k vs. Donnie Baseball: Not even cl

Puck vs. Donnie Baseball: Not even close

Codding Home / Sports Channel / Bullz-Eye Home

Recently, I've gotten into several discussions on the validity of Kirby Puckett's election into the Hall of Fame. More specifically, many people believe that, because Puckett was voted in on his first ballot, Yankees 1B Don Mattingly also has valid HOF credentials. Mattingly supporters look to his leadership status, his glove work, his "power bat" and his consistency when supporting their argument, claiming his career was Hall of Fame-worthy. But I disagree.

First, let's compare the easy numbers:

Don Mattingly:
14 seasons, 1,785 games, 7003 AB
Kirby Puckett:
12 seasons, 1,783 games, 7244 AB 

Mattingly:
2,153 hits, 1,007 runs, 442 2B, 20 3B, 222 HR, 1,099 RBI, 14 steals, 444 strikeouts
Puckett:
2,304 hits, 1,071 runs, 414 2B, 57 3B, 207 HR, 1,085 RBI, 134 steals, 965 strikeouts 

Mattingly:
.307 career hitter (98th all-time), .358 on base %, .471 slugging %, 3,301 total bases
Puckett:
.318 career hitter (48th all-time), .360 on base %, .477 slugging %, 3,453 total bases 

Mattingly:
Nine gold gloves at first base, six-straight All-Star appearances (1984-1989)
Puckett:
Six gold gloves in centerfield, 10-straight All-Star appearances (1986-1995) 

Certainly by those numbers alone, you could argue that Mattingly deserves a trip to Cooperstown as much as Puckett as, aside from the steals and strikeouts, their career stats are eerily similar. While neither player reached the unofficial "automatic" Hall of Fame numbers (3,000 hits, 500 homers), they each still delivered some remarkable seasons. But while it may appear these two former stars had parallel careers, it's not quite as simple as that. Numbers, after all, don't always divulge the whole story. 

As someone who can't stand to watch a talented player hang on to a deteriorating career long after his skills have disappeared, comparing the end of Mattingly's and Puckett's respective careers is critical to this argument:

1990 (DM): 102 G, 394 AB, .256, 5 HR, 42 RBI, 101 hits, .308 OB%, .335 slug%
1990 (KP): 146 G, 551 AB, .298, 12 HR, 80 RBI, 164 hits, .365 OB%, .446 slug% 

1991 (DM): 152 G, 587 AB, .288, 9 HR, 68 RBI, 169 hits, .339 OB%, .394 slug%
1991 (KP): 152 G, 611 AB, .319, 15 HR, 89 RBI, 195 hits, .352 OB%, .460 slug% 

1992 (DM): 157 G, 640 AB, .287, 14 HR, 86 RBI, 184 hits, .327 OB%, .416 slug%
1992 (KP): 160 G, 639 AB, .329, 19 HR, 110 RBI, 210 hits, .374 OB%, .490 slug% 

1993 (DM): 134 G, 530 AB, .291, 17 HR, 86 RBI, 154 hits, .364 OB%, .445 slug%
1993 (KP): 156 G, 622 AB, .296, 22 HR, 89 RBI, 184 hits, .349 OB%, .474 slug% 

1994 (DM): 97 G, 372 AB, .304, 6 HR, 51 RBI, 113 hits, .397 OB%, .411 slug%
1994 (KP): 108 G, 439 AB, .317, 20 HR, 112 RBI, 139 hits, .362 OB%, .540 slug% 

1995 (DM): 128 G, 458 AB, .288, 7 HR, 49 RBI, 132 hits, .341 OB%, .413 slug%
1995 (KP): 137 G, 538 AB, .314, 23 HR, 99 RBI, 169 hits, .379 OB%, .515 slug% 

Puckett clearly outplayed Mattingly in the final six seasons of their careers (they both retired after 1995). In fact, Mattingly only bettered Puckett in those six years twice in the above categories, 1993 OB% (.364 to .349) and 1994 OB% (.397 to .362). 

Unquestionably, Mattingly was a stud from 1984-1987, when he averaged nearly 30 homers, 120 RBI and 210 hits a season while hitting .337. That's an impressive four-year span and is easily Mattingly's best run of production during his career. Additionally, those four years were also his four best single seasons. 

Meanwhile, Puckett's best four-year run was from 1986-1989, when he averaged 23 homers, 100 RBI and 220 hits a season while hitting .339. The hits and average are both better than Mattingly's while the homers and RBI fall well short. But now let's combine Puckett's best four seasons overall (1986-1988 and 1992), and the numbers are a little closer: 25 homers, 106 RBI and 218 hits a season while batting .336. 

To take it even one step further, let's look at their next-best statistical seasons: 

Mattingly
1989:
158 G, 631 AB, .303, 23 HR 113 RBI, 191 hits, .351 OB%, .477 slug%
Puckett
1994:
108 G, 439 AB, .317, 20 HR, 112 RBI, 139 hits, .362 OB%, .540 slug% 

The power numbers are equal, but Puckett did his damage in 50 fewer games during the strike-shortened season. And, based on his hits/game ratio in 1994 (1.28 hits per game), we could realistically estimate that Puckett would have smacked 202 hits had he played 158 games that season. 

Looking at all that information, you could assume that Mattingly was a better power hitter than Puckett during their prime years but that Puckett was a slightly better hitter in terms of number of hits and batting average. So does that mean they were equal in terms of overall talent? 

Let's look at some totals after eliminating each player's best six seasons, statistically speaking. For Mattingly, those would be 1984-89, and for Puckett 1986-89, 1992 and 1994 would qualify. 

Mattingly:
Eight seasons (1982, 1983, 1990-95)
868 G, 3272 AB, .285, 62 HR, 415 RBI, 934 hits
Puckett:
Six seasons (1984, 1985, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1995)
880 G, 3570 AB, .301, 76 HR, 462 RBI, 1076 hits 

Puckett accumulated 16 more homers, 47 more RBI, 142 more hits and a much higher batting average in 298 more at bats during the "down" years. To put that into perspective, if Mattingly were given those extra 298 at bats, he would have needed to hit .476 in those AB to reach Puckett's hit total. 

Next is the question of MVPs and postseason success. Mattingly supporters cling to his 1985 American League MVP, a fantastic honor for a fantastic season and something that can't be underestimated. Puckett also has some hardware on his mantel, winning the ALCS MVP in 1991 and the All-Star MVP in 1993. By no means do those live up to Mattingly's league MVP, but they shouldn't be ignored either. 

But Puckett gains a huge advantage on my scorecard in playoff success. Mattingly played in only one ALDS (and played well, hitting .417 in five games) against the Mariners in 1995. Puckett played in two ALCS and two World Series, winning them all. His career WS average: .308; career postseason average: .309. Puckett's HR off Charlie Leibrandt in the 1991 Series was one of the most memorable World Series moments ever, and he arguably could have won the WS MVP that year. 

Now, if Mattingly was such a team leader how did he fail to lead the Yanks to even one World Series? Why did he only appear in one playoff series... which the Yankees lost? Puckett, on the other hand, led his Twins on the infamous "Worst-to-First" run in 1991, and to another championship four years earlier in 1987. 

Clearly, Puckett was still playing well when he was forced to retire while Mattingly was on the downside of his career. Puckett also was a much more consistent hitter than Mattingly throughout his career: he drove in at least 80 runs every year but his first two (83%); Mattingly failed to drive in 80 in six of his 14 seasons (57%). In fact, Puckett drove in at least 110 in two of his last four seasons (1992 and 1994) while Mattingly hadn't done it since 1989. Puckett reached double-digit homers in nine of his 12 seasons (67%); Mattingly did it in eight of his 14 (57%). As I've stated, there's no doubt in my mind that, from 1984-89, Mattingly was one of the best hitters in baseball - his 1985 MVP fully supports that. But Puckett was one of the best over his entire career, and he finished with style by hitting .314 and driving in 99 runs in his final season. Mattingly, on the other hand, stumbled to an ugly end. It was obvious that Puckett could have played another few seasons and substantially added to his overall numbers, but glaucoma ended his career prematurely. Conversely, Mattingly's career was over six years before he retired. For someone who was supposed to be a power hitter, Mattingly's lifetime numbers don't equal a Cooperstown plaque, and certainly four spectacular seasons, no matter how extraordinary they were, do not equal a Hall of Fame career.

In the Bullz-Eye

Seattle Supersonics point guard Gary Payton. GP will not play in tonight's game vs. Minnesota, ending his streak of 356 consecutive starts, after being suspended by head coach Nate McMillan for "conduct detrimental to the team." During a loss to Phoenix this past Wednesday, Payton and teammate Ruben Patterson got into several arguments on the floor, then following the game Payton and McMillan reportedly exchanged some heated words. Payton is well known for his quick temper - he's the main reason coach Paul Westphal resigned this season - and the Seattle brass are getting tired of his mouth. Payton needs to calm himself down soon before his mouth costs him his job.

 
/div>