Hall of Fame Veteran's Committee

[Trebro]

After this travesty of a Hall vote, I am once again calling for a Veteran's Committee.

I have a few different ideas for how this could work, but I'm not planning to flesh out too far unless there's a call to seriously consider it. But this is just getting stupid at this point. We need a system to prevent a very small number of GMs destroying the point of a Hall vote.

[cheekimonk]

I can get behind this. I still think first-year inductions are limited to a very small pool of very elite players

[BaseClogger]

Hear, hear

[woods]

I don't really see what was wrong with the Hall results. We elected two players, so the system seems to have worked fine?

I'd maybe look into tweaking some of the current rules regarding players staying on the ballot. Currently players only get dropped if they fall below 5%. The problem is mathematically, we have slightly less than 40 GMs, which means that a player only needs two votes to stay on the ballot. Increasing the drop-off threshold to 10% would do a lot to de-clutter the ballot. I'd go out on a limb to say that players like Weaver Ripley and Ron Shiplack are never going to be elected anyway, and serve to do nothing more than jam up the voting for the next number of years.

[RonCo]

The tension between Big Hall and Small Hall is, overall, healthy. Now that we can see the actually voting patterns, there are some interesting voting tendencies that can be pointed out. But I think the only thing that should probably change is that BBA GMs who are also GBC GMs should not be given two votes. They haven't done anything wrong by using those votes. It's in the system now. But that gerrymanders the system (kinda) and gives those GMs a bigger voice.

I wouldn't have a problem upping the lower limit, but it doesn't make much difference to me if the lower players hang on the ballot a few years.

[BaseClogger]

Unlimited votes scares me because I think it will lead to players staying on the ballot longer rather than inducting more players. Induction is the ultimate goal. I don’t know about veterans committee vs lowering the standard to say 65%. Veterans committee sounds like a more fun source of discussion and mimics real life would I guess be my reasoning to lean that way.

[Trebro]

Unlimited votes scares me because I think it will lead to players staying on the ballot longer rather than inducting more players. Induction is the ultimate goal. I don’t know about veterans committee vs lowering the standard to say 65%. Veterans committee sounds like a more fun source of discussion and mimics real life would I guess be my reasoning to lean that way.

There can be ways to do a Veteran's Committee that can even allay fears of putting too many people in. But again, I'm not gonna waste hours on his to do it if there's no support from the Board. I don't like going down to 65% or unlimited votes, either.

[Trebro]

The tension between Big Hall and Small Hall is, overall, healthy. Now that we can see the actually voting patterns, there are some interesting voting tendencies that can be pointed out. But I think the only thing that should probably change is that BBA GMs who are also GBC GMs should not be given two votes. They haven't done anything wrong by using those votes. It's in the system now. But that gerrymanders the system (kinda) and gives those GMs a bigger voice.

I wouldn't have a problem upping the lower limit, but it doesn't make much difference to me if the lower players hang on the ballot a few years.

BBA GMs who are GBC caretakers should not be getting 2 votes. I've never done it and I still wouldn't even if it remains allowed.

[indiansfan]

100% support a Veterans Committee. They should look at players no longer on the regular ballot and could have a limit of like 2 inductees per year.. I would love to serve on a committee like this.

[Graham]

But I think the only thing that should probably change is that BBA GMs who are also GBC GMs should not be given two votes.

This times one billion

[BaseClogger]

It could even be restricted to one player per year to appease the small hall folks.

[RonCo]

There are days I like the idea of a veteran's committee and days I don't. On the days I like It I think:

1) It should be comprised of very long standing GMs.
2) It should be limited in the number of players it can select in a year.
3) The players on their eligibility list should definitely be well past their voting window.

[Trebro]

There are days I like the idea of a veteran's committee and days I don't. On the days I like It I think:

1) It should be comprised of very long standing GMs.
2) It should be limited in the number of players it can select in a year.
3) The players on their eligibility list should definitely be well past their voting window.

Those are all things I have in mind, potentially, with some additional safeguards to ensure we minimize/eliminate the nostalgia problems that the MLB Veteran's Committee has/had. The goal here isn't to elect Harold Baines or even (Sorry Yinzers) Bill Mazeroski. It's to ensure people who should have gotten in DO get in.

[Lane]

Yeah i support a veterans committee.

[chicoruiz]

Do you guys see a Veteran’s Committee as a permanent thing, or just an ad hoc group that would work to clear the current logjam and then disband?

[7teen]

There are days I like the idea of a veteran's committee and days I don't. On the days I like It I think:

1) It should be comprised of very long standing GMs.
2) It should be limited in the number of players it can select in a year.
3) The players on their eligibility list should definitely be well past their voting window.

John Rasmussen has entered the chat...

[RT60]

I am not sure why I can even vote for the HoF. I have only been a BBA GM since 2053 so I didn't get to experience the full careers of the eligible players and put them in their proper context.

[RonCo]

Do you guys see a Veteran’s Committee as a permanent thing, or just an ad hoc group that would work to clear the current logjam and then disband?

Thinking out loud...if we were to ever have one, I don't see why it wouldn't be designed as a permanent thing, with a variable workload as time moves on. Time moves on. Every year there will be more guys to rethink.

[RonCo]

I am not sure why I can even vote for the HoF. I have only been a BBA GM since 2053 so I didn't get to experience the full careers of the eligible players and put them in their proper context.

Because you are Loserville, hear you roar.

And also it's fun.

[chicoruiz]

I need to go back and reread part of the Bill James book about the Hall of Fame…. They had the same problem we’re having.