Why Ken Boyer should be in the Hall of Fame

Ron Santo and his famous heel click (AP photo)

Congratulations to Ron Santo of the Chicago Cubs for being elected to the Hall of Fame.   The Veterans Committee voted overwhelmingly (15 of the 16 possible votes) to induct the former Cubs third baseman in Baseball’s historic shrine next summer.  What will follow may take on an air of  sour grapes, so I want to make this one statement, all by itself, without any conditions or hesitation.   It is a great day for the Chicago Cubs organization, fans, friends and family of one of the most loved Cubs players.   I got the chance to watch Santo in his prime, and he was one heck of a ballplayer.

Now, take a long dramatic pause so that I can continue with the rest of this article.

Ready ?  OK.

The election of Santo should open the door for Ken Boyer, but it won’t.   And that is just wrong.  W-R-O-N-G.  When considering whether a player is worthy of induction into the Hall of Fame, there are a couple of traps you should avoid, but I am unable to do that.

The Maris Effect

Roger Maris

The career of Roger Maris was cut short by an injury (among other things).  If he’d just been able to play longer, his numbers would have easily been good enough to meet the Hall minimums.  It is easy to get caught up in the 61 home runs in 1961 and totally miss that Maris was the best player in the game in 1960 and 1961 and followed that up with a very solid 1962.   He won just one Gold Glove, but should have easily won 2, if not 3 more.   The home runs are an albatross, Maris was a complete player and was one of the best in the game.  He should have been to the decade of the sixties what Mickey Mantle was for the decade before.

Unfortunately, his aggressive playing style led to a series of injuries that caused a huge drop in production following the 1962 season.   It could be that Cardinals fans have a different perspective since we got to see him in his final two seasons, far removed from memories (and sports press) of New York.   We saw a smart player that knew how to move runners up, hit the right cutoff man and field balls cleanly in the outfield.  If only we had been able to see him player earlier, what a sight it would have been.

But those injuries were a part of his career and separate him from Mickey Mantle, who largely avoided them (or played through them) and consistently produced over a much longer period.   It’s why Mantle is in the Hall of Fame and Maris isn’t.

My argument in support of Ken Boyer doesn’t fit in this category.  The difference between Boyer and Ron Santo is not injuries, but military service – and that’s a much different situation.

The Sutter Factor

It’s also somewhat dangerous to use the fact one player was inducted as reasoning for electing another.   Jim Rice, Bert Blyleven and Bruce Sutter are interesting inductees that open up all sorts of comparisons (Vada Pinson, Jerry Reuss, Lee Smith for example).  Of those six names, only Lee Smith deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, in my opinion.   But if we use Jim Rice as benchmark, you have to include some marginal players like Reggie Smith, Richie/Dick Allen, Vada Pinson and Keith Hernandez.   Bert Blyleven should open the door for Jim Kaat, Luis Tiant and maybe even Mike Cuellar (who was a dominating pitcher for half a decade).

For full disclosure, I am going to make heavy use of this in my arguments for Boyer, only because there seems to be overwhelming support for Santo, at least for the moment.

The Case for Ken Boyer

It is scary how similar the careers of the Ken Boyer and Ron Santo really were.  How much ? Let’s take a look.

Ken Boyer Ron Santo
20 9 44 .251 96
21 23 83 .284 121
22 17 83 .227 74
23 25 99 .297 128
24 18 62 .264 94 30 114 .313 164
25 26 98 .306 123 33 101 .285 146
26 19 62 .265 94 30 94 .312 161
27 23 90 .307 121 31 98 .300 153
28 28 94 .309 130 26 98 .246 126
29 32 97 .304 143 29 123 .289 131
30 24 95 .329 135 26 114 .267 115
31 24 98 .291 114 21 88 .267 109
32 24 111 .285 123 17 74 .302 139
33 24 119 .295 130 20 77 .267 112
34 13 75 .260 90 5 41 .221 69
35 14 61 .266 101
36 7 34 .249 100
37 6 41 .257 109
38 0 4 .206 49
Tot 282 1,141 .287 116 342 1,331 .277 125

Looking at the two players by age, you can learn a few things.

  • Both players were very good hitters.
  • Boyer generally for higher average, Santo with more power.
  • Some of Santo’s power is obviously influenced by playing more games at Wrigley Field (216 HR at home, 126 on the road).  Boyer hit 148 at home, 134 on the road.
  • Santo had a few exceptional seasons (1964, 1966, 1967).  Boyer was more consistent.
  • Both players won 5 Gold Gloves
  • Both players were routinely among the top in MVP voting, Boyer won the award in 1964
  • Santo’s career came to an abrupt end, probably due to the effects of diabetes.
  • Boyer stayed very productive until injuries finally ended his career.  Don’t underestimate Boyer’s age 35 season – he was the best hitter on a very bad Mets team.

There is one more difference, and this is perhaps the biggest, and why we are having this discussion.  Santo’s career started much earlier than Boyer’s and it’s a big part of why Boyer is at least as deserving, probably more so than Santo.   You have to dig a bit deeper into the Ken Boyer story to understand why.

The Boyer Story

Like his older brother, Cloyd, Ken was originally signed by the Cardinals as a pitcher.   Yes, the future MVP third baseman of 1964 was originally a pitching prospect in the Cardinals minor league system.   He followed in Cloyd’s footsteps and seemed poised to be another power arm in the rotation.   Both had big arms and could strike out batters, but also had control troubles, walking a few too many batters.   The difference between the two was the prolific bat of Ken.   In 16 games in with the Lebanon Chix (D), Ken hit hit .455 with 3 home runs, a double and a triple.   That’s not exactly the hitting profile of a pitcher.

He continued to hit like a lumberjack with the Hamilton Cardinals (D) in 1950 and was eventually moved from the rotation over to third base, originally as an interim assignment, but it soon became permanent.  He would finish the season with a .342 batting average, 9 home runs, 17 doubles and 6 triples.   That would earn Ken a promotion to Omaha (A) for the 1951 season.   Now a full time third baseman, he hit .306 with 14 home runs, 28 doubles and 7 triples.   Yes, this young man had a very bright future ahead.

If it were any other year than 1952, Boyer would have found himself in Houston with the Buffaloes (AA) for part of the season and probably called up to St. Louis, at the very least, when rosters expanded in September.  Given Billy Johnson, the Cardinals third baseman’s, age (33)  and relatively poor performance (.252 / .339 / .323), Boyer might have gotten that call a lot earlier.

But that’s not what happened, and it plays significantly into the Ron Santo comparisons.   What did happen was military service.    Ken Boyer was drafted and spent the next two years in the US Army.   Although he played baseball during his military time, it is not the same as getting the professional instruction he would have received in the minor leagues.    That created an opportunity for Ray Jablonski, who was one year behind Boyer in the Cardinals farm system, and it was Jablonski that played in St. Louis in 1953 and 1954.

When he returned from his military service in 1954, Boyer made up for his time away and put together an impressive season for Houston (AA), hitting .319 with 21 home runs, 116 RBIs and 42 doubles.  It was so good that the Cardinals traded Ray Jabslonski prior to the start of the 1955 season, handing the job to Boyer, even though he had not played a single game at the AAA level.  He was that kind of talent.

What If

Now, let’s play the “what if” scenario over those two missing years.   What if Boyer had not been drafted and took over third base in 1953 instead of 1955.   Losing those two years was totally out of Boyer’s control.  It was not an injury or that he was slow to develop in the minor leagues.   He was the next third baseman, but circumstances out of his control robbed him of two productive years.  Assuming that his rookie season and subsequent sophomore slump would have happened as they did, lets add two more years worth of his 3rd through 7th year average and see where that puts us.

That would add two more seasons of 25 home runs, 88 RBIs and a .303 batting average to his totals.   His career home run total would climb from 282 to 332 and his RBI total would go from 1,141 to 1,317.   What were Santo’s by comparison ?   342 and 1,331.   Take away the Wrigley effect and Boyer’s numbers are actually better than those of Santo.

If you are fan of WAR (Wins Above Replacement), doing the same exercise would add two more years of 6 WAR to Boyer’s numbers, taking it from 53.5 to 65.5.  Santo’s career WAR ?  66.4.

Any way you choose to look at this, if Ron Santo is worthy of inclusion into the Hall of Fame, Ken Boyer should be automatic.

But wait…..

That is unlikely to happen and for all of the wrong reasons.   The simple fact is that even the Veterans Committee members are from an era where they did not see players like Ken Boyer in his prime.   Santo came along a decade later, so the voters have more familiarity with his career than that of Boyer.    The current group of Hank Aaron, Pat Gillick, Al Kaline, Ralph Kiner, Tommy Lasorda, Juan Marichal, Brooks Robinson, Billy Williams, Paul Beeston, Bill DeWitt, Roland Hemond, Gene Michael, Al Rosen, Dick Kaegel, Jack O’Connell, and Dave Van Dyck just know more about players of Santo’s era than a decade earlier, and that hurts the chances of a player like Ken Boyer.

Time for the sour grapes, and I am not going to apologize for this next statement.   Ron Santo’s induction into the Hall of Fame has more to do with his recent passing than his career statistics.   That sounds harsh, especially considering the challenges that Santo faced, not only during playing career, but also later as a broadcaster.  Nobody should have to do through what he did, but the thing I love about Santo was that he never lost his passion during a broadcast.  That by itself does not make one a Hall of Fame candidate.

It was nearly one year ago to the day that Ron Santo lost his battle with cancer.   It was a terrible loss for the Cubs organization, and the entire baseball community.  Let’s not forget that Boyer lost his battle with lung cancer in 1982, at age of 51.   After his playing career was over, Boyer stayed involved with baseball, coaching for a short time in St. Louis  and eventually manging.   He managed for several seasons in the minor leagues before taking over the helm of the Cardinals in 1978.    He would be dismissed early into the 1980 season as the Cardinals started a total overhaul of the major league club.   Boyer was to return to managing in the minor leagues, but his poor health kept him from doing that.

Boyer’s passing came at the worst possible time for his Hall of Fame considerations.  It was too close to his playing time, so he would have still been under consideration through the normal balloting, but it was far too soon for the veterans committee to take up his case.  Since then, players from his era have been all but forgotten, and that is wrong.

To end this on a positive note, let’s all agree that Ron Santo is deserving of induction into the Hall of Fame.   In that case, the veterans committee needs to do the right thing and do the same for Ken Boyer.   If they don’t, it makes Santo’s invitation seem more like a sympathy vote rather than a reflection of a marvelous playing career.   I used to think the Cardinals overreacted when they retired Boyer’s #14, but after looking back at the playing career of Ron Santo, maybe they were just a couple of decades ahead of the rest of us in getting it right.

Still not convinced ?  Our friend, Mark Tomasik over at RetroSimba, wrote this excellent piece last year: If Santo goes into Hall, Boyer should, too.

This entry was posted in General History and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Why Ken Boyer should be in the Hall of Fame

  1. Kevin McCann says:

    You make a very good argument in favor of Ken Boyer. I appreciate your perspective!


  2. dave hopper says:

    I agree with your article. Huge Boyer fan. Notice the #14? What can be done?


  3. Doug Ort says:

    I disagree that Santo is HOF worthy. There are only two third basemen from the 1950-80 NL who should be (and are) in the HOF, Mathews (mainly for his power) and Schmidt.

    I was a fan of Ken Boyer. In August 1960 at Forbes Field I saw him crush a line drive that hit a couple of feet from the top of the scoreboard, which jutted many feet above the fence (it wasn’t even a HR, only a double). Santo simply didn’t have that kind of power. I attended a few games in Wrigley Field, and Santo’s HRs were typically high arcing drives that got carried into the bleachers by the ever-present SW wind. In night games in Sportsman’s Park they would have been fly ball outs.

    Another comparison between the two is that Boyer’s early career was played in the shadow of Matthews, a superstar slugger (not such a great fielder). On the other hand, after 1962 there was no superstar third baseman in the NL until Schmidt arrived. After 1964 Santo was the best of the lot, but it was a sorry lot.

    In my opinion Boyer was the better player. but it’s questionable whether he should be in the HOF. However, if you were to rate HOF players by their worthiness to be there, Santo would be at the very bottom of the list. His presence there cheapens the accomplishments of everyone else.


    • Thanks for the comment, Doug. I really appreciate it.

      I wasn’t trying to defend Santo as a Hall of Famer as much as present the case that if Santo is, then Boyer should be as well. I do agree there is a pretty big chasm between Mathews/Schmidt and the rest of the third baseman of that era. You had either power guys that couldn’t play the outfield (Richie Allen – talk about a walking error machine) or defensive wizards that couldn’t hit their body weight (Ken Reitz).

      Looking at inductees by position, third base is certainly underrepresented. I would then ask you the question, is that OK, and perhaps it is. Or is it OK to drop the relative bar for the position a little bit lower, in which case you pick up both Santo and Boyer. You do have to be very careful here else you will also include Graig Nettles, thus reenforcing your earlier point.

      I can live with Boyer and Santo both being in (the direction I’m currently leaning) or neither in the hall. I am having a very tough time with just one of them in the Hall 🙂

      As for cheapening the accomplishments, that’s a fascinating discussion all by itself. I’m still trying to understand Jim Rice’s induction. Certainly, someone like Vada Pinson (another guy who played in the shadow of a legend) should have gone in ahead of Rice. Bruce Sutter is another one (Roy Face, Lee Smith).

      Thanks for reading, and a big thanks for taking the time and effort to share your opinion.


  4. Kevin Albertina says:

    I totally agree with you on Boyer. From 1958 to 1964, his consistency was unmatched. I think he compares very favorably to Ron Santo and doesn’t even do that badly when compared to Brooks Robinson.

    In fact, if you take Boyer and put him in Wrigley Field he would have far exceeded Santo. Santo’s stats away from Wrigley were pretty pedestrian. The difference, as you mentioned, was that Santo was a folksy (if gruff) and much beloved announcer for the Cubs. The most current sportwriters remember about Boyer (if anything) was that he was an unsuccessful manager of the Cardinals in the late ’70’s, who died very young. They don’t remember what he meant to those Cardinals teams in the early ’60’s, most especially the 1964 team.

    In spite of the comments above, I don’t wish to belittle Santo’s accomplishments. He was a very good player and deserves his accolades. But so does Boyer.

    The sad thing is that Boyer doesn’t really have any advocates among the St. Louis writers. Even Rick Hummel, the dean of St. Louis baseball writers, seems not to want to look at Boyer as a HOFer, which I’ve never quite understood. With more and more players being booted into the old-timers category, it will be that much harder for Boyer to get in, which is not only a shame, but a travesty.


  5. brookboyer says:

    Ken Boyer’s granddaughter here – stumbled upon this blog while searching for some pictures of my grandpa to include in a scrapbook I’m making for my dad for Father’s Day – thank you so much for your amazing article on my grandpa! I sent it along to my dad, and I’m sure he’ll send it along to the rest of the family 🙂 we appreciate the support and the loyalty!


    • Thank you so much, Brook! You have certainly made my day.

      Your grandfather was really something special and meant a lot to my generation of fans, who were fortunate enough to see him play, and later coach and manage. Please pass along our best wishes to your dad on Father’s Day!


  6. Tom Westrud says:

    Ken Boyer also missed 2 years for military service. HE SHOULD BE IN! Ryan Sandburg is in, and they had similar numbers.


  7. Ken Boyer is actually the lesser known of the Boyer brothers because Clete played for the Yankees. The era of post WWII major league baseball players has never been given the respect that they deserve. It took Cooperstown until 1980 to induct Duke Snider, and I believe the vote actually came from the Veteran’s committee and not the regular voters. Ridiculous. Ken Boyer may be gone, but for all of us kids who grew up in the 1950’s, we will always remember him and what a great player he was.


  8. ronboyer says:

    I’m Ron Boyer. No, not the brother, Ron. The third cousin, Ron, or so I’ve been told. I had the rare pleasure of playing softball as a kid with Kenny’s autographed bat and Clete’s autographed glove. My grandfather, Meryl Boyer, tried out as a pitcher for the Tigers during the last days of Ty Cobb. An off-season accident ended his career prematurely. My dad was an AAA-Allstar catcher in softball. So, that’s the family baseball bonafides. Ken and Clete were all of our heroes. Clete had a fantastic glove, and didn’t need to be a powerhouse at the plate. Berra, Mantle, Howard, Maris took care of that. He was a joy to watch on 3rd base though. But Kenny was on another level altogether. Really a consistently GREAT ball player on both sides of the field. Awesome glove. Perennial top league batter. MVP. I may be biased, but he was all-around a better player than Santo. I think of him in the same league with Brooks Robinson. So nice to stumble onto this page.


  9. Bill says:

    The Boyers were all very good journeyman ballplayers, but certainly not the best of the best who ever played the game


  10. Stag Beer says:

    Sabermetricians have addressed Santo’s Hall of Fame credentials ad nauseam, and the overwhelming consensus is that he was a better player Boyer. Boyer was an excellent player, and it’s reasonable to argue for a Hall of Fame standard that both Santo and he exceed. It’s also reasonable to argue that there’s a Hall of Fame standard that splits the difference between the two. What’s NOT reasonable is to argue, as some Card fans do, that Boyer was the better player. He wasn’t, and no one outside the more delusional members of the Cardinal fan base believe that to have been the case.

    It’s also incredibly disingenuous to extrapolate that Boyer missed two mid-career seasons’ worth of stats because of time he MIGHT have missed at the beginning of his career. Had Boyer not had military service, he might have come up slightly earlier. And were that the case, his career counting stats would be higher, but his career rate stats probably would be unchanged or perhaps be slightly lower.

    Bottom line:
    – Both men won five gold gloves.
    – Santo put up a 125 OPS+ in 9,397 career plate appearances.
    – Boyer put up a 116 OPS+ in 8,272 career plate appearances.
    Santo clearly was the better player.


    • Ron Noren says:

      Do sabermetrics take into account the size of the ballpark? Wrigley Field in Chicago was 399 in center versus Sportman’s Park in St. Louis was 426. The wind was also a major factor in Chicago and I believe Santo benefited. His home statistics are similar to present day Colorado Rockie players (or reminiscent of Chuck Klein in the Baker Bowl).
      Boyer also delivered big in the 1964 World Series and should have preceded Santo’s entrance into the Hall. Two years lost to service cost Boyer. I hope that the Golden Days Committee votes him in when they meet in 2020. He should have gone in 30 years ago.
      Thank you.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s