Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    50,321

    Hall of Fame Tracker

    https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?...AAsz3uDsmqy_Vw


    Last year, Bonds and Clemens looked stronger until the announcement when they fell way shorter. Basically, a lot of their voters are submitting their ballots to this.


    Right now.

    Chipper and Vlad look like locks.

    Edgar and Hoffman might get in.

    Mussina, Schilling, Bonds, and Clemens are within range.


    Likely to fall off:
    Johan, Damon

    Andruw Jones and Rolen are crazy low

    Wagner is getting 14% of the votes that Hoffman is.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    50,321
    Bill Livingston from Cleveland voted for two guys.

    Thome and Vizquel.

    No one else.

    This guy should not be voting if he is just going to be a homer.



    32% of ballots are on this sheet right now.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    39
    Thome, Chipper and Vlad are locks. Would like to see a lot more love for Jeff Kent. Hall of Fame really needs to expand the ballot to 15. That Jeff Passan is not voting because Joe Morgan simply made his and other Hall of Famers thoughts be known is beyond childish but more importantly, unfair to the candidates. That's what pisses me off the most, he doesn't seem to care about the candidates, only himself. The new crop of voters scare me.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    16,864
    Rolen and Andruw are WAY too low. Neither guy isnít getting any love.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Annapolis MD
    Posts
    12,903
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Killer_P's View Post
    Thome, Chipper and Vlad are locks. Would like to see a lot more love for Jeff Kent. Hall of Fame really needs to expand the ballot to 15. That Jeff Passan is not voting because Joe Morgan simply made his and other Hall of Famers thoughts be known is beyond childish but more importantly, unfair to the candidates. That's what pisses me off the most, he doesn't seem to care about the candidates, only himself. The new crop of voters scare me.
    Kent was pretty surly towards the media if I recall, so that's why he isn't getting more support. Voters are human. What really stinks is how Scott Rolen is getting no love. He should be close to getting in, not closer to falling off the ballot. Ridiculous.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southeast Asia
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasTomasz View Post
    Kent was pretty surly towards the media if I recall, so that's why he isn't getting more support. Voters are human. What really stinks is how Scott Rolen is getting no love. He should be close to getting in, not closer to falling off the ballot. Ridiculous.
    Another indication of the media assumption that it's all and only about them, and what they think (we should think). The entire world media has been corrupt and manipulative for decades, long before Trump called them out.
    "They throw the ball, I hit it. They hit the ball, I catch it." - Willie Mays

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasTomasz View Post
    Kent was pretty surly towards the media if I recall, so that's why he isn't getting more support. Voters are human. What really stinks is how Scott Rolen is getting no love. He should be close to getting in, not closer to falling off the ballot. Ridiculous.
    I wouldn't call Kent surly. He was more of a Tim Duncan-type in basketball. Man of few words who didn't seek any attention. Just went about his job and was great at it. Rolen fits that mold as well, just showed up at his job less often. Voters holding the fact that Kent wasn't a good interview shows how sensitive and petty they are and it's a shame. When it comes to the Hall of Fame, voters are like umpires. Fans aren't showing up for the writers just as they aren't showing up for the umpires. Just make the right calls

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    50,321
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Killer_P's View Post
    I wouldn't call Kent surly. He was more of a Tim Duncan-type in basketball. Man of few words who didn't seek any attention. Just went about his job and was great at it. Rolen fits that mold as well, just showed up at his job less often. Voters holding the fact that Kent wasn't a good interview shows how sensitive and petty they are and it's a shame. When it comes to the Hall of Fame, voters are like umpires. Fans aren't showing up for the writers just as they aren't showing up for the umpires. Just make the right calls
    Quote Originally Posted by #24 View Post
    Another indication of the media assumption that it's all and only about them, and what they think (we should think). The entire world media has been corrupt and manipulative for decades, long before Trump called them out.
    Yup


    But I wouldn't vote for Kent, but I would vote for Rolen.


    I'm not terribly surprised by the lack of Kent love, and I don't know that the media has as much to do with it as much as his career performances.

    He had a nice 17 year career and 123 OPS+ with over 9K PA. But 55 rWAR, 56 fWAR places him well below the average Hall of Famer.

    This places him 234th all time in rWAR, tied with Mike Trout already lol.

    Behind guys like Robin Ventura, Will Clark, Joe Gordon, John Olerud, and Joe Torre
    And 201 st all time in fWAR places him behind guys like Joe Tinker, Ron Cey, Bobby Abreu, and Bill Terry

    Among 2B, he is 18th in fWAR, behind Joe Gordon, Ryne Sandberg, Chase Utley, and Roberto Alomar, just ahead of Bobby Doerr, Robinson Cano, and Dustin Pedroia
    And he is 17th in rWAR, between Joe Gordon and Ian Kinsler


    I'd say he is a healthy mix between Tony Phillips and Chase Utley with no true comp.


    For me, he is borderline out. The MVP helps, the era doesn't.

    I am surprised nobody claims PED's for him. His power came out of nowhere and was during the height of the PED years.

