Why is Johan Santana the most underrated baseball player of all-time?

Our love affair with career milestones has resulted in really good players being overlooked, none more than former Twins and Mets pitcher, Johan Santana. Let’s take a look at his unique achievements:

1). Over 12 seasons, Santana posted a lofty .641 winning percentage, which is the 10th best mark of all pitchers debuting since 1960 (min. 10 seasons).

2). His 136 ERA+ is the 5th highest in the last 100 years (min. 10 seasons).

3). Santana is the only player in MLB history to lead the league in ERA+, WHIP, H/9, strikeouts, and SO/9 in three consecutive seasons.

4). He is one of only four pitchers to lead the league in WHIP for four consecutive seasons (Carl Hubbell, Sandy Koufax, and Clayton Kershaw).

5). Since 1920, he is the only pitcher to lead the league in wins, ERA, strikeouts, innings, games started, ERA+, WHIP, H/9, and SO/9 in the same season.

6). He is one of only seven players to lead the league in ERA+ for three consecutive seasons (Christy Mathewson, Lefty Grove, Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, and Clayton Kershaw).

7). Since 1920, he is one of only four pitchers to lead the league in H/9 for three consecutive seasons (Bob Feller, Sandy Koufax, and Nolan Ryan).

8) He led the league in War for Pitchers three consecutive seasons. In the last 100 years, only Lefty Grove, Robin Roberts, and Randy Johnson have longer streaks.

9). He is the only pitcher in baseball history with multiple Cy Young awards and five top-5 finishes in the Cy Young voting who is not in the Hall of Fame.

Notice that every pitcher listed along side Santana above is in the Hall of Fame. While the list of unique accomplishments on Santana’s resume is befitting of a sure-fire Hall of Famer, he was resoundingly rejected by Hall of Fame voters to the tune of just 2.4% approval. Meanwhile, Sandy Koufax and Hank Greenberg—who, like Santana, didn’t quite nail the longevity component—are celebrated Hall of Famers, and routinely included on top-100 lists, despite playing in significantly less competitive eras. If we’re not going to hold it against Koufax and Greenberg, then we probably shouldn’t hold it against Santana. Hopefully, The Era Committee rights this wrong.

Leave a Reply

Hi (hopefully) awesome reader! I welcome your comments. However, please be aware that I make all of my arguments using facts, statistics, and logic. Unfortunately, the average comment on a top-100 list goes something like this:

"UR StooPid. (Insert player) is trash. I've watched (pick a sport) for (pick a number of years) and (pick a player) is better than everyone. UR DUMB. HAHA6969."

–Some Jabroni

As cognitively stimulating as this species of comment is, it ends up being a missed opportunity to share a nuanced perspective. I reply to all comments that show even the most basic levels of thought and humility. The people who make the comments like the example above are under the assumption that the three seconds of thought that popped into their brains after reading the list is more than the 1000s of hours that I put into creating and maintaining the lists. I would be happy to defend any placement, or make an adjustment if one is warranted. If you are a jabroni, like the one above, then your comment will die in the lonely void of the unpublished comments section.

For everyone else, I look forward to your comments!

P.S. The theme of this site and the top-100 lists is that athletes from previous generations have historically been grossly overrated by sports publications in a way that is statistically improbable. Click on the "About" dropdown menu to see just how badly the average top-100 list disproportionately favors athletes from older generations when leagues were smaller, race quotas existed, and globalization wasn't a thing. Also, please consider reading "The History" section of the sport you are commenting on.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *