|
leokitty posted:I think it's hard to predict how Manny will actually do because he's already started doing an image rehab which is the #1 thing to do. Also if you played in a big market and the local media liked you or can be convinced that they liked you that seems to work pretty well. Every New England sports writer suddenly deciding that Jim Rice was the nicest dude in the world to them because the Red Sox said so played a big part in that whole thing. Mussina gets very few votes from the NY writers because he rubbed all those dudes the wrong way for years. We have guys like Bagwell and Piazza being held out because of vague rumors and hunches about steroids ffs.
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
Partial results, first BBOF class voting in 1936: Yes, there are players who were active at the time the vote was held in there! They hadn't even established that it should be for retired players only at that point. bawfuls posted:As eager as many of the voters have been to paint anyone and everyone with the PED brush, I can't imagine some token image massaging is going to make up for Manny's two positive tests, plus the whole "Manny being Manny" thing and how much Boston decided they hated him towards the end. I don't think he will get in but I think he will do better than expected and if anyone starts writing Manny apologia the Red Sox will start one of their Hall PR campaigns for him. VV It's amazing how suddenly all these people like Jim Rice and Jack Morris became gosh just the nicest dudes 15 year later leokitty fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
bawfuls posted:As eager as many of the voters have been to paint anyone and everyone with the PED brush, I can't imagine some token image massaging is going to make up for Manny's two positive tests, plus the whole "Manny being Manny" thing and how much Boston decided they hated him towards the end. That was just so the Red Sox could kick him out, I'm pretty sure everyone would pretend like they never hated him in the first place at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
leokitty posted:Partial results, first BBOF class voting in 1936: Yeah, I guess I didn't think about the chaos that was hall voting then, and they were only a year removed from Babe's last game, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:I still don't understand how Babe Ruth didn't even get 100%. Because sports writers were just as poo poo then as they are now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:I still don't understand how Babe Ruth didn't even get 100%. Really wish he had so there wouldn't be this dumb prohibition against getting 100% today
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
For better or worse I imagine Manny is going to do a lot better in voting than Sheffield and other comparable players. He won't get in but name recognition goes quite a long way, and he had the good luck of having his negative tests come after the initial big scandals were already out, and likely will have the good luck of a less loaded ballot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Reformed Pissboy posted:For better or worse I imagine Manny is going to do a lot better in voting than Sheffield and other comparable players. He won't get in but name recognition goes quite a long way, and he had the good luck of having his negative tests come after the initial big scandals were already out, and likely will have the good luck of a less loaded ballot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
Manny's candidacy will probably depend largely on what extent the Red Sox PR machine goes to bat for him. If John Henry wants Manny in the Hall, the Boston writers will fall in line. That's all that's keeping ESPN from being on board, and that wins the narrative. If they decide he's not a True Red Sox like Jim Rice, then he's going to be like a roided up Dick Allen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
Intruder posted:Really wish he had so there wouldn't be this dumb prohibition against getting 100% today It's probably best to think of the BBWAA as a bunch of alcoholics who have almost no idea what they're talking about who just happen to be the gatekeepers of what should be baseball's highest honor. It would explain why Tom Seaver has the highest percentage at the very least. He's worthy of being there but not with a bigger %age over Babe Ruth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Reformed Pissboy posted:For better or worse I imagine Manny is going to do a lot better in voting than Sheffield and other comparable players. He won't get in but name recognition goes quite a long way, and he had the good luck of having his negative tests come after the initial big scandals were already out, and likely will have the good luck of a less loaded ballot. I think you over-estimate how closely hall of fame voters follow baseball news and how much time they spend on their ballots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Island Nation posted:It's probably best to think of the BBWAA as a bunch of alcoholics who have almost no idea what they're talking about who just happen to be the gatekeepers of what should be baseball's highest honor. I feel like retired players should probably be the frontline arbiters for entrance rather than just kind of one of the background committees.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:I feel like retired players should probably be the frontline arbiters for entrance rather than just kind of one of the background committees. bawfuls fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Then how do you fix it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Have SAS users be the only voters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Island Nation posted:It's probably best to think of the BBWAA as a bunch of alcoholics who have almost no idea what they're talking about who just happen to be the gatekeepers of what should be baseball's highest honor. When Ruth was elected the ballot consisted of literally every single player in the history of major league baseball to that point, including active players or guys who had just retired. It was a huge mess to sort out. Look at the results from that year Leo posted. CY YOUNG didn't even crack 50% Inspector_666 posted:Then how do you fix it? For a start get rid of the guys who haven't actively covered the game in decades but still get a vote, and open up the voting pool to include more internet writers, TV/radio people, etc. People who have actually watched a game recently and might pay attention to some of the recent advances in stats and stuff. You'd still get plenty of dumb voters, but there'd also be way more good ones and you wouldn't have a loving golf magazine with multiple hall of fame votes. If the last several decades of sports television have taught us anything, it is that ex-athletes are dumb as gently caress when it comes to big picture sports stuff. You really want, like, Joe Morgan and Tim McCaver deciding who gets in the Hall of Fame? They also tend to be small hall as hell once they actually get elected, unless they're campaigning for one of their friends, because they want it to be exclusive as possible to make them feel more special. MourningView fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:Have SAS users be the only voters. These assholes failed to elect Tim Raines so the obvious solution is to let me be solely in charge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:Have SAS users be the only voters. Actual answer (proposed by Keith Olbermann): Commissioner of Baseball nominates 1 person. President of the AL (Chrissy Teagan in Olbermann's vision) nominates 1. President of the NL nominates 1. The BBWAA may elect any additional players they think deserve to go in on merit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Who votes on the nominations? I don't see how that system is any different than the current one at the end of the day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
If you want to get more aggressive about fixing the Hall, you get the Hall itself to issue some clarifications/statements on voting guidelines such as: do not leave a player out of your votes just because it's his first year on the ballot or you're worried that "too many" players will be elected; sending in a blank ballot will result in losing your vote for X years; players who have not failed tests or been convicted of drug crimes should be treated as not having done PEDs. In combination with clearing out the deadwood writers and eliminating the ballot limit, this should lead to a reduction of some of the most egregious systematic problems. If you want to get really aggressive, also take note every time a writer either 1) votes for a player that receives <5%, or 2) fails to vote for a player that receives >90%. Get too many strikes in a particular period and you get your ballot suspended for a few years. That would in theory discourage habitual trolls and Darin Erstad voters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
There's nothing wrong with voting for a Darin Erstad in normal years, though. A kudos vote when you have an extra spot on a ballot isn't a thing worth getting worked up about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
leokitty posted:There's nothing wrong with voting for a Darin Erstad in normal years, though. A kudos vote when you have an extra spot on a ballot isn't a thing worth getting worked up about. Well, I was serious about it being an extremely aggressive idea. Also, I figure if you make blank ballots illegal then you're going to get some assholes voting for just one rando, and I felt like offering a crazy system instead of subjective "just look at the ballots and anyone who's repeatedly being a poo poo loses their vote".
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:I feel like retired players should probably be the frontline arbiters for entrance rather than just kind of one of the background committees. They did that with the Veterans Committee (which for a while comprised every living Hall of Famer) -- they voted five times and elected no one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:If you want to get more aggressive about fixing the Hall, you get the Hall itself to issue some clarifications/statements on voting guidelines such as: do not leave a player out of your votes just because it's his first year on the ballot or you're worried that "too many" players will be elected; sending in a blank ballot will result in losing your vote for X years; players who have not failed tests or been convicted of drug crimes should be treated as not having done PEDs. In combination with clearing out the deadwood writers and eliminating the ballot limit, this should lead to a reduction of some of the most egregious systematic problems. This would be great but Jeff Idelson and the curators at the hall are just as conservative and hero worshipping as the BBWAA. I wouldn't trust HoF leadership with anything at this point. I also wouldn't trust people like Bud Selig, because I mean seriously. The HoF should be separate from MLB somewhat, at least to be slightly adrift from the corporate offices. I don't know what can be done, and I fear that any drastic change in voting protocol would drive away fans because "tradition  ".
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
One of the guys for Baseball America, I'm not sure if it was JJ Cooper or John Manuel, pointed out that the HOF may be deliberately trying to keep out steroid guys because they are afraid that the more vocal anti-steroid crowd will then stop supporting the Hall and cost them money. I guess it's plausible. But they also brought up that the Hall lost more money again last year despite the election of a large class.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
No one ever mentions or investigates this further which always infuriates me considering guys like Bagwell and Piazza are denied simply on speculation http://t.co/hV1hcaR7id
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Dick Williams posted:No one ever mentions or investigates this further which always infuriates me considering guys like Bagwell and Piazza are denied simply on speculation Who would that even be? Rickey? Or a 41 year old Boggs, I guess. I'm not sure what you want people to investigate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
MourningView posted:Who would that even be? Rickey? Or a 41 year old Boggs, I guess. I'm not sure what you want people to investigate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Rickey wouldn't say it like that. For starters, Rickey can't even pronounce people's names correctly. The fact that Rickey used the first person tips me off immediately that it isn't him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
If anyone would have a roid hookup it's be Rickey, just a few doors down from Canseco and McGwire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:One of the guys for Baseball America, I'm not sure if it was JJ Cooper or John Manuel, pointed out that the HOF may be deliberately trying to keep out steroid guys because they are afraid that the more vocal anti-steroid crowd will then stop supporting the Hall and cost them money. I guess it's plausible. But they also brought up that the Hall lost more money again last year despite the election of a large class. They should probably play to the crowd that will be alive in 15 years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
I hope it closes because it's dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
Groucho Marxist posted:They should probably play to the crowd that will be alive in 15 years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
joshtothemaxx posted:This would be great but Jeff Idelson and the curators at the hall are just as conservative and hero worshipping as the BBWAA. I wouldn't trust HoF leadership with anything at this point. I also wouldn't trust people like Bud Selig, because I mean seriously. The HoF should be separate from MLB somewhat, at least to be slightly adrift from the corporate offices. Of course, but if the question is "how do you fix the Hall?" no answer will pass this test.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Is the HOF losing money currently?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Alain Post posted:Is the HOF losing money currently?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2012/01/02/Events-and-Attractions/Baseball-Hall-of-Fame.aspx 1. They're in the red on their balance sheet. 2. Attendance is (or was, old article) down. 3. Doesn't matter because they're a nonprofit with wealthy benefactors. So, they're probably fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
IDK it just kind of seems the HOF dicussions/arguments everywhere have gotten really vitrolic and unfun lately. The current crisis of what to do with a stacked ballot and the "steroid era" players is certainly significant, but there's been crises in the HOF's past before, and there's probably going to be more in the future. It's just part of the silly culture of a museum that's really cool but doesn't really matter in the long run anyway. IDK maybe this is just personal to me, I used to really enjoy the HOF threads every year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Alain Post posted:IDK it just kind of seems the HOF dicussions/arguments everywhere have gotten really vitrolic and unfun lately. The current crisis of what to do with a stacked ballot and the "steroid era" players is certainly significant, but there's been crises in the HOF's past before, and there's probably going to be more in the future. It's just part of the silly culture of a museum that's really cool but doesn't really matter in the long run anyway. IDK maybe this is just personal to me, I used to really enjoy the HOF threads every year. I think there's a major generational conflict going on, basically. A lot of voters seem to be using their Hall to delegitimize a whole era of baseball in favor of nostalgia. This leads to a lot of bad feelings from the younger generation, myself included, since our formative baseball years are being disrespected in a really stupid and hypocritical way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 07:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
Mornacale posted:I think there's a major generational conflict going on, basically. A lot of voters seem to be using their Hall to delegitimize a whole era of baseball in favor of nostalgia. This leads to a lot of bad feelings from the younger generation, myself included, since our formative baseball years are being disrespected in a really stupid and hypocritical way. Basically this. If "greenies" and Ty loving Cobb are in the hall (along with players who never had to play against black athletes) then the fact that Piazza used a supplement that wasn't even illegal at the time is being used to keep him out of the hall looks really, really dumb. And my favorite argument, which is that even if you throw out everything Barry Bonds did after 2000 (don't do this, but whatever) he's still a Hall of Famer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 07:23
|
|