About Ron Santo...and Joe Morgan.

[mickeyrom51]

Joe Morgan says that they shouldn't lower the standards just to get more people in.I wonder how Joe's stats compare to Ron's.This guy just seems to hate all things Cubbie,I wonder why. :confused:

[Al Spanglers ghost]

Joe Morgan says that they shouldn't lower the standards just to get more people in.I wonder how Joe's stats compare to Ron's.This guy just seems to hate all things Cubbie,I wonder why. :confused:

It seems to me that Morgan really began to be a Cub basher,as the talk about
Ryno being one of the best secondbaseman in the games history began to surface.
Joe Morgan was extremely jealous of all the talk about how good Ryno was with the bat,and the glove,and it seemed from that time on he had nothing positive to say about the Cubs[or Ryno]

[mickeyrom51]

It seems to me that Morgan really began to be a Cub basher,as the talk about
Ryno being one of the best second baseman the games history began to surface.
Joe Morgan was extremely jealous of all the talk about how good Ryno was with the bat,and the glove,and it seemed from that time on he had nothing positive to say about the Cubs[or Ryno]
I wouldn't be surprised if he didnt have a bit of responsibility for Ron's latest rejection by the veterans committee.After all he is a vice chairman of that group,or something like that.He probably has some influence with them.

[CubsFan23]

Whenevedr the Cubs play on ESPN, I mute so I do not have to listen to Joe. I listen with my XM and watch the ESPN game. In fact I mute any game he is broadcasting. Him and Joe Buck are two of the biggest Cub haters out there!

[Al Spanglers ghost]

Joe Morgan says that they shouldn't lower the standards just to get more people in.I wonder how Joe's stats compare to Ron's.This guy just seems to hate all things Cubbie,I wonder why. :confused:

Career stat comparison:

Ron Santo: Joe Morgan:

games-2243 / games-2649
hits-2254 / hits-2517
homeruns-342 / homeruns-268
rbi-1331 / rbi-1133
sb-35 / sb-689
batting avg.-.277 / batting avg.-.271
all star games-9 / all star games-10
gold gloves-5 / gold gloves-5

[mickeyrom51]

Career stat comparison:

Ron Santo: Joe Morgan:

games-2243 / games-2649
hits-2254 / hits-2517
homeruns-342 / homeruns-268
rbi-1331 / rbi-1133
sb-35 / sb-689
batting avg.-.277 / batting avg.-.271
all star games-9 / all star games-10
gold gloves-5 / gold gloves-5
Thanks,that pretty much said it all.Santo belongs at least as much as Morgan.The only advantage Joe has is steals.Shame on that Cub hating hypocrite :mad:

[elven_scout]

Thanks for the stats, Ghost. I wasn't so upset when I first heard that he didn't get in, but as you guys bring up things like this and I look into different stats and stuff, it make less and less sense. Well, if I ever get on the veterans committee, I'll vote for him.

-Scout

[bczar]

Thanks,that pretty much said it all.Santo belongs at least as much as Morgan.The only advantage Joe has is steals.Shame on that Cub hating hypocrite :mad:


Why? They played different positions and looking at numbers on paper doesn't tell the whole story of how good a player was overall. I'm just as much of a Joe Morgan anti-fan as most Cub fans but those stats don't represent everything that got Morgan into the HOF and has kept Santo out. Morgan also has two NL MVP's and WS rings. Santo never got to the WS and was also said to be non-clutch. Does a stat seem more impressive when it gets results or when it is a non factor because your team got nowhere from them anyway?

[CubsFan23]

Should it matter if the Cubs went to a WS or not. Think of it this way: Morgan's number could be considered padded because he had great supporting players and played on great teams.

Ernie is in, Billy is in, Ryno is in! What do all of them have in common no WS titles or appearances.

PLus Santo played the game battling a disease that limits most peoples lives. Morgan played relatively healthy his whole career.

IT IS SIMPLE: SANTO BELONGS IN THE HALL!!!

[mickeyrom51]

Why? They played different positions and looking at numbers on paper doesn't tell the whole story of how good a player was overall. I'm just as much of a Joe Morgan anti-fan as most Cub fans but those stats don't represent everything that got Morgan into the HOF and has kept Santo out. Morgan also has two NL MVP's and WS rings. Santo never got to the WS and was also said to be non-clutch. Does a stat seem more impressive when it gets results or when it is a non factor because your team got nowhere from them anyway?

