there are lots of problems with the hall of fame, but that's what makes in interesting. If you use the worst player in the hall of fame as the litmus test for who belongs, pretty much everyone north of David Eckstien has an argument. making it more complex, winning 220 games in the 1980s is very different than willing 220 games in 1910 and will be exceedingly different than winning 220 games in 2020, just as hitting 500 homers in the 1930s or 40s is different than doing it in the 1990s. Plus the argument are you ranking players for their longevity or their pinnacle? That's what makes it a good argument.
|