As we prepare for the big announcement, let’s talk a bit about how the Hall of Fame really works — the committees, writers, numbers and vibes behind the magic.
I dont think they should have a Special Committees who vote players into the Hall. Instead they should have committees vote for 3 players to get back on the Ballot for another run. Give the a list of players who have been overlooked for whatever reason. Players like Bernie Williams, Posada, Albert Belle, Cone, Lofton.., Whitaker, Evans, Stieb, Dave Stewart, Mattingly, Murphy, Munson, Randolph, Grich. + the ROID guys, Rose, Shoeless etc. and than if they dont get in they are done.
It was a pleasure to see that we had 9 votes in common. (No, obviously I don't have a vote, but I fill out a ballot anyway), the one I didn't vote for being Pettitte.
What is it about Baseball's hall of fame that brings so much discussion and so many feelings? There really isn't anything like it. (At least for me, and judging by the amount of words written and said every year, many other people).
I am also a big football fan, but, except for one omission on the coaching side, it never bothers me who they elect and who they do not. I love music and made part of a living that way when I was young, and while I could very easily be way more critical of the rock and roll hall of fame, instead I watch the show every year to see a few good performances, and am happy even for those that I think should have to pay admission to get in.
But something about the baseball hall of fame gets my juices flowing like no other. I get really upset about some snubs, and don't even get me started on the veteran's committee choices (as well as the omissions while making some of these crazy choices) the last decade.
There are hall of fames for many things. But the baseball hall of fame stands alone as far as the passion it evokes, and it is not just a personal opinion, it is something I would notice even if I did not care.
How much would voting have changed over the years had their been no cap on the number of votes for the committees and writers? Why is such a cap necessary in either situation? Who is getting elected in an endless ballot that wouldn’t get elected now? All it seems it would do is prevent some borderline guys being one and done and making the ballot longer, which is only a problem because of the cap.
The Board of Directors of the Hall of Fame, chaired by nepo baby and rich horsey aficionado, Jane Forbes Clark, instituted the limit because (I suspect) they think that it creates more buzz than if they had no limit and 16 guys were inducted some year. Clark does not get nearly enough spotlight on her, and I suspect Joe does not want to point a flame-thrower her way because baseball writers do not want to be black-listed from the HOF. The fact that some entitled heiress (who lives in the fucking Dakota for crissakes) is the gatekeeper of the HOF makes me want to puke.
Good history lesson Joe. With more than 23,000 players in MLB history and only 274 players enshrined (1.2%) adding 30 players (there are more than 30 questionable cases) would raise the percentage to 1.3%. How exactly would that 'ruin' the HOF?
I'm glad to see that you voted for Dustin Pedroia. It's kind of amazing to me that everyone talks as though Buster Posey is a no-doubt Hall of Famer, while Pedroia's support is pretty soft. They have nearly identical profiles: ROY, MVP, linchpin of multiple WS teams. Posey was a slightly better hitter and played catcher, of course, but it is not so big a difference to make him a no-doubter and Pedroia a hard pass.
It’s a terrible shame that his career ended the way it did - I don’t think there’d be any question about his HOF case if he had been able to keep playing.
But Pedroia is on record as saying that Machado is not to blame for the injury ending his career, and I think we should be mindful of that. He’s said that he positioned himself aggressively on the play and that his foot was planted awkwardly, causing his cleat to get stuck as Machado came in. And then Pedroia decided on his own to play through the injury (and aggravate it) the rest of the season, rather than opting right away for surgery. That tough, team-first mentality is one of the things that made Pedey great, but it also might have cost him a few years on the back end of his career.
Has the introduction and general acceptance of WAR made the Hall of Fame voting process better or worse? At first, I thought it was a good thing because it highlighted underrated but deserving players like Scott Rolen and Larry Walker and also shined a light on overlooked stars of the past. However, to me it feels like the pendulum is starting to swing too far in the other direction, where voters (and the general public) have drawn hard-and-fast lines designed to end conversations rather than begin them.
So, Joe, you're equating the BBHOF with a really good Vienna Beef dog Chicago-style? :)
I don't want to know how the sausage was made, nor do I care about what process the relish and pepper had to undergo to have that neon green color, but the entire concoction is freaking delicious (I miss getting a Chicago-style in the northern suburbs from Mustard's Last Stand or Paradise Pup, or even at Wrigley or Sox Park). I do care about the players' stats and intangibles and how they are elected.
BTW, excellent analysis on what bloc of voters voted the players in.
Why is there a ballot and limited number of players that can be voted on each year? If a writer believes Bobby Grich or Lou Whitaker are Hall of Famers shouldn’t they be able to vote for them? This year writers were allowed to vote for Howie Kendrick and/or Rick Porcello but not Grich or Whitaker? Just make anyone that played 10 seasons eligible to be voted on.
There has already been a precedent set for giving players a 2nd chance on the writer's ballot. In 1985, they added 11 players back on the ballot who had been previously dropped. None of those players wound up being elected by the writers, but two were eventually elected by committees (Santo and Dick Allen).
I think that, based on recent voter trends, Lou Whitaker, Kenny Lofton, Dwight Evans, and Johan Santana would all have a decent shot of eventually being elected by the writers if given a 2nd chance. I believe that would be better than them having to wait for the committees and hoping to get fortunate with a favorable draw.
This sounds super tempting, but if you make everybody eligible you will only be splitting the vote more. I'd love to see a way to get Grich and Whitaker and Lofton and others back on a writers ballot, but I haven't seen an opening to make that happen.
If you make everyone eligible AND let people vote for more than 10, problem solved. Similar reasoning applies. Not that I’m suggesting this (I’m a small hall guy).
This is just an outstanding history lesson. I'd have lost a lot of money on "a bar bet" if someone told me 39% of Hall of Famers were elected by the BBWAA.
One year, everyone in the Hall of Fame voted. That included Frick winners, so Vin got to vote. And I was not alone in thinking, who better to vote on who should be in there?
Jaime Jarrín, the answer to one of my favorite trivia questions (see below) was on the veterans' committee and talked about the process, and got chewed out. That was sad.
OK. Vin set the record--67 years. Who's #2? The answer was next door to him. 64 years for Jaime. Denny Matthews is headed for #58. Now that he's married, maybe he figures he needs to keep working?
After the questionable 2001 election of Mazeroski, the HOF decided that the process was broken. Consequently, they went to the system you mentioned, which allowed all the living members of the HOF (including Frick and Spink award winners for a few cycles) to vote. In theory, it does make sense that the existing HOF members should be the best to vote on potential new members. However, in practice, it was a failure and they elected nobody from 2001 through 2010, which is when the experiment was ended. The closest to election was Ron Santo, who received 69.5% in 2007. It seems like quite a few HOF members did not want to let anyone into their club.
This resulted in no living players being elected by any committees from 2001 until 2018, when Trammell and Morris were ushered in. This also resulted in a huge logjam of candidates and in eventual electees like Santo, Minoso, and Allen not being alive to enjoy the honor. It was kind of a shame that it went down the way it did.
I also remember Reggie Jackson saying at the time that he wouldn't vote for anyone who wasn't a player. I think someone reminded him that without Marvin Miller, he wouldn't have any money. Of course, even having the players vote didn't get him into the Hall.
Well, Marvin finally got in after he passed, despite his request for them not to vote him in posthumously. I spoke to someone at HOF a few years ago, and they said Miller's family would have nothing to do with the HOF. Can't say that I blame them.
I dont think they should have a Special Committees who vote players into the Hall. Instead they should have committees vote for 3 players to get back on the Ballot for another run. Give the a list of players who have been overlooked for whatever reason. Players like Bernie Williams, Posada, Albert Belle, Cone, Lofton.., Whitaker, Evans, Stieb, Dave Stewart, Mattingly, Murphy, Munson, Randolph, Grich. + the ROID guys, Rose, Shoeless etc. and than if they dont get in they are done.
Nice shoutout from Bob Costas on MLB network!
Best right handed hitter you ever saw since Judge? Huh??? Pujols and Miggy…….
Hey Joe, do you think we'll ever see another umpire inducted into the Hall again?
Speaking of Bill James, he was tweeting every day last year then in May just suddenly stopped. Is he ok, does anyone know?
It was a pleasure to see that we had 9 votes in common. (No, obviously I don't have a vote, but I fill out a ballot anyway), the one I didn't vote for being Pettitte.
What is it about Baseball's hall of fame that brings so much discussion and so many feelings? There really isn't anything like it. (At least for me, and judging by the amount of words written and said every year, many other people).
I am also a big football fan, but, except for one omission on the coaching side, it never bothers me who they elect and who they do not. I love music and made part of a living that way when I was young, and while I could very easily be way more critical of the rock and roll hall of fame, instead I watch the show every year to see a few good performances, and am happy even for those that I think should have to pay admission to get in.
But something about the baseball hall of fame gets my juices flowing like no other. I get really upset about some snubs, and don't even get me started on the veteran's committee choices (as well as the omissions while making some of these crazy choices) the last decade.
There are hall of fames for many things. But the baseball hall of fame stands alone as far as the passion it evokes, and it is not just a personal opinion, it is something I would notice even if I did not care.
How much would voting have changed over the years had their been no cap on the number of votes for the committees and writers? Why is such a cap necessary in either situation? Who is getting elected in an endless ballot that wouldn’t get elected now? All it seems it would do is prevent some borderline guys being one and done and making the ballot longer, which is only a problem because of the cap.
The Board of Directors of the Hall of Fame, chaired by nepo baby and rich horsey aficionado, Jane Forbes Clark, instituted the limit because (I suspect) they think that it creates more buzz than if they had no limit and 16 guys were inducted some year. Clark does not get nearly enough spotlight on her, and I suspect Joe does not want to point a flame-thrower her way because baseball writers do not want to be black-listed from the HOF. The fact that some entitled heiress (who lives in the fucking Dakota for crissakes) is the gatekeeper of the HOF makes me want to puke.
Good history lesson Joe. With more than 23,000 players in MLB history and only 274 players enshrined (1.2%) adding 30 players (there are more than 30 questionable cases) would raise the percentage to 1.3%. How exactly would that 'ruin' the HOF?
Can we talk about Mark Buehrle for a minute here? The actual “hold my beer while I help win the World Series” guy. That alone makes him HOF-worthy!
I'm glad to see that you voted for Dustin Pedroia. It's kind of amazing to me that everyone talks as though Buster Posey is a no-doubt Hall of Famer, while Pedroia's support is pretty soft. They have nearly identical profiles: ROY, MVP, linchpin of multiple WS teams. Posey was a slightly better hitter and played catcher, of course, but it is not so big a difference to make him a no-doubter and Pedroia a hard pass.
The other thing about Pedroia is that his stats are spookily similar to another Red Sox 2B who is in the HOF: Bobby Doerr.
Also, his career basically ended by injury suffered at the hands (or body) of another player that may have been dirty.
It’s a terrible shame that his career ended the way it did - I don’t think there’d be any question about his HOF case if he had been able to keep playing.
But Pedroia is on record as saying that Machado is not to blame for the injury ending his career, and I think we should be mindful of that. He’s said that he positioned himself aggressively on the play and that his foot was planted awkwardly, causing his cleat to get stuck as Machado came in. And then Pedroia decided on his own to play through the injury (and aggravate it) the rest of the season, rather than opting right away for surgery. That tough, team-first mentality is one of the things that made Pedey great, but it also might have cost him a few years on the back end of his career.
Yeah, I agree that it was probably a questionable, at worst play, a play that happens multiple times a year to every 2nd baseman.
It's funny, I saw his 2nd to last MLB game at Fenway and thought to myself, "Yeah, he's done".
Has the introduction and general acceptance of WAR made the Hall of Fame voting process better or worse? At first, I thought it was a good thing because it highlighted underrated but deserving players like Scott Rolen and Larry Walker and also shined a light on overlooked stars of the past. However, to me it feels like the pendulum is starting to swing too far in the other direction, where voters (and the general public) have drawn hard-and-fast lines designed to end conversations rather than begin them.
