Jeff Kent to officially retire
Just got word from the Dodgers media relations department that the crusty veteran and Hall of Fame lock has made up his mind to hang up the cleats. There will be a formal announcement tomorrow at Dodger Stadium, and I'll try to swing by. Until then, a few thoughts on my mixed feelings about Kent.
On one hand, I have an immense respect not only for Kent's talent, but how hard the guy played. He's among the bigger "gamers" I've ever come across in professional sports and was completely unafraid to push his body to the absolute limit. There's much to be admired along those lines. On the other hand, Kent left a ton to be desired as a teammate, often displaying a ridiculous willingness to keep people uncomfortable around him simply so he could avoid talking with them. There's no doubt in my mind that the Dodger clubhouse was decidedly low on mirth pre-Manny in large part because he was the "no fun" elephant in the room. I also think it's a shame that a guy with his credentials and clout seemed completely uninterested in being a leader or setting an example in any manner that didn't involve playing.
Again, I truly respect Kent on the diamond and hope his naked disdain for the media doesn't prompt voting scribes to use it against him or make him wait an unusually long time for a HOF induction. Cooperstown is a joke without his plaque. But retired or not, I think the Dodgers will be considerably better without him next season, on the field -- age has definitely caught up with Kent, as evidenced by 2008's often-brutal production -- and especially off it. The time to part ways had definitely arrived. Best of luck on a happy life away from the game.
AK
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
Three letters to describe Kent? A-S-S. We will soon have three more H-O-F. Congrats on the career Mr. Kent! Good Luck and God bless you and yours.
Posted by: gus2327 | January 21, 2009 at 11:29 AM
I would make the case against the HOF and Kent.
Is his piss poor teammate attitude really that much different than McGuire's "tainting" of the game with roids?
HOF players should be the full package, team players, world series victors, and not just turds devoted to their individual stats.
Kent does not belong in the hall anymore than I do.
Posted by: benzojones | January 21, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Hey Benzo
How long will it take for you to get over this?
Package
Posted by: Package | January 21, 2009 at 12:26 PM
There's a reason Kent never won a World Series ring. He's a crappy teammate. He and Terrell Owens can enjoy their Hall of Fame careers in solitude, the way they enjoyed their exceptional athletic ability. Team killers both.
What took you so long to call it quits, Jeffie? Did you think there was a team in baseball that wanted a sullen guy with poor offensive numbers and hands of stone in the infield to round out their roster?
Kent is the first of a coming generation of Hall of Famers for whom voters will have to think long and hard about what team he should represent. Mets? Blue Jays? Indians? Astros? Dodgers? His best years were as a Giant, so that's probably what they'll choose. But he was never one place for very long. Another indication of what kind of teammate he was.
Same is true for Garry Sheffield, maybe even more so. When you think Sheff, what team do you think of? Marlins? Padres? Yankees? Braves? TIgers? Dodgers? He played for almost every team in the league. Ditto Moises Alou, though his numbers might not get him to Cooperstown.
Posted by: SaMo | January 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Interesting question, SaMo. I think Kent will go into the HOF as a Giant, for sure, but I'm not sure what team Sheff would go in as (assuming he got in, which I don't think is a given). I would hope Sheff would not go in as a Dodger, because I'd hate to see his number retired.
Posted by: Valmont | January 21, 2009 at 12:52 PM
Benzo,
I can see why you'd choose to exclude Kent from the HOF because he wasn't a good teammate. When it comes to that particular spirit of the game, he was without question lacking. But I don't think he was ever bad enough to solely bring down a team to a significantly worse result or finish. With the possible exception of his last couple seasons, I think Kent contributed more than he detracted, and those numbers make it almost impossible to exclude. He certainly wouldn't be the only crabby dude to get enshrined and far worse people have made it. (Think Ty Cobb.) But your point is very well taken.
I don't, however, agree that comparing his sulking to steroid abuse is fair. That's pretty apples and oranges. The latter issue is a literal cheating of the game and its rules to provide a potential advantage. The former is simply not owning up to every aspect of what could/should be expected of a player. If you think that's enough to exclude a guy, again, I get your perspective. But I do think there's a pretty big difference.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | January 21, 2009 at 01:05 PM
"Is his piss poor teammate attitude really that much different than McGuire's "tainting" of the game with roids?"
Yes, Benzo, it is totally and completely different. Kent was the greatest hitting second baseman in baseball history. 100% of the reason for that is his natural ability and hard work.
McGuire was a really good hitter for a relatively short period of time. What percentage of his HOF credential (home runs) was his hard work and natural ability? We will never know.
We bestow HOF honors for what is seen on the field. Once the integrity of on-field performance is compromised by off-field chemicals, HOF is no longer a consideration.
The HOF is not the Good-Guy awards. Ty Cobb is a HOFer, and he once pistol-whipped a man to death in a bar. He also ran into the stands during a game to pummel a man in a wheelchair whom Cobb had incorrectly pegged as a heckler. Nobody liked Ty Cobb--not his teammates, not his coaches, not even most fans of the day. But he's arguably the greatest hitter of all time, and hence that is his HOF credential.
Kent may yet be a good father, husband, and philanthropist; we really don't know. Yes, he was a jerk to all who knew him professionally, and yes, that's pretty lame and none of us like it. But HOF is about honest on-field production--to try to change the game now and say it's about being an all-around good guy, well that's not baseball's Hall of Fame. Like it or not, baseball's HOF is in fact all about "turds devoted to individual stats" and you can't deny that Kent has posted HOF stats, turd as he may be.
SaMo, I thought players still got to choose what hat they wore to the hall, no? I don't see how on earth Kent goes in as anything but a Giant. In a way, that seems very appropriate to me.
And my guess is that Sheffield will choose the yankees, because NY's tolerance for jerks is much higher than any other city or team he played for.
AK--I thought your summation of Kent's time as a Dodger hit the nail on the head. Well said.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | January 21, 2009 at 01:15 PM
If you need a reason to lay-off Jent Kent's supposed "attitude" problems, go ask Joe Torre. He was the one player mentioned by Torre when he was introduced as the new manager of the Dodgers. Joe didn't know much about anyone, but he knew who Jeff Kent was...and stated a good deal of assurance that Kent was to play for him. I can't imagine Joe Torre would ever waste verbal goodwill on a problem player. Ability and experience doesn't make you a leader...It is entirely unfair to take pot shots at this guy after the career he amassed. It's pretty clear to me he cared more about winning that leading the league in statistical categories. In my opinion, he was the only guy on the 2006 roster who showed up to play during their first round defeat by the Mets.
Jeff Kent was better than a leader....He was a winner and difference maker.
Posted by: J_Is_Dismayed | January 21, 2009 at 01:51 PM
AK....I was thinking the same thing about Ty Cobb...Tough I agree JK was a huge cancer in the clubhouse...I also think during the majority of his career he was an asset in the field along with being an asset at the plate....He should be elected to the HOF
Posted by: K T | January 21, 2009 at 02:02 PM
I think VA is dead right about how on-the-field performance should be what constitutes HOF entry. Of course, that would mean that Pete Rose should be in the Hall...
Oh, and I thought that a player's choice was only one thing the Hall considered when deciding which hat goes on a player (I seem to remember Gary Carter wanting to go in as a Met but getting put in as an Expo)...
Posted by: Valmont | January 21, 2009 at 02:12 PM
VA: The players used to decide, but then Dave Winfield sold his right to decide to the Padres. Now the writers decide so that there isn't a bidding war for this honor.
JisDismayed:
The reason Torre knew only about Kent is because he didn't bother getting to know the rest of the players onthe roster. He knew Kent from the AL, and had seen his baseball card. But he didn't know anything about Loney, Kemp, Ethier, or Russell Martin. He seemed to think Juan Pierre was still the same guy who beat the Yankees in the 2003 World Series, not the slappy nancy-armed outfielder he became by the time he moved to L.A. He thought Andruw Jones was a good hitter, and it took him until July to realize that fatso wasn't the same player. He knew Nomar and Lowe from the Red Sox and Brad Penny from the 2003 World Series. But he didn't learn anything about the rest of the guys until well into the season. Remember how Ethier had to play himself into the lineup, first at the beginning of the season, and then again after Manny arrived?
Torre held Kent in high esteem because he was looking at Jeff with 1999 eyes.
There's no questioning Kent's ability as a player. He'll easily make the Hall of Fame because of his numbers. But there's also no questioning his attitude either. Where's a teammate who liked him?
Posted by: SaMo | January 21, 2009 at 02:22 PM
He may be an ass, but he belongs in the hall. He's no saint but he is no Ty Cobb either. He was a salty old player from back when people played hard and listened to veterans. He is first ballot guaranteed. He changed the way people viewed 2B and is deserving on enshrinement. Lets see if Kent thanks Barry on his inception.
Hats off to a great career Jeff. Too bad you never could be that team leader to rally your teams around you, or you would have had a ring or two and maybe some fan support...
Posted by: poppinfresh | January 21, 2009 at 02:23 PM
The Dodgers sign back-up catcher Brad Ausmus. At least he is very good defensively and hits better than AJ.
Congrats to Jeff Kent. A good clutch hitter for most of his tenure with the Blue.
Posted by: Joe the Plumber | January 21, 2009 at 02:47 PM
OK, he is a butthead in the lockerroom. BUT, if we got half of what we got from Jeff Kent's contract from Schmidt and Jones we might have a few extra pennants hanging from the rafters. He gave everything he had on the field. I think he just let time pass him by - he was part of the era where hard work and production trumped being teammates and the kids knew their place with the vets. He never evolved (or wanted to) into the dude who could hit a ton and still be one of the boys. That's Manny, not Jeff. Jeff Kent should be in the Hall but only because of the 2B's already there. And like someone else said, he did it without roids.
