Time Warp HOF Ballot 1973

[ifspuds]

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

We don't really want those people voting
Some of the people who vote already from year to year should be checked for signs of brain activity

And I soundly reject that sort of elitism. Look, as much as many of us love Time Warp, it remains a fictional baseball league. It's fun. There's no need to start passing value judgements on votes, or the people who cast them. Disagree if you like, but let's try and do it rationally, please?

[jeheinz72]

Wow, I can't believe people get so hot on bothered over voting method. Sheesh.

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

Wow, I can't believe people get so hot on bothered over voting method. Sheesh.

Welcome to the TWB voting threads.

[fhomess]

I like seeing the votes because I think it generates more discussion. Although, given TWB people, I'm not sure that's always a good thing.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by ifspuds

And I soundly reject that sort of elitism. Look, as much as many of us love Time Warp, it remains a fictional baseball league. It's fun. There's no need to start passing value judgements on votes, or the people who cast them. Disagree if you like, but let's try and do it rationally, please?

As Vris said, if you are too lazy to type out names then you are faaaaar too lazy to spend any sort of time researching the players and making intelligent voting options.
I would rather those sort of people not vote at all.

I would rather have quality votes than have people pad the vote total

[TwinsFan86]

Genarito Nunez
Bud Ayers
Bobby Johnson
Ben Cook
William Perry
Paul Lett
Arnie Stewart
Joe Helton
Randy Lieberman
Lex Tjeenk-Willink

[kreitena]

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

As Vris said, if you are too lazy to type out names then you are faaaaar too lazy to spend any sort of time researching the players and making intelligent voting options.
I would rather those sort of people not vote at all.

I would rather have quality votes than have people pad the vote total

Maybe we should move the ballot to the TWB Forums?

[fhomess]

Originally Posted by kreitena

Maybe we should move the ballot to the TWB Forums?

We should just let the people who know the players decide for the rest of us.

[Vris]

I have no problem at all with public voting; I prefer it. It makes things much more fun. But putting in a poll like that accomplishes a couple things:

1) It makes the totals known immediately, so people can hold off on voting until they know their vote "counts" so to speak.

2) Generates less discussion.

3) Promotes laziness and if they can't think of a 10th one, most people will just randomly pick one to finish off the poll.

4) It would have to be split up into multiple polls, which doesn't promote what we are after. What are the odds that people are actually going to follow directions and vote for 10 total between the two polls?

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by kreitena

Maybe we should move the ballot to the TWB Forums?

Nah I have no problem with letting people vote
I just hope they will take time and research before clicking that submit button

Some of the ballots leave off players who have players in the HOF at the same or less quality or they have players on their ballot but leave off players who have the exact same value and even play at the same posistion.
Its almost like they glance at a player and decide in 5 seconds or less whether or not to vote for them.
They need to slow down and look at who is already in the hall and then follow our history to get an idea of a players place in the fabric of our baseball world

[kreitena]

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

Nah I have no problem with letting people vote
I just hope they will take time and research before clicking that submit button

Some of the ballots leave off players who have players in the HOF at the same or less quality or they have players on their ballot but leave off players who have the exact same value and even play at the same posistion.
Its almost like they glance at a player and decide in 5 seconds or less whether or not to vote for them.
They need to slow down and look at who is already in the hall and then follow our history to get an idea of a players place in the fabric of our baseball world

Of course I agree with you but you have to admit that you are asking a lot from someone who is nothing more then a casual observer.

Personally, I believe there is nothing wrong with the system we are using now. I was just a little surprised that some people would refuse to vote if the voting was done by means of a poll. This discussion should probably end here.

[tward13]

Originally Posted by Vris

I have no problem at all with public voting; I prefer it. It makes things much more fun. But putting in a poll like that accomplishes a couple things:

1) It makes the totals known immediately, so people can hold off on voting until they know their vote "counts" so to speak.

2) Generates less discussion.

3) Promotes laziness and if they can't think of a 10th one, most people will just randomly pick one to finish off the poll.

4) It would have to be split up into multiple polls, which doesn't promote what we are after. What are the odds that people are actually going to follow directions and vote for 10 total between the two polls?

I agree.

I would be against going to a poll.

[jdw]

Five players elected to the Hall of Fame with 20 ballots counted:

Randy Liebermann    100.0%
Arnie Stewart       100.0%
Joe Helton          100.0%
William Perry        75.0%
Paul Lett            75.0%
Rudel Dietrich       65.0%
Luther Ormiston      55.0%
Lex Tjeenk-Willink   55.0%
Ben Cook             45.0%
Hank Makris          40.0%
Corky Stell          35.0%
Genarito Nunez       30.0%
Bobby Johnson        25.0%
Bud Ulrich           20.0%
Abraham Noel         20.0%
Wilford Woodworth    10.0%
Bud Ayers            10.0%
Walter Davis         10.0%
Gene Lopez            0.0%
Loren Cost            0.0%

The following players did not receive 5% of the vote and fell off the ballot. The year they become eligible for the VC is listed in parenthesis:

Loren Cost (1987)
Gene Lopez (1988)

The final ballot had a significant impact. Perry was running at 100% for a while, the starting with Tom's ballot fell off quite a few, including Cards Frank and Heinz though they had an extra vote left on their ballots. It dropped him to being under 75%.

