PDA

View Full Version : BBF Mock Veterans Committee Election: 1991


Freakshow
03-14-2007, 11:04 AM
Welcome to Baseball Fever's Mock HOF VC Election for 1991. This is the fifth election in a project to conduct Hall of Fame VC elections from 1987-2001 (and perhaps beyond). You're being asked to play the role of a VC voter, as if you were actually part of the VC conclaves of that time. The goal of this project is to elect the best candidate each time, with the knowledge you are applying a lower standard than used for the BBWAA elections. These elections will not consider players already elected in BBF Mock BBWAA elections, such as Ashburn, Santo, Allen and Cepeda.

This post will provide two things:

1) The Format and Rules

2) A Guide for the 1991 Election

Format and Rules
- The HOF VC never published an actual ballot, and the results of their voting were not compiled for public consumption. At the same time, they rarely considered players who retired over 70 years ago, preferring guys they fondly remembered seeing. Thus, our focus will be towards 20th century players they should have been considering. Our ballot will allow them a 50-year window of retirees (1918-1967 for this election). This will eliminate most players whose careers began in the 19th century. As the actual VC did, we will consider those players in separate ballots 1995-2001. The VC was also giving short shrift to Negro league candidates at this time. Again, as the actual VC did, we will consider those players in separate ballots 1995-2001.

- We will have a 37-player ballot for this election, down from 41 in 1990. I will act as the screening committee. You can suggest other candidates, along with your argument for their inclusion; then if I get a second for the candidate I’ll add him to the next ballot. This number will mainly decline as we proceed with elections, but we will always list at least 25 candidates. Close attention will be paid to identifying candidates who are in their last two years of eligibility (1918-19 retirees for the 1991 election).

- Voters may vote for between 1-37 candidates; you’re free to support anyone you think is deserving of the Hall. Because we are electing only one player each time, voters will have complete freedom to support everyone they like. This policy is consistent with the VC rules in force at the time.

- A "None of the Above" option is not available. We operate under the premise that the continued existence of a veterans committee establishes a fait accompli, that it is an acknowledgment that there are worthy players who should be elected. Our mandate is to identify the best ones, so figure out which players deserve the honor and vote for them. (The words above the poll, “but at least five,” are a suggestion and not a requirement, that we might have a better chance of fulfilling our mandate and actually electing a few guys.)

- We will enshrine the leading vote-getter so long as he is supported by a majority of the voters (more than 50% needed); but only one player per year maximum. If two or more players with +50% tie for first place, the one with better support in recent elections will be enshrined.

- Players will ensure their continuing on the ballot as long as they average 10% support over three years (candidates failing this requirement will sometimes be added back to the ballot to reach the 25-player minimum or if they’re deemed deserving of another chance). Players in their final year eligible will be allowed to continue beyond that as long as they receive 15% support. We’ll also give new candidates a chance to build some momentum: players drawing less than 10% may also continue on the ballot if their vote percentage equals or exceeds twice their years eligible. Look at that in chart form:

Yr 1 needs 2%
Yr 2 needs 4%
Yr 3 needs 6%
Yr 4 needs 8%
Yr 5 needs 10%

- This thread is also meant to be a discussion thread, so please feel free to stump for and/or against players, including players that will come up for election in the following year.

- When figuring a candidate’s worthiness, everything counts, the sum of their lifetime in baseball. Some players have significant manager credit – Red Schoendienst, Gil Hodges, maybe Harvey Kuenn. Others, like Lefty O’Doul, made contributions that nearly surpassed their playing career.

- The election will close exactly a week after it started. The next election might not commence for another day or two.

- IMPORTANT: There is some concern about voters defrauding this process by voting with multiple screen names. First, please don't as there is really no point and it takes the fun out of this which is to see how we come out, more than it being a heated competition to get your player elected. Nevertheless, to take precaution against the possibility of a voter abusing the process, votes will be made public, so if we see unfamiliar screen names casting similar ballots, we'll see cause for concern, and if the concern proves to be founded, some form of punitive action could follow. So basically, ONE PERSON = ONE BALLOT. Anything else is really just moronic and defeats the purpose.

