CDIH

then mattingly should be in. mattingly's numbers are better. the only difference is that puckett played in more post season games.

Mattingly's career totals are eerily similar to those of Puckett, who was a first-ballot inductee in 2001 despite having his career cut short after the 1995 season due to irreversible retina damage in his right eye.

Quote:
Mattingly retired with 2,153 hits to Puckett's 2,304, 442 doubles to Puckett's 414, 222 homers to Puckett's 207 and 1,099 RBIs to Puckett's 1,085.

Mattingly posted three more 100-RBI seasons than Puckett, two more 30-homer seasons, won one more MVP award and the same number of batting titles.

Is this the path the board is going to go in, you rambling and talking to yourself in threads. you know there is an edit button, jackass

Mattingly's bad back was a far worse affliction than Puckett's retina problems, also.

Black Lazerus Wrote:Is this the path the board is going to go in, you rambling and talking to yourself in threads. you know there is an edit button, jackass

you are just mad that i proved how clueless you can be.

can you back this up with stats from random seasons?

THREE random seasons, and compared to babe ruth, barry bonds, and ted willams, clearly showing mattingly as better for those three random years

feel free to use high school numbers and years after retirement

The thing that hurts Donnie baseball is he is a JINX. His last season with the Yanks they lost to Seattle in 95'. His first year they lost to K.C. in 82'. Between those years they didn't make they playoffs at all. The year after he leaves they win the world series. Then the Yanks win 4 out of 5. When he makes a return to the Bronx as a batting coach they have sucked royally making it to the series and losing to the Diamondbacks. Then the worst of all happened in 04' when the dreaded Red Sox won the World Series.

The Yanks are cursed by Donnie Baseball.

Puckett won a World Series. Puckett never had the support Mattingly had.

the HOf goes by stats. donnie's compare. vote him in!

you can't use a player being a jinx as reason why he shouldn't be in the HOF. one player does not do all the work to get a team to the world series.

the reason the yanks got to the world series in 96 and finally won was because they had gene michaels.

sutter
blylevyn
gossage
rice
mattingly
dawson

all hof'ers.

Furthermore, if Ozzie Smith is in, then Omar Vizquel and Edgar Martinez should get in.

Arpikarhu Wrote:sutter
blylevyn
gossage
rice
mattingly
dawson

all hof'ers.

Sutter - Absolutely.

Blylevyn - YES! It is a crime that he's not in already.

Gossage - Yes.

Rice - No.

Mattingly - No.

Dawson - No.

And this year's class is pathetic...

mattingly has better numbers than puckett.

And Puckett didn't deserve to be a first ballot HOF'er. I hate this argument that if 'X' is in than 'Y' should be in because 'Y' is just as good as 'X'. And I'll admit that I've used it in the past, sometimes it works, but this is a time it doesn't.

Don Mattingly was a good player, nobody's going to argue that. But he doesn't belong in the HOF. He was an above average First Baseman, an All-Star for sure, but Keith Hernandez will go in before Donnie Baseball...wait, I did it again...damn.

i still have a soft spot in my heart for that crackhead doc.

Kirby Puckett is not in the hall of fame "in spite of" his career being shortened, he's in it BECAUSE of it.

And what the fuck does Edgar Martinez have to do with Omar Vizquel and Ozzie Smith?

Ozzie Smith's 13 gold gloves merit him being in the Hall of Fame in spite of his atrocious offensive numbers. Thus setting the precedent that being dominant on one side of the field is enough to warrant a HOF nod.
Therefore, Edgar Martinez should not be penalized for his nonexistant defensive presence, and instead rewarded for his dominant offensive presence.

You can't have it both ways.

Bloody Anus Wrote:Ozzie Smith's 13 gold gloves merit him being in the Hall of Fame in spite of his atrocious offensive numbers. Thus setting the precedent that being dominant on one side of the field is enough to warrant a HOF nod.
Therefore, Edgar Martinez should not be penalized for his nonexistant defensive presence, and instead rewarded for his dominant offensive presence.

You can't have it both ways.

Bloody Anus, I love you, but you're wrong.

I'm a Mets fan, I hated the Cardinals, the pond scum shit in '86 even hurt me as a new baseball fan, but Ozzie Smith was not atrocious offensively.

He was good. He had a regular OBP above .350 (not great for a RF, but for a SS, find one better) and constantly stole more bases than anyone else at his position.

He was an offensive asset, and a defensive GOD.


Anyone described as a God probably belongs in the HOF, but to be that good on the other side...atrocious? You must be having a bad day at the tables or something.