Strange HOF Voting

At times, the manner in which some writers who are members of the BBWAA vote in the Hall of Fame elections seemingly defies rational explanation.Writers receive a ballot containing a list of candidates for the Hall.They are asked to vote for ten players at most.I would assume that if someone is voting for the first time, he (or she) would ask himself: Who do I think is deserving of induction?

It seems to me that a voter could decide that there are not ten players on the ballot deserving of the Hall and, therefore, choose to vote for only a few who he considers worthy.This is perfectly understandable.But my assumption would be that a serious voter will only vote for those players who he feels really deserve to be in the Hall.And if one of his choices does not make it on this ballot, he will continue to vote for that deserving player in future ballots.

It could even happen that a voter learns something new about a candidate who he did not vote for and decides to vote for that candidate in the future.This, of course, could happen.But I would expect that it would be an unusual event since I would like to believe that any voter would take the duty seriously enough to do his (or her) homework the first time around.Alas, it does not appear that this is the way that some voters go about their duties at all.It almost seems that some of the voters must be flipping a coin or spinning a dial looking for help to guide them — because there are times when events happen that seem to defy common sense.Here is an example of one of those times.

Allie Reynolds and Bob Lemon were both effective starting pitchers during their careers.Reynolds pitched in the American League for thirteen seasons from 1942 to 1954.During that time, he compiled a won/loss record of 182/107 for a winning percentage of .630.His career ERA was 3.30 compared to a league ERA of 3.61.Those are fairly good numbers.

Bob Lemon also pitched in the American League.His career also covered thirteen seasons from 1946 to 1958.During that time, he compiled a won/loss record of 207/128 for a winning percentage of .618 — just slightly less than Reynold’s.His career ERA was 3.23 compared to a league ERA of 3.85 — somewhat better than Reynold’s.

To many fans, these two pitchers would seem to have had very similar careers.And, at the moment, I am not concerned with whether either pitcher had HOF credentials (I will comment on that below).Lemon won 25 more games but he also lost 21 more.I suspect that most fans would give a slight edge to Lemon after looking at the numbers.The careers of the two men overlapped from 1946 to 1954 (nine seasons) — so they would certainly be considered contemporaries.The question here is: How did the two players make out when they were on the BBWAA ballot for the Hall of Fame?

History of BBWAA Hall of Fame Voting for Allie Reynolds and Bob Lemon:

Look at the years 1964 to 1971.For seven straight votes of the BBWAA (not counting the two run-offs), more voters thought Allie Reynolds was more deserving of the Hall of Fame than Bob Lemon.At least that is how I read the vote.In the middle of that span (1968), Reynolds got more than twice as many votes as Lemon (95 to 47).So, what would the normal fan expect to happen after 1968?Either Reynolds would get into the Hall ahead of Lemon or, possibly, neither player would make it.In fact, in 1968, the latter choice would seem reasonable since Reynolds got only 33.6% of the vote and Lemon only 16.6%.There was no reason for anyone to think that over 40% more of the voters would decide that Reynolds belonged in the Hall or almost 60% more would decide that Lemon was worthy.And so, what actually happened to Bob Lemon defies rational explanation.

In 1972, a funny thing happened on the way to the Hall of Fame.After both players had been retired for many years, Bob Lemon suddenly and mysteriously became a “better pitcher” than Allie Reynolds.Or, at least one could infer that from what happened in the voting.In 1972, Lemon passed Reynolds in the voting and went on to be elected to the Hall in 1976.And Allie Reynolds was never elected.What happened?How can anyone logically explain this turn-around?I have asked this question of some very knowledgeable baseball people and have gotten only one theory.

How is it possible that in 1968 only 45 writers thought that Bob Lemon deserved to be in the Hall.Yet, eight years later (in 1976), 305 writers thought he was Hall of Fame material.His credentials were exactly the same in 1976 as they were in 1968.What does that say about the people who are voting?Well, one might suggest that the voting on the part of some writers is erratic and/or capricious — or that some people simply do not take it seriously.In either case, it is sad to see the ballots handled in such a thoughtless manner.

The point here is that there is no logical explanation for this result.Unfortunately, it is all too typical of what happens on occasion with the Hall of Fame voting.

There is some insight about the voting which has been suggested by some members of SABR.Bob Lemon became the manager of the Kansas City Royals in 1970 and managed them again in 1971 and 1972.In his first full season as a manager, he guided the team into second place with an 85-76 record.None of the other 1969 expansion teams had more than 71 wins, so Lemon was praised for his achievement.A similar surge in Hall of Fame votes has occurred for other players who became managers.Both Gil Hodges in 1970 and Joe Torre in 1997 saw their percentages double from the previous election.

Should a player’s vote for the Hall of Fame be influenced by what that player did in some other major league capacity (other than playing)?Should the fact that a player becomes a manager, or a broadcaster or a baseball executive have any bearing on whether they are voted into the Hall?I happen to think not — but I am aware of many fans who do think that these achievements should count somehow.Certainly, if either Gil Hodges or Joe Torre ever make it into the Hall, it will be due in part to their managerial careers.

In any case, the NEWS HOF Gauge suggests that neither of these pitchers has HOF numbers.However, Bob Lemon did put up much better numbersthan Allie Reynolds during his pitching career.

With a NEWS cut-off of 235 for HOF numbers for a pitcher, Bob Lemon came reasonably close to having HOF credentials while Allie Reynolds was not even in the ballpark.Another good question might be – how was Reynolds able to garner more support than Lemon from 1964 to 1971?How many writers were guilty of not examining the players’ credentials closely enough?

And this is just one example of the sometimes bizarre voting patterns that emerge from the BBWAA ballots for the Hall of Fame.

For more info on the NEWS HOF Gauge, see BASEBALL’S BEST: The TRUE Hall of Famers on this site.