If you were starting a team today......

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

Yeah, and the Red Sox, Braves and Giants couldn't win with Williams, Aaron or Mays.

By your logic, Billy Martin was a better player than Ernie Banks.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Mark17

By your logic, Billy Martin was a better player than Ernie Banks.

No, that's your logic.
Again, ad nauseam, IF Williams, Aaron and Mays could've taken teams to World Series championships like Mantle did... They would have. It's simple.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

No, that's your logic.
Again, ad nauseam, IF Williams, Aaron and Mays could've taken teams to World Series championships like Mantle did... They would have. It's simple.

Again, Mantle did not single-handedly take his team to all those championships. In fact, most of the time he was not even named most valuable on his own team.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Again, Mantle did not single-handedly take his team to all those championships. In fact, most of the time he was not even named most valuable on his own team.

Yet, look at the World Series records he holds.... They say you're wrong.
And of course he was the most integral component to the Yankees success, whether you want to admit it or not.

[58pinson]

Mays. The best I've ever seen.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

Yet, look at the World Series records he holds.... They say you're wrong.
And of course he was the most integral component to the Yankees success, whether you want to admit it or not.

He was in more World Series so of course he has bigger numbers.

As far as him being the most integral part of his teams, your argument is not with me, it is with the sportswriters, who, yet again, 6 times out of 9, named one of Mickey's teammates, NOT Mickey, as being the most integral player responsible for the success of that season.

I don't accept the premise that only World Series stats measure a player's value. If that was the case, then Billy Martin (5 WS home runs) was far better than Ted Williams, which is silly. For that matter, Mantle hit only .257 in the World Series with a .374 slugging average, while Martin hit .333 with .371 slugging average.

Back to the original question, if I could have one of these guys, I would want many years of production. That means Aaron or Mays. A good argument can be made either way but I would choose Mays over Aaron because I want the defense and speed.

Player Hits Runs RBI Homers SB Avg.
Aaron 3771 2174 2297 755 240 .305
Mays 3283 2062 1903 660 338 .302
Mantle 2415 1676 1509 536 153 .298

[JollyElm]

This thread feels like it's devolving into a cry to recognize yet another new and ridiculous stat. Let's call it MAR.

MVPs Above Replacement, commonly abbreviated to MAR, is a non-standardized sabermetric baseball statistic developed to sum up "a player's total contributions to his team." A player's MAR value is claimed to be the number of additional MVP awards his teammates have received above the number of expected MVP awards his teammates would have won if that player were substituted with a replacement-level player: a player who may be added to the team for minimal cost and effort.

[Ricky]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

No, that's your logic.
Again, ad nauseam, IF Williams, Aaron and Mays could've taken teams to World Series championships like Mantle did... They would have. It's simple.

Williams, Aaron and Mays simply did not have the talent around them the way that Mantle did, either in the lineup or on the mound. They did for short periods of time but not for the extended period of time during their careers as Mantle did.

Same holds true for Trout. Can anyone argue that he's not the best player in baseball right now? But can he get his team to the postseason, even with the extra wild card spots? He can't, because he doesn't have the talent around him.