PDA

View Full Version : No soup for Santo


T Dog
02-26-2003, 12:12 PM
Wire services are reporting that Ron Santo didn't make it into the Hall of Fame today, along with everyone else. The the thing about Santo, though, is that he wasn't even mentioned in the report I read.

Saracen
02-26-2003, 12:15 PM
Amazing no one got in. Gil Hodges was closest, falling 11 votes shy.

irish rover
02-26-2003, 12:16 PM
so you think the suicide watch has begun?

upnorthsox
02-26-2003, 12:16 PM
OOH NOOO!!!!! :o:

Viva Magglio
02-26-2003, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Saracen
Amazing no one got in. Gil Hodges was closest, falling 11 votes shy.

The fact that no one got in is an embarrassment. They ought to dump this 75% rule. Watch for Uncle Bud to knee-jerk react to this and dump the rule.

T Dog
02-26-2003, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by irish rover
so you think the suicide watch has begun?

You would think Ron Santo would be used to losing.

Hullett_Fan
02-26-2003, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by T Dog
You would think Ron Santo would be used to losing.


*****!!!

irish rover
02-26-2003, 12:32 PM
pud selig should have nothing to do with who gets in or not, the HOF is not affiliated to MLB

http://baseballasamerica.org/artifact_chi_01.htm

I love this picture

Hangar18
02-26-2003, 12:38 PM
Good For Ronny (not woowoo) Maybe Murph over at the SCR Cub morning show and the rest of the Chicago media will stop talking about this finally. you know they wont though. Lets see if Huebner moans and groans about Minoso not going in tomorrow am.

jortafan
02-26-2003, 12:45 PM
Which wire service?

How are they wording it?

I'm nitpicking because the results aren't announced until 1 p.m. Chicago time. Unless they got some historic beat, somebody jumped the gun. They could be wrong. It would not be the first time AP managed to screw something up.

upnorthsox
02-26-2003, 12:49 PM
Santo comes up short (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-030226halloffame,1,7763430.story?coll=cs%2Dhome%2D headlines)

joecrede
02-26-2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by irish rover
so you think the suicide watch has begun?

Yes, on Murph . . .

irish rover
02-26-2003, 12:53 PM
cub lovin Offman is on Boers and Bernsy, played a tape of Ronny after he got the news, START THE SUICIDE WATCH jeez let it go man

a woman in the background kept yelling we love you, we love you. Boers then says Hey George get off the tape LOL

there was also people applauding him, George said it was Ronnies family and friends but I think the media there also joined in

Chisox353014
02-26-2003, 01:36 PM
I can't decide whether this is a good thing or not. Part of me wishes he would have gotten in so people would just shut up about it already. Now we'll have to listen to all this whining again until he's up for another vote.

moochpuppy
02-26-2003, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Chisox353014
Now we'll have to listen to all this whining again until he's up for another vote.

It's going to be a long two years. :whiner:

kermittheefrog
02-26-2003, 02:38 PM
I think at least Santo and Miller deserve to be in. Dick Allen and Minnie Minoso have pretty good arguments also. The fact that no one was elected really shows the weakness of the veteran's committee.

Juan Pizarro
02-26-2003, 02:59 PM
I think it shows why this new committee is a bad idea.
The living HOF'ers want to pretend they're better than those who didn't get voted in. They'll be more restrictive than anyone ever has, and that's silly, IMO.

duke of dorwood
02-26-2003, 03:36 PM
He deserved to be in. He was a threat-excellent glove, and never dogged it.

Nellie_Fox
02-26-2003, 03:45 PM
Minoso was a much better ballplayer than Santo. I repeat: Santo had a nice career, a memorable career, but not a HOF career.

czalgosz
02-26-2003, 03:56 PM
I've always felt that the Hall was way too inclusive anyway. How many guys are in the Hall simply for wearing Yankee pinstripes at the right time? Phil Rizzuto doesn't belong, Reggie Jackson doesn't belong, Dave Winfield doesn't belong.

I have stopped paying attention to Hall voting, because it's really more about politics than anything else. It's always been that way. Ty Cobb was not voted in on the first ballot, mainly because he was a jerk.

maurice
02-26-2003, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
I've always felt that the Hall was way too inclusive anyway.

Right. Folks like the Santo-backers use this to support the erroneous (but extremely common) argument that Player A deserves to be in just because he's comparable to Player B -- some schlub who made it for polictical reasons. Two wrongs don't make a right (but three rights make a left).

The Hall of Fame is for the very best players and others who have made substantial contributions to the game -- not merely above-average but unremarkable players such as Santo. (Note to Murph: getting your legs amputated does not count as a "substantial contribution to the game.")

I guess we'll have to live with this tripe until the Hall decides to stratify or remove the undeserving players already enshrined.

bc2k
02-26-2003, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by upnorthsox
Santo comes up short (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-030226halloffame,1,7763430.story?coll=cs%2Dhome%2D headlines)

Yeah, just a couple feet short. Tough luck.

I agree with the other posters that 75% is ridiculous. Wasn't it 65% at one point?

Fisk Fan
02-26-2003, 05:12 PM
Funny, I thought he was running for Chicago Mayor with all of the campaigning he was doing..........

T Dog
02-26-2003, 06:56 PM
I don't particularly believe Santo belongs in the Hall of Fame. The HOF should be for the greats of the game, and I think Santo falls short of that standard. When he was active, I thought. regardless of the stats, that he compared more to Sal Bando than Brooks Robinson.

34rancher
02-26-2003, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by maurice
Right. Folks like the Santo-backers use this to support the erroneous (but extremely common) argument that Player A deserves to be in just because he's comparable to Player B -- some schlub who made it for polictical reasons. Two wrongs don't make a right (but three rights make a left).

The Hall of Fame is for the very best players and others who have made substantial contributions to the game -- not merely above-average but unremarkable players such as Santo. (Note to Murph: getting your legs amputated does not count as a "substantial contribution to the game.")

I guess we'll have to live with this tripe until the Hall decides to stratify or remove the undeserving players already enshrined.
I agree. If you try to compare players and numbers, then if Santo gets in, I want Robin Ventura in (he doesn't deserve it either). Their numbers are almost identical. Two things though, Robin has more gold gloves than Santo did and Robin has actually won a divison title. With that many hall of fame players, how did the Cubs lose it in '69? And never get a divison title? Hmmmmmmmm

maurice
02-27-2003, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by 34rancher
I agree.

Reports are that Joe Morgan agrees also, prompting not Murph but FRED to call him an idiot this morning. Now there may be very good reasons for calling Morgan an idiot, but his opposition to people who want an overinclusive Hall is not one of them.

joecrede
02-27-2003, 11:56 AM
This column (http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/col_rozner.asp) ... well, I've never seen anything quite like it.

Here's a sample:

It'll be two years before Santo gets another chance with the Veterans Committee, but some of his friends don't think he will live that long now that he has been dealt another disappointment.

czalgosz
02-27-2003, 12:05 PM
See, it's that kind of stuff that makes me say that sometimes sportswriters get too close to the story.

It sounds like Rozner is a friend of Santo's, and wants him to enter the hall because Santo's a good guy. He likes him, and is making the HoF vote a personal one.

He makes it a given that Santo deserves to make it in on his playing ability; almost directly challenging those who refute that claim. I can almost imagine him asking those who say Santo isn't good enough to step outside. My question is, if "everyone knows" Santo belongs in the Hall, why isn't he in the hall? Is there some sort of shadowy conspiracy against him?

And besides, as my dad has pointed out, there are now 3 hall-of-famers from the '69 Cubs (Williams, Banks, and Jenkins). Santo would make it 4. How could a team with 4 future hall-of-famers not win anything?

Mediocrity
02-27-2003, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
I think at least Santo and Miller deserve to be in. Dick Allen and Minnie Minoso have pretty good arguments also. The fact that no one was elected really shows the weakness of the veteran's committee.

I agree with WonderTeen. Santo and Miller belong as does Minoso. I'd love for Allen to be in there, too, but I am not convinced on him yet.


Also, I was surprised that Finley got so little support.

34rancher
02-27-2003, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by Mediocrity
I agree with WonderTeen. Santo and Miller belong as does Minoso. I'd love for Allen to be in there, too, but I am not convinced on him yet.


First off, welcome to the board. :)

Second off, that comment on Dick Allen is (no offense) stupid. If you are not convinced now, when will you be? He is not going to come back and hit any more home runs, rbi's, or get any more walks or strikeouts. If he isn't good enough now, then he never should be. (my opinion is that none of those guys are good enough for the hall).

But Welcome still. :)