O/T, Slightly, Should Hodges Go In HoF Ahead of Santo

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

Gil Hodges actually came up from the minors prior to WWII and once again the Veteran's Committee is considering his nomination for the hall. If the Veteran's Committee will let in only Hodges or Santo, which should it be?

My vote would be for Ron Santo simply because he's a great 3d baseman and there are not enough of them in the HOF. However, there are plenty of first basemen. Also, Gil is long gone so he's not around to enjoy going into the Hall anyway. Furthermore, in my opinion he was never the best at his position in the NL for any length of time. Whereas, Ron Santo was the best 3d baseman in the NL for several years. Some even thought he was comparable to Brooks Robinson.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

is deserving...look at the stats, he was a great 3B, although with no post-season experience (he was one of my Cubbies, after all)...
He has fallen shy in the past, if I have heard correctly, because he is regularly campaigned against, by the ever warm and big-hearted Mr. Schmidt

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I think order of induction means very little.

It took Joe DiMaggio 7 years to be inducted, and people think it's a crime Cal Ripken didn't get 100 percent on his first year. As far as I know, most baseball players consider DiMaggio to be a good baseball player, despite the black smear on his name that he wasn't elected into the Hall within 0.5 seconds of his name being posted for voters. And, by the way, most historians consider Ripken to be a good player too.

To me, the ludicrousness of the heated HOF voting percentage debates is that many people thought it unjust that Ripken and Tony Gwynn didn't get 100 percent of the vote (which, obviously, would be the highest percentage in history and the highest possible), even though no one who complained considers Ripken or Gwynn the best player ever. These people see high crime when Ripken and Gwynn get higher percentages that Cobb, Honus Wagner, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, Walter Johnson and Joe DiMaggio-- even when these complainers consider these other players superior to Ripken and Gwynn.

Ripken and Gwynn themselves would never say they should have received higher percentages than Babe Ruth and Willie Mays.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

I'm not sure that either Santo or Hodges truly belong among the HOF greats. I also think saying Ron Santo was Brooks Robinson's equal is a bit of a stretch (the former had 5 Gold Gloves and the latter 16). If I had to choose between those two, though, I'd pick Santo.

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

I would put in Santo this year because he was the best 3rd baseman in the NL between Mathews and Schmidt. He might have been the best in the majors if you don't count Killebrew and Allen as 3rd basemen (I'm not sure how much they played there) and if you agree that he was better overall than Brooks Robinson. I've never heard about Schmidt's campaign against him. Anyone have any details?

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

David,

In general I would agree with you that order of induction means little. But to people like Buck O'Niel it matters a great deal that they were nominated before they passed away.

Also, for collectors it makes quite a bit of difference. The 5 HOF in the first class, their cards are hobby heavyweights whereas some of the people who came through the Veteran's Committee are virtually ignored.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: CN

I think Gil Hodges definitely deserves to go in before Santo. He was a multiple all-star player on one of the great teams in history and was I believe a multiple gold glover. I don't have his stats available but in the 50's when he played if you hit in the high 20's in home runs and high 90's in RBI's on a consistent basis and was a great fielder you have to be at least considered as well as playing in several World Series. The thing that I think really puts Hodges ahead of Santo is that he managed a team to one of the greatest upsets in 1969. Unfortunately he died too young at 48 years old. Hodges and Santo statwise are very similiar but if you had to pick one for the HOF I think Hodges intangibles as a leader puts him ahead. CN

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

Both Santo and Hodges were great fielders and multiple GG winners. But GG voting has been notoriously poor since the inception of the award and as such is not really a good barometer of defensive skill. Certain players, including Brooks Robinson, Ozzie Smith and Jim Kaat were "automatically" given the award year after year. They certainly were great defensively but there are plenty of folks who will tell you that Clete Boyer should have won a GG or two over Robinson and in 1971 Graig Nettles lost the award to Robinson despite having one of the all time great fielding seasons.

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

i think both should be in the hall of fame. and not for the reasons of all the guys we name here and why are they in so why not santo or hodges. but consider these facts, hodges was the all-star 1st baseman of the national league from 1949-57. also, he held the nl record for hitting over 20+ homers for 11 consecutive years. and, at one time he was the 2nd leading hr hitter in nl history behind mel ott. lastly the dodgers of his era were perhaps the greatest team in the history of the nl. now for ron santo,from 1961-1973 he performed at the skill level of any 3rd baseman in the hall of fame.he was the nl all star 3rd baseman every year from 1963 thru 1973 except for 1 year. he also happened to have diabetes which ,i believe led to his rapid decline in production which hastened his early retirement.w/o the disease he probably hangs around 3 or 4 more years and pads his stats.imo, growing up (a sox fan) in chicago during the 1960's, i believed santo to be a much better player than billy williams or the 1960's version of ernie banks, without a doubt.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Who would you rather have on your team? A .270-hitting first baseman with good power, or one of the greatest third basemen ever. There are dozens of guys who did what Hodges did, only better. But how many third basemen could hit for power, draw walks and play great third base? I'd take Santo over Brooks Robinson any day, and I love Brooks. HOF third basemen George Kell and Fred Lindstrom aren't even in Santo's league. And there are far fewer third basemen in the HOF than any other position. While many collectors rant about grading companies and auction houses, I prefer to rant about the HOF. Isn't tomorrow the big day? Hopefully, the Veterans' Committee will give me something to cheer about this year. C'mon Minnie!

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

I have thought for years both should be in. Maybe this is the year.....

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Dave,

Both of them were 8 votes short on the last ballot 2 years ago, I'd like to see Santo get in because he's still alive and kicking. Gil Hodges can wait a few more years.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: CN

It would be nice for Gil to get in while his wife Joan Hodges is still alive. She has done a lot for local charities since her husband died in 1972.CN

[Archive]

Posted By: Pcelli60

Hodges first because hes been deserving longer..Santo also needs to go.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ken McMillan

Santo needs to be in the Hall Of Fame. In addition to being the best third baseman of his era, he is an awesome person. He is always working to help JDRF (juvenile diabetes), and has been a trooper through all of his medical problems. He is also a champion for his team and he lives and dies with the cubs. Baseball has missed the boat by not having Ronnie in the hall. I personally know Ron and really do not understand what the vetrins committee is looking for in not electing Ron.

Ken

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Hodges, Santo and Oliva should all be in.
I think anyone who is upset that a lifetime hitter of .276 who played the infield and had an average arm, average range and an average glove didn't get 100% of the votes is crazy. I think Ripken's media popularity contributed greatly to his first ballot induction. Yes, I know. THE STREAK. Hail, hail longevity.....

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

To the original question.... no.

The should both be inducted in 2009, side by side, when the Veterans Committee has been cured of their current affliction, rectal craniums. O'Doul should go in then, with Reulbach, too.

That would be the right thing to do, so it won't happen.


Maybe what we need is an American Baseball Museum and Hall of Fame. And be seriously more selective about who gets in. I take that back, Gary Carter, Pete Rose, they could walk in anytime the bought a ticket.

Frank.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

Every year he picks up a few more votes, so eventually, he'll get in. Veteran's Committee is waiting for Ron Santo to croak. After that they will nominate him. It makes no sense, if your going to let him in anyway, you might as well nominate him so that he can enjoy it.

Another thing that irks me is why do they have a good moral character requirement for getting into the HOF.

You already have people like Ty Cobb, John McGraw, Ferguson Jenkins and others in the Hall who are not angels. It doesn't make any sense for this committee to judge the moral worthiness of an applicant.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

I think Hodges probably lost a year or maybe a year and a half to World War 2, so he might have nailed 400 homers without military service. I think he compares favorably to Ralph Kiner but also to Dale Murphy so is obviously (if not already apparent) a borderline candidate. Hodges was close to Kiner for a number of years' in the 70's HOF voting and well ahead of some other guys who got in. He was good to great in the field from what I have heard and won the Series with the Mets; two almost plusses. It's seems like he's one or two seasons away in many ways: 1 more World Series, one more 30 HR season, 1 more season over 100 RBI and I think he's in years ago. So again, the lost time to the war should be factored in. I think the lifetime BA works against him too. And I think there is a better argument for Hodges than Santo (whom I also feel should be in).

Some other guys I believe should be in: Blyleven, Dahlen, Hernandez (Keith that is-on the Mazeroski factor that outstanding fielding should be rewarded, which would also enshrine a few other guys I cannot recall right now-outstanding fielding should be rewarded over the long haul IMHO).

Here's a great site with HOF voting to start more arguments:

http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/history/hof_voting/default.htm

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I think it's interesting that Hodges was waaaaaay ahead of Snider in the voting when they were first on the ballot. Then Snider overtook Hodges and within a few more years was elected. I don't know how you explain that. For what it's worth, I do think Snider is more worthy than Hodges, so the voters eventually got it right.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Paul,

It was unfortunate that Duke Snider played the same time as Mantle and Mays. People thought of him as being a 2nd level center fielder however if you looked at his numbers historically he was one of the best center-fielders ever. After Mantle and Mays got in the Hall of Fame, the voters were ready to let in The Duke.

Richie Ashburn had it worse because people thought he was the fourth best center-fielder, however, after the Duke got in, Richie eventually got in.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: George Dreher

I would have to give the nod to Hodges because of his managerial career in addition to his playing career. Without the managing, he doesn't deserve to be inducted.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

George,

It doesn't work that way, it depends on the category that the ballplayer falls into. For instance that's why Buck O'Niel didn't get in, they were looking at his stats as a negro league player and the stats were not impressive. So he didn't get in.

