Originally posted by DertyDonahue:Originally posted by Niners99:Originally posted by Ninerjohn:Originally posted by Niners99:Originally posted by DertyDonahue:Originally posted by crzy:Originally posted by DertyDonahue:
This debate is like the "who was a better player, Mantle or Mays?" question.
I respectfully disagree.
But, this should be a thread (Mantle vs. Mays), if it isn't already.
Willie Mays was HOF caliber in all 5 tools.
whats your argument for Mantle being better anyways?
Mantle was HOF caliber in all 5 tools as well. He was actually a faster runner than Mays. Mantle had amazing natural ability and there may be no hitter ever that had the power and speed that Mantle did. HOWEVER, Mays was clearly the better all around baseball player and got more out of his natural ability than Mantle did over an entire career.
Mays hit more HR, more RBIs, nearly 1000 more hits, more doubles, more triples, twice as many steals, struck out 200 less times, more runs scored, higher career batting avg, more assists, higher career offensive AND defensive WAR, and identical SLG% AND fielding % actually, which is really cool.
Mantle had him beat in OB%, but Mays was better. and power wise, Mantle hit the vast majority of his HR left handed at the short porched RF of Yankee stadium, whereas Mays played in some of the worst home conditions for power his whole career.
obviously both were legendary HOF players, its just that Mays was so great, i dont see that much of an argument from Mantle unless you just want to talk pure talent. clearly they both had all the natural ability in the world. power, speed, defensive play, throwing arm, batting eye, etc.
also, ill bring up something that may or may not mean anything. Mays played the first few years of his career in the big apple, but spent the bulk of his years out on the west coast, far away from the media circus. Mantle spent his entire career in the biggest spotlight in America, and played for a team known for producing legends. the fact that Mays is universally recognized today as the greatest all around baseball player who ever lived, from mostly an annex out West, instead of the New York Yankees golden boy of the 50's of very similar talent, tells you all you need to know about the greatness of Willie Mays.
btw John this was a general response to why the original poster thinks Mantle was better, not an argument against your post. i know you know how incredible Mays was.
mays played in 500+ more games than mantle, 2700 more atbats, so of course the numbers will be skewed towards mays.
mays hit .302, mantle hit .298, that is nearly identical.
mantle played on one bum knee his whole career, on two the last five and a half. yet he was still fast, played through pain and managed to steal bases and play good defense.
i never said i didnt think mays was incredible. read what i've posted. they had the same strengths, i give the nod to mantle because i think despite his playing with major injuries he still put up numbers comparable to mays in most categories despite 2700 less at bats. thats a ton of AB's.
my answer to all that is, "so what?" at the point when you play that many games, why does it count against Mays that he had more AB? Mantle played 18 seasons, Mays played 22. the fact that he was able to play 4 more years should help his case.
alot of what you said sounds exactly like someone whos side of the argument finishes 2nd statistically in almost every single category. "yeah but he had more talent. yeah but he had injuries. yeah but he had less AB's. yeah but...."
Mantle was great, Mays was greater. when youre talking about all these elite HOF guys, talent is a given. its the results that matter most, and Mays' results were more impressive than Mantles. WS titles are awesome, but those are team based accomplishments. if were talking player vs. player you have to throw that out.