Jump to content

DaYooperASBDT

Tigers Hall Of Fame - Q&A

Recommended Posts

I think we're all open to including the Wolverines and Stars...Let's put the other teams on the backburner for now.

My suggestion is to start a seperate thread for the Wolverines and another for the Stars plus a much longer timeframe (two months?) for discussion, nominations and consideration. The info will be harder to find and piece together. The NL rules of the 1880s changed considerably season to season and must be examined (for instance, 1885 was the first season a pitcher was allowed to throw overhand).

With these threads, everyones main focus can be on the Tigers elections while becoming educated on the Stars and Wolverines.

I am currently working on a book on the Buffalo Bisons (1879-1885) of the National League and have vast information of 19th century players. With my schedule (I would like to but...) it will take some time to post all that should be on the Wolverines' players and the impact of rule changes year to year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mudman,

I've been dealing with the 1920s NNL players right now (mostly because I have a small base with the 1921-1923 NNL seasons with statistics) and I think just the nominations are going to be challenging. I see people list studs that are in the HOF for ideas and then I look and see these players were with the Stars or Wolves for a year. I see others that were solid or even above average and they were here for much longer. But where's the middle ground. I think Fidrych is going to make our list and he only had one full season (actually it wasn't even a full season) and another solid start to another. After that he really has very limited appearances over the course of about four more years. It's going to be really tough for us to sift through these guys and make these decisions. And I'm only looking at one small period of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to discuss the fact that six voters failed to vote. We should clarify the procedure and remove members that miss two votes, without showing cause. Propose the following:

1. Members must submit a ballot by the stated deadline. If they vote an "empty ballot", the PM to Dave must clearly state that. Not voting does not constitutute voting an empty ballot.

2. First missed vote, warning, second missed vote, member is removed from the committee unless the committee grants an excuse for that week/vote.

3. If a member is going to miss a vote, and advises Dave before the deadline, member is excused for that week/vote.

Sound good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think there should be an excuse unless the circumstances are really harsh.
Agreed. But they do happen so wanted to leave an out. But yes it should be something dire, absolutely. It doesn't take much to log in once per week.

EDIT: Wish you guys would discuss stuff in threads other than the election threads. I just found the lengthy discussion on this subject in the 1920 thread. I stuggle to find this stuff on a dial-up connection.

Dave, if you see fit to drop some people I'll support that, especially if the six that didn't vote have not even been logging in. We should display the voting deadline prominently in the first post of the election threads though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that people who don't vote in two elections should be kicked out. However, I suspect we'll lose more members as we go along and if the total number of voters gets too low, we may have to expand again somehow in the future. I think getting people to vote and deciding who is on the committee will be two of our biggest challenges throughout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point Lee. It's easy to sign up for something, but the time commitment can often turn out to be more than expected. That's just the nature of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can give people one more chance. However, I am not going to send PMs to people for warnings. In fact I think letting actions speak for themselves is key here. If people vote this week for the second class I will accept them without a second thought. In fact all I have is a list on a notecard who didn't vote. It's not like I have it memorized and have negative feelings or anything. In fact a few I recall were shockers because I do respect those people. However, if we have to prod them to vote then I don't want people to be here at the risk of losing too many members. If we have 10 people I can live with that. We will have 10 quality members. But that's not going to happen. When we get to the 1960s you are going to see people wanting to join so they can vote for their favorites. Will we still have the same interest? Maybe not, but if we fall to 14 in the 1950s I think by the 1980s we will have people knocking on our door.

About the time committment thing - We gave something like TEN days to do research. And this was an easy era in my opinion. People from the 1907-1909 teams with little outside of that. And those others well documented. There are "dryer" eras in terms of team success that people know less about. I'm guessing most can't name more than 5 people from the 1920s or even during the war years. I'm guessing most don't know much about the 1945 team even. The 1950s probably not much either. Those may be tougher eras than this one. If people couldn't get this one done in 10 days with the fires burning for a new project, I'm wondering if they can do it for other eras that may be more difficult for lesser known eras. And someone could've even "faked" it and got this done. I could've named five off that list and made it look like a reasonable ballot. Heck if someone voted just Mullin and Schaefer that would've looked legit to me.

