Ok, so I finally got sick of hearing idiots (Chris Russo) spouting off the same nonsense every year saying "some people think there shouldn't be a limit on hall of fame voting! How can people think there are 10 hall of famers on the ballot?!" So, I did some math and I went back to 1966 and figured out how many Hall of Famers were on the ballot every single year. Turns out, it's an average of 12 hall of famers on every ballot (and this doesn't even include the Bonds, Clemens, McGwires, Etc. of the world). Here's the year by year totals. So the next time you hear someone say "how can anyone believe there's more than 10 hall of famers here to vote for you can rest sound in the knowledge that for almost 6 decades, since the BBWAA did yearly voting, there have been more then 10 hall of famers on the ballot.
Looking it from this angle makes it clear that the players that get most votes any year will eventually all be selected (approximately top 10). So eg. Bonds, Clemens and Schilling will eventually get in. As they should.
The other weird thing was looking at those 2nd & 3rd tier candidates and seeing who broke through. Steve Garvey, Harvey Kuenn, Ken Boyer, etc. they were all tracking similarly or ahead of Oliva, Jim Rice, Ron Santo. I'm a big hall guy, so it doesn't bug me too much (OK, Baines bugged me), but it does show how kind of arbitrary the standards get sometimes.
The current voting system of course is hard to change, but it feels a bit silly that a player gets, say, fifth most votes in a particular year (whatever his percentage is) and that way has very good odds to be actually inducted some day. But he might have to wait 30 years for it (and we know what it might mean)! Because anybody who collects enough votes to be so high in any years list has been one heck of a baseball player. If only there could be criteria that would fasten the road to Hall.
Joe... an explanation for my write-in nomination for Ross Barnes, even though he's not officially eligible for the Hall of Fame.
I think the Hall should reconsider the eligibility requirements for those who played baseball prior to the advent of the National Association in 1871. As one of the greatest players of the first decade of the professional game, Ross Barnes would be a shoo-in first-ballot Hall of Famer if he was eligible . However, through no fault of his own, he's not eligible only because he only played nine seasons of major league baseball. I say no fault of his own because the first five seasons of his illustrious career came before there even was major league baseball (Rockford Forest Citys from 1866-70).
I believe the Baseball Hall of Fame should have an eligibilty exemption for players whose service before 1871 would otherwise make them eligible for the Hall. Your thoughts?
This was fun. I wish I had realized that not voting on a player was an option. I voted no on a number of players where my vote was "not enough info to say yes".
Having seen polls like this before, my expectation is aside from the obvious Hall of Famers who writers haven't voted on yet (Beltre, Ichiro, Pujols, others?) who will get 95%, no one gets 75% though Mauer, Posey, Molina, and Beltran could be close. It's always surprising to see how many people don't want Bonds and Clemens in, and I'm curious how that will compare with opposition to Rose and Shoeless Joe.
I was surprised how many players not in the Hall I voted yes on, especially starting pitchers.
Amazing. (The right word to use when discussing The Franchise.) I spent way too much time mourning Seaver's relegation to the Fifth Class, mollified only slightly by Joe's insistence that this was "Seaver's Class". Seaver remains the best pitcher I've ever seen live (Gibson, Maddux, Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer, Rivera, Eckersley, among others). And forever my childhood hero.
Was Paul Konerko on the list? I don't remember seeing his name. I think he's a little underrated.
1B is the toughest position for me. Delgado had a monster career but just wasn't "famous" enough to really move the needle. Statistically he's probably more deserving than guys like Clark and Mattingly...but it would be weird to see a HOF with Delgado but not Donnie Baseball. Hmm.
The 1999 - 2003 seasons for Delgado, Giambi and Helton are unworldly. Ok, so there was a whole lot of juicing going on. Giambi confessed. Palmero, who had an unworldly 1999, has a positive PED test and suspension. Does the entire era get thrown out, except for Big Papi?
I hate what the HoF baseball writers voting has become. Baseball thrived all during the PED period. Now self righteous gatekeepers want to exact revenge. But against what? Who is helped by the current process of writers concocting a purity test with no controls and nothing but feelings?
Oh, and Helton fails the purity test because he played at Coors field.
Big Hall and we have a nice party in Cooperstown every August. Small Hall and we get the dissonance of great modern players rejected while older players and game contributors slide in on a different scale. Sigh
A lot of good hit, no field players wound up at first base. And so there are a lot of guys who, at least to me, had a pretty good career but weren't among the top 25 at the position all time. And whether someone is the 22nd or 35th best 1B of all time can depend if you're looking at fWAR, bWAR, Win Shares, or some other model.
Fun! I voted for close to half the options, I think. Also, because the suggestions were position-centric, I forgot to add to the survey the one player I should have added: I would absolutely vote for the great '80s/ '90s utility man Tony Phillips.
Pretty interesting to break this down by position, because I found myself only voting yes on one SS (admittedly I don't necessarily think that the 19th century or Negro League guys shouldn't be in, I just haven't looked at it close enough) and a bunch of 3rd basemen. I guess my mind thinks that shortstop is pretty well represented, but 3rd base is not.
