They called him Donnie Baseball. He was the player every kid idolized, and who every kid’s parents wanted him to idolize. Clean. Pure. Hard-nosed. The mustache. Is it any coincidence that the Steroid Era exploded just when Donnie Baseball finally hung ‘em up? I think not.

Seriously, Don Mattingly was a very good player through the 1980s, and you can’t deny that he was a star of the first magnitude. He’s the kind of guy, like Jim Rice, that you hear a lot that he belongs in the Hall of Fame because when you saw him play, it just felt like you were watching a Hall of Famer.

How does his case actually stack up? Let’s cue the Keltner List.

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

Setting aside the merits of his argument, we must observe that, yes, during his peak, there were a good many people that believed Don Mattingly was the best player in baseball.

2. Was he the best player on his team?

Mattingly was the best player on the New York Yankees, which you might have heard is the most important sports franchise in the galaxy, for the bigger part of his career (those these were the Dark Years for the Yankees.)

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

Sort of. Mattingly was the best first baseman in baseball during the years 1984-1987, including his skyscraper peak in 1985-1986. After that, Will Clark and Fred McGriff passed him, and his productive years ended with his injury in 1990.

To qualify as the best player in baseball at your position in a historical sense, my opinion is you at least need to be the best over a five-year period. Mattingly probably doesn’t quite qualify that way. If you carefully carve out 1984 to 1988, Mattingly probably comes out #1, but in the big picture, the best first baseman in baseball in the early 1980s was Eddie Murray, and in the late 1980s it was Will Clark. So it’s borderline. Obviously Mattingly played at an extraordinarily high level at his peak.

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

This may be difficult for you younger readers to fathom since he played every game of his career with the New York Yankees, but until the very end of his very last season (1995), Don Mattingly never played in a postseason game. The Yankees won the AL pennant in 1981; Mattingly first reached the majors in 1982. Mattingly retired after the 1995 season; the Yankees won the World Series in 1996. For some reason, the baseball gods decided to abuse Don Mattingly for their own entertainment.

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

Yeah. Like I mentioned, Mattingly pre-1990 was one of the best players in baseball, but Mattingly post-1990 was a below average first baseman. (Mattingly did turn it around in 1993-1995 when his walk rate suddenly spiked. Anyone know what the deal with that was?)

But anyway, even after the injury/injuries drained him, Mattingly was good enough to play every day, yes, even though Mattingly was through as a star-caliber player at age 28.

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

He’s not close. Probably not in the top 20. This question is basically understood to mean “is he as good, or at least close to as good, as Ron Santo and Tim Raines?”

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

No. Of his top ten comparables, two are in the Hall of Fame. One, Jim Bottomley (#10) was a horrible mistake born of the cronyism of the Veterans Committee in the 1970s. The other was Kirby Puckett, and that’s more interesting. Like Mattingly, Puckett played at a superstar level for several years, and then his career was abruptly cut off by a severe injury. The system extracts a heavy penalty when comparing a center fielder’s stats to a first baseman’s, for obvious defense-related reasons, but even so, Puckett’s career numbers are so substantially similar to Mattingly’s that Puckett still grades out as Mattingly’s #4 comparable.

Kirby Puckett was a plus defensive center fielder and the best player on two world championship teams. Nonetheless, I know many people who think Kirby Puckett’s selection to the Hall of Fame was a mistake. That doesn’t speak well to the candidacy of a first baseman who almost never appeared in the playoffs and has nearly identical career stats.

8. Do the player’s numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

Black Ink: Mattingly 23, Average Hall of Famer 27
Gray Ink: Mattingly 111, Average 144
Hall of Fame Standards: Mattingly 34.1, Average 50
Hall of Fame Monitor: Mattingly 133.5, Likely Hall of Famer 100

Mattingly’s career numbers don’t quite meet the standards, which is no surprise given the brevity of his career relative to most Hall of Famers. His performance on the HoF monitor is eye-catching; he does so well there because it heavily rewards things like MVP awards and gold gloves.

The answer to the question is no, Mattingly’s numbers don’t quite measure up to Hall of Fame standards. That’s what those first three tests conclude; the fourth thinks better of him because it reflects that Mattingly, at his best, was very highly regarded by his contemporaries (in award voting).

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

There’s the nine gold gloves. Mattingly was an excellent defensive first baseman and deserved half of them. The traditionally very lazy gold glove voters continued to vote for him automatically every year, even though the same injuries that drained his performance at the plate did the same to him in the field in the 1990s. Still, that’s something in his favor: Mattingly was a better defender than most other first basemen candidates.

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

No. Setting Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro aside, probably Fred McGriff is the best first baseman not in the Hall of Fame. He’s not eligible yet, but I would also be inclined to vote for Will Clark before voting for Mattingly, and you’ll find people around singing Ed Konetchy’s praises, or Bob Watson’s or somebody’s. Mattingly’s biggest fans could construct an argument that he was better than Will Clark, but it’s a stretch.
11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

Mattingly did win the MVP Award in 1985. He was even better in 1986, but finished second in the MVP voting; he also finished 5th in 1984, his first full season in the majors, and second in 1987. That four-year run again suggests that during this period Mattingly was regarded by many commentators as the best player in baseball, or at least in the American League.

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

Mattingly played in six All-Star games, and that number’s about right. That’s not a point in his favor. His peak was brilliant, but short.

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

Yes, peak Don Mattingly (1984-1987) was plenty good enough that he could be the best player on a championship team. Given his offensive context, he was playing at a near-Pujolsian level those years.

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

Nothing here.

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

Extremely so. Mattingly gets extra credit Good Guy Points in many voters’ minds.

Conclusion? I think the Keltner List outlines what most of us already know: Mattingly had a distinctly Hall of Fame peak. The question being fought over is, was that peak long enough? He didn’t hang around long enough to compile any impressive career numbers. Mattingly’s problem is that he’s in a group of marginal first basemen candidates, headed up by Will Clark but also including guys like Watson, Konetchy, Mickey Vernon, Gil Hodges, and so on, and fails to really distinguish himself from the group.In the end, the same things that make Kirby Puckett a borderline, yes-but-not-by-much Hall of Famer put Don Mattingly on the other side of the line: Not by much, but no.