Neyer

Reading this Neyer post reminds me of one of my HOF pet peeves: the honored "first ballot inductee" tag. If a player is worthy of induction, shouldn't that be evident on his initial ballot? Either you're in or you're out, I don't really see the point in making a guy wait an extra year for the honors just because.

about 3 years ago R.J. Anderson 10 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

if i were a HOF voter,

i’d be the dick who didn’t vote for rickey henderson. because no one should be unanimous.

"They will surely make fewer home runs," Guillen said. "Defense players and worthy pitchers will likely take over the protagonist's role."

by larry on Dec 22, 2008 6:20 PM EST reply actions

I heard someone say this about Greg Maddux too, but I can't remember who.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 22, 2008 6:31 PM EST up reply actions

Someone explain the ‘We can’t vote in someone unanimously’ mindset. I don’t see a problem with someone like Rickey going in that way.

/deer head
Bay City Ball

by xanthan on Dec 22, 2008 6:42 PM EST up reply actions

For some people, it’s basically “If Ruth/Cobb/Musial/Young/YourFavoriteHoFer didn’t get in unanimously, then no one deserves to.”

by VictorW on Dec 22, 2008 8:21 PM EST up reply actions

oh i see

it’s because they’re stupid

by superk1ng on Dec 22, 2008 11:48 PM EST up reply actions

Why not?

And That Happened: Sports with a Hint of Sarcasm

by philkid3 on Dec 22, 2008 9:30 PM EST up reply actions

Someone, maybe Tom Tango, made this suggestion:

Instead of voting yes or no, you can vote yes, ask me later, or no. That way, you can avoid voting yes (like the people who think about “first ballotness”) while also avoid voting no. Because, if enough people vote no, that guy is off the ballot. To figure out if a guy who doesn’t make the HoF should appear on the next year’s ballot, you add up Yes and Ask Me Later votes and make sure they’re more than X% combined.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Dec 22, 2008 7:16 PM EST reply actions

Seems pretty reasonable.

This way guys like Grich, Whitaker and Simmons wouldn’t be peaced so fast. HOF needs to atleast re-evaluate he current process.

by James Kannengieser on Dec 22, 2008 8:58 PM EST up reply actions

Reasonable suggestion

but doesn’t get to the basic problem I have with this. What happens from year 1 to 2..3..4..etc that makes the guy a hall of famer. It does not make sense to say, “Babe Ruth didn’t get 100%, so Ricky Henderson shouldn’t”. Anyone who attempts to make apples to apples comparison of voting percentages is missing the boat, IMO.

by Adam Peterson on Dec 23, 2008 9:48 AM EST up reply actions

Competition

Some years have too many greats coming onto the scene while other years don’t have any. That’s how Sutter got in. He was the only non-veterans committee player selected that year.

Grammar is not a time of waste

by Patrick517 on Dec 23, 2008 7:49 PM EST up reply actions