This post is the spot for voting and discussion of the third round of voting for the Circle of Greats, which adds players born in 1966. Rules and lists are after the jump.
As before, each ballot must include three and only three eligible players. The one player who appears on the most ballots cast in the round is inducted into the Circle of Greats. Players who appear on half or more of the ballots cast win four future rounds of ballot eligibility. A new rule this round: players who appear on 25% or more of the ballots but less than 50%, earn two years of extended eligibility. Any other player in the top 9 (including ties) in votes (or who appears on at least 20% of the ballots) wins one additional round of ballot eligibility.
All voting for this round closes at 11:59 PM EST on Friday, January 4, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:59 PM EST Wednesday, January 2.
If you’d like to follow the vote tally, and/or check to make sure I’ve recorded your vote correctly, you can see my ballot-counting spreadsheet for this round here: 1966 COG Vote Tally . I’ll be updating the spreadsheet periodically with the latest votes. Initially, there is a row for every voter who has cast a ballot in one or both of the first two rounds, but new voters are entirely welcome — new voters will be added to the spreadsheet as their ballots are submitted. Also initially, there is a column for each of the holdover players; additional player columns from the born-in-1966 group will be added as votes are cast for them.
Choose your three players from the lists below of eligible players:
Holdovers:
Frank Thomas
John Smoltz
Mike Mussina
Roberto Alomar
Kenny Lofton
Trevor Hoffman
Jeff Kent
Omar Vizquel
Position Players (born in 1966, and 10 years in the majors or 20 career WAR, b-ref version):
Sandy Alomar
Moises Alou
Albert Belle
Sean Berry
Scott Brosius
Jerry Browne
Jeff Conine
Darrin Fletcher
Bernard Gilkey
Bill Haselman
Dave Hollins
John Jaha
David Justice
Orlando Merced
Mickey Morandini
Greg Myers
David Segui
Terry Shumpert
Bill Spiers
John Vander Wal
Larry Walker
Mark Whiten
Gerald Williams
Pitchers (born in 1966, and 10 years in the majors or 20 career pitching WAR, b-ref version):
Stan Belinda
Dave Burba
Dave Eiland
Tom Glavine
Eric Gunderson
Juan Guzman
Chris Hammond
Pete Harnisch
Darren Holmes
Greg Maddux
Jack McDowell
Jose Mesa
Alan Mills
Jeff Nelson
Greg Olson
Jim Poole
Mike Remlinger
Armando Reynoso
Mel Rojas
Curt Schilling
Jeff Shaw
Heathcliff Slocumb
Pete Smith
Mike Timlin
Dave Veres
Tim Wakefield
John Wetteland
Woody Williams
Frank Thomas, John Smoltz, and Roberto Alomar
Strike that! I failed to look at pitchers list from ’66. Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, John Smoltz
Once again I vote the straight WAR ticket, if not strictly for that reason:
Greg Maddux, Curt Schilling, Mike Mussina.
I would have bet money that Walker’s WAR was higher than Mussina or Schilling.
Good for me that I didn’t.
Maddux, Glavine, Alomar
I count 9 candidates that I think should move forward.
I vote for Mike Mussina, Kenny Lofton & Curt Schilling.
Maddux should be the clear winner and I suspect that Glavine and Alomar will all draw sufficient support to continue. I’m trusting in my fellow voters understanding of sabermetrics to carry Walker and Thomas and Smoltz are already in.
Apologies to Jeff Kent & Trevor Hoffman but the bar has just been raised.
And a shout out to the Governor just because.
Maddux clearly to the head of the line, Thomas and I’m sticking with Mussina.
My votes: Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Roberto Alomar
The most interesting thing about this ballot will be the holdovers – can’t possibly see anyone but Maddux winning.
Shout outs to Moose, Schilling, Smoltz, Lofton, and Larry Walker. I can’t shout out to Glavine – the implosion in the last game of 2007 still bothers me.
Is it just me or did this seem more difficult with the 1968 ballot? Personally, when I was thinking about voting the first time I was thinking about “HOF standards” and not “top 100” or “top 120” (whatever the number ends up being) standards. It’s easier for me to omit Walker or Lofton or even Glavine when thinking about it as “the best of the best”.
Maddux, Smoltz, Lofton.
Maddux, Thomas, Mussina
Maddux, Schilling, Thomas
Maddux, Smoltz, Mussina
I could be cheeky here and try to fudge the numbers and cast a “strategic” vote, considering that someone could be our first unanimous winner. Nonetheless, that feels against the spirit of the project. So I cast my vote as such:
Greg Maddux
Curt Schilling
Larry Walker
I feel awful leaving off Mussina and Thomas after voting for them in the first two rounds. Oh well.
Maddux
Thomas
Glavine
This was a tough ballot. I’d like to vote for Smoltz & Walker, but the other 3 are clearly higher up the line. Mussina, Hoffman, Kent & Schilling also deserve consideration.
Maddux
Thomas
Glavine
Maddux, Thomas, Glavine.
Thomas, Schilling, Maddux
Maddux, Thomas, Glavine
aka Jeff H #1
Maddox walker kent
Maddux, Alomar, Thomas. I’m determined to get Alomar in–I think this ends with me voting for Old Hoss Radbourn, John McGraw, and Alomar.
maddux, schilling, thomas
This ain’t a scene, it’s an arms race. Maddux, Smoltz, Mussina.
Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux.
Maddux,Walker, Schilling ; with apologies to Mike Mussina , who loses out on a peak value assessment — the guys I’m leaving off are getting to be either a) really good or b) Jim Poole
Maddux, Mussina, Alomar.
I’m not abandoning Alomar!
Maddux, Mussina, Thomas
Greg Maddux, Curt Schilling, Tom Glavine
hmm, as this election goes on, every player, who is on a single vote stays in for another round. Unless this election ends after the last birth year, EVERY player that last long enough on this list will be in, since in every round one will not longer be elegible(because of induction). So if i want, for example, Tom Glavine to be in the COG, i vote for him until he is in.
That’s not quite accurate-
” Any other player in the top 9 (including ties) in votes (or who appears on at least 20% of the ballots) wins one additional round of ballot eligibility.”
Only the top 8 players will move on. If Glavine were not in the top 9 one year- which I would think unlikely but I’m not certain how this is all going to unfold- he would be off of the ballot for good. Unless it were decided that a gross injustice had been committed in which case he could be allowed back on at a later date.
Where it’s going to get complicated is that there’s going to be room for about 10 players at each position and another 30 or so pitchers. And while the guys that are near the top at each position- like Maddux- will have no problems getting in it’s probably going to be a different story for those that are closer to the margins.
Even on the ballot now I don’t think that you could find a clear consensus for how Glavine-Smoltz-Mussina-Schilling would rank relative to one another and I would also be surprised if any of them would be considered among the top 20 pitchers of all time by a majority of the people currently voting. So it’s entirely possible that if a deep class comes along that one or more of them may find themselves bumped from the ballot. Multiply that by 8 other positions where there’s very little separating the 8th best player from the 12th or 13th and I can see us arriving at a point after we have done another 40 or 50 years of this where we might easily have a dozen or more players that a number of people will feel have been slighted. I’m not certain that that will happen but I could see how it might. I guess we’ll have to see how it all plays out.
Hartvig — your post highlights just how high the standards we are imposing are; some really, really good guys are going to be left off. Re the Glavine-Smoltz-Mussina-Schilling thing, it’s fascinating to me to see that you’re right, there is no consensus, even at this early stage. In my mind , Schilling was a step ahead, and Glavine a step behind the other guys ; looking at so many knowledgeable people with a different opinion caused me to go back and look at the record more closely. Schilling’s wonderful ability to avoid unearned runs is still the decider for me, but it’s a lot closer than I had thought, and I have gained a new respect for Mussina , in particular, who, despite his lack of black ink, was wonderfully consistent at a very high level, and went out while he was still very effective.
