This was mostly a response to Michael at post 40 it just took me a while to get it typed.
For a lot of reasons.
If a player doesn't get at least 5% in any eligible year they're off the ballot. So it's possible a player didn't get 5 years of eligibility. If for instance they were getting votes just short of being elected, then there was a very strong retirement group. Not a great example, but Dwight Evans had 5.9%, 10.4 %, and 3.6% what happened that last year? Ryan, Brett, Yount, and Fisk happened. It's possible Evans would have made it in eventually, maybe his 5th year. But he was removed from the ballot. His career numbers may seem unimpressive, but many are in the top 100 all time, a few in the top 50. Even after the steroid era his 385 HR are tenth for AL righthanders. Not too shabby for a borderline candidate.
For some players their impact may not be realized until much later. Some of these might more properly go in as contributors. Flood, Tommy John, probably others. Flood provided a player willing to take the risk that created free agency, Tommy John - Heck, the surgery that saves a few careers is named for him. Both had a larger impact than just what they did on the field.
And since the voting is done by the writers, there's a bias towards the guys who were more likable, or made for better stories. And towards NY and Boston players to some degree. Albert Belle is a prime example of a guy who did himself no favors. His numbers are pretty good, 381HR, .295 BA 1239 RBI and all that in what's more like ten and a half years. (And close to what Jim Rice did in 15 years, and it took them another 15 to elect him) But Belle was very abrasive, especially towards the press and only lasted 2 years on the ballot.
That's why it's good to give some players, as well as other contributors another look later on.
Steve B
Last edited by steve B; 11-12-2013 at 08:59 PM.
Reason: Added first line so the context makes sense
|