Gil Hodges and the Baseball Hall of Fame

[dodgerkim4]

Gil Hodges is a Hall of Famer according to the people who knew like Pee Wee, Roy and Duke. In the Players own words Gil is described. Quotes are given and page numbers are listed. History was made with the help of the team. Could it have been done without Gil? "Jack counted on Gil" as the quote reads. Important stuff...please read. Let's be a part of history and get Gil in the Hall of Fame.
http://gilhodgesdodgers.blogspot.com

[VIBaseball]

Welcome, Kim. There's been plenty said on this topic here over the years. Please feel free to express your opinions on the other matters we've raised.

[Ralph Zig Tyko]

Gil is amongst the best players not in the Hall. He was a terrific player, and had he lived longer, his managing may have gotten him in. That does not mean that he should be a member... and please don't bring up the "undeserving" members in your argument for his inclusion. Thanks.

[philliesfiend55]

Gil Hodges is a Hall of Famer according to the people who knew like Pee Wee, Roy and Duke. Let's be a part of history and get Gil in the Hall of Fame.


If only, that were so easy!

At present, it would seem like the Hall Of Fame rules were set up to keep Hodges out of the Hall Of Fame.
Hodges played in one game in 1943 before entering the Military. His MLB career began in earnest in 1947.
When the Veterans Committee was reorganized they split the candidates into two groups: players who made their MLB career debut before 1943, and in the other group, those who debuted in 1943 or afterwards. This later group's destiny is still in the hands of living Hall Of Famers. As everyone knows, in the four elections since this group was given the vote (2003, 2005, 2007, & 2009) they have elected no one. The living Hall Of famers seem to covet their distinction/honor and have seen to it that even the very best Veterans Committee candidates somehow fall short of election. In the pre-1943 group which uses a panel of experts, writers and historians, the chances of being elected is much better. They elected Joe Gordon in the last election and Allie Reynolds missed election by one vote. If the guidelines had been drawn differently and the cutoff date had been 1944, Hodges would have placed in the earlier group and in my opinion, he would instantly have become the best candidate in the earlier group. That's why I wonder why that particular cutoff year was chosen.
How far back do you have to go to be placed in that earlier group - over 65 years from your MLB debut until the election year? To me that seems to be far too long. There seems to be no historical significance to using 1943 as the cutoff date (unless it was chosen to keep Hodges out of the earlier, more candidate-friendly group). See below for three much more historically significant dates.

Historically it would make more sense to do one of three things at present.
A. Put the cutoff date at 1946. That way in the Modern group you would have all candidates who began their MLB careers after World War Two. The earlier group would include only candidates who played at least part of their career before the end of World War Two.

B. Use 1947 as the cutoff. - For the beginning of integration of the major leagues with Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier.

C. Split the 20th Century In Half. Use 1950 as the cutoff point. If you began your career in the
1940s or earlier then you belong in the earlier group. Those that began in 1950 or later, would be considered to have played in the "Modern Era" and they would fall under the jurisdiction of the living Hall Of Famers.

As time goes on I would expect to have the cutoff date adjusted. It would be moved to 1955, 1960 etc. in the coming years as time advances.

Right now it would seem like the only route to the Hall Of Fame by those not elected in 15 elections by the writers (BBWAA) would be to be elected by the early group and Hodges at present does not fall under the early group's jurisdiction. Unfortunately for these fine players, even with the cutoff date being adjusted in the future to some later date, that will probably mean in close to 100 per cent of the cases that any successful candidate from the earlier group will be elected Posthumously.

*Philly-brownsfan* (Dennis Orlandini)

P.S.: Note - To illustrate that last point- Consider this: In the last election of Pre-1943 players, at the time the candidate nominations were announced and their names were put on the Final Ballot, there was only one living candidate:
90-year-old, Mickey Vernon. However, he died shortly before the election was held.

[KCGHOST]

Hodges candidacy has had more than sufficient time and opportunity to be elected. To argue that he hasn't had that is absurd. He had 15 years on the BBWAA ballot and numerous VC attempts. Whether he should be in the HoF is a matter of opinion, but the fact is he had numerous opportunities to be elected and wasn't.