And wait till next year when Kevin Brown joins the group! Hard to see one of them breaking out of the pack and gaining election when you have 5 guys who were all contemporaries and somewhat similar.
And the next year Dave Cone followed a year later by Bret Saberhagen…
not to mention that Randy Johnson & Roger Clemens are both on the horizon as well.
All of them rank in the top 52 of Adam Darowski’s wonderful Hall of Stats
Rank WAR WAA
Schilling #16 76.1 53.1
Mussina #21 78.2 48.9
Glavine #25 76.8 46.6
Brown #30 63.4 40.0
Smoltz #32 65.9 40.9
Cone #40 58.8 36.3
Sbrhgn #52 56.0 36.8
I left out the adjust WAA & WAR numbers because I would guess some people are unfamiliar with the site plus I don’t entirely understand how they’re arrived at (I have some idea but certainly couldn’t explain it as well as Adam or many others of you would be able to)
Add Johnson & Clemens to the picture- not to mention ANY remaining or upcoming position players yet- and you’ve got a REALLY crowded field of fairly closely matched candidates. It’s hard to imagine Cone or Saberhagen sticking around for long under those circumstances and not hard at all to see one of the others even falling by the wayside.
I don’t always agree with the results of Adam’s system but the logic behind it is solid so it really makes me think hard about why I should arrive at a different conclusion.
Adam- I hope you don’t object to my plugging your site. I thought about linking to it in case there are readers unfamiliar with it but I’ll leave it up to you and birtelcom (since it’s his article) do decide if that’s appropriate.
While I think Cone and Saberhagen should maybe go into the hall we have (which has inducted close to 2 players per year), this hall will end up about half the size, and I think both those guys clearlly don’t belong.
Brown, Shilling, Mussina, Glavine, Smolz. Those guys should be automatic for the existing hall (though only Glavine and possibly Schilling look like favorites to get voted in by the BBWAA) But they are relatively borderline for the top 100-120 hall, depending on how you divide the positions, and order them. I think some of them won’t make it, and I think that will be reasonable.
For me, Darowski’s list looks about right for the order. If you go with 30 pitchers, that means Schilling and Mussina are pretty clear, Glavine is borderline in, Brown last in, and Smoltz just misses.
Seems a fair assessment for this line, though I think you could fairly swap a couple of these guys around.
Bryan you are highlighting exactly the problem with using the fraction of the ballots a player appears on as the criterion for determining eligibility extensions. Any year in which there is some sizeable group of players from which it is hard to choose the most deserving ones, the spread of opinion, as expressed in everyone’s votes, reduces the chances that any individual will exceed the 50% (or any other) ballot threshold. This is effectively a penalty on players who played in eras when there were lots of other good players. But other years in which a player similar to them plays, but in which he is clearly better than the others in his age cohort, that player will get many votes and hence either get elected or get some eligibility extension, the details depending on what other hold-overs from previous years he has to compete against, which is completely unpredictable.
Actually, Koma, both Kevin Appier and Jim Abbott received one vote last round, but there were 9 guys with two votes or more, so Appier and Abbott were dropped. This will happen whenever the cumulating backlog exceeds nine — the bottom guys will drop out unless they have accumulated extra exemptions from past rounds. Also, I do anticipate an end point at which those who have continued to hold over but have been unable to win induction would no longer be able to get in.
thats right. I have to admit that i didn´t exactly read the rules for eligibility extension, so i missed the “top-9-rule”.
Mad Dog, Moose, Big Hurt
Was there ever a baseball star with a manner and appearance less appropriate for the nickname Mad Dog than Greg Maddux? Well, except in the sense that you name the fat guy in your class “Tiny”.
I think that was part of the joke about Maddux’s nickname. During off-days he looked more like an accountant than a pitcher. But I guess he was a bulldog of a competitor, gotta give him that.
Bill Madlock was nicknamed “Mad Dog” as well.
bstr- Even before I had seen your comment Orel “Bulldog” Hershiser had already popped into my head: another player – especially his face- who always brought to mind more of an “annoyed accountant” vibe than determined world-class athlete.