BTW,

I have the ballots and I write down who people voted for so I have a backup system. However, I have the memory of a rock so when I talk on these boards I have no clue who DennisDubay, Davidsb, dt or Tiger337 voted for. I think this is one time where my "blank slate" memory works well. I don't think we need someone adding ballots who is memorizing who is voting for what and starts individually politicking. I'm sure if someone votes for Schaefer four times, I'll memorize it but it will take that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can put a message on the Tiger folder and say who didn't vote please do so for the next election on Friday and to announce people to look at our first nominee.

P.S. Another issue is going to be keeping people from posting in our final selection thread. There are going to be times I will unlock that thing so dt can put the people in that deserve to be there. But we can't have people putting posts there. We can delete them, but I think we can see them as deleted message (or at least I can) and I don't want people seeing that stuff. So please people when you see that unlocked DON'T POST IN IT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I may have been unclear on my comment on time commitment. If you volunteer for something, you should expect to invest a certain amount of time, at least enough to check in weekly and vote. Otherwise you have wasted everyone's time, including your own.

Just because it's human nature, that doesn't mean I'm cool with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait for the Donie Bush "he's crap" "he deserves consideration" conversations here.

He's one of my favorite players of all time because of the extremities involved with his career. Can't hit, can walk, can't field, a great defensive player - he's going to be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ozzie Smith gets in to the regular HOF for his D, then that means I'm taking a long look at Donie Bush.

(Almost said "taking a long look at Bush", but .......)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think there should be an excuse unless the circumstances are really harsh.

I can see if there is an emergency (hospitalization, etc) where someone might miss a vote, but needs to let Dave know in advance if possible, or as soon as possible afterwards. I think it is our responsibility to know when each deadline is and do the research to the best of our ability. This is a wonderful privilege we have that could easily have historical relevance. I think we all need to take this as a serious responsibility, and take the responisibility seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I might vote for Bush after reading that many consider him one of the top 3 defensive players at SS.

One of the top 3 Tigers defensive shortstops? Maybe. He doesn't have the reputation or stats as one of baseball's great defenders. I think he was a good fielder in terms of range but Bill James pointed out that he was horrible at turning doubleplays because he was of the old school philosophy that you go for one safe out. He played in a period where doubleplays were starting to get more popular and James said he didn't make the adjustment.

I agree with Troppens that Bush will be an interesting candidate. There are plenty of positives and negatives. I like the fact that he has longevity, played fairly good defense (maybe!) at an important position and drew a lot of walks. He couldn't hit though. He will be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donnie Bush was considered an outstanding defensive SS early in his career but the stats really don't reflect that and he was poor at the DP. As Tiger337 pointed out later in his career he was considered a liability because he could not turn the DP. You can see how people are limited when it comes to him. Some may read he was a poor SS if they read the DP thing (I think the book on lineups mentions that) but it disregards earlier in his career when he was considered a very good SS. The times changed a bit during his career and he didn't adjust. Still his fielding percentages are awful. His range must've been pretty good. When I grade him for my games I give him a tiny plus for range but keep the errors there and as the years go on his DP ability goes lesser and lesser. In the 1900s and even early 1910s getting DPs may not have been as important as just getting out. However, as you go on offenses got better and getting two when you can was more important. As he's the SS you can see our DP numbers don't get much higher if at all and some teams end up turning 130 or 140 a year - almost double the number the Tigers did. Ralph Young is given a bit of heat for this as well.

Bush also had very poor power in an era that eventually a tad of power became important. Without looking right now I'm sure he must've had seasons he had more walks than hits, but when you add all those walks to a low .200 average, it doesn't look bad. It's amazing he walked that much considering he had no pop (I think half of his homers were inside the parkers, something like that) and he posed no threat with that bat.

I don't think anyone's career is filled with contraditions like Bush's. He also promoted a Negro Leagues vs. MLB players series in Indianapolis for a few years during the offseason. That means a little to me. If all being equal with others I'll let that give him a tiny bit nod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know this for sure but at the half-century mark I think he was named the Tigers' all-time shortstop. I'll have to check that one out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the top 3 Tigers defensive shortstops? Maybe. He doesn't have the reputation or stats as one of baseball's great defenders. I think he was a good fielder in terms of range but Bill James pointed out that he was horrible at turning doubleplays because he was of the old school philosophy that you go for one safe out. He played in a period where doubleplays were starting to get more popular and James said he didn't make the adjustment.

