So Deadspin bought a HOF vote...
 

http://deadspin.com/deadspin-buys-ha...o-d-1467003665

Recently, as you may recall, we announced our plan to subvert the annual elections for baseball's Hall of Fame by buying votes from voters. Our idea was to make a mockery and farce of the increasingly solemn and absurd election process, and to take some power from the duly appointed custodians of the game's history and turn it over to the public.

Well, with the Baseball Writers' Association of America having released its official ballot today, we can happily announce that we have a vote. A member of the Baseball Writers' Association of America thought our plan sounded like a pretty damn good idea and sold us his/her vote, making a stand against the idea that a somewhat random subsection of the baseball press should maintain the power to confer what is, regrettably, the game's most prestigious honor. For obvious reasons, the voter will remain anonymous for now, but he/she will be filling out his/her ballot on behalf of Deadspin readers, who will be polled in binding elections. The voter will announce his/her name and motivations once his/her vote has been officially cast.

(We'll here note that we're still buying votes; we can be reached at tips@deadspin.com, or in the comments below. Confidentiality is assured.)

For now, though, we'd like to hear from you, the public: How should we proceed? What do you feel you need to cast an informed vote? What sort of voting system would best capture the will of the people? We have our own ideas, but we're curious what you think. Let us know in the comments below.

Based off the All-Star game votes I really don't think the public would be any better at picking the best people for the hall of fame. It would become more of a joke. I am not saying staying with the writers is the best idea, but giving it to the public is not a better idea it is just a different idea.

I think it's extremely insulting and unprofessional to sell your vote like this. People work hard to become a BWAA member and have the right to vote in these elections. It is supposed to be something you take pride in.

This is just wrong in my opinion. Also I agree that it is not a good idea to let the fans vote. Perfect example of this would be Don Mattingly. If it was up to the fans, especially casual fans, he would probably get in because of his popularity with Yankee fans, and now with dodger fans. I was a huge fan of his growing up but is not a HOFer.

I'm pretty sure this writer is prepared to lose his vote in the future...he's smart enough to know that. The BBWA vote has always been a farce anyway. If a guy is a hall of famer give him your vote, but half of the writers will not vote for someone in the first year of eligibility because they don't think someone should go in on the first ballot.

Not a fan or foe of Mattingly, but if Kirby Puckett got in, why can't Mattingly?

Trust me, he's not very popular with Dodger fans. He was only a few games from getting fired when Puig saved him.

He should be popular with Dodger fans. They weren't even a .500 team when he took over and he has finished 3rd, 2nd, and 1st consecutively since he's taken over.

Don't understand what they have to be mad at. Would they prefer going back to being 80-82?

Good point.

My guess and hope is that you have not bought any votes but I am sure you are enjoying the moment of publicity you are attempting to gain.

The Baseball Hall of Fame is far from a "holy" institution but the Hall's annual selection process is not that flawed.

Take you your feeble attempt at sanctimony to the football board, they have no issues with fraud or class.

My guess is that they don't have a vote but that they are trying to touch off a witch hunt for fun.

I've got an a BBWAA pin in my collection. Does that mean I get a vote?;)

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/...psbe29f7a1.jpg

Mike,

Are you directing this to the writer of the article? If so, you may want to send that to Deadspin. I simply copied the article from the site for us to discuss here. Unfortunately, I don't think Deadspin is reading Net54...

James- Please accept my apology! I just breezed through it. I will indeed do that! Once again, sorry.

Mike

Not to get off track here, but Mattingly is not a HOF'er, I'm sorry.

Agreed, were he not a Yankee I highly doubt it would ever be the subject of a serious discussion.

Are you next going to buy a vote for a Nobel Prize?

What about an Olympic Judge?

How about the watchers of Court TV be polled in lieu of a jury?

I think it is really awful that someone may have actually allowed you to play with their career/legacy, and you did it.

People who work in the field every day, with detailed knowledge - and time to dedicate - versus whatever ridiculous ill-fated marketing scheme this is - Id take the former.

How about "none of the above"

The Politics of Glory by Bill James provides many interest insights to HOF voting, and is a good read on the subject.

Silliness. The "problem" guys got in due to veterans committee cronyism. BBWA has a much better track record. The issue with the BBWA is the 15 years of being on the ballot. If you're not in within 5 years or so, ya done.

Puckett shouldn't be in either, two wrongs don't make a right.

Do most of the members here even understand what Deadspin is and what they stand for?

I don't know who deadspin is and what he does - can you give me a synopsis?

Deadspin is a sports website owned by Gawker Media and was launched in September 2005. As of February 2010, the site had attracted over 462 million unique visitors and about 573 million page views.[2]

Deadspin's founding editor-in-chief was Will Leitch, author and a founding editor of the New York City-based culture website, "The Black Table." Leitch announced on June 5, 2008 that he would be leaving to take a position at New York magazine.[3] He was replaced by A.J. Daulerio, former senior writer for the site.[4]

The current staff[5] consists of editor Tommy Craggs, managing editor Emma Carmichael, video/assignment editor Tim Burke, writers Barry Petchesky and Dom Cosentino, weekend editor Sean Newell, and contributing editor Drew Magary, along with a rotating group of regular contributors, interns and editorial assistants. The editorial tone is similar to that of its sister site Gawker.com: sarcastic, humorous and often critical of mainstream media personalities.

why? his stats were almost identical to kirby puckett, yet puckett got in?

Don't believe Puckett should have been voted in either.