Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Blogpen

Archives

August 2014
S M T W T F S
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blogpen
— Our Blogs and Nothing But Our Blogs

Hall of Merit: Token appearances

Let’s discuss token appearances here, I’ll lead off with DanG’s post . . .

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: April 16, 2003 at 09:44 PM | 93 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: New Eligibles for 1899

The notable newbies on the ballot (positional thread listing as well). We’ll be electing 2 new members for 1899.

Charlie Bennett (C)
Jocko Milligan (C)
Harry Stovey (1B)
Henry Larkin (1B)
Sam Wise (SS)
George Pinckney (3B)
Jim O’Rourke (LF)
Pete Browning (CF)
King Kelly (RF)
Tim Keefe (P)
Bob Caruthers (P)
Mark Baldwin (P)
Jesse Duryea (P)

I could have missed token appearances, my spreadsheet was set up when I wasn’t worried about token appearances, so I definitely could have missed some, please let me know if we need to fix something.

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: April 15, 2003 at 03:32 AM | 100 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: 1898 Results - Deacon White, Paul Hines, George Gore and Ross Barnes Elected to the Hall of Merit

The Class of 1898 is . . .

Deacon White, Paul Hines, George Gore and Ross Barnes. All are alive in January 1898 and expected to be in at the induction ceremony this August.

The Hall of Merit game between the Cleveland Spiders and Louisville Colonels should be entertaining as well. Louisville has a 24 OF-2B named Wagner that looks like he might turn out okay and Cleveland features Cy Young, who won his 200th game last year.

Here is the full balloting, let’s hope the formatting comes out well smallest text on your browser will help . . .

    Player       Pts Bal     1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1.  D.White      657  29    13 10  2  2     1  1
2.  P.Hines      654  29    11 13  2     2  1
3.  G.Gore       553  29     1  1 10  6  3  3  3  1  1
4.  R.Barnes     476  28     3     2  6  6  1  2  5  1     1     1
5.  C.Radbourn   427  28     1  1  3  3  3  3  3     1  8  1           1
6.  G.Wright     420  25        2  2  5  4  4  3  3        2
7.  E.Sutton     380  27           1  2  4  6  4  2  1  3  1  1  2
8.  H.Richardson 366  28           1  2  2  4  2  3  5  2  2  2  2  1
9.  A.Spalding   339  25        1  2  1  2  2  3  2  1  5  3  1  1  1
10. E.Williamson 328  28           1     1  2  1  4  8  2  3  3     1  2
11. J.Start      297  24           2     1     4  6  1  2  3  2  1  1  1
12. P.Galvin     209  21           1  1        1     2  1  3  3     6  3
13. C.McVey      198  19        1        1     1  1     2  3  2  7     1
14. T.O'Neill    132  13              1     1  1     2     1     2  2  3
15. L.Pike       123  14.5                  1              2  3  3  4  1.5
16. C.Jones       96  11                             2     1  3  1  3  1
17. M.Welch       95  11.17                       1  1     1  1  3  2  1.17
18. F.Dunlap      87  10                                   2  5  1  2
19. J.McCormick   70   7.17                          2  2     1  1     1.17
20. D.Orr         49   6                                      2  3  1
21. A.Dalrymple   31   4                                1           2  1
22. J.Whitney     24   2                          1     1
23. T.York        22   3                                         1  2
24. T.Bond        21   3.5                                             3.5
25. H.Wright      16   1.67                          1                  .67
26. J.Creighton   12   2                                               2
27. L.Meyerle      7   1.17                                            1.17
28. B.Mathews      7   1                                            1
29. J.Clapp        6   1                                               1
30. H.Nichol       6   1                                               1
31. D.Pearce       6   1                                               1
32. B.Sunday       4    .67                                             .67
33. C.Cummings     1    .17                                             .17
Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: April 15, 2003 at 02:18 AM | 43 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: 1898 Ballot

Let’s do it.

Post your ballots here, with a full explanation please. For a good example of what it might look like (other formats are good too, this is just one that I liked), look here, Andrew Siegel’s post of 11:08 a.m. on April 1, 2003.

sample ballot

Please do not tabulate the other votes before posting your ballot, and if you calc them after your ballot, please don’t post them here.

If as the week moves on, you realize you want to change your ballot, i.e., you’ve been convinced the John Doe really was better than Jim Smith, note that on this thread, along with the time and date of your original ballot.

Please post any comments on ballots on the discussion thread, try to keep this thread clean for just ballots.

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: April 07, 2003 at 03:41 PM | 37 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: 1898 Ballot Discussion

The general tone of the discussion seems to be that we’ll be moving the first election back to 1898. There haven’t been any major objections or anything, so I figured I’d get this thread up quick to give as much time as possible for discussion.

I’m posting this thread to allow for new discussions of provisional ballots, because . . . the players discussed will be quite different and that other thread was getting very long.