- MORE IMPORTANT: Remember, this is not an election of the BBF VC; this is not the place to express your personal feelings as to where the line should be drawn for the Hall of Fame. You’re playing the role of a HOF VC voter. You go into that room with a list of players that you're supporting - nobody goes in there with the aim of objecting to every candidate brought up. By requesting, insisting, agitating for at least five votes, I'm trying to impress this reality on our electorate here: you've gotta support some guys. I am also asking voters to be sensitive to the consensus of who the top candidates are (see chart below) and try to support them. I've even taken the unpleasant step of singling out ballots that are obviously contrary to our aim.

Given the standards established through seven decades of voting, it’s clear that the BBWAA missed some guys that are over the line for the Hall. However, there aren’t any no-brainers on here; we’re dealing with players closer to the Hall’s in-out line. Careful study of the candidates is required to determine the ins from the outs. If you’re not up to this, please, no off-the-top-of-my-head ballots. Don’t just cast a contrarian ballot without good reasoning. If that means fewer ballots, that’s fine. I would rather have an informed vote of 12 ballots then a quick-and-dirty vote of 52 ballots. We need voters who are on board with the mission. Ballots that are judged to be frivolous or an obstruction to our goal of electing someone may be deleted from the poll.

1991 Guide
There are 37 candidates on the 1991 ballot. They all played their final game in the period 1918 to 1967. Here's some information regarding the candidates:

Top Vote-getters in the 1987-90 Elections

38 bal 31 bal 31 bal 29 ballots
1987 1988 1989 1990
Larry Doby CF 71.05 80.65 ----- -----
Nellie Fox 2B NE NE 77.42 -----
Hal Newhouser P 68.42 58.06 67.74 72.41
Stan Hack 3B 47.37 51.61 58.06 68.97
Sherry Magee LF 52.63 58.06 67.74 65.52
Joe Gordon 2B 60.53 54.84 64.52 65.52
Carl Mays P 42.11 41.94 45.16 65.52
Gil Hodges 1B 34.21 45.16 35.48 58.62
Red Schoendienst 2B 42.11 41.94 45.16 48.28
Wes Ferrell P 31.58 35.48 41.94 48.28
Heinie Groh 3B 28.95 32.26 35.48 41.38
Larry Doyle 2B 15.79 16.13 29.03 41.38
Billy Pierce P NE 25.81 32.26 37.93
Gavy Cravath RF 23.68 25.81 25.81 37.93
Vern Stephens SS 18.42 16.13 19.35 34.48
Bob Johnson LF 23.68 22.58 22.58 24.14
Urban Shocker P 15.79 19.35 16.13 24.14
Phil Rizzuto SS 23.68 16.13 12.90 24.14
Al Rosen 3B 18.42 19.35 6.45 24.14
Tony Lazzeri 2B 28.95 19.35 19.35 20.69
Bucky Walters P 10.53 12.90 16.13 20.69
Lefty O'Doul LF 13.16 9.68 19.35 17.24

First Timers (2)
Lew Burdette
Dick Groat

Other Recently-New Eligibles
Joe Adcock (2nd year)
Bob Friend (2nd)
Jim Gilliam (2nd)
Harvey Kuenn (2nd)
Roy Sievers (3rd)
Billy Pierce (4th)
Gil Hodges (5th)
Red Schoendienst (5th)
Ted Kluszewski (5th)

Last Year of Eligibility
Tommy Leach (http://bioproj.sabr.org/bioproj.cfm?a=v&v=l&bid=897&pid=8056) (needs 15%)

Next to Last Year of Eligibility
Sherry Magee (http://bioproj.sabr.org/bioproj.cfm?a=v&v=l&bid=938&pid=8658)

Actual Hall of Famers on VC 1991 Ballot (3)
Tony Lazzeri (1991)
Phil Rizzuto (1994)
Red Schoendienst (1989)

Members of BBF Hall of Fame on VC 1991 Ballot (4)
Wes Ferrell
Joe Gordon
Stan Hack
Sherry Magee

Members of the Hall of Merit on VC 1991 Ballot (6)
Wes Ferrell
Joe Gordon
Heinie Groh
Stan Hack
Sherry Magee
Billy Pierce

Candidates Named to the BBF Hall of Corrections (4)
Wes Ferrell
Joe Gordon
Stan Hack
Sherry Magee

Candidates Listed on the 2007 Hall of Fame VC Ballot (http://www.baseballhalloffame.com/news/2007/07027b.htm) (8)
Wes Ferrell
Joe Gordon
Gil Hodges
Carl Mays
Don Newcombe
Lefty O’Doul
Cecil Travis
Mickey Vernon

For previous discussion of this project, see these threads:

Cooperstown, NY – Spring, 1986 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=57472)
BBF Mock Veterans Committee Election: 1987 (none elected) (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=57498)
BBF Mock Veterans Committee Election: 1988 (Larry Doby elected) (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=57838)
BBF Mock Veterans Committee Election: 1989 (Nellie Fox elected) (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=58135)
BBF Mock Veterans Committee Election: 1990 (Hal Newhouser elected) (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=58437)

Colorado Express
03-14-2007, 11:39 AM
Gordon
Hack
Hodges
Magee
Mays
Schoendienst

KCGHOST
03-14-2007, 12:31 PM
Bridges
Hack
Magee
Schocker
Pierce

Erik Bedard
03-14-2007, 02:02 PM
Once again, I'll nominate Curt Simmons.

Freakshow
03-14-2007, 02:32 PM
The list of players who dropped off the ballot from lack of support, that remain eligible to return, now numbers 14:

Dolph Camilli
Walker Cooper
Wilbur Cooper
Alvin Dark
Del Ennis
Charlie Keller
Dolf Luque
Marty Marion
Frank McCormick
Johnny Pesky
Jack Quinn
Hal Trosky
Lon Warneke
Ed Yost

Freakshow
03-14-2007, 02:46 PM
Once again, I'll nominate Curt Simmons.
I've just added one more requirement to the rules:

"You can suggest other candidates, along with your argument for their inclusion; then if I get a second for the candidate I’ll add him to the next ballot."

So, if you could provide a few reasons why you believe Curt Simmons is a candidate we all should consider, that will help getting him on the next ballot. It doesn't need to be really long, or a running through the Keltner test. You don't even have to try and argue that he's a deserving hall of famer or anything like that. Just something a bit more than "he's good", something to contribute to the discussion.

Freakshow
03-15-2007, 07:17 AM
An interesting list of new candidates are being considered for the 1992 ballot. Players retiring in 1968 who are possibilities for the ballot:

Rocky Colavito
Elston Howard
Roger Maris
Larry Jackson
Stu Miller

Also, players retiring in 1920 are under consideration for the ballot:
Ray Chapman
Jack Coombs

We're open for nominations and cases for any of these guys.

John Shoemaker
03-15-2007, 07:58 AM
I will enthusiastically nomimate Rocky "don't knock the rock" Colavito.

Erik Bedard
03-15-2007, 08:02 AM
All right, here's my argument for Simmons:

1) He has a career 111 ERA+ -- seven points higher than that of HoFer Catfish Hunter, and eight points ahead of fellow HoFer Rube Marquard.

2) In just his third full MLB season, he was arguably the Phillies' best starter as they won the NL pennant.

3) His career low in ERA+ is 81, and eight times topped 120.

4) In 1954, he would have been the best pitcher in the league if not for Johnny Antonelli.

5) He was consistently overshadowed by HoFer Robin Roberts, yet often put up better seasons than he did.

I honestly have no clue why nobody else feels he should at least be on the ballot.

Freakshow
03-15-2007, 08:24 AM
All right, here's my argument for Simmons:

1) He has a career 111 ERA+ -- seven points higher than that of HoFer Catfish Hunter, and eight points ahead of fellow HoFer Rube Marquard.

2) In just his third full MLB season, he was arguably the Phillies' best starter as they won the NL pennant.

