On Jeff Kent’s Hall Credentials: Bill Price Needs To Be Smacked
I don’t mind contrarians. Hell, I am one. But Bill Price at the New York Daily News has just taken things a bit too far, then stopped, took a look around, took a couple more steps, and then sprinted out of sight and into the horizon.
As UmpBump's Zvee Geffen notes, Jeff Kent looked a lot like an older Haley Joel Osment yesterday.
In his running column entitled “The Bitter Bill” (get it?), he wrote about the retirement of Jeff Kent – more specifically, his candidacy for the Hall of Fame.
Let me say first that I can deal with people who argue that Kent’s not a Hall of Famer. I’ll disagree with them and not-so-secretly judge them if they ever do make the claim, but I can live with it.
But for the love of Catfish, please show me that you have an ounce of understanding about baseball before you put your argument in print:
But I say Kent cannot be looked at as a second baseman, especially in this day and age where middle infielders all over baseball are putting up numbers usually posted by outfielders and third baseman.
Wait. I know we just started, but wait. So Kent wasn’t a second baseman? Then what the hell do you call that guy who stands near second base on the right half of the diamond? Because that’s where Kent used to stand around fielding grounders and stuff. And someone should also tell Price that first basemen can hit too. And there’s really no comparison between the numbers that they put up and those that middle infielders do. Check it out. You might learn something.
We have to start judging players – other than catchers – as all part of the same pool.
By this logic, we can put Ryan Howard at shortstop. You’ll hardly notice the difference, Phillies fans!
Is Nomar Garciaparra a Hall of Famer because he put up big numbers at shortstop?
No. No one who understands that a player has to play to be in the Hall of Fame has said that Nomar is a Hall of Famer.
Kent was never a great fielder. He had to hide somewhere and most teams chose to put him at second base.
This is precisely the moment when my mind exploded. You can hide someone by putting them at second base? Are you sure you meant to write this? Who in their right mind can give this man a job as a sportswriter? How are you more successful at your job than I am at mine?
Also, Kent played in the steroids era, so all of the numbers from that time have to be judged on some sort of scale. 600 homers may have to be the new 500 homers.
Yay! I love arbitrary numbers! So if 600 is the new 500, then that means that each homerun hit these days is worth .833 of one hit pre-steroids, right? Which gives Kent (in pre-steroid value)… 314 homeruns… Which is still the most ever hit by a ‘guy who stands between first and second base’. By 32 homeruns. You should really think before you write, Bill. Or did you mean 700 is the new 500? Maybe 721?
And while Kent’s numbers may have gotten him into the Hall of Fame 10 years ago, they are comparable to several other players who will be retiring soon or have already retired and likely won’t ever get in.
(Mind racing. Trying to think of other middle infielders whose careers can compare to Kent’s…)
Albert Belle has more homers (381) than Kent. Is he a Hall of Famer?
Gary Sheffield has more homers (499), hits (2,615) and RBIs (1,633) than Kent. Is he a Hall of Famer?
Clearly, I’ve wasted my time even thinking.
Andres Gallarraga (399), Dale Murphy (398), Joe Carter (396), Jason Giambi (396), Vlad Guerrero (392), Graig Nettles (390), Dwight Evans (385), Harold Baines (384), Larry Walker (383) and Matt Williams (378) all have more homers than Kent.
But… They’re not second basem…
Plus, in the next few years, plenty of guys with over 450 HRs will start to retire. Just how many players will the writers put in each year?
Has this guy ever seen a game of baseball? I mean, he does know that Home Run Derbies are just once a year right? And that in real games, things like “hits”, “doubles” and “walks” count too?
It should be interesting. I just want to know if Kent will go in as a Met if he makes it.
I’ll let you know, Bill. I’ll be sure to let you know. So for now, rest easy and not pay attention to sports again for a while.Because clearly, you’ve gotten away with it so far.
NOTE: Ken, dak and Junior… Please don’t sue me for this post. And come back.
NOTE PART DEUX: Hat tip to Rob Neyer for the article.
