Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Paulie MVP?
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=59773		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Walt Williams Neck [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:46 am ]
Post subject:  Paulie MVP?
Hawk mentioned it yesterday, and Stone Pony poo-pooed it. What's your take?
Author:  Rod [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 7:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
His team would have to do a whole lot better.
Author:  Aggravated Sox Fan Bob [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 7:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
His team would have to do a whole lot better.

+1
Author:  8675309 [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
:shock: I'm guessing players that play in Canada are not eligible
Author:  bigfan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
or guys named Gonzales
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
He just hit his 384th Homerun tying him with Harold Baines

MVP and Hall of Fame
Author:  Rod [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 5:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
rogers park bryan wrote:
He just hit his 384th Homerun tying him with Harold Baines

MVP and Hall of Fame


Since Andre Dawson is already in, the standard has been set.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 5:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
He just hit his 384th Homerun tying him with Harold Baines

MVP and Hall of Fame


Since Andre Dawson is already in, the standard has been set.

Andre was the truth.
Author:  Rod [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 5:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
He just hit his 384th Homerun tying him with Harold Baines

MVP and Hall of Fame


Since Andre Dawson is already in, the standard has been set.

Andre was the truth.


He just wasn't quite as good as Baines.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Youre right

He was better than Baines.

Clearly.
Author:  Rod [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
rogers park bryan wrote:
Youre right

He was better than Baines.

Clearly.


How do you figure? They were extremely similar players. Both were top flight defenders hindered by bad knees. I guess an NL guy might give Dawson points for hobbling along in right at the end of his career because there was no DH for him to play. Granted, Baines didn't last as long in the outfield simply because he didn't have to. But he was better with the stick, if only slightly.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Youre right

He was better than Baines.

Clearly.


How do you figure? They were extremely similar players. Both were top flight defenders hindered by bad knees. I guess an NL guy might give Dawson points for hobbling along in right at the end of his career because there was no DH for him to play. Granted, Baines didn't last as long in the outfield simply because he didn't have to. But he was better with the stick, if only slightly.

Their offensive numbers are a wash. Baines has a slightly higher career OPS but Dawaon had more power and stole bases.

Baines was a negative defender in all but 5 years of his career.

Dawson won 8 gold gloves. I know gold gloves can be deceiving but 8 to 0 is pretty obvious.

Baines was never considered for the title: best player in baseball. Andre was if only for a few years.
Author:  Rod [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
rogers park bryan wrote:
Their offensive numbers are a wash. Baines has a slightly higher career OPS but Dawaon had more power and stole bases.

Baines was a negative defender in all but 5 years of his career.

Dawson won 8 gold gloves. I know gold gloves can be deceiving but 8 to 0 is pretty obvious.

Baines was never considered for the title: best player in baseball. Andre was if only for a few years.


I don't think Dawson had more power. Baines played his prime in a place that was very difficult to hit homers and Dawson played in tiny parks for most of his career.

I'll allow that Dawson was a better outfielder. But Baines was damn good when he played out there. Anyway, these guys have to be judged as hitters. If defense were a primary criterion, Devon White and Jimmy Piersall would be in the Hall of Fame. And I'd suggest that Baines was a better hitter, if only slightly.

In any case, I don't think either one belongs in the Hall of Fame. I just find it absurd that Cub fans mock the Baines statue while celebrating the HoF induction of Dawson. Some guys like that are even on the radio pretending to be Sox fans.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Yeah, Im not slighting Baines. He's close.

Im not sure he was a real good outfielder. Ill take your word for it. The defensive SABR stats are not kind to him, but I know thats misleading.


Baines was the whole f'n show for the Sox in the late 80's
Author:  OldSchoolScoreFan [ Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
In my opinion, guys like Dawson and Jim Rice should not be in the HOF. The standard in the baseball HOF has been lowerd to NFL level. Dawson is slightly better than Baines. But, he is much closer to Baines than he is to Mays, Ruth, Aaron, Mantle, and Ted Williams.It is the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good. Let guys like Dawson and Rice be honored by their teams (retired numbers, ring of honor, whatever). Konerko and Buehrle should be honored by the White Sox at the end of their careers, not MLB. For someone to be in the HOF, they a reasonable fan should be able to answer YES of the following 3 of the following 5 questions.

1. Was the player considered one of the 5 or 6 best players or pitchers in baseball for a 5 year period?
2. Was the player considered the best at his position for a 5 year period?
3. Did the player reach one of the magic stat levels (3,000 hits, 300 wins, 3,000 KS, 500 HRs, 500 saves).
4. Does the player have significant post season accomplishments?
5. Did this player do something extremly outstanding or something that historically helped the health of the game? (Really the only people that fit into this category are guys like Ruth, Dimaggio, Jackie Robinson, Ripken)
Dawson at best a yes,yes,no,no,no. These questions also help deal with the PED issue. Guys like Shiefeld and Palamrio dont meet the 3/4 criteria. Bonds does, which puts him in, same with AROD. It is plain stupid to have a HOF that lets in guys like Rice, Dawson, and Fisk, but not Clemens, AROD and Bonds. Let them in and allow everyone remember that they used PEDs.
Recent guys that fit 3/4--Frank, Pedro, Randy Johnson, Schilling, Rivera, Jeter, AROD, Maddux, Clemens, Bonds.

Just by view...to answer the original post, the only way Paulie is in the MVP discussion is if the Sox somehow get to 95 wins and win the division.
Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Image
Author:  spanky [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Image
Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Hmmm...good point. A guy with bad knees who nobody wanted to sign has an MVP season on a bad team. I think you guys are onto something. Dawson was a juicer!
Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Hmmm...good point. A guy with bad knees who nobody wanted to sign has an MVP season on a bad team. I think you guys are onto something. Dawson was a juicer!


Probably.
Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
There is no probably about it. He was definitely on the stuff once he signed with the Cubs.
Author:  Darkside [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Frank Coztansa wrote:
There is no probably about it. He was definitely on the stuff once he signed with the Cubs.

But Sandberg said he did it the right way!
Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Frank Coztansa wrote:
There is no probably about it. He was definitely on the stuff once he signed with the Cubs.


Dawson hid it better than Konerko, though.

Can't wait to see Paulie have a third consecutive career year at age 36.
Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Yeah, really hidden. Not one other MLB team wanted to sign Dawson, so he basically gives the Cubs a fill-in-the-blank contract, then wins the MVP.

Yeah, he hid that real well :roll:
Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Not one other MLB team wanted to sign Dawson


Because of collusion. Had nothing to do with Dawson.
Author:  Keyser Soze [ Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
Can't wait to see Paulie have a third consecutive career year at age 36.

That makes two of us.
Author:  Walt Williams Neck [ Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Got to be leader of the Pack :!:
Author:  Beardown [ Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Walt Williams Neck wrote:
Got to be leader of the Pack :!:


Right now he's the best hitter in MLB, not just the AL. That's not even a question.

It's a damn shame we don't have a lead off man that can get on base cuz he would have 15 to 20 more RBIs if we just had an average lead off guy.
Author:  Free Ajent [ Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
What's this "we" shit??
Author:  sjboyd0137 [ Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
Free Ajent wrote:
What's this "we" shit??


Beardown is actually Brian Bruney
Author:  spanky [ Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Paulie MVP?
If the season ended today, Konerko is 2nd place at best:

Image
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/