Are users going to hold votes early on because certain players dont deserve to be "first ballot" hall of famers, even though they would vote for them the following season?

Yes

Quote: Originally Posted By usfbully on 2/20/2010Ye

+1

That is as silly in HBD as it is in Real Life.

No.

Quote: Originally posted by jwelsh1023 on 2/20/2010That is as silly in HBD as it is in Real Life.

+1

no. A guy is either good enough to be hall of fame material or he is not. There is no "first time ballot" hall of fame that separates from the non-first ballot guys. Once they are in, they are in, so what is the point of making a distinction when voting?

Quote: Originally posted by jwelsh1023 on 2/20/2010That is as silly in HBD as it is in Real Life.

A club within a club, pointless. One day, someone will be unanimous then it'll be a club within a club within a club..

Quote: Originally Posted By Crump123 on 2/20/2010

Quote: Originally posted by jwelsh1023 on 2/20/2010 That is as silly in HBD as it is in Real Life.

A club within a club, pointless. One day, someone will be unanimous then it'll be a club within a club within a club.

At this point it will never happen. I think voters are now scared to give an unanimous vote because of all the guys who should have gotten in with 100% of the vote but didn't. I don't think they want to give the impression that someone is the greatest baseball player.

It is all really crap, how does someone not vote for Ruth, Aaron, Mays, or Ripken to name a few?

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

i was actually thinking about this the other day. It doesn't make sense to me. A guy is either HOF or not. Any attempt to control which ballot the guy gets in on is just an ego exercise of the voter.

This is especially true in terms of the unique situation of HBD and the start up of worlds. Any voter who saves a vote at the start of the voting process simply because its a "first ballot" is holding situation against the player.

depends on how much better his stats get over that one year

We did the HOF in Moonlight Graham this season. There were four "top tier" candidates that I considered to be much better than the next group of candidates. There were a handful of guys who could all be grouped together in that next tier who were probably all HOF worthy. But since I could only vote for a max of five guys, I only voted for the four "first tier" candidates this time around (only three were voted in).

I suspect this will be fairly common for the first season or two of voting in each world, once the backlog of obvious candidates get enshrined. I would expect that starting in year 3 of HOF voting in each world, voting will be more all over the place.

has any one seen a guy get 32/32 votes yet?

In Hunter we had a guy get 31. But I suspect the one vote was someone who didn't vote at all because this guy was a 6 time Cy Young winner and should have the award named after him instead. He was discussed in the world chat over a number of days and everyone was in agreement he should get in unanimous.