Why is Bill Mazeroski so obscure?

A recent email from my son: ‘‘I just ran across this photo of me and Princess by the big statue to Bill Mazeroski. The Pirates unveiled it beside PNC park last summer. It’s on the far side of the stadium, so it probably will never get the attention of the Roberto Clemente statue by the bridge, but still pretty significant.’’

Has anybody else ever put one over the fence, seventh game of the World Series, bottom of the ninth, 2 out, nobody on, and a Golden Glove at the plate? OK, it was a long time ago, but the boys in the pinstripes went home without the rings. Oh yes, the fence was over 400’ from home plate. Had it been Mickey or Roger, it would still come up sometimes.

Can a guy who has a statue of him really be called obscure?

Joe Carter hit a Series-ending three-run homer with one out in game six of the '93 WS. Mazeroski’s home run is very famous, and so is Carter’s. Neither of them was as good as Clemente, but the homers are very well known.

Why isn’t he more well-known? He was a Pirate, and he was known more for his defensive skills. That about covers it. Of course, to us Pirates fans, the fact that he was more glove than bat just makes his 1960 series-winning home-run all that much cooler. An unlikely hero.

I think Kirk Gibson got more attention for his 1988 home run, and that was in game one of the world series. Maybe it’s partially due to the era Maz played in as well, and the relative lack of coverage compared to big events these days. Hell, they didn’t even have have a complete video record of game 7 until a kinescope was found in Bing Crosby’s estate two years ago.

Obscure? He has the statue you mention and he’s in the Hall of Fame… hardly obscure.

Mazeroski is very well known, at least to baseball fans, and it didn’t hurt that his homer came against the Yankees.

The Hall of Fame vote, coming after a solid but not spectacular career, is a pretty good indication he didn’t toil in obscurity.

Maz’s HOF credentials are essentially that one home run. He was certainly a good player, and beloved in Pittsburgh, but his offensive numbers were ordinary (even mediocre). He was a good fielder, but not spectacularly better than anyone else, and he was elected by the Veteran’s committee after never getting more then 40% of the votes from the sportswriters of the time.

Take away the home run and he’d have to buy a ticket to get into Cooperstown.

Apart from being the best fielding secondbaseman of all time, this is precisely correct.

Since this deals with a sports figure I’m going to move it to the Game Room. From IMHO. Swing away!

This is incorrect; his numbers (for what they’re worth) are incredible, and the testimony of his peers is that he was the best second baseman of his time and maybe the best guy at turning the double play ever.

On the OP, I don’t think he’s really obscure, considering that he retired 40 years ago - he’s probably better-known than half of the hall of famers he played with or against, and the ones who are better known than him (such as Willie Mays) were also much better players.

Mazeroski, obscure???

Are you kidding me? His home run from the 1960 World Series is re-shown all the time! It’s one of the iconic home runs in World Series history.

Only a handful of World Series homers have EVER gotten as much attention as Mazeroski’s. Babe Ruth’s “called shot,” certainly. Carlton Fisk’s homer in Game Six of the 1975 World Series, certainly. Kirk Gibson’s 1988 homer, probably.

Otherwise, Bill Mazeroski’s walkoff homer is the most storied, most re-broadcast World Series homer ever.

Al Hrabosky is obscure. Bill Mazeroski is a legend.

He has exactly the right amount of fame. A decent solid player who was involved in one of the most iconic plays in baseball history. If not for that play he would be truly obscure.

I’ll agree that it’s a bit surprising that his home run doesn’t get the kind of publicity that Bobby Thompson and Bucky Dent’s homers do, but he’s in the Hall of Fame and they aren’t.

Now, yes, his getting into the Hall was a bit controversial but suggesting that it was because of that homer is ridiculous. Bobby Thompson had a fantastic career and he’s not in the Hall despite his “Shot Heard Round the World”, nor is Bucky Dent, who was also a decent shortstop.

Mazeroski got into the Hall because he was probably the best defensive Second Baseman of all time and IMHO that should be enough to ensure entry to the Hall.

Obviously many people, such as Bill James disagree.

There are other reasons why Gibson’s home run is so famous.

First off, although Mazeroski’s home run won the World Series:

1 - It won the game, but it was hit in a tied game, rather than bringing the team back from behind.
2 - The score that day was 9-9; it’s not like the pitchers were dominating. (Incidentally, I also downgrade Joe Carter’s home run for a similar reason; he hit it off of Mitch freaking Williams, who barely got anyone out for the entire series).

By contrast, Gibson’s home run brought his team back from 4-3 down with two out, and he was facing the best pitcher in either league (inning-for-inning) who had just won the ALCS MVP for saving four straight games against the Red Sox. AND Gibson could barely walk.

Quick, without looking it up, who was the Yankee’s second baseman in the 1960 series.

Bobby Richardson.

Who played in seven World Series, with three championships. And with five Gold Gloves, he wasn’t exactly a hack at the position, either. Not only that

It was RICHARDSON who was the Series MVP!

That should make you feel a lot better about Maz.

We must not be reading the same thread. :confused:

Slightly off-topic, but footage of the entire game was recently found in Bing Crosby’s old wine cellar. (Crosby being part owner of the Pirates at the time)

Read post #3.

You’re somewhat right about the bat: he had a lifetime .260 average, but that was in a pitching-dominated era. He wasn’t an offensive giant, but those numbers sound worse today than they did when he was playing. He actually had more RBIs than any other middle-infielder in baseball for 11 of his 17 years in baseball.

About the glove - the first few sentences at the link below will get you started on the path to understanding.

In fairness, James wrote that a long time ago, and has since written stuff stating Mazeroski’s defense was perhaps not as unbelieveable as he had previously thought. In truth, the best defensive statistics of all time probably belong to Ozzie Smith or Brooks Robinson, two guys who I think most everyone will agree were not slouches with the mitts. No modern slate of defensive stats places Maz as being the best fielder of all time.

Nonetheless, every analytical method of measuring fielding prowess ranks Mazeroski as being in the range of “awesome.”

As to whether he should be in the Hall of Fame I’d have to say he probably wasn’t a good choice. Mazeroski was a flat-out bad hitter. Baseball Reference ranks Maz as the 380th best player of all time, which is below where a Hall of Famer should be, albeit not even close to the worst guy in there.

I don’t mind him being in but I do agree it’s strange to assert he’s “obscure.” He’s in the Hall of Fame and he has a statue outside a major league ballpark. The guys right next to him in career value in the BR ranking I mentioned are Elston Howard, who won an MVP Award for the Yankees, and Joe Adcock, who was sort of the exact opposite of Maz in that he could hit like a crazy bastard but couldn’t catch or throw; both men are now almost wholly forgotten and never sniffed the Hall. THAT’S obscurity.