Hall of Fame 2010: Andre Dawson elected

[topper09er]

Edgar finished with 309 HR/1261 RBI/2247 H/1219 R

That line doesn't do it for me, especially for basically a full-time DH.

His counting stats are not HOF worthy because he wasnt a full time player until later than most, but his rate stat are pretty good:

.418 OBP is 20th best ever, higher than guys like Musial or Mel Ott

147 OPS + is top 40 all-time, considering he played in the AL in the 1990s that is very high

[colbyjack]

I have to believe that Alomar, and even Larkin, didn't get voted in because there now is skepticism for everyone that enjoyed significant success in the 90s due to steroids (and of course his career ended in 2003/04 when the steroid issue truly blew up, and I think he allegedly was on the list that was never fully released to my knowledge). Alomar is the second or third best second baseman of all time that I can think of, behind Joe Morgan and Rogers Hornsby, although I'm sure I'm forgetting someone. I too thought he was a lock to get in on the first try, and if not the steroid era skepticism, I think people just forgot how good he was.

 

Injuries plagued Larkin's career, but he put up some really impressive numbers as a shortstop. I thought he had a pretty good chance as a first ballot HOFer too, although not as strong as Alomar's.

 

EDIT: I reminded myself of a few other good 2b like Nap Lajoie, Eddie Collins, Jackie Robinson and Ryne Sandberg. Still, Alomar is one of the best of all-time, and one of the most complete.

[joepepsi]

Larkin must be in the top 20 all best ss. That should be enough for the HoF.

[Invader3K]

I think the big problem for Larkin is that he was always sort of in Ozzie Smith's shadow as the best SS in the NL.

[topper09er]

I think that problem for Alomar was the spitting so some people held him back on his first time, hell be in next year for sure.

The problem for Larkin was that people look at his numbers as a SS and compare them to A-Rod and he looks bad, but for his time he was better than Ripken and not too far behind Yount. He was injured a lot so his counting stats are a little low but his rate stats are very good and played very good defense. He had a 30/30 season and finished with .295/.371/.444 for a 116 OPS+ (in the 90s mostly).

Ripken .276/.340/.447 112 OPS+ including more years in the 80s.

Yount .285/.342/.430 115 OPS + including more years in the 80s.

 

Ripken and Yount had longer careers and better peaks than Larkin but overall I think they are all on the same tier. Larkin just doesnt have the magical 3000 hits.

 

Larkin is easily in the top 10 SS all time which should be a lock for HOF

[endaround]

Larkin's problem isn't Ozzie Smith. Its Cal Ripken on one end of his career and Arod, Jeter, and Noamr on the other end.

[bacon06]

Hot Stove on MLB Network had Marty Noble, one of the writers who didn't vote for Roberto Alomar, on to explain why he didn't vote for Alomar. Basically, it boiled down to Noble still being upset Alomar spit at the umpire and because Alomar didn't "try" or "care" when he was playing for the Mets. Even when Harold Reynolds told Noble that Alomar has apologized to Hirschbeck and the two are all good now, Noble didn't care. Noble may have had a Freudian slip when he said Alomar hadn't apologized "to him" but he quickly corrected himself by saying he didn't have to apologize to him.

 

This discussion just showed how high and mighty BBWAA voters think of themselves.

 

Marty Noble on why he did not vote for Roberto Alomar

[Invader3K]

I think a lot of the anti-Alomar arguments are flimsy, "He's not a 'first ballot guy', but I'll vote for him next time", type excuses. I expect and hope that he gets in next time. I was never a huge Alomar fan (didn't follow him closely enough to be honest), but he has the numbers.

[1992casey]

According to deadspin.com there is a writer named Lisa Olson who has turned in a blank ballot every year since she has been eligible to vote.

 

I don't think there's a connection to the blank ballots, but Olson is the writer who was sexually harassed by New England Patriots players after they labeled her as a "looker."

[NeedMoreFans]

Apparently, Dawson will go into the HOF as an Expo. He had said that he wanted to go in as a Cub. Is this the HOF's decision, and not the players? I always thought it was the player's decision as to which team he wanted to be associated with.

[Invader3K]

No, the Hall makes the decision, supposedly with input from the player.

[Vgmastr]

It used to be the choice of the player, but after the controversy around Boggs and Winfield, the HOF took over choosing which cap the player wears.

[Invader3K]

Well, as far as Dawson, he played 11 seasons with the Expos and only 6 with the Cubs, so I'm not sure why he wouldn't go in as an Expo.

[pitchleague]

I never really understood why they don't make plaques with either no hat or a blank hat for those players who were good on multiple teams and the Hall and Player couldn't decide which team's hat should be on the plaque.

 

Does this make sense to anybody else? Is there some rule against modern players going in hatless or blank-hatted? I know a majority of the early plaques are hatless or blank-hatted, but that's the way they wore hats back then--without logos.

[Invader3K]

Didn't someone fairly recent get inducted with a blank hat? I'm thinking Gaylord Perry or someone like that.

[TSack27]

Didn't someone fairly recent get inducted with a blank hat? I'm thinking Gaylord Perry or someone like that.

It was Catfish Hunter

 

"Late pitcher Jim 'Catfish' Hunter, for example, enjoyed so much success with the Oakland Athletics and New York Yankees that he decided to be remembered with a blank cap bearing neither logo...

"The Hall of Fame took over the decision-making process for choosing the cap after the 2001 elections and does so after consulting with the player, according to Hall spokesman Brad Horn."