HOF results

[ejharrington]

In my opinion, Jeff Kent should be in the HOF. Bobby Grich should not be. Kent was considered elite during his peak years. I don't recall Grich being perceived the same way.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

In my opinion, Jeff Kent should be in the HOF. Bobby Grich should not be. Kent was considered elite during his peak years. I don't recall Grich being perceived the same way.

Kent made five all star teams, Grich six.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Good article on Kent and his HOF case.

http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/12/16/jaw...llot-jeff-kent

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kent made five all star teams, Grich six.

I know, but Kent won the MVP and seemed to me more dominant than Grich in his prime.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

I know, but Kent won the MVP and seemed to me more dominant than Grich in his prime.

Turning to peak WAR, covering his best seven seasons, Kent's 35.6 ranks 25th, about nine wins behind the average Hall of Fame second baseman and below 13 of the 19 enshrined. Kent is hurt on both WAR fronts because he had just three seasons of at least 5.0 WAR, all of them from 1999 to 2001, and two more seasons of at least 4.0 WAR. By comparison, Morgan had 10 seasons of at least 5.0 WAR. Alomar, Cano, Grich, Sandberg and Utley had six apiece, and Biggio, Rod Carew and Dustin Pedroia recorded five. Even at the 4.0 WAR bar, 11 post-expansion second basemen had more big seasons.

In the end, Kent's 45.4 JAWS is 12.6 points below the Hall standard for second basemen, 18th all-time but below 11 of the 19 Hall of Famers, and too far to be made up by the parts of his resumé that the system doesn't capture, mainly the awards and the postseason (a characteristic .276/.340/.500 with nine homers in 189 PA). Outside of his 2000 MVP award, his highest finish was sixth, and he made just five All-Star teams. He scores 122 ("a good possibility") on the Bill James Hall of Fame Monitor, but the average score for a Hall of Fame second baseman is 161.

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Turning to peak WAR, covering his best seven seasons, Kent's 35.6 ranks 25th, about nine wins behind the average Hall of Fame second baseman and below 13 of the 19 enshrined. Kent is hurt on both WAR fronts because he had just three seasons of at least 5.0 WAR, all of them from 1999 to 2001, and two more seasons of at least 4.0 WAR. By comparison, Morgan had 10 seasons of at least 5.0 WAR. Alomar, Cano, Grich, Sandberg and Utley had six apiece, and Biggio, Rod Carew and Dustin Pedroia recorded five. Even at the 4.0 WAR bar, 11 post-expansion second basemen had more big seasons.

In the end, Kent's 45.4 JAWS is 12.6 points below the Hall standard for second basemen, 18th all-time but below 11 of the 19 Hall of Famers, and too far to be made up by the parts of his resumé that the system doesn't capture, mainly the awards and the postseason (a characteristic .276/.340/.500 with nine homers in 189 PA). Outside of his 2000 MVP award, his highest finish was sixth, and he made just five All-Star teams. He scores 122 ("a good possibility") on the Bill James Hall of Fame Monitor, but the average score for a Hall of Fame second baseman is 161.

I know, I have the JAWS stats on my favorites. WAR / JAWS is helpful but by itself is not a bright line for or against Hall induction, especially since defensive WAR is highly suspect and in some cases totally inaccurate. I know Bobby Grich's baseball cards were in the commons bin growing up. He was underrated but not considered an elite player during his day.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

I know, I have the JAWS stats on my favorites. WAR / JAWS is helpful but by itself is not a bright line for or against Hall induction, especially since defensive WAR is highly suspect and in some cases totally inaccurate. I know Bobby Grich's baseball cards were in the commons bin growing up. He was underrated but not considered an elite player during his day.

And Kent's were valuable?

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And Kent's were valuable?

LOL, by that time none of them were...

[UnVme7]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kent made five all star teams, Grich six.

I take All Star appearances with a grain of salt in all sports where fans vote.

