 |
View Old Forum Thread
ArchieG
Q: How long does it take for a guy to get to the hall of fame after his retirement? Take [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=1369429]3B Jim Thomas[/url] for example: the guy belted 540 home runs, has 4 rings, was MVP 4 times and (incredibly) drove in 179 runs in a single season. But as far as I can see, he's not in the hall of fame. What gives?
Ive noticed a few other similar cases; take [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2528008]SS Ezra Caceres[/url] - a SS who made 15 All-Star teams and was MVP 5 times in 6 years.
Now, if these guys don't get into the Hall of Fame, there must be something wrong with it. Am I right? Or am I missing something?
Hall of Fame
January 31, 2011 at 04:59PM View BBCode
Hey guys, I'm back with my newbie dumb questions. :)Q: How long does it take for a guy to get to the hall of fame after his retirement? Take [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=1369429]3B Jim Thomas[/url] for example: the guy belted 540 home runs, has 4 rings, was MVP 4 times and (incredibly) drove in 179 runs in a single season. But as far as I can see, he's not in the hall of fame. What gives?
Ive noticed a few other similar cases; take [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2528008]SS Ezra Caceres[/url] - a SS who made 15 All-Star teams and was MVP 5 times in 6 years.
Now, if these guys don't get into the Hall of Fame, there must be something wrong with it. Am I right? Or am I missing something?
randb
January 31, 2011 at 10:39PM View BBCode
We tried doing the Hall of Fame, but it didn't get a lot of interest.
KuwentongPato
..secondly the player was banned from baseball? all this time i thought that all the banned players played in this league:)
February 01, 2011 at 05:01AM View BBCode
i am all for HoF voting every season too....secondly the player was banned from baseball? all this time i thought that all the banned players played in this league:)
lemaster
By all means
February 01, 2011 at 10:04PM View BBCode
If you want to start a Hall of Fame, go for it. You've got a lot of players to cover to be sure.
ArchieG
I propose we keep it very owners-driven, sort of speak. Every owner gets to nominate 1 player a year, who has to be retired for at least 5 years. I'd propose you can nominate a player 5 times in a row before he falls off the ballot.
So that'd give us 16 names a year. Then we just have an anonymous voting process. I'd propose you have to say either 'yes' or 'no' for every player - so the whole process doesn't fall through if people are too lazy to vote. Like in the real Hall, 75% yes's (of cast votes) gets a player in.
As lemaster mentioned, there is some serious 'backlog'. So I think we need to make a broad induction-process the first time around. Like - everyone gets to nominate (max) 10 players of his own team. Theoretically that might give us 160 names, but I know for a fact that I wouldn't even find 3 that are Hall-worthy, whereas lemaster might find 20...
Presumably we could have another big induction next year around, if need be.
What do you guys think? One more question: how do we make sure players end up on [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/hof.jsp?lid=322]this page[/url]?
[Edited on 2-2-2011 by ArchieG]
February 02, 2011 at 10:04AM View BBCode
Alright, let's get this thing rolling then. The history of our league deserves some attention! :)I propose we keep it very owners-driven, sort of speak. Every owner gets to nominate 1 player a year, who has to be retired for at least 5 years. I'd propose you can nominate a player 5 times in a row before he falls off the ballot.
So that'd give us 16 names a year. Then we just have an anonymous voting process. I'd propose you have to say either 'yes' or 'no' for every player - so the whole process doesn't fall through if people are too lazy to vote. Like in the real Hall, 75% yes's (of cast votes) gets a player in.
As lemaster mentioned, there is some serious 'backlog'. So I think we need to make a broad induction-process the first time around. Like - everyone gets to nominate (max) 10 players of his own team. Theoretically that might give us 160 names, but I know for a fact that I wouldn't even find 3 that are Hall-worthy, whereas lemaster might find 20...
Presumably we could have another big induction next year around, if need be.
What do you guys think? One more question: how do we make sure players end up on [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/hof.jsp?lid=322]this page[/url]?
[Edited on 2-2-2011 by ArchieG]
randb
February 02, 2011 at 03:37PM View BBCode
I think this sounds good, except I'm wondering about the 10 players from each team. I think 10 players from each team is a bit much even for starters. I would say you could nominate 10 players from all teams. Any thoughts on this? It's not a big deal. Any movement is better than none.
ArchieG
If you can nominate 10 from any team, my thinking is we'd get a lot of 'double' nominees given that say, the Brew Crew has a few sure-fire HoF'ers. That'd still leaving us with a backlog. I'll admit that 10 from e.g. my team is a bit much, though it might be too little for e.g. the Kansas City Explorers, which is why I proposed it as a ceiling (which you don't need to use...)
As for the other point you make, I wanted to keep nominations at this point to people's own team precisely because I want to get rid of the backlog as soon as possible. My thinking was we'd not have the problem of everyone nominating the same Brew Crew'ers...
Of course, once we can get rid of the backlog, nominations would be 'open' and you could nominate from any team you'd like.
But I see your point, though. What do other people think?
February 02, 2011 at 03:50PM View BBCode
I get your point, randb, but I proposed 10 per team (once) to make sure we get rid of the backlog as soon as possible.If you can nominate 10 from any team, my thinking is we'd get a lot of 'double' nominees given that say, the Brew Crew has a few sure-fire HoF'ers. That'd still leaving us with a backlog. I'll admit that 10 from e.g. my team is a bit much, though it might be too little for e.g. the Kansas City Explorers, which is why I proposed it as a ceiling (which you don't need to use...)
As for the other point you make, I wanted to keep nominations at this point to people's own team precisely because I want to get rid of the backlog as soon as possible. My thinking was we'd not have the problem of everyone nominating the same Brew Crew'ers...
Of course, once we can get rid of the backlog, nominations would be 'open' and you could nominate from any team you'd like.
But I see your point, though. What do other people think?
starbolt
Also, it doesn't take many inactive/indifferent owners to render the process somewhat moot. I know that I'm not excited about sifting through thousands of virtual players whose only merits for HoF are statistical and with whom I have no connection being a new owner in this league. If you want to be successful, you need to make the process interesting and unobtrusive.
A massive induction would be counterproductive in my opinion.
---
I would probably have HoF voting during the drafts, when there is ample reason for owners to check up on the league but little else for them to do while waiting. Many owners have multiple leagues to manage but get impatient during the breaks for something to do.
Since there's been no regular voting in this league, you probably just have it open for everyone for the first 15 years, letting players drop off if their vote totals are weak (BBWAA is <5%, I believe).
If you're *really* concerned about the backlog, you could introduce a Veteran's Committee approach and allow each owner to introduce a single player each year and apply a higher standard to those entrants.
---
HoF is cool but non-trivial.
[Edited on 2-3-2011 by starbolt]
February 02, 2011 at 04:58PM View BBCode
Backlog isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's harder to get a poor candidate OUT of the HoF than IN. I'm not sure I approve of the current members from what I recollect.Also, it doesn't take many inactive/indifferent owners to render the process somewhat moot. I know that I'm not excited about sifting through thousands of virtual players whose only merits for HoF are statistical and with whom I have no connection being a new owner in this league. If you want to be successful, you need to make the process interesting and unobtrusive.
A massive induction would be counterproductive in my opinion.
---
I would probably have HoF voting during the drafts, when there is ample reason for owners to check up on the league but little else for them to do while waiting. Many owners have multiple leagues to manage but get impatient during the breaks for something to do.
Since there's been no regular voting in this league, you probably just have it open for everyone for the first 15 years, letting players drop off if their vote totals are weak (BBWAA is <5%, I believe).
If you're *really* concerned about the backlog, you could introduce a Veteran's Committee approach and allow each owner to introduce a single player each year and apply a higher standard to those entrants.
---
HoF is cool but non-trivial.
[Edited on 2-3-2011 by starbolt]
lemaster
Suggesions
February 02, 2011 at 10:19PM View BBCode
Looking at the career leaders could probably help you. You might want to set up some milestone markers such as 3,000 hits, 500 HRs,, etc. I would start with guys who retired no later than 1959, then go in five year blocks 1960-64, 1965-69, etc, because of the volume of players involved. I believe our ill-fated attempt to start a HOFmany moons ago at least saw 4 players inducted. Anyway, some thoughts.
KuwentongPato
..I think that Lemaster's idea of inducting players in the 5 years incriments could be the way to go. It could be a good way to celebrate the history of the league and a more thorough way to cover the backlog.
