Jeff Kent: Hall of Famer? (1 Viewer)

[Eephus]

Jeff Kent's decision to retire was like most others -- forced upon him by market conditions. Doesn't make him a bad guy, mind you. It's just gravity doing its cruel work.As for his legacy, he was part of the best teams the Giants have known since the early '60s, so he'll be considered well here, despite his fireman-and-arsonist relationship with Barry Bonds. And he will probably be a Hall of Famer at some point, though not right away, and not because of his personality.The personality argument has always been a stupid one anyway. If personality had that much of an affect, Jim Rice would never have made it to Cooperstown, and neither would Steve Carlton or Mike Schmidt to name but two among scores. There are perhaps a few voters who still like to use their votes that way, but five years is a long time to hold an unjustified grudge, and there are too many voters who don't play that way. The math doesn't support the argument.But we'll give you math anyway. Since 1990, there have been more than two players inducted only twice -- in 1991, when Rod Carew, Gaylord Perry and Ferguson Jenkins made it, and 1999, when the roster was George Brett, Nolan Ryan and Robin Yount.This means one thing -- voters aren't as generous with their votes as they used to be. And since one place in the 2014 class will be taken by Greg Maddux, Kent goes into a group with anyone who hasn't made it between now and 2013, including current perennials Andre Dawson, Bert Blyleven, Lee Smith, Jack Morris and and any of the following:2010: Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez.2011: Jeff Bagwell, Rafael Palmeiro.2012: Nobody in particular, unless you have a thing for Terry Mulholland.2013: Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling and the Other Three Horsemen of the Chemical Apocalypse, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa. Plus, we haven't even factored in any change of heart on Mark McGwire.In short, Kent may seem like a no-brainer to you, but that's before full mathematical and contextual vetting over the next five years, the backlog of candidates and the consistently small class sizes. In other words, calm down. This is going to take awhile, and it has nothing to do with whether Kent was a swell guy, let alone a worthy candidate.

Kent's offensive numbers are as good as any 2B not named Hornsby, Lajoie or Morgan. Defensively, he probably wasn't as bad as his reputation. His Range Factors and Fielding Percentages were generally around league average. I watched a lot of Kent in SF and thought he was OK defensively--decent hands and reliable on the pivot. The fact he stayed at 2B until age 40 when his offensive production would hold up across the defensive spectrum indicates something. He leaves the game with a MVP award, no championships and a mixed reputation as a gamer and a jerk. I'm happy the Giants got his prime years and wish him a happy retirement with plenty of time to wash his truck.Oh yeah, I think he's deserving of the HoF. Middle IF with his bat are pretty rare.

 

[Magnetar Runner]

UZR has him at 10 runs below average or more in his final four seasons, but he broke even or better in the three seasons prior.

If Ty Cobb can get with his personality, Jeff Kent can get in.

 

[Koya]

NO question.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

 

[MrPhoenix]

Easily.

 

[Koya]

Good convo with the divide here in opinions.

So, where is Kent in terms of his era? Do you take him above any and all others?

I'd take Alomar - man, weird how that career just DOVE (roids maybe? Never thought of that with him).

That's likely it. Considering position, considering how long ago Kent started doing it, and the guy changed the game with his bat at 2B.

 

[MrPhoenix]

Alomar- weird how that career just DOVE (roids maybe? Never thought of that with him).

Kent- weird how that career just ROSE when he got to San Francisco.:balco:

 

[Limp Ditka]

Good convo with the divide here in opinions.

 

[Koya]

Alomar- weird how that career just DOVE (roids maybe? Never thought of that with him).

Kent- weird how that career just ROSE when he got to San Francisco.:balco:

Hard to argue. His MVP year was amazing at ANY position. For a 2B? Roidiculous.So, do the voters who won't vote for roiders not vote for Kent, or will we see some hypocrisy here?

 

[Eephus]

Good convo with the divide here in opinions.

OK, how about Joey Cora vs. Mickey Morandini?

 

[Limp Ditka]

Good convo with the divide here in opinions.

Mickey Morandini?

1st ballot Kentucky Waterfall HOFer

 

[MrPhoenix]

Good convo with the divide here in opinions.

OK, how about Joey Cora vs. Mickey Morandini?

Or we can do the epic debate of Fernando Vina vs Pat Meares.

 

[dparker713]

Alomar- weird how that career just DOVE (roids maybe? Never thought of that with him).

Kent- weird how that career just ROSE when he got to San Francisco.:balco:

Hard to argue. His MVP year was amazing at ANY position. For a 2B? Roidiculous.So, do the voters who won't vote for roiders not vote for Kent, or will we see some hypocrisy here?

You do know he has been at the forefront of players asking for testing. And he's got to be in your top 3 for 2b in his generation along with Biggio and Alomar.

 

[Wrigley]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

Get the #### out of town!!!!!That said, this shouldn't even be up for discussion

 

[guru_007]

Kent - yes, no doubt.

Did I see Edgar Martinez's name pop up above? I'd like to see that argument.

2013 could be veryyyyyy interesting:

Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa.

 

[Eephus]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

Get the #### out of town!!!!!That said, this shouldn't even be up for discussion

It's not that cut & dried.Offensively, Kent tops Sandberg in every category except for SBs. Nine point advantage in OPS+, almost 100 more HRs, more hits, runs & RBI, higher average, OBP & SLGDefensively, Sandberg has nine GGs to Kent's zero.Both have one MVP and no rings. Sandberg has the (almost) entire career with one team factor that voters seem to like, and isn't a jerk.

 

[iSnitch]

2010: Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez.2011: Jeff Bagwell, Rafael Palmeiro.2012: Nobody in particular, unless you have a thing for Terry Mulholland.2013: Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling and the Other Three Horsemen of the Chemical Apocalypse, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa. Plus, we haven't even factored in any change of heart on Mark McGwire.

I don't think Palmeiro belongs in the HoF.

 

[Eephus]

2010: Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez.2011: Jeff Bagwell, Rafael Palmeiro.2012: Nobody in particular, unless you have a thing for Terry Mulholland.2013: Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling and the Other Three Horsemen of the Chemical Apocalypse, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa. Plus, we haven't even factored in any change of heart on Mark McGwire.

I don't think Palmeiro belongs in the HoF.

I don't think noted local doosh Ray Ratto's article was promoting any of those players as worthy HoF candidates. He was just running down the noteworthy players who will become eligible in future years.

 

[Magnetar Runner]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

 

[maxwelledison]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

Get the #### out of town!!!!!That said, this shouldn't even be up for discussion

It's not that cut & dried.Offensively, Kent tops Sandberg in every category except for SBs. Nine point advantage in OPS+, almost 100 more HRs, more hits, runs & RBI, higher average, OBP & SLGDefensively, Sandberg has nine GGs to Kent's zero.Both have one MVP and no rings. Sandberg has the (almost) entire career with one team factor that voters seem to like, and isn't a jerk.

As a Sox fan Cubs love makes me sick but Sandberg was a great player and deserved to get in. The fact that the guy was producing while every Latin player on his team was nailing his wife, and everyone knew it, just strengthens his case. :mentallytough:

 

[Wrigley]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

ask Ozzie Smith

 

[shadyridr]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

WTF you abused me for saying he was a HOFer last year. Now everyone thinks hes a lock?

 

[shadyridr]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

WTF you abused me for saying he was a HOFer last year. Now everyone thinks hes a lock?

I take that back. Technically you laughed when I said he may be the best hitting 2B of all time. That being said I say hes a lock for the HOF.

 

[Magnetar Runner]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

ask Ozzie Smith

Yes, one example of someone who deserved it. But for every Ozzie Smith, there's a Derek Jeter.

 

[Koya]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

WTF you abused me for saying he was a HOFer last year. Now everyone thinks hes a lock?

I take that back. Technically you laughed when I said he may be the best hitting 2B of all time. That being said I say hes a lock for the HOF.

I'd laugh at you to if you claimed best hitting 2B of all time.Hornsby down? Guy could have played in 1362 for all I care. No one close.Nap Lajoie, going even earlier.Rod Carew? Not the pop, but an amazing hitter. Just assuming thats why DD gave you some guff on the best of all time. Of his generation, and arguably post '50? Certainly one of the top candidates.

 

[Tom Servo]

Matt Vasgerisian did the interview with Kent on Hot Stove. MV was lobbying his crew that Kent should wear an Indian hat in the HOF.

If Kent's career was an hour long, he spent less than 5 minutes with the Tribe. Nice schtick, though...

 

[shadyridr]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

WTF you abused me for saying he was a HOFer last year. Now everyone thinks hes a lock?

I take that back. Technically you laughed when I said he may be the best hitting 2B of all time. That being said I say hes a lock for the HOF.

I'd laugh at you to if you claimed best hitting 2B of all time.Hornsby down? Guy could have played in 1362 for all I care. No one close.

Nap Lajoie, going even earlier.

Rod Carew? Not the pop, but an amazing hitter.

Just assuming thats why DD gave you some guff on the best of all time. Of his generation, and arguably post '50? Certainly one of the top candidates.

You did already in that same thread. My statement may have been an exaggeration but I was just trying to backup my opinion that he was a HOFer in that thread.

 

[Koya]

Certainly more deserving than Ryne Sandberg ever was.

1st Ballot Porn Stache HOFer

WTF you abused me for saying he was a HOFer last year. Now everyone thinks hes a lock?

I take that back. Technically you laughed when I said he may be the best hitting 2B of all time. That being said I say hes a lock for the HOF.

I'd laugh at you to if you claimed best hitting 2B of all time.Hornsby down? Guy could have played in 1362 for all I care. No one close.

Nap Lajoie, going even earlier.

Rod Carew? Not the pop, but an amazing hitter.

Just assuming thats why DD gave you some guff on the best of all time. Of his generation, and arguably post '50? Certainly one of the top candidates.

You did already in that same thread. My statement may have been an exaggeration but I was just trying to backup my opinion that he was a HOFer in that thread.

At least I'm consistent?

 

[T Bell]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder. Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

 

[Eephus]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder.

Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

In Kent, we're talking about a guy who played over 2000 games at 2B for five different teams. True, he wasn't the greatest fielder in the game but numerous managers had the opportunity to move him to 1B, 3B or OF if they felt he'd be more valuable at one of those positions. None of them apparently considered him enough of a defensive liability to consider making a position shift. Maybe they were just scared of his reaction.I don't think you have to qualify Kent's offensive production by saying it's good for a middle infielder. Lack of consensus on that point has hurt Trammell's HoF chances. But if you look at Kent's BR comps, only one of the ten is a 2B (Sandberg). Oddly enough, the top five are all C (Fisk, Pudge, Yogi, Bench, Simmons).

 

[T Bell]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder.

Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

In Kent, we're talking about a guy who played over 2000 games at 2B for five different teams. True, he wasn't the greatest fielder in the game but numerous managers had the opportunity to move him to 1B, 3B or OF if they felt he'd be more valuable at one of those positions. None of them apparently considered him enough of a defensive liability to consider making a position shift. Maybe they were just scared of his reaction.I don't think you have to qualify Kent's offensive production by saying it's good for a middle infielder. Lack of consensus on that point has hurt Trammell's HoF chances. But if you look at Kent's BR comps, only one of the ten is a 2B (Sandberg). Oddly enough, the top five are all C (Fisk, Pudge, Yogi, Bench, Simmons).

This is precisely what I believe happened in his and Piazza's case. These were two guys (different personalities obviously) who insisted that they play their chosen positions even though they were quite limited in what they could contribute there. Lucky for them that they were good enough hitters that the managers could live with it, but that's what I believe happened with Kent.

 

[dparker713]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder.

Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

In Kent, we're talking about a guy who played over 2000 games at 2B for five different teams. True, he wasn't the greatest fielder in the game but numerous managers had the opportunity to move him to 1B, 3B or OF if they felt he'd be more valuable at one of those positions. None of them apparently considered him enough of a defensive liability to consider making a position shift. Maybe they were just scared of his reaction.I don't think you have to qualify Kent's offensive production by saying it's good for a middle infielder. Lack of consensus on that point has hurt Trammell's HoF chances. But if you look at Kent's BR comps, only one of the ten is a 2B (Sandberg). Oddly enough, the top five are all C (Fisk, Pudge, Yogi, Bench, Simmons).

This is precisely what I believe happened in his and Piazza's case. These were two guys (different personalities obviously) who insisted that they play their chosen positions even though they were quite limited in what they could contribute there. Lucky for them that they were good enough hitters that the managers could live with it, but that's what I believe happened with Kent.

He was only a hack at the very tail of his career. He was an average fielder the rest of his career. Why on earth would you move a guy that played a premium defensive position adequately while posting league leading numbers at his position? Piazza is a whole different discussion, but Kent was a legit 2B nearly his entire career.

 

[T Bell]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder.

Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

In Kent, we're talking about a guy who played over 2000 games at 2B for five different teams. True, he wasn't the greatest fielder in the game but numerous managers had the opportunity to move him to 1B, 3B or OF if they felt he'd be more valuable at one of those positions. None of them apparently considered him enough of a defensive liability to consider making a position shift. Maybe they were just scared of his reaction.I don't think you have to qualify Kent's offensive production by saying it's good for a middle infielder. Lack of consensus on that point has hurt Trammell's HoF chances. But if you look at Kent's BR comps, only one of the ten is a 2B (Sandberg). Oddly enough, the top five are all C (Fisk, Pudge, Yogi, Bench, Simmons).

This is precisely what I believe happened in his and Piazza's case. These were two guys (different personalities obviously) who insisted that they play their chosen positions even though they were quite limited in what they could contribute there. Lucky for them that they were good enough hitters that the managers could live with it, but that's what I believe happened with Kent.

He was only a hack at the very tail of his career. He was an average fielder the rest of his career. Why on earth would you move a guy that played a premium defensive position adequately while posting league leading numbers at his position? Piazza is a whole different discussion, but Kent was a legit 2B nearly his entire career.

I'm not arguing that he sucked. He was adequate, competent, but nothing more. The point here is that he was better suited to other positions, and that that would have opened up the 2B spot to someone better, but that didn't happen. The result was a 3B or a 1B who gets to claim that he "revolutionized the 2B position" as a hitter.

 

[Magnetar Runner]

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent.

NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder.

Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

I think you're overvaluing the Gold Glove. It's voted on by the managers, who are ridiculously inept at recognizing defensive ability. Case in point would be Derek Jeter. He won the Gold Glove three years in a row, from 2004 to 2006. Yet each of those years he played below average defense. UZR has it him costing the Yankees 12.5 runs in 2005. 12.5 runs! He single-handedly lost a game for the Yankees that season with his defense. And he was awarded a Gold Glove for that.

Does this mean that Sandberg wasn't good at defense? No, not in the slightest. However, Gold Gloves are awarded based on the subjective perceptions (i.e. eye-witness reliability) of managers, and as a result they shouldn't be used as a measuring stick for judging a player's defensive ability or hailed as a feather in the cap of a player.

 

[whoknew]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder. Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

Gold Gloves mean almost nothing. They have no credibility whatsoever.

 

[The Kansas Comet]

I wonder how much Kent's candidacy will be affected by Bonds' stench. While there's no way I think Kent was using steroids, I think a number of voters may look at the fact that the best period of his career was due in no small part to playing with Bonds and having Barry set the table for him. I also wonder how his poor relationship with teammates will factor into consideration, if at all.

Overall, I think he probably deserves to be in. His stats are very good, he did hit more dingers than any other 2B, he's got an MVP, and he was a solid postseason player.

 

[dparker713]

Not that I'm disputing Sandberg's defensive prowess, but should Gold Gloves really receive consideration in evaluating a player? Michael Young was awarded a Gold Glove for his play at shortstop last year, and he was actually below average for his position.

Seriously? I'd say they're very important for a middle infielder, and they're a huge asset in any discussion for Sandberg in an comparison with Kent. NOT winning a Gold Glove is less important than winning one, because it means you're in the company of 30 other non-winning guys at your position, but if like Sandberg you won a whole slew of them, that's a definite feather in your cap. Sandberg was an excellent 2B; Kent was adequate, and probably was out of position and should have played 3B or 1B to have yielded more for his team as a fielder.

Frankly, that is a further mark against him in that regard when people talk about how great his hitting numbers were "for a second baseman", because I think he was really playing out of position. Ditto, BTW, Piazza as a catcher, though at least Piazza can point to his hitting numbers in light of the physical wear that the position inflicted upon his body.

In Kent, we're talking about a guy who played over 2000 games at 2B for five different teams. True, he wasn't the greatest fielder in the game but numerous managers had the opportunity to move him to 1B, 3B or OF if they felt he'd be more valuable at one of those positions. None of them apparently considered him enough of a defensive liability to consider making a position shift. Maybe they were just scared of his reaction.I don't think you have to qualify Kent's offensive production by saying it's good for a middle infielder. Lack of consensus on that point has hurt Trammell's HoF chances. But if you look at Kent's BR comps, only one of the ten is a 2B (Sandberg). Oddly enough, the top five are all C (Fisk, Pudge, Yogi, Bench, Simmons).

This is precisely what I believe happened in his and Piazza's case. These were two guys (different personalities obviously) who insisted that they play their chosen positions even though they were quite limited in what they could contribute there. Lucky for them that they were good enough hitters that the managers could live with it, but that's what I believe happened with Kent.

He was only a hack at the very tail of his career. He was an average fielder the rest of his career. Why on earth would you move a guy that played a premium defensive position adequately while posting league leading numbers at his position? Piazza is a whole different discussion, but Kent was a legit 2B nearly his entire career.

I'm not arguing that he sucked. He was adequate, competent, but nothing more. The point here is that he was better suited to other positions, and that that would have opened up the 2B spot to someone better, but that didn't happen. The result was a 3B or a 1B who gets to claim that he "revolutionized the 2B position" as a hitter.

So, you'd rather have a 2b that is maybe 8 runs better defensively and can barely hit his weight than Kent at 2b? That makes absolutely no sense. The guy wasnt a 3b or a 1b, he was a 2b that put up offensive numbers similar to traditional power positions. The VORP for Kent is quite large at 2b, but at the corner spots he's fairly average. So you'd rather have an average corner infielder or outfielder than a all-star level 2b? Do you also advocate moving Utley to 3b? Your line of thinking is just plain wrong.

 

[skillz]

Kent definitely deserves to be in given the numbers he has put up -- particularly since the standard for being a HOF'r just got watered down with Rice's election this year. It will probably take him a few tries to get in though just like Sandberg but he will get in at some point.

As far as Kent being a jerk, I heard him on the Dan Patrick show on Friday calling out Bonds, McGwire, and the MLBPA on the steroids issue and was glad to hear someone actually speak out so freely on the subject. I am sure his retirement allows him to be more vocal now but is was a good interview to listen to.