    Why are guys like Bagwell called PED users, but guys like Kent not?


    Rolen is a little easier.

    70.0 rWAR is 9th among 3B, between Nettles and Santo
    70.1 fWAR is 9th among 3B, between Santo and Molitor

    Both of those ranks exclude A-Rod as a 3B because he played 700 more innings as a SS than a 3B.

    Rolen I believe has a better argument and should be a lock for anyone that puts Santo in. Kent I understand because he is right below the tier of borderline in 2B.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Who are some current players who you think are locks for the HOF?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    50,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255 View Post
    Who are some current players who you think are locks for the HOF?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Pujols and Ichiro


    Beltre might have gotten himself into lock status



    Posey, Mauer, Miggy, Verlander, Felix, Bumgarner, Votto, Max, etc (I'm missing some) are close or will be a good debate.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    Yup


    But I wouldn't vote for Kent, but I would vote for Rolen.


    I'm not terribly surprised by the lack of Kent love, and I don't know that the media has as much to do with it as much as his career performances.

    He had a nice 17 year career and 123 OPS+ with over 9K PA. But 55 rWAR, 56 fWAR places him well below the average Hall of Famer.

    This places him 234th all time in rWAR, tied with Mike Trout already lol.

    Behind guys like Robin Ventura, Will Clark, Joe Gordon, John Olerud, and Joe Torre
    And 201 st all time in fWAR places him behind guys like Joe Tinker, Ron Cey, Bobby Abreu, and Bill Terry

    Among 2B, he is 18th in fWAR, behind Joe Gordon, Ryne Sandberg, Chase Utley, and Roberto Alomar, just ahead of Bobby Doerr, Robinson Cano, and Dustin Pedroia
    And he is 17th in rWAR, between Joe Gordon and Ian Kinsler


    I'd say he is a healthy mix between Tony Phillips and Chase Utley with no true comp.


    For me, he is borderline out. The MVP helps, the era doesn't.

    I am surprised nobody claims PED's for him. His power came out of nowhere and was during the height of the PED years.

    Why are guys like Bagwell called PED users, but guys like Kent not?
    .
    Wow! A lot of junk stats with very little substance. Kent is a top 10 second baseman all-time offensively and while his defense wasn't great, it wasn't bad either. Kent was quick with his glove to hand transfer and was never asked to leave 2B even in his later years. Kent was a rare power bat from the 2B position during his 17 years. I really thought people were getting past WAR but I guess not.

    You should be embarrassed for comparing Kent to Tony Phillips. You should be even more embarrassed claiming Kent was on PEDs and claiming his power came out of nowhere. He hit 21 HR is just his second year in the league. Kent displayed power in the minor leagues and made the leap from AA to MLB. I honestly don't know how you came to your conclusion but it's clear it wasn't based on evidence of any kind. Much like using WAR, this was a very lazy approach. Thankfully, you have no media credentials or votes of any kind.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    50,321
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Killer_P's View Post
    Wow! A lot of junk stats with very little substance. Kent is a top 10 second baseman all-time offensively and while his defense wasn't great, it wasn't bad either. Kent was quick with his glove to hand transfer and was never asked to leave 2B even in his later years. Kent was a rare power bat from the 2B position during his 17 years. I really thought people were getting past WAR but I guess not.

    You should be embarrassed for comparing Kent to Tony Phillips. You should be even more embarrassed claiming Kent was on PEDs and claiming his power came out of nowhere. He hit 21 HR is just his second year in the league. Kent displayed power in the minor leagues and made the leap from AA to MLB. I honestly don't know how you came to your conclusion but it's clear it wasn't based on evidence of any kind. Much like using WAR, this was a very lazy approach. Thankfully, you have no media credentials or votes of any kind.
    junk stats?

    The only offensive category that Kent shows any dominance is in home runs.

    Offensive only second basemen I would easily take over Kent:

    1. Hornsby
    2. Collins
    3. Lajoie
    4. Robinson
    5. Morgan
    6. Carew
    7. Grich
    8. Cano
    9. Altuve
    10. Gehringer

    This doesn't account for defense.


    And why would people get past WAR? It's a great snap shot stat. It isn't perfect, but it's been well proven to be highly accurate.

    It's also worth noting that Tony Phillips managed to get on base much more frequently than Kent and was considered a better defender. He didn't hit for the average or power of Kent.


    Kent showed up at the age of 24, he was a college draftee out of the 20th round who didn't display any power while in college (8 total home runs while in college). He showed okay power in the minors, but he was old for each level he was playing in and he was more of a doubles hitter. His timeline fits perfectly with the rise of PED's, but also his age development.


    And claiming Kent for PED's isn't actually an accusation. But it certainly fits. If there is any embarrassment, I'm wondering why you are so sensitive and protective of Kent?

    I am not accusing. But he did play with some of the guys that are often accused (Bonds, Bagwell, Belle, Manny, etc). I find it odd that some guys are so easily given a pass (Kent, Griffey, etc) while others are assumed without evidence, like the aforementioned Bagwell.


