Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Primate Studies > Discussion
Primate Studies
— Where BTF's Members Investigate the Grand Old Game

Tuesday, January 07, 2003

Andre Dawson

Will this January 7 be happier for the former member of the January 7 Seven?  We’ll find out today.

Andre Dawson | RF/CF/DH |  Montreal, Chicago (NL), Boston, Florida

Yrs

G

AB

AVG

OBP

SLG

HR

2B

3B

RBI

R

H

SB

CS

BB

21

2627

9927

.279

.323

.482

438

503

98

1591

1373

2774

314

109

589

1) Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball?  Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

Yes.

 

Dawson was voted the Most Valuable Player of the National League in 1987.  It is debatable whether or not he was considered by most to have been a better player than the AL MVP that year, George Bell, but a significant amount of people definitely thought that way.

2) Was he the best player on his team?

Most of the time, no.

 

During Dawson?s 10 full seasons with Montreal he was rarely the best player on the team, as that honor usually went to Gary Carter or Tim Raines.

 

Here are his Win Shares and team ranking for each of his 10 seasons in Montreal, along with the player that led the team:

1977: 18 Win Shares, 3rd on Expos (Gary Carter, 25)

1978: 21, 3rd (Carter and Ellis Valentine, 22)

1979: 24, 3rd (Lance Parrish, 28)

1980: 29, 2nd (Carter, 30)

1981: 25, 1st

1982: 26, T-2nd (Carter, 31)

1983: 28, 2nd (Tim Raines, 29)

1984: 12, T-5th (Raines, 32)

1985: 16, T-4th (Raines, 36)

1986: 16, 3rd (Raines, 32)

 

In 10 total seasons with Montreal, Dawson led the team in Win Shares once, finished 2nd 3 times, 3rd 4 times, 4th once and 5th once.

 

Dawson then moved onto Chicago, where he played for 5 seasons:

1987: 20, T-1st

1988: 19, 4th (Ryne Sandberg, 22)

1989: 13, 9th

1990: 22, T-2nd (Sandberg, 34)

1991: 20, 2nd (Sandberg, 37)

 

As with the Expos, Dawson was rarely the best player on the Cubs in a given season.

 

While Dawson was with Montreal, the best Expo was Gary Carter and then Tim Raines.  While with Chicago, the best Cub was Ryne Sandberg.

3) Was he the best player in baseball at his position?  Was he the best player in the league at his position?

Yes, but mostly no.

 

Dawson was a center fielder from 1977-1983.  From 1977-1979, Dawson was the best centerfielder in the National League and may have been the best centerfielder in baseball, although that honor probably goes to Fred Lynn.

 

Overall, 1980-1983, Dawson was neither the best CF in the NL or in baseball, as that honor went to Dale Murphy, although Dawson was probably the best CF in 1981, when Murphy hit very poorly in the strike shortened season.

 

Dawson was a right fielder from 1984-1992.  He was neither the best right fielder in the NL or in MLB during that time.  That honor went to Tony Gwynn and probably would have gone to several other players (Jose Canseco, Darrell Evans, Dale Murphy, Dave Winfield, Darryl Strawberry, etc) before it got to Dawson.

4) Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

For a guy that played for the Cubs and Expos, yes.

 

Otherwise, not really.

 

During Dawson?s 11 year stay with the Expos, here are their best seasons:

 

Montreal finished second in the NL East in 1979 and 1980.  The Expos made the post-season in the strike shortened 1981 season by winning the second-half title for the NL East and won the NLDS, before losing to the Dodgers in the NLCS.  Montreal finished third in the NL East in 1982 and 1983 and again in 1985.

 

While in Chicago, the Cubs won the NL East in 1989 and lost to the Giants in the NLCS.  In his other 5 years with the Cubs they finished 6th, 4th, 5th, 4th and 4th.

 

Dawson?s team didn?t finish over .500 in any of his 4 years with the Red Sox or Marlins at the end of his career.

 

During Dawson?s 21 year career his teams were closer to last place more often than they were first place.

In his 2 trips to the post-season Dawson hit .186/.226/.237 with 0 homers and 3 RBIs in 15 games.

5) Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

Yes.

