The past few years of Hall of Fame voting have been a roller coaster of the good with the bad. I'm afraid at this point, where the voters really want to punish the steroid era players, they might accidentally be tarnishing or diminishing the idea of being a Hall Of Fame baseball player.
Let me just start out by saying Ron Santo was good. He won Gold Gloves, he was an all star 9 times (don't even get me started on how subjective and meaningless being named an All-Star is throughout baseball history), and he put up overall statistics that helped the Cubs win in the 60's sandwiched around Billy Williams and Ernie Banks. So he was good, on a good team; but was he a HOFer? Nope.
He's not a HOF if we use baseball-reference.com's four main "ink" numbers to judge HOF players:
| Black Ink | Batting - 11 (216), Average HOFer ≈ 27 | |||||||||||
| Gray Ink | Batting - 147 (91), Average HOFer ≈ 144 | |||||||||||
| Hall of Fame Monitor | Batting - 88 (196), Likely HOFer ≈ 100 | |||||||||||
| Hall of Fame Standards | Batting - 41 (148), Average HOFer ≈ 50 |
I like the ink numbers. They do a pretty good job of judging who has HOF numbers and who does not. You could say I'm definitely a "formulaic" statistician. I like formulas to determine and judge talent. They can go so much deeper than surface stats or opinions.
If you look at BR's "Most Similar Batters", none of them are in the HOF, 9 of them aren't even HOF calibur players which should give you a clue at how he stacks up all-time:
- Dale Murphy (875)
- Gary Gaetti (875)
- Ken Boyer (874)
- Ruben Sierra (865)
- Chili Davis (865)
- Bobby Bonilla (863)
- Brian Downing (862)
- Graig Nettles (860)
- Scott Rolen (857)
- Adrian Beltre (855)
It's not even so much Santo that makes me write this article. I'm still upset that Andre Dawson got in last year. I used to always talk about how much I didn't like that Lou Brock was in the Hall Of Fame, because his numbers are really subpar. He was not a very good hitter and made more outs than good plays at the plate. He also had the lowest OBP of any player in the HOF, until Andre Dawson.
Andre Dawson had an abysmal .323 career OBP. Despite that, his HOF candidacy using the ink and monitor numbers actually looks better than Santo's:
| Black Ink | Batting - 11 (216), Average HOFer ≈ 27 |
| Gray Ink | Batting - 164 (68), Average HOFer ≈ 144 |
| Hall of Fame Monitor | Batting - 118 (124), Likely HOFer ≈ 100 |
| Hall of Fame Standards | Batting - 44 (118), Average HOFer ≈ 50 |
I dislike that either guy got in, because neither one was really of the quality that the HOF is supposed to be about. The HOF should be the 1% best guys to ever play the game. This trend of putting "good" players in the HOF started in 2009 with the induction of Joe Gordon. Joe Gordon was a good player from the 40's who lost some years due to military service. I respect that, lots of guys did that and it was a great thing they did.
However, what gets me upset is that he was just that, good. He wasn't great. Sure he won a MVP but he wasn't great. The voting that year must have been rigged. If you look at the 1942 MVP voting, you can clearly see that Ted Williams destroyed him at every category. Gordon's ink and HOF ranks shake out worse than Santo or Dawson:
| Black Ink | Batting - 2 (598), Average HOFer ≈ 27 | ||
| Gray Ink | Batting - 111 (189), Average HOFer ≈ 144 | ||
| Hall of Fame Monitor | Batting - 88 (199), Likely HOFer ≈ 100 | ||
| Hall of Fame Standards | Batting - 31 (290), Average HOFer ≈ 50 |
When I look at these guys getting in over Dale Murphy or Fred McGriff, it just makes me upset. Dale Murphy won 2 MVPs and his ink and HOF numbers look better than all three of the above:
| Black Ink | Batting - 31 (55), Average HOFer ≈ 27 |
| Gray Ink | Batting - 147 (91), Average HOFer ≈ 144 |
| Hall of Fame Monitor | Batting - 116 (126), Likely HOFer ≈ 100 |
| Hall of Fame Standards | Batting - 34 (220), Average HOFer ≈ 50 |
So who's in charge of the veteran vote? Hank Aaron, Al Kaline, Ralph Kiner, Tommy Lasorda, Juan Marichal, Brooks Robinson, Don Sutton, Billy Williams. They made this happen. They tarnished the HOF's reputation as the best of the best players only. Since we've had one "good" player get in now for the last three years, who will be next year's inductee? Gil Hodges? Tony Oliva? Why stop at three...let's make an entire Hall of Very Good wing.
