Do you think Jef Kent should be in the Hall of Fame?

[sportscardtheory]

I would take Whitaker over Kent in a heart beat. Knowing that I feel Kent should eventually get in, imagine how I feel about Sweet Lou not even making it past his first year on the ballot. What a crock of XXXX that was. Literally one of the best overall 2nd basemen to ever play the game and he didn't even get 5%? What a joke. Him and Trammell should both be HOFers.

 

[MansGame]

I would take Whitaker over Kent in a heart beat. Knowing that I feel Kent should eventually get in, imagine how I feel about Sweet Lou not even making it past his first year on the ballot. What a crock of XXXX that was. Literally one of the best overall 2nd basemen to ever play the game and he didn't even get 5%? What a joke. Him and Trammell should both be HOFers.

Yea, what a crock of XXXX!

Best regards,

Albert Belle

 

[henderson939]

Yea, what a crock of XXXX!

Best regards,

Albert Belle

LOL! This is what pisses me off about the voting process. Played 11 years with avg of 40 HR and 130 RBI's per and hes not in because he was a dick.

 

[MansGame]

LOL! This is what pisses me off about the voting process. Played 11 years with avg of 40 HR and 130 RBI's per and hes not in because he was a dick.

Yea, tell me about it! He didn't even get enough to get to year 2 on the ballot! Crazy crazy crazy... my best hope is for the Vet Committee

 

[predatorkj]

Mac, tell me what it is that makes Belle a HOF'er? He doesn't even have 400 homers, doesn't even have 2,000 hits, doesn't even have 1500 RBI's. He hit 40 or more homers exactly 3 times. He also only played 11 years. Had he played for at least 14 or 15 years, and kept close to the same numbers, I'd agree he might have a shot. He was at a slugger's position and he had slugger numbers but it's almost like he only played half a career. I see the silver slugger awards and the all star selections. So what exactly about Belle makes him a HOF'er? Because right now, he's got only slightly better numbers over a second basemen you are so vehemently doubting. Sure Kent played 6 more seasons. But he also was not what you would call a typical slugger at a typical slugger's position. He also wasn't a compiler IMO because he played 17 seasons. He didn't pull a Nolan Ryan type of career. And he was good until he walked away.

What I'm trying to say is your player was a slugger. At a slugger's position. And he doesn't have any career numbers that make him stand out. It can't be argued he was damn good there. But he did not play long enough. That's obviously why he's not in. If he had any worthy career numbers, jerk or not, he'd be in. And I feel the same about Bagwell to be honest. And it sucks because I figure if his shoulder was ok, and he played another three years even, he'd be a lock.

 

[Austin]

Mac, tell me what it is that makes Belle a HOF'er? He doesn't even have 400 homers, doesn't even have 2,000 hits, doesn't even have 1500 RBI's. He hit 40 or more homers exactly 3 times. He also only played 11 years. Had he played for at least 14 or 15 years, and kept close to the same numbers, I'd agree he might have a shot.

I can't speak for Mac, but I believe Belle should be in the Hall of Fame for the same reason Kirby Puckett is in.
Both players were dominant, and had their careers end abruptly by severe injury.
Belle had 103 rbi in his final season before a back injury forced his retirement.

Belle's yearly stats are mind-boggling over his 11 years:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/belleal01.shtml

He had his ninth straight 100+ rbi season (led the league 3 times) when he was forced to retire, so he was still at the top of his game, unlike most players who hang on for years with mediocre stats to boost their career numbers.

He had MVP votes in 6 seasons, including three top 3 finishes.
He was robbed of the 1995 MVP, when he became the only player in MLB history to have 50 homers and 50 doubles in one season, and led the league in homers, doubles, rbi, runs, slugging% and total bases, plus hit .317.

Belle wasn't just a power hitter. He had seasons hitting .357, .328, .317 and .311.
Belle was at least as great of an overall hitter as Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell, and much better hitters than HOFers like Jim Rice, Tony Perez, Orlando Cepeda, Andre Dawson and several others.

Bill James scores Belle as a 135 on his Hall of Fame Monitor, with 100 being a Hall of Famer.
It's a shame that Belle was overshadowed by his reputation as a jerk, when he was one of the elite hitters of the '90s.

 

[Krom]

Mac, tell me what it is that makes Belle a HOF'er? He doesn't even have 400 homers, doesn't even have 2,000 hits, doesn't even have 1500 RBI's. He hit 40 or more homers exactly 3 times. He also only played 11 years. Had he played for at least 14 or 15 years, and kept close to the same numbers, I'd agree he might have a shot. He was at a slugger's position and he had slugger numbers but it's almost like he only played half a career. I see the silver slugger awards and the all star selections. So what exactly about Belle makes him a HOF'er? Because right now, he's got only slightly better numbers over a second basemen you are so vehemently doubting. Sure Kent played 6 more seasons. But he also was not what you would call a typical slugger at a typical slugger's position. He also wasn't a compiler IMO because he played 17 seasons. He didn't pull a Nolan Ryan type of career. And he was good until he walked away.

What I'm trying to say is your player was a slugger. At a slugger's position. And he doesn't have any career numbers that make him stand out. It can't be argued he was damn good there. But he did not play long enough. That's obviously why he's not in. If he had any worthy career numbers, jerk or not, he'd be in. And I feel the same about Bagwell to be honest. And it sucks because I figure if his shoulder was ok, and he played another three years even, he'd be a lock.

Bingo - neither Belle nor Kent are Hofers imho.

 

[Krom]

Belle wasn't just a power hitter.

It's a shame that Belle was overshadowed by his reputation as a jerk, when he was one of the elite hitters of the '90s.

