And he's nicknamed Mr. October for a reason. You can't go mearly by stats, but impact on the game. Unless of course, your a Hater of a certain team....Which you are.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Now the hating really comes out. He didn't hit home runs...so what? One doesn't have to be a home run hitter to dominate the game.
Why don't you head over to baseball-reference.com and see what Boggs' numbers are. 5 batting titles (Mattingly had one), 6 time league leader in OBP (mattingly best finish was 5th, which he did once). And Boggs never came close to Mattingly's 4 OPS titles? Uhm, where did you find Mattingly led the league in OPS 4 times? He led the league ONCE (Boggs led the league TWICE), and Boggs had 2 second place finishes, Mattingly had ONE.
Mattingly never led the league in home runs, led the league once in RBI, and wasn't nearly the force that Boggs was.
Anyone who says Boggs was an inferior batsman to Mattingly is out of their mind - or has suffered severe brain damage and should be examined immediately.
Look at the numbers objectively, and take off those yankee-stained glasses!
Yankees Red Sox, Red Sox Yankees. I'm getting really tired of this rivalry. It's just a game.
Mattingly stuff is going up in price because he was very popular player, and the people who watched him when they were young are now successful money spenders. John
<< <i>Dang Axtell, you really are a tool no matter where you post. >>
How do you figure, because someone wants to (errantly) call Mattingly a better hitter than Boggs, and I show them the stats that prove otherwise?
I was a big mattingly fan growing up too, but I don't let that past color my perceptions of what really happened: Boggs dominated in his era like few hitters ever have. Mattingly had a solid career, but never dominated, and surely didn't have more than 4 great seasons.
<< <i>The topic at hand has little to do with it. It's more your delivery. Meantime, no need to be sorry - I'm not. >>
The delivery?
Please...these blinded mattingly fans who say he should be in the hall and how he was superior to Boggs just needed to be shown the light, and I obliged.
Well my work is done here...if blinded 'fans' want to ignore the truth, let em. I'm content knowing Mattingly will be getting into the hall the same way as myself - by buying a ticket.
<< <i>Dang Axtell, you really are a tool no matter where you post. >>
How do you figure, because someone wants to (errantly) call Mattingly a better hitter than Boggs, and I show them the stats that prove otherwise?
I was a big mattingly fan growing up too, but I don't let that past color my perceptions of what really happened: Boggs dominated in his era like few hitters ever have. Mattingly had a solid career, but never dominated, and surely didn't have more than 4 great seasons.
Sorry that makes me a 'tool' in your eyes. >>
Who was a better position player? Boggs wasn't a dominant hitter, a great one yes but not someone who pitchers feared, he was at most a doubles hitter(over 500 for his career I believe). Mattingly wasn't dominate, but was the best at his position for many years. The same can't be said for Boggs.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Actually if you watched Boggs play, he was a dominate defensive player and even won two gold gloves at a much harder position than first base. At least Axtell use facts and not blind hate to make points.
<< <i>Actually if you watched Boggs play, he was a dominate defensive player and even won two gold gloves at a much harder position than first base. At least Axtell use facts and not blind hate to make points. >>
Boggs spent the first 75% of his career as a mediocre defensive player. He did not win a gold glove till his 13th or 14th season, when with the Yankees. And if asked there is not a single pitcher of their generation that would say Boggs was a bigger threat offensively in their prime. He had ZERO power, ZERO ability to drive in runs, and ZERO ability to be leader on or off the field. You Yankee haters really need to get your head out of the clouds, because there is not a single stat on earth that will ever prove Boggs was anything but a guy who could slap the ball.
"The other teams could make trouble for us if they win." -- Yogi Berra
<< <i>Actually if you watched Boggs play, he was a dominate defensive player and even won two gold gloves at a much harder position than first base. At least Axtell use facts and not blind hate to make points. >>
Axtell uses facts? lol, more like blind hatred/rage. How about the facts about the statistically variances in Boggs batting at home and away? Fact is, he wasn't a power threat, an RBI threat, he was simply a doubles threat. That's it. A great player in his own right, but to say him and Mattingly aren't on the same level is obsurd. I believe both are HOF'ers, Boggs just hung around longer and got to more "milestones". I actually did watch Boggs play, moreso after Boston dumped him and the Yankees had him and Tim Raines platoon the hot corner. 1st base is a place where you can "hide" a defensively weak player, but Donnie excelled at first.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
You yankee fans can't let that hatred of the red sox go long enough to appreciate that Boggs not only was a more dominant player, but he didn't fizzle out after 4 great years.
And he didn't just 'hang on' to get to 3000 hits, if you'd look at the statistical record, you'd see he hit over .300 in his final year.
While Boggs was rolling along on his HoF career, Mattingly was already washed up. Don't blame that on Boggs, Boggs had a HoF career, Mattingly didn't.
Its far from the end of story Ax. Mattingly didnt do it long enough for the hall, Boggs had longevity to get him there. That being said, at no point in either players prime was Boggs even remotely close to the offensive or defensive force Mattingly was. For you to argue otherwise is completely and utterly obsurd. It only shows that you either love to fight no matter what, or havnt the first clue about baseball.
"The other teams could make trouble for us if they win." -- Yogi Berra
Mattingly was definitely the more feared hitter than Boggs. Don Mattingly was the most feared hitter in the game for a few years. Boggs never was. Mattingly's back problems just did not allow him to earn HOF status IMO. Boggs does deserve to be there though. Wade Boggs was a great hitter and no one can take that away.
Also, anyone who says that Reggie Jackson does not deserve to be in the HOF doesn't understand baseball. That is ridiculous. I don't particularly like Reggie, but the guy deserves to be in Cooperstown.
Mattingly had one season BA below .283 and he was hurting that season and by far had his worst offensive season. But he did strike out 300+ less times than Boggs, hit nearly twice as many home runs, Boggs had 80 less RBIs with 4 more complete seasons played.
"certain" posters are acting like 2100+ hits, a .307 lifetime BA, and a .996 lifetime fielding percentage is easily overlooked. By the way, Wade Boggs finished with a .965 lifetime fielding percentage.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
This is the second time that a player's offensive numbers were the basis of contention, then, when that argument fell apart, they fell back to defensive prowess.
Here's a telling stat...if Mattingly was on such bad teams (which is the excuse I am given why he never won a title), then why didn't ever lead the league in intentional walks? Boggs led the league in intentional walks SIX times...so who was more feared again?
And if Mattingly was such a power hitter, then explain why he only led the league in OPS once, while Boggs did it twice?
Sure it sucks that Mattingly had back problems and had to retire early...but them's the breaks. Boggs didn't break down and was productive through the end of his career, as I said, in his final year, he batted over .300, so don't give me this crap that Boggs 'held on'. Boggs was clearly the more dominant hitter of the 2 (well to anyone not drunk on yankee kool aid).
300 more strikeouts, and 2100 MORE at bats...how pathetic do you look grabbing straws like that? I've already said Boggs wasn't a power hitter, he crushed the ball often, and top 3 in doubles seven times (led the league 3 times).
One last thing, Mattingly only had one season batting under .300? Uhm where do you get your stats, 'yankeecoloredglasses.com'? I count 5 seasons batting under .300 (and I'm not even counting either of his first two years).
Yes, Mattingly had more gold gloves and a higher fielding percentage. But we aren't talking about that. We are talking about plate dominance, here. Quit trying to sidestep and bring up ridiculous stats (career strikeouts, are you really that desperate?) Why is it so hard to admit that a RED SOX (sock?) was a more dominant player than donnie baseball?
I guess comparing 240+errors to less than 80 for a career just doesn't even matter. Like, defensive prowess HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GETTING IN THE HALL OF FAME. Good job, once again offense/defense was never specifically targeted and if you actually read you'd see since the beginning of this thread we've talked about Donnies' GREAT first base play.
Also, I said Mattingly had ONE season under .283, it's right on top of your post in numbers. Can you read and comprehend? Guess not. Go ahead, re read the post right above your last one. Again fabrications to downplay a Yankee.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Don't go run and hide now that you've been outed again. But I think your becoming accustomed to that.
I wrote "Mattingly had one season BA below .283 and he was hurting that season and by far had his worst offensive season."
You replied "One last thing, Mattingly only had one season batting under .300? Uhm where do you get your stats, 'yankeecoloredglasses.com'? I count 5 seasons batting under .300 (and I'm not even counting either of his first two years)."
So yeah...learn to read
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
My mistake, I thought you meant one season under .300 in which he batted .283. I apologize (but really, how pathetic is it you're stretching down to .283?)
So why are you so drunk on yankee players that you can admit Boggs was a decidedly better hitter, and therefore, more dominant?
I'll admit he was a better hitter(Not a better slugger, at driving in runs, getting in scoring position....basically getting on the basepaths). Not a more dominant hitter as Mattingly nearly reached 500 doubles 4 years before Boggs accomplished that feat with Tampa Bay. No where near as dominant, although I would agree he was more consistant for a much longer time period. Although more consistent doesn't mean he had a larger impact, was more feared, or for many years known as nothing more than a hitter with a great eye for getting on base. Boggs had a higher lifetime batting average. Mattingly(in more than 4 full seasons LESS) had more home runs and RBIs. Who was more dominant offensively AND defensively during their respective career....Mattingly.
Errors are part of the defensive side of the game. My little league coach taught me something many years back(not many, but more than a handful) "If they can't score, they can't win". Simply put if you have good pitching and fielding, the defense can keep a team in the game as well as any offense. Now, how am I reaching with that?
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Boggs led the AL in intentional walks 6 times, Mattingly never did, while supposedly on terrible teams that certainly wouldn't have given him lineup protection.
lol, Mattingly had 136 IBBs and Boggs had 180(In more than 4 more complete seasons). You speak like the difference is astronomical, when there is a bigger difference in the amount of RBIs Mattingly had in less seasons compared to Boggs. hahaahahaha, talk about reaching it's not like Boggs was walked like Bonds has been. Both had 10+ intentional walks 7 times in there career. Talk about stretching...hey guys lets not talk about having 150 more errors lets talk about the 40+ more intentional walks. I may be drowning, but your already a floater.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
You wanted to talk about dominating, about being feared. What shows fear more than an intentional walk?
I am not talking career stats, I am talking individual seasons: Boggs led SIX times, Mattingly NONE. Where is the fear that Mattingly supposedly struck into pitchers? It sure doesnt look like it there.
Look, I am done with you. You are a yankee apologist who won't cut his ties to admit Boggs was a superior hitter to Mattingly.
lol....yawn....just a Yankee hater. "NO NO NO NO, even though we are talking about the HOF, since when did lifetime stats come into the picture".
