What's is your HOF voting criteria?
 

I'm having a tad bit of trouble inducting people into Cooperstown, I know there are players who are good, but not "good enough" for the Hall of Fame

My current criteria for Batters is:
200-400+ Home Runs
A decent career batting average (.260-.300+)
1000+ RBI
A 60+ Career WAR
5+ All star selections
2+ Gold Gloves (if applicable)
2+ Silver Sluggers
1+ World Series Ring
Had to be a reasonable star that I noticed through news stories/leading stats (basically I had to know who they were)

Example of a person inducted under this criteria:
http://i.imgur.com/poTmv8k.png

For Pitchers:
200+ Wins
sub career 3.20 ERA
sub career 1.20 WHIP
2000 career K's
a 50+ career WAR
a 20 win season
a Cy Young
5+ All Star apperences
1+ World Series Ring
Had to be a reasonable star that I notices through news stories/leading stats

Example of a person who was inducted under this criteria:
http://i.imgur.com/4xGwlao.png
Note: Wacha was notably shammed from All Star games due to him never being quite popular for some reason.

I've only had 1 HOF inducee (Wacha) in the last 3 years, I want to know your guy's criteria so I can get a basis of which players should get in and who shouldn't, so what are yours?

My Position Player HOF prerequisites are steep. My mindset is that the Hall of Fame is for the ELITE, not the great.

WAR is a huge category for me.
Average H HR RBI OBP and years played factor in highly
I need:
.280+ Average
2500 Hits
400+ home runs
2000 rbi
More than 10 seasons

Pitchers need to have 250+ wins or 500 saves
2000 strikeouts a great Win% and again longevity.

I didn't know this was something you could set. I thought the game set the criteria.

You cant. Neither crawford or Wacha would get my vote.
I look for the milestone #'s.
Higher then .300 AVG with less then 3000 Hits but more then 2500.
3+ MVP/ Cy Young Awards but failing to meet other #'s I;ll consider that player.
Outstanding player during that era but without 3000 HIts/K's 300 Wins will still get in.
Some of the better HOFers in my aBF league not all compiled stats in the ABF but did play in the ABF. Some are from the PCL and the old SA & NL.

Absolutely for Crawford. I don't think so for Wacha.

I probably put more stock in OPS+ & ERA+, I like to see a player who consistently outhits his peers. Counting stats are always a good starting point, but I'd rather put in a guy with 2200 H, 350 HR, and a 150 OPS+ over a shorter career than a guy with 2800 H, 450 HR, but a 120 OPS+.

I also think the OP's point about hearing a lot about them in the BNN stories helps - HOF should be for guys who in a way transcend the game, in my opinion. I'd rather have a guy was consistently a big deal than a guy who just accumulated without really making a huge name for themselves (this is more of a real life thing than OOTP, but I think you know what I mean).

I would vote for both but that's because I'm very lenient when voting for the HOF. Crawford should definitely get in though.

Crawford is a no-brainer yes for me, Wacha is a similarly easy no vote.

For evaluating up the middle defensive positions, WAR absolutely has to be a consideration. 90+ WAR is pretty automatic in my book, and his JAWS and HOF Monitor numbers seem to reflect that.

Well I felt that Wacha deserved to get in, obviously not as a first ballot but as a 9th, he had 200 wins, had 2 20+ win season had an average ERA as a extreme fly all pitcher, and his ERA+ was constantly higher than 100, also for a non piper pitcher he got 2500+ K's

Also he was able to manage himself putting up 10+ win seasons with a average war of around 3 consistently into his 30s and giving up less home runs in a home run park (Cincinnati) that's why he got my vote

Wacha definitely looks to be in that Mike Mussina/Curt Schilling type area where if there was anything particularly special/famous about him beyond the basic stats, I could see putting him in. Postseason performances, overcoming personal adversity, great guy with the media, or something similarly outside the norm. It is hard to adjust one's expectations for cumulative career wins in the modern environment, the 1980s are long past, so 300 wins is probably an unfair standard going forward. A 120 ERA+ over a career of that length is certainly at least "Hall of Very Good", so while I wouldn't personally vote him in (ties go to the HOF stats when I'm trying to judge, AKA those 5 in the bottom left corner), it's nothing egregious to me to see him put in.

i don't have specific numbers. Just someone who was dominate in his era. If they lead the league (or were among leaders) on a regular basis (or more than just one great season) ...in BA, or HR, or RBI or Runs ... Ks, ERA, Win % ... well, you get the idea. Being among the elite of their generation.

I don't look so much at WS appearances. Ask Ernie Banks...or Frank Thomas...or Junior...or Gaylord Perry...or Rod Carew...or Luke Appling...or Phil Niekro...or George Sisler.

Also, I don't feel that there are too many .260 hitters who belong in the Hall. That's an average BA at best.

Based on the above, Crawford should be an easy yes, despite his middling home run totals. A Gold Glove shortstop with over 2800 hits, 800 extra base hits, plus excellent baserunning should be near automatic. His total of 92.6 WAR would, if he retired today, be 41st overall, a hair above Al Kaline and Wade Boggs. I wouldn't vote for Wacha -- based on run-of-the-mill career totals, and no real peak to speak of (no 6 WAR seasons). If he had a strong postseason record, he'd warrant some consideration.

This is Wacha's postseason stats, take it as you will
http://i.imgur.com/KguLORn.png