Circle of Greats 1880 Balloting

This post is for voting and discussion in the 109th round of balloting for the Circle of Greats (COG). This round adds to the list of candidates eligible to receive your votes those players born in 1880. Rules and lists are after the jump.

The new group of 1880-born players, in order to join the eligible list, must, as usual, have played at least 10 seasons in the major leagues or generated at least 20 Wins Above Replacement (“WAR”, as calculated by baseball-reference.com, and for this purpose meaning 20 total WAR for everyday players and 20 pitching WAR for pitchers). This new group of 1880-born candidates joins the eligible holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full list of players eligible to appear on your ballots.

Each submitted ballot, if it is to be counted, must include three and only three eligible players. As always, the one player who appears on the most ballots cast in the round is inducted into the Circle of Greats. Players who fail to win induction but appear on half or more of the ballots that are cast win four added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Players who appear on 25% or more of the ballots cast, but less than 50%, earn two added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Any other player in the top 9 (including ties) in ballot appearances, or who appears on at least 10% of the ballots, wins one additional round of ballot eligibility.

All voting for this round closes at 11:59 PM EDT Sunday, October 18th, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:59 PM EDT Friday, October 16th.

If you’d like to follow the vote tally, and/or check to make sure I’ve recorded your vote correctly, you can see my ballot-counting spreadsheet for this round here: COG 1880 Vote Tally. I’ll be updating the spreadsheet periodically with the latest votes. Initially, there is a row in the spreadsheet for every voter who has cast a ballot in any of the past rounds, but new voters are entirely welcome — new voters will be added to the spreadsheet as their ballots are submitted. Also initially, there is a column for each of the holdover candidates; additional player columns from the new born-in-1880 group will be added to the spreadsheet as votes are cast for them.

Choose your three players from the lists below of eligible players. The thirteen current holdovers are listed in order of the number of future rounds (including this one) through which they are assured eligibility, and alphabetically when the future eligibility number is the same. The 1880 birth-year players are listed below in order of the number of seasons each played in the majors, and alphabetically among players with the same number of seasons played.

Holdovers:

Shoeless Joe Jackson (eligibility guaranteed for 5 rounds)
Goose Goslin (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Ed Walsh (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Dick Allen (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Richie Ashburn (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Kevin Brown (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Andre Dawson (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Dennis Eckersley (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Graig Nettles (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Satchel Paige (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Luis Tiant (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Hoyt Wilhelm (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Dave Winfield (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)

Everyday Players (born in 1880, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Sam Crawford
George McBride
Davy Jones
Joe Tinker
George Gibson
Mickey Doolin
Heinie Wagner
Frank LaPorte
Matty McIntyre
Lee Tannehill
Chief Meyers

Pitchers (born in 1880, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Christy Mathewson
George Mullin
Barney Pelty
Charlie Smith
Addie Joss

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

176 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gary Bateman
Gary Bateman
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#1–Henry Aaron (1955-69)

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug: For question #3 I found only one pitcher to pitch such a game in his last season. It was Erskine Mayer in 1919 but it was not the final game of his career.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#3: How about Elam Vangilder

Gary Bateman
Gary Bateman
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Is #11 Mark Reynolds?

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Lee Tannehill: BA = .2000 in 1906
Don Wert: BA = .1996 in 1968

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago

The truly amazing thing is that Wert wasn’t even the weakest hitter on the left side of the World Series Champion Tigers infield.

The three-headed-beast that was the Tigers shortstop (Oyler/Matchick/Tracewski) managed to hit a combined 0.165

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago

Lowest BA for a qualifying starter on a pennant winner that I could find: Skeeter Webb of the Tigers with .1990 in 1945. However it’s not the modern definition of PA but the minimum for 1945.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago

@54: That’s for the time period 1914-2014.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

As I so often do, I’ll take some of the softballs:

1. Sam Crawford – Hank Aaron. Johnny Damon’s was equally long (14 years).

7. George Mullin – Bill Donovan, who completed 212 of 242 career starts.

12. Barney Pelty – Jim Palmer managed a 169 ERA+ in 323 innings in 1975.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#16: Andy Pettitte

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

4. Tinker — Shorstops Walt Weiss and Matt Williams homered in the 1989 World

Series.

Brendan Bingham
Brendan Bingham
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#9: Rico Petricelli?

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

I was going to guess Rico as well yesterday, but then saw Brendan had already figured it out. So, due to his games at 3B, Rico must have fallen just short of 3000 PA at SS? If so, the answer must be Rick Burleson.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

I thought it was Rico as well yesterday, and presumed Brendan had guessed it correctly. Rico must have had enough games at 3B to fall just short of 3000 PA at SS. Then the answer must be Rick Burleson.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

Had some issues trying to post a comment last night…[sigh]

Brendan Bingham
Brendan Bingham
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug,
A little push back: Rick Burleson is clearly a correct answer to the Heinie Wagner question with 4374 PA at shortstop for the Red Sox (per B-ref splits pages), but so is Rico Petrocelli (sorry to have misspelled his name in my earlier comment). He had 3122 PA as a Boston SS (again, per B-ref splits).

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago

It may have something to do with how Doug is defining a SS. Running the PI Batting Season Finder with at least 50% of games as a SS shows Burleson on the list but not Petrocelli. Running it with 49% shows both. Maybe Doug is using 50% as the cutoff for defining a SS.

