Was Mickey Mantle the best AL first baseman in 1968?

[julusnc]

Was Mickey Mantle the best AL first baseman in 1968?

Discuss.

[BoSox Rule]

He was way too awful defensively.

[DoubleX]

I'd have to go with Norm Cash in '68:

Norm Cash: .263, 25, 84, 145 OPS+
Mickey Mantle: .237, 18, 54, 141 OPS+

Boog Powell is probably also in the running:

Boog Powell: .249, 22, 89, 127 OPS+

[dgarza]

I have to say Cash was, but I really want it to be Killebrew.

[DoubleX]

I have to say Cash was, but I really want it to be Killebrew.

Me too, but he missed too much of the year due to injury. He was the best AL 1Bman of the period, just not this particular year.

[dgarza]

Me too, but he missed too much of the year due to injury. He was the best AL 1Bman of the period, just not this particular year.

Well, he did play roughly 2/3 of the year, so that's almost enough for me (100 games), his OPS+ being 132, still may place him above Boog for the year, I don't know, but, for my tastes, Killebrew's in the running, but he's really not Cash in 68.

[Tigerfan1974]

Was Mickey Mantle the best AL first baseman in 1968?

Discuss.

An outfielder playing first base to hang on one more year.
Sounds like a lot of guys who do that. Or now go to DH to get extra swings.

The Best??
Of course not. What is there to discuss?

[csh19792001]

I've seen film of Mantle running in both 67' and 68', and it was pretty pathetic. He was literally hobbling around the bases when he hit his 500th homerun.

OPS+ can say whatever it wants- Mantle was no longer anything resembling a great baseball player by 1968.

[dgarza]

An outfielder playing first base to hang on one more year.
Sounds like a lot of guys who do that. Or now go to DH to get extra swings.

The Best??
Of course not. What is there to discuss?

The discusion, I would guess, comes from 1968 not being an especially good year for 1stbasemen in the AL. When a .237 batting ex-outfielder who is playing his last year has serious claims at being the best 1B, there's a "problem".

[julusnc]

The discusion, I would guess, comes from 1968 not being an especially good year for 1stbasemen in the AL. When a .237 batting ex-outfielder who is playing his last year has serious claims at being the best 1B, there's a "problem".

Exactly.1968 showed just how far the American League was behind in comparison to the National League.The lack of intergration was shining through.

[538280]

I've said it for a long time-Mantle was still a great hitter as he aged. He just got hurt way too often and couldn't run or field. Him or Norm Cash was the best AL 1Bman in 1968.

Mantle's raw numbers don't look good, but you have to remember that he was playing in a pitcher's park in the toughest hitting year of all time (with the possible exception of a few deadball seasons). .237/.385/.398 may look pretty bad for a 1Bman, but in context they were awesome (141 OPS+).

[csh19792001]

I've said it for a long time-Mantle was still a great hitter as he aged. He just got hurt way too often and couldn't run or field. Him or Norm Cash was the best AL 1Bman in 1968.

Mantle's raw numbers don't look good, but you have to remember that he was playing in a pitcher's park in the toughest hitting year of all time (with the possible exception of a few deadball seasons). .237/.385/.398 may look pretty bad for a 1Bman, but in context they were awesome (141 OPS+).

True on the context, but then, how meaningful was the OPS+? It resulted in him scoring a grand total of 57 runs while driving in 54 in 548PA (which is basically the equivalent of a full season). He wasn't scoring mostly because he couldn't run at all anymore. He was a brutal fielder relegated to the only position where Houk could slot him where Mantle didn't have to be mobile (because he was no longer had the physical capacity to do so).

Mantle didn't go out with grace, he actually went in a pretty sad fashion at age 36, when most guys are stars are not only still playing, they're still playing at a high level.

[538280]

True on the context, but then, how meaningful was the OPS+? It resulted in him scoring a grand total of 57 runs while driving in 54 in 548PA (which is basically the equivalent of a full season). He wasn't scoring mostly because he couldn't run at all anymore. He was a brutal fielder relegated to the only position where Houk could slot him where Mantle didn't have to be mobile (because he was no longer had the physical capacity to do so).

Mantle didn't go out with grace, he actually went in a pretty sad fashion at age 36, when most guys are stars are not only still playing, they're still playing at a high level.

Mantle did not go out sad, he aged extremely well as a hitter. It is true that he was a horrible runner and fielder, but was he really any worse than a Mo Vaughn or David Ortiz? His peak hitting numbers, in context, were just as good as theirs', so he was basically relegated from Mickey Mantle to David Ortiz. No shame in that. Most players go out much worse.

Mantle scored 54 runs and drove in 57, but again, that's misleading because of the era. That's a runs average (which is RBI plus runs scored divided by at bats) of .255, compared to the league average of .204. That's a 125 relative number. The Yankees scored as a team 3.1% less than league average, so that deserves a 3 point boost team adjusted up to 128. I think a 128 runs average (still a very good number) is a good penalty from that 141 OPS+ to make up for his lack of speed on the bases. Maybe take the mean of 141 and 128 (134.5) and you've got a good idea of Mantle's hitting skill. That's still a great hitter, and I doubt there are many guys who went out with that kind of a hitting season.

[KCGHOST]

Offensively, he probably was. He played 17 more games than Cash which IMHO pushes him by Cash. It wouldn't take much defensive differential to offset that though.

[DoubleX]

True on the context, but then, how meaningful was the OPS+? It resulted in him scoring a grand total of 57 runs while driving in 54 in 548PA (which is basically the equivalent of a full season). He wasn't scoring mostly because he couldn't run at all anymore. He was a brutal fielder relegated to the only position where Houk could slot him where Mantle didn't have to be mobile (because he was no longer had the physical capacity to do so).

Mantle didn't go out with grace, he actually went in a pretty sad fashion at age 36, when most guys are stars are not only still playing, they're still playing at a high level.

Agreed. While Mantle's bat still had some life left and he was still able to work counts, I don't know if it would be enough to offset Mantle's deficiencies at that point in his career - you couldn't get more one dimensional than Mantle at that point. Poor fielder, could not run at all (and that really hurt his team I'm sure), and couldn't hit for average anymore. He really could have used the DH.

Interestingly, I remember reading someplace, might have actually been in Ball Four, that Mantle didn't officially retire after the '68 season and that there was a lot of serious speculation that he would make a return after some extended rest to heal his knees a little. Also, assuming I did read this in Ball Four, I think the implication was that Mantle's situation had something to do with the labor negotiations of the day because Mantle's status had some importance in terms of leverage (it's annoying that I can't remember anything more specific).

I'm pretty sure this was Ball Four, so anyone with a better memory of that part of the book care to fill in where I can't (I'm too lazy to actually go over to the bookcase and look for myself).