HOF results

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

I'm talking about average second basemen. They're everywhere. Maybe Bobby Grich was a little better, but nothing sets him apart from the plethora of guys like him. Decent stats, above average, but not the all time hitter Kent was.

Name another second basemen who could hit like Kent. You can't.

Hornsby, Lajoie, Collins, Morgan, Robinson, Alomar, Biggio, Gehringer, Carew, Grich, Sandberg, Utley, Frisch.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Hornsby, Lajoie, Collins, Morgan, Robinson, Alomar, Biggio, Gehringer, Carew, Grich, Sandberg, Utley, Frisch.

I would add Cano as well.

Tom C

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I would add Cano as well.

Tom C

Whitaker maybe as well.

[packs]

I'm not going to quote JAWS but I don't remember any of them driving in 100 runs six years in a row. I'm also not going to compare people like Hornsby, Lajoie and Eddie Collins to Jeff Kent. Clearly we are talking about the modern era and the modern game.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

I'm not going to quote JAWS but I don't remember any of them driving in 100 runs six years in a row. I'm also not going to compare Lajoie and Eddie Collins to Jeff Kent.

Why not? They are second basemen. You said no second baseman ever hit like Jeff Kent. They are relevant.

As to driving in x amount of runs x years in a row...first off RBI is a stat that requires the performance of other players (to be on base). It is one of the most flawed measurable stats out there when used to compare one player from one team against another from another team in a different situation (let alone from different eras). Secondly, again, 100 RBI during Kent's playing career meant far less than it did at other times. Scoring was sky high league wide. 100 RBI in 2004 might have meant the same as 75 or 80 in 1975.

Tom C

[packs]

So you think it's apt to compare say Cy Young to Pedro Martinez?

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

So you think it's apt to compare say Cy Young to Pedro Martinez?

Not in terms.of raw numbers as you are doing. But in terms of Youngs performance versus a league average pitcher of his time and Martinez performance versus a league average pitcher of his time, absolutely.

How much better than an average pitcher of his day was each one? That is quantifiable and thus each can be compared based on that.

Tom C

[packs]

Whatever you say. I think players like Morgan and Carew were better pure hitters and for a longer amount of time, but they couldn't do what Kent did with the bat. Only Jeff Kent could and to an extent Sandberg. And with 3 decades between debuts, I think that says something about the special player Kent was considering there's no one on your list in between.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

Whatever you say. I think players like Morgan and Carew were better pure hitters and for a longer amount of time, but they couldn't do what Kent did with the bat. Only Jeff Kent could and to an extent Sandberg. And with 3 decades between debuts, I think that says something about the special player Kent was considering there's no one on your list in between.

Well so far you, Darren, and one out of seven voters are the only ones buying.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

Whatever you say. I think players like Morgan and Carew were better pure hitters and for a longer amount of time, but they couldn't do what Kent did with the bat. Only Jeff Kent could and to an extent Sandberg. And with 3 decades between debuts, I think that says something about the special player Kent was considering there's no one on your list in between.

Offensively Kent was special. No question. If I try real hard I could make a case for him to be in the top ten second basemen in terms of just offense. And because I don't value defense as much as others might, Kent may be around #14 or 15 all time at the position. That's a HOFer in my book. Not a slam dunk, but deserving. Certainly way better than his voting percentages thus far.

Tom C

[glchen]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Hornsby, Lajoie, Collins, Morgan, Robinson, Alomar, Biggio, Gehringer, Carew, Grich, Sandberg, Utley, Frisch.

I really think there is an eye test that is being missed here. What we do know is that Kent moved to Astros in 2003, and joined Biggio there. However, Kent is the player who stayed at 2nd base, and Biggio moved to the outfield. If Biggio were the better player at 2nd, wouldn't the team have kept him at 2nd and moved Kent to the OF?

I really think it's pointless to continue to argue this because I'm pretty confident that Kent will eventually make the HOF even if it is via the Veteran's Committee (unless of course, he is implicated for using PEDs). Every other player who leads his position (excluding pitchers) in home runs all time is in the Hall of Fame (taking out PED users). He's obviously not a first ballot HOFer, and he doesn't have the 3000 hit credentials like Biggio. However, he is someone like a Gary Carter who will get in eventually.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by glchen

I really think there is an eye test that is being missed here. What we do know is that Kent moved to Astros in 2003, and joined Biggio there. However, Kent is the player who stayed at 2nd base, and Biggio moved to the outfield. If Biggio were the better player at 2nd, wouldn't the team have kept him at 2nd and moved Kent to the OF?

I really think it's pointless to continue to argue this because I'm pretty confident that Kent will eventually make the HOF even if it is via the Veteran's Committee (unless of course, he is implicated for using PEDs). Every other player who leads his position (excluding pitchers) in home runs all time is in the Hall of Fame (taking out PED users). He's obviously not a first ballot HOFer, and he doesn't have the 3000 hit credentials like Biggio. However, he is someone like a Gary Carter who will get in eventually.

