Mantle corking bats? Article on Yahoo Sports

[CMIZ5290]

I just read this and I can't believe I have never heard of this. Has anyone else heard about this, and more importantly, does anyone believe it?

[ctownboy]

I don't know if they knew it back then but they have found in the last 10 or 15 years that corking a bat does NOT help with added distance. In fact, it REDUCES the distance a baseball flies. So, the ONLY way I can think a cork bat would help is if there are runners on base, the outfield is playing deep and a hitter connects and the ball goes further than the infield but in front of the outfielder.

David

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by ctownboy

I don't know if they knew it back then but they have found in the last 10 or 15 years that corking a bat does NOT help with added distance. In fact, it REDUCES the distance a baseball flies. So, the ONLY way I can think a cork bat would help is if there are runners on base, the outfield is playing deep and a hitter connects and the ball goes further than the infield but in front of the outfielder.

David

100%, corking bats does no help one bit, I know from experience

And I believe Sports Science did testing on it too

[tiger8mush]

i thought the idea on corking bats wasn't that it'd make the ball go a longer distance, but that it'd make the bat lighter while not losing distance. So you'd be able to get the bat around quicker, allowing the hitter extra time to "read" the pitch?

[Donscards]

Norm Cash stated before he died---he used a corked bat the entire 1961 season---needless to say, he led the league in hitting .361---so I would say it certainly does help the batter. I never heard the Mantle did it. Don

[timber63401]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

i thought the idea on corking bats wasn't that it'd make the ball go a longer distance, but that it'd make the bat lighter while not losing distance. So you'd be able to get the bat around quicker, allowing the hitter extra time to "read" the pitch?

Thats the biggest benefit, not any extra distance.

[aabram23]

Quicker bat speed = further distance.

[Wite3]

Quicker bat speed does necessarily not equal more distance...physics has proved this...

F=ma

Force equals mass times acceleration. The force the batter is contacting the ball with does not necessarily go up. If the bat is reduced by 2 ounces, and the acceleration is increased by 2 mphs...really no difference.

Of course the above is a very simplified way of looking at it...you would also have to talk about torque on the bat head, the kind of wood, corking material, and glue used and their density and elasticity.

Hitter might gain a tiny bit of distance if they connect just right...

Joshua

[the 'stache]

Anybody who has ever seen Mickey Mantle should laugh off the suggestion that he used a corked bat. The man was built like a Greek God, and didn't need any kind of help hitting a ball a country mile. He could roll out of bed in the morning on two hours of sleep, and hit a pitch 500 feet without even trying.

Ted Williams used a lighter bat than most power hitters in his day, as he was able to generate more bat speed with it. The man analyzed every aspect of hitting, and if he felt he was able to generate more power with a lighter bat, I'm inclined to believe him.

Yahoo Sports is trying to keep up with ESPN for the rights to be called the TMZ of sports journalism. I find their "reporting" to be less and less credible as time goes bye.

[itjclarke]

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/batw8.html

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/batw8.html

a couple of links found on the same site:

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/bat-moi.html

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/corkedbat.html

[aabram23]

Originally Posted by Wite3

Quicker bat speed does necessarily not equal more distance...physics has proved this...

F=ma

Force equals mass times acceleration. The force the batter is contacting the ball with does not necessarily go up. If the bat is reduced by 2 ounces, and the acceleration is increased by 2 mphs...really no difference.

Of course the above is a very simplified way of looking at it...you would also have to talk about torque on the bat head, the kind of wood, corking material, and glue used and their density and elasticity.

Hitter might gain a tiny bit of distance if they connect just right...

Joshua

Here's what I can tell you. You're obviously much smarter than I am but this doesn't come from any book or science show. It comes from actual experience on a baseball field.

If you can lighten a bat 2 oz. your gain of bat speed will be much much greater than 2 mph.

Also with a lighter bat you have more control so you can hit it "just right" more often.

[felada]

Your units are wrong. And mph is velocity not acceleration.

Originally Posted by Wite3

Quicker bat speed does necessarily not equal more distance...physics has proved this...

F=ma

Force equals mass times acceleration. The force the batter is contacting the ball with does not necessarily go up. If the bat is reduced by 2 ounces, and the acceleration is increased by 2 mphs...really no difference.

Of course the above is a very simplified way of looking at it...you would also have to talk about torque on the bat head, the kind of wood, corking material, and glue used and their density and elasticity.

Hitter might gain a tiny bit of distance if they connect just right...

Joshua

[Wite3]

okay...so I posted late at night and forgot about my units...it has been 25 years since i was in physics in college. Still think that a corked bat might cause negligible results though. I do agree that more control of the bat would create better contact but again...hard to measure.

As to Williams...he used a 33 ounce bat...about 2 ounces less than average of the time. Many people close to Williams and Williams himself often spoke about the swing and the eye as the key to their power. Williams generated torque and his eye was amazing. Watch Ruth, Williams, Ott, Gehrig, Mize, Mantle, and other hr hitters from that era. They often swung using whole body rotation generating bat speed, and torque.

Now watch Bonds, AROD, Ortiz, McGwire, Sosa, Fielder, Howard...they generate power mostly with upper body strength and even swing with just their hands. I am always amazed watching them hit homeruns at times. Griffey Jr was an exception in my mind and his power was generated with his smooth full body swing.

Also, lengths of bats matter as well...the lever affect does happen. It is easier to move a baseball with a longer bat than a shorter one. Anyone who hit a ball on the handle as opposed to the barrell can tell you this.

Type of wood is also important. How much the wood will indent and spring back before it reaches a breaking point is also a factor.

This is not to even talk about the ball and the elasticity of the ball, hitting it on the laces vs. the sweet spot, frictional, rotational mechanics of the ball, etc.

Physics has shown that swinging a heavier bat slightly faster is better than swinging a lighter bat much faster. There are some great articles on this...one found here.

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/batw8.html

Oh, btw, I did play baseball for ten years all the way through high school. I did have some experience with this. And just for honesty's sake... I used a 33 inch bat that weighed 33 ounces. I was not a power hitter at all...in fact, I barely hit period. I was used mostly as a fourth outfielder who could bunt, make contact with the ball, and walk.

Joshua

[steve B]

Originally Posted by felada

Your units are wrong. And mph is velocity not acceleration.

And the formula that matters is K=1/2MVsquared(No superscript in this text editor) So long way Kinetic energy=half mass times velocity squared.

After that the elasticity of the ball and bat, and the angle of the impact come into play. Maybe the spring rate of the bat as it bends and springs back on impact -Maybe. I'm not sure the spring back is fast enough to give any energy back to the ball.

And no, I don't recall the formulas for most of that. I haven't used them in around 25 years. (There's also some very complex stuff involving the ball passing through the air that I've never really gotten the math for. I understand the concepts, but not the calculus)

Basically, yes, faster bat=more distance than heavier bat.
Unless you have slow hands like me, then the heavier bat is better.

Steve B

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Wite3

Now watch Bonds, AROD, Ortiz, McGwire, Sosa, Fielder, Howard...they generate power mostly with upper body strength and even swing with just their hands. I am always amazed watching them hit homeruns at times. Griffey Jr was an exception in my mind and his power was generated with his smooth full body

Bonds had incredible hip rotation.. It may not have been as smooth and aesthetic to the eye Griffey, Will Clark, or even a Michael Tucker, but it was incredible. I do agree though, a lot of the big muscle guys just didn't/don't look like the guys you're talking about (and don't forget Joe D, his swing was amazing).. And many of their HR's, especially to the opposite field, are more heavily upper body generated. Some in the modern era that come mind who created amazing rotational (torque) with their legs/hips, into their upper bodies- Shawn Green, Josh Reddick, Ryan Braun, Bryce Harper, Ichiro (watch a BP), etc.

To add: per links I and Tiger8Mush posted above, you should get all the academic explanation necessary. The one that really jumped out at me is the comment that many many hits, being glancing blows, are hugely influenced by the angle at which the bat hits back, and whether this will create back spin and carry the ball further. This is definitely a factor and is not calculable using simply force/mass/acceleration equations.

[Exhibitman]

Corking a bat doesn't improve performance.

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/corkedbat.html

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats...atingPaper.pdf

[HRBAKER]

The steroids didn't help them at all.
That's precisely why they did them and then lied about it, bc they thought they weren't helping them at all.

[itjclarke]

I think placebo effect for anything.. Roids, corked bats, etc, will often have great unquantifiable influence too. I mean, does swinging a donut or two bats make you swing faster in your at bat?? No, but I know I was a mess if I couldn't get my two bat warm up swings in before stepping to the plate.

Btw- I think there are 4 separate references to the same website now. It's an informative read, and in my opinion explains the physics nicely.

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

i thought the idea on corking bats wasn't that it'd make the ball go a longer distance, but that it'd make the bat lighter while not losing distance. So you'd be able to get the bat around quicker, allowing the hitter extra time to "read" the pitch?

correct, also if you remember some guys used batteries in their bats, but leaving room inside. So when waiting for the pitch the battries were lower in the handle and when he swings they slide to the top. #1 bat is lighter as its hollowed out and #2 the batteries sliting to the top give the bat more weight when contact is made.

I wouldnt doubt Mick did that, why not. Most guys did everything they could to be better, He also did speed as most guys as well.

Players will always do what they can to get an advantage, in any sport, always have always will.

[auggiedoggy]

Originally Posted by Wite3

Quicker bat speed does necessarily not equal more distance...physics has proved this...

F=ma

Force equals mass times acceleration. The force the batter is contacting the ball with does not necessarily go up. If the bat is reduced by 2 ounces, and the acceleration is increased by 2 mphs...really no difference.

Of course the above is a very simplified way of looking at it...you would also have to talk about torque on the bat head, the kind of wood, corking material, and glue used and their density and elasticity.

Hitter might gain a tiny bit of distance if they connect just right...

Joshua

Quicker swing speed plus hitting on the sweet spot gives you added distance. Ask any pro golfer. Hell, ask any golfer, period!

[Tanman7baseball]

I see the science being thrown around on this thread but has anyone played baseball in the last 10 years? The mechanics of the swing has changed tremendously since the 60s. Most hitters then were rotational hitters. Today the swing has changed to using your hands more than anything. The lower body obviously generates power but "staying though the ball" with your hands is what the key is. Using your lower half to extend your hands is what the lower body is used for mainly. The result is "back spin". Rotational hitters generally hit the balls with "front spin", which results in less carry. Perfect example of a recent rotational hitter was Jim Edmonds. These type of hitters rotate off the ball when swinging which disallows them to stay through the zone longer when hitting. Now Pujols is one of the greatest hitters of all time. Does he have incredible bat speed? Absolutely not, it is very average actually. But he stays in the zone with his swing better than anyone else.

Back to the topic about corked bats. The density of the bat is what determines weight. When the bat companies make their bats they take out moisture to decrease the weight. If you have a 34in/35oz bat it is denser than a 34in/32oz bat. If you have a 34in/34oz bat and cork the center to make it 32oz then you have the advantage of using a denser but lighter bat. Therefore, ADVANTAGE.

Sammy Sosa broke one of his bats back in the day and it happened to be corked. He said he used it in batting practice and it must of got mixed into his game bats. The reason he used it though was because he said it made him feel good during BP because he would smash the ball better...

[deadballfreaK]

Do you suppose a person selling a Mantle bat might come up with something to spur interest in the auction? More likely to me that someone would take a legit Mantle bat and cork it to make money. I saw Mickey play. He could have taken a 3 foot 2 by 4 up there and hit it over the fence.

[HRBAKER]

Is it that hard to believe that Mantle corked his bat?

[timber63401]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Is it that hard to believe that Mantle corked his bat?

Not if you think about it logically but too many people think the old time players were pure and good and would just never do anything bad. I dont know if he ever did or not but to completely dismiss it is just romanticizing the man.

[deadballfreaK]

The guys been dead for 18 years and hasn't swung a bat in 45. I'm a Yankee hater, but Mick was a great player and I can't understand anyone at this late date trying to make him out as a cheater when he's not here to defend himself. Maybe Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, and Sibbi Sisti used corked bats. Maybe Warren Spahn threw a spitball. Maybe your grandma cheated on your grandpa. Seems like someone got a sensational story and someone will make money out of it selling the bat. If it works we'll see more of the same.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Tanman7baseball

I see the science being thrown around on this thread but has anyone played baseball in the last 10 years? The mechanics of the swing has changed tremendously since the 60s. Most hitters then were rotational hitters. Today the swing has changed to using your hands more than anything. The lower body obviously generates power but "staying though the ball" with your hands is what the key is. Using your lower half to extend your hands is what the lower body is used for mainly. The result is "back spin". Rotational hitters generally hit the balls with "front spin", which results in less carry. Perfect example of a recent rotational hitter was Jim Edmonds. These type of hitters rotate off the ball when swinging which disallows them to stay through the zone longer when hitting. Now Pujols is one of the greatest hitters of all time. Does he have incredible bat speed? Absolutely not, it is very average actually. But he stays in the zone with his swing better than ...

I see your point, but I think the mechanics/physics of the swing has not changed that much in the last 50 years... Maybe the last 75-80, when the ball was mush and bats were 15-20 oz heavier, but not in the last 50.

Hips have always been key to triggering and generating upper body torque both swinging and in a pitching motion. I think the focus on hands, "staying inside the ball", "keeping hands back" etc are things that are talked about and taught more now, but are aspects that have always been present in great players' swings. Conversely, many/most of the beefcake power hitters of today have great hip action in their swings... More are able to "muscle" the ball out via upper body stregth, but the base mechanics are similar.

Btw- played ball my whole life.. Graduated HS 17 yrs ago, but played adult semi pro until about 6-7 yrs ago.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by deadballfreaK

The guys been dead for 18 years and hasn't swung a bat in 45. I'm a Yankee hater, but Mick was a great player and I can't understand anyone at this late date trying to make him out as a cheater when he's not here to defend himself. Maybe Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, and Sibbi Sisti used corked bats. Maybe Warren Spahn threw a spitball. Maybe your grandma cheated on your grandpa. Seems like someone got a sensational story and someone will make money out of it selling the bat. If it works we'll see more of the same.

Or maybe Mantle corked a bat and someone discovered it. That would be news in my book. If someone is no longer alive then you can't report news about them? I've got no dog in the fight, and could care less if he did or didn't.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by deadballfreaK

The guys been dead for 18 years and hasn't swung a bat in 45. I'm a Yankee hater, but Mick was a great player and I can't understand anyone at this late date trying to make him out as a cheater when he's not here to defend himself. Maybe Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, and Sibbi Sisti used corked bats. Maybe Warren Spahn threw a spitball. Maybe your grandma cheated on your grandpa. Seems like someone got a sensational story and someone will make money out of it selling the bat. If it works we'll see more of the same.

Very well said!

I just can't believe that some people are trying to besmirch Mantle now in 2013. Maybe he did use a corked bat, maybe he didn't. Maybe it helped him, maybe it didn't.

Does anybody who has seen Mantle play, be it in person, on television, or for my generation, on tape, seriously think that Mick needed help hitting the ball out of the park? If a corked bat helped him (and that is a big if to me), how much distance did he really get from it? Or how much additional bat speed did he realize from a lighter bat weight? The guy nearly hit the ball out of Yankee stadium. Let me repeat that. He nearly hit the damned ball out of Yankee Stadium. He also hit the facade of the upper deck in right field. Before I hurt my back, I was a pretty damned good hitter. I could have hit the ball three times, and the combined distance of the three fly balls wouldn't have gotten the ball up there.

