The Hawk elected
 

!! :)

What did Ben Hogan get elected to?

Not Ben Hogan dummy!

There is only one Hawk.

Well deserved

Knock it off

Truths a bitch :)

Golf is barely a sport

Oh, Boy.....It's going to be on now!

Ken Harrelson? HOF?
















Actually Big Congrats to Andre. Very well deserved.

Dude, the guy played baseball for 37 years...finally decided to retire at age 62 and only won 8 gold gloves. And, he played for the Cubs at one time, so he couldn't have been that good.

Any player that wins a MVP when he is on the worst team in baseball should get in automatically. If that doesn't tell you how much better he was then anyone at the time, on what some will say one leg, then I don't know what will.

Players with 400+ Home Runs and 300+ Stolen Bases:

Barry Bonds
Willie Mays
Andre Dawson

A-Rod will be there with 3 more stolen bases. Not bad company.

Yeah, except he didn't deserve to win the MVP that year. I still don't understand how the hell he did.
A .328 OBP? For an MVP? That's terrible.
Tony Gwynn's batting average that year was over 40 points higher than Andre Dawson's on-base percentage. That's ridiculous. And Gwynn stole 50+ bases on top of that.
Jack Clark's numbers were also a lot better than Dawson's that year too. He hit for roughly the same average, but drew something like 100 more walks than Dawson while still putting up good power numbers (his OPS was MUCH higher than Dawson's). All Dawson did that year was hit a lot of home runs on a really bad team.
I guess he still probably deserves to be in the HOF though, so congrats to him.

Tough to get too upset about a guy winning MVP that hit 49 HRs, drove in 137 RBIs, and won a Gold Glove. There is a solid argument for Gwynn that year although the 137 to 54 RBI margin is tough to overcome but no one ever confused Jack Clark with a gold glover. While he put up good numbers offensively he was never helping his team in the field.

It just irritates me that voters pay more attention to a stat like RBI than to a stat like OPS (or at least the stats that go into OPS before the number was tracked). To me, OPS gives a much clearer indication of the kind of year a guy had offensively than a team-dependent stat like runs scored or RBI. Dawson's OPS in '87 wasn't bad....but it was hardly MVP worthy in my estimation.

That is changing, OPS is definitely very strongly considered when people are looking at MVP's now.

Stop it. I'm just giving you a hard time because I know how bad you thought he deserved it.

Ben Hogan is still "The Hawk" though.

As it should be.

To illustrate again how horrible Dawson's .328 OBP is for an MVP:
Every other NL MVP in the last 50 years had a OBP at least 14 points higher than .328, and most were significantly higher. Furthermore, the guys that finished in the ten spots behind Dawson in the MVP voting that year also all had OBP's at least 14 points higher than Dawson's....and again....most were much higher.
Now obviously OPB isn't the only thing that matters, but to me the MVP of the league should be able to get on base a lot when he comes up. Dawson did not.

:tro: :tro: :tro: