The Mount Rushmore of the Chicago White Sox

Paul Konerko / US PRESSWIRE

The White Sox are an original American League team dating back to 1901. The had a good amount of success early on, winning the World Series in both 1906 and 1917. Then came the infamous 1919 World Series, which they lost ostensibly because several players were paid to tank. The team then entered a long dry spell, without a 1st-place finish from 1920 to 1958. In 1959, they lost another World Series (presumably played on fair terms). The team experienced another long drought until a first-place finish in 1983, when they lost the ALCS to the eventually-champ Baltimore Orioles. From 1990 to 2006, the team never finished lower than 3rd, including a World Series win in 2005. Since then, they’ve been about a .500 team.

Let’s take a look at the best personnel this team has had.

Rk	Player	WAR/pos	From	To
1	Luke Appling	69.9	1930	1950
2	Frank Thomas	65.0	1990	2005
3	Eddie Collins	63.4	1915	1926
4	Nellie Fox	44.5	1950	1963
5	Minnie Minoso	39.3	1951	1980
6	Robin Ventura	36.9	1989	1998
7	Luis Aparicio	32.6	1956	1970
8	George Davis	31.3	1902	1909
9	Fielder Jones	30.0	1901	1908
10	Paul Konerko	27.7	1999	2012
11	Shoeless Joe Jackson	26.5	1915	1920
12	Carlton Fisk	26.5	1981	1993
13	Ray Schalk	25.0	1912	1928
14	Sherm Lollar	24.3	1952	1963
15	Willie Kamm	23.6	1923	1931

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 6/20/2012.

Lots of great players here. Seven of them are already in the Hall of Fame (Appling, Collins, Fox, Aparicio, Davis, Fisk, and Schalk) with Frank Thomas as a shoo-in one day soon, and another player in Jackson who is Hall-worthy based on numbers but is banned.

Let’s look at pitchers:

Rk	Player	WAR	From	To
1	Red Faber	61.9	1914	1933
2	Ted Lyons	60.7	1923	1946
3	Ed Walsh	59.6	1904	1916
4	Wilbur Wood	49.1	1967	1978
5	Eddie Cicotte	47.2	1912	1920
6	Billy Pierce	46.5	1949	1961
7	Mark Buehrle	45.7	2000	2011
8	Doc White	31.6	1903	1913
9	Thornton Lee	27.1	1937	1947
10	Jim Scott	26.1	1909	1917
11	Joe Horlen	22.8	1961	1971
12	Tommy John	22.0	1965	1971
13	Jack McDowell	20.1	1987	1994
14	Tommy Thomas	20.0	1926	1932
15	Reb Russell	19.9	1913	1919

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 6/20/2012.

This is a much weaker group. For starters, there are only two pitchers on here who pitched as recently as 1980s. Only Faber, Lyons, and Walsh are in the Hall of Fame, and only Mark Buehrle has any chance from the rest of the guys.

Here’s the poll. Please pick 4:

0 0 votes

Article Rating

67 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Dave V.

12 years ago

I went with Luke Appling, Frank Thomas (the two easiest picks IMO) and then it was tough. I went with Ted Lyons and Shoeless Joe. Lyons because he is one of the franchise’s best pitchers, he pitched 21 years with the Sox and I wanted to have a pitcher represented. And Shoeless Joe will always be synonymous with the White (Black) Sox to me, so I think he’s perfect for a Mount Rushmore of the team.

Hartvig

12 years ago

Impossibly difficult. I had to pick Collins because I had punted on him with the Athletics. In addition I did Appling, Lyons and Thomas but now that I think about it there’s just no way to justify leaving off Nellie Fox plus you have Ed Walsh and Shoeless Joe from the early days and so many more as you go forward. Other than Appling I could easily pick an entirely different 4-some and feel completely justified in doing so. They even played in a park named after Comiskey for nearly 80 years. Plus I always associate Bill Veech with the… Read more »

Steven

12 years ago

Luke Appling, Eddie Collins, Bill Veeck and (mgr.) Al Lopez.