Brendan Bingham
Brendan Bingham
9 years ago

Richard,
Your explanation makes sense; thank you. Petrocelli played mostly shortstop through 1970 and mostly 3B from 1971 on. If only he had retired a couple years earlier…

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

10. LaPorte — Reginald Martinez Jackson, all in 1976

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#14, Matty McIntyre: If I understand the question correctly it’s Bobby Higginson and Magglio Ordonez. Higginson did it for the Tigers in LF and RF. Ordonez did it RF for the Tigers and the White Sox.

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

I think #2 is Dal Maxvill

brp
brp
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#15 – Ernie Lombardi, 1935-1937

Kahuna Tuna
Kahuna Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#13, Charlie Smith question: Russ Kemmerer, 21-45, .318. (Kemmerer was 22-14, .611, with the White Sox, Red Sox, and Colt .45s.)

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

2. George McBride – I found TWO guys with two such seasons (Mark Belanger and Roger Metzger), but I can’t find the guy. I’ve looked through like three dozen baseball-reference pages. Am I overthinking this? Is it someone obvious?

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Dr. Doom: I take it you do not have a PI subscription. If you did you would find the guy pretty easily. There is a such a guy with 3 seasons and another one with two such seasons.

Brent
Brent
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Dr Doom, I don’t have a PI subscription either, but if I am right, the player you are looking for had a couple of MLB playing sons, one of whom was named for him

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Brent

HUGE hint! Thanks!

The answer is Sandy Alomar.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

14. Matty McIntyre – Lu Blue and Tony Phillips are the two.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Dang it! I forgot about the positional part…

Brent
Brent
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Dr. Doom, let’s try Magglio Ordonez

Brent
Brent
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Half the answer for #5 is Greg Gross. Still looking for the other guy

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Brent

Looks like the other half is Charles Gipson. He is one of 8 players with more games played than PA with a minimum of 100 games played. He played in 373 games and had 366 PA. Only Matt Alexander has achieved the feat with more games played than Gipson.

Brent
Brent
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#9 is Rick Burleson

Kahuna Tuna
Kahuna Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

#6 (George Gibson), two steals by a catcher in a World Series: Manny Sanguillén, 1971, and Johnny Bench, 1972.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago

My ballot: Christy Mathewson Kevin Brown Luis Tiant I expect Christy to win this round, and he deserves it. But I’m going to lay out my $0.02 on a couple of other candidates for whom I’m not voting: Ed Walsh – other than the volume of innings pitched, I see him as basically Kevin Brown. He was the best pitcher in baseball for a few years (six for him, five for Brown), including better than a bunch of Hall of Fame pitchers (in Walsh’s case, Johnson, Mathewson, Alexander; in Brown’s, Maddux, Johnson, Clemens). Each led his league in WAR twice.… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Doom – I’m going to push back a bit on Crawford. 1) He played a shorter schedule than some others on the ballot. 2) His Rdp is 0 for every single year. Obviously impossible to know what it should be but it’s not hard to imagine that a speedy player like Crawford should have positive Rdp numbers. 3) Similarly his Rbaser numbers look strange. He’s at 0 or -1 every year until age 32 when he suddenly turns in a +6. Again, I have doubts about the accuracy of those numbers. 4) Defense? Well who knows. Rfield shows him as… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

These are all fair points. I’m willing to concede that all of them should factor into an analysis. However: In regards to 3), Ty Cobb was on the same teams as Crawford, and has much more variety in Rbaser. This could simply be because Cobb’s SB totals fluctuated more, but nonetheless, there it is. Additionally, we can look at good ol’ Bill James tools: Black Ink, Gray Ink, HOF Monitor, and HOF Standards. Those don’t involve any of the components you’re talking about. Here are Crawford’s numbers: Black Ink Batting – 33 (52), Average HOFer ≈ 27 Gray Ink Batting… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Doom – Thanks for your reply. Regrading Rbaser, unfortunately, I can’t find any explanation for how it’s calculated pre-1953 (when there’s no play-by-play data). I suspect they’re relying 100% on stolen base data. And imputing caught stealing data for years in which it’s missing. For Crawford, that’s nearly his whole career. What’s interesting is that for the three years in which caught stealing data is available for Crawford, he’s +9 runs in Rbaser. And those three years all came when he was older (32, 34 and 35). For the rest of his career, mostly when he was a lot younger… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Re: Rbaser, thanks. I didn’t know.

Re: Whitaker, I agree 100%. And it makes sense that I would’ve posted this, since I never voted for Whitaker for exactly the same reasons I’m not voting for Crawford. 😉

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago

Larry Bowa, I think, is the culprit re #8.

Stephen
Stephen
9 years ago

Mathewson, Goslin, Ashburn

shard
shard
9 years ago

Sam Crawford – Christy Mathewson – Richie Ashburn

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago

Addie Joss qualifies for this ballot with 25+ WAR and 9 years of Big-League experience.

CursedClevelander
CursedClevelander
9 years ago

Shameless plug alert: My uncle wrote a very good monograph about Addie Joss that was published by SABR. It’s available on Amazon for pretty cheap: http://www.amazon.com/Addie-Joss-Pitchers-Scott-Longert/dp/0910137749 Is Joss’s perfect game the most clutch regular season pitching performance in history? If not #1, it’s certainly in contention. The Indians needed a win to stay in the tighter than an Elizabethan corset pennant race, and they were opposed by Ed Walsh and the White Sox. Walsh twirled a gem, striking out an amazing 15 batters (in 1908, that’s just not something people did), but Joss bested him with his perfecto on a… Read more »

CursedClevelander
CursedClevelander
9 years ago

I’m sure most of you know about the Addie Joss benefit game that was played in 1911, often considered the first “All-Star” game. The Naps faced a team of stars from the other 7 AL clubs, including Sam Crawford, Eddie Collins, Smokey Joe Wood, Walter Johnson, Home Run Baker, Tris Speaker and Ty Cobb. They ended up losing 5-3, a pretty respectable score considering the caliber of the opposition. It also led to one of the greatest photos in baseball history: (it’s the picture on the right-hand side of the image, which features Jackson, Cobb and Speaker; the left-hand picture… Read more »

Steven
Steven
9 years ago

Mathewson. Crawford. Goslin.

MikeD
MikeD
9 years ago

Davy Jones and Micky Dolenz? The Monkees are up for election? Oh, that’s Mickey Doolin, never mind.

Matthewson
Paige
Nettles

Andy
Andy
9 years ago

Mathewson, Crawford, Shoeless Joe

JEV
JEV
9 years ago

Mathewson, Jackson, Joss

MJ
MJ
9 years ago

Christy Mathewson, Kevin Brown, Sam Crawford

dr-remulak
dr-remulak
9 years ago

Mathewson, Nettles, Winfield.

Kirk
Kirk
9 years ago

Christy Mathewson, Sam Crawford and Hoyt Wilhelm

Steve
Steve
9 years ago

Shoeless Joe Jackson; Goose Goslin; Christy Mathewson

Mike L
Mike L
9 years ago

I tried something slightly different with this group of holdovers/newbies–looked at bWAR per 100 IP, and PA/bWAR. I added Randolph for hitters and Reuschel for pitchers, and integrated the five pitchers already inducted that we had previously identified as having the lowest total WAR–Vance, Marichal, Rivera, Ford, Koufax. Dick Allen 7315 PA, 124.6 PA/WAR Randolph 9461 PA,144.4 PA/WAR Ashburn 9736 PA, 153.1 PA/WAR Goslin 9829 PA, 148.7 PA/WAR Nettles 10228 PA, 150.4 PA/WAR Crawford 10593 PA, 141.1 PA/WAR Dawson 10769 PA, 166.9 PA/WAR Winfield 12358 PA, 193.7 PA/WAR Rivera 1283 IP, 22.7 IP/WAR (insane, and maybe shows a flaw) Wilhelm… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

Part of Rivera’s WAR is because baseball-reference includes Leverage Index for relief pitchers. Rivera pitched in high leverage situations, and so everything he did – every pitch – was “worth” more than the same 1st-inning pitch by a starter. This may be a great idea, and it may be a terrible one. I’m pretty agnostic on it. But it DOES go to explain some of why Rivera’s IP/WAR is so high. His career LI is 1.8 – in other words, his pitching was in (almost) twice as critical situations; therefore it makes sense that he would earn WAR at almost… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Doom: My big issue with leverage index is that only relievers can earn it. A starter who stays in the game and does the exact same thing as a reliever receives 0 leverage. For the life of me, I can’t see how that makes sense.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Yeah, it should most probably be applied evenly. The thing is, though, by the end of a starter’s career, his LI would basically be 1. It would most likely be between .9 and 1.1, anyway, in all but the most extreme of cases (and even THEN it would still be .8-1.2). So that’s why I think baseball-reference’s WAR doesn’t take it into account.

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Doom – I agree that it would only have a small impact. But the level of impact, in my opinion, isn’t why something should or shouldn’t be included in WAR. It should be about accuracy. Plus, WAR already includes lots of small, insignificant adjustments. What’s the rationale for leaving this one out?

Gary Bateman
Gary Bateman
9 years ago

Mathewson, Goslin, Ashburn

Is the answer to #9 on the quiz Rick Burleson?

Paul E
Paul E
9 years ago

Allen, Joss, Mathewson

Bryan O'Connor
Editor
9 years ago

Wins Above Average, excluding negative seasonal totals:

Mathewson 64.4
Brown 43.3
Jackson 41.0
Walsh 38.6
Tiant 37.5
Crawford 36.2
Allen 35.8
Nettles 35.7
Dawson 35.4
Eckersley 34.6
Ashburn 33.9
Goslin 31.7
Winfield 31.1
Tinker 30.6
Wilhelm 28.7
Joss 25.2
Paige 5.7

Mathewson, Brown, Jackson

Another quiz: Mathewson is one of four baseball Hall of Fame players whose last name begins with the last name of another Hall of Fame player, then adds letters at the end (Mathews + on). Who are the other three?

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago
Reply to  Bryan O'Connor

Nellie Fox/Jimmie Foxx
George Kell/King Kelly/George Kelly/Joe Kelley
Ron Santo/Louis Santop

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  David Horwich

Also Cy Young/Ross Youngs

Bryan O'Connor
Editor
9 years ago

Good work, guys. I’d forgotten about the Kell(e)ys. I was looking for Foxx, Santop, and Youngs. I guess there are seven legitimate answers, including Mathewson.

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago

Very early returns (through #49, 14 ballots):

14 – Mathewson
=============50% (7)
5 – Crawford
4 – Goslin*, Jackson*
=============25% (4)
3 – Ashburn, Brown
2 – Joss, Nettles
=============50% (2)
1 – Allen, Paige, Tiant, Wilhelm, Winfield
0 – Dawson, Eckersley, Walsh*

Asterisks denote players not on the bubble.

Brent
Brent
9 years ago

I vote for Mathewson, Crawford, and Goslin

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

I noticed George Mullin had a 29-win season.
And 4.6 WAR.

That has to be some sort of record, right?
Yep.

Lowest WAR, minimum 29 wins:

4.6 … Mullin
5.5 … Christy Mathewson (33)
6.9 … Claude Hendrix
7.4 … Denny McLain (31)

8.0 … Hal Newhouser
8.2 … Mordecai Brown
8.4 … Jim Bagby (31)
8.5 … Dizzy Dean

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Voomo: And the year before that, Mullin had the second lowest WAR ever for a season of 17+ wins!

The worst is Jimmy Ring in 1920 with -0.7 WAR. Then Mullin with -0.5 followed by Denny McLain with -0.2.

And McLain’s 17 win, negative WAR season came the year before his 31 win season just as Mullin’s came the year before his 29 win season.

Chris C
Chris C
9 years ago

Mathewson, Eck, Allen

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
9 years ago

Mathewson, Paige, Crawford

David P
David P
9 years ago

Here’s some sleuthing for you PI experts!

The Cardinals have 100 wins with 3 games left in the season.

Their current RBI leader (Matt Carpenter) has only 84. Their top two combined (Carpenter and Peralta) have only 155. Their top 3 combined (Carpenter, Peralta and Molina/Wong) have only 216 RBIs.

Are those the lowest totals ever for a 100 win team?

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Don’t know if these are the lowest totals but here are the 1969 Mets:
76….Tommy Agee
75…Cleon Jones
52…Ron Swoboda

Top player ……76
Top 2 players…151
Top 3 players…203

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Don’t know if these are the lowest totals but here are the 1915 Red Sox:
76…Duffy Lewis
69…Tris Speaker
61…Dick Hoblitzell

Top player ……76
Top 2 players…145
Top 3 players…206

David P
David P
9 years ago

Thanks Richard! Of course, the ’69 Mets! As for the ’15 Red Sox, that’s obviously a different beast entirely.

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago

The 1907 Cubs make a “strong” showing here:

70…Harry Steinfeldt
51…Johnny Evers
49…Frank Chance

Top player: 70
Top 2: 121
Top 3: 170

Kahuna Tuna
Kahuna Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Wow. The Cardinals are tenth in the NL in runs scored, ten runs lower than the NL team average. Of course, a 136 team ERA+ helps out with that.

Brent
Brent
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

How about this one? How often has a 100 win team had its primary leadoff hitter lead the team in RBIs? This would seem especially unusual in a league where the #9 hitter is a pitcher.

Kahuna Tuna
Kahuna Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Brent

And then there’s this: Carpenter’s OPS in 80 games batting leadoff was 1.022 with 22 HR, and the team’s record in those games was 48-32 (.600). His OPS in 69 games batting second was .700 with 6 HR, and the team’s record in those games was 46-23 (.667).

brp
brp
9 years ago

Vote:
Mathewson
Wilhelm
Ashburn

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago

I’m still having some difficulty in deciding on how I should vote. I don’t want to be unfair to the guys who played a long time ago but I also don’t think it’s totally unreasonable to acknowledge that they guys who came along later were playing at a time when it was much more difficult to stand out for a whole variety of reasons. Bill James talked about something I think he called “competitive balance”. Does anyone know if anyone has taken that further than he did and, if so, have they written anything about it that is comprehensible? (i.e.… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Sam Crawford

Most Xtra Base Hits, with less than 100 home runs
Since 1893:

902 … Nap Lajoie
864 … Sam Crawford

716 … Sam Rice
674 … Sherry MaGee
672 … Eddie Collins
663 … Joe Judge

649 … Rod Carew
648 … Fred Clarke
648 … Max Carey
646 … Ed Delahanty

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Crawford played 4 years of a full Pacific Coast League schedule (age 38-41) after he was done in Detroit. One of his teammates was Doc Crandall. In 1914, Crandall, for the St. Louis Terriers of the Federal League, was a true 2-way player. 196 IP 348 PA 21 Starts on the mound 55 Starts at 2nd base. _______________________ Only a handful of guys have done that. Most Plate Appearances, with a minimum of 20 Games Pitched. Since 1893: 417 … Win Mercer (1899) 383 … Jimmy Callahan (1897) 382 … George Ruth (1918) 377 … Harry Howell (1902) 348 …… Read more »

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago

Comparing the lesser COG electees (position players) Expanding on the topic Mike L. brought up previously, the bottom 19 position players (by WAR) with additional stats: Alomar 66.8, JAWS 13th (9073 AB, 2724 H, 504 2B, 80 3B, 210 HR, 1134 RBI, 474 SB, .300 BA, .373 OBP, 116 OPS+) Snider 66.5, JAWS 7th (7161 AB, 2116 H, 358 2B, 85 3B, 407 HR, 1333 RBI, 99 SB, .295 BA, .380 OBP, 140 OPS+) Cronin 66.4, JAWS 16th (7579 AB, 2285 H, 515 2B, 118 3B, 170 HR, 1424 RBI, 87 SB, .301 BA, .390 OBP, 119 OPS+) Reese 66.3,… Read more »

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

At this point of the analysis of COG position players we have 10 left to justify (Reese, Boudreau, Baker, J. Robinson, Killebrew, Greenberg, Gordon, Sisler, Cochrane, Campanella). Reese is the easiest to explain (66 WAR, almost 2200 H in just 8000 AB, missed 3 years to WWII, a spark plug and leader on the great 50’s Dodger teams) the only soft spot a .269 BA and 99 OPS+. He epitomized the guy that did the little things to help his team win (and win big games) and with 3 more prime years would have gotten well into the 70’s for… Read more »

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

Speaking of position players, here is who we have left coming up with WAR numbers: 1880: Crawford (75.1), Tinker (53.2) 1879: Bresnahan (41) 1878: Jimmy Sheckard (49.6) 1877: Tommy Leach (46.8) 1876: Flick (53.2), Chance (45.6) 1875: zip 1874: Wagner (131), LaJoie (107.4) 1873: Wallace (70.2 + 6.1 pitching!) 1872: Clarke (67.8), Keeler (54) 1871: zip 1870: Davis (84.7), Bill Dahlen (75.2), J. Collins (53.2) Pre-1870: zip 1971: Pudge (68.4) 16 of any note (cutoff at 40 WAR). Assumes at least 40% of games played after 1900 cutoff (allows Davis/Dahlen/Young). Crawford should gain support once Mathewson moves on, maybe a… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

Dave H – You inspired me to find more Jack Powell related info! 1) Powell lost 19 games in a season 5 times without ever losing 20. Unfortunately, there are no games logs from that era so there’s no way of knowing if his manager’s were holding him out of games to prevent 20 losses. 2) In 1904, Powell and Jack Chesbro threw 845 of the Highlanders 1380.2 innings, a whopping 61.2%. 3) The year after Powell retired, the Browns had another Jack Powell on their roster. The second Jack Powell only pitched two innings in the majors at age… Read more »

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

A while back I felt Crawford was a sure thing candidate but some felt we should set the bar higher for early stars as the level of competition was lower. I listed him as borderline based on those assertions, but didn’t feel good about it. Dr. Doom and David P.’s discussion of Crawford has prompted me to re-think my ‘prediction’ on him. Doom’s contention is the lack of a dramatic peak. I get that Crawford with no 7 WAR seasons and lots of 5’s doesn’t blow people away, but David P.’s suggestion that he was the Whitaker of his time… Read more »

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

Oops,

Crawford’s RBI total should be 1525, not 155.

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

Just as a reminder- as much for myself as for anyone- the 3 upcoming no-doubters among the pitchers are Gettysburg Eddie, Cy Young & Pedro. In addition we’ll also have Iron Man, Three Finger, Rube and maybe Vic “How do I not get a cool nickname with a middle name like Gazaway” Willis. In addition to the holdovers & who ever comes out of the redemption round assuming we’re still doing another one. I really hope that the BBWAA decides this is Bagwell’s year (in addition to Griffey & Piazza) since I think that Pudge is probably close to a… Read more »

mosc
mosc
9 years ago

I think Mathewson should get in. I’m not so sure about Crawford. A pure deadball hitter, I am lothe to look at his stats without some context for the level of competition and think adjusting WAR for the shorter length of the season rather silly. I also feel like outfielders in the deadball era had a very light load defensively (even center fielders, not much difference). All that said, Sam Crawford’s production was so solid that it nearly overcomes all of that for me. Still, I don’t find him in the top 3 even if I wouldn’t argue with his… Read more »

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago

Crawford, Nettles, Tiant

T-Bone
T-Bone
9 years ago

D. Allen, Wilhelm, Mathewson

Mike L
Mike L
9 years ago

Dave Humbert, nice work. Looking at those stats, and things like IP/WAR and PA/WAR, you have to be struck at how much better the absolute inner circle greats are. Winfield is a HOF, he’s been hanging around COG forever, he;s still getting votes, but he amasses WAR at less than half the rate Williams/Mays/Mantle does, and one third the rate Ruth does. In pitching the extremes aren’t as great, but Walter Johnson/Lefty Grove/Pete Alexander gain WAR at a third or more faster rate than Marichal/Tiant/Ford, and do it in much more innings-which makes it even more impressive. If I had… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago

Mathewson, Jackson, Crawford

aweb
aweb
9 years ago

Mathewson
Brown
DAwson

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago

An update, through 24 (aweb @100):

22 – Christy Mathewson
================75% (18)
================50% (12)
9 – Sam Crawford
================25% (6)
5 – Goose Goslin*, Shoeless Joe Jackson*
4 – Richie Ashburn, Kevin Brown, Graig Nettles
3 – Dick Allen, Andre Dawson, Satchel Paige, Luis Tiant, Hoyt Wilhelm
================10% (3)
2 – Addie Joss
1 – Dennis Eckersley, Dave Winfield
0 – Ed Walsh*

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Zack Gronk goes

19-3
1.66
0.844

…and probably doesn’t win the Cyclone Award.
_______________

Kershaw (with one short start remaining),
2.16 and 294 SO

And is the 3rd best pitcher in the league.
_______________

The Max, with 2 no-hitters and an 8.12 SO/BB, is a distant 4th.

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Meanwhile, Dallas Keuchel is the first pitcher ever to go 15-0 at home. The previous record was 13-0, done by Tex Hughson in 1944 and Dave Ferris in 1946.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Ed Walsh? How does what he did compare to his contemporaries? First, cherrypicking his peak, 1906-1912 IP Leaders: 2526 … Ed Walsh 2183 … Christy Mathewson 2031 … George Mullin 1852 … Nap Rucker 1832 … Eddie Plank WAR: 60.0 … Walsh 52.4 … Mathewson 44.9 … Walter Johnson 41.4 … Nap Rucker 38.9 … Mordecai Brown _______________________ Okay, nobody touches him. That’s worth something. His career was 1904-1917. So, same stats, last two decades of the dead ball era 1900-1919: WAR 119.8 .. Big Train 95.3 … Mathewson 86.5 … Plank 80.2 … Denton Young 69.0 … Pete Alexander… Read more »

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

To me Walsh seems fairly comparable to Dizzy Dean, once you adjust for the fact that Walsh was pitching in the Dead Ball era and Dean in the 1930s. Walsh was better, I think, but not *hugely* better. Dean had a 5-year peak, and a few more useful-ish seasons; Walsh had a 6- or 7-year peak, and a few more useful-ish seasons. Dean won an MVP award, and finished second twice; Walsh finished second twice, and probably would’ve won the MVP had they been awarding it in 1908. Each was on one WS-winning team. The CoG hasn’t been too welcoming… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  David Horwich

I get that counting stats have value and that Walsh has a ton of black ink in his career. What bothers me is that Mathewson told a young pitcher that in order to be successful you needed to “save” your best stuff for when you really needed it. He wasn’t talking about setting up your change up or something like that either. That’s how guys could pitch both ends of a double header or 20 inning complete games. And while not only couldn’t you get away with that today I don’t think you could have got away with it a… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Another way to think of this is to go to Baseball-Reference & click on the top single-season WAR leaders and look at the top 27 guys on that list. You have 3 seasons by Big Train at his peak, 1 by the Babe and Doc Gooden’s 1985 season. Everyone else is a pitcher and all of the seasons are prior to 1900. Jim Devlin. Not once but twice. Guy Hecker. Jim Whitney. Ed Morris. Not exactly names that scream Hall of Fame. Now look at JAWS. Fourteen guys in the top 38 pitched before 1900. Another five pitched in the… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

In the NBJHBA, Bill James’s solution to that was to simply cut IN HALF all pitcher statistics before 1893, I believe. That alleviates some of the imbalance. But yes; I basically agree with you, and that’s a huge part of the issue I have with Ed Walsh.

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Hartvig – You make some good points but I want to push back a bit. Part of the reason that Devlin, Heckler, Whitney and Morris posted such high single season WAR total is that they were often pitching over 500 innings in a season. Yes, Walsh also pitched a lot of innings though no where near what those 4 threw. That’s also why so many pre-1900 pitchers rank highly in JAWS. On a WAR/per inning basis, they’d rank a lot lower. Walsh is a bit different though. He has a six WAR year peak that’s much better than anyone else… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

David P But that argument only holds up IF you limit it to the years of Walsh’s peak and/or 6 consecutive years. If you expand it by a decade on either side or just make it 6 best instead of 6 consecutive or change it in any of a dozen other ways and you have what is maybe the 8th best pitcher in a 25 year window. I can see the case for Walsh but that fact that JAWS sees 5 of the 7 best pitchers off all-time pitching within 5 years of one another- and which centers EXACTLY on… Read more »

Hub Kid
Hub Kid
9 years ago

I don’t see any active chats, so I’ll try this here- apologies if I’ve cluttered the voting thread unnecessarily.

Did the Cleveland Indians just play a 161 game schedule? I’m all in favor of a slightly shorter schedule, but I must have missed something here. For for that matter, who is the other team(s)?

I have only noticed this as a smarting Red Sox fan- what a streaky way to end the season. No hard feelings to the Indians, I’ll not begrudge the winning record.

I can’t find anything on recent Indians fan site posts.

Kahuna Tuna
Kahuna Tuna
9 years ago
Reply to  Hub Kid

The Indians and Tigers were rained out on Sept. 11 and 12. The Sept. 11 rainout was made up as part of a Sept. 13 doubleheader. The teams had been scheduled to play a single game that day. Neither team had an off day on the 14th. The Sept. 12 rainout was not made up because it had no postseason ramifications. From the Indians’ Sept. 30 official game info (link): “Beginning Sept. 4, Cleveland was scheduled to play 27 of the club’s remaining 30 games against A.L. Central opponents, incl. Sept. 12 rainout vs. Detroit to be made up if… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Hub Kid

This used to happen all the time. It’s really only the Selig era that MLB has actually TRIED to force every team into a 162-game season. For example, in 2002, EIGHT teams didn’t play 162 (four games not made up). As recently as 1991, the Cubs only played 160, as a game each with the Mets and Expos were not made up. It used to be that MLB didn’t want to make up games (especially at the end of the season, if it were deemed too difficult) unless they had impact on the pennant race. I personally prefer every team… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Hub Kid

Some musings on the recent season. There were six NL teams with 90+ losses. That’s the most ever in a season. From 1901 through 2014 there were 16 occasions of a player with 40+ HR and fewer than 100 RBI. In 2015 there were 5 such players: Pujols, Trout, Harper, Cruz and Gonzalez. There have only been four other seasons in which there were as many as two such players. Pujols and Trout formed just the second pair of teammates to do it in the same season. The other pair was Hank Aaron and Davey Johnson for the Braves in… Read more »

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago
Reply to  Hub Kid

Games Played leaders, AL, 1985 Season 163 … Greg Walker (SOX) 162 … Bill Buckner (BOS) –> … Alfredo Griffin (OAK) 161 … Wade Boggs (BOS) –> … Tony Fernandez (TOR) –> … Brook Jacoby (CLE) –> … Kirby Puckett (MIN) –> … Cal Ripken, Jr. (BAL) during the consecutive games streak The Sox and Sox played to a tie in Boston in late July and made up that game as a doubleheader the next day. They also made up the game in Chicago that was lost due to the players’ strike as part of a twi-night doubleheader (which I… Read more »

Lawrence Azrin
Lawrence Azrin
9 years ago
Reply to  oneblankspace

The further back you go in MLB history, the more ‘uneven’ overall is the actual games-played-in-a-season total for each team.

For instance, compare Ripken and Gehrig’s consecutive games-played streaks:

RIPKEN: He had seasons of 161 games played twice, and 163 games
GEHRIG: He had seasons of 149(!) and 152 games on the short end, and 156, 157 and 157 on the long end.

Jimmy Barrett played 162 games for the 1904 Detroit Tigers, the record for a 154-game season. Their record was 62-90, so they played 10 games with no decisions.

Artie Z.
Artie Z.
9 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

I wondered what implications the Yankees playing a 149 game schedule had on the pennant race the year Gehrig played “only” 149 games. I thought it may have come in a year the Yankees ran away with it, so there was no reason to play more, or a year in which they couldn’t possibly have caught up. Not exactly. It happened in 1935. The Tigers went 93-58 to win the AL, but the Yankees were 89-60. I’m guessing it was a 154 game schedule, but the most games played in the AL was 153 (the Cubs and Cardinals played 154… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Artie Z.

The 1907 Tigers played 153 games. They had 3 tie games and their W-L record was 92-58, good for a percentage of .613 and first place in the AL. The second place A’s played 150 games with 5 ties and a 88-57 W-L percentage for a winning percentage of .607. So the team with the fewest losses did not win the pennant.

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
9 years ago
Reply to  Artie Z.

It doesn’t change the bottom line, Artie, but the Tigers actually played 152 games that year. One was a tie, and in the past, tie games were not suspended or made up; they were part of the season record (which is why Detroit won the 1908 pennant by 0.5 games – the difference with Cleveland was that Cleveland lost one more game because Detroit tied one). Had the Tigers tied two games in ’35, they would have clinched the pennant even if all unplayed games had been made up. I chased down their record suspecting that was the case, but… Read more »

Mike L
Mike L
9 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

A brief comment on the old-timers unfinished schedules. Go back long enough and travel was harder and longer. Even before hopping the Mississippi, you could be talking 20 hours or more by train. Schedules were set up for long road trips, going from one regional team to another–Phily, to Pittsburgh, to St. Louis, etc. And gate receipts were modest-in 1920, only five years managed to average more than 10K per game, and three of those were the New York teams. Attendance for the two SL teams, two Philly teams, and two Boston teams was less than half that. It probably… Read more »

Hub Kid
Hub Kid
9 years ago
Reply to  Hub Kid

Thanks to Kahuna Tuna & Dr. Doom for the answers, and to all for fascinating discussion and examples of shortened individual seasons, etc.

I guess I only ever really counted or noticed tiebreakers, and missed shorter uneven seasons. Day in, day out ballgames for six months sure make for a lot of scheduling legwork. Not adding games on to the end of the season as long as pennant races aren’t affected sounds eminently sane to me.

Then again, I don’t think I would mind a 154 game schedule.

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago
Reply to  Hub Kid

I know I have posted this elsewhere on line… The 154-game schedule was based on an eight team league. Seven opponents x 11 home games ageainst each = 77 home games x 2 = 154 games. Before expansion past 16 teams, there was talk of extending the schedule to 7x12x2 = 168 games. The 162-game schedule was based on a ten team league; 9 teams x 9 home games = 81 x 2 = 162. The Leagues made it work for two six-team divisions 5×9 + 6×6 = 45+36 = 81, and the American League made it work for two… Read more »

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago

I have no objection to Henry Mathewson’s big brother getting in. When the Niekros were chasing the Perrys for pitching wins by brothers, the Mathewsons were mentioned in the top five (Christy 373, Henry 0).

So my votes for this round are toward keeping / adding eligibility :

(S.)J. Jackson
H. Wilhelm
E. Walsh

Mike HBC
Mike HBC
9 years ago

Christy, Crawford, and ShoeJoe.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago

Doug, I have some post ideas I wanted to send your way, but I can’t find the thread where you posted your e-mail. Can you direct me thataway?

Jameson
Jameson
9 years ago

I want to vote for:

Mathewson

Big Ed Walsh

Adrian Joss

Jameson
Jameson
9 years ago

I want to vote for:

Mathewson

Big Ed Walsh

Adrian Joss

Ed Walsh & Addie Joss are #’s 1 & 2 in Career ERA and Career WHIP. Joss has WHIP, Big Ed ERA.

