Quote: Originally Posted By domiisgod on 1/13/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By smoelheim on 1/13/2010

Quote: Originally posted by patrickm885 on 1/13/2010
toddcommish:

There are going to be a lot of guys at first because we are updating the eligibility retroactively. Over time the list will diminish because not a lot good or great players retire every season.

patrick... here's a quandry...

You admit to "a lot of guys at first"... how many is "a lot" on average?

I'm just worried... say you have 25 teams casting 5 votes each (I'll assume SOME won't vote)... thats 125 votes that are cast overall.. getting 20 of those 25 in a particular season, or even a reduced number such as the 17 Mike suggested... I think the votes are going to be spread too thinly to get anyone elected. Especially because we now have 15 seasons under our belts in some worlds, thats a LOT of retired players to consider, and everyone will spread their votes differently. After these "old timers" fall off the 5-year limit, it will get easier to have a 17 or 20 owner consensus... but I'm worried that nobody (or close to nobody) will get elected in the first 5 seasons because there will be too many choices.




I was thinking the same thing. This could be a problem early on until it thins out. If there are that many legit HOF possibilities in the 1st 5 or so seasons (which it would be until they fell off the ballot), it might be tough, if not near impossible to get 25 votes...Im thinking Mike has a good point with 17, and even tough that seems a bit tough at 1st, should be a good standard in the long term.

This is kind of what happened with the real HOF... some really awesome guys didn't get in on their first ballot because of a huge backlog from the past.

3 things: First, I second mfahie's suggestion of expanding the all-time records beyond just the Top 5. Top 20 would be good, but I'd even settle for Top 10. As was said, it'd be nice to see if a guy is 8th all-time in homers, or 28th.

Second, I know you said a franchise can vote for 5 per year, but is there a minimum number? Like, if I only feel 2 guys on the ballot are worth it, can I vote for those 2 only, to maintain the integrity of the Hall?

Lastly: Maybe I missed this, but can we hold off on nominating guys while maintaining their 5 years of eligibility? For example, I have Players A, B and C that I wish to nominate:

-Knowing I can only nominate 2 per season, and knowing the ballot will be huge in the first year, if I chose to nominate the 2 best guys (A and B), will C still be around the following season with 5 full years of eligibility remaining?

-Or, if I wanted to hold off until there was a really weak ballot, say 6 seasons down the road, could I nominate player C then, with full 5-year eligibility?

-Also, if I nominate Player C in Season 16, and he doesn't get in, can I hold off nominating him in Season 17, then nominate him again in Season 18 with 4 years ? Or does his first nomination start the clock, keeping him on the ballot until he either gets in, or 5 seasons pass?

Not a big deal, but re: auto-nominations, why does it take only 7+ Silver Slugger, but 10+ Gold Gloves.

Voters will overvalue offense enough as it is, why the need to make it even harder to get the defensive stars even nominated?

Oh, and how about this for a suggestion? Since the initial backlog will be huge for a couple of seasons, due to all the retro guys, how about for the first season or two only, each franchise can vote for more than 5 players?

This will ensure that all deserving players from the past get in right away, without any very good (but not automatic) players wasting a year of eligibility because of 6 or 7 near-unanimous selections.

Quote: Originally Posted By volk on 1/13/2010Oh, and how about this for a suggestion? Since the initial backlog will be huge for a couple of seasons, due to all the retro guys, how about for the first season or two only, each franchise can vote for more than 5 players?

This will ensure that all deserving players from the past get in right away, without any very good (but not automatic) players wasting a year of eligibility because of 6 or 7 near-unanimous selections

I'd actually prefer the limit on votes be kept. In my mind, better to have voters make tough decisions than to let any extra borderline players slip in. Once you get a couple in, you'll have the same argument that's made with the real HOF and some veteran's committee (esp., but some voted in also) selections of - "well, John James is in and his numbers aren't any better than Jim Johnson's." Keep the HOF truly exclusive, at least for a couple of seasons (I'd expect it to get slowly watered down, in almost any World).

Quote: Originally Posted By volk on 1/13/2010Oh, and how about this for a suggestion? Since the initial backlog will be huge for a couple of seasons, due to all the retro guys, how about for the first season or two only, each franchise can vote for more than 5 players?

This will ensure that all deserving players from the past get in right away, without any very good (but not automatic) players wasting a year of eligibility because of 6 or 7 near-unanimous selections

Like I said, the FIRST class from each world should be the greatest players, and not necessarily subject to a vote from guys who may not have been in the league for more than a year.

If a player meets at least THREE of the SIX offensive categories, or TWO of the SIX pitching (after all, it's tough to have 3000 strikeouts or 300 wins as a reliever), they should be automatically IN. No votes, just put them in, because there should be no arguments whether they're qualified. We should only have to vote on the second tier of candidates...

Quote: Originally Posted By toddcommish on 1/13/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By volk on 1/13/2010
Oh, and how about this for a suggestion? Since the initial backlog will be huge for a couple of seasons, due to all the retro guys, how about for the first season or two only, each franchise can vote for more than 5 players?

This will ensure that all deserving players from the past get in right away, without any very good (but not automatic) players wasting a year of eligibility because of 6 or 7 near-unanimous selections.

Like I said, the FIRST class from each world should be the greatest players, and not necessarily subject to a vote from guys who may not have been in the league for more than a year.

If a player meets at least THREE of the SIX offensive categories, or TWO of the SIX pitching (after all, it's tough to have 3000 strikeouts or 300 wins as a reliever), they should be automatically IN. No votes, just put them in, because there should be no arguments whether they're qualified. We should only have to vote on the second tier of candidates...

If you did this, you could have players AUTOMATICALLY get in, even if they couldn't actually be nominated to even be voted on.

In any event, let that be the first year's Vote - how many of these players (that you would have in automatically) exist in established Worlds? In most Worlds, this will be the first class of players. In a select few, maybe it takes 2 classes. In theory, maybe some world out there has enough to fill the first three classes (though I'd really begin to suspect some "inflated" offensive number due to mismanagement at that point). Fine. So be it. If your guy still can't get voted in even in the 2-4 seasons after the "slam-dunks" make it in, maybe he just doesn't deserve it?

Plus, if you do it auto, I think you take away from comparing the greatest HOF guys. I'd much rather be able to see who the World reached a consensus on as the most worthy (earning the most votes) rather than just having all the first-rate slam-dunk players be treated equally.

Quote: Originally posted by toddcommish on 1/13/2010
the FIRST class from each world should be the greatest players, and not necessarily subject to a vote from guys who may not have been in the league for more than a year.

If a player meets at least THREE of the SIX offensive categories, or TWO of the SIX pitching (after all, it's tough to have 3000 strikeouts or 300 wins as a reliever), they should be automatically IN.  No votes, just put them in, because there should be no arguments whether they're qualified.  We should only have to vote on the second tier of candidates...

If a world has so many guys who meet those criteria that qualified players aren't being voted into the HOF, then that world is ... you know, one of those worlds.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

^^^^^
Exactly

I've been looking thru MG for the last few hours. Of retired players, there are really that many that deserve to be in. They'll be eligible for 5 seasons. I don't think I can find 25.

Well, that "exactly" was meant for travisg and not to confirm what I said.

Any way we could get some expanded historical career stats? Making informed decisions based on Top 5 is very hard to judge.

Also due to the number of worlds there will be decent amount of data to work with very quickly. It would help discussions if owners saw some data across worlds about HoF players and see what kind of stats other worlds are voting into the HoF.

Quote: Originally Posted By TheJester74 on 1/13/2010Any way we could get some expanded historical career stats? Making informed decisions based on Top 5 is very hard to judge.

Also due to the number of worlds there will be decent amount of data to work with very quickly. It would help discussions if owners saw some data across worlds about HoF players and see what kind of stats other worlds are voting into the HoF.

I like the first idea a lot (additional historical stats).

I dislike the second idea almost as much. The players that World X thinks are HOF worthy shouldn't have any impact on what makes someone a HOFer in one of my Worlds.

I believe that it was said in one of the Developer's Chats that expanding the records page any further would make for a real difficult time in programming.

My question:

In the event that a pitcher starts out as a Starting pitcher, and eventually becomes a reliever, what happens? For example, Zachrey Cone in UBA has been and remains a starting pitcher with stats that would easily put him in the hall. But, with his stamina dwindling, I expect to put him in the bullpen very soon, hopefully to prolong his career. Say he is a starter for 12 seasons, then is a closer for 4. What happens to qualifications then?

I'm assuming the stats you guys are asking about will be available on the the voting page just like MVP/Cy Young voting.