Let was the opposite with a slow start, but a strong finish.

The final ballot pushed both up to 75% exactly.

Added to the ballot next year:

Tom Dufresne
Cal Granger
Roger Joyce
Mike Kreitenberg
Alan Liao Jr.
Roger McNicholas
Bryce Ostrander
Charlie Shellenbarger


John

[jdw]

On Thread vs. Poll, I'm a thread person.

We've been doing it that way since 1936. Some of the best discussions that we've ever had relating to the league have been in these threads, and are linked back to in one of the early posts in the thread each year.

I like public votes as well for two reasons.

They encourage discussion if you disagree with someone specifically. I disagreed with some of Matt's votes over the years, and he with some of mine. It would lead to us either questioning why a vote was/wasn't made by the other, or to do an advocacy post in support of a candidate that we thought should be in.

They also allow one to monitor vote manipulation. On a board like this it's pretty easy to socko it up. I'd rather have 20 ballots of people we generally know rather than 50 ballots and not having a clue why Loren Cost got 30 votes. It's far easier with public voting to toss on the woodpile the votes of people who are f'ing with the process.

I do think there are places for polls. I just don't think this is one of them.


John

[rudel.dietrich]

Dietrich should finally make it in the next year or two

[ifspuds]

Originally Posted by jdw

One player elected to the Hall of Fame with 20 ballots counted:

Randy Liebermann    100.0%
Arnie Stewart       100.0%
Joe Helton          100.0%
William Perry        75.0%
Paul Lett            75.0%

I think you've got a typo there at the beginning, John.

And for Perry! Interesting that Herm Vardaman, his partner in crime for so many years, but often the unsung one in the public eye, made it on the first ballot, while Perry took a few years.

[chowbeng]

It's the first time that I had voted for Perry in as many years he is in the ballot. I didn't expect him to make it but I am glad that I changed my mind.

[kreitena]

Just looking ahead to the next class, specifically Mikey K. Should be interesting, Mikey has some pretty solid stats but you got to keep in mind that he was drafted at 24 years old and spent 4 years as supersub for the Tigers in their championship years. Had he been given more playing time in his "early years" he may be a bit closer to 3000 hits. I don't think being drated at 24 makes that much of a difference though, it would have probably taken him until he was 24 until he actually became a starter anyway. He also had a pretty underated glove too.

[jdw]

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

Dietrich should finally make it in the next year or two

What helps Dietrich is:

* Lett and Perry get cleared off the ballot in addition to the three "locks" this year

If anyone used up 10 and had Dietrich at #11 or #12, he can move up.

* next year is light on locks

Cal Granger, Roger Joyce, Mike Kreitenberg and Alan Liao Jr. are the ones likely to get some votes. But I don't know if any is a lock.

Cal is one of the two best relievers in league history, holding both the Saves and Appearances record... and not doing it by pitching a lot while sucking. He was good for a lot of years, and his best years were extremly good.

Roger Joyce was the shortstop on one of the big dynasties in league history.

Mike Kreitenberg was the SuperSub one of the other big dynasties in league history, then went on to be a star as a regular.

Alan Liao Jr. had a short but brillant career, and his trade back to the Cards was one of their keys to back-to-back pennants along with a World Title.

They're all middle infielders. Kreit was an exceptional defensive player.

There aren't likely people left on the current ballot that are going to steal a lot of votes from Dietrich, as Lett and Perry would have.

On the other hand, I think there remains some resentment that he was "retired" at the age of 34 with 6/8/5/5 over 6/8/4/6 skills for a CF from a team that went 61-101 in 1963 and would end up running out a 4/8/5/3 over 4/7/6/4 in his place. It wasn't even like he was "cut" and could head off to a expansion team. It was a retirement to protect his .313/.385/.473/.858 career numbers from 3-5 years of dropping in the 1964-68 pitching years.

To a degree, Dietrich is lucky that there aren't pro/con "advocacy" posts with each year's ballots, and that any number of voters might not recall that.

I voted for Dietrich despite recalling that, and also after being strongly against the decision to "retire" him that Matt allowed. It's possible that being remineded of it each year might make others *not* vote for him. All it takes when there are 20 voters is for 6 to not vote for him. I don't know if any of those who didn't vote for him had that reason. If that's the case, you're never going to draw them into voting for Dietrich.

John