January 23rd, 2009 at 5:09 pm
While I won’t go as far as our friend Mr. Price, I do agree with him that Kent is not a HOFer, or at the very least, is a borderline case along the lines of Rice, Dawson, and 20 others who are not yet in (though they may be someday).
Kent was a brutal second baseman. His teammates did not like him. He was a me-first guy. On the other hand, those numbers are hard to ignore…
REPORT COMMENT
January 23rd, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Kent wasn’t nearly as bad defensively as people think. Some years, he was good, others, bad.
And if you say that his numbers are hard to ignore, then why is he still borderline?
REPORT COMMENT
January 24th, 2009 at 1:47 am
For me what really seals it for Kent going to the Hall, other than the numbers, which should make him an absolute lock to begin with, is that he called for more steroid testing on more than one occasion. I know people say you can’t judge just by looking at a player’s body, but when Kent was 40 he had the flabby body of a 40 year old, and that was quite refreshing.
REPORT COMMENT
January 24th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Rob, did you miss the announcement like, a week ago where Rice was voted in?
Dawson also deserves to be in, in my view, and will very likely make it in — he gets more and more support every year.
Jeff Kent is a Hall of Famer. There’s really not much room for debate (I am less tolerant than Paul).
REPORT COMMENT
January 24th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Sarah, be nice to Rob. Just because Rice got elected doesn’t mean he wasn’t a borderline candidate. The man got in by the skin of his teeth and plenty of smart people think he doesn’t belong.
On the other hand, I agree that Kent is a no-brainer for the Hall (not so sure about Dawson).
REPORT COMMENT
January 24th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Agreed that the DailyNews article was bunk.
Interesting note: Compared Kent to Bobby Grich and Grich edges him out on two park/era-adjusted stats: OPS (125 to 123) and BattingWins (27.3 to 27.2). Plus, Grich was definitely the better fielder.
I’d still vote for Kent but it definitely goes to show that Grich got jobbed…
REPORT COMMENT
January 25th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Offensively, Kent definitely has the numbers to be in as a second baseman. In my opinion there would be only 2 areas in which you could question him. One would be steroids and despite anything he may have said I do not believe for one moment that he avoided PEDs. I would say having his career high 37 homers at age 34 might be one indicator, the year before and the year after he only had 22 per season. The other question would be can you elect a player that was below average defensively at a position where defensive skill is of great value?
When people argue that Kent deserves HOF but Dawson does not it shows how little they value defense in HOF consideration. Dawson was a 5 tool player and Kent was not. Kent couldn’t have played center field or stolen the kind of bases Dawson did and Dawson had more power at the plate. Dawson was a better all around player and in the end both probably deserve to go in.
As steroid era players become eligible it’s going to be interesting who goes in and who doesn’t. There are plenty of players like Kent that most likely used but weren’t called before Congress. Guys like Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell have the numbers as well and were most likely users.
REPORT COMMENT
January 25th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
The memories of Kent as a brutal defensive 2nd basemen are basically people who only took into account his Dodger career when he was absolutely atrocious with the glove.
This does not, however, account for his prime years when he was AT LEAST an average 2nd baseman according to most sabermetric types. I think that was the general consensus among scouts as well.
So just because he was a shitty player late in his career, it doesn’t change the fact that he was an elite player during his prime, and he had a rather incredible peak for a 2nd baseman.
To me, peak is important, rather than penalizing a player for having shitty years late in his career.
That kind of logic is terrible to me. If a guy has 10 All-Star years, but then plays like 4-5 years too long, his overall career numbers will fall. However, it doesn’t change the fact that his peak was great, and that’s what really matters anyway.
REPORT COMMENT
January 25th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Keep in mind that I absolutely hate Kent as a person, so I have no incentive to defend him. :o
REPORT COMMENT
January 26th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Sarah… what’s your deal? Rice is a borderline HOFer. He’s borderline and he got in. Dawson is borderline and is not in. There are plenty of others who are borderline as well. That’s my point.
REPORT COMMENT
January 26th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
I just can’t get over Dawson’s .323 career OBP. It’s so god awful.
REPORT COMMENT
January 26th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
How exactly is Kent borderline though?
Kent’s OPS in his career was 123. There are about 37 2nd basemen with OPS over 100 in major league history. Kent ranks 8th.
http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/BAs5
During his prime, from 1998 to 2005, Kent’s OPS was 136. He was 22nd in the entire majors leagues. How many 2nd basemen were ahead of him? Zero.
He would have to be a truly horrific defensive 2nd baseman for it to discredit anything he’s done. And all signs point to that only starting in 2004 or 2005.
Name -PA -OPS -ZR*
Player A -12503 -111 -.818
Player B -9537 -123 -.822
Player C -10400 -116 -.817
One is Jeff Kent, one is Roberto Alomar, and one is Craig Biggio.
REPORT COMMENT
January 26th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Rob, I’m sorry. I thought you said, “a borderline case along the lines of Rice, Dawson, and 20 others who are not yet in (though they may be someday).” It seemed like you were lumping rice in with Dawson and the 20 others who are not yet in though they may be someday.
Kensai, interesting comment about “peak” years. Most people go the other way, penalizing players who had great peaks but whose career counting stats fall short because they didn’t stick around playing into their playing-Canasta-and-eating-prunes years.
Melissa, but Kent is so flabby!
REPORT COMMENT
January 28th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Yeah, never understood that logic.
A first baseman with an OPS of 105 for 25 years is going to have great counting stats, but that wouldn’t warrant inclusion to me. Being like the 50th best player in the league for 2 decades wouldn’t blow me away.
REPORT COMMENT
February 20th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
As a regular reader of The Bitter Bill, his article so eloquently titled “Jeff Can’t Make The Hall Of Fame” was his Mona Lisa, a masterpiece if you will. I think if you were to check his comment section from that particular article it would seem as if Howard Stern was his guest columnist that day, well guess what, that was the desired effect. Bill knows this guy is a HOF’er, but at the same time I think he’ll tell you to shut the Hall down if Jeff were to be elected on the first ballot. Why, you ask.
Why oh why would a bitter Mets fan be bitter over Jeff Can’t’s career evaluation? He cost us David Cone for starters, and in the words of wikipedia, this is how Can’t is remembered by us.
“Kent’s time with the Mets was marked with some success and some failure. Although he batted well, particularly for a second baseman, the Mets were among the worst teams in the National League. Furthermore, he acquired a very poor reputation in the clubhouse, where he was known for a quick temper and isolationism…. While in New York, Kent was pejoratively dubbed “Jeff Can’t.”
Ahhhh.
Jeff’s lucky Bill didn’t have write a one sentence blog like….While on the New York Mets Jeff was a punk and a compilier, on a losing team, that was no fun to watch….Because as far as were concerned that’s the bottom line.
REPORT COMMENT
February 20th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
So you blame Kent for being traded for David Cone? How does that make any sense?
And was it Kent’s responsibility as a player at the beginning of his career to make sure that a veteran Mets team wins? A team, mind you, that featured Dick Schofield, Tim Bogar an over-the-hill and often injured Howard Johnson, a yet to be roided up Todd Hundley, David Segui, Ryan Thompson and Joe Orsulak batting clean-up? This is all Kent’s fault?
And if it’s true, as you say, that Price thinks Kent’s a HOFer, then he’s being totally disingenuous and is flat out lying. And building a terrible case in the process that doesn’t hold water anywhere
REPORT COMMENT
February 21st, 2009 at 11:43 am
Whats up Paul. I just discovered your blog while browsing MLB Trade Rummors.
No I don’t blame “Can’t” for being traded for David Cone, and no it wasn’t his responsibility as a player at the beginning of his career to make sure that a veteran Mets team won. I’m just stating the obvious, the part that clearly went right over your head. Why would a Mets fan nicknamed “BITTER BILL” be bitter over the sparkling evaluation of a Mets-not-so-great nicknamed “Jeff Can’t”.
It was the perfect story for Bitter Bill’s blog. From Bitter’s point of view(in baseball terminology)…”Jeff Can’t’s” retirement was like a big fat juicy meatball served up on a silver platter, and to be frank with you. Bitter hit a breath-taking, aesthetically-pleasing” “soaring majestic big fly” “high and deep and way back there”
Forgive me for being so blunt. Kudos to you and your blog.
REPORT COMMENT
February 23rd, 2009 at 12:05 am
Whats up. I’m fully aware it’s your right your right to delete this comment, but if you dish it then you should be ready to take it. If you do delete it, would you please send me an E-Mail and tell me why.
No I don’t blame “Can’t” for being traded for David Cone, and no it wasn’t his responsibility as a player at the beginning of his career to make sure that a veteran Mets team won. I’m just stating the obvious, the part that clearly went right over your head. Why would a Mets fan nicknamed “BITTER BILL” be bitter over the sparkling evaluation of a Mets-not-so-great nicknamed “Jeff Can’t”.
It was the perfect story for Bitter Bill’s blog. From Bitter’s point of view(in baseball terminology)…”Jeff Can’t’s” retirement was like a big fat juicy meatball served up on a silver platter, and to be frank with you. Bitter hit a “breath-taking, aesthetically-pleasing” “soaring majestic big fly” “high and deep and way back there”
REPORT COMMENT
February 23rd, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Hey MegaMets. Sorry, man. I don’t think anyone here deleted your comment. I’m seeing it now though so not sure what was going on. We here at Umpbump can definitely take some punishment and keep coming back.
Here’s my problem with Price’s column – it comes off as insincere. He’s picking fights because that’s what he does. If all he does is complain, then only a few people take him seriously. After a while, it just becomes “ignore him, this is just what he does”.
Besides, it was his rationale that bothered me more. He just automatically said that Kent shouldn’t be thought of as a second baseman – a ridiculous premise since he very clearly was – and built an argument around that. There was no foundation upon which he could actually build an argument. He began with this because this twisted rationale was the only way he could get a column on this.
REPORT COMMENT
February 24th, 2009 at 2:21 am
Your still missing the point. If Bill’s Mets blog was named “Grey Skies Are Going To Clear Up” than obviously, obviously, Bill Price would have wrote a sparkling piece on Kent, but since Bill’s blog is named “The Bitter Bill” Bill’s going to adhere to that theme.
To me this is not rocket science.
I tune into the Bitter Bill because in all honesty I’m bitter about The Mets right now, and do not want to see Mets-Killers praised from here to high heaven or to the hall of fame. Not to mention it’s the best damn blog on the New York Daily News. Which does have a substitute Mets Blog where articles like “Jeff Cant Make The Hall Of Fame” do not exist. That’s Adam Rubin’s blog “Surfing The Mets”. That is my second favorite blog on the Daily News. My third favorite is Warzone. I go there to pay my respects to our fallen soldiers. War, a topic that obviously has to be taken very very seriously.
When I visit each of the different blogs I know what to expect, because they all adhere to their themes, and that’s all Bill was doing when he wrote his masterpiece “Jeff Cant Make The Hall Of Fame”.
REPORT COMMENT
February 24th, 2009 at 10:54 am
No, it’s not rocket science. And I get the “point” just fine. But the “point” is incredibly flawed. I understand that being angry is his schtick. But he’s being angry for the sake of being angry. It doesn’t come across as something he truly feels. It sounds like an argument he just made up to get a column in to his editor on time. If you want to read contrarian points of view, that’s fine and I understand that desire. But Bill Price doesn’t do it well. Especially not here.
REPORT COMMENT
February 24th, 2009 at 11:40 am
And really, what’s the value in being contrary just to be contrary? I don’t want to read something you wrote but don’t actually believe to be true. This is the problem with so much of what’s on ESPN these days. For example, ESPN’s Skip Bayless/Woody Paige debates sucked so hard because neither of them actually believed what they were saying. They were just arguing with each other because ESPN told them that’s what makes good TV.
REPORT COMMENT