Jason Kendall (yes, you read that correctly)

[Eddie Collins]

Playing in Pittsburgh, this guy has almost slipped under the radar, despite being a tremendous catcher. Now at age 30, with 9 years under his belt, his stats look like this:

.306/.387/.418

1409 Hits
706 Runs
259 Doubles
39 Triples
67 Homers
140 Stolen bases

He rarely strikes out, and has the anomaly factor, in that he is one of the few leadoff-catchers.

3 time all-star
3 top 10 BA finsihes
already ranks 11th all-time in HBP

Should easily get 2,500 hits in his career. His only huge weakness is his slugging%, but again, he isn't a slugger, so that is expected.

His ink stats are all on good track, he just needs to build some counting stats. Any opinions?

[leecemark]

--Well Pittsburg has been trying desparately to get rid of him (strictly financial as far as I know) for a couple years now and that doesn't help a players rep. I haven't actually seem him play much, but I've heard is below average defensively. he doesn't run much anymore and probably needs to do something about that lack of slugging as he moves into his 30s if he wants to retain hsi value as a hitter.
--If the Pirates find a contender who is willing to take on that contract and Kendall can manage a couple good years for a team with a higher profile that would be a huge boost to his chances. If you are right about him getting 2,500 hits he would end up as a candidate worth talking about. However, Ted Simmons was a much better hitter and probably as good a catcher and hasn't made much of an impression on Hall voters. That doesn't bode well for Kendall.

[Cougar]

Seems to me that 2000 hits and a .300 career BA get him into the discussion. He's at 1409 hits and .306, so it's a reasonable goal. If he catches Simmons in hits, he's really a top candidate. (Simmons being the best catcher not in -- and he'd have to do a lot more than get more hits to convince me he's better than Simba.)

His defense is about average, which is fine given his bat. He was better defensively before the leg injury that really stunted his development as a player overall -- looked like he was starting to develop a little extra-base power until that happened.

As of now, he's not a candidate, but it's not unreasonable to say that he's on track.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Seems to me that 2000 hits and a .300 career BA get him into the discussion. He's at 1409 hits and .306, so it's a reasonable goal. If he catches Simmons in hits, he's really a top candidate. (Simmons being the best catcher not in -- and he'd have to do a lot more than get more hits to convince me he's better than Simba.)

His defense is about average, which is fine given his bat. He was better defensively before the leg injury that really stunted his development as a player overall -- looked like he was starting to develop a little extra-base power until that happened.

As of now, he's not a candidate, but it's not unreasonable to say that he's on track.

He's a .300 career hitter at this writing, so that gets him into the discussion, but the trend is such that he probably will not be in 2 seasons.

Kendall does not have the defensive reputation to overcome his lack of power. His HOF candidacy is dependent on staying at catcher for a long time, and racking up a huge number of career hits.

The big obstacle to Kendall getting into the Hall is that the writers don't think he's a HOFer. Nobody thinks Kendall is a HOFer among the BBWAA; if they do, they are keepin it quiet. He won't go in on the first ballot, and is in danger of being one and done. (Will Clark and Lou Whitaker were one and done, so that's a realistic possibility but not an insult.) If Kendall is able to stay on the ballot, his chances will, over time, depend more and more on his batting stats. So if he hits in the high .290s and has 2,600 hits, minimum, he might get in on the strength of being a catcher.

Even at that, he is still a longshot. I still think that Kendall has to keep his BA over .300, but to do that, he'll have to take his game up a notch, and I don't think he can at this point in his career.

[Cougar]

I don't disagree with a word Fuzzy wrote. Since my previous post, Kendall has changed teams and played a full season in 2005 and a partial in 2006. In that time, he's looked like a player in decline, both offensively and defensively. His big contract is probably the main reason the A's haven't considered other options at catcher yet.

He's aging badly, which a player with a longshot case who needs to reach counting stat milestones and maintain rate stat milestones can't do.

Barring a revival of fortune, Kendall's chances are nil.

[DoubleX]

Underrated when he was at his best. If he played for a winning team and/or in a bigger market, he would have received more praise. Still, a far cry from a Hall of Fame career.

[CTaka]

I tend to think of Kendall as similar to a modern day version of Bresnahan. Good OBP, no power, excellent speed for a catcher, and a solid but not great defensive catcher. I think Bresnahan was clearly better than Kendall, but similar players.

While I am a Bresnahan fan as a solid choice for the HOF, many consider Roger to be on the lower (or lowest) rung in Cooperstown. Barring any significant changes in the rest of Kendall's career, that probably puts Jason in the "close but not quite" level for induction.

[yankillaz]

We'll have to see if he maintains the same level for, say, 6 or more seasons. But right now, he's not in. I'd rather have Miker Lieberthal running for the Hall.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Some of Kendall's "decline" since coming to Oakland is the result of switching leagues and switching to a tougher hitter's park. It doesn't look like he's adjusting well, however, and some of that decline may well be real.

Kendall's real hope for the HOF is dependent on having a better career in his thirties than he did in his twenties. Fisk did it, and so did Boone. Fisk is a HOFer, and there was much disucussion of Boone as a HOFer at the end of his career, although he didn't make it. A long, long career at or near career norms is Kendall's big hope; if he does that, there may well be a late-in-life reassessment. It's not something one can predict will happen, but it is possible if (A) Kendall stays healthy, (B) Kendall stays at catcher, and (C) Kendall moves into a more favorable park to help his numbers.

[Cougar]

Some of Kendall's "decline" since coming to Oakland is the result of switching leagues and switching to a tougher hitter's park. It doesn't look like he's adjusting well, however, and some of that decline may well be real.

The fact that Oakland is a tough park for hitters is undoubtedly unhelpful, but the fact is, it's far from the whole story. I don't think his road stats are very good either.

Switching leagues is not as hard as it used to be, with interleague play and all the player movement today.

I think you can adjust for context all you want, but eventually a guy just needs to hit, whatever his circumstance. Oakland's had two offensive MVP's this decade, and they had numbers that didn't need park adjustment. (Granted, PED's were an issue in at least one case...)

[KCGHOST]

Kendall was awful in 2005 and he is putting up similar numbers this year. Starting to look like the end of the line for him.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Kendall was awful in 2005 and he is putting up similar numbers this year. Starting to look like the end of the line for him.

He'll play a long time, but not at the level he needs to play at to emerge as a HOF candidate. That's what it looks like at this moment in time. If he gets hot and finishes at .320, I'll obviously change this assessment.

[candy curveball cummings]

Of the 13 Hall of Fame Catchers:

Only 4 have higher career Batting Averages than Kendall

Only 3 have higher career On Base Percentages than Kendall

Only 3 have more stolen bases than Kendall

Only 7 have more career hits than Kendall (unless he gets injured or just falls off the planet, Kendall will pass Lombardi in ’07, making it only 6 with more hits than Kendall)

Only 8 have more runs scored than Kendall (he will most likely pass Hartnett this year, making it just 7 with more runs than Kendall)

Does Kendall have a shot, or none at all? What more does he have to do?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Of the 13 Hall of Fame Catchers:

Only 4 have higher career Batting Averages than Kendall

Only 3 have higher career On Base Percentages than Kendall

Only 3 have more stolen bases than Kendall

Only 7 have more career hits than Kendall (unless he gets injured or just falls off the planet, Kendall will pass Lombardi in ’07, making it only 6 with more hits than Kendall)

Only 8 have more runs scored than Kendall (he will most likely pass Hartnett this year, making it just 7 with more runs than Kendall)

Does Kendall have a shot, or none at all? What more does he have to do?

Kendall has a shot, but it's not a good shot, and his chances seem to be diminishing.

To have a real shot, Kendall needs to keep his BA over .300. The trade to Oakland has clobbered him on that score. Kendall has no power to offer, although his career OBP is pretty good.

Kendall is not considered a top defensive catcher. He calls a good enough game, but he's had injuries, and his throwing arm is not good. He gets no help here.

Kendall has never received a vote for MVP. He has played in only 3 All-Star games, none since 2000. He has never been the best catcher in his league, although his competition has been Mike Piazza, so that's not a big ding against him.

If Kendall makes it to 2,500 hits, or thereabouts, with his BA and OBP no lower than what they are now, he MIGHT make the HOF. Kendall's problem is that, like Don Sutton, he just doesn't seem like a HOFer, even though he's done (as least superficially) some of the things that HOFers at his position do. But if he stays at catcher and makes it to 2,500 hits at the BA and OBP levels he's at now, he's in the game. (Kendall will DEFINITELY make the HOF if he gets 3,000 hits, but it is extremely unlikely that he'll last that long.)

I don't think Kendall will keep his BA over .300. Kendall has played almost 1,500 games at catcher (1,493 to be precise). He's also had major injuries, so he's at the stage where he could be expected to wear down. If he doesn't; if he shows unusual durability, THAT would be a sign of greatness.

If Kendall ages in the pattern that is likely, he'll resemble more closely the one HOFer he is comparable to: Rick Ferrell. He'll also resemble more closely one of the still burining HOF controversy cases: Thurman Munson. Is Kendall better than Munson? Is he better than Ferrell? Is Ferrell better than Munson?

Maybe none of those questions matter, either. Ferrell is considered a HOF mistake; being better than Ferrell, in and of itself, isn't an argument for the HOF. On the other hand, I doubt Kendall is as good as Munson, who was a Gold Glove defensive catcher who was the best catcher in the AL at one time, and who DID win an MVP award and who DID lead his team to a pennant. If Munson isn't in the HOF, why, really, are we discussing Kendall? (There may be a good answer for that question, but it needs to be asked.) The same can be said for Kendall vis a vis Bill Freehan, Lance Parrish, and even Bob Boone.

One thing that would help is for Kendall to get out of Oakland and play in a park that would mask his decline a bit. A trade to Houston or Chicago would be helpful. Oakland is KILLING his BA. Another thing would be a return of his power; Kendall hit only ONE HR last year; he's hit as many as 14 in a season. A few more All-Star selections would be helpful as well.

I'm not betting on any of the good stuff to happen here, though. Kendall will play a few more years, end up with a BA in the .290s, and miss the HOF. He's overshadowed by Piazza, Rodriguez, Pierszynski, Mauer, even Posada. He's not thought of as a HOFer now, and he's not doing anything to add to this.

[dgarza]

Kendall is a long shot. He's been on somewhat of a downturn. He would realy need to kick things into high gear for about 3 years to have a descent shot. I don't think he'll maintain his .301/.381.400.

There are a few catchers who have higher numbers than Kendall but are not HOFers with at least a similar numbers games.

All the catchers with a higher average are or will be HOFers.

Wally Schang has the highest OBP, but I have Kendall only rank slightly ahead on Schang at this point.

Slugging percentage is not in Kendall's favor. Even Benito Santiago has a higher slugging %, so does Ted Simmons, Smoky Burgess, Darrell Porter, a host of others.

I think he's just going to find himself in that group of catchers who were very good, but far enough from boarderline like an Elston Howard.

And I know this sounds shallow, but he hasn't been an All Star since 2000. I think he's going to need that kind of recognition just for support and to make more of a name for himself.

[Fuzzy Bear]

If Kendall stays at catcher and gets 2,500 hits as a catcher, he'll get looked at. I do believe that much.

Kendall is the kind of guy whose chances can go way up or way down with one season. If Kendall hits .330 next season in a full season of play, his chances of making the HOF go up a lot. Especially if he's an All-Star, or wins a major award. A .255 season in 400 ABs would push Kendall under .300 lifetime, and that would decrease his chances significantly, not just because he'd become a .299ish hitter, but because it would affect his future playing time. Kendall won't make the HOF if he spends any part of the next 5 years as a part-timer.

[hudsonharden]

He's going to have to do a lot before he retires, because he's never gotten an MVP vote in his career. Johnny Bench, Carlton Fisk, Gary Carter, Yogi Berra, Mickey Cochrane, Gabby Harnett & Bill Dickey all finished in the top 5 in MVP voting at least once, with many of them winning it. He might have a chance with the veterans committee, but considering his contemporaries (Piazza, Pudge, and even Javy Lopez finished 5th in the voting once), I don't think he has a snowball's chance with the BBWAA.

[candy curveball cummings]

He's going to have to do a lot before he retires, because he's never gotten an MVP vote in his career. Johnny Bench, Carlton Fisk, Gary Carter, Yogi Berra, Mickey Cochrane, Gabby Harnett & Bill Dickey all finished in the top 5 in MVP voting at least once, with many of them winning it. He might have a chance with the veterans committee, but considering his contemporaries (Piazza, Pudge, and even Javy Lopez finished 5th in the voting once), I don't think he has a snowball's chance with the BBWAA.

Yeah, but doesn't this reasoning punish a guy for playing on a lousy team? Look at Kendall from 1998-2000. In 1998 the guy batted .327 with a .411 OBP. His OPS+ was 131 and he was a solid defensive catcher. Don't you think that if he played for a better team putting up those numbers he would've been gotten a few MVP votes?

[Rose4theHall]

He will definitely be an interesting case, he seems to be built like a tank and is a lock for 140+ games, year in and out. If he can be productive and healthy for the next 7 years then he will actually get close to 3000 hits, 1265 to go and his age 33 season coming up next year, it wont happen but you never know and cant discount a late career spurt that tends to happen from time to time. Its just ashame he has no power anymore. He will put forward an interesting case for sure, it all depends when he starts falling off. A catcher who hits leadoff and has an OBP of .381 are a rare breed, Im sure he will find work somewhere.....

[cavalier1968]

i vote no......by a moderate amount.......Is his career better than T.Munson?

Cav

[KCGHOST]

I don't think Kendall can be seriously looked at. He might have a nice BA, but that's about it. Ted Simmons was vastly superior to Kendall and he can't get in. Simmons WARP3 is 98 while Kendall's is 68. His lack of power is just a killer.

[EvanAparra]

No way. I just loathe this man. Nothing but a me type player.
Yeah, leaning into pitches all the time to help your team is a very ME thing to do.

[tearforamariner]

Yeah, leaning into pitches all the time to help your team is a very ME thing to do.

Seriously. He's only been hit 209 times in 11 seasons! He even played games in the outfield for Pittsburgh (I think 2001) trying to do whatever he could to make the Pirates a winner.

[EvanAparra]

Seriously. He's only been hit 209 times in 11 seasons! He even played games in the outfield for Pittsburgh (I think 2001) trying to do whatever he could to make the Pirates a winner.

He's 7th ALL-TIME in HBP, he's got a fighting shot at the HBP record by the time his career is all said and done -- I think he just said that because Kendall didn't stay in Pittsburg to wallow in last place his whole career.

[tearforamariner]

He's 7th ALL-TIME in HBP, he's got a fighting shot at the HBP record by the time his career is all said and done -- I think he just said that because Kendall didn't stay in Pittsburg to wallow in last place his whole career.

But Pittsburgh traded him!

[EvanAparra]

But Pittsburgh traded him!

Haha, wow, didn't know that -- then I have no idea why he would say that. I dont remember him having any public problems in Pittsburg... but then again I didn't remember him getting traded either. :ughh

[tearforamariner]

Haha, wow, didn't know that -- then I have no idea why he would say that. I dont remember him having any public problems in Pittsburg... but then again I didn't remember him getting traded either. :ughh

I like Jason Kendall, but I didn't know that much about his character. I've been looking him up the last 20 minutes or so, and will continue to do so. Kendall has been called a "media favorite" because he won't turn down an interview. He once said "everyone has a job to do, and I like helping people do their jobs".

[candy curveball cummings]

i vote no......by a moderate amount.......Is his career better than T.Munson?

Cav

Good Question! Let's have a look see:


Kendall:
.301 BA | .381 OBP | .400 SLG | 104 OPS+
1735 H | 307 2B | 30 3B | 68 HR | 574 RBI | 852 R | 159 SB

Munson:
.292 BA | .346 OBP | .410 SLG | 116 OPS+
1558 H | 229 2B | 32 3B | 113 HR | 701 RBI | 696 R | 48 SB

Defensively, Munson had a better arm, but Kendall is a better fielder. They are both noted for being excellent game callers.

Munson has the awards and reputation, but this is because he played for the Yankees. Kendall spent his best years in obscurity. As you can see, Munson and Kendall are pretty well-matched. I think Kendall makes up for the OPS+ deficit with his speed and average. His OPS is much higher than Munson, but Munson did play in a tougher era. Kendall is not noted for power, but he does have more extra-base hits than Munson (mainly doubles).

[cavalier1968]

A player's stolen base percentage (aka SB%) measures his rate of success in stealing bases. Because stolen bases tend to help a team less than times caught stealing hurt, a player needs to have a high stolen base percentage in order to contribute much value to his team. A commonly used figure is that a player needs to succeed about 2/3 of the time just to break even.

Kendall 68.5%........So his value as a SB threat is minimal......

Cav

[Captain Cold Nose]

A player's stolen base percentage (aka SB%) measures his rate of success in stealing bases. Because stolen bases tend to help a team less than times caught stealing hurt, a player needs to have a high stolen base percentage in order to contribute much value to his team. A commonly used figure is that a player needs to succeed about 2/3 of the time just to break even.

Kendall 68.5%........So his value as a SB threat is minimal......

Cav
Stoeln bases are minimal for modern catchers, threat aside. At least when they're on the base paths. I'm not sure how this is part of the HOF equation for any catcher.

[cavalier1968]

Stoeln bases are minimal for modern catchers, threat aside. At least when they're on the base paths. I'm not sure how this is part of the HOF equation for any catcher.

Agreed........very rare for a catcher....

Cav

[Fuzzy Bear]

Good Question! Let's have a look see:


Kendall:
.301 BA | .381 OBP | .400 SLG | 104 OPS+
1735 H | 307 2B | 30 3B | 68 HR | 574 RBI | 852 R | 159 SB

Munson:
.292 BA | .346 OBP | .410 SLG | 116 OPS+
1558 H | 229 2B | 32 3B | 113 HR | 701 RBI | 696 R | 48 SB

Defensively, Munson had a better arm, but Kendall is a better fielder. They are both noted for being excellent game callers.

Munson has the awards and reputation, but this is because he played for the Yankees. Kendall spent his best years in obscurity. As you can see, Munson and Kendall are pretty well-matched. I think Kendall makes up for the OPS+ deficit with his speed and average. His OPS is much higher than Munson, but Munson did play in a tougher era. Kendall is not noted for power, but he does have more extra-base hits than Munson (mainly doubles).

If Kendall is a better fielder, how come he hasn't won a single Gold Glove?

Kendall was rumored to be headed to the outfield, except that J. R. House is more injury prone than Kendall has been. (Kendall has actually been pretty healthy, but he's had one MAJOR injury, however.)

[EvanAparra]

If Kendall is a better fielder, how come he hasn't won a single Gold Glove?


Its very hit and miss to whether the best fielder actually gets the gold glove they deserve.

[Cougar]

Kendall was a better than average fielder before the broken leg, good enough to perhaps luck into a Gold Glove if there wasn't an obvious Bench or IRod figure to claim the award. But he didn't.

After the break, his fielding declined a bit, in a pretty typical type of path for a catcher. He's mediocre now, adequate to man the position, which is not a demerit really for a guy in his thirties, so long as he doesn't fall off any further.

[Cougar]

Overall, Kendall's HOF case is weak, and will be predicated almost entirely on longevity. In order to have a credible argument (especially considering that catchers like Munson and Simmons are currently on the outside), he's going to have to get about another 1000 hits while maintaining a BA over .300. The way his career has been trending, that doesn't seem at all likely.

I think Kendall is an All-Star caliber player, but probably not a HOF-caliber player.

[Rose4theHall]

Kendall was a better than average fielder before the broken leg, good enough to perhaps luck into a Gold Glove if there wasn't an obvious Bench or IRod figure to claim the award. But he didn't.

After the break, his fielding declined a bit, in a pretty typical type of path for a catcher. He's mediocre now, adequate to man the position, which is not a demerit really for a guy in his thirties, so long as he doesn't fall off any further.

FYI, only Pudge had more defensive win shares than Kendall did in 2006.

[CTaka]

Of the 13 Hall of Fame Catchers:

Only 4 have higher career Batting Averages than Kendall

Only 3 have higher career On Base Percentages than Kendall

Only 3 have more stolen bases than Kendall

Only 7 have more career hits than Kendall (unless he gets injured or just falls off the planet, Kendall will pass Lombardi in ’07, making it only 6 with more hits than Kendall)

Only 8 have more runs scored than Kendall (he will most likely pass Hartnett this year, making it just 7 with more runs than Kendall)

Does Kendall have a shot, or none at all? What more does he have to do?

I have posted before that I think that Jason Kendall is similar to Roger Bresnahan. Their strength is based on their ability to get on base and the plus speed they displayed from a traditionally slow-footed position.

That being said, I think that Bresnahan was clearly the better of the two. Kendall's OBP of .381 is very impressive and is 10.4% above league average. Bresnahan's .386 OBP is 14.8% above league average. But Kendall has below average power, with a league slugging percentage being 8.25% higher than Kendall's. Bresnahan was not a power hitter either, but at least his slugging percentage was 8.5% above league average. As a result, Bresnahan's career OPS+ of 126 is far better than Kendall's 104. Given Kendall's decline in slugging over the past few years, it would seem logical to conclude that his OPS+ will continue to decline as he ages. Even with an LQ adjustment, Bresnahan is clearly better offensively.

They both had excellent speed for a catcher. Bresnahan stole more bases (212) than Kendall (159), but he played in an era in which stolen bases were much more emphasized.

I have them about even defensively.

While I have Bresnahan as a clearly deserving member of the hall of fame. But many here have Bresnahan as a "mistake" choice for the Hall. If a clearly superior catcher such as Bresnahan doesn't receive his just due as a legitimate hall of famer, I don't think that makes a strong case for a lesser player such as Kendall.

[Cougar]

FYI, only Pudge had more defensive win shares than Kendall did in 2006.

Perhaps I'm underrating him -- I may well be.

I'd be curious to see the full rankings, to see if they mostly comport with expectations. Defense behind the plate is, as you know, notoriously difficult to capture statistically.

[The Kid]

I doubt he gets in. He may be an on base machine, but he has absolutley no power and has never finshed in the top five in MVP voting. Kendall is a long shot, but i'd have to give him some recognition.

[tearforamariner]

Perhaps I'm underrating him -- I may well be.

I'd be curious to see the full rankings, to see if they mostly comport with expectations. Defense behind the plate is, as you know, notoriously difficult to capture statistically.

Defensive Win Shares, Top 10 Catchers 2006:

1. Ivan Rodriguez, 11.5
2. Jason Kendall, 11.2
3. Joe Mauer, 9.5
4. Brad Ausmus, 8.3
5. Yadier Molina, 8.3
6. Kenji Johjima, 7.6
7. Miguel Olivo, 7.4
8. Ronny Paulino, 7.3
9. Ramon Hernandez, 6.9
10. Russ Martin, 6.9

[Cougar]

OK...What do 2004 and 2005 look like? Maybe 2006 was a fluke?

I'm not doubting you, per se...I'm attempting to falsify a hypothesis with fairly likely alternate possibilities. If I fail, then your hypothesis is probably true.

[EvanAparra]

I'm not doubting you, per se...I'm attempting to falsify a hypothesis with fairly likely alternate possibilities. If I fail, then your hypothesis is probably true.

