MLB Offseason

[brandx]

Kind of curious as to why on Kent, care to share?  I feel like I made my case for, what is yours against?

I am also not a fan of Kent being in the HOF. Very good player, but....

And I think the fact that teammates and writers were near unanimous in their dislike for him may have affected the vote, as well.

But here's an interesting article on the subject - if you're into thiese kinds of stats.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/an-alternative-hall-of-fame-rating-system/

[brandx]

I thought Raines is the guy that should have been voted this year. Arguably the 2nd greatest leadoff hitter in history behind Rickey.

As far as Kent, he was a good hitter in a live ball/steroid era. But, he only made the All-star team 5 times in 17 years. And while the all-star voting doesn't always reflect a players full value, it still means he wasn't even considered among the top two 2nd basemen in just one league for the vast majority of his career.

And his best seasons were at the height of the steroid era at the age where, historically, players start their decline.

[buckchuckler]

I thought Raines is the guy that should have been voted this year. Arguably the 2nd greatest leadoff hitter in history behind Rickey.

As far as Kent, he was a good hitter in a live ball/steroid era. But, he only made the All-star team 5 times in 17 years. And while the all-star voting doesn't always reflect a players full value, it still means he wasn't even considered among the top two 2nd basemen in just one league for the vast majority of his career.

And his best seasons were at the height of the steroid era at the age where, historically, players start their decline.

I'm with you on Raines.  I didn't include him because it looks like he will get in next year, as his numbers keep rising and he is pretty close right now.  It is a little funny, I am a White Sox fan, and had Raines to watch closely for a while.  I never once thought of him as a hall of fame player.  I mostly missed his prime in Montreal, he certainly was a premium leadoff hitter, even for the Sox.  Pretty definitive for what a team would look for in a great leadoff man. 

And I get you on Kent, I guess my only thing is, has there ever been any whispers of him being involved in roids?  I mean, more so than anyone else in the era?  There is quite a bit of evidence against guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, and many many more.  I sure wouldn't be surprised at all if Kent was one of those guys, but right now, I can't remember any evidence, heck even stories that link him.  Maybe I'm wrong or mis-remembering.  I can't be sure.  I am also all for keeping guys with credible doubt of PHDs out of the Hall.  But with the only evidence being that he hit homers into his mid-late 30's... I don't know, I guess I'd give the benefit of the doubt, even if it is ignoring a bad smell. 

Hmm as I'm writing this I don't know.  He was pretty much always productive though.  In his first full season he hit 21hr and knocked in 80.  That was in 1993.  In 94 he slugged higher, and had a better OPS, but didn't have the totals because he was limited to 107 games.  He never had a season in which he reached 500 PA where he didn't hit 20 hrs.  Actually if you split his career in half, he had just about the exact same production in the first half as the second. 

I don't know.  I guess he is an interesting case.  I guess I hope he gets more time on the ballot, so that stories may come out or he may be cleared more or what.   

[buckchuckler]

I am also not a fan of Kent being in the HOF. Very good player, but....

And I think the fact that teammates and writers were near unanimous in their dislike for him may have affected the vote, as well.

But here's an interesting article on the subject - if you're into thiese kinds of stats.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/an-alternative-hall-of-fame-rating-system/

Pretty interesting.  And by this measure, and others, wow did Edmonds get screwed. 

[MerrittsMustache]

Career WAR
Sandberg: 67.5
Kent: 55.2

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

My knock on Kent has nothing to to with PED. As stated before I am all for guys like Bonds being inducted. Just when you say the name Jeff Kent I don't think, Hall of Famer. Very good overall player, yes. But did he really do anything exceptional? I dunno, just my own opinion I guess.

But with that being said, I still feel like my opinion is more valid than the guys who didn't vote for Maddux or Griffey

[brandx]

I'm with you on Raines.  I didn't include him because it looks like he will get in next year, as his numbers keep rising and he is pretty close right now.  It is a little funny, I am a White Sox fan, and had Raines to watch closely for a while.  I never once thought of him as a hall of fame player.  I mostly missed his prime in Montreal, he certainly was a premium leadoff hitter, even for the Sox.  Pretty definitive for what a team would look for in a great leadoff man. 

And I get you on Kent, I guess my only thing is, has there ever been any whispers of him being involved in roids?  I mean, more so than anyone else in the era?  There is quite a bit of evidence against guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, and many many more.  I sure wouldn't be surprised at all if Kent was one of those guys, but right now, I can't remember any evidence, heck even stories that link him.  Maybe I'm wrong or mis-remembering.  I can't be sure.  I am also all for keeping guys with credible doubt of PHDs out of the Hall.  But with the only evidence being that he hit homers into his mid-late 30's... I don't know, I guess I'd give the benefit of the doubt, even if it is ignoring a bad smell. 

Hmm as I'm writing this I don't know.  He was pretty much always productive though.  In his first full season he hit 21hr and knocked in 80.  That was in 1993.  In 94 he slugged higher, and had a better OPS, but didn't have the totals because he was limited to 107 games.  He never had a season in which he reached 500 PA where he didn't hit 20 hrs.  Actually if you split his career in half, he had just about the exact same production in the first half as the second. 

I don't know.  I guess he is an interesting case.  I guess I hope he gets more time on the ballot, so that stories may come out or he may be cleared more or what.

I understand the sentiment for Kent. He was a very good player for a long time. I also think he was the victim of a year when there were more than a dozen good candidates.

