No Hall for Santo

Here's the voting results for the post-1942 players:

Santo (39 votes, 60.9 percent), Jim Kaat (38, 59.4 percent), Tony Oliva (33, 51.6 percent), Gil Hodges (28, 43.8 percent), Joe Torre (19, 29.7 percent), Maury Wills (15, 23.4 percent), Luis Tiant (13, 20.3 percent), Vada Pinson (12, 18.8 percent), Al Oliver (nine, 14.1 percent), Dick Allen (seven, 10.9 percent).

Thanks for the list, dcf. Santo was 9 votes short.

This just sickens me. He will never get in now, this was his best chance. If guys who played with him won't put him in, for sure players that came later won't because the stats srink over time compared to current stats. I think it is pretty clear that at least 40% of the current members look at it as an exclusive club for which they do not want any new members. Mike Schmidt was quoted once as saying that anyone that didn't get in on the first ballot should never get in. I think Santo had a higher percent when the writers and broadcast guys were inlcuded in the voting.

4 straight now that the HOF members haven't added any to their ranks. I wonder if some just won't vote for any as they want their own induction to be more unique. Self serving protectionism?

Of course, what we're all thinking is, who knows if the poor guy will even be alive in two years when he is next up for a vote? The pathetic irony is that it may take him passing away to cause the voters to look at him anew.

Horrible. Just horrible.

Sadly, I agree at this point I think the only thing that could change the outcome, other than a change in the voting system, is Santo's death. At this point, I just don't see what happens in his lifetime that changes the perception.

I also wonder if Santo's broadcasting career helps or hurts his case at this point. I mean, being in the booth does keep his name out in the public eye, but I also think it may make it more difficult to take him seriously in the baseball/HoF community.

I am starting to wonder if it's not something more devious. A big FU to the sabermatic community that insists Santo should be a slam dunk.

It's certainly odd. The veteran's commitees have made more mistakes over the years than the writers - but all the groups seem to agree that Santo's a bit short.

Santo did less well in terms of percentages than he did the last time around, as did Kaat, Oliva, Hodges, Wills and Oliver. Torre, Pinson, Tiant, Oliver and Allen all did marginally better.

The 2007 results: Santo (57 votes, 69.5%), Jim Kaat (52, 63.4%), Gil Hodges (50, 61%), Tony Oliva (47, 57.3%), Maury Wills (33, 40.2%), Joe Torre (26, 31.7%), Don Newcombe (17, 20.7%), Vada Pinson (16, 19.5%), Roger Maris (15, 18.3%), Lefty O'Doul (15, 18.3%), Luis Tiant (15, 18.3%), Curt Flood (14, 17.1%), Al Oliver (14, 17.1%), Mickey Vernon (14, 17.1%), Minnie Minoso (12, 14.6%), Cecil Travis (12, 14.6%), Dick Allen (11, 13.4%), Marty Marion (11, 13.4%), Joe Gordon (10, 12.2%), Ken Boyer (9, 11%), Mickey Lolich (8, 9.8%), Wes Ferrell (7, 8.5%), Sparky Lyle (6, 7.3%), Carl Mays (6, 7.3%), Thurman Munson (6, 7.3%), Rocky Colavito (5, 6.1%) and Bobby Bonds (1, 1.2%).

The issue is not with how Joe Morgan votes. The issue is with how this is set up. All of the changes seem designed, perversely, to make it less (rather than more) likely that the VC will ever elect another player. Limiting the selections to ten this time and limiting the electors to living HOF members only benefitted the players on the lower end of the voting table.

Joe Gordon? Nice player, but he was not as good as Bobby Grich, who probably won't ever be on the ballot ever again. Gordon had a career OPS+ of 120, but only 1530 career hits. He did miss two years to the war, but he's still pretty short on counting stats. Grich's OPS+ was 125. I'm shocked that this is the best they can do.

" to make it less (rather than more) likely that the VC will ever elect another player"

But the belief was the change was to make it more likely , correct?

It's a shame Santo didn't make it in, and it is even more of a shame that the system is now constructed in a way that makes it even more difficult for veterans to get elected. The idea behind the veterans committee is to take a look back through the prism of history to recognize players that we *now* appreciate more than their contemporary baseball writers did. Santo fits that bill, and that is what the sabermetric community has been showing.

Having all alive HOFs vote now makes it more of a popularity contest now than it should be. Had the Cubs made a playoff run this last year, it could have led to a mini tidal-wave for Santo that might have gotten him over the hump.

This should have been Santo's best chance to get in. Now, I'm not sure that he'll ever get in unless his death earns him a few extra votes.

I think the HOF understands that the Veterans Committee is a problem for them. They tried to change the way the voting was done, but the result was the same. It will be interesting to see if additional changes are made. Unfortunately, it may be too late for Ronny.

I continue to be amazed that there are people who presumably know baseball who feel Santo doesn't belong in the Hall. By almost any measure, he is one of the best third basemen in the history of the game.

The "veterans committee" is really a dismal example of the old saw, Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

Personally, I think the HoF has too many mariginal players in it. So maybe the best use of the veterans committee would be to have them vote on players already in the hall. Given their track record, that would reduce the size of the committee by 19 or 20 players.

for bankruptcy protection

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28101775/

It's interesting that only players and managers make up the "veterans committee." Why not add the living Frick and Spink award winners to the committee? Including journalists like Peter Gammons, Murray Chass and Rick Hummel on the committee, as well as broadcasters such as Bob Uecker, Jerry Coleman and Dave Niehaus could make a difference for someone like Santo.

Maybe it's simply his personality at this point that is keepng him out...from the heel click after a win to having a short fuse...maybe his contemporary players just don't like the guy very much, and that's blocking him from the 5-10 additional votes he needs.

Timmer, this is the first time it was only players and managers. Last time all of the others (newspaper writers, radio. tv, etc.) WERE included in the voting.