Jon Heyman voted for Don Mattingly over Jeff Bagwell. In his tweets Heyman mentioned that he was the best player in baseball for 3-4 years. He also mentioned that he votes for greatness at one point rather than being good for a number of years. We should also mention that he voted for Jack Morris, as well. So, while I am inspired by Ken Tremendous and FJM, I will look at his ballot and reasoning.
"4. Don Mattingly: Some will argue this is geographic bias. But if anything, it's greatness bias. I like players who were great for a little while a lot more than those who were merely very good forever. He didn't last forever because of a bad back I suspect was earned twisting his 185-pound body into a power hitter. Some of his total numbers aren't overwhelming, but they look a lot like those of Kirby Puckett, an obvious Hall of Famer. Was maybe the best player in the game for three straight years (he won the Sporting News Player of the Year 1984-86) and also was one of the two greatest fielding first basemen of all time. A lot of greatness there."
Well, first we would like to say that by winning the Sporting News Player of the Year award does not necessarily make you a Hall of Famer. Here are a few winners of that award who do not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Johnny Allen (1937), Johnny Vander Meer (1938), Spud Chandler (1943), Marty Marion (1944), Bob Turley (1958), Roger Maris (1961), Maury Wills (1962), Danny McLain (1968), Ron Guidry (1978), Fernando Valenzuela (1981), George Bell (1987), Orel Herschiser (1988), Kevin Mitchell (1989), Albert Belle (1995), Ryan Howard (2006). This does not even include players like Ken Boyer, Al Rosen, Phil Rizzuto, Bill Mazeroski, Don Drysdale, Lou Brock, Joe Torre, Gary Sheffield, Rafael Palmeiro, and Sammy Sosa. These players all have had their Hall of Fame candidacy debated. Well not entirely for Rosen.
Secondly, Mattingly did not win the Sporting News Player of the Year award from 1984-1986. He won it once in 1985. Ryne Sandberg won it in 1984 and Roger Clemens won it in 1986. Jeff Bagwell won the same award in 1994. See the paragraph above for a small list of the players who have won the award once or click here to see te past awards. If Heyman is implying that Mattingly was the best player from 1984-1986 because he won tha award for three straight years, he is dead wrong. He won it once.
Third, Mattingly finished in the top 10 for rWAR four times 1984-1987. That is pretty good. Bagwell did it from 1994-1999 including two times leading his league in rWAR. I am not saying that WAR is the end-all of stats but if you're going to say that Mattingly was the best player in baseball for 3-4 years, you should at least consider Bagwell to be the best during his 6 year reign.
Fourth, we'll look at briefly the argument between Mattingly and Puckett. It doesn't matter how similar their numbers are. Puckett was a centerfielder and a pretty good defensive center fielder. If Puckett was able to combine hitting as well as Heyman thinks Mattingly hit while playing a harder defensive position then Puckett would be much more valuable and thus better deserving of the Hall of Fame. But we'll look at Mattingly vs. Puckett. Mattingly: .307/.358/.471 127 OPS+. Puckett: .318/.360/.477 124 OPS+. Puckett was not really considered a power hitting centerfielder but yet somehow Mattingly is considered a power hitting first baseman? My head hurts. Mattingly should have to be a much much better hitter than Puckett in order to be worthy of the Hall of Fame, which just isn't true.
According to rWAR, Mattingly had four All-Star caliber seasons and 0 MVP seasons. Bagwell had 9 All-Star caliber seasons and 3 MVP seasons. Yet somehow, Heyman has delusioned himself into thinking Mattingly had a lot of greatness.
I will not argue with Heyman about the fielding. However, I think it is extremely unlikely that Mattingly was one of the two greatest fielding first basemen of all-time.
Here is what Heyman said about Bagwell.
"7. Jeff Bagwell: The percentages (.540 slugging, .408 on-base) are worthy, and that he won only one Gold Glove and one MVP may have been a matter of timing and the era. Also gets points for uniqueness; not many huge first basemen could run like him (202 stolen bases, 100 runs in eight seasons). Still thinking about it. "
Somehow, despite that Bagwell won the important award Heyman likes to quote, the Sporting News player of the year award, as many times as Mattingly did but there is no greatness for Bagwell. Apparently Bagwell wasn't great....
Bagwell's career OPS+ was 149, Mattingly topped that 3 times. Bagwell topped it 6 times.
Batting average: Mattingly finished top 10, 5 times including one time leading the league. Bagwell finished top 10, 3 times.
On-base percentage: Mattingly finished top 10, 2 times. Bagwell finished top 10, 8 times.
Slugging percentage: Mattingly finished top 10, 5 times. Bagwell finished top 10, 6 times led the league once.
OPS: Mattingly finished top 10, four times, led the league once. Bagwell finished top 10, seven times, led the league once.
OPS+: Bagwell finsihed top 10, five times, led the league twice. Bagwell finished top 10, nine times, led the league once.
I can go on for awhile. However, there is no possible world where Bagwell is not as great as Mattingly. No reasonable person can come to this conclusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment