Bleacher Bums Forum

A significant point he made is that the Cubs already have three members of that team in the Hall of Fame, despite the fact they never won anything.  Granted, Banks at the time was near the end of his career, but Fergie, Williams, and Santo were at their peaks. 

It may be blasphemous, but I think Aramis Ramirez is better than Santo ever was.

You have to consider the era in which Santo played.  Relative to his peers, Santo was probably as good an offensive player as ARam.  And he was a much better defensive player.

I saw Santo play throughout his career.  Santo was inconsistent.  He had his up and down years.

Aram has been a consistent masher throughout his career, even considering his slow starts in 10 and 11. 

I agree on the fielding aspect, but Aram is better than average.  He doesn't dive much any more after shoulder injuries, but has really quick reactions, a strong arm, and is good on slow hit balls as well.  He also knows when to eat the ball instead of making ill advised throws.  Take note, Starlin.

In his 10 seasons as a full time MLer, ARam has had an OPS over .900 five times, an OPS less than .800 twice, and an OPS in the .800s three times.  In Santo's first 10 years as a full time MLer (1961-70), he had an OPS over .900 three times, an OPS less than .800 twice, and an OPS in the .800s five times.  During this time, ARam has averaged just over 30 HR/season and Santo average 27.  I can't agree that ARam is clearly the superior offensive player relative to his peers.

When comparing players of different eras, I find that I give the nod to the old guys.  Santo played at a time when the league had 2/3 as many major league teams and baseball was still attracting the best athletes rather than sharing them with football or basketball.   I think a guy hitting .300 in 1963 was accomplishing much more than a guy hitting .300 in 2010.  Shorter mound, no choking up with two strikes, even better groundskeeping and ballparks are also little advantages today.  There are probably 250 players in the majors today who wouldn't even have had a shot in 1960.

In his 10 seasons as a full time MLer, ARam has had an OPS over .900 five times, an OPS less than .800 twice, and an OPS in the .800s three times.  In Santo's first 10 years as a full time MLer (1961-70), he had an OPS over .900 three times, an OPS less than .800 twice, and an OPS in the .800s five times.  During this time, ARam has averaged just over 30 HR/season and Santo average 27.  I can't agree that ARam is clearly the superior offensive player relative to his peers.

The raw OPS number or HR figures or BA can only be put in context by comparing them against the average and best performances of the era when each player played.  To do that the easiest way is to look at OPS+.

Folks it is not even close.  It is not blasphemy to say ARam is better.  It is simply ignorant.

ARam has a career OPS+ to date of 113.  Santo had a career OPS of 125, and that included his abysmal final season at age 34, one year older than ARam, when Santo had an OPS+ of 69.  Santo had a peak OPS+ of 164.  Another of 161.  A third of 153 and another of 146.  Those are steller years, and he was in the top ten for the league each of those season.  ARam's best has been 138 (not as good as Santo's 4th best), and he has never been in the top ten in the league.  (ARam right now is only one year younger than Santo was after Santo's last year.)

Santo was also in the top 10 in slugging five times, finishing 2nd once.  ARam has been in the top 10 four times (and that counts this year, when he is currently 10th), but never better than 6th.

Santo led the league in walks four times.  ARam has never place in the top ten.

Santo led the league in OBP twice and was in the tip ten 7 times.  ARam was in the top ten only once (8th).

Santo was top 10 in games played 8 times.  ARam not once.

Santo was in the top 10 in total bases five times, twice in the top five.  ARam 3 times, one 7th and two 8ths, and that is counting this year when he is now 8th.

Santo was in the top 10 in HR 7 times, twice in the top five.  ARam was 8th one year and 9th another.

Santo was in the top 10 in RBI 8 times and 2nd twice.  ARam was in the top 10 4 times (counting this season) and was never better than 6th.

And there is no point in even trying to compare their gloves or their leadership.

Again.  It is not blasphemy to say ARam is better than Santo was.  It is simply ignorance.

Jes sure has a lot of time on his hands.

Not sure I follow that logic.

I saw Santo play throughout his career.  Santo was inconsistent.  He had his up and down years.

Aram has been a consistent masher throughout his career, even considering his slow starts in 10 and 11. 

Jes sure has a lot of time on his hands.

At least enough time to address such foolishness.

From 1963 to 1973, 11 seasons from age 23 to 33, Santo had an OPS+ of 109 or better every season, and all but three years he had an OPS+ about 125, which was his career average.  During that period, Santo had a best year to worst year range of  55 OPS+ points.  http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/santoro01.shtml

For the same age period, 2001 to 2011 for ARam, ARam has had five different years in which his OPS+ was lower than Santo's worst season during the comparable 11 year period of their careers.  And twice ARam has had an OPS+ below 100, with one particularly bad season when he had an OPS+ of 72 in 522 ABs.  During that period he had a best to worst performance range of 64 OPS+ points.  http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/santoro01.shtml

Santo was clearly the better glove.  He was a better leader and role model.  He was more durable.  He was more dependable.  He had better peak years.  He had a higher career performance average.  And he was actually MORE consistent than ARam.

Please do not get me wrong.

I like ARam.  I think he would be an excellent supporting player on a strong team, and I believe he deserved to make the All Star team this season.

But thinking he has outperformed Santo on ANY level is nonsense.

It is hard to envision any statistical analysis that could show that Ramirez has had a better career than Santo.  Not only was he an excellent defender, while Ramirez is barely adequate, Santo had a much better offensive career, as well as much more consistency.