Posted by llamanunts on 3/31/2011 9:52:00 AM (view original):
Trentonjoe: Here's my take on your point.  Jim Edmonds' offense fits comfortably in the middle of the very best hitting outfielders of his era.

You seem to say "I don't know" a lot, which is probably a strength.  It makes me wonder, though... when you say that he's 8th or 9th, what are you basing that on?  Also, do you not believe there's much of a difference between great defensive CFs and lousy-to-okay defensive corner outfielders?

I guess this is my issue.  If you created Manny Edmonds - the guy with Manny's defense and Edmonds' offense - there's no way I'd support his candidacy.  Less extreme?  Jim Gonzalez.  Pick your favorite Gonzalez.  There's no way Jim Gonzalez gets in.  Great defense in center field is a big deal.

I said "I don't know" because I didn't know.

I just eyeballed the #'s.

My big question is how good was Edmonds in CF?  I don't really understand the complicated defensive ratings and the ones I do understand have him as 8th or 9th in his career.   I think defense is still very subjective, someones says he good and others just parrot it.

  

Well, the numbers and scouts both seem to think Edmonds was a fine defender.  He won 8 Gold Gloves (I know, I know) and he's top-100 all-time in dWAR.  He's also top-100 all-time in oWAR. 

Here is the list of players who are eligible for the Hall of Fame but are not in, who are also top-100 all-time in offensive WAR and defensive WAR:

1. Bill Dahlen  (Probably ought to be in.  Deadballer.  Few care.)


Here is the list of players who are eligible for the Hall of Fame but are not in, who are within 30 spots of Edmonds' oWar and top 100 in dWAR:

1. Larry Walker  (Pretty strong case, direct contemporary.)
2. Reggie Smith  (Similar player to Jim, but not quite as good.  Skills underappreciated in his era.

Also, Ichiro has been great.  (236th in oWAR, T-36th! in dWAR all-time)

He still seems more like Dwight Evans,Tori Hunter, Keith Hernandez, Don Mattingly, and Scott Rolen than Al Kaline.

I think your analysis is tainted by only using the WAR data.

MVP share, OPS+,  and career totals all should be at least considered.

As great as Edmonds was, how come he didn't get 2000 hits?  That does hold some weight.

I'll admit... well, smugly assert, that I don't give a rip about MVP voting.

OPS+?  Kaline 134, Edmonds 132, Evans (interesting case) 127, Mattingly 127, Rolen (another interesting case) 124, Torii a joke to discuss in this context.  108.  (Ichiro: 117)

No 2000 hits?  1949 ain't bad, exactly.  Maybe partially because he drew 998 walks instead of hacking.  Would have been well over 2000 without injuries, but that doesn't count.  Note: There are 40 or so Hall of Famers with fewer hits.  Not all of 'em belong, but number of hits doesn't seem to be a great reason to keep him out.

Career totals? Well, you tell me.  How many  CFs hit better than .275/.365/.515?  Edmonds hit .284/.376/.527.  How many CFs hit close to (or more than) 400 homers?

I used WAR data because it's pretty comprehensive and pretty easy.  I would say your (and others') analysis is tainted by trying to compare Edmonds with corner outfielders and first basemen... and by generally ignoring that CF is a premium defensive position, played very, very well by Edmonds.

Also, Ichiro has been great.

I don't think he'll get in, which is why I'm beating the drum already.  I think Manny's a lock, based on the Jim Rice FEARED theory, which I hate.  I think he's qualified, based on the ridiculously high offensive output with crap defense at a position where expectations are low.  I don't think the steroid thing will hurt him much because he's a likable space cadet more than a villain to most people, I gather.

CF players should be lumped in with other 'center zone' position players (C - SS - 2B - CF) as having a different set of comparative offensive valuations.  Such players are extremely crucial to a team's success based because of their defensive prowess.

After all, Ozzie Smith ain't gonna make it in if you compare his #'s to 3B, 1B and corner OF players.  But compared to other SS players, a whole new valuation metric creates a more comprehensive perspective.

I can find 5 players since WWII who are in the HOF who have less than 2,000 hits.   Three started their career late because of the color barrier (Robinson, Doby and Campenella), one is in only because he was a Yankee (Rizzutto), and the other is Ralph Kiner who was the Sandy Koufax of batters.   I fdon't think that helps Edmonds.

The closest player I could find to Edmonds in the HOF is Puckett.

They have similar GG and Career OPS+.

Puckett seems more consistent,  did better in MVP voting, stole more bases, had a higher BA, was probably the best player on his team for 10 years and  arguably the best player in the AL from like 1986-1992.

Edmonds hit for more power (although adjusted for era, I don't if it is significant), walked more, was probably better defensively, and probably not considered the best player on his team but one or two years.

I think the biggest difference (other than Pucket had to retire at 35 and probably would have compiled a few more good years of stats) is that Pucket stood out.   Edmonds was the other OF for the Angels.

I don't think Edmonds is HOF worthy.   I do think Puckett is.  Although, this conversation has made me think more about it.

 

Well if you'd take Puckett over Edmonds, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Doodooface.