All Hail James Patrick Edmonds I
A couple of weeks
ago, when Pope John Paul II passed away, plenty of discussion started stirring
about who would take his place. You could hardly turn on any news station
without hearing talks of which cardinal would be selected to succeed the late
John Paul II, a very well-respected individual. Well, early on Tuesday morning
reports began circulating that the College of Cardinals had selected a new
pope, Joseph Ratzinger from Germany. Joseph selected the name Benedict XVI,
and appeared truly grateful to be serving the Lord. While his faith is likely
very genuine, I do have one small complaint: I think that the College of Cardinals
have chosen the wrong man!
Okay, so I’m not Catholic. I may not exactly know a lot about pope selection
or the process involved. What I do know, however, is that the College of Cardinals
had to pick among all of the cardinals to make their selection. So why, may
I ask, was Jim Edmonds not named the pope? Why are we not being greeted with
news of Pope Edmonds I? The whole situation reeks of travesty.
Jim Edmonds began his major league career in 1994, but didn’t really
break out until 1995, when he burst onto the scene as a 25 year-old California
Angels outfielder. Edmonds hit 33 homers that year and began to gain a reputation
as a tremendous defensive player. A lot of baseball fans thought that Edmonds
success would turn out to be a fluke, but things only got better for this
would-be pope.
Edmonds hit between 23 and 27 homers a year between 1996 and 1999 before being
traded away from the Angels. The Angels dealt Edmonds for second baseman Adam
Kennedy and rotund hurler Kent Bottenfield, who was fresh off one of the dumbest
successful seasons ever. I think we all know how this ordeal turned out. Edmonds
has won a Gold Glove in all five seasons he’s played with the Cardinals,
and he’s hit between 28 and 42 homers each season. He’s also never
posted an OBP lower than .385 or a slugging percentage lower than .561 as
a Cardinal. So why, with this level of success as a Cardinal, is Edmonds not
ready to be pope? If these numbers weren’t enough to convince you, take
a look at this chart of career statistics prior to the 2005 season:
| Candidate | AB | AVG/OBP/SLG | HR | RBI | H |
| James Patrick Edmonds I | 5090 | .294/.384/.544 | 302 | 909 | 1,496 |
| Pope Benedict XVI | 0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Looking at this statistical
evidence, it’s almost appalling that the College of Cardinals came to
the decision they did. On top of this startling evidence, Edmonds has captured
seven Gold Glove awards in his career, while Pope Benedict XVI has none.
That’s right, none. Things might be different if Pope Benedict XVI was
having an exceptionally strong start to the 2005 season; I might be willing
to let this decision slide. But that’s simply not the case. Edmonds
has been his usual self early on, hitting .276/.405/.759 with four homers
and seven walks. As for Pope Benedict XVI, he’s still hitless for the
year. The evidence is becoming damning, isn’t it?
I know there isn’t a precedent for it, but if any of you good men from
the College of Cardinals are reading this, I suggest you heed my suggestion
and rethink the decision that you all spent so much time making. While I understand
that this Joseph Ratzinger may be a very fine man, statistically he’s
no James Patrick Edmonds. I would understand Ratzinger being named the pope
over say, Damion Easley or Mike Maroth. But Jim Edmonds? Come on. The only
drawback I can even think of is that Edmonds’ 6’1” frame
might not fit into the friendly confines of the bullet-proof Pope-mobile.
Other than that, he’s the perfect choice. I think if you cardinals out
there give this whole situation another look, you’ll agree that all
of the news reports should be talking about the great Pope Edmonds I.
