BKing: I'm not sure a lot of voters remember anything about the '52 series. Any voter under the age of 60 was barely alive then.
Here are the committee members: Hall of Famers: Hank Aaron (67), Al Kaline (66), Ralph Kiner(89), Tommy Lasorda(84), Juan Marichal(74), Brooks Robinson(74), Don Sutton(66), Billy Williams(73) Executives: Paul Beeston, Bill DeWitt, Roland Hemond, Gene Michael, Al Rosen Media: Dick Kaegel, Jack O'Connell, Dave Van Dyck
All the HOF players on the list but for Don Sutton played while Hodges was still a player. From what I heard Lasorda led the group in support of Hodges entering the Hall. He'll get in eventually, the Brooklyn Dodgers wouldn't have won so many pennants without him, and he performed great in the other world series. Too bad.
<< <i>I'm shocked at how many people are against Santo being in. All of the borderline talk is crazy in my opinion. Either people aren't reading the arguments for Santo, or they only know how to find career HR & RBI totals.
Depending on the metric used Santo is either the 5th, 6th, or 7th best 3rd baseman of all time. No matter how exclusive you want the Hall of Fame to be, the top 7 players at each position should be there.
I never saw the man play so I don't know. However, I know his career stats (across the board) are not HOF worthy. The fact that he retired at 34 is irrelevant, to me, because if he had kept playing he could have had marginal years and then devalued his career; I mean he did bat all of .221 his last year. To me you are either a HOFer when you retire or you are not. The fact that this changes as the years go on is silly to me. You are IN or you are OUT and then it should stay like that. It should not matter if there are no strong candidates one year or not. If there are no good candidates then nobody should get in the HOF that year. There should be no veterans committee. In my opinion the HOF has let way too many people in and this is just one more example.
Ron had ZERO MVP's, 4 gold gloves, 9 all-stars... he sounds like Steve Garvey (but without an MVP) if Garvey had retired at 34 and not amassed another 500 hits! >>
However, I know his career stats (across the board) are not HOF worthy.
clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
he was at worst the 7th best 3B of all time...and let's not forget that he put up his offensive numbers in an extreme pitcher's era where a guy (an overrated St Louis Cardinal) with a K/9 rate lower than Ted Lilly and Jeff Fassero was considered dominating...you know when the mound was 36 feet tall.
clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
Thanksfully I have no clue what any of those acronyms stand for and thus I can safely say he is clearly not a hall of famer. I know about things like hits, walks, steals, gold gloves, and other simple minded factors. I am not a stat geek and do not care to be enligtened. If he was worthy of being a HOFer he would gotten in within his first 15 tries. The fact IS he was a nice guy and that is what changed the vote and NOT what he did ON THE FIELD (or even off the field) during his PLAYING DAYS!
<< <i>clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
Thanksfully I have no clue what any of those acronyms stand for and thus I can safely say he is clearly not a hall of famer. I know about things like hits, walks, steals, gold gloves, and other simple minded factors. I am not a stat geek and do not care to be enligtened. If he was worthy of being a HOFer he would gotten in within his first 15 tries. The fact IS he was a nice guy and that is what changed the vote and NOT what he did ON THE FIELD (or even off the field) during his PLAYING DAYS! >>
you don't need to understand stats to know comparing a 3B to the production of a 1B (Garvey or anyone else) doesn't work. You can only compare his numbers to other 3B and again, he's at worst the 7th best 3B of all-time. He didn't get in because he was a "nice guy". Quite the contrary. A good portion of his peers didn't like him because he had a sizable amount of Pete Rose-esque fiery red-arse in him + the 1969 heel-click/perceived hotdog thing. That accounts for a good portion of the reason he didn't get previously in the HOF member voting because dopes like Joe Morgan who used to head up the committee, and bitter old Willie didn't like Santo.
<< <i>it is the sign of society where everyone should get rewarded for being pretty good. give every kid a medal for participation.
i disagree with this award for ron santo, just like mazeroski and rizutto (despite what mr calaban says!)
santo had one chance for playoff glory during the cubs collapse in 1969. from septmber 1 on that year he hit .243 with two home runs. when you look at all star games/gold gloves who were any of the premier third baseman from that era in the national league? jim ray hart? mike shannon? bob aspromonte? they were won by default by a very good player. Brooks Robinson was an MVP and a WS MVP. Santo was nowhere near him in overall talent.
he never garnered over 44% of the writers in his 15 years. could all of them be so far off?
the veterans committee is a joke. after 15 tries only people from the negro leagues or others with bizarre circumstances should ever be considered.
