Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

el Águila asked in SportsBaseball · 1 decade ago

What do you think of the VC changing their voting process AGAIN?

Here's the link:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100726&c...

Anyway, if I understand it correctly (and, really, why wouldn't I?), the players won't be voting en masse for players who debuted after 1943 (?) anymore. Instead, there will be a panel, like those already voting on managers, etc, consisting of players, historians, etc. There will be three 'Eras', Pre-Integration, Golden Age, and Expansion, and each will be voted on every three years, with one being voted on every year (Expansion this year, Golden Era next year, Pre-Integration in 2012, then back to Expansion). However, instead of just voting for players, ALL candidates from an era will be voted upon (managers, umpires, executives, etc).

Personally, I think this will make it easier for some ignored players (RON SANTO, RON SANTO, RON SANTO!!!!) to FINALLY be elected. Unfortunately, said players (SANTO, SANTO, SANTO!) will have to wait another year, as he's a 'Golden Age' player, by my calculations (retired 1974; Expansion, which is next, starts in 1979...).

So, your thoughts?

Each era contains 10 names, except the Expansion, which has 12; I see no evidence that there will be a set number of players, umpires, managers, executives on each ballot, so I suppose it could be 12 players, or 10 players and two managers, or 12 umpires- I don't know.

So who will likely be on the ballot this year? The guidelines are 'based on dominance' to determine what era a player will be considered to be in. So, my thoughts:

Players on the last 'Modern Players' VC ballot-

Ron Santo- retired 1974, ineligible

Jim Kaat- retired 1983, but was already 40 in 1979, so likely won't be on ballot, either

Tony Oliva- retired 1976, ineligible

Gil Hodges- retired 1963, heck, died 1972, so won't be eligible, even as a manager

Joe Torre- retired 1977, still active as manager, ineligible on both counts

Maury Wills- retired 1972, ineligible

Luis Tiant- retired 1982, probably in Golden Age

Vada Pinson- retired 1975, ineligble. Are ANY of these guys eligible before next year?!

Al Oliver- retired 1985, played since 1968. Had four AS games and four MVP placings after 1979, so COULD be slated in Expansion Era...

Dick Allen- retired 1977, ineligible.

Alright, so of the 10 players on the 2009 VC ballot, only ONE 'could' be on this year's new ballot. Which stinks, I think they should've started with the Golden Age.

Other candidates (maybe):

Steve Garvey?

Vida Blue?

Bobby Grich?

Dave Concepcion?

Ron Guidry (definitely)

Ted Simmons

Don Baylor

Tommy John?

Buddy Bell

Graig Nettles?

Darrell Evans?

Ron Cey

Cecil Cooper

Bill Madlock

And that's about it. Players who retired after 1989 (and would thus, technically, be on the Writers' ballot) are not eligible, even if they got robbed (Lou Whitaker, for instance). No offense, but... kind of a lousy ballot. But it should help Ted Simmons get elected, at least. Honestly, he and Ron Guidry are the only 'definites' who I think should be elected ('definites' being, definitely not going on the Golden Era ballot).

If someone smart with great baseball resources (Chipmaker, Utter Chaos, etc) could see who would likely be on via Managerial, Executive, Umpirial, etc, that would be great...

Anyway, thoughts?

Update:

@Chipmaker-Interesting thoughts and points. I hadn't thought about Steinbrenner, he's a lock; I was going to suggest Bob Sheppard would get in, too, but it seems announcers don't have a category! Since the Frick Award is just that, an award, should announcers/broadcasters be elected to the Hall as full members? I think so...

1 Answer

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I haven't fully digested this yet (I did a lot of travel Monday and am still off-kilter, more than usual), but the big undercurrent message is "dammit, the VC STILL is not doing a good job, so let's rework it yet again". Specifically what the various VC iterations are failing at, in the Hall Board's eyes, I cannot be sure of, but clearly someone high up (and if it's not Jane, it's no one) is dissatisfied with the last few years' worth of VC voting.

    Snap assessments:

    1. "Golden Age" is a wretched name selection for the middle era ballot.

    2. George Steinbrenner will be on the ballot later this year, and may very well get elected.

    3. Maybe THIS edition will elect Ron Santo, who has continually stood as receiving the highest ballot returns but not yet been elected. I won't be unbiased here -- I want to see Santo adorn a plaque. (Gil Hodges supporters are probably right in line with hoping that, okay, maybe this one will get it right. I'm not a Hodges supporter, but have no beef with those that are.)

    4. Marvin Miller is probably still screwed.

    5. "Pre-Integration" is a pleasant yet clunky way of avoiding saying "Segregation". I understand why, but it is pure spin doctoring.

    6. The second break time doesn't make immediate sense. (I need to re-read the various articles and announcements.)

    7. Marvin Miller is probably still screwed. (Bears repeating.)

    8. The composition of the voting population will be interesting, but clearly having the living HOFers address modern-ish era candidates was not working (stingy barstiches). If that electorate idea has been banished, good riddance. (Not that I'm in favor of tiny electorates, but the living HOFers, mostly ex-players, like keeping the number of keys to the washroom extremely limited, and it showed. And a committee that elects no one is serving the same purpose, at greater expense, as having no committee at all.)

    As for which names will be on the ballot late this year (to be announced in October), probably the best of the usual suspects from the appropriate era, and I cannot imagine they'll leave out Steinbrenner. It'd be nice if Dwight Evans got another swing in there.

    Conspiracy-minded thought: with the Steroid Era generation approaching the BBWAA ballot, and the writers enjoying their petty embargoes, the Hall may very well be hedging with this new VC to make more likely that SOMEONE will get elected every year, because if some Hall Of Fame weekend has no honorees, well, attendance isn't going to be much if there's only a Spink and Frick Award winner to welcome. And the Hall's big weekend is a huge part of Cooperstown's annual economy. The Hall is strongly backed and could marshal a pile of donations if necessary, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum, and fiscal reality is fiscal reality.

    Thanks for asking this -- I've been wanting to blog-dissect this VC revision, but not until my serotonin cycles are back in sync.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.