e pluribus munu

12 years ago

I see this as a problem of geographical displacement. I feel Collins belongs on the Athletics’ Rushmore, but I made a quick trip to that monument and his head’s not there. A range of Rushmores without Collins’ heroic features would be a blot on the landscape, so I think we should carry his granite over here (awkward because the ears are so heavy and the chin so light). If Collins were not involved, I think this would be an easy pick: Appling can’t be bypassed, then Lyons, Thomas, and Fox, would follow (Walsh complicates this, but he had only a… Read more »

Brent

12 years ago

I won’t pick any of the Black Sox guys. Sorry to Jackson and Cicotte on that one, but infamy doesn’t get you on my Rushmore. For similar reasons, Charles Comiskey won’t get my vote either (yes, I am being judgemental today) Senor Guillen would be a pretty decent write in, as would Al Lopez. The current manager has a lot more WAR as player than I realized too. For what it is worth, the ChiSox themselves have retired the numbers of: Nellie Fox, Harold Baines, Minnie Minoso, Luis Aparicio, Ted Lyons, Billy Pierce, Frank Thomas and Carlton Fisk. Also, they… Read more »

Hartvig

12 years ago

Reply to Brent

I love Harold Baines but when I went to his B-R page to see why he wasn’t listed among the WAR leaders I was dumbstruck by how many years he played for other teams other than the Sox and how often he had gone back and forth between teams either in a trade or as a free agent. I’m sure that I was aware of all of it at the time but I had never looked at it on paper. I never would have guess that over 40% of his games were for teams other than the Sox. Steve “Psycho”… Read more »

Howard

12 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

That always seemed like a contrived move to me as if he was trying to make a name for himself as a character.

topper009

12 years ago

Breaking down into eras, First the Second-City Series 1906 team, playing in the 3rd World Series and foreshadowing the 3rd Superbowl pulling the upset over the 116 win Cubs. Also the last World Series in which both teams have never played in the World Series before (a Mariners-Nationals matchup is not looking likely anytime soon). This Rushmore would have mgr/center-Fielder Jones, SS George Davis, P Ed Walsh and P Doc White. The Black Sox are next, really a loaded team. Winning the Series in 1917 and we all know about 1919. This team would have Collins, Shoeless Joe, Cicotte and… Read more »

Jason Z

12 years ago

I went with the big hurt, old aches and pains, Eddie Collins
and Nellie Fox.

If you look at the big hurt through his age 29 season, it’s
just silly. His OPS+ was between 174 and 181 every year.
Except 94 when it was a Ruthian 212.

The other three were obvious choices.

I thought about Ted Lyons and Red Faber, but since Faber
is number 2 on Lyons’ similarity score and Lyons is number
4 on Red’s BR page for similarity score, I lost all ability
to distinguish and left them both off at numbers 5-6.

Brent

12 years ago

Reply to Jason Z

Well, one way to differentiate them is that Faber won 3 games in the 1917 WS (which, of course, was the last WS the City of Chicago would win for 88 years), whereas the teams Lyons pitched for were generally pretty bad. To me, that breaks the tie (in Faber’s favor)

Abbott

12 years ago

Reply to Brent

I don’t see why you would penalize Lyons for playing on bad teams.

Brent

12 years ago

Reply to Abbott

Not really penalizing, just breaking tie with Faber’s stellar performance in the 1917 WS, since that is 1 of only 3 titles the ChiSox own in their history.

Abbott

12 years ago

Reply to Brent

I hear ya. I just think that sometimes the post season is give too much weight when looking at a player’s entire career, given that fact that post season games make up such a small percentage of their overall career. Personally I would go with Wilbur Wood instead since the first glove I ever owned was signed by Wood and by the time my mom threw it out it was so broken in and floppy that you couldn’t even catch with it anymore.

Howard

12 years ago

Reply to Brent

Both guys get some extra credit from me for serving their country in wartime. Faber only missed two thirds of a season but it was during his prime and he was quite right for a year when he returned. Lyons was in his 40s when he joined the service but in his last season before that he completed all 20 of his starts and led the league in ERA and ERA+. He returned after three years away and completed his last five starts with an ERA of 2.32.

Tmckelv

12 years ago

Here are the eras for the Whitesox: Early 1900’s – decent team that won a WS in 1906 – Ed Walsh, Doc White, Fielder Jones, George Davis Black Sox – the whole lineup was pretty good – or maybe just famous – Joe Jackson, Eddie Cicotte, Eddie Collins, Red Faber, Lefty Williams, Ray Schalk, Charlie Sheen, John Cusack (oops, Happy Felsch and Buck Weaver). The Luke Appling/Ted Lyons Years – Luke Appling, Ted Lyons Go-Go Sox of the 1950’s and 1960’s – could only break thru in 1959 with WS appearance – Nellie Fox, Luis Aparicio, Sherm Lollar, Minnie Minoso,… Read more »

Abbott

12 years ago

Reply to Tmckelv

Comiskey was a dick! Gotta disagree with you on that one. At least go with Luke Appling instead.

Luis Gomez

12 years ago

Frank Thomas is, in my opinion, the best White Sox player ever, so he is in. Luke Appling hit the most famous homerun ever for a senior citizen, he is deffinetly in. After those guys is a little tricky. I’ll go with Eddie Collins because I put him in my Inner Circle HOF ballot. The last spot is for Minoso… I don’t know exactly why. Maybe is because Orestes Saturnino Minoso is too good of a name to be left out. Perhaps Konerko is worthy of a spot on the Mount Rushmore too.

tag

12 years ago

This one is impossible for me – just too many favorites and too many great memories. Others have broken down the eras well and mentioned most of the players that need mentioning. I mean, I could have a Rushmore of just the ’77 Rent-A-Team. Or one with four Dick Allens, for being a bad mother(shutchermouth). Or an anti-Rushmore of hated Sox (led by Charles Comiskey and including Ken Harrelson and Steve Stone and, irrationally, Bucky Dent) that I would dynamite into smithereens the moment it was finished. I’ll have to go with a personal Rushmore based on the connections I… Read more »

Yippeeyappee

12 years ago

Reply to tag

I love the idea of the Mount Anti-Rushmore (Mt Rush-Less?). I was just reading the comments on the Mount Rusmore for my Jays and I wonder if Joe Carter would be on Rushless? (He’s on my Rushmore)

bstar

12 years ago

Reply to tag

You tell good stories, Uncle tag.

tag

12 years ago

Reply to bstar

Yeah, just like a classic toothless old fart, except I’m not that old and still have a dependable set of teeth. My daughters run anytime I threaten to give them what I call “context” and they call “Sominex.” So I inflict it on you guys instead.

Jim Bouldin

12 years ago

Reply to tag

Excellent. We could use a few more Bill Veecks and Charlie Finleys if you ask me.

tag

12 years ago

Reply to Jim Bouldin

Definitely, but we’ll probably keep getting hedgies and corporations.

Paul E

12 years ago

Reply to tag

Dick Allen basically saved the organization from total economic failure in the early 1970’s. The team had even played regular season games in Milwaukee prior to the SDeattle Pilots move there….

At his HoF induction, Goose Gossage referred to Allen as the ” greatest teammate I ever had “.

tag

12 years ago

Reply to Paul E

Very good point, Paul. A lot of inconvenient facts get conveniently ignored later.

And he even looked good in those ridiculous uniforms they had at the time.

Paul E

12 years ago

Reply to tag

tag:
I certainly hope you’re not making reference to “Allen’s 44″ chest and 28″ waist”? Please, let’s limit the man-crush talk to feats on the ballfield 🙂 Allen, though, does get extra points for his general avoidance and distrust of the press and media in general

tag

12 years ago

Reply to Paul E

Well, actually in my case it would have been a boy-crush. 🙂 I was in fact referring more to his high stirrups, which we all thought were waaay cool at the time and tried to recreate in our Little League unis. We had no chance of recreating the V-physique nor the awesome sideburns.

Paul E

12 years ago

Reply to tag

Allen’s successor as cult role model and anti-hero, George Hendrick, shortly thereafter brought back the Ted Williams/Gene Stephens long pants look and evebntually took ’em over the ankles.

Dan McCloskey

12 years ago

I went with Frank Thomas, Luke Appling, Eddie Collins and Ed Walsh. I know there’s a bit of a prejudice against Deadball era pitchers, but seriously, take a closer look at Walsh vs. Lyons and Faber. There really is no comparison. Walsh earned virtually the same WAR in about 1000 fewer innings, and his 146 ERA+ blows them both away. Plus, he pitched on a World Series winner (15 IP, 2-0, 0.60 ERA). He’s also the all-time major league leader in ERA+ for that matter. I’m also curious as to what the fascination with Nellie Fox is? I’m not meaning… Read more »

Richard Chester

12 years ago

Reply to Dan McCloskey

I too am surprised at the support for Fox. He was a really good player but I think his teammate Minnie Minoso was a superior player. Minoso had a higher BA, OBP, R and RBI. And he had a far superior OPS+, 130 to Fox’s 93.
Fox was involved in one of the most lop-sided trades ever when the A’s sent him to the Sox for C Joe Tipton.

bstar

12 years ago

Reply to Dan McCloskey

Dan, no Walsh is not first all-time in ERA+(I think you were thinking standard ERA perhaps?). Walsh ranks ninth all-time in ERA+, and that doesn’t include Billy Wagner at 187 because he only pitched 900 instead of 1000 innings.

Dan McCloskey

12 years ago

Reply to bstar

You’re right. I misremembered, knowing that Walsh is #1 all-time in ERA, but that his ERA+ still holds up among the best ever despite pitching in the deadball era.

bstar

12 years ago

Reply to Dan McCloskey

Yeah, that’s why he got my vote too. Big Hurt, Appling, and Eddie Collins also.

CursedClevelander

12 years ago

Bill Melton, Geoff Blum, Roberto Hernandez and Shingo Takatsu.

Andy R

12 years ago

Or a not-so-Mount Rushmore of minor league Sox from my youth-

Marv Staehle
Cisco Carlos
Fred Klages
Dick Kenworthy

Sorry-had to do it…

tag

12 years ago

Reply to Andy R

Oh, I remember those first few starts by Cisco Carlos. My uncles thought he was going to be the next Bob Gibson. The following year disabused them of those notions and he sank into the Southside sunset like so many before him.

Steven

12 years ago

Reply to Andy R

How about a Nearer-to-Rushmore from about the same era: Don Buford, Floyd Robinson, Pete Ward, and Gary Peters.

tag

12 years ago

Reply to Steven

You had to love Peters, the Carlos Zambrano of his day (well, at least on the mound and in the batter’s box if not in temperament). And Pete Ward was a fine player who had the misfortune of playing in Santo’s shadow.

Steven

12 years ago

Reply to tag

Peters could hit, too. Better than many of his teammates.

Steven

12 years ago

Reply to tag

I missed your batter’s box comment. Sorry. Ward had a couple of really good seasons, then, I think he hurt his neck in a car wreck prior to the 1965 season, and his career never really took off after that.

no statistician but

12 years ago

My reasons for calling this one impossible are more academic and less personal than tag’s:1) I like to spread the four choices over eras. Appling is an easy choice, but 2) I angst over Thomas because he sank from being a first baseman to resenting having to don a glove at all, or at least that was my impression at the time. I’m not overfond of placing DHs above position players, but Thomas was fantastic with the bat. So . . .? 3) Pierce, Fox, Minoso—how do you choose just one for that era? 4) There are too many eras.… Read more »

Kirk

12 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

Just a word on impressions of The Big Hurt’s fielding. He had the misfortune of being compared to Mark Grace across town. I clearly remember when inter-league play started in 1997 the debate of which team had the better first baseman. Talk shows were swamped with people who wanted Grace over Thomas (go check their 1997’s) just because of Grace’s fielding, because we all know that a slick fielding first baseman will lead you to victory just like ??and??. I believe this talk made Frank paranoid about his fielding and caused him to want to be a DH more than… Read more »

