The 2007 Baseball Hall Of Fame Veterans Committee Ballots
The Players (82 votes cast, 62 needed for election)
rank candidate.....votes..percentage
1. Ron Santo*.......57 69.51%
2. Jim Kaat.........52 63.41%
3. Gil Hodges.......50 60.98%
4. Tony Oliva.......47 57.32%
5. Maury Wills......33 40.24%
6. Joe Torre........26 31.71%
7. Don Newcombe.....17 20.73%
8. Vada Pinson......16 19.51%
9t. Roger Maris.....15 18.29%
9t. Lefty O'Doul....15 18.29%
9t. Luis Tiant......15 18.29%
12t. Curt Flood.....14 17.07%
12t. Al Oliver......14 17.07%
12t. Mickey Vernon..14 17.07%
15t. Minnie Minoso*.12 14.63%
15t. Cecil Travis...12 14.63%
17t. Dick Allen*....11 13.41%
17t. Marty Marion...11 13.41%
19. Joe Gordon*.....10 12.20%
20. Ken Boyer*.......9 10.98%
21. Mickey Lolich....8 9.76%
22. Wes Ferrell......7 8.54%
23t. Sparky Lyle.....6 7.32%
23t. Carl Mays.......6 7.32%
23t. Thurman Munson..6 7.32%
26. Rocky Colavito...5 6.10%
27. Bobby Bonds......1 1.22%
The Non-players (81 votes cast, 61 needed for election)
1. Doug Harvey*.........52 64.20%
2. Marvin Miller*.......51 62.96%
3. Walter O'Malley*.....36 44.44%
4t. Buzzie Bavasi.......30 37.04%
4t. Dick Williams.......30 37.04%
6. Whitey Herzog........29 35.80%
7. Bill White...........24 29.63%
8. Bowie Kuhn...........14 17.28%
9. August Busch, Jr.....13 16.05%
10. Billy Martin........12 14.81%
11t. Charley O. Finley*.10 12.35%
11t. Gabe Paul..........10 12.35%
11t. Paul Richards......10 12.35%
14. Phil Wrigley.........9 11.11%
15. Harry Dalton.........8 9.88%
The big movers by change in percentage points.
Players, relative to 2005.
Winners:
Newcombe, +10.7
Kaat, +9.6
Wills, +7.7
Losers:
Gordon, -5.3
Maris, -5.5
Marion, -6.6
Tiant, -6.7
Mays, -7.7
Boyer, -7.8
Pinson, -9.3
Torre, -13.3
Santo saw his second straight gain, +4.5 percentage points, so here's hoping for a happy ending in 2009. Among the other big gainers, only Kaat appears to have a chance. Torre's drop is particularly surprising in that he is still active, but perhaps some voters agree with me that a manager's plaque is his best destiny, and changed their minds from two years ago.
The non-players, relative to 2003.
Winners.
Miller, +18.7
Herzog, +4.2
Losers.
Paul, -4.1
Williams, -4.7
Bavasi, -6.0
Kuhn, -8.0
Martin, -13.0
Miller, I think, is inevitable. The electorate changes, more players get added, more modern thinkers win the writing and broadcasting awards -- it's a matter of time. I just hope he's still among us in 2011, if he finally gets his due then. I cannot imagine why Martin dropped off a cliff.
The non-player ballot requires some sort of temporary relegation method, because some of these candidates clearly are deadwood and need to be swept out at some point. Both ballots are completely reconstituted each voting cycle, but come on, Hall, repeating such glaringly obvious DOA candidates serves no meaningful purpose. The ballot is so short and the electorate sufficiently small that I wouldn't object to a 25% minimum return for reconsideration; anyone receiving less could not be considered for at least one cycle.
For that matter, the player ballot could use a temporary relegation method as well; perhaps a minimum of 5% (like the BBWAA ballot) or 10% (allowing for the much smaller electorate than the BBWAA provides) dumps a player out of consideration for one or two cycles.
The current VC has now had three elections in which it has honored no one. That's more irritating than genuinely bad, but if the 2009 vote is another shutout, the Hall will have to start rethinking this style of Veterans Committee, the composition of the electorate, because (and I have written this before) a committee that elects no one produces the same result as having no committee, and having no committee is easier.
That's it for 2007. The next Veterans Committee ballot for players is in 2009, and non-players in 2011. Stump for Santo; it is well past time he got moved to the good side of the velvet rope.
1 comment:
Conversely from Miller's situation, where new members of the electorate will presumably be in favor of his candidacy, I think Harvey is doomed for the same reason. As older voters, who actually interacted with him on the field for a long period of time, pass on, and younger voters join the electorate, who probably didn't see Harvey much if at all, Harvey will lose support. If the VC maintains the same format for another one or two non-player voting cycles (no sure thing), and he still doesn't get elected, I'm pretty sure his window of opportunity will be closed for good.
Post a Comment