White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Congratulations on the Rookie records for HR and RBI in April, Jose!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-13-2013, 11:21 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 16,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian26 View Post
I have no doubt he won't get elected unanimously. Unfortunately, in today's environment, there's more incentive for a writer to not vote him in to get that heel recognition rather than to do the correct and proper thing the first time.
I don't believe that is a big part of it, although it may be for a few who write about their contrarian ballots.

The threshold is set at 75 percent. Leaving a player off of a ballot is not a no vote to keep someone out of the Hall of Fame. No one has a veto. A voter can vote for up to 10 candidates. Add up the numbers when the votes are released and divide by 10 and you'll see that very few do. There was a year when there was a movement among friends of Pete Rose to turn in blank ballots to bring attention to what they believed to be the injustice of prohibiting someone who brought shame to the game from being enshrined in its Hall of Fame.

The year Carlton Fisk became eligible, George Brett, Nolan Ryan and Robin Yount were elected. Fisk was only named on 66 percent of the ballots and didn't get in until 2000. Eight of the top 10 in 1999 actually would end up eventually getting the 75 percent, but Gary Carter was only named on about half as many ballots as Fisk. Bert Blyleven only picked up about 14 percent in his second year of eligibility, finishing behind Tommy John in his fifth.

The vote isn't so much a referendum on who voters want to see in the Hall of Fame as it is a spotlight to recognize and honor players. There are voters who believe this guy should be in already and shouldn't have to wait for that guy. If there is a player you believe isn't getting the attention he deserves, or several who are running out of eligibility, voters can vote for them to give them more attention knowing that these others who should be elected will get far more than 75 percent. Even if you believe both Carlton Fisk and Gary Carter belong in the Hall of Fame, you aren't going to vote for them both if you have strong feelings for one or the other catchers. Many believe it was Brett, Ryan and Yount that cost Fisk his first-ballot status, but I think Carter had something to do with it. Fisk was probably the reason Carter lost votes from 1998 to 1999.

There are writers who say they don't believe a player is first-ballot eligible. There certainly were voters who weren't going to vote for Henry Aaron, no way, no how, for obvious reasons. But for the most part, it isn't voters snubbing players so much as voters lobbying for players they believe deserve to be there and won't vote for players to get in ahead of them. Frankly, if I had a vote, it would upset me that I couldn't vote for Harold Baines, especially knowing that there are voters voting for only two or three of the biggest vote-getters. While I don't always agree with the way some writers vote, I really couldn't demand their union cards. If the threshold were 80 percent instead of 75 percent, I think, I would hope you would see more voters using up more of their ballot lines.

It's the writers who didn't vote for Nellie Fox in his last year of BBWAA eligibility that bother me.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-14-2013, 06:16 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,737
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
Mariano clearly was the GOAT for his position. He's got tons of post season success under his belt too. He's one of those guys might hurt other people's chances that year because writers will feel compelled to write his name and no one else as a tribute to his greatness.
Doesn't matter, he won't get in unanimously, there will be at least a handful of writers who just don't vote for him to preserve the Hall of Fame's "integrity."
__________________
2014 Obligatory Attendance & Record Tracker

0-4

LAST GAME: May 31 - Padres 4, Sox 2
NEXT GAME: Maybe never? Apparently I am bad luck
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-27-2013, 06:14 PM
oldcomiskey oldcomiskey is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ripley, Ms.
Posts: 1,316
Default

hope Im wrong but the commitee frowns upon DHs--so Im gonna say no--but he goes in next year
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-27-2013, 07:08 PM
ZombieRob ZombieRob is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Braunfels Texas
Posts: 7,054
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Doesn't matter, he won't get in unanimously, there will be at least a handful of writers who just don't vote for him to preserve the Hall of Fame's "integrity."
Think Jack Morris will split his Votes. Morris is deserving even though he was a major Sox killer.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-27-2013, 07:22 PM
sox1970 sox1970 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZombieRob View Post
Think Jack Morris will split his Votes. Morris is deserving even though he was a major Sox killer.
4.43 ERA against the Sox.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-27-2013, 10:04 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 16,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sox1970 View Post
4.43 ERA against the Sox.
It's even worse when you take out the no-hitter and at least three other shutouts. I think Morris had at least a dozen complete-game wins against the Sox.

I don't see how Jack Morris gets voted in by the BBWAA when Tommy John and Jim Kaat were not.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-27-2013, 10:20 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,661
Default

The more I read about it the more I worry Frank's not being inducted in 2014.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 1-1.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-27-2013, 10:50 PM
ZombieRob ZombieRob is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Braunfels Texas
Posts: 7,054
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
It's even worse when you take out the no-hitter and at least three other shutouts. I think Morris had at least a dozen complete-game wins against the Sox.

I don't see how Jack Morris gets voted in by the BBWAA when Tommy John and Jim Kaat were not.
I don't remember the Sox ever really beating him to much. Him and Tanana owned us
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-28-2013, 01:07 PM
JB98's Avatar
JB98 JB98 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 27,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
The more I read about it the more I worry Frank's not being inducted in 2014.
I wrote a blog about this yesterday. I can't believe it's even a debate. How can somebody not vote for Frank Thomas for the Hall of Fame? He has first-rate credentials.

People say he's one-dimensional, but the Hall is already full of one-dimensional players. They are called pitchers. Neither Tom Seaver nor Nolan Ryan could hit water if they fell out of a boat. I don't know that either man was considered a great fielder either. But who cares? They are among the greatest pitchers of all time, therefore they went into the Hall as soon as they were eligible.

Frank is one of the greatest hitters of all time. Why should it matter if he wasn't great with the leather? He's a lifetime .301 hitter with over 500 career homers. The list of players who have accomplished that is very short, and it includes names like Aaron, Mays and Ruth.

Frank is an absolute no-brainer.
__________________
JB's attendance record:
2004: 14-5; 2005: 16-8; 2006: 19-10; 2007: 8-12; 2008: 15-7; 2009: 6-13; 2010: 12-11; 2011: 9-8; 2012: 11-7; 2013: 8-9; 2014: 4-6; Total: 122-96.
Next game: Aug. 3 vs. Minnesota

R
ead my new baseball blog: http://thebaseballkid98.blogspot.com/

Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-28-2013, 01:43 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,661
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB98 View Post
I wrote a blog about this yesterday. I can't believe it's even a debate. How can somebody not vote for Frank Thomas for the Hall of Fame? He has first-rate credentials.

People say he's one-dimensional, but the Hall is already full of one-dimensional players. They are called pitchers. Neither Tom Seaver nor Nolan Ryan could hit water if they fell out of a boat. I don't know that either man was considered a great fielder either. But who cares? They are among the greatest pitchers of all time, therefore they went into the Hall as soon as they were eligible.

Frank is one of the greatest hitters of all time. Why should it matter if he wasn't great with the leather? He's a lifetime .301 hitter with over 500 career homers. The list of players who have accomplished that is very short, and it includes names like Aaron, Mays and Ruth.

Frank is an absolute no-brainer.
I absolutely agree, but I don't trust the BBWAA.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 11-28-2013, 02:53 PM
jdm2662 jdm2662 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 7,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
I absolutely agree, but I don't trust the BBWAA.
Right, which is why I'm going to say no this year.
__________________
4-time WSI NFL Pick 'em vs Spread Champion
2009 2010 2011 2013
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-28-2013, 03:17 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is online now
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 18,214
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
I absolutely agree, but I don't trust the BBWAA.
If Frank put up the same numbers for the Red Sox or Yankees (with the same postseason appearances as he had with the Sox), this wouldn't even be a question.
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-28-2013, 05:34 PM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,100
Blog Entries: 134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB98 View Post

Frank is an absolute no-brainer.
Unfortunately, some of the guys casting votes have no brains. All it takes is 26% or more to pooh-pooh his DH status and that will be all she wrote.
__________________
I am Dabuiek
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-29-2013, 12:38 PM
JB98's Avatar
JB98 JB98 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 27,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyJohn View Post
Unfortunately, some of the guys casting votes have no brains. All it takes is 26% or more to pooh-pooh his DH status and that will be all she wrote.
You're right, of course, but I'm still going to call attention to the idiocy of those casting the votes.

The DH has been around 40 years now. It's here to stay. It's a position that teams have had to fill for a long time. The purists lost that argument long ago, although apparently many of them haven't noticed. Why shouldn't the best DHs in history be in the Hall of Fame? Sure, all they do is hit. There are some guys in the Hall who didn't do anything except pitch. So what?

I'm sure the purists also are unaware that Thomas played first base predominantly during his two MVP seasons. The DH extended his career, but there are a lot of guys who change positions late in their career in order to keep playing. I don't know why that should be a strike against Thomas.

And even if voters aren't impressed with the compiled statistics, Frank was so dominant from 1991 to 1997 that he deserves to be elected on those years alone. And those are years where he played more 1B than DH.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-29-2013, 02:12 PM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 29,195
Blog Entries: 52
Default

I don't see any way after what's happened over the past five years that Frank isn't elected on the first ballot,
__________________


2014 Attendance Record: 3-3, 0.500
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:38 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.