Santo better than Colavito? Come on.

RonBurgundy

I just looked at the HOF Veterans Committee results. Santo gets 57 votes, while Rocky Colavito only gets 5? That is absurd. Santo may or may not have been a superior player to Colvaito, but even if he was a better player the gap between the two is not that large. This process is ridiculous.


Ron

Volver

Both have a name in their respective cities...a few numbers on their careers below. Rocky was power and run producer...Santo seemed to be patient and was able to get on base.

Colavito

6 time All Star
Top 5 in MVP voting 3 times
Lead league in slugging 1958
Lead league in total bases 1959, 1962
Lead league in home runs 1959
Lead league in RBI 1965


Santo

9 time All Star
Top 5 in MVP voting twice
Lead league in on-base % 1964, 1966
5 time Gold Glove
1973 Lou Gehrig Award winner

tennesseebanker

I still cant believe Gil Hodges didnt make it in.

RonBurgundy

Hodges should've been in a long time ago.


Ron

cravetopps

I would agree with you, Ron. However, I also think they have to look at it on a position basis. Santo is not in the same league as any of these players. He's close to a couple in BA and fielding, but overall, not in the same league. I think Colavito has stiffer competition and I think that contributed to the lack of support. I'd hate to be a RF trying to get into the HOF.

3rd base

Frank Baker Phil. Athletics
Wade Boggs Red Sox
George Brett Royals
Jimmy Collins Red Sox
Ray Dandridge N
Judy Johnson N
George Kell Tigers
Freddy Lindstrom Giants
Eddie Mathews Braves
Brooks Robinson Orioles
Mike Schmidt Phillies
Pie Traynor Pirates

Right Fielders

Hank Aaron Braves
Roberto Clemente Pirates
Sam Crawford Tigers
Kiki Cuyler Cubs
Elmer Flick Indians
Harry Heilmann Tigers
Harry Hooper Red Sox
Reggie Jackson A's
Al Kaline Tigers
Willie Keeler Yanks
King Kelly White Sox
Chuck Klein Phillies
Tommy McCarthy Boston Braves
Mel Ott Giants
Sam Rice Senators
Frank Robinson Reds
Babe Ruth Yanks
Enos Slaughter Cards
Sam Thompson Phillies
Paul Waner Pirates
Dave Winfield Yanks
Ross Youngs Giants
Jud Wilson N

WinPitcher

The amonut of votes that Santo got could be in relation to the voters knowing it was his last time on the Vets ballot?

I am right in that? it was his last time on the ballot?


Perhaps Colavito has other chances? In any event I would pick Santo over the Rock but not by that margin either.


I also agree Hodges should be in already.

i was pleased to see how well kaat did. maybe one day...........


Steve

Volver

I for one like the exclusivity of the HOF. It is reserved for the best of the best. It's not like football where they are electing 6 - 9 each year.

brumbach

I think it was somewhere on these boards, but someone made a link to this article featuring Luis Tiant. From the article:

"I know my numbers, they can't take them away from me. I don't want to tell you I don't want to be there, because I should be there. It's hard to make a group of people change their minds, or whatever. Check the records: 'If he's there, why isn't he there?'

I believe that history and fan support is a greater force than the Hall Of Fame. The fans already support and remember Hodges, and Santo, and Colavito, and many others. Buck O'Neill was in our own hall of fame for many years before he passed and was given some pitifull and posthumous recognition from baseball. The Hall Of Fame is a great idea and a great place to visit and the list of it's members is impressive but it is not the be all end all. And like Tiant says, nobody can take away a player's career numbers and personal achievements, these are recorded for all time in the record books and indelibly marked in our hearts and minds. Thanks but no thanks veteran's commitee, I'll make up my own mind on this one.

alifaxwa2

<< <i>I for one like the exclusivity of the HOF. It is reserved for the best of the best. It's not like football where they are electing 6 - 9 each year. >>



Football is 3-6 per year. Plus, they have 52 guys on a roster versus 25 for baseball, and 2 more teams in the league. Plus the average football career is probably much shorter. Not to mention essentially 22 positions versus 15 for baseball (8position, 5 pitchers, 2 other).
So its not as different as it seems.

Stone193

I'm disappointed.

I have a few that I wanted to see go in.

Volver

<< <i>

<< <i>I for one like the exclusivity of the HOF. It is reserved for the best of the best. It's not like football where they are electing 6 - 9 each year. >>



Football is 3-6 per year. Plus, they have 52 guys on a roster versus 25 for baseball, and 2 more teams in the league. Plus the average football career is probably much shorter. Not to mention essentially 22 positions versus 15 for baseball (8position, 5 pitchers, 2 other).
So its not as different as it seems. >>

Text

Well...Seeing how all 52 or 25 guys do not play it's closer than you think. 8 everyday players plus a starting rotation makes 13 "starters" for baseball and of course in football it is 11 "starters" per team.

Football has inducted 7 or more players 10 times with the most recent in 2001. As for baseball the most was the original class of 5 in 1936 with 4 being inducted twice, most recently in 1955.

grote15

Personally, I find it hard to believe that Sutter and Puckett are in the Hall and Kaat, Blyleven, Hodges and Santo aren't. Sometimes the Hall isn't as exclusive as it seems.

stevek

Frankly, I'm glad the Hall of Fame Veterans Commitee has gotten tougher - that's the way it should be.

