Very good but not great. Someone has to be The Best Player Not In The Hall, and Hodges stands right behind Santo (who deserves being escorted to the other side of the velvet rope) for this dubious but honest distinction.
Regarding Hodges, I blogged this in 2007:
-----
Playing career: 18 seasons; Brooklyn/Los Angeles Dodgers (1943, '47-61), New York Mets (1962-63).
Standout season(s): 1954 (.304/.373/.579, 42 HR, 130 RBI, 142 adjOPS).
Career stat highlight: 370 HR (11th when he retired, now 61st).
Major honors and statistical crowns: eight All-Star selections, three NL Gold Gloves at first base (1957-59), games played twice. Member of two World Series champion teams (1955, 1959) and five other NL champions (1947, '49, '52-53, '56).
Primary position: first base.
BBWAA Hall voting: 15 ballots, peaking at 63.37% (on his final ballot).
2003 VC voting: 61.7% (highest return).
2005 VC voting: 65.0% (tied for highest return).
Baseball bonus points: was a manager for nine seasons with the Washington Senators and New York Mets, leading the 1969 Amazin's to the World Series championship. Hit four homers in one game in 1950 (Retrosheet.org doesn't yet go that far back). Jersey #14 retired by the Mets.
Hodges always comes up in these debates, for a few reasons – he was really good, he got a lot of face time in the World Series, he brought home the first (and considered wildly improbable) Mets championship, and he came agonizingly close to election through the BBWAA. Plus, the VC has treated him nicely the first two go-arounds. Hodges brings a big ball of baseball wax to the table.
But he was never really great. Never led the league in any positive hitting category; often among the leaders but never #1, no season where he sat down everyone else. Had four straight seasons with an adjusted OPS between 138 and 143 (his peak); that's pretty much my floor for Hall-class performance, and playing a historically power-heavy position (1B) should demand a bit more that wasn't there. If Hodges hadn't played for some highly storied Dodgers teams (and he did make strong contributions to them), he wouldn't be half so popular a candidate. It is inescapable that someone has to be The Best Player Not In The Hall, and to me Hodges fits that role perfectly (as soon as Santo gets elected, anyway). I expect he will get a plaque someday, but it doesn't bother me that he doesn't have one yet nor would it bother me if he never did get one.
-----
And then added this in 2008:
-----
Primary position: first base.
Playing career: 18 seasons, 1943 & '47-63 -- *Brooklyn/Los Angeles Dodgers 1943 & '47-61, New York Mets 1962-63.
Standout season: 1954 (.304/.373/.579, 106 runs, 176 hits, 42 HR, 130 RBI, 141 OPS+.)
Other noteworthy seasons: 1951, 1952, 1953.
Career highlight stat: 370 HR.
Honoraria and statistical crowns: eight All-Star selections, three NL Gold Gloves at first base (1957-59), games played twice. Member of two World Series champion teams (1955, 1959) and five other NL champions (1947, '49, '52-53, '56). Jersey #14 retired by the Mets.
BBWAA voting: 15 ballots, peaking at 63.4% (on his final ballot).
VC voting: 2003, 61.7% (highest return); 2005, 65.0% (tied for highest return); 2007, 61.0%.
Baseball bonus points: Hodges was a manager for nine seasons with the Senators and Mets, bringing home the 1969 World Series championship to Queens. Once hit four homers in one game, 1950.
No matter how I look at Hodges, I just cannot see greatness. He's close, yes, but so have been a lot of other guys. The 1969 championship is a huge bonus, but this is a player ballot, so that doesn't really count; and besides, the rest of his managerial career was pedestrian. Granted there's only so much anyone can do with an expansion team, but his other Mets seasons were nothing special -- that 1969 team was lightning in a bottle. I consider Hodges to be, after Santo (whose case may be redressed this time), The Best Player Not In The Hall. It has to be someone, and Hodges is an ideal office-holder.
He likely will get a plaque someday, more on the basis of his entire career and contributions to baseball than for any one role. This happens, and I'm okay with it. But assessing him as a player, for me he falls just short.
-----
I haven't seen anything to convince me otherwise -- No on Hodges.