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.
Members of SABR who have put in the effort to publish studies, books, etc. should have the greatest say in Hall of Fame voting. Maybe limit it to members who have published three items of research.
Let SABR do it, and let them figure out how they want to do it.
Maybe limit it to members who have published three items of research.
If anything, SABR members as a body are probably *more* opposed to seeing PED users in the HoF than the BBWAA voting community
1) Every accredited beat writer
2) Every BBWAA member
3) Every retired Major League player
4) Expand the number of candidates that you can choose on one ballot to 15.
5) Keep induction level @ 75%.
Based on what I have seen I believe that to be the case - which is perfectly logical, given that the average SABR member is far smarter than the average sports journalist.
I think football is just 20 guys in a room and they vote privately.
Top guy gets in regardless of pct. Everyone else over 75% too. With the current pile-up, it's going to be a long time before we see an iffy guy get in.
Having the Hall pick the voters seems like a better system. BBWAA writers would be eligible as well as people like John Thorn and Bill James. Restricting the voting pool to the BBWAA alone does not produce the most knowledgeable voting body.
I'll say it again: The only way that you're going to get "better" HoF selections (translation: HoF selections that you approve of) is to educate the existing and future BBWAA membership and convince them that your perspective on Hallworthiness is superior to theirs. The problem is that you know that this isn't something that can be achieved overnight, and many of you obviously feel that such a long range effort is beneath you, since you're so much smarter than those stupid writers. Which pretty much mirrors those writers' opinions of you**, so where does that put you?
I do have a problem with an outdated process. Restricting the voter pool to BBWAA disqualifies many experts. How does disqualifying people like John Thorn and Bill James make the process better? The process should be big enough to allow people like Thorn in along with people like Chass.
I've belonged to SABR for almost 30 years (I just renewed the other day), and SABR enjoys whatever status it's attained by being neutral on these issues. I'd hate to see it advocate HOF candidates, whoever they might be.
To me, the question isn't what disqualifies them, but what method do you use to qualify them? How do you select the experts?
How is the Veterans Committee selected? How many members does it have?
Yeah, I don't see SABR getting it. More likely the writers keep it, next in line would be a panel the HOF puts together ala the various vet committees and if that is the alternative I say keep it with the writers.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (3 members)
Page rendered in 0.6206 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed