Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Election Results:  Grich and Santo Are Tops for Group 2!

Second base star Bobby Grich earned the most possible points with a nifty 90%.

Hot corner great Ron Santo also did very well with his 88% of the points.

Feared* slugger Dick Allen and outstanding backstop Ted Simmons earned at least 75% of the vote.

RK   LY  Player         PTS    Bal   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14   15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1  n/e  Bobby Grich    325     30  16  6  2  4  1              1                 
 2  n/e  Ron Santo      317     30   6 17  2  2  2           1                    
 3  n/e  Dick Allen     280     30   4  3 10  6  3     2  1  1                    
 4  n/e  Ted Simmons    272     30   3  2  8 11  2  1  1     1     1              
 5  n/e  Darrell Evans  195     30      1  1  3  7  3  5  5  2  1  2              
 6  n/e  Joe Torre      183     30         2  2  5  5  6  2  2  5     1           
 7  n/e  Minnie Minoso  159     30   1     2     3  3  5  4  2  6  2  2           
 8  n/e  Bill Freehan   147     30         1     4  4  1  6  6  2  5  1           
 9  n/e  Billy Pierce   133     30            2  2  3  4  4  3  3  4  5           
10  n/e  Jimmy Wynn     119     30      1           4     7  5  5  2  6           
11  n/e  Graig Nettles  113     30         1     1  4  4     4  2  7  7           
12  n/e  Ken Boyer       97     30         1        3  2  1  3  5  7  8           
Ballots Cast: 30

Thanks go to OCF and Ron Wargo for their help with the tally!

* Yes, it’s a good-natured poke at the Jim Rice election team again. :-)

 

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 10, 2008 at 08:54 PM | 24 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.

   1. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 11, 2008 at 04:09 AM (#2687896)
Hot topics
   2. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: February 11, 2008 at 04:20 AM (#2687902)
Thanks John!

How did Darrell Evans only get 29 votes?
   3. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: February 11, 2008 at 04:26 AM (#2687907)
Did somebody not vote for Darrell Evans?

Funny thing, I just looked this up. Back when he was elected in 1996, Rusty had Jimmy Wynn #6 on his ballot, while I was the only person to have him #1. Now in this group, Rusty has him #2 and I had him #6.

And Minnie-not-the-Moocher? In 1987, Rusty had him 16th, and I was one of 3 people to have him #1. Now it's 1st/7th.

I'm not picking on Rusty, I was just curious who liked Wynn a lot more than I did.
   4. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 11, 2008 at 04:28 AM (#2687909)
He got 30, but my spreadsheet program screwed up for some reason.

I'll fix it right now.
   5. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 04:50 AM (#2687921)
Big majorities separately place Grich, Santo, Allen, and Simmons in the top four.
No one else has a majority for the top half.
   6. OCF Posted: February 11, 2008 at 05:12 AM (#2687931)
Evans actually has 7 fifth place votes, not 6, and 195 points. John will get that fixed.

Here are all 30 consensus scores, on my new -100 to 100 scale. We do have an extreme outlier.


70 andrew siegel
70 OCF
69 ronw
69 kenn
68 Tiboreau
66 Paul Wendt
66 mulder & scully
66 Rick A
65 Howie Menckel
65 Chris Cobb
64 AJM
64 jimd
64 Got Melky?
63 John Murphy
62 Dan R
---- median ----
61 Sean Gilman
61 Daryn
61 sunnyday2
59 Joe Dimino
59 Devin McCullen
58 karlmagnus
57 pocket8pin
57 Brent
56 Esteban Rivera
50 EricC
49 dan b
47 DL from MN
47 Al Peterson
41 Rob Wood
-15 Rusty Priske
   7. andrew siegel Posted: February 11, 2008 at 09:18 AM (#2687993)
So what do I win?
   8. Rusty Priske Posted: February 11, 2008 at 02:50 PM (#2688025)
Wow. I haven't been that far away from the consensus since the VERY early days.

I wonder how you all got so very wrong.




Just kidding. :)
   9. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: February 11, 2008 at 03:04 PM (#2688033)
Rusty, I asked you twice about how you managed to have Grich at #10 but you never responded!
   10. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 05:42 PM (#2688115)
7. andrew siegel Posted: February 11, 2008 at 03:18 AM (#2687993)
So what do I win?

OCF lists you first as a courtesy but you have to knock out the champ to win the belt.
   11. Rusty Priske Posted: February 11, 2008 at 05:58 PM (#2688127)
No problem. How can I have Grich at #10? I liked other guys better.

That may seem a little dismissive, but the reality is that I have all but 1 of these guys in my PHoM. I think they are all deserving.

I do think that Minnie Minoso is not getting enough credit for his pre-MLB time... and that is something that has changed since I originally voted for him. I used to give him a bump. Now I think that bump should be bigger.

Either way, I think all except for Pierce should be in the Hall.
   12. Jim Sp Posted: February 11, 2008 at 06:49 PM (#2688177)
Oops, the deadline was yesterday. I'll have to get on the ball next time.

I don't think our scoring system is working very well for this task. Grich clearly outvoted Santo for #1, but only won by 8 points. I think we need a stronger differentiation between #1 and #2 votes.
   13. Chris Cobb Posted: February 11, 2008 at 08:15 PM (#2688236)
I don't think our scoring system is working very well for this task. Grich clearly outvoted Santo for #1, but only won by 8 points. I think we need a stronger differentiation between #1 and #2 votes.

I would say that the problem is not so much the system as the small voting pool, which gives greater weight to extreme outlier votes like Rusty's on Grich. There's only so much a system can do to mitigate the effects of poor choices by the electorate. And I have to say that Rusty's placement of Grich vs. his placement of Ken Boyer doesn't pass the sniff test.

Grich was a gold glove second baseman with a career OPS+ of 125 in 2058 games, with his seasons adjusted to 162 games.
Boyer was a gold glove third baseman with a career OPS+ of 116 in 2088 games, with his seasons adjusted to 162 games.

Boyer is ranked third, Grich tenth? This is not a reasonable ranking.

If Rusty treats Grich like the rest of the electorate, he finishes more like 15 points ahead, which would be a pretty strong advantage in this system.
   14. jimd Posted: February 11, 2008 at 10:15 PM (#2688331)
Actual results:

BG RS DA TS DE JT MM BF BP JW GN KB

Prediction based on ballot strength:

RS BG TS DA JT DE BF BP MM KB JW GN

Prediction is not as close as last time.

Some notable differences:

Grich vs Santo: Prediction said Santo, but very close. Grich's margin here is surprising (to my voting prediction system at least).

Simmons, Torre, Freehan: All slipped one notch. Have other voters also reduced their catcher bonuses?

Minoso, Freehan, Pierce: Minnie's showing here was surprisingly strong. The other two were elected ahead of Minoso in the original elections of the mid-1980's.
1985: 2 568 Freehan, 4 441 Pierce, 7 406 Minoso.
1987: 2 497 Pierce, 3 442 Minoso

Boyer vs Wynn: Boyer was elected ahead of Wynn.
1991: 2 455 Boyer, 5 366 Wynn.
   15. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 10:35 PM (#2688346)
How many of the 30 voters were HOM election participants?
Say 25 for illustration in the next paragraph

The HOM electorate varied from about 45 to 55 once the project was fully underway(*). Say 45-55 for simplicity. How many of the 45-55 were not among the 25 who voted yesterday? Perhaps more than 30 with annual variation among the 45-55. (I don't know how much annual variation was common.)
   16. OCF Posted: February 12, 2008 at 12:13 AM (#2688383)
Of the 30 voters, only two had never cast a HoM ballot: pocket8pin and Paul Wendt. Of course Paul has been with the project from the beginning, so the only "new" voter is pocket8pin. Of the 28 others, kenn first voted in the 2003 election; the other 27 have been around a lot longer than that.

My own records of the electorate only go back to 1921 - they cover 88 elections, from 1921 through 2008. I have 20 voters who voted in all 88, 31 who voted in at least 80, 39 who voted in at least 70, 45 who voted in at least 50, 54 who voted in at least 30, and 74 who voted in at least 10.

Among the die-hard hardly-ever-miss-an-election crowd, the following did not submit group 2 ballots:

Jim Sp
TomH (although he did submit a late one that I think wouldn't have changed the standings)
Don F
DanG
KJOK
David Foss
Adam Schafer
favre
Patrick W
yest
   17. jimd Posted: February 12, 2008 at 12:46 AM (#2688394)
TomH (although he did submit a late one that I think wouldn't have changed the standings)

It would have swapped Allen and Simmons.
   18. sunnyday2 Posted: February 12, 2008 at 03:41 AM (#2688514)
I've been a bit haphazard around here lately.... Did Chaleeko vote? If he did I missed him. If he didn't, OCF missed it.

Glad to see I was below the median...but only by 1 point. I'll try to do better (lower) next time ;-)

Ed Williamson will be #1 in Group 3!
   19. Rusty Priske Posted: February 12, 2008 at 02:38 PM (#2688689)
THat woudl definitely throw off your score, since he isn't listed as being eligible. :)
   20. OCF Posted: February 12, 2008 at 05:26 PM (#2688840)
Did Chaleeko vote? If he did I missed him. If he didn't, OCF missed it.

He didn't vote. For what it's worth, I cut off the list in post #16 at 80 votes in my 88-vote database. Eric Chalek has 79 - he didn't start voting until 1930.
   21. jimd Posted: March 25, 2008 at 01:03 AM (#2719012)
Head-to-head results matrix:
30 BG RS DA TS DE JT MM BF BP JW GN KB 
BG 
-- 20 21 23 29 27 28 30 30 29 29 29  295
RS 10 
-- 24 24 28 28 27 29 29 29 30 29  287
DA 09 06 
-- 14 26 27 27 28 29 29 27 28  250
TS 07 06 16 
-- 23 26 26 28 27 28 27 28  242
DE 01 02 04 07 
-- 14 17 21 23 25 25 26  165
JT 03 02 03 04 16 
-- 17 20 21 22 20 25  153
MM 02 03 03 04 13 13 
-- 13 17 19 19 23  129
BF 00 01 02 02 09 10 17 
-- 14 19 21 22  117
BP 00 01 01 03 07 09 13 16 
-- 16 18 19  103
JW 01 01 01 02 05 08 11 11 14 
-- 16 19  089
GN 01 00 03 03 05 10 11 09 12 14 
-- 15  083
KB 01 01 02 02 04 05 07 08 11 11 15 
--  067 

Example: BG (Grich) defeats RS (Santo) 20-10.

Note: Row total + 1 pt/ballot (30) equals election total.

Define "close" to be [ballots/2 + 1 binomial standard deviation]
In this case that is 15-15, 16-14, 17-13, which also happens to be all HTH battles less than 60%.

These are:
15-15: Nettles-Boyer
16-14: Simmons-Allen!, Torre-Evans!, Pierce-Freehan!, Pierce-Wynn, Wynn-Nettles
17-13: Evans-Minoso, Torre-Minoso, Freehan-Minoso!, Minoso-Pierce

The ! point indicates a "backwards" result, where the HTH victory goes against the cumulative standings. There are four of those, all involving catchers. There is another triangle, where Pierce upsets Freehan who upsets Minoso, who defeats Pierce (but that is also close). The other two catchers upset the player directly ahead of them, but don't do as well against other players, thereby losing in the overall standings.
The only non-adjacent (with respect to the final standings) matchups involve Minoso who has 4 total.
   22. Paul Wendt Posted: April 03, 2008 at 11:10 PM (#2729760)
Veterans Committee (rules, 2007 rule changes)

Having read the new Veterans Committee rules at long last, I suppose all three committees that meet in person will use a single vote by paper ballot at or near the end of their meeting. There will be ten names on the ballot, voters to select no more than four, candidates needing 75% of ballots cast.

Twelve is not much different from ten. So I wondered, what would be the outcome according to Veterans Commitee rules, if I interpret (a) HOM discussion by internet as committee discussion in person, (b) HOM votes by rank order, 1 to 12, as committee votes for the four players ranked 1 to 4.

For Group Two the answer is election of the top four candidates.
28 93% : Grich
27 90% : Santo
24 80% : Simmons
23 77% : Allen

The maximum possible is election of five candidates, by incredibly even distribution of the "top fours" five ways.
Grich, Santo, Simmons, and Allen missed only 18 of the 120 top fours (4x30), too few to elect another by any distribution.

--
For the 22-man Group Three, if I recall and judge correctly (rank-order data has not been posted), probably the top three candidates scored top four votes from 75% of the electorate.
   23. jimd Posted: April 04, 2008 at 07:27 PM (#2730691)
Using that election method, we have enough consensus in our elections to elect at least 3 candidates from each group.

Group I (Randolph and Dawson do not make top 10; no top 4 votes anyway)
33 100% : Blyleven
33 100% : Raines
28 85% : McGwire
22 67% : Trammell (not elected)

Group II (Boyer and Nettles do not make top 10; 1 top 4 each otherwise)
28 93% : Grich
27 90% : Santo
24 80% : Simmons (25 83% after picking up vote for Nettles)
23 77% : Allen

Note: There was a late ballot cast which was not counted.
If it were to be counted, Allen would drop to 74% and not be elected.
Note: The Boyer vote would go to Evans after a top-10 cutdown

Group IV: (Oms and Lundy do not make top 10; no top 4 votes anyway)
18 95% : Rose
17 89% : G. Johnson
15 79% : Barnes
11 58% : J. Jackson (not elected)

Group III: (Top 10 are Dahlen, White, Hines,
Glasscock, Gore, Start, Sutton, Groh, Richardson, Caruthers;
5 other top-4 votes for Keller 2, Gordon, Magee, Hack;
these votes would go to Dahlen, Hines, Gore, Start, Caruthers after cutdown)

22 96% : Dahlen
22 96% : White
23 100% : Hines
12 52% : Glasscock (not elected)

Others: 4 Gore & Start, 2 Sutton & Caruthers, 1 Groh, 0 Richardson
   24. Paul Wendt Posted: June 30, 2009 at 03:22 PM (#3237687)
This ranking of HOM members with mlb careers strictly 1943-1987 is strictly consistent with the rankings by fielding position.

The weak showing by Jimmy Wynn is difficult to reconcile with his relatively strong showing in the later Ranking of Center Fielders at rank 18 of 26. Here he shows up in a tussle for the booby prize with thirdbasemen Nettles and Boyer, who are distant trailers in the thirdbase rankings.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
danielj
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.3692 seconds
49 querie(s) executed