For Gil Hodges he falls into the player category, so they will be looking at the numbers solely. If they were looking at him as a manager, they would be looking at his managerial record only and he would fall short.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

...Kiner was a far better hitter than Hodges.

[Archive]

Posted By: CN

Joe Torre is an interesting case. As a player he just falls short and as a manager he was a losing manager until he got to the high payroll Yankees. I wonder how he would have fared with the 1980,s Yankees. CN

[Archive]

Posted By: Darren

yes.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

CN,

I agree that Joe Torre is an interesting situation. However, he should get in because he's an outstanding hitting catcher. Probably among the top ten hitting catchers of all time.

The rub against him is that when he won the NL MVP he was playing third so that shouldn't help him move up on the list of best hitting catchers.

Since his career as a manager isn't over yet, I wouldn't want to speculate where he ranks among managers.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Snyder

.......either should go in. Maybe in the "Hall of Better Than Average, Solid Ball Players" but not the Hall of Fame. There are literally people in the HOF that have double the numbers these guys do - hits, hr's, rbi, and the list goes on and on. Santo and Hodges were undeniably two fantastic ball players, but they were not among the GREATEST of all time. I disgaree with several people who have been voted in in recent years....and if the Mendoza line keeps dropping, pretty soon you'll see all the players on the fence get in, like:

Dwight Evans
Jim Rice
Alan Trammell
Lou Whitaker
Bill Buckner
Dale Murphy
Dave Parker
Bill Madlock
Carney Lansford
Willie McGee
Dave Kingman


If you'd be proud of a hall of fame that had all these guys in it, then throw Santo and Hodges in too.

I'd put Vada Pinson and Joe Torre in before all of them, and I'm a Red Sox fan!

-Dave

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

How about Ken Boyer. Boyer and Santo very close. But I think Boyer should go before Santo.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Mike,

Ken Boyer was a better fielding 3d baseman and Santo had more punch as a hitter. Now days, for a 3d baseman, it's more important to have somebody that can hit like A-Rod, so I would think that Santo should go in before Ken Boyer.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

Peter,
More punch? Santo more homeruns but slugging pct 462 to 464 and Boyer 10 points better BA

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

I do appreciate the support for Ken Boyer. I believe he was as good a player as Santo. He hurt his back bad just a year after his '64 MVP, which curtailed his career by a few years. I'm not sure his ballpark was a hitter-friendly as Wrigley Field, but he didn't play his peak years in the late 60s, when batting averages reached their lowest pre-WWI point. Ken Boyer, like Ron Santo, is a highly underappreciated player. And they both play third base, arguably the hardest to fill position ...

[Archive]

Posted By: J Levine

It was not the war that sunk Hodges chances it was playing in the Los Angeles Coliseium and batting right handed. After the Dodgers moved to Los Angeles they played in this area and the field that Hodges hit most of his homeruns/doubles to in Ebbets became a cavern...right center and right field were over 400 feet dropping off to 390 and then a steep drop off down the line...Hodges was a pull hitter and in Brooklyn hit most of his HRs to right center...in Los Angeles everything dropped for him including hits, hrs, doubles, and eventually games...put him in!

Joshua

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

It took Joe DiMaggio 7 years to be inducted,

David, Joe D retired in 1951 and he was inducted into the HOF in 1955. Rumors that he was going to un-retire and sign with the Pirates are said to be the main reason he was not elected in his first year of eligibility. [In the 50's, there was a one year waiting period after retirement before possible induction. The wait is five years now.]

BTW, I can't see either Santo or Hodges in the Hall.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Frank,

Well if Joe Dimaggio is your standard for the Hall of Fame then it's obvious Santo and Hodges should not get in.

However, Ron Santo is probably within the top 10 third basemen of all time, he should be in.

Hodges is a more difficult case because there are so many good first basemen already in and some knocking on the door. Hodges would be in the top 25, maybe, among the first basemen.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

just think....if there never was a veterens commitee,we would never have a thread like this. and the hall of fame would be nenamed the baseball HALL OF GREATS.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

Frank,

Well if Joe Dimaggio is your standard for the Hall of Fame then it's obvious Santo and Hodges should not get in.

However, Ron Santo is probably within the top 10 third basemen of all time, he should be in.


Peter, I don't find any mention in my post about Joe D being my standard HOFer...do you? I was merely responding to an inaccuracy in a prior post.

I understand you like Mr. Santo, but do you have any credible facts to support his inclusion into the Hall?
How about his being among the "top 10 third basemen of all time"? Here are ten Hall of Fame third sackers, which one is Santo better than?

