<<if Mattingly was not a Yankee this thread would not be here>.
Bullfeathers! The guy won the GG in 9 out of 10 years and has a lifetime batting average of .307. Mattingly's offensive statistics are extremely comparable to Kirby Puckett. And yes, Puckett's WS rings certainly help but what team did he play for?
Don Mattingly - a first baseman, THE spot for the power hitting player. He had ONE batting title, ONE RBI crown, and never led the league in HR or Runs.
It's not that hard. You'll get credit for great defense as an up the middle player (catcher, 2B, SS, CF) and to a lesser extend, a 3rd baseman. It just doesn't mean that much to be great defensively at 1B, pitcher, or the corner outfield positions, because they field far fewer batted balls, have less area to cover, and even an average fielder can do an acceptable job.
Jim Kaat had 16 STRAIGHT Golden Gloves - no one is arguing he should be in based on defense. Keith Hernandez was a better fielder than Mattingly (10 straight GG), SAME era, led one of the most famous WS teams of modern times, and his stats are fairly similar to Donnies - not a HOFer. Dawson has 8GG and 438 HR, not in the Hall. To make the defensive argument, you have to be an all-time great defensive player AT a premium position.
I'd wager there are 25+ guys out there right now, from the modern (post WWII) era, with better credentials than Mattingly, and 50+ with better than Munson.
You can put the following name at the top of the "what the heck" or the "look what being friends with Stan Musial can get you" list:
Red Schoendienst.
Rizzuto was at least a star or spark plug of a major winning team. Schoendienst did NOTHING. Wasnt much of a player, had two pennant winning teams as a manager (as have tons other), and has been on the bench of teams for 50 years....so what. If he is in, Torre is a shoo in. He barely matches Zimmer's record of activity and longevity as well.
I just cant understand it. Ole Red is in and Ron Santo and Gil Hodges and the others are not.
Yankee players always have (and always will) receive more undue press than any other team.
Mattingly and Munson are 2 prime examples. Had they played on some small market team, it's unlikely we would even be having these discussions.
How many of the current teams get overdone hype? Bernie Williams comes to mind...he's always referred to as this 'great' player though as a center fielder, he's mediocre at best.
The east-coast bias (specifically NY bias) in this country is not a myth...these types of threads just prove it DOES exist.
Just imagine if Ron Santo were on the Yankees. I guarantee he would already be in. Yes NY players always seem to get extra credit when they really don't deserve it. I would push more for Mattingly making it than Munson, but neirther really have the numbers although as shown earlier Mattingly is very close
People forget that Munson played in a tough park for right handed hitters. So his stats are depressed. So when you look at a measurement tool like in Total Baseball, one that takes park effect into account, then he and Fisk are about the same for the 1970's catchers. I think I posted the Batter Runs, and Batter wins on another post.
I think Munsons being killed must certainly be taken into account. Heck, Kirby Puckett's early retirement due to an eye ailment was most surely taken into account. And the funny thing about Puckett, had his vote come up two years later, he would not have been voted in because of the sexual stuff he got caught in.
The question is for Munson, was he one of the best players in the league in the 70's? Not just at catcher, but did his value mix well with the other players in other positions as well? You have to be more than just the best at your position. You have to be one of the best players period. That is why the best middle reliever is not considered. I will look and see what we come up with, and how many players in the 70's that were better than Munson. The position you play is most certainly taken into account when measuring this. He could have inferior numbers than a LF, and still be a better player because he mans a more challenging position.
<<In the last vote of the Veterans Committee Munson got 4 votes to tie for 24th in the voting.>> and this year Thurman Munson received only two votes
And sure enough - just like I told you earlier in this very thread: Like I said - He will get LESS votes this year than last, and in a few years he will not even be on this bogus "back door" ballot anyway. Case closed.
last year he got 4 total votes. which was sad enough, but to only get 2 this year. wow. that has to hurt. next year he will not even get on the ballot I bet. and if he does I predict he gets 0 votes. (which is no more than he deserves)
Anti-Yankee sentiments aside.....I am too lazy to look this up but think it may be worthy of consideration. By position, by era....how many guys get in to the HOF . In other words, there is no doubt that Bench was the greateast catcher in the era Munson played in. Fisk was awesome. Munson was right up there comparatively - obviously didn't play as long.
Proud of my 16x20 autographed and framed collection - all signed in person. Not big on modern - I'm stuck in the past!
Comments
Bullfeathers! The guy won the GG in 9 out of 10 years and has a lifetime batting average of .307. Mattingly's offensive statistics are extremely comparable to Kirby Puckett. And yes, Puckett's WS rings certainly help but what team did he play for?
It's not that hard. You'll get credit for great defense as an up the middle player (catcher, 2B, SS, CF) and to a lesser extend, a 3rd baseman. It just doesn't mean that much to be great defensively at 1B, pitcher, or the corner outfield positions, because they field far fewer batted balls, have less area to cover, and even an average fielder can do an acceptable job.
Jim Kaat had 16 STRAIGHT Golden Gloves - no one is arguing he should be in based on defense. Keith Hernandez was a better fielder than Mattingly (10 straight GG), SAME era, led one of the most famous WS teams of modern times, and his stats are fairly similar to Donnies - not a HOFer. Dawson has 8GG and 438 HR, not in the Hall. To make the defensive argument, you have to be an all-time great defensive player AT a premium position.
I'd wager there are 25+ guys out there right now, from the modern (post WWII) era, with better credentials than Mattingly, and 50+ with better than Munson.
I have been arguing Jim Kaat's case since Ive come aboard. Look at my Icon.................
Red Schoendienst.
Rizzuto was at least a star or spark plug of a major winning team. Schoendienst did NOTHING. Wasnt much of a player, had two pennant winning teams as a manager (as have tons other), and has been on the bench of teams for 50 years....so what. If he is in, Torre is a shoo in. He barely matches Zimmer's record of activity and longevity as well.
I just cant understand it. Ole Red is in and Ron Santo and Gil Hodges and the others are not.
Mattingly and Munson are 2 prime examples. Had they played on some small market team, it's unlikely we would even be having these discussions.
How many of the current teams get overdone hype? Bernie Williams comes to mind...he's always referred to as this 'great' player though as a center fielder, he's mediocre at best.
The east-coast bias (specifically NY bias) in this country is not a myth...these types of threads just prove it DOES exist.
I think Munsons being killed must certainly be taken into account. Heck, Kirby Puckett's early retirement due to an eye ailment was most surely taken into account. And the funny thing about Puckett, had his vote come up two years later, he would not have been voted in because of the sexual stuff he got caught in.
The question is for Munson, was he one of the best players in the league in the 70's? Not just at catcher, but did his value mix well with the other players in other positions as well? You have to be more than just the best at your position. You have to be one of the best players period. That is why the best middle reliever is not considered. I will look and see what we come up with, and how many players in the 70's that were better than Munson. The position you play is most certainly taken into account when measuring this. He could have inferior numbers than a LF, and still be a better player because he mans a more challenging position.
He got that many? I wonder who those two guys were?
and this year Thurman Munson received only two votes
And sure enough - just like I told you earlier in this very thread:
Like I said - He will get LESS votes this year than last, and in a few years he will not even be on this bogus "back door" ballot anyway. Case closed.
<< <i>Bench was the greatest catcher - Fisk was awesome - Munson was right up there >>
which is the point by many here. We should not have a HOF full of players that were "right up there". Mediocrity should not be lauded as wonderful.