Historical Articles

[Bill Burgess]

Gaging from the musings on the thread where Christy Mathewson picked his 1924 all-star team, I'm wondering if there is any interest in my cracking open the Musty, Dusty Cabinet of Forgotten Baseball Lore?

I am fully capable of posting some arcane, yet tantalizing articles form both The Sporting News, and Baseball Magazine, if the interest is there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents:

2. The Greatest Players I Ever Saw, by Walter Johnson, October, 1929, Baseball Magazine. He evaluated Waddell, Mathewson, Alexander, Joe Jackson, Ruth, Crawford, Cobb.
4. The Greatest Batters I Have Ever Faced, by Walter Johnson, June, 1925, Baseball Magazine. He evaluated Lajoie, Joe Jackson, Speaker, Cobb, Eddie Collins, Baker, Ruth.
5. Christy Mathewson Picks a (1924) All-America Team for Collier's. October 11, 1924.
7. Christy Mathewson Lauds The Babe, The Outlook, August 30, 1922, pp. 704, Interview by Frederick M. Davenport)
9. Hot Tamale Circuit, Part 1 & II
10. My Story of the Black Sox Series, Chick Gandil, as told to Melvin Durslag, Sports Illustrated, 1956.
11. Pitchers I Have Faced, by Edward T. Collins, July, 1914, American Magazine. Eddie evaluated Walter Johnson, Mathewson, Vean Gregg, Joe Wood, Ed Walsh, "Big Jack" Powell, Lefty Russell, Eddie Cicotte, Jim Scott, Russell Ford, Eddie Summers, Waddell.
12. Cap Anson - 2 articles, 1909 team, 1917, 1918 teams.
15. Historical Polls/Surveys.
16. Miller Huggins' All-Time Team, Washington Post, February 5, 1929, pp. 20.
17. McGraw's View on Pitchers, Catchers, Sporting News, February 8, 1934, pp. 4, column 3.
18. John B. Sheridan, On Defensive Shortstops, catchers, 3B; ; Sporting News column, "Back of Home Plate", 1917-29"; (Sporting News, February 11, 1926); Herman Long's Case
19. John B. Sheridan on Relative Value of a Player, Sporting News, December 8, 1927, pp. 4, column 6.
20. George Sisler; His All-Time Team, April, 1931, pp. 483, 484, Baseball Magazine.
23. William B. Hanna; 25 Greatest Players; June, 1924, pp. 300-301Baseball Magazine.
25. What BB Records Mean To the Player; William Kamm, February, 1928, pp. 387, 388, Baseball Magazine.

Page 2.

26. Ed Cicotte: I Did Wrong, But I Paid For It, February, 1966.
27. Introducing John B. Foster; His All-Time Team, 1938.
29. St. Paul Pioneer Press articles.
30. Ed Barrow; His Top 5 Players Ever, Honus Wagner, Ty Cobb, Nap Lajoie, Babe Ruth, Tris Speaker, February 28, 1929, Sporting News; 1951, autobiography.
31. BB's Greatest Player; 12 Veterans choose their top 5 Players Ever, John McGraw, Wilbert Robinson, Walter Johnson, Connie Mack, Kid Gleason, Bill McKechnie, Joe McCarthy, Jim Burke, Gabby Street, Dan Howley, Bucky Harris and Burt Shotton, June, 1931, Philadelphia Ledger.
32. - 34. MLB special report on Race Relations, August 28, 1946.
33. The Sad Story of Martin Bergen, January 20, 1900.
34. Introducing Early Player Profiles; Buck Ewing, Bill Lange, Jimmy Archer, Charlie Bennett, Herman Long, Jimmie McAleer, Ned Williamson.
35. Clutch Players.
36. Charles J. Ferguson.
37. Versatile Baseball Players; Honus Wagner, Herman Long, Roger Bresnaham, Dick Allen, Buck Ewing, Michael 'King' Kelly, Harmon Killebrew, Jim O'Rouke, Deacon White, Charlie Ferguson, Pete Rose, Jimmy Foxx, George Davis, John 'Monte' Ward.
38. Greatest Player Ever Survey/Poll, Sporting News, April 2, 1942
39. Childhood Idols, by Frank Graham, December, 1983; Also Joan Culcen, Dec., 1983.
40. Carl Mays, and UnderHanders. by John B. Foster, Sporting News, November 24, 1921.
41. Introducing Francis Richter, John B. Foster, Sam Crane, Bill Phelon, Ferdinand Lane & Tim Murnane.
42. Most important, Famous, Influential Sports Writers
44. The Atlanta Constitution, piece done by Billy Evans, January 26, 1919
45. Sporting News, Taylor Spink, Baseball Magazine, SABR, Proquest.
46. Fond Memories of Ty and Babe.
47. Ty Cobb Found a 'Cousin' in Babe Ruth, the Pitcher.
48. Damon Runyon on Who's the Greatest Pitcher: Christy Mathewson, Grover Cleveland Alexander, or Walter Johnson?
49. CENSUS OF FANS SHOWS BIG MAJORITY LIKES HOME RUNS, February 1, 1923
50. Players Who Are Always Hustling.

Page 3.

51. When Is a Home Run Not a Home Run?
52. They Had Their Heroes, Too.
53. The Toughest I've Ever Faced.
54. Honus Wagner talks about Ty/Babe.
56. Interview with Harry Heilmann.
57. Baseball's Popularity
58. Number of newspapers in 1933 per city
59. Good Sports Writers Who Died since 1988.
60. Historical salaries.
61. On August 26, 2003, Nate Silver and Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus had an interview with Rickey Henderson
62. Excerpt from Reggie Jackson's 1984 autobiography, Reggie
65. Francis C. Richter
67. Joe Morgan article, July, 2000.
70. Honus Wagner picks 3 all time teams: 1924, 1935, 1949.
71. Sultan's extensive Babe Ruth post.
72. Carl Mays talks about Ty Cobb.
73. Hal Chase's 1941 Sporting News' interview.
74. Tris Speaker's 1944 Sporting News' interview
75. Bobby Wallace's 1954 Sporting News' interview

Page 4.

76. Bobby Lowe's 1951 Sporting News' interview
77. Jimmy Sheckard's 1940 Sporting News' interview
78. Jimmy Collins' 1943 Sporting News' obituary/tribute article
79. Bill Bradley's 1950 Sporting News' Interview
80. Amos Rusie's 1939 Sporting News' Interview
81. Jimmy Burke's 1940 Sporting News' Interview
82. Zack Wheat's 1941 Sporting News' Interview
83. Frank Baker's 1955 Sporting News' Interview
84. Charlie Gehringer's 1951 Sporting News' Interview
85. Ed Walsh's 1957 Sporting News' Interview
86. Clark Griffith's 1952 Sporting News' Interview
87. Nap Lajoie's 1942 & 1953 Sporting News' Interviews
88. Pete Alexander Interview, Baseball Magazine, July, 1929
89. Carl Mays' 1925 article, "Is Hornsby Baseball's Greatest Hitter?"
90. My Attitued Toward the Unfortunate Chapman Affair, as Stated by Carl Mays (Baseball Magazine)
91. Ty Cobb Picks The greatest Ballplayers Since Ty Cobb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Myankee4life 08-05-2005, 11:10 AM

I'm interested
---------------------------------------------------------
wamby 08-05-2005, 11:41 A

I would be interested also.
------------------------------------------------------------
CyNotSoYoung 08-05-2005, 12:09 PM

Sounds good to me!
-----------------------------------------------------
CyNotSoYoung 08-05-2005, 12:14 PM

I always like to read old articles. It would be great if you posted them here on BBF.

Thanks in advance.
----------------------------------------------------
2Chance 08-05-2005, 12:49 PM

All of the above. More as you find them in that dusty closet.
---------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

---------------------The Greatest Players I Ever Saw-------------------------------

The Best Natural Hitter--The Smartest Ball Player---The Speediest Hurler---The Greatest Pitcher---These Stand Out in Vivid Relief Against the Memories of Twenty Years

-----------------Comprising an Interview with Walter Johnson---------------
-----------------Baseball Magazine, October, 1929-------------------------

Who were the greatest players I ever saw? That's a question, or rather a whole series of questions. There have been many who stood out above the crowd in the past twenty years. But the top-notchers, well--a man can give only his opinion.

It seems but a little while ago that I came east from Idaho, a young rookie, green, wondering whether I would make good, stirred by the prospect of pitching in the great cities I had read about but never had seen. And now I am a "has-been," done with professional pitching forever, my only activity to sit on the bench, to watch others, to direct their play as well as I can, and to meditate about the great days when I could go in there myself, kick my spikes into the mound and face the opposing batter.

Two things I had when I came up--speed and control. They were all I needed for years. When my speed began to lessen, I tried to master curves and change of pace. But I can't say that I ever was more than indifferently successful. I often said that if a pitcher didn't have a good fast ball, he wasn't a pitcher. Now that it has left me, I'm willing to admit that I took a lot of comfort out of my fast ball.

Sport writers, fans, interested people everywhere have asked me how present day pitching compares, to my way of thinking, with pitching when I was in my prime.

Conditions are altogether different. I once went for more than fifty innings without allowing a run. I wouldn't guarantee to do that now, even if I were in my prime. The lively ball has struck deep at the heart of pitching.

I have seen Dazzy Vance pitch. I imagine he has more sheer speed than any pitcher now on the mound. But he has other things. He impressed me as being an all-round pitcher. He had a great curve, which was something I never could boast of myself. But I wouldn't want to say that Dazzy had more speed than any pitcher I ever looked at. That wouldn't be true.

In my opinion, and I suppose if there is any subject that I am qualified to discuss it is pitching. Rube Waddell had more sheer pitching ability than any man I ever saw. That doesn't say he was the greatest pitcher, by a good deal. Rube had defects of character that prevented him from using his talents to the best effect. He is dead and gone, so there is no need for me to enlarge on his weaknesses. They were well enough known. I would prefer to dwell on his strong points. And he had plenty.

There is one game that stands out in my memory above all, perhaps, that I have pitched. That was a game fairly early in my career, when I hooked up in a pitching duel with Rube Waddell.

Rube was a queer character and he could get indisposed more quickly than anyone I ever saw, when the mood seized him.

That day we scored a run off him in the first inning. This didn't please Rube at all. He wasn't feeling particularly ambitious that day, and as he came in to the bench, he started to limp. His leg, it seemed, hurt him a good deal. We had a coach at the time who had a deep knowledge of human nature and a particular knowledge of Rube Waddell's nature. He started after Rube, without an instant's delay. "You'd better be getting on your way to the showers," he said. "If you don't get out of the box, we'll knock you out."

Somehow, that remark got under Rube's skin. He really was a sensitive soul under it all. He made up his mind that he wouldn't quit. Instead, he came back the next inning with blood in his eyes, and from then on he gave the greatest exhibition of all-round speed and unhittable curves that I ever looked at. They scored a run off me, meantime, to tie up the tally. The game drifted into extra innings. In the eleventh inning they scored another run and beat me by 2 to 1.

In those eleven innings Rube struck out seventeen Washington players. Most of the time they were choking up on the bat and just trying to keep from getting struck out. But Rube burned them past in spite of everything.

There have been many arguments about pitchers' speed. Such arguments invariably hinge on personal opinion. When Waddell had a red letter day such as the one I have mentioned, and cut loose with everything he had, he showed an amazing amount of speed. But Rube was erratic and uncertain, and his pitching was decidedly unequal.

When I was in my prime, I could go in there and be sure that I had plenty of speed on tap. Besides, it didn't tire me to pitch. In spite of all the criticisms I encountered in the early days of my Big League career. I had an easy, natural delivery. Pitching a fast ball was second nature to me. It did not require any great exertion. I was always fast, when in shape, in those years. But, like Rube, I, too, had my red letter days.

Personally, I believe I know more about those red letter days than anyone else. They didn't always get into the records. In fact, they didn't always do me much good, for when I had more than my ordinary speed and cut loose with everything, as the saying goes, the ball would jump so much I couldn't control it.

Perhaps the best day I ever had, so far as speed was concerned, was in a game against the Athletics. I don't recall the date and I could not, off hand, give the year. But I remember the game as distinctly as if it was pitched last week.

A pitcher likes to cut loose when he has a fast ball, and I was no exception. I cut loose in that game, all right, but immediately got into trouble. One of my fast ones jumped, struck the catcher, who misjudged it, disabled one of his fingers and went through him. They put in another catcher, but I hadn't thrown three balls before I could see that he was going to have trouble holding my fast one. We finally compromised by having him put up his glove. I would pitch directly at the glove and then he could hold me. If I didn't, the ball would get away from him. There have been many times since when I have thought of that day and wished that I had all that stuff, more than I could use, and a catcher who could really hold me. But that's only an idle dream. We all have them, I suppose.

One thing I will say, without boasting. When I was young and strong, I could put the ball past the batter. I don't notice many pitchers doing it today. The difference between a very fast ball and a ball that's so fast it's practically unhittable may not be much, but it's that difference that tells the story.

Great pitchers have not necessarily excelled in speed. I remember Christy Mathewson very well. I saw him pitch a number of games. He is commonly rated as the best all-round pitcher who ever lived. That may be true. I hesitate to say anything which would detract to the slightest degree from the well-earned reputation of a man who was universally respected in life and who is now dead. But I am going to be honest with my opinion, such as it is. With all due respect to Mathewson, I think Grover Alexander had a little on him. I can think of nothing that Mathewson had that Alexander didn't have. Certainly Alexander had a marvelous fast ball. Not so speedy as some, it was particularly good because it was so deceptive. My fast ball jumped and frequently broke up. Alexander's fast ball broke down. Mathewson gained fame in his later years because of his fadeaway. But if he ever had a better fadeaway than Alec, I never saw it. Alec's screw ball is proverbial. Mathewson's control was gilt-edged. But even there I think Alexander could go him one better. Alec's control is as near perfection as it's humanly possible to get. I doubt if any pitcher ever lived who could put the ball as near where he wanted it to go, game in and game out, as Grover Alexander. I doubt if any pitcher will ever excel him in that respect.

Mathewson made a grand reputation and deserved it all. Usually, however, he had a strong, scrappy team behind him. Alexander has had many weak teams behind him in the years of his career.

They tell many tales of Matty's pitching wisdom. I have no doubt that he was a master of the craft. And yet, I can not think of anything worth knowing in pitching that Alexander doesn't know.

Alexander is what I never was, a well-rounded pitcher. He has everything. I am talking now of the years of his prime. Alexander is an old veteran now and can not last much longer, but he lasted longer than I did. And he lasted because he was such a well-rounded pitcher. When my great speed left me, my bid to pitching greatness went with it. When Alexander's speed left him, he fell back on an all-round assortment of stuff and an unbeatable control.

Pitchers are naturally impressed more by great natural hitters than by great fielders. But so, for the matter of that, is the general public. Think of stars ten years ago and you think of great hitters. Fielding, important as it is, seems to be merely incidental to baseball glory.

The greatest natural hitter that I ever saw was Joe Jackson. Joe passed out of it about the time the lively ball came in. It was a bad break for him. How he would have waded through the records with that fast ball to lengthen his hits! Joe's career was cut short by the Black Sox scandal. But I shall never believe that he was a bad fellow at heart. He was easily led and terribly misled by his associates. He paid a heavy penalty.

People have asked me if I didn't consider Babe Ruth the greatest of natural hitters. I certainly do not. There are many times when Babe looks terrible at bat. I've seen him miss a ball by two feet. Nobody ever saw Joe Jackson miss a ball two feet. Babe has his particular specialty where no one can equal him. He can hit a ball harder than anybody who ever lived. But why go outside that specialty and make claims for him that aren't true?

Babe is certainly a terrific slugger. No one can convince me that his equal ever lived since baseball graduated from the rounders stage. I, for one, do not expect to live long enough to see any other player come up who can hit the ball, day in and day out, as hard as Ruth. Some kind friends have claimed that Lou Gehrig can hit the ball nearly as hard as Babe. Perhaps he can, but if so, it's just nearly. Gehrig may be second best, but he's not and never will be Babe's equal in sheer slugging.

Among the old timers, Sam Crawford stands out in my memory. He too would have thrived in these days of the lively ball. I was touring the Pacific Coast in '24. Babe Ruth was there. I pitched against him and he drove out a tremendous fly for a long home run. Everybody began to yell. It was a true Ruth wallop. Then Sam Crawford came up, an old player long past his prime. I put a lot on the ball and he met it on the nose. It soared out and fell in almost the precise spot where Ruth had put it earlier in the game. That doesn't mean to say that Sam would hit the ball as hard as Ruth all the time or very often. But if he was playing at the Yankee Stadium now, and was in his prime, he'd belt a lot of homers into that right-field stand.

