How does something like that even get written? Is Mattingly remotely in that same stratosphere as Hernandez defensively?

Because, having lived through both, I've always thought the Mattingly love made the Jeter love look like a minor crush. I could certainly be wrong.

Kansas City Athletics (just because no one remembers these people, well except...):

C -- Hal Smith, 1957
1B -- Norm Siebern, 1962
2B -- Jerry Lumpe, 1962
SS -- Wayne Causey, 1963
3B -- Ed Charles, 1962
LF -- Bob Cerv, 1956
CF -- Bill Tuttle, 1959
RF -- Rocky Colavito, 1964

P -- Ray Herbert, 1960
P -- Catfish Hunter, 1967
P -- Bud Daley, 1959
P -- Moe Drabowsky, 1963
RP -- Jack Aker, 1966

I'll say what I always say about catchers: there's no way a guy who fields on average one ball in play every three games or so can give back a significant amount of his value on defense unless he's bad enough that he couldn't possibly be a catcher

That's quite possible. The delta between a bunt single and an out is something like .7 runs. Suppose that the catcher's ability makes a difference on 25% of bunts (number pulled out of thin air, but sounds reasonable.) So the worst catcher gives up .7 runs every 12 games, or 9.5 runs over a season, that's one win. That's a significant amount of the value of an average-hitting 3-4 WAR catcher.

Not even in the same ZIP code.

ZIP codes don't work that way.

Because, having lived through both, I've always thought the Mattingly love made the Jeter love look like a minor crush.

Interesting comparison. The first natural inclination is to agree simply because Jeter was a better player, so if the love were equal, then Mattingly would be more overrated. That's hard to determine, however...

The "best player in baseball" thing is worth unpacking. I don't think either one actually was the best player in baseball at any point, although surely near the top. And I don't think even Tim McCarver at his horniest would have quite said that Jeter was the best player in baseball. It's true that Mattingly was in fact voted that. And it's easy to see why, especially given that it was the mid-1980s: Mattingly was an RBI man (i.e. a power hitter who hit 3rd on a team with Rickey Henderson), while Jeter was a #2 hitter whose offensive contribution was a little more abstract. It's also true that it was constantly publicized that Mattingly had been voted the best player in baseball. I'm sure that vote is taken every year, but I couldn't tell you who had won it at any other time (I'm sure I could often guess correctly based on simple logic, but I couldn't actually tell you.) So it wasn't just that Mattingly won that honor, it was also that people chose to really run with it, in a very unusual way.

I don't think, however, that even most Yankee fans believe Mattingly should be elected to the HOF. (And I'll point out that Bill James does, which -- although I really don't understand Bill's logic -- has to at least brand it as a position that is not utterly crazy.)

Of course, the Dodgers' performance this year seems to be a heckuva step towards Mattingly as a dual player-manager candidate! :)

The White Sox single season WAR leaders since 1962 are pretty uninspiring. For the pitchers, I only listed each pitcher once. Otherwise Wilbur Wood would be pitching every other day. Hmm, that might actually work.

C - Carlton Fisk (1990)
1B - Dick Allen (1972)
2B - Don Buford (1965)
3B - Pete Ward (1964)
SS - Ron Hansen )1964)
LF - Albert Belle (1998)
CF - Tommie Agee (1966)
RF - Magglio Ordonez (1999)
DH - Frank Thomas (1991)

P - Wilbur Wood (1971)
P - Jim Kaat (1975)
P - Esteban Loaiza (2003)
P - Britt Burns (1980)
P - John Danks (2008)
RP - Goose Gossage - 1975)

I don't think, however, that even most Yankee fans believe Mattingly should be elected to the HOF.

I don't think you've talked to many street mouth-breathing Yankee fans then. They worship him. His one and only flaw is not bringing any ringzz but even that gets held against Steinbrenner more so than Donnie.

Mattingly is still a dangerous case, though. He could easily attract a Rice/Morris wave of support as a True Ballplayer Hero, especially once Morris is actually in.

The White Sox single season WAR leaders since 1962 are pretty uninspiring. ...

C - Carlton Fisk (1990)

42-year-old future Hall-of-Famer has best season in 12 years, providing good defense while leading team in batting average, on-base percentage, walks, and homers (league top 10 in OBP and OPS+); carries Sox to surprise second-place finish (25 games better than previous year's record)... I dunno, I thought that, specifically, was pretty inspiring. Not an all-time-great season, certainly, but darned pleasing just the same.

Since I was thinking about it... Oakland A's All-Fluke-Season Team:

C: Dave Duncan, 1972 (2.5 WAR, 4.9 career)
1b: Dave Revering, 1980 (3.5 WAR, 4.2 career)
2b: Dick Green, 1969 (4.1 WAR, 13.7 career)
3b: Scott Brosius, 1996 (5.1 WAR, 13.6 career. Did it again in 1998... the other 9 seasons of his career gained his teams 3.5 WAR total)
SS: Alfredo Griffin, 1986 (3.1 WAR, -0.1 career)
LF: Mitchell Page, 1977 (5.8 WAR, 7.7 career)
CF: Mark Kotsay, 2004 (4.3 WAR, 20.8 career)
RF: Tony Armas, 1980 (5.6 WAR, 13.4 career)
DH: Erubiel Durazo, 2004 (3.1 WAR, 8.2 career)

SP: Kenny Rogers, 1998 (7.2 WAR, 46.6 career, next-best is 5.5)
SP: Vida Blue, 1971 (8.7 WAR, 41.3 career, next-best is 7.3)
SP: Mike Norris, 1980 (5.6 WAR, 7.1 career)
SP: Mike Torrez, 1976 (5.0 WAR, 20.6 career)
SP: Steve McCatty, 1981 (4.3 WAR, 8.1 career)

RP: Mudcat Grant, 1970 (4.4 WAR, 17.0 career)
RP: Huston Street, 2005 (2.8 WAR, 9.0 career)

Honorable mentions: Daric Barton (5.1/7.7) and Cliff Pennington (4.1/5.0), both 2010. They might still be really good. For somebody. Maybe.

My impression of the two "crushes" is that NY fans thought that Mattingly was God and Jeter only Jesus. STL fans don't revere Stan Musial as much as NY fans did Mattingly. He was like Kirk Gibson; he just had, without trying, a charisma that said, "I'm an ideal manly god among men, descended here to lead your players and give your children a role model." It's one of the few times that I've seen NY fans go completely out of control about one of their own players, and it turned out to be driven by the player's charisma, and not some flashy World Series or pivotal game that he'd played. I think even Bill James may have given Don one of his subjective adjustments to account for the aura. On the other hand, Win Shares likes peaks and primes, and Don had those. Career length can be a wash in that system. After a while, you're just adding to your total Win Shares for your career, at the cost of dropping your Win Shares per 162 Games played. Those balance out, which is why Bill says that "hang around" value doesn't change a player's ranking much. - Brock Hanke