Andre Dawson’s election into the Hall of Fame brings the pro-sabermetrics vs. anti-sabermetrics debate into pretty clear focus, particularly regarding the pro-sabermetrics argument that a team’s on-base percentage correlates better to scoring runs than any other statistical measure.
The argument goes something like this:
Pro-sabermetrics: Dawson’s career .320 on-base percentage is the lowest among all outfielders in the Hall of Fame, and therefore he doesn’t belong.
Anti-sabermetrics: What are you talking about? He was a five-tool player, one of only three in history to get 300 steals and 400 home runs. The others are Willie Mays and Barry Bonds. Just because he didn’t walk enough, he’s not a Hall of Famer? Dawson’s job wasn’t to take a walk, his job was to swing the bat and drive in runs, not let someone else take care of it.
Pro: The .320 OBP is more about not taking walks, it’s also about making outs. Judging by his low OBP, Dawson was very good at making outs.
Anti: Maybe, but there wasn’t as much emphasis on OBP when Dawson played as compared to now. Walks weren’t as sacred then.
Etc.
If you’ve been following this blog at all, you may have noticed that I fall on the pro-sabermetrics side of the fence and did not endorse Dawson’s Hall of Fame candidacy.
With that in mind, allow me to refute the primary anti-sabermetric arguments regarding Dawson.
- About BBA (1.000)
- Bloggers List (1.000)
- BBA Awards (1.000)
- "Not Indicative" (1.000)
- Talkin' Baseball with Former Baltimore Orioles Catcher Chris Hoiles (1.000)
