Posted by MikeT23 on 12/28/2014 8:37:00 PM (view original):
Does BL understand how the voting works?

The 600ish writers vote for players they deem HOF-worthy.   18 of them felt Lofton was.   The rest did not.    We have no idea how "seriously" they "considered" Lofton but, at what ever level their consideration was, they deemed he was not.     They could not give him 1/3rd of a vote.  It's simply "yes" or "no". 

I understand that.

When someone is as close to hall of fame average at their position as Lofton is, there's usually more support. I keep citing Mattingly. He's something like the 40th best first baseman of all time, which is clearly not hall of fame level, yet he routinely got almost 20% of the vote.

Bah, the 3.2% could just as easily be that 96.8% think there are at least ten better candidates on the ballot... which ISN'T the same as "he doesn't deserve to be in the HOF"

Posted by toddcommish on 12/28/2014 9:45:00 PM (view original):
Bah, the 3.2% could just as easily be that 96.8% think there are at least ten better candidates on the ballot... which ISN'T the same as "he doesn't deserve to be in the HOF"

True. A good argument for lifting the limit. Especially since the are something like 15 deserving players on the ballot now.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/28/2014 9:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 12/28/2014 7:52:00 PM (view original):
Maybe you're drastically overestimating his legitimacy as a candidate.

Instead of being borderline "worthy of the HOF", he was borderline "staying on the ballot for more than one election".

Because that's what 3.2% seems to indicate.

I don't think I am. I think the voters underrate Lofton because so much of his value came from his defense.

So you're smarter than the BBWAA voters because you understand baseball better than they do?

Well, I wouldn't have voted for him either.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/28/2014 10:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 12/28/2014 9:45:00 PM (view original):
Bah, the 3.2% could just as easily be that 96.8% think there are at least ten better candidates on the ballot... which ISN'T the same as "he doesn't deserve to be in the HOF"

Simple math sez "bullshit".

I figured it out earlier but got busy doing something else.  There were 560ish voters.   They voted for 3750ish players.   It's less than 7 players per ballot.    Assume 18 of them voted for 10 and Lofton was on each ballot.    Yeah, they said "He's not a HOFer."   No doubt. 

Not necessarily.  There are still voters that like to play games with "I'll only vote for the guys I THINK will get in", and others who automatically avoid "first timers" and "suspected PED users", still others who think player A should get in before player B.  I'm pretty sure more than 3.2% think Lofton deserves to get into the HOF eventually, just NOT RIGHT NOW for some of them.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/28/2014 10:18:00 PM (view original):
Well, I wouldn't have voted for him either.

Ok, so if they vote the way you would vote (they vote no), you criticise them for not giving him what you feel is his due consideration. And if they vote opposite of how you would vote (they vote yes), then what? You praise them?

Do you realize how retarded that logic is?

Again, I'm not really concerned with Lofton's votes. I'm concerned with the process. If a guy like Lofton is dismissed without any discussion or debate, what are the chances of a slightly better player making it? That slightly better player should be a Hall of Famer.

"I'm not really concerned with Lofton's votes"

But you keep talking about his votes.

"If a guy like Lofton is dismissed without any discussion or debate, what are the chances of a slightly better player making it?"

What source are you using to determine that Lofton was not discussed or debated?

Posted by toddcommish on 12/28/2014 11:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/28/2014 10:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 12/28/2014 9:45:00 PM (view original):
Bah, the 3.2% could just as easily be that 96.8% think there are at least ten better candidates on the ballot... which ISN'T the same as "he doesn't deserve to be in the HOF"

Simple math sez "bullshit".

I figured it out earlier but got busy doing something else.  There were 560ish voters.   They voted for 3750ish players.   It's less than 7 players per ballot.    Assume 18 of them voted for 10 and Lofton was on each ballot.    Yeah, they said "He's not a HOFer."   No doubt. 

Not necessarily.  There are still voters that like to play games with "I'll only vote for the guys I THINK will get in", and others who automatically avoid "first timers" and "suspected PED users", still others who think player A should get in before player B.  I'm pretty sure more than 3.2% think Lofton deserves to get into the HOF eventually, just NOT RIGHT NOW for some of them.

So you believe the voters don't understand the process?    That, if a player doesn't receive x-amount of votes, he will be dropped from the ballot making "just not right now" irrelevant?

Posted by stinenavy on 12/29/2014 12:29:00 AM (view original):
"I'm not really concerned with Lofton's votes"

But you keep talking about his votes.

"If a guy like Lofton is dismissed without any discussion or debate, what are the chances of a slightly better player making it?"

What source are you using to determine that Lofton was not discussed or debated?

I'm bringing up his vote total as evidence that he wasn't seriously considered by voters.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/29/2014 9:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by stinenavy on 12/29/2014 12:29:00 AM (view original):
"I'm not really concerned with Lofton's votes"

But you keep talking about his votes.

"If a guy like Lofton is dismissed without any discussion or debate, what are the chances of a slightly better player making it?"

What source are you using to determine that Lofton was not discussed or debated?

I'm bringing up his vote total as evidence that he wasn't seriously considered by voters.

Maybe you should contact the HOF and the BBWAA, tell them that their process is flawed, and offer your services as "Executive Director of Serious Consideration By Voters".

National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum
25 Main Street,
Cooperstown, NY 13326

and

[email protected]

There are plenty of people pointing out the flaws in the hall of fame voting. No need for me to pile on.

I keep wondering how BL knows that 540ish voters didn't seriously consider Lofton and decide he was not worthy.    They did NOT have full ballots so allowing them to vote for 20 players wouldn't have mattered.    What secret source does he have?