WAR = groupthink
Nice short and clever history lesson! You like movies so much, can't you convince someone to make a HOF movie??? You could star as Landis!
I know this isn't quite what you meant, but Joe literally (co-)wrote the Hall of Fame movie!
https://www.mlb.com/news/top-games-to-remember-for-hall-of-fame-class-c287407856
So, Joe, you're equating the BBHOF with a really good Vienna Beef dog Chicago-style? :)
I don't want to know how the sausage was made, nor do I care about what process the relish and pepper had to undergo to have that neon green color, but the entire concoction is freaking delicious (I miss getting a Chicago-style in the northern suburbs from Mustard's Last Stand or Paradise Pup, or even at Wrigley or Sox Park). I do care about the players' stats and intangibles and how they are elected.
BTW, excellent analysis on what bloc of voters voted the players in.
Why is there a ballot and limited number of players that can be voted on each year? If a writer believes Bobby Grich or Lou Whitaker are Hall of Famers shouldn’t they be able to vote for them? This year writers were allowed to vote for Howie Kendrick and/or Rick Porcello but not Grich or Whitaker? Just make anyone that played 10 seasons eligible to be voted on.
There has already been a precedent set for giving players a 2nd chance on the writer's ballot. In 1985, they added 11 players back on the ballot who had been previously dropped. None of those players wound up being elected by the writers, but two were eventually elected by committees (Santo and Dick Allen).
I think that, based on recent voter trends, Lou Whitaker, Kenny Lofton, Dwight Evans, and Johan Santana would all have a decent shot of eventually being elected by the writers if given a 2nd chance. I believe that would be better than them having to wait for the committees and hoping to get fortunate with a favorable draw.
This sounds super tempting, but if you make everybody eligible you will only be splitting the vote more. I'd love to see a way to get Grich and Whitaker and Lofton and others back on a writers ballot, but I haven't seen an opening to make that happen.
If you make everyone eligible AND let people vote for more than 10, problem solved. Similar reasoning applies. Not that I’m suggesting this (I’m a small hall guy).
This is just an outstanding history lesson. I'd have lost a lot of money on "a bar bet" if someone told me 39% of Hall of Famers were elected by the BBWAA.
One year, everyone in the Hall of Fame voted. That included Frick winners, so Vin got to vote. And I was not alone in thinking, who better to vote on who should be in there?
Jaime Jarrín, the answer to one of my favorite trivia questions (see below) was on the veterans' committee and talked about the process, and got chewed out. That was sad.
OK. Vin set the record--67 years. Who's #2? The answer was next door to him. 64 years for Jaime. Denny Matthews is headed for #58. Now that he's married, maybe he figures he needs to keep working?
After the questionable 2001 election of Mazeroski, the HOF decided that the process was broken. Consequently, they went to the system you mentioned, which allowed all the living members of the HOF (including Frick and Spink award winners for a few cycles) to vote. In theory, it does make sense that the existing HOF members should be the best to vote on potential new members. However, in practice, it was a failure and they elected nobody from 2001 through 2010, which is when the experiment was ended. The closest to election was Ron Santo, who received 69.5% in 2007. It seems like quite a few HOF members did not want to let anyone into their club.
This resulted in no living players being elected by any committees from 2001 until 2018, when Trammell and Morris were ushered in. This also resulted in a huge logjam of candidates and in eventual electees like Santo, Minoso, and Allen not being alive to enjoy the honor. It was kind of a shame that it went down the way it did.
I also remember Reggie Jackson saying at the time that he wouldn't vote for anyone who wasn't a player. I think someone reminded him that without Marvin Miller, he wouldn't have any money. Of course, even having the players vote didn't get him into the Hall.
Well, Marvin finally got in after he passed, despite his request for them not to vote him in posthumously. I spoke to someone at HOF a few years ago, and they said Miller's family would have nothing to do with the HOF. Can't say that I blame them.
I was with them all the way on that. It was disgraceful.