Frank Baker
Wade Boggs
George Brett
Jimmy Collins
George Kell
Freddie Lindstrom
Eddie Mathews
Brooks Robinson
Mike Schmidt
Pie Traynor


Remember, Santo hit .277 lifetime. He never finished in the top three in MVP voting and he never made the post-season. He has failed to win election in numerous votes by the writers and the veterans committees. He was a very good player, but not a Hall of Famer.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Frank,

Santo is clearly better than George Kell and Freddie Lindstrom. He's as good if not better than Frank Home Run Baker and Jimmy Collins.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Peter, I agree that Santo is better than Lindstrom and Kell. It's not even close. I'd take Ken Boyer over those two guys as well. Jimmy Collins must have been a pretty good player for Connie Mack to put him on his all-time team in '51, but even if he was Brooks with the glove, I'd still take Santo over him. But I wouldn't put him above Home Run Baker. His offensive numbers in the Dead Ball Era were amazing. I'd certainly consider John McGraw on the list as well, but like Collins, he's hard to judge since his best years are in the 19th century during a live ball era. By the way, didn't McGraw have the highest average ever for the hot corner? So even by conservative standards, Santo is clearly a Top Ten third baseman in my estimation. Isn't that good enough for Cooperstown? What other position has fewer representatives in the HOF? None are even close. Third base, for better or worse, is the hardest position on the field to fill, even tougher than catcher. Look at how many decades some teams like the Cubs, the Dodgers (until Ron Cy came along) and the Mets (remember Hubie Brooks?) searched for a third baseman ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve M.

No.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Chris,

It's difficult to compare Home Run Baker and Ron Santo because they are from significantly different eras. However, I will also give the edge to Baker because of his post season performances. By the way, he earned the nickname of Home Run Baker for his hitting against Matty and the NY Giants.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh Adams

I see the Cubs Kool-Aid is being served in abundance today! After all, Opening Day is Monday.

Santo is one of the top 10 3rd basemen of all time?!! You cannot be serious. Can you?!

There's a reason that 3rd base has the least number of members in the Hall. It's a tough position! Santo was an ok player, and was on a team that perhaps is the biggest chokers of al time.

Hall of Fame? No way.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Peter,

While Baker and Santo played in different eras, they both played their best years during eras when hitters faced severe challenges. Baker played most of his career in the Dead Ball era, while Santo played most of his career in the 1960s, when pitchers dominated. To illustrate Santo's excellence, in an era where offensive stats don't look very impressive, let's look at what Santo accomplished in 1968, the same year Carl Yastrzemski won the AL batting crown with a measily .301 average. Santo hit an unimpressive .246. But he drove in 98 runs (second in the league), walked 98 times (first in the league), played in 162 games, and won the Gold Glove at third base. And this was considered an off-year for him ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

Bill James offers than Ron Santo is the best eligible player not in the HOF. I agree.

There can be an argument over should he be elected, certainly. But from a career value perspective, Santo was worth alot more to his team than Hodges.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Josh,

I'd love to see your list of 10 third basemen who were better than Santo ...

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

Bill James considers Ron Santo to be the 6th best 3d baseman of all time. Just compare Ron's numbers with Brooks Robinson who is arguably the 2nd best 3d baseman of all-time.

Brooks basically has a few more gold gloves and clutch during post-season, otherwise Ron Santo would have the edge.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. The facts are that in 15 years of voting by the BBWAA, Santo never even came close to election, achieving a total over 40% just once [43% in 1998.] The Veterans Committe has also deemed him unworthy of Hall status.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Frank,

This Veteran's Committee doesn't know what it's doing. Both Hodges and Santo should have gone in this time.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

I guess the writers who didn't vote them in over a 15 year period didn't know what they were doing either.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

The credibility of the Hall of Fame has long been compromised by the cronyism and politics of its voters. Just because someone was a great player or a well-known sportswriter doesn't mean they understand the complexities of baseball history ...

Also statistics are deceptive, and that is why Bill James' studies are so invaluable. James isn't perfect, but he's come up with the best system so far to evaluate the true productivity of players. You just can't look in the baseball encyclopedia and compare Fred Lindstrom and Pie Traynor with Ken Boyer and Ron Santo. They played in completely different eras ...

As for Santo, it is my belief he has pissed off at least a few voters with his campaigning for enshrinement in the HOF. Just as Minnie Minoso clearly did when he kept trying to be the oldest guy to get a hit (he was banned for it, no joke). How else can you explain why Buzzie Bavasi got three times the votes as Minoso in the last election. Can anybody here tell me why Bavasi should be in the HOF? Mark my words, one day they'll be pushing to put Bud Selig in the Hall. Why? Because he belongs to the same "old boy's club" as Bavasi ...