Also, Joe you have Al Oliver listed at 1b, but the position he played mostly often is CF and the argument for him surely is a lot stronger at CF than 1B.
Years as regular (more than half the games at a position): CF 7, 1B 4, LF 3. Played his most games in CF (about 40% of career games); played 1B at least once in the most seasons (14). That sort of “division” works against him in an exercise like this…
I would have appreciated the ability to pass on the vote: there’s a world of difference between not thinking a player worthy and not feeling worthy to judge.
That was pretty fun... though I feel like an idiot voting yes or no on everybody when I should have left several blank (which didn't occur to me to do... doh!)
A lot of good starting pitchers in the 80s/90s that I think should have gotten more consideration. It's going to be hard to find pitchers like that anymore.
The best part was getting to vote no on Yadier Molina!
I would like to write in Marvin Miller as a contributor.
I completed the survey, realized I hadn’t written him in, so then took it again with the intention of doing so. I did not realize there was no write in options for contributors. He would be a terrible omission in my book. So I’m sorry I took it twice.
For me I voted yes on all the ones that were obvious to me and no on the ones that were obvious no's for me, anyone that was borderline in my mind I left blank. I also left the ones I didn't know blank.
Tough survey, actually. Most of these are certainly in the Hall of the Very Good; some are worthy of Cooperstown, for sure (and should already be in). I would be happy to field a team with any of them.
Taking a survey like this made me realize how deeply I loathe the Yankees. I lacked all objectivity.
Sorry, I love John Fogerty and Centerfield! Put them in the Hall!!
Ok, so I finally got sick of hearing idiots (Chris Russo) spouting off the same nonsense every year saying "some people think there shouldn't be a limit on hall of fame voting! How can people think there are 10 hall of famers on the ballot?!" So, I did some math and I went back to 1966 and figured out how many Hall of Famers were on the ballot every single year. Turns out, it's an average of 12 hall of famers on every ballot (and this doesn't even include the Bonds, Clemens, McGwires, Etc. of the world). Here's the year by year totals. So the next time you hear someone say "how can anyone believe there's more than 10 hall of famers here to vote for you can rest sound in the knowledge that for almost 6 decades, since the BBWAA did yearly voting, there have been more then 10 hall of famers on the ballot.
YEAR | HOF ON BALLOT | How Many BBWAA Elected
2023 | 1 | 1
2022 | 2 | 1
2021 | 1 | Shutout Year
2020 | 3 | 2
2019 | 7 | 4
2018 | 9 | 4
2017 | 10 | 3
2016 | 11 | 2
2015 | 13 | 4
2014 | 14 | 3
2013 | 10 | Shutout Year
2012 | 9 | 1
2011 | 12 | 2
2010 | 11 | 1
2009 | 9 | 2
2008 | 9 | 1
2007 | 10 | 2
2006 | 8 | 1
2005 | 10 | 2
2004 | 11 | 2
2003 | 12 | 2
2002 | 10 | 1
2001 | 9 | 2
2000 | 9 | 2
1999 | 11 | 3
1998 | 9 | 1
1997 | 9 | 1
1996 | 10 | Shutout Year
1995 | 11 | 1
1994 | 12 | 1
1993 | 9 | 1
1992 | 10 | 2
1991 | 12 | 3
1990 | 12 | 2
1989 | 12 | 2
1988 | 8 | 1
1987 | 9 | 2
1986 | 10 | 1
1985 | 11 | 2
1984 | 11 | 3
1983 | 15 | 2
1982 | 16 | 2
1981 | 13 | 1
1980 | 13 | 2
1979 | 12 | 1
1978 | 12 | 1
1977 | 12 | 1
1976 | 13 | 2
1975 | 15 | 1
1974 | 16 | 2
1973 | 16 | 1
1972 | 16 | 3
1971 | 16 | Shutout Year
1970 | 16 | 1
1969 | 18 | 2
1968 | 15 | 1
1967 | 19 | Shutout Year
1966 | 20 | | 1
Looking it from this angle makes it clear that the players that get most votes any year will eventually all be selected (approximately top 10). So eg. Bonds, Clemens and Schilling will eventually get in. As they should.
The other weird thing was looking at those 2nd & 3rd tier candidates and seeing who broke through. Steve Garvey, Harvey Kuenn, Ken Boyer, etc. they were all tracking similarly or ahead of Oliva, Jim Rice, Ron Santo. I'm a big hall guy, so it doesn't bug me too much (OK, Baines bugged me), but it does show how kind of arbitrary the standards get sometimes.
The current voting system of course is hard to change, but it feels a bit silly that a player gets, say, fifth most votes in a particular year (whatever his percentage is) and that way has very good odds to be actually inducted some day. But he might have to wait 30 years for it (and we know what it might mean)! Because anybody who collects enough votes to be so high in any years list has been one heck of a baseball player. If only there could be criteria that would fasten the road to Hall.
ok, i finally have taken the survey...
Joe... an explanation for my write-in nomination for Ross Barnes, even though he's not officially eligible for the Hall of Fame.