Please don’t add the totals and score them this time . . . if you want to add them up and post a top 10 or something that’s fine (alphabetically, without the total points) that’s fine, but I’d rather not open that can of worms, if people want to do it individually that’s fine, but I don’t think it should be posted. A top 10 accomplishes the goal of seeing the consensus without the other concerns.

The discussion of the merits of moving the ballot back to 1898 is on the First Ballot Schedule thread.

Our new start date will start the with the old opening day most of us grew up with, about a week into April, not the last day or two of March, if that’s any solace to the people who were pumped about starting on opening day :-)

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: March 27, 2003 at 01:15 AM | 104 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: Provisional Ballots

As requested . . . feel free to start discussing your ballots . . . I will probably not be able to check back in until Monday, I may pop in at some point before then, but it’s unlikely.

Rob Wood has as good of an understanding of this as anyone, he should be able to answer most questions.

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: March 20, 2003 at 02:03 AM | 57 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: Something Better

Here’s the article that started all of this off . . . I guess it’s a really long mission statement, for people new to this area of Primer . . .

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: March 19, 2003 at 09:04 PM | 1 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: Links to positional threads from last year

Here’s a link to the postional threads, I’ll just add a few notes if there’s something that needs to be considered that isn’t obvious, for those new to the discussions.

Catchers - by far the worst hitters as a group, so the ones that could hit (i.e. Deacon White, Buck Ewing, Charlie Bennett) were extremely valuable.

First Basemen - the pre-gloves players should get a major boost. Gloves caused the defensive spectrum to shift.

Second Basemen - equivalent to 3B today, it was more offensive ...

Read More...
Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: March 19, 2003 at 04:21 AM | 20 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: First Ballot Schedule

Okay, let’s get this rolling.

Let’s open the 1906 polls from March 30 (a Saturday) through April 6 (a Sunday). My fantasy league, of which I’m the commissioner drafts April 5, so I’ll be busy inputting rosters, moves, etc. on the 6th and 7th, but I should be able to tally the ballots by April 9.

We’ll then reopen the polls for 1907 on Monday the 14th, and get on a one-week on, one-week off schedule, generally voting Monday-Sunday. Does this work?

I need suggestions for how to structure the discussion threads leading to the first ballot. Should I reopen the old threads? Organize them by position, etc? What would you like?

The ballot structure we decided on was:

5 electees: 24-23-22-21-20-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
4 electees: 24-23-22-21-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
3 electees: 24-23-22-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
2 electees: 24-23-18-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
1 electee: 24-19-18-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6

I think this is the schedule for electees that we agreed on:

1906 5
1907 3
1908 2
1909 2
1910 2
1911 2
1912 2
1913 1
1914 1
1915 1
1916 1
1917 1

Then from 1918 through 1975 we elect two candidates per year. The year we “catch up” to the expected number of HoMers is 1955. Keep in mind that we will be 18.9 candidates behind when we start, plus we should be inducting 1.26 new per year at that time.

From 1976-83 we alternate between 3 in even years, 2 in odd years.

From 1984-95 we elect 3 candidates per season.

From 1996-2008 we elect a 4th candidate in “leap years”.

Starting in 2010, we’ll alternate between 4 in even years, 3 in odd years.

In 2014 we’ll be at 4 every year, except leap year when we’ll elect 3.

We’ll stay with that until another expansion throws us off, but earliest it would change an election would be 2019 (assuming expansion next year).

Here’s a link to the thread discussing the Constitution.

Let me know what else we need.

We’ll be voting through the yahoo group.

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: March 18, 2003 at 04:39 PM | 31 comment(s)
  Related News:

Hall of Merit: 1876 National League

Once again, jimd’s thoughts are in the discussion:

Standings      W  L   PCT    GB  Adjusted Standings  W   L  PCT  GB
Chicago       52 14  .788   --   Chicago           128  33 .794  --
Hartford      47 21  .691   6.0  St.Louis          115  46 .717  13
St.Louis      45 19  .703   6.0  Hartford          112  49 .694  16
Boston        39 31  .557  15.0  Boston             90  71 .557  38
Louisville    30 36  .455  22.0  Louisville         75  86 .467  53
New York      21 35  .375  26.0  New York           61 100 .379  67
Philadelphia  14 45  .237  34.5  Philadelphia       39 122 .245  89
Cincinnati     9 56  .136  42.5  Cincinnati         24 137 .146 104

If you look at the 3 worst teams, only Philadelphia had more than one or two legit major leaguers. Also the three teams were by far the worst fielding teams in the league. Removing them from the standings would produce these records:

Standings      W   L  PCT  GB
Chicago      112  48 .700  --
St. Louis     94  66 .589  18
Hartford      89  71 .558  23
Boston        61  99 .379  51
Louisville    44 116 .273  68

 

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: March 04, 2003 at 12:45 AM | 8 comment(s)
  Related News:

Page 128 of 132 pages ‹ First  < 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 >  | Features Archive | Site Archive

 

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14!
for his generous support.

Hot Topics

Page rendered in 0.6710 seconds
56 querie(s) executed

Page rendered in 0.6710 seconds
56 querie(s) executed