- 07/15/2012, 08:15PM ET
CuntryBlumpkin said 07/15, 08:15 PM
When Johan Santana retires, SHOULD he be inducted into the HOF?
I say yes.
It's true that Santana doesn't have, and with his injury problems of recent years, probably won't have the compiled stats most think of when they think HOF. He'll be lucky to get 200 wins, 3000 strikeouts is out of reach unless he can stay healthy the rest of his career, but the numbers he has put up when healthy and during his peak should warrant an induction into the HOF.
There was a 5 year stretch in Santana's career where he was arguably, and in my opinion was the best pitcher in baseball, and that's something that can't be overlooked.
During Santana's best years he lead his league in ERA 3x, WHIP 4x, strikeouts 3x and won 2 Cy Young Awards and was robbed of another.
He's been very successful in both leagues, and the argument is between he and Halladay as to who the best starting pitcher of the 2000s was. It's rare to see a p[itcher that gets so many strikeouts have the control of Santana. A career K/BB of 3.52 is great, and during his peak years he saw a ration of better than 5 a couple times.
He is HOF material
Mitch_Woulf said 07/15, 10:12 PM
Is Johan Santana a good pitcher? the answer is yes. Was there a time when he was outright nasty? The answer is is still yes. Santana sadly has had a big injury that may keep him out. Santana only has 139 wins right now which isnt near as many as you need to make the Hall of Fame. There have been several really good pitchers that have not made the Hall of Fame, including Bret Saberhagen and Denny McClain both won 2 Cy Young's and did not end up making the HOF.
The Hall of Fame is not chosen from a 5 year stretch of dominance, it is judged over a whole career. Should Doc Gooden be in the Hall of Fame? He had a great 5 year stretch were he was a Cy Young winner, 4 time All Star led the league in Strikeouts twice, and had a great ERA. But he didnt have the numbers a Hall of famer should have when he was done with his career.
Santana isnt near as dominant this year coming back from Tommy John Sugary as he was in years past, which is a shame, it is likely he will never be the same. The Hall of Fame committee, doesnt give free passes if you were good at a time in your career, you need a good long career to make it, especially in baseball.
CuntryBlumpkin said 07/15, 10:23 PM
The issue with comparing Santana to Saberhagen and McLain is for McLain, he had a sharp decline in productivity immediately after MLB lowered the mound, and his best season is known as the year of the pitcher, and really he only had around 3 good seasons, and he didn't meet the HOF requirement of at least 10 full seasons to qualify and as for Saberhagen, though he has 2 Cy Youngs, was never near as dominant as Santana was during his peak seasons.
Santana's situation is more in line with Sandy Koufax's. I know Koufax's peak was more dominant, but Koufax lacked the compiled stats, much like Santana and got in because of his great 5 season peak where he was the best pitcher in the Majors.
Being the best in the majors at your position for an extended period of time, and 5 years is an extended period of time says something about the skill level of the player.
Also keep in mind that Santana is 33 years old, he has some time to get closer to 200 wins and 2500 strikeouts.
You seem to be arguing that Santana won't get voted in. That's not what this TD is about. It's about whether or not he SHOULD be voted in, and I still say he SHOULD.
Mitch_Woulf said 07/15, 11:22 PM
Santana was very good in that five year stretch, but he is not even in the same ball park as Sandy Koufax. Koufax led the league in ERA his last 5 Seasons, winning 3 Cy Young's leading the league in WHIP 4 and Strikeouts 3 of his last 5 years. The kind of dominance Koufax had was arguably better then any 5 year stretch by a pitcher in baseball History. Something Koufax and Santana had in common was their big success really didnt start till they were 25. Koufax retired very early unlike Santana. Koufax also had 40 shutouts.
Saying that Santana was the best maybe 2nd best ( Halladay ) is true, and yes 5 years is a long time. 5 years is not a career though. Santana's stats are still good and above average, but especially in MLB 11-9 and 13-9 ( His last 2 seasons ) Consistently are not going to make the cut for the Hall of Fame .
It is true that Santana will be in the Majors for at least a few more years, barring any injury's, even 175 wins may be a stretch at this time though.
The Baseball Hall of Fame is very hard to get into, and with his stats he just shouldn't be a Hall of Famer with just 5 great seasons.
CuntryBlumpkin said 07/16, 11:57 AM
You can say Santana wasn't near as dominant as Koufax, and while I do agree, he lead the league in WHIP and strikeouts in the same amount of seasons as Koufax, and Koufax was pitching with a higher mound and never had to face a DH. And while Koufax's era was better, their era's compared to the rest of the league are essentially the same during their peak.
Dizzy Dean is another good comparison to Santana. Was great for a 5-6 year period, but injuries sidetracked his career, but he still made it into the HOF.
IMO, when discussing whether or not a player should be voted into the HOF, the prime seasons should be the main seasons looked at. Injuries and old age might skew stats towards the end of a career and inexperience and nerves can skew them early in a career. Santana's prime years were arguably the best of the last decade.
If it were only a 2-3 year stretch, I could see not voting him in, but 5 years is a long enough span to induct him. Being the best at your position for an extended period of time should get you in the HOF.
Santana's stats are great, he just doesn't have the compiled stats.
Mitch_Woulf said 07/16, 01:14 PM
Unlike Santana though, after the age of 25 Koufax was dominant every year until his early retirement, Koufax had 4 No hitters and 23 one hitters, that is the definition of dominance which shows why Sandy is deserving.
It is unfair to compare Dizzy Dean to Johan Santana. First off, Dean played in the 1930's. Everyone knew who Dizzy Dean was,perhaps the most popular pitcher in ML History. Dean played in a different time. If you want to make a comparison, Dean had 30 wins in 1934, along with 29CG in 35, and led the league in strikeouts his first 4 years. Dean was probably voted in because of what he did for baseball and how he was a household name, he drew fans and made more people interested in the game of baseball.
It is true that the prime of your career is looked at when being looked at for the Hall of Fame they still do look long term, where Santana's stats have not been completly lights out the past few years. Ryan Braun has been amazing his last 5 and a half years,up there with the best,if he gets injured and comes back and is average the rest of his career, ends up with lets say 1750 hits and 300 Home Runs, he would not make the Hall,why would Johan be any different?
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia