Hello & Welcome to our community. Is this your first visit? Register
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Senior Member Yankwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    860

    So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    To me, these are the most perplexing bats of anyone of the last 20 years or so. I see so many M110s that just don't look right. When I first started collecting bats we looked only for the T141 Louisvilles and then became aware of the M1728 model he used. Now I'm seeing P72s popping up and this has just become way too confusing. I even had a Cooper at one time that came right from the Blue Jays visiting clubhouse so I know he used those, however sparingly. If either of you good people could shed some light on the Mattingly bat situation, I would be very grateful. Thanks.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,093

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Yankwood - Yes, Mattingly bats can be very confusing at times. I will be posting a blog this year on Mattingly bats, but let me try to answer a few questions about his bats and what we see in the marketplace. First off - it is clear - that the New York Yankees NEVER ordered M110 model bats for Mattingly during the 1986-1989 time period, yet we see many of these bats in auctions. Could a M110 bat from the 86-89 period have made it into his hands - the answer is yes, but I have yet to see one that I like that looks legitimate. I don't have the records right in front of me as I am at work, but I don't believe the Yankees ordered P72 bats during this period either for Mattingly. The same comments relative to M110 bats above applies to P72 model bats. I will confirm the P72s when I review the records. Also - it should be noted that in the 80's, Mattingly ordered primarily unfinished bats. I will go into more depth on this in my future blog.

    Regarding other models, Mattingly really started to experiment with other models in the early 90's, including Cooper ( blonde and two tone ), Worth and Adirondack. He also used Worth and Adirondack bats in the 80's, but very sparingly. At one time I owned 20 legitimate Mattingly bats so I feel I know his bats better than any other player I collect or have seen in the market.

    Let me know if I can answer any specific questions and look out in the future for my post on Mattingly bats. Jim Caravello

  3. #3
    Senior Member BULBUS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,059

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Jim, I havent seen a nice Mattingly game used bat in a long time, just those finished M110's that people are paying a lot of money for. I have two of his bats in my collection. Ive been trying to do research on one of them, maybe you can help me out. Its a Louisville Slugger Mc44. MATTINGLY in block lettering. Two toned, brown barell with a natural handle. I picked it up from a guy in Puerto Rico. After purchasing the bat, I found out that Don player winter ball in PR (83-84). He won the batting title. I guess he contiued his hot hitting into the 84 season with the Yanks Do you have any input on the bat? My other bat is a 1987 T141 unfinished with lots of use, my favorite piece!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,093

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Bulbus - will get back to you tonight......

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,093

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Bulbus - there is one order for Mc44 bats on October 5, 1983 - 18 pieces - 34" long and 32 ounces - Walker Finish. The order is under Baseball Miscellaneous and not by the New York Yankees. It is quite possible that the team that Mattingly played for in Winter ball ordered those bats. This is the vague area in modern records - where the team has not ordered the bat for the player and we really do not know who placed the order. If the bat shows Mattingly use characteristics and you feel good about the source / provenance, its probably a legitimate piece. The two tone finish is the commonly known "Walker Finish" made popular by former major leaguer Harry Walker who ordered most of his bats with hickory barrels and blonde / golden handles.....hope all this helps and if you are ever interested in selling your Mattingly bats, I am always buying. Jim Caravello

  6. #6

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Jim,

    I am a huge Mattingly fan and have just recently started collecting game used bats. I have been waiting for the "right one" and your post has me a little worried about finding it. You said that the Yankees never ordered Don Mattingly the M110 model during 86-89. What about earlier in his career? American Memerobilia has a M110 from 84-85 it is 34" and weighs 34.6oz John Taube graded it a 8. What are your opinions on this bat I want to make sure I get a good one. I have pictures of the bat below.

    I appreciate any advice/feedback on this bat.
    Thanks

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,093

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Kahuna23 - there are numerous orders by Mattingly during this time period for M110 bats as pictured. The bat appears to be from 1985, as the "Don Mattingly" engraved signature appears to be a foil stamp which was embossed on some bats in 1985 and 1986. The 23 on the knob appears consistent with other 23's I have seen from this period and the pine tar markings are also consistent. Lastly - PSA ( Taube ) has authenticated Mattingly bats from this period on many occasions and I am confident of the grade they have given this bat. Let me know if I can help any further. Jim Caravello

  8. #8
    Senior Member BULBUS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,059

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Jim, thanks for the info. Much appreciated. Wow, only 18 of these bats were made! I wonder how many are left? I am looking to sell it, but I would like to do some more research on it.

    I have a question about Mattingly writing 23 on the knob. About when did he stop doing it? I know at some point his bats were disappearing and he started using retired numbers. My 1987 bat has the number 5 on it.

    Regarding that M110. Isnt it a little too heavy for Mattingly? Didnt he mostly use 32oz bats? My Mc44 is 32oz, so is my T141. Do the records show that weight? I wish I kept the pictures, but I bought and sold an unfinished M110 w/ foil stamping on Ebay. Absolutely no use. Vintage Mattingly autograph in the same location. I sold it because it was too heavy and knew it wasnt a real gamer. I dont like the fact that you dont see any use on the barell. The pine tar doesnt look old. In my opinion, I would stay away from that bat.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Yankwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    860

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Again, this is what I meant by "shady looking".

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,093

    Re: So many shady looking Mattingly bats

    Hi Bulbus - regarding #23, I have seen Mattingly bats in the 90's with #23 on the knob that were very good Mattingly gamers. I owned a two tone cooper from the early 90's with #23, as well as a Louisville Slugger with #23. When Mattingly started using 3, 5 and 7 as numbers on the knob, he didn't abandon #23, so you will see examples of #23 into the 90's.

    Regarding the weight of this bat, there are weights indicated in the records and he ordered as heavy as 32 ounce bats. The bat in question is 34.6 ounces, which is a little heavy. There is pine tar on the bat which in my opinion would add weight to the piece. Would it add 2.6 ounces, I can't tell you unless I could see the bat. The bat was probably heavy to begin with and was probably more than 32 ounces from the factory. Since MEARS and others do not agree with my opinions on weight variances, my initial response to your question did not challenge the weight and I really do not want to touch on that topic here and start the questions and debates all over again. Most people think that 1 or 2 ounces in weight differential is ok. The authenticators believe this. I do believe the pine tar could have added some weight to the bat.

    Now, to the pine tar - yes, it looks different, but once again, I would have to see it in person and I didn't comment on it to begin with, because I have the upmost respect for the authenticator of this bat. He has seen a tremendous amount of Mattingly bats from this period. What you should Ask American Memorabilia for is the full COA so you can read it - or to be quite honest, I would call John Taube and ask him about the bat - I bet he remembers it and can answer any questions you may have about the weight, the tar, the use on it, etc.

    Frankly, I don't like the piece not because of the things you have mentioned - I am not fond of foil stamped bats from this period and would personally not buy the bat because of that. If the bat was not foil stamped and had a nice deep engraving, I would probably call John about the bat and ask him about the weight and the pine tar application.

    Its hard to sit here and second guess the authenticator on this bat without seeing it or reading the details of the COA - AND - John's integrity goes beyond all others ( in my opinion ) as an authenticator of bats - and I am sure he can answer any of your questions.

    Hope this helps. Please let me know if you have any other questions regarding Mattingly. Thanks, Jim

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com