Jeff Kent HOF

[Jeff Goldblum]

I'm old school and I think he was a very good player but the hof should be for the elite. I really don't care what the metrics say in my opinion, and its just that, he just doesn't pass the eye test for the hof. I agree with those that say that the bar has been lowered.

He has the most hr all time as a 2b. That’s not metric-y insider baseball.

377 home runs is pretty impressive for a position that is not a power position. His other numbers are good but I will stand by my OPINION that while he was a very good player that doesn't necessarily make him a Hall of famer. I can see how some people see him as a hof player.

Kent played 17 years. He had 560 doubles, 377 HRs and nearly 2500 hits.

If Kent were a lifetime Cardinal player, he would be celebrated as one of the greatest Cardinals ever, and many would be saying he should be in the HOF.

No, he would be regarded as a player whose numbers were inflated by his use of PED's, just like McGwire.

Um, no. McGwire and others were actually known to use steroids. I do not recall any rumors of Kent using steroids until the Bonds controversy blew up - and even then, it was presumed guilt by association.

The “proof” provided of his supposed steroid use is only his elevated SLG in his 30s. If there is anything else of substance, please provide it.

I’m not claiming Kent was innocent, but it seems to me you’re claiming he was guilty based on numbers alone. It would have no more merit to claim Brock must have used steroids when he broke the single season SB record at age 35.

Kent's statistical profile strongly suggests that he was a PED user.

*41 of his 55.4 brWAR came after age 30.

*His 3-year peak came between age 32-34! That's an age when the vast majority of players are declining. The exceptions are almost all known or likely PED users.

*It's not just SLG: Kent's OPS was 802 up to age 30, and .888 from age 31-40.

It's just not normal for a players OPS to increase by almost 100 points from age 31-40, and I could make similar points about other stats (Kent's performance rose pretty much across the board from age 31-40 compared to his numbers up to 30.)

*Kent's performance boost came in 2000 which exactly coincides with the wave of PED use that followed McGwire and Sosa.

Baring some other factor that's not obvious in the numbers, the evidence strongly suggest that we're talking about a PED user.

And I don't have a bone to pick with Jeff Kent. I'd say the same for any player with these numbers.

His peak also coincides with hitting before/after Barry Bonds.

A cursory look at the records shows that Kent's peak does coincide with Bond's explosion in the early 2000s,

Kent's OPS by age:
24-31: .812
31-34: .943 (with Bonds peaking)
35-40: .855 (After going to Houston)

Batting directly after (and later sometimes before) a roids raging Bonds may explain much of Kent's extordianry middle-age performance.

However, after Kent went to Houston, where he didn't have Bonds next to him in the line up, his performance at the plate remained well above what he'd done prior to age 31. That in and of itself makes Kent an statistical outlier, unless you include him with the group of probable PED users.

He also had the Crawford boxes and Biggio and Bagwell hitting around him. And Alou, Bell, etc.

You'd make a good defense lawyer.

It's possible, perhaps even likely, that Kent used steroids, but you've created at least a shadow of doubt about it.

So with the PED issue set aside, is Kent a HOF caliber player?

56 WAR makes him a borderline candidate IMO. If I were a voter, he probably wouldn't get my vote, but I'm a small hall guy and we've a large HOF already. In other words: Jeff won't be close to the worst player in the HOF.

Cheers

Honestly, I hated the guy when he played. And I am with you on the smaller Hall; it is getting too convoluted. That being said, if we are enshrining players based on the best at their position then I think he belongs in. I also believe that Edmonds belongs in because he is the best center fielder i have ever seen play.