Ron Santo makes HOF

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Ron Santo makes HOF

    Finally, and like I predicted. Too bad he couldn't live to see it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In Response to Ron Santo makes HOF:
    Finally, and like I predicted. Too bad he couldn't live to see it.
    Posted by nhsteven


      I agree, should have been done long ago.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rgmfick. Show rgmfick's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    Ron Santo belongs in the Hall of Fame with Ernie Banks, Billie Williams and Andre Dawson and Ryne Sandberg.  Even though the Cubs have not won a World Series for the longest drought in the MLs, the team has a rich history and not because Theo is now the President of the Cubs, I hope the team will have some success. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    it's about damn time!!!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    I can't believe he wasn't already there a long time ago.

    But we've discussed the lunacy of Hall Of Fame selection in Baseball and in Rock 'n Roll, too many times.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from saintJ. Show saintJ's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    Good player, better person.  However, like so many hall of famers he wasnt quite good enough.  Unfortunatly this is one of those years where the hall of fame has no one who is really worthy so they have a borderline player make the cut.  You cant blame them, they are cash strapped with a bloated executive payroll.  They need a popular player to stay alive one more season.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In Response to Re: Ron Santo makes HOF:
    Good player, better person.  However, like so many hall of famers he wasnt quite good enough.  Unfortunatly this is one of those years where the hall of fame has no one who is really worthy so they have a borderline player make the cut.  You cant blame them, they are cash strapped with a bloated executive payroll.  They need a popular player to stay alive one more season.
    Posted by saintJ


    Disagree. MLB Experts were screaming for his induction for decades; he was almost as good as Brooks Robinson with the glove, with a far better stick, but played largely on a 2nd division team, out of the limelight.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In Response to Re: Ron Santo makes HOF:
    In Response to Re: Ron Santo makes HOF : Disagree. MLB Experts were screaming for his induction for decades; he was almost as good as Brooks Robinson with the glove, with a far better stick, but played largely on a 2nd division team, out of the limelight.
    Posted by nhsteven


     Good Post Steven. Santo was denied for too long, too bad he didn't live to see it. But then again the HOF is for fans. It let's us remember the greats and near greats as they representd our teams and our dreams. I think the doors should be a little wider, great defensive players get snubbed, yet what they do on the other side of the ball can be dominating, while the offensive guys pile up stats in blowouts. Was Jim Rice better than Dewey Evans? Sure, but not by much.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    Sadly MLB missed the boat on this wonderful man...he should have been in a long time ago.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

     Barry Codell, a Chicago baseball statician, thinks Santo has been overlooked for a few reasons. First, while he was a great fielder, he was less spectacular in execution than his contemporary Brooks Robinson, the Orioles Hall of Famer. (Offensively, though, Santo trumps Robinson: He hit for a higher average, .277 versus .267, slammed more home runs, 342 versus 268, and knocked in about the same number of runs, 1,331 versus 1,357,  Robinson's.all in a career eight years shorter than Robinson's)

     
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In a pitcher's ERA.Nice avatar; he (Tebow) continues to defy the experts. I myself is wondering if he can sustain it.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In Response to Re: Ron Santo makes HOF:
    In a pitcher's ERA.Nice avatar; he (Tebow) continues to defy the experts. I myself is wondering if he can sustain it.
    Posted by nhsteven


     Tebow's after game comments about working to get a little better each week, and commending his defense, believing in his team mates is a great contrast to last season's chicken eating, beer swilling slackers and his leadership approach is much different than Papi's, "What was I supposed to do? they're grown men." For a young guy, his story line has been all Hollywood this year. Benched, maligned, doubted and reluctantly played has remakably turned around Denver's season, which was on life support after 6 games. I know doubters are out there, but there are a lot of things that doubters just don't see. Sports sometime allow us a window inside the heart of a champion, whether it's a three minute mile, or a climb up Mt Everest, the exploits are inspiring to all of us, great and small and are really the essence of sports and the sportsman.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    Well put.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    I wondered if Santo was overlooked because of his contemporaries.  The truth might be that he was hurt more by the fact that he was not the dominant 3B of the NL in the 1960’s.

    Santo had good credentials.  He hit .277 / .362  /.464 over his career and won 5 Gold Gloves.  But did he really outshine Ken Boyer, whose career almost perfectly intersected Santo’s?  Boyer hit .282 / .349  / .462 and also won 5 Gold Gloves, and had an MVP on his resume.  Boyer is not in the Hall of Fame.

    Both of these guys were overshadowed by the dominant 3B name of the NL.  Even though he was winding down his career, Hall of Famer Eddie Matthews was still getting MVP votes as late as 1965.  When you are being weighed against Matthews, and not outshining your contemporaries, it is easy to get overlooked.  And that appeared to happen to both Santo and Boyer.  And it also appeared to happen to Matthew’s eventual successor at 3B in Atlanta, Joe Torre, who wound up hitting .297 / .365 / .452 and won a Gold Glove (at catcher) and an MVP award himself.  Torre spent the early part of the decade catching and playing 1B on a team loaded with HOF talent and got lost in the shuffle when it came time for Cooperstown.  But really, what did any of these three (Santo, Boyer, Torre) do to separate themselves from the others?  They were all basically the same player, and all got the same treatment.  The real problem was that the bar was too high to recognize how good they all really were

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jaytf25. Show jaytf25's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    I'm glad he's in. He should have been in long ago, but I think it's lame that they waited until he died. If he was still alive they wouldn't have voted him in unfortunately. It's obvious that's why he's in now. I guess that will probably happen with Pete Rose also.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In Response to Re: Ron Santo makes HOF:
    I wondered if Santo was overlooked because of his contemporaries.  The truth might be that he was hurt more by the fact that he was not the dominant 3B of the NL in the 1960’s. Santo had good credentials.  He hit .277 / .362  /.464 over his career and won 5 Gold Gloves.  But did he really outshine Ken Boyer, whose career almost perfectly intersected Santo’s?  Boyer hit .282 / .349  / .462 and also won 5 Gold Gloves, and had an MVP on his resume.  Boyer is not in the Hall of Fame. Both of these guys were overshadowed by the dominant 3B name of the NL.  Even though he was winding down his career, Hall of Famer Eddie Matthews was still getting MVP votes as late as 1965.  When you are being weighed against Matthews, and not outshining your contemporaries, it is easy to get overlooked.  And that appeared to happen to both Santo and Boyer.  And it also appeared to happen to Matthew’s eventual successor at 3B in Atlanta, Joe Torre, who wound up hitting .297 / .365 / .452 and won a Gold Glove (at catcher) and an MVP award himself.  Torre spent the early part of the decade catching and playing 1B on a team loaded with HOF talent and got lost in the shuffle when it came time for Cooperstown.  But really, what did any of these three (Santo, Boyer, Torre) do to separate themselves from the others?  They were all basically the same player, and all got the same treatment.  The real problem was that the bar was too high to recognize how good they all really were
    Posted by notin


    Interesting point. The experts complained about Santo not getting in the HOF, but never Ken Boyer, MVP and all (However, I always thought his brother Clete was better defensively, not that Ken was any slouch; the '64 series was a clinic/show of brother robbing brother from hits down the 3B line). The Torre comparison, IMO, doesn't work with regard to the 3B context because he was primarily a C, who was moved from behind the dish, like others, later in his career because his body couldn't take the pounding anymore (Like Berra, Bench, Simmons, Freehan, others I can't recall, and soon probably Mauer. Others who should have been moved due to wear and tear but weren't include Munson, Carter, Boone, Varitek, & R. Hundley. I-Rod & Fisk were animals) . Also, let's keep in mind that in this era, offensive #s were down.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    In Response to Re: Ron Santo makes HOF:
    I wondered if Santo was overlooked because of his contemporaries.  The truth might be that he was hurt more by the fact that he was not the dominant 3B of the NL in the 1960’s. Santo had good credentials.  He hit .277 / .362  /.464 over his career and won 5 Gold Gloves.  But did he really outshine Ken Boyer, whose career almost perfectly intersected Santo’s?  Boyer hit .282 / .349  / .462 and also won 5 Gold Gloves, and had an MVP on his resume.  Boyer is not in the Hall of Fame. Both of these guys were overshadowed by the dominant 3B name of the NL.  Even though he was winding down his career, Hall of Famer Eddie Matthews was still getting MVP votes as late as 1965.  When you are being weighed against Matthews, and not outshining your contemporaries, it is easy to get overlooked.  And that appeared to happen to both Santo and Boyer.  And it also appeared to happen to Matthew’s eventual successor at 3B in Atlanta, Joe Torre, who wound up hitting .297 / .365 / .452 and won a Gold Glove (at catcher) and an MVP award himself.  Torre spent the early part of the decade catching and playing 1B on a team loaded with HOF talent and got lost in the shuffle when it came time for Cooperstown.  But really, what did any of these three (Santo, Boyer, Torre) do to separate themselves from the others?  They were all basically the same player, and all got the same treatment.  The real problem was that the bar was too high to recognize how good they all really were
    Posted by notin


    Notin,

    To me the argument is defining the distiction between a Hall of Fame career vs an All Star career. Many argue that player X is deserving because his career numbers are similar to a player that is already in the Hall. There's many that get in based on longevity due to emassing and/or passing hallowed bench marks. 300 wins, 3000 hits, 500 Hrs. Players who were never considered to be the best at thier position at any point in their careers..While others fall short becasue they didn't play long enough due to injury, but were cleary in thier primes "worthy of consideration". Was Don Sutton who pitched for a perenial contender better than Blyleven? Was either at any point during their respective careers on the same level as Carlton, Seaver or Gibson?

    In my mind if you can't get in, in the first year of eligablility, you probably aren't truly worthy of being recognized as an all time great. I've never understood the unwritten rule that some of the writers have with regards to what makes a player worthy of first ballot status. Who in year two have little problem checking the box next too that players name? Or in the case of Blyleven and now Santo checking the box next to their names after more than a decade...

    Today, given the issues with performance enhancements, there are and will be many players that will fall short on induction or have to wait until the fervor subsides before they'll get serious consideration...So I won't be surprised in 2021 when we're likely to see the names of many of those that have tested positive or suspected to have used "finally" make the cut and gain enshrinment...



     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from fishers5. Show fishers5's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    The question remains.....what is actually the criteria used for the HOF...Is he he was a wonderful guy that was an average hitter....or is it that he was the best overall 3rd baseman in history or in his era??    The way its going seems like if you play a long time and are "sweet" to the press/voters you have a shot at getting in.......
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    IDK, seems Santo's best attribute starts with "he was a great guy". One could argue his best 4 years were inferior to Youk's best 4 years. Granted, Santo did it for 8 years. Gold Gloves are rather meaningless other than a popularity contest, and Santo's metrics in the field are not that great.
    Granted, different era, but Santo never stood out to me as a dominant player of his era.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Ron Santo makes HOF

    If Santo is Hall-worthy than make way for Dwight Evans.

    Evans /> Santo.

    Let's not wait until Dewey is 80 to recognize that.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share