I agree with Troppens that Bush will be an interesting candidate. There are plenty of positives and negatives. I like the fact that he has longevity, played fairly good defense (maybe!) at an important position and drew a lot of walks. He couldn't hit though. He will be interesting.

I think it was top 3-5 defensive SS in Tigers history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, back to rules, schedule, etc. Here's a summary of information/questions from today. If I missed anything please advise, and I'll edit this post. I also have some requests for Dave:

1. Several members requested a thread with the schedule, deadline for submission, and a summary of FAQ. Oblong suggested no replies.

Request: I would like to post the voting schedule and rules in post #1 of this thread, or have Dave edit post #1 accordingly. Also may help to sticky the thread?

2. We have been discussing ground rules in multiple threads. This is causing confusion among members.

Request: Let's try to keep such discussions over here, and summarize rules in the first post of this thread, if no objections?

3. Voting schedule. Can we go ahead and post the whole thing?

Request: Dave, are you willing to stick with one election per week, deadline Friday midnight? Works for me. If OK, I can go ahead and generate the entire voting schedule through 2005 then?

4. Election Deadline - DT intends to post the deadline in the first thread of each election post. That should help also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some reminders from Dave on voting format/procedure:

P.S. If anyone ever can't make it on the board to vote, send me a PM. I'll give you my office phone number that has voice mail. I will give you my email address. I will give you a mailing address. Heck, if you live close I'll meet you at a school while I'm working to get your results. I don't care how I get them. I just want to make sure we do.

I suggest before you send your list you wait a day if there is still time to wait. Then look at it again and see if you still like your list. We had quite a few people turn in a couple PMs and that can make it confusing and adds chance at getting the wrong votes. I will always use the oldest PM when I add votes if that happens. I pretty much knew who I was going to vote for but I waited until late Wednesday to make my vote. There's no rush to get them here. I'll probably check them on Thursday to make sure everything is easy to understand and it gives us time if there are any questions, but if you give it to me tomorrow, I won't open it until Thursday anyway.

Also please make your votes this way..

John Smith

John Doe

Larry Jackson

Only names of people you WANT. Please don't put lists with people you don't want and the ones you do highlighted. If you have more names than you are supposed to, I'll PM you if there is time. If there is not I'll use only the top five votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think adding a schedule post would be kind of easy and interesting to see how long this will take us at the current pace. Just assume 1 week for every set of players:

1901 - 1915 - February 9th at 12:00 AM

1916 - 1920 - February 16th at 12:00 AM

1921 - 1925 - Fabruary 23rd at 12:00 AM

1926 - 1930 - March 2nd at 12:00 AM

1931 - 1935 - March 9th at 12:00 AM

1936 - 1940 - March 16th at 12:00 AM

1941 - 1945 - March 23rd at 12:00 AM

1946 - 1950 - March 30th at 12:00 AM

1951 - 1955 - April 6th at 12:00 AM

1956 - 1960 - April 13th at 12:00 AM

1961 - 1965 - April 20th at 12:00 AM

1966 - 1970 - April 27th at 12:00 AM

1971 - 1975 - May 4th at 12:00 AM

1976 - 1980 - May 11th at 12:00 AM

1981 - 1985 - May 18th at 12:00 AM

1986 - 1990 - May 25th at 12:00 AM

1991 - 1995 - June 1st at 12:00 AM

1996 - 2000 - June 8th at 12:00 AM

2001 - 2005 - June 15th at 12:00 AM

That would give one week for every vote. And everyone would know that they have to get their votes in every Friday by midnight. I like that personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Ozzie Smith gets in to the regular HOF for his D, then that means I'm taking a long look at Donie Bush.

Smith and Bush should not even appear in the same sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the baseball season starts, I have many responsibilities with pictures etc that often leaves me little time to sleep (kind of like working two full time jobs, but one doesn't pay) . research could be really challenging at that point. If anyone is inclined to make it every two weeks during the baseball season, that would be really nice. If it stays at one week, it will be a real challenge, but I am committed to this thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

April 27, May 18, and June 1 could be problems for me. Home tiger games that night. I'll be sending through a drunk ballot. "Yeah, uhh... John Doherty. He was cool".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...