Quote:
Originally Posted by ParisianJohn
Good point about the lower number of HOF voters due to new rules
It may not have been that many in 2019 but I do know Bill Balou said he'd not vote at all because he didn't want to cost Rivera the first 100% vote. There may have been others.
https://nesn.com/2018/12/boston-area...-hall-of-fame/ |
There may have been a handful of folks like this guy, who didn't cast a ballot (as others have pointed out, he didn't send one, not send a blank ballot).
But his logic is pretty terrible. "He's the best closer, but doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame because saves are a bad statistic" is non-sensical. Even if saves were not a stat, wouldn't Rivera STILL be the best closer?
I always thought the "percent of the vote" thing is given more attention than it deserves, both from those who would "protect" the "unanimous" and those who concern themselves too much with who got what.
An awful lot of this is all context driven...the first class didn't have low percentages for obvious reasons. A player who was on a weak ballot might see a bit higher percentage.
One minor thing that public ballots has more or less done away with is the whole "local writer throws a vote to local favorite who's clearly not a Hall of Famer". Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't really have an opinion on.