HOF locks - Pedro & Randy

[StanMarsh51]

Looking at Kents OFFENSIVE numbers only, he had 9 seasons of being good to great, the rest of his 17 seasons were injury plagued or just not good at all... He also averaged 135 games per season, which is pretty bad....


He is certainly on the fence, but i just don't know with him since i don't think he really played healthy enough of his career...

But even in his non-great seasons, he was pretty solid overall (particularly by 2B standards)....The average 2B tends to have an OPS+ around 95-100, only once in Kent's career did he have an OPS+ under 101, and that was in his last year at age 40.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

What does Jay Jaffe think about Kent? Has JAWS been brought up in this discussion?

Second Base JAWS Leaders | Baseball-Reference.com

I wouldn't exactly say JAWS helps him... As he is 19th all time for 2B... And he is 27th in WAR7, and remember that he really only had 9 good seasons...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But even in his non-great seasons, he was pretty solid overall (particularly by 2B standards)....The average 2B tends to have an OPS+ around 95-100, only once in Kent's career did he have an OPS+ under 101, and that was in his last year at age 40.

You bringing up OPS+, does this really help his argument... He is 14th all time for 2B in OPS+ for players who played 1300+ games... and Jeff kent is the only real power hitter the position has ever saw...

 

[StanMarsh51]

You bringing up OPS+, does this really help his argument... He is 14th all time for 2B in OPS+ for players who played 1300+ games... and Jeff kent is the only real power hitter the position has ever saw...

And many of those ahead of easily had HOF careers (Hornsby, Lajoe, Eddie Collins, Morgan, Carew, Gehringer for instance), with a number of them playing pre-WW2. You also have guys like Cano and Utley ahead of him, many both of whom may have a HOF case when their careers are done.

So I don't think being 14th all time really hurts him that much...just as a comparison, Jeter is 13th all-time in OPS+ of SS with 1300+ games, and will probably drop to 14th this year since Hanley is 80 games away from 1300. Not saying Kent is as good as Jeter, but being in the 10-20 range is still highly impressive.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

And many of those ahead of easily had HOF careers (Hornsby, Lajoe, Eddie Collins, Morgan, Carew, Gehringer for instance), with a number of them playing pre-WW2. You also have guys like Cano and Utley ahead of him, many both of whom may have a HOF case when their careers are done.

So I don't think being 14th all time really hurts him that much...just as a comparison, Jeter is 13th all-time in OPS+ of SS with 1300+ games, and will probably drop to 14th this year since Hanley is 80 games away from 1300. Not saying Kent is as good as Jeter, but being in the 10-20 range is still highly impressive.

Again, I am not arguing whether he should make the HOF or not, I just don't believe he should make it by comparing him with other 2B... and apparently through this exercise, he is not even as clear cut through comparison... For someone known to be the best power hitter at 2B, his OPS+ is very disappointing... and for someone who only had 9 good to great seasons his WAR7 is very disappointing...

 

[Montalban]

Looking at Kents OFFENSIVE numbers only, he had 9 seasons of being good to great, the rest of his 17 seasons were injury plagued or just not good at all... He also averaged 135 games per season, which is pretty bad....


He is certainly on the fence, but i just don't know with him since i don't think he really played healthy enough of his career...

Best second baseman of his era. He deserves to be in.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Best second baseman of his era. He deserves to be in.

The best 2nd baseman of his era made the hall back in 2011.

 

[calsnowskier]

The best 2nd baseman of his era made the hall back in 2011.

????

Alomar and Kent were completely different players. Alomar was defense, Kent was power. BA was similar (.300 vs .290), but basically all other offensive numbers fall to Kent in a rather significant way.

I am not saying Alomar was anything short of a solid HOF. But to say he was the clear better 2B is a stretch (as the reverse is a stretch as well).

 

[StanMarsh51]

????

Alomar and Kent were completely different players. Alomar was defense, Kent was power. BA was similar (.300 vs .290), but basically all other offensive numbers fall to Kent in a rather significant way.

I am not saying Alomar was anything short of a solid HOF. But to say he was the clear better 2B is a stretch (as the reverse is a stretch as well).

It's not as if Alomar was some mediocre offensive 2B though. He ended up with a .371 OBP, 1500 runs and 116 OPS+, combined with 474 steals (at an 80%+ rate).

At the point in which Kent retired (9,500 PAs), Alomar had a 119 OPS+, which isn't far off from Kent's 123. Then when you factor in baserunning and defense (Alomar was overrated defensively, but I still think his defensive was worth more than Kent's), I don't see how Alomar doesn't get the edge.

 

[navamind]

You bringing up OPS+, does this really help his argument... He is 14th all time for 2B in OPS+ for players who played 1300+ games... and Jeff kent is the only real power hitter the position has ever saw...

Because, you know, Roger Hornsby and Joe Gordon were slap hitters.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Also, his window of being good to great was 1997-2005, wasn't that the main period of the steroid era, where power came at an abundance all over the place... Not saying he did anything, but does he really get the comparison boost when he was the one who played in a time where power was seen to be the most important thing in baseball...

Again, my only argument is that he should not get in by comparing him to the rest of the second base pool... I am not arguing whether he should make it or not...

 

[calsnowskier]

Also, his window of being good to great was 1997-2005, wasn't that the main period of the steroid era, where power came at an abundance all over the place... Not saying he did anything, but does he really get the comparison boost when he was the one who played in a time where power was seen to be the most important thing in baseball...

Again, my only argument is that he should not get in by comparing him to the rest of the second base pool... I am not arguing whether he should make it or not...

And during that period, he was one of the top overall players in the game.. If anything, I think that works in his favor, not against him.

 

[Montalban]

The best 2nd baseman of his era made the hall back in 2011.

A case can be made for Alomar but if given the choice, I'd take Kent.

 

[Montalban]

Also, his window of being good to great was 1997-2005, wasn't that the main period of the steroid era, where power came at an abundance all over the place... Not saying he did anything, but does he really get the comparison boost when he was the one who played in a time where power was seen to be the most important thing in baseball...

Again, my only argument is that he should not get in by comparing him to the rest of the second base pool... I am not arguing whether he should make it or not...

In my opinion that is the only way he should be judged.

 

[molsaniceman]

Stanton had a .395 OBP. He could have hit 7 dingers too and still had the higher OPS.

Altuve doesn't hit home runs but he also doesn't draw any walks either.

Actually if his 30 other HRs are singles his OPS would drop below Altuves

when u have 225 hits do u really need alot of walks

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Best second baseman of his era. He deserves to be in.

by this logic then shouldn't there be more relievers in the HOF, and shouldn't there be DHs in the HOF...

 

[calsnowskier]

by this logic then shouldn't there be more relievers in the HOF, and shouldn't there be DHs in the HOF...

No.

Relievers (basically) are not closers because they are not good enough to be. And closers (not so much anymore, but...) are closers because they cant be starters.

DHs are SHs because they cant field ANY position. Are you saying 2B is the defensive equivalent of the DH? Even 1B have to at least expose themselves to the rigors of the position. And if their D is too bad, they lose playing time.

 

[Montalban]

by this logic then shouldn't there be more relievers in the HOF, and shouldn't there be DHs in the HOF...

Not necessarily, but they should be judged against other DHs or relievers if one were to go in.

 

[DragonfromTO]

by this logic then shouldn't there be more relievers in the HOF, and shouldn't there be DHs in the HOF...

If the reliever is not in the game any pitcher could be throwing in his place though, so that's the (larger and better) pool he needs to be judged against. DH has a similar problem, he gets compared to every player that bats (and to top it off has no defensive contribution).