Talk:Willie Mays
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
Can Someone plaese include whether he batted/fielded left/right handed? I think it would be helpful...What?! What does the Second World War have to do with anything? Willie Mays didn't start playing professional baseball until 1950, when he was 17! -- Zoe
-
- If anything, the War helped him come closer--Williams fought in both World War II and Korea, and likely would have posted more records if he'd been playing ball in those years. Vicki Rosenzweig
My apologies -- I'm English, I watch cricket, I know nothing. Maybe I was thinking of the time he spent in the Army, or maybe I was thinking of Elvis, or something. I'm glad the page got improved. Mswake
-
- He did serve in the Korean War, maybe that's what you were thinking of. Ted Williams did lose all of 1943, 1944, 1945 and most of 1952 and 1953 to military service.
Contents |
[edit] Photograph
Someone should think of inserting this past-copyright photograph into the article.
Benn M. 08:52, 2005 May 15 (UTC)
Why is there that random picture of the Hall of Fame in this article with that horrible caption? I realize he is in the Hall of Fame, but that picture and caption is fairly worthless in this article. --Agerard 19:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Controversy Regarding Mays
In my town of Hagerstown, MD, there was this controversy involving Mays recently. The mayor wanted to pay homage to him by renaming this street after him as an apology for the way he was treated here a long while ago. The thing that the mayor really didn't think of was that the street was called Memorial Blvd., which got a negative response from many people (obviously the veterans were very upset) and our local newspaper received numerous letters with disgust for the whole idea. Now we're viewed by some as racist, but I think the whole thing is pathetic. I don't know, maybe someone could research a little more, as I'm not too clear on the whole deal.
I added paragraphs in the pertinent areas about the subject. Looks like the mayor needs a little PR help.
[edit] Gold Gloves
It really should say something in this article about his # of Gold Gloves.
- It does now :-) --Tecmobowl 02:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Retirement and legacy
I removed the folowing paragraphs from the article as it apears to be original research. I've placed it here for comment -- No Guru 21:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Each of these had obvious advantages in one facet or another of the game. Ruth hit more home runs, was also a talented pitcher, and had a higher batting average. Cobb had a considerably higher average and far more lifetime hits, and played with an intensity equalled by Mays, but "Cobbie" added to that an almost violent willingness to run over opponents (particularly infielders) to gain advantage and win games. Aaron, a contemporary who probably had the best hitter's wrists in history, had a rather comparable career but simply outlasted Mays, ending up with nearly 100 more home runs. Aaron did this by having several more "big" batting years, with roughly 35 home runs, a .310 average, and 100 RBIs. If any contemporary was a more overwhelming power hitter than Mays, it would be the switch-hitting Mantle whose broad back and huge muscles arguably gave him more raw power. Mantle hit more truly long balls, including a few that flew completely out of the park. One of these landed 565 feet from home plate; Mays did not do anything comparable. Williams hit over .400 one year, and was overall a bit more productive at the plate than Mays, equally powerful, with considerably higher average. Looking at their entire careers, one suspects that there was something, possibily intangible, about Ruth and Mantle, that allowed them to lead their teams on to victory in a way that Mays, Williams and Cobb did not. Yes, they had the great Yankee supporting cast, but there is a lingering doubt that, were we to replace either Ruth or Mantle with Mays for their entire MLB careers, their teams might not have fared quite as well. In their one direct confrontation in the 1962 World Series, on comparable teams, Mantle's team beat Mays' by inches, but he beat him.
On Mays' behalf, the answer to each of these comparisons is the same, and to many it seems unanswerable: None of them could do ALL of the important things a ballplayer must do as well as Willie. He is the most complete player in history, the Michael Jordan of his sport.
Start the case with fielding: no matter how well his famous counterparts played their position, it is easy to make the case that Mays played his better. In some cases (Ruth and Williams, not superb defensive players), Mays was fabulously superior. In others (Cobb, Mantle, DiMaggio, Aaron), Mays was visibly better, but the margin of superiority was smaller. Mays' command of every part of defensive outfield play was impressive. He made the most famous catch in baseball in 1954, but some feel that the throw he made back to the infield on the same play after the catch, surpassed the catch itself. It is not hard to make the case, though unprovable, that Mays is the best-fielding player baseball has had.
Continue Mays' case with speed and running. Mantle, batting left-handed, by objective measures of timing available in his day, was faster down to first base than anyone in the game, including Willie. Cobb was a very fast, aggressive, often ruthlessly effective base runner. Mays probably matched him, except in ruthlessness; the two were likely the best pair of base runners in history. Either could turn a single into a double when no one expected it, or score from first on batted balls that would have barely delivered other great runners to third. Mays had a way of moving along all the base path, not just down to first, that many considered the best of his era. DiMaggio was a fast and gifted runner, while Ruth and Williams were heavy-footed.
Cobb lacked Mays' power. Ruth and Williams, both slightly better hitters, lacked his speed and defense. Mantle was his equal, or near-equal, but was crippled by injury.
Aaron, it can be argued, equalled Mays at hitting the ball, and bested him in two things--longevity and wrists. Mays caught the ball better than Aaron and threw the ball better than Aaron. He ran the bases better, and had more ability to inspire other players to their best. Mays also lost his cap more gracefully and more often than anyone in history--another superlative! It is easy to suppose that Mays possessed more raw baseball instinct than anyone he played against. At a time when All-Star Games were taken more seriously, Mays dominated the All-Star Game for a decade. Aaron and Mantle, Koufax and Spahn were merely the supporting cast to his starring role. Mays faded in the latter 1960s and Aaron remained powerful, continuining on to best Ruth in lifetime home runs, which Mays failed to do. While they played together in their prime, the best compliment contemporaries could give Aaron was that, on a given day or for a given season, he JUST MIGHT ALMOST be the equal of Willie for a while. But not indefinitely.
The last and most decisive factor in favor of Mays, against all these greats and all other players, was how infectious his love of the game was, and how it could affect his teammates and the fans for the good. All of the others inspired lesser players on to better achievement, but Mays did it more completely and more spontaneously than the rest. He won most hearts for baseball than anyone but possibly Ruth.
This power of inspiration took on another dimension no one else matches when Mays entered into a mutually nurturing relationship with a player who would succeed him as the best player of his generation, Barry Bonds. Part of the credit for Bonds' surpassing success in the last years of his career must go to Mays. Exactly how much is unclear, but it is safe to say that none of the other greats has done anything comparable.
- Seems like original research. Get rid of it! Ponch's Disco 00:21, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Current Revision
I've tried to go through and tighten up the article. Some pieces may be a bit off still. I have tried to remove as much non-encyclopedic information as possible. A lot of this information needs to be sourced and I'm sure it wouldn't hurt to clean it up a smidge more. Have at it wiki people. --Tecmobowl 02:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Cited about half the uncited sources, which was basically all I could find in a sitting. It's someone else's turn now. Wayman975 19:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's a big help. // Tecmobowl 01:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
