I'm not sure I can give him an A, but I'd feel silly giving him a B, so A- it is.An A. Not an A+ because he missed out on that Ace that would have made those teams transcendent as well as a title.
The 90s Indians teams are probably the best squad to never win a title.
Of course, one would lower the grade to A- if one gives credence to the rumors that Hart refused to trade Jaret Wright for Pedro Martinez.
But would it have made a difference in 1997? Probably not. But 1998, for sure if they would have re-signed Martinez.
He had been an above-average hitter in each of his five seasons as a mostly full-time player to that point. Nearly a .800 OPS and a 107 OPS+ in his time with the Mets.It tough to hate on Kent too much as i remember he was not hitting the world on fire with us or really at any point in his career. Its also crazy that i somehow remember he part of trade that got one of my favorite players as a kid in one Matt Williams.
I'm not sure I can give him an A, but I'd feel silly giving him a B, so A- it is.
Trading Burnitz and Giles for pennies on the dollar hurts a lot, too. More Giles than Burnitz, but it would have been nice to at least get better value.
Trading for Jeff Kent at midseason to be a utility player and then letting him go, just to watch him be a perennial All-Star is another.
I don't discount Hart for the Indians not getting over the hump. I fault him for how quickly it fell apart after 2001.
Kent had a couple 20 HR seasons with just around 500 PA with the Mets. He had shown pop before. He went from 22 HR per 672 PA with the Mets (his 162 game average for his career) to 30 HR per 672 PA with the Giants. Honestly, he probably just started juicing with everyone else. It would explain why he was still a silver slugger winner at 37 while playing in LA.I always thought Kent's becoming an all star had more to do with hitting behind Bonds who might be the most feared hitter of all time...steroids or no steroids.
Bonds is probably the best player of all time, obviously he has his scars/warts whatever, but kent had 12 home runs the year before SF, then 29. Hits behind bonds for years, last year is 37, then moves on and hits 22, just saying its not coincidence.
I always attributed it to PED's.I always thought Kent's becoming an all star had more to do with hitting behind Bonds who might be the most feared hitter of all time...steroids or no steroids.
Bonds is probably the best player of all time, obviously he has his scars/warts whatever, but kent had 12 home runs the year before SF, then 29. Hits behind bonds for years, last year is 37, then moves on and hits 22, just saying its not coincidence.
I always attributed it to PED's.