1920 Ballot results

[DTroppens]

Two made it and one missed by a single vote.
25 voted. Thanks!

Here is the Class of 1920.
Inducted (75% of the vote or at least 19 votes)
Sam Crawford 25
Bill Donovan 22
Remaining on the ballot (at least 10% of the vote or 3 votes)
Hughie Jennings 18
Ed Killian 16
Harry Covelski 16
Ed Siever 9
Jimmy Barrett 4
Davy Jones 3
Ed Summers 3
Germany Schaefer 3
* Matty McIntyre 1
Off the ballot
Jean Dubuc 1
Willie Mitchell 1
No votes
Jim Delahanty
Ossie Vitt
George Burns
Bernie Boland
Bill James
George Cunningham


*McIntyre remains on ballot because his two-ballot percentage remains at or above 10%

Edit: I had some updates on here since my first post and realize I forgot to post a person with THREE VOTES! I need to double-check this better.

[estrepe1]

No Hughie Jennings.... That is a complete joke.

[dt35456884]

Congratulations, committee members. You voted down a member of the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Jennings was good enough to be in Cooperstown, but apparently we couldn't make room for him on the first ballot here.

Ludicrous result.

[estrepe1]

http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/plaques/images/Jennings_Hugh.jpg

Jennings apparently was good enough for the MLB HOF for his contributions to Tiger history since he only had 2 seasons with another team... However he isn't good enough for the Motown Tigers HOF. Hmmm I think I notice an old English D on that cap he is wearing....

Congrats voters we just made a mockery of our own project.

[Just Some Dude]

No Hughie Jennings.... That is a complete joke.

I agree!

[DTroppens]

estrepe,
On the last two ballots sent he went from not on it, to on it and back off of it. I voted for him. But I think this shows a few things. This shows how tough 75% really is. And it shows that probably 100 percent clear shots are going to make it the first time on the ballot. I can't see him not making it eventually. This showing should help him and if nothing else he's going to go to the vet's committee one day. I think it also shows that some people prefer players over managers. And while dt mentioned it a ton I don't know if people knew they could vote for him WITHOUT it counting towards the top 5. This will be the case again next time so I'm guessing he's going to make it. We need to start a Jennings must be elected thread.

I had a bio all set on him and had this thread ready to be posted. Then with minutes left the last ballot came in and changed the results. Believe me it would've been easier for me if he made it as well. For dt it was a matter of preparing to post him and then don't post him.

[squid]

I'm gonna guess that at least a couple voters didn't realize that he didn't count against the player vote.

[DTroppens]

dt,
again great job on the presentations of the winners.

And thanks to all for not posting there for the few minutes that thread was unlocked.

[estrepe1]

I understand and I am not blaming you DT. I also understand that some prefer players over managers. However greatness is still greatness. Managers have to have players to be successful. But managers still deserve to be in an HOF if they have success.

[squid]

I am happy to see the support for Coveleski, Killian and Siever, although I didn't vote for Siever, I hoped he stayed on the ballot.

[Edman85]

My hope is that my Jennings vote counted. I knew he didn't count against, just had the managers seperate on the spreadsheet and forgot to double check everybody until five minutes I pressed send. Even then, I thought he would be unanimous.

He'll get in, it will just be the second time around. This just tells me that people are being a little too stringent and need to rethink their voting.

Jennings non-voters out there have some explaining to do.

[DTroppens]

estrepe,
I understand you weren't blaming me. Heck, I voted for him. Again, I think we need to make people understand how important this guy was. I had his bio all done. Heck, I'm sure dt had his presentation post pretty much done. He was asking me to send the rest of the bio that got cut off. That's when I got the last ballot and found out he didn't make it.

Can someone find a picture of Jennings and post it? I'm not good at that stuff. His picture is either the No. 1 or No. 2 picture in Tiger history behind or slightly ahead of Cobb sliding into third. That's not the reason why he should be in. But the reason those images are so clear even in our minds today (about 100 years later) is because how great the man was.

