The Planetary Extreme Baseball Alliance

How long should players have to wait after retirement before they are eligible to appear on the ballot slip ?

I think immediately or one year (season). My reasoning is that we are more likely to have GMs who are familiar with the group than we would if we waited multiple seasons and have 2,3,4, etc new GMs who aren't familiar with the players and league history.

Borealis wrote:I think immediately or one year (season). My reasoning is that we are more likely to have GMs who are familiar with the group than we would if we waited multiple seasons and have 2,3,4, etc new GMs who aren't familiar with the players and league history.

That's a good call Mike, and one I hadn't thought of. In light of your suggestion, I voted for one year. I'd like to make it a 3 year waiting period just to allow for appreciation/context, but for practical purposes Mike's idea makes lots of sense to me.

I voted 2 years for context and the fact that players can unretire in OOTP.

Nutmeggers wrote:I voted 2 years for context and the fact that players can unretire in OOTP.

I voted one year. What does it matter if they do come back?

I hate drama... let them in. Wgats the point of waiting and forgetting

5 Years. Context.

Sincerely,

Small Hall Guy

As Barry Goldwater once said (or was it Margaret Thatcher?), "A PEBA Hall of Fame big enough to let in a Canton Longshoremen is big enough to. . . " Crap, I can't quite remember the rest of it.

Now get off my lawn!

Longshoremen wrote:5 Years. Context.

Sincerely,

Small Hall Guy

As Barry Goldwater once said (or was it Margaret Thatcher?), "A PEBA Hall of Fame big enough to let in a Canton Longshoremen is big enough to. . . " Crap, I can't quite remember the rest of it.

Now get off my lawn!

Agreed. I also think we want a Hall of Fame, not a Hall of Very Good. So why rush it?

We're not really trying to rush it, the whole point of this is so we can debate at our leisure the setting up of it. It's far better to have loads of discussion now when we have two to five years or more before it opens rather than trying to rush it all through the summer before and ending up with a flawed Hall.

Cyclones wrote:
I also think we want a Hall of Fame, not a Hall of Very Good. So why rush it?

I do not think that we are rushing it. PEBA is 1/2 the seasons that are simed and 1/2 the history of PEBA. Nothing says baseball history like HoF. And, I agree that HoF discussion can be some of the most interesting.

I think rushing is something we need not worry about. We sim two seasons a year - and the past two years I think we've actually been a tad shy of that. Our league has a long (I've been here 4.5 years in RL) history, time-wise, and more than the majority of on-line leagues, we have a pretty good collection of longtime GMs and a very well documented history - through our writing and thanks to Frank's awesome efforts with StatsLab. I figure at least another season (6 months) will pass by as we discuss this all and hash out the details. I don't think waiting 5 years is truly relevant. I'm not sure how that helps put things in context - do we really need 5 years to put 'Fireworks' resume into context? Or Conan's? Morimoto? Those guys go right in, and the borderline, questionable guys (Steve McDonald - I think a HoF guy) won't go in first ballot anyway and thus the timeline-context thing would more-or-less be imbedded.

Why would we wait 5 seasons? That's 2.5 years in real time!

I've NEVER seen anyone come out of retirement in OOTP, so a year should be fine. If a guy deserves to go in, then we should put him in, why wait? It doesn't hurt anything.

If you want a small Hall, then don't fill out your whole ballot?

Speaking of ballot size, how many guys do we vote for on each ballot? What's the threshold for getting in?

Those were my next two polls Charlie. I thought I'd get the where & when sorted first and then move on to the nitty gritty of what our HOF standards ought to be. Following that we then need a discussion on what we have in terms of numbers on the ballot paper and how long they're on it and do we have a criteria for staying on it?

I think we've got more than enough to while a season or two away with interesting chatter

Borealis wrote:I don't think waiting 5 years is truly relevant. I'm not sure how that helps put things in context - do we really need 5 years to put 'Fireworks' resume into context? Or Conan's? Morimoto? Those guys go right in, and the borderline, questionable guys (Steve McDonald - I think a HoF guy) won't go in first ballot anyway and thus the timeline-context thing would more-or-less be imbedded.

There's a saying in the law - Hard cases make bad law.

The concept is that it's the borderline case that is inappropriate to set a precedent for general applicability. The danger isn't in letting a guy like Fireworks in (although, frankly, there's plenty of career left for him to make his HOF case worse - he doesn't even have 200 wins, after all), the danger is letting a guy in whose level of performance ends up being meh after you have 10-15 more seasons of retirees.

Longshoremen wrote:

Borealis wrote:I don't think waiting 5 years is truly relevant. I'm not sure how that helps put things in context - do we really need 5 years to put 'Fireworks' resume into context? Or Conan's? Morimoto? Those guys go right in, and the borderline, questionable guys (Steve McDonald - I think a HoF guy) won't go in first ballot anyway and thus the timeline-context thing would more-or-less be imbedded.

There's a saying in the law - Hard cases make bad law.

The concept is that it's the borderline case that is inappropriate to set a precedent for general applicability. The danger isn't in letting a guy like Fireworks in (although, frankly, there's plenty of career left for him to make his HOF case worse - he doesn't even have 200 wins, after all), the danger is letting a guy in whose level of performance ends up being meh after you have 10-15 more seasons of retirees.

This is a very good point.