MLB Networks Top 9 Centerfielder's of All Time

[FirstTimer]

9. Kirby Puckett

8. Jim Edmonds

7. Duke Snider

6. Ken Griffey Jr

5. Joe Dimaggio

4. Tris Speaker

3. Mickey Mantle

2. Ty Cobb

1. Willie Mays

[dell71]

I like Edmonds, but there's no way in hell he belongs ahead of Puckett. Not sure he belongs ahead of Dale Murphy, Fred Lynn, Larry Doby, Richie Ashburn, and Andruw Jones. I know Edmonds was great with the glove but I've never seen anything like Jones during his ATL days, except possibly Griffey in his younger days (a tad too young to see Mays). If AJ were a more consistent hitter he'd be a no-brainer (and maybe if he weren't such a slob these days).

[Warner2BruceTD]

SCHNEIDER

[NAHSTE]

Kirby Puckett?!?!?!

Edmonds?!?!?!?!?!

:srs:

[Primetime]

Andruw Jones should make this list for defensive reasons alone.

[NAHSTE]

I finally edited Snider's name because I'm pretty sure his ghost lives in my building and I don't want him to send Campy and Ersky and the boys after me for this perceived slight.

[mcstl25]

Edmonds is one of my favorite players of all-time. I think he's very underrated in most baseball circles. Very few have been as good as him both defensively and offensively. With that being said, he's not a top 10 CFer.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Hmm, Edmonds v Puckett. Let's break it down:

Batting - Puckett .318/.360/.477/.837, 124 OPS+
Edmonds .284/.376/.527/.903, 131 OPS+

Slight edges across the percentage board for Edmonds, with the exception of a decent lead for Puckett in batting average, and a pretty large lead in slugging for Edmonds.

Edmonds clearly had more HR power, as he hit nearly 400 HR's, hit over 40 twice, and had one season with 39. Puckett only hit 30+ one time.

Puckett hit more doubles & triples. He hit nearly as any doubles in five less seasons, and more triples. Puckett also had more total hits, about 500 more, even while playing five less seasons.

Edmonds never led the league in anything. Puckett led the league in hits four times, batting once, and twice led the league in total bases.

Advantage: Edmonds. Slightly. He got on base more and had more HR power. Had Puckett played longer he would have closed/widened the totals gaps and I probably would have given him the edge. But it is what it is. Longevity does count for something.

Baserunning - Neither man was a particularly efficient base stealer, but Puckett stole more bases and at a higher percentage.

Puckett hit into far more double plays, a hidden stat that is far too often ignored. He led the league one time, and his totals were into the double figures 11 out of 12 seasons.

Edmonds, meanwhile, hardly ever hit into DP's, crossing the double digit threshold only 4 times in 17 seasons.

Advantage: Puckett. Neither guy was a great baserunner, and I guess I should probably lump the DP's into batting anyway.


Fielding - Both men rate much better than the rest of their respective leagues in fielding percentage, R/FG, R/F9, and most of the other fielding stats. Edmonds has the wider gaps. Both won multiple gold gloves, if you are into that.

Look, both were great fielders by any measure. I watched both play for their entire careers. For my eye test, it's Edmonds all the way. He may be the best i've ever seen.

Advantage: Edmonds


Intangibles - Puckett was known as a clutch player for two World Series winning teams, and was considered a great teammate and leader. Some disregard these things, I personally do not. Athletes are not emotionless stat generating cyborgs, they are human beings who can absolutely be influenced by emotion and have performance effected by it. By all accounts, and by watching him play, Puckett had that extra something special that made people around him better.

Puckett's postseason stats back up his reputation. .308/.393/.519/.913 World Series slash line is better than his regular season line (as is his overall postseason line). He hit 5 HR's in 24 WS games and made one of the more famous World Series catches of all time up against the old Metrodome plexiglass.

Edmonds postseason numbers are nearly identical to his regular season numbers, but he was only a .156 hitter in 9 World Series games with no HR's.

Advantage: Puckett. By a mile.


Overall, I like Edmonds a little but better. I think he's vastly underrated. I wouldn't argue very hard if you prefer Puckett. I think it's close.

[NAHSTE]

I don't think Puckett or Edmonds should be on this list above Andruw Jones. That said, I'd take Puckett over Edmonds.

Edmonds struck out a ton, was, at least to me, slightly overrated defensively (and even if you disagree, it's not like he was lightyears better than Puckett with the glove anyway), and was just kind of a bland guy in general. Puckett, as you alluded to, was a transcendent personality who was a huge part of two WS champions.

[Senser81]

Hmm, Edmonds v Puckett. Let's break it down:

Batting - Puckett .318/.360/.477/.837, 124 OPS+
Edmonds .284/.376/.527/.903, 131 OPS+

Slight edges across the percentage board for Edmonds, with the exception of a decent lead for Puckett in batting average, and a pretty large lead in slugging for Edmonds.

Edmonds clearly had more HR power, as he hit nearly 400 HR's, hit over 40 twice, and had one season with 39. Puckett only hit 30+ one time.

Puckett hit more doubles & triples. He hit nearly as any doubles in five less seasons, and more triples. Puckett also had more total hits, about 500 more, even while playing five less seasons.

Edmonds never led the league in anything. Puckett led the league in hits four times, batting once, and twice led the league in total bases.

Advantage: Edmonds. Slightly. He got on base more and had more HR power. Had Puckett played longer he would have closed/widened the totals gaps and I probably would have given him the edge. But it is what it is. Longevity does count for something.

Edmonds also played in the home run era, whereas Puckett's career ended just when that era was beginning. Puckett was a tough guy to get out, whereas Edmonds would strike out a ton. I don't know how much this is worth, but other than Albert Pujols steroid-aided monster career, Puckett had the highest batting average for a right-handed hitter in the modern era.

Edmonds might have the stat totals, but I think Puckett was the better hitter and the tougher out.

Also, if Duke Schnieder is on the list, then where is Mark McGuire?

[FirstTimer]

Also, if Duke Schnieder is on the list, then where is Mark McGuire?

other than Albert Pujols steroid-aided monster career

[nflman2033]

Edmonds has advantage over puckett in power numbers, but edmonds played in a more homer happy era of baseball, so that voids that edge in my opinion.

[Senser81]

LOL @ Jim Edmonds. It's like the MLB Network was reading my homer Angel posts when I jokingly lump him in with the great CFs of all-time.

I think the MLB network messed up their lists and included a couple people from the "Top 9 CFers not in the Hall of Fame" listing.

[Warner2BruceTD]

You guys ae really underselling Edmonds.

[Senser81]

Puckett hit into far more double plays, a hidden stat that is far too often ignored. He led the league one time, and his totals were into the double figures 11 out of 12 seasons.

Edmonds, meanwhile, hardly ever hit into DP's, crossing the double digit threshold only 4 times in 17 seasons.

Why do you think this is? Is it dependent on managerial style (Kelly v. LaRussa)?