Did Morgan get into the WS by himself,or was he just a part of a team?Ithink you know the answer to that.HOF is mostly about the stats...period.If Morgan belongs,Santo belongs.

[CubsFan23]

Did Morgan get into the WS by himself,or was he just a part of a team?Ithink you know the answer to that.HOF is mostly about the stats...period.If Morgan belongs,Santo belongs.

Well said! I may have to quit posting on this subject it just keeps pissing me off.

How about we take up a collection, make our own bronze bust of Santo. Then somebody could go to Cooperstown, sneak the bust in and put it in front of Joe Morgan's plaque!

[Sheffield_&_Waveland]

Did Morgan get into the WS by himself,or was he just a part of a team?Ithink you know the answer to that.HOF is mostly about the stats...period.If Morgan belongs,Santo belongs.

Agree 100%

[bczar]

No, he doesn't necessarily belong in the HOF. Many would argue that he wasn't even the best 3B of his era much less one of the top of all time. Comparing Santo to Banks and Sandberg is a ridiculous example and there's plenty to argue Williams should be in the HOF. You are also using three players as examples, non of which were 3B. And who cares if you had 340+ HR and 1300+ RBI's if you got a big chunk of them going against pitchers when your team was getting blown out?

[bczar]

REPEAT

[Sheffield_&_Waveland]

No, he doesn't necessarily belong in the HOF. Many would argue that he wasn't even the best 3B of his era much less one of the top of all time. Comparing Santo to Banks and Sandberg is a ridiculous example and there's plenty to argue Williams should be in the HOF. You are also using three players as examples, non of which were 3B. And who cares if you had 340+ HR and 1300+ RBI's if you got a big chunk of them going against pitchers when your team was getting blown out?

I don't understand your line of thinking here. Ron Santo getting in the HOF and what his team did in his career have nothing to do with each other. What does it matter if they were losing 26-4 and Santo stepped to the plate and went 4-4 with 4 homeruns? Well it matters a ton because no matter what his team was doing he was still playing the game the way it should be played and thats with heart. And no matter what his accomplishments have been overlooked.

[bczar]

Did Morgan get into the WS by himself,or was he just a part of a team?Ithink you know the answer to that.HOF is mostly about the stats...period.If Morgan belongs,Santo belongs.

That's such a flawed statement I don't even know where to begin responding. Joe Morgan was a critical part of his team winning two WS titles. If you want to compare him to Ron Santo who played 3B be my guest. How many of Santos hitting stats took place in situations that they meant nothing to the team. Look up how he played in the second half of the '69 season. As much as I dislike Joe Morgan, he belongs in the HOF much more than Santo.

[CubsFan23]

I am beginning to seriously wonder at your logic here. I have never met a Cubs Fan who seems so intent on arguing against Santo being in the Hall.

I never said Joe did not belong. I ahte him but he was a great player. But so was Santo. For a person to put up those numbers and play ahrd every day for a team that was rarely ever in a pennant race speaks volumes about that persons make up. Not only are his numbers Hall worthy, but so is he as a person and ambassador of the sport.

[bczar]

I don't understand your line of thinking here. Ron Santo getting in the HOF and what his team did in his career have nothing to do with each other. What does it matter if they were losing 26-4 and Santo stepped to the plate and went 4-4 with 4 homeruns? Well it matters a ton because no matter what his team was doing he was still playing the game the way it should be played and thats with heart. And no matter what his accomplishments have been overlooked.


Think about pitching situations in those blowout games compared to close games. If you want to use a blowout game and 4 HR's as an example also look at the other side of the spectrum. Why then would it matter if he came to the plate in a 2-1 ballgame in the bottom of the 9th with 2 outs and bases loaded only to strike out and the Cubs lose? Those stats don't count?

[Sheffield_&_Waveland]

Look up how he played in the second half of the '69 season.

