Mlb hof tracker

jiw98 · #1 12-31-2016, 01:45 PM

Just wondering how a player can be inducted into the Hall on his 15th year of eligibility, but wasn't good enough in the previous 14 years? Did his stats didn't change?
A player that really belongs in the Hall should be in on his first year of eligibility.
Maybe there should be a set criteria to be eligible, and remove the popularity vote.
JMO

hysell · #2 12-31-2016, 02:49 PM

Thanks,Jeff!So it takes a voter 15 years to put a player in,what"s that saying about that voter!How many newer voters, know about the older players? Yes I do know MLB doe not run the HOF,but with that said,ROSE is banned from MLB ,not the HOF, thing!You guys keep on talking about Roids & other drugs in the MLB, but why do the NFL & other sports get a pass! TO me this is witch hunting & if we are going to try to keep the baseball HOF clean,just how great were Babe Ruth & TY Cobb,would you want your kids to grow up like that & they didn"t face black players by there stats! SO they were great only vrs other white players!Sorry ,but it"s still a joke!!!Robert.

bravos4evr · #3 12-31-2016, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hysell

Thanks,Jeff!So it takes a voter 15 years to put a player in,what"s that saying about that voter!How many newer voters, know about the older players? Yes I do know MLB doe not run the HOF,but with that said,ROSE is banned from MLB ,not the HOF, thing!You guys keep on talking about Roids & other drugs in the MLB, but why do the NFL & other sports get a pass! TO me this is witch hunting & if we are going to try to keep the baseball HOF clean,just how great were Babe Ruth & TY Cobb,would you want your kids to grow up like that & they didn"t face black players by there stats! SO they were great only vrs other white players!Sorry ,but it"s still a joke!!!Robert.

dude, spaces between ideas ,please

hysell · #4 01-01-2017, 12:23 AM

Sorry dad,you must be perfect? Not from this world are you!By the way your not my dad, he just died 3 weeks ago!Robert!!!!!

clydepepper · #5 01-01-2017, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hysell

Sorry dad,you must be perfect? Not from this world are you!By the way your not my dad, he just died 3 weeks ago!Robert!!!!!

Don't take it personally, Robert.

I also have difficulty in reading posts that aren't properly spaced.

Sorry for your loss.

.

clydepepper · #6 01-01-2017, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiw98

Just wondering how a player can be inducted into the Hall on his 15th year of eligibility, but wasn't good enough in the previous 14 years? Did his stats didn't change?
A player that really belongs in the Hall should be in on his first year of eligibility.
Maybe there should be a set criteria to be eligible, and remove the popularity vote.
JMO

Jeff- You are not the only one that thinks that way. They have changed the time a player can remain on the ballot to 10 years now. Who knows, 10 years may eventually be 5 years...and a good reason for that is how society approaches everything now...almost instantaneously.

There are many instances of voters who have become more appreciative of certain players after reviewing their careers as a whole, plus a player's last years are hardly ever what sets him apart from the other 99% - which is why the 5-year wait after retirement.

Perhaps, some voters need that extra 10 years...and there are always those voters with their own agenda- which, by the way, I see as a really big problem with the elections. If you have a personal beef with a certain player (not talking about 'rule-breakers'), you need to set it aside before voting or you don't deserve to have a vote.

.

.

clydepepper · #7 01-05-2017, 06:55 PM

All this time, I thought we would find out next Tuesday (1/10).

Are they trying to make it like the seemingly forever lasting presidential campaign?

Does anyone remember when they moved to a later date?

When was last year's announcement?

.

egri · #8 01-05-2017, 06:56 PM

I thought last year, they announced the results on 1/6/16, but I'm not positive.

clydepepper · #9 01-07-2017, 12:49 AM

Typical...just as soon as I got addicted to it.

Anyone know another route to it?

.

bn2cardz · #10 01-07-2017, 09:05 AM

The link to the tracker changed

https://t.co/H609i4mQap

I do want to clarify that this is not my tracker. I just follow it and was sharing it.

The official results will be announced Jan 18. As of now with 40% of the votes made public these are the ones to watch.

Bagwell - 92% has gained 14 votes from returning voters and needed 12
Raines - 91.5% has gained 25 votes from returning voters and needed 20
I. Rodriguez - 82.4%

The next two may get a boost from unseen ballots, but more likely will be voted in years to come.
Vlad Guerrero is sitting on the line at 74.4%.
Trever Hoffman is sitting at 72.7% having gained 13 of the 38 he needed from last year.
Based off last years public vote vs total votes I would say there is a +/- 8%

Of particular note for future votes these players are above 60% and have gained more than 10 votes already:

Edgar Martinez - 68.8%, has gained the most votes at 29 of the 137 he needed
Bonds - 67.6%, gained 20
Clemens - 67%, gained 21
Mussina - 61.9%, gained 12

Sitting as the biggest loser of votes is Schilling having lost 10 votes.

clydepepper · #11 01-07-2017, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

The link to the tracker changed

https://t.co/H609i4mQap

I do want to clarify that this is not my tracker. I just follow it and was sharing it.

The official results will be announced Jan 18. As of now with 40% of the votes made public these are the ones to watch.

