[BostonCard]

Like humans shouldn't be calling balls and strikes anymore, baseball writers shouldn't be voting on who is in the Hall of Fame anymore. 



The numbers are what matters. The personalities don't.

Uh, that's not what the written criteria for the hall of fame says:

https://bbwaa.com/hof-elec-req/

Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

I get that in practice, as with the college football award that shall not be named, in practice, "...integrity, sportsmanship, character..." are mere buzzwords, but just because you think that there is some platonic ideal objective way to identify who is hall of fame worthy and who isn't (which, by the way, there is not, because different people value different aspects of a players contributions; for example, would you prioritize a player who is brilliant for a few years but their career was cut short due to injury, or a player who has tremendous career numbers due to longevity, but even at their peak paled compared to other players).

Anyway, I very much disagree with your premise that a) personalities don't (or shouldn't) matter with regards to the HoF and b) that numbers, per se, are what count.  Numbers are meaningless without context, so even if you want to emphasize playing ability and contribution to the team (even if you can measure them objectively with something like WAR), the HoF should never be and has never been, about a checklist of items.

BC

[BostonCard]

Like humans shouldn't be calling balls and strikes anymore, baseball writers shouldn't be voting on who is in the Hall of Fame anymore. 



The numbers are what matters. The personalities don't.

Uh, that's not what the written criteria for the hall of fame says:

https://bbwaa.com/hof-elec-req/

Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

I get that in practice, as with the college football award that shall not be named, in practice, "...integrity, sportsmanship, character..." are mere buzzwords, but just because you think that there is some platonic ideal objective way to identify who is hall of fame worthy and who isn't (which, by the way, there is not, because different people value different aspects of a players contributions; for example, would you prioritize a player who is brilliant for a few years but their career was cut short due to injury, or a player who has tremendous career numbers due to longevity, but even at their peak paled compared to other players).

Anyway, I very much disagree with your premise that a) personalities don't (or shouldn't) matter with regards to the HoF and b) that numbers, per se, are what count.  Numbers are meaningless without context, so even if you want to emphasize playing ability and contribution to the team (even if you can measure them objectively with something like WAR), the HoF should never be and has never been, about a checklist of items.

BC