Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The BBF HoF All-Timeline

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I agree, Hamilton and Rusie are the two names I'll consider adding to my ballot right off the bat. After we get a few seasons under our belt, we'll get a better idea of the ballot structure for future candidates. Right now I don't have much:

    1st ballot
    Cap Anson 95.65%
    John Clarkson 86.96%
    Buck Ewing 86.96%

    personally, I like how Ewing's early support pans out for future catchers .

    --btw I added an "inductees" section on the front page, at the bottom of the first post.
    Last edited by J W; 04-10-2005, 07:57 PM.
    http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploa...-showalter.gif

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by J W
      "1901" RESULTS

      Congratulations to the inaugural class of our BBFHOF All-Timeline!

      Three players have been inducted here at the turn of the century:

      Cap Anson

      John Clarkson

      Buck Ewing


      Here are the full results. Twenty three ballots were cast:

      22 Cap Anson
      20 John Clarkson, Buck Ewing
      ---------------------------------------
      17 Tim Keefe
      16 Roger Connor
      13 King Kelly, Charlie Radbourne, Al Spalding
      12 Deacon White
      9 Ross Barnes
      6 Pete Browning
      5 Paul Hines, Bid McPhee, Mickey Welch
      4 Pud Galvin, George Wright
      3 Cal McVey, Harry Stovey, John Ward
      2 Bob Caruthers, Jack Glasscock, Bill Lange, Jim McCormick, Joe Start
      1 Mike Griffin, Bill Joyce, Tip O' Neill, Lip Pike, Jake Stenzel, Ned Williamson

      Thanks everyone. "1902" comin' up.
      Very very suprised here. Only 3? I just don't see how Conner and Keefe don't make it in a relatively weak pool.
      Curious... how many <10 ballots were sent in?

      Comment


      • #48
        I know I am taking part in this project but I still dont see the reasoning in keeping ballots secret?

        I know it is your project JW but more disscussion is made when you know who to talk to and perhaps try to sway.

        Comment


        • #49
          I'm a little surprised that Connor didn't make it, and also very surprised at the level of support for Spalding.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by abacab
            I'm a little surprised that Connor didn't make it, and also very surprised at the level of support for Spalding.
            I am not surprised by Spalding, but, I must say, I see Spalding and Barnes in a similar light. I can't see voting for Spalding without voting for Barnes, but it happens. Spalding was and still is my top 5-6 cadidate.

            Comment


            • #51
              I'm not impressed by Spalding and don't think he belongs. I'll post about that in more detail later.

              Another surprising thing I just noticed - neither George Gore nor Hardy Richardson got any votes. They didn't miss my ballot by much.
              Last edited by abacab; 04-11-2005, 10:23 AM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by dgarza
                Very very suprised here. Only 3? I just don't see how Conner and Keefe don't make it in a relatively weak pool.
                Curious... how many <10 ballots were sent in?
                Just in case anyone is curious, I submitted a 10-player ballot. Nine of my choices were the top vote-getters.

                I calculate that there were 209 votes cast.
                Dave Kent

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by dgarza
                  I am not surprised by Spalding, but, I must say, I see Spalding and Barnes in a similar light. I can't see voting for Spalding without voting for Barnes, but it happens. Spalding was and still is my top 5-6 cadidate.
                  The difference to me was that while they were teammates (1871 thru 1876), Spalding pitched in more games (343) and had almost as many starts (326) as Barnes played in (331). After 1876, Barnes had just 749 PA in which he was barely a league-average batter.

                  Barnes is not going to make my ballot while Spalding has and will continue to do so.
                  Dave Kent

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Keep ballots private

                    Publicizing ballots only opens people up to criticism and bullying for votes. Of course it's nice to see how others voted and to get an idea of some of their quirks and thought processes. If everyone thought alike, candidates would either get elected with 100% of the vote, or receive 0%.
                    People can adjust their ballots as they wish without pressures from others, and if people want to put a plug in for a player that they feel is truly deserving, then post away.
                    "Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you. What's that you say Mrs. Robinson? Joltin' Joe has left and gone away. Hey hey hey."

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by ballparks
                      Publicizing ballots only opens people up to criticism and bullying for votes. Of course it's nice to see how others voted and to get an idea of some of their quirks and thought processes. If everyone thought alike, candidates would either get elected with 100% of the vote, or receive 0%.
                      People can adjust their ballots as they wish without pressures from others, and if people want to put a plug in for a player that they feel is truly deserving, then post away.
                      Public voting hasn't set back the Baseball Fever Hall of Fame voting process. I really don't have a problem either way, but if someone feels strongly about a particular player, positive or negative, they do need to say why.
                      Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
                      Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
                      Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
                      Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
                      Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I think the idea here was to model voting after the BBWAA procedures. Since individual ballots are kept secret in BBWAA voting, they might as well be kept secret here.

                        Now, BBWAA voters can make their ballots public if they choose to do so, as far as I know, but they are under no obligation to do so.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by wrgptfan
                          After 1876, Barnes had just 749 PA in which he was barely a league-average batter.
                          this seems like an odd thing to bring up since it is more than what Spalding did after that point

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by wrgptfan
                            I calculate that there were 209 votes cast.
                            209 out of a possible 230. The only thing I can figure is that some voters submitted just two or three names - whoever they thought deserved to be "first ballot" inductees.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by AG2004
                              With Cupid Childs, Billy Hamilton, and Amos Rusie retiring in 1901, there's going to be very good class of newly eligible players for 1902.
                              And Nig Cuppy and Gus Weyhing

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by AG2004:
                                I think the idea here was to model voting after the BBWAA procedures.
                                Absolutely correct. And I, for one, like it. I think there will be a lot less pressure put on voters to "vote for those near election, and put off some others for later", as so often occurs in the BBFHOF. I like the way JW has set this up. It is not necessarily better, but it is different, from the BBFHOF. Both are excellent in their own right. I think everyone appreciates how much effort Chancellor has put into the BBFHOF - obviously a true labor of love on his part. Now, JW is doing the same here, but in a different fashion.

                                Also, JW does mention early on that if you wish to campaign for a candidate, go ahead and post that info. The BBWAA writers are undoubtedly inundated with info as the election approaches for the real HOF, so why not here?

                                I was also surprised that Tony Mullane received zero support. He wasn't on my ballot (obviously), but I did seriously consider him. Nice to see that I had all three inductees on my ballot, and all 10 of my candidates received at least some other support.

                                Thanks, JW! Very enjoyable, and look forward to continued participation!
                                You see, you spend a good deal of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. J. Bouton

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X