"I'm glad I don't have to face that guy every day. He (Don Mattingly) has that look that few hitters have. I don't know if it's his stance, his eyes or what, but you can tell he means business." - Dwight Gooden
Lets not forget the nine gold gloves or 7 times he led the league in fielding percentage. BTW, he's widely considered the best defensive first baseman ever. But yeah, since when does that matter right Ax? lol
Or the 10 consecutive home runs(tied an MLB record with that one!) in 8 games. But yes...Boggs was a more feared hitter. Pure comedic genius Ax.
BTW, you've been done. It's a known fact your a hater who will try and discredit ANY NY sports figure. Yet you consistently run away from your losing discussions, and get caught in falsehoods and fabrications on a near daily basis.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Once again Ax is discredited and leaves the thread with his tail inbetween his legs. Ax, you should really try harder. I mean there may be 1-2 board members who don't see the hatred you have towards NY.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
<< <i>Mattingly should be in the HOF simply because he was one of the top 10 Yankees of all time, he holds numerous Yankess records and MLB records...that should be enough...he was the Yankee captain, and was a leader on and off the field...The hall of fame should not be purely about the numbers, mattingly had intangibles that cannot be measured, and anyone who saw mattingly play at the stadium knows what DONNIE BASEBALL is! >>
Why is it that every time a Yankee player doesn't measure up statistically to whatever standard is being discussed, the Yankee player always has these great "intangibles" that cannot be measured? And, if the Hall Of Fame is not purely about the numbers, what is it about then? How else are we going to decide who gets in there?
I grew up, of course, a Red Sox fan. Still, I had great respect for Mattingly as a player...but never saw him as being the "most feared hitter in the game" for one minute. He's the kind of player Yankee fans just loved to root for, but his stats don't paint the picture of a player who dominated anything. Boggs always seemed like a hit machine, a guy who had a great eye at the plate and hardly ever struck out. He didn't hit for power, but he was always an offensive prescence. I think, during that era, that pitchers hated facing Boggs much more than they hated facing Mattingly.
This stopped being about the hall of fame when you said
<< <i>'But Donnie is comparable to Puckett and Boggs(although both have WS Championsips). Just look at the stats and compare and contrast, don't just blindly hate. >>
Then it became a discussion about why Boggs was a more dominant hitter, not about why Mattingly should be in the all (he still doesn't deserve it).
You use a quote by Doc Gooden to back up your claim that Mattingly was more feared? Hmm could it be perhaps that they were both NY fellas?
<< <i>Or the 10 consecutive home runs(tied an MLB record with that one!) in 8 games. But yes...Boggs was a more feared hitter. Pure comedic genius Ax. >>
The only comedy here is you pulling random, obscure facts like this as the basis for your reasoning. Wait, there's more:
<< <i> But he did strike out 300+ less times than Boggs, hit nearly twice as many home runs, Boggs had 80 less RBIs with 4 more complete seasons played. >>
He struck out 300+ less times in 2100+ less at bats. And yes, Boggs wasn't a home run hitter, but crushed the ball, leading the league in OPS more times (twice) than the supposedly dominant Mattingly (once).
Look, its obvious your blind love for anything and everything NY yankees is never going to allow you to see Boggs as a more dominant hitter. Boggs hit for better average, hit for better CAREER OPS than Mattingly, and was an out and out better hitter. Sure Mattingly was a better fielder, but what exactly does that have to do with his dominance at the plate (which is what we've been debating this entire time?)
<< <i>^^ But Donnie is comparable to Puckett and Boggs(although both have WS Championsips). Just look at the stats and compare and contrast, don't just blindly hate. >>
Funny....I didn't mention offense/defense in that post. Maybe(again) you were reaching. It wouldn't suprise any of us that you completely don't acknowledge the by far worst aspect of Boggs game. Look at the stats dumb chit.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
First, Reggie's candidacy has no valid reason to be questioned. An average strikeout costs a team approximately .003 runs, when compared to an average contact out. So if Reggie has 100 more strikeouts in a season, it is costing his team approximately 3 runs over the contact guy. That topic has been put to bed for years now.
For Mattingly and Boggs, there are two ways to look at who was better, their peak or their career.
There is one measure called value added runs which measures every offensive event(all info is taken from the actual play by play data that the palyers did), and it measures contact, runners moved up, batting by base and out situations, and it even accounts for what the runners did on the batted ball(this should not be in there as it is unfair because not all guys have equal runners in front of them).
It is also adjusted by Park Factor, though the park factor has a flaw, as a LH opposite field hitter at Fenway(like Boggs), benefitted more greatly than what the overall park factor shows. Bogg's number should be a bit lower. THough Mattingly's probably should too as LH pull hitters at Yankee stadium don't get hurt as much as the overall Yankee park factor shows either.
The number is expressed in terms of the number of runs created above the average player.
Here are the totals of each player's best five seasons(not necessarily consecutive).
Mattingly 212 Boggs 242
For their career...
Mattingly 228 Boggs 403
The reason why Mattingly's career total is similar as his peak is that an average season is expressed as zero runs, and a below average season is expressed in negative terms. Mattingly had some negative seasons to pull his total down.
Mattingly can have a case for the Hall, but it is a mistake to say he was better than Boggs, as Boggs beats him in both career and peak value. Mattingly's peak occured in the toughest time in MLB history to separate oneself from the league average, so that needs to be considered for HOF questiosn.
J. Clark.......226 Hernandez..224 Henderson.216 Mattingly....212 Yount.........212 Foster.......209 Murphy......208
Dw. Evans...198 C. Cooper.....182
Pucket.......171 Raines.......169 McGwire.....169**PRE MLB EXPANSION, PRE LIVE BALL ERA** Molitor........168 Gwynn........168**PRE MLB EXPANSION, PRE LIVE BALL ERA** Rice...........159 Baines.......154 Hrbek........147
Dawson.....128 Palmerio....100**PRE MLB EXPANSIN, PRE LIVE BALL ERA** Buckner......86
This is on of most comprehensive analysis to date, though there are many other things to consider still...However, the other things to consider may make a difference among a cluster ie. between Brett/Schmidt/Murray, but it most likely won't have a player jump a cluster.
NOTE, this is NOT the best method for cross era comparisons, in fact it needs a major adjustment, but it works welll within(at least gives a good outline).
CONCLUSION: There is no argument on earth that could vault Mattingly into the big three of the era, though that really isn't the topic. These are only peak numbers, and lets forget the career numbers for now to avoid the injury debate.
DOES HE MERIT INCLUSION BASED ON HIS PEAK?? Stick to that question for now. Consider position as well...Yount's value gets a boost because he was a SS, some analysts give it a huge boost, some not so huge, but he gets one for sure. I lean towards the smaller side of the boost.
<< <i>^^ But Donnie is comparable to Puckett and Boggs(although both have WS Championsips). Just look at the stats and compare and contrast, don't just blindly hate. >>
Funny....I didn't mention offense/defense in that post. Maybe(again) you were reaching. It wouldn't suprise any of us that you completely don't acknowledge the by far worst aspect of Boggs game. Look at the stats dumb chit. >>
What's the matter tough guy? You've been shown over and over and over again that your boy Donnie doesn't stack up to Boggs, and you resort to calling me dumb chit?
Look, I know he's a yankee, so you automatically conclude he's better. But in this case, he plain and simply was not a more dominant hitter.
Now if you want to reach and say you meant defensively, fine, go ahead, grasp at those straws. But please, we all know you didn't. Just be a man and say 'hey I thought Mattingly had better numbers...I was wrong."
^^ Skin-Shouldn't both sides of the game come into play? 9 gold gloves, .996 lifetime fielding percentage, and 7 times he led the league in fielding percentage at his position. Not to mention a lifetime BA above .300.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Pedro Guerrero is simply one of the most overlooked hitters of that era...the man could flat out rake in his prime!
I use to be more for Mattingly and the Hall, but as I looked deeper in comparisons to hitters from his own era, I don't know. If he is to be put in, then how could one ignore the others above him? Some players even went on to have longer productive careers as well. This accounts for every offensive factor imagineable, and aside from some of the screws that need to be tightened, it has very strong validity.
This list does not count stolen bases either, so Henderson and Raines get boosts.
Notice McGwire and Palmeiro? They sure did not look to be on a Hall of Fame track in the tougher era to hit in.
I've always had a thing for the Cobra too! He is quite high, and had longevity.
AX-How was Boggs "Dominant"? Show me in stats. He had a higher lifetime Batting average. Wow, let's forget about the miniscule home run total and less RBIs with 4+ additional seasons. Your "stats" are laughible. Show me in stats smartguy. It certainly won't be in home run totals, or rbi totals.
BTW, once again the defensive side of Mattinglys game was brought up almost immediately simply because of the NINE GOLD GLOVES. How many non HOF'er have nine? Or have led the league in fielding percentage 7 times? Exactly.
Collecting; Mark Mulder rookies Chipper Jones rookies Orlando Cabrera rookies Lawrence Taylor Sam Huff Lavar Arrington NY Giants NY Yankees NJ Nets NJ Devils 1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Topps, no need to mention how many .300 seasons, as this is the actual play by play data of what he did, and counts every offensive contribution. Mentioning the .300 seasons would be like saying Kelly Preston is beautiful because the soles of her feet are pretty, and ignoring the most vital elements Dude she is hot, watch MISCHIEF. WOW!
As for the fielding, no doubt it matters, though a SS contributions to fielding outweights what a 1B does. 1B fielding is very underrated though, but fielding percentage is a poor measure. Nobody has ever done a measure on 'picks' or 'scoops' at first, as that is an underrated contribtuion. That being said....
Many of those guys on the list could play defense too. Parker had the best arm in baseball, Dewey Evans cannon, Raines could cover; Hernandez was better than Mattingly on D, Cooper was no slouch, Murray was excellent at 1B, Buckner had a great glove(forget the '86 hype).
All in all, when counting defense, and looking at the players immediately above him, I don't see him passing any of them when defense is added to the mix. Though I do see Dale Murphy, Dw. Evans, and Raines passing him up when defense and SB are added. Yount of course too.
****So, when counting defense and SB, Mattingly falls somewhere as having the 16th best FIVE YEAR peak among his peers. I may have missed a couple of guys on that list too.
So, topps, what would you define as dominant? And throw out the defensive stuff, this discussion has been about plate numbers all along.
Do you want to say OPS? If that's the case, Boggs owns the advantage there, 2-1. How about intentional walks, which is a true mesaurement of a pitcher's fear of a batter? Boggs led the league 6 times, Mattingly none. On base percentage? Mattingly's best year was a 5th place finish, Boggs led the league 6 times. Career OPS? Boggs holds that edge too. Runs created? Boggs led the league 3 times, Mattingly once. Sure, Mattingly held a power advantage, but Mattingly only averaged 20 home runs per 162 at bats, so please, quit saying he was a dominant power hitter. One more thing, you said that mattingly hit 500 doubles before boggs did? Uhm, Mattingly finished with 442 doubles, THAT'S NOT 500!!
So, now we've established that Mattingly wasn't a power hitter (20 home runs per season is not a power hitter), and Boggs kicked his ass in BA, OBP, and OPS.
What will you say to that? Are you going to bring up (again) that he hit a home run in 8 consecutive games, and *that's* why he was a more feared hitter? Or are you going to bring up some other trivial piece of information that has no relevance whatsoever to the discussion?
<< <i>Axtell- are you hoarding Boggs rookies or something? geez, give it a rest. >>
No, not at all, but the continued argument that Mattingly was a more dominant hitter is so absurd I couldn't let it go. >>
What is absurd is your utter refusal to listen to reason, logic, or facts. Whats more is the absurdity of your mind to spin facts and use only statistics that help your cause without regard to the overall picture. Further adding to your love of the absurd is your hatred towards anything NY. Even more absurd than anything else is the fact that you honestly believe if you say something it must be true.
"The other teams could make trouble for us if they win." -- Yogi Berra
Look, Mattingly wasn't a power hitter (20 HR's / 162 games does not a power hitter make). When someone tries to use power numbers as a way of trying to emphasize being a better hitter, well, that's ridiculous.
I simply pointed out numbers that are a fair comparison (not ridiculous stats like career strikeouts, or the fact that mattingly once hit home runs in 8 straight games) that showed that Boggs was indeed a more dominant hitter.
Once the facts were laid out so plainly even a yankee fan could understand them, that's when you all get upset and want to go home.
So, this time, the yankee doesn't win. Maybe next time!!!
Comments
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
Now the hating really comes out. He didn't hit home runs...so what? One doesn't have to be a home run hitter to dominate the game.
Why don't you head over to baseball-reference.com and see what Boggs' numbers are. 5 batting titles (Mattingly had one), 6 time league leader in OBP (mattingly best finish was 5th, which he did once). And Boggs never came close to Mattingly's 4 OPS titles? Uhm, where did you find Mattingly led the league in OPS 4 times? He led the league ONCE (Boggs led the league TWICE), and Boggs had 2 second place finishes, Mattingly had ONE.
Mattingly never led the league in home runs, led the league once in RBI, and wasn't nearly the force that Boggs was.
Anyone who says Boggs was an inferior batsman to Mattingly is out of their mind - or has suffered severe brain damage and should be examined immediately.
Look at the numbers objectively, and take off those yankee-stained glasses!
Mattingly stuff is going up in price because he was very popular player, and the people who watched him when they were young are now successful money spenders.
John
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
<< <i>Dang Axtell, you really are a tool no matter where you post.
How do you figure, because someone wants to (errantly) call Mattingly a better hitter than Boggs, and I show them the stats that prove otherwise?
I was a big mattingly fan growing up too, but I don't let that past color my perceptions of what really happened: Boggs dominated in his era like few hitters ever have. Mattingly had a solid career, but never dominated, and surely didn't have more than 4 great seasons.
Sorry that makes me a 'tool' in your eyes.
<< <i>The topic at hand has little to do with it. It's more your delivery. Meantime, no need to be sorry - I'm not.
The delivery?
Please...these blinded mattingly fans who say he should be in the hall and how he was superior to Boggs just needed to be shown the light, and I obliged.
Who's alt are you again?
<< <i>Alt? You got me wrong, sweetie.
uh huh, sure.
Well my work is done here...if blinded 'fans' want to ignore the truth, let em. I'm content knowing Mattingly will be getting into the hall the same way as myself - by buying a ticket.
<< <i>
<< <i>Dang Axtell, you really are a tool no matter where you post.
How do you figure, because someone wants to (errantly) call Mattingly a better hitter than Boggs, and I show them the stats that prove otherwise?
I was a big mattingly fan growing up too, but I don't let that past color my perceptions of what really happened: Boggs dominated in his era like few hitters ever have. Mattingly had a solid career, but never dominated, and surely didn't have more than 4 great seasons.
Sorry that makes me a 'tool' in your eyes. >>
Who was a better position player? Boggs wasn't a dominant hitter, a great one yes but not someone who pitchers feared, he was at most a doubles hitter(over 500 for his career I believe). Mattingly wasn't dominate, but was the best at his position for many years. The same can't be said for Boggs.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
<< <i>Actually if you watched Boggs play, he was a dominate defensive player and even won two gold gloves at a much harder position than first base. At least Axtell use facts and not blind hate to make points. >>
Boggs spent the first 75% of his career as a mediocre defensive player. He did not win a gold glove till his 13th or 14th season, when with the Yankees. And if asked there is not a single pitcher of their generation that would say Boggs was a bigger threat offensively in their prime. He had ZERO power, ZERO ability to drive in runs, and ZERO ability to be leader on or off the field. You Yankee haters really need to get your head out of the clouds, because there is not a single stat on earth that will ever prove Boggs was anything but a guy who could slap the ball.
-- Yogi Berra
<< <i>Actually if you watched Boggs play, he was a dominate defensive player and even won two gold gloves at a much harder position than first base. At least Axtell use facts and not blind hate to make points. >>
Axtell uses facts? lol, more like blind hatred/rage. How about the facts about the statistically variances in Boggs batting at home and away? Fact is, he wasn't a power threat, an RBI threat, he was simply a doubles threat. That's it. A great player in his own right, but to say him and Mattingly aren't on the same level is obsurd. I believe both are HOF'ers, Boggs just hung around longer and got to more "milestones". I actually did watch Boggs play, moreso after Boston dumped him and the Yankees had him and Tim Raines platoon the hot corner. 1st base is a place where you can "hide" a defensively weak player, but Donnie excelled at first.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
And he didn't just 'hang on' to get to 3000 hits, if you'd look at the statistical record, you'd see he hit over .300 in his final year.
While Boggs was rolling along on his HoF career, Mattingly was already washed up. Don't blame that on Boggs, Boggs had a HoF career, Mattingly didn't.
End of story.
-- Yogi Berra
Also, anyone who says that Reggie Jackson does not deserve to be in the HOF doesn't understand baseball. That is ridiculous. I don't particularly like Reggie, but the guy deserves to be in Cooperstown.
"certain" posters are acting like 2100+ hits, a .307 lifetime BA, and a .996 lifetime fielding percentage is easily overlooked. By the way, Wade Boggs finished with a .965 lifetime fielding percentage.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
Here's a telling stat...if Mattingly was on such bad teams (which is the excuse I am given why he never won a title), then why didn't ever lead the league in intentional walks? Boggs led the league in intentional walks SIX times...so who was more feared again?
And if Mattingly was such a power hitter, then explain why he only led the league in OPS once, while Boggs did it twice?
Sure it sucks that Mattingly had back problems and had to retire early...but them's the breaks. Boggs didn't break down and was productive through the end of his career, as I said, in his final year, he batted over .300, so don't give me this crap that Boggs 'held on'. Boggs was clearly the more dominant hitter of the 2 (well to anyone not drunk on yankee kool aid).
300 more strikeouts, and 2100 MORE at bats...how pathetic do you look grabbing straws like that? I've already said Boggs wasn't a power hitter, he crushed the ball often, and top 3 in doubles seven times (led the league 3 times).
One last thing, Mattingly only had one season batting under .300? Uhm where do you get your stats, 'yankeecoloredglasses.com'? I count 5 seasons batting under .300 (and I'm not even counting either of his first two years).
Yes, Mattingly had more gold gloves and a higher fielding percentage. But we aren't talking about that. We are talking about plate dominance, here. Quit trying to sidestep and bring up ridiculous stats (career strikeouts, are you really that desperate?) Why is it so hard to admit that a RED SOX (sock?) was a more dominant player than donnie baseball?
Also, I said Mattingly had ONE season under .283, it's right on top of your post in numbers. Can you read and comprehend? Guess not. Go ahead, re read the post right above your last one. Again fabrications to downplay a Yankee.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
I wrote "Mattingly had one season BA below .283 and he was hurting that season and by far had his worst offensive season."
You replied "One last thing, Mattingly only had one season batting under .300? Uhm where do you get your stats, 'yankeecoloredglasses.com'? I count 5 seasons batting under .300 (and I'm not even counting either of his first two years)."
So yeah...learn to read
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
So why are you so drunk on yankee players that you can admit Boggs was a decidedly better hitter, and therefore, more dominant?
Now you're bringing up errors? hahaha
Shall I throw you a rope? You're drowning, man!
Errors are part of the defensive side of the game. My little league coach taught me something many years back(not many, but more than a handful) "If they can't score, they can't win". Simply put if you have good pitching and fielding, the defense can keep a team in the game as well as any offense. Now, how am I reaching with that?
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
Boggs led the AL in intentional walks 6 times, Mattingly never did, while supposedly on terrible teams that certainly wouldn't have given him lineup protection.
Who was feared again?
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
I am not talking career stats, I am talking individual seasons: Boggs led SIX times, Mattingly NONE. Where is the fear that Mattingly supposedly struck into pitchers? It sure doesnt look like it there.
Look, I am done with you. You are a yankee apologist who won't cut his ties to admit Boggs was a superior hitter to Mattingly.
Good night.
"I'm glad I don't have to face that guy every day. He (Don Mattingly) has that look that few hitters have. I don't know if it's his stance, his eyes or what, but you can tell he means business." - Dwight Gooden
Lets not forget the nine gold gloves or 7 times he led the league in fielding percentage. BTW, he's widely considered the best defensive first baseman ever. But yeah, since when does that matter right Ax? lol
Or the 10 consecutive home runs(tied an MLB record with that one!) in 8 games. But yes...Boggs was a more feared hitter. Pure comedic genius Ax.
BTW, you've been done. It's a known fact your a hater who will try and discredit ANY NY sports figure. Yet you consistently run away from your losing discussions, and get caught in falsehoods and fabrications on a near daily basis.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
<< <i>Mattingly should be in the HOF simply because he was one of the top 10 Yankees of all time, he holds numerous Yankess records and MLB records...that should be enough...he was the Yankee captain, and was a leader on and off the field...The hall of fame should not be purely about the numbers, mattingly had intangibles that cannot be measured, and anyone who saw mattingly play at the stadium knows what DONNIE BASEBALL is! >>
Why is it that every time a Yankee player doesn't measure up statistically to whatever standard is being discussed, the Yankee player always has these great "intangibles" that cannot be measured? And, if the Hall Of Fame is not purely about the numbers, what is it about then? How else are we going to decide who gets in there?
