Player A vs. Player B

[Broken Parachute]

This is interesting. Some of you might catch on to who they are quickly.

Player A
.289 Avg, 354 HR, 1413 RBI, 2247 hits, .355 OBP, .503 SLG
0 Gold Gloves, 5 time All Star, 1 MVP

Player B
.285 Avg, 282 HR, 1061 RBI, 2386 hits, .344 OBP, .452 SLG
9 Gold Gloves, 10 time All Star, 1 MVP

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

I know who player B is....

Ryne Sandberg

[Clarett'sGreyGoose]

Player A has me stumped

[Broken Parachute]

Well, they play the same position, that's probably obvious. A is probably the most consistent guy offensively at his position.

[Nimrod5]

jeff kent

[xbrokendownx]

player A is jeff kent i think


a throwdown im in at fan nation brought about this

[Scott Weber]

Player A's statistics are not impressive for his era and without considering his position...for his time, Player B's stats are more impressive, and he was WAY better defensively.

[bigmike]

Player A's statistics are not impressive for his era and position...for his time, Player B's stats are more impressive, and he was WAY better defensively.
...Kent from 1997-2005 had only 1 season in which he did not drive in 100 runs, and he had 93 that year. He averages 27 HR, 109 RBI per 162 games. I don't see how it's "not impressive". He's been the most consistent offensive 2nd baseman in a long, long time (if not the best ever) and if Mike Piazza is revered for being so great offensively regarding his postion, Kent deserves the same recognition.

And if you look at Kent's comps for his career, he's got 5 HOFers in it and one (pudge rodriguez) future HOFer. Sandberg has 2, and his body of work is more Barry Larkin than anything (who should also bein the HOF, and will be come 2009).

Overall, I think i'd take Sandberg since his stellar defensive play makes up for his lack of power (comparitively to Kent). But Kents offensive production is hardly "not impressive".

[Broken Parachute]

Kent has the most HR's for a second baseman.

[Nimrod5]

Player A's statistics are not impressive for his era and position...for his time, Player B's stats are more impressive, and he was WAY better defensively.

i really don't know how you could make this statement

[Scott Weber]

...Kent from 1997-2005 had only 1 season in which he did not drive in 100 runs, and he had 93 that year. He averages 27 HR, 109 RBI per 162 games. I don't see how it's "not impressive". He's been the most consistent offensive 2nd baseman in a long, long time (if not the best ever) and if Mike Piazza is revered for being so great offensively regarding his postion, Kent deserves the same recognition.

And if you look at Kent's comps for his career, he's got 5 HOFers in it and one (pudge rodriguez) future HOFer. Sandberg has 2, and his body of work is more Barry Larkin than anything (who should also bein the HOF, and will be come 2009).

Overall, I think i'd take Sandberg since his stellar defensive play makes up for his lack of power (comparitively to Kent). But Kents offensive production is hardly "not impressive".
I'm sorry, I'll rephrase. Impressive, ok. Not outstanding. I have, personally, very high standards for the HOF, and since this is what it's implying... Jeff Kent is also a huge douchebag and that doesn't help anybody's opinion of him.

This whole "everyone nuts over Mike Piazza" card you play all the time is a bit much, too. I haven't seen everyone busting their load over Piazza half as much as you imply...although he had some stellar seasons and he's a first ballot player, I just think it's a bit much. I don't know what this has to do with anything.

[Broken Parachute]

He was talking about the relativity between position and statistics. IE: Mike Piazza and being a catcher, Jeff Kent and being a second baseman

[bigmike]

I'm sorry, I'll rephrase. Impressive, ok. Not outstanding. I have, personally, very high standards for the HOF, and since this is what it's implying... Jeff Kent is also a huge douchebag and that doesn't help anybody's opinion of him.

This whole "everyone nuts over Mike Piazza" card you play all the time is a bit much, too. I haven't seen everyone busting their load over Piazza half as much as you imply.
That is the first time I can remember bringing Mike Piazza into a debate. Also, position does matter regarding statistics. If Piazza hit 420 HR's as a 1st baseman he'd be slightly above Andres Galaragga territory so my point remains relevant and valid.

And him being a huge douchebag shouldn't have anything to do with it. Ty Cobb was a racist. Babe Ruth womanized. Doesn't diminish the on the field accolades they recieved. It's not the Noble Prize, it's rewarding what they did on the field of play over their career.

[Scott Weber]

Also, if I may, can I pose a 2nd question? What is the big deal about a guy having the most homers ever for his position if he is completely mediocre defensively AT his position? If Kent were on another team with a better defensive 2nd baseman, there's a good chance he gets moved to 3rd or more likely 1st. Then what would we be saying? His offensive stats without consideration to his position certainly aren't spectacular, they're very good, but HOF worthy? Doubtful. So why do we care where he played on the field if he wasn't that good with the glove? Why even take it into consideration?

[Scott Weber]

That is the first time I can remember bringing Mike Piazza into a debate. Also, position does matter regarding statistics. If Piazza hit 420 HR's as a 1st baseman he'd be slightly above Andres Galaragga territory so my point remains relevant and valid.

And him being a huge douchebag shouldn't have anything to do with it. Ty Cobb was a racist. Babe Ruth womanized. Doesn't diminish the on the field accolades they recieved. It's not the Noble Prize, it's rewarding what they did on the field of play over their career.
Oh I agree, I'm just saying my PERSONAL opinion of Jeff Kent isn't helped by his actions. Has nothing to do with his hall merits. And must be somebody else who plays the Piazza card.

[bigmike]

Being the best offensive 2nd baseman in history is nothing to just write off because he's average defensively. And really, all 2B are are SS's with no range.

Edit: and I may have used the piazza card at some point in another Jeff Kent discussion. He was also terrible defensively. And if you're going to punish Jeff Kent, then how can you endorse Edgar Martinez' entry into the hall of fame when he was primarily a DH?

[Broken Parachute]

In Kent's case, his consistency speaks louder than anything. He's not horrible at second base anyway, that's why he was moved there. He plays it better than he would play third base, where he started off his career.

[Scott Weber]

Being the best offensive 2nd baseman in history is nothing to just write off because he's average defensively. And really, all 2B are are SS's with no range.

Edit: and I may have used the piazza card at some point in another Jeff Kent discussion. He was also terrible defensively. And if you're going to punish Jeff Kent, then how can you endorse Edgar Martinez' entry into the hall of fame when he was primarily a DH?
But why? Why does his position matter if he's average defensively? In Sandberg's case, his glove was awesome, that's why his offensive numbers spoke so loudly.

I can endorse Edgar because he was the purest hitter in the game for a decade, hit for average and a spectacular OBP...his offensive numbers alone earn him my endorsement. I'm not "punishing" Jeff Kent...his offensive numbers just shouldn't be heralded for his position.

[Broken Parachute]

Being the best offensive 2nd baseman in history is nothing to just write off because he's average defensively. And really, all 2B are are SS's with no range.I was so angry when Art Howe moved Jose Reyes to 2B a lot of times in 2004 to make room for Kaz Matsui. Reyes has a cannon, it's an insult to put him at 2B.

[Scott Weber]

I was so angry when Art Howe moved Jose Reyes to 2B a lot of times in 2004 to make room for Kaz Matsui. Reyes has a cannon, it's an insult to put him at 2B.
Haha, I find it funny how Kaz Matsui is absolutely owning right now in Colorado.

[Nimrod5]

kent has more home runs than any other 2b in the history of the game, being the only player to have hit 300 home runs as a 2b. he's the only 2b to have ever driven in 100 runs in 8 seasons.

as for piazza, he is the best hitting catcher of all time and a first ballot hall of famer.

[Scott Weber]

kent has more home runs than any other 2b in the history of the game, being the only player to have hit 300 home runs as a 2b. he's the only 2b to have ever driven in 100 runs in 8 seasons.

as for piazza, he is the best hitting catcher of all time and a first ballot hall of famer.
Being a catcher is different than playing 2nd. The amount of abuse it puts on your entire body and playing in the national league still 150+ games a year? Crazy. 2nd base? Not so much. Why does it matter? Why?

[Broken Parachute]

Haha, I find it funny how Kaz Matsui is absolutely owning right now in Colorado.hahaha I know. Is he still hitting .300+? He's like the only guy ever to hit a HR in his first at bat three seasons in a row.

[Scott Weber]

hahaha I know. Is he still hitting .300+? He's like the only guy ever to hit a HR in his first at bat three seasons in a row.
Yeah he is, 11 SB too.

[Nimrod5]

your original post made specific reference to kent's position. in terms of his position, his numbers and consistency speak for themselves. i agree with your point regarding catchers.

[Broken Parachute]

Yeah he is, 11 SB too.hahaha I don't miss him, I love Ruben Gotay.

[Scott Weber]

your original post made specific reference to kent's position. in terms of his position, his numbers and consistency speak for themselves. i agree with your point regarding catchers.
Sure, I've reformulated my argument after actually taking 30 seconds to think about it, haha.

[bigmike]

But why? Why does his position matter if he's average defensively? In Sandberg's case, his glove was awesome, that's why his offensive numbers spoke so loudly.

I can endorse Edgar because he was the purest hitter in the game for a decade, hit for average and a spectacular OBP...his offensive numbers alone earn him my endorsement. I'm not "punishing" Jeff Kent...his offensive numbers just shouldn't be heralded for his position.
Because 2nd base wasn't ever a productive spot in the batting order. Your 2nd baseman, historically, was your weakest hitter not being your catcher. The same was true for a long while for your shortstop. I don't see how someone hitting like he's done while playing essentially average defense (.980 fielding % at 2B, league average is .982) can be dismissed. There are expectations for every position: corner infielders are the power positions, as are corner OFer's. Up the middle (C, SS, 2B) were average hitting positions or worse. they were meant to be slick fielders and Jeff Kent is breaking/has broken those expectations offensively.

[Scott Weber]

Because 2nd base wasn't ever a productive spot in the batting order. Your 2nd baseman, historically, was your weakest hitter not being your catcher. The same was true for a long while for your shortstop. I don't see how someone hitting like he's done while playing essentially average defense (.980 fielding % at 2B, league average is .982) can be dismissed. There are expectations for every position: corner infielders are the power positions, as are corner OFer's. Up the middle (C, SS, 2B) were average hitting positions or worse. they were meant to be slick fielders and Jeff Kent is breaking/has broken those expectations offensively.
But if Kent was on other teams with an actual good fielding 2nd baseman, he wouldn't of played there. You see my point? If 2nd base is a historically weak hitting position, then why don't we just say "Ok, I guess there's barely any 2nd basemen that belong in the hall of fame - especially if they weren't great with the glove." Why do we reward a guy who's numbers are borderline HOF, probably not, because of where he played on the field? I understand expectations, but who cares? A bat is a bat, no matter where the guy plays on the field.

I have a feeling this is going to go nowhere.


One last thing:

Player C: 352 HRs, 1206 RBI, .291 hitter, 2107 hits. Is anybody calling Ellis Burks' name to the hall? No. But because a guy played a mediocre 2nd base with similar offensive numbers he's HOF candidate? Don't buy it.

[bigmike]

But if Kent was on other teams with an actual good fielding 2nd baseman, he wouldn't of played there. You see my point? If 2nd base is a historically weak hitting position, then why don't we just say "Ok, I guess there's barely any 2nd basemen that belong in the hall of fame - especially if they weren't great with the glove." Why do we reward a guy who's numbers are borderline HOF, probably not, because of where he played on the field? I understand expectations, but who cares? A bat is a bat, no matter where the guy plays on the field.

I have a feeling this is going to go nowhere.


One last thing:

Player C: 352 HRs, 1206 RBI, .291 hitter, 2107 hits. Is anybody calling Ellis Burks' name to the hall? No. But because a guy played a mediocre 2nd base with similar offensive numbers he's HOF candidate? Don't buy it.
I understand what you're saying, but I just disagree. And if there were a better fielding 2nd baseman on his team, it wouldn't supplant him because of how potent Kent's bat is (whether or not it's HOF worthy, 25+ HR, and 100+ RBI year in year out is potent).

Burks is Kent's 5th best Comp. you left out Berra, Pudge Rodriguez, Johnny Bench, and Carlton Fisk who are all HOFer's and his 1-4 comps.

Conversely, Edgar Martinez' top 5 career comps are: Will Clark, John Olerud, Bernie Williams, Bob Johnson and Ellis Burks. The only one having an HOF monitor above 100 being Bernie Williams.

[Scott Weber]

I understand what you're saying, but I just disagree. And if there were a better fielding 2nd baseman on his team, it wouldn't supplant him because of how potent Kent's bat is (whether or not it's HOF worthy, 25+ HR, and 100+ RBI year in year out is potent).

Burks is Kent's 5th best Comp. you left out Berra, Pudge Rodriguez, Johnny Bench, and Carlton Fisk who are all HOFer's and his 1-4 comps.

Conversely, Edgar Martinez' top 5 career comps are: Will Clark, John Olerud, Bernie Williams, Bob Johnson and Ellis Burks. The only one having an HOF monitor above 100 being Bernie Williams.
This isn't about Edgar. Stop. I wasn't trying to hide anything by leaving out the other comps. I was making a point with Burks.

[thejetstolehome]

Jeff Kent v. Ryne Sandberg

i did this comparasin @ fannation.com yesterday.

[bigmike]

This isn't about Edgar. Stop. I wasn't trying to hide anything by leaving out the other comps. I was making a point with Burks.
And Ellis Burks is only the 5th most comparable player to Jeff Kent. If you want to compare, why don't you use the first 4? All of which are HOFers. I brought up Edgar since you think he's an HOFer (much like I think Kent is) and he's got terrible comps as his top 5. It's easy to pick and choose what comps to use to back your argument up.

[+thecalisonme]

kent is a hall of fame lock how you could argue against is silly

[Scott Weber]

And Ellis Burks is only the 5th most comparable player to Jeff Kent. If you want to compare, why don't you use the first 4? All of which are HOFers. I brought up Edgar since you think he's an HOFer (much like I think Kent is) and he's got terrible comps as his top 5. It's easy to pick and choose what comps to use to back your argument up.
Because the first FOUR are all catchers, and I already said how impressive it was to put up those kind of numbers with the abuse your body takes as a catcher, to be that good offensively for that long is a whole different ballgame than being a 2nd basemen with a below average glove. See: when I said this, talking about Piazza. You can't compare their arms/defense/abuse on the body to what Kent has been through...which is why I went with the first non-catcher average defender in Burks.

Being a catcher is different than playing 2nd. The amount of abuse it puts on your entire body and playing in the national league still 150+ games a year? Crazy. 2nd base? Not so much. Why does it matter? Why?

...

Baseball Reference only takes comps based on offensive stats, not defense.

[youkwalks]

kent is a hall of fame lock how you could argue against is silly
I dont know if I would personally consider him a lock, but if Sanberg gets in Kent should be in.

[bigmike]

Because the first FOUR are all catchers, and I already said how impressive it was to put up those kind of numbers with the abuse your body takes as a catcher, to be that good offensively for that long is a whole different ballgame than being a 2nd basemen with a below average glove. See: when I said this, talking about Piazza. You can't compare their arms/defense/abuse on the body to what Kent has been through...which is why I went with the first non-catcher average defender in Burks.



...

Baseball Reference only takes comps based on offensive stats, not defense.
So why not look towards Ron Santo, Joe Cronin, or Ken Boyer who are infielders? And their HOF Monitors are based on their offense because defense is a hard thing to judge, statistically speaking. So if you are going solely based on offensive production, those comps are still legit.

Sandberg's better defensively, but Kent's better production offensively outweighs him being an average 2B in the field. If Sandberg's offensive production+defense gets him in, Kent's MUCH better offensive production and still playing league average defense should get him in.

[Scott Weber]

So why not look towards Ron Santo, Joe Cronin, or Ken Boyer who are infielders? And their HOF Monitors are based on their offense because defense is a hard thing to judge, statistically speaking. So if you are going solely based on offensive production, those comps are still legit.

Sandberg's better defensively, but Kent's better production offensively outweighs him being an average 2B in the field. If Sandberg's offensive production+defense gets him in, Kent's MUCH better offensive production and still playing league average defense should get him in.
Gee, I don't know, because I was making a point and Ellis Burks is a player we grew up with and nobody would consider him a HOF candidate despite his comparable stats. And Santo, Cronin, Boyer? Not HOFers. Only enforces my point more.

And really? Is it "MUCH" better? Why don't we take their 162 game averages.

Kent: .288, .355 OBP, 27 HR, 109 RBI, 7 SB, 57 BB, 111 SO
Sandberg: .285, .344 OBP, 21 HR, 79 RBI, 26 SB, 57 BB, 94 SO.

(Funny how SB conveniently got left out of the initial comparison)

Those are pretty damn close. Kent has the obvious edge in power and RBI, but Sandberg stole WAY more bases and struck out less. Part (not all) of the RBI difference is because Kent, if I'm not mistaken, primarily hit cleanup while Sandberg batted 2nd most of the time. The BA/OBP is obviously quite close. Combine that with Sandberg's glove, and there's a reason why Sandberg is in. Plus, Sandberg hit 40 HRs in a season and stole 56 bases in another on his way to 344 career steals.

[thejetstolehome]

Haha, I find it funny how Kaz Matsui is absolutely owning right now in Colorado.

haha, my friend is all over his nuts.

[+thecalisonme]

Gee, I don't know, because I was making a point and Ellis Burks is a player we grew up with and nobody would consider him a HOF candidate despite his comparable stats. And Santo, Cronin, Boyer? Not HOFers. Only enforces my point more.

And really? Is it "MUCH" better? Why don't we take their 162 game averages.

Kent: .288, .355 OBP, 27 HR, 109 RBI, 7 SB, 57 BB, 111 SO
Sandberg: .285, .344 OBP, 21 HR, 79 RBI, 26 SB, 57 BB, 94 SO.

(Funny how SB conveniently got left out of the initial comparison)

Those are pretty damn close. Kent has the obvious edge in power and RBI, but Sandberg stole WAY more bases and struck out less. Part (not all) of the RBI difference is because Kent, if I'm not mistaken, primarily hit cleanup while Sandberg batted 2nd most of the time. The BA/OBP is obviously quite close. Combine that with Sandberg's glove, and there's a reason why Sandberg is in. Plus, Sandberg hit 40 HRs in a season and stole 56 bases in another on his way to 344 career steals.
who cares how many bases he stole they both scored roughly the same amount of runs

[bigmike]

Gee, I don't know, because I was making a point and Ellis Burks is a player we grew up with and nobody would consider him a HOF candidate despite his comparable stats. And Santo, Cronin, Boyer? Not HOFers. Only enforces my point more.

And really? Is it "MUCH" better? Why don't we take their 162 game averages.

Kent: .288, .355 OBP, 27 HR, 109 RBI, 7 SB, 57 BB, 111 SO
Sandberg: .285, .344 OBP, 21 HR, 79 RBI, 26 SB, 57 BB, 94 SO.

(Funny how SB conveniently got left out of the initial comparison)

Those are pretty damn close. Kent has the obvious edge in power and RBI, but Sandberg stole WAY more bases and struck out less. Part (not all) of the RBI difference is because Kent, if I'm not mistaken, primarily hit cleanup while Sandberg batted 2nd most of the time. The BA/OBP is obviously quite close. Combine that with Sandberg's glove, and there's a reason why Sandberg is in. Plus, Sandberg hit 40 HRs in a season and stole 56 bases in another on his way to 344 career steals.
Actually, Cronin is a HOFer and Bill James has stated that Gil Hodges and Ron Santo are the two biggest exclusions from the HOF out there.

He K'd 17 times less, not like he was a 1:1 K:BB guy. And why leave out their 162 game average slugging percentages? Kent's is .503, Sandberg's is .452. A 50 point difference makes up for the steals.

Sandberg also played in Wrigley, a hitters park while Kent's spent time in Shea Stadium, Candlestick Park (before SBC or whatever it's called now opened) and is now in LA which isn't a hitters park either. His numbers offensively are better and, for me, make up the difference between their gloves. I'm not overly worried about the steals as Sandberg was more of a speed player then Kent was, who was more of a run producer.

[youkwalks]

but, Webs, in your comparison, if Sanberg gets in why do you leave Kent out when they have comparable stats? Because Sanberg is better with the glove? Kent is not too bad himself: http://pages.map.com/pinto/charts/11192004.htm

John Dewan and the fielding bible rank him about average.

So if Kent is average defensive second basemen, but above average offensively for second basemen, shouldn't he at least equal Sanberg? And since Sanberg got in....Kent should as well, no?

[Scott Weber]

Actually, Cronin is a HOFer and Bill James has stated that Gil Hodges and Ron Santo are the two biggest exclusions from the HOF out there.

He K'd 17 times less, not like he was a 1:1 K:BB guy. And why leave out their 162 game average slugging percentages? Kent's is .503, Sandberg's is .452. A 50 point difference makes up for the steals.

Sandberg also played in Wrigley, a hitters park while Kent's spent time in Shea Stadium, Candlestick Park (before SBC or whatever it's called now opened) and is now in LA which isn't a hitters park either. His numbers offensively are better and, for me, make up the difference between their gloves. I'm not overly worried about the steals as Sandberg was more of a speed player then Kent was, who was more of a run producer.
Are you Bill James? Do you ever think for yourself? I wonder sometimes. You do have valid points though (fortunately Bill James is a smart dude and I agree with him 90% of the time). I think there's arguments for both sides, we are never going to agree on this one. Jeff Kent is an underrated player but I don't think he should be rewarded for playing a weak position historically when his offensive numbers alone don't merit the HOF - to this point. Of course, we'll see how much longer he plays.

[Scott Weber]

but, Webs, in your comparison, if Sanberg gets in why do you leave Kent out when they have comparable stats? Because Sanberg is better with the glove? Kent is not too bad himself: http://pages.map.com/pinto/charts/11192004.htm

John Dewan and the fielding bible rank him about average.

So if Kent is average defensive second basemen, but above average offensively for second basemen, shouldn't he at least equal Sanberg? And since Sanberg got in....Kent should as well, no?
Did you only show the 2004 season on purpose? I'd like to see his career numbers. Bigmike mentioned that his career FP is below the league average at his position. And no, I think I've made my argument on Sandberg vs. Kent crystal clear, so I'm not going to type it all out again, you can read 5 posts up to see the in-depth explanation.

[youkwalks]

Are you Bill James? Do you ever think for yourself? I wonder sometimes.
outside sources have never and should never been used in an argument....

and don't act like you have never quoted somebody's work.

[Scott Weber]

outside sources have never and should never been used in an argument....

and don't act like you have never quoted somebody's work.
Oh come on, clearly not the point of that statement. I never thought I'd say this, because it's one of the reasons I love this place, but....damn, you guys are too serious sometimes.

[bigmike]

Are you Bill James? Do you ever think for yourself? I wonder sometimes. You do have valid points though (fortunately Bill James is a smart dude and I agree with him 90% of the time). I think there's arguments for both sides, we are never going to agree on this one. Jeff Kent is an underrated player but I don't think he should be rewarded for playing a weak position historically when his offensive numbers alone don't merit the HOF - to this point. Of course, we'll see how much longer he plays.
Actually I had stated that I thought Ron Santo should be in the HOF and only came across Bill James' quotes on Santo's wikipedia page when i was looking up backround info on him after you were ripping him and wondering how the cornerstone of a franchise for more then a decade and the best 3B in their history and a fan favorite would get a radio color commentary job.

But thanks.
Did you only show the 2004 season on purpose? I'd like to see his career numbers. Bigmike mentioned that his career FP is below the league average at his position. And no, I think I've made my argument on Sandberg vs. Kent crystal clear, so I'm not going to type it all out again, you can read 5 posts up to see the in-depth explanation.
baseball reference has his Fielding % at like .980 with league average being .982. Essentially league average defensively with above average offensive production.

[Scott Weber]

Actually I had stated that I thought Ron Santo should be in the HOF and only came across Bill James' quotes on Santo's wikipedia page when i was looking up backround info on him after you were ripping him and wondering how the cornerstone of a franchise for more then a decade and the best 3B in their history and a fan favorite would get a radio color commentary job.

But thanks.

baseball reference has his Fielding % at like .980 with league average being .982. Essentially league average defensively with above average offensive production.
Oh I'm sorry, do I detect a hint of sarcasm in that post? Haha. I don't care what he was as a player, if he can't bring anything remotely insightful or unbiased into the booth, he doesn't belong. I'd kick Griffey out of the booth in 10 years if all he did was scream "YEAH YEAH GO MARINERS YEAH YEAH!" And thanks, Kent's defense is below average.

[youkwalks]

Did you only show the 2004 season on purpose? I'd like to see his career numbers. Bigmike mentioned that his career FP is below the league average at his position. And no, I think I've made my argument on Sandberg vs. Kent crystal clear, so I'm not going to type it all out again, you can read 5 posts up to see the in-depth explanation.
Well I figured a graph may grab your attention and thats the only graph they have, but if you must, http://www.tangotiger.net/UZR0003.html, UZR has him at about average from 2000 to 2003 as well.

and you did say this in your "in-depth explanation":
The BA/OBP is obviously quite close. Combine that with Sandberg's glove, and there's a reason why Sandberg is in Sandberg had a .796 ops and Kent had a .858. If we're taking defense into account this should put them level.

You stated that Sandberg should be in and Kent is not a HoF player...

[+thecalisonme]

does this mean you dont think joe morgan should be in the hall of fame

[bigmike]

Oh I'm sorry, do I detect a hint of sarcasm in that post? Haha. I don't care what he was as a player, if he can't bring anything remotely insightful or unbiased into the booth, he doesn't belong. I'd kick Griffey out of the booth in 10 years if all he did was scream "YEAH YEAH GO MARINERS YEAH YEAH!" And thanks, Kent's defense is below average.
Me? Sarcastic? I don't know the meaning of the term!

I, personally, haven't heard Santo in the booth so I can't really comment, but he's in there because he's a cubbie through and through. No other reason then that. I don't know how I'd feel if, say, Lou Whitaker was in the booth yelling. I think I'd like it just because it's Lou. Whatev's, Cubs suck.

And it is 'below average' but .002 is not that big of a difference.

[Scott Weber]

Well I figured a graph may grab your attention and thats the only graph they have, but if you must, http://www.tangotiger.net/UZR0003.html, UZR has him at about average from 2000 to 2003 as well.

and you did say this in your "in-depth explanation":
Sandberg had a .796 ops and Kent had a .858. If we're taking defense into account this should put them level.

You stated that Sandberg should be in and Kent is not a HoF player...
Why are you posting this? He's slightly below average for his career. Average, below average, whatever - it's still not good. And I still stand by that statement. They're different types of players. Kent is obviously more of a power hitter, while Sandberg got in on his spectacular glove and defense and speed, along with some pretty decent power numbers himself. Kent also batted cleanup in the lineup and hit behind Barry Bonds (not surprisingly where he best and career-defining years came), and we all know what that meant for his chances and it certainly helped his numbers.

[youkwalks]

below average and average is different. Below average implies that his defense was a negative quality while average implies him neutral.

and where do you get slightly below average? Everything I posted shows him slightly above average. Baseball-reference shows him above average for league range factor.

[Scott Weber]

below average and average is different. Below average implies that his defense was a negative quality while average implies him neutral.

and where do you get slightly below average? Everything I posted shows him slightly above average. Baseball-reference shows him above average for league range factor.
Because 2nd base wasn't ever a productive spot in the batting order. Your 2nd baseman, historically, was your weakest hitter not being your catcher. The same was true for a long while for your shortstop. I don't see how someone hitting like he's done while playing essentially average defense (.980 fielding % at 2B, league average is .982) can be dismissed. There are expectations for every position: corner infielders are the power positions, as are corner OFer's. Up the middle (C, SS, 2B) were average hitting positions or worse. they were meant to be slick fielders and Jeff Kent is breaking/has broken those expectations offensively.
see above.

[Nimrod5]

Gee, I don't know, because I was making a point and Ellis Burks is a player we grew up with and nobody would consider him a HOF candidate despite his comparable stats. And Santo, Cronin, Boyer? Not HOFers. Only enforces my point more.

And really? Is it "MUCH" better? Why don't we take their 162 game averages.

Kent: .288, .355 OBP, 27 HR, 109 RBI, 7 SB, 57 BB, 111 SO
Sandberg: .285, .344 OBP, 21 HR, 79 RBI, 26 SB, 57 BB, 94 SO.

(Funny how SB conveniently got left out of the initial comparison)

Those are pretty damn close. Kent has the obvious edge in power and RBI, but Sandberg stole WAY more bases and struck out less. Part (not all) of the RBI difference is because Kent, if I'm not mistaken, primarily hit cleanup while Sandberg batted 2nd most of the time. The BA/OBP is obviously quite close. Combine that with Sandberg's glove, and there's a reason why Sandberg is in. Plus, Sandberg hit 40 HRs in a season and stole 56 bases in another on his way to 344 career steals.

averages are fine, but i think that it has to be considered that kent has been able to do it for much longer than sandburg was able to

[bigmike]

I didn't look at the range factor as Kent is just about average to slightly above average in the field and I think his bat makes up for that (as I've stated) but for what it's worth he's got a 4.79 range factor at 2B and the league average is 4.35.

Either way, by fielding percentage or range factor, he's not wowing with the glove but never put his team at a distinct disadvantage with it either. Couple that with his bat and I think he's an HOFer if Sandberg is.

[youkwalks]

Either way, by fielding percentage or range factor, he's not wowing with the glove but never put his team at a distinct disadvantage with it either. Couple that with his bat and I think he's an HOFer if Sandberg is.
Essentially my argument as well.

[Scott Weber]

Essentially my argument as well.
What if Kent played in the OF? Or 1B? Are his offensive numbers still good enough for the Hall? Doubt it.

[Nimrod5]

What if Kent played in the OF? Or 1B? Are his offensive numbers still good enough for the Hall? Doubt it.

he didn't play in the outfield or 1b, so this is merely a hypothetical

[Scott Weber]

he didn't play in the outfield or 1b, so this is merely a hypothetical
:wallbash:Way to miss the point entirely.

[Nimrod5]

i get your point...if he had played another position, his numbers would not be as unique. but the fact of the matter is that he did play 2b. why it is important is because 2b is arguably a tougher position to play then of or 1b and his numbers are the best among 2b's.

you see many players that have been big offensive players who have played in the of or 1b...their teams were able to put them in these positions and allow the players to concentrate on their offense. you don't see too many very good hitting 2b's.

[Scott Weber]

i get your point...if he had played another position, his numbers would not be as unique. but the fact of the matter is that he did play 2b. why it is important is because 2b is arguably a tougher position to play then of or 1b and his numbers are the best among 2b's.

you see many players that have been big offensive players who have played in the of or 1b...their teams were able to put them in these positions and allow the players to concentrate on their offense. you don't see too many very good hitting 2b's.
So why does that make him more HOF worthy? Because he played well offensively at a historically weak offensive position? A bat's a bat, and he's not spectacular with the glove - so why are those numbers more impressive? Nobody has answered this (at least to my satisfaction)

[Nimrod5]

because he played a position that takes a certain amount of skill that many others have not been able to play adequately while still maintaining a very good bat. the point is that 2b is a very tough spot to play, so he has been able to provide his teams with someone who could play the spot decently and still produce offensive numbers, thus increasing his value and importance.

[Scott Weber]

because he played a position that takes a certain amount of skill that many others have not been able to play adequately while still maintaining a very good bat. the point is that 2b is a very tough spot to play, so he has been able to provide his teams with someone who could play the spot decently and still produce offensive numbers, thus increasing his value and importance.
But he wasn't a great defender, he was average. So being a decent fielder having having good but not outstanding numbers makes you a HOFer? I just don't buy it.

[dhammer]

Sandberg, with arguably borderline HOF numbers, got the nod into the Hall because he was the premier 2nd baseman of his generation.

I really believe that it's much easier to have an opinion on a borderline HOF candidate when you've had the opportunity to follow the player's carrer firsthand. It's been interesting to me the last few inductions, where guys that I grew up watching are starting to go in.

On a side note, growing up, Sandberg was my favorite player. I grew up in Seattle, have been a huge M's fan my whole life. I have zero ties to Chicago and never was a 2nd baseman in little league. I still to this day have no idea why I idolized him as a kid. Oh well, I was happy to see him go to the hall for sure.

[+thecalisonme]

But he wasn't a great defender, he was average. So being a decent fielder having having good but not outstanding numbers makes you a HOFer? I just don't buy it.
jeff kent has more career runs, hits, hrs, rbi's than edgar martinez

[Scott Weber]

jeff kent has more career runs, hits, hrs, rbi's than edgar martinez
career stats are often overrated and often a reflection of how long you played instead of how good you were.

Edgar's 162 avgs: .312, .418 OBP, 24 HRs, 99 RBI, .515 SLG
Kent: : .288, .355 OBP, 27 HR, 109 RBI, .503 SLG


Yeah I'll take Edgar.

[+thecalisonme]

they look like the same stats to me. i think a better comparison would be the six full seasons edgar played the field

[Scott Weber]

they look like the same stats to me. i think a better comparison would be the six full seasons edgar played the field
hahaha, have you seen what Jeff Kent's stats looked like before he went to SF and had Barry Bonds to hit behind? They look something like .273, 17 HR, 65 RBI, .319 OBP. Even before Edgar moved to DH he was still a pure hitter who hit over .300 consistently and whose OBP was around .390 or .400...Kent's was between .300 and .330 at the same point in his career. No contest.

[+thecalisonme]

i guess arod griffey and buhner were chopped liver

[+thecalisonme]

.301 10hr 43rbi

[deadstar]

Pretty comparable numbers from a 2B who was/is average defensively and a guy who solely hit for a living.

Also, hitting behind Bonds is not nearly as productive for Kent as hitting in front of him would have been.

[Scott Weber]

.301 10hr 43rbi
Haha, you didn't seriously try and make an argument by averaging all his injured years in there and passing them off as full years, did you? Because...I'm pretty sure you did. When I estimated Kent's stats, I took into effect his non-playing time (even though he played over 100 games each of those years) - Edgar only played over 100 games 3 times in his first 8 years. You're not going to be able to shape statistics convincingly here.

[+thecalisonme]

Haha, you didn't seriously try and make an argument by averaging all his injured years in there and passing them off as full years, did you? Because...I'm pretty sure you did. When I estimated Kent's stats, I took into effect his non-playing time (even though he played over 100 games each of those years) - Edgar only played over 100 games 3 times in his first 8 years. You're not going to be able to shape statistics convincingly here.
that was the point he was hurt alot but he his average was just 300 when he played the field

[Scott Weber]

that was the point he was hurt alot but he his average was just 300 when he played the field
Just .300? He hit .343 in 1992 and led the AL in batting average. Plus his OBP was at .400 for 3 straight years and Kent's was never higher than .341 during that span (in fact he's only gotten over .385 once in his entire career)

[+thecalisonme]

Just .300? He hit .343 in 1992 and led the AL in batting average. Plus his OBP was at .400 for 3 straight years and Kent's was never higher than .341 during that span (in fact he's only gotten over .385 once in his entire career)
ok you got me .301

[Scott Weber]

It's like talking to a child.

[+thecalisonme]

id having a better discussion with a glass of milk than you

[Scott Weber]

id having a better discussion with a glass of milk than you
"id having a better"

ok.

[Scott Weber]

Former players supporting a player from their era for the hall?????? SHOCKER!

[Scott Weber]

I was obviously referring to Vina.

[bigmike]

They had Adam Dunn for consideration into the HOF? I saw them discussing if he had a shot at 600 HR Club and they both said no. That might've been what you saw.

[bigmike]

I don't take your word for it.

[bigmike]

Yes. My entire goal is to look clever when I saw an episode of Baseball Tonight earlier tonight and they were asking about the 600 HR club in regards to Adam Dunn.

[Scott Weber]

Bullshit they were talking about Adam Dunn getting into the HOF.