I don't understand how they picked better than the actual ballot. Only 4 deserved to be in it. Biggio will go in next year for sure. Le Batard lost his privilege, one he didn't deserve to begin with. Also I'm pretty sure the bbwaa is actually quite a bit of younger guys and writers don't usually have personal bias, never understood that complaint. The NFL voting now that is nothing but bias
That's your opinion, which seems to be based mostly on the voting results. One could easily make the claim that guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, and Sosa deserve to be in since PED's have been around since the 1960's yet the BBWAA isnt doing any moral grand-standing about those players. (Not saying I agree with this.)
You can also make a case for Edgar Martinez, if you're not one of the crotchety lot who has a bug up their rears about the DH.
The point was that the guys that went on to Deadspin's ballot, were all guys who can at minimum have a legit argument be made that they should be in the Hall, and all of the guys they voted for had at least 50% of the total vote. There weren't any terrible selections like Jacque Jones, Hideo Nomo, or Armando Benitez on there, who some of the actual BBWAA had on their ballots. I think one clown even submitted a ballot with only Jack Morris' name on it and nothing else to protest the fact he hasnt been elected yet. Where's the moral outrage at that guy?
There always going to be a bias no matter what type of voting system you do but by having so many voters that bias just gets crushed. Plus saying they're bias makes no sense and hasn't for a while, that complaint only works if someone was voted in that probably didn't deserve it which hasn't been the case for awhile. it's the hall of fame not the hall of very good.
Purely statistically speaking, 600 isnt a large sample size, and wouldnt discount inherent voter bias, especially with all of the BBWAA being in the same profession (group). You want to completely discount bias, you'd have to at least triple that number and have randomly selected voters each year from different sports-related areas (broadcasting, former players, writers, stats people, management, etc.) so you dont have the same people shilling for or railing against the same candidates. Statistically speaking you probably couldn't have a WORSE sampling process.
Le Batard deserved to lose his right, the only reason he did that crap was because he wasn't getting his way. He didn't make a point, he did nothing but just prove that he is immature and this is his way of whining because things aren't going the way he wants them to.
Yup, because in normal years where 3 of the most deserving, yet vanilla guys of their time get elected to the HoF, we talk about it this much.
Hard to say what the impact of Le Batard doing this is will be. There wasnt a particular candidate he wanted in or out here, keep that in mind. He did it because he felt the voting system was out-dated and terminally flawed, which it is. People have been slamming it for years and nothing's changed. Effectuating change from the inside may not be a bad idea.