[dt35456884]

I'm assuming the three people who didn't vote for Donovan prefer to keep this Hall of Fame limited to about 20 Tigers.

[dt35456884]

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e389/amchiche/Detroit%20Tigers%20HOF/hughiejennings1920.gif

[estrepe1]

I'm assuming the three people who didn't vote for Donovan prefer to keep this Hall of Fame limited to about 20 Tigers.

Lets just limit it to people with their names on the wall in right center and the people with statues in left center.

Oh wait Jennings has his name on that wall.

[DTroppens]

Edman,
Your vote counted. I got both PMs.

To all:
I hope this doesn't keep others from voting. None of us are always going to be happy with the election. I was totally shocked that Jimmy Barrett didn't get more love. I thought he had a shot and found out last night he wasn't going to make it. Heck, I even PMd dt35456884 that I thought he had a good chance. If nothing else his good work at WJR for years should've been honored. :classic:

Again, this isn't 50-50. This is 75 percent. And I wonder if some may have wanted Sparky to go first as the winningest manager ever. Really I bet people didn't understand the voting process.

[dt35456884]

Really I bet people didn't understand the voting process.

At this point, the voting process has been made as clear as day.

[Edman85]

Edman,
Your vote counted. I got both PMs.

Cool, I felt really bad there for about five minutes. I have faith Jennings will make the next round.

I've already got my six ready for 1925... Just throwing two new names on the list in place of Crawford and Donovan.

[Edman85]

There were 101 votes for players among the ballots, out of 125 possible. Had this number been higher, I'd be convinced about the misunderstanding the voting. At this point, it seems as if people didn't feel as if Jennings was worthy, or didn't feel like managers should be voted on right now.

[squid]

We all have our own oppinions and reasonings for voting for or not, that's what makes this super cool and very special, at least to me. To ask someone to explain a vote for or against doesn't set well with me. Look at the bright side, we elected 100% more this time. We wanted this to be a group of fans that decide on their own who should be "the best of the best" of the Detroit Tigers. Although I truly believe Jennings should be in, I'm not going to think less of those who don't. Heck, I think it's a shame that Harry Coveleski didn't make it, but....I'll just have to campaign for him harder this week.

[DTroppens]

All being equal I would keep a manager off before a player. However, in my opinion he was no worse than third on this list.

It looks like Killian and Coveleski are going to have a shot. I haven't seen the players involved in the next election but those were good showings. Ed Siever has had a few decent showings as well.

[estrepe1]

I am happy with the number of votes Siever received. I wasn't saying he deserved to be in but he deserved some votes. He did get more respect this time around.

[DTroppens]

We had a great # of votes to voters ratio without a doubt this time. We had about half use 6 votes. Surprisingly, I wasn't one of them.

[squid]

Seems to me we are all doing more "homework", I know I am, and I will continue to do so, last week at this time I had never heard of Harry Coveleski. Whether or not if it's recognized as "official", doesn't matter to me. This is the Detroit Tigers Hall Of Fame!

People at work can't believe it when I tell them that you guys know more about the Tigers than I do.

[DTroppens]

Squid,
I disagree to a point. I think pleading cases is important. This is done in real life for sure and should be part of the process. I think people making posts that say "what a joke" can solidify someone's opinion against what you want to happen. I'd say people probably should be a bit smarter with their opinions if they want to get that one person or two to change their minds.


I agree with this though. I don't think less of those who didn't vote for someone or did for someone.

For those who wonder. I'm not memorizing who's voting for who. I tabulate the results and don't look at it again. I don't know who were the ones that didn't vote for Donovan and I don't know who were the ones that supported Barrett (along with me). I have a great "blank slate" memory and won't remember. And

[dt35456884]

We all have our own oppinions and reasonings for voting for or not, that's what makes this super cool and very special, at least to me. To ask someone to explain a vote for or against doesn't set well with me.