3) His career low in ERA+ is 81, and eight times topped 120.

4) In 1954, he would have been the best pitcher in the league if not for Johnny Antonelli.

5) He was consistently overshadowed by HoFer Robin Roberts, yet often put up better seasons than he did.

I honestly have no clue why nobody else feels he should at least be on the ballot.
A good summation of his case, Erik.

To me, if you support Simmons you have to support Larry Jackson and a whole lot of other guys. In fact, they're high on each other's comp list at BB-ref. Other guys on both of their lists are Rick Wise, Claude Osteen, Dolf Luque, Rube Marquard, Doyle Alexander, Lee Meadows and Larry French. Not a deserving hall of famer in the bunch.

dgarza
03-15-2007, 08:36 AM
I'd nominate or second :

Rocky Colavito - 374 HRs, 132 OPS+, for 5 year stretch he played almost every game

Elston Howard - very good catcher, MVP winner, 9 straight AS seasons

Roger Maris - 1961, 2 time MVP

Erik Bedard
03-15-2007, 08:59 AM
A good summation of his case, Erik.

To me, if you support Simmons you have to support Larry Jackson and a whole lot of other guys. In fact, they're high on each other's comp list at BB-ref. Other guys on both of their lists are Rick Wise, Claude Osteen, Dolf Luque, Rube Marquard, Doyle Alexander, Lee Meadows and Larry French. Not a deserving hall of famer in the bunch.

True, but a whole bunch of guys who could easily be on this ballot.

dgarza
03-15-2007, 09:22 AM
True, but a whole bunch of guys who could easily be on this ballot.
I agree. Nominating as ballot-worthy is not the same as advocting for the Hall neccessarily.

Freakshow
03-15-2007, 09:45 AM
I agree. Nominating as ballot-worthy is not the same as advocting for the Hall neccessarily.
I tend to agree. But I think a ballot-worthy candidate should at least have a plausible argument for Hall election. I know that's a rather fuzzy idea, but i'm a big hall guy so I can see arguments for a couple hundred candidates.

One reason that I resist putting everyone on the ballot is a desire to keep us focused on the plausible candidates. To this end, I intend to gradually raise the standards for continuing on the ballot as this project proceeds.

Another reason is that I find it cumbersome to cut and paste 40+ names, one by one, into the poll each week. If there's an easier way to do it, someone please tell me.

leecemark
03-15-2007, 10:54 AM
--Personally I don't see any reason to nominate someone unless you intend to put them on your ballot. I would drop anyone who receives 0 votes in any year, if that is not already the policy. I would also not accept further nominations from anyone who fails to vote for someone they nominated.
--I don't really see the distinction between "ballot worthy" and Hall worthy". Granted, worthiness is in the eye of the beholder, but the idea that you think someone should be on the ballot - but you wouldn't vote for them - doesn't click for me. If we had a maximum number of players you could vote for and there is a guy you support who didn't make your top 10 that would be one thing. Since there is no ceiling on the number of players you can vote fo in this project though, then nominating a guy who is below your cutoff just doesn't make any sense to me.

leecemark
03-15-2007, 10:59 AM
--It appears we won't have anyone get 75% again this election. We currently have two players tied at 62% and another one vote behind. If we have a tie for most votes, will we induct multiple players with the lower standard or have a runoff?
--I'd prefer the runoff. We lowered the standard in order to increase the chances of an induction every election, not to open the flood gates for players under 75%.

Freakshow
03-15-2007, 11:13 AM
--Personally I don't see any reason to nominate someone unless you intend to put them on your ballot. I would drop anyone who receives 0 votes in any year, if that is not already the policy. I would also not accept further nominations from anyone who fails to vote for someone they nominated.
Zero votes is always dropped. Generally speaking, one vote is kept on if the candidate is in his first year eligible or if he's been getting +10% in recent elections.
I'm not going to closely police who votes for whom anymore; but I'm trying to encourage increased consideration of guys before they're tossed up as nominees.
--I don't really see the distinction between "ballot worthy" and Hall worthy". Granted, worthiness is in the eye of the beholder, but the idea that you think someone should be on the ballot - but you wouldn't vote for them - doesn't click for me. If we had a maximum number of players you could vote for and there is a guy you support who didn't make your top 10 that would be one thing. Since there is no ceiling on the number of players you can vote fo in this project though, then nominating a guy who is below your cutoff just doesn't make any sense to me.
Thanks, that's the spirit.

