Wednesday, December 12, 2012
2013 Results: Bonds, Clemens, Piazza and Biggio are elected to the Hall of Merit!
(bbtf)
Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mike Piazza and Craig Biggio have been elected to the Hall of Merit!
The timing for our first year electing 4 candidates could not have worked out better, since class of 2013 is the strongest in terms of electees that we’ve ever had. The top of the 1934 ballot included Ty Cobb, Tris Speaker, Eddie Collins, Pop Lloyd, Smokey Joe Williams and Cristobal Torriente, but only 2 were elected.
Bonds and Clemens were each unanimous at 1 and 2. I believe that’s the first ...
Read More...
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 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >Hi, this is Brock Hanke. I love this idea, but then, I've already done a lot of the research in voting the HoM. I do have one suggestion: separate into two committees for at least the first year, as that first group of voters did. Have one vote for players who strike the voter as more 20th-century than 19th, and a SEPARATE vote restricted to players who had more value in the 19th c., both votes cut off at 75%. This is what the actual voters did, and they blew the second vote, unable to focus on one guy. They also struggled with people like Cy Young, who straddled the century border. Since we won't have actually different people on the different committees, that may disappear, but I think it's a good idea to mirror the whole process. Ten from the 20th, five or ten from the 19th. (I'm not sure whether the old-timer's committee voted for ten or five guys on their ballots.)
In this system, you'd have to come up with something like:
1. Cap Anson
2. Buck Ewing (these two tied for the actual top spot in 1936)
3. John Clarkson
4. Ol' Hoss Radbourne
5. Al Spalding
I also suggest that this project wait until at least the first of the new year, since we're right in the middle of HoM voting now.
- Brock Hanke
Yeah, there was no formal 5 year waiting period then. Not only that, but the BBWAA wasn't supposed to consider 19th century players; that was for the old timers committee. Thus, Cy Young took a few years as he was neither entirely fish nor fowl.
I'm going to go with a strict 5 year waiting period, and 19th cent players allowed:
Johnson
Mathewson
Young
Alexander
Cobb
Speaker
Collins
Lajoie
Wagner
Anson
Not sure whether Don wants us to vote for the 19th century players too. I'm betting yes.
Also note that both Gehrig and Foxx received votes in 1936. Gehrig finished 15th. I'm pretty sure they were free to vote for anybody in 1936. Whether Don wants to impose more restrictive rules is not clear to me. But I'd suggest that you're free to vote as you see fit.
EDIT: I'm not voting strict 5 year. I want to be able to vote for Ruth.
Hitler
(except for the Jesse Owens unpleasantness)
Cap Anson
Ty Cobb
Eddie Collins
Walter Johnson
Christy Mathewson
Babe Ruth
Tris Speaker
Honus Wagner
Cy Young
A whole passel of active players got votes in 1936:
Traynor
Simmons
Frisch
Hornsby
Terry
That first ballot is really interesting. With all the immortals available, and only 10 spots, one writer nonetheless decided to use a spot for Lou Criger. Another, presumably (hopefully) not the same guy, voted for Nap Rucker.
It sounds like fun.
My list:
Pete Alexander
Cap Anson
Ty Cobb
Eddie Collins
Roger Connor
Walter Johnson
Babe Ruth
Tris Speaker
Honus Wagner
Cy Young
I know those guys didn't have much if anything to use as a reference, but Jeeze. That is some scattershot voting. You'd think he guys who voted Bassler 5th, 6th, and 7th in the MVP in successive years just a dozen years prior would remember him instead of Gabby Street.
I'll probably wait until we get up to 1960 or so before I start voting. I don't know enough about the early days.
This isn't going to be quite as easy to handle as the excerpt suggests unless they're going to give us eligible lists for each election -- i.e. if we elect Johnny Mize in his 5th year of eligibility, he still shows up on b-r's list for another 10 years.
Cobb
Wagner
Ruth
Johnson
Speaker
Eddie Collins
Mathewson
Lajoie
Young
Alexander
I see that Criger was basically Cy Young's personal catcher. Maybe the narrative was that he was greatly responsible for Cy's success. (I'm reminded of Bill James, commenting on the amount of credit that reliever Luis Arroyo got for the '61 Yankees pitching staff, speculating that Whitey Ford probably got fed up when people started suggesting that Ford and Arroyo be elected to the Hall of Fame as a duo...)
I think there was a small contingent back then who felt there was a large "narrative"/"symbolic" quality to the voting. I remember James also saying that Eddie Grant got votes for being killed in World War I. Maybe someone thought that Street, who managed two pennant winners and who famously caught a ball dropped from the Washington Monument, was part of the "story of baseball". Or maybe, much like Criger got credit for Cy Young, Street got credit for Walter Johnson.
I gotta say, though, I am always surprised to be reminded that a guy who played 344 games, who had a 72 OPS+, and who bashed in the skulls of his wife, 6-year-old daughter and 3-year-old son with an axe got Hall of Fame votes.
EDIT: Oh, and don't you hate Sweatpants?
Rk Player WAR/pos OPS+ G From To1 Babe Ruth 190.0 206 2503 1914 1935
2 Ty Cobb 159.5 168 3034 1905 1928
3 Honus Wagner 134.5 150 2794 1897 1917
4 Tris Speaker 132.9 157 2790 1907 1928
5 Eddie Collins 126.7 141 2825 1906 1930
6 Nap Lajoie 104.2 150 2480 1896 1916
7 Cap Anson 99.3 142 2524 1871 1897
8 George Davis 90.3 121 2372 1890 1909
9 Roger Connor 87.2 153 1998 1880 1897
10 Dan Brouthers 81.7 170 1673 1879 1904
11 Sam Crawford 76.6 144 2517 1899 1917
12 Bill Dahlen 75.9 109 2444 1891 1911
13 Ed Delahanty 74.7 152 1837 1888 1903
14 Fred Clarke 73.4 132 2246 1894 1915
15 Billy Hamilton 69.6 141 1594 1888 1901
16 Harry Heilmann 69.4 148 2147 1914 1932
17 Jesse Burkett 68.0 140 2067 1890 1905
18 Bobby Wallace 65.9 105 2383 1894 1918
Rk Player WAR ERA+ IP From To1 Cy Young 143.2 138 7356.0 1890 1911
2 Walter Johnson 139.8 147 5914.1 1907 1927
3 Pete Alexander 106.8 136 5190.0 1911 1930
4 Kid Nichols 103.2 140 5067.1 1890 1906
5 Christy Mathewson 90.7 136 4788.2 1900 1916
6 John Clarkson 81.3 134 4536.1 1882 1894
7 Tim Keefe 79.0 127 5049.2 1880 1893
8 Eddie Plank 76.8 122 4495.2 1901 1917
9 Old Hoss Radbourn 73.6 120 4527.1 1881 1891
10 Bob Caruthers 71.4 123 2828.2 1884 1892
11 Pud Galvin 70.5 108 6003.1 1875 1892
12 Tony Mullane 69.6 118 4531.1 1881 1894
Ty Cobb
Cy Young
Walter Johnson
Honus Wagner
Rogers Hornsby
Lou Gehrig
Tris Speaker
Eddie Collins
Pete Alexander
Position players
Rk Player WAR/pos From To Age1 Rogers Hornsby 127.7 1915 1935 19-39
2 Lou Gehrig 96.1 1923 1935 20-32
3 Frankie Frisch 74.7 1919 1935 20-36
4 Jimmie Foxx 61.3 1925 1935 17-27
5 Goose Goslin 59.5 1921 1935 20-34
6 Al Simmons 57.5 1924 1935 22-33
7 Paul Waner 54.8 1926 1935 23-32
8 Bill Terry 54.1 1923 1935 24-36
9 Mel Ott 53.2 1926 1935 17-26
10 Charlie Gehringer 52.3 1924 1935 21-32
Pitchers
Rk Player WAR From To Age1 Lefty Grove 66.9 1925 1935 25-35
2 Carl Hubbell 42.3 1928 1935 25-32
3 Waite Hoyt 41.9 1918 1935 18-35
4 Wes Ferrell 36.4 1927 1935 19-27
5 Ted Lyons 35.5 1923 1935 22-34
2. Ty Cobb
3. Cy Young
4. Walter Johnson
5. Christy Mathewson
6. Honus Wagner
7. Eddie Collins
8. Tris Speaker
9. Kid Nichols
10. Nap Lajoie
And that's why, if Don is serious about this, he has to set up some guidelines. Gehrig and Hornsby are fine selections for the initial ballot. But both were still active players in 1936. If he wants to operate under the BBWAA guidelines as they evolved, fine. But spell them out, eg, active players eligible until 1946 (Joes Dimaggio and Gordon got votes in 1945), no 5 year rule until 1960, no 5% rule until 1980, etc. Not sure when the 10 year eligibility rule came into place, but I suspect that won't be a problem. Can't see anyone today voting for Marty Bergen or Hack Miller.
Though it could be a problem if active players are eligible for a time. As I said, Joe DiMaggio got a vote in 1945. At that point he had only 7 years, but he already had 52 career WAR. Does one vote for him then? Especially knowing that he will eventually become overwhelmingly qualified? How about Ted Williams? Only 4 years through 1945, but 35 WAR. Bob Feller, Jimmie Foxx, Lefty Grove? It would be odd to elect Ted Williams in 1945, but have to wait until 1969 to induct Stan Musial.
I agree that is a significant point. But it could also throw a serious monkey wrench into the system. Few of us, me included, have more than a cursory knowledge of the Negro Leagues. I wouldn't feel qualified to pass judgement on more than a handful of the biggest names. Thus, while some are filling their ballots with Greenberg, Gheringer, Ott..., others are voting for Santop, Mendez, and Mackey, and perhaps only the inner circle guys get consensus and elected.
There's also the eligibility thing. At what point, for example, is Satchel Paige eligible? His MLB career added essentially nothing to his resume, but he was active until 1953 (not counting the cameo in 1965). So, does he get elected in 1945 or 1959? Or 1936 if active players are eligible?
Bill Dickey and Ted Lyons both got votes in 1946 after having played that season. Dickey played 54 games and got 40 votes. If active players are eligible through 1946, and the 10 year rule isn't required (Jack Dunn and Addie Joss got votes), then I can certainly see voting for Williams in 1946. 5 years .353/.484/.647 195 OPS+, 1 MVP, 3 other times in the top 4, 1 triple crown, one .400 season, more black ink that an average HOFer, 47 WAR.
As to the comments, let's start with Hitler. Really pointless, but thanks for playing. We have parting gifts for you, including a toaster oven with low mileage and even lower wattage.
What's the point? I think I stated it reasonably well--we have some advantages over the BBWAA, and out vote should clearly be better, but the constraints that the BBWAA had (including a paucity of records and, yes, "metrics") are worth imposing on this process to see just how different the results will be and just how much better our voting is across the timeframe. We know how the HoM inductees differ from the HoF, and it's useful, but it was done with different rules. I hope that this will produce something worth pondering a bit.
I'm hoping this approach will permit folks to try it at several levels of involvement, from somewhat casual to the very intricate and highly considered interpretations that are prominent in the HoM group. That would approximate (analogously) the range of "voter expertise" in the BBWAA at any given time. I know there's a prevailing sentiment that these guys weren't all that swift, but one of the things this process is hoping to capture is just where they went wrong.
Voting constraints: I do think we should impose a process where we don't vote for active players in the early rounds. None of the active players got elected, of course, and it seems that if we allow it, it may serve to minimize voting differences. Ron, do you remember when active players were no longer on the ballot? It looks to me that it stopped after the first year (no votes for Gehrig in '37, and posters since I started writing this post indicate a few straggling votes for active players).
You can vote for 19th century players. But understand that they're not very likely to be elected from a BBWAA ballot.
Black players--if someone points me to a source that covers all of the Negro League data (the Negro League D/B at Seamheads is impressive but incomplete), I can add this as a parallel process. I would suggest that we use the voting lull during WWII (1940-41, 1943-44) as a way to bring these players into the process. We can also use the years in which the BBWAA didn't vote during the 60s as another portal to enshrine Negro League players. I think that this is the best we can do regarding that, Guapo: unfortunately, I don't think it's really feasible in this format to try to put the two processes together, since the primary objective is to replicate the BBWAA voting process and see how much different/better a more educated electorate will be using the rules imposed on the writers.
I would figure that for the Negro Leaguers we would enshrine the top three vote-getters in each election, a la the HoM.
The best way to handle Negro League eligibility would be to do on the basis of the last year they played in the Negro Leagues. We would have Negro League ballots in 1940, 1941, 1943, 1944, 1957, 1959, 1961, 1963 and 1965 (years when only VC was voting) and we would have twenty seven Negro Leaguers enshrined that way. We could then continue with a supplementary Negro League vote in each decade, which would net a total of 42 (as opposed to the 26 currently in the HoF).
The early Vets Committee--I agree we should do this, and we can simply do that as a separate round. That could be what happens over Xmas week, before we move to 1937. Once an actual Vets Committee comes into play, however, we should opt out. At that point our voting might well get very different...we'll just have to see what develops.
We'll hold these votes in the same years that they were held historically--1936, 1939. We will use the 1946 and 1949 runoff votes only if we fail to elect anyone with the regular process during those years.
How to keep track of who's in/out and using BB-ref: we'll provide a chart of who's in and who to ignore on the BB-ref ballot. Trying to keep this low-tech, so we're unable to create an app for all this just now.
Hoping that many of you will feel free to give it a shot. Per Brock's suggestion, we'll let this first year vote play out over the balance of the year and close the voting on Dec 31, then start up again once the HoM folks are done. Please feel free to continue the discussion about the voting structure and let's see what kind of consensus can be reached that will allow the most possible participants.
1. Ruth
2. Cobb
3. Wagner
4. Johnson
5. Young
6. Mathewson
7. Alexander
8. Lajoie
9. Speaker
10. Collins
What about the 5 year rule? If no, then I need to change my ballot and put in Ruth. I say don't count ballots until these guidelines are hammered out.
I think 1946 was the last year. After that, a 1 year rule was created. Bill Dickey got 40 votes while active in 1946 (19th place), none in 1947, and 39 (10th place*)
in 1948.
* a lot fewer voters in 1948.
His 1912 season: 45 G, 34 GS, 23 CG, 6 SHO. 297 2/3 IP, 272 H, 6 HR, 2.10 K/BB, 151 ERA+ . . . and an 18-21 W-L record. He did yield 28 unearned runs, though, so while the ERA was 2.21, the RA was 3.05. (Of course, the league average ERA was 3.40, and RA was 4.65, so he was still better than average. But I don't think that's one of the all-time hard luck run support seasons)
1. The normal BBWAA voters, which only count players who have been retired for 5 years, and only counts white major leagues until integration sits in and there's no real Negro League to vote any more.
2. The Old Timers committee, which can ONLY vote on players in the white majors during the 19th c., with perhaps a slow pickup of 29th c. white old-timers.
3. The Negro and Other League committee, which only votes for blacks, Latins and Asians who had much of their careers outside of the white major leagues.
This way, you get the full effect of voting in those non-white-majors guys, but you also get the people on those committees whom you actually should want to have there. There have to be some guys whose voting would vastly improve if you left out the guys he can't analyze. I. for example. really have no serious business voting for Cubans, Dominicans, and Mexicans, because I don't know much about them. But I have studied the 19th c., and would want on that committee as well as the first one. And I have enough chops, with the help of people like Chris Cobb, to do decent job on the NgLs. You may have different specialties and different arenas that are your weak spots. Volunteer to vote on the ones you know.
Don, in general, this sounds like a great idea now. Enough people are already interested. Score another Karabell-like Three-pointer for MISTER Malcolm, Junior.
- Brock Hanke
Buck Bokai XIX?
Cy Young
Walter Johnson
Christy Matthewson
Grover Cleveland Alexander
Babe Ruth
Ty Cobb
Honus Wagner
Tris Speaker
Nap Lajoie
Eddie Collins
Collins was the one vote which I struggled with. It came down to Collins or Sisler. However, I took Collins based upon 10 more years of success and a WAR 70 points higher than Sisler.
Which reminds me, have you guys seen The Shining lately? Great winter movie. Awesome GF loves it.
Anyway, Jack Nicholson demonstrates such a nice facility with catching and throwing, it makes me disappointed he never played a jock role that I'm aware of. Obviously he can swing an axe, but he'd been a volunteer firefighter - don't know if he ever played ball.
Anybody else get a little pleased when an actor does athletic stuff surprisingly well? Kevin Costner being I guess the ideal here. (and Sigourney Weaver its opposite)
Honus Wagner
Ty Cobb
Walter Johnson
Tris Speaker
Pete Alexander
Cy Young
Eddie Collins
Nap Lajoie
Cap Anson/ Christy Mathewson
Ty Cobb
Eddie Collins
Walter Johnson
Nap Lajoie
Christy Mathewson
Babe Ruth
Tris Speaker
Honus Wagner
Cy Young
No Veterans Committee players and no active players, only those who were on the Writer's ballot, per B-Ref, and retired at least 5 years.
Ruth?
Ruth
Wagner
Mathewson
Alexander
Speaker
Johnson
Collins
Lajoie
Young
Would have added Hornsby (probably over Young) if I were voting on actives as well.
I'm going to propose that everyone here is quite probably well-versed enough to vote in any round, as designated. In the interest of capturing as many folks to the project as possible, I'm looking at using the non-BBWAA voting years for Negro League players. We can have an Old-Timers vote for '36 as specified, and then do them just as they were done as the process was altered over the actual time frame.
I'm also open to Hornsby being on the '36 ballot given that his playing time was so low. I should be, since I voted for him. But I'd rather hear from everyone about when they think he should be on the ballot. If the consensus is that he should wait until 1938 (first year after retirement), then I'm happy to adjust accordingly. As noted, this was a bit too spur-of-the-moment the other evening and any input into how to make these first irregular years work best is greatly appreciated.
Ty Cobb.
Eddie Collins.
Walter Johnson.
Nap Lajoie.
Christy Mathewson.
Babe Ruth.
Tris Speaker.
Honus Wagner.
Cy Young.
DOH!!!! Thanks for catching that!
Edit: I'm going to leave it since Don didn't specify retired for 5 years, just not active, and Ruth retired in 1935.
Don, are you not reading this thread? Active players got votes until 1947. Then they were required to be retired for 1+ years. Then, in 1954, they were required to be retired for 5+ years.
It's not that hard to find on the internets.
Not that it matters what I think, but I think it should be 1+ years from retirement for players from 1936-1954, then 5+ years. So, Ruth, eligible 1937, Hornsbry 1939, DiMaggio 1953, and Feller, 1962.
Ruth was on the ballot in '36 and had just retired, so he's in for this version. We use the rules as they were in place, which means that DiMag et al will be available the year after they retire. I think that's up to 1956, but someone check me on that, please.
My column on post-DiMaggio voting reforms at Cooperstown
this is utter gibberish to me. You have Collins, arguably one of the greatest players of all time, versus George Sisler and you thought it was a debate? Sisler is Bernie Williams, Collins is Joe Morgan...there is nothing comparable between the two other than they played until 1930...
Realistically for something like this to work, you have to acknowledge the faults in the voting system provided....example Joe Jackson is eligible. we have a hof talent who tanked a world series who is, by the rules, still eligible. Are you planning on putting in place a system that will allow an admitted world series cheater to get into the hof, but not an admitted better? (the rules were changed to keep Pete Rose out, but technically Joe Jackson was eligible for a number of years.
absolutely agree.
I agree, it was gibberish that I was trying to self-disclose. I was more familiar with Sisler than Collins, it was not a comparison once I put their careers side by side. I will completely admit that I overlooked or discounted him previously due to a Black Sox bias that also was foolish.
How about Mickey Cochrane? How low is low enough? OK, Cochrane played 44 games to Hornsby's 2, but then the next year they played 27 and 20 respectfully. Or frank Frisch? Yes, Frisch played 93 games in 1936, but he played less than Hornsby in 1937.
Now, the easy answer is that no one will, or at least not many will vote for Frisch or Cochrane in 1936, but that's not really the point. The point is to codify the eligibility rules at the start, otherwise you end up with a mishmash like the real Hall, with "If Joe DiMaggio didn't get in on the first ballot, nobody should" type results. Unless that's what you're aiming for.
What about Gehrigh? 1939 like in real life? Or 1940 like he would have been had he merely retired after a crappy start ala Mike Schmidt in 1989? Or 1941 if the post 1946 rules had been in place? Or 1942 if the rules of today had been in place?
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.