Santo and The Vet's Committee

by WGNstatic on Dec 28, 2006 8:37 PM CST

I came across an interesting story on the Sports Illustrated site written by Mike Schmidt. He is a guy who, when first elected to the HOF, took a very elitist view of who should be there, and likely voted against Santo. Based on this article, his views have clearly changed.

It seems as if the travesty of Buck O'Neill just missing the Hall before his death may have made some folks realize that perhaps things should be a bit different.

I know Santo's candidacy has been discussed before, but I found Schmidt's comments to be very interesting. Clearly Schmidt is among the elite in the HOF, especially among 3B, and I think that his support of Santo might spur a few others to support Ronnie as well. Here's to you Ronnie!

Here is a link to the article

Poll

Should Ron Santo be in the Hall of Fame?

Yes

127 votes

No

9 votes

136 votes | Poll has closed

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 41 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I did read that

but he didn't mention Santo right away. He alluded to him in passing only later in the article. whether that reflects his true feelings, however, I can't be sure.

by cashcowsquirtingsourmilk on Dec 28, 2006 9:09 PM CST reply actions

I am...

... very, very pleased to read this. Schmidt was, as you point out, one of those who felt "I'm in and no one else could possibly be as good" in the past. That has CLEARLY changed, and this seems to be a signal that it's Santo's time.

The article is almost written as a message to the other VC members. I hope they get it.

by Al Yellon on Dec 28, 2006 9:17 PM CST reply actions

Schmidt

As recently as a year or two ago, Schmidt was one of the more outspoken critics whenever anyone got into the Hall. He has seen it as almost a personal afront to him with each person who has added, feeling as though it erodes the meaning of his Hall entry. I find it interesting that Schmidt has decided to write something like this.

IMO, if the veterans committee fails to put someone in the Hall this year, its time to again reevaluate the process. For those who don't remember, the veterans committee process changed a few years ago, altering who voted and moving the vote to every other year. No one has gotten in via the new process. If no one gets in this year (and this is not a Santo issue) its time to revisit or scrap the veterans committee process.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 28, 2006 10:18 PM CST reply actions

I just really hope...

...that Santo gets selected, because I'll be in the area.

Well, I'll be happy for Santo, of course. But I'm my own priority.

PTBNL!

by gravedigger on Dec 28, 2006 11:15 PM CST reply actions

I also hopes he gets in.

He was a great player, and I'm still amazed at what he overcame.

I love Ronnie. It's fun to listen to him and Pat.

"I don't talk. I just let what I do talk for myself." -Johan Santana

by sparkles721 on Dec 29, 2006 12:06 AM CST reply actions

Listening to Ron and Pat

has made my love of baseball even stronger over the past 2 years.

Santo was obviously a great ball player. He should be in the hall of fame already. But his legacy is bigger than his stats.

It's good to see Schmidt write this now.

phat

by phatass on Dec 29, 2006 1:47 AM CST reply actions

santo

im sure his numbers were comparable with sandberg but for some reason are not considered good enough for a 3rd baseman.he may never get in but he is tremendously loved by cub fans which is probably just as good. god bless ron santo.

by NOMAR on Dec 29, 2006 5:40 AM CST reply actions

Not as good as the hall...

No offense, but it is pretty clear by what Ron says, that no, the adoration that Cub fans give him isn't enough. I think part of that is because he views his own snub as a snub of the Cubs. Had he played on a team that won a few WS he probably would have been elected to the hall 25 years ago.

Eamus Ursuli!

by WGNstatic on Dec 29, 2006 9:37 AM CST up reply actions

I know...

... how badly Santo wants in -- that is, in fact, the reason he wanted the WGN job so badly after having spent 15 years out of baseball. He thought the public persona would help him get some recognition.

That said, Santo did say at the retirement ceremony for his number in 2003, that that honor was "his Hall of Fame". Maybe that was just lip service, but it didn't feel that way at the time.

by Al Yellon on Dec 29, 2006 9:39 AM CST up reply actions

This is yet...........

.........another reason why he should NOT get in the door. The shameless politicking by Santo and the Cubs so insults those involved in the process that he'll never make it.

by tville on Dec 29, 2006 10:50 AM CST up reply actions

This is...

... one thing that I am so ridiculously tired of. Too much of the Cubs radio telecast seems to be focused on the life and times of Ron Santo. The constant trumpeting of "This Old Cub" and Ron's son Jeff is so transparent. Hughes has to play down his abilities to a sophmoric level because of Ron (and while its entertaining, I think we miss out on Pat's true abilities).

I don't know whether or not Ron belongs in. I'm just so tired of the the dog and pony show.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 29, 2006 11:19 AM CST up reply actions

Hard To Say

Santo says publicly and privately (to me, in the hotel bar at the San Diego Marina Marriott last May) that the Cubs' retiring his number 10 was good enough for him. And he says it with conviction. However, I'm sure if he made it he'll cry like a baby, and I mean that in the best way possible.

Santo Forever!

by BeerCub on Dec 29, 2006 9:52 AM CST up reply actions

Ron's career stats

are nearly identical (or better than) to those of one of his peers, Orioles third baseman Brooks Robinson. However, as has been posted many times in the past -- Robinson had the stage of the World Series to display his talents. As a kid, I can still remember Robinson diving everywhere to grab grounders and liners in post-season action.

All of that extra attention got Robinson in the Hall immediately. Santo, stuck with the never-in-the-post-season Cubs, was screwed.

Quickly:

Robinson -- 10,654 AB's Santo -- 8143 AB's

2,848 hits 2,254 hits
482 2B 365 2B
68 3B 67 3B
268 HR 342 HR
1357 RBI 1331 RBI
860 Walks 1108 Walks
28 SB 35 SB
.267 Avg .277 Avg
.401 slug .464 slug
.322 OBP .362 OBP

from thebaseballpage.com on Santo:

Ron Santo is the greatest third baseman in Chicago Cubs' history. He hit 342 career home runs and won five Gold Gloves. Playing all but one season with the Cubs, Santo never made it to the post-season. He hit 30 homers and batted .300 four times each, despite playing much of his career in an era where scoring was suppressed. He paced the National League in walks four times. He topped NL third basemen in putouts seven times, assists seven times, and double plays four times.

Brooks Robinson, from the same source --
and, intrestingly enough THEY reference Robinson's post-season 3B theatrics: (I didn't read this paragraph prior to writing this -- I went right to his stats)

It was his amazing, acrobatic fielding in the 1970 World Series that made him a superstar, but Brooks Robinson was a Baltimore institution for over two decades. The 16-time Gold Glover winner played in 2,896 games, and his 267 home runs were, at the time of his retirement, the most by any American League third baseman. He was one of the most popular players of his generation, and thousands of fans in Baltimore named their children after him.

"Thousands of fans named their children after him?"

Wow, is that a lame way to continue to describe a Hall Of Famer, or what, huh? Perhaps they ran out of supleratives. They had plenty to say about Santo, though -- didn't they? Take away the World Series platform that Robinson enjoyed, realize the era he and Ron played in -- if Robinson is in STILL the HOF -- so's Santo.

Without question.

by Smooth Jazz Man San Diego on Dec 29, 2006 3:46 PM CST up reply actions

Santo is better than Robinson

and it is not particularly close, IMO. As a hitter, Robinson was barely above average for his career and is far behind Santo. He was, of course, awsome defensively, but Santo himself was also very good defensively.

by VS on Dec 29, 2006 4:07 PM CST up reply actions

The key is...

... not only the WS appearances, but Robinson's longevity.

Had Santo played perhaps three or four more years and gotten to 400 HR, he'd have been in long ago.

by Al Yellon on Dec 29, 2006 4:46 PM CST up reply actions

I truly

believe that longevity is part of being a HOFer. Sure, its not vital but I really believe that you must take the test of time also. And kudos to a guy for playing that long.

JKuhle "I'd walk through hell in a gasonline suit to play baseball."

by TCobb1911 on Dec 30, 2006 8:50 AM CST up reply actions

Debatable.

Robinson's hitting stats are not as good, but damn close to Santo and 16 gold gloves!?! Thats sick.

JKuhle "I'd walk through hell in a gasonline suit to play baseball."

by TCobb1911 on Dec 30, 2006 8:43 AM CST up reply actions

It's not debatable, really

Hitting is by far the most important part of a hitters job, and Santo excelled at that. As for the Gold Gloves, quite a few of them were undeserved and were won more on repuation than on actual skill.

by VS on Dec 30, 2006 9:09 AM CST up reply actions

And you're sure about that...........

