I've heard all the arguments against guys like Dawson, Rice, Murphy, etc. I think they're bull. I hear "it's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good." You're right, it is the Hall of Fame. However, since when is "fame" limited to the immortal type baseball gods like Ruth, Gherig, and Aaron? I look at it this way. When I go (back) to the HoF, I want to see the greatest players from my youth. I want to see their plaque. I want to see their memorbelia, etc. Dawson is definitely one of those guys. I don't give a rat's ass what his VORP, OPS, LMNOP, XYZ is. The pitchers that feared Dawson didn't give a crap about that either. In addition, inducting guys like Dawson and Rice would not take away a thing from the cream of the crop --- the Aaron's, Mantles, Mays, and Ruths of the hall. They're still the best. No one in their right mind would say otherwise. Regardless, the Hawk is one of baseballs all time greatest players ---- his peers would agree. I know I'm in the minority, but I'm all for a more liberal HoF voter. If I were a voter, I'd fill out the 10 spots as often as possible. This year, I'd vote for Gwynn, Ripken, Dawson, Rice, Gossage, T John, L Smith, Murphy, Blyleven, and Albert Belle.