Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dueces
I have to disagree. Just because he was the best there was at that time doesn't mean he was the best there was at his position. So his peers were weak during his playing days makes him a HOFer? It shouldnt work that way. He should stack up to the top tier players of all time to merit the hall. The Hall is too watered down to be called the Hall of Fame any more. Should be called the Baseball Museum. It diminishes the careers of the truly great player to let Above Average players in. But Santo isn't the first and won't be the last to be elected with less than impressive numbers. Election to the Hall shouldn't have anything to do with sentiment, it should have everything to do with how he stacks up to Brooks Robinson or Mike Schmidt. JMO.
|
It is a great argument, and I can't blame anyone for saying he shouldn't be in. I am usually as tough as anyone on keeping guys out. I didn't agree with Dawson, if Larkin gets in I don't agree with that either. And there are a ton of other guys already in that I don't agree with.
With that said, take the average Brooks Robinson offensive year against the average Ron Santo offensive year. Brooks was a great player, but offensively he was a compiler. Defensively he might have been the best ever, but Santo was hands down a better offensive player than Brooks.