Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • A Hall Of Fame Case For Johan Santana


    Seth Stohs

    Over the weekend, the Minnesota Twins celebrated their Hall of Fame weekend. On Saturday, Michael Cuddyer was inducted, and then Sunda it was Andy MacPhail’s turn. The fun part about the Hall of Fame (baseball’s or the Twins) is the conversation that it can create.

    While watching Bartolo Colon on Sunday, the name of Johan Santana was mentioned. Of course, I mentioned about how Colon ‘stole’ the 2005 Cy Young from Santana. As baseball conversations tend to do, it shifted again, this time to a comparison between Johan Santana and Sandy Koufax.

    Koufax, of course, was a Hall of Famer. He was one of baseball’s greatest pitchers ever for a six year period in the early 1960s. His full career went 12 years, but his final six seasons were incredible. He retired while at the top of his game. He was just 30 years old and coming off a great season in which he won his third Cy Young Award. However, he had chronic arthritis in his left arm. He feared it would become increasingly worse until he eventually couldn’t use his left hand.

    Santana was a Rule 5 pick for the Twins. He spent a couple of seasons in the early ‘90s working primarily out of the Twins bullpen. But he had an eight year stretch where no one in baseball was as good.His final five seasons with the Twins, and his first year as a member of the Mets were six incredible seasons.

    So, how do the careers, and those “peak seasons” of Johan Santana and Sandy Koufax match up? Let’s find out.

    Image courtesy of Gregory Fisher, USA Today

    Twins Video

    It’s interesting to note that both Johan Santana and Sandy Koufax pitched in 12 major league seasons. For Koufax, his career spanned 1955 through 1966. For Santana, he pitched in the big leagues from 2000 until 2012. He missed all of 2011 which is why he pitched 12 seasons. Let’s just put some of the numbers out there between the two and see how they line up.

    ccs-19-0-15005700-1503551837.png

    Santana had a stretch of five seasons during which he did not pitch less than 219 innings. During Koufax’s career, he had a stretch where he threw over 300 innings in four out of six seasons. The times were different, of course, as Bert Blyleven informs us, frequently. Santana had 15 complete games during his career. Koufax went the distance 15 or more times in five seasons. That’s why Koufax had more wins and more losses. He rarely had to rely on his bullpen finishing what he started.

    Their WHIPs are pretty much identical. Koufax gave up fewer hits, but Santana had much better control. They both struck out about a batter an inning.

    It’s interesting to note that while Koufax gave up nearly a half run less per nine innings over his career, Santana’s ERA+ is actually 5% better than Koufax’s. Why? In the late 1950s, offense was down. In 1961, baseball raised the mound in an attempt to help hitters. It worked, and yet run scoring was still not high. Santana was pitching during an era when offense was prevalent, for whatever reasons you want to credit.

    Looking at the totality of their careers, one would have to say that they are very much equivalent, particularly when adjusting for era. Koufax was very much an average big league pitcher over his first six seasons, and then he became one of the best pitchers ever over a six year stretch to close out his career. Santana had two years of adjusting to the big leagues after being forced to be in the big leagues because of the Rule 5 status. His second year also wasn’t great. However, from 2002 through 2010, he never had an ERA+ under 129 (29% better than average). Santana’s stretch of success was a couple of years longer than Koufax’s. Unfortunately, once Santana got hurt in 2011, his career was basically over. He tried multiple comebacks but was not successful.

    Both great left-handers had careers that ended far too soon. Koufax made that decision as a 30-year-old. Santana’s great stretch ended as a 31-year-old. Koufax benefited - in terms of long-term status - because he didn’t end his career with injury. He quit too early, rather than too late. Santana, for many, may have hurt his stock by pitching hurt and trying to come back for so long.

    One of those things that people like to look at is a player’s peak. How good was a player, or a pitcher, when he was at his best. As it relates to the Hall of Fame, the minimum peak seems to be five or six years.

    While I noted above that Koufax's peak was a six-year period, Santana's was an eight-year period. But to be equal, I just looked at Santana's best six-year stretch.

    ccs-19-0-44432200-1503553992.png

    As you recall from the 12-year comparison, Koufax has a better ERA during his peak years than Santana did. In this case, Koufax also was better relative to the league. He was 56% better than league average while Santana was still very impressive at 50% better than the league. They both gave up right around one base runner per inning. Koufax's control was significantly better during the great half of his career, with a walk rate of nearly one less per nine innings.

    They both recorded a lot of strikeouts. While hitters a decade ago didn't strike out quite as much as they do now, they struck out a lot more than they did in the '60s. In other words, 9.4 K/9 in the '60s is more impressive than 9.4 K/9 in the '00s because fifty years ago, batters took a lot of pride in not striking out.

    LEAGUE LEADERSHIP/AWARDS

    Sandy Koufax - Led the league in strikeouts four times. Led in innings pitched twice. Led in ERA five times and ERA+ twice. He led the league in WHIP four times. He led the league in K/9 six times. He won three Cy Young awards and finished in the top three four times.

    Johan Santana - Led the league in strikeouts three times. He led in innings pitched twice. He led the league in ERA and ERA+ three times. He also led the league in WHIP three times. He led the league in K/9 three times. He won two Cy Young Awards and finished in the top three four times.