So you want to hold 3 months of a guys stats against him out of a 15 year career? And because he wasn't the guy that was pitching and getting rocked? He wasn't the manager making the calls for the guy to steal 2nd base? He wasn't the guy getting thrown out stealing? Winning a World Series is a big team effort and to deny a guy for three months of stats out of a 15 year career and the fact his team didn't win a World Series is really a far fetch.

[bczar]

I am beginning to seriously wonder at your logic here. I have never met a Cubs Fan who seems so intent on arguing against Santo being in the Hall.


Be my guest at considering my logic questionable if I'm a Cubs fan. If you're saying that I'm so intent on Santo being in the HOF because I think comparing him to other players that were better than him at their respective postions is ridiculous that's your opinion. Put some proof on the board that Santo belongs there other than copying his career stats form the internet. How many times did you see Santo play or are you just basing your opinion on what you've seen in the books?

[CubsFan23]

Joe may have been a key component of the Reds winning, but they did not win just because of him. Just as the Cubs didn;t lose just because of Santo. The situautions could have been totally reversed. With the Cubs a dominant team in the 60s and Santo having 2 WS titles, and Morgan playing for a terrible team in the 70s and getting his numbers while his team was losing big. WOuld that make Santo a HOFer and Morgan waiting for a veteran committee vote.

[bczar]

Look up how he played in the second half of the '69 season.

So you want to hold 3 months of a guys stats against him out of a 15 year career? And because he wasn't the guy that was pitching and getting rocked? He wasn't the manager making the calls for the guy to steal 2nd base? He wasn't the guy getting thrown out stealing? Winning a World Series is a big team effort and to deny a guy for three months of stats out of a 15 year career and the fact his team didn't win a World Series is really a far fetch.


Where in my statement did I say that I based my overall opinion of Santo belonging in the HOF on three months of his 15 year career?

[Sheffield_&_Waveland]

Where in my statement did I say that I based my overall opinion of Santo belonging in the HOF on three months of his 15 year career?

You are the one that said to look up how he did in the second half of the 69 season. Well he played 15 seasons, why should it matter what he did the second half of the 69 season? I am willing to bet I could find three months that Joe Morgan didn't produce much for his team also. Not to mention that it took Morgan 21 years to put up very similar numbers to Santo while Santo accomplished it in 15 years.

[CubsFan23]

Look I am not trying to make this a personal attack. I just strongly believe that Santo belongs. I will leave it at that.

[bczar]

You are the one that said to look up how he did in the second half of the 69 season. Well he played 15 seasons, why should it matter what he did the second half of the 69 season? I am willing to bet I could find three months that Joe Morgan didn't produce much for his team also. Not to mention that it took Morgan 21 years to put up very similar numbers to Santo while Santo accomplished it in 15 years.

Once again, where in my statement did I say I based MY ENTIRE OPINION of Santo on those three months? Read the whole whole statement, and not just the part you decided to quote. Why do you insist on comparing the career numbers of a HOF 2B to Ron Santo? How about looking at the numbers of the other 3B that are in the HOF and then make a logical comparison. There's not one player in modern baseball (from 1950-present) that is in the HOF as a 3B that I would say Santo was better than.

[mickeyrom51]

That's such a flawed statement I don't even know where to begin responding. Joe Morgan was a critical part of his team winning two WS titles. If you want to compare him to Ron Santo who played 3B be my guest. How many of Santos hitting stats took place in situations that they meant nothing to the team. Look up how he played in the second half of the '69 season. As much as I dislike Joe Morgan, he belongs in the HOF much more than Santo.
Im sure every hit Morgan had was in a crucial situation.(LMAO)

[bczar]

Look I am not trying to make this a personal attack. I just strongly believe that Santo belongs. I will leave it at that.

Works for me. I'm not out to argue about it as if everyone should agree with one opinion. I just find it extremely odd that stats of a HOF 2B are compared to Santo. In my opinion, there's been almost 30 years of enough voters saying no that he hasn't made it, and there's a reason for it.

