Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

You are here > Home > Hall of Merit > Discussion
Hall of Merit
— A Look at Baseball's All-Time Best

Monday, March 15, 2004

1922 Ballot

This one shouldn’t be too tough . . .

JoeD has the Imperial March Stuck in His Head Posted: March 15, 2004 at 10:29 AM | 128 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. jimd Posted: March 20, 2004 at 02:17 AM (#523046)
Read previous ballots if you want more depth on my reasons for all but the latest eligibles. The new rating system is not yet up-to-speed, unfortunately, due to a lack of available time on my part.

1) N. Lajoie -- !.
   102. KJOK Posted: March 20, 2004 at 07:09 AM (#523047)
...just because they pitched for some pennant winners (amplifying their WS)

Just to keep the record, straight, pitching or playing for pennant winners does NOT amplify Win Shares. The only way Win Shares can at all be "amplified" is for players on a team that wins more games than their runs scored and runs allowed would predict that they win. This can occur on LAST PLACE teams - has nothing to do with winning the pennant.....
   103. Sean Gilman Posted: March 20, 2004 at 11:14 AM (#523048)
I've spent most of the last 2 weeks moving into my first house (woohoo!), but fortunately, this week is an, ahem, no-brainer (all Caruthers arguments aside).


1. Napoleon Lajoie (-)--He?s really good.

2. Christy Mathewson (-)--Him too.

3. Lip Pike (3)--Not quite as good in the NA as McVey, but better before; much better in the NA than Start, not as good before. Very underrated. I?ve never been able to understand the anti-1870s crowd. A pennant is a pennant. How one could rank, say, Sam Thompson ahead of Pike I have no idea.

4. Home Run Johnson (4)--KJOK?s translations put him this high. Not sure if he shouldn't rank above Pike.

5. Jimmy Sheckard (5)--Looks pretty much identical to Keeler to me.

6. Hugh Duffy (6)--Peak and Career edge on Browning after the AA discount.

7. Bobby Wallace (7)--Lack of a peak keeps him from the top of the ballot, but I think he?s an eventual HOMer. Of course, I was a big fan of McPhee and Sutton too. Guess I like the defense.

8. Joe McGinnity (8)--A lot like Browning: big peak, not so much career value.

9. Pete Browning (9)--AA discount and short career keeps him in the middle of the ballot. I think he?s really underrated by the electorate at large.

10. Mordecai Brown (-)--I?ve got 3-Finger behind the Iron Man based on McGinnity?s IP advantage in their respective peak seasons and Brown superior defensive support. Both may belong higher on my ballot, however.

11. Dickey Pearce (10)--The best shortstop of his time ranks in the middle of the ballot.

12. Bob Caruthers (11)--His WARP1 and 3 Pennants Added are essentially the same as Pete Browning?s, which is interesting. . .

13. Hughie Jennings (12)--Like Sam Thompson, only a slightly better peak and he was a shortstop instead of a right-fielder.

14. Roger Bresnahan (13)--Great rate stats, but he just didn?t play enough to generate the value of the higher ups on the ballot. I might be underrating him though. . .

15. Rube Waddell (14)--Like Hughie Jennings, only a pitcher instead of a shortstop, which means I?m probably still underrating him. Childs and Grant follow closely behind Wadell as very little seperates spots 12-20 or so on my ballot.
   104. Marc Posted: March 20, 2004 at 02:57 PM (#523049)
> I?ve never been able to understand the anti-1870s crowd

Sean, it is the same thing as the anti-Negro crowd. The player must be penalized for our lack of knowledge and/or curiosity about his day and time. (Ignore the disconnect between who is at fault and who is paying the price.)
   105. Sean Gilman Posted: March 20, 2004 at 08:44 PM (#523052)
"Sean, it is the same thing as the anti-Negro crowd. The player must be penalized for our lack of knowledge and/or curiosity about his day and time. (Ignore the disconnect between who is at fault and who is paying the price.)"

I know, I just don't understand why anyone would take that position. Why one would say "we've elected enough players from the 70s, lets move on" or whatever. I don't know what that has to do with ranking the 15 most meritorious baseball players per year.
   106. Dag Nabbit at Posted: March 20, 2004 at 09:11 PM (#523055)
Well Tom Yawkey was probably the one single-handedly responsible for reviving the Red Sox franchaise
   107. Adam Schafer Posted: March 21, 2004 at 10:20 AM (#523058)
It's almost sad not having Bennett at the top of my ballot anymore. I hope somehow he's looking down on this project and is recieving some satisfaction for the recognition we have given him as a group some 110 years after he last played in a Major League game.

1. Nap Lajoie (n/a) - Nap is an easy choice for #1

2. Christy Mathewson (n/a) - Not a whole lot to say here. Easy choice for #2

3. Three Finger Brown (n/a) - I had to really think hard about where he belonged on my ballot. I knew he'd be in the top 6, but I really had to debate whether he is more deserving than Welch and McGinnity. After much deliberation with myself, I decided that he was.

4. Mickey Welch (2) - So he pitched for great teams. So those great teams may have won the games for him. So he pitched in a lot of games each year and when you pitch that many games, you're bound to win as many games as he did. They are the same conditions that Keefe had. I'm not getting so crazy here that I'm saying Welch as great a player as Keefe. He wasn't, but if we penalized Keefe for all the same things that everyone is penalizing Welch for, then Keefe wouldn't be a HOMer. I just think that I have been following the crowd too much on Welch and have allowed myself to have double standards. Do I think he was better than Waddell, McGinnity, and Joss? Yes, I do. And if pitching was so easy back then, how come we don't have more 300 game winners?

5. Joe McGinnity (3) - Yes, 2 of my top 3 spots are pitchers, and it's not going to be a popular vote with everyone else I know, but at least read my explanations before you ridicule me. I've thought about Joe, I've dropped him off of my ballot, added him back to my ballot, had him near the top of my ballot, then back towards the bottom again. He led the league in wins 5 times, stands out more as a player than the OF glut does. I've stated several times before that I'm a big fan of catchers, but I never mentioned that pitchers are my 2nd favorite players to be voting for. I might find more worth in pitchers and catchers than anyone else voting, much like some people favor shortstops.

6. Sam Thompson (4) - 10 great years. Excellant peak. I'm more of a career type of person than I am peak, but Sam has a great mix of both.

7. Bobby Wallace (5) - Career, career, Career. That's what I keep saying I like. I like Bobby's, I really do. I would really like to see SOME peak.

8. Jake Beckley (6) - Again, I'm a career lover

9. Rube Waddell (8) - The top 5 in strikeouts for 10 consecutive years. 107 years after he pitched his first MLB game, he's #10 in the all-time ERA leaders.

10. Roger Bresnahan (9) - It's no secret that I love catchers. I would've ranked Roger higher had he caught more and played the OF less during his peak years.

11. Lip Pike (10) - Just like everone else, Pike moves down with 3 newcomers this year.

12. Hughie Jennings (11) - Nothing new to add to Jennings, except that he moves up above my OF glut

13. George Van Haltren (12) - I've been a moderate supporter of Van Haltren, unfortunately he'll never make the HOM, but he's still the 13th best player eligible in my opinion. Good career, very modest peak.

14. Jimmy Ryan (13) - See Van Haltren

15. Home Run Johnson (14) - For the first time I felt like there was enough information for me to rank one of the early Negro League players. Is there enough information for me to rank him higher? No. Would he have fared well against Major League talent? Maybe. We'll never know. I don't feel comfortable ranking him extremely high. I honestly don't think he was a better player than the people I have above him. I do feel he was a better player than the people I have below him though. Unfortunately Johnson moves down the ballot with 3 newcomers this year.

Here's the best of the rest......

16. Clark Griffith (15) - He's hanging on to the bottom spots. I doubt he ever moves up to the middle spots

17. Bobby Carruthers (15) - I like Griffith a little bit better

18. Jimmy Sheckard - Just another Outfielder. I just don't get his high ranking for some.

19. Hugh Duffy - I'm beginning to wonder why I have him so low

20. Tommy Leach - I am a personal fan of his, I just can't rank him any higher

21. Vic Willis - A great pitcher, and I'm a friend of most pitchers. Vic lost too many games for my liking.

22. Ed Reulbach - Pretty decent pitcher and look at that ERA!

23. Dickey Pearce - Although doubtful, I could still persuaded to move him up

24. Deacon McGuire - I really wish I could justify putting him on my ballot somewhere, I really like the guy

25. Mike Tiernan -
   108. Ken Fischer Posted: March 21, 2004 at 06:33 PM (#523059)
1-Christy Mathewson 426 WS?no brainer
   109. favre Posted: March 21, 2004 at 11:40 PM (#523060)
Over the past twenty years I?ve developed from a strict career voter into something of a ?prime? voter. My rankings are based heavily on the best seven (nonconsecutive) years of each player, but also gives weight to career and peak.

1. Nap Lajoie
   110. Esteban Rivera Posted: March 22, 2004 at 12:20 AM (#523061)
The fantastic Dead Ball era pitcher is edged out by the outstanding Dead Ball hitter and a couple of position flip flops this year.

1. Nap Lajoie - He was the hitter. (Gotta write something here)

2. Christy Mathewson - He was the pitcher. (Ditto)

3. Sam Thompson - A heck of an offensive machine. Reputed to have the best arm of his time. Doesn't the 1890's Philadelphia outfield kind of resemble the mid 1990's Cleveland outfield?

4. Joe McGinnity - Compiled an awesome record in only a decade and began past the usual starting age for a ballplayer in the majors. The best pitcher or runner up for half his career

5. Mordecai Brown - See him around McGinnity's level. Brilliant defense behind him lands him just a bit behind the Iron Man. But only a bit.

6. Grant Johnson - I am very certain that Home Run is a HOMer. All evidence points to a player of superior ability.

7. Frank Grant - I am finally comfortable ranking Grant higher. The experts that chose Grant in their list gave me the added confidence of boosting him higher. Was a great ballplayer acording to all accounts. Would be a an honor to have him grace our hall.

8. Lip Pike - One of the best players in early baseball. Definitely deserves more attention.

9. Rube Waddell - Was a special picher. I buy the run support analysis and also believe in the higher value of being a phenomenal K artist in his time and place. His career record isn't that impressive but you have to remember that there were some stretches where he was jettisoned because his managers did not know how to deal with his unique personality.

10. Hughie Jennings - A historical monster for five years.

11. Pete Browning - Was a heck of a hitter and did it under tremendous duress. I buy the "greatness can't take full advantage off lower competition" idea. Proved he could hold his own in the player's league.

12. Hugh Duffy - His credentials are that he was for a time one of the best players and he produced during the 90's. Then he just fell off. However, I feel his peak gives him the slight edge over Ryan and Van Haltren.

13. Clark Griffith - The more that I look at him the more I realize I have been underestimating his accomplishments.

14. Roger Bresnahan - Starts of low on my ballot. He has his favorable points such as his offense and being versatile. However, playing time and defensive issues make me a bit wary of going higher with him.

15. Bill Monroe - The information presented so far is promising. However, a little more may be needed for him to gather momentum on my ballot. With the appearance of Grant Johnson, my perception of Monroe has changed slightly, thus his placement below him. Thanks to the work done by KJOK on MLE's, Monroe inches his way back on my ballot.

Falling out:
   111. Dag Nabbit at Posted: March 22, 2004 at 04:24 AM (#523063)
If Boston was such a good market, why didn't the Braves also spend the money needed to make their club better?
   112. Dag Nabbit at Posted: March 22, 2004 at 04:26 AM (#523064)
Jack Chesboro was a good pitcher.

I mean he was no Jack Chesbro or anything, but he was good.
   113. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: March 22, 2004 at 05:10 AM (#523065)
Well, the "dull election" period couldn't have been better timed for me. Working for accounting firms in March and April ain't fun. That's part of the reason there isn't a lot of change here. Also because I know what I'm doing. :)

1. Nap Lajoie (new) I don't think he was as good as Collins, Hornsby or Morgan, but he's still one of the top 50 all-time. Very limited thought processes required (since we can't use the "n-b" phrase).

2. Christy Mathewson (new) One of the best human beings to ever play the game. A thought that occured to me: If he hadn't gotten sick, he might well have been a candidate to be Comissioner after Landis. Obviously deserving of induction.

3. Lip Pike (3) You know, if you told me before this project started that I'd have Lip Pike ahead of Three Finger Brown, I'd have said, "Who's Lip Pike?" An excellent hitter, one of the best players of his era, and has significant "off-the-books" play. If we're willing to have an 1870s pitcher in, when we're not sure how much they really contributed*, why not an 1870s OF? Made my HoM in 1920.

*Yes, Spalding's in my HoM and got there first, but I'm still not completely certain he deserves the honor.

4. Dickey Pearce (4) Here come the shortstops. The best player of the 1860s by most accounts, and I believe that's worthy of honoring here. Made my HoM last year

5. Home Run Johnson (5) I'm mostly convinced by Chris's evidence, but I do want to be a little cautious. The one thing that worries me is that a good part of the argument feels like tying Don Drysdale to Sandy Koufax and defying anyone to argue they weren't great, except in this case we're tying him to John Henry Lloyd.

6. Three Finger Brown (new) He does good in all the mesures I look at for judging pitchers, but not necessarily great. Take this ranking as "subject to change"

7. Bobby Wallace (6) I don't quite buy the Beckley comparisons - he has a similar type of argument, but his peak value isn't as pathetic as Beckley's. His OPS+ is reasonable for a middle infielder, and his defensive play was very good at worst. Not one of the HoF's major mistakes.

8. Frank Grant (7) I feel pretty certain he was a very good player, and I tend to think honoring the best Negro Leaguer of the 19th Century is worthwhile.

9. Jimmy Sheckard (8) A very good player who didn't get the recognition he deserved.

10. Hughie Jennings (9) I still think his outrageous peak may be worthy of induction, but when I've got 3 shortstops ahead of him on the ballot, maybe he was a little too high.

11. Bob Caruthers (10) Trying to stay out of the crossfire - he's got a really unusual set of attributes. I will admit that I'm not sure enough of his worth to say he should defintely be inducted.

12. Bill Monroe (11) Johnson's addition doesn't help his cause - mostly because we're not talking about him. There's no rule against being a flashy player.

13. Jim McCormick (12) One of the best pitchers in baseball in the early 1880s, I can't prove to myself that any of the other pitchers in this section of the ballot were better than he was.

14. Joe McGinnity (13) I don't really think we're short on pitchers, and I don't see him far ahead of Waddell or Griffith (or obviously McCormick)

15. Jimmy Ryan (14) A very good player with a reasonably long career, but we've got plenty of OFs already.

Off the ballot:
   114. karlmagnus Posted: March 22, 2004 at 03:54 PM (#523069)
Joe, I like "someone convince me." How, precisely?

(comment intended to be humorous/quizzical, not aggressive!)
   115. OCF Posted: March 22, 2004 at 04:47 PM (#523070)
46 ballots in. Anyone else? As soon as I'm convinced we're done, I have a couple of "navel-gazing" at the voters items to post.
   116. karlmagnus Posted: March 22, 2004 at 05:12 PM (#523071)
Polls close at 5pm today, don't they?
   117. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: March 22, 2004 at 05:21 PM (#523072)
Polls close at 5pm today, don't they?

Pacific time?
   118. Carl Goetz Posted: March 22, 2004 at 06:46 PM (#523074)
I've been swamped lately and am sitting this one out, though 'm confident that I will agree with the consensus. I'll be back in 1923.
   119. OCF Posted: March 23, 2004 at 01:00 AM (#523075)
First up: my "Best friends of" list. Every candidate who received votes had someone who listed him the highest. Here's that list. Note: the names are listed in order of 1921 votes, not 1922 votes, except that the three top newcomers are listed first.

Top supporters:
   120. OCF Posted: March 23, 2004 at 01:02 AM (#523076)
This is my "agreement with consensus" score for each voter, ranked from top to bottom. The first number is that score for 1922. The number in parentheses after the handle is that score for 1921. Everyone's scores were much higher in 1922, and the highest possible score was higher, because it was easier to agree.

22 ed (15)
   121. OCF Posted: March 23, 2004 at 01:29 AM (#523078)
Lennox - what is that? Because it's sure not a 1922 ballot. A 1922 ballot would have Lajoie and Mathewson on it, in the top two spots. It would either have Three-Finger Brown on it or a reason why not. And it wouldn't have either Charlie Bennett or Jimmy Collins on it.
   122. Marc Posted: March 23, 2004 at 01:41 AM (#523079)
OCF, that was a 1921 ballot, recycled, except without the re.