Bagwell - 92% has gained 14 votes from returning voters and needed 12
Raines - 91.5% has gained 25 votes from returning voters and needed 20
I. Rodriguez - 82.4%

The next two may get a boost from unseen ballots, but more likely will be voted in years to come.
Vlad Guerrero is sitting on the line at 74.4%.
Trever Hoffman is sitting at 72.7% having gained 13 of the 38 he needed from last year.
Based off last years public vote vs total votes I would say there is a +/- 8%

Of particular note for future votes these players are above 60% and have gained more than 10 votes already:

Edgar Martinez - 68.8%, has gained the most votes at 29 of the 137 he needed
Bonds - 67.6%, gained 20
Clemens - 67%, gained 21
Mussina - 61.9%, gained 12

Sitting as the biggest loser of votes is Schilling having lost 10 votes.

Andy- I realized it was not your tracker, but I appreciate you sharing it just the same (I never would have seen it otherwise). Thanks for the updated link.

-Raymond

.

Topps206 · #12 01-11-2017, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiw98

Just wondering how a player can be inducted into the Hall on his 15th year of eligibility, but wasn't good enough in the previous 14 years? Did his stats didn't change?
A player that really belongs in the Hall should be in on his first year of eligibility.
Maybe there should be a set criteria to be eligible, and remove the popularity vote.
JMO

Simply put - the voters are a very fickle bunch. The ballot is crowded and there is a logjam of worthy Hall of Famers.

I also would say with more research and reading, some players had better careers than we think. I get the vibe many BBWAA writers are egotistical and think it's all about them. So they'll send in a blank ballot to draw attention to themselves.

packs · #13 01-11-2017, 10:55 AM

They voted NO on Jimmie Foxx 7 times before he finally got in. He's one of the greatest right handed hitters of all time. By that criteria he doesn't deserve induction.

Beatles Guy · #14 01-11-2017, 11:03 AM

I found this to be a very good article regarding active pitchers and their chances for the Hall.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/activ...-shot-at-hall/

packs · #15 01-11-2017, 11:34 AM

Pretty interesting stuff. Looking at the modern pitchers chart, I really only feel like Felix is a HOFer. I don't think CC or Verlander are better than he is even if they rank higher, and I don't think either of them are HOFers.

Topps206 · #16 01-11-2017, 02:12 PM

If I had a ballot, it would look like this:

1. Jeff Bagwell

2. Tim Raines

3. Trevor Hoffman

4. Edgar Martinez

5. Curt Schilling

6. Mike Mussina

7. Vladimir Guerrero

8. Billy Wagner

9. Jeff Kent

10. Larry Walker

Honorable mention goes to Fred McGriff, whom I'd have to leave off due to the rule of 10.

bn2cardz · #17 01-11-2017, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topps206

If I had a ballot, it would look like this:

1. Jeff Bagwell

2. Tim Raines

3. Trevor Hoffman

4. Edgar Martinez

5. Curt Schilling

6. Mike Mussina

7. Vladimir Guerrero

8. Billy Wagner

9. Jeff Kent

10. Larry Walker

Honorable mention goes to Fred McGriff, whom I'd have to leave off due to the rule of 10.

Here is mine. I know this would mean Tim Raines would roll off, but I don't believe he had a better career than any of these players when compared to their contemporaries.
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Jeff Bagwell
Curt Schilling
Ivan Rodriguez
Mike Mussina
Sammy Sosa
Larry Walker
Edgar Martinez
Manny Ramirez

bravos4evr · #18 01-13-2017, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Topps206

If I had a ballot, it would look like this:

1. Jeff Bagwell

2. Tim Raines

3. Trevor Hoffman

4. Edgar Martinez

5. Curt Schilling

6. Mike Mussina

7. Vladimir Guerrero

8. Billy Wagner

9. Jeff Kent

10. Larry Walker

Honorable mention goes to Fred McGriff, whom I'd have to leave off due to the rule of 10.

swap out Vlad and Wagner for Bonds and Clemens and that would be my ballot. (tho I think both wagner and vlad get in, but we are limited to ten)

Aquarian Sports Cards · #19 01-11-2017, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

Pretty interesting stuff. Looking at the modern pitchers chart, I really only feel like Felix is a HOFer. I don't think CC or Verlander are better than he is even if they rank higher, and I don't think either of them are HOFers.

Um Kershaw???

packs · #20 01-11-2017, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Um Kershaw???

He is not eligible for the HOF until after he plays this season.

jiw98 · #21 01-18-2017, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

They voted NO on Jimmie Foxx 7 times before he finally got in. He's one of the greatest right handed hitters of all time. By that criteria he doesn't deserve induction.

They didn't vote NO, he just didn't get the 75% vote. To many choices.
With the stats that Foxx put up he should have been in on his first year of eligibility, not year seven. Which is my point, his stats didn't change in those seven years.
The unfortunate thing with the early years of the HOF there were 100 player on the ballot. Years when not even 1 player made the the hall with several players very deserving. Look at the list from 1950, not 1 player voted in and yet there were a lot of HOF's on the ballot.
If a criteria is set a player is either in or is not on. No vote. No popularity contest.
JMO

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
VCP-like auction tracker for modern	peterose4hof	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	1	02-05-2013 10:50 PM
Vintage Card Tracker	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	8	08-06-2003 01:11 PM