Edmonds: The Next Forgotten One
When a good player hangs up his cleats, be it of his own volition or a lack of offers, a good chunk the baseball analysis community tends to forget everything they know, gravitating towards the Hall of Fame extremes. Either a player is or isn’t worthy of Cooperstown enshrinement. It does not matter that the writers spent countless words evaluating the subtle nuances of his performance over the years or just how valuable he was to a team, because he either played well enough to get into the Hall of Fame, or he didn’t. I’m not sure how or when this all occurred, but it is quite bothersome considering that the players who do not get in are generally forgotten unless they stick around as coaches or took part in controversies, like those involving drugs.
Sure, I might see Evan Longoria’s torrid RBI pace (yes, I know RBIs are not that important, keep your saber-snark in your pants) to start the season and remark about the incredible offensive years from Juan Gonzalez at the turn of the century, but Juan-Gone is nothing but a footnote these days. Sadly, I fear that Jim Edmonds is in store for a similar fate, not based on his actual career accomplishments but rather the perception of what constitutes a Hall of Fame player.
Edmonds played for 16 seasons, and realistically should be playing right now given the outfield situation of at least the Braves, and likely a few others. Despite a reputation for being particularly fragile, he did manage to surpass the 400 PA plateau in all but three of his seasons. Since he became a full-time starter in 1995, and our win value data extends back to 2002, I am going to call upon Rally’s Baseball Projection site for the pertinent WAR numbers, an appropriate choice given that Edmonds began his career with the Angels. Early on, Edmonds developed a reputation for being a tremendous fielder, a reputation occasionally matched by the numbers; statistically he was not as solid as he looked but he sure was fun to watch.
The defensive reputation also overshadowed his offensive contributions. From 1995-98, his first four full seasons, Edmonds averaged 28 home runs, a .360 OBP and ranged from .371-.404 in wOBA. Fuse his offense and defense together with a mix of positional adjustment and value above replacement and Edmonds put up WAR marks of 6.2, 4.8, 4.1 and 4.2. He missed significant time in 1999 and found himself a member of the St. Louis Cardinals as the 2000 season rolled around. This would mark the beginning of Edmonds’ peak, when his 1995-98 maximum WAR of 6.2 would look a tad on the low side.
From 2000-05, Edmonds averaged 35 home runs, never hitting fewer than 28. His OBP never fell lower than .385 and his wOBA ranged from .386-.436. According to Baseball Projection, here were his win values: 6.6, 6.3, 7.2, 7.5, 8.4, 6.9. His career declined following the 2005 season thanks to the wear and tear of playing such a demanding position as well as simple aging. Even at 38 years old, though, he might serve as an upgrade over a few starting outfielders.
What doesn’t bode well for Edmonds’ chances of making the hall are his good but not insane numbers in a fantastic offensive era, his defensive reputation overshadowing the solid offense, and that the bulk of his peak not only coincided with Scott Rolen’s, but also with the emergence of Albert Pujols. In fact, speaking of Pujols, as it currently stands, Rally’s site has Edmonds at 67.9 wins and Pujols at 67.8. Sure, Edmonds began getting regular playing time six years prior to Pujols’ debut, but to do in essentially 13 seasons what Pujols has done in eight is still incredibly impressive.
He might get bonus points for appearing clean relative to others throughout the era, which is dumb, but I digress. Edmonds had a pretty fantastic career and deserves to be more than simply a guy on the cusp of the hall that gets forgotten within ten years of being left off the ballot. If I had a vote, he would certainly garner my support, as he deserves to be remembered. What say you?
Print This Post
Jim Edmonds has 6 seasons with a wOBA over .400. Vladimir Guerrero has 7 seasons with a wOBA over .400. Let’s suppose that Vlad rebounds and puts up three more seasons with a wOBA around .380. I think that makes him a surefire HOFer, with a career wOBA around .395. Edmonds has a career wOBA of .384.
But wait – Guerrero is at best an average defensive corner outfielder. Edmonds is an above average defensive center fielder, at least. Does that make up for a difference of .010 in wOBA? I think it does for sure.
(Why do I have Vlad rebounding in my scenario? To highlight how good Edmonds is by comparing him to the best case scenario. If Vlad doesn’t rebound but still makes the hall of fame, I think that only strengthens Edmonds’s case.)
As far as the Hall goes, I tend to use WARP-3 as a rough measuring stick, with 80 being required to get my support. Kind of arbitrary, and WARP-3 isn’t perfect, but it does go back (obviously Fangraphs’ WAR can’t be used for discussing older players), and that 80 threshold does a pretty good job of catching all the guys who “should” be in and leaves Jim Ed far, far short of worthiness. Works for me. :)
Oh, and by Jim Ed, I meant Jim Rice. Duh, might want to actually talk about Edmonds, who’s right on the line (I think it was like 80 point something).
Edmonds has 82.5 WARP3 according to BP as of today, with five seasons above 8 WARP and eight above 6 WARP. Are u sure ur numbers r right?
Yeah, that’s right. Like I said, I was taking a shot at Jim Rice, forgot to mention Edmonds, and realized how similar Rice’s nickname was to Edmonds, so I corrected myself below. Yeah, low 80s is correct on Edmonds.
I’d use Rally’s WAR data over WARP3. The methodology is actually transparent, not to mention better.
I said months before the Braves signed Anderson (when they were going after Griffey) that Edmonds was the guy who made sense for them. Even still, I think he would make sense for them, as he could platoon with/replace Frenchy. Maybe the Braves don’t want to run two platoons in the outfield, but that would certainly improve them. I’m also not entirely sure why the Cubs, who fretted this offseason about being too right-handed and gave a thirty-million dollar deal to a guy who’s only everyday position is DH, didn’t just bring Edmonds back.
I felt the same way with the Anderson to the Braves deal. Every time I’d read something about Anderson or Griffey going to Atlanta with Edmonds still available just made me shake my head.
I know this post is about Jim Edmonds (who belongs in Cooperstown), and I know some people may get tired of the gee-Albert-Pujols-is-good category of commentary, but consider: Pujols’ career WOBA is equal to the best SEASON ever turned in by a very, very good hitter. That really boggles my mind.
I would feel more confident if I didn’t think he was a serious juicer. I saw him in Chi-Town back in ‘05 or ‘06 walking next to Pujols and Rolen and he made them BOTH look small! He has always been well put together, but he was pretty clearly on some sort of PED. I hate that that is the new company line, but it’s gonna taint the entire generation unfortunately.
Some guys are just naturally huge. Is Frank Thomas an obvious juicer? Jim Thome? Ryan Howard? Sorry, I need a lot more than “he’s big” to call a guy a juicer. In Edmonds’ case, there’s absolutely nothing else on him. Furthermore, guys have been cheating since the game was created. Do we knock the careers of Perry, Ford, or Carlton for scuffing the balls?
I hear ya, but it doesn’t change the fact Edmonds was a likely steroid user. I can tell a juicer when I see one. I’m sorry, but he had a ‘double’ peak ala Barry Bonds. Normally, we’d agree players peak around 26-29?
Jim Edmonds at the relatively late stage of a career at age 33 and 34 had his TOP SLG seasons (617 and 643). His top wOBA of .436 at age 34? Sorry dude, that’s pretty clear cut.
As for scuffing the ball in comparison to a labratory created substance that gives us nearly super human strength, endurance and power. Not quite the same ballpark. Scuffing, spitting etc was more ingenuity to me, than cheating. Hard to compare pinetar to d-bol.
What defines cheating, except being against the rules? Scuffing was against the rules. Interestingly enough, the cream and the clear, which Bonds is accused of using, were neither illegal nor banned by baseball when he allegedly used them; since they weren’t known well enough, they weren’t classified as steroids.
As for peaking, Edmonds career is more of a single peak, though it was in his mid-thirties. Of course, so was Aaron’s… guess he was a juicer, too! We know he took greenies.
Edmonds was massive from the beginning of his career. I saw him at Quad Cities in 1989 and he was big as a 19-year-old.
He also really didn’t have a double peak; he just had an outlier bad year in 1999; he was pretty consistent from 1995 to 2004.
Jimmy would get my vote for Cooperstown.
Kinda like Neifi Perez was big when he was on the juice.
I thought (and mostly still think) this post was a joke to get a rise out of people because of how clearly Edmonds DID NOT look like a PED user. Pujols and Rolen each have 2-3 inches and 20-30 pounds on him.
What do PED’s have to do with the argument, anyways? This whole “morality clause” in HoF voting is a load of crap, and anyone who doesn’t vote for a player PED related on that basis is an idiot. That said, if you think he used and want to argue as a user, he didn’t stand out from his peers enough…well, at least you have an argument whether or not others agree.
No, because for the toughest HOF to get in, the standards need to be THAT tough. If say 5% of ALL-time players took this stuff, that same 5% doesn’t deserve to make the HOF. Period.
So, are we kicking out the greenie users? Ball scuffers? Coke snorters? Stabbers of black elevator operators because they got too ‘uppity’ (I’m looking at you, Mr. Peach)? What a bizarre stance to suddenly link that cheaters are the scum of the earth.
What a bizarre stance to suddenly praise the cheaters and give them ample excuses.
I’m not praising them, and there’s nothing sudden about it. I’m just following baseball’s tradition, which is to take the results for what they are. We’re adult enough to understand the context they were achieved in.
