Jan 14, 2013, 2:00 PM EDT
Eno Sarris of FanGraphs writes up a media conference call which took place after last week’s Hall of Fame announcement. The primary subject: the response of the powers that be to calls for change to the voting process and stuff. I wasn’t drinking a beverage when I read this passage, but if I would have been, I would have done a major spit-take:
Perhaps the most illuminating question was asked and answered quickly. One writer wanted to know what the BBWAA would say to those writers that were voting on suspicions. O’Connell said he wasn’t aware of any writers that were doing so and hadn’t seen anything on the subject.
Given how many writers have explicitly said that they’re not voting for Bagwell and others based on their suspicion alone — Eno cites several — this can only mean that the guy who basically runs the BBWAA doesn’t read much of his membership’s writing. Awkward.
Or, I suppose, it could mean that he knows his membership is doing ridiculous things and chooses to simply pretend that they aren’t so as to maintain the seemingly preferred BBWAA stance which insists that the current setup cannot be improved upon.
- The eyes have it: Thomas’ greatness built on patience 5
- Expert’s Corner: How to troll fans of all 30 teams 99
- Mariners re-acquire Kendrys Morales from Twins for Stephen Pryor 17
- A’s designate $10 million reliever Jim Johnson for assignment 28
- Everything you need to know about next week’s trade deadline 31
- Impending free agent Jon Lester won’t talk contract with the Red Sox until after the season 18
- And That Happened: Wednesday’s scores and highlights 30
- Verducci: baseball should think about an “illegal defense” rule to combat shifts (162)
- Luke Scott released from Korean team after calling coach a “liar” and a “coward” (108)
- Yankees acquire Chase Headley from Padres (108)
- Expert’s Corner: How to troll fans of all 30 teams (99)
- Who is the next Face of Baseball? (97)