Getting a little ridiculous!

[GPK]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Okay, you win there. Here are my first baseman better than TEX in the last 25 years. This should be fun to chew on:

1. Don Mattingly
2. Jeff Bagwell
3. Eddie Murray
4. Rod Carew
5. Will Clark

I know it may be difficult to include Maguire in those talks, but Todd Helton's name needs to be somewhere in the mix too.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Okay, you win there. Here are my first baseman better than TEX in the last 25 years. This should be fun to chew on:

1. Don Mattingly
2. Jeff Bagwell
3. Eddie Murray
4. Rod Carew
5. Will Clark

He and Mattingly are very close at age 28 but Tex hits from both sides and Donnie baseball only had 5 good seasons and was pretty much done at 29.
Bagwell may have a little better raw numbers but Tex is a far better fielder and bags peaked in a very suspicous era.
eddie murray was a better player
carew was not a great 1st baseman, his overall career is hall of fame worthy but he simply had no power and outside of his 1977 season which was unbelievable he is not the player that tex is.
Will Clark was a good player but is not in tex's league either

I understand that most havent seen the guy play that much but he is a very good hitter, has power, makes contact, takes walks, superior defender and shows up to play.
his career average season:
612 Ab's
101 runs
177 hits
40 2bs
36 hrs
121 rbis
79 bb
124 k
.290 avg
.378 obp
.541 slg

keep in mind he has dramatically dropped his k rate and raised his bb rate the last 2 seasons and plays Gold Glove defense

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

I know it may be difficult to include Maguire in those talks, but Todd Helton's name needs to be somewhere in the mix too.

Helton was a very good player who will always be downgraded a bit by playing in Colorado. But his numbers are really good for 5 or 6 years

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

He and Mattingly are very close at age 28 but Tex hits from both sides and Donnie baseball only had 5 good seasons and was pretty much done at 29.
Bagwell may have a little better raw numbers but Tex is a far better fielder and bags peaked in a very suspicous era.
eddie murray was a better player
carew was not a great 1st baseman, his overall career is hall of fame worthy but he simply had no power and outside of his 1977 season which was unbelievable he is not the player that tex is.
Will Clark was a good player but is not in tex's league either

I understand that most havent seen the guy play that much but he is a very good hitter, has power, makes contact, takes walks, superior defender and shows up to play.
his career average season:
612 Ab's
101 runs
177 hits
40 2bs
36 hrs
121 rbis
79 bb
124 k
.290 avg
.378 obp
.541 slg

keep in mind he has dramatically dropped his k rate and raised his bb rate the last 2 seasons and plays Gold Glove defense

Donnnie baseball was better in the field, hit for better average and was just a more dominant all around player. We can only use those years up to where TEX is now because it is impossible to say what TEX will become. Isnt that fair?

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Helton was a very good player who will always be downgraded a bit by playing in Colorado. But his numbers are really good for 5 or 6 years

5 or 6 years?? He played 35 games in '97. Starting in '98 he hit over .300 for 10 straight seasons. His OBP was over .400 for the last 8 straight of those 10 seasons. Also had 8 straight years where his SLG % was over .500 and 4 of those years it was over .600, including 2000 where he was damn close to .700.

[Cannon Shell]

Frank thomas has great numbers but was mainly a 1st baseman for 4 season because he was a brutal fielder. Palmiero has numbers and was a really good player but is more tainted than even McGuire. Morneau is looking like a really good 1st baseman too but needs to do it longer, Giambi had a few great years at the plate but juiced and was always a bad fielder, Delgado was a great hitter but not so great in the field. Who else is there?

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Frank thomas has great numbers but was mainly a 1st baseman for 4 season because he was a brutal fielder. Palmiero has numbers and was a really good player but is more tainted than even McGuire. Morneau is looking like a really good 1st baseman too but needs to do it longer, Giambi had a few great years at the plate but juiced and was always a bad fielder, Delgado was a great hitter but not so great in the field. Who else is there?

Steve Garvey?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Donnnie baseball was better in the field, hit for better average and was just a more dominant all around player. We can only use those years up to where TEX is now because it is impossible to say what TEX will become. Isnt that fair?

No way was he better in the field, no way. Mattingly's peak is not superior to what Texiera has done. And if we include Mattinglys 1990 through 1995 seasons it aint even close. I was being nice but if Mattingly had played in Texas most wouldnt even remember him now.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

5 or 6 years?? He played 35 games in '97. Starting in '98 he hit over .300 for 10 straight seasons. His OBP was over .400 for the last 8 straight of those 10 seasons. Also had 8 straight years where his SLG % was over .500 and 4 of those years it was over .600, including 2000 where he was damn close to .700.

he played in Colorado. He had 6 seasons where the numbers were great even for there but Coors field was such a good hitters park it is hard to get an accurate read on him, Larry Walker too.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

Steve Garvey?