People ask me often if I don't consider Ty Cobb the greatest hitter I ever saw. I certainly don't. He was never in Joe Jackson's class as a natural hitter. A number of other hitters have excelled him in natural ability, in my opinion. There again, people go astray. Ty, like Babe, has honors enough without fastening others on him that do not belong.

Ty was the smartest player that I ever saw by so great a margin that I won't even bother to think who was second best. And that's credit enough. For brains are just as prominent in baseball as in any other profession. Ty was always about three jumps ahead of the crowd. That's what made him such a wonderful star. You could never dope out what he was going to do next. Always, he had you guessing. He had the infield up in the air. He was continually getting the catcher's goat. The outfield couldn't lay for Ty. They never knew where he would drive the ball.

There was a time when Ty was sore at me. That was when he was racing Joe Jackson for the Championship. Joe was hitting me much better than Ty. Ty accused me of putting the ball over for Joe. That was foolish, though I guess he was sincere. The fault lay rather in Ty's system and Joe's superior hitting ability. Joe would lay back with that black bat of his and merely slap at my fast ball. He always had a good chance to connect. Ty favored place hitting and beating out bunts. My fast ball, chest high, that had a tendency to jump, was a tough ball to place. It was also a tough ball to bunt. In later years Ty changed his system and had much better results against my pitching. He was too smart and resourceful to be buffaloed very long by any pitching on earth.

In sheer batting ability he had superiors. But in dazzling footwork, mechanical skill and lightning quick thinking he never had an equal. Ty has also graduated. He has taken with him most of the records in the American League. He needs no tribute from a "has-been" pitcher who could once bother him in the heyday of his prime. But I'll say of Ty, as I would say of Babe, he was unique.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

End of first article.

[538280]

Bill,

I have a question for you. I always see these old articles that ask players for their all-time team or the best player they ever saw, or to rank the top ten players ever. Nowadays, though, we do see interviews and articles written by old stars, but it always seems to be about their personal life. Why don't they ask players like George Brett, Reggie Jackson, Bob Gibson, Willie Mays, Stan Musial, and any other living HOFers for their all-time team? I would love to hear Reggie's opinion on players of his own time, but they never ask him. Why?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill responds to Chris:

I'm with you on this one, man. Here would be a great idea, and have historical significance. The BBWAA should give every player, at the end of every season, a questionaire.

The questionaire should ask the player for his 3 teams.

1. All time team, A & B
2. Best team for that one year, A & B
3. Best team comprised of only active players

That way we would have a living, evolving record of professional opinion, as to who the pros felt were the best, in those 3 contexts.

Maybe I should send them my ideas. Provoke them to action!!!

Concerning Reggie. There are now 2 books in my collection. You should have them, since they address the issue on which you speak.

1. The "All-Stars" All-Star Baseball Book, by Nick Acocella & Donald Dewey, 1986, paperback.

2. The Greatest Team of All Time, As Selected by Baseball's Immortals, from Ty Cobb to Willie Mays, compiled by Nicholas Acocella & Donald Dewey, 1994.

Both should be available on www.bookfinder.com

Both books have the all time all star teams of those you mention. Whose teams would you like me to post here?

In the latter book, Reggie was asked who were his toughest pitchers. His response: "I did very little against two lefties, Mike Caldwell and Sott McGregor, for a few years anyway. Eventually, I caught up with both of them, though. It was really Jim Palmer who stands out in this context: I had some success against him overall, but he was so good in clutch situations that I never really hurt him when the game was on the line."

That is all he gave the authors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Bill contributes this one.

These guys were asked who were their all time teams, but were limited to only those players that they had actually seen/played against. Still . . .


Joe Morgan:---------Willie Mays:--------Buck Leonard:--------Monte Irvin:
1B: McCovey--------Musial--------------Jonny Washington----Gehrig
2B: Maz------------Robinson------------Sammy Hughes-------J. Robinson
3B:Schmidt--------Mathews------------Ray Dandridge---------Mathews
SS: Concepcion----Reese--------------Willie Wells------------Banks
RF: Aaron---------Clemente-----------Bill Wright-------------Mantle
CF: Mays---------Mays---------------Cool Papa Bell---------J.DiMaggio
LF: Stargell-------Aaron--------------Fats Jenkins-----------Mays
P: Marichal/Koufax-Gibson/Koufax-----Paige/Slim Jones-------Gibson/Koufax
C: Bench----------Campanella-------Josh Gibson------------Campanella


Roy Campanella:-------Cool Papa Bell:--------Aaron:--------Musial: (NL only)
1B: Hodges-----------O.Charleston-----------Hodges-------B. Terry
2B: J.Robinson--------Sammy Hughes---------J.Robinson----Hornsby
3B: Billy Cox----------Willie Wells-------------Mathews------Mathews
SS: Reese------------Judy Johnson----------Banks---------Wagner
LF: Furillo------------Rap Dixon--------------Clemente------Aaron
CF: Snider-----------Turkey Stearns---------Mays----------Mays
LF: Mays------------Monte Irvin-------------Musial---------Clemente
P: Newcombe/Koufax--Ted Trent/W.Foster---Gibson/Koufax--Gibson,Spahn,
C: Campanella---------Biz Riley Mackay------Campanella-----Seaver,Matty
----------------------------------------------------------Alexander,Hubbell
----------------------------------------------------------Koufax,Face,Labine--C:Campanella



Spahn:
1B: Hodges/Musial
2B: Maz
3B: Billy Cox/Mathews
SS: Johnny Logan
RF: Mantle
CF: Mays
LF: Aaron
P: Burdette/Koufax
C: Crandall/Bench

[Bill Burgess]

-----------------The Greatest Batters I Have Ever Faced-----------------

In the Following Interview the Great Walter discusses the More Famous Batters Who Have Faced His Terrific Speed And Offers a Few Sage Comments on Pitching

From an Interview with Walter Johnson, Baseball Magazine, June, 1925, pp. 291, 292, 327, 329

Although I am the oldest veteran among American League pitchers, I have something in common with the rookie who is beginning his first season. For I, too, am starting all over again.

When the last man was retired to that great twelfth inning of the last and decisive World's Series game in October, I figured that my career as a Major League pitcher had come definitely to an end. It was the psychological moment for me to say good-bye. That was the most thrilling game that I have ever seen. Although as Joe Engle said, "The ground keeper really decided the Series," I was fortunate enough to be called upon to pitch the final innings and so receive credit for the victory. My wish had been granted. I had pitched in a World's Series and I felt that I could now write a fitting close to my eighteen years of Major League service.

There is, so we are told, a time for everything. That was my time to step aside and to prepare for the future. I felt that I owed it to my family to embark in some worth-while business venture, which would assure me a permanent income. I naturally looked to the Pacific Coast for such an opening. In that great and growing country, baseball has prospered and favors a veteran like myself. And I was reasonably certain to be able to pitch on the Coast for some years to come. Besides, I could have entered that field with the prestige of a World's Series behind me, as something of a drawing card. The stage seemed to be set for me and I have no doubt that had matters progressed as I thought they would, I should now be well located on the Pacific slope.

Unfortunately my efforts to obtain a suitable Pacific Coast League ball club were not destined to prove successful. And so it happened that after I had turned my back on familiar scenes and old associates, I found myself constrained to begin all over again with a two years contract and with uncertain though limited time at my disposal.

I won't deny that the winter was something of a disappointment. And yet, perhaps it was better so. A ball club is still a risky venture. I might not have made good. Anyway, I seem to have many friends in this part of the country who wish me well and hope that I may linger with them quite a little while to come.

I have been a long time in this League and with this ball club. Many things have happened and I can note a decided change in pitching standards. Ball clubs carry more pitchers than they used to and change them more frequently. But the big thing, I believe is the new ball and the particular rules which seen to govern the ball. It isn't so much that the ball now is use is livelier than it was years ago. What is fully as important is that fact that it is thrown out so often that you always seem to have a new ball in your hand. When I broke into the League most of the time a pitcher used a rather battered ball that was often discolored. Such a ball thrown with the speed that I used would hop a good deal, and because it was often discolored, it was harder to see. Pitching conditions as they exist now favor the batter a good deal.

Pitching does not seem to me to be as good as it was, though I may be prejudiced. I certainly pay little respect to stories of iron man pitching stunts like Radbournes'. I do not believe that any pitcher ever lived with more strength or endurance than Ed Walsh. I do not believe any pitcher ever lived who could pitch oftener than a number of pitchers who are wearing the uniform now. The style of game in these days was different. I don't say they were not good pitchers, but they had an easier job. There are kids on the sand lots who pitch every day and they think nothing of it. They wouldn't pitch every day in the Big Leagues however. No pitcher is going in there now and pitch twenty or thirty consecutive ball games. The pitcher hasn't changed but baseball has changed.

I believe it is just as hard to compare batters of the present with batters of twenty or thirty years ago. The lively ball has helped batters in recent years. But, on the other hand, there may be other factors which have handicapped batting. It's pretty hard to say. It is all right to compare batters who have worked in approximately the same period of time, but to compare batters of one generation with those of another generation is difficult and the records don't help you much. Perhaps my opinion is not worth any more than others, but this is my nineteenth year of facing Major League batters and I have faced some good ones during that time.

I wouldn't care to say who was the best hitter I ever faced. I never saw Hans Wagner but, I have faced Hornsby, but only in an exhibition game when he wasn't in his best form. No I am not in a position to judge just how good he is. Undoubtedly he has developed greatly in recent years. I am inclined to believe that the hitter who impressed me most of all those that I have faced was Lajoie. It is hard for me to believe that anybody could be a greater hitter than the Frenchman.

I would put Joe Jackson close to him, however. Joe was certainly one of the greatest natural hitters who ever lived. Poor Joe is out of it now and I feel sorry for him. Others were guilty. Joe was merely foolish. Tris Speaker was a great hitter, but I don't think he had quite the natural talent that Joe had.

Of course Ty Cobb has to be considered. But I don't class Ty with Joe Jackson or Lajoie. So far as natural hitting ability is concerned, they were his superior beyond any reasonable doubt. Where Ty had it on them and where he has it on any batter who ever lived is in amazing speed and tricky head work. He was always doing something, bunting, placing his hits here and there through the infield, slugging when he had to slug. An ordinary roller to short stop was a hit for Ty. If you're talking about great players, Ty is in a class by himself. But when I say that a fellow is a good hitter, I mean that he is naturally a good batter, quite apart from speed of foot, originality and all round head work.

Eddie Collins was a great hitter, but he was something of the Ty Cobb type. He was a fellow who always made his head help out his batting eye. Sam Crawford and Frank Baker were good heavy hitters, uncommonly good but they wouldn't rank with the Frenchman or with Joe Jackson.

Babe Ruth is the most dangerous hitter I ever saw, but he is not the best hitter. Like Ty Cobb, Babe has other talents which help out his batting. He is so big and strong that sheer strength works for him just as speed worked for Ty Cobb. Ty would beat out an infield hit by fast footwork. Babe will beat out an infield hit by sheer strength, for he will top a ball and still drive it through the infield for a hit.

The public figures a batter altogether by results. His average is what counts. But a pitcher figures a batter by his ability as a batter. Ruth will look worse in one game than Lajoie would look all season. He will sometimes get crossed up and miss a ball by two feet. Lajoie was a well nigh perfect hitter. Ruth, at times, is about as imperfect as anybody you could think of. But he is, with it all, naturally a good hitter and his prodigious strength and knack of driving the ball for long clouts makes him the most dangerous batter in the game.

I sometimes hear a batter say he likes curve pitching better than fast ball pitching . I'm inclined to doubt that statement myself. If a fast ball is very fast with a hop on it like a bullet, then it's hard to hit, but ordinarily a curve will bother a man more than a fast ball.

But I am just as strong for speed as I ever was. I have said, and still maintain it that if a man hasn't a fast ball, he isn't a pitcher. Fast ball pitching is natural pitching. The men who have lasted a long time in baseball always had good speed. Curve ball pitching is unnatural. It twists and wrenches the arm. So does the average slow ball. But fast ball pitching is just as natural for a pitcher's arm as it is natural for a dog to run.

Some people have been kind enough to tell me that they were glad I came back because I could perhaps break a few records over my long career. That is a phase of the question that I never even considered. For example, I don't know how many ball games I have won in my career or how near I am to equaling somebody else's record. I have won all that I could and let it go at that.

Strike-outs have been my specialty, but that is merely because my style of pitching naturally expresses itself in strike-outs. Generally you will find a speed pitcher strikes out more men than a curve pitcher. Some years ago I pitched a game in which I struck out ten men in the first five innings. Then we got a big lead and I didn't strike out any more. I didn't need to. Perhaps if I had set out to do so, I might have struck out fifteen or sixteen men. The last game of 1923 I struck out twelve men. I had struck out eleven and the crowd was rooting for me to make it a dozen. I didn't know what they were yelling about, for I never keep count of the number of strike-outs I make. But anyway I struck out the last man up and they were satisfied.

Having a lot of stuff may not enable you to strike out batters as well as considerably less stuff would do. When I first broke into the League I had so much stuff that I figured any batter who went in there swinging from the handle was bound to strike out once or twice during the game anyway. But the batters learned not to swing from the handle. They started meeting the ball so it was more difficult for me to strike them out. There are days now when I have a lot of stuff, the batters will choke up and punch at the ball. On days when I have less stuff, they may swing from the handle and I will strike out more of them.

A pitcher can never be certain to strike out any batter. But there are times when he already has two strikes on the batter and is in the hole himself, so he has to exert himself to retire the side that he can, if he has stuff enough, feel reasonably sure of fanning the batter. And that's the only time when a pitcher should exert himself to strike a man out.

What goes for strike-outs goes equally well for shut-outs. No pitcher ever deliberately pitches a shut-out, unless the score is 1 to 0 against him or there is no score at all. Ordinarily he merely aims to win his ball game. If there is a big score in his favor, he can afford to take things a little easier and he's foolish not to do this, for the pitcher will exert his arm enough in the general course of the season without exerting it unnecessarily.

The lively ball has made a baseball game much more uncertain that it used to be. There was a time when, if the club gave me a two-run lead, I felt that I could count on that game as already in. Now a two-run lead is nothing to get chesty about. A home run with a man on base will wipe out that lead.

Homers always were a black eye to a pitcher. Twice in my career I have lost ball games because the first man up hit me for a home run, the only score of the game. Doc Johnston did that once and Harry Hooper was the other batter. That was a tough break. Pitching through a game with the score 1 to 0 against you is a tough assignment anyway. You can't let the other club score any runs at all. And still, though you pitch shut-out ball, with the exception of that one slip, the best you can look for is a loss, unless your team pulls the game out of the fire.

The worst hole a pitcher can be in is to have three men on and nobody out. Still, that situation has its compensations. You can make a forced play at any base, but you've got to play a mighty tight game with no slips. Ordinarily I would rather have a man on second and third and nobody on first, than to have the bases full. That gives you a chance to work on the batter. Even if I pass him I am no worse off.

One of the best games I ever pitched was against the Red Sox when they were a great team. There was no score on either side and then in the ninth inning they got three men on with nobody out. But I managed to pull out of that hole and won the game in the fifteenth inning by the score of 1 to 0.

Fortunately a pitcher isn't called upon to face that bit of hard luck very often. It may not happen more than once or twice in a season. What happens rather often, however, and what is always a present danger, is a batting rally.

A batting rally is a queer thing. Sometimes it seems to come because a pitcher has begun to weaken. That isn't always the case, however. I know I have faced batting rallies when I was just as good as ever and knew it. But the boys had started to hit and they seemed determined to hit anything. What makes matters worse, from the pitcher's viewpoint, is the fact that such a rally seems to inspire every batter with more confidence. The fellow just up has made a hit and he's is going to make a hit. It's largely a matter of psychology.

Sometimes a batting rally is a bit of strategy on the manager's part. He has been studying the pitcher for some innings, instructing the batters to wait him out. And then, when he feels that the time is ripe, he orders them to hit. If his judgment is sound and he has picked the right moment, the batters may succeed in shelling the pitcher off the mound before he is able to protect himself.

Luck plays an important part in batting rallies. The batters are certainly getting the breaks. I have fooled batters at such a time with curves so badly that they hit the ball with the handle of their bats and still it went safe. In my opinion the only way to stop a batting rally is to call up some reserve speed, put everything you have on the ball and breeze it past them. A batter isn't going to hit a ball very hard that he can't see.

With this fast rabbit ball the pitcher not only has to figure the batter and the opposing team, but he also must take into consideration the ball park as well. For example, there are stunts that I would try at Washington, that I wouldn't try, for example, at the Yankee Stadium.

A pitcher can fall back occasionally on his reputation. I have always been known to have a good fast ball. There have been plenty of times when I could get by on speed and nothing else. The best curve ball ever invented wouldn't get a pitcher very far with nothing else. There have been games, however, when my speed wasn't right. I pitched a game two years ago when I really couldn't pitch a fast ball. I had been sick and my stuff had left me temporarily, so I pitched curves and slow balls and got away with it, simply because the batters were expecting every minute that I was going to cut loose with some speed. I fooled them for one game, but if I pitched that way very long they would murder me.

I do not pay much respect to wind up. I do not believe it deceives many batters. There have been pitchers with an effective wind up, particularly for a slow ball. Most peculiar wind ups are used by left-handed pitchers.

A pitcher feels good and bad by turns, like every other person. But feelings don't affect his work as much as you would suppose. I have gone into the game feeling great, only to be knocked out of the box. On the other hand, the best game, theoretically at least, that I ever pitched was when I was just recovering from an attack of grippe and didn't think I was able to work at all. I really had no idea of sticking through the game. I told Griff I would go in and pitch for an inning and see how I felt. I did this and told him I could work another inning. By that time my arm was pretty well loosened up so I finished the game without allowing a hit. I believe I deserved that no-hit game too, although such a game is always a trifle lucky.

Control is just as important to me now as it ever was . You can't over-rate a pitcher's control. I used to wonder what control really was. Now I think I know. It is comprised of four things-confidence, practice, condition and natural talents. If a man doesn't think he can get the ball over the plate, he can't get it over. Practice is important. All pitchers know that if they get rusty, their control suffers. Condition is very important, and by condition I mean not only physical health, but pitching in turn. A pitcher's arm is just right or it isn't just right. It's best when he takes his regular turn in the box. Those three things are all important, but you must add natural talent to round them out. Some pitchers can just naturally aim a ball more accurately than others. It's a gift.

Important as control is to a pitcher, it may be something of a defect. Take my own case for instance. I have often been told I would have been more successful if my control had not been so steady. The batters could always depend upon my getting the ball over the plate, or at least trying to, so they weren't gun shy. If I had had the reputation of being a little wild, they would have tried to avoid getting hit all the time and that would have bothered them.

Stuff is valuable to a pitcher, but there are times when too much of that is bad. On my very good days, I have sometimes had more stuff than I could use to advantage. The ball would hop a little too much and go wild. This only proves, I suppose, that it's possible to have too much of a good thing.

On the whole, I am inclined to believe that a base on balls bothers a pitcher more than a hit. There are three reasons for this. In the first place, a base on balls usually means more physical exertion than a hit. The pitcher must have given the batter at least four balls and quite possible two or three strikes, including fouls. A hit may have been made off the first ball pitched. In the second place, a hit is often an accident. A pitcher knows this quite as well as the batter. He knows that he had the batter fooled, but that luck broke with him. Accidents are unpleasant, but they don't impair his confidence in himself. That's no doubt the biggest injury he suffers from a base on balls. He's inclined to be suspicious of his own control.

For much the same reason hitting a batter bothers a conscientious pitcher worst of all. A speed pitcher like myself doesn't want to hit a batter, if he has any conscience, because he knows that he may injure that batter. If he hits a man he is therefore likely to be extra cautious not to hit the next fellow up and so may cut down a little on his stuff or get the ball right over the heart of the plate where it can be more easily hit.

You read a lot about bad balls. A bad ball isn't necessarily a ball that doesn't happen to be over the plate or is too high or too low. It's simply a ball that that particular batter likes. I believe there are about as many hits made off so-called bad balls as there are off perfect strikes.

I suppose I am pretty lucky to be able to pitch at all after all these years. And right now I am doubly lucky in being with a strong team that has just proved itself a champion. But I have had my ups and downs. This is my nineteenth year with Washington. True enough, I was glad to get there when they offered me a job for I was only a rookie in Idaho. Washington has treated me well, but at the same time I would have prospered much more, financially, with certain other clubs. Most of the time I have been with Washington, the team has been entirely out of the running.

This has hurt me in every way. In the first place, it has hurt my record. It has often been said that no modern pitcher would ever equal Cy Young's great record of winning over 500 ball games. I am very certain that I will never equal that record at least. But I might have done so had I been with a strong club instead of a weak club for going on nineteen years. I believe I would have won a hundred more ball games in those years. Everyone will agree that would have made some difference to my record.

A player values a record not only for its own sake, but because it affects his salary. He likes to be with a strong club not only because he wants to win, but because a strong club is prosperous and can pay him more money. There are players in this League who have been in five or six World's Series. That's a small fortune in itself.

While I appreciate the fact that my career has been by no means so profitable as it might have been had I signed, for example, with New York, I have never had any sympathy with fellows who laid down on the job with the avowed intention of being traded. Not a few players in this League have benefited by just such tactics, but I never would resort to such questionable methods myself I have always given my best work to the ball club every year. A player owes something to his own self respect.

I deliberately said good-bye to the American league and circumstances over-ruled me. Some day circumstances will compel me to say good-bye. When they do, I want to be able to leave the game with a free mind. I want to feel that I have nothing with which to reproach myself. I want to know that I have played a square game in a square way. (Interview with Walter Johnson, Baseball Magazine, June, 1925, pp. 291, 291, 292, 327, 329)

[Bill Burgess]

-------------Christy Mathewson Picks an All-America Team for Collier's------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

A man who is known to every fan on earth here does for baseball what for years Walter Camp, writing in Collier's, has done for football. He has reviewed the season just closing and named the men who, in his opinion, have proved themselves the greatest in their respective positions on the diamond. He has chosen two teams - a first and a second. We'd go a long way to see a series of games between them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------Collier's, the National Weekly, for October 11, 1924


In choosing the All-America Baseball Team for 1924, I am assuming the role of a manager with the material of both major leagues at his command and a baseball game to play. I am assuming the game is to be played under conditions and with equipment typical of the season of 1924 and that the characteristics of that season will still predominate.

Before I can proceed to the formation of the strongest possible combination from the players at my disposal, it is imperative that I reach a definite understanding of what those characteristics are.

The may be succinctly summarized as follows:

Nineteen twenty-four was another year of high score games hard-hit balls, and harassed pitchers. Several clubs, notably Pittsburgh and Detroit, made an early-season effort to revive the obsolete art of base stealing, but they soon found the 1924 ball as fast as ever and abandoned attempted base thefts as a useless risk. The next man up was far too likely to hit a three-bagger.

So the season, long before it had reached the halfway mark, settled down into another slugger's year. Both right-and left-handed pitching suffered. Pitching in both leagues continued the previous year's improvement as a matter of accuracy, due to the fact that balls in all parks were again left in the game longer, but hitting nevertheless maintained a sharply defined lead.

The records, still incomplete as this article is being written, seem to show that left-handed pitchers as a class fared better than right-handers this year, but paradoxically enough 1924 was also a year of sensational left-handed hitting.

This last fact is the clinching argument that 1924 was a year of batting supremacy and a true index to the requirement that any team built to win 1924 -style baseball must be a batting team. Defensive power must be there too, of course, but in choosing between two men with anything approximating equal defensive ability the player who can hit the ball hardest and oftenest must be given the call.

With that fact in mind, I start assembling my team of world beaters.

For the catching assignment, I single out Bassler of Detroit and Myatt of Cleveland.

Bassler is considered by most experts the smartest catcher of the year. He has the ideal temperament and talent for the highly specialized art of backstopping. He is aggressive in a thoroughly wholesome manner, a quick thinker, a masterful handler of pitchers, the posseser of a powerful arm, and a batter of the clean-up variety.

Bassler is exceptionally "smart around the plate," a sure guardian, and a power in stopping the double steal. He never cripples his pitcher by demanding repeated pitch-outs, and the fact that he coaxed Rip Collins, Yankee and Red Sox trade-off, Whitehill, a rookie, and Holloway to pitch Detroit into a contending position in the American League race this year is high tribute to his all-around value.

Myatt's chance came this year when Steve O'Neill went to the Red Sox, and he promptly shouldered his way into the limelight. He is faster than Bassler, but lacks Bassler's experience and skill in guarding the plate and stopping the double steal.

Myatt is a strong right-field hitter and especially valuable on his home diamond, where the right-field wall is close in, but he is a great at all times with an average that has hovered between .320 and .330 from the first.

Hartnett of the Cubs, Severeid of the Browns, and Ruel of Washington are all splendid catchers, but they haven't pounded the ball this year with the viciousness of Bassler and Myatt.

Vance of Brooklyn and Walter Johnson of Washington are unquestionably kings of the pitchers. Vance, the "Strike-out King," supplanted Adolfo Luque this year as leading "Won-and-Lost" pitcher and also shattered his own 1923 record of 197 strike-outs.

The tall Brooklynite used a fast-breaking hook such as carried Luque to glory in 1923, but mixed it with a faster ball than Luque's. Control he had in the pinches, but ordinarily he was just wild enough to make him unbeatable. Even the most daring batsman hesitates to crowd the plate on Vance.

Vance probably reached the peak of his 1924 season on August 23rd at Chicago when he struck out fifteen Cubs for the season's record to that date, six of them consecutively, lifting his year's total to 196, which is one less than his record mark for the entire season of 1923.

Vance is also that rare gem - a good fielding pitcher. He has a sound minor-league background and easily qualifies as one of the greatest pitchers of all time.

Walter Johnson's eighteenth season of major-league ball has found him greater than ever. Long a magnificent figure with a team never until this year in the running, Johnson has has one of his greatest seasons. His fast ball may have leaked some of its former steam, but it is still so much faster than the majority of fast balls doing business that it still has the batters lunging at the spot it just left.

Walter Johnson is also a batter of ability. He frequently goes in as a pinch hitter, and when he smacks a ball it travels. With him in the game pressure would be on the opposing pitcher all the way. There would be no respite anywhere along the line. Our offensive team would always be in danger of breaking through.

Hollis Thurston of the White Sox is a youngster who made a splendid impression in 1924. He is colorful, confident, and aggressive. He has an uncanny ability to sneak the ball by the batter. Some sixth sense seems to enable him to serve his pitch either just before of just after the batter is ready for it. He promises to become one of the very real stars of the future.

Vance, Johnson, and Thuston are right-handers. A team doing actual battle should also have a supply of left-handers in reserve. Joe Shaute of Cleveland, Earl Whitehill of the Tigers, and Jack Bentley of the Giants are three left-handers who have come to the fore this year. Artie Nehf of the Giants is a veteran of established worth, and Wingard of the Browns has looked unbeatable at times.

In selecting Fournier of Brooklyn and Sheely of the White Sox as my first basemen, I am for the first time setting aside other considerations to get men who slaughter the ball. Fournier, my first choice, isn't so perfect a target as George Kelley of the Giants, for example. He isn't the relay and cut-off man Kelley is.

He may not field his position so cleanly as Jim Bottomley of the Cardinals, Charley Grimm of the Pirates, Joe Judge of the Senators, or Lu Blue of the Tigers, but he is an all-round workman of parts, nevertheless, and he is by far the most murderous batsman of the group. As this is being written Fournier is leading the National League in home runs with twenty-five to his credit, and his batting average is .346. Sheely trails ten points below him, and Judge, the nearest of the others, is fourteen points below Sheely.

Fournier has a sufficiency of other points to supplement his slugging. He is fast, despite his years in the harness, and his throwing arm is still one of the best. He bats left-handed.

Sheely, a right-hand hitter, impresses me as one of the smartest stickmen in the game. He is invaluable on the batting end of the hit and run. He can hit behind the runner, pull his shot through short or push it through second with uncanny skill. He is a great target at first and can dig a ball out of the dirt better than Fournier. His handicap is lack of speed, but he is great despite it. Sheely at first, Eddie Collins at second, and Harry Hooper in right field bunch three of the smartest men in baseball in one corner of the White Sox defense.

The first basemen can't be passed without a reference to George Sisler. He is still great, but he is sadly not the Sisler of two years ago. The dimming of this brilliant star is one of the real tragedies of baseball history. It is to be fervently hoped that this eclipse is only temporary.

Hornsby of the Cardinals gets the assignment over Eddie Collins of the White Sox at second only because of the tremendous hitting. The only established .400 hitter in baseball, and five-time leader of the National League, Hornsby's is one of the great names in baseball's Hall of Fame.

Hornsby doesn't cover so much ground as Collins nor offer the brilliant defensive play of Frisch, but he is nevertheless dependable, with a great arm a natural flair for the game, and a pair of the fastest legs of the decade. Archdeacon of the White Sox is called the fastest man in baseball, and perhaps he could beat out Hornsby down the first base line. But I should like to see them race against each other from first to third. I think I'd back the National Leaguer to get there first.

Eddie Collins, playing his nineteenth consecutive season in the game, is second choice for the keystone assignment. He has been hitting close to .340 all year and leading his league in stolen bases despite his 38 years of age. Collins is a finished defensive second baseman in every sense of the term. He plays his position the same as Speaker plays the outfield, shifting constantly on each count and pitch. He has the knack of getting the jump on the batter and he does even the most difficult things so well that they appear ridiculously easy.

Despite the fact that three of the greatest stars of the contemporary game, Hornsby, Collins, and Frisch, are second basemen, the keystone position is the weakest in the major leagues at present. After these three the field falls rapidly away with the single exception of Maranville of the Pirates, who shifted to second this season after years of starring at short stop and continued his splendid playing.

Stanley Harris, the young manager of the Senators, and Aaron Ward of the Yankees were the other outstanding second-sackers of the year.

-------------------------------Frisch is Best at Third----------------
-----------------
Frank Frisch of the Giants and Joe Dugan of the Yankees are my nominations at third. Frisch's normal position is at second base, of course, but he was a star third baseman before he became a star second baseman, and any team defending the honor of American baseball would be foolishly discounting its strength if it failed to avail itself of his spectacular defensive play and his sharp work with the willow.

Frisch has a marvelous pair of hands. He is a courageous, desperate, try-for-everything type of player. He is lightning fast of brain and body. He has a powerful, arm and can throw from any angle. He hits from either side of the plate and clubs at a .330 clip. In short, he is a Fielding third baseman who gets the call over other fielding third basemen because of superior hitting ability.

Joe Dugan is the best of the bona fide third basemen. Although barely in the .300 class, he is a hitter of the clean-up category with an especial perchant for the two-baggers and three-baggers. He too has great hands. They have a particular affinity for balls that take wicked hops, and many apparent base hits are tamed by his spectacular knockdowns.

Traynor of the Pirates and Kamm of the White Sox are other star third sackers. Traynor batted for .337 in 1923 but he wallowed in a slump until midseason of 1924. Both Frisch and Dugan are more versatile batsmen that Traynor and will hit the ball harder to the different fields.

All these men are exceptional on bunts laid down their alley, and Dugan and Kamm are wonderful handling that more exacting chance - a topped ball. Traynor has the best throwing arm of the lot perhaps, but Frisch and Dugan will shade him getting the ball away. Walter Lutzke of Cleveland is a marvelous fielding third baseman, but his hitting ability isn't so marked.

For shortstop, my first choice is Bancroft of the Braves. I have never seen more brilliant shortstop play than Bancroft's while he was in the game this year. The ease with which he plays a ball would appeal to these efficiency experts who go into the different trades to eliminate lost motion. He can go farther to either side to get a ball and cut off his man than any shortstop since Hans Wagner.

Banny covers a huge amount of territory, and he is near perfection in the all-important item of midfield defense. He is an adept on relays and cutoffs with throws from the outfield; he is the best man in either league handling the long or short throw against the double steal, and he puts the ball on a runner with the best of them. He is sure fire on either end of the double play and like Frisch, is reversible at bat. He was hitting like a demon when illness removed him from the battlefield.

Young Glenn Wright, the brand-new Pittsburgher, is my second choice for the short field, although he is quite a drop from Bancroft. He is a youngster of great promise. He takes a hard cut at the ball and is a busybody at all times. He is exceptionally fast for a big man and he fields the position cleanly. The fact that he jumped from the minors into the pivotal position of a contending major-league club and made good from the start gives a true line on his ability.

Walter Gerber of the St. Louis Americans is even a faster fielder than Bancroft. He can make a play faster when he has to than any shortstop I have ever seen, but he is not so dependable at bat as Bancroft and Wright.

Peckinpaugh of the Senators, Joe Sewell of Cleveland, and Everett Scott, the wonderful veteran of the Yankees, are the other great shortstops of the year with Chick Galloway of the Athletics and Travis Jackson of the Giants close behind.

From the plenitude of outfield material the 1924 season produced, I am selecting Babe Ruth of the Yankees, Edd Roush of Cincinnati, and Bib Falk of the White Sox for my first string, with young Hazen Cuyler of the Pirates, Ty Cobb of Detroit, and Zack Wheat of Brooklyn in reserve.

These are six of the most murderous sluggers in baseball. If any one of them had a real batting weakness in the season just closed, the pitchers in their respective leagues failed to discover it. But they were also considerably more than mere sluggers. They exhibited a sterling brand of defensive play that was usually overlooked because all eyes were riveted upon their tremendous hitting.

Babe Ruth in right field is an unquestionable nomination. His record as the leading slugger of all time is too well known to require amplification here. He is unquestionably the most valuable player in the game. Most enthusiasts think of Ruth only as a mighty batsman. As a mater of fact, he is a very finished outfielder with a marvelous throwing arm; and the fact that he was one of the greatest left-hand pitchers in the game before he became an outfielder is now generally forgotten.

Ruth plays a hard-hit ball as well as any outfielder in the business. He goes after a ground ball like an infielder, and for all his size he is a smart and daring base runner.

Vicing for Ruth I should place Hazen Cuyler, who broke in as a regular this year with Pittsburgh and became the sensation of his league. Cuyler is young, strong, and fast. He can throw and run with the best of them and his hitting for the season has been better than .380.

---------------------The Years Keep Cobb Off----------------------------

In Center Field, I select Edd Roush over Cobb and Speaker because he is still great in every department, while time has begun to take its toll of the remarkable Tris and Ty; I place him ahead of Archdeacon of the White Sox because Archdeacon eventually faltered after a sensational start, while Roush started poorly, then blazed his way to heights never attained before in his career.

Roush is a finished outfielder in every sense of the word. He is a great ground covered, a shifting ball hawk, and a clean-up slugger of the .350 class.

Ty Cobb, like Babe Ruth, is far too well known to require comment here. Ty is slowing a little but he is still one of the greatest of them all.

Bib Falk in left is a fitting teammate for Ruth and Roush. he is wonderful on a fly ball, and with Ruth is the best throwing outfielder in the game. He hits better than .350 and, like Roush, plays all over his field. Like Ruth and Roush, Falk can also go back after a ball. This is the ultimate test of outfield greatness. When a man can play in close enough to snare short hits and still go back fast enough to pull down the long ones, he is of double value to his club.

Zack Wheat get the alternate assignment in left chiefly because of his hitting. Wheat's arm isn't so good as it once was and he doesn't handle a ground ball so well as the first stringers, but his .350 batting average would fit in handsomely with any plan of attack.

--------------------------The Question of Batting Order----------------------

Having selected this first team of heavy-hitting stars, I should next build me a batting order that would enable me to utilize their several talents to the fullest. This is the order in which I should send them to the plate:

1. Bancroft
2. Roush
3. Ruth
4. Hornsby
5. Falk
6. Fournier
7. Frisch
8. Bassler
9. Vance

Bancroft is an ideal lead-off man. He hits either right-handed or left-handed. Bancroft is a good waiter and is presented with many a base on balls. He hits hard enough to keep the infielders back, but he is also fast enough to make a bunt extremely dangerous.

Roush as second man is not only a long slugger who could be depended to bring Bancroft in, but he is also fast enough to make an infielder hustle to double him at first. Roush can lay down a bunt expertly when that strategy is resorted to or he can take a free swing if that seems advisable.

Although Ruth and Hornsby both bat third for their respective teams, I should send the Babe up ahead of Hornsby here because he is a long hitter, while Hornsby's specialty is base hitting. Ruth would either clean the bases or clout a long sacrifice fly. In case of a shorter hit or a base on balls, he is fast enough to stay ahead of Hornsby, who, batting as clean-up man, could do whatever Ruth failed to in the matter of cleaning house.

The heavy artillery would already be under way, with Falk, Fournier, Frisch, and Bassler waiting in line to keep up the drum fire. The batting average of this team, based on 1924 figures and exclusive of Vance, is something over .350.

Vance is not a hitting pitcher, but Walter Johnson is, and with the latter in there, terrific pressure would be on the opposing battery all the way. The opposing hurler would have to pitch his hardest at every stage, for all these men are smart batsmen. They don't go after the bad ones. The all have to be pitched to.

The opposing infield would be under a severe strain also, for any one of these batters is smart enough to cross up the defense with an unexpected bunt at any stage.

The fact that Roush, Ruth, Falk, Fournier, and Bassler are all natural left-hand hitters may draw the criticism that this is a left-handed batting team. That criticism won't hold because players with the batting averages of these stars have proved that they can hit any kind of pitching.

This team of mine may never be assembled as a unit on a playing field, but if it could, and would play up to its capabilities, I fail to see how it could be defeated. It boasts the best of everything that makes baseball a game - tremendous hitting power, sensational fielding ability, and pitching of unbeatable class. With a manager like John McGraw to guide its destiny, there is no limit to the heights it might attain. ( He also chose Ty Cobb of Detroit, to manage his second team) (End of article)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Burgess

PS. This is a lot of typing. Is anyone getting any satisfaction out of these articles?

[Dodger]

PS. This is a lot of typing. Is anyone getting any satisfaction out of these articles?
Great stuff, Bill.
-----------------------------------------
538280 09-21-2005, 02:08 PM

Any more historical articles, Bill? I find them to be quite interesting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
blackout805 09-21-2005, 03:14 PM

thanks for posting these William, these are baseball gold!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sultan_1895-1948 09-21-2005, 05:41 PM

Damn Bill, thanks

Very interesting, keep 'em coming. Anything about Ruth is always appreciated. Players who played with him and saw him, clearly understand that he could do it all. And now I have a quote from Christy which says as much

Thanks again.
ps. Anything Gehrig or DiMaggio related would be cool too
---------------------------------------------------------
blackout805 09-24-2005, 04:18 PM

please post more articles!@##!@!#@#@!!#@#@!#!@
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
four tool 09-26-2005, 07:29 AM

Bill, you never cease to amaze me. Incredible stuff. Johnson's evaluation the strength and weakness of various hitters is masterful. Did he really say Joe Jackson could have beat out the records of Cobb and Ruth?

Sounds like a new discussion to me
------------------------------------------------------------
janduscframe 09-26-2005, 02:17 PM

I'm with Cold Nose. Good thread and I'll read all you guys care to post.
Bill, I have an article in which Ty Cobb recalls his "greatest day in baseball".
Do you have it? or should I post it? I'm under the impression you kind of admired Mr. Cobb.
---------------------------------------------------------
yanks0714 11-08-2005, 02:01 PM

Keep'em coming. I found this extremely educational and fascinating.
-------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

Randy,

Thanks so much for the appreciation. Always appreciate appreciation. Since you sound so pleased with Christy lauding The Babe, allow me to toss in another bone. This one is just for you, Randy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christy lauds The Babe: (The Outlook, August 30, 1922, pp. 704, Interview by Frederick M. Davenport)

We fell to discussing the salaries of big players. "They are very much larger now than they were in my day," said Mathewson. "I began at $250 a month for six months' work. Even at the height of the period the best players got only from $7,000 to $10, 000 for the season. Now I hear that Babe Ruth gets somewhere near $40,000 a year."

Here was an opening. I said, "Isn't Babe Ruth growing irascible and showing pretty poor self-control?" Instantly the poise and breadth of sympathy of Mathewson showed itself. "Well, I don't know," he replied. "Self-control is a wide word. Sometimes the management doesn't think a player has self-control because he exercises his own judgment at the bat instead of following implicitly the directions of the coach. Ruth is what he is. It is his temperament which makes him so valuable to baeball and so worthy of his salary. The mass of people on the bleachers care most for a man whom they can cheer to-day and jeer to-morrow, and Ruth fits into that picture. He is on the heights when the bleachers rock with applause, and he is correspondingly depressed and irritable sometimes when the great crowd turns on him because he doesn't produce the thrills. It is all in the mercurial temperament. And it is the very thing which gives Ruth great money value.

Now there is Sisler, of the St. Louis team--he is every bit as valuable a player as Ruth, some people think more valuable. But he has another temperament. When he makes a great hit or a great play and the crowd are ready to idolize him, he modestly touches his cap and fades away out of sight. He doesn't fit into the picture."

[CoasttoCoast]

Just for anyone interested in listing old articles from magazines and books.

It is legal to relist an article from any source if said source falls into one of the following -

1.Article is from a defunct magazine or newspaper.

2.Article has been reproduced in another source by said publisher or author.

3.Article is older than 20 years.

4.Article has been found to be false in some part.

5.If you hold a paid subscription to a source you may save to your pc and house a link to a blog site.

6.Article has written consent of the author or publisher.

7.Article has a quote or reference to the person posting said article.

8.Article has a quote from a direct family member that can be considered a family archive


Hope this helps.I had to look at all the ends and outs of articles for a class a couple of years ago.

Most publishers dont care if articles are used for a website as long as it is used for non negative means.

Matt Drudge online is the source of above....

Just be sure to use the author's byline.

[2Chance]

HOT TAMALE CIRCUIT
By Kyle Crichton
FROM COLLIER'S
Copyright @1946, Kyle Crichton

In 1946 the American baseball player was still in serfdom to the reserve clause and all the attendant evils that a standard baseball contract offered. Playing ball in Mexico during the off season was an attractive moonlight occupation which American owners resented and fought. The author comes to grips with the whole issue of the relationship between management and employees that even today is besmirching the sport of baseball. Originally this piece was two different articles, but they are here combined.


In Mexico City Mickey Owen was on second base when the next hitter drove a fly into right field. Mickey tagged up and set sail for third as soon as the ball was caught. He made it safely by one of the famous belly-buster slides specialized in by Pepper Martin of the St. Louis Cardinals.

This was Mr. Owen's first game in Mexico City and he had been on Mexican soil only a week. The altitude in Mexico City is 7,325 feet and most visitors not only refrain from belly-busting but take to their beds immediately on arrival. Mickey is obviously a brave man, but as he lay on the ground at Delta Parque there were varying thoughts about him in the capacity crowd. Had it not been for the stern and challenging eye of Senor Jorge Pasquel, president of the American League, it is quite possible that sporting bloods among the spectators would willingly have ventured a few centavos on the proposition that Senor Owen would never get up alive. Mr. Owen arose, dusted particles of sacred Aztec soil from his uniform, and was left there on third when Chili Gomez hit into a double play and killed the rally.

We mention this excruciatingly unimportant detail because it represents one of the minor hazards to be faced by American players crossing the border. Now that the original tumult and shouting have died, it is possible to estimate Mexican baseball and see what it means to the blacklisted American players who have temporarily departed the homeland for a sample of Senor Pasquel's gold.

It may seem farfetched to say it, but that arrival of Mickey Owen in Mexico City was an event of considerable international importance. It followed close on the departure of Vernon Stephens, who had fled to the States across the border at Laredo as if he were escaping from a concentration camp. This was bad enough, but subsequent interviews with Stephens produced varying reflections about Mexico which were considered insults by the Mexicans. When a spokesman for the State Department in Washington hinted that it might be well for the American leagues and the Mexican League to get together, he was obviously speaking from information not available to the public.

In the interests of mutual amity, we shall not recount the entire Stephens story, but it can be said that Jack Fournier, of the St. Louis Browns, met Stephens at Monterrey, and other mysterious Americans went over the border with the intent of facilitating Stephens's release. An explosion could easily have occurred there which would have had tragic consequences for our relations with Mexico. We can get an idea of how the Mexicans felt by envisioning a situation in which Mexican agents filtered into Chicago by nightfall and spirited away a Mexican player on the ground that he was in danger from gangsters.

Owen and his wife had reached San Antonio on their way to Mexico when the Stephens incident occurred. It gave them pause, and they were further harassed by pressure from the American side. The general tenor of the remarks was that the Mexican League would blow up and Owen wouldn't get his money; also he would be mixed up with a gambling racket, would sacrifice a good career in the States, and might even end up shot by tough Mexican hombres who didn't like his style of catching. The phone in the Owen hotel room rang all night long, and after a few days it was plain that they either had to get away or collapse.

A phone call with Branch Rickey had brought merely the suggestion that Mickey come back and be a good boy and Brooklyn would look into his case. Rickey promised further that in fifteen days he would dig up the money so Owen could repay the $20,000 already received from Pasquel. The Owens then got in their car and started to roam. When they reached Vicksburg, Mississippi, they read a newspaper story saying that Rickey was adamant in his determination that Owen would never again play for Brooklyn but would be traded. That was the finisher. Mickey got in touch with Alfonso Pasquel in Houston and later joined him in Laredo. What Mickey wanted was proof that his five-year contract would be carried out.

"Name any proposition you want and you'll get it," said Alfonso.

Jorge Pasquel has stated privately that Owen was paid $50,000 in advance on his contract; Mickey says he was paid a bonus of $12,500 and was given his fifth year's salary of $15,000 in advance. In all, he got $27,500, says Mickey, and is being paid for this year's work as he goes along. He explains the difference between his own and Pasquel's figures by the amount that Pasquel will pay out for Owen's living expenses. It seems impossible that Mickey could live that sumptuously but the point need not be stressed; it is certain that Owen has $27,500 at least and ample assurance for the rest.

What is most immediately apparent in interviewing the ball players in Mexico is that Pasquel would have had no luck whatever in his recruiting if the players had not been dissatisfied with conditions in the States.

The landscape of Mexico is dotted, for example, with ex-New York Giant players. Down at Puebla you will see a familiar figure waddle his way out of the coaching box and will recognize him immediately as Dolf Luque, former pitcher and coach of the Giants. With him at Puebla are Napoleon Reyes, Adrian Zabala, and Salvatore Maglie. Up at Laredo are Roy Zimmerman and Tommy German; Danny Gardella and Charley Mead are with the Vera Cruz team in Mexico City. George Hausmann is up at Torreon with Red Hayworth, former St. Louis Browns catcher Ace Adams and Harry Feldman are new arrivals.

“I did good with Cincinnati and Brooklyn,” said Luque, “but those Giants ...” He stopped and waved a hand. “They don't want to pay nobody no money.”

“Don't forget those two autographed balls they sent us as a bonus last winter,” laughed Maglie.

It is difficult to reconcile the opinion the public has of Mel Ott and the resentment the Mexican ex-Giant contingent has against him. Quite aside from the salary differences, they maintain that there is no team spirit on the Giants because Ott suppresses it. At least half a dozen of the men said to us: “Ott never even looked at us away from the ball park. He doesn't mean to do it but he beats you down until you haven't any spirit left as a player.”

The players particularly resented the treatment given to Nap Reyes, Danny Gardella, and Ace Adams.

“Maybe Reyes isn't a great player, but he worked his head off for the Giants last year. He played third base and first base and kept going even when he had a leg injury that would have put anybody else on the bench. Then when he couldn't get what he wanted with New York and signed with the Mexican League, the newspapers said it was good riddance and he was a bum anyhow. You can say what you want, but Gardella was the only drawing card the Giants had last year. Ace Adams pitched in over 60 games for two years in a row, and when he left New York one paper said it was the best break the Giants ever had. The Giants broke their record for home attendance last year, with a low-salaried team-and that's what they say about the players that helped them make a fortune.”

But the financial details are less important than the human element. How are the Americans going to get along in Mexico? What chance has the Mexican League to last? What sort of a man is Jorge Pasquel (pronounced “Pass-kell”)? How will the Americans be affected by the living conditions, the food, the water, the necessity of learning a foreign tongue? To get the answers, we visited the homes of as many American players as we could reach and talked also with Cuban, Puerto Rican, and Mexican players. We have found out a great deal about Mexican baseball and almost as much about American baseball.

Take the case of Tommy De La Cruz, formerly a very good pitcher for the Cincinnati Reds. Tommy was setting the league on fire last year for the Mexico City team (working on a five-year contract at a salary almost twice that of Cincinnati) when he tore a muscle in his leg. He collected his salary for the remaining two months of the year and then Pasquel paid all expenses for a major operation last winter in Havana. When De La Cruz returned to Mexico City this spring, Pasquel refused to let him pitch until it was certain he was in shape. He still wasn't pitching a month after the season opened.

“Jorge said it didn't matter if I ever pitched again,” said De La Cruz. “He said I was with him for life and could be a manager or coach if I couldn't pitch.”

The De La Cruzes were established in an expensive apartment in the Washington Apartments with their rent paid and their living expenses assured by the club. The Owens were around the corner in another nice apartment, and down the block were the Frank Scalzis. Scalzi, the former New York Giant player, is known in Mexico as Rizzuti because he played in Mexico under that assumed name in 1940. A short distance away are the Bobby Estalellas in the Latino-Americano apartments. Danny Gardella, late of the New York Giants, is set up in style in an apartment near Hamburgo Street, where Jorge Pasquel lives. Luis Olmo, the former Brooklyn star, is also living in Mexico City, and Charley Mead of the Giants is a new arrival.

The apartments are rent-free and last year the players were given six hundred pesos a month for living expenses (approximately $120 at the current rate of exchange). But this means nothing under the Pasquel system. If groceries come higher, the players let Pasquel know and he puts up the difference. Without doubt, it is the most amazing thing ever known in the history of sports. The players practically get their salaries clear.

George Hausmann has his wife and children at Torreon, where they enjoy the privileges of the country club and have a swimming pool for the children. Red Hayworth is also at Torreon and likes it so well that he has sent for his family. Mickey Owen reports that Roy Zimmerman is happy at Nuevo Laredo, and we can testify that the Mexico City contingent feel they are sitting on top of the world. They were worried about Murray Franklin, the ex-Detroit player, at Tampico, where it is hot and not too attractive, but Franklin has stated that he is quite content there. He feels he got a raw deal from Detroit in being dropped after a month of spring training, and is one of the greatest boosters for Mexican baseball.

Pasquel treats the players with such prodigality that they go about with their eyes popping. In addition to the salaries, bonuses, free apartments, and allowances for living expenses, he pays all doctor and dentist bills and is so free with his largesse that all the players' wives have gold bracelets as gifts from him and many of the players have clothes, watches, and rings as presents. Ramon Bragana, Cuban Negro pitcher and manager of the Vera Cruz team, is wearing a diamond ring presented by Jorge and said to be worth $6,000. Dolf Luque down at Puebla has a new car as a gift from the club.

Thinking that this might only be true for the higher-priced athletes, we talked with Raymond Dandridge, American Negro second baseman for Mexico City. He assured us that conditions are exactly alike for all players. Since he has been coming to Mexico for many years, he knows the situation well and other players told us with envy that Dandridge was installed in one of the finest houses in town. At forty-two, Dandridge is a wonder as a fielder and hitter. He plays baseball 11 months a year (Panama, Cuba, and Mexico), and there is general agreement that he would be a star on any big-league club in America.

However, Mexico is not the United States and there are handicaps that are inclined to irk the visitor. It is a country without water, and Mexico City, modem as it may be, is no exception. In some apartments the water is turned off at noon and unless the housewife learns to keep a reserve supply in the bathtub, the family may have a tough time during the day. However, the 6,000 other Americans who make Mexico City their permanent home get used to such difficulties and also accustom themselves to the differences in food.

The Mexico City ball park looks like a run-down minor league plant in this country. It seats around 20,000 but is a rickety job with no lavatory conveniences, no clubhouse, and no showers for the players. They dress at home and go back home to change. Even President Pasquel's box has no chairs; you sit on the flat boards with no backrest. There is a line of boxes in front holding four patrons sitting on small wire chairs such as we see in drugstores. The Puebla ball park holds around 10,000 and the boxes there consist of one row of grandstand seats protected by a railing.

However, the league will spend $6,000,000 next year for new parks. Pasquel now has two architects in the States inspecting our plants, and ground will be broken in January for a $2,000,000 Baseball City in Mexico City, with an apartment house for the ball players, space under the stadium for 2,000 cars, and theater seats for the paying guests. Puebla is even now extending its grandstand to care for this season's crowds and will have a new park next year. At Tampico a spur of railroad track runs through right field but that also will soon be corrected. Night ball is played only in Torreon and Laredo. Formerly the league played three games a week, Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday morning at 11:30. A fourth game was added, starting in May, and this met with the players' approval because they complain about getting out of shape from too much lying around. But they are frankly relieved at getting away from the seven-day grind in the States.

“Hell!” said one of the Americans disgustedly. “If we ever had an off day, they'd book an exhibition game. On this system down here a guy should be good to fifty.”

Pasquel owns two clubs in Mexico City (Mexico and Vera Cruz), controls every park in the league, and is said also to own San Luis Potosi and Torreon. The Tampico is owned by the American Coca-Cola representative, Fleischmann, who is said to net $100,000 a month from the franchise. Laredo is backed by men worth $40,000,000. Monterrey is a rich city and is completely nuts about baseball, and this is true of the whole country. Monterrey, with no American players on its roster, was leading the league in early May. Pasquel's own pet team, Vera Cruz (he was born there and still keeps a residence there), was in last place, and Jorge was suffering audibly. He acts for the good of the league, but when Vera Cruz loses goes into mourning. If he is a dictator, he is having little luck with his dictating.

Pasquel's personality is all-important in any discussion of Mexican baseball, and it can be said immediately that he is an amazing man. He conducts an importing and exporting business with his brothers (Alfonso, Bernardo, Gerardo, and Mario) but his fingers are in dozens of pies. He owns a ranch near San Luis Obispo and his brother Gerardo owns another near Torreon. Bernardo and Alfonso are installed at Laredo, and Mario, the youngest, is a lawyer in Mexico City. Nobody in Mexico City has any idea what Jorge is worth; it is a matter of as much heated discussion there as it is in some circles here. The first surmise is that Pasquel is confusing pesos and dollars when he speaks of a $60,000,000 fortune, but Pasquel replies that he is well aware of the difference, and it is dollars he is mentioning.

All we know is that Pasquel seems to be connected with almost every line of activity in Mexico. It is rather well established that he controls a Mexico City bank, although this is not publicly known. His mother owns a cigar factory in Vera Cruz.

Whether Pasquel has 18 pesos or $60,000,000, he is a red-hot baseball fan and he is also a proud Mexican and there is no possibility whatever that he will give up the fight against American baseball (the baseball monopoly, he calls it) or that he will renege on his contracts. When Branch Rickey followed Luis Olmo's defection with harsh words against Mexican baseball, the die was cast.

“That hurt me, that hurt my pride,” says Jorge, with his hand on his heart. "It hurts the pride of all Mexicans. If American baseball wants peace with us, I will not go to them. They will get peace only when Commissioner Chandler comes here to this office and sits in this chair and explains what he has meant by his words about Mexico.”

His feelings were not assuaged in the slightest by the injunction taken by Colonel Larry MacPhail and Branch Rickey in American courts to prevent Pasquel's agents from tampering with their players. This would certainly be accounted another provocation by Jorge.

Pasquel's acquaintance with the Americans came in a rough way. As a boy of six, he cowered in a cellar in Vera Cruz while American warships blasted the town and killed hundreds of citizens of the little port town. Relations with Mexico were so bad in the First World War it was estimated that the country was almost unanimous in desiring a German victory.

The episode has been forgotten now, and Jorge Pasquel forgot it to the point where he began making yearly trips to this country in 1931. He knows more about the United States, its roads, its industries, its farms, than most Americans. He thinks the United States is the greatest country ever created by God and destined to rule the world for the next thousand years.

On the personal side, Pasquel is a fanatic on good health and sports. He neither smokes nor drinks, and when Danny Gardella arrived in Mexico, they rigged up a gymnasium in the patio of Pasquel's Mexico City house (a lavish affair on all counts) where they have daily workouts with Jorge's American trainer, Robert Janis. On Sunday afternoons after the ball game, they go out to Chapultepec Heights and play a variety of squash tennis on a jai alai court. During the week Jorge sneaks away from his work and turns up at Delta Parque to throw a few with the ball players. He was an amateur player and got deeply interested in the sport in 1940, when he managed Vera Cruz into the pennant. He may not be an expert, but he knows the game thoroughly.

What is not generally understood in the States is that Mexico is baseball mad. On the train coming down from Laredo, we saw dozens of games going on in backlots; in Puebla the grocery boys wore baseball caps with the peaks turned up, like kids all over America; the waiters in the Ritz Hotel were more concerned about how the game came out than in getting the soup on the table hot. Bobby Estalella and Tommy De La Cruz tell us that Cuba is even wilder about the sport.

Lefty Gomez is managing a team in Venezuela and it seems only a short time till baseball captures all Latin America.

Which is to say that Jorge Pasquel is no fool. He likes baseball, but he is also a businessman. We saw seven games in Mexico and all but one ( Easter Sunday ) was a complete sellout, with the gates closed at game time and crowds around the outfield and sitting in front of the stands ( at Puebla ).

Jorge Pasquel expects the league to gross between $2,000,000 and $2,250,000 this year, which will allow it to break even, despite the high salaries being paid. Fifty-five percent of all receipts are turned into the league treasury and divided among the teams at the end of the year. This means that Mexico City ( and Pasquel) carries the league; that is why other owners are quite content to let him run things.

Next year, with the new parks built, Mexican baseball is going to be a gold mine. The prices range from two and a half pesos (50 cents) to 10 pesos (two dollars) for box seats. Pasquel figures that next year his games at the new Mexico City Park will bring average daily receipts of $30,000. This is money in any language, but the enthusiasm of the Mexicans for baseball seems to warrant Pasquel's expectations. In view of this, his three- and five-year contracts to American players appear less startling. The man knows exactly what he is doing, and things that strike outsiders as fantastic may turn out to be sound business deals. Mickey Owen would probably have brought Brooklyn $75,000 in a trade; Pasquel gets him for a $12,500 bonus. Mickey makes a good deal for himself, Pasquel gets a valuable player; everybody's happy except Brooklyn.

The Mexico and Vera Cruz teams travel either by air or by Pullman on their trips. Tampico, Laredo, and Torreon also travel by air and train. Monterrey has its own bus; San Luis Potosi uses bus, train, and plane on other trips. We mention this because of reports in the States that Mexican players travel like a class-C American outfit, taking their chances in rickety charabancs with paisanos, chickens, goats, and odors.

The players feel that the American baseball contract is inequitable and harsh in its terms. It contains a clause whereby a player may be discharged with ten days' notice and an even more famous clause (the reserve clause) which permits the club to retain possession of the player from one season to the next. Because of this he is always the property of some club in organized baseball and is prevented from making a deal for his services.

It is plain from speaking to players on both sides of the border that the Pasquel threat is the finest thing that ever happened to them. Even if they don't jump to the Mexican League, their salaries are being hiked here. Instead of being at the mercy of the American club owners, they now have a leverage that makes life infinitely sweeter for them. It seems inevitable that if Pasquel persists in his campaign, changes will be made in the American system that will greatly better the status of the players.

All reports to the contrary, the players down below consider it a Mexican hay ride. If they are eating their hearts out with regret, they are dissembling in a most amiable manner. It doesn't show.



The Hot Tamale Circuit, PART II

Mexican baseball is exactly like American baseball, except for the extraneous embellishments. They work the hit-and-run and make the double play. but they don't sell the hot dog. The Mexico City ballpark (Delta Parque) looks like something discarded in Oskaloosa, Iowa, in 1915, but the bleacher fans are a spitting image of the horny-handed sons of toil from downstate Missouri who crowd the stands in St. Louis for a Sunday doubleheader. In spirit, however, they are much like a New York crowd. Which is to say, they are impartial and often on the side of the visiting team.

Games in Mexico are really a spectacle for the gods. The bleacher aficionados (fans) are rattling the gates for admittance long before the ball players arrive. Outside the concessionaires are lining up their wares. A young man stands on a table busily mixing huge bowls of what seem to be soft drinks. In little booths outside the park, frijoles, tamales, and tortillas are steaming on the stoves. In the grandstand early arrivals are having their shoes shined by bootblacks.

After the game starts, the vendors begin selling oyster cocktails, tall glasses in which the oysters are embedded in tomato sauce. Another delicacy is chicken, of which you buy a very full plate with a mixture of white and dark meat. Despite what the young man is selling outside, the vendors inside are getting rid of vast quantities of soft drinks.

It's an American game, right down to the nomenclature. On the scoreboard are places for Strikes, Bolas, Runs. Out on the field the players are proving that beisbol has an excellent chance of becoming an international sport. The teams are made up of Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans, South Americans, and recruits from the States. They handle themselves with every mannerism known to American players. And don't let anybody fool you with the theory that Mexican baseball is amateurish. They play fast, hard, and very good ball. The Americans playing down there feel it ranks up with AA baseball in the States. If the seven we watched were a fair test, the Mexican League has major-league class in defensive play, at least.

In the Vera Cruz-Monterrey game, Colas for Vera Cruz made a sensational catch of a screaming low drive into center field with the bases full and two out. In the San Luis Potosi-Puebla game, the Puebla third baseman made a fantastic play on a ball over the bag, converting it into a double play in the ninth with the bases full and none out.

What will be harder to believe is that the best ball we saw played in Mexico was by Danny Gardella, who was noted in New York for his awkwardness as an outfielder. Gardella happens to be a physical-culture fanatic who can do flying splits and tie himself into a knot with ease. Vera Cruz had him on first base, which is where he perhaps should always have been. He made three unbelievable plays in a game with Monterrey, on the last play throwing himself full length on the ground to the left, keeping his foot on the bag and making a backhanded pickup of a wild throw. Hal Chase in his palmiest days never did better.

But what about the pistol-toting Mexicans from whom Vernon Stephens of the St. Louis Browns fled in terror? Stephens signed a Mexican League contract with Jorge Pasquel, played two games to the frantic approbation of the Mexican fans, and then decamped. Do the Mexicans carry guns? Ladies and gentlemen, they most certainly do! Sitting in a box with Pasquel, you will discern the glint of something at his feet and there the revolver will be. The gentleman next to him may have taken his out of his holster in the hot weather and have it resting easily under his seat cushion.

We offer no explanation of this. but can report no instances where ball players were pinked in the anatomy for ineptitude. The revolution may still be in action in Mexico or it may merely be a frontier country, but the gentry wear their gats at social events and there is no denying it. And how about gambling? There are persistent reports in the States that baseball in Mexico is merely an excuse for gambling and that games are run accordingly. This suggests that gambling coups are possible with games being thrown, which naturally is repugnant to all loyal Americans. From what we could see - and we looked with gimlet eye and made every investigation possible - this is a lot of nonsense. There is absolutely no open gambling at the ball parks and certainly no animated group of swindlers such as are seen behind third base in every ball park in this country.

There is the further charge that baseball in Mexico is a syndicate affair because Jorge Pasquel owns or is interested in every club in the league, but this also blows up on interviewing the owners of the various teams. They are fanatically proud of their organizations and determined to win the pennant. Pasquel takes the greatest care not to overload his favorite team, Vera Cruz, with the best players. The Mexicans look with horror at the very thought of anything irregular in their sports.

“You've never heard of bullfight or soccer or prizefighting scandal down here, have you?” they ask, with flashing eyes. They take this inquiry about syndicate ball very hard, as if it were a reflection on their integrity, we can only surmise that Pasquel would be in grave danger if any hint of manipulation ever arose.

The crux of the whole situation is Jorge Pasquel, who is an amazing character. At thirty-eight he is a well-set-up, vigorous man with very definite ideas on the future of baseball in Mexico. At his elaborate home on Hamburgo Street there is a statuette of Napoleon prominently placed in the reception hall. Pasquel admits to having read 25 books on Napoleon and being an authority on his life. This may account for a lot in his career.

Although he is not the oldest, he is the head of the Pasquel family. Living at home with him are his mother, his brother Mario and sister Rosarie, his married sister and her husband and two children. Another sister is married and lives in Puebla in another fabulous Pasquel mansion. The old family home is kept up in Vera Cruz, and there is another Pasquel establishment in Nuevo Laredo, where brothers Bernardo and Alfonso live. Gerardo runs a huge ranch near Torreon.

The Vernon Stephens affair was particularly painful to Jorge (pronounced “Hor-gay” in Spanish but now “George” by common consent) because Stephens had been taken into the Pasquel home as a guest, a distinctive honor. This accounts for Pasquel's determination to sue Stephens for breach of contract. “I will sue him as long as he lives,” Jorge kept saying over the phone to New York, when reporters called him during the excitement about Mickey Owen's arrival.

This suit could easily be a disaster for American baseball, and it ties in with much of the resentment among American players against American club owners. The baseball contract is admittedly a one-sided affair. The player is tied to organized baseball for life, but he can be discharged at will. The player either works for what the club owner offers or he doesn't work at all, for no club is allowed to tamper with the players of any other club.

It must be admitted at once that without this type of contract, baseball might be impossible. If the players were free after each season to make new deals for themselves, the best players would naturally gravitate to the best-heeled clubs and no team would know from year to year where it stood.

However, there is a possibility that the courts would find the present contract a form of peonage, since the player has no legal rights whatever. This has been known to the owners for a long time and accounts for their reluctance to tangle with the law. It is most ironically possible that Pasquel could lose the suit against Stephens for damages (even though Pasquel reported in the middle of May that Stephens had not returned any of the money advanced to him by Pasquel) and yet blow up the whole structure of baseball by getting the present standard contract held invalid.

Since Pasquel's raids on our leagues, facts about American salaries have become public and shocked the fans. Luis Olmo knocked in 110 runs for Brooklyn last year and was offered a contract this season for $7,500. Hal Gregg won 18 games for the same team and was given $8,000 after a hard fight. We were told by American players in Mexico that the St. Louis Cardinals pay their new men $400 a month, raising the ante to $600 after May 15, if they stick. The season is five and a half months.

There was a report in New York that Ralph Branca of the Dodgers had signed a three-year contract calling for a total salary of $4,900. It is alleged that men on the Philadelphia Nationals have played for as little as $1,750 a year. The newspapers reported that Branch Rickey had offered Joe Hatten, the spectacular southpaw, a salary of $500 a month this spring. Hatten held out and got more.