I agree to an extent. On the other hand, if you go into this process with the idea that only 20 Tigers are deserving of induction, I just wonder what the point is. I'm all for debate, disagreement, and controversy. But Donovan and Jennings ought to have been unanimous, or pretty close to it.

[estrepe1]

I am sorry Dave. I know what you are saying I am sure that you are correct that I should plead the case better. But that was my initial response to the fact that one of the all time great managers in the game and in the history of the Tigers was not voted in. I am sorry that I didn't respond in a better manner or as a gentleman. I am not saying that everyone that voted against him is an idiot. I just would love to know the reasons why someone with 1131 wins as a manager of the Tigers and 3 pennants should be left out of the HOF.

He was the first Tiger manager with 100 wins in a season. When the 1915 Tigers went 100-54.

There are only 2 Tiger managers in the history of the club with over 1000 wins as the manager. Sparky Anderson and Hughie Jennings. They are also the only two managers in Tigers history with over 2000 games managed. They are also the only two Tiger managers to manage the team for more than a decade.

[squid]

I wasn't saying that pleading for a vote was wrong, I did it myself by only posting stats and arguments for the 5 players I felt worthy. However, won't get mad at anyone for not voting for someone that I feel worthy. That's the point I was trying to make.
Estrepe made me think about Siever, which is good, I spent some time deciding between him and Covelski... in my opinion, Coveleski got my vote.
Depending on the class I may vote to keep Siever on the ballot.

I voted for Ed Summers and I'm disappointed he didn't make it to the next ballot, but I understand.

[tiger337]

I voted for Jennings but I think some people may have forgotten that they could vote for him without losing one of their 5 votes. Others might not think that managers are that important in baseball and I can certainly understand that. I think he should be in there but I don't think it's a joke that he didn't make it. He'll still probably end up making it anyway.

There has been a lot of complaining about people being too stingy but who's to say that they are wrong? I'm being fairly liberal myself but I think people have every right to vote how they want to vote. There was no criteria stated at the beginning about what it meant to be a Hall of Famer. People have been given the freedom to use their own criteria and that's how it should be.

[tiger337]

I'm glad Killian got more votes this time. I think he deserves to be in there.

[estrepe1]

However, won't get mad at anyone for not voting for someone that I feel worthy. That's the point I was trying to make.
Estrepe made me think about Siever, which is good, I spent some time deciding between him and Covelski... in my opinion, Coveleski got my vote.
Depending on the class I may vote to keep Siever on the ballot.

There is a difference between pleading for someone like Siever to at least get respect. Which is what I was mad about. I wasn't mad he didn't get in I was mad that people just glossed over him like he was terrible. I think 9 votes is just fine for him.

Jennings is a different case for me. I want this to be something that people from the outside will see as serious. Yet if you leave someone like Jennings out that is in the MLB HOF it will look bad. And really beyond that I don't see a good reason not to vote for him.

[DTroppens]

Again,
It didn't appear people were out to get "only 20" in here. Too many people voted four, five and six candidates for this to be the case.

And to be honest I wouldn't mind if we only got 25-30 (without looking at the ballots in advance) to start with. If only the "studs" get in while we do the Class votes, I have no problem with that. Others will get in later. That said in my mind Jennings was a "stud".

I think people realized that if they wanted borderline candidates to make it in they had to show love to others that were equally borderline.

I really thought about voting for Coveleski. He had a decent little run there and I actually know that well from my game playing. However, I didn't. He was close.

[DTroppens]

tiger337,
There has been complaining about people being stingy but again I'll post this - people are turning in a lot of votes. At a quick glance ONE person voted for less than three. Most voted for 4-6.

squid,
I screwed up in my haste to get that list out fast. I missed Summers completely on the ballot. He not only got votes but is still on the ballot because of his overall average.