 

Dawson put up good seasons until the age of 37 and then dropped off quite a bit.

 

From 35-37 he posted OPS+ seasons of 136, 115 and 114, while playing right field for the Cubs everyday.

 

At 38 he left Chicago and went to Boston, where his adjusted OPS fell below league average for the first time in 16 seasons.  He played semi-regularly for the Red Sox in 1993, totaling slightly less than 500 plate appearances.

 

Dawson put up a 82 OPS+ with the Red Sox in 1994, at age 39.  He only had 306 plate appearances, but that season was shortened by the strike and Dawson played almost every day as the DH.

 

He joined the Marlins for his age 40 and 41 seasons.  Dawson totaled only 246 PAs in the abbreviated 1995 season and then only 61 PAs in 1996, his final year.

 

Dawson was good enough to play regularly through about age 38 and then his production dropped way below league-average and his playing time lessened considerably.

6) Is he the very best player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

Absolutely not.

 

There are several players on this year?s ballot alone that have much stronger cases than Dawson does and there are also several players that were eligible in the past and did not make it that probably deserve induction more than "Hawk."

7) Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

Mostly, yes.

 

There are 5 Hall of Famers (Billy Williams, Tony Perez, Ernie Banks, Dave Winfield and Al Kaline) among Dawson?s "Most Similar" list at BaseballReference.com.  Also on the list are 2 eligible non-Hall of Famers (Vada Pinson and Dwight Evans), 1 currently eligible player (Dave Parker) and 2 not yet eligible players (Rafael Palmeiro and Harold Baines).

 

At least a couple of those 5 current non-Hall of Famers will probably be inducted someday, but as it stands now, out of the 8 "Most Similar" players that have been eligible for the HoF, 5 of them made it.

8) Do the player?s numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

Probably.

 

Andre Dawson scores a 43.7 on the "Hall of Fame Standards" test (the "average Hall of Famer" scores approximately 50) and a 117.5 on the "Hall of Fame Monitor" test (a "likely Hall of Famer" scores over 100).

 

Dawson ranks 29th all-time in games played, with 2,627.  There are several eligible players ahead of him on the games played list that are not in the Hall of Fame: Rusty Staub (11th), Graig Nettles (24th) and Darrell Evans (25th).

 

Dawson ranks 42nd all-time in hits, with 2,774.  All of the eligible players ahead of him on the list are in the HoF, but several players directly behind him are not: Vada Pinson (43rd), Al Oliver (45th), Rusty Staub (49th), Bill Buckner (50th).

 

Dawson ranks 23rd all-time in total bases, with 4,787.  Every eligible player in the top 40 is in the HoF.

 

Dawson ranks 38th all-time in doubles, with 503.  Only 1 eligible player in the top 40 is not in the HoF, Al Oliver (25th).

 

Several players immediately after Dawson on the list are not Hall of Famers: Rusty Staub (40th), Bill Bucker (41st), Mickey Vernon (45th), Vada Pinson (50th).

 

Dawson ranks 29th all-time in home runs, with 438.  The only eligible player ahead of him and not in the HoF is Dave Kingman (28th).  Several players near Dawson on the list are not in the HoF: Darrell Evans (32nd), Graig Nettles (38th) and Dwight Evans (41st).

 

Dawson ranks 27th all-time in RBIs, with 1,591.  Every eligible player in the top 40 is in the HoF.

 

Dawson ranks 21st all-time in extra base hits, with 1,039.  The only eligible player in the top 40 that is not in the HoF is Dwight Evans (34th).

9) Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

Yes and no.

 

In the first half of his career, while with the Expos, Dawson played in a tough park for hitters, Olympic Stadium.

 

Then, later in his career, with the Cubs, Dawson played in Wrigley Field, which was a great place for hitters - particularly power hitters - while Dawson was there.

 

As a whole, his power numbers being helped by Wrigley are probably offset by the hit his batting average took while playing in Olympic Stadium.

 

Dawson was also a very good defensive center fielder early in his career, before injuries took a huge toll on his knees, and he was a pretty good defensive right fielder with the Expos and Cubs later on.

 

He won Gold Gloves in 8 straight seasons, from 1980-1987, 4 as a center fielder and 4 as a right fielder.

10) Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

That depends on what position he is.



As a center fielder, his biggest competition probably comes from current candidate Dale Murphy and also Jimmy Wynn.

 

As a right fielder, guys like Dewey Evans, Tony Oliva and current candidate Dave Parker may have good arguments over Dawson.  Actually, guys like Reggie Smith, Ken Singleton, Jack Clark and Bobby Bonds have decent cases over Dawson too.

 

Basically, right field is a tough group.  It has a ton of good candiates and already boasts the most members of any non-pitcher position in the Hall of Fame.

11) How many MVP-type seasons did he have?  Did he ever win an MVP award?  If not, how many times was he close?

Strangely enough, Dawson?s one MVP award (1987, with Chicago) came in a season that he really wasn?t such a great MVP candidate.

 

His "real" MVP-type seasons all came while he was with Montreal, when he finished 2nd in the voting in 1981 and 1983 and 7th in 1980.

12) How many All-Star-type seasons did he have?  How many All-Star games did he play in?  Did most of the players who in played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

Dawson played in 8 All-Star games, 3 in a row from 1981-1983 and then 5 years in a row from 1987-1991.  He had at least a marginal All-Star-type season pretty much every year from 1977-1992.

 

8 All-Star games is a good total, but not an overly impressive number for a Hall of Fame player.

 

Hall of Famers with a total of 8 All-Star games include: Duke Snider, Nolan Ryan, Ernie Lombardi, Catfish Hunter, Bob Gibson, Whitey Ford, Rick Ferrell, Bob Feller, Don Drysdale, Roy Campanella and Lou Boudreau.

 

On the other hand, there are many players that appeared in 8 career All-Star games and are not in the Hall-of-Fame: Vern Stephens, Ted Simmons, Walker Cooper, Del Crandall, Gil Hodges, Bob Johnson, Harvey Kuenn, Marty Marion, Tony Oliva and Lance Parrish.

13) If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

Not likely.

 

Dawson was a good player, but a team with him as its best probably would not have competed for a pennant in most seasons.

 

He never totaled 30 Win Shares in a season and only got over 25 3 times.

14) What impact did the player have on baseball history?  Was he responsible for any rule changes?  Did he introduce any new equipment?  Did he change the game in any way?

The only thing that seems obvious to me for this question is Dawson?s situation in 1987.

 

Dawson was a free agent after 10+ seasons playing on the artificial surface in Montreal and he desperately wanted to get himself and his aching knees onto a grass playing surface, preferably with the Chicago Cubs.

 

He had difficulty finding a new place to play because of the collusion that was taking place during the 1987 off-season and he eventually agreed to play for the Cubs by giving them a blank contract with his signature on it.

 

Dawson ended up making only $700,000 for the 1987 season and won the MVP award in no small part because of his off-season story.

15) Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

By all accounts, Dawson was a hell of a guy and a fierce competitor.

 

I have 3 stories to relay, two come from my uncle and one comes from me:

 

While on vacation in Chicago, my uncle attended a Cubs/Reds game at Wrigley in which Andre Dawson went completely ballistic, was ejected from the game and ended up, in my uncle?s words, "Throwing everything in the entire dugout onto the field."

 

My uncle also recalls that, while he was in Arizona for Spring Training, he witnessed Dawson standing in the parking lot after a game, signing autographs for dozens of fans in the rain.

 

About 3 years ago I was at a banquet held at a Sports Card and Memorabilia convention in Chicago and Andre Dawson (and Mike Singletary, Fergie Jenkins and Nate Archibald) were the guests of honor and signed autographs for everyone in attendance following dinner.  I was in line with my Dawson picture ready to be signed when Dawson stopped signing for a moment, turned to some guy that was standing behind him and asked "When does this thing get over?" in a way that suggested he was more than a little sick of signing autographs.  After he got his answer, Dawson turned back to the table, took the next picture to sign and proceeded to have about a 5 minute conversation with the next few people in line.

Conclusion:

Dawson does reasonably well on the Keltner test.

 

He was never really the best player in baseball and he was rarely the best on his team or at his position, but the majority of his "Most Similar" players are in the HoF or will be soon and his overall numbers are generally up to the standards of the Hall of Fame.