Baseball-Reference.com has his lifetime stats comparable to these players: 1.Dale Murphy 2.Gary Gaetti 3.Ken Boyer 4.Ruben Sierra 5.Chili Davis 6.Bobby Bonilla 7.Brian Downing 8.Graig Nettles 9.Scott Rolen 10.Adrian Beltre
Do you see any HOFers on that list?
On that note if they had to put him why wait until after he died. >>
yes both Rolen and Beltre will both eventually get in with a couple more years of above average level production. Rolen is about the best comp one can make to Santo.
FWIW, I'm a reasonably aware stats guy, and I had a hard time remembering what in the name of Tom Tango a few of those acronyms were.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
This is what I've always said...If the Hall of Fame was what it should be, then no Santo isn't a HOF'er, but because of what it is, the Hall of the Very Good (ie; Jim Rice, Andre Dawson, Roberto Alomar, among many other), yes, Ron Santo is a HOF'er.
yes both Rolen and Beltre will both eventually get in with a couple more years of above average level production. Rolen is about the best comp one can make to Santo.
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!?
<< <i>clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
Thanksfully I have no clue what any of those acronyms stand for and thus I can safely say he is clearly not a hall of famer. I know about things like hits, walks, steals, gold gloves, and other simple minded factors. I am not a stat geek and do not care to be enligtened. If he was worthy of being a HOFer he would gotten in within his first 15 tries. The fact IS he was a nice guy and that is what changed the vote and NOT what he did ON THE FIELD (or even off the field) during his PLAYING DAYS! >>
The key phrases are "simple minded," and "do not care to be enightened."
<< <i>This is what I've always said...If the Hall of Fame was what it should be, then no Santo isn't a HOF'er, but because of what it is, the Hall of the Very Good (ie; Jim Rice, Andre Dawson, Roberto Alomar, among many other), yes, Ron Santo is a HOF'er. >>
I agree with you re Rice and Dawson, but not Alomar. He was an easy choice.
Alomar would have been an initial ballot inductee (and rightfully so) if it weren't for the spitting incident. He was the best 2B in baseball for a decade. Jeff Kent will get in, as well.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!? >>
The key phrases are "simple minded," and "do not care to be enightened."
Oh never mind....
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!? >>
Answer: No.
After I posted and went to look at the simple stats that a simple minded guy like myself can handle and I was surprised to see the numbers he amassed at only "32" years of age. Surprising to me. I guess my Dodgers should have kept him!
<< <i>yes both Rolen and Beltre will both eventually get in with a couple more years of above average level production. Rolen is about the best comp one can make to Santo.
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!? >>
um no, not joking. He's 32 years old with 310 HRs and calls an extreme hitter's park home for the next 4 years. Barring serious injury or Roberto Alomar extreme skill decline, I don't see how he doesn't reach 400 HRs and 1500 RBIs. He Isn't great at getting on base, but at worst, he's the 2nd greatest defensive 3B of all-time with an absurd 156 Runs Saved Above Average.
That is so pathetic that Mr. Santo is a HOF-Elect now, less than a frickin' year after he dies. What's next, Buck O'Neill gets in after he's dead??? Folks it's called induct them while they can enjoy it!
Too bad the player I feel is most deserving, Jim Kaat came up two votes short (he's to pitcher what Bill Mazeroski and Ozzie Smith are to 2B and SS respectively). How come Gil Hodges hasn't gotten in yet? He seems pretty popular as far as "on the bubble" players go.
And lastly, when is Joe Torre and Tony LaRussa eligible? They should be first balloters for sure.
duh....... the point is he was an average player (at best) away from that bandbox called Wrigley Field!
Not deserving in the least bit (unless he was voted in for being a "broadcaster"), and Ron should have never be elected before Hodges, Mattingly, Garvey, Vernon, Oliva, Kluszewski, Munson, and about 30 others
but its a done deal and the Hall is even more water down now.... >>
Those look a lot like Brooks Robinson's home splits eh? .272/.329/.410....which incidentally are better than his road splits.
Not deserving in the least bit (unless he was voted in for being a "broadcaster"), and Ron should have never be elected before Hodges, Mattingly, Garvey, Vernon, Oliva, Kluszewski, Munson, and about 30 others
hang up on yourself for that
>>
why is there no Bill Madlock on your list??? (list is heavily flawed) Madlock the guy that basically made Ron Santo retire... ie move to the White Sox for one last below average year Maddog played 3rd base with the Cubs and basically took Rons job from him (Cubs traded for Bill and sent Ron packing), Bill had 4 BATTING titles in 15 years (with a .300+ careerBA, while Ron had 4 WALK titles in 15 years
All of this stuff about fiery competitor, Joe Morgan blackballing him, he played with diabetes is just nonsense. I go back to my point--Why did he never get over 44% of the vote in any year for 15 years. Did 150 writers (or more) miss something for all of that time. I have a masters degree in statistics and I know that you can twist things to make many arguments sound good. All of the SABR measurements can be very interesting but also confusing and manipulated to get the answer you want.
Whatever that chart means compares Santo to Ventura who will never make the HOF, then says Ron Cey was as good as Brooks Robinson. At this point check please.
Exactly my thoughts. I am a HUGE Ron Cey fan but do not consider him anywhere close to being HOF worthy. When I saw he was up there so high on that list it didn't totally add up to me.
You skew enough stats and you can make any argument (hey, I am a lawyer I know!).
<< <i>Too bad the player I feel is most deserving, Jim Kaat came up two votes short (he's to pitcher what Bill Mazeroski and Ozzie Smith are to 2B and SS respectively). How come Gil Hodges hasn't gotten in yet? He seems pretty popular as far as "on the bubble" players go. >>
Ya really want to put Kaat in because he was (arguably) the greatest defensive pitcher of all-time? Really? On the list of things on which a pitcher should be judged, his defensive skills comes in somewhere after.......just about everything else. It's really nothing in the grand scheme of things for a pitcher.
Kaat put up decent - good stats for a looooong time but he was never great with the exception of maybe 1966. He pitcher in the low-run era of the 1960s - and still had ERAs over 3.00. During the last several years of his career, he was a reliever - but had a high (for relievers) ERA. He never got anything resembling Cy Young consideration. There was never a time when people named the top pitchers in the game - except maybe 1966 - and Kaat's name came up. Take away his 3 20-win seasons and we're talking about a guy who averaged 9+ wins in his other 22 years.
Kaat himself has said he was a #3 pitcher and not an ace.
Really, other than his 283 wins - which are nice but wins are overrated as a pitcher stat - I don't see a case for Kaat at all.
While we're on the subject of guys who should be in the Hall, I nominate Albert Belle:
- 28+ HR and/or 95+ RBI for 10 straight seasons (usually WELL north of both) - 48+ HR in 3 seasons - 140+ RBI in 2 seasons - 5-time All-Star - 5 top 10 MVP finishes - only guy to have 50 HRs and 50 (heck, 45!) doubles in the same season
Belle averaged .295 with 40 HRs and 130 RBIs every 162 games over his entire career. Those are ridiculous numbers.
The knock on Belle is that he had a short career (10 full, 2 partial seasons). I think Belle is the Sandy Koufax of hitters - a debilitating injury/condition that forced him into retirement before his time, while still being an excellent player. Unlike Koufax, however, Belle was never anything less than excellent. After he arrived full-time in 1991, Belle's WORST season was .281/23/103 - and that was his last season, playing through pain so bad he retired. His other 9 full seasons, he was an elite, usually all-world hitter.
why is there no Bill Madlock on your list??? (list is heavily flawed) Madlock the guy that basically made Ron Santo retire... ie move to the White Sox for one last below average year Maddog played 3rd base with the Cubs and basically took Rons job from him (Cubs traded for Bill and sent Ron packing), Bill had 4 BATTING titles in 15 years (with a .300+ careerBA, while Ron had 4 WALK titles in 15 years
Madlock is on the list, a few slots down largely as the result of him being one of the worst defensive 3B of all-time. -89 Runs Saves Below Average. Imagine the indignity the Cubs opted for a younger, cheaper option than a 34 year old 3B at the end of his career. I suppose by your logic Mike Bordick would rate higher on your SS list considering he pushed Ripken to 3B.
Scott Rolen HOF---please.
well case closed then
All of this stuff about fiery competitor, Joe Morgan blackballing him, he played with diabetes is just nonsense. I go back to my point--Why did he never get over 44% of the vote in any year for 15 years. Did 150 writers (or more) miss something for all of that time. I have a masters degree in statistics and I know that you can twist things to make many arguments sound good. All of the SABR measurements can be very interesting but also confusing and manipulated to get the answer you want.
did you make this same argument for Blyleven? Could it be that now more votes are being tallied from much smarter voters now that members of Baseball Prospectus and Fangraphs and SBN and other net based writers have votes now? Could it be that more mainstream writers/voters are using/borrowing/stealing the research/work of said net based writers? And if you don't think Santo was being shunned by a portion of his peers than I suggest you dial up Rob Neyer and/or Keith Law's columns on the matter. Strange that Santo went in the year after he died, and the year after the HOF took the vote away from the majority and streamlined to a small minority eh.
Comments
<< <i>No way Santo should be in the HOF. The Baseball HOF is a useless watered down HOF. Period. >>
Boycott it then. No one will miss your support.
Here are the committee members:
Hall of Famers: Hank Aaron (67), Al Kaline (66), Ralph Kiner(89), Tommy Lasorda(84), Juan Marichal(74), Brooks Robinson(74), Don Sutton(66), Billy Williams(73)
Executives: Paul Beeston, Bill DeWitt, Roland Hemond, Gene Michael, Al Rosen
Media: Dick Kaegel, Jack O'Connell, Dave Van Dyck
All the HOF players on the list but for Don Sutton played while Hodges was still a player. From what I heard Lasorda led the group in support of Hodges entering the Hall. He'll get in eventually, the Brooklyn Dodgers wouldn't have won so many pennants without him, and he performed great in the other world series. Too bad.
<< <i>I'm shocked at how many people are against Santo being in. All of the borderline talk is crazy in my opinion. Either people aren't reading the arguments for Santo, or they only know how to find career HR & RBI totals.
Depending on the metric used Santo is either the 5th, 6th, or 7th best 3rd baseman of all time. No matter how exclusive you want the Hall of Fame to be, the top 7 players at each position should be there.
I never saw the man play so I don't know. However, I know his career stats (across the board) are not HOF worthy. The fact that he retired at 34 is irrelevant, to me, because if he had kept playing he could have had marginal years and then devalued his career; I mean he did bat all of .221 his last year. To me you are either a HOFer when you retire or you are not. The fact that this changes as the years go on is silly to me. You are IN or you are OUT and then it should stay like that. It should not matter if there are no strong candidates one year or not. If there are no good candidates then nobody should get in the HOF that year. There should be no veterans committee. In my opinion the HOF has let way too many people in and this is just one more example.
Ron had ZERO MVP's, 4 gold gloves, 9 all-stars... he sounds like Steve Garvey (but without an MVP) if Garvey had retired at 34 and not amassed another 500 hits! >>
However, I know his career stats (across the board) are not HOF worthy.
clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
he was at worst the 7th best 3B of all time...and let's not forget that he put up his offensive numbers in an extreme pitcher's era where a guy (an overrated St Louis Cardinal) with a K/9 rate lower than Ted Lilly and Jeff Fassero was considered dominating...you know when the mound was 36 feet tall.
Thanksfully I have no clue what any of those acronyms stand for and thus I can safely say he is clearly not a hall of famer. I know about things like hits, walks, steals, gold gloves, and other simple minded factors. I am not a stat geek and do not care to be enligtened. If he was worthy of being a HOFer he would gotten in within his first 15 tries. The fact IS he was a nice guy and that is what changed the vote and NOT what he did ON THE FIELD (or even off the field) during his PLAYING DAYS!
<< <i>clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
Thanksfully I have no clue what any of those acronyms stand for and thus I can safely say he is clearly not a hall of famer. I know about things like hits, walks, steals, gold gloves, and other simple minded factors. I am not a stat geek and do not care to be enligtened. If he was worthy of being a HOFer he would gotten in within his first 15 tries. The fact IS he was a nice guy and that is what changed the vote and NOT what he did ON THE FIELD (or even off the field) during his PLAYING DAYS! >>
you don't need to understand stats to know comparing a 3B to the production of a 1B (Garvey or anyone else) doesn't work. You can only compare his numbers to other 3B and again, he's at worst the 7th best 3B of all-time. He didn't get in because he was a "nice guy". Quite the contrary. A good portion of his peers didn't like him because he had a sizable amount of Pete Rose-esque fiery red-arse in him + the 1969 heel-click/perceived hotdog thing. That accounts for a good portion of the reason he didn't get previously in the HOF member voting because dopes like Joe Morgan who used to head up the committee, and bitter old Willie didn't like Santo.