I personally think anyone who used PEDs should be banned from the Hall if they took the PEDs after the testing policy took shape. If they took them prior to that then no big deal. PEDs were available in 1918 so any player since that time could have juiced and more likely HOFrs did than didn’t. Particulalry if they played in NYC or Boston where th old time factories were. But anyone who gets caught this year should be banned for life, because the rules have essentially changed.
Yes, the rules have changed – and there are clear and defined consequences, among which is not exclusion from the Coop.
He was an excellent player for a long time. I was suprised that no one signed him, given the success that he had with the Cubs last year.
Juan Gon only played in about 1700 games and had about 6500 at bats. He also only had about 80 homeruns after the age of 30. He didn’t walk that much, and his highest on base pct. for a season was .378. People also probably had high expectations for his career, but he couldn’t stay healthy enough.
If we wanna go baseballprospectus on this:
Jim Edmonds: 82.5 WARP3
Andre Dawson: 66.1 WARP3
Tim Raines: 94.2 WARP3.
One of these men will more than likely be in the Hall of Fame soon. Guess which one.
Moral of the story: Screw the Hall of Fame vote.
I would vote for Tim Raines
Absolutely he’s in. His five-year peak was unparalleled to an other CF. During his years in Anaheim and then St. Louis he consistently delivered for a player slotted in a no 3 or 4 role in the lineup, while playing a demanding defensive position.
It’s so surprising that he did not find a contract this off season. He splits warrant continued playing time, far and above what many outfield regulars or platoons offer this year.
I assume you meant his five-year peak compared to his contemporaries; otherwise, Messrs. Mantle, Mays, Speaker and others would have words for you (if, you know, two of those three weren’t dead). Even still, a little digging finds a contemporary who had a fairly close five-year run, at least offensively: Bernie Williams during the dynasty years put up wOBAs that were certainly in the same ballpark as what Edmonds did his first five years in St. Louis. Junior also had a fairly beastly run, although arbitrarily cutting the window at five years benefits Edmonds in the comparison. Still, unparalleled? Not sure you can say that.
I’d love to for the Twins to just dump Delmon and put Edmonds in Twinkie pinstripes this season.
Hall of Famer, if I had a vote. Funny how a lot of consistently awesome CFs from the steroid era are so under appreciated by the non-saber crowd, despite being really good on both sides of the ball. Jim Edmonds, Mike Cameron, Carlos Beltran all come to mind.
“When a good player hangs up his cleats, be it of his own volition or a lack of offers, a good chunk the baseball analysis community tends to forget everything they know, gravitating towards the Hall of Fame extremes. Either a player is or isn’t worthy of Cooperstown enshrinement. It does not matter that the writers spent countless words evaluating the subtle nuances of his performance over the years or just how valuable he was to a team, because he either played well enough to get into the Hall of Fame, or he didn’t. I’m not sure how or when this all occurred, but it is quite bothersome…”
“…but Juan-Gone is nothing but a footnote these days. Sadly, I fear that Jim Edmonds is in store for a similar fate, not based on his actual career accomplishments but rather the perception of what constitutes a Hall of Fame player.”
“Edmonds had a pretty fantastic career and deserves to be more than simply a guy on the cusp of the hall that gets forgotten within ten years of being left off the ballot. If I had a vote, he would certainly garner my support, as he deserves to be remembered. What say you?”
This article was odd to me. Am I the only one seeing the contradiction here?
I can sort of see where you’re coming from but the point was that I cannot stand how players get reduced to In or Out… but since that isn’t going to change, am I alone in thinking that Edmonds deserves to be remembered? And in this day and age, being remembered by people outside of your city basically = induction into the HOF.
Yeah, I just thought it odd/funny that you wrote an article on seemingly exactly what you complained others do. Anyway, whether he deserves to be in or out I’m not sure but he was always fun to watch.
Edmonds was the guy I remember comparing “my” CFer (Bernie Williams) to. What a player.
Edmonds really gave the Cubs a shot in the arm last year. 20 HR in 111 games for the Pads and Cubs last year. I’m surprised Hendry didn’t have room for him, at least as a role player/pinch hitter/Bradley insurance policy.
He won’t be completely forgotten, but yes, the shadow of PED use hangs heavy over Edmonds. He and Glaus were buddies for years.
if i had a vote he would be in there, Pujols would not have been able to put up some of the stats he has without Edmonds being so dangerous hitting behind him. I remember a year when the MVP talk was Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen. No other center fielder in my mind comes as close to those numbers for the period of time
Outside of SS, it seems the Hall frequently overlooks a players defensive contributions. A ton of mediocre defenders are in the Hall, and many great defensive players have been left out. Edmnds was one of the better glovemen of his time and was an outstanding hitter. He deserves serious consideration for the Hall. He is a boarderline Hall of Famer, but I would put him above Vlad.
I am surprised no one picked Edmonds up. I guess we will never know why teams passed on him this year.