Is it really that bold to say we should be evaluating a player's career based on statistics and not reputation/perception/opinion?
I wouldn't have thought so...
Not superbold but not sure how serious, and it feels a bit of a strawmen, I think if we start to talk about it everyone will simply agree to use both.
Imagine how horrible the conversation around Kevin Lowe, Emile Bouchard, Garbonneau or Gainey induction to the hall among 2 people purely looking and evaluating them by their stats, public statistics of some eras are quite limited. If we limit Martin Brodeur to regular season, looking at single season after single season save percentage finish, that would miss a lot of the story here.
Brodeur playoff stats in different Devils era
95-00: .921 (fully elite like Roy, .923)
01-04: .918 again full elite, similar to old Hasek-Roy
05-12: .915, similar to Luongo-Lundvist
Only 2 Top 3 regular season save percentage in his whole career, but 9 time he had .923 or better playoff run, more often than otherwise (8), during his prime he did it 75% of the time, no one watching find it bizarre for Brodeur to replace Joseph on a stacked team Canada in 2002 instead of a Turco-Belfour even if:
Brodeur was in middle of a whole decade with 0 Top 10 in regular season save percentage finish and it is obvious to us why, we should allow some credit to the watched of the past has well (people that went Brodeur era will probably feel like the older one feel when the younger talk about Fuhr).
In all sport stats does not tell all the story (at least until modern actual full 3d scans of games with all events fully described a la NBA that can tell a big amount), goaltender Hockey statistics are maybe way better than hockey player (which are better than soccer player), but still will not tell all of the story.
Specially when it goes to the Hall of Fame or not conversation, regardless of that value we give to the contemporaries perception-opinion at evaluating hockey player actual worth (it is fully possible that even coach-hockey player are bad at evaluating what actually make a team win and be influenced by spectacular hits, shot blocking, etc... that were bad strategy in reality) it is still relevant to the level of fame and hockey history of a player. Like when faceoff win % or GAA/shutout seem to have influenced trophy quite a bit, because they were popular stats around versus others things would they have been popular stats.
And it is hard to believe that even the lowest, say journalist opinion, would have no value, at least they saw many of the games.