Looking at Ronnie's numbers and considering the pitching dominated era in which he played, it's a complete travesty he isn't in. OPS+ normalizes stats for park and league effects (in other words, it gives a decent basis of comparison across generations). I completely agree with you on Ronnie, but Jeff Kent has an equal OPS+ over a longer career and at a position where offense is more of a premium, although with average to below average defense. with everything in the balance, it's pretty hard to say Santo should be in, then turn around and say Kent shouldn't be. Good point. Looking again at their stats, they are nearly identical at this point: Santo: 342 HR, 2254 hits, 125 OPS Kent: 354 HR, 2247 hits, 125 OPS I'm not a stat head, so maybe you can explain to me how OPS gives equivalence between their ERA's. Santo absolutely played in a less powerful era and hitter friendly era. I don't know, Kent's numbers for a player who played in this era just don't scream HOF at me. But 342 homers for a person who played in the 60's does scream HOF. Ronnie also was a much more slick fielder. Maybe you can LOOK SOMETHING UP FOR YOURSELF? just kidding