Ron Santo

Who would we be comparing him too? 340 (or so) HR and a .277 average isn't bad, but not sure it's HOF worthy at this point. Am I correct in seeing he was a 9 time all star? And 5 gold gloves? That's impressive.

 

Bill James says he's one of the best players not in the HOF. Compared to the few other 3rd basemen in the Hall, he's way better than most of them.

Brooks Robinson for instance. He was a brilliant defensive 3rd basemen and a great guy, but as far as body of work, Ron Santo was way better.

I can't stand him, though. I know he was a great guy, but after two years of living in Chicago, I couldn't even turn on the broadcasts anymore. He was the worst announcer...announcer isn't even the right word...air personality I have ever heard in my entire life. He's the worst ever. It's a shame he was teamed with a really solid play-by-play man, Pat Hughes.

Oh well, hope he'll get in one day, but the problem with the veteran's committee is that you have a bunch of old guys voting for some of their own peers, generally, and they don't ever want to admit that those guys belong with them. Besides that, they're completely uninformed and unqualified. And many of them are pretty dumb. God knows Santo was pretty dumb.

The BBWAA, though they have some real knuckleheads and have made some horrible mistakes, such as leaving Blyleven out and putting Sutter in, are still better judges.

 

All-Star and GG numbers are less than helpful in comparing. In fact, I don't think they should be taken into account at all.

Fans put in many of the AS, and we've seen a bunch of times that fans vote for the people they want to see, not necessarily who's the best at their position.

And the GG is a nice honor, but statistically, it's nothing. It's awarded by managers and coaches who get to see them a few times a year. Most of the time, it's awarded on reputation and visibility. Adam Everett was the best shortstop in baseball for most of his career, but he never came close to getting a GG. Andrew Jones was about a 600-pound water buffalo in 2007, but he won his, too.

For instance, Ken Griffey Jr. was a great player and a very good outfielder, but he was never close to being the best in his league.

Heck, Otis Nixon was a better centerfielder (different leagues, I know). He just didn't make flashy plays, since diving is unnecessary if you're already underneath the ball.

Even if it was true, defense shouldn't get you within 10 miles of the HoF.

 

I can't vote in this because it's just not a clear Yes or No for me. I remember him as a player, but most of his career preceded my being enough on-top of the game to understand it. Nevertheless, the corner infield positions are the ones where the player has to have offensive production to be considered a star. Looking at Santo's numbers, they are fair-to-good overall, but he did play in a park in Wrigley Field friendly to power hitters. At that time the power-allies were 368 feet. So his mean season of 25 HR, 96 RBI, coupled with good defensive play, and consistency for 15 seasons is borderline Hall of Fame. He won 5 straight Gold Gloves, but note that his predecessor, Ken Boyer, won the previous 5, had offensive numbers a little better, playing most of his career in St. Louis, and he is not in the Hall of Fame either.

 

Good point, but there's more than the HR numbers [although Wrigley's alleys are labeled at 368, many believe it's closer to 355-360. And I've sat in many a bleacher, but I've never been in an alley closer than the first row of Wrigley above the 368 sign.

Anyways, Santo had generally great production in the more meaningful offensive categories.

 

BTW http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/santoro01.shtml says he played in 164 games for Chicago in 1965. Checking the standings, the Cubs had a 72-90 record. Uh, how did he manage that? [not sure if it might be the clincher for the Hall of Fame]

 

Before lights were added at Wrigley...or anywhere else for that matter...tie games could be called off and resumed later. The game counted for one in the standings but two for individual statistics.

Had nothing to do with the postseason, although at one time they also used to play three-game instead of one-game playoffs to settle division ties.

The only player to play more, if I'm not mistaken, was Maury Wills, who played in 165 one year.

 

I remember him from when I was a kid. Put him in the HOF. He was a very good 3rd baseman. I am prejudiced toward the players from my childhood. Helps me to remember back when.

 

While I did watch baseball back when he was playing, I really can't say I saw a lot of him. So when just looking at his numbers he come up a little short of HOF numbers type statistics. Especially when considering he played his career in Wrigley which help to increase his HR & RBI numbers compared to the average numbers.

 

How was the AS game voted for in his day?

 

Good that you brought that up. I had forgotten about this part. During most of his career, fan balloting wasn't allowed, so managers and coaches did the selections. While being a bit more judicious than fans of that day, it's an understatement to say that managers were not objective or fair in their selections.

It's just a highly subjective award, no matter how you look at it.

 

We've talked about this before, and due to time constraints I'll have to search for the thread later. But I voted yes, and Bill James says he's the first guy that would go in if it were left up to him.

 

340 HR and a .277 avg was very good for the era. I think I voted no on Santo at one point, but I might be changing that position.

Number of times a player has been chosen to an all-star team is not a good argument for HOF-worthiness. Gold Gloves is a better argument, but when Jeter's getting Gold Gloves, it renders the award meaningless.

 

When comparing to others not in and some in, I tend to agree. I think he's on the verge of being HOF worthy.

 

Santo deserves to be in the hall just for his heel clicking. As a kid who grew up watching the the Cubbies in the late 60's and early 70's about 150 times a year on WGN, I'm not exactly objective about this one. Go Cubbies!

 

Compare him to other 3rd basemen and the list above him is very short.

Schmidt, Matthews, Brett...and some older guys who's stats are very hard to compare...

With above-average defense and excellent hitting, he was easily better than Brooks Robinson.

 

I agree. Plus, it might be nice to have a genuinely nice man in the Hall.

 

I don't see AS appearances as being totally irrelevant. Fans and/or mgrs are not necessarily stupid, just as they are not necessarily without bias. I think a repeated selection says something when taken in weight with other factors. If someone is a 4 time AS, that doesn't mean much on its own. But if it goes to show that you're the best of your era at a given position, that says something in tandem with other aspects. And CRob is right: people blast AS selections but hold Gold Gloves as sacrosanct. That's horribly inconsistent, much like MVP voting. The same voters who decide who is MVP ultimately decide your HOF status, so to say "Well, he wasn't MVP so he isn't HOF worthy" is circular reasoning as Bill James has pointed out.