Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Satan's Twin
How can anyone say that Santo was better than someone who never had a motion picture camera on them? Get serious. Do you think a few dagurreotype shots by Matthew Brady taken post-civil war showing some of the nifty fielding moves of Home Run Baker at the hot corner would prove he was a better fielder than Santo? Get serious. This argument is lame. The modern players are bigger, faster, stronger and more athletic than their predecessors with better sports equipment, better training facilities, better instructors, etc. Again, NONE of the HOF'ers on your list other than Brooks Robinson was a better fielder than Ron Santo.
|
So if modern day players are better, then Santo loses out to many of the 3rd basemen that play NOW. You dont think the players of 2000 are bigger faster and stronger (if thats what makes one a HOFer) than the players of the late 1960's early 70's? So who needs to get serious?
I was a very big Cubs fan (showing a bit of prejudice here) Sandberg was fantastic. Santo was very good, but HOF... thats really tough. Sandberg is a no-brainer. And I think he was better than Morgan. Considerably.