Edmonds - why not valued higher?

[MissingOakley]

Why is Edmonds' average draft # so low (in the 90s)? His numbers over the past few years are really, really good.

[j24jags]

At this point, he is on the decline and he is injury prone.

[The Jury]

At this point, he is on the decline and he is injury prone.

Yes, and he takes a lot of games off at random, which is irritating to a fantasy manager.

[giants!]

Both of the last posts are major factors in his low rating

[MissingOakley]

Fair enough, makes sense. Do you think he's undervalued at #90? He's come back from low HR seasons before.

[j_d_mcnugent]

it seems every year people predict the downfall of edmonds. he always seems to have minor injuries of some sort, although he plays more games than most people think. sooner or later those minor injuries will develop into major injuries.

[great gretzky]

you know, I think he is undervalued, all things considered. If you think about it, how many guys who have a flaw? (Can't hit lefties, whatever the case may be) where you sit him and start him according to his flaws, but you end up missing stats? Is that any different than "missing stats" because edmunds takes off?

I'd take him as a third outfielder.

[johnsamo]

still good but his #s declinging over the last few years... That and his on the field heroics make him more of an injury risk.

[mak1277]

still good but his #s declinging over the last few years... That and his on the field heroics make him more of an injury risk.

You mean his on the field histrionics don't you? So many of his magnificent diving catches are a direct result of him dogging it just so he can dive. Then he comes up like he hurt himself. He's just a hot dog. It's a shame too, because he really is a superb defensive player.

[jealousblues]

still good but his #s declinging over the last few years... That and his on the field heroics make him more of an injury risk.

not to split hairs, his numbers declined last year. The year before that, 2004, he had maybe the best numbers of his career. Even last year, his numbers were pretty good.

But there was a decline, but it was probibly more dramatic coming off his best year.


Runs 2004=102, 2005=88

HR 2004= 42, 2005=29

RBI 2004=111, 2005 = 89

SB 8, 5

BA .301, .263

His numbers last year are down, but not too far off from what his career numbers look like.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/e/edmonji01.shtml

dont know if that helps. I dont think he was as bad as everyone thought he was.


A Jones 2005
Runs 95 HIts 154 HR 51 RBI 128 BA .263 OBP .347 SLG .575 SB 5

J Edmonds 2005

Runs 88 Hits 123 HR 29 RBI 89 BA .263 OBP .385 SLG.533 SB 5

Just for fun: Edmonds 2004

Runs 102 Hits 150 HR 42 RBI 111 BA .301 OBP .418 SLG .643 SB 8 SO 150

It could be argued, the Edmonds had a fairly close year statistacally to Jones. Granted Jones had more guys to knock in, from RBIs,and JOnes Killed him in the HR department, and Slugging. I mean Jimmy was no Jones, but he wasnt TOO terribly far off. I dont get why Jones was close for MVP, compared to Pujols and Lee.

Anyone here (who probibly has a way better baseball knowlege than me) want to show me what im looking at wrong.
Or is it closer than we would all think from the surface? I mean, im kind of new to this and want ot learn.


oh and Jones struk out 112 times, and Edmonds 139 OUCH!
I can see why Jones is a much better fantasy player, and Edmonds is really annoying with days off, streakyness, and little injuries.