“If a player is good enough to make a big-league team,” said Sal Maglie when he left the Giants, “he should be worth at least $10,000 a year.”

We talked with Maglie in Puebla, where he and his wife are installed in a suite in the best hotel in town and very contented with their fate.

'I'm twenty-nine years old and had a hard time making the big leagues. I won five straight games for them when I came in late last year, but that didn't seem to mean anything to them this spring. They didn't answer my letters when I wrote them about a new contract and then finally offered me one with a small raise. When they heard I had been approached by the Mexican League, they boosted it to $8,000. I'm working on a three-year contract down here and even if I'm no good and am dropped after the first season, I'll still be better off than if I'd stayed three or four years with the Giants.”

Pasquel has been swamped with letters from players in this country since starting his raiding campaign. Many of them are from amateurs and minor-leaguers with no chance in Mexico, but we can testify to .being startled by some of the big names involved. The players seem to feel that they play baseball for a living and are entitled to make the best deal for their services. If an engineer can run off to Egypt or Russia or India to build a bridge, they don't see the disloyalty in making the best of their talents in Mexico.

The Mexicans are unable to understand our psychology in the battle between Pasquel and the big leagues. Baseball is our national sport and it seems to the Mexicans we should be the proudest people in the world at the thought that others are taking it up. With the war over and big-league rosters crammed with players, the Mexicans think it would have been a smart thing for us to offer Pasquel some of our overflow talent. Instead, we have practically waged a vendetta against them, they claim, replete with insults, recriminations, and boycotts.

“The manufacturers took our order for 2,000 dozen baseballs,” says Pasquel, “and then refused to fill it. We have to get baseballs and bats from retail stores in the States, just as if we were bootlegging them. Every foul ball that goes over the fence costs us fourteen pesos [approximately $2.80].”

That pettiness was not lost on the Mexican fans, who are aware of everything going on over here. The big Mexico City dailies (Excelsior, Universal) carry more baseball news than any paper in this country. La Aficion is said to be the only daily sports paper in the world.

The madness for baseball in Mexico will probably soon produce many fine Mexican players. At the present time the core of the league are the Negro players from Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the United States. There are some great players in this group, but the Mexicans are coming fast with such talented young fellows as Vecino and Magallon of San Luis Potosi and Bache, a fine shortstop, and Torres, a great outfielder of Monterrey. Torres is a natural hitter and is said to have the best arm in the league.

When we asked if Mexicans might not resent the influx of American players, the Mexicans answered with astonishment: “The Mexican players are entirely satisfied because the success of baseball here has raised their salaries about 400 percent. Hockey is a popular game in your country and yet all players are Canadians. Do you resent that?”

The raiding has not all been on one side. For years Joe Cambria, scout for Washington, has been luring prospects north. The Mexicans feel that Commissioner Chandler is slightly less than logical when he objects to Mexico seeking our players and yet welcomed Vernon Stephens back with open arms, although he had repudiated a Mexican contract; but their chief resentment is against Clark Griffith of Washington, who for years has had almost a monopoly on Latin-American players.

When Griffith welcomed the flurry of injunctions against Mexican tampering with American players by saying that the Mexican officials “can be prosecuted for trying to persuade American players to jump their contracts, since this is clearly outside the law,” the Mexican laughter rose to hysterical heights. They pointed out that Griffith, Connie Mack, and Ban Johnson formed the American League by raiding the National League, a battle in which contracts were repudiated right and left. They also recalled how contracts were flouted in the famous Federal League war of 20 years ago and noted that in the present conflict between American professional football leagues many strange things are happening to the sanctity of the contracts.

The cardinal point in the discussion is that baseball is in Mexico to stay. They call their home runs jonrons or cuadralangulares, but the crowd gets into hysterics over them just as they do at the Yankee Stadium, and the happy team rushes out en masse to meet the hitter when he arrives at home plate. We observed the umpiring down there and were convinced that it was honest.

Two of the best umpires are Atan, a Chinese Cuban, and Maestri of Cuba. Maestri made his reputation years ago by ignoring insults on the field but meeting the offender after the game under the stands and fighting it out.

From a ball player’s point of view, Mexico is not all peaches and cream. The altitude at Mexico City and Puebla has had a bad effect on some players and this is especially felt among the wives.

Most visitors to Mexico get a touch (sometimes a serious touch) of dysentery from being careless about eating fresh vegetables and drinking impure water. The ball parks are primitive and the playing fields rough specimens compared with our big-league layouts. The pitchers find that their curve ball doesn’t break at high altitudes (Tampico, at sea level and with a muggy climate, is said to be a pitcher’s idea of heaven), but the hitters admire the way a ball travels at 7,000 feet.

The players we interviewed in Mexico all felt they had landed in the middle of a gold mine and could easily put up with the hardships.

Mickey Owen is considering offers from Cuba and South America for the winter months. He has paid off his farm at Springfield, Missouri and is dickering for another one.

“The way I was going in the big leagues, I couldn’t have done that in ten years if ever,” he says.

According to J.K. Lasser’s authoritative book, Your Income Tax (1946 edition), American players will not have to pay an income tax here if they get their “compensation for services outside the country for the entire year.” In that period they can make business and vacation trips to this country without changing their status. This is not to say that any of the players looks down his nose at American baseball and certainly none will risk his American citizenship, no matter how much pelf is involved. They read the daily box scores and recall the exciting days in the States, but then they scan their bankbooks and relax.

“I liked it fine at Washington,” says Roberto Ortiz, the big outfielder, “but by the time I paid my living expenses and the taxes, I got back to Cuba every winter broke. This is different here.”

The procession of American players keeps wending its way south and the trail may grow deeper next year when the new parks are built in Mexico.

“Then maybe you won’t be surprised at seeing Ted Williams down here,” says Senor Pasquel proudly.

With Pasquel, nothing would surprise me. It is not true that the Mexican government is backing him now, although he is a friend of President Avilo Camacho, but if Miguel Aleman becomes the next president (and it seems a cinch for him now), the league will definitely be a favored sport. Aleman and Pasquel grew up together in Vera Cruz and are fast friends.

“Maybe even Bobby Feller next year, eh?” said Senor Pasquel when we last saw him.

If that happens, the battle royal will really be on, and we will probably see contracts breaking in all directions. At least one American scout was lately run out of the Mexican ball park, just as we have been fighting off Mexican agents here. The happy gentry you will note on the sidelines will be the ball players, experiencing the millennium at last.

[Bill Burgess]

----------------HE KEPT BASEBALL'S BLACKEST SECRET FOR 36 YEARS. . .

---------------THIS IS MY STORY OF THE BLACK SOX SERIES---------------

The ringleader of the infamous plot, the first baseman of the team which exploded baseball's dirty business with the game's worst scandal, breaks his silence to speak for the first time

------------------------by Arnold (Chick) Gandil as told to Melvin Durslag
------------------------------------Sports Illustrated, 1956

About this time each year when people start getting excited about the World Series, I find myself wanting to crawl into a cave. I think you'd feel the same if you had the memories I do.

I have played in two World Series, the last time 37 years ago when I was first baseman for the Chicago White Sox. The Sox haven't been in a Series since. We played the Cincinnati Reds and had a hell of a ball club, the best I've ever seen. But people didn't remember us afterward for our playing. They remembered us only as the "Black Sox."

A lot of you young readers have probably heard of the Black Sox scandal fom your dads or granddads. It was some mess. Eight of us Sox were accused of throwing the 1919 World Series to Cincy. We were taken into court in Chicago, tried and acquitted. But organized baseball banned us for life.

To this day I feel that we got what we had comning. But there are certain things about the Series that have never been told and which I would like to clear up right now.

I'm an old man by any standards. I'm going to be 69 in January. I have worked the past 35 years as a plumber, mostly in Oakland, California. Now I'm about to retire. The wife and I plan to take a small place in the country, out in Napa Valley. We've been married 48 years.

A lot of stuff has been written by newspaper and magazine people about the Black Sox scandal, but most of it has been rumor and guesswork because none of us involved ever told our story. Four of the Black Sox were supposed to have made secret confessions with immunity before the Cook County grand jury in 1920, but they all denied the statements later and refused to talk. When we went on trial in 1921, all of us stood on our rights and dummied up.

Why should I wait until now to tell the real story of the Black Sox? One by one the Black Sox players have been taking the secret to their graves. Joe Jackson is gone, so are Fred McMullin and Buck Weaver. I'm sure I could go the rest of my life easily without talking. But after thinking it over--and against the better judgement of my wife--I asked myself, why not? It should be on the record. So here goes.

To start with, I think I should recall to you the main charactors involved.

First, there was Charles Comiskey, the White Sox owner. He was a sarcastic, belittling man who was the tightest owner in baseball. If a player objected to his miserly terms, Comiskey told him: "You can take it or leave it." Under baseball's slave laws, what could a fellow do but take it? I recall only one act of generosity on Comiskey's part. After we won the World Series in 1917, he splurged with a case of champagne.

Comiskey's manager was William (Kid) Gleason, who had been our coach in 1918 and became manager in 1919 when Clarence (Pants) Rowland resigned. He was a tough little guy, and he had a hard time trying to keep peace among the malcontents on our club. But most of the players liked him and gave him their best.

The players involved were most of the top guys on the club. There was Joe Jackson, the left fielder; Buck Weaver, third base; Oscar Felsch, the center fielder; Swede Risberg, our shortstop; Eddie Cicotte, our leading pitcher; Fred McMullin, a utility infielder; Claude Williams, who was basically perhaps even a better pitcher than Cicotte; and, finally, myself, the first baseman.

Let me tell you a little more about myself. I was 6 feet 2 inches tall, weighed 195 pounds and had been playing baseball for 14 years. I had run away from my home in St. Paul, Minnesota at the age of 17 and hopped a freight bound for Amarillo, Texas to play semipro. Then I caught on with an outlaw team in Cananea, Mexico, just across the Arizona border.

Cananea was a wide-open mining town in those days, which suited me fine. I was a wild, rough kid. I did a little heavyweight fighting at $150 a fight. I also worked part-time as a boilermaker in the copper mines.

I slowed down some after my marriage in 1908, but I guess I still remained a pretty roughhouse character. I played minor leauge ball for a couple of years, then was sold to the White Sox in 1910. I then bounced around to Washington and Cleveland but landed again with The White Sox in 1917. I have often been described as one of the ringleaders of the Balck Sox scandal. There's no doubt about it. I was.

For all their skill, the White Sox in 1919 weren't a harmonious club. Baseball players in my day had a lot more cut-throat toughness anyway, and we had our share of personal feuds but there was a common bond among most of us--our dislike for Comiskey. I would like to blame the trouble we got into on Comiskey's cheapness, but my conscience won't let me. We had no one to blame except ourselves. But, so help me, this fellow was tight. Many times we played in filthy uniforms because he was trying to keep down the cleaning tab.

Most of the griping on the club centered around salaries, which were much lower than any other club in the league. Cicote, for example, had won 28 games in 1917 and still wa making only $6,000 a year, Jackson, a great hitter, was earning the same. I had been making $4,500 a year for the past three seasons. Only one man on the club was drawing what I'd call a decent salary, Eddie Collins, who had finagled a sharp contract in coming to the Sox from the Philadelphia Athletics. He was making about $15,000 a year. Naturally, Collins was happier with Comiskey than we were.

So when the opportunity came in 1919 to pick up some easy change on the World Series, Collins, though a key man, wasn't included in our plans. Neither was Catcher Ray Schalk or Outfielder Nemo Leibold.

Where a baseball player would run a mile these days to avoid a gambler, we mixed freely. Players often bet. After the games, they would sit in lobbies and bars with gamblers, gabbing away. Most of the gamblers we knew were honorable Joes who would never think of fixing a game. They were happy just to be booking and betting.

I had always considered "Sport" Sullivan as one of those gamblers until he approached me in Boston in 1919, about a week before the World Series.

I had only had social contacts with gamblers until that September day in 1919 when Sullivan walked up to Eddie Cicotte and me as we left our hotel in Boston. As I recall, we were four games in front the final week of the season, and it looked pretty certain that the pennant was our.

I was kind of surprised when Sullivan suggested that we get a "syndicate" together of seven or eitht players to throw the Series to Cincinnati. As I say, I never figured the guy as a fixer but just one who played for the percentages.

The idea of taking seven or eight people in on the plot scared me. I said to Sullivan it wouldn't work. He answered, "Don't be silly. It's been pulled before and it can be again."

He had a persuasive manner which he backed up with a lot of cash. He said he was willing to pay $10,000 each to all the players we brought in on the deal. Considering our skimpy salaries, $10,000 was quite a chunk, and he knew it.

Cicotte and I told Sullivan we would think it over. The money looked awfully good. I was 31 then and couldn't last much longer in baseball. Cicotte and I tried to figure out first which players might be interested. And of those who might be, which ones would we care to cut in on this gravy. We finally decided on Jackson, Weaver, Risberg, Felsch, McMullin and Williams--not that we loved them, because there never was much love among the White Sox. Let's just say that we disliked them the least.

We played our game that afternoon and won. That night Cicotte and I called the other six together for a meeting and told them of Sullivan's offer. They were all interested and thought we should reconnoiter to see if the dough would really be put on the line. Weaver suggested we get paid in advance; then if things got too hot, we could double-cross the gambler, keep the cash and also take the big end of the Series cut by beating the Reds. We agreed this was a hell of a brainy plan.

I met Sullivan the next morning and told him I could close the deal only if the players got their money in advance. He explained it would take a little time to raise all that cash so quickly but said that when he got it he would contact me in Chicago. As we parted, he told me that no player was to yap about the fix to other gamblers.

When the White Sox returned to Chicago for their final games of the season, Cicotte brought a friend of his to see me, a former big leauge pitcher named Bill Burns. Somehow Burns had got wind of our negotiations with Sullivan; one of our players must have talked. Burns asked that we definetely not accept Sullivan's deal until he could contact a rich gambling friend in Montreal. He said he could top any offer.

Cicotte and I called a meeting of the players that night and told them about Burns. Weaver piped up, "We might as well take his money, too, and go to hell with all of them."

I personally disliked and distrunted Burns and said that we should stick with Sullivan. But I was overruled by the others who voted at least to listen to Burn's proposition when he returned from Montreal.

Later in Chicago I got word from Sullivan that he was bringing a friend from New York to sew up the deal. A meeting was arranged at the old Warner Hotel on the South Side, where many of the players lived. Sullivan introduced his friend as "Mr. Ryan", but, having met this man two years before in New York, I recognized him as Arnold Rothstein, the big shot gambler. His plan was this:

We were to try our best to win the first game behind Cicotte, who was the leauge's leading pitcher. The White Sox were rated as 3-1 favorites in the Series. A win in the first game would boost the price higher. We were then to lose the Series at our convenience. At that time, a World Series was decided by five out of nine games instead of the four-out-of-seven system used today.

Rothstein said nothing until we asked for our $80,000 in advance. He asked calmly, "What's to assure us you guys will keep the agreement?" We offerd him our word. He answered, "It's a weak collateral."

The deal was about to fall apart when Rothstein came up with a compromise. He would give us $10,000 in advance and pay the remaining $70,000. in installments over the first four games, each payment amounting to $17,5000.

We asked Sullivan and Rothstein to come back in an hour. I got the gang together and we decided to accept the deal. Rothstein returned and gave us ten $1,000 bills. When the gamblers left we entrusted the money with Cicotte until it could be changed inconspicuously. He put the bills under his pillow. At Rothstein's insistence, we had given our solemn word that no other gambler would be tipped off, but as soon as he left, we agreed to take any money we could get from Burns, too.

Worry and Arguments

The next day, I got a telephone call from Jake Lingle, the Chicago reporter who was later to be murdered by gangsters. Lingle said he heard the Series was fixed. "Where did you hear that crazy story," I said and hung up. I now began to worry. That night Sullivan paid me a visit. He was mad. He said that someone had yapped to Chicago gamblers about the fix. The price on the Sox had suddenly begun to drop. We had a hot argument that came close to turning into a fist fight. We both apologized, and an agreement was made for Sullivan to make the cash payments after each game to a friend of mine.

By the time we arrived in Cincinnati to open the Series the rumors were really flying. Even a clerk in a stationery store, not recognizing me as a ballplayer, told me confidentially, "I have it firsthand that the Series is in the bag." Waitresses and bellhops were talking the same way. Reporters were buzzing about, asking questions.

We were now convinced that every move on the field would be watched like a hawk and we were beginning to sweat. Burns and a friend, the prize-fighter Abe Attell, came to see Cicotte and me at the hotel. They asked that we arrange a meeting with the gang--which we did grudgingly. Attell took the flooer and produced a telegram which read, "Will take you in on any deal you make. Will guarantee all expenses." It was signed, "A. R."

