I think with Gil no one is saying his offensive numbers alone are HOF worthy. They are exceptionally good but maybe not Hall worthy. But that you should look at his impact, his Dodger gravitas, his managerial success, i.e., the whole package of the man. And I think his premature death is another factor worthy of consideration.
It's not possible to argue that the only HOF criteria should be raw numbers. We can all debate the other factors, but stats can't be the be all and end all.
Are there any bridges in the United States named after Norm Cash or George Foster? Any elementary schools? I'm guessing no.
Last edited by Snapolit1; 12-05-2021 at 09:34 AM.
|