The recent induction of Andre Dawson into the baseball Hall of Fame has spurred quite a bit of discussion in the baseball and specifically sabremetric community about just how good he really was, and who might have a better case for induction. I wrote a few days ago that I would have voted for six players on the ballot this year, but not for Dawson. He is to me a borderline candidate and as a proponent of a small hall, unless I'm sure the candidate definitely belongs, I wouldn't vote for enshrinement. After looking at the usually evidence (career stats, yearly average, black ink, Keltner test, etc) I remain unsure that Dawson is significantly better than a lot of outfielders that don't belong in the Hall. As a further test, I went to Baseball-Reference.com and looked up a little more data for comparison. Here's what I found:
Chart A: Average 162 game performance - neutralized
AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | BB | SO | BA | OBP | SLG | OPS | RC | |
A | 616 | 90 | 175 | 32 | 6 | 28 | 103 | 21 | 37 | 93 | 0.284 | 0.329 | 0.49 | 0.819 | 99 |
B | 594 | 107 | 187 | 31 | 8 | 12 | 66 | 61 | 96 | 63 | 0.314 | 0.41 | 0.455 | 0.864 | 111 |
C | 616 | 88 | 180 | 35 | 5 | 22 | 104 | 10 | 45 | 100 | 0.291 | 0.34 | 0.473 | 0.813 | 100 |
D | 594 | 91 | 157 | 26 | 3 | 30 | 96 | 12 | 74 | 129 | 0.265 | 0.346 | 0.467 | 0.813 | 99 |
E | 632 | 96 | 184 | 28 | 6 | 28 | 111 | 4 | 50 | 110 | 0.29 | 0.344 | 0.488 | 0.832 | 106 |
F | 654 | 93 | 156 | 31 | 5 | 25 | 88 | 5 | 90 | 106 | 0.277 | 0.377 | 0.479 | 0.855 | 102 |
G | 607 | 99 | 177 | 31 | 5 | 26 | 109 | 13 | 69 | 91 | 0.291 | 0.362 | 0.487 | 0.849 | 108 |
H | 568 | 78 | 169 | 39 | 5 | 15 | 90 | 9 | 52 | 60 | 0.297 | 0.359 | 0.464 | 0.823 | 94 |
I | 597 | 92 | 181 | 23 | 12 | 3 | 47 | 55 | 35 | 86 | 0.303 | 0.345 | 0.396 | 0.741 | 82 |
J | 573 | 89 | 164 | 32 | 4 | 25 | 94 | 6 | 73 | 92 | 0.287 | 0.365 | 0.488 | 0.835 | 103 |
K | 567 | 78 | 170 | 26 | 7 | 6 | 66 | 27 | 34 | 91 | 0.3 | 0.338 | 0.402 | 0.74 | 78 |
L | 582 | 101 | 163 | 29 | 3 | 35 | 111 | 14 | 87 | 149 | 0.281 | 0.377 | 0.524 | 0.902 | 115 |
M | 578 | 87 | 183 | 40 | 11 | 18 | 99 | 9 | 53 | 58 | 0.317 | 0.375 | 0.518 | 0.893 | 113 |
N | 616 | 106 | 192 | 22 | 11 | 4 | 45 | 45 | 92 | 67 | 0.311 | 0.401 | 0.403 | 0.804 | 100 |
O | 578 | 94 | 164 | 31 | 5 | 27 | 91 | 14 | 62 | 109 | 0.283 | 0.354 | 0.495 | 0.85 | 101 |
P | 595 | 96 | 166 | 29 | 2 | 26 | 100 | 22 | 63 | 76 | 0.279 | 0.364 | 0.467 | 0.831 | 97 |
Q | 625 | 87 | 163 | 32 | 4 | 30 | 107 | 17 | 39 | 102 | 0.26 | 0.307 | 0.466 | 0.773 | 90 |
Players A-Q are all outfielders chosen for a few specific criteria. Four are members of the Hall of Fame and many of the rest were or are strong candidates. They were also chosen because they had a similar skill set to either Andre Dawson or Tim Raines (my favorite among the outfield candidates.) Can you tell which ones belong in the HoF and who doesn't?
What if I throw in this information?
Player | Seasons | Black Ink Test | MVP awards |
A | 21 | 11 | 1 |
B | 23 | 20 | 0 |
C | 19 | 26 | 1 |
D | 18 | 31 | 2 |
E | 16 | 33 | 1 |
F | 20 | 15 | 0 |
G | 22 | 4 | 0 |
H | 19 | 9 | 0 |
I | 19 | 18 | 0 |
J | 17 | 15 | 1 |
K | 18 | 12 | 1 |
L | 21 | 35 | 1 |
M | 13 | 1 | 0 |
N | 17 | 16 | 0 |
O | 18 | 6 | 0 |
P | 19 | 8 | 1 |
Q | 16 | 9 | 0 |
This probably disqualifies M for having too short a career and only 1 point on the Black Ink Test. G, H, O, P, and Q were clearly not dominant in their times. Most of these players racked up impressive numbers due to longevity rather than a series of great seasons. Are C, D, E, and L the Hall of Famers? They all won MVP awards and the average Hall of Famer only scores 26 on the Black Ink Test. In fact of those four only E – Jim Rice and L – Reggie Jackson are in. C& D are Dave Parker and Dale Murphy, two candidates who have received some support but will likely never get in. The other two Hall of Famers are A- the newly inducted Andre Dawson and G – Dave Winfield. Neither stands out as an especially strong candidate, and Winfield especially looks like a poor choice when you look at the second chart. I don't think this proves that Dawson and Winfield should be out and Parker and Murphy in, but it does illustrate the problem of primarily looking at career statistics and not looking at players in context.
Here's the whole chart with names included:
AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | BB | SO | BA | OBP | SLG | OPS | RC | Seasons | Black Ink Test | MVP awards | |
Dawson | 616 | 90 | 175 | 32 | 6 | 28 | 103 | 21 | 37 | 93 | 0.284 | 0.329 | 0.49 | 0.819 | 99 | 21 | 11 | 1 |
Raines | 594 | 107 | 187 | 31 | 8 | 12 | 66 | 61 | 96 | 63 | 0.314 | 0.41 | 0.455 | 0.864 | 111 | 23 | 20 | 0 |
Parker | 616 | 88 | 180 | 35 | 5 | 22 | 104 | 10 | 45 | 100 | 0.291 | 0.34 | 0.473 | 0.813 | 100 | 19 | 26 | 1 |
Murphy | 594 | 91 | 157 | 26 | 3 | 30 | 96 | 12 | 74 | 129 | 0.265 | 0.346 | 0.467 | 0.813 | 99 | 18 | 31 | 2 |
Rice | 632 | 96 | 184 | 28 | 6 | 28 | 111 | 4 | 50 | 110 | 0.29 | 0.344 | 0.488 | 0.832 | 106 | 16 | 33 | 1 |
Dw. Evans | 654 | 93 | 156 | 31 | 5 | 25 | 88 | 5 | 90 | 106 | 0.277 | 0.377 | 0.479 | 0.855 | 102 | 20 | 15 | 0 |
Winfield | 607 | 99 | 177 | 31 | 5 | 26 | 109 | 13 | 69 | 91 | 0.291 | 0.362 | 0.487 | 0.849 | 108 | 22 | 4 | 0 |
H. McRae | 568 | 78 | 169 | 39 | 5 | 15 | 90 | 9 | 52 | 60 | 0.297 | 0.359 | 0.464 | 0.823 | 94 | 19 | 9 | 0 |
W. Wilson | 597 | 92 | 181 | 23 | 12 | 3 | 47 | 55 | 35 | 86 | 0.303 | 0.345 | 0.396 | 0.741 | 82 | 19 | 18 | 0 |
Lynn | 573 | 89 | 164 | 32 | 4 | 25 | 94 | 6 | 73 | 92 | 0.287 | 0.365 | 0.488 | 0.835 | 103 | 17 | 15 | 1 |
W. McGee | 567 | 78 | 170 | 26 | 7 | 6 | 66 | 27 | 34 | 91 | 0.3 | 0.338 | 0.402 | 0.74 | 78 | 18 | 12 | 1 |
R. Jackson | 582 | 101 | 163 | 29 | 3 | 35 | 111 | 14 | 87 | 149 | 0.281 | 0.377 | 0.524 | 0.902 | 115 | 21 | 35 | 1 |
B. Herman | 578 | 87 | 183 | 40 | 11 | 18 | 99 | 9 | 53 | 58 | 0.317 | 0.375 | 0.518 | 0.893 | 113 | 13 | 1 | 0 |
B. Butler | 616 | 106 | 192 | 22 | 11 | 4 | 45 | 45 | 92 | 67 | 0.311 | 0.401 | 0.403 | 0.804 | 100 | 17 | 16 | 0 |
Burks | 578 | 94 | 164 | 31 | 5 | 27 | 91 | 14 | 62 | 109 | 0.283 | 0.354 | 0.495 | 0.85 | 101 | 18 | 6 | 0 |
Baylor | 595 | 96 | 166 | 29 | 2 | 26 | 100 | 22 | 63 | 76 | 0.279 | 0.364 | 0.467 | 0.831 | 97 | 19 | 8 | 1 |
J. Carter | 625 | 87 | 163 | 32 | 4 | 30 | 107 | 17 | 39 | 102 | 0.26 | 0.307 | 0.466 | 0.773 | 90 | 16 | 9 | 0 |
No comments:
Post a Comment