Johan Santana’s Cooperstown Case: The Puckett Clause

I agree with you Mr Christie.

To me, that is exactly where Tony O and Jim Kaat are too.

Injuries derailed their outstanding careers. None of the three would be the worst at their position if they were in the Hall.

What's a bit funny is that because the writers completely screwed the pooch during the 2005 CY Young voting, then can say he only won two CYs. I Imagine three might have gotten him in. 

A better, more obvious comparison is Sandy Koufax. Of course, one thing Koufax has (and so did Puckett actually) is multiple World Series rings. Not saying that no one without that can get in, but when a guy is borderline, that matters. It did with Bert. It may still with Morris.

What's a bit funny is that because the writers completely screwed the pooch during the 2005 CY Young voting, then can say he only won two CYs. I Imagine three might have gotten him in. 

i prefer light shining brighter over lesser light shining longer.    3 awards does seem to be a pretty good threshold for Cy Youngs and batting titles.     If a guy got three of those he should be in even if he only played 3 seasons.    That is my case for Oliva and Mauer.   Santana should be a shoe in with 3 Cy Young's.   The fact that he  only has two but should have had 3 or maybe even 4 (2008) is what makes him a borderline guy, IMO.   No tears if he doesn't get in.    You can make a case, but it is still borderline.

Re: the Puckett clause:

 

Check out the Tony Oliva Clause, the Doc Gooden Clause, the Fernando Valenzuela Clause, the Mike Scott Clause and the Ron Guidry Clause as well.

 

If those guys are not in the Hall, Johan does not belong either.

Mike Scott >>>>>> Johan ?   I guess the Mike Scott clause, as well as the other pitcher clauses are called t pull the names out of a hat of players who had long careers with a short window of great success. Nothing at all like Sanana's career.

I am a small Hall person, I would not put in Mussina or Shilling and I would not put in Santana.  Loved to watch him, but not an all time great.  

I think Johan is a fair choice. He's a little borderline because the career was so short (only 8 seasons as a full-time starter, only 12 seasons total) but the peak was pretty stunning.

2 Cy's that no one questions. Should have won a 3rd, and would have in today's voting. Could have won a 4th and been a perfectly reasonable choice (2008). Finished top 5 five year in a row. in a row!

Led the league in ERA 3 times, K's 3 times, IPs twice, WHIP four times...the "black type" splattered across his resume is fantastic. Heck his career ERA+ is actually better than Koufax!

Koufax had better post-season success, but also was fortunate that his post-season opportunities primarily came at the same time he peaked as a player. Johan only made three post-season appearances in seasons where he started the full year and had become "Johan": he was great in all of them, so it's not like his post-season record was a mess. Just limited opportunity.

I don't think Johan is a slam dunk, but he was so great and he did do it for an extended period: 5 straight years of being the best damn pitcher in baseball that I think he's a fair choice for the Hall. His case is closer to Koufax than Guidry in my mind. Take the top ten seasons from Guidry and Santana and lay them side-by-side from best to worst: Guidry had exactly 2 seasons that would top Johan's. Johan's 6th best season is roughly as good as Guidry's 2nd best; other than Guidry's ridiculous '78 season the others aren't all that close.

Koufax is a much closer comp; if he's a no-doubt HoFer, Johan at least deserves very very serious consideration. I think the stretch of greatness was long enough he deserves to get in, even without the handful of additional solid years that would have locked it down.

Santana is my all-time favorite Twin. That being said, in a perfect world with a perfect HOF induction process, I don't think he's in.

However, I gave up trying to argue that certain players are not HOF worthy. I think the field is diluted to the point that it's far easier to argue that a guy should be in than shouldn't.

It's the same way I feel about Torii Hunter. He probably shouldn't be in, but hey, why not?

No Jack Morris no Johan Santana.

Puckett received quite a few sympathy votes, no doubt, although he probably didn't have more than one or two good years left in him. He had a good year at 35, but what are the chances that a chubby guy who had played his whole career on the fuzzy concrete still would have been going strong at 37-38? Not really good.

Anyway, his WAR/JAWS and WAR7 peak put him on the level of Fred Lynn and Bernie Williams, but he had the sympathy vote on his side, and he was the face of two World Series champs. (Poor Bernie, just one of the Very Good players on the Yankees dynasty.)

Johan's WAR7 peak puts him right between Dave Stieb and Don Drysdale, not far below Koufax, and just a bit ahead of Luis Tiant, Mike Mussina, Tom Glavine, David Cone, and Justin Verlander. So there is a case that he was about as good as Koufax and Drysdale, although his WAR7 is only tied with Stieb for 62nd all-time, far short of elite level. Was he on the level of Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Greg Maddux? WAR7 says no.

And since Johan doesn't have the legendary World Series performances on his resume, I suppose that he'll go down like Dave Stieb--who also was done in by an injury in his early 30's.

Saberhagen 85-91 won two Cy Youngs and had a third year worth 8 WAR and didn't even receive a vote. 

And Saberhagen probably deserved a little more consideration than he got, but Johan is still the superior pitcher. ('87 Saberhagen should have gotten Cy votes, but Clemens won it and deserved it; Viola was arguably better than Saberhagen that year as well)

ERA+: Saberhagen had four years over 140, Santana had six. Saberhagen had three years over 150, Santana had five. 

Outside of Saberhagen's amazing '89 he rarely led the league in much of anything; Santana had a 5 year run where he was leading the league in K's ERA, ERA+, FIP, WHIP, IPs multiple times.

Santana had a higher, more consistent peak. Saberhagen was able to come back from equally horrid injury to grind out a few extra seasons. Both great pitchers, but I'd put Santana above Saberhagen. Both are clearly superior to jack Morris, who is more likely to get elected.

By the numbers it's a tough sell. But HOF voters don't necessarily go by the numbers. Santana will get votes, probably a lot of them. Was Santana the best pitcher in the game for a few years? Most who can remember would say yes.

Someone on here wrote if Morris isn't in, Santana shouldn't get in either.  I imagine that's why JLease brought Morris into the conversation.

One doesn't even have to look at WAR to slam Morris' credentials. Santana's ERA+136, Morris' ERA+ 105. Santana has two CYs (deserving three for sure, arguably four)Morris has zero (deserving zero)

Morris never led the league in ERA, ERA+, or K/9 and averaged less than 6 K/9 while averaging more than 3 BB/9.

For me, in the end, I would have to vote my conscience and my heart.   If I had a ballot, I would vote Johan in simply on talent alone.   Would a longer career and larger sample size of numbers help make the case stronger?   Absolutely.   But since injuries cut him down in his prime, I would vote what my heart tells me, and that is that he should at least be on my ballet.   The rest I would leave up to the other voters consciences and the Good Lord's will.