1993 Hall of Fame Discussion/Voting

[Clay]

Clay, can we get a ruling from you on this? Do we need to take into account years prior to 1978... or do we treat them as if they never happened?

I'm not sure it's my ruling to make.

I guess I kind of see it as "Owner's Discretion". Just like real HOF voting... Award Voting.... All Star Voting.... whatever. It's really what you believe, feel, etc.

The idea of "assuming" stats prior to '78 might be difficult for people. Especially for those who weren't around in the early years.

I know personally... I try to look at their impact in the years that they were in the league for these older players. But I'm not sure we can put a hard and fast RULE in on that history.

[Ryan]

I always project what a guy had done if the league were around before 1978. Just made no sense to assume otherwise.

[Dave]

You can't tell people how to project. But I think it's worth making a ruling as to whether we're supposed to assume that they had careers prior to 1978. I think some people refuse to project because they don't think anything even happened prior to 1978.

Otherwise I am at a loss to explain why someone refuses to acknowledge that a player who posted HoF caliber numbers in every season long past his prime wouldn't have also, even just possibly, posted HoF or close numbers during what would have been the peak years of his career.

[Clay]

Brad has taken the reign on HOF Voting and formed a Committee. I'm more than happy for that team to make that call.

[rubisco43]

I don't understand how Cabezas will get in, but Cleary might not.

[BradZ]

Brad has taken the reign on HOF Voting and formed a Committee. I'm more than happy for that team to make that call.

Well, I think it's fairly clear where I stand, but I'll be consulting with the esteemed members of the committee to get their takes as well. As soon as I hear back from everyone we'll issue our guidance memorandum.

[Jistic]

I don't understand how Cabezas will get in, but Cleary might not.

They both should, and it's not just numbers when it comes to Cleary.

[BradZ]

They both should, and it's not just numbers when it comes to Cleary.

It may not be just numbers when it comes to Cleary, but the numbers appear to be the reason Cabezas is getting the attention that he is.

He was less hittable:

H/9: 7.17 vs 7.38 (small difference, and perhaps not statistically significant)

He was more dominant:

K/9: 9.95 vs 8.81 - fairly significant

He had better control:

BB/9: 2.24 vs 2.85

He was better at his ultimate job:

47 BS in 543 Opps
vs
51 BS in 483 Opps


I'm curious if anyone was reluctant to include two RP's in the same class and they simply chose the better of the two and figured they'd get another shot to include Cleary next year?

[Clay]

I think Cleary is actually MORE deserving than Cabezas (I voted for both)... but... I think Cleary may be hurt by new Owners. New Owners know Cleary as the golden years guy on the expansion Mohawks. Original and Long-timers remember when he was one of the cornerstones of the Guides Juggernaut.

The other thing that could hurt... you know me.... Nickname vs No Nickname.... just sayin'...

[BradZ]

Well, I think it's fairly clear where I stand, but I'll be consulting with the esteemed members of the committee to get their takes as well. As soon as I hear back from everyone we'll issue our guidance memorandum.

Thankfully we’ll be past this phase very soon as there simply won’t be that many more guys who didn’t get a “fair shake” with regards to the number of seasons they had a chance to play in.

Question: Are we to assume that BLB players had careers prior to 1978.

Answer: Absolutely. Guys who got off the bus at age 29+ and started accumulating BLB stats in 1978 should be given some benefit of the doubt when trying to place their career accomplishments. They clearly had experience playing baseball somewhere prior to joining us during our inaugural season or they wouldn’t have put up the types of numbers which are causing us to have these discussions.

This isn’t saying that you have to project stats for those years, but it should be used to give some context when looking at someone who started late. If a batter puts up All Star type numbers for 5-7 years beginning in his early 30’s, it’s fairly safe in context to assume that he was fully capable of putting up similar type seasons in his mid to late 20’s. Examples of those types of careers are simply the norm when compared to players who suddenly “got it” in their early 30’s and became completely different players in that phase of their careers. If anything the reverse is almost exclusively true, players who start out with good/great careers then crater when they approach 30.

Still, this comes down to an individual's point of view, so this is merely a guideline being given because the question has been asked.

[Jake]

Thankfully we’ll be past this phase very soon as there simply won’t be that many more guys who didn’t get a “fair shake” with regards to the number of seasons they had a chance to play in.

Question: Are we to assume that BLB players had careers prior to 1978.

Answer: Absolutely. Guys who got off the bus at age 29+ and started accumulating BLB stats in 1978 should be given some benefit of the doubt when trying to place their career accomplishments. They clearly had experience playing baseball somewhere prior to joining us during our inaugural season or they wouldn’t have put up the types of numbers which are causing us to have these discussions.

This isn’t saying that you have to project stats for those years, but it should be used to give some context when looking at someone who started late. If a batter puts up All Star type numbers for 5-7 years beginning in his early 30’s, it’s fairly safe in context to assume that he was fully capable of putting up similar type seasons in his mid to late 20’s. Examples of those types of careers are simply the norm when compared to players who suddenly “got it” in their early 30’s and became completely different players in that phase of their careers. If anything the reverse is almost exclusively true, players who start out with good/great careers then crater when they approach 30.

Still, this comes down to an individual's point of view, so this is merely a guideline being given because the question has been asked.

If we're going to look at these early players through this lens - which, although I disagree with, is fine, and I'm glad to do it - then we absolutely have to go back and re-vote past inductions. I appreciated you mentioning the Founders Wing earlier in connection with Kellum - but now that we don't have that specific wing, if we're to look at a guys career in context to what he was doing in whatever league before 1978, guys like Kuramochi and Hoover need to be put back up for a vote. Taking Kuramochi as an example, if you look at what his "projected" career path would have been before 78, it's very easy to say that he was one of the best pitchers this league has ever seen considering at age 36 he threw 15 CGs, struck out 283 batters, and had a .98 WHIP, and therefore a HOF.

We didn't look at those guys in this context, so if we're going to treat HOF voting like this moving forward, I think it's only fair to go back and re-vote on those "Founder's Wing" elections.

[Jake]

I don't understand how Cabezas will get in, but Cleary might not.

As Brad said, the numbers give Cabezas a slight edge, but I tend to agree.

However, there are only five relievers in the HOF. I realize IRL that the game has changed and we're sure to see more as we go forward, but I wonder if we really have two first ballot reliever HOFs in our little universe in our third class.

[BradZ]

We didn't look at those guys in this context, so if we're going to treat HOF voting like this moving forward, I think it's only fair to go back and re-vote on those "Founder's Wing" elections.

The difference being both of those guys you mentioned already went through being viewed specifically for the Founder's Wing and both failed. They were already looked at through this lens (IMO that was the specific purpose of the Founder's Wing distinction) and neither garnered enough support (rightly or wrongly).

[BradZ]

Just a reminder that voting is still open and will remain so until SIM time next Wednesday. We are still waiting on ballots from 8 teams at this point, so take some time this weekend and get those ballots submitted.

Thanks!

[BradZ]

Reminder - Voting runs up until SIM time on Wednesday. Vote early, vote often, just vote.

Thanks!