Santo makes HOF

Santo finally got in. Too bad it wasn't before he died. Lots people say he doesn't belong, but those people usually compare his numbers to players other than those that played 3B. Compared to others that played 3B he is top 10 all-time and that makes you a HOFer in my book.

Santo HOF

It's about freaking time. Power numbers were awesome for the mid-late 60's when the pitchers dominated. Very good in the field. Got too much criticism for his antics in the field, with the ankle clicks, criticizing the rookie during the penant run, and the other things. Hurt by Banks, Williams, and Jenkins in without the series appearance. Probably damaged by his radio work; couldn't listen to a Cubs game if you wanted to follow the game. The guy wanted to win and he was not going to lose quietly. Until Ramirez was obtained in a trade, the vaunted Cubs farm system failed to replace him for almost 30 years.

I would've like to have seen a couple of the others get in, but just Santo makes his selection even more sweet.

post-humous selections are stupid...it's like the voters are spitting on the player's face.

I wouldn't have voted him in, but I am happy for anyone who makes it, dead or alive.

cccc wrote:post-humous selections are stupid...it's like the voters are spitting on the player's face.

Quan, we do not know each other, but life is not a requirement for induction. And maybe life should be a requirement, but these are not the writers, and maybe the family can get some satisfaction (I won't be surprised if they stick a thumb in baseball's eye). This process was pretty much designed to correct a glaring oversight by multiple previous processes and committees, and was the Ron Santo Selection Process which finally resulted in what I hope becomes an induction following the vote by the Ron Santo Selection Committe. Stop hating on Mr. Santo, please. Thanks.

i'm not hating on santo at all, guess i didn't make that clear in my rant. congrats to him.

i just feel the whole voting process is flawed.

Out of everyone they were voting on, Santo was the only worthy one in my opinion and I am a huge Tony Oliva fan. I get so tired of hearing about Hodges. Sorry, but compared to other 1B he doesn't make the cut.

hodges, not a hof'er...even tho i bleed dodgers blue.

So if you don't think that Santo is a HOFer, then you hate him?
I guess he was the one guy who all of the powers that be conspired to keep out for nearly 30+ years.
I have no dog in this fight, I don't care one way or the other but it sure has been a super emotional issue for a selection at the margins IMO.
Congrats to his family though.

I don't see how people can say he is a marginal HOFer. He is one of the top 10, if not top five 3B of all time. That's hardly a marginal HOFer.

Generally, 3B is not a position of top quality because the top athletes mostly choose to play SS. A lot of 3B-men start out as shortstops but are moved to 3B because they are too slow. So being top 10 is not as a great an accomplishment as it would be for other positions.

Seriously? That is horrible reasoning. 1B are worse athletes than 3B. Does that mean that being a top 10 all-time 1B is no big deal? It's comparing apples and oranges.

Yeah, but the top ten 1Bmen have much better offensive numbers. What can I say, most guys don't want to play third... Look at the situation right now on the Marlins... Or Arod, who was willing to do it just to play on the yanks since Jeter refused to switch. A lot of guys just don't want to do it, it is like a dent to their pride.

corner positions are not as valued as other spots...so you have to make it up with better offensive #s. also it's easier to replace production from a corner pos than premium spots like ss, cf, catcher. that's why with all things considered it was ridiculous to give braun lf the mvp instead of kemp cf.

i still haven't looked up santo's stats (and i don't care enough to) as he was way ahead my time so i have no opinion on him either way.

Braun won it because, if I have read correctly, he came up with a huge amount of key hits/hr's during the pennant stretch. Performance isn't simply a compilation of statistics; the relative output of your actions and how much they effect the final result of the game, and ultimately your team's ability to make the playoffs, is the ultimate indicator of performance over the course of a season.

That's why, I think with some possible exceptions for overwhelming statistical achievement (didn't Arod win the MVP while in Texas?), the award often goes to a player from a contending team who has made a large contribution to that team's ability to make the playoffs.

Jamie, if you base your HOF criteria solely on offensive numbers then you will have almost no one from 2B 3B C or SS and that's just silly. It would be on a level of the NFL not having Ray Guy in the HOF. Just because he is a punter doesn't makes him any less deserving of the HOF. It's supposed to honors the greats, offensively and defensively. When Edgar Martinez is eligible he would be a first ballot selection for me because is was simply the best DH the game has ever seen.

The only 3b with better offensive numbers than Santo are Mathews, Schimdt. Brett and Traynor. You can't comparing his greatness to OF or 1B. It's apples and oranges.

Jay, I never said that HOF criteria should be based solely on offensive numbers. Please don't misrepresent my opinions. You have a right to your viewpoint and I have a right to disagree. Obviously, the committee who voted him in agreed with you, and here he is in the Hall of Fame. Some of it may have been a sympathy vote because he died recently. But I wouldn't have voted for him, if I had a vote, that is my perspective. Obviously the fact that it took so long and he wasn't voted in by the reporters means I am not alone in this opinion. Regardless, even if he is in, he is still a borderline HOFer. He is not Mike Schmidt or anything. I don't want to continue to butt heads with you on these types of topics because there is no empirical answer and we can agree to disagree.

Saying he is no Mike Schmidt is like saying everyone to ever play the game is no Babe Ruth. Not ever HOFer can live up to those standards. They are the absolute cream of the crop in greatness. If no one could get in unless they were better than the very best that is already in then we would be waiting decades or longer between inductees. And I am not saying that there needs to be someone inducted every year, but when you are one if the 5 best to ever play your position then you belong in the HOF.

sabrjay wrote:Saying he is no Mike Schmidt is like saying everyone to ever play the game is no Babe Ruth. Not ever HOFer can live up to those standards. They are the absolute cream of the crop in greatness. If no one could get in unless they were better than the very best that is already in then we would be waiting decades or longer between inductees. And I am not saying that there needs to be someone inducted every year, but when you are one if the 5 best to ever play your position then you belong in the HOF.

Sounds good, Jay

Jay, are you saying that Santo is one of the 5 best 3rd basemenÉ If so, I strongly disagree.

Who else would you put ahead of him, current players excluded.

First, why would you exclude current players? do they not count if you make a statement that Santo is one of the 5 greatest 3rd basemen?
So, current players, Chipper Jones and ARod. Past players, Boggs, Robinson and Baker. This is in addition to the 4 you named in a previous post, Schmidt, Brett, Mathews and Traynor.
Also, I want to make clear that I don't have a problem with Santo being in the HOF, he certainly fits in with a number of other inductees.

Can't argue with your list. I prefer to reserve all-time lists for retired players although I would probably make an exception for a player that has been around 15+ years since their legacy is pretty much cemented by that point.

Well, it'd be nice if someone who's played baseball at various level would chime in. As I understand, historically, catchers, pitchers, and infielders (other than first) require more training (meaning $$$) and have higher equipment costs (again $$$). Also, blowing a lot of hot air here, I think a comparison fielders and batters from different eras is difficult, since the conditions, rules, strategies, and trends can be very different between those eras and even the leagues.

Santo was a dominant NL hitter during an era of very strong pitching. Compare the the average hitting stats from the 1960s to those from the 1920s and early 1930s. Remember too, that baseball was the professional mass played sport of the 1920s. Athletes had alternative viable professional sports in the 1960s. You'd expect the competition to be keener during the 1920s, yet the batters were dominating the pitchers.

Santo played 3B well. As well as Robinson, I do not know, but Robinson speaks highly of Santo. He probably could have been a first baseman or an outfielder, but the Cubs used Banks in his later years at first. I suppose that he was too good an infielder to put into the OF. While I have not read that fielding was particularly strong in the 1960s, if it was, Santo was comparatively a very good 3B. Since Wrigley is a hitters park, the Cubs seem over the years to try to acquire or develop decent Catchers, 2B, SS, and center fielders. Until they traded for Ramirez, they averaged something like one 3B per season between Santo and Ramirez, a 30 year period.

Very good or great, and should be in the HOF. I say yes. The Hall is a museum of baseball history, and it attracts visitors to stay in business. Too many visitors come to see the plaques or that number to be restricted to the very top hitters, sluggers, flame throwers, or winners. There'd be not much reason to return for the mass of fans, unless they had enough new players every couple of decades. As a local resident, while the new camps help summer work and local development, no doubt the camps and the Hall feed off each other as complements.

My $2 again. Santo is deserving and should be in.

I suppose as full disclosure (although I certainly do not advocate you go out and buy buy buy Santo stuff), somewhere in my parents home is probably a dozen 1962 Santo cards I acquired in the late 1980s for $3 or so each. Bet they might finally go for $2 on eBay.

Happy holidays.