Can you name the ESPN's MLB 2000s All-Decade Team? by schredder

Position	Player	Team
Catcher		Minnesota Twins
First Base		St. Louis Cardinals
Second Base
Shortstop		New York Yankees
Third Base		Texas, New York Yankees
Left Field		San Francisco Giants
Center Field		Kansas City, Houston, New York Mets
Right Field		Seattle Mariners
Designated Hitter		Minnesota, Boston
Right-Handed Pitcher		Toronto Blue Jays
Left-Handed Pitcher
Closer		New York Yankees

Javascript is not currently enabled on your browser.
If you do have Javascript enabled:
This site uses javascript to make the magic happen.
Please turn on javascript and reload this page, or use a more current browser (like Firefox)

ESPN's 2000s MLB All-Decade Team Quiz

by schredder

Created Dec 19, 2009 in Sports
Game Plays 10,537

Friend Scores and Standings

Loading friend results....

Top Games Today in Sports

Top Games with Similar Tags

Top User Games in Sports

	AndyVanSlyke18:	Dec 19th, 2009 at 18:26 GMT	2 points
	Good quiz, maybe make the time allowance a little less. Otherwise, well done.

	slugga27:	Dec 19th, 2009 at 18:34 GMT	4 points
	You could try to make it a little more difficult by not showing the team name until after. This made it TOO easy. It took me exactly 30 seconds to finish.

	crashintoavan:	Apr 12th, 2010 at 19:48 GMT	5 points
	Nice. I thought surely there had to be some mistake so I typed in Utley and Santana 3 or 4 times each.

Comment below threshold: show it

	Giggity1:	Apr 12th, 2010 at 20:52 GMT	4 points
	Not during the decade in question.

	havlorech:	Apr 12th, 2010 at 23:35 GMT	4 points
	A-Rod was still a Mariner in 2000.

	paddy26:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 01:47 GMT	-1 points
	Good quiz though I'd take Santana over Johnson in the 2000s easily.

	kward:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 02:50 GMT	3 points
	gotta go with chase at second

	josh23:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 02:56 GMT	2 points
	@bdogrox2: yes but he was a Jay during the entire decade.

	Suffron_SD:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 19:53 GMT	10 points
	Johnson won three Cy Youngs and was second in another vote and had effective seasons in the other six. Santana didn't even pitch in every season. Santana didn't go into the rotation permanently until mid-'03 and only won 2 Cy Youngs. You could certainly make an argument for Santana (he was my first guess), but there's no way it's "easy."

	RCray7:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 19:56 GMT	3 points
	id take utley over kent

	chazzykc:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 19:57 GMT	3 points
	I agree that utley should be at second over kent

	CAV:	Apr 13th, 2010 at 23:13 GMT	1 point
	I think there is a reason no one is getting Beltran, its that he has no business being on this list

	Salukimars:	Apr 14th, 2010 at 01:26 GMT	2 points
	this is true CAV, I'd take Jim Edmonds or Torii Hunter over Beltran

	nysports24:	Apr 14th, 2010 at 01:32 GMT	0 points
	time doesnt work

	mwolfe86:	Apr 14th, 2010 at 02:02 GMT	1 point
	@CAV who else would you put? If it were a generic OF spot, then I'd agree. But we haven't had a legit great CF in a while. Beltran and Torii Hunter are the best options here, with Jim Edmonds a close 3rd based on lack of longevity. If I'm forgetting someone, please forgive me.

	darksilver2820:	Apr 14th, 2010 at 02:17 GMT	2 points
	I'd take Pudge Rodriguez over Mauer, of course not now, but over the span of the entire decade.

	Giggity1:	Apr 14th, 2010 at 04:48 GMT	0 points
	I might lean towards Edmonds as well, but Beltran did have about 1300 more PAs than him. Hunter doesn't really have a place in the discussion. You guys are really underrating Beltran imo. I think Piazza has a pretty strong case, but Jeff Kent's 2000 more PAs compared to Utley are just too many to ignore.

	JGS:	Apr 18th, 2010 at 05:30 GMT	-1 points
	You can have Mauer and Utley, you can have Posada (who blows Pudge out of the water in terms of 2000-2009 output) and Kent. You can't have Mauer and Kent. Be consistent, ESPN

	AlexSmith:	Apr 18th, 2010 at 13:32 GMT	0 points
	Beltran is a terrific CF, there's no way you can say he doesn't deserve to be on the list. Year in and year out he makes it look easy. Is he head and shoulders above the crowd? Maybe not, but you certainly cant say he has no business being on the list. And the reason he isn't being guessed a lot is because he plays for the Mets, who play in the Yankees market, meaning he has to compete with the enormous publicity shadow cast by them. I am a die hard Mets fan so Beltran was a quick decision for me, but it is understandable why casual baseball fans wouldn't think of him, or really any other Mets (aside from Piazza and Santana).

	McDevitt12:	Jul 6th, 2010 at 20:22 GMT	0 points
	Jeff Kent, come on now.

	gobosox3424:	Jul 16th, 2010 at 19:27 GMT	-2 points
	manny ramirez would make it at any position besides 1st base or left field. shame

	rdc718:	Nov 8th, 2010 at 04:23 GMT	0 points
	i love jeff kents baseballe reference sponsor page "I've never come across a more unfriendly, unhappy, ungrateful person in all my years following baseball. It's a shame you are going to the HOF. You give ballplayers a bad name." Kents WAR through the decade was 36.2, had four years where he got mvp votes (including the year year won 2000, although i dont get how helton or his teammate bonds didnt win....helton was INSANE that year) Utley has a WAR of 38.7, had five years where he recieved mvp votes, and was making much less money throughout the years he was in the league. Not really much of anything but some "stats"....

	rdc718:	Nov 8th, 2010 at 04:24 GMT	1 point
	forgot to write i don't think there is a snowballs chance of kent making the hof.....and im guessin the rockis did not come close to the pennant for him to win even "splitting votes" with a teammate...sorry about the double post

	JPO:	Nov 9th, 2010 at 15:03 GMT	1 point
	There's just no argument for Hunter over Beltran. Beltran gets on base more, slugs for a higher average, hit more home runs and hit for a higher average during that decade. Not to mention he stole over a hundred more bases than Hunter while getting caught half as many times (62 for Hunter versus 30 for Beltran). UZR also has him as a rangier center fielder. There's certainly an argument for Edmonds, in that he was a better all around hitter, but not quite as good on the basepaths, and slightly less durable, though obviously neither have been particularly durable recently.