Jeff Kent doesn't Stump Me
Series so far: Introduction, Fred McGriff, Mike Mussina, Andy Pettitte, Andruw Jones
The Jeff Kent love always sort of confused me. There's no doubt he was a good hitter, especially for a second baseman. He owns the record for most home runs as a second baseman, by a considerable margin (although Robinson Cano may take this crown from him in time). However, despite Jeff Kent's power, he was not (in my opinion) particularly close to being the best offensive second baseman ever, and he did not provide a ton of value elsewhere.
Jeff Kent was Overrated
Let's start here: Jeff Kent won an MVP, and he probably did not deserve it. Don't get me wrong: he had an excellent season, but he was probably not the best player on his own team (which is not knocking Kent: he played with Barry Bonds). Overall, 2000 was an absurd season for Kent hitting:
.334/.424/.596 (OPS+ 162), 125 RBI
He was about an average fielder at 2nd, and obviously played a premium position. However, he was not particularly close to being the best offensive force in the NL that season. Todd Helton had a crazy year (he had an OBP of .463, for example). Andruw Jones did too. Barry Bonds was also pretty obnoxious, hitting:
.306/.440/.688 (OPS+ 188)
Why did Bonds lose out to Kent? Simple: Bonds scored the Runs (129), and Kent drove him in (125 RBI). Bonds led the league in OPS+, and walks (117). Kent got to benefit from Bonds' prolific ability to reach base.
That is not to say this completely discounts his Hall of Fame case, as it does not. But the issue with Kent is his Hall of Fame case revolves around his offense, which was prolific. Despite this: Kent is probably not the best second baseman outside the Hall of Fame, determined solely on his offense. He has this reputation because of his home runs, but home runs are not the only offensive category. Here are second baseman outside the Hall of Fame by OPS+:
Bobby Grich 125
Jeff Kent 123
Chase Utley 117
Lou Whitaker 117
Despite Kent's massive lead in home runs, this has not translated into a massive lead in offense. Why is Jeff Kent a less prolific offensive force than possibly expected? Two reasons: Kent played in an insane offensive era (where home run rates were inflated), and Kent did not get on base as aptly as other second baseman. Of all the second baseman listed above, Jeff Kent ranks last in walks.
Kent also failed to provide much value outside of his bat. Kent's offensive value is marginally ahead of his competition here, their rank by rBAT:
Jeff Kent 297
Bobby Grich 256
Lou Whitaker 206
Chase Utley 176
But, Kent pretty much was either even everywhere else, or negative. Bobby Grich, Chase Utley & Lou Whitaker won Gold Gloves, and were excellent fielders. Utley, the best fielder of the three, offered almost as much value on defense as he did on offense. Lou Whitaker was probably the least accomplished with the glove, but he was also a strong baserunner. Jeff Kent was an average fielder until the last few years of his career, and was not much of a baserunner. In short: Jeff Kent's case is offense, and largely offense alone.
The Question of Value
Overall, all of this comes into play when looking at their JAWS scores. Jeff Kent ranks 20th in overall JAWS ranking, and only 26th in peak score. There are three retired players with JAWS scores ahead of Kent (the aforementioned Whitaker, Grich & Utley), but also three active ones: Robinson Cano, Ian Kinsler & Dustin Pedroia. Cano is compiling a case for being near the best second baseman of all time, already racking up as much value defensively as Utley provided in his career, while also hitting as well, or better, than Jeff Kent. Kinsler & Pedroia were on the Hall of Fame path, before stalling near the end of their careers.
Which brings Kent the biggest issue of his candidacy: Kent was a Hall of Fame hitter at his position, but overall his value just falls short. In such a big offensive era, Kent was not as valuable as many other second basemen. Kent also lacks a major post season resume, and never won a World Series.
Conclusion
I find the Jeff Kent love a tad confusing. By some traditional measures Kent stacks up, but a reasonable investigation finds Kent well short of numerous other players and generally below the current Hall of Fame standard set for the position. Kent managed to remain a productive offensive player for a majority of his career, and in a large Hall of Fame may make some sense, but until (in my judgment) several other players are deemed worthy: I must conclude Kent falls short.