Who was better, who would you take, Mickey Mantle or Willie Mays?
 

2 of the best of all time, but I would have to go with the Mick...

More popular and great player Mantle...better stats Mays....based on stats alone it would be Mays.

I'm sure talent wise they were similar but Mays had the much better career.

Mays had the better career, I don't think that can be argued. But at his best, Mantle was better. Mick's three best years (1956,'57,and'61) were each better than Willie's best year. So it comes down to which matters more to you, peak performance or career achievement. As for me, I choose career value, so my vote goes to Mays.
I also think that Mick's 1956 Triple Crown year was the best season any centerfielder has ever had. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Mays played a lot more games than Mantle...but if Mantle had been healthy he would have most likely finished with similar stats than Mays.

Popularity wise Mantle by a 100 miles easy!!! Ask kids of today who Mantle is they mostly all know can't say the same for Mays.

Gary Cooper

To paraphrase Bill James" someone is not a great player because he could have been a great player." Mantle would have had better stats if he had been healthy. But he wasn't, and he didn't. And in the end that's all that matters.

Diehard Yankees fans will likely pick Mantle, but is this really a competition? Mays by a landslide.

What, no Duke? :)
 

I would take Willie Mays...in a New York minute. :D

No he WOULD have had better stats than Mays had he played longer AND wasn't hung over/injured most of the time. Mantle thought he wasn't gonna live past 40......and he drank like it.

Not to mention he played damn near his whole career on a broken body. Had Mays gone through what Mantle did physically and drank himself half to death like Mick, Mays wouldn't even be in the HOF right now or have come even close to his career stats. "Die hard" Yankee fan or not......Mantle was the MUCH more talented ball player than Mays. Faster, stronger, tougher and more naturally talented than Mays or anybody else at that time.

Mays
 

Willie Mays was my childhood baseball hero. I tried to play the game like him - imitating his basket catch style in the outfield (which made my Little League coach nervous) :D

I became a Giants fans because of him. I still remember when my father took me to Montreal in 1969 to see the Expos vs the Giants and Mays was playing that night. I was over the moon.

All this to say my choice is Mays.

You can have all of the talent in the world, but if you can't harness it and actually use it, it's pointless. Willie Mays wins this one. The question you pose isn't who had the most talent, but who was better. Mays was better than Mantle as his career numbers clearly show.

Same in hockey what if Mario Lemieux was healthy would he be the all time points leader....that DOES not count he simply is not....same with Mantle...love the guy but Mays was better. Mantle should have known better and staid healthy but he CHOSE not to and the price to be paid now in history is that Mays was and still is a better player. Mays was simply a smarter man and staid healthy by CHOICE!!!

I agree. Mays, no contest.

Although I was a Yankee fan and Mantle my hero, the answer has to be Willie Mays. He was the best ballplayer I've ever seen.

Mantle was great, but I have to go with Mays on this one. Mays was a pure five-tool, all around player. Mantle may have had the speed, but he didn't have the fielding proficiency that Mays had. Mays had the knack of being in the right place at the right time. Of course, I never saw either of them play, so I am largely talking out of my ass. :D

Mays by far.

It's the Pre War vintage section, but...
 

With all the talk about Joe D and Williams, Mantle and Mays...

62 World Series tells all.

A career isn't defined by one series. ;)

Should be known, Mays doubled with 2 outs in the 9th of game 7. It should've scored Alou with the tying run but Maris made a great play cutting it off and getting it back to the infield. Mays would've been the winning run had McCovey's liner made through the infield.

That's hilarious. You mean the series where Mays hit .250 with no HR and 1 RBI? Wow, epic.

True Mantle stunk in that series. But whose team won? Mays played in 4 World Series and hit zero home runs with 6 RBI, batting under .240. Mantle played in 3 World Series with no home runs; of course he also played in 9 others with 18 Home Runs and 40 RBI . Seven World's Championships to 1, and 12 World Series to 4. We're supposed to focus on what actually happened and not what could have, right? Scoreboard.

A previous poster correctly noted that Mantle's peak years--12 seasons-were notably better than Mays. That sample size is large enough for me, and other than possibly Dimaggio's 1937 season, I do not believe any CF could match Mickey's 1956 campaign. I would like to hear from those who played against both, especially pitchers. I doubt it would be close. Mantle was pitched very carefully, and walked more than 100 times in 10 seasons, including his broken down final two. Mays walked 100 times or more exactly once in 22 years.

Mays hands down.

Mays, no question. Not close. Name a single aspect of the game that Mantle was better at.

The one area Mantle dominated in would be postseason hitting. But what would that comparison be with Mays on the Yankees and Mantle on the Giants? Would anyone say Mantle is a better hitter than Williams? Of course not. But Mantle crushes Williams based on postseason alone.

-Ryan

I think he was using the '62 series as argument for Mantle.

Ryan,

I argued this with you and Al two Cleveland Nationals ago (when Don Larsen got in a fight at the hotel bar) and you were just as wrong then as you are now. :) Hopefully Al has seen the light.

Mantle could hit the ball farther (BOTH WAYS) and could run faster. He had a stronger arm. Most importantly and by a wide margin, he was more CLUTCH.

Wow. I would have said Mantle, but I'm learning that you don't want to disagree with a Mays fan :eek:

Hitting homeruns that went over 500 feet:D

Todd,

I agree that Mantle was more clutch. By a wide margin. And I do believe clutch hitting is real. I'm not so sure he was faster than Mays. Maybe pre-injury. I'm also not sure he had a better arm. But you couldn't really be trying to say that Mantle was better than Mays defensively, could you?

Trivia: Who had the fewest 100-RBI seasons in their career out of the following players:

* Mickey Mantle
* Bob Meusel
* Dolph Camilli
* Vic Wertz
* Rudy York
* Del Ennis
* Steve Garvey
* Danny Tartabull
* Moises Alou
* Magglio Ordonez

-Ryan

Getting on base, the Mick has a much higher OBP.

Career Homeruns:

Willie mays: 660
Mickey mantle: 536

Its not how far, its how many.

:D

That is such a fallacious question. The Mick had 5 90-100 RBI seasons.

I'm guessing Mantle.

Another trivia question: who led the league in RBIs more times, Mays or Mantle?

I've had this conversation with the late Hall of Fame broadcaster Ernie Harwell many times. He saw Mantle play his entire career and he saw Mays when he got a chance. Based on what they did - not on what they might have done - Ernie long claimed Mays was the best ballplayer he ever saw. Good enough for me.

If I was a manager, Mays. Both were great, Willie could do just a little more.

If I was an owner, Mickey. He sold a lot of tickets and won more rings. You could argue he had better talent around him, but I'd have to look at that pretty close to validate it. Mantle had Maris. Mays had McCovey. Mantle had Ford. Mays had Marichal. Probably the Yanks mid-level players were a little better.

Couldn't tell you but Mays is ranked 10th all-time in RBIs with 1,903 while Mantle is ranked 51st with 1,509. ;)

Five seasons of 90 to 100 RBI is pretty good. Add that to his 4 100-RBI seasons, and that makes 9 years of 90+. Not bad.

Mays had 14 seasons of 96+.

Mantle led the league in RBI one time more than Mays. How many times did Mantle lead the league in stolen bases? Mays did 4 times. The same amount of times he led the league in home runs.

-Ryan

Ill just keep it simple and say Mays. Probably the wrong forum to make an arguement on how overrated RBIs are :)

I would pick Mickey Mantle
 

We all have our favorites.

We all have aspects in baseball that are more important to us than others.

We all are much affected by what we've seen , read, and heard from those we trusted and respected. That includes whether we have actually met the given athlete, which can have a profound affect upon us, if the encounter goes "I'll never wash my hand again or forget this day for the rest of my life" or "I made him into a monument in my heart and he just took a sledgehammer and shattered it to pieces. I don't like him anymore. I'll give away or sell any baseball cards I have of him."

There is no answer, per se. We could argue this, heatedly, until we are all blue in the face.

I watched Willie Mays on TV play my Cubs from 67-on. I liked him, respected him, and he was a great player. But in the clutch he fell apart like a Dollar General toy. A few years after he came to Frisco, he had yet to produce any of the New York numbers the fans thought they were going to see. The Frisco boo-birds let loose with tremendous booing. It got under Willie's skin. It got to the point where he asked and then demanded that owner Horace Stoneham move IN the outfield fence at the key areas where his long balls were hit. Mr. Stoneham complied. Can you imagine? The whining crybaby!

I believe the renovations were erected beginning with the 1961 season. Mr. Mays began to hit more home runs--it was very apparent the friendlier Candlestick Park right field porch was having a major effect upon the sensitive slugger. That year Willie hit 40 home runs; he would do so for several years after that. To be sure, Say Hey hit lottsa HRS at other ballparks, but I believe he began hitting more at home, and it was a confidence boost that helped him do better at the other parks.

Still, when the pressure was on during the '62 Series, Willie was a pricked balloon. Mick had an awful Series too, agreed. However, Mr. Mantle had so many other Series appearances where he came through this clutch time remarkably well--great Series performances! Even though they lost '60 and '64, Mickey helped make them so memorable, thrilling, and close by his spectacular play.

This will not count for some. I began collecting in 1961. I lived in a neutral area, the suburbs of Chicago. All the kids would be excited to get a Willie Mays baseball card, but they absolutely HAD to get Mickey Mantle's card in any given year. No one card, certainly not Willie Mays, was worth even up to Mickey Mantle in the hearts of all the kids I was around, and that was a lot of kids.

Most of you talk about Mantle as if he had lousy career hampered by booze, broads, and not taking care of himself. As teammate Hank Bauer retorted in frustration to someone expressing the same thing, look what he did anyway. The numbers are there. The many World Series rings were well-earned and his to wear.

Honestly, I believe if the Giants had remained in New York Willie would have produced much more impressive numbers. More so if Leo Durocher had remained his manager. The vast, and yet cozy Polo Grounds was tailor-made for Willie's extremely wide range. He could make impossible fielding plays, and make them look so exciting to watch. Sure, he did that at Frisco, but his hitting just didn't measure up or look as awe-inspiring as at Polo, where with his speed and its far reaches he turned many hits into doubles and triples. That kind of stuff made Mays a legend.

Guess I never came out and answered the question. I want Mickey Mantle!!!!

I've been watching baseball on TV since 1952, when I was 10 years old. The best all around player I've ever seen is Willie Mays.

Duke Snider :D

Pretty much every aspect (pre-injuries). His reports as a prospect remind of Bo Jackson. It's unreal, I glow when I read scouting reports on Mantle, I truly wish I could have seen them play.

Could run faster? Maybe before he blew his knee out early in his career. 153 to 338 in favor of Mays for stolen bases too doesn't help your cause.

Caught stealing 38 to 103 in favor of Mantle.

As was said in different words before, speculating what a player would have done if he was healthy or otherwise miss time is just that-- speculation. Mays' stats were real.

It's like when people say Babe Ruth would have been the best pitcher ever if he hadn't been moved to the outfield. Pure speculation, if not wishful thinking.

The Mantle/Mays question is a good one though in vaguery. Take which player when and for how long? For a career, obviously Mays. For a shorter period, I can see the arguement Mantle.

For the record, I'd pick Mays. He was the best all around (5 tool) player, which is something I'd want on my team.

Then after I picked Mays, I then you use my second draft pick to pick Mantle. See? It all works out.

.

According to the Strat-o-matic Hall of Fame set, Mays is better. I picked him over Mantle to be on my Strat team.

I have never seen either one play,but on what I have read Mays would be my pick.
I do alot of TTM's,and always ask questions.I wrote to J.W.Porter not to long ago.
He played from '52-'59 and asked him who the best all around player he ever saw was.

If your looking at stats, it's Willie Mays. With the help of Joe DiMaggio in 1951, started a series of injuries for Mantle that carried him through his entire career. There's no telling what Mantle could have done if healthy.