Well I bet that Dale Murphy will get in on one of these vet committee things in a decade or two from now.
And Hodges probably benefited from winning 2 World Series and 4 more National League Pennants (maybe it was 3 more, I forget). WS winners get elevated in these things.
Here’s a funny stat I stumbled upon: Brett Gardner has slightly more bWAR, and slightly less fWAR, than Gil Hodges. In 1500 fewer PAs. 
But did Brett Gardner manage the 1969 New York Mets? Or play for the Brooklyn Dodgers of the 1950s, possibly the most written-about team of all time?
No, no, he did not.
Those committee selections (except for those whose career was all or partially in the Negro Leagues) are an absolute joke. There needs to be some sort of limit to how many chances a person can have between BBWAA rejections and committee rejections before he is simply declared a permanent “non-Hall-of-Famer.” How many cumulative votes have been overridden by one small committee? How is it that so many “no” votes mean “pending reconsideration” and a single “yes” vote is forever?
Congratulations, Gil Hodges Fan Club. You finally got a dozen people who agree with you on the same committee at the same time. Now you no longer have to feel inferior to the fan clubs of Phil Rizzuto, Bill Mazeroski, Ron Santo and Joe Gordon.
I’m not sure I really care anymore who’s in the Hall of Fame. The insistence of the small committees to keep inducting turkey choices like Harold Baines effectively means there are at least a thousand deserving Hall of Famers, while they won’t induct guys like Roger Clemens. It’s just stupid.
My point about Gardner was that the committee members were completely ignoring modern stats. Obviously Gardner isn’t worthy, and neither is Hodges.
That other stuff should have no bearing on whether or not Hodges makes the Hall. He was inducted as a ballplayer, not a manager, and the Brooklyn Dodger part is so what? Whoopee, he played for a team.
Speaking as a sports fan from the great unwashed Midwest, it has always seemed to me that, since New York is the traditional hub of sports media (as well as being the biggest metropolitan area of the country), its teams and players get an outsized amount of attention and recognition.
This may not be a fair criticism on my part, but it has long seemed to me that a player with a borderline case for making it into his sport’s Hall of Fame will have significantly better odds if he happened to play in New York, compared to a similar player who played elsewhere.
It is an absolutely fair criticism, especially when it comes to those who played in the 1940s and 1950s.
However, we should also note, that in the late 40s and 50s those New York based teams were REALLY good. The Dodgers teams that Hodges were on went to 6 World Series. The Yankees were the dominant team of the era.
Part of it may be NY, but the other part of it is likely due to all the World Series appearances. It’s why Derek Jeter is exalted so far above his actual accomplishments (though he did deserve to be a HoFer there are folks out there who try to argue he’s the best SS, which no).
Especially if his team won a championship or two. Not that winning should be entirely discredited, but this isn’t the NBA where one guy can will his team to a ring. Guys get rewarded for having good teammates.
Not to take this too far afield from MLB, but Eli Manning is a good example of this. I’m on the NFL subreddit, and there are a lot of Giants fans who are absolutely convinced that Eli is a no-brainer choice for the PFHOF, despite his really mediocre overall stats, because “two rings! He was awesome in the two Super Bowl runs!” Also, because New York.
Well QB is kind of a critical team position on a championship run compared to, say, first baseman on a baseball team.
I can’t get too upset over HOF election of players who were consistently good to excellent over a long period of time (like Minoso), even if they aren’t “great” by a metric like OPS++SuperWAR.
I don’t disagree, but if Manning had played anywhere else but New York, his overall career performance (even with two Super Bowl wins) would almost undoubtedly leave him out of the conversation for the Hall.
Disagree. Any QB with 2 rings, especially one where the passing game was an important part of the story, is going to get serious attention. It’s a very, very short list of QBs with multiple rings and they are all in the hall. Bob Griese is a good comp as a very mediocre QB who eventually got in based on that.
Edit: I’m not saying he deserves to get in, just that you can’t really blame NYC/East Coast bias for this discussion. It would be happening if he played in Jacksonville.
Griese was also a two-time All Pro, and depending on the season, led the league in various measures (completion percentage, touchdown percentage, QB rating, etc.). The only major statistical measures in which Manning ever led the league was in interceptions.
That said, if two Super Bowls is indeed effectively an automatic Hall of Fame ticket for a quarterback, then that’s unfortunate. (For the record, I imagine that’s a big part of what got Kurt Warner in, too, and while I like Warner, I don’t think he belongs in, either.)
See my edit above.
To continue the hijack, I’m cool with Warner getting in on the Gale Sayers corollary. His apex was something the NFL to that point had never seen before. He and that Rams offense redefined football for a time and that stuff really matters. You can’t adequately discuss the '00s without talking about Warner and that offense. That he got back to the dance with another team made him a no brainer, it wasn’t a fluke.
They are all not. Jim Plunkett is not in the Hall.
Ooops, for some reason I thought he got in recently. Well, he’s certainly been talked about a lot for it which sort of makes my point.
I am not sure this is the case. Don Mattingly and Thurman Munson are frequent “why aren’t they in the Hall?” complaints. You’ve also got Keith Hernandez, mentioned upthread, and Ron Guidry.
Of the very worst HOF selections ever it’s certainly the case that a disproportionate number are guys who played for the New York Giants, but that’s because Frankie Frisch bullied them all in (his former teammates represent MOST the worst selections of all time) - but he also got a bunch of former Cardinals in too, so that wasn’t really a New York thing as much as a Frisch thing.
Good points. As I noted, my observation may not be particularly fair or accurate.