Freakshow
03-15-2007, 11:15 AM
--It appears we won't have anyone get 75% again this election. We currently have two players tied at 62% and another one vote behind. If we have a tie for most votes, will we induct multiple players with the lower standard or have a runoff?
--I'd prefer the runoff. We lowered the standard in order to increase the chances of an induction every election, not to open the flood gates for players under 75%.
The rules were revised after the 1990 election was posted. This is the current rule:

"We will enshrine the leading vote-getter so long as he is supported by a majority of the voters (more than 50% needed); but only one player per year maximum. If two or more players with +50% tie for first place, the one with better support in past elections will be enshrined."

Erik Bedard
03-15-2007, 11:28 AM
I see Simmons as one who will definitely make my ballot, and Burdette, who I nominated last year, as a viable candidate as well, though in an effort to tighten up my voting procedures this year, did not vote for him. Simmons, however, I see as someone who will without a doubt make my ballot.

Simmons' best comps, according to BBref, are Larry Jackson, Claude Osteen, and Doyle Alexander -- none of whom I would support for the HoF, even with the ultra-relaxed standards I employ in projects such as this, where the goal is to elect somebody, not to debate somebody's worthiness. However, none of them are even close to adequate comparisons for Simmons, who, at his best, was often among the top three pitchers in the league. Jackson and Osteen were basically consistently above-average guys, but ones who were rarely spectacular. Alexander was generally below-average, with a few good seasons. Simmons was generally above the league average as a pitcher, and had a few truly spectacular seasons. He pitched 20 seasons, and his two best ERA+ seasons were his fourth and his sixteenth. He was a guy who was consistently good, and often great. I would not support him in a project such as the mock BBWAA elections, but in these mock VC elections, I plan to vote for him for as long as it takes.

AlecBoy006
03-15-2007, 02:38 PM
How could ANYONE vote for Gil Hodges?

His batting average is .273, not HOF material.

Gil Hodges was a FIRST Baseman, and his OPS+ is 120.

He's not close to the HOF. And will be lucky to be considered a top 20 first baseman.

John Shoemaker
03-15-2007, 07:29 PM
How could ANYONE vote for Gil Hodges?

His batting average is .273, not HOF material.

Gil Hodges was a FIRST Baseman, and his OPS+ is 120.

He's not close to the HOF. And will be lucky to be considered a top 20 first baseman.

Then why did the BBWAA give him more votes (over 3000) than any player not elected except for Jim Rice? According to that if Gil Hodges isn't HOF material then no player that the BBWAA did not put in should ever be elected.

538280
03-15-2007, 08:01 PM
Then why did the BBWAA give him more votes (over 3000) than any player not elected except for Jim Rice? According to that if Gil Hodges isn't HOF material then no player that the BBWAA did not put in should ever be elected.

That's assuming we think the BBWAA is right on. They are not. Gil Hodges was just nothing special as a hitter, and if you're going to make you HOF as a 1Bman you have to be something special as a hitter. His career OPS+ was 120, it didn't come in a particularly long career, he was a 1B the whole time, his OBP was only barely above average, and while he had good power, it wasn't great power-his SLG is .487 compared to a league norm of .420. For a 1Bman with a basically average OBP he has to have more power than that-and it's not there. Hodges, for all the talk of what a key performer he was for the Dodgers, never finished higher than 7th in MVP voting and is below 300th all time in MVP vote shares. Hodges should not be in the HOF IMO.

AlecBoy006
03-15-2007, 08:01 PM
The BBWAA doesn't always get things right. They like the players who hit alot of homeruns, and such. I don't think he should be in.

