So I think voting for baseball players is much easier. The game is easier to normalize, careers are longer, there are lots more careers, and I cannot imagine a friendship ending over whether Rickey Henderson deserved 100% of the HOF votes. But I’ve seen friendships end in political discussions about two of our most recent presidents, and given time I suspect that I may see the same happen with Obama.

What that *really* shows to me is that recent HOF voters have been heavily favoring pitchers who played the majority of the their time in the NL. I’m sorry, but facing a pitcher is a lot easier than facing a DH. Again, we have BBWAA not doing adequate homework on league and park effects (such as Larry Walker’s MVP) to the detriment of pitchers who pitched in the worst possible environments: teams that were in small AL cities who aggregated under a .500 record aside from their starts. Blyleven gets the triple crown of ignorance.

Finally (on baseball awards) claiming there is no east coast bias is just hogwash. In 1985, for an egregious example, Don Mattingly won the MVP with an OPS of .938, beating out George Brett (on a World Series winner) with an OPS of 1.021. Brett also won a gold glove at a more important defensive position and had an OPS+ *SIXTY* points better than the next best hitter on his team. Heck, the Royals won the series that year with only three hitters with an OPS+ of 98 or better, and the other two were under 120. The Yankees had *SEVEN* players with an OPS+ above 100 that season and Mattingly didn’t even lead his own team, being one point behind Rickey’s batting (and 78 stolen bases behind Rickey). So in raw offense Brett was by far the best, in context Brett was by far the best hitter on his team as well as the league, Brett was intentionally walked *EIGHTEEN* times more than was Mattingly that year (31 to 13), but Mattingly got MVP. No media bias my donkey’s bottom! In 1985 Brett clearly had one of the best seasons ever by a third baseman. Mattingly didn’t clearly have one of the best seasons ever by a Yankee first baseman (Gehrig alone had 13 better seasons by OPS+), let alone league wide. But Mattingly got the MVP, and still gets HOF votes because east coast bias gave him an MVP he didn’t deserve which in turn makes him look like a better HOF candidate than he really is.

Jim Rice, supposedly the most feared hitter in the league, was intentionally walked 5 times in 1985. His season high in intentional walks was 10. George Brett was intentionally walked more in a season than Rice’s season high ten times. Brett had more intentional walks than Rice (6 to 5) even in Rice’s MVP season of 1978, when Rice played in 163 games (including a playoff) and Brett only played in 128. How does Rice get labeled the most feared hitter in the American League if there is no east coast media bias?

Just because some team/award combinations for some cities *don’t* show apparent bias (such as numbers of Cy Young Awards) doesn’t mean there is no bias. If the New York teams deserved two CYAs but won four, that’s still media bias. Like I wrote before, Carlton won a CYA with an ERA+ of 119; Blyleven had a *ton* of better seasons without even getting a CYA vote, let alone an award. Carlton’s in the HOF; Blyleven isn’t. Carlton played in the NL, Blyleven mostly against the DH. Carlton plays in a big east coast city; Blyleven played in the boonies. No east coast media bias my donkey’s donkey.

If there is one thing the internet has done for baseball, it has made it impossible for the small market super star to stay hidden. Even the least conscientious voter would have to list the great player on a small city team on his MVP or CYA ballot, or he’d look stupid. So I think awards are becoming less inaccurate. But HOF voting still comes from awards earned back in the days when small market teams were shunned.

Perhaps so- he was responsible for worsening the Vietnam War, a major demerit. He also created large new social spending programs, which of course have both benefits and drawbacks. However, he was also responsible for ending the Jim Crow laws that defined the South just forty years ago. Without the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we would not be a country capable of electing a black president today. For that alone, I think he deserves a nomination.

you’re a communist. Your opinions don’t matter at all.

See? Ad personam is easy. And worthless. If you disagree with what Lowry wrote – attack the arguments, not the person. Elementary, dear Watson.

To coin a term: Adverse-tising: Advertising so annoying that it makes you less likely to buy a product than never having seen the advertising at all.

Attention all Madmen: Insipid tunes, bad acting, manipulative statistics, intrusiveness, stupid writing, crashes to my browser from your pop-up window — just remember, I’m taking notes.