Prospect Insider - How I'd change the HOF voting

How I'd change the HOF voting

By Alex Carson

By 01-10-2012

The Baseball Hall of Fame Class of 2012 was announced this week, and as usual, it's a pretty small class. Barry Larkin was the lone player elected by the BBWAA, having received 86 percent of the vote. Larkin, in my view, was a deserving candidate and deserves this honor.

There were other players on the ballot I'd deem worthy as well, however, including former Seattle Mariners icon Edgar Martinez.

There has been a lot of talk about how differently the voters think throughout their selection process. Some want a more inclusive hall while others want a more exclusive edition. When you have nearly 600 voters, you're understandably going to have a wide variance of opinion.

The BBWAA isn't going away and it shouldn't. A large percentage of their members have earned the honor to have a say in who is deserving of a plaque at 25 Main Street in Cooperstown, New York.

However, we have seen that the Hall of Fame is not opposed to changing things up a bit. When the Veterans Committee failed to induct anyone for several consecutive years, that committee was scrapped as the Golden Era Committee was formed.

An optimist who dislikes the BBWAA may look at this as hope that the Hall would consider altering their role in voting. But how could they and who would replace them? Could I pick out the best of the best when I attend 10 percent of the games the beat writers do?

Sure, I watch a ton more on television. But I'm not going to sit here and pretend that's the same thing. Writers can't run to the store in the third inning. Writers can't doze off in their recliner. Writers can't say "to hell with this," and go to Europe for three weeks during the season. And those that cover the beat regularly get a much better sense of how a player impacts the team in the clubhouse and how he makes a difference in the community -- both are involved areas of consideration, or at least they can be. Some believe they should be.

I've done all three of the aforementioned in-game sins in the past and will be doing all three of them again this season. So, just to be clear, I do think that the BBWAA could make some positive changes. I don't think I'm more fit than the dedicated beat writer.

Having said that, here are some changes I propose:

1. Mandate earning Voting Privileges
I'm not talking about requiring voters to attend a crazy-high number like 100 games per season, but maybe the number is 25. Maybe there's another way to make sure those who are voting are doing the process justice.

The point of this rule would be to drastically reduce the number of voters who cover a bunch of sports or serve in some other media role than those who attend lots of games and perhaps keep an open mind about who deserves to be voted in and who does not. If it eliminates half those that qualify, so be it.

Can you name 600 media members who have contributed to your baseball knowledge?

Yes, there are some brilliant bloggers out there who may not live near the team they cover or any team at all. However, having a vote means you're probably on the payroll of an accredited outfit and have decided to make this your career, pepping up the credibility meter.

2. Reduce the Number of Years a Player is on the BBWAA Ballot
Reduce the BBWAA ballot period to seven or 10 years. One of the reasons a player hangs out on the ballot for so long is because writers know they have a chance to vote for them later if they don't vote for him now.

This is stupid. Writers shouldn't need 20 years -- the 15-year ballot period and five-year retirement requirement -- to make up their mind, adding and removing players as they play these strange voting games. This causes unintended consequences such as bumping a player up against a strong class in the future, which pushes him even further from enshrinement.

It doesn't usually to help a player to remain on the ballot for several years, and if voters knew they only had 7-10 years, they might vote for him sooner rather than later, if they ever will at all. That, of course, brings up ...

3. Increase or Remove the Vote Limit
Currently, voters can select up to 10 players on their ballot. This seems like a lot, especially when so few are being enshrined each year. However, there is a massive wave of worthy players coming in the next several years.

Unfortunately, if the limit isn't raised or lifted, a lot of fringe players are going to be left in the dust without much of a chance when during other voting eras they may have received the necessary votes.

If you reduce the number of eligible years, you probably have to increase or remove the ballot limits. My question is: so what? Why tie voter's hands and make them stress over the limit? You have trusted them to make these decisions because of their qualifications. If they think 11 or 15 guys deserve enshrinement -- or just one -- let them make that call.

4. Allow Golden Era Committee to Induct Immediately
You may have to change the name of the committee again, I suppose. Let this committee immediately help decide the fate of guys like Martinez, Bert Blyleven and Ron Santo.

I haven't the foggiest idea if they would be inclined to vote for those guys, but if this group is qualified to induct players 25 years after their retirement, why can't they five years after, 10 years after, or at least the year these players fall off the standard ballot?

5. The Corky Simpson Rule
I'm borrowing this from ESPN.com's Jim Caple. Dump the voters who purposely do not vote for elite players for no apparent reason. Either a player is a Hall of Famer in your opinion, or he's not. There aren't levels of Hall of Fame. It's yes or no.

No player has ever been voted in unanimously. So, because Babe Ruth and Ted Williams weren't, Rickey Henderson can't be. Because Henderson wasn't, Albert Pujols won't be. The cycle will continue for no other reason than silly precedent.

Make the voters sweat. Do you want to be one of the few people who lose their right to vote for a year because you played a pointless game that benefits no one?

Ruth was an easier selection than Bert Blyleven, there's no question about that. But if you voted for Blyleven at all, you view he and Ruth on the same Hall of Fame level. In.

Voting for the Hall of Fame, according to so many respected writers, is an extreme honor. Those fortunate enough to have a vote should want to protect that right. Get rid of the games, the vendettas and the assumptions.

I respect the Buster Olneys and Ken Rosenthals of the world. Only one of the two voted the way I would have, but I wouldn't dare tell the other that they don't know what they're doing. Their eyes have seen far more baseball than mine, and they have their own point of view, so I'll just respectfully disagree.

To the half-paying-attention editors, lazy journalists, game players and Corky Simpsons of the world, however: Kick rocks and stop mucking up our Hall of Fame.

The game and those who put all they had into it deserve better.

E-Mail Alex | Follow Alex on Twitter

how-i\'d-change-the-hof-voting

Comments
The following 3 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: manninkt on 01-10-2012 19:50:20
I think this is a fantastic idea. Maybe not the whole concept of the piece, but the gist of it. I feel too many writers try to find reasons not to put players in than the reasons for enshrinement.

For example, if you choose not to vote for an AL or NL player because you cover one league, then you should have your vote suspended. This would apply to voting geographically as well.

I read every year how a journalist in Atlanta (only an example for this statement) won't vote for someone who plays for the Twins or Royals. This doesn't make much sense because they are supposed to view beyond their area and vote for the best players in baseball, not the Braves or in the NL.

It's not hard these days to look at stats online or watch MLB Network/ESPN to see who impacts the game. I think the next generation of BBWAA will have a more inclusive understanding of the game. It's no longer a regional sport where fans of a team come from the local community. This is something I feel many of the current writers fail to see especially when it comes to teams like the Mariners.

What team was considered the most popular team in the 1990's, the Seattle Mariners because of Ken Griffey, Jr., Randy Johnson, Jay Buhner and Edgar Martinez. If you listen to what many of the current HS and college prospects talk about is the Mariners of the 90's and how a player there influenced them. Many of them know what "The Double" means and many of the slogans like "My oh My" have transcended the game.

These last few reasons alone tell a tale of how someone like Dave Niehaus got into the Hall, and why Edgar should get in.

2. By: Adam H. Wong on 01-10-2012 22:47:37
Follow this logic.

Last year, Edgar Martinez earned 32.9% of the vote. This year, 36.5%

One might ask: Why did his vote percentage increase?

One answer is that the number of elite caliber players dropped this year, compared to the number of E.C.P.s that were on the ballot last year. Ergo, there were less people to get in the way of Edgar receiving votes, and the new dispersion of votes was in his favor.

One might ask: Edger didn't get better or worse from 2011 to 2012.

One answer is that, that isn't a question. It is a statement. But, still. Come on.

Edgar either belongs in the Hall of Fame, or doesn't. That's what Alex's #3 is probably the best improvement that could be made. Players are either HOF caliber players, or not.

What if was a one-vote-playoff. The voters could vote any amount of players once, and that player only gets the first eligible year to hope for entrance into the Hall. That would sure settle things in a hurry.

Oh, Edgar. Ed, gar.

3. By: skyway park on 01-11-2012 11:52:34
Off Topic but was wondering if anyone knows. Since Jay has decided to stop with the daily updates on Mariner Minors anyone know of another blog who keeps tabs on the M's minors on a daily basis during the season?

You are not currently logged in. If you'd like to comment on this report, please log in.
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!