Would SSI Vote for Edgar?, part 2

Subscribe to Comments for "Would SSI Vote for Edgar?, part 2"

Replies

SABR Matt's picture

...I lost interest in the HOF voting procedure a very long time ago...(in young person speak...a very long time ago means at a significantly earlier stage of my emotional development, which in my case, refers to when I was like 20)..

The BBWAA is a joke.  The way the baseball writers think is, quite frankly, inexcusably narrow minded and anti-American (yes, I said anti-American).  These men are holding back national understanding of the game by 40 years because, like a bunch of petulent children, they think their way is the only way.

Edgar Martinez is just the latest travesty.  A long line of men getting the vote for all the wrong reasons and failing to get the vote for similarly wrong reasons prevails.  I have no respect at all for the BBWAA.  None.  If they offered me membership by some accident, I would refuse it.

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

There are serious, serious issues with their credibility.  I'm wit' you.

Problemo is, the HOF means a lot of $$ to the guys voted in.  ::sigh::

SABR Matt's picture

...this is the group that accidentally elected the wrong Farrell and wouldn't admit their mistake.

The HOF is a joke.  Someone should create a second HOF...call it the Baseball Hall of Merit or something...

IcebreakerX's picture

It's the basically the HOF Monitor. Done.

The BBWAA is a joke that will hopefully perish as newspapers die off and we run out of real 'writers'. And it's not even in the snubs that this is markedly proven. It's also true in the votes for 'real' HOFers. Why weren't Ricky Henderson, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Willie Mays and Hank Aaron unanimous? What POSSIBLE argument could you structure against any of those players? Up coming, there should be no questions on Greg Maddux, Albert Pujols, Ichiro, Ken Griffey Jr., Randy Johnson, Mariano Rivera, Trevor Hoffman, Alex Rodriguez or Chipper Jones. 

The BBWAA really only needs to vote on two things: non-players and 'borderline' players that *should* be tested. The rest of it can be solved by the HOF Monitor and Index Scores like the SAT or something.

We already have the 10 years requirement. Let's go a little further. The writers can hash it out when you have a Kirby Puckett, John Smoltz or Curt Schilling come up. In fact, the writers can be the ones that vote on standards, for all I care. Let's just make it a little more fair and less personal crusades and vendettas.

Too much cloak and dagger for me.

SABR Matt's picture

The HOF monitor a junky toy stat...typical for James.  Of course in this case, it does exactly what he claims it does...it tracks how the voters have behaved in the past.  So that's all well and good.

I want my HOF to be based on real objective analysis blended with adjustments for character issues applied only to borderline candidates.

But yes...the statistical approach works once we get past our stupid golden era prejudices.

IcebreakerX's picture

The HOF Monitor is probably not the best, but at the same time, you don't really want to bog it down with heavy number crunching either.

A lot of sabers complain about stats like Wins, RBIs and ERA, but the truth is, very few bad or borderline HOFers have bad peripheral stats. I would prefer the index simple...  Rank in League in OBP, Hits, HRs, RBI, Runs, SB, etc./Season x weighting points, etc. Defense is tougher, but i think this is where you blend stuff like UZR, but with surveys of scouts, players, coaches, etc.

We get tied up in lots of stats, especially stuff like WPA, but I don't see the point of penalizing an RBI/Run because it was scored in a blow out. All things equal, the run is still a run.

Anyways, anything would be better than what we have now.

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

Why weren't Ricky Henderson, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Willie Mays and Hank Aaron unanimous? What POSSIBLE argument could you structure against any of those players? Up coming, there should be no questions on Greg Maddux, Albert Pujols, Ichiro, Ken Griffey Jr., Randy Johnson, Mariano Rivera, Trevor Hoffman, Alex Rodriguez or Chipper Jones.

Right.  Aaron wasn't unanimous because writers make it personal.  As James put it, the HOF has so many credibility issues that "It no longer can honor a player like Aaron.  It can only insult him."

It would never happen, but I would love to see an HOF Monitor trigger at, say, 200 points.  You lap the field, we put gold piping on your uniform and the fans get to enjoy watching an inducted HOF'er play baseball.

IcebreakerX's picture

For Aaron and Mays, there was probably some residual racism.

And when Ichiro comes down the pipe, it will be a debate over NPB production. But the sad part is that few writers will even consider the point that the world is not 'free' and not put a check on Ichiro. MLB is a notorious cartel/business model that has very exclusive controls over its employees. The same applies for the NPB, but the writers will nonetheless insult the sovereignity of other league's rules and its former players by penalizing them for what is essentially not under the control of the player.

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

That argument puts "paid" to the ostensible "problem" that one-dimensional players shouldn't be in the Hall.

Of course, starting pitchers themselves are one-dimensional.  They help only during 50% of the half-innings.  (They get a few hits here and there?  Edgar played 500 games in the field.)

misterjonez's picture
Submitted by misterjonez on

would, holding to their apparent logic, have to disallow any AL pitchers, since they didn't have anything to do with the offensive side of the ball.

 

I know it's too simplistic and there are holes when you take it to the extreme, but in the end the pitcher is just the leader of the defensive unit.  He dictates how the game will play out for half of the game.  The DH presents the same value on the opposite side of the ball.

 

If you're going to vote Ozzie Smith into the HOF, you have to vote Edgar.  'Gar was one-dimensional when it comes to his game-changing skills, but so was The Wizard.  Ozzie didn't win many games with his bat, just like Edgar didn't win many games with his glove.

 

There are just too many flaws in the pseudo-logic of the crusty ol' timers who simply refuse to acknowledge that, as Doc pointed out earlier, the game has moved past the version they grew up with.  There's a reason the AL dominates interleague.  The NL rules are inferior.  Time to accept that by inducting the greatest DH ever.

Leave a Reply

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.