Baseball Writers To Baseball Fans: @&%! You

[Chuck]

Baseball Writers To Baseball Fans: **** You

 

When we started in on our project of making a farce and mockery of baseball's annual Hall of Fame election by buying a vote from a veteran baseball writer and then turning it over to the public, we had two principal aims. One was to draw attention to the way an increasingly ridiculous election process has diminished the Hall of Fame's ability to honor great ballplayers; the other was to turn a small but symbolically resonant amount of power over to the public.

 

As we figured they would, the veteran baseball writers whose process we were criticizing generally played to type in their responses to our stunt. Rather than addressing the substance of the critique, they chastised us for seeking attention—as if there's something wrong with wanting to bring attention to a point you'd like to make—and complained about the whole thing not being right, because QED. It was classic smarm, with a lot of ad hominem grouching about how we're not a respectable shop for reasons no one really bothered to spell out and very little explanation of what either we or Dan Le Batard, the voter who gave us his ballot, had actually done wrong.

 

More

[tdawg87]

Any year now these dinosaurs should start dying off and get replaced by younger, hipper, WAR veterans.

[Brent Maguire]

There's some very entertaining conversations going on amongst some baseball people on twitter.

Jeff Passan pretty much schooled Rosenthal with his logic.

I'm ready for some of these dinosaurs to stop voting and let the new guys from Fangraphs and BP actually help the voting process.

[tomsred]

However, it is interesting to note that the AngelWin vote produced the same results as the baseball writers with a vote.  Does this mean we're dinosaurs, and everyone will be the better for it when we "die off."

 

I'm not sure the problem lies with those voting, but the system for determining the inductees.

Edited January 9, 2014 by tomsred

[tdawg87]

I don't even know who they voted for. I don't really care. It's more about their general behavior and demeanor, as well as their reasoning.

[Jimmag]

Agree with Tomsred it a system failure. Most anything determined with voting or scoring is bound to have problems.

[tomsred]

I don't even know who they voted for. I don't really care. It's more about their general behavior and demeanor, as well as their reasoning.

I guess that makes our general behavior and demeanor, as well as our reasoning to be pretty similar, since the results are the same.

[Dave Saltzer]

At some point, bloggers are going to have to be added to the BBWA just to keep it going. It would REALLY make things easier and better for everyone, including the sports teams. There will have to be a vetting process. Being a writer is NOT an easy job, and even I am amazed and impressed with the class, dignity, and dedication of all the main writers for the Angels and around the leagues. Try writing about another 5-1 loss every year. It isn't easy. 

 

Having said that, some changes need to be made. I don't think that every person with a keyboard should be allowed in, but some who have been around and shown consistent professionalism should be more accepted by the BBWA.

 

As one of those who has worked hard to try and get more and more access and availability, I do have to call these guys out for doing what they did. While they did expose the flaws in the system, they did so by exposing the flaws in the blogosphere by proving some of the concerns from the writers against bloggers. In the end, it may lead to less access for all of us who are trying to go about doing it the right way.

[tdawg87]

I guess that makes our general behavior and demeanor, as well as our reasoning to be pretty similar, since the results are the same.

 

WTF are you even talking about

[tomsred]

Agree with Tomsred it a system failure. Most anything determined with voting or scoring is bound to have problems.

I think my reasoning here is correct.  It seems like the more guys you vote for (up to 10), the more it makes it harder for someone to reach 75% of the total votes.  So it seems like the system is set so that the more votes that are submitted the harder it becomes to get many elected.  I need some math wiz to tell me that is correct.  The more people that are nominated seems to produce less inductees.  And who the heck comes up with the nominees in the first place.  Some of the names near the bottom probably should not even have been submitted, or do they do that to keep those guys happy?

[tomsred]

WTF are you even talking about

I talking about the other thread below this one that has the results of the voting by AngelsWin members, and comparing the results to the BBWA voting.  If the results are the same, isn't the reasoning probably the same?  So if the BBWA and AngelsWin members are both screwed up, then the problem must be with the system itself, or maybe some other group (former players, a special committee, etc.) needs to vote. 

Edited January 10, 2014 by tomsred

[tdawg87]

That's like saying a christian fundamentalist shares demeanor, behavior and reasoning with the Taliban. Just because you may share a similar view on one area, doesn't mean you share it on all others.

[Jobu]

Plus our vote was similar only in outcome because of the 75% threshold. There were substantive differences below that line.

[The Ghost of Bob Starr]

I applaud Dan Le Batard.

[Spirit]

I applaud Dan Le Batard.

 

I agree.  We (and everyone in baseball circles) are talking about this because of what he did.  Something needs to change.  I'm not so sure about the fans getting a vote (though I'm not totally against it), but I do think player peers need to be included in the voting.  No one knows a player's worthiness like other players that played with and against him.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Geoff

[ScottT]

I'm glad the BBWAA did what they did.  They had to do something.  Otherwise, where does it stop?  

 

Better yet, while I think the process can be improved, how is it broken, and why are people outraged?  The results are better than the yearly awards where they rotate a small number of voters and they have little room for error.  

 

People are bent  that Biggio didn't get in, but I think he's borderline.  He had a great career, but was a 1 WAR (per year) player for his last 8 seasons.  He boosted his hit total quite a bit, but other players perform like that and they are quickly out of a job.  

 

I disagree with some of the voting results, but the title of this article is stupid.  Predictable coming from a site like that, that would do what they did.... props to them, though, they are probably making money.   From all the lists I've seen, I think the most I agreed with anyone was 6 times... I listed 9 guys on here.  I picked 2 of the 3 that made it.  I don't think the BBWAA said **** you to me... and I cannot fathom why anyone would seriously think so.

[Blarg]

That's like saying a christian fundamentalist shares demeanor, behavior and reasoning with the Taliban. Just because you may share a similar view on one area, doesn't mean you share it on all others.

 

Tom's analogy was the same amount of votes that the BBWA allotted to players were nearly identical to the AW poll hence there seems to be no difference in the decision making process. Now granted, some of the members here act like the Taliban trying to blow up the game day threads, but for the most part the participants here are somewhat versed in stats and can make logical choices for which players deserve recognition and which don't.

 

What is more interesting is the AW Taliban and the BBWA both opted to lop off Bonds and Clemens hands for stealing stats with PEDs and barely gave them a 35% vote share. Allah is great and still not very forgiving of PED users.

 

Jeff Fletcher is a confessed non believer and voted for the great Satans. Surprised he hasn't been banned yet.

 

Edited January 10, 2014 by Eric Notti

[Mark68]

It was a genius move.

 

A system populated by a minute population who wield a disproportionate amount of power that is dead-set against others getting access to even a diluted portion of that power...where have I seen that movie before?

[Inside Pitch]

At some point, bloggers are going to have to be added to the BBWA just to keep it going. It would REALLY make things easier and better for everyone, including the sports teams. There will have to be a vetting process. Being a writer is NOT an easy job, and even I am amazed and impressed with the class, dignity, and dedication of all the main writers for the Angels and around the leagues. Try writing about another 5-1 loss every year. It isn't easy. 

 

 

Or they will take it away from writers period?  The days when people had limited access to other teams are long gone. 

Edited January 10, 2014 by Inside Pitch

[mtangelsfan]

Sporting award voting in general is archaic.  The baseball hof is just one example.  It's time that people other than just writers were given the abiltity to cast a HOF vote.

 

and no I am not talking about the fans.

[YouthofToday]

There needs to be a mix of fans, broadcasters managers and FO types who vote for the HoF.

See my post in the HOF thread re: fans. I maintain they must be added.

[Dave Saltzer]

There needs to be a mix of fans, broadcasters managers and FO types who vote for the HoF.

See my post in the HOF thread re: fans. I maintain they must be added.

I am just curious where there needs to be this. I am undecided at the moment, but am leaning against it. If it were solely up to the fans then there would be extreme homerism and cases of outrage against ballot box stuffing, etc. If fans are truly so upset, don't go visit the HoF or tune in to the swearing in ceremonies.

 

I get that the way it is right now isn't perfect. Some crusty old guys are not taking their job seriously. But, is that just a case of the individuals failing to do their job rather than a flaw in the system?

 

I honestly don't have a resolution to this. Maybe allowing teams to designate some blog sites to vote on behalf of the fans and some specific bloggers who are more attuned to the fans themselves to vote might work. Or, it might lead to more problems as before.

 

I am really following the arguments from people and don't have a strong opinion either way.

[tdawg87]

The ASG is why fans should never be allowed to vote for anything ever.

[Docwaukee]

nothing is perfect and frankly, it's doesn't have to be.  It just needs to be better. 

 

I think fan voting is a bad idea. 

Let's say it's only 10%.  Why bother.  Millions would cast votes but what if the fan vote was different from the rest of the voters to the point that a couple of guys the fans want in don't make it?  How much outrage would there be then?  Honestly, it only adds fuel to the fire. 

 

If you are going to let the fans choose, then let them choose outright.  Either give them the power or don't. 

 

For the HOF, I say don't. 

[Amazing Larry]

The ASG is why fans should never be allowed to vote for anything ever.

 

But this time it counts...