What was Jeff Kent (Set to retire tomorrow at Dodger Stadium see story at http://www.midvalleynewsonline.com/) and how will he be remembered in Dodger lore?Hard-nosed? Yes
Pain in the neck? Yes
I think everyone would have loved to hear stories about this guy and the other veterans getting along with the Dodger rookies, but it didn't happen.
Kent will always strike me as a player who was who he was. I appreciated his outspoken attitude toward performance enhancers, but to me he won't really be remembered as anything special because he bounced around so much. With the exception of Toronto he produced at every stop, but what will we remember him as?
Met? Giant? Astro? Dodger? The guy who didn't get along with Barry Bonds? The guy who spent too much time on his motorcycle?
I'll even try this one to get Scanlan going; is he Hall of Fame worthy?
He's a cinch for the Hall...and he will go as a Giant.
ReplyDeleteMost HRs ever by a 2B. How can you keep him out?
Sohn Jcanlan
I don't know what was his whip, obp, era, esp, and pms?
ReplyDeleteHey, I have an idea! Since I don't understand the stat and it's relevance, I'm going to make fun of it! The only stats that count were the ones flashed on my TV screen during the 80's during the NBC Game of the Week!
ReplyDeleteYeah, that sounds good. I think part of losing my interest in baseball, is when I see a great player doing great things...I'm later told by the abbreviation police that he really isn't that good.
ReplyDeleteSo I am only permitted to understand and enjoy baseball through the eyes of the baseball elite. They will tell me who is good, who is bad, and who is overrated.
And I'm sure very soon they will be happy to pass on that war is peace, freedom is slavery, and love his hate.
Now I have always understood those to be contradictions...but I'm sure I will soon be provided some abbreviated words to support the validity.
Don't crawl into victim mode. Enjoy the players you want to enjoy, like the players you want to like, etc. etc. No one can take that away from you.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if you want to say someone is good or great, be prepared to rationalize why. But don't bring, "I think he's great and, even though I can't support why, you're wrong when you say he isn't." If we're always going to hold on to archaic ways of measurement, then we may as well ditch our pounds and ounces system and go back to the days of filling buckets with stones and putting them on a balance mechanism.
The first inclination of people who don't understand the research behind sabermetrics is to spit on it and the people who do. They just throw around terms like "Moneyball", "stat geeks", "propeller heads", "elitists" and "computer guys" because they can't explain why the research is "wrong". Because it's only true if it's seen with the eyes and written down on paper. They want to believe the old axioms (like 200 hits is greatness and wins are a true measure of a pitcher) because it takes less effort. The second they get called on it, they hide behind defensiveness and turning themselves into victims.
If stats are taking away your enjoyment of baseball, that's on you and not anyone else. I don't let the Joe Morgans, John Kruks and Steve Phillipses of the world ruin baseball for me. Think about how many "stat geeks" you have to listen to on radio and television broadcasts vs. those with the "wins are good and RBIs are the true measure of a hitter" line of thinking. When you answer that truthfully, ask yourself whether the enjoyment for baseball is really being taken from you or if it's just pure bluster and hyperbole.
Hey Mr. Personality
ReplyDeleteWith an average first baseman with a lousy obp how did the Dodgers go to four world series from 1974-81
Tell me what the formula was that got them there...tell me it had nothing to do with Lasorda, three million fans, or any other set of intangibles...just tell me...and I might buy...
How did the Braves make it to 7 straight postseason appearances with Mark Lemke as their second baseman? How'd they do it with 5 years of Jeff Blauser at SS? Terry Pendleton won 2 MVP awards. Do we put him in the Hall of Fame? Charlie Hayes and Scott Brosius were the starting 3B for those Yankee World Series teams. I guess what I am asking is what the point is.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the Dodger success, have you tried answering your own question first? Where did the Dodgers place in pitching during those years? Who else was in the lineup? To try and pretend Garvey was the only guy on those teams just further diminishes your assertion and shows you haven't really looked into it.
And 74 didn't have to do with Lasorda...Alston was the manager.
In so far as intangibles, that's exactly what they are. By nature, they're immeasurable. Who is in a position to say who has heart? Who is in a position to say "who has that look in their eyes"? Who is in a position to say, "That guy is a leader?" Intangibles are all well and good, but they're entirely too subjective to base someone's worth on. Do you give a guy an extra 4 million a year because he's a leader, even though his skills aren't there? An example is Luis Gonzalez. He was signed because he was a "proven veteran and a leader". So once the younger guys start outproducing him, he starts poisoning the well. When making decisions with millions of dollars on the line, you have to go with what you know and can prove (stats) over "intangibles".
The formula isn't a secret: plenty of talented players sprinkled in with playing well at the right time. We've seen what a crapshoot the playoffs are.
I'm sorry your mancrush for Garvey won't put him in the HOF. Appreciate him for what he was: A good 1B who was a part of a great era of Dodger baseball. That doesn't make him a Hall of Famer though.
Hey Terry Pendleton was a great player...I don't have a crush on Garvey (okay, I did for a while...but that was because Cyndi was soo good looking back in the day)...I just would like to know what the ever evolving criteria is..."Plenty of talented players sprinkled in with playing well at the right time..." No argument there...but it seems when somebody excells, its pointed out that "well they really didn't do that good of a job because the numbers..."
ReplyDeleteI come from the position that Kirk Gibson's one at bat had a lot to do with the Dodgers win over the A's in '88...
It seems from your perspective it only had an effect on one game...
1) Criteria for what?
ReplyDelete2) You need to look at the standards used to measure what "excels" means.
3) I come from the position that for every Gibson home run you point to, I can point to Albert Pujols's HR in '04 off of Brad Lidge. The Astros still won the NLCS. BK Kim gave up two game winning HRs to the Yankees in the '01 World Series. The D'backs still won the World Series. Pointing strictly to Gibby minimizes the accomplishments of Hershiser, Hatcher and the Dodger bullpen.
It's more fun to wax poetic about Gibson's HR propelled the Dodgers into victory in the Series. It helped them win Game 1. The A's did win Game 3, so it's not as if they rolled over and died.
I disagree my friend...and you really are my friend after the news I got today (give me a call later)...as for baseball, stats, and whips...enjoy your time living with the Baseball Borg
ReplyDelete