The Keltner List

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I've taken the names suggested so far and threw them in a hat. I'll draw names at random for these. If you have a suggestion, send it my way and I'll add it to the pile.

 

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

 

Doubtful. In his best seasons, Santo was overshadowed by Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Bob Gibson, and Sandy Koufax at various times.

 

2. Was he the best player on his team?

 

One poster noted that Ron Santo was overshadowed by teammates Ernie Banks and Billy Williams. Ernie Banks declined by the time Santo arrived, and Banks was never better than Santo after 1963. Santo and Williams were often the two best players on the Cubs, but Santo was actually better in 1964, '66, and '67.

 

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

 

Time for controversy. Ron Santo, from 1965-69, was the best third baseman in baseball. Dick Allen was better in the mid-60s, but he ceased playing third full-time after 1965. Harmon Killebrew was better when he did play third, but he was a third baseman in name only. Brooks Robinson? Yes, Robinson was an incredible fielder, but Santo did more with his bat. In fact, Santo accumulated more Win Shares every season from 1964-69, a six year stretch. Santo also won five consecutive Gold Gloves.

 

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

 

Santo never played in the postseason. In 1969, Santo's Cubs went 8-17 in September, blowing a five game lead to the Miracle Mets. Santo hit poorly, as did the entire team. Season splits are unavailable before 1969, preventing us from evaluating his entire career.

 

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

 

No. Santo had a bad season in 1974 at the age of 34, and retired after the season.

 

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

 

Yes, in my opinion.

 

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

 

None are in the Hall of Fame, but there's a reason, that we'll come to in a few moments.

 

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

 

Santo scores below HOF average in the Black Ink test, but above HOF average on the gray ink test. Santo meets 41% of HOF Standards.

 

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

 

Yes. Santo played his prime during the second Dead-Ball era, when offenses were incredibly low.

 

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

 

Yes.

 

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

 

Santo finished in the top 10 of MVP voting four times, his highest finish was in 1967, when he finished fourth.

 

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

 

Ron Santo made nine All-Star teams, a very good total. Oddly, he missed the team in 1967, when he finished fourth in MVP balloting, and won a Gold Glove.

 

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

 

Very likely. Santo earned 38, 36, 32 and 30 Win Shares in his best seasons. For comparison, the '98 Yankees won 114 games when their best player had 27 win shares. Jorge Posada had 29 when the 2000 squad won the Series.

 

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

 

Ron Santo was the first player to take advantage of the 10-5 trade rule, refusing a trade to Anaheim in favor of a trade to the White Sox.

 

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

 

Yes. Santo remains a prominant figure for the Cubs.

 

Conclusion: I really believe Santo deserves the Hall. His problems have been that HOF voters fail to recognize third basemen in general, that he played in a very tough offensive era, and that he didn't stick around to pad his stats. He was the best 3B in the league for half a decade, and won gold gloves when many other great defensive third basemen, notably Ken Boyer, plied their trade. Santo earned just 15 votes his first year of eligibility, which astounds me. He got a second chance, and had earned 43% of the vote his last year before dropping from the Ballot. Hopefully the veterans' committee gives him the nod.

[Bored 0]

In fact, Santo accumulated more Win Shares every season from 1964-69, a six year stretch.

Hey Al is there a site your getting the historic win shares from or a book?

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I get them from Bill James' Win Shares. Currently, there's no web site that has them archived, and even looking them up in the book is a pain, as they are poorly organized. The new version of Total Baseball has them as well, and that should arrive in my mailbox any day now.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Ron Santo should make it into the Hall of Fame. No question. Plus, his color commentary on 720 is, at times, priceless. A great player and great broadcaster, and believe me, the Cubs have had quite a share of great broadcasters.

[Beast 0]

Yeah, I agree he deserves to be in. As for being the most qualified person not in the Hall yet, I don't know. Sandberg is a hall of famer, plain and simple and he's not in, and as for Veteran candidates, Minoso, Oliva, and Mays are right up there as well. Also, you said that if Santo was the best player on his team, then they would have a good chance to win the pennant. However, he was the best player on the Cubs in the 60's and they never won once. Most of the time, they were low in the 2nd division, and that is with Banks, Williams, Santo, and Jenkins among others.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Banks was an average player by that point. Jenkins brought them to the brink of contention, but keep in mind it was a 10 team league at that point, not easy to win. And bottom line is, their other players just weren't good enough. The Cubs had Williams, Santo and Jenkins yes. But the Cardinals had Gibson, Carlton, Brock, and Cepeda. The Mets had Seaver, Koosman and McGraw. The Cubs had tough competition.

[phoenixrising 0]

I wonder why there are so few third basemen in the Hall. It is an incredibly tough position to play, one must have good range and a strong arm to make the throw to first. Plus I think the voters expect huge power numbers of the type put up by first basemen and corner outfielders.

 

Great Keltner List posts, al. I got a few players for you to consider:

Jim Kaat

Dave Parker

Jim Rice

Lee Smith

Stan Hack

Steve Garvey

[Vern Gagne 0]

Carl Mays never makes it for one reason. Ray Chapman.

 

How about a Keltner test on Joe Torre.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I'll add those players to the hat.

[B. Brian Brunzell 0]

I never knew much about Santo before I moved to Chicago. But in the 12 years I livd there, I learned more and more about him, and seeing old footage and reading up on him, there's no doubt in my mind that he should be in the Hall. One day, the Veteran's Committee will have to vote him in.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I wanted to bump this up, in support of Ron Santo.

[The Czech Republic 0]

I never knew much about Santo before I moved to Chicago. But in the 12 years I livd there, I learned more and more about him, and seeing old footage and reading up on him, there's no doubt in my mind that he should be in the Hall. One day, the Veteran's Committee will have to vote him in.

That day better be really freaking soon.

 

If he does, what do the rest of the TSM Cubs fans say about a trip to Cooperstown

[The Czech Republic 0]

FUCK

[CanadianChris 0]

Not surprising. I doubt the Veterans Committee will ever elect anyone under the current setup.

[The Czech Republic 0]

"Well if they couldn't get in the first 15 years, why should we let them in now?"

 

god so stupid. I hate the committee

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

The "committee" is actually all of the former Hall of Famers.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article...t=.jsp&c_id=mlb

 

I don't think Jane Clark has any real association with baseball. Rather, she's the leader of the Trust that governs the Hall of Fame.

 

It is hard to pinpoint the problem, but I am reasonably sure the format is flawed, and will not result in anyone being elected. A poster at Baseball Think Factory pointed out that the average ballot contained six names, more than the Baseball Writers usually select. The BBWAA ballot this year held 27 names, 11 of whom had realistic HOF arguments. The Veterans' Committee ballot held 25 names, about 19 of whom have reasonable cases. When you have that many qualified candidates, it is hard to get a group of 80, voting blindly from one another, to come to any kind of consensus.

 

Is this a good thing for the Hall? No, for two reasons. One, there are several overly qualified candidates on this ballot who deserve induction. Ron Santo was one of the five best third basemen of all time, before Schmidt, Boggs and Brett played. Second, a lack of inductions equals a lack of interest in the Hall. The Hall suffers during lapses of activity.

 

Over 65% of the current Hall of Famers DID vote for Ron Santo, and that is to their credit. Now the Hall needs to re-organize, and develop a better format.

[Beast 0]

I was so disappointed that no one was elected because I've been waiting since the last one for someone to finally get in. I love the concept though because we actually get to see who the choices are. I wish they just made it so that the top votegetter gets in. Therefore: Hodges would have gotten in 2003, and Santo would have made it in this year. I know a whole lot of baseball fans would have been relieved. I was actually hoping that Santo would get in as an announcer this year, so he could be at least in the Hall Of Fame somewhat.