But seriously I read it as Chass being disingenuous and deliberately misleading by saying he didn't vote for Molitor rather than saying he couldn't vote for Molitor because the NYT wouldn't let him vote for the Hall.

I read it the same way. Unless Chass actually DID vote when Molitor was eligible, then Chass using the wording "didn't vote for" rather than "wouldn't have voted for" was disingenuous.

I read it the same way. Unless Chass actually DID vote when Molitor was eligible, then Chass using the wording "didn't vote for" rather than "wouldn't have voted for" was disingenuous.

OTOH, Murray is a piss-poor writer, so it may have simply been his inability to communicate, rahter than unwillingness.

"Chass was excellent in examining and reporting on labor issues."

The worst anyone could really say about him at the time would be to claim that he was the one-eyed king in the valley of the blind. But nobody else had two eyes there, and I'm not sure it would be fair to make Murray only a one-eyed guy on that, either...

Chass was better at writing about labor issues than on-field baseball, but he was hardly an objective observer of the labor scene in the 1980s. If Dick Young was in the pocket of owners, then it could be said that Chass was fully in the vest of the Players' Association.

Through the past blogly with Murray Chass

"I have written here recently of being uncertain about whether I would resume voting, which I was not permitted to do with The New York Times, and if I did, would I vote for Rice.

Although I don’t think writers should vote for the Hall of Fame, I have lost that fight. As long as writers continue to vote and I believe Jack Morris belongs in the Hall, I decided I would vote because Morris needs all the votes he can get.

I also voted for Henderson and Rice, the first an obvious selection, Rice not so obvious, a borderliner actually. But I marked an X next to his name for two reasons."

2009 HOF Ballot J. Morris, R. Henderson, Jim Rice

2010 HOF Ballot J. Morris, Dawson, Blyleven, Larkin, Alomar, E. Martinez.

2011 HOF Ballot J. Morris & Bagwell

Wait, what? Murray voted for Larkin in 2010 but not in 2011 or 2012? The same with Edgar? Even more bizarre than one might have expected...

Did he say who should vote for the HOF if the writers shouldn't?

2009 HOF Ballot J. Morris, R. Henderson, Jim Rice

2010 HOF Ballot J. Morris, Dawson, Blyleven, Larkin, Alomar, E. Martinez.

2011 HOF Ballot J. Morris & Bagwell

So, 9 players, four of them weak HOFers.

Except for the first time I voted 40 years ago, I have annually voted for only a few candidates, the best of the best, in my opinion.


Jack Morris, of course!

Yeah it's fine if you're a small hall guy. Raines isn't a blow me away candidate or antyhing, but there's no way you could have such high standards and vote Morris.

So, 9 players, four of them weak HOFers.

At least he's better than Heyman who votes for Morris by not Blylevin. God I hate Heyman. It is weird that he didn't vote for Bagwell or Martinez this year after voting for them previously, it's not like his ballot is maxed out.

What I don't get is how any so-called professional baseball writer cannot be aware that modern players (1970ff) are being shafted by being held to a higher standard than players from previous eras. Best of the best is a glorious hallucination, nothing more. More accurately, an ego trip on the writer's part. You don't have to repeat the obvious errors of the past (George Kelly) but haven't players who are better than, say, Joe Sewell and Bobby Wallace and Joe Tinker and Dave Bancroft (such as, for e.g. Alan Trammell) earned a little bit of respect? The bottom line case against the BBWAA is ignorance.

It is weird that he didn't vote for Bagwell or Martinez this year after voting for them previously, it's not like his ballot is maxed out.

Since most of his actions are done out of nothing but spite, his votes are more likely to ebb and flow with whatever is grieving him most on the day the ballot arrives.