..........how?

Final GG tally is 16 to 5. Even if half of them were won on rep, as you say, Brooks was still a far better fielder.

by tville on Dec 31, 2006 9:20 AM CST up reply actions

Woah, first of all

I never said Robinson wasn' a better fielder than Santo. He was, without a doubt.

How do I know some of those were undeserved? By looking at the information we have. Towards the end of his career guys like Aurelio Rodriguez were deserving of some of those Gold Gloves.

Anyway, his edge in fielding doesn't make up for Santo's huge edge in hitting, which is far more important.

by VS on Dec 31, 2006 10:07 AM CST up reply actions

There should be no doubt about it

Long overdue. Comparing him to other third baseman...no doubt about it. Bill James, who has spent more time researching baseball history than I can imagine, has him rated as the 6th best at 3B, ahead of numerous HOF 3Bers. Sure he was on drugs, but definitely not the kind used today. And Schmidt, who James has as #1, has finally come down off the horse. Maybe aging has given him a new perspective on life and viewing others from a more human level.

"1958-NL MVP; 1959- NL MVP; 1960-GOLD GLOVE SS"

by letsplaytwo on Dec 29, 2006 7:46 AM CST reply actions

Santo

Must get in.

Spendry!!!

by mrcubsfan on Dec 29, 2006 9:18 AM CST reply actions

This gives me hope

That Ronnie will get in while he's still alive to appreciate it.

And if he does get to take that stage, his lower legs lost to diabetes, to inspect his plaque ...

I hope he makes it to that day.

by mlf on Dec 29, 2006 10:13 AM CST reply actions

In my opinion Ron should already

be in the HOF. AS for his shameless politicking, that's a load of BS. Pat turned down an offer to broadcast in the TV booth so he could stick with Ron. His feelings for Ron are genuine. And Ron's feelings for the Cubs and his fans are genuine. I think that's pretty rare in baseball and broadcasting both these days. Unfortunately. Go Ron!!

by teacher tom on Dec 29, 2006 11:59 AM CST reply actions

No one said...

... that Pat's feelings weren't genuine. However he certainly has dumbed down his broadcast. Listening to a replay of the 2003 NLCS a while back with Hughes and Steve Stone made me realize that.

And yes, the WGN radio broadcast has seemingly become an infomercial for "This Old Cub" with daily references to the movie, interviews with Jeff Santo whenever he's around... Its been old for a while.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 29, 2006 12:07 PM CST up reply actions

I understand your point...

...but I think you're going overboard with the hyperbole. When "This Old Cub" first came out, it was common to hear some sort of reference to it, but it was hardly a daily occurrence this past season, and I don't think I heard a single interview with Jeff Santo this season either. You may dislike Ron's commentary and style (as I do myself on occasion), but to say that he exists in the broadcast booth merely to plug himself and his Hall candidacy is going a bit overboard.

Further, as I understand it, the movie wasn't even his idea, and he probably doesn't get anything out of it except the knowledge that he's helping awareness of diabetes and its related charities. I don't particularly feel like being cynical about that, seeing as how he had both legs amputated because of it.

by gauchodirk on Dec 29, 2006 2:10 PM CST up reply actions

Plus...

...can we please note that plugging "This Old Cub" raises money for diabetes related charities?

If they're plugging that as much or more than some of the other Cubs sponsors, good for Pat and Ron....

by Chadnudj on Dec 29, 2006 3:12 PM CST up reply actions

Santo

I'm not saying that Santo has been pusing this agenda, I just believe that this is what Cubs radio has become. I don't blame Santo, but the Cubs broadcast has evolved into, in part, a Santo promotion machine.

DmL

by dmlichte on Dec 29, 2006 3:41 PM CST up reply actions

I agree

that the radio broadcast has been dumbed down, and I'm sick of the plugging (even if the proceeds do go to charity.)

That said, I'd be interested in hearing from the handful of people who voted in the poll above that Santo shouldn't be in the HOF. What are your thoughts behind this?

by danimal15 on Dec 29, 2006 3:47 PM CST up reply actions

Sure...

...That is part of having a "celebrity" broadcaster. Is it any different than when Harry was broadcasting?

