Comments for Pinstriped Bible

Comment on All rain means all A-Rod by freeatlast17@gmail.com

freeatlast17@gmail.com — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:51:54 +0000

Steve,
I am an old sports fan. I have the first edition of Sports Illustrated
and only chucked the last 20 years when threatened with divorce.
I can honestly say that Selena Roberts is the worst Sports Reporter I have ever read. It started with her article on Bodie Miller in the NY Times. She had never interviewed Miller and I question if she has ever personally interviewed anyone she has written about. She is negative to a fault and has only written positive articles about dead people (Maggie Dixon) and people with handicaps. She is a coward and I can’t believe you are the only Sports Writer that has called her out. Kornheiser and Wilbon are wimps and I guess there must be an unwritten law in your trade
preventing Writers from dissing their own. Although who would want to consider her their own. I would love someone to write an article in her style on her.

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by sadaharuo

sadaharuo — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:34:08 +0000

I didn’t say that Donnie couldn’t hit. I don’t believe I ever even implied this. He hit very well, just not like a Hall of Fame (or “dominant”) first baseman. Instead of picking and choosing snippets and refuting those, please try to understand this: a heavy-hitting second baseman is much more valuable than a an average-hitting first baseman. You have to evaluate these two players as they compare to their positions. Over the course of his career (not just the dominant period) Mattingly doesn’t measure up to other first baseman. If Mattingly was a second baseman with those numbers, he’d already be in the Hall. Different positions are asked to contribute different levels of offense, which is why Derek Jeter is more valuable than Russell Branyan. Shortstops, 2b, and catcher are traditionally non-hitting spots in the lineup. When you get a guy who plays that position well AND he can hit, you’ve got a rare commodity. Then you have other positions like 1B and RF, which place a much higher premium on offense. Hitting is more important than defense at these positions.
Mattingly couldn’t keep up with the offensive output of his position, whereas Joe Morgan greatly outhit other second basemen. And are you really trying to tell me that Mattingly was a better offensive player than Joe Morgan based on batting average? Morgan’s BA was only .271, but his on-base percentage was .392. OBP is way, way more important than batting average. Mattingly’s BA was .307, but his OBP was only .352. You do understand that a 2B with a .392 OBP is more valuable than a 1B with a .352, right?
And yes, of course I saw Mattingly play before his back was hurt. Don’t be insulting. You know I’m talking about the entirety of his career. The last two-thirds of his career were not very good.

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by thatkevin@msn.com

thatkevin@msn.com — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:05:21 +0000

Forgot Donnie’s .307 career AVG. Do find it odd that we’re the only 2 talking about this?

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by thatkevin@msn.com

thatkevin@msn.com — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:03:15 +0000

First of all I didn’t say a thing about Mattingly in the HOF so I don’t know why you’re bringing that up. I know it was mentioned in other posts but not mine. Are debate was about Morgan vs. Mattingly and you being under the immpression the Donnie couldn’t hit. As for who considered him “the best in the game?” not only be but in 87′ or 88′ in a major media poll Mattingly was voted the best in the game by the writers, players and the fan’s. Not to bad for someone who “wasn’t that dominant”.

“Hitting is more important than defense.” Wow I guess you just made a case against Joe Morgan.

22 Seasons

H 2B HR RBI AVG

2517 449 268 1133 .271

I will say Morgan had OUTSTANDING career SB and BB totals.

Mattingly. 14 seasons

H 2B HR RBI
2153 442 222 1099

BTW did you see Mattingly play before the back problems?

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by sadaharuo

sadaharuo — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 02:55:36 +0000

Sigh. Do we have to continue this? Isn’t it possible to say that we all loved Mattingly without thinking he was a Hall of Famer? Again, he just wasn’t good enough for long enough. Even your own line of reasoning hammers this home. His fabled “6 years of dominance” don’t add up to enough to put him over the line. For one thing, it was more like 4-5 years, for another thing, it wasn’t that dominant. He was good -very good- for 5 years, then pretty mediocre for the rest of his career. It’s not a slight on his character. It doesn’t mean we love him any less. Donnie the hitman simply didn’t have the longevity. His peak was good, but it wasn’t legendary like Koufax’ was. To hear some of you speak, you’d think Mattingly’s peak years were like Barry Bonds in 2001. Who considered him “the best in the game?” You? Was he better than Rickey Henderson, Mike Schmidt, Bonds, Griffey Jr., or Darryl Strawberry?
Mattingly played great defense, but not enough to make up for only hitting 222 homers. Yes, you would rather have a good defender than a bad one. That’s obvious. Nobody wants Giambi playing first, but his bat makes up for his defensive shortcomings. Hitting is more important than defense, which is why nobody is making a case for Doug Mientkiewicz to make the Hall of Fame. Being a great defensive 1B is nice, but you HAVE to hit. For more than 5 years of your career. God, it’s not that complicated. If Mattingly hit as well for his career as he did during his peak we wouldn’t be having this argument. He didn’t. He fell off the map. It’s not his fault his back betrayed him, but we can’t give him credit for imaginary homeruns and RBIs. Do Mo Vaughn and Albert Belle deserve credit? They were both Hall-bound until injuries sidelined them.

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by thatkevin@msn.com

thatkevin@msn.com — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 02:02:59 +0000

“First base is just not that importent.”

Are you serious? Do you have any idea how many errors a great defensive first baseman saves a team through out a season.

“Second basemen rarely hit at all, and to hit like Joe Morgan is rarer still.”

Well first basemen aren’t expect to be great defensivly so wouldn’t that make Mattingly rare?

“First basemen, on the other hand, are required to hit. They have to hit homers and drive in runs.”

You do remember the nickname “the hitman” right? In the 6 years that he was considerd the best in the game these were his averages.

Avg .326 H 203 HR 26 RBI 114

“Jason Giambi is an awful first baseman”

I coudn’t agree more.

“Joe Morgan and Don Mattingly were not in the same league.”

Joe Morgan would disagree with you.

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by sadaharuo

sadaharuo — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 23:09:00 +0000

thatkevin-
Joe Morgan is one of the best players in the history of the sport (one of the worst broadcasters, but that’s not relevant). Don Mattingly is not one of the game’s all-time greats. There is no comparison. You can’t compare the offense of a second baseman with that of a first baseman. I notice you left that essential bit of context out of your comparison. Second basemen rarely hit at all, and to hit like Joe Morgan is rarer still. First basemen, on the other hand, are required to hit. They have to hit homers and drive in runs. Yes, Mattingly’s defense was outstanding, and it should be counted, but first base defense is just not that important. Jason Giambi is an awful first baseman, but his career has more value than Mattingly’s. Hate to say it, but it’s true.
Joe Morgan and Don Mattingly were not in the same league.

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by thatkevin@msn.com

thatkevin@msn.com — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 20:10:35 +0000

So you’re basically saying that Morgan had offensive years than Mattingly because he walked more. OBS+ is the most misleading stat when measuring a players worth. Talk about igorance. Here’s some other stats…..

162 game AVG BA 2b HR RBI H SO SLG

Mattingly .307 40 20 100 195 40 .471

Morgan .271 27 16 69 154 62 .427

Gold Gloves

Mattingly 9

Morgan 5

If you take the names away and look at the numbers who would you think is the HOF’er?

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by lolordov@unlv.nevada.edu

lolordov@unlv.nevada.edu — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:57:06 +0000

“Mattingly had more great years then say Joe Morgan.And Mattingly?s years were quite a bit better than Morgan?s. Now Morgan was a good fielder (not quite in Joe Gordon?s class) but he did not strike fear in opposing teams when he came to bat.”

do you have ANY idea how good a player Joe Morgan was?

best 5 years, OPS+, in descending order:
Morgan: 187/169/159/154/149
Mattingly: 161/156/156/146/133

So Morgan had three offensive years better than ANY of Mattingly’s, PLUS he was a great basestealer, which OPS+ doesn’t even count, PLUS he played a more important defensive position….

the ignorance and provincialism of my fellow Yankee fans sometimes is just appalling………

Comment on More thoughts on the Hall of Fame ballot by sadaharuo

sadaharuo — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:13:52 +0000

Sandy Koufax was definitely credited with those 6 great years, but the difference between his peak and Mattingly’s peak is gigantic. Don Mattingly had maybe a 4-5 year period where he could be considered “great” followed by another 8 years where he was merely serviceable. He had only 4 seasons of .500+ SLG and a lifetime OPS of .830. These are just not outstanding numbers for a first baseman. Even at his peak, he was never the best player in baseball. Let’s not overstate Mattingly’s case here. He was probably in the top 5, which is still good. Again, not good enough and definitely not long enough. Koufax’ period of dominance was one of the great feats in baseball history. For those 6 years he pitched as well as anyone ever has. Mattingly’s dominant stretch was certainly good, but hardly legendary.
Moreover, Koufax’ great stretch came at the end of his career; he retired due to injury, not ineffectiveness. Mattingly did it in reverse; he was great at the beginning then staggered towards the finish line.
Listen, I wish it hadn’t happened like that. I wish #23 had hit 500 homeruns and won another couple of MVPs. I wish he’d been good for a few more years, long enough to win a WS ring. But he didn’t. He was good, briefly, in the 1980s, then limped along for the better part of a decade. He gets a permanent free ride from us because he was Donnie Baseball, but he doesn’t deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Would that it were otherwise.