Example- Adrian Beltre(who I believe will be a HOF'er btw), hit 48 HR's with a .330 BA in 2004, second in MVP behind Bonds and didn't make an All Star appearance that year.

It looks good when you have them, but if you don't, I don't put into much consideration. I look more at the top 15 MVP each year.

[UnVme7]

Originally Posted by UnVme7

I take All Star appearances with a grain of salt in all sports where fans vote.

Example- Adrian Beltre(who I believe will be a HOF'er btw), hit 48 HR's with a .330 BA in 2004, second in MVP behind Bonds and didn't make an All Star appearance that year.

It looks good when you have them, but if you don't, I don't put into much consideration. I look more at the top 15 MVP each year.

Speaking of MVP-

Grich
MVP (yr lg (rk, shr))
1972 AL (14, 5%)
1973 AL (19, 3%)
1974 AL (9, 15%)
1979 AL (8, 15%)
1981 AL (14, 5%)
0.43 Career Shares (501st)

Kent
MVP (yr lg (rk, shr))
1997 NL (8, 20%)
1998 NL (9, 12%)
1999 NL (26, 0%)
2000 NL (1, 88%)
2002 NL (6, 30%)
2004 NL (13, 4%)
2005 NL (19, 4%)
1 MVP
1.58 Career Shares (145th)

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by UnVme7

Speaking of MVP-

Grich
MVP (yr lg (rk, shr))
1972 AL (14, 5%)
1973 AL (19, 3%)
1974 AL (9, 15%)
1979 AL (8, 15%)
1981 AL (14, 5%)
0.43 Career Shares (501st)

Kent
MVP (yr lg (rk, shr))
1997 NL (8, 20%)
1998 NL (9, 12%)
1999 NL (26, 0%)
2000 NL (1, 88%)
2002 NL (6, 30%)
2004 NL (13, 4%)
2005 NL (19, 4%)
1 MVP
1.58 Career Shares (145th)

I am not sure what the point of this is. It has already been established that Grich always has been overlooked as a player. "Cards in the common bin" and all that.

It has also been established that be was a better hitter than Kent when judged against the other players of his time, and when judged by WAR. Grich also won four gold gloves and likely should have won several more. He was a top defensive second baseman.

Kent no so much.

Better hitter. FAR better fielder. Vastly undervalued.

Tom C

[UnVme7]

Because someone brought up All Star appearances between the 2, and in my previous post I stated that...

Ehh, just scroll up and read it. I put MVP because All Star appearances are pointless.

[AndrewJerome]

Very interesting thread. Comparing real world perceptions of player value (i.e watching guys play) to pure statistical analysis is something modern MLB upper management seems to have trouble balancing, and this thread is no different.

[UnVme7]

Originally Posted by AndrewJerome

Very interesting thread. Comparing real world perceptions of player value (i.e watching guys play) to pure statistical analysis is something modern MLB upper management seems to have trouble balancing, and this thread is no different.

Yep. I don't go off of WAR and all this new stuff in the last 5 yrs. I just watch the players with my own eyes. You'd think that would be good enough.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by AndrewJerome

Very interesting thread. Comparing real world perceptions of player value (i.e watching guys play) to pure statistical analysis is something modern MLB upper management seems to have trouble balancing, and this thread is no different.

Very true. I was never all that impressed with Kent, but given all the guys here whose opinion is that Kent should be in the HOF, I checked out his stats. To me, they still don't add up to HOF:

• His hitting was above average, but certainly not great.
• He was MVP once, but other than that never received more than 6 votes.
• He never won a gold glove at his position, so if you are going to argue that he was a 'great' hitter compared to other second basemen, you'd also have to admit that he wasn't as great of a fielder as other second-basemen - even those playing at the same time he was;i.e-compare his hitting to those second basemen who were all-around HOF'ers.
• While his 162 game numbers are above average, he only played 140 games or more in 7 seasons, so not a great fielder and no iron man.

I think he easily makes the 'Hall of above average'