Ron Santo in the HOF

no point in putting him in after he is dead anyway

Santo is one of the ten best third basemen ever, which to me is a slam dunk Hall of Famer. Baseball is over 100 years old, and he is one of the peak players at his position. In fact, I find his exclusion until after his death, when he can't enjoy the honor, is a real black stain on the Baseball HOF.

Then again, I actually think we should err on the side of inclusion because these institutions are designed to be celebratory. Thinking the standard is "Willie Mays" is ridiculous. We'd have a very small Hall. Like ten people, at most.

quote:

---

In fact, I find his exclusion until after his death, when he can't enjoy the honor, is a real black stain on the Baseball HOF.

---

I think it is one of the worst things the Hall has ever done. Dying should not have made Ron Santo a HOF. If he earned by his play for the Cubs, then I totally support it. Also, I further support his induction as a Cubs fan.

quote:

---

Then again, I actually think we should err on the side of inclusion because these institutions are designed to be celebratory.

---

Completely agree.

I think it's really only fair to compare a guy's credentials to others at his position. Great hitting numbers for, say, a second baseman, wouldn't get you into the Hall as a right fielder. Larkin got in as a shortstop, but his number wouldn't get him in as a first baseman. It's how we make a defensive adjustment by position.

That said, what 3B are better than Santo? Brett, Schmidt, Brooks, and Matthews for sure. Then, he fits comfortably in that next group -- Boggs, Traynor, Chipper, and Home Run Baker. I actually think, given defense, he's better than Boggs.

quote:

---

I think it's really only fair to compare a guy's credentials to others at his position

---

To a point I see what you are saying, but my point would be that if you have, let's say 20 center-fielders in, I don't think you need 20 3rd basemen. There just aren't as many superstar players at 3rd. Great athletes tend to play center and the greater athletes just tend to do most everything better.

Santo hit .277 for his career and averaged about 23 homers per year. He also drew alot of walks. He was a good defensive player, but gold gloves tend to be such a political and subjective thing I discount that as a true barometer.

I love the dude. But as mentioned at first I differ from many in that I'm not inclined to liberal inclusion.

But it probably is better for the game and fans. So I should be.

I just always thought baseball set an early precedent for excellence in their HOF and that the historical significance of baseball in America is just different than the other sports and striving to maintain that excellence honors that history.

And letting everybody play just seems to me akin to not keeping score in little league games.

3rd base is the least represented position in the Hall. I'm not saying that every position gets equal representation, but saying a guy is the best at his position not enshrined, and that his position is the least represented in the Hall is a great argument for including a player.

I actually think he might be top five at the position (the top four is pretty solid), but it depends on how you rank Traynor and Boggs.

No. I think of A-Rod as a shortstop.

quote:

---

3rd base is the least represented position in the Hall.

---

Well, Baloo...after searching some lists of all-time best third baseman I actually see why. After the first 9 or 10 on most lists ain't too many even arguable.

At least one can make a good argument for Santo. He's ranked in all top ten's, I would say the concensus of those I saw putting him 9th. My first favorite Cub.

Awesome