ERA+ (Career) Walsh 145, Joss 142. Good for 10th & 12th all-time.

Hub Kid
Hub Kid
9 years ago

Time to remember to vote:

Mathewson, Allen, Tiant

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago

A brief update, through Hub Kid’s vote @133: 25 – Christy Mathewson ===========75% (21) ===========50% (14) 10 – Sam Crawford 7 – Shoeless Joe Jackson* ===========25% (7) 5 – Goose Goslin* 4 – Dick Allen, Richie Ashburn, Kevin Brown, Graig Nettles, Luis Tiant, Hoyt Wilhelm 3 – Andre Dawson, Addie Joss, Satchel Paige ===========10% (3) 2 – Ed Walsh* 1 – Dennis Eckersley, Dave Winfield I know my last update wasn’t THAT many votes ago, but it’s been two days, so I thought I’d throw another one out there. Based on recent voter turnout, Goslin is already safe this round,… Read more »

Joseph
Joseph
9 years ago

Nettles, Big Six Mathewson, Wahoo Sam Crawford.

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago

I suspect we will have a redemption round shortly, simultaneously with the 110th round (1879-78). A few new guys have joined the redemption lists, and the end is near. This redemption may be the last chance for anyone to come back – Doug mentioned that round 120+ may be limited to those already on the backlog! Seems appropriate to review the top candidates by position (with WAR numbers): Catcher: Torre (57.6) and T. Simmons (50.1) are the only real options. Torre got some of his value at third base, and has not seen any traction yet. Simmons has had support… Read more »

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

There are 9 catchers currently in the CoG, rather than 8 (Bench, Berra, Campanella, Carter, Cochrane, Dickey, Hartnett, FIsk, Piazza).

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago
Reply to  David Horwich

Thanx, forgot about Hartnett somehow.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

Red Ruffing(55.4 + 15.0) is another player who had some decent support for a while on the COG ballot. It’s just getting really hard with the Redemption Rounds, because (as you point out), we’ve DONE all these before. Gary Sheffield (LF, 60.3 WAR) left his initial round with ZERO votes (but it was the very first round, and we were TERRIBLE at voting at the time). I would also note Dave Stieb (57.0) as a pitcher who once received support. He managed 8 votes one round… and fell off the ballot that same round. We had 81 voters (that looks… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

Great stuff, as usual. I had completely forgotten that Edmonds had already made an appearance. I thought he was coming with the Class of 71. With Ashburn & Dawson on the holdover list already and the 3 of them so closely matched I imagine if he does get back on the ballot it would mean that they’ll split whatever votes there are and none of them will get in. I’d say it’s a long shot that any of them will as is. But who knows? There are a few guys on the list I’ve voted for in the past- most… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Humbert

I was just poking around the Hall of Stats and decided to see how our electees stack up by position. C – 9 in. We have all the top 9 (except #4 Ivan Rodriguez, not yet eligible), plus #26 Roy Campanella, who has extenuating circumstances. A+ by the Hall of Stats. 1B – 12 in. This is tougher, because a bunch of the top guys aren’t yet eligible (#2 Cap Anson, #3 Albert Pujols, #5 Roger Connor, and #6 Dan Brouthers). Ignoring them, we have all the top 12. After that, though, we’re more scattershot. We have #s 15, 17,… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

So, I started looking at the pitchers. We nailed our top 20. We have 20 of the HOS top 23, only omitting #2 Cy Young, #13 Pedro Martinez, and #18 Eddie Plank, none of whom are yet eligible. After that, though, things get messy. Here are the eligible pitchers below that top 20, marked I (in) or O (out): Kevin Brown – O (on ballot) John Smoltz – I Rick Reuschel – O Carl Hubbell – I Ed Walsh – O (on ballot) Mariano Rivera – I Luis Tiant – O (on ballot) Bob Feller – I David Cone –… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

I’m a little puzzled that you would think that Marichal is a more puzzling choice than Ford. I suppose the 2 years lost to military service might be the reason but it’s at least debatable if even that would have moved him ahead in the HoS rankings and if so, probably not by much. I’ve long thought that Three Finger Brown might have a good shot at getting in since I view him as being very similar to Ford and Marichal. All three have eye-popping W-L records who were the staff ace on some great teams. And WAR doesn’t seem… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

I don’t see Marichal as that surprising. His 6 year peak is equal to Koufax (46.3 vs 46.6 WAR) though in non-consecutive years. And he had more good years than Koufax outside of his peak. Plus, he was a better hitter (+5.4 WAR).

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

John Roseboro could certain attest to his being a better “hitter”. Ba-da-bing! But I do agree. I know I voted for Marichal, at least a few times. I don’t think that I voted for Ford but I don’t think that he’s a bad choice either. When we’re all finished I would imagine that there might be a few pitchers on the outside that I would consider to be a tiny bit more deserving but his selection is certainly a defensible one. And I can understand why some of the guys on the Dr’s list of second 20 HoS ranked pitchers… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Doom – So LF voting is unworthy of a grade? 🙂

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Let’s call it an A. Thanks.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Vote:

Dennis Eckersley
Leon Goslin
Hoyt Wilhelm