February 03, 2011 at 03:04AM View BBCode
I happen to agree that a first year mass induction into the HoF could be counterproductive. I first liked the idea of each person nominating three players to start, but that could still be a bit much...I think that Lemaster's idea of inducting players in the 5 years incriments could be the way to go. It could be a good way to celebrate the history of the league and a more thorough way to cover the backlog.
randb
February 03, 2011 at 03:25PM View BBCode
I agree. I prefer a backlog to a flooding of the gates. It would make the HOF meaningless. I would go for the five year increment with owners nominating from all teams, not just their own. If we get double nominees, fine. The standards should be kept high and their probably isn't more than two or three players for each 5 year period. We should keep it simple and easy so that voting isn't a chore.
ArchieG
February 03, 2011 at 09:22PM View BBCode
Sounds good guys. Let's get this ball rolling then! :)
randb
February 03, 2011 at 11:16PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
How do we start? Should we pick '50-'54 and send players into the HOF page? What do you think?
lemaster
first you need some rules...
February 04, 2011 at 04:35AM View BBCode
such as ... how long does a guy have to retire before he's eligible. I'm think 3 seasons is about right.
ArchieG
So each owner nominates two players? And after that we have a period of 'debate' where you can advocate the case of one of your nominees (a la the Football Hall of Fame?) Might make it interesting...
February 04, 2011 at 08:54AM View BBCode
I was thinking 5 years at first, but on further review that might be a bit long for 'virtual' players. Memories fade fast and owners probably turn over pretty quickly too. So three years sounds good!So each owner nominates two players? And after that we have a period of 'debate' where you can advocate the case of one of your nominees (a la the Football Hall of Fame?) Might make it interesting...
starbolt
Unless I misread your intent, we're basically looking at 5-year classes anyway?
As far as getting started, I need to put on the brakes a bit and say that I'm not likely to be able to give this a lot of attention in rapid-fire succession. I might be able to get through a 5-year class in a week; possibly two. Unless the pools are smaller than I think they are.
February 04, 2011 at 02:15PM View BBCode
I don't think 'memory fade' is a risk here since nearly all of what we're dealing with is backlog. A five-year wait really only applies to new candidates and that only matters if you're going to be a short-timer in the league and want to vote your guys in :)Unless I misread your intent, we're basically looking at 5-year classes anyway?
As far as getting started, I need to put on the brakes a bit and say that I'm not likely to be able to give this a lot of attention in rapid-fire succession. I might be able to get through a 5-year class in a week; possibly two. Unless the pools are smaller than I think they are.
randb
February 04, 2011 at 09:43PM View BBCode
I can go any way on this, but, I think that having an online debate won't work. Some owners might be really into it, and it could be fun, but others won't want to take the time or have the time to spend to debate the merits of a virtual ball player. Having been through this before, it can be hard just to get everyone to vote.
randb
February 04, 2011 at 11:02PM View BBCode
One more thing: Is there any interest in starbolt's veterans committee?
randb
February 04, 2011 at 11:11PM View BBCode
And yet another thought. We could simplify this whole thing. Anyone of us who had the time could go back through the stats and pick players from the past who are HOF worthy. ArchieG could be good since he's new and has no real history with the league so wouldn't be swayed by players on his team. Plus, he's enthusiastic. If anyone felt that a player was left out, they could add them to the list. Once we have the list we all agree to vote on certain number of players. Those with 75% (or what ever is agreed on) gets in.
starbolt
I was just offering an alternative to opening the doors wide open so people wouldn't feel that their pet candidate didn't get enough consideration for some reason or another.
Still, looking at a small pool of 'overlooked' players is really no big deal. If a candidate isn't self-evident, it's probably fine to vote 'no' again.
February 05, 2011 at 04:40AM View BBCode
Heh - I'm not even sure that I'm interested in a Veteran's Committee!I was just offering an alternative to opening the doors wide open so people wouldn't feel that their pet candidate didn't get enough consideration for some reason or another.
Still, looking at a small pool of 'overlooked' players is really no big deal. If a candidate isn't self-evident, it's probably fine to vote 'no' again.
ArchieG
February 08, 2011 at 02:55PM View BBCode
Hey, I'm happy to help in any way you guys like. So do we get this thing going?Pages: 1 2