From a true scouting perspective Mantle was better than Manny.
If we take the 5 tools...
Run - Mantle was "much" faster than Manny.
Field - Mantle was "much" better and played CF.
Throw - Mantle had a "much" stronger arm.
Power - Mantle had "much" more power.
Hit - That is the only tool worth debating.
Also, Mantle looked 100 times better in a uniform!
Of course, there comes a time when "results" become more important than tools.
rhobbs I think your complete infatuation with the older generations and almost hatered of today's players will not allow you to understand my points. Regarding Schmidt and your first post and then in your second you totally contradicted yourself just to make your point. I don't see any point in continuing this because I just don't think you have an open mind to the fact that it's possible the "heroes" of yesteryear might not be that clean.
Besides I'm tired and don't feel like going back and forth.
Have a good one.
Besides I'm tired and don't feel like going back and forth.
Have a good one.
In the argument of whose a better hitter between Mantle and Manny (since it's ridiculous to even compare them as overall players) It cannot be stressed enough that the 50's and 60's were much less of hitting era's with the 60's being the poorest hitting conditions since the deadball era of the teens. Mantle played his home games in a huge old Yankee stadium that was death on righthanded power hitters. Manny played his whole career up to the last year and a half in home ballparks very favorable for hitters in the greatest power hitting era of all time and the best overall hitting conditions since the 1930's. The decline phase of Manny's career has not been factored in statistically and the BA and slugging averages will decline some more toward Mantle's numbers. Mantle already has a better on base percentage before Manny's decline phase. Until R. Maris joined the Yankees, Mantle only had Berra batting behind him who was an excellent hitter but only had a career high of thirty HRs. Manny has had some greater hitters around him throughout his career. The Yankees of the 50's won with a bunch of winning unselfish players like Bauer, Woodling, McDougald, Richardson, Skowron, E. Howard, who were solid but not great. I think Mantle was actually the better hitter too, just not by a large margin.
There's no doubt Mannys a great batter.
But when does playing below average defense, trump your
Hitting ability?
So you hit a homer, but let a run score because you could not get to a playable fly ball.
But when does playing below average defense, trump your
Hitting ability?
So you hit a homer, but let a run score because you could not get to a playable fly ball.
quote:Originally posted by theEH:
There's no doubt Mannys a great batter.
But when does playing below average defense, trump your
Hitting ability?
So you hit a homer, but let a run score because you could not get to a playable fly ball.
Apparently never, because he has never lost his position on the field. He epotmizes the oldest cliche in baseball. "If you can hit....."
Coach--I hope you are now well rested. I don't contradict myself wrt Schmidt. I am merely paraphrasing the article that quotes Schmidt--and in neither quote does he say he used any PED. The contradiction is when HE says in the first instance that, if he played today, he would have used PEDs, only to then write, later, that, if he played today, he would not have used PEDs. SCHMIDT provides the contradiction, but it is only as to the speculative. As to whether he ever actually did, in his day, he flat out says no.
I am not infatuated with players of any era. Players are like all other humans--we are all "all too human." What I object to is trying to make valid comparisons between known PED abusers and guys we are almost 100% certain did not use PEDs. MLB record books are not worth the paper they are written on, as rules changes, technological advances, materiel changes. . . all contribute to a constantly changing game. Raise the mound, lower the mound. Change the ball. Change the fences. Build players bigger, faster, stronger. Cheat with steroids or HGH. Hire personal trainers, publicists, nutrionists, personal chefs. . . Baseball is different among eras, and the experience of each player is different within eras. Comparison using numbers is a fool's errand, to be honest. Maybe it is still amusing (again Mays vs. Mantle vs. Williams vs. DiMaggio), but it is a fool's errand. What I know is that I (I cannot account for your views) will never trust the numbers of known PED abusers. As far as I now know, Bonds' Pirates numbers are as tainted as his Giants numbers. I trust no one who has cheated like these guys have cheated.
I am not infatuated with players of any era. Players are like all other humans--we are all "all too human." What I object to is trying to make valid comparisons between known PED abusers and guys we are almost 100% certain did not use PEDs. MLB record books are not worth the paper they are written on, as rules changes, technological advances, materiel changes. . . all contribute to a constantly changing game. Raise the mound, lower the mound. Change the ball. Change the fences. Build players bigger, faster, stronger. Cheat with steroids or HGH. Hire personal trainers, publicists, nutrionists, personal chefs. . . Baseball is different among eras, and the experience of each player is different within eras. Comparison using numbers is a fool's errand, to be honest. Maybe it is still amusing (again Mays vs. Mantle vs. Williams vs. DiMaggio), but it is a fool's errand. What I know is that I (I cannot account for your views) will never trust the numbers of known PED abusers. As far as I now know, Bonds' Pirates numbers are as tainted as his Giants numbers. I trust no one who has cheated like these guys have cheated.
hobbs
Is it possible that we compare supposed PED users with players who may have been PED users but were not caught doing so.
Is not using greenies to offsst a massive hangover using PED's?
Is it possible that we compare supposed PED users with players who may have been PED users but were not caught doing so.
Is not using greenies to offsst a massive hangover using PED's?
tr
i would say the term...performance enhancing drug. say's it all. but it does/will mean different things to different people. if it made you play better or at all, it was a ped.
by definition anyway.
i would say the term...performance enhancing drug. say's it all. but it does/will mean different things to different people. if it made you play better or at all, it was a ped.
by definition anyway.
I feel that cortisone shots, painkillers et al are PED's by definition
I have had numerous arthritis situations along with gout but a trip to the doc , a steroid shot and various drugs I am walking without pain within 30 minutes---if this works that well for me and I am totally mobile it can certainly be termed a PED
I think we throw some of these terms around too loosely
I have had numerous arthritis situations along with gout but a trip to the doc , a steroid shot and various drugs I am walking without pain within 30 minutes---if this works that well for me and I am totally mobile it can certainly be termed a PED
I think we throw some of these terms around too loosely
TR are those banned substances ?
As was pointed out a couple years ago by a Doctor that used to post here, medical use steroids are not the same as performance enhancing steroids.
I had a steroid shot in my left eye and no it didn't pop out of its socket.
As was pointed out a couple years ago by a Doctor that used to post here, medical use steroids are not the same as performance enhancing steroids.
I had a steroid shot in my left eye and no it didn't pop out of its socket.
TR, I think I see the point you are making about PED's. But to take your hypothetical example one step further...
The arthritis treatments you mention are all legal for you to take. However, if you or I decided to seek out illegal drugs to treat our pain or illness, we would be breaking the law, and if caught we would have to face whatever penalties were attached.
On this topic in general, if players use pain relievers or supplements that are NOT banned by major league baseball, I don't see a problem. If current or former players used a substance BEFORE it was banned that later was banned, I don't see a problem. The spitball used to be legal in baseball; now it is not. I haven't heard anyone demanding they throw out the stats of pitchers who used a spitball before the rule change.
Julie
The arthritis treatments you mention are all legal for you to take. However, if you or I decided to seek out illegal drugs to treat our pain or illness, we would be breaking the law, and if caught we would have to face whatever penalties were attached.
On this topic in general, if players use pain relievers or supplements that are NOT banned by major league baseball, I don't see a problem. If current or former players used a substance BEFORE it was banned that later was banned, I don't see a problem. The spitball used to be legal in baseball; now it is not. I haven't heard anyone demanding they throw out the stats of pitchers who used a spitball before the rule change.
Julie
quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
From a true scouting perspective Mantle was better than Manny.
If we take the 5 tools...
Run - Mantle was "much" faster than Manny.
Field - Mantle was "much" better and played CF.
Throw - Mantle had a "much" stronger arm.
Power - Mantle had "much" more power.
Hit - That is the only tool worth debating.
Also, Mantle looked 100 times better in a uniform!
Of course, there comes a time when "results" become more important than tools.
PG - respectfully disagree. Manny has a career slugging average of .595 compared to Mantle's .557. Manny has 538 homers in 7751 ab's compared to Mickey's 536 in 8102 ab's. I would say that is more than debatable.
Now, if your argument is that Mickey could hit them farther, then I don't know how to respond to that. Manny hits them far enough to go over the fence. I am not sure arguing anything else makes much sense? I have also seen Manny hit many that are way, way, way over the fence. Based on what esteemed people like you have told me about Mickey, I have no doubts he hit them a long ways and farther than Manny.
Manny was no slouch with the arm either. Again, no doubt he was no Mantle defensively but he was a decent right fielder when he came up with perhaps an above average arm.
Manny made a foolish mistake using steroids because he did not need them imho. He is one of the best hitters I have ever seen and most people probably do not realize how hard he works to be one of the all time greats.
CD,
I have a bit of a different view on the Mantle vs Manny issue, especially when it comes to stats.
If we look at MM's stats, one sees two different players/two different careers. From 1951 to about 1962, even with his terrible knee, there was no one in baseball who hit for average, hit for power and drove in runs like Mantle.
From about 1963/64, his skills declined rapidly. The last few years of his career were painful to watch. He stuck around far too long as a shell of his greatness as a player. For these years, it would be kind to suggest he was "average."
If we then compare the totality of their comparative careers, Manny's offensive stats speak for themselves.
If we examine Mantle during those peak years, especially the late 50's to 1961, very few played the game at that level, ever. Manny never has performed at such a high level, as a complete player.
In their age periods from 32 onward, Manny is, by far, the better player, even the better all around player.
From ages 20-30, Mantle is right there with Mays in being superlative in all 5 tools. From ages 20-30, I would take Mantle offensively. Defensively, I don't ever visualize Manny making the Vic Wertz catch, if you get my drift.
I have a bit of a different view on the Mantle vs Manny issue, especially when it comes to stats.
If we look at MM's stats, one sees two different players/two different careers. From 1951 to about 1962, even with his terrible knee, there was no one in baseball who hit for average, hit for power and drove in runs like Mantle.
From about 1963/64, his skills declined rapidly. The last few years of his career were painful to watch. He stuck around far too long as a shell of his greatness as a player. For these years, it would be kind to suggest he was "average."
If we then compare the totality of their comparative careers, Manny's offensive stats speak for themselves.
If we examine Mantle during those peak years, especially the late 50's to 1961, very few played the game at that level, ever. Manny never has performed at such a high level, as a complete player.
In their age periods from 32 onward, Manny is, by far, the better player, even the better all around player.
From ages 20-30, Mantle is right there with Mays in being superlative in all 5 tools. From ages 20-30, I would take Mantle offensively. Defensively, I don't ever visualize Manny making the Vic Wertz catch, if you get my drift.
quote:Defensively, I don't ever visualize Manny making the Vic Wertz catch, if you get my drift.
Indeed I do get your drift
Look, I never saw Mantle play. I didn't start following MLB until about 1969 when I was nine years old. I have no doubts what people say about him. HBO did a wonderful special on him and everyone that spoke of him commented on the "two" careers and lamented what might have been.
FWIW they don't give out cortisone shots that freely, if they did, most likely lots of guys wouldn't be sitting out on the DL.
Cortisone shots can build up scar tissue, which prevents mobility of the joints and muscles it is injected into which athletes need to perform their job, we don't. With that information, any shot given now has to be accompianied by rest from 5-10 days. Teams now treat their players with oral anti inflammatories and excercises, rather than injections.
They are not performance enhancers but rather therapy to reduce inflammation and not given just for pain so an athlete can perform better.
Cortisone shots can build up scar tissue, which prevents mobility of the joints and muscles it is injected into which athletes need to perform their job, we don't. With that information, any shot given now has to be accompianied by rest from 5-10 days. Teams now treat their players with oral anti inflammatories and excercises, rather than injections.
They are not performance enhancers but rather therapy to reduce inflammation and not given just for pain so an athlete can perform better.
Taking a cortizone shot to cut down inflamation and easing the pain is a lot different than a healthy, injury-free player taking steroids and PEDS to get bigger and stronger to hit the ball further. Taking a cortisone shot with no pain or inflamation in a healthy joint or area isn't gonna inprove performance. Besides, you will be limited on how many shots a doc will administer in a given area.
CD,
Manny is obviously a great hitter, but I doubt if you could find one scout who saw them both that wouldn't say Mantle had "much" more power. Mantle might have had more power than anyone who has ever played.
The statistics are important, but two completly different eras. Manny played in the era that obliterated almost every home run record.
Manny is obviously a great hitter, but I doubt if you could find one scout who saw them both that wouldn't say Mantle had "much" more power. Mantle might have had more power than anyone who has ever played.
The statistics are important, but two completly different eras. Manny played in the era that obliterated almost every home run record.
quote:Originally posted by PGStaff:
CD,
Manny is obviously a great hitter, but I doubt if you could find one scout who saw them both that wouldn't say Mantle had "much" more power. Mantle might have had more power than anyone who has ever played.
The statistics are important, but two completly different eras. Manny played in the era that obliterated almost every home run record.
I guess it is the "much" part that has me scratching my head. Obviously, I have not seen both play so I really don't know. Of course I trust your opinion on the matter.
These things are fun to argue sometimes however. Leaving the steroids issue out of it, the three guys who were up there for the all time season homerun record were Maris, Ruth, and Mantle. Do you think it was just a coincidence they all played in Yankee Stadium? That said, no one would disagree that they all had great power. Manny obviously has played in some favorable ballparks in Cleveland and Boston.
The ball park does make a difference, but the 27 and 61 Yankees are generally considered two of the best teams in baseball history. A big reason for that were Ruth, Mantle and Maris, along with many other great players.
I just think hitting 40 or more home runs in the last decade was “much” more common than it was in the 50s and 60s.
In the 50s there were only two players who hit 50 HRs or more in a season (Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle)
In the 60s there were only three players who hit 50 HR or more in a season (Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris)
In the 70s only one player hit 50 HRs or more (George Foster)
In the 80s not a single player hit 50 HRs in a season.
From 1990 to 1995 only one player hit 50 HRs or more (Cecil Fielder)
From 1995 to 2007 “24” players hit 50 or more HRs in a season. Manny has been very consistent, but his best year was 45 HRs in 1998.
In the entire history of baseball up until 1998, 2 players hit 60 or more HRS in a season. (60 in 1927 and 61 in 1961)
From 1998 to 2001 6 players hit at least 63 HRs in a season, two hit 70 or more.
That is why we can’t use just the numbers to compare “power” from different eras. Whether it is the equipment, the ball parks, maple bats, steroids or something else… Things change from one era to another.
I agree that this stuff is fun to debate.
I just think hitting 40 or more home runs in the last decade was “much” more common than it was in the 50s and 60s.
In the 50s there were only two players who hit 50 HRs or more in a season (Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle)
In the 60s there were only three players who hit 50 HR or more in a season (Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris)
In the 70s only one player hit 50 HRs or more (George Foster)
In the 80s not a single player hit 50 HRs in a season.
From 1990 to 1995 only one player hit 50 HRs or more (Cecil Fielder)
From 1995 to 2007 “24” players hit 50 or more HRs in a season. Manny has been very consistent, but his best year was 45 HRs in 1998.
In the entire history of baseball up until 1998, 2 players hit 60 or more HRS in a season. (60 in 1927 and 61 in 1961)
From 1998 to 2001 6 players hit at least 63 HRs in a season, two hit 70 or more.
That is why we can’t use just the numbers to compare “power” from different eras. Whether it is the equipment, the ball parks, maple bats, steroids or something else… Things change from one era to another.
I agree that this stuff is fun to debate.
PG,
That was great stuff. Interesting, even during those questionable years, not too many hit over 60, and the two with 70 have controversy. Just goes to show you how tough it is, just like a perfect game for a pitcher.
One thing I like is consistancy, year after year through a player's career. And I am with you,you can't compare eras in baseball, too many factors to consider.
I probably won't be around, but I think in years to come, Pujols will surpass most players as one of the best hitters in the history of the game. I really hope that his name remains free of all this steroid mess, brings hope and promise to the betterment of the game.
That was great stuff. Interesting, even during those questionable years, not too many hit over 60, and the two with 70 have controversy. Just goes to show you how tough it is, just like a perfect game for a pitcher.
One thing I like is consistancy, year after year through a player's career. And I am with you,you can't compare eras in baseball, too many factors to consider.
I probably won't be around, but I think in years to come, Pujols will surpass most players as one of the best hitters in the history of the game. I really hope that his name remains free of all this steroid mess, brings hope and promise to the betterment of the game.
This site will let you look at the HR#'s from year to year.
Just click on the year you want to look at.
I have it on year 1995.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/history...r/1995/sort/homeRuns
EH
Just click on the year you want to look at.
I have it on year 1995.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/history...r/1995/sort/homeRuns
EH