[bczar]

Im sure every hit Morgan had was in a crucial situation.(LMAO)


I never said that every hit Morgan had was in a crucial situation. never said that Santo should be judged on three months in 69. You want something to laugh about? Try comparing stats of a HOF 2B to a 3B............Oh wait, you've been doing that already. LMAO

[VanMan]

I think Joe Morgan is looking down upon Cubs players from his era because he won multiple world championships with The Big Red Machine while the Cubs were the Lovable Losers that had the big meltdown in 1969. It's the typical big bully mindset. He thinks he's better than everyone else because he has the bling. Bull! He and the rest of the Veterans Committee should look at both Ron's stats during his playing days as well as the circumstances of his life. Ron only needed five more members of the committee to vote for his induction this time around. If Ryno, Ernie, Billy and Fergie can talk to the other members of the committee about Ron, the way he played, his life after baseball, and how much the game flows through his veins, then those five along with the HOFers inducted this year and next year can put Ron over the top in 2009.

[mickeyrom51]

I think Joe Morgan is looking down upon Cubs players from his era because he won multiple world championships with The Big Red Machine while the Cubs were the Lovable Losers that had the big meltdown in 1969. It's the typical big bully mindset. He thinks he's better than everyone else because he has the bling. Bull! He and the rest of the Veterans Committee should look at both Ron's stats during his playing days as well as the circumstances of his life. Ron only needed five more members of the committee to vote for his induction this time around. If Ryno, Ernie, Billy and Fergie can talk to the other members of the committee about Ron, the way he played, his life after baseball, and how much the game flows through his veins, then those five along with the HOFers inducted this year and next year can put Ron over the top in 2009.
There are better players than Ron in the Hall,but there are also lesser ones.

[Al Spanglers ghost]

Why? They played different positions and looking at numbers on paper doesn't tell the whole story of how good a player was overall. I'm just as much of a Joe Morgan anti-fan as most Cub fans but those stats don't represent everything that got Morgan into the HOF and has kept Santo out. Morgan also has two NL MVP's and WS rings. Santo never got to the WS and was also said to be non-clutch. Does a stat seem more impressive when it gets results or when it is a non factor because your team got nowhere from them anyway?

These players are all in the HOF,and like Ron Santo,never played in a World Series:
Phil Niekro-318 wins
Gaylord Perry-314 wins
Fergie Jenkins-284 wins
Jim Bunning-224 wins
Ralph Kiner-369 hr
Ernie Banks-512 hr
Billy Williams-426 hr
Rod Carew-3053 hits
Ryne Sandberg-282 hr

Should they not be in the HOF?:rolleyes:

[ryno4ever]

I posted this in a thread earlier in the offseason after spending almost an entire evening comparing the numbers of Santo's to those in the HOF... but I'll post it again here:

was listening to banter on 670 the score...which I hate to listen to, but it was the only one talking baseball.... there was a debate as to whether Santo belongs into the HOF or not. One caller said his numbers were simply not good enough to qualify for the Hall of Fame. Now, I was not alive when Ron played, so I can't say I remember watching him, etc. I watched This Old Cub and after watching that, I could not believe this man was not in the HOF.

So, tonight, I got onto baseball-alamanac.com and did a little number comparisons. What I found certainly warrants Ronnie a plaque in the HOF, in my opinion. I looked up Hall of Fame third basemen...there are nine. I made a little chart with these nine and added Ron as the 10th. I compared every stat they had on that page...each of the nine and Santo's.... I will try to summarize what I discovered.

The nine 3B HOF: Frank Baker (played 13 years), George Brett (21 years), Jimmy Collins (14 years), George Kell (15years). Freddie Lindstrom (13 years), Eddie Matthews (17years), Brooks Robinson (23 years), Mike Schmidt (18 years), and Pie Traynor (17 years). Ron Santo played for 15 years.

Of the 10, I have Ron ranked 7th in number of triples. 6th of the 10 in Batting Average, Total Runs scored, RBIs, and Fielding %. He tied for 6th with OBP. He was 5th out of the 10 in number of career hits. He was 4th in slugging percentage, number of games at 3B, number of Errors. He was third in home runs, base on balls, fielding assists,and fielding double plays. He did not rank below
6th place in any of the cateogries.

The fielding stats, I took strictly on their numbers at third base, as that is the position they are listed in the HOF for, as many of them played other postions throughout their career.

Now, one stat I figured out on my own that they didn't list on the site was the one I found the most amazing. I didn't want to compare number of games played (total at all positions) between all of the players, as you had players such as Brooks Robinson who played for 23 years vs. Frank Baker who played for only 13...that is a 10 year difference and a lot of games. I figured out the games played per year average.......Santo was number one with 149.5 games per year played. Next behind him was Eddie Matthews with 140.6. The next one behind that was only at 133.6 (Robinson). All of the others were in the 120's down to 110.6 for Lindstrom. Why do I find this stat amazing??? Ronnie played with a disease that he hid for a good part of his career. Diabetes, back then, wasn't as well known or treated as it is now. Both my dad and brother have Diabetes, so I know the severety of the disease and what it can do to you...how hard it can be to control, even with a "normal" lifestyle. Now, that is why I find it amazing Ron put these kind of numbers up with Diabetes....and being on the road so much with not much of a "daily routine".

[Al Spanglers ghost]

Like I said the first time you posted it,that is some terrific research,ryno4ever!!!

[ryno4ever]

Thanks, but it makes me so angry to compare those numbers and know Santo still doesn't have his plaque on that wall in the HOF!

On a promising note, Steve Stone was on the Score tonight and said that he believes the voting commitee will be taking a good look at the voting procedures this spring and look into a yearly vote instead of an every other year thing (or four years for umpires and coaches/managers).

[mickeyrom51]

I posted this in a thread earlier in the offseason after spending almost an entire evening comparing the numbers of Santo's to those in the HOF... but I'll post it again here:I wish that the snobs who are on the veterans committee could see your post.It might change their minds.I am believer now,without any doubt.

[ARamfan]

That IS wonderful research, ryno! We are lucky to have you here with us at fogpog. :) My uncle had diabetes also, so I understand how debilitating that disease can be. One thing that Ron has mentioned on more than one occasion is that he doesn't want his diabetes to be a factor in their decision, whether or not he makes it into the HOF. I kind of have to disagree with him. (IMO) he was an amazing third baseman, especially when you take into account what he was dealing with. All of these other guys in the HOF excelled, but not with what HE had to deal with. I think it should be a consideration, but not what the decision is based upon.

[ryno4ever]

I wish that the snobs who are on the veterans committee could see your post.It might change their minds.I am believer now,without any doubt.

When I sent my original email to the HOF back in December, I did send that information to them. I got a generated "thank you for your concern" email.

[mickeyrom51]

When I sent my original email to the HOF back in December, I did send that information to them. I got a generated "thank you for your concern" email.
I guess they dont want the facts to confuse them.To be honest,until I read your post I wasn't sure Ron was HOF material,but since then I am 100% in favor of his induction.He's done it the old fashioned way."He's earned it".Perhaps you might send it to Sporting News,they are pretty influential.:mad:

[roenick99]

Career stat comparison:

Ron Santo: Joe Morgan:

games-2243 / games-2649
hits-2254 / hits-2517
homeruns-342 / homeruns-268
rbi-1331 / rbi-1133
sb-35 / sb-689
batting avg.-.277 / batting avg.-.271
all star games-9 / all star games-10
gold gloves-5 / gold gloves-5

Joe also played 22 years. Let me play for 22 years and I could put those stats up. Imagine if Sanot and Sandberg played for that long. First ballot for both of them.

[roenick99]

Oh yeah, and I hate Joe Morgan.

[roenick99]

Oh yeah, and I really couldn't put those stats up in 122 years, but you know what I mean.

...I still hate Joe Morgan.

That will make a good signature, I think...

[bczar]

These players are all in the HOF,and like Ron Santo,never played in a World Series:
Phil Niekro-318 wins
Gaylord Perry-314 wins
Fergie Jenkins-284 wins
Jim Bunning-224 wins
Ralph Kiner-369 hr
Ernie Banks-512 hr
Billy Williams-426 hr
Rod Carew-3053 hits
Ryne Sandberg-282 hr

Should they not be in the HOF?:rolleyes:

Of course most of those guys are no brainers for the HOF. My intention wasn't to imply you should be on a WS team in order to be in the HOF. It is, however, looked at as a plus by the voters. I'm not saying I agree with that, but there's no denying that they look at that. It's the same way that Gold Gloves shouldn't be judged on anything other than fielding yet it's very apparent that hitting stats play a role in the voters mind these days.

