Is Jim Thome as great as Mickey Mantle?

Question

They were comparing them on Baseball Tonight because Thome has similar career numbers, but I think Mantle was better. He won more rings, played more defense, and he was a switch hitter. What do you think?

Answer 1

No Mickey Mantle is better

Answer 2

Mickey Mantle was more talented, but Thome is sober. Mantle shorten his career & life because of alcohol.

Answer 3

Baseball Tonight often ignores the context of the time.

Mantle played in generally bigger parks and when many of the rules favored pitchers (poor backdrop, they could pitch inside more, higher mound, etc.)

Thome has an OPS+ of 149.  That is outstanding.  But he plays a mediocre 1st base.  He has a Black Ink score in leading the league in various categories of 13.

Mantle has an OPS+ of 172  and his Black Ink score is 65.  And he was an outstanding defensive center fielder.

No comparison--Thome is great (or at least very good), Mantle was one of the greatest of all time.

Answer 4

Mantle was a true five-tool player, and was still extremely gifted in all phases of the game even after he hurt his knee so early in his career. His injuries and personal issues definitely would have been dealt with differently now, but by his own admission he shortened his career because he didn't take very good care of himself physically. I mean, he retired when he was 37! But at the height of his career he was an unreal baseball player.

Answer 5

No, he isn't. That isn't to say he's not great, but Mantle had speed, defense, a triple crown, and that charisma.

Paul S -- your knowledge of history is distorted. Mantle injured himself out of baseball. He was too lazy to rehab properly. The booze had virtually nothing to do with his playing career.

Answer 6

I don't think its a close call because when you take the fact that pitchers were better back then and ball parks were bigger. Also, Mickey Mantle probably couldn't pass a second grade math test while he played is another factor to count in

Answer 7

Thome is a good ball player, but the Mick did it as a complete ball player playing both the outfield (and he could track down a ball) and from both sides of the plate.  A case can be made that it took both of them 17 years to reach this amount of HR's and that both have been injury prone, but I think that Mick had more taking a toll on his body since he wasn't in the DH era like Thome is.  Mick does have more rings, but that's because he had guys around him like Whitey Ford, Roger Maris, and Yogi.  I can't say Thome has had that support.

Answer 8

At one point, before his injuries, Mantle was the fastest player in baseball and a gold glove outfielder. Thome doesn't belong in the same sentence as Mickey.

Answer 9

Mantle hit for average as well as power.  He has speed and was an excellent fielding Center Fielder.  What is Thome?  A DH only.  Mantle is still considered the best CF in the history of baseball by many baseball people.

Answer 10

Jim Thome is good but not as great as Mickey Mantle.

Answer 11

Mantle was better, and unfortunately his career was cut short because of his alcohol problem.

Thome, other than HRs, isn't really that much of a player.

Answer 12

Thome compiled his numbers in a paradise of a hitter's era with juiced baseballs and microscopic strike zones.

Mantle compiled his numbers at the old, old Yankee Stadium.

Mantle holds the record for most World Series Home Runs, a record which no active player is going to break.  Forget this "post-season records" c**p, with 3 rounds of playoffs.  If Mantle had 3 rounds of playoffs every year, he'd have put that record way out of sight.

Mantle played center field, brilliantly.   Thome is a 1st baseman/DH... there's no comparison.

Mantle was a 16 time all star (he played in 20 all star games, but they played two all star games in 1959, 60, 61 and 62).

Thome is a five time all star.  No comparison.

Mantle won 3 MVP awards, finishing 2nd an additional 3 times. He finished in the top 10 in MVP voting 8 times.

Thome never won an MVP award, and finished in the top 5 only once (4th).

And, as you pointed out, Mantle was a switch hitter...the greatest switch hitter of all time (yes, he was a better hitter than Pete Rose, he just didn't play as long).

When Mays and Mantle were in their primes,Mantle was not only a better hitter than Mays, he was a MUCH better hitter than Mays (although Mays did compile better career stats).  Mantle was also a much better post-season player than Mays was (Mays only got to two World Series in his "prime", 1954 and 1962.  His other two W.S. appearances took place in his rookie year of 1951, and his final year of 1973 with the Mets, at the age of 42).

Plus, Yankee Stadium was not the best place to hit if you were a righty  (which Mantle was a good deal of the time).

Mantle is a far, far better player than Jim Thome.  It's not even close.

Answer 13

If Mantle played in the era of the DH, he'd have hit a hundred more homers.  In this era, his knee would have been repaired not destroyed by surgery.  In this era, his alcoholism would have been treated and not ignored.

Mantle was one of the most gifted players in MLB history but injuries, bad doctors, and alcohol all added to his demise.