Griffey decides to hang them up

[JoltinJoe]

See, Gil, you actually make my point. People look at Mays' career numbers, see that cumulatively they are better than Mantle's, and then begin to try to explain why Mantle was the most popular player of his era.

They say it was because Mantle was white; or played for the Yankees, etc.

But the fact is if you look at their productivity during the peak of their careers, it is simply that Mantle was better.

That's why Bill James rates Mantle as one the three best players ever at peak value. During the period 1954 through 1964, James rates Mantle's as the best player in the game for every season but one.

[89Hen]

I have to admit that I'm not a big baseball buff, but Griffey is always an afterthought for me when thinking of the best players of all-time. This is somewhat case of genuine ECB, but actually more a combination NL/ECB. Yes, he played for the Reds, but he was in his decline and the real start of his injury bug. The fact that the Mariners made the playoffs only twice while he was there also contributes to that. I'm honestly not trying to take away from how good he was (like I could if I wanted) but he's just a player that I never though of much.

you're fucking joking about being an after thought right? Look at his numbers, watch the plays he made day in and day out so effortlessly that 99% of baseball players could only dream of making.

One of the purest swings on history.

You can't blame him for the Ms being, for the most part, a second level franchise. That is like the morons who say Marino wasn't any good because he never wins title.

[Gil Dobie]

See, Gil, you actually make my point. People look at Mays' career numbers, see that cumulatively they are better than Mantle's, and then begin to try to explain why Mantle was the most popular player of his era.

They say it was because Mantle was white; or played for the Yankees, etc.

But the fact is if you look at their productivity during the peak of their careers, it is simply that Mantle was better.

That's why Bill James rates Mantle as one the three best players ever at peak value. During the period 1954 through 1964, James rates Mantle's as the best player in the game for every season but one.

I don't need Bill James to tell me who was better, Mantle had 2 great season during that span. I'd take Mays over Mantle most of those seasons.

[JoltinJoe]

See, Gil, you actually make my point. People look at Mays' career numbers, see that cumulatively they are better than Mantle's, and then begin to try to explain why Mantle was the most popular player of his era.

They say it was because Mantle was white; or played for the Yankees, etc.

But the fact is if you look at their productivity during the peak of their careers, it is simply that Mantle was better.

That's why Bill James rates Mantle as one the three best players ever at peak value. During the period 1954 through 1964, James rates Mantle's as the best player in the game for every season but one.

I don't need Bill James to tell me who was better, Mantle had 2 great season during that span. I'd take Mays over Mantle most of those seasons.

Two great seasons?? Four of his seasons during that span rank as among the 100 greatest seasons ever by a player; in three of those seasons, he had an OPS+ of greater than 200!! During that span, he had a season when he won the baseball wide triple crown (1956); another season when he hit .365 and reached base almost 52% of the time (1957); another season when he hit 54 homers (1961); and another season when he had 135 RBI. And I'm just scratching the surface. At the peak of his career, Mantle was such a feared and dominant hitter that pitchers refused to give him anything to hit. In 1957, Mantle was walked 146 times, even though the next batter in the line-up was YOGI BERRA! That might be the most eye-popping stat of all. I'd like to know what other player has ever been walked that many times batting in front of a top-tier Hall of Famer in the peak of his career.

Even counting his decline years, Mantle for his career was on base over 42% of the time! (Mays 38%).

In contrast, none of Mays' seasons rank among the top 100 seasons ever. Mays never approached an OPS+ of 200.

[Gil Dobie]

Two great seasons?? Four of his seasons during that span rank as among the 100 greatest seasons ever by a player; in three of those seasons, he had an OPS+ of greater than 200!! During that span, he had a season when he won the baseball wide triple crown (1956); another season when he hit .365 and reached base almost 52% of the time (1957); another season when he hit 54 homers (1961); and another season when he had 135 RBI. And I'm just scratching the surface. At the peak of his career, Mantle was such a feared and dominant hitter that pitchers refused to give him anything to hit. In 1957, Mantle was walked 146 times, even though the next batter in the line-up was YOGI BERRA! That might be the most eye-popping stat of all. I'd like to know what other player has ever been walked that many times batting in front of a top-tier Hall of Famer in the peak of his career.

Even counting his decline years, Mantle for his career was on base over 42% of the time! (Mays 38%).

In contrast, none of Mays' seasons rank among the top 100 seasons ever. Mays never approached an OPS+ of 200.

