It sure is a fun discussion. My two cents on a couple of themes that have come up here. I think through statistics and the eye test, Mattingly was a much better player than George Foster.
I believe there was a comparison between Mattingly's shortened career and Koufax's shortened career. Let's face it, Koufax's 5-6 prime years were much greater and much more dominant than Mattingly's, and Koufax led his team to the World Series and championships.
And for whatever reason, the writers and others treat a player like Koufax, who
didn't linger, but retired at a young age after one of the greatest pitching seasons ever, differently than a player facing injuries who continues to play for a number of years. For some reason, they're perceived differently.
I'd actually put Tony Oliva in ahead of Mattingly when it comes to great players who didn't achieve their full potential because of injuries.
The bottom line is that injuries and overall declining ability affect lots of players and keep them from having the careers we expected of them during their peak years -- you'd have to build a new Hall of Fame to put them all in.
Greg
|