John Shoemaker
03-15-2007, 11:35 PM
The BBWAA doesn't always get things right. They like the players who hit alot of homeruns, and such. I don't think he should be in.

You are right the BBWAA doesn't always get things right otherwise Gil Hodges would have already been elected by them. As for home runs he only hit 370 which is not many compared to many modern first baseman but he meant so much more to the Dodgers and Brooklyn both as a player and a person. I was lucky enough to see him play in person many years.

THE OX
03-16-2007, 06:26 AM
This dates from many years ago, but didn't Hodges have something like 13 grand slam home runs, which was second on the all-time list as of back in the late 1950's/early 60's?

Freakshow
03-16-2007, 07:44 AM
This dates from many years ago, but didn't Hodges have something like 13 grand slam home runs, which was second on the all-time list as of back in the late 1950's/early 60's?
Hodges set the NL record with 14 slams, now held by Willie McCovey with 18.

The top 20 in career grand slams:

Lou Gehrig 23
Manny Ramirez 20
Eddie Murray 19
Willie McCovey 18
Robin Ventura 18
Jimmie Foxx 17
Ted Williams 17
Hank Aaron 16
Dave Kingman 16
Babe Ruth 16
K Griffey, Jr. 14
Gil Hodges 14
Mark McGwire 14
Mike Piazza 14
Harold Baines 13
Albert Belle 13
Joe DiMaggio 13
George Foster 13
Ralph Kiner 13
Jeff Kent 13

AlecBoy006
03-16-2007, 02:38 PM
First base is a power position, and his OPS+ is 120. That's terrible. Howcome Gil Hodges gets so many threads, but we barely see anything for Mr. Hernandez, whos OPS+ is higher by 9 points?

dgarza
03-16-2007, 02:47 PM
First base is a power position, and his OPS+ is 120. That's terrible. Howcome Gil Hodges gets so many threads, but we barely see anything for Mr. Hernandez, whos OPS+ is higher by 9 points?
An OPS+ of 129? That's just average...:rolleyes:

Anyway, since when is OPS+ directly a "power" stat?

Erik Bedard
03-18-2007, 05:38 PM
Nobody wants to second Curt Simmons? :eek:

catbox_9
03-19-2007, 12:43 AM
On the subject of veterans why doesn't Tommy Bond even make the ballot? I checked out past ballots and didn't see him there either. He's the winningest pitcher of the 1870s and every winningest pitcher of the decade other than Jack Morris and Greg Maddux (not eligible) is in the HOF. I started a thread on this here (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?p=848442#post848442) if anyone is interested.

Freakshow
03-19-2007, 07:08 AM
On the subject of veterans why doesn't Tommy Bond even make the ballot? I checked out past ballots and didn't see him there either. He's the winningest pitcher of the 1870s and every winningest pitcher of the decade other than Jack Morris and Greg Maddux (not eligible) is in the HOF. I started a thread on this here (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?p=848442#post848442) if anyone is interested.
From the Rules:

"they rarely considered players who retired over 70 years ago, preferring guys they fondly remembered seeing. Thus, our focus will be towards 20th century players they should have been considering. Our ballot will allow them a 50-year window of retirees (1918-1967 for this election). This will eliminate most players whose careers began in the 19th century. As the actual VC did, we will consider those players in separate ballots 1995-2001."

Freakshow
03-19-2007, 07:27 AM
Nobody wants to second Curt Simmons? :eek:
I appreciate your stumping for his inclusion.

Another reason, to me, that he falls short is his general lack of in-season durability. Yes, he had a really long career (20 years), but he reached 30 games started in only five years. Also, he exceeded 215 innings pitched in only four years. I like guys who play, so I think if you are not a workhorse you need to be piling up some Black Ink - Curt had 1 point. He also led the league in ERA+ one time, but in a season he pitched less than 200 IP.

Again, IMO he falls in with a great many other pitchers who don't really have a good argument for election to the Hall. And, as leecemark said, "the idea that you think someone should be on the ballot - but you wouldn't vote for them - doesn't click for me."

