The Captain's Blog

It’s time to reform the Hall of Fame election process.

Yesterday’s historic election of three Hall of Famers was met with more criticism of the process than congratulations for the new honorees. Considering the increasingly controversial nature of the voting, that’s not surprising. It’s also unacceptable. Reform of the Hall of Fame’s voting procedures has been long overdue, but when the process overshadows the pomp, the call to action becomes more urgent.

The first obstacle to reforming the voting process for the Hall of Fame is the institution itself. After all, what’s not to like about the low cost and convenience of outsourcing the process to the Baseball Writers Association of American (BBWAA), especially when it comes with months of free publicity? If that’s more important to the Hall of Fame than historical integrity, then reform of the voting process is a non-starter. However, if the Hall of Fame takes seriously its role as guardian of baseball history, it can’t settle for minor tweaks to the current system. Instead, significant changes are needed.

It’s one thing to diagnosis the problem, but another to prescribe a solution. Too many criticisms of the process have focused on the BBWAA, but they are not to blame (well, some members might be contributors). On the contrary, its many well meaning members are an important part of the solution. After all, most baseball writers remain well qualified jurors; however, they are no longer uniquely qualified to serve as the sole arbiter of baseball’s greatest honor. In addition to tenured writers, several other groups merit a voice, including historians, sabermetricians, former players and executives, broadcasters, and other members of the media, including those who work for electronic platforms or lack 10 years on the print side. It’s time for the Hall of Fame to turn away from convenience, and make diversity, transparency, and accountability the guiding principles of its electoral process. It also wouldn’t hurt to have more clearly defined voting guidelines to help prevent the moral dilemmas that exist in the gray areas of the current instructions.

Instead of creating one large, diverse electorate, a more organized approach would be to have five unique voting blocs, all of which would be tasked with conducting a simultaneous election. In addition to baseball writers, these groups would include former players and executives, alternative media (including broadcasters and non-print media), sabermetricians, and historians. Of course, identifying voting blocs is the easy part. Finding and maintaining a roll of qualified voters is more difficult. To accomplish that, the Hall of Fame could create a voter registration process and then either take direct control over each segment, or, when one exists, allow a third-party to perform administrative functions (e.g., BBWAA for writers; SABR for historians; MLBPA for former players, etc.). These organizations would be responsible for maintaining the rolls, but regardless of how each segment is administered, the Hall of Fame would retain oversight over the voter selection process.

Instead of doling out a lifetime vote based on tenure in a trade organization, the Hall of Fame should establish minimum verifiable criteria for participation, based on both experience in the industry and current involvement in the game. Also, potential voters would be required to register for the privilege every year instead of having it bestowed upon them in perpetuity. This would prevent the apathetic from automatically being sent a ballot. In addition, all voters would be required to perform continuing education on topics deemed relevant by a special Board created to oversee the process. Finally, every voter’s decision would be subject to scrutiny by an oversight committee. So, if someone votes for Tony Womack, or doesn’t vote for Mike Piazza because he may have had acne on his back at one time, they’d have to defend that decision in order to retain their vote.

With the different segments identified and an administration structure put in place, the next challenge becomes integrating the separate elections. Instead of simply pooling all votes and determining a percentage, a better approach would be to count each segment’s results separately and then, if a candidate passes the bar in four of the five, enshrinement would be bestowed. Although the specifics could be tweaked, a two-thirds majority in each segment seems like a reasonable threshold. As a fail safe, a super majority of something like 85% of the overall vote could also be used as a trigger. This would prevent individual segments from disproportionately swaying the final decision.

Players with Between 66.7% and 75% of BBWAA Vote

Note: Since 1967, when annual elections became the norm.
Source: baseball-reference.com

Using a two-thirds majority in each segment will probably alarm those in favor of an exclusive Hall of Fame, but even with this lower threshold, a system with five voting bodies shouldn’t damage the exclusivity of being elected. Besides, since 1967, only seven players have surpassed 66.7% on the BBWAA ballot and not eventually been elected. Included among those is Craig Biggio, who will likely be enshrined next year. In addition, this group includes Nellie Fox, Jim Bunning, Orlando Cepeda, Red Ruffing and Enos Slaughter, all of whom were eventually elected by the veteran’s committee or in a special run-off (the other is Jack Morris, who could meet a similar fate). In other words, using five electorates with a lower majority requirement will likely approximate the combined efforts of the BBWAA and Hall of Fame era committees.

Finally, along with a new voting process, the Hall of Fame needs to provide some guidance on PEDs. However, it should not be a blanket statement like some have advocated. Ultimately, each voter will have to make up his mind about the relevance of PEDs, but the Hall of Fame should provide education about the topic (as part of the continuing education program referenced above) and encourage voters to only use verified facts as the basis for their decision. These reasonable steps could help mitigate some of the current confusion without forcing the Hall of Fame to mandate how a voter interprets the use of PEDs.

Until recently, the BBWAA had done a very good job shepherding the Hall of Fame process, but now it is time to expand the flock. Unfortunately, widening the electorate won’t be easy…or cheap. Is historical integrity worth the price? That’s what the Hall of Fame needs to consider. Although the current system is not the travesty some have suggested, and a perfect system is impossible to achieve, a sport like baseball, which values its history more than any other, deserves that pursuit.