    SUMMARY

    While this is a very quick analysis and comparison of the two pitchers, I think the high-level data does show that Sandy Koufax was a little better statistically in his era during his peak than Santana was. Looking at their full careers, the argument could certainly be made that Santana had the better career.

    Wins Above Replacement - bWAR, Koufax led 53.1 to 50.7. Koufax has a bigger advantage in fWAR (54.5 to 45.3). And again, 46.5 of Koufax's fWAR was in those six peak years.

    So yes, Sandy Koufax was the better of the two pitchers. But it does seem that even us, Twins fans, may not realize how great Johan Santana was. I watched him pitch. I knew he was good, but to look at the numbers, and realize just how similar Santana's career was to Koufax's, it surprised me.

    Obviously Johan Santana will be a member of the Twins Hall of Fame, likely the first time he appears on the ballot. But maybe the Twins fan base should also start pushing the candidacy of Johan Santana for the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown too.

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

     

    Kevin Brown does have a strong case, and I'd vote for him without a problem. Brown is especially interesting since his peak came after he turned 30; he should have won a Cy in 1998, and probably should have won it in 1996 too. (and I think if he does, his case gets a lot easier)

     

    Guidry is a little tougher: his peak was shorter than johan's and he actually had a longer career, while compiling a lower bWAR. His 1978 season is amazing, but he never cleared a 7 bWAR season again. Johan was the better pitcher in my mind. But Guidry certainly wouldn't be anywhere near the worst pitcher in the HoF if he ended up there some day.

    When fans stump for Morris in the HOF I understand it but just like you think Santana was the better pitcher I think Guidry was better than Morris.   I am ok if they all get in.   Yes, 1978 was a big reason for putting him out there and is part of my star shining brighter but for not as long position.    I don't know why I got to see so many of his games that year or why I cared but he was amazing.   25-3 record which I know fans pooh pooh but these were earned.   He was 22 games over .500 on his own on a team that needed a game 163 to get into the playoffs.    30 of 35 quality starts, 9 complete game shutouts.   Every month under 3.00 ERA and only two months above a 2.00.     Fact that he was 5'11" and 160 lbs was pretty cool also.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'd bet Santana gets in someday on a Veteran Committee, it'll probably take his contemporaries who personally knew how good he was to vote him in.

     

    Even more so than their postseason glory, I think the thing that Koufax and Puckett had that Santana didn't was a baseball-crushing sudden announcement of premature retirement. Had Santana's career abruptly and very clearly ended following the 2010 season, or even more dramatically after his no-hitter late in that season, I'd guess people would view him much more similarly to Koufax and Puckett. His retirement has just been too drawn out, he never got that sudden rush of sympathy and resentment which lingers eternal with athletes cut short in their prime.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    We actually didn't "have" to chase down Detroit that September. We were basically tied for the wild card spot at the start of the month, and finished up 6 games in that race..

    . Don't mean to argue, and I think we are both discussing a great body of work all year long. But they did have to chase down Detroit (unless I am dreaming) they caught Detroit on the last day of the season. It helped that Detroit went 4-6 their last 10 games and lost 5 in a row at the end as well while the Twins went 6-4 in their last 10 including winning on the last day to over take Detroit. I biasedly include Santana's September of work that year to include his Oct 1 start in which the Twins lost 3-2, but Santana gave the Twins offense every chance to win leaving after 8 innings giving up just 2 runs.
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    . Don't mean to argue, and I think we are both discussing a great body of work all year long. But they did have to chase down Detroit (unless I am dreaming) they caught Detroit on the last day of the season. It helped that Detroit went 4-6 their last 10 games and lost 5 in a row at the end as well while the Twins went 6-4 in their last 10 including winning on the last day to over take Detroit. I biasedly include Santana's September of work that year to include his Oct 1 start in which the Twins lost 3-2, but Santana gave the Twins offense every chance to win leaving after 8 innings giving up just 2 runs.
    . 2006 standings CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD RS RA DIFF STRK L10

    xMinn Twins 96 66 .593 - 54-27 42-39 801 683 +118 W1 6-4

    yDetroit Tigers 95 67 .586 1 46-35 49-32 822 675 +147 L5 4-6

    ChiWhite Sox 90 72 .556 6 49-32 41-40 868 794 +74 L1 5-5

    Cleve Indians 78 84 .481 18 44-37 34-47 870 782 +88 W4 8-2

    Kan Royals 62 100 .383 34 34-47 28-53 757 971 -214 W3 4-6

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You still have to look at a Jack Morris. Dominant pitcher of his decade/era. He gave up runs (like Bert did homers), but he was a stallion out there on the mound. 

     

    So longevity is not always an issues, either. 

     

    It's such a crazy world where the baseball writers vote for these things, especially when the terms of a baseball writer may no longer cross generations of players.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    . Don't mean to argue, and I think we are both discussing a great body of work all year long. But they did have to chase down Detroit (unless I am dreaming)

    They chased down Detroit in 2006, obviously, but they didn't "have" to. Had they not caught Detroit, the Twins could/would have won the wild card by a decent margin (as Detroit did, and they actually made the World Series that year).

     

    That finish was more fun than it was meaningful. Basically just playoff seeding by mid-September. 2009 was the more meaningful September chase of Detroit (and the one that Detroit would regret).

    Edited by spycake
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think he makes the HOF simply because I don't expect many people who were better to be up for consideration during his years of eligibility....

     

    Does he deserve it? Sure, but I understand the argument against.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...