Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Santo May Finally Make It

I don't follow this sort of thing very closely so this may be old news for a lot of you, but apparently the Veterans' Committee voting has changed in such a way that, for the first time in seven years, they may elect someone to the Hall of Fame. And that someone may very well be Ron Santo:
In recent years, the veterans committee -- essentially the living Hall of Famers -- selected from a filtered ballot of 20 to 25 players, listing as many as 10 on their individual ballots. A player was required to be listed on 75 percent to gain induction.

Santo led all vote-getters in the most recent round of the every-other-year voting but fell five votes short of induction.

This time around, that 20-to-25-man list is used in a preliminary ballot to narrow the final ballot to 10 names. Committee members then vote again, this time selecting up to four from the 10-player list, with the 75 percent criterion in effect.
Obviously Santo belongs in the Hall. If you disagree, post your argument in the comments. I have yet to see a cogent case against the man, but I'm open to anything.

Also please note from the article that Joe Morgan is perhaps Santo's biggest supporter. It's easy to lob grenades at the guy -- he makes such a big target sometimes -- but I'd be willing to sit through any amount of his color commentary in exchange for a Santo plaque on the wall of the Hall.

12 comments:

dastudes said...

My comment about Santo: he was helped tremendously by Wrigley, more than Banks, Billy Williams or anyone else I'm aware of. He played when games at Wrigley were always in the day, and it appears to have helped him tremendously.

Would I keep him out of the Hall over it? No. But I personally don't think his case is as ironclad as some make it out to be.

themarksmith said...

His 46% SB%?

My biggest question is if Santo gets in, then does Gary Gaetti? They have strikingly similar stats. Or does the "different era" (even though they're only about 15-20 years apart) explanation count here?

Aaron said...

Gaetti OBP/SLG .308/.433 Career OPS+ 97
Santo OBP/SLG .362/.464 Career OPS+125

That doesn't seem all that "strikingly similar" to me.

themarksmith said...

I was talking about other things as well, but Gaetti did play 5 more years. I rescind my last comment.

Anonymous said...

In 1107 road games, Santo's numbers were .257/.342/.406. That's the best argument against him.

kehrsam said...

The main problem with Santo is while he is not overwhelmingly qualified, he is qualified, and the debate over where he belongs is essentially blocking more recent third basemen with arguably better records (Darryl Evans is at the head of the list; an argument can be made for Bill Madlock). Get him in already.

Anonymous said...

There's an argument to be made for Madlock and Evans, but, even though it's unfair, Evans will never make the Hall because of batting average and Madlock will be kept out based on his power numbers.

Don Imus said...

Ron Santo should not be in the Hall of Fame because he is black. There you go.

Dre said...

Only way Santo gets to Cooperstown is if he buys a ticket

Anonymous said...

He should go in the HOF before any steroids era player...
A fan's plea...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWvv-3UwT8c
FansLoveBaseball

Anonymous said...

I was always a Ron Santo fan, but when I saw his road statistics, I figured that he was one of those guys who was helped by Wrigley Field.

He hit 126 HR's on the road and 216 at home, and his road batting average was only .257, vs. .296 at home. Had he played on a neutral field, his career numbers would have looked something like this: 252 HR's, 1176 RBI's, .257 average. That's good, and he walked a lot, but wouldn't put him in the Hall of Fame.

I always thought that Billy Williams made the Hall of Fame due to Wrigley (he hit .278 with 181 HR's on the road, meaning that with a full career in a neutral park, he would have hit about 362 home runs).

The Cubs had Billy Williams, Ernie Banks, Fergie Jenkins and Ron Santo all on the same team. If they were all of Hall of Fame caliber, wouldn't the Cubs have won it a few times?

Anonymous said...

Adding to my comment above, I would vote Ken Boyer into the Hall before Santo. Boyer's numbers are better when you take out the Wrigley Field context, and they were about the same caliber defensively. Plus, Boyer won an MVP and his team won a pennant.

By the same token, there are many players worse than both Santo and Boyer in the Hall of Fame (George Kelley, Earle Combs, Harry Hooper and Lloyd Waner, to name a few), and although we shouldn't let previous mistakes justify new ones, I wouldn't be ashamed if Santo does get voted in eventually. He was a very good player and a very good guy.