The failure of Ichiro Suzuki to be unanimous clinched that.
Monday’s announcement by the Hall of Fame that Ichiro Suzuki had been elected, but one vote short of unanimously on the 394 returned ballots by BBWAA members, runs the risk of making these Hall elections irrelevant.
Some would argue that they already are, but let’s look at the potential arguments by this single voter, who has not yet been identified.
The voter thinks no one should be unanimously inducted
That ship sailed when Mariano Rivera was unanimously elected in 2019.
The voter thinks that Rivera should be the only one unanimously inducted
This is a ridiculous argument. In fact, there is a “first tier” of Hall of Famers who probably should all have been inducted unanimously, players like Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Stan Musial, Mickey Mantle, Greg Maddux and others. Players who were the best of their generation, added something to the game that no one else did or have an argument for being the best of all time.
Ichiro Suzuki definitely qualifies in the “added something that no one else did” category. How it can be that this voter would have thought Rivera — well qualified in that category too — should be unanimous but Suzuki shouldn’t is totally beyond me.
The voter figured Ichiro would get in regardless, so voted for others strategically
This is dumb, too. That voter identified nine players BETTER than Ichiro? I certainly didn’t see anyone on this year’s ballot who would qualify.
Honestly, I can’t think of any other even partly logical reasons and so this voter should identify himself or herself and explain. The Hall said no blank ballots were returned, so it wasn’t that.
It was just someone trying to be cute or clever. The BBWAA has a policy of not publicly identifying ballots unless the voter gives permission, but in this case I think they should change that policy.
Further, and more to the point of the headline, the voting system needs to be changed. There are some who think induction should be on the basis of some statistical formula, using WAR or other measures, and I could not disagree more. This is not the “Hall of Statistical Achievement,” it is the Hall of FAME. People don’t go to the Hall to celebrate stats, they go to celebrate the history of the game. Ichiro Suzuki, for example, compiled 60 career bWAR. That ranks 127th among all MLB position players, just behind Bobby Abreu and Harmon Killebrew (one of whom is in the Hall, and the other should be). Most of the position players with 60 or more bWAR are in — check out the full list.
What I am going to suggest — again, since I’ve done this before — is to change the voting system. When the BBWAA was given this vote in 1931, they were the people who knew most about baseball, since they went to more games than fans, and the only other way to follow the game was radio. Obviously things have changed greatly since then and ordinary fans have much more knowledge about baseball than they did nearly a century ago.
Why shouldn’t team and national broadcasters get a vote? When Vin Scully was living, he certainly had seen much more baseball than most writers. Pat Hughes, a recent Frick Award winner, certainly would be as knowledgeable or more about the sport than many BBWAA members. At least the living Frick Award winners should get a vote.
Then, why not give the living Hall of Fame members a vote?
Lastly, since the Hall exists for baseball fans, why not give fans a small portion of the vote, a national vote (one per person) that would count for maybe five percent of the total vote. If you think that’s too much, then at least include the other two groups above.
Something’s got to change to avoid this sort of thing in the future. Mariano Rivera should not be the only player unanimously elected to the Hall of Fame, and it’s a shame that one person felt Ichiro shouldn’t join him.