Santo elected to HOF

I don't mind Santo getting in. There are a ton of others I would put into the hall though. As we have all talked about many time before on the board.

Tony

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by TT40391

I don't mind Santo getting in. There are a ton of others I would put into the hall though. As we have all talked about many time before on the board.

Tony

Tony, it's interesting how many people are adamant about who should and shouldn't be in the HOF, but even more interesting that none of these 'definitive' lists are in agreement.

I remember as a child, having a paperback book that had images of the HOF plaques, and short bios/stats on every HOF'er at that time. Since I was too young to have heard of many of them, it was the 'definitive' list for me - all players listed within became icons, more so each time I read the book. Wish I still had it.

[kmac32]

Just read that Ralph Kiner was the only person on the committee that didn't vote for Santo. He said that he chose to vote that way because he didn't like some of the things Santo said about the 1969 Mets. If this is true, Kiner should never be allowed on another Hall of Fame committee. Votes need to be based on the stats of the player, not political posturing. Grow up Mr. Kiner!!! Leave your personal politics outside of the room!!! At least Ronny was elected in the end.

[Chris-Counts]

I'd take Santo any day over Kiner. What a chump!

[Robextend]

Although arguable, I think Santo is deserving of the election. It is pretty clear he was just about the most dominating 3B in the National League for about a decade both offensively and defensively. His overall numbers don't stack up to some other HOFers, but still deserving. It is a shame he isn't around to see it happen.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Most similar players statistically, according to baseball-reference.com.

There may be a reason he didn't get in on his first 15 or however many tries.

Dale Murphy (875)
Gary Gaetti (875)
Ken Boyer (874)
Ruben Sierra (865)
Chili Davis (865)
Bobby Bonilla (863)
Brian Downing (862)
Graig Nettles (860)
Scott Rolen (857)
Adrian Beltre (855)

[Anthony S.]

Lifetime road splits:

126 HRs
588 RBIs
.257 BA
.406 SLG

[2dueces]

Originally Posted by Robextend

Although arguable, I think Santo is deserving of the election. It is pretty clear he was just about the most dominating 3B in the National League for about a decade both offensively and defensively. His overall numbers don't stack up to some other HOFers, but still deserving. It is a shame he isn't around to see it happen.

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.

[Robextend]

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.

[novakjr]

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.

Santo had 74 more HR's, 26 less RBI's, 248 more walks in 8 less seasons than Brooks.. He also Batted 10 points higher, 40 points higher in OBP.. Sure he wasn't anywhere near his equal defensively, but hell, the guy did win 5 straight GG's, and made 9 all star games in a span of 11 years..Dude definitely compares well to Brooksie... If I were looking for a 3B and had to choose one, I'd take Santo, in his prime. He was great for 11 years(some just very good), vs Brooks' prime, having consisted of 12 really good seasons(some great), with a bunch of mediocre ones at the end, while they still just kept handing him the GG's and All Stars.

I'm not trying to diminish Brooks, he's honestly one of my all time faves, while I was never much of a fan of Santo, but the numbers don't lie..Santo might've been better overall when comparing their primes..

Schmidt however, was a beast. It's almost unfair to compare any 3B to him..

[Chris-Counts]

"Chris, yes I can. Frank Baker, Pie Traynor, Jimmy Collins, George Brett, George Kell, Eddie Mathews, Brooks Robinson, Wade Boggs, Mike Schmidt, Tony Perez, Darrell Evans and Freddie Lindstrom ..."

Frank, while I usually agree with you on these things, I consider Santo to be the superior player to Traynor, Lindstrom, Kell and Collins. Traynor and Linstrom's stats were inflated by playing their peak years during a time of obscenely inflated batting averages (see 1929 and 1930 — there's a reason Hack Wilson had so many RBIs). Kell might have been a better place hitter than Santo, but he had little power and couldn't have been any better as a fielder. If you placed him in the 1960s, you would have to dock at least 10 points from his batting average. And I see nothing in Collins' record to show he was any better than any of the above. It's my belief Collins and Traynor are overrated because at one point, each was known as "the greatest third baseman ever," which dramatically illustrates why there are so few Hall of Fame third baseman.

I'd also take Santo over Perez, who may have been a slightly better hitter, but didn't have nearly the glove. It's my belief gloves are underrated and bats are overrated in the Hall of Fame, particularly at such a key position like third base. Perez was better suited for first base.

As for Evans, he's one of the most underrated of all players and I applaud you for putting him on the list.

Santo had a great glove, outstanding power, a keen batting eye and one of the best averages of any third baseman who played during an era that was absolutely dominated by pitching ...

[refz]

Originally Posted by kmac32

Just read that Ralph Kiner was the only person on the committee that didn't vote for Santo. He said that he chose to vote that way because he didn't like some of the things Santo said about the 1969 Mets. If this is true, Kiner should never be allowed on another Hall of Fame committee. Votes need to be based on the stats of the player, not political posturing. Grow up Mr. Kiner!!! Leave your personal politics outside of the room!!! At least Ronny was elected in the end.

kiner himself doesnt belong, schmuck

[FrankWakefield]

Runscott... Chris asked if anyone could name 10 better third basemen. I said yes I could, and named 12. I was saying that Brett, Robinson, and Schmidt were better than Santo... and they were better.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

Runscott... Chris asked if anyone could name 10 better third basemen. I said yes I could, and named 12. I was saying that Brett, Robinson, and Schmidt were better than Santo... and they were better.

I totally misread your response. Dohhhh!

I've posted too many times today and must go entertain the woman - I'll talk with you guys tomorrow!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Deck the Hall with average players
Colavito, Kaat, fa la la la
Vote em in ignore naysayers
Hodges, Tiant, Blue, la la la la
Don we now Mattingly and Baylor
Oliva, Kluszewski, la la la
Deck the Hall with average players
Santo, Reynolds, Staub, la la la la

[zljones]

Glad I bought his rookie card last year. I just wish he was never a Cub, GO SOX!

[kmac32]

Peter obviously has never met Mr. Santo. And also we need to remember that players are supposed to be compared to players in their own era.

[HercDriver]

I agree - Brooks Robinson and Ron Santo were the best at their position in the AL and NL for at least a decade. Who was better than those two in that time frame? I'll take gamers like Ron Santo and Mark Grace in my HOF any day...

Take Care,
Geno

[fkw]

add Bill Madlock to the list of better 3rd basemen...

4 BATTING titles in 15 years is a bit more impressive than 4 Walk titles in 15 years...

and he also may be the reason Ron retired... IMO
(edited to say I didnt know Ron changed leagues the last year, but still may have because of Madlock taking his position with the Cubs)