Started By
Message

Greg Maddux HOF selection question

Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:35 am
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:35 am
I was reading about today's MLB Hall of fame inductees and noticed Greg Maddux got 97% of the vote from writers. Statistically he was the most consistent pitcher of his era with 355 career wins and never was connected to PEDs (Clemens)

With that said, how can any voter ego watched baseball between 1988-2008 not feel Maddux is worthy of the HOF? What's their justification for not voting? Do some just straight up refuse to vote for first timers?

In a couple years if Ken Griffey Jr. Isn't infamous I think those who refuse to vote should have their credentials taken away.
This post was edited on 7/27/14 at 11:36 am
Posted by CunningLinguist
Dallas, TX
Member since Mar 2006
18773 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:36 am to
Old arse baseball writers do that because Babe Ruth was not unanimous
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:38 am to
Do they ever justify their reasoning? I'm guessing these old timers aren't on Twitter to respond to their ballots.
Posted by LSUMJ
BR
Member since Sep 2004
19890 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:39 am to
No one has ever been unanimous so current writers think they need to be old school and keep that going
Dumb
Posted by CountryVolFan
Knoxville, TN
Member since Dec 2008
2970 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:40 am to
If you don't vote for a 300 game winner not connected to PEDs you should lose your vote.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:41 am to
I would liken it to movie reviewers who love to be contrarians. I guarantee you that when Gone With The Wind came out there was at least one reviewer who called it the 'worst movie of the year.' It's an ego thing ... 'look at me...I'm unique. People will flock to me to justify my opinion. I'll be on TV.'
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:41 am to
Highest vote ever was Tom Seaver 99% 5 voters didn't vote for him.

LINK
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:42 am to
Voters are allowed a certain amount of votes, many will leave off a sure thing like Maddux in order for another player to receive votes and stay on the ballot or get in.
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:42 am to
quote:

If you don't vote for a 300 game winner not connected to PEDs you should lose your vote.


THIS

ANd why Randy Johnson should get a high % next year
Posted by WPBTiger
Parts Unknown
Member since Nov 2011
31084 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:43 am to
quote:

No one has ever been unanimous so current writers think they need to be old school and keep that going


This.
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:44 am to
quote:

Voters are allowed a certain amount of votes, many will leave off a sure thing like Maddux in order for another player to receive votes and stay on the ballot or get in.


Stupid IMO. If you have the honor of voting for the HOF then you should do just that, not vote to keep guys on the ballot.
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:46 am to
Sometimes someone deserving gets left out in a crowded class....
Some voters have special ties/relationships and they will vote for a player with no shot out of respect for his career.

Sometimes I have issue with how the voters vote but I understand those two lines of reasoning.
Posted by chalmetteowl
Chalmette
Member since Jan 2008
47655 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:46 am to
i'll play devil's advocate. if you know without a shadow of a doubt that Maddux or whoever is getting in, he doesn't need 100% as opposed to 95% to be "more in"

so you take that vote and spread it to guys who might need it to stay on the ballot, a guy who is at 70% or a guy who has a goal of just getting 1 HOF vote

personally i think you should name 10 guys on your ballot and vote for 8 with two "backups". if one or two of the 8 gets 90% or more, then the votes count for the other two guys you named
This post was edited on 7/27/14 at 11:51 am
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:47 am to
Other issue is when voters only put 4 guys when they are allowed 10
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:50 am to
quote:

Other issue is when voters only put 4 guys when they are allowed 10


Like last year when nobody got in.

I think Biggio and Randy Johnson get in next year
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:52 am to
Pedro Martinez as well... 3 man class before veterans committee
Posted by DaBeerz
Member since Sep 2004
16953 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 11:59 am to
Why do you want KGJr to be infamous?
Posted by tduecen
Member since Nov 2006
161244 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 12:05 pm to
Sheffield, Delgado, and Nomar will get votes along with Percival, Clark, Gordon, and Ryan because well people liked them
Posted by Al Bundy Bulldog
The Grindfather
Member since Dec 2010
35809 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 12:05 pm to
quote:

Why do you want KGJr to be infamous?


He was my favorite player as a kid. He didn't juice. He was the best player at his position for a decade. No off the field problems. Etc....
Posted by SPEEDY
2005 Tiger Smack Poster of the Year
Member since Dec 2003
83374 posts
Posted on 7/27/14 at 12:09 pm to
11 voters left Babe Ruth off their ballots

37 voters left Walter Johnson off their ballots

Cy Young wasn't a first ballot hall of famer
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram