The "election" of Harold Baines to the Hall of Fame spear-headed by by an ex-employer, and former GM who traded for him, and a committee of players he played with, puts a huge magnifying glass on the massive conflict of interest and potential cronyism of this cherry-picking selection process. While some conflicts exists in the 500+ members/voters of the BBWAA, they are redcuced by the size of the voing base and several elements of diversification and they are relatively conflict-free body, as attested that not more than 6% of the voters thought Baines was a HoF player. There are only a handful of players who have been denied votes, and largely on the grounds they were massive assholes.
and voting for the HoF is not making news per se, again reduced by the fact a minimum of 75% of the 500+ voters are required to share a like opiinion, And its a largely neutral/bias free assessment of a ballplayer's qualifications relative to other ballplayers, and certainly much more neutral and less conflicted than a former owner might be.
Thank you, Joel Sherman. But the writers cannot call themselves journalists, when they create the news.
They're reporters who write about baseball.
They are giving their opinion on the subject they are probably 1) more qualified AND 2) less conflicted
than any other singular population to give an opinion.
And given a the tiny handful of errors, real and imagined, they may have made as a group, its hard to believe any other group would do as good and unbiased a job.
Given that it takes at least 375 like opinions (75% of 500) on the same player, the "make the news" argument is just not very well thought out position.
I adjusted my post above. And clarified my argument, demonstrating how you are indeed, wrong.
We disagree.
Big surprise.
Writers as a diverse population are more objective and less conflicted than owners, managers, past teamamates.
Case in point Jerry Reinsdorf, and Tony LaRussa championed and persuaded Baines-era players to elect Baines.
Only 6% of the BBWAA writers/voters who watched him play thought thought him a good candidate.
There was no Baines conspiracy to kee[ Baines out, No one really thought he was a compelling HoF player.
Listening to most callers/pundits for the past couple of days, Baines election is getting killed.
the consensus: Nice guy, good player but he doesn't belong in the Hof.
And troll the only thing you clarified was you were wrong again.
There you go again, with insults. You do that whenever you know you're either wrong, or have overstated your case. In this case, you've done both.
I've already proved why it's wrong for writers to create the news.
But here's more. They should not be involved in award giving.
The writers are impacting what players earn., Both on and off the field.
Can you "conflict on interest"?
Don't just take my word for it.
Others recognize this wrong you are too willing to defend: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/heres-a-vote-for-getting-sports-writers-out-of-the-balloting-process/2017/01/04/8cd4a25c-d285-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f5cdd1943d65
Thanks for playing, but you lost another one.
Troll
Pointing out you are wrong is not an insult but rather an amply supported fact.
Objectivy and knowledge about the game are to me the needed criteria for HoF voters. IMO the BBWAA supplies both those better than any other single voter group.
The Baines election was pure cronyism by voters with varying degrees of conflicts of interest and personal interests.
This tainted election process has been mocked the last few days as its obvious flaws exposed for most to see,
A diverse group of 500 reporters and writers voting five (5) plus years from the candidates retirement have no such direct conflicts or biases.
In general they bring knowlwedge gained from years of watching the game and modest side issues which could cloud neutral assessments.
I understand that you do not understand, but trust me when I say your intellectual short-comings and inability to construct a coherent argument supporting your postion should not be a permanent barrier to you learning.
Asking questions might be a good way for you to to start.
And troll if you bothered to read the article you lnked to
here was the most important sentence in the article.
There may not be a more qualified group (BBWAA) to vote on players’ credentials for the Hall or for MVP, Cy Young honors, etc.
Your feeble attempts to belittle me, as a result of you being schooled once again as to why writers should be disqualified from any voting are as lame as your belief system that you are anyone else's superior.
That said, you've revealed that
you didn't read it completely, or you would have likely comprehended the MAJOR PART OF THE PIECE.
Likely, though being as dense as you are, you may not fully grasp what has been so well defined.
But here's your last chance to gather in what is so plain for any normally functioning individual to understand:
The Washington Post has a long-running policy preventing its writers from voting on any and all awards. Other organizations — including the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Baltimore Sun — have similar policies. So while these decisions were taken out of my hands for me, let’s follow a couple of examples of why we all need to pull ourselves out of these processes.
Hall of Famers, of course, make more money in retirement than really good players do. Speaking engagements, card signings, potential endorsement deals — they’re all impacted by whether a player is in the Hall. “Hall of Famer Johnny Bench” simply earns more than “former Reds catcher Johnny Bench.”
If that doesn’t seem like a direct link between a writer voting and a player’s earning potential, look at current players’ contracts. Carlos Gomez is a veteran major league outfielder who, this offseason, signed a one-year, $11.5 million contract to return to the Texas Rangers, with whom he had revitalized his career. This wasn’t a marquee signing, and it barely made much of a ripple outside of Arlington, Tex.
What also didn’t make a ripple because they’re so mainstream: clauses in Gomez’s contract that would pay him $250,000 for winning the American League MVP award, $200,000 for coming in second, down to $50,000 for placing fifth — in voting performed by two members of the BBWAA in each AL city.
Should Gomez be named the World Series MVP, he would receive $150,000. Should he be the MVP of the American League Championship Series, that’s $100,000. Both of those postseason honors have BBWAA members as part of the voting panel, joining broadcasters. Given he hit .231 and slugged .384 while splitting time between Houston and Texas in 2016, Gomez would be a candidate for comeback player of the year in 2017. That would be worth $150,000, and that, too, would be voted on by baseball writers.
So Gomez could earn $650,000 in awards voted on by the people who cover him. And he is just an example.
In some ways, these kind of pay-for-performance deals should be praised because they reward players for what they accomplish, not what they might do. The problem lies in how those accomplishments are determined. Think about it: Part of a Rangers beat writer’s job is having at least a working relationship with Gomez. What’s to prevent Gomez, at the end of a strong season, from approaching a reporter and saying, “Hey, you thinking about me for MVP?”
...the current setup assigns responsibility where it does not belong.
Part of a sportswriter’s job is to debate the historical merits of Guerrero, Rodriguez, Bagwell and the other candidates up for the Hall or argue whether Daniel Murphy or Kris Bryant should have been the National League MVP last season. Affecting the livelihoods of athletes, either during or after their careers, most certainly is not.What you excuse, and attempt to paint as competence, is indeed NOT part of a sportswriter's job--an assertion put forth by a professional sportswriter.
You apparently don't even know what the discussion is, or you'd have the sense to shut your pie-hole, dim one.
Once again,
you missed the clearly stated arguments being against writers being involved in the HOF or for any awards for athletes.
I didn't support Baines selection, nor did I oppose it. Don't confuse the two issues.
And admit when you're wrong.
As you were again.
The beatings and your abject humiliation will continue, so best you learn to get used to it, Igor.
Poll
1 (33.3%)