I guess it would be a bit presumptuous of me to assume that everyone has seen the same or close to the same amount of games in person that I have. I realize not everyone lives in the market I did.

I'll leave my list as is, because it's how I interpreted the question - but your(contrarian's) Carlos Quintana example opened my eyes a bit.

I certainly didn't mean to come across as defensive, either

Numbers don't tell everything, although they provide one yardstick.  Would the recent Yankees have been the same, as successful, with a 'better' shortstop than Jeter?  Not likely.  Maybe Donnie Baseball had that quality, I don't know.  My point in challenging the Mattingly backers - and recall, I'm a die-hard Yankees fan - is that if you saw Mattingly live you saw a lot of other first basemen who I think are so much better, on the field definitely and possibly in the clubhouse as well.  And I never saw that certain je ne sais quoi with him; and I most certainly have not seen it in him as a manager, where on numerous occasions I've seen him let his players twist in the wind arguing with umpires (less this year with instant replay).  Would I turn him down as my 1B?  No, not for most of his career.  Would he be my first choice?  Not close.

No offense taken nockahoma, and likewise I certainly don't mean to offend.  These discussions/debates are part of what makes baseball a wonderful game.

Mattingly for me falls in a category of players for whom I just don't understand why some people rank them so highly.  A really good comparison is Steve Garvey.  I know several Dodgers fans who grew up in the 70s who think Garvey should be in the HOF, and who argue as passionately about him as Yankee fans do about Mattingly.  I saw plenty of Mattingly during his prime, and I think people (a) think he had 6 great years when he really only had 3 (b) give him way too much credit for his defense when every form of objective analysis that has ever been attempted suggests 1B defense is a very very small factor (c) put a halo of leadership around him, and completely disregard the intangibles that other players have/had (d) want to give him credit for what he might have done had he not been injured, which is just wishful thinking.  I just don't see it.

There are still people who think Jack Morris was a great pitcher.  I just don't see it.

There are people who think Omar Vizquel was defensively as great as, or better than, Ozzie.  I just don't see it.

In football, I'm always amazed when I see lists of greatest QBs of all time that have John Elway in the top 3, or even #1.  I just don't see it.

Viva la difference.  

And I should add another example...as a Red Sox fan, I don't think Jim Rice was all that great, and I don't think he belongs in the Hall of Fame.  But plenty of my Red Sox Nation brethren will argue to their death that he was "the most feared hitter of his time" which is (a) nonsense (b) irrelevant.

If Mattingly is the best Prof ever saw, then he's the best Prof ever saw.  The topic of how he rates relative to his peers at 1B in any specific timeframe is quite different, but still an interesting discussion.  I never saw Mattingly in person, and probably just a few random occasions on TV, so I never saw with my own eyes what he did on the field.  For my list, I included not only guys I saw in person at the stadium, but guys I saw a lot of on TV as well.

True, skunk.  Age and location factor dramatically into the discussion because of the 'saw them live' parameter.  Being born in 1961 in a market with both AL and NL and in a sports-crazy family, I can say I've seen just about every player of any significance who played from the mid-60s to today.  Younger WIS folks, especially if from single or no team markets maybe haven't been to as many games in their lives as I used to go to in two or three seasons.  For people like me, it is more of an all-time best (at least the last forty years).  I admit I was spoiled.  My grandfather was a retired sports photographer for the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, so I could call him on any summer afternoon and say 'hey, Paul and I were thinking of going to the Angel game tonight' and he'd pick up the phone and voila!  There's be tickets waiting for me at will call.  Dodgers or Angels, didn't matter.

As I said above, if you saw Mattingly I bet you saw other 1B who were better: I think our good friend Italyprof is looking at life through pinstripe-colored glasses ...

I guess I should also add(or factor in my decision) is that a lot of these choices come through rose-colored, youth-inspired memories. Again, I interpreted it as games I "saw". I saw many more games from ages 6-20 than I have 21-46. Many more. Many, many more.

That being said, I guess I allowed my 'memories' to cloud my 'baseball sensabilites'. Had I taken more time & given each position more in-depth thought - I'm sure my answers would be different. It was done in 10 minutes from my desk at work.

Giambi played for the Yankees for the back end of his prime.  I'd take Giambi over Mattingly in a heartbeat.

He also played against them in the postseason...

Yes the original question was best player u saw at all positions, so if u lived in ny and saw mattingly in 85, he is the best u saw, although Murray and cecil cooper had better careers.  Actually the best player at all positions were Cesar Tovar or Bert Campanieris.  

kudos on big mac, roids aside, sat In fenway one sunday, saw him hit 2 balls I didn't think were gonna land,,,ever, lol

Miggy - Greatest Hitter of All Time. Think about it. His healthy years are in the era of the advanced scouting reports and 20 different pitch types

Here are the stats for the first 7 seasons comparing Mattingly with "The Greatest Player of All Time". In every season Mattingly is either decisively better or about even with Barry Bonds over the first 7 seasons. After that Mattingly was injured and did not use steroids which, as several people on this site have pointed out, help you recover from injuries, and Bonds' truly great years begin in 1993 - right on time for the steroid era. 

Barry Bonds                                                        Don Mattingly

1986 .223 16 HR                                                  1983 .283  4

1987 .261 25                                                        1984 .343  23

1988 .283  24                                                       1985 .324  35

1989 .248  19                                                       1986 .352  31

1990 .301 33                                                        1987  .327  30

1991 .292  25                                                       1988  .311  18

1992 .311  34                                                       1989 ..303  23

There are a few stats left out of the tables above that are important.  I've taken the liberty of adding them:

Bonds	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	OPS+	WAR
1986	.223	.330	.416	.746	103	3.5
1987	.261	.329	.492	.821	114	5.8
1988	.283	.368	.491	.859	148	6.2
1989	.248	.351	.426	.777	126	8.0
1990	.301	.406	.565	.970	170	9.7
1991	.292	.410	.514	.924	160	7.9
1992	.311	.456	.624	1.080	204	9.0
						50.1
Mattingly	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	OPS+	WAR
1983	0.283	0.333	0.409	0.742	107	0.5
1984	0.343	0.381	0.537	0.918	156	6.3
1985	0.324	0.371	0.567	0.939	156	6.4
1986	0.352	0.394	0.573	0.967	161	7.2
1987	0.327	0.378	0.559	0.937	146	5.1
1988	0.311	0.353	0.462	0.816	128	3.7
1989	0.303	0.351	0.477	0.828	133	4.2
						33.4

So, after 7 years of their respective careers, Bonds had 3 times posted an OBP better than Mattingly's career best, twice posted an OPS better than Mattingly's career best, twice posted an OPS+ better than Mattingly's career best, had 4 seasons of total value better than Mattingly's career best, and had already posted more than 50% more WAR than Mattingly.  In fact, 7 years into Bonds's career - exclusively pre-steroid by everything we know - he already had more WAR than Mattingly would have in his entire career.

And of course, the above table gives Bonds zero credit - not even adjusted credit - for what he actually did later, when he had perhaps the greatest offensive seasons ever.  Discount them if you choose, but the above table implicitly counts them as zero.

Posted by cleansox on 7/9/2015 7:38:00 PM (view original):
kudos on big mac, roids aside, sat In fenway one sunday, saw him hit 2 balls I didn't think were gonna land,,,ever, lol

I saw him many times, but the most memorable was during the 1998 HR chase with Sosa.  Saw him hit one out at the Astrodome; I swear it never got more than 20 feet off the ground in a stadium that had no carry.  An absolute rocket, the hardest-hit ball I've ever seen.