jalbright
08-26-2007, 06:31 AM
In this poll, I will review the results of the polls of the selections made by various incarnations of the Veteran's Committee. All the polls will end in early October 2007, so the results won't come in until then. I will place a link to this thread in the stickied HOF Resources thread to make it easier to find. I will also put links to all the threads I'm talking about in this post.
I will rank the groups on the following bases:
1) mean percentage of selections deemed HOFers;
2) median percentage of selections deemed HOFers;
3) highest percentage of selections getting 75% or more as qualified HOFers;
4) highest percentage of selections getting 50% or more as qualified HOFers; and
5) lowest percentage of selections getting 40% or less as qualified HOFers.
Once those five rankings are done, I will add the placements to rank the overall performance of each group (e.g., a first, a third, a sixth, a second and a seventh is a total of 19), the lower scores being the better performing groups.
Links to the polls:
First Old-Timer's Committee (pre 1945) (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66903)
1945-46 Old Timer's Committee (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66904)
1949-59 Veterans (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66905)
The "Lee Allen" VC (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=65768)
How bad was Frankie Frisch's VC? (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=65764)
1973-79 VC (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66907)
The VC of the 1980's (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66909)
The VC 1990-2001 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66910)
The Negro Leagues
Original Negro Leagues Committee (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66906)
Negro Leaguers elected 1987-2001 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66912)
Negro Leaguers, class of 2006 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=66913)
jalbright
10-12-2007, 06:11 PM
I promised a review of the polls of our opinions of the work of various incarnations of the Veteran's Committee. The percentage results are as follows:
Committee…..
............. >=75% >=50% < 40% mean median
pre 1945……… 100.0 100.0 0.0 97.4 100.0
45-46…………. 42.1 78.9 21.1 78.9 64.3
49-59…………. 62.5 87.5 12.5 76.0 88.5
Lee Allen…….. 25.0 83.3 0.0 62.4 64.3
Frisch………… 6.3 25.0 75.0 26.9 15.3
73-79…………. 33.3 66.7 25.0 56.1 59.1
80's…………… 36.4 45.5 54.5 49.4 28.6
90-2001………. 50.0 60.0 40.0 56.7 62.5
orig Negro……. 88.9 100.0 0.0 92.6 100.0
87-2001 Negro. 77.8 100.0 0.0 79.0 77.8
2006 Negro…… 46.2 83.3 23.1 65.0 46.2
The pre-1945 group has an advantage in the fact that it only made three selections, while all other groups picked at least 8. Obviously, those picks we supported by 75% or more are ones we agree with, as our electorates would also elect them. The picks in the 50% and up category at least should be ones we would say are strong candidates, as at least a majority of our voters support them. The picks receiving less than 40% support from us are ones that we as a group regard as weak ones, see as a strong majority doesn't support them. The mean is just another way of saying average, and the median is the point at which half the picks have higher percentages and half lower. The advantage of the median is it minimizes the effect of an isolated super popular or terribly unpopular pick.
A lot of the picks of the Veteran's Committees aren't supported by 75% or more of our voters. Exceptions are the original Negro League selections, the 1987-2001 Negro League picks, and the pre-1945 selections. Some of the problem may be the unfamiliarity of our voters with some of the very early candidates, at least where such candidates pulled at least 50% of the vote. Only two VC groups had less than 60% of their picks supported by a majority of our voters: the Frankie Frisch group at 25%, and the 1980's, at 45.5%. The three groups that did well in the 75% and up category were able to muster majorities for all their picks.
The next category is where strong majorities opposed the group's selections. This time, there are four groups with nobody meeting this definition. They are: Pre-1945, Original Negro Leagues, 1987-2001 Negro Leagues, and the Lee Allen groups. Only the Frisch group at 75%(!!)
and the 1980's (54.5%) have more than 40% of their selections meeting this definition.
Frisch and the 80's couldn't even manage to average 50% favoring their picks, while all the other groups averaged at least 56%, and five managed to average over 75% support for their picks.
When we turn to considering the median, two groups hit the 100% plateau (pre 1945 and the Original Negro League groups), and two more surpassed 75% support (1949-59 and the 1987-2001 Negro Leagues). Two groups failed to beat 30% (Frisch and the 1980's again), and the 2006 Negro Leagues just missed the 50% mark, which could be due to some unfamiliar picks which will come to be seen more favorably as the results of the study of the Negro Leagues done in conjunction with that election make their way out to the fans.
I promised I'd rate the groups by their placement in these five categories, and here it is:
Committee…..
............. >=75% >=50% < 40% mean median total
pre 1945……… 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0
45-46…………. 7.0 7.0 6.0 4.0 5.0 29.0
49-59…………. 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 21.0
Lee Allen…….. 10.0 5.0 1.0 7.0 5.0 28.0
Frisch………… 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 55.0
73-79…………. 9.0 8.0 8.0 9.0 8.0 42.0
80's…………… 8.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 48.0
90-2001………. 5.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 38.0
orig Negro……. 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 7.0
87-2001 Negro. 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 12.0
2006 Negro…… 6.0 5.0 7.0 6.0 9.0 33.0
The above doesn't list the rankings by this method in order, which I'll take care of with the chart below:
Committee….. score
pre 1945……… 5
orig Negro……. 7
87-2001 Negro. 12
49-59…………. 21
Lee Allen…….. 28
45-46…………. 29
2006 Negro…… 33
90-2001………. 38
73-79…………. 42
80's…………… 48
Frisch………… 55
The top three in this ranking shouldn't be much of a shock in view of the foregoing discussion (in order): pre-1945, original Negro Leagues, and the 1987-2001 Negro Leagues. Similarly, the two lowest ranked ones by this method should be no shock: Frisch (swept last place in all categories, without so much as being tied once) and the 1980's. The third worst group by this measure is one which fell right between the two worst: 1973-79. The more you look at it, while some of the other VC's may have had their stinkers, the biggest reasons the VC picks are so poorly received are the picks made by these groups. Just to review, here are the ones these three groups picked but got less than 40% support from us: Bancroft, Beckley, Bottomley, Combs, Cuyler, Ferrell, Hafey, Haines, Hooper, Hoyt, T. Jackson, Kell, Kelly, Klein, Lindstrom, Lombardi, Marquard, Schoendienst, L. Waner, and Youngs. Suffice it to say, they are responsible for an outsized proportion of the dregs of the HOF.
Jim Albright