lasttriptotulsa Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Frank up to 89.1% with 16% of the votes accounted for. I know it won't happen, but it would be awesome to see him crack 90%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2013 Author Share Posted December 31, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 05:19 PM) Thomas now with 81 votes out of 91 ballots, good for 89.1% Any stats geeks out there who can give a confidence number based on the 569 ballots cast last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lasttriptotulsa Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 05:23 PM) Any stats geeks out there who can give a confidence number based on the 569 ballots cast last year? It's really hard to apply any statistical significance to this type of thing. If you were talking about a random lot. Say how many bad parts a company manufactured out of 569, we would already have enough data at just 16% to make a fairly accurate call. The problem here is that you're dealing with humans. There are so many old crotchety guys that have hall of fame votes that a) will not publish them and b) are the guys that would have a vendetta against steroid guys/DH/whatever the hell is they have issues with. That gizmo has shown to be accurate within around 10% in past years, so I would say it's looking pretty good for Frank. Edited December 31, 2013 by lasttriptotulsa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco72 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 07:33 PM) It's really hard to apply any statistical significance to this type of thing. If you were talking about a random lot. Say how many bad parts a company manufactured out of 569, we would already have enough data at just 16% to make a fairly accurate call. The problem here is that you're dealing with humans. There are so many old crotchety guys that have hall of fame votes that a) will not publish them and b) are the guys that would have a vendetta against steroid guys/DH/whatever the hell is they have issues with. That gizmo has shown to be accurate within around 10% in past years, so I would say it's looking pretty good for Frank. As lastriptotulsa said, it's a question of representiveness, not sample size, so it complicates things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 1, 2014 Author Share Posted January 1, 2014 QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 05:33 PM) It's really hard to apply any statistical significance to this type of thing. If you were talking about a random lot. Say how many bad parts a company manufactured out of 569, we would already have enough data at just 16% to make a fairly accurate call. The problem here is that you're dealing with humans. There are so many old crotchety guys that have hall of fame votes that a) will not publish them and b) are the guys that would have a vendetta against steroid guys/DH/whatever the hell is they have issues with. That gizmo has shown to be accurate within around 10% in past years, so I would say it's looking pretty good for Frank. Throw out all of that. I am curious what the confidence level of hitting 75% for having 89% at this point is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 07:08 PM) Throw out all of that. I am curious what the confidence level of hitting 75% for having 89% at this point is. That's his point. It's impossible to say unless you can say with certainty how representative the early voting group is of the whole group, and we have no idea how that stands up historically. However, he only needs 72.3% of the remaining votes, if that helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 1, 2014 Author Share Posted January 1, 2014 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 06:11 PM) That's his point. It's impossible to say unless you can say with certainty how representative the early voting group is of the whole group, and we have no idea how that stands up historically. However, he only needs 72.3% of the remaining votes, if that helps. You guys are way overthinking what I am asking. I'm not making this complicated on purpose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I would imagine the Maddux/Glavine/Thomas types will get fewer votes than what ThinkFactory reflects while the Clemens/Bonds types will get more. Just have to think of what types of votes would make a writer more likely to conceal their choices so as to avoid a bunch of abuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 10:33 AM) The interesting one is Piazza. He is right on the doorstep. It will be an absolute joke if Piazza gets in and Bonds doesn't. Then again, it's a joke that Bonds isn't in at all, but that's another discussion for another day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2013 -> 05:19 PM) Thomas now with 81 votes out of 91 ballots, good for 89.1% Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Link? http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsst...ollecting_gizmo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 98 ballots reported, Frank is at 89.8% or 88 votes. We sit at 17.2% of last years vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) It's going to be a loooong ceremony this year. I think they're up to 100 ballots and Frank is on 90 of them. Edited January 2, 2014 by flavum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Frank Thomas is up to 90% with 101 ballots being reported. Remember 569 were turned in last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I'm pleasantly surprised that Frank's chances are looking so good for this year. It seems all of the ballot-clogging and Jack Morris-ing and PED-use issues have sucked up all the vitriol that I expected would be used on the DH issue. It seems Frank is quietly floating in with almost no discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Joe Posnanski's Blog. http://joeposnanski.com/joeblogs/the-massi...l-of-fame-post/ I don't agree with everything, but if I had a vote, I might actually come up with the same 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Frank---94/104 Not sure if this is a bold prediction, but I could see Biggio fall under 75%. I definitely think Piazza stays under 75% 100 - Maddux 97.1 - Glavine 90.4 - F. Thomas 80.8 - Biggio ——————————— 73.1 - Piazza 66.3 - Bagwell 60.1 - Morris 56.7 - Raines 45.2 - Bonds 44.2 - Clemens 39.4 - Schilling 35.6 - Mussina 23.1 - Trammell 19.2 - L. Smith 19.2 - E. Martinez 15.4 - McGriff 13.5 - Kent 11.5 - L. Walker 10.6 - McGwire 8.7 - S. Sosa 7.7 - R. Palmeiro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 3, 2014 Author Share Posted January 3, 2014 Thomas now 97 of 107, 90.7%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 He needs about 426 out of 567 to get elected. At this juncture, he needs 329 out of the next 460. That's 71.5%. Baby steps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 99/109 for Thomas. He's getting in. Voters were more than happy to get three no-brainer candidates without ties to roids. Interesting, next year is Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and John Smoltz (with Sheffield). So the same thing may happen next year. 100 - Maddux 97.2 - Glavine 90.8 - F. Thomas 80.7 - Biggio ——————————— 73.4 - Piazza 66.1 - Bagwell 60.6 - Morris 56.0 - Raines 46.8 - Bonds 45.9 - Clemens 39.4 - Schilling 33.9 - Mussina 22.9 - Trammell 20.2 - E. Martinez 18.3 - L. Smith 14.7 - McGriff 13.8 - Kent 11.0 - L. Walker 11.0 - McGwire 8.3 - S. Sosa 7.3 - R. Palmeiro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 3, 2014 -> 10:52 AM) He needs about 426 out of 567 to get elected. At this juncture, he needs 329 out of the next 460. That's 71.5%. Baby steps. Considering that mostly old farts are the ones who haven't disclosed their ballots, that number doesn't make me extremely confident yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 3, 2014 Author Share Posted January 3, 2014 study showing how close the BBTF is on its ballot predictor. http://www.baseballnation.com/2014/1/2/526...-of-fame-ballot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Thomas-less ballot: https://twitter.com/RRepoz/status/419252914310217728 Turned in a ballot with 9 names. No room for Frank. Old guy, by the way. Retired a few years ago. As far as I can tell, Frank is at 101/112- 90.2% Edited January 3, 2014 by flavum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 3, 2014 -> 05:52 PM) Thomas-less ballot: https://twitter.com/RRepoz/status/419252914310217728 Turned in a ballot with 9 names. No room for Frank. Old guy, by the way. Retired a few years ago. As far as I can tell, Frank is at 101/112- 90.2% If this is the Gary Brown referred to in the twitter link , what did he ever do to deserve a ballot in the first place? Lol http://m.bbref.com/m?p=XXminorsXXplayer.cgiQQid=brown-001gar Edited January 4, 2014 by StRoostifer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Jan 3, 2014 -> 06:08 PM) If this is the Gary Brown referred to in the twitter link , what did he ever do to deserve a ballot in the first place? Lol http://m.bbref.com/m?p=XXminorsXXplayer.cgiQQid=brown-001gar It's Garry Brown. http://connect.masslive.com/user/gbrown413/posts.html Been in the BBWAA since 1977. Edited January 4, 2014 by flavum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.