Freakshow
03-19-2007, 11:04 AM
I'm nominating Ray Chapman for the ballot. Best known as the victim of "the pitch that killed", his case for the Hall of Fame is based on being the best shortstop of his era.

From BB Library:

The popular Chapman led the Indians in stolen bases four times, setting a team record with 52 in 1917 that stood until 1980. He led the AL in runs scored and walks in 1918. He was hitting .303 with 97 runs scored when he died. It is baseball analyst Bill James's opinion that Chapman was "probably destined for the Hall of Fame had he lived."

From Wikipedia:

Chapman led the American League in runs scored and walks in 1918. A top-notch bunter, Chapman is 6th on the all-time list for sacrifice hits. Only Stuffy McInnis has more sacrifices for right-handed batters. Chapman was also an excellent shortstop who led the league in putouts three times and assists once. He batted .300 three times, and led the Indians in stolen bases four times. In 1917, he set a team record of 52 stolen bases, which stood until 1980. He was hitting .303 with 97 runs scored when he died.

Shortstops with best OPS, 1915-20:

.745 Ray Chapman
.677 Roger Peckinpaugh
.663 Dave Bancroft
.660 Art Fletcher
.658 Rabbit Maranville
.641 Donie Bush

Shortstops with the most Runs Created, 1915-20:

449 Ray Chapman
379 Roger Peckinpaugh
367 Donie Bush
341 Art Fletcher
335 Dave Bancroft
304 Rabbit Maranville

Erik Bedard
03-19-2007, 11:37 AM
Simmons may not have been a total workhorse in that he piled up 250 IP each season, but in eight of twenty years, he went over 200 IP. Also, six times, he completed over 10 games which he had started. He was outstanding at his peak, and I honestly don't understand why nobody wants to second him. I firmly intend to vote for him if somebody will second him.

Erik Bedard
03-19-2007, 11:38 AM
I'm not very familiar with Chapman. Was he generally considered a good defensive SS, like Bancroft and Maranville?

Freakshow
03-19-2007, 05:38 PM
I'm not very familiar with Chapman. Was he generally considered a good defensive SS, like Bancroft and Maranville?

Career win shares per 1000 innings:

7.04 Art Fletcher (A+) 4 WS GG
6.42 Rabbit Maranville (A+) 5
6.20 Dave Bancroft (A) 2
6.09 Roger Peckinpaugh (A) 3
5.40 Ray Chapman (B) 1
4.60 Donie Bush (C) 2

Erik Bedard
03-19-2007, 07:25 PM
All right. Not horrible, but not top-of-the-line. Still good defensively. Of course, the main obstacle to his induction is that he only played nine MLB seasons, and because of that, I won't second him.

EDIT: I don't believe Chapman is HoF-eligible anyway, since he only competed in parts of nine seasons. And both the VC and BBWAA require ten.

Freakshow
03-20-2007, 07:00 AM
All right. Not horrible, but not top-of-the-line. Still good defensively. Of course, the main obstacle to his induction is that he only played nine MLB seasons, and because of that, I won't second him.

EDIT: I don't believe Chapman is HoF-eligible anyway, since he only competed in parts of nine seasons. And both the VC and BBWAA require ten.
The nine years is not a stumbling block to election for the VC. They inducted Addie Joss, who played only nine years, giving him an allowance for his sudden death. The same rule applies to Chapman.

Especially for voters who give extra credit to guys like Joe Jackson or Thurman Munson for their premature career endings, Ray Chapman is a guy to seriously consider.

yanks0714
03-20-2007, 07:08 PM
On the subject of veterans why doesn't Tommy Bond even make the ballot? I checked out past ballots and didn't see him there either. He's the winningest pitcher of the 1870s and every winningest pitcher of the decade other than Jack Morris and Greg Maddux (not eligible) is in the HOF. I started a thread on this here (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?p=848442#post848442) if anyone is interested.

Wasn't he James Bond's dad???? Wore 007??? :crazy

Erik Bedard
03-20-2007, 07:20 PM
The nine years is not a stumbling block to election for the VC. They inducted Addie Joss, who played only nine years, giving him an allowance for his sudden death. The same rule applies to Chapman.

