Quote:
Originally posted by holyroller
So I guess the fact that Santo played gold glove level defense while hitting .277/.362/.464 at a tough position to fill means nothing eh? . Boyer's peak was ending right as Santo's was beginning. Honestly, I would vote in both of them, but no is going to ask me 
|
Since when is 3B 'tough to fill?' That's where aging vets like Joe Torre went to finish their careers
Santo was a very good player, but not HOF quality. Santo may have made the all-star team, but he wasn't the starter, even playing behind the immortal Deron Johnson in 1965. Plus, Santo rarely had the pressure of a pennant race on him. The one time he did, in 1969, he was a choking dog down the stretch as the Mets charged past the Cubs.
I do think winning is the final yardstick for admission. And Santo didn't win. Boyer was key to the Cards winnning in 1964, and rates higher IMO.
Actually, as thought about it some, I would be perfectly happy with none of these players being added. They all had their chances and didn't make it, and by rather large margins. No one had the Nellie Fox 74%, did they?
As some one mentioned about Brooklyn, there's a certain nostalgia factor for the lovable, losing Cubs. Plus, Santo gets more sympathy points because he was a diabetic in an era where insulin injections controlled the disease. I've read and heard players talking about him going into insulin shock during games and still walking out there. Courageous and admirable stuff, but I still think Santo is one notch below HOF. Somebody has to be there, and he's it.