Talk:George Kelly

"Kelly had a 16-year career in the majors, led the league twice in RBI and once in homers, was a slick fielder, and was a key infielder on the New York Giants teams that dominated baseball from 1921 to 1924. He was 3rd in the Most Valuable Player Award voting in 1925, and 6th in 1924." Is this really an argument that he's not a good HoFer? Don't a lot of non-Hall of Famers play 16 years in the majors, a fair number leading in a category or two and getting a few MVP votes? - Mischa (talk) 23:57, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

I meant to communicate that, although he's seen as an unworthy Hall of Famer, he nevertheless did some impressive things. Not necessarily good enough to qualify for the Hall, but good nonetheless. If the Hall of Fame is top 1% but a player is "only" in the top 5%, that's still an accomplishment. - Randy (talk) 01:38, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why we need to comment on his qualifications as a HOFer. He did lots of things. He's in the Hall. Both facts. We're an encyclopedia. Jeff (talk) 07:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

I think addressing the controversy is noteworthy - we have several "borderline" HoFers (some in, some out) where we have the facts on the cases for and against their inclusion. As long as it's not advocacy for or against a given player. - Mischa (talk) 14:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

I remember researching articles from the period when he was elected because I wanted to see why exactly they thought he was a Hall of Famer. One basically said it's because he was an "upstanding gentleman." Alexsautographs (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2020 (UTC)