[squid]

I agree to an extent. On the other hand, if you go into this process with the idea that only 20 Tigers are deserving of induction, I just wonder what the point is. I'm all for debate, disagreement, and controversy. But Donovan and Jennings ought to have been unanimous, or pretty close to it.
__________________

I don't have the idea that 20-30 Tigers should be inducted, my mindset is around 75-100 should be in, we're talking about a 100+yr history of pro baseball. Yes I believe that Jennings should be in, but I'm not going to try and shame other voters into voting him in. I'll only try harder to convince people why I think nominees should be voted in.

I do think it's a shame that Jennings wasn't voted in, that's my opinion.

[estrepe1]

I am partially afraid that we will only elect a few people from the early time period and a ton from the later.

[squid]

I am partially afraid that we will only elect a few people from the early time period and a ton from the later.

isn't that how the real HOF voting goes though?

[DTroppens]

estrepe,
I'm not sure if that's going to happen. People are using their votes and are giving the benefit of the doubt I think since high vote numbers kind of symbolize that.

I think we may see people voting for "favorites" but as many people that adored Bobby Higginson (example) others won't vote for him to their dying breath regardless what his stats may suggest what he was during his era. Also, there only can be 10 to 12 nominees in an era and that's going to keep numbers down regardless.

I'm glad someone suggested doing this in five-year intervals. I thought it was way too short of a period and would result in about 1,000 inductees. Now I see with that 75% that this is going to be tough and that every five years is plenty. I can't imagine what it would've been like if we had 10 years worth of nominees and had to limit the ballot to about 12-15 of them and then had to vote on such a large list. The vote would be so watered down we'd get the minimum number of people in.

[tiger337]

I would rather have too few get in there the first time around. We can always lobby and add later but we can't subtract players.

[estrepe1]

That is true Lee.... I will back off about Jennings. I just thought he was a no brainer and was very upset to hear that he was not.

[dt35456884]

I'm glad someone suggested doing this in five-year intervals.

Don't mention it. :classic:

[DTroppens]

It wasn't like Jennings got less than 50% of the vote either. I was a bit shocked when he didn't get in but he missed by one vote. That's well over 50% - just not 75%.

That's three out of every four people. If two people aren't going to vote for managers (I'm making something up here) the first time around, that really makes it tough for him to get voted in for the rest of the people.

Remember Wild Bill was as many votes away from being unaminous as he was getting the minimum required to get here.

[tiger337]

That is true Lee.... I will back off about Jennings. I just thought he was a no brainer and was very upset to hear that he was not.

Don't back off too much though. People are being more passionate about this than I expected which is a good thing.

[DTroppens]

dt,
I thought it was either your or DaYooper.

[estrepe1]

Don't back off too much though. People are being more passionate about this than I expected which is a good thing.

The history of baseball is one of my favorite subjects.

[Tigeraholic1]

To bad Hughie was not voted in.... He will be on the next ballot right? Lets all lobby to pick up those few extra votes!

[DaYooperASBDT]

I was shocked about Jennings not getting 75%. Dave, I agree that we need to strongly emphasize that non-players are voted separately. Tempted to suggest requiring a specific "Yes" or "No" on non-players:

Example Ballot:

Player1
Player2
etc.

Jennings - Yes

That would insure that all voters are participating in the non-player portion of the ballot.

[84 Lives!!!]

Don't you guys have a Veteran's Committee?

:grin:

[redshark63]

Keep in mind B, that Jennings was going to the Bsbl HoF even if he had never managed One day with the Tigers. He made it as a player.

Just like the real HoF, there are very worthy candidates that just miss.
As has been said many times before, DiMaggio went in his 3rd year and he was probably the most popular player of his generation in addition to the numbers he put up.

[DaYooperASBDT]

75% is really a tough standard, but it makes this a challenging exercise. I really blew my top when I saw Jennings didn't get it, but the thought of Joltin Joe waiting 3 years? That helps put things in perspective for me.

[DTroppens]

DaYooper,
Why do I get the feeling you are going to vote for Pete Fox when his election is up? :classic:

[Doctor Detroit]

Keep in mind B, that Jennings was going to the Bsbl HoF even if he had never managed One day with the Tigers.