In my mind, Hartvig, I link Hershiser to another Braves pitcher: Tom Glavine.
Being a bulldog and refusing to give in, ever, to any hitter, pretty much defined Glavine’s career. I always thought he should have been called “Bulldog” but Hershiser had already taken that moniker when Glavine came along.
Glavine always said he’d rather give up a bases-loaded walk than give in to a hitter in that situation and groove a fastball in a fat part of the zone.
bstar @57 — Yeah, but I was thinking of another name starting with “Bull” when Glavs hit Dontrelle Willis on a 1-2 pitch with the sacks full in the last game of 2007, forcing in the 5th run of the opening stanza and bringing an end to the Mets’ season and his own NYM career.
Not that I’m bitter — that’s what we deserved for signing an ATL reject. 🙂
Oh you crazy, bitter Mets fans. You never forget, do you? 🙂
birtelcom, do you remember his ’87 Donruss rookie card? I could see that guy in a high school shop class being nicknamed Mad Dog.
Good point, Nick. He does look a bit of the tall, skinny tough kid in that pic.
Thomas, Maddux, Mussina
I could have just as well voted for Schilling, Smoltz or Glavine, and with Biggio and Brown the best new candidates next election I’ll probably add Schilling or Smoltz
It appears to me Schilling was clearly better than Glavine, but I can’t stand the guy and he will be tough to vote for
The tally cutoff points are still a problem IMO. If you’re going to base them on percentage of ballots, then applying them only at the 50% and 25% points is just inconsistent. Why not apply them to all four possible extension periods, at 12.5, 25, 37.5 and 50 percent cutoff points? There’s also the question of why to use percentage of ballots cast instead of percentage of the top vote-getter as the comparison metric. That could have some important implications too, and should be discussed.
Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz
They probably have put Bobby Cox in the HOF, although that’s a different issue!
Mussina Mussina Mussina
Saw it on another comment and it sounds good – since that will likely get booted I will go w/ the following.
Mussina
Smoltz
Maddux
Greg Maddux
Curt Schilling
Mike Mussina
I’m hoping Larry Walker, John Smoltz, Frank Thomas and Kenny Lofton get enough love to stick around.
DOH! This doesn’t affect my vote, but I’m also hoping for Tom Glavine to get his share of the love, too.
Maddux, Glavine, Thomas.
Maddux, Schilling, Mussina
Although so-called “strategic voting” is now considered acceptable, I’m going to give an initial vote for who I believe to be the 3 most-worthy players on the ballot, and make any strategic changes later.
As I’ve explained before, I consider a player to be an HOFer if they have a WAR/162 games of 5.0 or greater during a “peak” of 5+ years, with an attempted WAR adjustment for relief pitchers. (Players with less than 5.5 WAR/162 during this peak are considered “borderline” HOFers unless they have an unusually long peak of 10+ years). This gives 11 would-be HOFers; interestingly, 7 of them are holdovers from previous ballots, but none of these 7 make my initial vote, simply because 3 of the newcomers eclipse all of them.
These three are Curt Schilling (7.3 WAR/162 during 6-yr peak), Greg Maddux (6.5 WAR/162 during 15-yr peak), and Larry Walker (6.6 WAR/162 during 11-yr peak), and they are my initial vote (before any strategic changes that may occur later).
The others that I would vote for if I could are Kenny Lofton, Frank Thomas, Mike Mussina, Trevor Hoffman, John Smoltz, and Jeff Kent. Roberto Alomar and Tom Glavine are borderline HOFers. Watch for these players in any potential strategic changes I may make.
What is your “162-game” equivalent for starting pitchers like Maddux?
It’s established by Baseball-Reference based on each player’s stats (I presume). Go to any player’s page on B-R and specify a stretch of seasons to view the stats for (for Maddux, I used 1988-2002, based on my method for determining “peak” years) and B-R gives total stats, per-season stats, and stats normalized to 162 games. This can be done in the Player Value tables as well.
For Maddux, it is normalized to 35 starts. For Schilling’s peak (2001-06), it is normalized to 32 starts and 5 relief appearances (due to his time as a closer in 2005).
And now, as hinted at earlier, a strategic vote change!
Since Maddux is apparently destined to win, I’ll throw out my vote for him in favor of Kenny Lofton, who may become the first to be helped by our voter expansion by finishing in 9th place with less than 20% of votes (which it appears is going to be what happens, but I’d like to add my vote to help ensure he stays on the ballot for at least one more year).
It’s a shame that it appears that Hoffman and Kent are going to fall by the wayside here, but my larger support for Schilling and Walker prevents me from changing my vote for either of them.
So, to clarify, my final vote is for Curt Schilling, Larry Walker, and Kenny Lofton.
Maddux, Glavine, Thomas
Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz
Maddux, Alomar, Mussina
Maddux, Thomas, Smoltz
This is depressing that the Big Hurt, once again will not garner enough votes to be enshrined into the circle of greats. I will still give Mr. Thomas a vote, but he is no longer my number 1. My vote would look something like this;
Maddux
Thomas
Smoltz
and the first pitcher to be included in the “Circle of Greats”, Mike Maddux little brother, Greg Maddux. You heard it here first.
Maddux, Thomas, Schilling
Maddux
Schilling
Walker
A bit of strategic voting here. I have Walker as borderline but I’m a bit concerned about him getting serious enough consideration. Also — he’s the only position player from 1966 that belongs, IMO.
Guys on the ballot that I think belong but didn’t vote for this year: Thomas, Mussina, Glavine
Guys on the ballot that I think might be borderline: Roberto Alomar, Kenny Lofton, John Smoltz
Walker was the only new position player I thought deserved serious consideration.
I think Glavine will get enough other votes to be safe on the ballot for a while. Mussina and Thomas are already safe for a few years. I want to make sure Schilling and Walker stay on the ballot. Maddux should win this one I doubt it will be close.
Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Larry Walker
Maddux, Schilling, Thomas
Maddux, Glavine, Mussina
Frank Thomas, Mike Mussina, Greg Maddux
Kenny Lofton
Roberto Alomar
Mike Timlin
(I didn’t think I would be a “strategic vote guy”. But there it is.)
Timlin?
2003 playoffs.
Badass.
And 7th all time in games pitched.
My vote was missed. Maddux, Thomas, Mussina, please (almost went for the bloody sock one Schilling this time). Thanks…
Not sure what you are looking at, because your vote has been recorded (Greg, Frank, Mike) since yesterday.
Got it. I must have been looking at Professor Larry. Thanks…
Maddux, Mussina, Walker
Maddux, Thomas, and Smoltz.
Maddux and Frank Thomas are my first two picks.
For my third pick, I’ve had difficulty the last few days pondering the difference between Mussina, Glavine, and Schilling. I think I’ll go ahead and vote for Glavine mainly because of the IP gap he has over the other two and because he’s a little behind in the voting, but I’ll be happy to vote for Mussina or Schilling instead of Glavine down the line. I’m just sick of thinking about it at this point.
Maddux, Thomas, Glavine.
Career Wins Above Average, excluding negative seasons:
Maddux 68.6
Schilling 56.2
Mussina 49.4
Walker 48.6
Glavine 42.2
Thomas 40.9
Smoltz 40.2
Lofton 39.5
Alomar 37.3
Would love to support the underrated Walker, but Mussina’s underrated too, so I’m voting for him for the third straight time.
Maddux, Schilling, Mussina
Thomas, Maddux, and Smoltz
I was looking over Maddux’s numbers and was struck by the fact that in 1994 he only gave up 4 HR in 202 IP. Four! I decided to investigate the details – here they are:
#1 April 19, at home vs Cardinals. A solo shot by Todd Zeile on a 3-0 pitch with 2 out in the top of the 2nd gives the Cardinals a 1-0 lead. Cards end up winning 5-4 via a 3-run rally in the 7th (aided by the Braves defense and bullpen). Maddux posted a Game Score of 38, one of only two times on the season that he had a GS < 50.
