Net 54 Baseball HOF

[bigtrain]

Sounds like a fun idea. I would love the opportunity to vote on a HOF as it could be a real elite group without the marginal HOFs that have been inducted in Cooperstown because they had friends on the veterans committee.

[Jlighter]

Would we include Joe Jackson or Pete Rose?

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by Jlighter

Would we include Joe Jackson or Pete Rose?

i would vote for both

[z28jd]

If you truly want to make the voting group friendly, have a vote on every aspect you can think of, first.

Banned players?

Minimum playing time to be on ballot?

% of votes needed?

players only?


etc, etc

[drmondobueno]

Originally Posted by Jlighter

Would we include Joe Jackson or Pete Rose?

You bet.

[jimivintage]

I'm in for the voting process. I know there are a few HoFers that I wouldn't necessarily be voting for, that's for sure.

[scooter729]

When I first read the headline, I thought it was going to be a post about establishing an HOF of best Net54 posters! Now THAT could stir up some controversy!

But upon re-reading, I think Scott has a great idea here (and MUCH better than where I thought he was initially going with it!)....

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by scooter729

When I first read the headline, I thought it was going to be a post about establishing an HOF of best Net54 posters! Now THAT could stir up some controversy!

I honestly thought the same thing.

[novakjr]

We should do ballots by era. It would help us in being a little more objective when it comes to the steroid guys...And to avoid situations like this years HOF ballot, where everyone is getting sandbagged because of steroids, I think we should place a "minimum"(maybe 5) on the number of players you must vote for in each era...

[CobbSpikedMe]

I'm all for it. I think the end results would be a very respectable group of N54 HOFers. And I'm on the side of Joe Jackson and Pete Rose being in as well.

Cool idea!

AndyH


.

[T206DK]

Originally Posted by Jlighter

Would we include Joe Jackson or Pete Rose?

I would include both Rose and Jackson , and exclude any players who have been found to have taken any drugs that would have aided in their attaining stats

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by T206DK

I would include both Rose and Jackson , and exclude any players who have been found to have taken any drugs that would have aided in their attaining stats

Don't know if it will include post-wwii (probably not since this is a pre-war forum), but there definitely would not be any players 'banned' from voting.

[Eric72]

The first "class" of Net54 HOFers could be broken into six time periods, with a "starting nine" from each era.

6 periods X 9 players = 54

Voting could be very simple in this way. Define the time period (say, Pre-1876) and ask members to cast their vote on a starting nine. After voting has ended for that time period, tally them up.

The pitcher with the most votes gets in. All other pitchers will not get in on that ballot.

Repeat this with catchers. Then repeat with all four individual infield positions.

For simplicity's sake, perhaps the three outfielders with the most votes get in...no differential between left, right and center field.

Have voting rounds take place once each month. After six months, the Net54HOF would consist of 54 players. At that point, start again from the beginning. That would give all of the players from the 1st time period a new chance to make the Net54 HOF.

[AMBST95]

Originally Posted by Eric72

The first "class" of Net54 HOFers could be broken into six time periods, with a "starting nine" from each era.

6 periods X 9 players = 54

Voting could be very simple in this way. Define the time period (say, Pre-1876) and ask members to cast their vote on a starting nine. After voting has ended for that time period, tally them up.

The pitcher with the most votes gets in. All other pitchers will not get in on that ballot.

Repeat this with catchers. Then repeat with all four individual infield positions.

For simplicity's sake, perhaps the three outfielders with the most votes get in...no differential between left, right and center field.

Have voting rounds take place once each month. After six months, the Net54HOF would consist of 54 players. At that point, start again from the beginning. That would give all of the players from the 1st time period a new chance to make the Net54 HOF.

The downside to this voting pattern is there are not an equal number of HOF Caliber players at each position and some players who deserve recognition over another can be hampered because they played a certain position. I'm for setting a limit to the number of players picked for an era, if we go that route, but I don't think we should force ourselves to take certain position players when another player is more deserving.

[Eric72]

Adam,

What you wrote makes sense. Guess the appeal of hitting the number 54 clouded my thinking.

Best Regards,

Eric

[Runscott]

Others have posted similar ideas. I guess the problem I have with this way of going about it, is that you might have a person who's 'next best' at a position during an early 'era', who might be better than the 'best' player of any other era. With this system, he has to wait. I'm just going through everyone's ideas - not making the rules based on my own preferences - but my personal opinion is that it should be the best players. For instance, if you end up with too many outfielders and 'not enough' third basemen - sobeit.

I think the real Hall made some error judgement regarding banning and the way they set up inducting players from previous eras. Fortunately, we have reviewable history to go on, and no Kennesaw Mountain Landis, so if we want Hal Chase and Joe Jackson, we can have them. And none of us were buddies with Phil Rizzuto...I hope.

I'll have the ideas processed and regurgitated in useable form, by next week.