All models are false, eh? Good science my friend.

[Cougar]

Aw shucks...Yeah, I try.

[tearforamariner]

OK...What do 2004 and 2005 look like? Maybe 2006 was a fluke?

I'm not doubting you, per se...I'm attempting to falsify a hypothesis with fairly likely alternate possibilities. If I fail, then your hypothesis is probably true.

2005 showed that Kendall struggled to adjust to his new ballpark. He was ranked 18th among all MLB catchers in win shares. However, in 2004 he was 4th, behind Schneider, Miller, and Matheny.

[Cougar]

OK: I see 2006 -- Excellent; 2005 -- Mediocre; 2004 -- Very good.

I don't know that this makes a lot of sense. Yeah, the ballpark changed, but how much does that really affect defensive catching?

Foul pops: More foul territory in Oakland, which should help him by giving him more putout opportunities. After that I'm stumped.

Now, I want to see 2000-2003.

[Walt Zink]

okay. i am NOT saying he's a HOFer. i want to make that clear. however, looking at his numbers, i see a catcher that's two years younger than the catchers everyone screams about (varitek and posada) and see far better career numbers. had he not suffered that freakish injury where he broke his leg, also, his stolen base numbers would be much higher, and they're still high for a catcher as it is.

not to mention he throws out more runners than varitek and is comparable to posada. his fielding percentage is lower, but by not much, and all that considering this guy has caught nearly 15,000 innings.

i'm not doing a poll on this one, because i know the numbers geeks will break this one down and then push their glasses up and vote no and laugh. the point is i think we're severely overvaluing posada and varitek. they played on winning teams and have certain intangibles (posada being a part of 3 WS winners, varitek of two plus catching what, 4 no-hitters?), but they're certainly not HOFers.

[jjpm74]

Posada's peak is much better than Kendall's. We're talking about an OPS+ of 125 vs an OPS+ of 99. I don't think Posada is a HOFer (at least not yet). Kendall is even further away than Posada, though. I never hear anyone refer to Varitek as a potential HOFer. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Agreed that Kendall is better than Varitek.

[Brad Harris]

Five years ago he had a pretty good case as the third-best active catcher candidate (after Piazza and I-Rod). He's pretty much fallen off the map since. I could probably make the argument he's one of the 50 greatest catchers in history, but not that he's a Hall-of-Fame caliber player.

[Walt Zink]

Posada's peak is much better than Kendall's. We're talking about an OPS+ of 125 vs an OPS+ of 99. I don't think Posada is a HOFer (at least not yet). Kendall is even further away than Posada, though. I never hear anyone refer to Varitek as a potential HOFer. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Agreed that Kendall is better than Varitek.

looking at posada's numbers (and he's out the rest of this year), he'll enter next year at 37 years of age, with not even 1400 hits. kendall, on the other hand, is 34 and approaching 2000. they're completely different in hitting styles, so that's a moot point. kendall was always a #2 hitter that made contact and was easily designed as a good hit-and-run sort. he very rarely strikes out (i believe half as many career Ks than posada with 1500+ more at-bats), and while his OBP is lower, part of that is due to the aforementioned contact hitter in him.

and i've heard probably just as many say varitek as well as posada, but both don't seem to get too many positive responses as a HOFer. again, different style of hitter, kendall and posada. however, if i were a GM and both of these guys were free agents and i needed acatcher, depending on my needs in a lineup? i'd most likely take kendall (that's if posada was not on the DL, obviously).

[jjpm74]

and i've heard probably just as many say varitek as well as posada, but both don't seem to get too many positive responses as a HOFer. again, different style of hitter, kendall and posada. however, if i were a GM and both of these guys were free agents and i needed acatcher, depending on my needs in a lineup? i'd most likely take kendall (that's if posada was not on the DL, obviously).

Kendall is great defensively. How good is he at calling games? I haven't seen him play as much as Posada and Varitek.

[Walt Zink]

i think of the three, varitek would get the nod as best at calling games. he has a pretty strong reputation in the league for that. i honestly don't know about kendall's ability to call a game. and posada, it used to be a weakness of his, but he has gotten much better over the years.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

I certainly see your point. You're not endorsing Kendall for the HOF. You're simply saying that he isn't far behind two guys who have much more HOF hype than him. I think you are correct. Looking at their numbers, I was surprised to see that Kendall has caught a lot more games than Posada or Varitek. At the end of the 2000 season, Kendall had built a pretty good resume. Unfortunately, he's had six mediocre to bad seasons since then. As far as I'm concerned, as of now, Posada and Varitek aren't HOFers. Posada could change that with a few more productive seasons, but I don't think that's likely.

[Brad Harris]

Given their respective ages and the certainty Kendall would come considerably cheaper, I too would take Kendall over Posada on the free agent market.

And I agree, once you get past the drop-off from Rodriguez, Kendall's not that far behind Posada. (I'd take Kendall over Varitek as a Hall candidate, actually.)

[BlueBlood]

the point is i think we're severely overvaluing posada and varitek.

Umm, the East Coast biased sports media is overvaluing them. I've never for once thought either was anything close to a HOFer.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Umm, the East Coast biased sports media is overvaluing them. I've never for once thought either was anything close to a HOFer.

I don't think anyone outside of RSN thinks Varitek has a shot at the HOF. But Posada has received a little talk here, based on comparisons to catchers in history. That's not the East Coast media talking or Kool Aid being ingested.

[dgarza]

Kendall's not that far behind Posada. At this point in time, Kendall is not that far behind Posada.
But I think he will appear considerabley behind in 3-4 years.

The only reason Varitek is in discussion is that he's a contemporary, and a Red Sox.

[Brad Harris]

I don't think anyone outside of RSN thinks Varitek has a shot at the HOF. But Posada has received a little talk here, based on comparisons to catchers in history. That's not the East Coast media talking or Kool Aid being ingested.

*sips Hawaiian Punch* mmmmh?

[KCGHOST]

Kendall has fallen off the table offensively. Only once in the last four years has he posted an OPS north of .700 and that just barely. If you don't want Posada you should pursue other players than Kendall. He's cooked.

[Captain Cold Nose]

*sips Hawaiian Punch* mmmmh?

I prefer Hi-C myself. Anything but kool-aid.

[dgarza]

If you don't want Posada you should pursue other players than Kendall. He's cooked.
I'm afraid to say his name because he's so young, but I feel more confident pulling for Joe Mauer for the HOF than cheering for Kendall's HOF case anymore.

[abolishthedh]

I'm afraid to say his name because he's so young, but I feel more confident pulling for Joe Mauer for the HOF than cheering for Kendall's HOF case anymore.

Mauer is a better hitter than Kendall, but Kendall was very similar early and remained similar for a lengthy period of time. He was overlooked because so many fans and media sources overvalue power in various stat measures.

However, that's not my main consideration. IMO, he's a sentimental choice on my behalf b/c I liked him early in his career and had him on my 1990s/early 2000s fantasy teams. What I liked about him? 1) his defense, and 2) his apparent ability to get the most out of veteran pitchers.

There was a pitcher with the Pirates when Kendall came up named Danny Darwin who was finished as a pitcher, mostly because in 1994-1995 Darwin's AL ERA was well north of 6.00 in 170+ IP over two years. Darwin pitched for most of 1996 with the Pirates, and for that losing team went 7-9 in 122 IP with a 3.02 ERA. Darwin then was traded to another NL team and he finished his career with several teams with ERAs well North of 4.00. I took note that Kendall was his catcher, and noticed that a few other pitchers seemed to do well with Kendall but not with prior or later teams. Unfortunately, I did not make a list of such pitchers, and I don't have time to regenerate such a list. Maybe someday I will.

Jason Kendall is a classic case of becoming a Veteran's Committee pick, based on whatever criteria the VC will use. As fans, we too often look at offensive numbers, but I believe that the number which might be most revealing is a year-by-year breakdown of Catcher's ERA. This is posted somewhere on the internet, and someone here at The Fever shared where to find it once. Catcher's ERA is just like pitcher's ERA, but calculated for the catchers. Once you have enough data, the data could be crunched into normalized Catcher's ERA and more.

[Cougar]

There was a thread on Kendall a while back...I'm sure Jim A will track it down.

Basically, the guy doesn't bring you a ton of year to year value, especially in recent seasons. But, if the guy plays until he's 40 and ends up with, what, 2500, 2600, 2700 hits, as a catcher, with a BA around .300, he's going to get some BBWAA attention, and he'll merit it.

[Fuzzy Bear]

There was a thread on Kendall a while back...I'm sure Jim A will track it down.

Basically, the guy doesn't bring you a ton of year to year value, especially in recent seasons. But, if the guy plays until he's 40 and ends up with, what, 2500, 2600, 2700 hits, as a catcher, with a BA around .300, he's going to get some BBWAA attention, and he'll merit it.

Kendall won't be elected by the writers because nobody thinks he's a star. And it's too late in the game (barring some miracle of rejuvenation) for Kendall to reverse himself, play regularly at catcher, and get his BA up over .300 again.

[willshad]

Through the first 5 years of his career, he was pretty much what Joey Mauer is now. A good example of why it is foolish to talk about hall of fame chances too soon.

[Ursa Major]

We had him at Oakland for several years and he was very good at calling games and a great team leader. But, the guy's offense went waaaaaay south, even separating out that he went a year between homers at one point. That's sad for a shortstop -- you've got to get something from your catcher. The A's essentially dumped him to give the spot to a mediocre hitting AAA call-up. While that's partly the usual A's salary dump, it does tell how dispensable he was. That's not very good for a guy who should still be in the prime of his career.

