Dawson only inductee..........

[pwilk17]

All I read and hear about are lifetime statistics of players when it comes to deciding whether or not they are worthy of the Hall of Fame. I agree that this is very important and should be the main criteria used for the vast majority of candidates. However, if it truly is a Hall of Fame then Don Larsen definitely deserves to be in. Same thing with the Hockey Hall of Fame. Paul Henderson definitely deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. However since they are Halls of Statistics, they are not members. And yet they are far more famous than most of the members in their respective halls.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by pwilk17

However, if it truly is a Hall of Fame then Don Larsen definitely deserves to be in.

I believe his perfect game is represented in Cooperstown, I think that is enough.

[bigtrain]

but by any standard, I think he is in the top 10 or 12 second basemen of all time. He and Blyleven both just missed this year and are likely to be elected next year. I love the Hall of Fame and visit every year so I really enjoy these debates as to who should be elected and who should not. The problem as I see it is that most of us think of the Hall as a place for only the greatest "elite" players, Ruth, Mathewson, Johnson, Wagner, Cobb, Mays, Aaron and the like. The fact is that almost from the beginning, certainly from the 1940s and 50s, it has been the Hall of Very Good. I'm sure that we can all rattle off a dozen names that arguably don't belong there. How about Rick Ferrell, Tinker, Evers, Chance, Tommy McCarthy, Schalk, Hooper, Haines, George Kelly, Bottomley, Lindstrom, Hafey, Marquard, Bancroft, Combs, Coveleski, Faber, Hack Wilson, Chuck Klein? There are almost 20 questionable members off the top of my head. I could easily argue more modern selections were also mistakes. My point is: should the Hall standards now be raised after 70 years? I think that too much time has passed to now try to transform the HoF into something it is not.

[bigtrain]

Barry, I think they would hold an induction for other award winners regardless of whether a player is elected by the BBWAA or the Veteran's Committee. Most Hall of Famers do attend induction. They have a banquet and golf tournament among other events. This year they are starting a new tradition, a parade down Main Street on Saturday night. Although I don't think that Dawson and Herzog will draw a big crowd, many people do come to town to see the Hall of Famers, get autographs, attend the card show etc. I would think attendance would be down this year due to the economy as well as the lack of a big drawing card. With a smaller crowd, this might be the ideal year to go.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Anyone have a scan of the 1977 Montreal Expos Team Issued Postcard picturing Dawson?

[barrysloate]

Thanks Tom. I don't think they ever had a year when nobody was inducted.

[Bosox Blair]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

I'm sure that we can all rattle off a dozen names that arguably don't belong there. How about...Hooper...

I hear this a lot, but don't accept it.

A few points about Hooper:

- He was a lead-off man with more pop than most,
- His job was to score runs - he scored 1429 of them (#79 all time), averaging 100 per season over his entire career,
- Top 100 all time in career base hits,
- #39 all time in triples, which means, in that era, both speed and power,
- Drew over 1000 walks, averaging 80 per season,
- Glove? Not even a question. One of the greatest. Key component of what many regard as the best outfield of all time,
- World Series? Unreal with both glove and bat. Won 4 World Series titles with Red Sox. The key player who was a constant in all 4 Red Sox championship years. First player ever to hit 2 home runs in a single WS game in 1915,
- Also stole 375 bases,
- The first and longest part of his career was played in the dead ball era with Boston. He hit .272 over this period. He went to Chicago roughly when the lively ball came into play and after that - in the twilight of his career - he hit .302...pretty good evidence of the effect of the lively ball on the stats of some players.

So I strongly disagree with the widely-held idea that Hooper does not belong.

I also disgree with the old chestnut that Tinker-Evers-Chance are in because of a poem. Evers for the reasons best set out by Bill James. Chance's career as both a player and a great manager combined make him worthy.

Cheers,
Blair