Quote:
Originally Posted by packs
Simple. The perception today is that you have to have certain numbers to be a HOFer. Mattingly doesn't have them. My argument is that the HOF has recognized injury shortened careers and HOF potential in its past elections. That same eye should be applied to Mattingly. But it hasn't been. That's what we're discussing.
|
Right, and my point is that if you let people in because the same logic applies to them as applied to past inductees, in your example 50 years or more ago, it would argue for the inclusion of a whole host of players. Standards change, and I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. Suppose you were to apply your logic, and induct every player since 1940 who was as good or better than Chick Hafey or Travis Jackson or Fred Lindstrom. How many people would that be?