Like ryno4ever already did, I also have a spreadsheet that I did that shows the major stats of all the 3B in the HOF and Santo. There are 10 MLB players in the HOF (I believe she didn't include Wade Boggs). I didn't count the Negro League players because their stats are difficult to find and generally thought to be incomplete, but there are three players from there as well. I also broke it down by when they played, when they were inducted, the date they were inducted, and who voted them in. I'll post it later this evening so everyone can see. I am not trying to say that Santo absolutely doesn't belong in the HOF, but I will say that he doesn't absolutely belong there. He's marginal IMO.

There are six players that were inducted by the BBWAA. They are: Pie Traynor, Eddie Mathews, Brooks Robinson, Mike Schmidt, George Brett, and Wade Boggs. There are four players voted in by various Veteran's Committees. They are: Frank Baker, Jimmy Collins, Freddy Lindstrom, and George Kell.

If Ron Santo gets to the HOF couldn't there be an argument that Bill Madlock should be there also?

[bczar]

Just an FYI. These are the numbers Santo got from the BBWAA for his 15 years that he was eligible. I think it's unusual that there are so many that demand he be in there and was robbed yet in 15 years of voting he never got more than 43% and didn't get the 5% required his first year of eligibility and was bumped from the list for five years. Baseball has 10 MLB 3B in the HOF in 120 years. Should Santo be one of them or is he just a hometown hero? I could see it either way, but he shouldn't be called a "sure thing" or "no brainer" or should it be said that he was robbed.


Hall of Fame Voting
Year Election Votes Pct
1980 BBWAA 15 3.9%
1985 BBWAA 53 13.4%
1986 BBWAA 64 15.1%
1987 BBWAA 78 18.9%
1988 BBWAA 108 25.3%
1989 BBWAA 75 16.8%
1990 BBWAA 96 21.6%
1991 BBWAA 116 26.2%
1992 BBWAA 136 31.6%
1993 BBWAA 155 36.6%
1994 BBWAA 150 33.0%
1995 BBWAA 139 30.2%
1996 BBWAA 174 37.0%
1997 BBWAA 186 39.3%
1998 BBWAA 204 43.1%

[mickeyrom51]

Of course most of those guys are no brainers for the HOF. My intention wasn't to imply you should be on a WS team in order to be in the HOF. It is, however, looked at as a plus by the voters. I'm not saying I agree with that, but there's no denying that they look at that. It's the same way that Gold Gloves shouldn't be judged on anything other than fielding yet it's very apparent that hitting stats play a role in the voters mind these days.

Like ryno4ever already did, I also have a spreadsheet that I did that shows the major stats of all the 3B in the HOF and Santo. There are 10 MLB players in the HOF (I believe she didn't include Wade Boggs). I didn't count the Negro League players because their stats are difficult to find and generally thought to be incomplete, but there are three players from there as well. I also broke it down by when they played, when they were inducted, the date they were inducted, and who voted them in. I'll post it later this evening so everyone can see. I am not trying to say that Santo absolutely doesn't belong in the HOF, but I will say that he doesn't absolutely belong there. He's marginal IMO.

There are six players that were inducted by the BBWAA. They are: Pie Traynor, Eddie Mathews, Brooks Robinson, Mike Schmidt, George Brett, and Wade Boggs. There are four players voted in by various Veteran's Committees. They are: Frank Baker, Jimmy Collins, Freddy Lindstrom, and George Kell.

If Ron Santo gets to the HOF couldn't there be an argument that Bill Madlock should be there also?I dont know about Madlock's career stats,so if you have them, and post them I will be happy to weigh in on that subject.He probably has a higher BA than Santo, but less power.I have no idea how many all star games he was in,or how many GGs he was awarded.
BTW there was another post comparing RS to the 3rd basemen in the HOF.By any standard he is equal to at least half of them.I am speaking as a former Santo for HOF doubter,but no more.After seeing that post,Im 100% sure that Ron belongs there,or half of the ones there dont belong.Take your choice.Consider the numbers Santo could have put up,had he not had Diabetes, and played as long as some of the others.

[Sheffield_&_Waveland]

This was posted in another thread that was a little off subject. I will post it here to get it in the right spot.




I have seen his stats and many players from his era of playing. I have done comparisons and little by little each year the stats always seem to be getting better. With that in mind I did a comparison between Santo and Wade Boggs.

Santo 15 seasons
9 Time All Star
5 Time Gold Glove Winner

Games - 2243
At Bats - 8143
Runs - 1138
Hits - 2254
Double - 365
Triples - 67
Home Runs - 342
RBI - 1331
BB - 1108
BA - .277
OBP - .362
SLG - .464
FLD% - .954

Boggs
18 Seasons
12 Time All Star
2 Time Gold Glove Winner

Games - 2440
At Bats - 9180
Runs - 1513
Hits - 3010
Doubles - 578
Triples - 61
Home Runs - 118
RBI - 1014
BB - 1412
BA - .328
OBP - .415
SLG - .443
FLD% - .965
If you were to average out Santos stats and add the three years longer that Boggs played I would really think that Santo has been cheated if they have allowed Boggs in the HOF. The only difference between their stats is that Boggs was more of a contact hitter while Santo produced more power. Something else I found that was interesting was the fact that not only did Santo hit for power but he also led the National League in walks numerous years of his career. After looking at this I can see where Santo has every right to be upset. If they felt ok with putting Wade Boggs in the HOF 6 years after his retirement why is Santo still trying to get in 33 years later?

[bczar]

Santo and Madlock have similar numbers. Not identical but very comparable. Madlock had a much better career average (.305 vs. .277) but Santo had more power (342 HR vs. 163). I don't like the whole AS appearances because that's fan vote. I think there's a good case to argue that both players were as good as the other in different ways.

[bczar]

If you were to average out Santos stats and add the three years longer that Boggs played I would really think that Santo has been cheated if they have allowed Boggs in the HOF. The only difference between their stats is that Boggs was more of a contact hitter while Santo produced more power. Something else I found that was interesting was the fact that not only did Santo hit for power but he also led the National League in walks numerous years of his career. After looking at this I can see where Santo has every right to be upset. If they felt ok with putting Wade Boggs in the HOF 6 years after his retirement why is Santo still trying to get in 33 years later?

Sorry to chop part of your post but I didn't want to quote the whole thing over. Boggs got to the coveted 3000 hit club. Almost a sure thing to get in. He also had 760 more hits in 190+ games more than Santo. He also had over 300 more BB's and an OBP over .50 higher.

[Sheffield_&_Waveland]

Sorry to chop part of your post but I didn't want to quote the whole thing over. Boggs got to the coveted 3000 hit club. Almost a sure thing to get in. He also had 760 more hits in 190+ games more than Santo. He also had over 300 more BB's and an OBP over .50 higher.

I still don't see where those numbers would warrant Boggs entry automaticaly and Santo is still trying to get in. Like I also pointed out its still a tough comparison because Boggs was more of a contact hitter and Santo was more for power. Santo also had more HR than Boggs. Do I think that alone makes him a hall of famer? Definatly not, but if you take those numbers and compare them they are not that much different to where Santo should still be trying to gain entry in the Hall.
Everyone has their own interpretation of great players and who should be in the HOF. This comparison was done in an attempt to prove that maybe Santo was not a GREAT player but neither was Boggs so where does it make it right for one to be in and not the other.

[bczar]

All I can say is that getting 3000 hits is generally one of the most reliable marks of a player getting into the HOF. Get 3000 hits, 500 HR, or 300 Wins and you can pretty much count on getting in if you've kept your nose clean.

[Al Spanglers ghost]

Santo and Madlock have similar numbers. Not identical but very comparable. Madlock had a much better career average (.305 vs. .277) but Santo had more power (342 HR vs. 163). I don't like the whole AS appearances because that's fan vote. I think there's a good case to argue that both players were as good as the other in different ways.


Between 1958 and 1970 Allstar teams were voted on by players,coachs,and managers only.Fan voting did not begin again until the 1971 season.Most of Ron Santo's All Star appearances where not voted on by fans,while all of Bill Madlock's were.Also Bill Madlock was no where near the defensive thirdsacker that Santo was.

[jcubs69]

All you have to do is compare other 3rd basemen at the time Santo played. Clearly Santo was one of the best. He has the stats to be in the HOF and it is a shame that he has to wait another 2 years to be voted on. It is tragic that Santo is not in.