HOF Voting

[spot]

I just realized how big of a dick I'd be if I was part of BWAA. I'd make Nolan Ryan wait for the second ballot.

I'm the opposite. I'll throw some votes at guys who probably won't get in on this ballot but have a shot at staying eligible.

[Clay]

Clay, Brad... can one of you please clear my voting ballot? I'd like to take another look at the full class.

Done

[Carlos]

I'm talking about the other.

Oooh, I honestly had no idea he even wore a Washington uniform. And twice? Hmm.

[Delandis]

I'm pretty sure everyone was on my ballot, but can I resubmit to make sure?

[Andrew]

Not a very impressive class. I only voted for two players and both were borderline.

[Clay]

I'm pretty sure everyone was on my ballot, but can I resubmit to make sure?

Cleared

[BradZ]

Not a very impressive class. I only voted for two players and both were borderline.

Considering the age those two started their careers I felt they were a bit better than borderline (assuming you voted for the two players I think you are talking about). They both missed out on some prime peak years.

[Jake]

Are we still voting on founders wing? Because that could make the difference on the guy I may vote for.

[Andrew]

Considering the age those two started their careers I felt they were a bit better than borderline (assuming you voted for the two players I think you are talking about). They both missed out on some prime peak years.

Yeah and that's why I included them. Their numbers stacked up pretty well even without some peak seasons and both were among the best players in the league over multiple seasons. If we were differentiating Founders Wing members I probably would have voted for a few more.

[Carlos]

Not a very impressive class. I only voted for two players and both were borderline.

I tried to take into consideration that some guys were old when they started. I also have a hard time faulting players that are bound to the ridiculous contract offers OOTP enforces, thus making them year long free agents that eventually retired.

Some of these guys should have played longer adding to their career numbers. They hadn't even begun to decline.

But, that's just my perspective. Not saying anyone should have the same. We have 24 voters for a reason.

[Pat]

Oooh, I honestly had no idea he even wore a Washington uniform. And twice? Hmm.

Hmm, indeed.

[BradZ]

Are we still voting on founders wing? Because that could make the difference on the guy I may vote for.

There's several guys on the ballot I chose to view in that context, yes. It only makes sense to me. If a guy gets started at age 30+, past his prime and still puts up great numbers during his time in the league, I don't see penalizing him just because the league didn't exist during his younger days. That's just my view.

[Jake]

There's several guys on the ballot I chose to view in that context, yes. It only makes sense to me. If a guy gets started at age 30+, past his prime and still puts up great numbers during his time in the league, I don't see penalizing him just because the league didn't exist during his younger days. That's just my view.

I guess my thing is, the first few votes we had, we were specifically voting on the founder's wing, which, IIRC, was supposed to be a separate wing to celebrate guys that were otherwise not going to be HOF'ers because of age issues.

Without knowing specifically what I'm voting on - say, Stiver for Founders Wing or Stiver for the main wing - I can't make the same vote for each one. They're two different votes IMO. While one person might look at it that way and give a guy the benefit of the doubt, another may not and then a guy is either getting in that doesn't deserve it or a guy who would deserve Founder's Wing consideration isn't getting it because his body of work isn't big enough. That being said, I'd be comfortable with my single vote either way, although I may have voted for one more if I knew he was going into the Founder's Wing specifically.

I realize it's not that big of a deal, I mean, it's a fake HOF. But, I just figured I would type something for the sake of typing.

[liquidcrash]

Is it too early for me to start campaigning for a certain player to wear a D.C. cap?

He should go in as a member of the team he won a championship with.

[Clay]

I guess my thing is, the first few votes we had, we were specifically voting on the founder's wing, which, IIRC, was supposed to be a separate wing to celebrate guys that were otherwise not going to be HOF'ers because of age issues.

Without knowing specifically what I'm voting on - say, Stiver for Founders Wing or Stiver for the main wing - I can't make the same vote for each one. They're two different votes IMO. While one person might look at it that way and give a guy the benefit of the doubt, another may not and then a guy is either getting in that doesn't deserve it or a guy who would deserve Founder's Wing consideration isn't getting it because his body of work isn't big enough. That being said, I'd be comfortable with my single vote either way, although I may have voted for one more if I knew he was going into the Founder's Wing specifically.

I realize it's not that big of a deal, I mean, it's a fake HOF. But, I just figured I would type something for the sake of typing.

It's one HOF. You have to use that information provided to determine which they fit and vote accordingly. If you don't apply some reasoning, it'd be just blindly voting on stats.