Absolutely 1000% correct.

Just because they hate the guy personally doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be in the HOF

jeff was my favorite player when he came to the Mets, my brother and I both said he's gonna be great and we were both 100% correct. I HATE the way the voting is done for HOFers. If Mazeroski is in the HOF Kent is a no brainer. Jeff was a feared RBI man, Bill had great hands but 200 less hrs and had a career BA of .260. They both played 17seasons, Jeff had roughly 500 more RBI's with a career BA of .290 The baseball writers SUCK ! Look how long it took for Gil Hodges to be enshrined. Gil had 7 consecutive seasons with 100 rbis When Gil hung up his cleats he had the most HR's in NL history, most grand slams in NL history, hit 4 hrs in a game yet lost seasons in his prime to military service. Jeff had 8 seasons with over 100rbi's (6 yrs in a row). That's something that Mantle never did. Jeff is in my HOF for sure. I agree with your comment 1000%

so whomever has the highest WAR should win MVP?

@@playlistiphone8743 Dude, the writers have been voting for the MVP for over a century. And WAR is just something that appeared in the 21st century. That’s not how I determine who’s the most valuable. But what I don’t like is how people flip flop on the issue. In the last decade WAR was the all be all when they want to vote on MVP. Now when its not someone they want to win, then WAR doesn’t matter. I like a player who leads their team into first place and has great numbers where it matters. For instance I thought Mookie Betts should have won the MVP in 2016 over Mike Trout. He had more homers, rbis and a better average than Trout plus he led the Red Sox to a first place finish in the division. Trout led the league in WAR but didn’t lead his team to a division title wins the MVP. Then they switch it up on Betts in 2020, as he lead the NL in WAR but again finishes 2nd in the MVP while the Dodgers won the title. It’s not me, it the writers.

@@flame-sky7148 I agree with you on Betts back then but has nothing to do with my question. If you retire with the most home runs ever from your position and won an MVP along the way, you don’t think that player deserves to be in Hall of Fame. The same 2nd baseman that compiled over 1500 RBIs?

@@playlistiphone8743 see now you want to talk about hrs and rbis. Listen Kent will get it, because his numbers with the Astros and Dodgers were almost as good as they were when he was with the Giants. But when he was playing, I never said in my mind, there’s a hall of famer. He’ll get it, I don’t really care. I mean they just put in Ted Simmons. I think Kent and Utley were the best in that era.

@@flame-sky7148 I’m not trying to give you a hard time. I wanted someone to convince me why he shouldn’t be in. You wrote a big comment with all kinds of numbers and now you’re saying you don’t care. Of course you care, lol. You’re just not good at defending your position. My question was about Jeff Kent’s justification of being enshrined or not in Hall of Fame, and next I see, you’re talking about MVP voting from years ago and now Ted Simmons and Utley . I would ask another question but since you ducked the last time, I’ll spare myself. Don’t bother responding. I have no problem with someone disagreeing with me but when someone makes a weak argument, doesn’t answer questions relevant to the topic, then cops out by saying “I don’t care”, it’s a surrender. I think you’re either Jason Whitlock or one of the voters.

Giants legend

Shut up