Mattingly, Murphy, Baines and Kent

Yesterday, the Baseball Hall of Fame's Contemporary Era Ballot -- a piece of what used to be known as the Committee on Veterans -- elected Jeff Kent to the Hall.

The main argument for Kent is that he hit 351 of his 377 career home runs at the position of 2nd base, and that's a record for the position. The main arguments against him are that, even taking his position into account, it's not good enough; and that he's a jerk, as if there aren't plenty of those in the Hall.

As with the vote for recently-retired players taken annually by the Baseball Writers Association of America, 75 percent of the vote is necessary to gain election. This committee had 16 members, so 12 votes were needed. Here was the vote, as published last night:

Jeff Kent: 14

Carlos Delgado: 9

Don Mattingly: 6

Dale Murphy: 6

Barry Bonds: "Less than 5"

Roger Clemens: "Less than 5"

Gary Sheffield: "Less than 5"

Fernando Valenzuela: "Less than 5"

For the record: Bonds, Clemens and Sheffield still have, at the least, the suspicion of steroids. Kent, Delgado, Mattingly, Murphy and Valenzuela never have.

Getting less than 5 votes mean that Bonds, Clemens, Sheffield and Valenzuela will not be included on future "Contemporary Era Ballots." 

The next Contemporary Era Ballot will be in December 2028. The Contemporary Baseball Era Committee Managers/Executives/Umpires ballot will be considered in December 2026. The Classic Baseball Era Committee, which considers player, manager, umpire and executive candidates whose primary contributions to the game came prior to 1980, will consider candidates in December 2027.

If I'm doing the math right, Valenzuela, Bonds, Clemens and Sheffield will have to wait for their next consideration until, respectively, 2024, 2054, 2054 and 2056. Valenzuela is already dead. Bonds would be 90 years old, Clemens 92, and Sheffield 88. And guys who use steroids tend not to live that long.

*

Yankee Fans not old enough to remember the Reggie Jackson era believe Mattingly should be in. People who became Atlanta Braves fans by watching "SuperStation WTBS" in the 1980s believe Murphy should be in. They don't think Kent should be in, just as they didn't think Harold Baines should be in. Baines has become the "poster boy" for players who shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame.

Let me explain this, so that even my 9-year-old niece -- who, sadly, has no interest in baseball, unlike her 18-year-old sisters -- can understand it:

Kent was a 2nd baseman, a position that generally produces lower hitting stats than 1st base, which Mattingly played; and both generally produce lower hitting stats than the outfielder, which both Murphy and Baines played.

Mattingly played his entire career in a stadium perfect for his swing. Murphy played most of his career in the most hitter-friendly stadium in the National League at the time. Kent played most of his career in pitcher-friendly stadiums. Baines played the majority of his career in one of the most pitcher-friendly stadiums in the majors.

Mattingly had 7,722 career plate appearances. Murphy had 9,041. Kent had 9,537. Baines had 9,908. Kent had a season's worth more than Murphy, and Baines had 2 more. Compared to Mattingly, Baines had 5 more, Kent 4 more, Murphy 2 more.

Murphy got 2,111 hits, Mattingly 2,153, Kent 2,461, Baines 2,866. Kent had 2 more good seasons' worth than Murphy and Mattingly, Baines 4 more.

Mattingly hit 222 home runs, Kent 377, Baines 384, Murphy 398. Baines hit 384. Given the difference in ballparks, Murphy should have had considerably more than the others. Baines hit 2 more, and Kent 5 fewer, than Jim Rice, for whom home runs were his thing, and who had the Green Monster to hit to, and nobody is questioning Rice's worthiness.

Mattingly had 1,099 RBIs, Murphy 1,266, Kent 1,518, Baines 1,628. That's about 3 more good seasons' worth over Murphy for Kent, 4 for Baines. Over Mattingly, it's 3 more for Murphy, 4 for Kent, 6 for Baines.

At the age of 40, Baines batted .312, hit 25 home runs, and had 103 RBIs. At 39, Kent batted .302, with 20 homers and 79 RBIs. Murphy played his last game at 37, and had his last good season at 35. Mattingly played his last game at 35, and had his last full season at 32. Yes, he had a back injury, but peak performance should only be taken into account as, for all intents and purposes, a tiebreaker. Mattingly is not tied with the other 3. He's noticeably behind them.

Does fielding matter? It should. Mattingly was an exceptional fielder, but not enough to boost him to Hallworthiness. Murphy and Baines were good fielders, but not great ones. Kent was not a very good fielder, and that might have cost him until now.

Murphy helped his teams reach the postseason once -- and both the Braves and the Phillies won the Pennant the season after he left. Baines helped his teams reach the postseason 6 times, although they only won 1 Pennant. Kent helped his teams reach the postseason 7 times, albeit also with just 1 Pennant.

If Harold Baines and Jeff Kent don't belong in the Hall of Fame, then supporting Don Mattingly or Dale Murphy for it is a joke. If Mattingly and Murphy do belong, then you need to shut up about Baines and Kent.