 

Dawson?s stats came at the expense of an awful lot of outs.  His career OBP of .323 is actually about 10 points worse than the league average while he played, which is just awful for a Hall of Famer.  However, it is difficult to ignore his counting stats, particularly the homers, hits and RBIs and Dawson will almost certainly be a Hall of Famer eventually.

 

Aaron Gleeman Posted: January 07, 2003 at 06:00 AM | 14 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Walt Davis Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:18 AM (#608103)
Well, I'll add my favorite Dawson story. If such things merited HOF inclusion, I'd put him in for this alone.

One (rare) day, the Cubs are crushing some team, like 10-0. Late in the game, the other team hits a screaming liner into short right field. Dawson comes flying in, dives fully stretched out, and catches the ball just before it hits the ground.

After the game, a reporter asks Dawson why he risked injury diving for a ball with such a big lead. Andre's response:

"Because it was in play."

I can understand the case that he doesn't belong in the HOF, but I can tell you I'll be very happy should the day come that he makes it. I loved watching Dawson play.
   2. Dan Szymborski Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:18 AM (#608113)
Whenever Raines comes up, I like to use the following comparison:

              AB    BA   OBP   SLG   SB    CS  
Raines      9288  .294  .385  .425  808   146         
Mystery    10089  .306  .398  .437  861   230       


Mystery is considered an easy shoo-in for the Hall of Fame.
   3. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:18 AM (#608118)
Nice article, Aaron. Doesn't do anything to shake my belief that Parker's a better candidate.

Well, Dan, I can't find anybody to match those numbers, so I assume you're doing something clever. (Lou Brock only with the Cardinals?)
   4. Jason Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:19 AM (#608140)
FYI--I think the Parrish in Q2 was Larry not Lance.
   5. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:19 AM (#608149)
Another good example of a borderliner. I said no on my Internet ballot.
   6. Dan Szymborski Posted: January 07, 2003 at 02:19 AM (#608170)
Mystery is the average of the careers of Tony Gwynn and Rickey Henderson
   7. jimd Posted: January 08, 2003 at 02:20 AM (#608226)
Comparing the 6 offensive stars on the ballot using:

Black ink, grey ink, HOF Standards, HOF Monitor

(These are intended for predictive purposes, so let's use them that way.)

Bl - Gry - HS - HMo - %Vote

11 - 181 - 56 - 155 - 85 - Eddie Murray

33 - 176 - 43 - 147 - 52 - Jim Rice

11 - 164 - 44 - 118 - 50 - Andre Dawson

23 - 111 - 34 - 130 - 14 - Dave Mattingly

31 - 147 - 34 - 116 - 12 - Dale Murphy

26 - 145 - 41 - 126 - 10 - Dave Parker

Murray doesn't have the black ink, but he wins the other categories.
The other 5 fall in two groups on HOF Standards (and on the wrong side of the HOF average), but Rice beats them out in the other categories. There isn't much to distinguish the other 4.

My question to you all is: Why does Dawson have so much more support that the other 3?
   8. Chris Cobb Posted: January 10, 2003 at 02:21 AM (#608255)
Hm. Let's see if this thread has any life left:

Re: My question to you all is: Why does Dawson have so much more support that the other 3?

Dawson's career shape is a lot like Murray's: he was a very good player for a long time, and when he stopped being a good player, he was old enough that everyone accepted it. This career shape may not ultimately create a more valuable career as measured by sophisticated metrics, but it does wonders for a player's reputation and his raw counting stats. If no one ever writes the story, "what's happened to X? Does he still measure up?" a player will hold his reputation for greatness better, I guess, than if his decline is subjected to public scrutiny.

Mattingly, Murphy, and Parker all had stretches of time when everyone expected them to be great players, and they weren't anymore. For Mattingly and Murphy, this hurts their career numbers, and it hurts their reputations. Parker resurrected his career, so his career numbers are on a level with Dawson's, but the stink surrounding his mid-career trough holds him back.

This chart would appear to be evidence that not only career numbers, but _consistent _production of traditionally attractive counting stats is a decisive for many Hall voters.
   9. strong silence Posted: January 11, 2003 at 02:21 AM (#608282)
Let's set the standard high. Only great players belong in the Hall. Let's define greatness. For the purpose of brevity let's say greatness is defined as "the cream rises to the top." Playoffs and WS are where stars shine and great players step it up.

Dawson hit .186/.226/.237 with 0 homers and 3 RBIs in 15 playoff games. He does not get my vote because he did not contribute to playoff victories, which is what great players do.

Does his weak playoff performance suggest that Dawson's counting statistics came primarily from average or mediocre pitchers? Perhaps this is a tangent but I think the field of sabrmetrics and Win Shares in particular misses a key component. That is, why not weight a players stats by the level of competition he faces. For example, if Davey Lopes faced Carlton 60 times, but Morgan had only 30 AB against him would not we give Lopes credit for the higher quality pitching he faced?

I would replace #12 with this question: In pennant races, playoffs and World Series, did the player perform beyond expectations? All-Star games are really a popularity contest so it is not germane to evaluating a candidate for the HOF.
   10. jimd Posted: January 13, 2003 at 02:22 AM (#608341)
How do you propose weighting the relative merits of the playoffs vs the regular season?

Here are the top 10 offensive performances in the World Series (according to XR)


4.52 1928 Lou Gehrig

4.28 2002 Barry Bonds (lost)

3.74 1990 Billy Hatcher

3.26 1928 Babe Ruth

2.44 1914 Hank Gowdy

2.28 1947 Bobby Brown

2.28 1988 Orel Hershiser

2.26 1954 Dusty Rhodes

2.24 1959 Chuck Essegian

1.84 1919 Dutch Ruether

Three of the top 4 would be in most peoples HOF, but the rest?
I doubt anybody claims that Hershiser was a great hitter.

If you want to include other rounds of playoffs the top ten would also include:


3.96 1992 Lloyd McClendon (lost)

3.80 1989 Will Clark

3.70 1989 Mark Grace (lost)

3.46 1983 Gary Roenicke

2.80 1976 Jay Johnstone (lost)

There are two players which manage two entries in the top 50.
They are Benji Gil for the 2002 WS and ALDS, and Jay Johnstone for the 1981 WS also.

   11. Paul Wendt Posted: January 16, 2003 at 02:23 AM (#608430)
>>Black ink, grey ink, HOF Standards, HOF Monitor (These are intended for predictive purposes, so let's use them that way.)

Bl - Gry - HS - HMo - %Vote
11 - 181 - 56 - 155 - 85 - Eddie Murray
33 - 176 - 43 - 147 - 52 - Jim Rice
11 - 164 - 44 - 118 - 50 - Andre Dawson
23 - 111 - 34 - 130 - 14 - Dave Mattingly
31 - 147 - 34 - 116 - 12 - Dale Murphy
26 - 145 - 41 - 126 - 10 - Dave Parker
<<

The best intentions . . .
Have the four statistics been tested as HOF electoral predictors?
Have their poor predictions been examined for systematic biases?
   12. King Anaconda Posted: December 29, 2007 at 05:17 PM (#2656241)
I think this Keltner test is not properly filled.
There are a lot of "Yes and Not" that are not an adequate answer. And in others question the answers is not in line with others Keltner test
For ex. in "11) How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?" If the MVP standard season is any with at least 30 winshares and Dawson never reached that mark, then the answer is no. His 1987 MVP award was a terrible mistake with only 20 winshares supporting his performance. In fact how can be someone who never reached 30 winshares in a season be considered the best player at baseball as the answer to question 1) Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball? says.
And for the question No.9) Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics? It´s incredible that the answer never says anything his poor approach to walk which means a substandard .323 carrer obp (vs. .332 lg).
No enough merit for Dawson.
   13. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: December 29, 2007 at 06:06 PM (#2656271)
Especially when the MVP awards of 1987 are so dumb that people still find them great sources of discussion 20 years later.

Dawson's prime was around 1978-1983 or so. He was a legit great centerfielder there, about as good as Andruw Jones or Mike Cameron at their defensive peaks. But he was playing in the same league as Schmidt, so certainly was not the best player in baseball regardless of whether anyone said so.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5753 seconds
66 querie(s) executed