Which Player Do You Want?

[G1911]

It should be noted that you get player B for 25%+ more games, and played in a period where the .977 OPS is significantly better in context to time and place.

I pick B, because of the context.

[Schwertfeger1007]

Originally Posted by G1911

It should be noted that you get player B for 25%+ more games, and played in a period where the .977 OPS is significantly better in context to time and place.

I pick B, because of the context.

Very unamerican of you to downgrade "Player A" due to him missing a few seasons so he could serve his country. LOL

I'm voting for the war hero who married the most iconic actress/celebrity of his generation.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Schwertfeger1007

Very unamerican of you to downgrade "Player A" due to him missing a few seasons so he could serve his country. LOL

I'm voting for the war hero who married the most iconic actress/celebrity of his generation.

Yes. I hate America because a question about which is statistically better spurred me to use statistics, and not war service or comparing which actresses they got with. What an excellent and insightful point.

[Jason19th]

This exercise shows the importance of eras. If player B played in the national league in the 1960’s he would have been a top level star. If player A was an outfielder in the 1930’s he would have been one bad week away from riding the pine as a forth outfielder.

[Schwertfeger1007]

Originally Posted by G1911

Yes. I hate America because a question about which is statistically better spurred me to use statistics, and not war service or comparing which actresses they got with. What an excellent and insightful point.

Seems you didn't catch the sarcasm. Thought the "LOL" would do the trick...oh well can't win them all.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Schwertfeger1007

Very unamerican of you to downgrade "Player A" due to him missing a few seasons so he could serve his country. LOL

I'm voting for the war hero who married the most iconic actress/celebrity of his generation.

DiMaggio wasn't actually in combat, was he? Didn't he essentially play baseball to entertain? The other thing is, if you take away Mantle's long decline, his per 162s look a lot better.

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

DiMaggio wasn't actually in combat, was he? Didn't he essentially play baseball to entertain? The other thing is, if you take away Mantle's long decline, his per 162s look a lot better.

As if entertainment wasn't heroism of the highest order....

[oldjudge]

Obviously, by this time everyone knows that Player A is Joe DiMaggio and player B is Mickey Mantle. After Mantle retired in 1969 baseball selected its’ all time team. the outfield: Ruth, Cobb and DiMaggio. In 1994, Ted Williams was asked to rank the greatest hitters ever. On his list DiMaggio was number 5, Mantle was number 12. I just think that after both have been long retired Mantle continues to get better relative to DiMaggio. This is just hitting. As a fielder DiMaggio was clearly better. Mantle was routinely replaced in late innings for defensive purposes. DiMaggio was the premier center fielder of his day.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Obviously, by this time everyone knows that Player A is Joe DiMaggio and player B is Mickey Mantle. After Mantle retired in 1969 baseball selected its’ all time team. the outfield: Ruth, Cobb and DiMaggio. In 1994, Ted Williams was asked to rank the greatest hitters ever. On his list DiMaggio was number 5, Mantle was number 12. I just think that after both have been long retired Mantle continues to get better relative to DiMaggio. This is just hitting. As a fielder DiMaggio was clearly better. Mantle was routinely replaced in late innings for defensive purposes. DiMaggio was the premier center fielder of his day.

Did Williams rate himself? If so, where did he rank himself?

It's hard to rank players from different eras, but there was that one year overlap for both of them. From a purely entertainment value I'd pick the Mick because he gave some great interviews! Both were great.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Fred

Did Williams rate himself? If so, where did he rank himself?

It's hard to rank players from different eras, but there was that one year overlap for both of them. From a purely entertainment value I'd pick the Mick because he gave some great interviews! Both were great.

He did not

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Obviously, by this time everyone knows that Player A is Joe DiMaggio and player B is Mickey Mantle. After Mantle retired in 1969 baseball selected its’ all time team. the outfield: Ruth, Cobb and DiMaggio. In 1994, Ted Williams was asked to rank the greatest hitters ever. On his list DiMaggio was number 5, Mantle was number 12. I just think that after both have been long retired Mantle continues to get better relative to DiMaggio. This is just hitting. As a fielder DiMaggio was clearly better. Mantle was routinely replaced in late innings for defensive purposes. DiMaggio was the premier center fielder of his day.

I agree with your analysis, this was a thoughtful exercise.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[jsfriedm]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Obviously, by this time everyone knows that Player A is Joe DiMaggio and player B is Mickey Mantle. After Mantle retired in 1969 baseball selected its’ all time team. the outfield: Ruth, Cobb and DiMaggio. In 1994, Ted Williams was asked to rank the greatest hitters ever. On his list DiMaggio was number 5, Mantle was number 12. I just think that after both have been long retired Mantle continues to get better relative to DiMaggio. This is just hitting. As a fielder DiMaggio was clearly better. Mantle was routinely replaced in late innings for defensive purposes. DiMaggio was the premier center fielder of his day.

In that same ranking, Pie Traynor was selected as the greatest third baseman of all time, and Mickey Cochrane was the greatest catcher. DiMaggio, meanwhile, refused to go to events for the rest of his life unless he was introduced as "the greatest living ballplayer," which was probably never true for a single day of his life.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Obviously, by this time everyone knows that Player A is Joe DiMaggio and player B is Mickey Mantle. After Mantle retired in 1969 baseball selected its’ all time team. the outfield: Ruth, Cobb and DiMaggio. In 1994, Ted Williams was asked to rank the greatest hitters ever. On his list DiMaggio was number 5, Mantle was number 12. I just think that after both have been long retired Mantle continues to get better relative to DiMaggio. This is just hitting. As a fielder DiMaggio was clearly better. Mantle was routinely replaced in late innings for defensive purposes. DiMaggio was the premier center fielder of his day.

As far as Ted Williams' ranking of the 20 greatest hitters go, here is the list:
1) Babe Ruth 2) Lou Gehrig 3) Jimmie Foxx 4) Rogers Hornsby 5) Joe DiMaggio 6) Ty Cobb 7) Stan Musial 8) Joe Jackson 9) Hank Aaron 10) Willie Mays 11) Hank Greenberg 12) Mickey Mantle 13) Tris Speaker 14) Al Simmons 15) Johnny Mize 16) Mel Ott 17) Harry Heilmann 18) Frank Robinson 19) Mike Schmidt 20) Ralph Kiner

So he's got DiMaggio ahead of Cobb, and Al Simmons 4 places ahead of Frank Robinson.

"In 1994, Ted Williams opened his Hitters Hall of Fame in Hernando, Florida. He celebrated the event by inviting hundreds of former ballplayers and one current player — Tony Gwynn.

Williams enshrined the top twenty all-time hitters using his own "secret formula" which he stated was a combination of on base percentage and slugging average."

His "secret formula" is just OPS. OPS+ would come later.

Mantle and DiMaggio have the same OPS for their careers (.944) thanks to Mantle's drop off in his final four seasons. Mantle led the League in OPS 6x, DiMaggio led the League in OPS zero times.

Mantle's career OPS+ was 172 despite the drop off in his last four seasons to DiMaggio's 155.