from Amazon
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Public v Private HOF ballots
The first column is the number of ballots posted publicly, or otherwise collected by Keith Law. The second column is the percentage (based on 120 votes). The next two columns is the difference between the actual counts released by the HOF and the Law numbers. It shows that:
Of the voters willing to talk about their ballots publicly or with Keith Law, 35% voted for Raines. The private voters only selected Raines on 21% of their ballots. Tommy John showed a reverse support: 18% willing to admit it, but 32% not willing to come forward in admitting it. Don Mattingly had a similar split: only 5% of HOF voters willing to admit that he’s a HOF publicly, but 19% when guaranteed the cloud of secrecy.
Just look at the Raines/Mattingly gap. Of the confidential guys, 90 said yes to Raines and 80 said yes to Mattingly. But, when willing to come forward, 42 yes on Raines, and only 6 yes on Mattingly. 32% of the Raines voters were willing to admit to it publicly or to Keith Law. Just 7% of Mattingly’s supporters were willing to come out and say it.
120 Law 423 Rest TOTAL
108 90% 358 85% Gossage
82 68% 310 73% Rice
79 66% 279 66% Dawson
79 66% 257 61% Blyleven
44 37% 191 45% Smith
58 48% 175 41% Morris
22 18% 136 32% John
42 35% 90 21% Raines
29 24% 99 23% McGwire
29 24% 70 17% Trammell
16 13% 72 17% Concepcion
6 5% 80 19% Mattingly
11 9% 71 17% Parker
13 11% 62 15% Murphy
4 3% 24 6% Baines
Not that I think Mattingly is more deserving than Raines (he isn’t) but I wonder how much better he’d look with advanced defensive metrics to validate his reputation. The one quick 1B study you did in a thread last week had him at +13 plays per year, I believe.
I could imagine Mattingly being in the 50 WAR range, which puts him in the same group as Puckett & Rice.