He only hit 1700 hits!!!

His reputation is NOT the only thing keeping him out, in fact he is close (yes, close) but no frackin cigar.

 

[Austin]

Belle only hit 1700 hits!!!
His reputation is NOT the only thing keeping him out

More than 30 Hall of Fame hitters had fewer than 1,800 hits.
Mickey Cochrane had 1,652
Hank Greenberg had 1,628
Hack Wilson had 1,461
Ralph Kiner had 1,451
Roy Campanella had 1,161

Are you going to argue they're not Hall of Famers?

 

[Krom]

More than 30 Hall of Fame hitters had fewer than 1,800 hits.
Mickey Cochrane had 1,652
Hank Greenberg had 1,628
Hack Wilson had 1,461
Ralph Kiner had 1,451
Roy Campanella had 1,161

Are you going to argue they're not Hall of Famers?

Ichiro has only 111 Hrs. Still a hofer (future)

If ya read what i quoted it said Belle was not just a power hitter cause he hit over 300 a few times, thats why i posted what i did, not saying you can't get in with 1700 hits. There are many factors that make up a hofer and Belle is lacking enough to not make it.

 

[matfanofold]

I don't know....

Belle was amazing for the time he played, both in regards to his era and to the length of his career. I would be willing to bet that if he had the persona and popularity/likability of say a Griffey Jr. he would have been a lock first ballot. So in that sense I do believe it was really his ability to keep people from liking him that made all the difference.

 

[Anthony K.]

I can't speak for Mac, but I believe Belle should be in the Hall of Fame for the same reason Kirby Puckett is in.
Both players were dominant, and had their careers end abruptly by severe injury.
Belle had 103 rbi in his final season before a back injury forced his retirement.

Belle's yearly stats are mind-boggling over his 11 years:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/belleal01.shtml

He had his ninth straight 100+ rbi season (led the league 3 times) when he was forced to retire, so he was still at the top of his game, unlike most players who hang on for years with mediocre stats to boost their career numbers.

He had MVP votes in 6 seasons, including three top 3 finishes.
He was robbed of the 1995 MVP, when he became the only player in MLB history to have 50 homers and 50 doubles in one season, and led the league in homers, doubles, rbi, runs, slugging% and total bases, plus hit .317.

Belle wasn't just a power hitter. He had seasons hitting .357, .328, .317 and .311.
Belle was at least as great of an overall hitter as Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell, and much better hitters than HOFers like Jim Rice, Tony Perez, Orlando Cepeda, Andre Dawson and several others.

Bill James scores Belle as a 135 on his Hall of Fame Monitor, with 100 being a Hall of Famer.
It's a shame that Belle was overshadowed by his reputation as a jerk, when he was one of the elite hitters of the '90s.

This was said much better than I could have.

Kudos Austin.

Sent from my VS870 4G using Freedom Card Board mobile app

 

[predatorkj]

So, we are now using the argument that so and so has so many hits or are we still going with he could have made it had he played longer? I'm not going to lie about how I feel about a lot if HOF'ers. Some are in despite the numbers, some are in despite being truly one dimensional. So that's my question? Which is it? There needs to be a standard criteria or formula. They let guys with short careers in, guys who couldn't hit worth a lick, and guys who were good but have no outstanding numbers.

So why does Belle fit or not fit that criteria? Or Biggio? Or Bagwell, or Kent? Come up with a set standard and go from there. Anything else is starting to seem like a waste of time.

 

[matfanofold]

So, we are now using the argument that so and so has so many hits or are we still going with he could have made it had he played longer? I'm not going to lie about how I feel about a lot if HOF'ers. Some are in despite the numbers, some are in despite being truly one dimensional. So that's my question? Which is it? There needs to be a standard criteria or formula. They let guys with short careers in, guys who couldn't hit worth a lick, and guys who were good but have no outstanding numbers.

So why does Belle fit or not fit that criteria? Or Biggio? Or Bagwell, or Kent? Come up with a set standard and go from there. Anything else is starting to seem like a waste of time.

No, there does not need to be a 'formula', the set criteria works near perfectly.

"Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."

As you can see, the criteria is based on subjectivity and thus no one opinion can ever be quantified by a formula or specific set of statistics.

 

[Austin]

So, we are now using the argument that so and so has so many hits or are we still going with he could have made it had he played longer? I'm not going to lie about how I feel about a lot if HOF'ers. Some are in despite the numbers, some are in despite being truly one dimensional. So that's my question? Which is it? There needs to be a standard criteria or formula. They let guys with short careers in, guys who couldn't hit worth a lick, and guys who were good but have no outstanding numbers.

To me, a Hall of Famer is a player who was among the greatest of his era, despite the length of his career.
He was a player who, during his playing days, fans were in awe of and thought of as a future HOFer.

Numbers and stats don't tell the whole story.
That's why players with 2,850 hits like Harold Baines or 493 homers like Fred McGriff or 260 wins like Jamie Moyer are considered inferior to dominant players with far less hits or homers or wins.
They had very long, though excellent, careers that allowed them to pile up huge lifetime stats.
But neither Baines nor McGriff were better than Bagwell, who had lesser numbers.
And Moyer was far inferior to Pedro Martinez, despite having 50 more wins.

Career longevity and gaudy lifetime stats should be a secondary consideration, because injuries are often unavoidable.
(Puckett, Koufax, Dizzy Dean, Campanella and a few other HOFers had career-ending injuries, and were still elected despite inferior lifetime stats, because they were dominant players when healthy.)
The greatness of the player, not the longevity, should be what makes a Hall of Famer.