Please dont get him started...

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Please dont get him started...

Ok...I won't.


Merry Christmas Chuck

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GPK

Ok...I won't.


Merry Christmas Chuck

Merry Xmas to you too!!

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No way was he better in the field, no way. Mattingly's peak is not superior to what Texiera has done. And if we include Mattinglys 1990 through 1995 seasons it aint even close. I was being nice but if Mattingly had played in Texas most wouldnt even remember him now.

??? Don mattingly was a 9 time gold glove winner and is widely considered the second best fielding first baseman of his era behind Hernandez who was probably the best ever.

No doubt Mattingly played in Yankee Stadium which is pretty friendly to lefties, but he didnt play in the juice era and he didnt play in a launching pad like the ballpark...during the juice era. (not to imply that texiera was ever involved).

Compare Mattingly's first 6 years to Texiera's

Mattingly


1984 23 NYY AL 153 603 91 207 44 2 23 110 1 1 41 33 .343 .381 .537 156 324 8 9 8 1 15 MVP-5,AS
1985 24 NYY AL 159 652 107 211 48 3 35 145 2 2 56 41 .324 .371 .567 156 370 2 15 13 2 15 SS,MVP-1,AS
1986 25 NYY AL 162 677 117 238 53 2 31 113 0 0 53 35 .352 .394 .573 161 388 1 10 11 1 17 SS,MVP-2,AS
1987 26 NYY AL 141 569 93 186 38 2 30 115 1 4 51 38 .327 .378 .559 146 318 0 8 13 1 16 SS,MVP-7,AS
1988 27 NYY AL 144 599 94 186 37 0 18 88 1 0 41 29 .311 .353 .462 128 277 0 8 14 3 13 AS
1989 28 NYY AL 158 631 79 191 37 2 23 113 3 0 51 30 .303 .351 .477 133 301 0 10 18 1 15 MVP-15,AS

Texiera

2003 TEX 146 529 66 137 29 5 26 84 1 2 44 120 .259 .331 .480 254 0 2 5 14 14 0.811
2004 TEX 145 545 101 153 34 2 38 112 4 1 68 117 .281 .370 .560 305 0 2 12 10 6 0.930
2005 TEX 162�† 644 112 194 41 3 43 144 4 0 72 124 .301 .379 .575 370 0 3 5 11 18 0.954
2006 TEX 162�† 628 99 177 45 1 33 110 2 0 89 128 .282 .371 .514 323 0 6 12 4 17 0.885
2007 TEX-ATL 132 494 86 151 33 2 30 105 0 0 72 112 .306 .400 .563 278 0 2 13 7 7 0.963
2008 ATL-LAA 157 574 102 177 41 0 33 121 2 0 97 93 .308 .410 .552 317 0 2 8 3 12 0.962
Total 840 3187 518 906 205 13 203 624 11 3 400 665 .284 .371 .533 1698 0 17 55 49 74 0.904



At the same time in their respective careers,

Mattingly: Texiera

5 gold gloves 2 gold gloves
3 silver slugger 2 silver sluggers
5 all star appearances 1 all star appearance
1 MVP 0 MVP


Chuck, its not even close. Mattingly was a better player. You can't factor what Mattingly did from 1990-95 in comparison because we don't yet know what TEX will do. Be fair here. I realize that yankee fans hold Mattingly's career in a higher regard than his overall career should probably dictate. However, if we are looking strictly at his first six full years, they compare favorably to Texiera and a lot of other really good ball players. Mattingly was widely considered the best player in the game from 1984-1986. No one would say that about Tex.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

??? Don mattingly was a 9 time gold glove winner and is widely considered the second best fielding first baseman of his era behind Hernandez who was probably the best ever.

No doubt Mattingly played in Yankee Stadium which is pretty friendly to lefties, but he didnt play in the juice era and he didnt play in a launching pad like the ballpark...during the juice era. (not to imply that texiera was ever involved).

Compare Mattingly's first 6 years to Texiera's

Mattingly


1984 23 NYY AL 153 603 91 207 44 2 23 110 1 1 41 33 .343 .381 .537 156 324 8 9 8 1 15 MVP-5,AS
1985 24 NYY AL 159 652 107 211 48 3 35 145 2 2 56 41 .324 .371 .567 156 370 2 15 13 2 15 SS,MVP-1,AS
1986 25 NYY AL 162 677 117 238 53 2 31 113 0 0 53 35 .352 .394 .573 161 388 1 10 11 1 17 SS,MVP-2,AS
1987 26 NYY AL 141 569 93 186 38 2 30 115 1 4 51 38 .327 .378 .559 146 318 0 8 13 1 16 SS,MVP-7,AS
1988 27 NYY AL 144 599 94 186 37 0 18 88 1 0 41 29 .311 .353 .462 128 277 0 8 14 3 13 AS
1989 28 NYY AL 158 631 79 191 37 2 23 113 3 0 51 30 .303 .351 .477 133 301 0 10 18 1 15 MVP-15,AS

Texiera

2003 TEX 146 529 66 137 29 5 26 84 1 2 44 120 .259 .331 .480 254 0 2 5 14 14 0.811
2004 TEX 145 545 101 153 34 2 38 112 4 1 68 117 .281 .370 .560 305 0 2 12 10 6 0.930
2005 TEX 162�† 644 112 194 41 3 43 144 4 0 72 124 .301 .379 .575 370 0 3 5 11 18 0.954
2006 TEX 162�† 628 99 177 45 1 33 110 2 0 89 128 .282 .371 .514 323 0 6 12 4 17 0.885
2007 TEX-ATL 132 494 86 151 33 2 30 105 0 0 72 112 .306 .400 .563 278 0 2 13 7 7 0.963
2008 ATL-LAA 157 574 102 177 41 0 33 121 2 0 97 93 .308 .410 .552 317 0 2 8 3 12 0.962
Total 840 3187 518 906 205 13 203 624 11 3 400 665 .284 .371 .533 1698 0 17 55 49 74 0.904



At the same time in their respective careers,

Mattingly: Texiera

5 gold gloves 2 gold gloves
3 silver slugger 2 silver sluggers
5 all star appearances 1 all star appearance
1 MVP 0 MVP


Chuck, its not even close. Mattingly was a better player. You can't factor what Mattingly did from 1990-95 in comparison because we don't yet know what TEX will do. Be fair here. I realize that yankee fans hold Mattingly's career in a higher regard than his overall career should probably dictate. However, if we are looking strictly at his first six full years, they compare favorably to Texiera and a lot of other really good ball players. Mattingly was widely considered the best player in the game from 1984-1986. No one would say that about Tex.

It is very close and you are using some things that are not really valid. Texiera has consistently shown more power than mattingly did. Not to mention that Tex's K's have decreased and his OBP has steadily risen which leads one to believe that his further production will be at the very least as good as it has been and most likely better. Not to mention that he has had the last 2 seasons interupted by mid season trades. The gold gloves are a flawed argument as Tex would have 4 in a row if he had not switched leagues the last 2 years and All star appearances are a poor way to compare players due to the fact that it only takes 1/2 of the year's numbers, is heavily tilted towards big market teams and in essence is a popularity contest. The reason that Mattingly was considered the best player (for perhaps 2 years) is that there was a gap of great players during that period. If he had played in an era with Bonds, Arod or Pujols not to mention Manny he would not have been consider such. Let us not forget that his big rbi years came with the addition of Ricky Henderson hitting in front of him. Texiera has never had a player of that caliber leading off in front of him. Mattingly had 1 really outstanding season that is better than Texiera's. And the fact of the matter is that Mattingly does have a track record after his peak where he simply was a league average player. Understanding that it was due to unfortunate back issues is one thing but the odds that Texiera will fade as badly as Mattingly is highly unlikely and by 2010 will easily have eclipsed him as a player.

[dalakhani]

The slugging pct over the same period of time is nearly identical. Mattingly led the league in doubles three times over that era. No, he didnt hit as many home runs, but the LEAGUE didnt hit as many home runs and he more than makes up for that with a MUCH HIGHER Batting average and a higher on base pct.

What he will likely be in 2010 doesnt matter for what we are discussing because he could get hit by a bus tomorrow and we will only have his current body of work to judge him by. What Mattingly did after his first six years are also immaterial. That being the case, the numbers and the awards clearly point to mattingly.

I do admit that from a numbers perspective, it is very difficult to find five better than TEX. Could that not be more of a result of the era than the quality of player? I would venture to say that we could take a top position player from ANY position today (except pitcher) and compare him to top players from the 80's at the same position and the numbers would be favorable to the player of this era. I was looking at the year Keith Hernandez won MVP. He was an MVP first baseman with 11 home runs.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

The slugging pct over the same period of time is nearly identical. Mattingly led the league in doubles three times over that era. No, he didnt hit as many home runs, but the LEAGUE didnt hit as many home runs and he more than makes up for that with a MUCH HIGHER Batting average and a higher on base pct.

What he will likely be in 2010 doesnt matter for what we are discussing because he could get hit by a bus tomorrow and we will only have his current body of work to judge him by. What Mattingly did after his first six years are also immaterial. That being the case, the numbers and the awards clearly point to mattingly.

I do admit that from a numbers perspective, it is very difficult to find five better than TEX. Could that not be more of a result of the era than the quality of player? I would venture to say that we could take a top position player from ANY position today (except pitcher) and compare him to top players from the 80's at the same position and the numbers would be favorable to the player of this era. I was looking at the year Keith Hernandez won MVP. He was an MVP first baseman with 11 home runs.

While it is different eras the awareness of what constitutes value in players has also changed. The year Hernandez won he actually tied Stargell and won witht the help of a media surge that decided he was valuble versus straight stats similar to the year Kirk Gibson won. While I agree that Mattingly had a few really great years if you take his entire career he isnt the player that Texiera is now. The thing that everyone misses about Texiera is that he still is improving and there is no reason to believe he has peaked. Regardless even if i give yoy Mattingly begrudgingly and Murray that still leaves a lot more to go.

[Stickhorse]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

yeah teams should be criticized for TRYING TO WIN!!! That is a real winner. I would rather my team just keep turning a profit and never taking a risk to WIN THE WORLD SERIES!!! Yeah lets make it so that only the Yankees and Red Sox ever make a move. You are obviously have no understanding of baseball and should stick to something a little less mentally challenging like figuring out who could possibly be contenders for horse of the year.

Settle down, I'm not criticizing teams for trying to win. I'm criticizing teams for being too impatient and sacrificing their future for a quick fix. Better to be a contender year after year than to sell out for an unsuccessful title run.

The better franchises have it figured out. Build your team for the long haul. Beat your opponents in the draft. I will concede that once in awhile you might have to pick up a free agent during the season. The Dodgers picking up Manny midseason was not a a typical move for them.

The Red Sox are a great example of building a solid team via the draft.

Patience is still important in building a successful sports franchise just as it is in managing a stable.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Stickhorse

Settle down, I'm not criticizing teams for trying to win. I'm criticizing teams for being too impatient and sacrificing their future for a quick fix. Better to be a contender year after year than to sell out for an unsuccessful title run.

The better franchises have it figured out. Build your team for the long haul. Beat your opponents in the draft. I will concede that once in awhile you might have to pick up a free agent during the season. The Dodgers picking up Manny midseason was not a a typical move for them.

The Red Sox are a great example of building a solid team via the draft.

Patience is still important in building a successful sports franchise just as it is in managing a stable.

Whoa. I agree that Boston's front office is as shrewd as there is out there but the keys to their championship teams WERENT built through the draft. The first title was led by Manny (free agent) Papi (free agent) and the pitchers were all a result of trades or free agency. Granted, it is fair to say that they had to draft and develop the prospects to trade away for a Josh Beckett but lets not act like the Red Sox are this homegrown championship contender like Tampa or Philly. A majority of Boston's regulars during their title runs did not come up through their system.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While it is different eras the awareness of what constitutes value in players has also changed. The year Hernandez won he actually tied Stargell and won witht the help of a media surge that decided he was valuble versus straight stats similar to the year Kirk Gibson won. While I agree that Mattingly had a few really great years if you take his entire career he isnt the player that Texiera is now. The thing that everyone misses about Texiera is that he still is improving and there is no reason to believe he has peaked. Regardless even if i give yoy Mattingly begrudgingly and Murray that still leaves a lot more to go.

Okay, you gave me Mattingly (I admit...one of my favorites) and Eddie Murray (one of the most underrated players ever to play the game). Lets try a couple of more. I won't get cheap and try to include Pete Rose.

Cecil Cooper. Please dont tell me Tex is better than Cecil Cooper was during his prime.

[Stickhorse]

The Red Sox have picked up free agents but not typically in midseason like the Brewers and Angels last year. Picking up free agents in midseason is not the answer to success.

No doubt the Red Sox don't have the homegrown talent that TB and Philly or even LA. They do have a solid nucleus of homegrown talent right now. Pedroia, Ellsbury, Youkilis and Veritek on offense along the arms of Lester & Papelbon.

When the Yankees were at their peak they had Leyritz, Jeter, Rivera, Williams and Pettitte.

Still believe the good ones must be patient, don't go for the quick fix; start with a solid draft.