After hearing various projections, especially Repoz's, for the BBWAA Hall vote to be released tomorrow morning, I fully expect a big Goose egg. Therefore, we fans have to console ourselves with the Negro League ballots. I think I picked everyone but Cap Anson to gain admittance to the hallowed Hall from the Negro Leagues ballots.

My friend Murray responded with an interesting question: Didn't we get everybody from the Negro Leagues who's really important into the Hall already? Aren't all these other efforts just a form of SABR-PCness?

Well, my first response to this obviously racist question (I'm joking, of course) was that it comes down to a matter of opinion. The majors have selected an expert panel to review the candidates. I happen to know a bit about the Negro Leagues and feel that a number of the candidates are Hall-worthy.

I especially felt that there were a number of non-playing Negro Leaguers who deserved representation in the Hall. The only person whose Hall credentials were helped by his non-playing career was Rube Foster, who could have gone into the Hall as a pitcher, a manager, or an executive. Yes, there was a lot of turnover among the leagues and teams in the history of the Negro Leagues, but there was a great deal of success that should be celebrated.

Murray also pointed out that Bill James lauded the work of the Negro Leagues Committee in the Seventies. He said that they completed their task and then went quietly into the night. However, I had to point out that Rube Foster, someone I would hold in the highest esteem among all Negro League candidates, did not make the Negro League Committee's cut. He got in after the Negro Leaguers were folded back into the Veterans Committee.

Here are all of the Negro League Hall of Famers broken down by committee:

So again it came down to opinion. The Negro Leagues Committee felt that only nine men deserved to be recognized in Cooperstown. The Vets Committee doubled that. So what's the standard? Now, the number of reps could be doubled in one fell swoop. That's opinion, not standards.

But the stathead in me could just accept that it was a matter of opinion. I thought it might be helpful to look at the number of white Hall of Famers active in each season and the number of Negro Leaguers. There are currently 22 Hall of Famers who played in the Negro Leagues at some point in their careers including Hank Aaron (1 year), Willie Mays (3), Jackie Robinson (1), and Larry Doby (4). I looked at the years 1884 (Moses Fleetwood and Wenday Walker appearance on a major-league roster, the last by an African-American player in the majors until Jackie Robinson) through 1955 (the last by a Hall of Famer, Satchel Paige, in the Negro Leagues). This is the period during which segregation held some sway in the game.

What is the proper ratio of Negro Leaguers to major-leaguers that should be in the Hall for this period? Some have said that there should be one Negro Leaguer per each major-leaguer in the Hall. That seems a bit high to me.

Maybe by the time that the majors re-integrated, one could argue that there were as many outstanding players in the Negro Leaguers as in the majors. However, until 1920 there was no viable organization for African-American players. One could hardly argue that the individual black teams pre-1920 developed players as effectively as the organized white leagues did. So where does one draw the line?

Let's look at where the de facto line is right now. Here is the count of active major leaguers and active Negro Leaguers per season that are in the Hall of Fame currently with a grand total for all years in the "segregation era":

Ignoring the war years, in which apparently fewer black players were detained, the highest ratio was in 1946 in which slightly more than a third of the white HoFers had active Negro League counterparts (10 to 27). Overall there's just one Negro Leaguer per every six active major leaguers for those years.

OK, so there is still a bit of opinion in the mix. What is the proper ratio? In my opinion, the fewer than 1:5 that one sees before the formation of the Negro National League in 1920 was plenty low. However, one might say that the 3:1 ratios that pop up as the timeline wends toward Jackie Robinson seem about right.

So what do I conclude? Pre-Negro Leaguers are woefully under-represented. Nods to Sol White and Frank Grant. But it might make later players like Minnie Minoso and Buck O'Neil harder sells. Also, managers and execs need some better representation, perhaps good news for the Taylor brothers and J. L. Wilkinson.

Whatever happens, as James pointed out, we can perhaps but one segment of the Hall debate to rest. However, given the one the issue of race has continued to play a large role in our country and in the game, I wouldn't be surprised if a new or at least different committee is tasked to investigate the issue again in a few years. At least someone will get in the Hall this year.