#2 May 11, at home vs Phillies (opposing starter: Curt Schilling). A solo shot by Darren Daulton on a 1-2 pitch leading off the 5th ties the game at 1; Braves ultimately win, 4-2. Maddux goes 2-2 and scores the go-ahead run ahead of a Fred McGriff home run; Mark Wohlers, in relief, singles in his one bat for his only career hit, giving the 9 spot in the Braves' batting order a 3-3 day. Time of game: 2:16.
#3 June 27, at Expos. With runners on the corners and 2 outs and the Expos leading 2-1, Cliff Floyd hits a 3-run dinger on a 2-2 pitch to drive Maddux from the game. This is Maddux's only other Game Score less than 50 on the season, also a 38.
#4 August, at Mets. Bobby Bonilla hits a solo shot on a 3-2 pitch in the bottom of the 8th to cut the Braves lead to 3-2. The Braves scored an insurance run in the 9th and prevailed 4-2, with Maddux pitching a complete game.
3 solo shots and one 3-run home run; that's it in 25 starts (including 2 in Colorado) and 202 IP. Man! While none of the 4 hitters who managed to connect vs Maddux was a top-tier power hitter, all of them had at least decent power in their prime.
I note, as a piece of trivia, that none of the stadia these games were played in (Fulton County, Olympic Stadium, Shea) are in use today.
Aargh. Erratum:
#4 August 1, at Mets.
Great find David! Since 1950, only two pitchers have given up 4 or fewer home runs while qualifying for the ERA title. Maddux in 1994 and Reggie Cleveland in 1970 (3 in 170 IP). The year before his feat Cleveland gave up 19 homeruns and the year after he gave up 20. His innings pitched were comparable all three years.
Frank Thomas, Curt Schilling, Tom Glavine
Hmm… I do like Maddux as a HHS “Great”, and I do agree that Mussina should be in the discussion, but I am choosing the above for my votes in this round. I have not yet voted for the player to actually get voted into that round of voting. Maybe I should stop voting tactically, although I like the ability to do so; especially since Maddux is probably this round’s winner already. Also, I like the addition of new thresholds of extra eligibility, although I do not so far think any more thresholds are necessary.
Man, this is getting tough:
Maddux, Mussina, Schilling
My votes-
Jeff Kent
Kenny Lofton
Tom Glavine
Maddux, Thomas, Smoltz.
Maddux, Thomas, Mussina. A shame that my favorite needs to wait a bit until election, but how do you not elect Maddux? Yeesh.
Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz. Easiest decision I’ll ever make.
Maddux, Thomas, Glavine
Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Curt Schilling
You have until midnight tonight to change previous votes, and till midnight Friday to vote in this round. As widely expected, Greg Maddux has a huge lead for induction, but who will enjoy the 50%, 25% and ninth place thresholds rewards remains a matter of a handful of votes one way or the other.
As several others above have stated, I could’ve cast stategic votes to keep personal faves on the ballot, but (for now) I am going to play it “straight”:
-Greg Maddux
-Frank Thomas
-Roberto Alomar
in that order
Candidates that were not Top-3, but that (I think) should continue to stay on our Circle-of-Greats ballot:
John Smoltz
Mike Mussina
Kenny Lofton
Jeff Kent
Albert Belle
Larry Walker
Tom Glavine
Curt Schilling
Trevor Hoffman
Maddux, Thomas, Alomar
Maddux, Glavine, Frank Thomas
Maddux, Glavine, Mussina
Greg Maddux, Larry Walker, Frank Thomas.
Thomas, Maddux, Glavine
I was planning on waiting longer to cast my vote but I’m going to go ahead and cast it now cause it seems like most things have already been decided. About the only outstanding question is who gets a one year vs a two year extension between Schilling, Smoltz and Glavine (though I suppose Mussina could slip below 25%).