But, for defensive catchers, I'd have rated Mike Matheny higher. And Matheny was more likely to give you a clutch hit, IMHO.

[Cowtipper]

There was a thread on Kendall a while back...I'm sure Jim A will track it down.

Basically, the guy doesn't bring you a ton of year to year value, especially in recent seasons. But, if the guy plays until he's 40 and ends up with, what, 2500, 2600, 2700 hits, as a catcher, with a BA around .300, he's going to get some BBWAA attention, and he'll merit it.

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=55477&highlight=Kendall

[JDD]

Let's not forget HOW Catchers are elected to the HOF. Look at those players already in the HOF. What parts of the game were they good at? What made them famous?

Catchers who can steal bases and rack up base hits are nice, but that is not the path to the HOF.

Think power. Think post season. Yeah, the guy hits like Tony Fenandez, and he hits pretty well (for a catcher), but you have to add that qualifier in order to say that he hits "pretty well".

I am not sure if the HOF voters are inclined to vote in any more players with career numbers like Red Schoendienst without a ton of Gold Gloves to back up a decent batting record.

[BenHertz]

He has more R (931), RBI (648), and BB (622) than K (570), which is always nice for me.

[Brad Harris]

I am not sure if the HOF voters are inclined to vote in any more players with career numbers like Red Schoendienst without a ton of Gold Gloves to back up a decent batting record.
Schoendienst was a Veterans Committee selection and I'm sure, whatever the Hall said, his many years as a coach and manager played at least some part in adding to his case in some voters' minds.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Schoendienst was a Veterans Committee selection and I'm sure, whatever the Hall said, his many years as a coach and manager played at least some part in adding to his case in some voters' minds.

Schoendienst was, arguably, the best second baseman in the NL for much of his career. Yes, I know that Jackie Robinson was a contemporary, but Robinson was a regular at 2B for only five (5) years in his career. Robinson was, of course, a much greater player, but it could very well be argued that Schoendienst was a player that, in ordinary times, would have been considered the best player in the NL at his position. Schoendienst's defensive stats are excellent, and he well may have been a perennial Gold Glove winner in another era.

Consider these numbers for Jason Kendall:

Gray Ink: Batting - 26 (853) (Average HOFer ≈ 144)
HOF Standards: Batting - 25.9 (387) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)
HOF Monitor: Batting - 88.5 (179) (Likely HOFer > 100)
Overall Rank in parentheses.

The HOF monitor puts Kendall in the bottom half of the gray (70-130) area of the monitor. Kendall, IMO, gets that far up because the monitor's design gives him a decent "position bonus", one that is based, in part, on prior selections.

The 88.5 ranking for Kendall is pretty realistic, IMO. Most guys who do what Kendall has done are NOT in the HOF, but some are. Elston Howard, Lance Parrish, Thurman Munson and Bill Freehan are not in the HOF, but Rick Ferrell is, and so is Ray Schalk. (Ferrell does a little better than Kendall; he's at the 100-110 mark, as is Parrish. Freehan, Munson, and Howard are all in the 80s, while Schalk is below the gray area, at 56.)

One problem with Kendall's HOF credentials is that his defensive reputation mentioned here is not backed up by any Gold Gloves. You'd think that a top-ranked defensive catcher with a long career would have at least one Gold Glove for his efforts, but Kendall has none. I doubt that, come electioni time, Kendall will be remembered as a defensive star, and I don't really believe that he meets that criteria. He's good enough to still play the position, but he's no Yadier Molina.

[Cowtipper]

These can be combined:

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=81555&highlight=kendall
http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=55477&highlight=kendall

[Cowtipper]

If he'd been able to repeat his first five years, he'd have a shot. But after those first five years, he became below average, according to OPS+.

First five years ('96-'00): 121 OPS+
Next five years ('01-'05): 92 OPS+
Next four years ('06-'09): 74 OPS+
Past nine years ('01-'09): 85 OPS+

He could have been a Hall of Fame catcher, but right now I don't think he has what it takes.

[abolishthedh]

One problem with Kendall's HOF credentials is that his defensive reputation mentioned here is not backed up by any Gold Gloves. You'd think that a top-ranked defensive catcher with a long career would have at least one Gold Glove for his efforts, but Kendall has none. I doubt that, come electioni time, Kendall will be remembered as a defensive star, and I don't really believe that he meets that criteria. He's good enough to still play the position, but he's no Yadier Molina.

The problem I have with Gold Gloves is that selections so often are biased by what the player does in the batters box. If I had time, I would back that up with a list of bad fielding GG selections across all 8 daily playing positions. I also believe there is an East Coast bias, but it may take the research I just hinted at to bear it out.

The offensive bias exists, IMO.