In response to this post I posted this as a comment:
As many of us, and others, have stated ad nauseam, the hall of fame voters obviously do not like, nor know anything about Baseball. Players must be considered in context. Pitchers should be considered in two distinct groups: starters and relief pitchers.
Position players should be considered at their respective positions in context of when they played, and their respective status in the game.
To illustrate my point, it's the Robert Horry argument in the NBA. Not an MJ, not Bird, not Magic, but in 16 years he won 7 titles and hit some huge, huge, let me say it again huge shots. For Pete's sake his nick name is Big Shot Rob. Anyway, is he a hall of famer? I say yes. As silly as that sounds, its the hall of fame, not the Hall of Stats. Even if it is the Hall of Stats, many players such as Tram and Sweet Lou deserve to be in. Often referred to as the greatest double play combo of all time. Hence the Fame aspect is met.
Many people believe that no one that played after their precious Golden Age deserves to be in. The Wall of Nostalgia keeps a lot of players out. The fact that anyone argues against Jim Rice, Andre Dawson, Lee Smith, Dale Murphy, etc proves my point. If these guys don't deserve to be in then who since 1975 does?
I tend to work on an era theory. Who were the 10 most dominant players for any particular 5 year period works well. For example, look at the league leaders from 1981-1985. The names will probably surprise you and you will see them on the lists over and over and over again.
Apparenlty there is some sort of collective amnesia on behalf of voters and the media. It would be cool to see aggregate rolling 5 year stat leaders. Batting average, HR, and RBI would shock quite a few people.
Not sure if I have made any sense but my point is, its the Hall of Fame not stats and it doesn't get much more famous than Tram to Sweet Lou. Even if it is the HOS many of these players deserve to be in. What I want to know is how is Steve Garvey not in the HOF?