Kaat and Oliva miss shot at the Hall; Ron Santo in
They needed 12 of 16 votes from the Golden Era committee. Kaat came in second with 10 and Oliva had 8 votes. Ron Santo was the only player elected. (Other sources say 15 votes, but the Pioneer Press says "all ballots," which I suspect is wrong.)
6 months ago
ColossusOfRhode
10 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Posnanski had a nice piece about the tragedy of it coming just a year too late
It would have been nice if Santo had been able to be around for his own induction.
by ColossusOfRhode on Dec 5, 2011 9:59 PM EST up reply actions
None of the 3 deserve to be in...
IMO.
With guys like that (or Dawson/Rice) it is quickly becoming the hall of average. While there are about 10 guys on the ballot currently that should be in but won’t. Larkin will be the only one on the traditional ballot that gets in this year. And I guess I’d vote him in, but only because Ozzie Smith is in already and Larkin was a better player than Smith.
by DJSkillz on Dec 5, 2011 11:20 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Ron Santo was a clear omission
He’s better than half of the players in the Hall of Fame. If Santo doesn’t deserve it, they’d better close the doors and start over because they’ve made over 50% mistakes. That may be your opinion but I’d say it would be a much less interesting museum if you threw out half the players inducted.
Barry Larkin was a fantastic shortstop. He’s one of the 10 best in history. Larkin and Santo is a pretty damned impressive induction class. Both players are so far ahead of Jim Rice it isn’t even funny.
by DJL44 on Dec 5, 2011 11:32 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
well, sure...
I should amend that. Santo and Larkin I think there are at least cases for, and I would put both far ahead of Rice/Dawson. But I’m still not sure I’d let either in. Both are borderline cases to me.
But yes, I think there are a TON of guys who should not currently be in the HOF. And on the flip side, as I mentioned, there are a lot of guys on the ballot right now that should be in; Edgar Martinez, Tim Raines, Mark McGwire, Jeff Bagwell, Alan Trammell (if Larkin/Smith are in).
I just really do think it’s becoming the hall of average in some ways (Rice/Dawson were big parts of that IMO). I would not let Morris in, I would not let Kaat in. And though I love him, I would not let Oliva in.
Those doors were opened in the 1940s
It would be a terrible idea to raise the standards of the Hall of Fame for the current generation of players. You mention Ozzie Smith but Mazeroski, Nellie Fox, Aparicio and Rabbit Maranville are all in the actual Hall of Fame. Ozzie Smith and Alan Trammell are much, much better than those guys.
There is the actual Hall of Fame, then there is your idea of what you would have for a Hall of Fame. I’d rather elect players that meet the established standard, minus the obvious mistakes.
maybe so...
I just think the standard has been slowly degrading over time, that’s all.
No, if anything the standards are getting too high of late
You’re right that Rice and probably Dawson were mistakes but for every modern mistake there are two mistakes from any previous era. Not to mention the number of extremely strong candidates of late than disappear from consideration after a single ballot. We have more teams now, but somehow less inductees.
I think there’s a notion that the inductees from before we were born were somehow better than they were due to a mythology built up about them.
Good point
There are certain eras that are radically overrepresented (1930’s white baseball) and others that are underrepresented. Some people try to use that to say baseball players are worse now then they were back in the day. That’s a ridiculous statement. I want my favorite players in the Hall of Fame too.
BTW – If you’re including Rice and Dawson as mistakes then you have to add Puckett to the list.
Puckett is easily my favorite player of all time...
but yes, I think you can easily make the case he’s not a HOF’er. Similar to Oliva (time played).
