What does moving Biggio to the outfield have to do with whether he or Kent was the better hitter? Or maybe Biggio was more adaptable and Kent couldn't play outfield?

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What does moving Biggio to the outfield have to do with whether he or Kent was the better hitter? Or maybe Biggio was more adaptable and Kent couldn't play outfield?

Well said Peter. Jeff Kent couldn't run down a beach ball in the outfield, let alone a batted baseball!

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by glchen

I really think there is an eye test that is being missed here. What we do know is that Kent moved to Astros in 2003, and joined Biggio there. However, Kent is the player who stayed at 2nd base, and Biggio moved to the outfield. If Biggio were the better player at 2nd, wouldn't the team have kept him at 2nd and moved Kent to the OF?

I really think it's pointless to continue to argue this because I'm pretty confident that Kent will eventually make the HOF even if it is via the Veteran's Committee (unless of course, he is implicated for using PEDs). Every other player who leads his position (excluding pitchers) in home runs all time is in the Hall of Fame (taking out PED users). He's obviously not a first ballot HOFer, and he doesn't have the 3000 hit credentials like Biggio. However, he is someone like a Gary Carter who will get in eventually.

I agree he will eventually get in barring some PED issue real or imagined keeping him out.

But Biggio went to center field because he was a good enough athlete to move there. He was also a good enough athlete to have started his career as a catcher. Jeff Kent in Center field?

Oh. My. Freaking. Goodness. No.

No.

Tom C

[glchen]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What does moving Biggio to the outfield have to do with whether he or Kent was the better hitter? Or maybe Biggio was more adaptable and Kent couldn't play outfield?

Peter, please just read your comments again. Seriously, if that doesn't get through, how about Kent had a higher WAR than Biggio those two years that both played for the Astros? Would that prove to you that Kent was the better hitter then during those years?

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I agree he will eventually get in barring some PED issue real or imagined keeping him out.

But Biggio went to center field because he was a good enough athlete to move there. He was also a good enough athlete to have started his career as a catcher. Jeff Kent in Center field?

Oh. My. Freaking. Goodness. No.

No.

Tom C

Tom, Biggio had a negative defensive WAR during those 2003 and 2004 when he played OF when Kent was there. In fact, Biggio's career defensive WAR is -3.9 while Kent's career defensive WAR is -0.9. Therefore, just maybe Kent was the better athlete.

[btcarfagno]

Regarding Bernie Williams and "clutch", Fangraphs has a stat called...well...clutch. It measures a players stats in such " clutch" situations versus his stats overall. Someone with better stats in the clutch situations will have a positive "clutch" value. Generally a number greater than zero but less than two. So conversely, a negative number means that person did worse than their normal in clutch situations.

Bernie Williams clutch number is -.99.

Tom C

[packs]

Does this clutch factor into playoff games or only regular season?

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

Does this clutch factor into playoff games or only regular season?

Only regular season. Doing just playoff games would be too small of a sample size to be meaningful.

Tom C

[packs]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Only regular season. Doing just playoff games would be too small of a sample size to be meaningful.

Tom C

Postseason is what I was talking about when I said clutch. I said I'd pick Bernie for my team if I wanted to win. He hit 280 with 22 homers and 80 rbi's in 121 postseason games. That's nearly an entire season of postseason games and he played that well when it mattered most.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

regarding bernie williams and "clutch", fangraphs has a stat called...well...clutch. It measures a players stats in such " clutch" situations versus his stats overall. Someone with better stats in the clutch situations will have a positive "clutch" value. Generally a number greater than zero but less than two. So conversely, a negative number means that person did worse than their normal in clutch situations.

Bernie williams clutch number is -.99.

Tom c

lol.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by glchen

I really think there is an eye test that is being missed here. What we do know is that Kent moved to Astros in 2003, and joined Biggio there. However, Kent is the player who stayed at 2nd base, and Biggio moved to the outfield. If Biggio were the better player at 2nd, wouldn't the team have kept him at 2nd and moved Kent to the OF?

ARod was a vastly superior shortstop in comparison to Jeter. Who ended up moving?

[glchen]

Originally Posted by Tabe

ARod was a vastly superior shortstop in comparison to Jeter. Who ended up moving?

The story there was that since ARod was going to the Yanks, he would move to a new position. If it had been Jeter going to the Rangers, then ARod would have stayed at shortstop and Jeter would move to a new position. This was what both Jeter and ARod told the media at that time, I believe.

In the Kent/Biggio case, Kent moved to the Astros, but it was still the incumbent Biggio who ended up moving positions. Hmmmm.....

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by glchen

The story there was that since ARod was going to the Yanks, he would move to a new position. If it had been Jeter going to the Rangers, then ARod would have stayed at shortstop and Jeter would move to a new position. This was what both Jeter and ARod told the media at that time, I believe.

In the Kent/Biggio case, Kent moved to the Astros, but it was still the incumbent Biggio who ended up moving positions. Hmmmm.....

Jeff Kent had less range at second than the McCovey statue. I would pay good money go see him try to play center field.

Tom C