Our Hawk

by ExNorthsider on Dec 14, 2007 8:13 PM CST

If the Mitchell report results in BBWA limiting their choices of legit HOF candidates, maybe Andre Dawson has more of a shot now?? His numbers-- with no juice, I presume-- are really pretty darn good.
438 homers, an MVP, lots of gold gloves, great guy, team leader, etc.

It would be great to see The Hawk and Ron Santo make the Hall (or is Santo done? That stinks.)

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Not quite done but almost...

I hope next ballot sees him in.

MMMMM...Golden shrimp and chicken combo from Ron of Japan!

by Kinky Reggae on Dec 14, 2007 8:03 PM CST reply actions

I imagine it might...

... as people reassess what players in the Steroid Era did as compared to the players, like Dawson, who played in the era just before it.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 14, 2007 8:31 PM CST reply actions

I'm thinking

I'm thinking of starting a Andre Dawson for hall of fame website.

He is my all time favorite or 1a favorite with Sandberg.

He was one of only 2 non juiced players to have over 400 homeruns and 300 stolen bases. And 8 gold gloves.

Can you imagine what he could have done if he hadn't had the knee problems? Or played his entire career with the Cubs?

He was always my favorite non Cub before he came here. I actually cried with joy when the Cubs signed him.

And my all time favorite Wrigley memory outside of the 03 clinching and 98 one game playoff was when he hit that homerun in his last at bat at home in 87 with chants of MVP MVP resounding to the park. As he returned to the dugout 40,000 people raised their arms up and bowed. And he bowed back.

How about this? Hawk gets elected this year. Cubs win the 08 series and Santo goes in in 09.

A fun diary topic for a slow period might be what are your all time favorite Cub moments outside of the clinchings?

We are all waiting for that glorious October night when we finally win it all. Until then we will continue to cheer, never do the wave and hope.

by puckishcubsfan on Dec 14, 2007 10:05 PM CST reply actions

Has anyone

read the book "Hit List" by Ted Williams?? Its an interesting take on one of the greatest, if not, the greatest pure hitter ever (but he has Cobb 6th?? Come on!!) He has a honorable mention in his book and says that Dawson would have been an even more unbelievable hitter if he didn't have "bad pins". Thats pretty high praises from Ted. Also, I went to a baseball banquet in Des Moines, Iowa, and they had Ozzie Smith there to speak because he played in Clarinda, Iowa. I asked him who the best hitter(s) he ever saw were and he told me undoubtedly, Andre Dawson.

I would not fight Jason Kendall.

by TCobb1911 on Dec 14, 2007 10:29 PM CST up reply actions

About time

that Dawson gets his due. By far my favorite Cub as well.

D-LEE!

by airweino on Dec 14, 2007 11:04 PM CST up reply actions

Agree to all

Get the Hawk in the Hall!!!

by TheHawk5 on Dec 14, 2007 11:10 PM CST up reply actions

Great idea!

A Dawson for HOF website is a great idea. Like you, I consider him one of my two favorite Cubs of all time, along with Ryno.

by jmroe23 on Dec 15, 2007 10:33 AM CST up reply actions

This could be the Hawk's year....

as there are no obvious no-brainer first ballot guys this year. Gossage will most likely make it, as he was over 70% last year, and maybe Jim Rice, who I think is a definite Hall of Famer, looking at his numbers. And Hawk's overall numbers are better than Rice's. There's the 2,000-400-300 club, but how about this....the only eligible player with 1,000 career extra base hits who is not in the Hall. Amazing. Still, I think Andre was only at about 54% last year, and that is a long way to go in one year. I think the year before Sandberg got it, he was at least over 60%.

"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004

by ctcoff99 on Dec 15, 2007 10:38 AM CST reply actions

Last year's voting

Dawson got 56.7%. Complete 2007 voting list here.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 10:45 AM CST up reply actions

No Brainer

No disrespect to Dawson, but the real "no-brainer" for the HOF is Blyleven. Consider that he had seasons with more complete games than wins. That strongly suggests that his win total was "deflated" by the bad teams that he played on. In 1973, for example, he lost complete games by the scores of 2-1, 3-2, 2-1, 2-1, 3-2, 54-3 and 3-0. And he lost another game 6-3 where he gave up 2 earned runs. IN 1972 he lost a game 1-0 in 11 innings.

The only reason he is not in the HOF is that he did not win 300 games. (Okay a little bit, in the preDH AL and in the NL he proved to be a rotten hitter....)

by frustratedfan on Dec 17, 2007 12:54 PM CST up reply actions

No Brainer

I think the poster meant that there are no Ripkens or Gwynns this year. I don't think he meant that Dawson is a no brainer.

by McRipper on Dec 17, 2007 1:26 PM CST up reply actions

Plus...

... fifth on the all-time strikeout list (3730).

Ninth (!) on the all-time shutout list with sixty. Among modern (post-World War II) pitchers, only Warren Spahn (63), Nolan Ryan (61) and Tom Seaver (61) had more, and just barely more.

Blyleven's problem is that he pitched for under-the-radar teams, threw in only three postseasons, and had a somewhat prickly personality. He should have been in years ago.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 17, 2007 2:39 PM CST up reply actions

I have no opinion

on whether or not Andre Dawson should be a hall of famer. But...

Andre Dawson had a career obp of .323. in his years with the Cubs his on base percentages were 328/344/307/358/302/316.

So I wonder if Dawson was playing today (or if this blog existed from 87-92) would Dawson be hailed as a potential hall of famer or would most BCBers be blasting him for his poor plate discipline, inability to take a walk, and lousy on base skills?

It's funny how things change.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." -- Mark Twain

by circuitclout on Dec 15, 2007 1:02 PM CST reply actions

The "geek" statistical factor

had yet to overtake baseball. Bill James was just beginning to write his first abstracts.

His work changed the way fervent fans look at the game. I don't even rememeber discussing OBP until the 90s....

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 17, 2007 12:34 AM CST reply actions

I was aware of OBP

way back in the '80s when I was a light-hitting second baseman playing slow pitch softball. My manager and I both knew that even though I hit .250 or .300, because I would take a walk I had an on base percentage of well over .500 which was equal to or better than most of the free swingers on the team. Maybe it's just that the mainstream media didn't figure out OBP until the '90s?

by FrankSereno on Dec 17, 2007 5:48 AM CST reply actions

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

mine happens to be that Dawson doesn't belong in the HOF. He was my 3rd favorite Cub growing up...right behind Ryno and Grace, so I'm not bashing him. He was a spectacular player when his knees weren't killing him, but if you put him in you'd have to put in a bunch of other guys with comparable numbers too. Gulp...

Juan Gonzales
Dave Kingman
Jeff Bagwell
Fred McGriff

The Hawk was great, but I'm a crazy person who thinks there are way too many guys in the Hall already who don't belong. Just my dumb opinion.

As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.

by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2007 4:56 PM CST reply actions

You can't be serious...

... about Kingman being similar to Dawson.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 17, 2007 5:26 PM CST up reply actions

I try to not be....

I threw Kingman in based on only his career HR #'s. Granted he's not the caliber of player Dawson was, but your objection sort of shows why I don't like HOF voters using raw #'s to judge a player's worthiness. Kingman only hit 4 more career HR's than Dawson 442 to 438, but he did it in 3250 fewer ABs. Defensively there is NO comparison, and any rational person would see Kingman isn't even in Dawson's league. The danger lies in the fact that the HOF voters, and the Veteran's Committee are not well known for their rationality.

As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.

by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2007 9:35 PM CST up reply actions