I don't care who you are. The average man, hell, the best baseball players today couldn't hit it that far. Load them up with every steroid on the planet. Work them out until their biceps are the size of Minnie Minoso. Give them a brand spanking new Louisville Slugger. They're not hitting the ball up there.

While I respect the Yankee legacy, I am not a Yankee fan per se. But anybody suggesting that Mantle somehow achieved his home run prowess from a corked bat is a few playing cards short of a deck. As far as pure power goes, Mantle is top 5 to ever play the game. If he'd been healthy during his career, and didn't play with the thought of "hey, you'll be dead by 45" floating around in the back of his head, Bonds, Aaron, Mays et all would be looking at a pretty much unattainable career home run record.

I love Hank Aaron. He remains one of my favorite human beings. But he would be the first to tell you that for pure home run power, he couldn't have competed with Mantle. Hitting the ball out of the park is one thing. Hitting a moon shot that could come down in Brooklyn is an altogether different thing.

[HRBAKER]

So this should have gone unreported? This is not news?
The article I read didn't intimate that his "prowess" was a result of a corked bat but rather that he may have used one as his skills began to wane.

[the 'stache]

I don't care that it was reported. I find it laughable that two decades after Mantle died somebody is coming out and saying "he cheated". I know little about the auction house, but I have seen people call their scruples into question.

Who knows what has been done to that bat since it left his hands. Give me a Babe Ruth bat, and internet access, and I can shove a cork in his bat, too.

I just think it's absurd to insinuate that one of the greatest power hitters the game has ever seen somehow benefited from a corked bat. It's amusing to me.

[GoldenAge50s]

I grew up in the late'40's--early '50's & followed Mickey every step of the way! I IDOLIZED him as a young boy and all the way to his death in 1995. As passionate as I was about him, I don't believe I could have stated what you wrote any better, or even as well!

Thank You for your post---it expresses my feelings about what Mickey Mantle meant to me in a beautiful way!

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Very well said!

I just can't believe that some people are trying to besmirch Mantle now in 2013. Maybe he did use a corked bat, maybe he didn't. Maybe it helped him, maybe it didn't.

Does anybody who has seen Mantle play, be it in person, on television, or for my generation, on tape, seriously think that Mick needed help hitting the ball out of the park? If a corked bat helped him (and that is a big if to me), how much distance did he really get from it? Or how much additional bat speed did he realize from a lighter bat weight? The guy nearly hit the ball out of Yankee stadium. Let me repeat that. He nearly hit the damned ball out of Yankee Stadium. He also hit the facade of the upper deck in right field. Before I hurt my back, I was a pretty damned good hitter. I could have hit the ball three times, and the combined distance of the three fly balls wouldn't have gotten the ball up there.

I don't care who you are. The average man, hell, the best baseball players today couldn't hit it that far. Load them up with every steroid on the planet. Work them out until their biceps are the size of Minnie Minoso. Give them a brand spanking new Louisville Slugger. They're not hitting the ball up there.

While I respect the Yankee legacy, I am not a Yankee fan per se. But anybody suggesting that Mantle somehow achieved his home run prowess from a corked bat is a few playing cards short of a deck. As far as pure power goes, Mantle is top 5 to ever play the game. If he'd been healthy during his career, and didn't play with the thought of "hey, you'll be dead by 45" floating around in the back of his head, Bonds, Aaron, Mays et all would be looking at a pretty much unattainable career home run record.

I love Hank Aaron. He remains one of my favorite human beings. But he would be the first to tell you that for pure home run power, he couldn't have competed with Mantle. Hitting the ball out of the park is one thing. Hitting a moon shot that could come down in Brooklyn is an altogether different thing.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by GoldenAge50s

I grew up in the late'40's--early '50's & followed Mickey every step of the way! I IDOLIZED him as a young boy and all the way to his death in 1995. As passionate as I was about him, I don't believe I could have stated what you wrote any better, or even as well!

Thank You for your post---it expresses my feelings about what Mickey Mantle meant to me in a beautiful way!

Tip of the cap to you, Fred.

[36GoudeyMan]

I grew up in NYC in the 1960s. If anyone dared whisper that Mantle was cheating (whether it was 1960 or 1969, with peak skills or diminished skills), there would have been a beat down worthy of West Side Story. Now, that doesn't mean he didn't "cheat." And it doesn't mean that it isn't newsworthy because he's dead and iconic. All it means is that someone out there is making an allegation. True, its an allegation about one of the most beloved and held-sacred players in the national pastime, but its an allegation. None of us were there when he supposedly did this; none of us worked with the seller of the bats in Minnesota, or the corker himself, apparently. Many of us were graced by the display of power Mantle could put on ("moon shots" often did not do those homers justice). But we also know he was an terrible alcoholic, used controlled substances like amphetamines, etc. Is there an un-flawed hero anywhere? The "science" over the lack of an advantage from corking a bat may be exact and reliable, but baseball is not "science." It is feel, it is psyche, it is intuition, it is hunch, it is timing, it is belief, it is streaks and and it is slumps. If Mantle wore a purple tutu under his pinstripes because it made him feel lucky, so what? Science can disprove the impact of purple tutus and we'd still be gawking over an auction of a Mantle game-used purple tutu, as if that was the talisman of Mantle's being. Did Mantle use a corked bat in 1956 when he won the Triple Crown? When he hit 54 home runs? When he hit his 500th? I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm saying that, of all the things players have done in the batters' box, on the pitchers' mound (Dock Ellis, anyone?) on the field, even off the field, it seems to me that the question of Mantle maybe, possibly corking his bat in 1962 (IIRC) is, at the very worst, a trifle. The auction is a curiosity, perhaps accurate in its description, perhaps, well, let's call it "fanciful." But to extrapolate from that listing that "Mantle cheated" is a leap I can't make, and won't make, and not because it was Mantle, although that helps me minimize what the auction suggests. Its because that form of "cheating" doesn't make enough of an impact, often enough, consistently enough, to a hitter of Mantle's caliber, consistency and power, in any event.

[CardTarget]

If you try to cheat but 45 years later physics proves that your "cheating" actually hurt you, are you still a cheater?

I'm only 35, so Mantle was retired 15+ years by the time I was truly watching baseball, but it seems to me that things like corking, spitballs, etc were a lot more accepted before 1980.

Was anyone actually penalized in a game before 1980 for "cheating"? We can all remember Phil Neikro, George Brett, Sosa, etc... but before cameras recorded every second of every game perhaps it was just part of the game.

[sycks22]

Mantle was already seeing triple by the time he was up to bat anyways with all the booze in his system. I don't think the corking would've helped him.

[brob28]

Originally Posted by deadballfreaK

Do you suppose a person selling a Mantle bat might come up with something to spur interest in the auction? More likely to me that someone would take a legit Mantle bat and cork it to make money.

Ken, I never saw Mantle play, but I thought the same thing when I read the article. Just because there is a Mantle bat with cork in it, does not mean it was there when he owned the bat.

[shelly]

During the 54 season Al Rosen's bat flew apart. He had nails in it. I think corking came later.
news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1964&dat=19540520&id..

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

But anybody suggesting that Mantle somehow achieved his home run prowess from a corked bat is a few playing cards short of a deck.

I don't think anyone's saying that at all, no one.

[Bocabirdman]

Of course, the difference is that Mantle emptied the bottles that the corks came out of, the night before using the bat.

[DeanH3]

[QUOTE=CardTarget;1127375]If you try to cheat but 45 years later physics proves that your "cheating" actually hurt you, are you still a cheater?

I would still say yes because the intention was to get an advantage whether it helped or not. I'm not accusing Mantle of cheating. That is something that can never be proven. But I do believe players of every generation did something to get an advantage over the competition. Some helped and other probably not as much as intended.

[HRBAKER]

Ill winds blow when people speculate that something may be amiss with their man-gods. Could you really not see an aging megastar not trying to get a late in career boost by corking? Certainly just as plausible as thinking someone would take a Mantle gamer and cork it themselves. All that really matters is if the corker thought it would help, most players weren't exactly schooled in physics!

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Very well said!

I just can't believe that some people are trying to besmirch Mantle now in 2013. Maybe he did use a corked bat, maybe he didn't. Maybe it helped him, maybe it didn't.

Does anybody who has seen Mantle play, be it in person, on television, or for my generation, on tape, seriously think that Mick needed help hitting the ball out of the park? If a corked bat helped him (and that is a big if to me), how much distance did he really get from it? Or how much additional bat speed did he realize from a lighter bat weight? The guy nearly hit the ball out of Yankee stadium. Let me repeat that. He nearly hit the damned ball out of Yankee Stadium. He also hit the facade of the upper deck in right field. Before I hurt my back, I was a pretty damned good hitter. I could have hit the ball three times, and the combined distance of the three fly balls wouldn't have gotten the ball up there.

I don't care who you are. The average man, hell, the best baseball players today couldn't hit it that far. Load them up with every steroid on the planet. Work them out until their biceps are the size of Minnie Minoso. Give them a brand spanking new Louisville Slugger. They're not hitting the ball up there.

While I respect the Yankee legacy, I am not a Yankee fan per se. But anybody suggesting that Mantle somehow achieved his home run prowess from a corked bat is a few playing cards short of a deck. As far as pure power goes, Mantle is top 5 to ever play the game. If he'd been healthy during his career, and didn't play with the thought of "hey, you'll be dead by 45" floating around in the back of his head, Bonds, Aaron, Mays et all would be looking at a pretty much unattainable career home run record.

I love Hank Aaron. He remains one of my favorite human beings. But he would be the first to tell you that for pure home run power, he couldn't have competed with Mantle. Hitting the ball out of the park is one thing. Hitting a moon shot that could come down in Brooklyn is an altogether different thing.

Bill,

Very well said!! Even during the Mick's rookie pre-season in '51 when he only weighed between 165-175 lbs, he was crushing the ball from both sides of the plate with a frequency and distance that no one had ever seen before. For example, in the Yankees vs USC game, Mickey hit 2 tape measure HRs (one estimated to travel between 645-660 ft the other well over 500 ft) and also had a triple, single and 7 RBIs and he left the California tour batting .432. I don't believe that the combination of his natural power from both sides of the plate with his world class speed, at least as a rookie (2.9 sec to first from the left-side and 3.1 sec from the right-side) has ever been seen before or since.

Anyone who saw Mickey in his prime would place him as one of the 10 best players (non-pitchers) of all time. His power numbers elevate that to the top 4 or 5. And remember, he essentially played his entire career with one crippling injury after another.

Any assertion that these natural abilities and pure talent were enhanced by corking bats is absurd. As a player, Mantle was basically very shy and self-effacing. He never talked about himself over the team and ran out HRs with his head down.

Did he ever use a corked bat during his prime - I would suggest absolutely not. Is there any evidence that he did - no. Might he have tried a corked bat in his later years when many of his physical advantages had waned - maybe.
But my guess is that he would have only used these in batting practice, as many players did at the time. To date, I have not seen any evidence that the auction bat was in Mickey's hands during a regular season game. Moreover, the few and light ball marks on this bat suggest it was not used regularly as most documented Mantle gamers are covered with deep seam imprints all over the barrel. In addition, the Mick broke a huge number of bats during his career and I have never heard of one being found to be corked.

So what is the truth? I do not know from the analysis if there are any indications of when this bat was corked. Considering the current state of the Hobby it would not surprise me if this was done after Mantle's playing days for profit. What if future research indicates that the Mick did in fact use this bat in a regularly scheduled game or games. So far there is absolutely no evidence that this is the case and even if it were found to be true I do not believe it would tarnish in any way the remarkable career that Mickey had nor what he meant to all of us growing up.

Craig

[ruth-gehrig]

Originally Posted by brob28

Ken, I never saw Mantle play, but I thought the same thing when I read the article. Just because there is a Mantle bat with cork in it, does not mean it was there when he owned the bat.

Exactly!!

[the 'stache]

Good post, Craig.

Again, I don't know what Mick did or did not do. All I'm saying is this article does nothing to diminish Mantle's accomplishments in my mind, even if he did try a corked bat later in his career.

I have HBO's Mantle documentary "save until I delete" on my DVR (which means it's there until they pry the remote out of my cold, dead hands). I never had the pleasure of seeing him in person, but knowing what I do about baseball, I can say categorically that Mantle did not need a cork in his bat to hit home runs.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

... with his world class speed, at least as a rookie (2.9 sec to first from the left-side and 3.1 sec from the right-side) has ever been seen before or since.

Good points all around, except I can not believe those times are accurate. I know they're referenced online if you Google it, but I highly doubt that even Usain Bolt could approach a 2.9 sec- 30 yard dash (even with the 2-3 foot head start from the left side).

When electronically timed, the fastest NFL and/or track stars run around a 4.2 sec 40 yd dash. There may even be some that have run a 40 in the high 4.1's... but even those guys' first 20 yards are substantially slower than their second 20 yds. The thought that someone could average under 1 second per 10 yards for a 30 yard dash is unheard of, if no one on earth can average under a second per 10 yds for a 40.

Handheld times are the stuff legends are made of. That said, the Mick is the stuff of legend and legends in the game of baseball are a beautiful thing.. cork or no cork.

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by Bocabirdman

Of course, the difference is that Mantle emptied the bottles that the corks came out of, the night before using the bat.

ROFL!!!

IMO I could care less if he did or didnt, he was still awesome. Every player pushes to the edge (and sometimes over it) to get a leg up on the rest when compeating. This is the highest level of sport. From scuffing balls, spitters, corking bats, using speed, coke, red bull, stearoids, HGH and what ever drug is next. Always happened always will.

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Good points all around, except I can not believe those times are accurate. I know they're referenced online if you Google it, but I highly doubt that even Usain Bolt could approach a 2.9 sec- 30 yard dash (even with the 2-3 foot head start from the left side).

When electronically timed, the fastest NFL and/or track stars run around a 4.2 sec 40 yd dash. There may even be some that have run a 40 in the high 4.1's... but even those guys' first 20 yards are substantially slower than their second 20 yds. The thought that someone could average under 1 second per 10 yards for a 30 yard dash is unheard of, if no one on earth can average under a second per 10 yds for a 40.

Handheld times are the stuff legends are made of. That said, the Mick is the stuff of legend and legends in the game of baseball are a beautiful thing.. cork or no cork.

I fully agree that stop watches vs electronic timing explains a great deal of the discrepancies you point out. In addition, the 2.9 sec from the left-side of the plate was probably measured during a drag bunt - yet another tool Mickey had in his arsenal. But, as you state and infer so nicely in your post, the absolute numbers don't mean that much. The combination of his remarkable power from both sides of the plate and sprinters speed (he was considered by most to be the fastest player in the majors, at least before the injuries robbed him of that) are the stuff of legends. And Mickey will always be a legend to those of us who grew wanting to be exactly like him and the generations of fans who only read or viewed his many accomplishments after he finished playing.... cork or no cork!!!

[Jlighter]

Item removed.

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/...l_defense.html