Anyway…
1) Maddux – doesn’t need my vote but I’ve always liked him and he’s clearly the best candidate on the ballot.
2) Glavine – Of the guys who are fighting to gain two additional years of eligibility, he’s the one I prefer.
3) Dave Justice – A definite “token” vote. For three reasons. He was a key member of my Cleveland Indians. He was a member of my first ever fantasy baseball team. And a friend’s brothers were friends with Justice in high school. So I only have 1 or 2 degrees of separation from him. (I also have a friend who pitched against Dave Hollins in college. So I have a close connection to a second person on the ballot).
Of course, I’d really prefer to take 3 votes away Schilling. Really dislike that guy!!!
Maddux, Schilling, Alomar.
Maddux – I’m all for strategic voting to keep someone on the ballot, but personally I feel like I should at least give a vote to the person I view as the best player every round. Maddux doesn’t need my help to win, but he’s the obvious choice.
Walker – I admit that there’s a bit of subjectiveness (he’s underrated, I’m Canadian) but I think his numbers speak for themselves. Obviously if it was a straight up vote Frank Thomas looks a bit better, but he’s not going to get in past Maddux, and he’s certainly on the ballot next 8-12 times (although will probably win next year). Walker probably would be on next year’s ballot without me too, but I like the guy.
Glavine – Schilling has some impressive numbers for both career and peak in terms of WAR, WHIP and SO, but Glavine pitched almost 1200 innings more, and he was no slouch either. Definitely tough between all these pitchers.
Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine.
Maddux, Schilling, Mussina
birtelcom (or someone else who remembers), what “year” is the end of our voting? Are we going back to 1847, for the oldest HOFer (Deacon White, I believe)? Or are we gonna slap some years together? Just curious, because I’m running my own mathematical system on players, and I’m trying to work ahead. I’ve gotten to 1895, but I’m curious how much farther I should go. Thanks!
Also (sorry to be a bother), but what are the regulations on voting for someone who’s fallen off the ballot? Is it allowed? Just curious. I looked back for the post with the rules (once they were finally decided) but I couldn’t find it. So either straight answers or just a link would work fine. Thanks!
Doom,
http://www.highheatstats.com/2012/12/the-circle-of-greats-a-proposal/
We will have a ballot once in a while in which the vote, instead of being a vote for induction, will be to bring back into eligibility a guy who is no longer eligible.
The master plan is to go back that number of years that gives us a match to the number of players inducted into the Hall of Fame by vote of the BBWAA. As of today, that’s 112 players, which having started with birth year 1968 would take us back to the birth year 1857. That may change a little bit depending on what the BBWAA does in its next couple of rounds, including the vote that’s just been completed and the results of which will be announced on Wednesday next week At induction time this summer, we’ll add in a 1969 vote for the Circle of Greats, and if the BBWAA announces on Wednesday that it has voted in more than one player, or no players, that 1857 end year will adjust slightly up or down.
One more clarifying question: when we get to the 1857 (or whatever) induction, then, will we automatically include all players from before that year? Or will Deacon White simply never be eligible? I’m just curious.
The overall concept behind the COG is to mimic the scope of the BBWAA-elected part of the Hall of Fame, while selecting the inductees in a way that is perhaps more thoughtful, and more focused in the discussion that it creates, than the process the BBWAA itself uses. Becasue the idea is to mimic the BBWAA’s scope, and the BBWAA itself never really conceived its mission as considering the guys from the earliest days of pro baseball — from the beginning that effort was left to specialized old-timers and veterans committees — I’ve generally conceptualized the COG as not extending back to the earliest days. But if we get back that far and there is still interest in keeping things going back further, I’d certainly be open to expanding the concept.
I’m sure there’s plenty of time to sort it out, but one idea is perhaps that once you get back to the early 1870s you could do a couple of years at once, since there were so fewer ballplayers born in days before the 16-team Major Leagues of 1901. It would be fun and interesting to consider early candidates on some level, although with the relative dearth of great candidates, of course it will be a bit imbalanced compared with the current crop. It might also be appropriate at that time to have some serious contenders that fell off the ballot voted back on (I know we are probably going to do this before that too, but maybe we can vote a few back on?)
