Seems you might have missed some context here.....I think Hossa is absolutely a worthy candidate and I believe and hope he gets in first ballot. I was responding to a pretty bad argument that inferred his induction would be "lowering the floor" further. He's going to get inducted because he should get inducted.
Well first, how have they "error-d?" Do you know their mandate? Do you know their induction criteria? This is such a common refrain that I'm betting very few give it any deeper thought. Just throw out Clark Gillies or Joe Nieuwendyke and scoff at the stupidity of the committee, right?
The person I originally responded to claimed that inducting Hossa would be tantamount to "lowering the floor," and that no one was going to tell their kids about the times they got to watch Hossa play hockey. Do you agree with that? I certainly don't.
Of course inducting "worse" players works in Hossa's favor. Even if the committee had a player who represented their
cut-off between induction and refusal, Hossa MORE than eclipses that player.
Take a look. There have been way more inductees that Hossa competes with on a cumulative career level than there are guys who blow his career out of the water. This "purity of the hall" movement among some fans feels weird, especially given who makes up the majority of player inductees. It's a myth....a nonsensical myth....that only the uber elite
should be worthy. Where is that established, and my god, how boring would the Hall be?