I think the Hall should reconsider the eligibility requirements for those who played baseball prior to the advent of the National Association in 1871. As one of the greatest players of the first decade of the professional game, Ross Barnes would be a shoo-in first-ballot Hall of Famer if he was eligible . However, through no fault of his own, he's not eligible only because he only played nine seasons of major league baseball. I say no fault of his own because the first five seasons of his illustrious career came before there even was major league baseball (Rockford Forest Citys from 1866-70).
I believe the Baseball Hall of Fame should have an eligibilty exemption for players whose service before 1871 would otherwise make them eligible for the Hall. Your thoughts?
This was fun. I wish I had realized that not voting on a player was an option. I voted no on a number of players where my vote was "not enough info to say yes".
Having seen polls like this before, my expectation is aside from the obvious Hall of Famers who writers haven't voted on yet (Beltre, Ichiro, Pujols, others?) who will get 95%, no one gets 75% though Mauer, Posey, Molina, and Beltran could be close. It's always surprising to see how many people don't want Bonds and Clemens in, and I'm curious how that will compare with opposition to Rose and Shoeless Joe.
I was surprised how many players not in the Hall I voted yes on, especially starting pitchers.
As Tim Burnell wrote, this was a time sink but tremendously fun!
Did the Joe Blogs Hall of Fame just die a quiet death? If I remember correctly, there were 3 classes of inductees and then it stopped.
Close. Five and stopped.
https://www.joeposnanski.com/jbhof-home
(I've been pondering the same question in my spare time.)
Thank you! I should've remembered it was 5 since the 5th class was when Tom Terrific finally got in.
Amazing. (The right word to use when discussing The Franchise.) I spent way too much time mourning Seaver's relegation to the Fifth Class, mollified only slightly by Joe's insistence that this was "Seaver's Class". Seaver remains the best pitcher I've ever seen live (Gibson, Maddux, Kershaw, Verlander, Scherzer, Rivera, Eckersley, among others). And forever my childhood hero.
Mine too!
Was Paul Konerko on the list? I don't remember seeing his name. I think he's a little underrated.
1B is the toughest position for me. Delgado had a monster career but just wasn't "famous" enough to really move the needle. Statistically he's probably more deserving than guys like Clark and Mattingly...but it would be weird to see a HOF with Delgado but not Donnie Baseball. Hmm.
The 1999 - 2003 seasons for Delgado, Giambi and Helton are unworldly. Ok, so there was a whole lot of juicing going on. Giambi confessed. Palmero, who had an unworldly 1999, has a positive PED test and suspension. Does the entire era get thrown out, except for Big Papi?
I hate what the HoF baseball writers voting has become. Baseball thrived all during the PED period. Now self righteous gatekeepers want to exact revenge. But against what? Who is helped by the current process of writers concocting a purity test with no controls and nothing but feelings?
Oh, and Helton fails the purity test because he played at Coors field.
Big Hall and we have a nice party in Cooperstown every August. Small Hall and we get the dissonance of great modern players rejected while older players and game contributors slide in on a different scale. Sigh
A lot of good hit, no field players wound up at first base. And so there are a lot of guys who, at least to me, had a pretty good career but weren't among the top 25 at the position all time. And whether someone is the 22nd or 35th best 1B of all time can depend if you're looking at fWAR, bWAR, Win Shares, or some other model.
Fun! I voted for close to half the options, I think. Also, because the suggestions were position-centric, I forgot to add to the survey the one player I should have added: I would absolutely vote for the great '80s/ '90s utility man Tony Phillips.
Pretty interesting to break this down by position, because I found myself only voting yes on one SS (admittedly I don't necessarily think that the 19th century or Negro League guys shouldn't be in, I just haven't looked at it close enough) and a bunch of 3rd basemen. I guess my mind thinks that shortstop is pretty well represented, but 3rd base is not.
Also, Joe you have Al Oliver listed at 1b, but the position he played mostly often is CF and the argument for him surely is a lot stronger at CF than 1B.
Years as regular (more than half the games at a position): CF 7, 1B 4, LF 3. Played his most games in CF (about 40% of career games); played 1B at least once in the most seasons (14). That sort of “division” works against him in an exercise like this…
I would have appreciated the ability to pass on the vote: there’s a world of difference between not thinking a player worthy and not feeling worthy to judge.
That was pretty fun... though I feel like an idiot voting yes or no on everybody when I should have left several blank (which didn't occur to me to do... doh!)
A lot of good starting pitchers in the 80s/90s that I think should have gotten more consideration. It's going to be hard to find pitchers like that anymore.
The best part was getting to vote no on Yadier Molina!
I would like to write in Marvin Miller as a contributor.
I completed the survey, realized I hadn’t written him in, so then took it again with the intention of doing so. I did not realize there was no write in options for contributors. He would be a terrible omission in my book. So I’m sorry I took it twice.
For me I voted yes on all the ones that were obvious to me and no on the ones that were obvious no's for me, anyone that was borderline in my mind I left blank. I also left the ones I didn't know blank.
Tough survey, actually. Most of these are certainly in the Hall of the Very Good; some are worthy of Cooperstown, for sure (and should already be in). I would be happy to field a team with any of them.