Veteran's Committee election contest

[jalbright]

I want to run a contest (no prize except for pride) deciding who the VC will elect at the winter meetings. Entries will have to be in no later than 11:59:59 PM EST December 1 (the voting will be on the 2d and/or 3d). The only thing is, I'm not sure how to score it. I know there has to be points for successful picks and penalties for unsuccessful ones, but I'd like to open the floor for a few days for suggestions. Perhaps three points for a successful pick, and a rising value for unsuccessful ones, i.e., -1 for the first wrong pick, -2 for the second, and so on.

[jjpm74]

Jim, what I am thinking is a mathematic approach along the lines of a reversal of 75%-25%. Maybe the correct picks get 1 point and an incorrect pick gets a -3. People should have to pick on a yes/no system. For example:

Samuel Breadon No
Bill Dahlen Yes
Wes Ferrell Yes
Marty Marion No
Tony Mullane No
Hank O’Day No
Al Reach No
Jacob Ruppert Yes
Bucky Walters No
Deacon White No

Let's say that is my ballot (who I think will get elected). On December 3, the announcement comes in that these people are elected:

Deacon White
Jacob Rupert

My ballot gets scored as follows:


Samuel Breadon No +1
Bill Dahlen Yes -3
Wes Ferrell Yes -3
Marty Marion No +1
Tony Mullane No +1
Hank O’Day No +1
Al Reach No +1
Jacob Ruppert Yes +1
Bucky Walters No +1
Deacon White No -3

Total: -2

I personally like the idea of penalizing more heavily for incorrect guesses and awarding more lightly for correct guesses.

[jalbright]

I think -3 for a wrong pick versus +1 for a right one too strongly favors picking almost no one, even beyond the likelihood of a small class. I mean, I don't want to make none of the above a favorite over all entries which had say 2 right and one wrong. How about +3 for a correct pick for induction +1 for a correct pick of not elected, and -2 for the wrong picks on induction/not inducted? That gives us more points by forcing calls on 10 candidates, and favors picking guys to get in, which is the source of greatest interest.

[jjpm74]

I think -3 for a wrong pick versus +1 for a right one too strongly favors picking almost no one, even beyond the likelihood of a small class. I mean, I don't want to make none of the above a favorite over all entries which had say 2 right and one wrong. How about +3 for a correct pick for induction +1 for a correct pick of not elected, and -2 for the wrong picks on induction/not inducted? That gives us more points by forcing calls on 10 candidates, and favors picking guys to get in, which is the source of greatest interest.

Even better as it promotes educated guesses. However you do it, I would stick to the yes/no system. I'm assuming you will get the usual suspects and somewhere between 10-20 participants. Hopefully some of them will weigh in on the tallying process.

[jalbright]

I'll give another day for suggestions/refinements of the scoring, then start accepting entries Sunday. Your suggestion of talking about the calls on all 10 possibilities was something I hadn't thought of, and a definite improvement. Maybe someone else has a similarly valuable suggestion.

[jalbright]

OK, I'll now accept predictions. You can list only who you think will be inducted, but, per post 3, the ones you omit are assumed to be guys you think won't make it.

We'll use jjpm74's example in post 2 of his ballot if White and Ruppert are elected:

Samuel Breadon No +1
Bill Dahlen Yes -2 for a total of -1
Wes Ferrell Yes -2 for a total of -3
Marty Marion No +1 for a total of -2
Tony Mullane No +1 for a total of -1
Hank O’Day No +1 for a total of 0
Al Reach No +1 for a total of +1
Jacob Ruppert Yes +3 for a total of +4
Bucky Walters No +1 for a total of +5
Deacon White No -2 for a final total of +3

The tie breaker will be the most correct induction picks. If a tie persists after that, it's a tie.

[jalbright]

I'm going to go with Dahlen and Ruppert making it, the rest not.

[Cougar]

I'm going to go with Dahlen and Ruppert making it, the rest not.

I think you're right.

[jjpm74]

Ruppert yes
Everyone else No

[jalbright]

Anyone else interested in posting their guesses?

[jalbright]

Down to about a week to go, and only three entries, two of which are identical. It's not worth doing with that little participation.

[Cowtipper]

I'll say Ruppert Yes, Mullane Yes, Dahlen Yes. Everyone else no. Why not.

[philliesfiend55]

That's the ballot? - Really? I think the Hall Of Fame did a horrible job in deciding who to nominate and the 19th Century and early 20th Century is very poorly covered.
For starters - in covering such a vast Time Period of about 75 years of major leagues history why did they limit it to just 10 nominations? Doubling that to 20 or even 25 would have been a lot more appropriate. When you consider that the Golden Era is just 26 years 1947 to 1972 and the coming election of the most recent era for the Class of 2014 will only cover players and non-players who have been retired since 1992, that's an even shorter 20 year period, 1973 to 1992. - Yet they are going to have the same number of nominations for each era? - That simply doesn't make sense. The era before 1947 (Pre-Integration) should be represnted by a lot more nominees.
And the quality of some of the nominees selected? Well, I think they've fallen short of nominating the best of the best to a good degree. Even as a Phillies fan, I can't support wholeheartedly the nomination of former Phillie Bucky Walters. You're nominating a pitcher who won about 5 out of every 9 decisions (198-160- .553 win. pctg.)) , and even if you take into account the fact that he pitched or some bad teams and might have won about 225 games with most other franchises, it doesn't quite make up for the fact that many pitchers with much better records failed to receive a nomination. For about a year I've wondered how the HOF would deal with such an enormous timeperiod and it seems like my concern was not misplaced. All-in-all: they've botched it - A very poor job overall by the HOF and it's Committees in the nominations phase!

[jalbright]

Anybody else interested in voicing an opinion/venturing a guess? Only a few days until the VC makes its call.

[TheMendozaLine]

Ruppert and Dahlen are my choices to make it.