Changes to Hall of Fame Eras Committees eligibility

[jayshum]

It looks like some changes are being made to prevent the same candidates from showing up on the Eras Committees ballots if they don't receive much support in previous ballots. This should give different players who may have previously been overlooked a chance to be on these ballots.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...mmittee-ballot

[Mike D.]

I like the whole "don't get 5 votes, can't get on the next ballot" part a lot. Should keep some of the same guys appearing every 3 year cycle.

I'm not so sure about the "two ballots w/ less than 5 votes and you're done forever". In an era like the "post 1980", the chance of a very stacked ballot is very real. Some good candidates could get dropped off the ballot without a real fair shake.

I'm really interested to see who is on the ballot this year for post 1980. Whitaker? Evans? Lofton? Schilling? Or do they trot the PED guys out again to get their first "less than 5 votes" appearance over with?

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

I like the whole "don't get 5 votes, can't get on the next ballot" part a lot. Should keep some of the same guys appearing every 3 year cycle.

I'm not so sure about the "two ballots w/ less than 5 votes and you're done forever". In an era like the "post 1980", the chance of a very stacked ballot is very real. Some good candidates could get dropped off the ballot without a real fair shake.

I'm really interested to see who is on the ballot this year for post 1980. Whitaker? Evans? Lofton? Schilling? Or do they trot the PED guys out again to get their first "less than 5 votes" appearance over with?

It wasn't clear if the rule is being applied retroactively or not. If so, then Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro and Belle already have their first less than 5 vote ballot so wouldn't be eligible for the next one. I guess we'll find out later this year.

[G1911]

At least some of the names cycling through will end up getting removed. In the system before this change, basically anyone on the ballot would eventually have to be elected.

However, a guy who vets 4 votes twice in a row and removed from the ballot may well be replaced with players worse than him, and so in a few cycles they'll be electing people worse than those banned from the ballot.

Really, the entire system should be redesigned. We have like 50-60 years of these veterans/experts committees making consistently bad selections. A closed room with a very small number of insiders, many of whom have/had personal relationships with those on the ballot is very unlikely to produce consistently good or fair results.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

At least some of the names cycling through will end up getting removed. In the system before this change, basically anyone on the ballot would eventually have to be elected.

However, a guy who vets 4 votes twice in a row and removed from the ballot may well be replaced with players worse than him, and so in a few cycles they'll be electing people worse than those banned from the ballot.

Really, the entire system should be redesigned. We have like 50-60 years of these veterans/experts committees making consistently bad selections. A closed room with a very small number of insiders, many of whom have/had personal relationships with those on the ballot is very unlikely to produce consistently good or fair results.

Agreed. The committees should be larger in size and drawn from different constituencies.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Agreed. The committees should be larger in size and drawn from different constituencies.

The larger the committees, the less likely that they select anyone. Some people would consider that good news, but it's bad news for others. I think the Hall of Fame probably wants more inductees because it brings people to the induction weekend and to the museum so I would be surprised if they made any changes that would make it less likely that new inductees are selected.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by jayshum

It wasn't clear if the rule is being applied retroactively or not. If so, then Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro and Belle already have their first less than 5 vote ballot so wouldn't be eligible for the next one. I guess we'll find out later this year.

Everything I've read it suggests with the ballot this December (so, not retroactive).

Thankfully, the nominating committee is terrible at building ballots, so hopefully my fear of 8-10 very good candidates appearing in the same year and some dropping won't happen.

[jayshum]

Here's a link to an article by Jay Jaffe talking about the changes made to ballot eligibility. It does appear that they start with this year's era committee ballot.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/never-is...e/#more-458516