<< <i>it is the sign of society where everyone should get rewarded for being pretty good. give every kid a medal for participation.
i disagree with this award for ron santo, just like mazeroski and rizutto (despite what mr calaban says!)
santo had one chance for playoff glory during the cubs collapse in 1969. from septmber 1 on that year he hit .243 with two home runs. when you look at all star games/gold gloves who were any of the premier third baseman from that era in the national league? jim ray hart? mike shannon? bob aspromonte? they were won by default by a very good player. Brooks Robinson was an MVP and a WS MVP. Santo was nowhere near him in overall talent.
he never garnered over 44% of the writers in his 15 years. could all of them be so far off?
the veterans committee is a joke. after 15 tries only people from the negro leagues or others with bizarre circumstances should ever be considered.
Baseball-Reference.com has his lifetime stats comparable to these players:
1.Dale Murphy
2.Gary Gaetti
3.Ken Boyer
4.Ruben Sierra
5.Chili Davis
6.Bobby Bonilla
7.Brian Downing
8.Graig Nettles
9.Scott Rolen
10.Adrian Beltre
Do you see any HOFers on that list?
On that note if they had to put him why wait until after he died. >>
yes both Rolen and Beltre will both eventually get in with a couple more years of above average level production. Rolen is about the best comp one can make to Santo.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!?
<< <i>clearly you don't know otherwise you couldn't come to that conclusion. Again
Thanksfully I have no clue what any of those acronyms stand for and thus I can safely say he is clearly not a hall of famer. I know about things like hits, walks, steals, gold gloves, and other simple minded factors. I am not a stat geek and do not care to be enligtened. If he was worthy of being a HOFer he would gotten in within his first 15 tries. The fact IS he was a nice guy and that is what changed the vote and NOT what he did ON THE FIELD (or even off the field) during his PLAYING DAYS! >>
The key phrases are "simple minded," and "do not care to be enightened."
<< <i>This is what I've always said...If the Hall of Fame was what it should be, then no Santo isn't a HOF'er, but because of what it is, the Hall of the Very Good (ie; Jim Rice, Andre Dawson, Roberto Alomar, among many other), yes, Ron Santo is a HOF'er. >>
I agree with you re Rice and Dawson, but not Alomar. He was an easy choice.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!? >>
Answer: No.
Oh never mind....
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!? >>
Answer: No.
After I posted and went to look at the simple stats that a simple minded guy like myself can handle and I was surprised to see the numbers he amassed at only "32" years of age. Surprising to me. I guess my Dodgers should have kept him!
<< <i>yes both Rolen and Beltre will both eventually get in with a couple more years of above average level production. Rolen is about the best comp one can make to Santo.
You are joking about Beltre, right? I know I don't follow baseball like I did when I was a kid but isn't he a known PED user who had one really good year!? >>
um no, not joking. He's 32 years old with 310 HRs and calls an extreme hitter's park home for the next 4 years. Barring serious injury or Roberto Alomar extreme skill decline, I don't see how he doesn't reach 400 HRs and 1500 RBIs. He Isn't great at getting on base, but at worst, he's the 2nd greatest defensive 3B of all-time with an absurd 156 Runs Saved Above Average.
Too bad the player I feel is most deserving, Jim Kaat came up two votes short (he's to pitcher what Bill Mazeroski and Ozzie Smith are to 2B and SS respectively). How come Gil Hodges hasn't gotten in yet? He seems pretty popular as far as "on the bubble" players go.
And lastly, when is Joe Torre and Tony LaRussa eligible? They should be first balloters for sure.
Dimes: 54S, 53P, 50P, 49S, 45D+S, 44S, 43D, 41S, 40D+S, 39D+S, 38D+S, 37D+S, 36S, 35D+S, all 16-34's
Quarters: 52S, 47S, 46S, 40S, 39S, 38S, 37D+S, 36D+S, 35D, 34D, 32D+S
74 Topps: 37,38,46,47,48,138,151,193,210,214,223,241,256,264,268,277,289,316,435,552,570,577,592,602,610,654,655
1997 Finest silver: 115, 135, 139, 145, 310
1995 Ultra Gold Medallion Sets: Golden Prospects, HR Kings, On-Base Leaders, Power Plus, RBI Kings, Rising Stars
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Lifetime road splits:
126 HRs
588 RBIs
.257 BA
.406 SLG >>
And your point is.........? >>
duh....... the point is he was an average player (at best) away from that bandbox called Wrigley Field!
Not deserving in the least bit (unless he was voted in for being a "broadcaster"), and Ron should have never be elected before Hodges, Mattingly, Garvey, Vernon, Oliva, Kluszewski, Munson, and about 30 others
but its a done deal and the Hall is even more water down now.... >>
Those look a lot like Brooks Robinson's home splits eh? .272/.329/.410....which incidentally are better than his road splits.
Not deserving in the least bit (unless he was voted in for being a "broadcaster"), and Ron should have never be elected before Hodges, Mattingly, Garvey, Vernon, Oliva, Kluszewski, Munson, and about 30 others
hang up on yourself for that
why is there no Bill Madlock on your list??? (list is heavily flawed) Madlock the guy that basically made Ron Santo retire... ie move to the White Sox for one last below average year
Maddog played 3rd base with the Cubs and basically took Rons job from him (Cubs traded for Bill and sent Ron packing), Bill had 4 BATTING titles in 15 years (with a .300+ careerBA, while Ron had 4 WALK titles in 15 years
IMF
Whatever that chart means compares Santo to Ventura who will never make the HOF, then says Ron Cey was as good as Brooks Robinson. At this point check please.
Exactly my thoughts. I am a HUGE Ron Cey fan but do not consider him anywhere close to being HOF worthy. When I saw he was up there so high on that list it didn't totally add up to me.
You skew enough stats and you can make any argument (hey, I am a lawyer I know!).
<< <i>Too bad the player I feel is most deserving, Jim Kaat came up two votes short (he's to pitcher what Bill Mazeroski and Ozzie Smith are to 2B and SS respectively). How come Gil Hodges hasn't gotten in yet? He seems pretty popular as far as "on the bubble" players go. >>
Ya really want to put Kaat in because he was (arguably) the greatest defensive pitcher of all-time? Really? On the list of things on which a pitcher should be judged, his defensive skills comes in somewhere after.......just about everything else. It's really nothing in the grand scheme of things for a pitcher.
Kaat put up decent - good stats for a looooong time but he was never great with the exception of maybe 1966. He pitcher in the low-run era of the 1960s - and still had ERAs over 3.00. During the last several years of his career, he was a reliever - but had a high (for relievers) ERA. He never got anything resembling Cy Young consideration. There was never a time when people named the top pitchers in the game - except maybe 1966 - and Kaat's name came up. Take away his 3 20-win seasons and we're talking about a guy who averaged 9+ wins in his other 22 years.
Kaat himself has said he was a #3 pitcher and not an ace.
Really, other than his 283 wins - which are nice but wins are overrated as a pitcher stat - I don't see a case for Kaat at all.
Tabe
- 28+ HR and/or 95+ RBI for 10 straight seasons (usually WELL north of both)
- 48+ HR in 3 seasons
- 140+ RBI in 2 seasons
- 5-time All-Star
- 5 top 10 MVP finishes
- only guy to have 50 HRs and 50 (heck, 45!) doubles in the same season
Belle averaged .295 with 40 HRs and 130 RBIs every 162 games over his entire career. Those are ridiculous numbers.
The knock on Belle is that he had a short career (10 full, 2 partial seasons). I think Belle is the Sandy Koufax of hitters - a debilitating injury/condition that forced him into retirement before his time, while still being an excellent player. Unlike Koufax, however, Belle was never anything less than excellent. After he arrived full-time in 1991, Belle's WORST season was .281/23/103 - and that was his last season, playing through pain so bad he retired. His other 9 full seasons, he was an elite, usually all-world hitter.
He belongs.
Tabe
Madlock is on the list, a few slots down largely as the result of him being one of the worst defensive 3B of all-time. -89 Runs Saves Below Average. Imagine the indignity the Cubs opted for a younger, cheaper option than a 34 year old 3B at the end of his career. I suppose by your logic Mike Bordick would rate higher on your SS list considering he pushed Ripken to 3B.
Scott Rolen HOF---please.
well case closed then
All of this stuff about fiery competitor, Joe Morgan blackballing him, he played with diabetes is just nonsense. I go back to my point--Why did he never get over 44% of the vote in any year for 15 years. Did 150 writers (or more) miss something for all of that time. I have a masters degree in statistics and I know that you can twist things to make many arguments sound good. All of the SABR measurements can be very interesting but also confusing and manipulated to get the answer you want.
did you make this same argument for Blyleven? Could it be that now more votes are being tallied from much smarter voters now that members of Baseball Prospectus and Fangraphs and SBN and other net based writers have votes now? Could it be that more mainstream writers/voters are using/borrowing/stealing the research/work of said net based writers? And if you don't think Santo was being shunned by a portion of his peers than I suggest you dial up Rob Neyer and/or Keith Law's columns on the matter. Strange that Santo went in the year after he died, and the year after the HOF took the vote away from the majority and streamlined to a small minority eh.