Like I said, I don't need Bill James or any other stat maker, I have my own spreadsheet ranking the top 100 seasons of all-time. Mantle struckout over 1700 times, and was over 100 K's 8 times, 7 times during your sweet spot 1954-64. Mays struckout 300 less times in approx 3000 more plate appearances. On my list, strikeouts are a negative. Mays also was above and beyond Mantle in Total Bases.

FYI Mantle's best RBI year was 130.

[JoltinJoe]

Seriously Gil, who cares how many times Mantle struck out? A much more significant stat is on-base percentage. For his career, Mantle swamps Mays on on-base percentage. Mantle reached based over 42% of the time; Mays about 38%. You give me a No. 3/4 power hitter with on OBP of 42%; I'll win you seven world series championships in 18 years.

Mantle made everyone in the line-up around him a better hitter. Guys in front of him would see more fastballs, because pitchers didn't want to face Mantle with runners on base. (Witness what happened when Ralph Houk flipped Maris into the No. 3 spot, and Mantle into the 4 spot in 1961 -- Maris hits 61 homers). Guys behind him drove in more runs, because Mantle was on base so often.

It's baffling to me that you just want to ignore the stat that most baseball experts today widely accept as the best indicator of offensive productivity: OPS and OPS+. Maybe if you explain your methodology, I would understand your logic.

[Gil Dobie]

Seriously Gil, who cares how many times Mantle struck out? A much more significant stat is on-base percentage. For his career, Mantle swamps Mays on on-base percentage. Mantle reached based over 42% of the time; Mays about 38%. You give me a No. 3/4 power hitter with on OBP of 42%; I'll win you seven world series championships in 18 years.

Mantle made everyone in the line-up around him a better hitter. Guys in front of him would see more fastballs, because pitchers didn't want to face Mantle with runners on base. (Witness what happened when Ralph Houk flipped Maris into the No. 3 spot, and Mantle into the 4 spot in 1961 -- Maris hits 61 homers). Guys behind him drove in more runs, because Mantle was on base so often.

It's baffling to me that you just want to ignore the stat that most baseball experts today widely accept as the best indicator of offensive productivity: OPS and OPS+. Maybe if you explain your methodology, I would understand your logic.

Just checked my speadsheet, I have Mays with 5 seasons in the top 100, Mantle with 3. Mays 1954, 1955, 1958, 1962 & 1965. Mantle 1956, 57 & 61. Mantle's season's rated higher, but Mays had more great seasons even during the 1954-64 range that excludes Mays 1965 season. I use 18 different offensive catagories to calculate my list and strikeout are subtracted as they are a negative. I also give credit to a player that stays healthy and plays more games. Babe Ruth dominates my list with #1 season being 1921. Balco Barry's 2001 season was number 2.

[JoltinJoe]

Seriously Gil, who cares how many times Mantle struck out? A much more significant stat is on-base percentage. For his career, Mantle swamps Mays on on-base percentage. Mantle reached based over 42% of the time; Mays about 38%. You give me a No. 3/4 power hitter with on OBP of 42%; I'll win you seven world series championships in 18 years.

Mantle made everyone in the line-up around him a better hitter. Guys in front of him would see more fastballs, because pitchers didn't want to face Mantle with runners on base. (Witness what happened when Ralph Houk flipped Maris into the No. 3 spot, and Mantle into the 4 spot in 1961 -- Maris hits 61 homers). Guys behind him drove in more runs, because Mantle was on base so often.

It's baffling to me that you just want to ignore the stat that most baseball experts today widely accept as the best indicator of offensive productivity: OPS and OPS+. Maybe if you explain your methodology, I would understand your logic.

Just checked my speadsheet, I have Mays with 5 seasons in the top 100, Mantle with 3. Mays 1954, 1955, 1958, 1962 & 1965. Mantle 1956, 57 & 61. Mantle's season's rated higher, but Mays had more great seasons even during the 1954-64 range that excludes Mays 1965 season. I use 18 different offensive catagories to calculate my list and strikeout are subtracted as they are a negative. I also give credit to a player that stays healthy and plays more games. Babe Ruth dominates my list with #1 season being 1921. Balco Barry's 2001 season was number 2.

If you are weighing 18 stats, that means you are weighing virtually every number which appears on a modern stat line. So the question is what weight you are giving to each item. I'm going to guess that you weigh cumulative stats higher, which of course is your right since it is your ranking system. But then if you also weigh "staying healthy" as a criterion, you are effectively rewarding a player twice for "staying healthy" by your emphasis on cumulative stats (which will be higher due to a player staying healthy) and then giving more reward simply for staying healthy. Isn't the reward for being healthy that you have more chances to score runs, drive in runs, and achieve more total bases?

Yes, Mays was healthier in his career, and thus he managed, cumulatively, higher total bases, runs scored and RBI totals than he would have had if he missed as much time as Mantle. Tellingly, though, Mantle often scored as many runs as Mays even though he usually played in fewer (sometimes far fewer games).

But if you look at their career stat line projected over a 162-game season, Mays averages 103 RBI per 162-game season; Mantle 102. Both average 36 homers. Their batting averages are virtually indistinguishable too (.302 for Mays v. .298 for Mantle). Runs scored is a wash too (Mantle 113; Mays 112). Their slugging percentages are identical (.557). The only significant distinctions run in favor of Mantle: he has a far higher on base percentage (.421! v. .384), and thus higher OPS (.977 v. .941). For their careers, Mantle scores a remarkably high overall OPS+ of 172; Mays comes in an excellent but lower 156.

Indeed, even in those last four years of Mantle's career which are considered his "throwaway years," he managed OPS+ of: 137 (1965); 170 (1966); 150 (1967); and 142 (1968). In other words, in two of Mantle's "decline" years he managed to but up an OPS which, relative to the league average, were comparable to the years Mays frequently put up in his prime.

What is remarkable about Mantle is that even though he played in the offensive-starved eras of the 1950s and 1960s, he managed raw OPS scores which, even unadjusted to league average, equal those put up by the steroid wonders of the offense crazy eras of the 1990s and 2000s. Mantle's name stands out because he is the only player whose career started in the 1950s whose name is on the list of top unadjusted (raw) 100 OPS scores of all time (other than one single season by Norm Cash). This means, of course, that adjusted to league average, Mantle's OPS+ scores in many of his seasons are truly historical. Mantle vastly outperformed those players of his own era to the point that his stat line resembles the best stat lines of the 1990s and 2000s (which were often the product of PED use).

[Gil Dobie]

If you are weighing 18 stats, that means you are weighing virtually every number which appears on a modern stat line. So the question is what weight you are giving to each item. I'm going to guess that you weigh cumulative stats higher, which of course is your right since it is your ranking system. But then if you also weigh "staying healthy" as a criterion, you are effectively rewarding a player twice for "staying healthy" by your emphasis on cumulative stats (which will be higher due to a player staying healthy) and then giving more reward simply for staying healthy. Isn't the reward for being healthy that you have more chances to score runs, drive in runs, and achieve more total bases?

Yes, Mays was healthier in his career, and thus he managed, cumulatively, higher total bases, runs scored and RBI totals than he would have had if he missed as much time as Mantle. Tellingly, though, Mantle often scored as many runs as Mays even though he usually played in fewer (sometimes far fewer games).

But if you look at their career stat line projected over a 162-game season, Mays averages 103 RBI per 162-game season; Mantle 102. Both average 36 homers. Their batting averages are virtually indistinguishable too (.302 for Mays v. .298 for Mantle). Runs scored is a wash too (Mantle 113; Mays 112). Their slugging percentages are identical (.557). The only significant distinctions run in favor of Mantle: he has a far higher on base percentage (.421! v. .384), and thus higher OPS (.977 v. .941). For their careers, Mantle scores a remarkably high overall OPS+ of 172; Mays comes in an excellent but lower 156.

Indeed, even in those last four years of Mantle's career which are considered his "throwaway years," he managed OPS+ of: 137 (1965); 170 (1966); 150 (1967); and 142 (1968). In other words, in two of Mantle's "decline" years he managed to but up an OPS which, relative to the league average, were comparable to the years Mays frequently put up in his prime.

What is remarkable about Mantle is that even though he played in the offensive-starved eras of the 1950s and 1960s, he managed raw OPS scores which, even unadjusted to league average, equal those put up by the steroid wonders of the offense crazy eras of the 1990s and 2000s. Mantle's name stands out because he is the only player whose career started in the 1950s whose name is on the list of top unadjusted (raw) 100 OPS scores of all time (other than one single season by Norm Cash). This means, of course, that adjusted to league average, Mantle's OPS+ scores in many of his seasons are truly historical. Mantle vastly outperformed those players of his own era to the point that his stat line resembles the best stat lines of the 1990s and 2000s (which were often the product of PED use).

Don't think we are going to agree here Joe, both were great players, but I still take Mays over Mantle. IMO May put up better numbers more consistantly over the same period of time, and I'm still convince it was against better pitching and better players overall. Mays defense and baserunning, (Not speed) even puts him further in front.