Posted by: Jack in DC | January 21, 2009 at 03:02 PM
Samo,
I think you are loosing your grip on reality.
Torre was the first skipper to start Ethier at the beginning of the season on his first year with the club.
I'm 90% sure he was forced to keep playing AJ by the money men so the money guys wouldn't look so stupid and kept praying he would eventually snap back to that 0.200 average. I know Joe watched more Dodger games than I did, and it didn't take many to know the guy was done. Joe can evaluate players; he just doesn't have the only say.
As far as the HOF, Pete Rose in, Mark M. and Barry B. out. If they want to put an asterisk by Pete's name saying this is just as a player and not as a coach so be it, but there isn't an asterisk big enough in this world for those guys. How many championships did the steroid era cost the Dodgers? We didn't start playing well until we got a roster of guys taking roids, and then they got rid of most of those guys and we sucked again. How many rookies of the year did we have in that era wasted by some guy getting better through the needle? Same for Gagne, he would have been a lock. Kent was good, but certainly not HOF good as a Dodger. He did much more damage against the Dodgers than for the Dodgers, but that was all done when he was a Giant. But at least we tarnished their potential HOF by retiring as a Dodger!
Posted by: Dodger Dude | January 21, 2009 at 03:25 PM
Comparing Jeff Kent to Ty Cobb is like comparing Samatha Ronson to Hayden Panettiere.
Posted by: benzojones | January 21, 2009 at 03:38 PM
Valmont--but I would submit that off-field gambling also compromises the integrity of on-field performance. Pete Rose did not observe the pure integrity of competition, and hence should be excluded from baseball's highest honor as well.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | January 21, 2009 at 03:51 PM
My wife attended the Women's Initiative baseball clinic a couple of years ago, and she instantly became a Jeff Kent fan. During one of the drills, Jeff sat the women down and started going off on an anecdote of some very obscure ballplayers of the past and how they should learn to field like them... knowing full well that they will have no idea what he was talking about. My wife just started laughing to herself because she loved that type of sense of humor where he obviously was only trying to amuse himself.
Later that day, the Dodger players who showed up were signing autographs for the women, and my wife ran up to JK and said, "Hey Jeff! Picture!" before he had a chance to object. It worked... she got her picture without a fight, and he even smiled!
I know this has nothing to do with his HOF credentials, but the point is, maybe he really is a good guy, but just likes to keep to himself. I guess we'll never really know.
Posted by: Artful Dodger | January 21, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Kent vs Sheffield.
One big difference is that for the most part you never read of any other players gripping about Sheffield. I know he had his issues like Manny and forced himself off his early team, but that was early in his career. He was always well respected by the players and they felt he said what they wish they had the courage to say. Most of his gripes were with management. Like Kent he came ready to play and was great in the clutch. Unlike Kent he was liked in the clubhouse.
David
Loved him on the Marlins
Posted by: David s | January 21, 2009 at 04:30 PM
Geez. I read this on espn today regarding the 2000s:
LOWEST BATTING AVG. (4,000 PLATE APPEARANCES): Brad Ausmus (.243).
LOWEST SLUGGING PCT. (4,000 PA): Brad Ausmus (.326).
I was thinking, God I hope the Dodgers don't sign that guy. Sure enough...
Posted by: Valmont | January 21, 2009 at 04:46 PM
Benzo,
"Comparing Jeff Kent to Ty Cobb is like comparing Samatha Ronson to Hayden Panettiere."
I don't think I even got that, but I still laughed.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | January 21, 2009 at 04:54 PM
VA Blueblood,
Thanks. Appreciate it.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | January 21, 2009 at 04:55 PM
Dodger Dude:
Ethier was the odd man out headed into spring training, but then hit like a house afire to win the right field job. The man he displaced was not Jones, or even Pierre, but Kemp. Then Kemp hit well in the early part of the season to make Torre realize what everybody knew all along--that the kids needed to play every day. Yet when Manny arrived, Torre again sat Ethier rather than Pierre.
I know money plays a part in all these decisions, but Torre's unwillingness to use his eyes also played a part. The point is he has always been a guy who remembers what you did for him a long time ago.
With that in mind, I expect the Dodgers to sign Julio Franco to a minor league deal. Weren't he and Torre teammates at one point?
Posted by: SaMo | January 21, 2009 at 06:01 PM
So long Krusty Kent!!! Hopefully that AARP membership can get you some great discounts on your Motorcycle rags...
Posted by: DodgerBlueBalls | January 21, 2009 at 06:23 PM
one thing I think everyone keeps forgetting, McGuire was always very surly up until the point he saw how popular Sammy Sosa was during their big homerun race. That is when McGuire put on the act and became the beloved of the media.
Posted by: one dodger blue | January 21, 2009 at 06:57 PM