Best team with no HOFers or HOF caliber players?

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

1981 Dodgers?

I was thinking about them, but its hard to say how dominant they really were, due the '81 strike. Their record was 63-47 for 2nd best in the NL West.

And they eeked by in both their Divisional and NL Championship Series with 3-2 series wins.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

I was thinking about them, but its hard to say how dominant they really were, due the '81 strike. Their record was 63-47 for 2nd best in the NL West.

And they eked by in both their Divisional and NL Championship Series with 3-2 series wins.

Agreed, but they're only the second champion we've been able to come up with i think, besides the Angels.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Agreed, but they're only the second champion we've been able to come up with i think, besides the Angels.

Did you see my posts about the Cubs (#33) and Royals (#3)? Sorry, I know I’ve posted a lot in this thread.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Did you see my posts about the Cubs (#33) and Royals (#3)? Sorry, I know I’ve posted a lot in this thread.

OH, right you are, my mindset going in was teams from the past, not teams with current players but those are good.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If you don't like Molina's chances the 2011 Cardinals maybe? Am I missing someone there, I don't think Wainwright makes it.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you don't like Molina's chances the 2011 Cardinals maybe? Am I missing someone there, I don't think Wainwright makes it.

Pujols was on the 2011 Cardinals

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Pujols was on the 2011 Cardinals

Ah, I was off in my mind by a year on his departure.

[D. Bergin]

If Jeff Kent had put up the bulk of his traditional stats as a 2nd Baseman in almost any other period of baseball history other then the late 90's to mid 2000's (and playing in the shadow/infamy of Bonds), he likely would have sailed in to the Hall a long time ago.

A lot of the players around him dampened his analytical numbers (and let's be honest, that's what we go by nowadays), with all of the monster offensive seasons going on around the rest of the league during that time period, he was killed by the grading curve of the era.

If Kent put up the same stats as a 2nd baseman, that he put up in 1997 to 2007, from 1977 to 1987 instead, he'd probably have a career WAR number in the range of Joe Morgan.

Lastly, I don't recall Kent ever being implicated in PEDS, but I'm sure it's hard for a lot of voters to shake a couple thoughts:

#1. He was Bonds team-mate for so long (even if they hated each other), along with team-mates with lots of other suspected PEDs cheats on other teams...and

#2. All his best seasons were essentially post prime seasons for most other players in the league (age 30 to 39).

It might just be guilt by association, but it does create certain doubts.

[packs]

How did the players around him dampen his analytical numbers?

Kent has some surface level totals that might impress you if you only looked at his raw numbers for home runs but baseball Reference has him ranked as the 21st best second baseman, with Ian Kinsler ranked just above him.

All of his advanced stats are below the average 2B Hall of Famer.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by packs

How did the players around him dampen his analytical numbers?

Kent has some surface level totals that might impress you if you only looked at his raw numbers for home runs but baseball Reference has him ranked as the 21st best second baseman, with Ian Kinsler ranked just above him.

All of his advanced stats are below the average 2B Hall of Famer.

The more other players have monster seasons around you (whether they are on PEDS or not), the less valuable your semi-monster season is going to be, from a replacement value perspective.

Again, I'm not arguing for him to be in the HOF, but when you say "surface level"...do you mean HR's, RBI's, Runs, Extra Base Hits, OBP, etc., etc., etc....

Baseball Reference has him ranked based on WAR alone.

However, Jeff Kent ranks 43rd All-Time in extra base hits...(a pretty good catch-all for your quality of batted balls to me). The only regular 2nd basemen ahead of him are Rogers Hornsby and Craig Biggio.

He's 54th All-Time in RBI's. Hornsby and Lajoie are the only regular 2nd basemen ahead of him in this category.

His surface level lifetime BA, Slugging%, OBP, OPS, and even OPS+ are all pretty impressive for a 2nd baseman IMO.

He was a competent but not spectacular 2nd baseman defensively. This does not help his overall WAR. He was thought of highly enough for multiple teams to keep trotting him out there though. Even supplanting an aging Biggio in Houston near the end of his own career.

[Peter_Spaeth]

But isn't the point of the analytics that Kent likely would NOT have put up those same numbers in a different era?

[D. Bergin]

Maybe I'm not being clear enough. I'm not posing an argument for why Jeff Kent SHOULD be in the HOF, but rather, why he is not...regardless of my personal beliefs.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

But isn't the point of the analytics that Kent likely would NOT have put up those same numbers in a different era?

I wasn't arguing otherwise. Just hypothesizing what his raw stats might have translated to in a slightly different era.