THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

I’m not sure “fair” is what they’re going for with HOF balloting, so they might not want experts involved in making the ballot.

It’s not even about fairness.  Just pure logic.

Suppose I say: “Who are the 4 greatest pitchers in the last 60 years.”

And then I proceed to give you a list of 10 names:
Halladay, Pedro, Clemens, RJ, Maddux,
Seaver, Koufax, Spahn, Gibson, Marichal

Are you going to get anyone to appear on 75% of the ballots?

Indeed, why even limit it to 4 names?  Why not just say: list as many names as you want.

And THEN say you need at least 75% of the ballots AND a maximum of four pitchers selected.  This way, if everyone happens to put 8 or 9 names on the ballot, and you end up with 6 or 7 pitchers at 75%+, then you put the constraint at that point.

But to just out-and-out stack the deck against everyone is ridiculous.

And that NO ONE CARES about this is shocking.

I don’t particularly care about the HOF (Raines notwithstanding), but I do care when math gets hurt in the process.

no one cares now, but thats because the HOF still more or less looks OK to most people. its only after a few rounds take place and people realize what a mess the voting has become and when some ‘no-doubters’ miss getting in and die before being elected that the terrible rules story will gain traction.

then you’ll still probably need a change in leadership at the Hall so the new guy can have a special committee assigned to fix everything the previous regime screwed up. so a bunch of people will get in during a ‘special’ election and then the voting process will be overhauled to perhaps begin making sense.

least thats my prediction. though i hope im wrong about the speed in which reform takes place.

What are the criteria for a manager’s admittance into the Hall of Fame? And is there any objective (or even remotely good) way of analyzing a manager’s “talent?” Or are we just commemorating the old guys who were called “manager” of the actually talented players?

I think there are more problems with the idea of mangers in the Hall of Fame than the silly process by which they’re chosen.

the rules have never been a problem before.  It would not surprise me if they’re changed once it becomes clear that there are more legitimate candidates than slots on voters’ ballots.

But it’s so easy to see the problem.  It’s not like you can’t see it coming.  Why does it have to “become clear”.  It IS clear.

Thucydides and Paul Simon would agree on this one.  ("I do attest/ That a man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest.")

tango/6- yes, you’re right.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  It’s a pointless rule as well as a bad one- I’d bet anything it never kept anyone out of the HOF or even forced anyone off the ballot sooner than otherwise would have been the case.  At least in the last 50 years.  I’m guessing the original purpose was to ensure that the initial HOF classes were not over-large....