X

Although Jennings was voted in as a player and was one of the best shortstops of his era with the bat, he had just five good seasons as a player and not much more. He wears the Old English D on his plaque (he had 9 ABs as a Tiger) and if you go to baseball reference dot com or many other links it brings his managerial record up first. He would not have gone to the HOF on his playing record alone.

[dt35456884]

Although Jennings was voted in as a player and was one of the best shortstops of his era with the bat, he had just five good seasons as a player and not much more. He wears the Old English D on his plaque (he had 9 ABs as a Tiger) and if you go to baseball reference dot com or many other links it brings his managerial record up first. He would not have gone to the HOF on his playing record alone.

Well said. Jennings will be remembered a manager first and foremost. As he should be.

[tiger337]

X

Although Jennings was voted in as a player and was one of the best shortstops of his era with the bat, he had just five good seasons as a player and not much more. He wears the Old English D on his plaque (he had 9 ABs as a Tiger) and if you go to baseball reference dot com or many other links it brings his managerial record up first. He would not have gone to the HOF on his playing record alone.

It's true that he is better known as a manager but I think that's because he did that in the so called modern era beginning in 1901. He had an outstanding career as a player. Keep in mind that leagues were unstable back in those days and careers tended to be shorter. I believe Redshark is right that he had a Hall of Fame career as a player. I am not convinced that he would have made the Hall of Fame if he was not also a great player as well as a manager.

[tiger337]

Well said. Jennings will be remembered a manager first and foremost. As he should be.

That's how he is remembered because a lot of people don't care about the 1800s but that doesn't mean it should be that way or that it was that way back then. When he was managing, people were very aware of his legacy as a player. I think he is a great Tigers manager and he belongs in our Hall of Fame but I don't regard his managerial career as being better than his playing career.

[DTroppens]

Navin had to fight the AL to get Jennings to Detroit. Right now Jennings is fighting to get here.

[Doctor Detroit]

It's true that he is better known as a manager but I think that's because he did that in the so called modern era beginning in 1901. He had an outstanding career as a player. Keep in mind that leagues were unstable back in those days and careers tended to be shorter. I believe Redshark is right that he had a Hall of Fame career as a player. I am not convinced that he would have made the Hall of Fame if he was not also a great player as well as a manager.

Oh I agree. He wouldn't have made it only as a manger, and he wouldn't have made it only as a player. Not sure what you mean by unstable but Jennings was only good for a few years. Compare him to a Honus Wagner who played 21 years...and...well...there is no comparison. He wasn't a HOF player, he was the Alan Trammell of his generation. He got into the HOF becaue of his overall contribution to the sport.

[DaYooperASBDT]

DaYooper,
Why do I get the feeling you are going to vote for Pete Fox when his election is up? :classic:Oh, I'll struggle to maintain objectivity, no doubt !! But he was only truly terrific in 1935, so .........

[tiger337]

Oh I agree. He wouldn't have made it only as a manger, and he wouldn't have made it only as a player. Not sure what you mean by unstable but Jennings was only good for a few years. Compare him to a Honus Wagner who played 21 years...and...well...there is no comparison. He wasn't a HOF player, he was the Alan Trammell of his generation. He got into the HOF becaue of his overall contribution to the sport.

You are right that he didn't have a enough years to make him a slam dunk Hall of Famer as a player. I wouldn't compare anybody to Wagner because I consider him one of the 5 greatest players ever but comparing him to other 19th C players in the HOF, he is borderline as a player. He is interesting in that it's hard to find players who were so successful as both players and managers as he was.

[redshark63]

Fitting that Crawford & Donovan made it on the same ballot.

I was just reading in Richard Bak's "A Place For Summer", that both Donovan & Crawford, who had both jumped from the NL to the AL in 1903, were both awarded to Detroit as part of the subsequent winter's 1903 AL/NL peace agreement.

Thiat agreement also included keeping Detroit from transferring to Pittsburgh.