very good player, leaving out the single season of 1987.

    • Don says:

      Favorite quote on Don Mattingly comes from Bill James:

      “100% Ballplayer, O% Bullshit”

      Sad to say he isnt a HOFer though.

      • Joseph M says:

        And Andre Dawson is. You tell me how this guy gets into the Hall of Fame and Dale Murphy who won two MVP awards and had exxentially the same career taking into account he had 1800 less plate appearances doesn’t even get 20% of the vote. This entire system is screwed up. THey need to either expand the definition of what a Hall of Famer is to include players like Dawson, Mattingly and Murphy or pull the cards of some of the writers who vote. Dawson is not a legit choice.

  30. Ivan says:

    Im completely shocked that Alomar and Larkin were not elected in the HOF.

    The voters are making the HOF a farse right now, if they keep voting in guys like Rice and Dawson in the HOF.

    • Renny Baseball says:

      I agree on Jim Rice. He should not be in the HoF. Dawson was borderline, but probably the precedent set by Rice put him over the top. I could have accepted Dawson being denied entry. In his favor, Dawson had nearly 2,800 hits and 400+ HR, so just short of the 3,000/500 “automatic” HoF criteria, won an MVP and was a dominant player in his era. Also 300+ steals. Here’s something many might not know about him: during the owner/free agent collusion years, when he was a free agent and decided he wanted to lave the Montreal Expos to play on the Cubs, he approached Cubs GM Dallas Green with a contract with the salary amount blank, for Dallas Green to fill in. Just, name your price, guys, here’s where I want to play. Green agreed to pay him a measly $500,000, and he had his MVP season that year.

  31. pete c. says:

    With the exception of Jack O’connell the bbwwa is a disgrace. How can they keep guys like Kaat, Blylenen and Morris out is beyond me. I wouldn’t be surprised if some douchebag writer keeps Mo off his ballot because he was only a reliever.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.