Ron Santo an excellent ballplayer? Of course.

Hall of Famer? No.

ironranger

Volver, it's 11 starters on offense, 11 on defense...and that's not counting special team players such as kickers and returners.

Volver

True, so really you have about 7 more on the football field. Hard to count returners or punters since one has not been inducted.

Either way I agree about the Veterns clamping down on the voting

BobaFett72

"I for one like the exclusivity of the HOF. It is reserved for the best of the best."

...such as Phil Rizzuto.

compiling nearly 1600 hits! and an impressive .272 average.
yeah, he really deserves to be in the HOF.

<bring on the yankee fans!>

SidePocket

9 time all star at a high production position like 3b? Gotta be in the hall. At the same time I do like the fact that it's tough to get in.

cjb1977

Regarding Santo, and this maybe a local Chicago thing that the national media doesn't pick up or care to discuss but people and or the voters just don't like him as a person and his attitude on the field. The Cubune Company has done a lot to spin his story and polish his legend for their own gain.

Honestly if he was anyone but Ron Santo he probably would have made it in on weak ballot year or veteran selection. But since he is Ron Santo he gets hammered as the guy who could never get hit when it mattered, only able to get RBI's when it didnt matter, the 69 Cub debacle, lack of leadership and general pandering for the sympathy vote.

GDM67

<< <i>I believe that history and fan support is a greater force than the Hall Of Fame. The fans already support and remember Hodges, and Santo, and Colavito, and many others. Buck O'Neill was in our own hall of fame for many years before he passed and was given some pitifull and posthumous recognition from baseball. The Hall Of Fame is a great idea and a great place to visit and the list of it's members is impressive but it is not the be all end all. And like Tiant says, nobody can take away a player's career numbers and personal achievements, these are recorded for all time in the record books and indelibly marked in our hearts and minds. Thanks but no thanks veteran's commitee, I'll make up my own mind on this one. >>


Well put

In re Puckett...I don't begrudge him his inclusion, but I really think that the fact that Mattingly's stats are so close to his and their careers are so parallel, that it really smarts to have Donnie Baseball (a name that Puckett gave him, IIRC, just to finish the analogy with a flourish) being stuck outside on a "Good but not great" basis.

RoarIn84

Mattingly WILL get in. i can't think of any reason why he isn't. he played 2 more seasons than Puckett, had 3 more Gold Gloves (9 total), and an MVP. Puckett, however, has 2 WS rings. The fact that we are even considering guys like Santo, Hodges (???), Kaat, etc, is proof that Donnie can't elude the Hall for long!!!

there are tons of players that should get in the Hall, and we all have our opinions as to who. i stated in the other thread that i believe Alan Trammell and Lou Whitaker should be side by side as they were for 18 seasons turning more DP's together than anyone in history (and yes, that 78T card is a Trammell rookie!! Molitor was a glorified DH, with 3000 hits and a .306 BA). well, kinda kidding on that last part.....

so yeah, let's turn this into a thread where we fight for our favorites and curse the fallacies like Bruce Sutter?!??!?!

Volver

I do not think Mattingly will or should get in. He only had 5 great years and even that can be challenged. He did win 9 Gold Gloves, but as Jim Kaat has proved, defense does not get you into the Hall.

The two rings for Puckett sure helped his cause

RoarIn84

yeah, Kaat sure racked up the GG's!!! Maybe the committees don't look too much at that for pitchers. or maybe their distracted by the fact that over 25 years he only got 284 wins. his last 4-5 seasons were pretty much throwaways. but of the players mentioned, Kaat's case is strongest...

gosteelers

I was surprised to see that, except for Gold Gloves, Santo had better career numbers than Brooks Robinson. In a much shorter career (8 years shorter...)

Skinpinch

I will always say, the Hall of Fame is a strange entity. There are players that are just so darn close, and to distinguish one of them by bestowing an immortal honor such as the Hall of Fame, while basically relegating the other player to obscurity(by not voting them in), is bordering on sheer folly.

I've been through numerous examples of such on here, and those debates are exhausting(mainly because fans want to see their guy get recognized, and it is hard to blame them when some other guy is in who is a smidge better, or maybe even a smidge or more lower).

While it is true that the fans remember the guys who haven't been voted in, there isn't denying the fact that they still aren't looked at in the same light as a member of the HOF(a member who often times isn't any better). Player A always has "Hall of Famer" attached to his name, while player B....

I don't want to use specific examples of players...done that enough, almost to the point where I'm not sure if I ever want to do a HOF debate again.

The HOF is a great baseball museum, but really falls short in their attempt to bestow honors on the right players. It really isn't fair, to do what they do. They certainly don't have a very consisten track record.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing all these guys who are talked about so much on here, be inducted. They are being championed by a lot of fans for a reason, and that reason may be worthwhile enough for future generations to know that man existed a long time ago, and they should be recognized too. A lot of these guys aren't as far away from the immortals as many think, adn they are certainly close to many of hte current HOFers.