Whatever you choose to do, I hope that there can be some way to consider all ballplayers, even early ones, even if that consideration is sort of lumped in altogether. Deacon White would certainly be interesting to discuss, but I’m more thinking of someone like Cap Anson (born in 1852) who would have a real chance of making the COG, but would miss it if it were simply cut off in 1857.
Right, Bells. I agree 100%. It would be weird to include guys back to 1857, but not include the other ten years of ML births (since there were no players born before 1847, at least according to b-ref. In other words, the last 10 polls could just do two years at a time, and that would allow us to cover every year birth for every player in ML history, moving backwards from 1968. I think that would just make a lot of sense. More sense, anyway, than just leaving 10 years out. So I hope we can make that a rule change.
Of course, I just checked my work. I went to the 1947 birth year page, and there was no “previous year,” so I assumed that was the earliest year. Of course, there’s yet another decade thereafter. So I would propose either doing two seasons per year for the last 15 elections, or 3 seasons per year for the last 10. I just think it makes sense to include everyone (and actually, you have to stretch a little, because there were no ML players born in 1837 or 1836, but one of the Wrights was born in 1835 – and I’m pretty sure HE’s the oldest one).
Anyway, it just makes sense to me that picking an end date without including everyone would be weird – but if we were to do so, it would make sense for the year in question to be Cy Young’s birth year (1867? I’m guessing without looking it up) and then to have 10 “special elections” after that with all the remaining players in the field who have gotten a minimum number of votes. Then you can have 10 big run-off years, where we can figure out who we want. Something else to think about maybe.
Maddux, Mussina, Schilling
Oops, sorry. I already voted.
Not ready to do strategic voting (yet). These are the top three, in order.
1. Greg Maddux
2. Curt Schilling
3. Mike Mussina
Maddux, Mussina, Walker
Larry “Booger” Walker – speed, power, average, great arm, a joy to watch. Like watching a linebacker play baseball.
Robbie Alomar – slick fielder, good power for a 2nd baseman, good BA/OBP and OPS+, speed on the basepaths.
Mike “Moose” Mussina – AL version of Greg Maddux?
Fuzzy, you made it under the wire this round. Welcome aboard. Not sure Moose quite scaled the heights of a Maddux-type. Lacks the transcendant peak of Greg’s first six seasons in Atlanta. But undeniably a solid candidate.
birtelcom, I didn’t mean to suggest that Mussina was of the same caliber as Maddux, but during their careers Moose reminded me most of Maddux in terms of approach and demeanor.
Wow! So many legitimate candidates, especially among the pitchers.
Three votes: Glavine, Smoltz, Mussina.
#1. Greg Maddux
#2. Mike Mussina
#3. Tom Glavine
Very tough vote here. I consider quite a few to be HOFers, but if I can only pick 3, then it’s Greg “Bulldog” Maddux, Curtis Montague Schilling, and Michael “Moose” Mussina.
Maddux, Thomas, Mussina
Again, I know that it’s way beyond the voting deadline for this round. But, just for fun, I’m starting at the beginning and catching up to the project.
For the 1966 election, I’m voting for:
–Greg Maddux
–Frank Thomas
–Roberto Alomar
Other top candidates I considered highly (Okay yeah, this process is starting to get tough. I’m glad I started this from the beginning though.):
–Mussina
-Smoltz
–Kent
-Lofton
-Schilling
-Walker
-Glavine
-Hoffman (I hope he gets some consideration for the real Hall of Fame, but compared to the others we’re considering, he doesn’t have much of a chance.)
Sentimental favorites, but I didn’t consider at all:
–John Jaha (This round’s honorary Brewers selection. I saw his first major league hit.)
Following you as you are catching up has been entertaining. Even if you don’t make it for the 1962 ballot, I think I can recommend, without engaging in any spoilers, that you definitely try to get in on the 1961 vote, which could be particularly interesting.