    As far as the slight about not being in the media, it wouldn't matter, they aren't voting for him any way.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    39
    Yes, WAR is a junk stat and a very lazy approach especially when giving the highest honor baseball has to give. Even Bill James is past WAR along with many others. Kent shows dominance in HR, SLG, Doubles, RBI and other offensive categories. When your name is next to Rogers Hornsby and other elite so many times, it becomes quite clear what kind of player Kent was. It's not like he played in hitters parks his whole career. He held no advantages over any other 2B or any player in his era.

    So you will take a bunch of Hall of Famers over Kent? That doesn't mean Kent is not a Hall of Famer and certainly doesn't make you right.

    Again, you should be embarrassed comparing Phillips and Kent. You still don't even see why you should. More laziness.
    "
    And claiming Kent for PED's isn't actually an accusation. But it certainly fits.
    "
    Greatest backtrack of the day! I'm glad you finally did some research and saw he showed power in the minors. Who cares if he was slightly older? He showed the power nonetheless. Were his minor league parks pitchers parks like Bagwell's? Make more of an effort!!! Hitting 21 HR in your second year in the league is not out of nowhere. Kent remained a doubles hitter and progressed naturally with his power. There is no evidence to link Kent to PEDs in his numbers or outside the lines. It's a claim made out of ignorance. You seem to be upset that Bagwell had claims made about him based on very little (I agree) but want to do the same to Kent. Makes little sense to me. I'm not sensitive or protective, just mad someone would make such claims without doing research and being so lazy. I hate laziness and yes, you should be embarrassed.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    16,864
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Killer_P's View Post
    Wow! A lot of junk stats with very little substance. Kent is a top 10 second baseman all-time offensively and while his defense wasn't great, it wasn't bad either. Kent was quick with his glove to hand transfer and was never asked to leave 2B even in his later years. Kent was a rare power bat from the 2B position during his 17 years. I really thought people were getting past WAR but I guess not.

    You should be embarrassed for comparing Kent to Tony Phillips. You should be even more embarrassed claiming Kent was on PEDs and claiming his power came out of nowhere. He hit 21 HR is just his second year in the league. Kent displayed power in the minor leagues and made the leap from AA to MLB. I honestly don't know how you came to your conclusion but it's clear it wasn't based on evidence of any kind. Much like using WAR, this was a very lazy approach. Thankfully, you have no media credentials or votes of any kind.
    You didnít even use a stat to make your case.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    50,321
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Killer_P's View Post
    Yes, WAR is a junk stat and a very lazy approach especially when giving the highest honor baseball has to give. Even Bill James is past WAR along with many others. Kent shows dominance in HR, SLG, Doubles, RBI and other offensive categories. When your name is next to Rogers Hornsby and other elite so many times, it becomes quite clear what kind of player Kent was. It's not like he played in hitters parks his whole career. He held no advantages over any other 2B or any player in his era.

    So you will take a bunch of Hall of Famers over Kent? That doesn't mean Kent is not a Hall of Famer and certainly doesn't make you right.

    Again, you should be embarrassed comparing Phillips and Kent. You still don't even see why you should. More laziness.
    "
    And claiming Kent for PED's isn't actually an accusation. But it certainly fits.
    "
    Greatest backtrack of the day! I'm glad you finally did some research and saw he showed power in the minors. Who cares if he was slightly older? He showed the power nonetheless. Were his minor league parks pitchers parks like Bagwell's? Make more of an effort!!! Hitting 21 HR in your second year in the league is not out of nowhere. Kent remained a doubles hitter and progressed naturally with his power. There is no evidence to link Kent to PEDs in his numbers or outside the lines. It's a claim made out of ignorance. You seem to be upset that Bagwell had claims made about him based on very little (I agree) but want to do the same to Kent. Makes little sense to me. I'm not sensitive or protective, just mad someone would make such claims without doing research and being so lazy. I hate laziness and yes, you should be embarrassed.
    I'm the lazy one....and you never provided any stats to support your case. Who is honestly lazy?

    I listed ten better offensive second basemen because you said he was a top 10 offensive 2B. I wasn't excluding hall of famers, simply stating 10 better offensive second basemen. It was your claim I was refuting.

    And being older in minor league levels is huge. Most players in the minors are in their developmental years. If you are 3 years older than the guy pitching to you, it doesn't say a lot about you when you homer off him in a developmental league.

    As far as a backtrack...no, no backtrack. I never accused him in the initial post either. I apparently needed to clarify that though.

    He hit 21 HR in his age 25 season.

    35 players did that alone this season. Not very many of those guys are going to progress to see a 37 HR season in their careers (much less their age 34 season).

    Again. I never said he took PED's. But it's odd that he is randomly given a pass when so many others who we have the same amount of evidence against, are assumed to have juiced.



    As for no research, I'm probably the last guy on here you want to make that accusation of.


    Kent had a nice career, but I'd easily take Bobby Grich, Lou Whitaker, and the still active Chase Utley over him, and these guys aren't in the Hall and played the same position.
    Last edited by Jeffy25; 12-30-2017 at 04:58 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •