Vet Committee votes for no one

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • rubisco43
    All Star
    • Feb 2003
    • 4372

    #16
    Re: Vet Committee votes for no one

    Originally posted by PodSquad
    What, did they move the fences in as the years went by?

    The point is, that both players were good in their prime, but not good enough for immortalization in the Hall.

    For the guy that claims Santo was better than Brooks Robinson...did you happen to notice the SIXTEEN Gold Gloves stat?

    Its okay Cubs fans, weep not, as soon as old Ronny bites the dust he will get in.
    I agree that Santo doesn't belong. But we can argue this topic over and over again, but my stance will stay that 30 HR's in the 60's and 70's meant much more and was harder to do than it was in the 90's and now.
    http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=805002

    Comment

    • chippered
      MVP
      • Aug 2002
      • 1528

      #17
      Re: Vet Committee votes for no one

      Originally posted by PodSquad
      What, did they move the fences in as the years went by?

      The point is, that both players were good in their prime, but not good enough for immortalization in the Hall.

      For the guy that claims Santo was better than Brooks Robinson...did you happen to notice the SIXTEEN Gold Gloves stat?

      Its okay Cubs fans, weep not, as soon as old Ronny bites the dust he will get in.
      Given the fact that I typed that post, yeah, I did notice Gold Glove discrepancy. What I posted was my opinion. Like the previous poster stated, this debate could go on forever, but to each his own.

      Also, to disregard the differences in eras is the same as saying a player that plays his home game in coors for a full career is equal to one that plays a career in tiger stadium. There is a difference, and it needs to be acknowledged. Good debate though.
      GT = Chippered

      Brewers League Baseball
      Indianapolis Clowns

      Comment

      • CMH
        Making you famous
        • Oct 2002
        • 26203

        #18
        Re: Vet Committee votes for no one

        The Santo/Robinson argument is silly.

        It's silly because the only reason people say Robinson is better than Santo is because people say he's better than Santo. That's silliest argument I've ever heard.

        In this thread, I saw that comment three times from three different people. "Robinson was considered the best 3B of his time. Santo was not!"

        That's why Santo doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame? I didn't realize that news worthy opinions or the media's humping of your bat meant HOF induction.

        The stats clearly show that Santo was comparable to Brooks Robinson.

        The Gold Glove comparison is also silly. People acting like 5 Gold Gloves is easy to win. It's in common agreement that Santo was one of the best defensive 3B in baseball history. So, why use Gold Gloves as a comparison? Besides, everyone knows that Gold Gloves are slightly overrated to begin with considering the voting process is a joke. (Heck, Derek Jeter has 3 Gold Gloves. Derek Jeter! If that doesn't say much about the award, what does?)

        Santo played during the same period as Brooks Robinson.

        I'm not going to argue either way for the guy, but at least present solid reasons for his not being inducted. Don't give baseball fans the "He's not Brooks Robinson" reasoning. That's just dumb.
        Last edited by CMH; 03-01-2007, 10:22 PM.
        "It may well be that we spectators, who are not divinely gifted as athletes, are the only ones able to truly see, articulate and animate the experience of the gift we are denied. And that those who receive and act out the gift of athletic genius must, perforce, be blind and dumb about it -- and not because blindness and dumbness are the price of the gift, but because they are its essence." - David Foster Wallace

        "You'll not find more penny-wise/pound-foolish behavior than in Major League Baseball." - Rob Neyer

        Comment

        • PodSquad
          Banned
          • Jul 2005
          • 460

          #19
          Re: Vet Committee votes for no one

          Originally posted by YankeePride_YP
          The Santo/Robinson argument is silly.

          It's silly because the only reason people say Robinson is better than Santo is because people say he's better than Santo. That's silliest argument I've ever heard.

          In this thread, I saw that comment three times from three different people. "Robinson was considered the best 3B of his time. Santo was not!"

          That's why Santo doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame? I didn't realize that news worthy opinions or the media's humping of your bat meant HOF induction.


          The stats clearly show that Santo was comparable to Brooks Robinson.

          The Gold Glove comparison is also silly. People acting like 5 Gold Gloves is easy to win. It's in common agreement that Santo was one of the best defensive 3B in baseball history. So, why use Gold Gloves as a comparison? Besides, everyone knows that Gold Gloves are slightly overrated to begin with considering the voting process is a joke. (Heck, Derek Jeter has 3 Gold Gloves. Derek Jeter! If that doesn't say much about the award, what does?)

          Santo played during the same period as Brooks Robinson.

          I'm not going to argue either way for the guy, but at least present solid reasons for his not being inducted. Don't give baseball fans the "He's not Brooks Robinson" reasoning. That's just dumb.
          Minus about 11 gold gloves, you might be right.

          Like I said, even Ventura won SIX gold gloves and most people dont think **** about him. Show me why Santo deserves it, you act like you want to, but stop completely short of it.


          Being considered the second best 3rd baseman of your time is meaningless.
          Last edited by PodSquad; 03-02-2007, 03:38 AM.

          Comment

          • wang_chi7
            Rookie
            • Sep 2004
            • 217

            #20
            Re: Vet Committee votes for no one

            Originally posted by YankeePride_YP
            The Santo/Robinson argument is silly.

            It's silly because the only reason people say Robinson is better than Santo is because people say he's better than Santo. That's silliest argument I've ever heard.

            In this thread, I saw that comment three times from three different people. "Robinson was considered the best 3B of his time. Santo was not!"

            That's why Santo doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame? I didn't realize that news worthy opinions or the media's humping of your bat meant HOF induction.

            The stats clearly show that Santo was comparable to Brooks Robinson.

            The Gold Glove comparison is also silly. People acting like 5 Gold Gloves is easy to win. It's in common agreement that Santo was one of the best defensive 3B in baseball history. So, why use Gold Gloves as a comparison? Besides, everyone knows that Gold Gloves are slightly overrated to begin with considering the voting process is a joke. (Heck, Derek Jeter has 3 Gold Gloves. Derek Jeter! If that doesn't say much about the award, what does?)

            Santo played during the same period as Brooks Robinson.

            I'm not going to argue either way for the guy, but at least present solid reasons for his not being inducted. Don't give baseball fans the "He's not Brooks Robinson" reasoning. That's just dumb.
            Thats what the HOF is though really, isn't it? Its just opinions on a guy's career. There is no mathematical equation to figure it out, its all about reputation. Right or wrong, thats how it goes down.

            Robinson was a no brainer because of his defensive play. Nobody in his time is in his class in that category. The Gold Glove can be kind of a joke, but its no mistake when a guy wins it 16 times. He also had longevity on his side- 23 years in the majors.

            What it comes down to is that you would have a hard time finding too many people arguing Robinson's induction. Just here on this board there is a lot of resistance to Santo getting in. That says a lot right there.

            Look, I'm a Cubs fan. But Santo is just a no. He's in that class just below the HOF- the hall of very good. There are much better players to argue for inductions- Blylevin, Flood, Oliva, and probably Rice and Gossage.

            Comment

            Working...