But you did compare Don fucking Mattingly to Mike Trout.
First 9 years. Jeez. The numbers are not that far apart. For a 19th rounder to do that. What don't you people get?
You posted the numbers. The numbers do not reflect what you're saying. Donnie Baseball was a very good player. Mike Trout is an all-timer. There is no comparison.
And, by the way: fuck the Maryland state flag. It's everywhere in that state, now on the Orioles jersey? Good god. There's no escaping that thing down there.
It's so hideous. I don't understand the obvious pride in that flag. And you're right, it's everfuckingwhere in MD.
But you did compare Don fucking Mattingly to Mike Trout.
First 9 years. Jeez. The numbers are not that far apart. For a 19th rounder to do that. What don't you people get?
You posted the numbers. The numbers do not reflect what you're saying. Donnie Baseball was a very good player. Mike Trout is an all-timer. There is no comparison.
And, by the way: fuck the Maryland state flag. It's everywhere in that state, now on the Orioles jersey? Good god. There's no escaping that thing down there.
agree on the Maryland flag. it's crazy how that damn flag appears everywhere down there.
and Don Mattingley should be in the Hall of Fame...but he is no where near Mike Trout. Trout might be the best player in my lifetime.
But you did compare Don fucking Mattingly to Mike Trout.
First 9 years. Jeez. The numbers are not that far apart. For a 19th rounder to do that. What don't you people get?
You posted the numbers. The numbers do not reflect what you're saying. Donnie Baseball was a very good player. Mike Trout is an all-timer. There is no comparison.
And, by the way: fuck the Maryland state flag. It's everywhere in that state, now on the Orioles jersey? Good god. There's no escaping that thing down there.
agree on the Maryland flag. it's crazy how that damn flag appears everywhere down there.
and Don Mattingley should be in the Hall of Fame...but he is no where near Mike Trout. Trout might be the best player in my lifetime.
Does Don Mattingly have numbers as good as some HoFers? Probably. Does he deserve to be in the Hall because other unworthy players were elected? No.
He’d be the Maryland flag of the HoF if he ever got the votes.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
Mattingly was never the best player in baseball. Not even the best at his position in his division or city.
Pujols had 400HR, a .330BA and 3 MVPs by year 9. His numbers since aren’t that far below Mattinglys best years.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
Mattingly was never the best player in baseball. Not even the best at his position in his division or city.
Pujols had 400HR, a .330BA and 3 MVPs by year 9. His numbers since aren’t that far below Mattinglys best years.
You are kidding me right?
Mattingly is the 2nd best Yankees 1st baseman of all-time only behind Gherig.
I don't think he should be in the HOF but Mattingly was the best player in baseball for a period of time. 84-87.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Those are the kinds of names to compare Trout's first 7 or 8 years too
That's different. Those are guys who played 20+ years. And retired in their late 30s early 40s Mattingly retired at 34. Played 14 seasons (12 full seasons) Which proves my point that you're including Mattingly's final years. I was saying for the first 9 years or similar amount of games. The numbers were not that far from each other. And that 9th year I included he missed 50 games. So I could've chosen the 92 or 93 season to make it look better. Using the race analogy. If both runners are neck and neck. Maybe one guy is ahead a half second. And the other guy gets hurt half way. That doesn't mean the guy who couldn't finish the race wasn't up to that point a top runner.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Those are the kinds of names to compare Trout's first 7 or 8 years too
That's different. Those are guys who played 20+ years. And retired in their late 30s early 40s Mattingly retired at 34. Played 14 seasons (12 full seasons) Which proves my point that you're including Mattingly's final years. I was saying for the first 9 years or similar amount of games. The numbers were not that far from each other. And that 9th year I included he missed 50 games. So I could've chosen the 92 or 93 season to make it look better. Using the race analogy. If both runners are neck and neck. Maybe one guy is ahead a half second. And the other guy gets hurt half way. That doesn't mean the guy who couldn't finish the race wasn't up to that point a top runner.
THE ARTICLE IS COMPARING THEIR FIRST 1000 GAMES......just like the stats you provided comparing Trout and Mattingly's first however many years in the league.
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Those are the kinds of names to compare Trout's first 7 or 8 years too
That's different. Those are guys who played 20+ years. And retired in their late 30s early 40s Mattingly retired at 34. Played 14 seasons (12 full seasons) Which proves my point that you're including Mattingly's final years. I was saying for the first 9 years or similar amount of games. The numbers were not that far from each other. And that 9th year I included he missed 50 games. So I could've chosen the 92 or 93 season to make it look better. Using the race analogy. If both runners are neck and neck. Maybe one guy is ahead a half second. And the other guy gets hurt half way. That doesn't mean the guy who couldn't finish the race wasn't up to that point a top runner.
THE ARTICLE IS COMPARING THEIR FIRST 1000 GAMES......just like the stats you provided comparing Trout and Mattingly's first however many years in the league.
j
I know. But they're still comparing to guys who played a long time. And were able to have full career. They're not going to put Mattingly on that list because the final 6 were not as great. They were still good considering. And if he played another 5 or 6 years. His numbers would have filled out nicely.
If ESPN did the same article in 89. They would be doing the same for Mattingly. Keep in mind Mattingly wasn't thought of as a homerun hitter. They're not going to say "Well in 5 years he won't be the same player because of a bad back. So we can't compare him to guys who played over 20 years."
The same thing could happen to Trout next week and he might not be the same player. (Although he's buitl differently so he might overcome it a little more). It doesn't mean what he did before wasn't great or comparable to previous greats.
Yeah just saw this as well, DAMN! Thoughts with his family and the Angels.
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
4/28/16- Philly, PA
4/29/16- Philly, PA
5/1/16- NYC
5/2/16- NYC
9/2/18- Boston, MA
9/4/18- Boston, MA
9/14/22- Camden, NJ
9/7/24- Philly, PA
9/9/24- Philly, PA
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly. PA
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly, PA
RNDM- 3/9/16- Philly, PA
in case you missed it, yesterday was bobby bonilla day.
$1.2 million every july 1 from 2011 to 2035. the mets decided on this, rather than give him a $5.9M buyout in 2000, because they were making so much money with bernie madoff.
wait.....what?
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Mattingly at that time was the best player in baseball and his numbers were staggering.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
That was my point. People here are including the final 5 years of Mattingly's with what Trout will most likely accomplish in the next 5-10 years.
Comments
and Don Mattingley should be in the Hall of Fame...but he is no where near Mike Trout. Trout might be the best player in my lifetime.
He’d be the Maryland flag of the HoF if he ever got the votes.
It's not a far fetch to want to put the two stats side by side.
Take a look at Pujols and Trout stats side by side. Everyone seems to forget just how amazing Pujols was as do they forget about how great Mattingly was for the first 9 years of his carer.
Wish me luck!
Pujols had 400HR, a .330BA and 3 MVPs by year 9. His numbers since aren’t that far below Mattinglys best years.
Mattingly is the 2nd best Yankees 1st baseman of all-time only behind Gherig.
I don't think he should be in the HOF but Mattingly was the best player in baseball for a period of time. 84-87.
MAYS
AARON
GRIFFEY JR
BONDS
AROD
HORNSBY
MUSIAL
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23800260/how-mike-trout-stacks-mlb-greats-first-1000-games
Those are the kinds of names to compare Trout's first 7 or 8 years too
Using the race analogy. If both runners are neck and neck. Maybe one guy is ahead a half second. And the other guy gets hurt half way. That doesn't mean the guy who couldn't finish the race wasn't up to that point a top runner.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
The same thing could happen to Trout next week and he might not be the same player. (Although he's buitl differently so he might overcome it a little more). It doesn't mean what he did before wasn't great or comparable to previous greats.
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
4/28/16- Philly, PA
4/29/16- Philly, PA
5/1/16- NYC
5/2/16- NYC
9/2/18- Boston, MA
9/4/18- Boston, MA
9/14/22- Camden, NJ
9/7/24- Philly, PA
9/9/24- Philly, PA
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly, PA
RNDM- 3/9/16- Philly, PA
They have had a few players go very early.
Sad.
$1.2 million every july 1 from 2011 to 2035. the mets decided on this, rather than give him a $5.9M buyout in 2000, because they were making so much money with bernie madoff.
wait.....what?
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Can you name another player other than Mattingly, that had a great burst his first few years then fizzled out and isn't in the hall?
Soriano, Helton, Larry Walker? Anybody else?
I would compare his numbers to another HOF'er in Kirby Puckett. I still don't understand how he got in but he is in.
There numbers are really, really close.