Fireworks

12 years ago

Frank was my favorite player when I was a kid, after I got over my Bo boy-crush. Still annoyed at the way the Sox treated him. I get that he was often injured, but this is a guy who had ‘diminished skills’ clauses invoked in his contracts because his fellow sluggers were… well, we know what they were doing. I just think that of all the original franchises the White Sox have probably the weakest hitting, and certainly not one truly epic slugger other than Frank, though Konerko is certainly doing something interesting with what should be the twilight of… Read more »

tag

12 years ago

Reply to Fireworks

It’s interesting if you compare the top postwar Sox players vs. their even less successful Northside neighbors (I’ll skip the earlier guys to keep it simple). At all but one or two positions, the Cubs are clearly superior and start a deserving Hall of Famer everywhere on the diamond but CF, RF (Sammy has the numbers to enter but it may be a loooong time before they let him in), 1B (counting Banks as a SS) and catcher, and sporting a pitching staff featuring the likes of Fergie, Maddux and Big Daddy, with Sutter and Lee Smith coming out of… Read more »

Editor

John Autin

12 years ago

For the first time in these things, I just voted for 4 guys I like for some reason or other: Minnie Minoso, Wilbur Wood, Ted Lyons and Carlton Fisk.

I still get a thrill thinking of Fisk batting 2nd in 1983, and how their season took off when he was moved to that spot in late May.

Bill Veeck deserved my vote, but I think he would have rather left these honors to the guys in uniform. Veeck goes on my Mt. Rushmore of Baseball Like It Oughta Be.

Voomo Zanzibar

12 years ago

Ed Walsh,
Lucius Appling,
Saturnino Orestes Armas (Arrieta) Minoso,
and Ozzie Guillen

1910
Walsh led the league in era and losses
That’s 20 losses with a 1.27 era, folks.

Lawrence Azrin

12 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

Yes, but Ed Walsh in 1910 also allowed 35 UN-earned runs, so that his “run average” is a little above 2.00. This is mighty impressive still, since the 1910 AL R/G was 3.64, but doesn’t sound as awesome as a 1.27 ERA.

Plus, you have to consider that Comiskey Park was an extreme pitchers park, in the middle of the deadball era. Walsh was still great in 1910, but he wasn’t Superman.

Voomo Zanzibar

12 years ago

This is the great-nephew of Eddie Gaedel:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=gaedel001kyl

e pluribus munu

12 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

Looks more like the great nephew of two or three Eddie Gaedels, Voomo. But despite the Veeck connection, Gaedel/es would be a topic for the Browns Rushmore, since the vast majority of Eddie’s PAs were in a Browns uni.

Editor

John Autin

12 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

Not much with the stick yet … but at least he’ll take a walk!

MikeD

12 years ago

Appling, Thomas, Collins and Faber. I’m picking Faber because he consistently gets ignored, which really should preclude him from his team’s Rushmore, but what the heck.

Scott

12 years ago

Thomas, Appling, Collins and Jackson for me. All those guys embody the White Sox as a team. On a little side note, I am surprised that Harold Baines wasn’t on that list. I wouldn’t have voted for him on their Mt. Rushmore, but I feel he should have gotten some kind of mention in the poll.

Jim Bouldin

12 years ago

A question that’s been on my mind recently is “who started the ‘Latin American revolution’ in MLB?”. I’m guessing Aparicio must have been one of the first, along with the Alou brothers maybe?, but I’ve never seen anything at all on that topic, which I think is a big one. I’m not sure that this effect has been accounted for when comparisons are made between players who play now and players who played before this influx, which in the last two decades has improved the game greatly IMO, as many of the game’s best players are Latin American. btw, I… Read more »

Steven

12 years ago

Reply to Jim Bouldin

I think Chico Carrasquel, who was the Chisox shortstop prior to Aparicio, may have been the first Latino in the post-WW2-era to have success in the Major Leagues.

Richard Chester

12 years ago

Reply to Steven

Paving the way for Carrasquel was his uncle Alex who had moderate success with the Senators during WWII.

e pluribus munu

12 years ago

Reply to Jim Bouldin

I’m not sure there was any single path for Latin American players, but I think the recruiting pattern of the Washington Senators was a factor. In the mid-1950s, they brought up a string of players from Latin American countries: Jose Valdivielso, Reno Bertoia, Zoilo Versalles, Julio Becquer, Pedro Ramos, Camilio Pascual all come to mind (I’m actually thinking back to the 1959 Topps cards – I recall noticing this when I was a kid). Although there were Latin players from the early part of the century, and I recall stories about John McGraw recruiting in Cuba (I seem to recall… Read more »

Richard Chester

12 years ago

Reply to e pluribus munu

Reno Bertoia was born in Italy which is a long way from Latin America. He came into the ML via the Tigers.

You could also add Carlos Paula to your list.

e pluribus munu

12 years ago

Reply to Richard Chester

I stand corrected, Richard.

Steven

12 years ago

Reply to e pluribus munu

And the Senators almost signed a left-handed pitcher from Havana named Fidel Castro. He turned out to be far-left-handed.

no statistician but

12 years ago

Reply to Jim Bouldin

I made a quick scan of the rosters of the teams for 1953, and found only one notable Latin player in the National League—Ruben Gomez in his rookie year with the Giants. In the American League, the White Sox had five Latin Players, Minoso and Carresquel as starters, plus three pitchers, Mike Fornieles, Sandy Consuegra, and Luis Aloma, although Aloma didn’t get many opportunities. The Yankees had Willie Miranda as a back-up infielder, Cleveland had Bobby Avila, an All Star in 1952, at second base, and Washington had Connie Marrero as a fifth starter. Most of these guys were Cuban.… Read more »

Richard Chester

12 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

Luis Aloma was obtained be the Sox mainly to act as an interpreter for Chico Carrasquel. I guess the other Latin players did not speak English well enough.

MatthewC

12 years ago

I picked Thomas, Appling, Fox, and Walsh. Shoeless Joe’s three best years were all for Cleveland, and Aparicio and Collins also had greater success elsewhere. It is interesting that as old a franchise as the Sox are there aren’t more knock out obvious choices for top 4.

The Real Deal

12 years ago

I have a question about the poll counting system. It seems that the percentage does not properly reflect how popular a candidate is. For example, the Big Hurt has 22% of the votes, which seems low. Because each person has 4 votes, each person is being counted 4 extra times. This means the percentages are cut to a quarter. What I mean is that although Frank Thomas received 22% of the vote, he is included in 88-89% of the different monuments.It seems all percentages need to be multiplied by four. Is there anyway to correct for this, as it would… Read more »

MikeD

12 years ago

Reply to The Real Deal

Is that you Rahm Emanual?

I’m not sure I understand. You want to times Frank Thomas’ 22% vote by four to get him up to 88% because you believe he’s more popular? I know this vote involves Chicago, but we just can’t import Chicago political tactis here to HHS! : -)

Seriously, I’m not sure what you’re asking.

The Real Deal

12 years ago

Reply to MikeD

No, I mean that his percentage is of all votes. But each person has 4 votes for their Mount Rushmore and can’t pick him four times. What I mean is that he is on 88% of the Mount Rushmores, but only 22% of the votes. I mean to display that he is on 88% of the Mount Rushmores as opposed to displaying he has 22% of the votes. Because each voter has 4 votes, and each player can be picked only once per voter, the max popular percentage available is 25% for a player. What I am asking about is… Read more »

Lawrence Azrin

12 years ago

Reply to The Real Deal

In theory, if several people vote for less than four players on a particular Mt. Rushmore, and the most popular player gets (just about) all of our votes, the most popular player _could_ have more than 25% of the total vote.

It’s unlikely to happen, though – has anyone tabulated the player %’s for each particular Mt. Rushmore yet?

Like Mike D, I’m not sure what problem you are pointing out, though. That’s the nature of the system.

The Real Deal

12 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

Thank you Lawrence. I just was initially confused why the great Players were getting such small vote percentages. After thinking, I was just checking that the percentages were that low for the reasons I mentioned. I understand it was just how it was handled in the system, but I thought it might reflect true popularity if percentages were multiplied by four. I wasn’t trying to make a big stink, just more of a small inquiry.