Especially for voters who give extra credit to guys like Joe Jackson or Thurman Munson for their premature career endings, Ray Chapman is a guy to seriously consider.

Hmm... forgot about Joss. Something like that would have to be considered for J.R. Richard as well, though he doesn't have that much of a case. I guess I just don't see Chapman as someone I'd feel comfortable voting for.

Captain Cold Nose
03-21-2007, 05:20 AM
Hmm... forgot about Joss. Something like that would have to be considered for J.R. Richard as well, though he doesn't have that much of a case. I guess I just don't see Chapman as someone I'd feel comfortable voting for.
But Richard didn't pass, and he did try to come back, he just wasn't successful about it.
Did Tony Conigliaro last long enough to make the ballot? I know Dickie Thon was able to return, although his effectiveness was reduced after he was beaned.
Chapman very well coulld have been a HOF'er. And I don't mind his being included on our ballot. But I woould not cast a vote his way.

Freakshow
03-21-2007, 07:49 AM
But Richard didn't pass, and he did try to come back, he just wasn't successful about it.
Did Tony Conigliaro last long enough to make the ballot? I know Dickie Thon was able to return, although his effectiveness was reduced after he was beaned.
Chapman very well coulld have been a HOF'er. And I don't mind his being included on our ballot. But I woould not cast a vote his way.
Thanks for considering Chapman's case.

As for the others:
Richard was on the BBWAA ballot; one and done.
Thon didn't get by the ballot screeners for the 1999 election.
Conigliaro played only 8 years, so he was never under cosideration for the ballot - no special consideration was granted.

Freakshow
03-21-2007, 11:27 AM
Here are the results, in order, for the 1991 Mock VC election:

1918-1967 Votes Pct
Sherry Magee 20 64.52% (elected)
Joe Gordon 19 61.29%
Red Schoendienst 18 58.06%
Carl Mays 16 51.61%
Gil Hodges 15 48.39%
Stan Hack 14 45.16%
Wes Ferrell 13 41.94%
Larry Doyle 11 35.48%
Heinie Groh 11 35.48%
Vern Stephens 11 35.48%
Billy Pierce 10 32.26%
Gavy Cravath 9 29.03%
Bob Johnson 7 22.58%
Tony Lazzeri 7 22.58%
Phil Rizzuto 7 22.58%
Bucky Walters 7 22.58%
Tommy Bridges 6 19.35%
Al Rosen 6 19.35%
Lefty O'Doul 5 16.13%
Urban Shocker 5 16.13%
Joe Wood 5 16.13%
Bob Elliott 4 12.90%
Mickey Vernon 4 12.90%
Joe Adcock 3 9.68%
Wally Berger 3 9.68%
Ted Kluszewski 3 9.68% (will not be on 1992 ballot)
Tommy Leach 3 9.68% (eligibility expired)
Don Newcombe 3 9.68%
Wally Schang 3 9.68%
Roy Sievers 3 9.68%
Cecil Travis 3 9.68%
Harvey Kuenn 2 6.45%
Buddy Myer 2 6.45% (will not be on 1992 ballot)
Bob Friend 1 3.23% (will not be on 1992 ballot)
Dick Groat 1 3.23%
Lew Burdette 0 0.00% (will not be on 1992 ballot)
Jim Gilliam 0 0.00% (will not be on 1992 ballot)

The average ballot had 8.39 names listed, a big nosdive from 10.76. Still, that seems like a pretty reasonable minimum to me; voters ought to be able to find eight guys worth supporting.

We have elected Sherry Magee. Sherry has been supported by a majority of the electorate in every year and his election is certainly well deserved. Let's keep focusing on the top guys. Among the top finishers, IMO at least five have impeccable cases for election.

There are five players here who will not be carried over to the 1992 ballot due to lack of support. These players may appear on future ballots, if someone raises them as candidates and they are seconded. Tommy Leach's case now passes to the 19th century ballot committee, set to begin voting in 1995.