I grew up, of course, a Red Sox fan. Still, I had great respect for Mattingly as a player...but never saw him as being the "most feared hitter in the game" for one minute. He's the kind of player Yankee fans just loved to root for, but his stats don't paint the picture of a player who dominated anything. Boggs always seemed like a hit machine, a guy who had a great eye at the plate and hardly ever struck out. He didn't hit for power, but he was always an offensive prescence. I think, during that era, that pitchers hated facing Boggs much more than they hated facing Mattingly.
This stopped being about the hall of fame when you said
<< <i>'But Donnie is comparable to Puckett and Boggs(although both have WS Championsips). Just look at the stats and compare and contrast, don't just blindly hate. >>
Then it became a discussion about why Boggs was a more dominant hitter, not about why Mattingly should be in the all (he still doesn't deserve it).
You use a quote by Doc Gooden to back up your claim that Mattingly was more feared? Hmm could it be perhaps that they were both NY fellas?
<< <i>Or the 10 consecutive home runs(tied an MLB record with that one!) in 8 games. But yes...Boggs was a more feared hitter. Pure comedic genius Ax. >>
The only comedy here is you pulling random, obscure facts like this as the basis for your reasoning. Wait, there's more:
<< <i> But he did strike out 300+ less times than Boggs, hit nearly twice as many home runs, Boggs had 80 less RBIs with 4 more complete seasons played. >>
He struck out 300+ less times in 2100+ less at bats. And yes, Boggs wasn't a home run hitter, but crushed the ball, leading the league in OPS more times (twice) than the supposedly dominant Mattingly (once).
Look, its obvious your blind love for anything and everything NY yankees is never going to allow you to see Boggs as a more dominant hitter. Boggs hit for better average, hit for better CAREER OPS than Mattingly, and was an out and out better hitter. Sure Mattingly was a better fielder, but what exactly does that have to do with his dominance at the plate (which is what we've been debating this entire time?)
<< <i>^^
But Donnie is comparable to Puckett and Boggs(although both have WS Championsips). Just look at the stats and compare and contrast, don't just blindly hate. >>
Funny....I didn't mention offense/defense in that post. Maybe(again) you were reaching. It wouldn't suprise any of us that you completely don't acknowledge the by far worst aspect of Boggs game. Look at the stats dumb chit.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
For Mattingly and Boggs, there are two ways to look at who was better, their peak or their career.
There is one measure called value added runs which measures every offensive event(all info is taken from the actual play by play data that the palyers did), and it measures contact, runners moved up, batting by base and out situations, and it even accounts for what the runners did on the batted ball(this should not be in there as it is unfair because not all guys have equal runners in front of them).
It is also adjusted by Park Factor, though the park factor has a flaw, as a LH opposite field hitter at Fenway(like Boggs), benefitted more greatly than what the overall park factor shows. Bogg's number should be a bit lower. THough Mattingly's probably should too as LH pull hitters at Yankee stadium don't get hurt as much as the overall Yankee park factor shows either.
The number is expressed in terms of the number of runs created above the average player.
Here are the totals of each player's best five seasons(not necessarily consecutive).
Mattingly 212
Boggs 242
For their career...
Mattingly 228
Boggs 403
The reason why Mattingly's career total is similar as his peak is that an average season is expressed as zero runs, and a below average season is expressed in negative terms. Mattingly had some negative seasons to pull his total down.
Mattingly can have a case for the Hall, but it is a mistake to say he was better than Boggs, as Boggs beats him in both career and peak value. Mattingly's peak occured in the toughest time in MLB history to separate oneself from the league average, so that needs to be considered for HOF questiosn.
Other studs five year totals from that era...
Brett.........269
Schmidt....263
Murray......259
Guerrero....246
Boggs.......242
Winfield....236
Parker......232
Strawberry..231
J. Clark.......226
Hernandez..224
Henderson.216
Mattingly....212
Yount.........212
Foster.......209
Murphy......208
Dw. Evans...198
C. Cooper.....182
Pucket.......171
Raines.......169
McGwire.....169**PRE MLB EXPANSION, PRE LIVE BALL ERA**
Molitor........168
Gwynn........168**PRE MLB EXPANSION, PRE LIVE BALL ERA**
Rice...........159
Baines.......154
Hrbek........147
Dawson.....128
Palmerio....100**PRE MLB EXPANSIN, PRE LIVE BALL ERA**
Buckner......86
This is on of most comprehensive analysis to date, though there are many other things to consider still...However, the other things to consider may make a difference among a cluster ie. between Brett/Schmidt/Murray, but it most likely won't have a player jump a cluster.
NOTE, this is NOT the best method for cross era comparisons, in fact it needs a major adjustment, but it works welll within(at least gives a good outline).
CONCLUSION: There is no argument on earth that could vault Mattingly into the big three of the era, though that really isn't the topic. These are only peak numbers, and lets forget the career numbers for now to avoid the injury debate.
DOES HE MERIT INCLUSION BASED ON HIS PEAK?? Stick to that question for now. Consider position as well...Yount's value gets a boost because he was a SS, some analysts give it a huge boost, some not so huge, but he gets one for sure. I lean towards the smaller side of the boost.
Discuss
P.S. There are more guys on that list.
<< <i>
<< <i>^^
But Donnie is comparable to Puckett and Boggs(although both have WS Championsips). Just look at the stats and compare and contrast, don't just blindly hate. >>
Funny....I didn't mention offense/defense in that post. Maybe(again) you were reaching. It wouldn't suprise any of us that you completely don't acknowledge the by far worst aspect of Boggs game. Look at the stats dumb chit. >>
What's the matter tough guy? You've been shown over and over and over again that your boy Donnie doesn't stack up to Boggs, and you resort to calling me dumb chit?
Look, I know he's a yankee, so you automatically conclude he's better. But in this case, he plain and simply was not a more dominant hitter.
Now if you want to reach and say you meant defensively, fine, go ahead, grasp at those straws. But please, we all know you didn't. Just be a man and say 'hey I thought Mattingly had better numbers...I was wrong."
Skin-Shouldn't both sides of the game come into play? 9 gold gloves, .996 lifetime fielding percentage, and 7 times he led the league in fielding percentage at his position. Not to mention a lifetime BA above .300.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
I use to be more for Mattingly and the Hall, but as I looked deeper in comparisons to hitters from his own era, I don't know. If he is to be put in, then how could one ignore the others above him? Some players even went on to have longer productive careers as well. This accounts for every offensive factor imagineable, and aside from some of the screws that need to be tightened, it has very strong validity.
This list does not count stolen bases either, so Henderson and Raines get boosts.
Notice McGwire and Palmeiro? They sure did not look to be on a Hall of Fame track in the tougher era to hit in.
I've always had a thing for the Cobra too! He is quite high, and had longevity.
BTW, once again the defensive side of Mattinglys game was brought up almost immediately simply because of the NINE GOLD GLOVES. How many non HOF'er have nine? Or have led the league in fielding percentage 7 times? Exactly.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
As for the fielding, no doubt it matters, though a SS contributions to fielding outweights what a 1B does. 1B fielding is very underrated though, but fielding percentage is a poor measure. Nobody has ever done a measure on 'picks' or 'scoops' at first, as that is an underrated contribtuion. That being said....
Many of those guys on the list could play defense too. Parker had the best arm in baseball, Dewey Evans cannon, Raines could cover; Hernandez was better than Mattingly on D, Cooper was no slouch, Murray was excellent at 1B, Buckner had a great glove(forget the '86 hype).
All in all, when counting defense, and looking at the players immediately above him, I don't see him passing any of them when defense is added to the mix. Though I do see Dale Murphy, Dw. Evans, and Raines passing him up when defense and SB are added. Yount of course too.
****So, when counting defense and SB, Mattingly falls somewhere as having the 16th best FIVE YEAR peak among his peers. I may have missed a couple of guys on that list too.
Do you want to say OPS? If that's the case, Boggs owns the advantage there, 2-1.
How about intentional walks, which is a true mesaurement of a pitcher's fear of a batter? Boggs led the league 6 times, Mattingly none.
On base percentage? Mattingly's best year was a 5th place finish, Boggs led the league 6 times.
Career OPS? Boggs holds that edge too.
Runs created? Boggs led the league 3 times, Mattingly once.
Sure, Mattingly held a power advantage, but Mattingly only averaged 20 home runs per 162 at bats, so please, quit saying he was a dominant power hitter.
One more thing, you said that mattingly hit 500 doubles before boggs did? Uhm, Mattingly finished with 442 doubles, THAT'S NOT 500!!
So, now we've established that Mattingly wasn't a power hitter (20 home runs per season is not a power hitter), and Boggs kicked his ass in BA, OBP, and OPS.
What will you say to that? Are you going to bring up (again) that he hit a home run in 8 consecutive games, and *that's* why he was a more feared hitter? Or are you going to bring up some other trivial piece of information that has no relevance whatsoever to the discussion?
You're dismissed.
<< <i>Axtell- are you hoarding Boggs rookies or something? geez, give it a rest. >>
No, not at all, but the continued argument that Mattingly was a more dominant hitter is so absurd I couldn't let it go.
<< <i>
<< <i>Axtell- are you hoarding Boggs rookies or something? geez, give it a rest. >>
No, not at all, but the continued argument that Mattingly was a more dominant hitter is so absurd I couldn't let it go. >>
What is absurd is your utter refusal to listen to reason, logic, or facts. Whats more is the absurdity of your mind to spin facts and use only statistics that help your cause without regard to the overall picture. Further adding to your love of the absurd is your hatred towards anything NY. Even more absurd than anything else is the fact that you honestly believe if you say something it must be true.
-- Yogi Berra
Look, Mattingly wasn't a power hitter (20 HR's / 162 games does not a power hitter make). When someone tries to use power numbers as a way of trying to emphasize being a better hitter, well, that's ridiculous.
I simply pointed out numbers that are a fair comparison (not ridiculous stats like career strikeouts, or the fact that mattingly once hit home runs in 8 straight games) that showed that Boggs was indeed a more dominant hitter.
Once the facts were laid out so plainly even a yankee fan could understand them, that's when you all get upset and want to go home.
So, this time, the yankee doesn't win. Maybe next time!!!