Jim Edmonds didn't even get enough votes to merit getting back on the ballot next year. And, if you look at advanced stats, he was a better player in his prime years than Kent. Kent was better offensively, but brutal on defense. Edmonds was very good offensively, and outstanding on defense in a prime up-the middle spot.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/appreciating-jim-edmonds/

[🏀]

Edmonds can suck it.

[Blackhat]

McGuire was a consistent all-star before roids made him god-like.   He should get in.  Same with Bonds.  Sosa just sucked before roids, him, Pudge, and Juan Gonzalez should be out.

[buckchuckler]

Career WAR
Sandberg: 67.5
Kent: 55.2

Ugh.  I did't say Kent was a better player.  I said Kent was a better hitter.  Obviously, as I have mentioned, Sandberg was a much better defender.  But just the fact that Kent compares on any level to a guy most would consider the best hitter of the Hall's 2B, should say that he deserves some pretty serious consideration. 

[buckchuckler]

But with that being said, I still feel like my opinion is more valid than the guys who didn't vote for Maddux or Griffey

Definitely true. 

Again, for Kent, I think the offense he provided at the position he played needs to be considered.  If he was a 1B, I would say he doesn't deserve enshrinement.  But he wasn't.  For a 9 season stretch he averaged .296/.365/.529 with 28 Hrs and 110 RBI.  If you take any cloud of suspicion out or don't care about it, those are numbers that really stand with the best among other second basemen.

[buckchuckler]

I understand the sentiment for Kent. He was a very good player for a long time. I also think he was the victim of a year when there were more than a dozen good candidates.

Jim Edmonds didn't even get enough votes to merit getting back on the ballot next year. And, if you look at advanced stats, he was a better player in his prime years than Kent. Kent was better offensively, but brutal on defense. Edmonds was very good offensively, and outstanding on defense in a prime up-the middle spot.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/appreciating-jim-edmonds/

I certainly liked to watch Edmonds more than Kent.  I loved the flash with which he played.  Great two way player.  I think its a shame he dropped off in one ballot. 

[🏀]

McGuire was a consistent all-star before roids made him god-like.   He should get in.  Same with Bonds.  Sosa just sucked before roids, him, Pudge, and Juan Gonzalez should be out.

McGwire was an all star twice 'before' using steroids.

[brandx]

McGwire was an all star twice 'before' using steroids.

He hit 49 HR his 2nd year in the league and averaged almost 100 walks a season (including the 4 years he was injured for the majority of the season). with almost a .400 OBP

We also need to keep in mind that he was often facing pitchers who were using steroids.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

We also need to keep in mind that he was often facing pitchers who were using steroids.

This is the fact I always refer too. It wasn't just big name pitchers who were roided up. It was mediocre pitchers who were trying to keep themselves in the league and on the mound for more games. I think there was a much higher percentage of pitchers on roids than position players. Someone can fact check me on that. Too lazy to look it up right now.

[CTWarrior]

He hit 49 HR his 2nd year in the league and averaged almost 100 walks a season (including the 4 years he was injured for the majority of the season). with almost a .400 OBP

We also need to keep in mind that he was often facing pitchers who were using steroids.

Mark McGwire's age 27-30 seasons

154G  .201  22  75
139G  .268  42  104
27G   .333  9  24
47G   .252  9  25

His career through age 30 (ages 22-30, 9 seasons - into decline phase for players historically, and probably on the juice already for quite some time)

.250  238  657  (Good but not HOF-worthy if he continued on a normal trajectory.)

His numbers ages 31-37

.278  345  757

I don't think he would have put of HOF numbers without the help.  I think you can make a strong case that Clemens and especially Bonds were HOFers anyway, but anyone else is a tough sell for me.

[brandx]

This is the fact I always refer too. It wasn't just big name pitchers who were roided up. It was mediocre pitchers who were trying to keep themselves in the league and on the mound for more games. I think there was a much higher percentage of pitchers on roids than position players. Someone can fact check me on that. Too lazy to look it up right now.

I think you make an important point.

It wasn't just the stars whop were using.

[tower912]

Upton to the Tigers.   Ilitch wants to win NOW and doesn't care about salary caps or long term ramifications. 

[buckchuckler]

Upton to the Tigers.   Ilitch wants to win NOW and doesn't care about salary caps or long term ramifications.

Gotta love an owner that just goes for it.  I heard the Tigers just became just the second team in history to hand out 2 100+ million contracts in the same offseason (the other is of course the Yanks).  The crazy thing for the Tigers, is they basically just replaced Price and Cespedes with Zimmerman and Upton. 

[tower912]

More importantly, they addressed their bullpen.   There is a chance that there will be a 100% turnover in their pen between opening day 2015 and opening day 2016.   Rondon may show enough to make the team.     They got Zimmerman for a lot less than they would have had to pay Price, and Upton for a lot less than Cespedes wants. 

[🏀]

More importantly, they addressed their bullpen.   There is a chance that there will be a 100% turnover in their pen between opening day 2015 and opening day 2016.   Rondon may show enough to make the team.     They got Zimmerman for a lot less than they would have had to pay Price, and Upton for a lot less than Cespedes wants. 

Wasn't it reported that Cespedes wants 6yr/$132m?

[tower912]

Wasn't it reported that Cespedes wants 6yr/$132m?

I thought I read 7yr/$200m, but I can't find it. 

[🏀]

I thought I read 7yr/$200m, but I can't find it. 

[tower912]

Completely agree.    Guess I will have to eat more Little Caesar's Pizzas

[Lennys Tap]

I thought I read 7yr/$200m, but I can't find it.

7 years 200 million may be what he wants but I think he'll be lucky to get Upton money/duration. He's 30, and lots of teams have traded him or let him walk.