As for Pat "dumbing down" his broadcast. Certainly when Pat is teamed with Stone or Otto, the broadcast takes on a more decidely "baseball talk" aura. However, the straight man/"goof" team is hardly new or unique to the Cubs. As a matter of fact, Stone had a long time partner once who...

Sure, I love listening to Stone and Hughes call a playoff game. But you know, on a mid July day, in a game without significant meaning, when the game is already decided, I think I would rather listen to two guys who make the broadcast fun, and that is exactly what Pat and Ron do.

Eamus Ursuli!

by WGNstatic on Dec 29, 2006 3:52 PM CST up reply actions

This might hurt.

Before everyone reaches through their monitor and tries to kill me, I'm only 22. So I obviously didn't see him play. If I look at numbers, which is all I've really got, his numbers aren't HOF worthy. I know people will say that there are inferior players in the Hall, but they're are also better players not let in. So, for the people that watched him play, can someone tell me what I'm missing? I just believe the hall was meant for a select few.

JKuhle "I'd walk through hell in a gasonline suit to play baseball."

by TCobb1911 on Dec 30, 2006 8:47 AM CST reply actions

If you really look at his numbers

and put them in the context of his time, he is one of the best 3b in history. As for there being better players not in, who?

by VS on Dec 30, 2006 9:15 AM CST up reply actions

You want

names of 3b or any player?

JKuhle "I'd walk through hell in a gasonline suit to play baseball."

by TCobb1911 on Dec 30, 2006 2:14 PM CST up reply actions

Any player

There's no 3b better than Santo who is not already in the Hall so, any player.

And I see below you said Dawson. I can't possibly imagine how anyone could pick Dawson over Santo so please explain that to me.

by VS on Dec 30, 2006 2:53 PM CST up reply actions

I think a case............

........for Ken Boyer could also be made.

Statistically he's on Santo's heels plus he has an MVP and WS victory on his side.

by tville on Dec 31, 2006 9:25 AM CST up reply actions

A good 3b indeed

But Santo is still a better hitter and defender. The year Boyer won the MVP, his OPS+ was 130. Santo topped that six times.

by VS on Dec 31, 2006 9:49 AM CST up reply actions

Keep in mind...

that he also played during the "pitcher era". A period from about '63-'68 where MLB enlarged the strike zone and raised the mound. Had this not been done, he would have had better stats than those that didn't play during that period.

"1958-NL MVP; 1959- NL MVP; 1960-GOLD GLOVE SS"

by letsplaytwo on Dec 30, 2006 11:35 AM CST up reply actions

Also...

He played before much of the expansion that eventually led to divisional play starting in the latter part of his career. That meant that he had the "benefit" of facing some of the toughest pitchers of all time, in a time when pitchers were favored, on a regular basis.

Just imagine what many of today's stars numbers would look like if they were forced to face the best pitchers of their generation with the frequency that guys like Santo faced Koufax, Dryesdale, Ryan, Seaver, etc.

It is important to put numbers into the perspective of era. Fred McGriff is a perfect example. Had he put up his HR totals a decade or two earlier, he would be a first ballot HOFer, no doubt. But he played in a time when HRs were more common. Same can be said of Dawson.

Eamus Ursuli!

by WGNstatic on Dec 30, 2006 11:45 AM CST up reply actions

Dawson

should be in before Santo, I believe.

JKuhle "I'd walk through hell in a gasonline suit to play baseball."

by TCobb1911 on Dec 30, 2006 2:20 PM CST up reply actions

The mound

was lowered 10 inches in 1969.

JKuhle "I'd walk through hell in a gasonline suit to play baseball."

by TCobb1911 on Dec 30, 2006 2:17 PM CST up reply actions

T Cobb

please read my earlier post and COMPARE the #'s of HOF 3B Brooks Robinson and Santo, from the same era. Obviously, you didn't read the post, or you wouldn't make that statement.

If Robinson made the Hall, so should Santo.
Robinson was a shoo-in because of all the attention he and the Orioles received due to the 5 WS the team played in that era.

Santo was stuck with the Cubs and shouldn't be penalized for that.

You cannot compare the present day player/stats to that era. It's a different game now -- and there no 'designer' supplements then, to 'help' their game. These guys barely even knew what 'weight training' was. They had off-season jobs, they made regular salaries.

Sorry if you don't 'get' it. Better do more research.

by Smooth Jazz Man San Diego on Dec 30, 2006 3:20 PM CST reply actions