PDA

View Full Version : Dawson in-Baines out


LITTLE NELL
07-25-2010, 08:49 AM
Andre Dawson enters the HOF today, if he's in why isn't Harold Baines in?
Harold had more hits, RBIs and a better average. Dawson had 54 more HRs.
Some will say Baines was a DH for good part of his career but unless that automatically disqualifies a player (which it does not) then Baines should be in.
Will Baines eventually get in? Lets hope so.

Madvora
07-25-2010, 09:28 AM
The DH bias is ridiculous. It's real position in the lineup that has to be filled 162 games every year. You can't blame a player for filling that role and succeeding at it.

LITTLE NELL
07-25-2010, 09:33 AM
The DH bias is ridiculous. It's real position in the lineup that has to be filled 162 games every year. You can't blame a player for filling that role and succeeding at it.

I agree 100%, it should have no negative bearing on election.

LongLiveFisk
07-25-2010, 10:14 AM
The DH bias is ridiculous. It's real position in the lineup that has to be filled 162 games every year. You can't blame a player for filling that role and succeeding at it.

I agree 100%, it should have no negative bearing on election.

I'm with you guys on this all the way. They allow the position to exist and then discriminate against those who play the position. ****ing stupid. :kukoo:

FielderJones
07-25-2010, 11:52 AM
I'm with you guys on this all the way. They allow the position to exist and then discriminate against those who play the position. ****ing stupid. :kukoo:

Courtesy the baseball purists who think a two-out intentional walk to a .240 #8 hitter is strategy.

JB98
07-25-2010, 12:00 PM
I have no idea why Hall voters exclude DHs because "all they could do is hit."

Hall voters have elected a number of players who couldn't do anything except pitch. Why should it be different for hitters?

TDog
07-25-2010, 12:09 PM
Of course, Harold Baines belongs in the Hall of Fame. Players who played with him and against him will tell you that. Some even rank Baines ahead of Frank Thomas as far as all-time White Sox greats, although the statistics don't bear that out.

Baines developed into an elite right fielder earlier in his career with a great arm. His knee problems were worse than Dawson's were, but Dawson would have been a DH if he had signed with an American League team during the collusion era when he went to the Cubs and offered himself up at a bargain price because no one else would sign him.

It would be different if Baines were a DH from the start of his career. The prejudice against designated hitters is there because hitting is only half the game. DH isn't a position on a baseball team. A DH is someone who comes off the bench to hit. Although Frank Thomas played a lot of first base -- actually almost 1,000 of his more than 2,300 games at first base -- he will face the same prejudice that Baines has.

gregoriop
07-25-2010, 12:17 PM
It's ridiculous that Harold never got more than 6.1% of the vote. Edgar Martinez had 36.2%. Harold has more HR, hits and RBI...and a pretty darn good .289 lifetime average (Martinez: .312).

What a damn shame.

tstrike2000
07-25-2010, 12:24 PM
As much as I liked Dawson, he probably shouldn't be an HOF'er and definitely not Jim Rice. Since those guys are though, it's even more unfortunate Baines is not.

TommyJohn
07-25-2010, 12:58 PM
Harold Baines isn't excluded because of a "bias" against the DH. He is excluded because he wasn't a great enough player to get in.

Funny though, that Dawson intends to thank Chicago fans, because he believes that his years with the Cubs helped him get to the Hall. Certainly they did. Dawson was one of those types of borderline players that was greatly helped by playing for a marquee team. (Jim Rice also comes to mind.) Had he stuck with the Expos or had his MVP season with the Atlanta Braves or the Philadelphia Phillies, I believe he would still be on the ballot, perhaps never to be elected.

Brian26
07-25-2010, 01:02 PM
Funny though, that Dawson intends to thank Chicago fans, because he believes that his years with the Cubs helped him get to the Hall. Certainly they did. Dawson was one of those types of borderline players that was greatly helped by playing for a marquee team. (Jim Rice also comes to mind.)

The Cubs from '87 to '92 were anything but a marquee team. The year he won MVP, the Cubs finished in last place. They made the playoffs one time during that stretch, but other than that they were fairly mediocre.

Unless, somehow what they've turned into 20 years later affects voting today.

SI1020
07-25-2010, 01:05 PM
The Cubs from '87 to '92 were anything but a marquee team. The year he won MVP, the Cubs finished in last place. They made the playoffs one time during that stretch, but other than that they were fairly mediocre.

Unless, somehow what they've turned into 20 years later affects voting today. Maybe not "marquee" in terms of wins and losses, but it certainly didn't hurt Dawson's chances that he had some nice years in a Cubs uniform.

TommyJohn
07-25-2010, 01:24 PM
The Cubs from '87 to '92 were anything but a marquee team. The year he won MVP, the Cubs finished in last place. They made the playoffs one time during that stretch, but other than that they were fairly mediocre.

Unless, somehow what they've turned into 20 years later affects voting today.

Maybe not "marquee" in terms of wins and losses, but it certainly didn't hurt Dawson's chances that he had some nice years in a Cubs uniform.
The bolded quote is what I meant. No, the Cubs were not winners during the Dawson era (except 1989) but they were on superstation WGN and drawing well, their popularity was on the upswing. To expand on what I said, I doubt he would have won NL MVP in 1987 had he played for the other last place team, which I believe was the Braves.

theamb
07-25-2010, 02:15 PM
The bolded quote is what I meant. No, the Cubs were not winners during the Dawson era (except 1989) but they were on superstation WGN and drawing well, their popularity was on the upswing. To expand on what I said, I doubt he would have won NL MVP in 1987 had he played for the other last place team, which I believe was the Braves.

That's quite the tin foil conspiracy theory you have.

I don't blame Dawson for wanting to go in as a Cub. Who wants to represent a defunct franchise?

In general, the whole specific team selection should be done away with. But until that happens, silly debates like this will exist.

TommyJohn
07-25-2010, 02:44 PM
That's quite the tin foil conspiracy theory you have.

I don't blame Dawson for wanting to go in as a Cub. Who wants to represent a defunct franchise?

In general, the whole specific team selection should be done away with. But until that happens, silly debates like this will exist.How is it a "tinfoil hat conspiracy theory"? I am merely saying that he wouldn't have won in 1987 because he wouldn't have been showered with the attention he received in Chicago. THAT'S a conspiracy theory? I don't believe there was a "conspiracy" involved in it. Simply that he had a monster season for the right team. (One of them, anyway.) Oh, and Oswald acted alone.