Or else Lennox is buckin' for lowest consensus score.
   123. Marc Posted: March 23, 2004 at 02:56 AM (#523080)
PS. Hey, O. I voted for "Bob" (Lazhway) and Matty like a good boy. How the hell did karl (who actually likes the french) jump ahead of me? And John Murphy caught up to me. I am SOOO embarrassed!

John, don't get cocky. I am gonna toe the line from now on.
   124. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: March 23, 2004 at 06:45 AM (#523081)
And John Murphy caught up to me. I am SOOO embarrassed!

You're embarrassed? How do you think I feel? Sheesh! :-)

9 RobC (11)

It appears Rob was the only one whose score actually went down.


Thanks again for the data. Fun stuff!
   125. OCF Posted: March 23, 2004 at 04:20 PM (#523083)
Sorry - I dropped a line. Joe is in 5th place, between Chris J. and TomH.

21 JoeDimino (9)
   126. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: March 23, 2004 at 09:07 PM (#523085)
with my score going up 25 points I can't belive I'm still tied for the 6 worst score(or is it the 6th best score)

I assume a Bill James 100 greatest players list would have scored "terribly" compared to the majority of non-sabermetric analysts in 1982, too. IOW, just because James held extreme positions about certain players didn't necessarily make him wrong (or us, for that matter).

Just doing my part to deflate the consensus opinion around here. :-)
   127. Marc Posted: March 23, 2004 at 10:07 PM (#523086)
>The list could also be looked at from the perpective of who has made the most convincing arguments for their guys, it would follow that the consensus would reflect this. It's a chicken/egg thing I think.

I think your first and second points go in different directions. IOW, by chicken/egg I took it that you meant that if one chose to argue in favor of Jimmy Collins one actually didn't have to be all that convincing. If one chose to argue in favor of Ed Williamson, well that was an egg of a different color.
   128. OCF Posted: March 23, 2004 at 10:42 PM (#523088)
Voters go up and down on this consensus list mostly because the list of candidates changes. Why did my level of agreement increase relative to the pack? Because I had been holding Jimmy Collins quite a bit below where most others did. With Collins elected, that particular conflict disappeared. Chris Cobb's level of agreement decreased relative to the pack because Three-Finger Brown appeared on the ballot, and he holds a low (as in off-ballot) opinion of Brown. yest's level of agreement increased sharply because of the removal of Collins and Bennett from the ballot, and because the addition of Lajoie, Mathewson, and Brown to the top of his ballot forced him to drop some of his more unusual selections (like Mathews and McGraw) off the bottom.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.



<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF


Thanks to
Ray (CTL)
for his generous support.


You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Most Meritorious Player: 1942 Ballot
(4 - 5:59pm, Apr 25)
Last: bjhanke

2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(112 - 10:24am, Apr 25)
Last: DL from MN

Most Meritorious Player: 1942 Discussion
(11 - 9:27am, Apr 22)
Last: Chris Fluit

Latin American Players and Pitchers Home Page
(68 - 8:01pm, Apr 18)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Carlos Moran
(70 - 6:27pm, Apr 11)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Oliver Marcelle
(12 - 6:24pm, Apr 11)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Connie Marrero
(10 - 1:40pm, Apr 06)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Leroy Matlock
(68 - 1:39pm, Apr 06)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Max Manning
(4 - 1:38pm, Apr 06)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Marvin Williams
(30 - 1:36pm, Apr 06)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Most Meritorious Player: 1941 Results
(1 - 4:29pm, Apr 04)
Last: DL from MN

Most Meritorious Player: 1941 Ballot
(12 - 3:16pm, Apr 04)
Last: DL from MN

Most Meritorious Player: 1941 Discussion
(17 - 4:17pm, Mar 31)
Last: TomH

Jim Gilliam
(9 - 12:58pm, Mar 30)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

George Scales
(71 - 12:55pm, Mar 30)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko


Page rendered in 0.2391 seconds
42 querie(s) executed