Today's Trivia Question

[Butch7999]

Hall of Fame vote-casting is a little more complicated than some people assume.
Not voting for some unquestionably deserving sure-fire mortal lock candidate generally isn't a vote against the guy --
it's a voter thinking "that guy is an unquestionably deserving sure-fire mortal lock for the Hall, all the other voters
are going to vote for him, so he doesn't need my vote, but this other borderline candidate I like needs my vote,
so he's one of the guys I'll vote for instead of the sure-fire mortal lock guy."
That's why few eligible players, even the most obvious and most deserving candidates, get 100% of the votes.

A hockey history group ran an interesting exercise several years ago, in which a couple of dozen or so
hockey historians participated in "re-voting" the Hockey Hall of Fame from scratch, a fresh vote every few days.
It took about a year to complete, and the vote manoeuvering got pretty clever and involved as the "years" went by,
players were voted in, failed to be elected but had enough support to be rolled over as eligible for subsequent votes,
fell off the eligibility list after several "years," and so on.
It would be fascinating to see the results of a similar exercise in here to "re-vote" the baseball hall.