Attell idntified A. R. As Arnold Rothstein. The players exchanged looks. Obviously the telegram was faked, and Attell and Burns knew nothing of Rothstein's private deal with us. We walked out of the room.

This was the last of our group meetings with any gamblers. But now our troubles were just beginning. That night, the eve of the Series, several players got threatening phone calls. I must have had five during the early part of the evening. Many of them--maybe all of them--came from cranks, but they still left me creepy. Cicotte was so upset that he left the hotel about midnight and took a long walk. I don't think he slept an hour all night.

I had just fallen asleep when Sullivan knocked at my door and awakened me. He said excitedly that a couple of the players had told him the deal was off. I said to him, "Well, maybe it is." He replied, "I wouldn't call it the best policy to double-cross Rothstein."

Deep down, I knew he was right. In my nervous state I got mad at Sullivan and told him to get out. I sat on the edge of the bed, trying to think. I truthfully wanted to go to our manager, Kid Gleason, and tell him the whole story, but I knew it wouldn't be that simple. I realized that things were too involved by now to try to explain.

I guess some of the others must have felt the same way, because the next morning I was called to a meeting of the eight players. Everyone was upset and there was a lot of disagreement. But it was finally decided that there was too much suspicion now to throw the games without getting caught. We weighed the risk of public disgrace and going to jail against taking our chances with the gamblers by crossing them up and keeping the $10,000. We were never remorseful enough to want to return the ten grand to Rothstein. We gambled that he wouldn't dare do anything to us since he was in no position himself to make a fuss over the cash. Our only course was to try to win, and we were certain that we could.

But when we trotted out on the field that day for the opener, we were still a tense buch of ballplayers. And, as if things were't bad enough, some joker in the stands yelled to Cicotte, "Be careful, Eddie. There's a guy looking for you with a rifle."

Cicotte wasn't worth a wooden nickel in that opening game. He was knocked out of the box in the fourth inning when Cincy scored five runs. The Reds were unstoppable that day. Even their pitcher, Dutch Ruether, got two triples and a single, driving in three runs. When Cicotte was lifted in the fourth with the Reds leading 5-1, Gleason sent in Roy Wilkinson. The Cincy batters slugged him too, just as they did our next pitcher, Grover Lowdermilk. Cincinnati got 14 hits that day and beat us 9-1.

RUMORS AND PHONE CALLS

Rumors of a fix began to circulate right away, and, though I didn't see Comiskey, I heard he was running around like a wild man, trying to track down information. What the wiseacres didn't know was that our original agreement with Rothstein was to try to win the first game.

That night I got more threatening phone calls. I'll never know whether they came from screwballs or from gamblers. I half expected a visit form Sullivan or one of his men, but I imagine things were hot for them, too. By this time I'm sure they knew the deal was off, especially since our collection man didn't show up after the game to try to get the first installment of the $70,000.

The White Sox made 10 hits in the second game against four for Cincinnati, yet we were beaten 4-2 when we should have own easily. In the fourth inning, with no score, we had runners on second and third with one down, but I grounded into an out at the plate and Risberg popped up to kill our chances.

In the last of the fourth our pitcher, Williams, hit a wild streak, gave up three walks and a triple to give the Reds a 3-0 lead. They stretched it to 4-0 in the sixth, but we made two in the seventh when Risberg and Schalk scored on a wild throw by Greasy Neale, the Cincinati right fielder who later became a pro football coach.

After the game the cynics made quite a thing of the six walks issued by Williams, and there were rumors that he wasn't following his catcher's signals. But nothing was said about Neale's wild throw, or some dumb base running By Edd Roush, the Cincy center fielder, who was caught in a trap and tagged out after trying to go to second.

When the doubt is planted, it is easy to mistake plain and simple boners in a ball game for acts of crookedness.

The pressure eased when we came back to Comiskey Park for the third game and Dickie Kerr threw a shutout for a 3-0 win. I batted in our first two runs in the second inning with a long single to center. We made our third run on a triple by Risberg, who then scored on a slick bunt by Schalk.

That night I was paid an unexpected visit by Burns, who was in a panic. He and some other gamblers, going on the assumption the Seris was fixed, had bet heavily on the Reds. Now they had their doubts. Burns said that if I could assure him that the players would go along with the fix, he would guarantee me $20,000. Since I personally didn't feel that Burns could guarantee me 20 cents, and since I was troubled with enough outside pressure as it was, I told him I wasn't interested. Meanwhile, the threatening calls got so heavy that I had to quit answering the telephone.

Cicotte went to the mound in the fourth game and allowed only five hits, but we got only three and were beaten 2-0. Both of the Cincy runs were scored in the fifth inning, partly due to two errors by Cicotte. One was probably my fault. Eddie fielded an easy roller and threw wide to first, permitting the runner to move to second. When the next batter singled to left center, and Jackson threw to the plate to try to cut off a run, I yelled to Cicotte to intercept the throw. I felt we had no chance to get the man at home but could nail the batter now trying to reach second. Cicotte juggled the ball and all hands were safe. The next man then doubled, and Cincy had both its runs.

Well, you can imagine all the gossiping that took place that night. Everyone talked of Cicotte's two errors, but no one even mentioned that he had allowed only five hits. After listening to all the talk in the hotel lobby, Gleason called a meeting of the players. He asked if there were any truth to the rumors he had been hearing. We who were involved with gamblers got all huffy about this; the players who were not kept quiet. Gleason was happy to let the matter drop, but Comiskey was now convinced that we were out to throw the Series. He suspected the whole club.

With the Reds now leading three games to one, we came back with Williams in the fifth game against Hod Eller, who was one of those fellows who could be either real bad or real good. This day he was good. He had a mean shine ball that had us missing all over the place. He struck out the side in two straight innings--and half of those he fanned were never in on our plot.

Williams allowed Cincy only four hits that day, three comning in the sixth inning in which the Reds scored four runs. But before Eller was through with his shine ball, he struck out batters and shut us out 5-0.

Felsch got the blame for that loss. He had thrown wild after fielding a Texas leaguer in the sixth inning and later chased a long fly to the fence which he couldn't get and it went for a triple. When Collins booted one later permitting the fifth run to score, the experts must have thought that he was in on the fix, too.

We went back to Cincinnati for the sixth game which we won 5-4 behind Kerr, after we had overcome a 4-3 Cincy lead. this was the only game to go into extra innings. In the 10th, Weaver doubled and I drove him home with a single for the winning run.

WE HIT OUR STRIDE

Though Cincy now led the Series 4-2, we honestly felt we had hit our stride and would have no trouble taking the next three games. We were even more confident the next day when Cicotte won his third start easily, 4-1. We breezed in this game, led all the way and only Collins committed an error.

Things had quieted down by the time we got back to Chicago for the eighth game. The Series now stood at 4-3 in favor of the Reds and a lot of the skeptics decided that maybe the Sox meant business after all. It was Gleason's feeling that if Williams could finally win in the eighth game, then he would start Kerr in the ninth and have Cicotte ready for relief at the first sign of trouble.

But Williams lasted less than an inning. Cincy drove him out with four runs, and that was the game and Series. We lost 10-5 as Eller pitched his second win for Cincinnati.

If there is any doubt about our trying to win the Series, let's look at the record. Jackson was the leading hitter with .375. He didn't commit an error.

Weaver was our seond man with .324. He didn't boot any, either. Total hits favored Cincy only 64 to 59, and each side committed 12 errors. Though I hit only .233, it was still seven points better than our star Eddie Collins, and two of my hits knocked in winning runs.

Our losing to Cincinnati was an upset all right, but no more than Cleveland's losing to the New York Giants by four straight in 1954. Mind you, I offer no defense for the thing we conspired to do. It was inexcusable. But I maintain that our actual losing of the Series was pure baseball fortune.

The loser's share amounted to $3,254 apiece, which Comiskey held up while he conducted a private investigation. I never did get any part of Rothstein's $10,000 and I don't know who did. Since Rothstein probably won his bets anyway, he never gave us any trouble. Naturally, I would have liked to have had my share of that ten grand, but with all the excitement at the Series' end and with Comiskey's investigation, I was frankly frightened stiff. Besides, I had the crazy notion that my not touching any of that money would exonerate me from my guilt in the connspiracy. I give you my solemn word I don't know to this day what happened to the cash.

During the next two months, after returning to my winter home in Los Angeles, I heard some wild reports about the killing I made on the World Series. One account said I was flashing around a bankbook with a $25,000 entry. Another said I had been paid off in diamonds. And still another had me plunking down cash for a house. The truth was, I did buy a house--with $2,500 I had borrowed from the bank for down payment. The loan was repaid when I finally got my World Series check from the White Sox.

By the time the 1920 season came around, I was kind of sour on baseball, Comiskey and everything else. I didn't care whether I went back to the Sox or not. I asked for a $2,000 raise, which Comiskey naturally refused. I became the only one of the eight conspirators not to report that year. Instead, I played semipro ball twice a week for the Elks Club in Bakersfield, Calif. I earned $75 a game.

News about ehe 1919 World Series was disappearing from the newspapers--which was fine with me. And then came the explosion. It happened in September of 1920 while the Sox were fighting for the league lead. I recall the headline I read clearly: WHITE SOX CONFESS SERIES FIX.

Cicotte, for reasons unknown, appeared to have told the story of our plot to Comiskey, who ordered him to confess (with immunity) before the Cook County grand jury. There were reports that Williams, Jackson and Felsch squealed, too. Meanwhile Comiskey banned from the team the seven players connected with the conspiracy. It was just before the end of the pennant race, and the Sox lost out to Cleveland.

No one really knows for sure what the players confessed privately to the grand jury, and we'll never find out because the confessions later turned up missing (in my opinion, this was Rothsteins's work), and everyone repudiated the things that were supposed to have been confessed.

The grand jury brought an indictment against the eight of us in Septemeber 1920, but the case didn't come to trial until July 1921. I was picked up by police in Los Angeles and spent a night in jail before being extradited to Chicago.

The trial dragged out for 15 days. Upon advice of our attorneys none of us testified, and without our testimony the state had no case. When the jury finally found us not guility there was loud cheering in the court room, and the jurors even carried a few of us out on their shoulders. What a scene.

SUSPENDED FOR LIFE

But our ban from baseball stuck, and when Judge Landis took office as commissioner a short itme later, one of his first acts was to extend the suspensins for life.

Inasmuch as we were legally freed, I feel Landis' ruling was unjust, but I truthfully never resented it because, even though the Series wasn't thrown, we were guilty of a serious offense, and we knew it.

Aside from embarrassment and personal qualms I have never suffered any hardship because of the Black Sox incident. The doors to jobs have never been closed to me. We have lived quietly away from the news, and I have attended only half a dozen ball games - all minor league - during the past 37 years.

For a good many years, I held a deep resentment against Cicotte for his initial confession. I felt I would never forgive the guy, but I think I have by now. Still, I don't believe we would have ever been caught if he hadn't gabbed.

[Bill Burgess]

Excerpt from Eddie Collins autobiography, Sporting News, August 16, 1950, pp. 13.

"I put on a uniform that did not fit me too well," said Eddie. "Gosh, I weighed only about 140 pounds. I was self-conscious among all those big fellows--men like Waddell, whom I had read so much about. Waddell had been warming up on the sidelines.

"Get a bat, kid," he said "and I'll throw you a few". I thought that was great--I was to bat against the great Rube. But I didn't know what Waddell was up to. With more fear than confidence I took my stance at the plate. He threw me three curve balls that looked as if they had dropped off a table. I missed all three. I thought I'd never make good if they had that kind of pitchers in this league and I started to walk away. Rube must have noticed how downcast I was, for he walked out of the box, patted me on the back and said, "Don't mind kid. I do that to all of 'em."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------Pitchers I have Faced, by Edward ("Eddie") T. Collins
----------------
------------------------------------American Magazine, July, 1914, Illustrated with Photographs---------------------

It has long been evident that what draws people into the ball parks is hitting. The fans like to see air-tight pitching and brilliant fielding, but without batting, excellence solely in these things becomes tiresome and that is why, day in and day out, the most brilliant fielder in the game will only get scattered applause, while the man who is reasonably certain of clubbing the ball safely,--at least once out of every three times he comes to bat,--he is the man who more often throws the stands into tumult.

For seven years I have faced the pitchers of the American League, and some of the best of the National, in three World Series. Of them I have observed certain things and I think I know wherein their strength lies. What I shall try to do is to give you an idea of the representative pitchers of big league baseball, and what a batsman who faces them confronts. Sometimes it looks so easy to those in the stands to get up there and drive the ball on the line to the fences; but, believe me, it is not. I have chosen pitchers who have exhibited something in the art of twirling out of the ordinary, against the Athletics. By this I do not mean to put myself on record as saying that these men whom I shall mention are the best pitchers in baseball, as unquestionably some of them are; but I prefer to think of them as those who have impressed me most.

I shall state my frank opinion, however, that Walter Johnson, of Washington, is without any question the greatest pitcher of all time. Of all the men I have faced, he is by far the best. He is also the easiest working, apparently putting no effort at all into his task. His wind-up is the poetry of motion and there is about him a gentle, lackadaisical manner, a sort of "I don't care whether school keeps or not" air. Possessor of extraordinarily long arms, Johnson takes a full sweep backward; then something white whizzes by, and you hear it crash against the catcher's mitt. When the umpire yells "Strike!" you begin to realize that Johnson has pitched.

To describe his speed is impossible. It was tested one day last winner in the testing room of a big cartridge company by special electrical instruments and showed a velocity of one hundred and twenty-two feet per second. Rucker, Brooklyn's great southpaw, who is also rated as a speed merchant, underwent the same test, and the result showed his ball to be nine feet per second slower.

When Johnson began his career in the American League, speed was all he had. Learning rapidly, he soon developed a curve so good that it is now as effective as his "fast one." Whenever I face Johnson, I always get the feeling that he is holding something in reserve; because, somehow, he never seems to let himself out. However, if he ever uses any more "stuff" than he does now, I hope I shall never have to face him. It would not be difficult for me to count up all the hits I made from Johnson during the last year or two: in fact the fingers of both hands would suffice for the job. Yet last year, the greatest of his career, Johnson met with more reverses against the Athletics than against any other club. But it is a cinch that these triumphs were not due to me, as Johnson has always had "my number." Frank Baker has been successful against him, but "Bake" is about the only one.

I recall one particular game when Johnson ruled us with an ion hand. It was that nineteen inning game two years ago at Shibe Park. In the last of the ninth inning Johnson relieved Bob Groome and worked the rest of the distance. During the final innings it grew dark, and as they flew past, Johnson's pitches were like bullets. Washington won the game in the nineteenth inning, but from the ninth until the end we did not get anything like a score off Johnson. According to figures he did better against us in the opening game in the 1910 season in Washington, when he shout us out and allowed only one hit, a double by Baker into the overflow crowd: but I always look upon the nineteen inning game as Johnson's best. Modest and unassuming off the field, you'd never gather from his conversation that he was associated with baseball at all.


Vean Gregg of Cleveland is one of the best southpaws I ever faced. He is tall and rangy, and the best compliment I can think of is to call him a left-handed Johnson. To Gregg pitching comes natural; he possess abundant speed, but it is a wonderful curve ball that rounds him out as a great pitcher. He gave more bases on balls last year than any pitcher except Huck of the Athletics, yet his control was always perfect. Gregg's "wildness" is not a handicap; on the other hand, it is often as asset. Let me show you what I mean:

One afternoon last year the Cleveland battery was Gregg and O'Neil. They seemed to be having a lot of trouble with their signals and Gregg was having difficulty locating the plate. He seemed to be favoring his fast ball. To be sure, when he got it over it was impossible of solution; Gregg's curve had been very effective against us in the past, but for some reason he didn't use it much on this particular afternoon. Finally O'Neil walked out to the box and said something to Vean. I never knew what it was, but I felt the effects soon after when I cam to bat the next inning, with two runners on base. Before I knew it, I had "three and nothing" and I figured that a base on balls was inevitable. Then Steve O'Neil, who was crouching behind the bat, shouted to him: "Come on now, Vean! Remember what I told you!"

Whereupon Gregg Vean threw three curve balls in succession--mind you!--and they all cut the middle of the plate for clean strikes, after which I took a drink of ice water.

That is where Gregg's mastery lies. If he had to, he could almost put that curve ball of his through a know hole. It seems to have a break on it like the letter S, and whenever you see him on a sweltering hot day, wearing a bright red flannel shirt, look out!--as that is his lucky combination. It is then that his wonderful control is at its best; and that curve of his can certainly make you look bad.

Russell Ford, the New York American man, who at this writing has signed with the Federal League, is unusually known as a "spit ball" pitcher; but you could never prove that by me. All the times I have ever batted against Ford I can never recall his throwing me a spit ball. To close followers of baseball this may seem amazing, but it's true. I have had plenty of chances to observe, however that besides the "spitter" Ford has something unique in his pitching equipment. You often hear it said about a pitcher: "he's got a good fast ball," but did you ever hear of a pitcher with two kinds of a fast ball? Before I faced Ford I know I had never encountered such an assortment.

"Russ" enjoyed his best season in 1910, when by his wonderful pitching he made the Yankees the runner-up in the race. Illness held him back in 1911, and the effects of it still showed on him in 1912, but at times last year Ford looked more like himself. On Memorial Day morning he pitched one of the best half games of his career. For eight innings we could not get anything that looked like a hit. Only one man reached first base, he on an error. With one out in the ninth, Eddie Murphy singled. Oldring followed with a drive to the shortstop which ought to have resulted in a double play, ending the games; but instead, another error followed, and then a hit by McInnis broke up the toughest game I believe I ever saw lost.

It was on that day that Ford impressed me most, as never before do I remember being so helpless against a pitcher. I must have looked it, too, for I struck out enough. All Ford did was to throw me his variety of fast balls. One would be the straight one, and the next would look as if it were going to be in the same place, only it would break down and out from me, a left-hander.This is significant, for it was the very opposite "break" that any other right-handed pitcher would give the ball. When I thought his next was about going to hit me in the back, it would swoop out over the plate. About this time I would say to myself, "Well, I won't let any more get by!" and Ford must have known my exact thought, as then up would come a bad ball, on which I would bit and go back to the bench.

To a left-hander, Ford's peculiar fast ball breaks out like a "fade-away about which I shall have more to say when considering another pitcher. Against a right-hander it breaks in, close to the hands. About the time you prepare for it he throws a regular fast one, and then you have to begin figuring all over again. In spite of the fact that he has never used it against me Ford has a good spit ball and a curve. Apparently all he needs to set me back are his two kinds of "fast ones".

Edward Walsh is about as valuable a man as any club could wish for. While Johnson may surpass him in various individual points there is a doubt if the "Iron Man of the White Sox" could not win more games in a season. At any rate I am positive that Walsh would be in a greater number. During the early part of last season, Walsh's arm "went bad" on him. But eliminating 1913, in any four-game series the White Sox played it was not at all uncommon to see Walsh pitch the first game; called in for a ninth inning rescue in game number two; pull game number three out of the fire, and then begin and finish game number four. During the years 1906-12, Walsh participated in more games than any other pitcher. He simply gloried inn his work; and he was always a rescuer.

If any pitcher ever had the Athletics' number it was Walsh. He always seemed to have something on us. Before last year I don't think we ever knocked him out of the box; and even then, batting against his but recently healed "bad" arm, we could get only one run off him in five innings, when he was retired. I recall a game two years ago, when we got fifteen hits off him and only three runs. Talk about Mathewson's finish against the Athletics in the World Series! It was tame compared to "Big Ed's" in that ninth inning. With three men on base, none out, and the score 4 to 3 in Chicago's favor, it was up to Walsh to check any Philadelphia rally, and he did not take any chances on fly balls or gentle taps to the infield. Instead, every man who faced him was mowed down on strikes; and when I say that Baker and McInnis fanned too, you have an idea of the marvelous pitching Walsh must have done.

Walsh is the only real master of the spit ball I know of. He was the first absolutely to perfect and control it. Most spit-ball pitchers are wild; and they have trouble especially to make their spitter a strike, and usually have to resort to the fast on, but not Walsh! Many times I have seen him give a batter three balls and no strikes, and then three spitters would go swishing across the plate knee high, and the batter would sit down. Walsh invariably aims his spitter at one spot on a batter, namely between the waist and the knees. I have never seen a spitter that was any good that broke above the waist.

Walsh never attempted to throw a curve until last year, when his arm was in bad shape. A visit to a noted arm specialist is said to have put Walsh back in form again, and I hope he is again the old "Iron Man," for if baseball were to lose him, his absence would be severely felt. A good fielder, a dangerous batter, Walsh always helped to win his own game. In our series against the White Sox there was always a keen personal rivalry between Jack Barry, the Athletic shortstop, and Walsh, as they both live in Meriden, Connecticut, and, oddly enough, our Jack Always seemed to get a little the better of it.

Walsh was not a pitcher I dreaded to hit against, because it was never a battle of wits. You were never fighting in the dark, as you always knew what to look for--the spitter. It was sure to be in the same place--waist to shoe tops, and it was not like the spitters of some pitchers, at your head one minute and at your feet the next. In spite of this it was mighty hard to hit safely. Although there was almost a foot break on Walsh's spit ball, Sullivan, who always caught him, said he could do it sitting in a rocking chair, his control was so perfect.

In contrast to Walsh is Christy Mathewson of the New York Giants. I would call Matty the clairvoyant of all pitchers. He seems to posses an uncanny power of diving what you are expecting; and then he serves up the exact opposite. Neither his fast ball, nor his curve, is remarkable, indeed they are only ordinary, but there is something about Mathewson, though, --his bearing, his manner,--that gives you the impression that you are going up against Gibraltar. Unconsciously you think: "I am up against something now, for fair.

In the box Matty wastes no time or surplus energy, and he pitches as soon as a batter takes his place at the plate. By doing so he bothered me a lot, I know, because I was not used to it. I go through habitual movements, fix my cap, hitch my trousers, tap the plate, and I am accustomed to do these things as I wait for the pitcher to wind up. Matty, however, didn't give me a chance. Before I could hitch my trousers the ball was in the catcher's mitt, and the result was that I felt at a loss. Disturb the habitual preliminaries of a batter and you bother him. The result was I was forced to do all my motions before I got into the batter's box.

All the advance notices and bits of dope that find their way into the clubhouse before a World Series, led us to believe that Mathewson was a curve ball pitcher. Naturally we thought we were prepared for him. Imagine my state of mind, for the first time I faced him in a World Series, expecting a curve nearly every other ball, and he throwing nothing but fast ones right across the middle! About the time I would say to myself, "Hum, nothing but fast ones: all right, here's another," he would send up a curve, and as I let it go by it would break over the plate. Why, at times it seemed he actually smiled at me.

When he came back at us in the last game in the 1913 series, I thought by that time I knew all his methods, and that I had him doped out right. But only one fast ball did I get the whole game; all the rest were curves, and only once in the whole series did he throw me his most noted ball, the "fade-away," a sort of a slow, screw ball, that breaks away from a left-hander.

Mathewson's brain really make him a great pitcher, although his other big asset is his control. By comparison his style of balls is insignificant, for he has neither the fast one of Johnson nor the spitter of Walsh, but Matty comes nearer to putting a ball where he wants to than anyone else pitching today. With this ability he wastes few balls. Indeed, he prides himself on being able to go through a whole game and throw only eighty or ninety times, while most pitchers use well over one hundred. I understand that Mathewson has pitched a game in which he threw only sixty-nine. So you see, in this way he conserves his pitching strength.

Perhaps I do him an injustice when I say he has not a remarkably good fast ball. But I am only basing my judgment on what I have seen, facing him. I do not know what he may have had, say in 1905, when he stood out so prominently in the World Series of that year. But I do not see, whatever he had, how he could have been a much better pitcher than he is to-day. Possessor of unlimited nerve and composure, brainy, and a rare guesser, Mathewson is one of the most remarkable figures in baseball.

Compared with some of the others I have mentioned Eddie Summers of Detroit had a brief career. But it was brilliant while it lasted, and certainly he will long be held in respect by the Athletics of '08, '09, and '10. Like Walsh, Summers seemed to have the edge of our club and he was sure enough a "jinx" for me. I cannot recall ever having made more than one hit a game off Summers. Similar to Ford he had something all his own in the like of pitching, namely, the "knuckle ball." He threw it holding the ball by the thumb and little finger, with the knuckles of the other fingers pressing against the cover. Delivered in this manner the ball followed a most peculiar course. on its way to the batter it never rotated a bit. Also, this grip did not impair the speed. Summer's "knuckle ball" was extremely hard to hit. It had a way of taking queer and unexpected shoots that had the catcher hopping about to stop it. It was difficult to handle, however, and I understand that Jennings gave summers orders not to use it if possible when a man was on third base, as it seemed to invite passed balls.

But besides his "pet," Summers had a mighty good fast ball "with a jump on it" and a sharp breaking curve. He was a pitcher who liked to work fast, and the faster he worked the more effective he became. Conversely, slowness meant the loss of effectiveness. We discovered his secret one day, and then he ceased to be a riddle to us. We would never have found this weakness if it hadn't been for a remark he let drop to a young catcher. Schmidt, who generally caught him, had been hurt, and the youngster didn't know Summer's ways. In the early innings the substitute catcher took his time, and holding the ball walked up to the pitcher's box, as catchers often do, and said something to Summers. Oldring, who was at bat, saw that Summers instantly became very peevish, and overheard him say to his catcher, "Give me that ball quick, and throw it back to me every time without any waiting."

Oldring was quick to see what this meant. Summers was a nervous, high-strung pitcher, and no one had ever guessed it! At once Oldring did everything he could to delay his time at bat, and deliberately he began to rub Summers the wrong way. He stopped the game, and made out he had something in his eye. Then, after Summers had thrown one ball, Rube got out of the Box to rub his hands with dirt. Summer's annoyance grew, and presently he gave Oldring a base on balls. As soon as Rube came into the bench he told us what he had done and why, and from that day our club always hit summers more effectively. Every time we faced him we used the same tactics as Oldring, and invariably it bothered Summers a lot. His retirement from the game, however, was a heavy blow to the pitching strength of the Detroit club

I shall always hold Joe Wood of the Boston Red Sox in high esteem because it was against him that I got my first home run in the American League, the only run of a game we won, 1-0. That "homer," by the way, was the hardest ball I have ever hit.

"Smokey Joe" is what he is commonly called, and there is good basis for the nickname. You only wonder how such a small fellow can use such awful speed. Compared to Johnson, Walsh, or Mathewson, he really looks small, although I guess he must weigh one hundred and sixty pounds. He is much like Johnson in his style of pitching and, like Walter, came into the league with only a fast ball, but has learned a most effective curve.

Wood is not only a good pitcher but, like Walsh, he breaks up many games with his batting. But Wood has a fault; when he isn't pitching he is more strenuous than is often good for him; he is a source of worry to his manager because of his untiring activity. I have often heard the players of his own club yell at him, "Take it easy, Joe."

It is an unwritten law in the House of Mack that a pitcher shall not run, or overexert himself, and thus interfere with his work in the box. Invariably, when one of our pitchers goes to bat Connie Mack will say, "Don't run now." Naturally, when Wood ran wild on the bases one day in Philadelphia last year, it made us all wonder. Unfortunately for him and the Boston club, it resulted disastrously.

Having singled, Wood was on first base, when Hooper followed with a drive to right, on which Joe tried to make third. The play was close and Joe attempted to slide. In some way he hurt the thumb of his pitching hand, and from that day until the close of the season he was of little use to his club. the X-ray showed a broken bone.

Next to Johnson, Wood throws the speediest ball I have ever batted against. At one time all base runners were happy whenever Wood pitched, as he let a man get a big lead off first. But those days are over; to-day Wood holds you as close to the base as the best of them, and he is one of the hardest pitchers to get a "lead on" in the business.

Many fans may not understand why the man I shall now consider is being mentioned in the same breath, so to speak, as Wood and Johnson. I have in mind "Big Jack" Powell of St. Louis.

"Put a bat in me hand and get me a run."

Members of the St. Louis club have told me Powell always used to say this just before he was ready to start a game. He meant he was sure to win if his club could get one run, as he was sure to shut out the opponents; then, if there was a man on base, give him a turn at bat, and he would knock him in.

For such a huge man--he weighs easily two hundred and fifty pounds--Powell made pitching the easiest kind of work imaginable. Because his club was always down in the race, he never received the recognition, for instance, that Joe Wood did in 1912. But I know that Powell gave many a club just as hard a battle as Wood ever did. Indeed I would not be surprised if the records showed that he has beaten the Athletics quite as often as either Johnson or Wood.

"He hasn't a thing."--I've heard more than one player say this after facing Powell, despite the fact that he had not hit one safe. Really, to bat against Powell, it makes you wonder how he does it. The balls he throws certainly do look as big as balloons. His fast one looks as huge as his curve. Moreover he uses both with equal regularity--no "mixing 'em up." He seems as easy to hit as a high school pitcher, but you don't hit him. Powell is the kind of a pitcher who always makes you say to yourself:

"I'll hit this next one out of the lot," and then you pop it into the air and there is a fielder camped below.

One day at Shibe Park, when Powell was leaving the St. Louis bench on his way to the club house he passed very close to our dug-out. As he did to Connie Mack spoke to him:

"Hello, Jack, pretty soft for you."

"Why, say, Connie, it's a shame to take the money. If it wasn't for your club, I wouldn't be in the league. They just keep me on the pay roll to beat you fellows!"

And so it seemed: certainly Powell carried out his part of the bargain. He has outlived his usefulness with the St. Louis club, but in his day he was a mighty good pitcher. To use a baseball expression, he had "something on his fast one," a decided hop, not perceptible from the stands.

I must mention another man whom you see no more--the late Addie Joss, pitching star of Cleveland. Joss was a master of the art of pitching, as he made it his careful study, likewise the batters who faced him. He knew the weak point of every one of them, and pitched accordingly. The beauty of it was that Joss could do as he wanted, and this is where lots of pitchers fail. They know what they ought to do, but cannot do it: that is, they size up the situation correctly, but are shy on control.

Joss's strongest point was his change of pace. Most pitchers who employ this trick give it away by their style of delivery, some motion lacking from their ordinary style. That is, when they plan to send up a "floater," and want the batter to think it will be a "fast one," they use their fast ball motion, but to it add an exaggerated shoulder hunching so untrue as to give it all away. But Addie threw his slow ball with the same motion as his fast one, and it was impossible to tell the "floater' until it was right on top of you.

His slow ball was more difficult to hit than any of its kind I have ever batted against.

Tall and slim, he used a style of delivery that was very effective for his pitching. When he took his wind-up he would swing his body clear around, so that as he was about to pitch he faced away from the batter. This would bother the batter because he could not follow the ball before it left Joss's hand and it was nearly on top of you before you saw it. This style was particularly effective against right-hand hitters as it had a tendency to drive them away from the plate.

Joss always bothered me, as I used to break my back trying to hit his slow ones. I remember that for one whole year he would never work against our club, because he felt he could not beat us. But in 1909 he beat us the first time he faced us, and we were never successful against him again. His best achievement on the mound came in Cleveland, against the White Sox, when pitted against Walsh he pitched a nine inning game in which not a man reached first base. He shares this honor alone with Cy Young,--that of having pitched a perfect game.

Lefty Russell of the Chicago Americans is often spoken of as a second Rube Waddell, and not only does he bear to Rube a striking resemblance, but he pitches in a very similar manner. Unlike most southpaws, Russell throw his fast ball over-handed, and for a left-hander his control is exceptional. But the thing that makes him of immense value to the Sox is his seeming love for work. It is odd that his club should have developed two pitchers, Walsh and Russell, both of them able to work nearly every other day and appear just as effective.

Of all the pitchers I have ever hit against I have less success against Lefty Russell than any other. To be exact, I got exactly three hits off him all of last year, and he must have been in at least a dozen games against our club. why this is I do not understand, because in spite of the fact that he is a southpaw and I am a left-handed batter I would prefer to hit against him any time than some of the pitchers I have already mentioned. "Lefty" is the opposite kind of pitcher from Gregg in the sense that his fat ball is his most effective asset. In point of service in the Major, Russell is by far the youngest of any of the pitchers mentioned in this article. In the face of almost insurmountable obstacles, he broke in and earned a place for himself in one year on one of the strongest pitching staffs in the American League.

It would appear that I have been more impressed with pitchers of the Chicago White Sox than those of any other club, for the last man I shall consider is also on Comiskey's pay roll. Eddie Cicotte has two marked distinctions. He is the smallest man [5'9,175] pitching in the American League and upholds the old adage of "good things comes in small packages." He has, in his pitching repertoire, a bigger assortment than any other twirler I have named.

Just try to put yourself in my place when I face him, and say, "I wonder what he will throw me now, a fast, a curve, a spitter, or a slow one?" That is something to figure out, for Cicotte can throw any one of those balls as effectively as the other. Dan Murphy, a former captain of our club , once told me that he considered Cicotte the hardest pitcher to bat against he had ever faced, and a man of Murphy's long experience ought to have a baseball opinion of some weight. "Knuckles" is Cicotte's nickname, and he comes b it because the slow ball he throws patterned after the one Summers made famous. His spitter, however, is his most effective ball, and last year was really the best of the six he has spent in the American League.

Before closing I would like to make mention of Jim Scott, if for no other reason than to say I believe his is the hardest man to get a lead on, in order to steal a base, who is pitching in our league to-day. By this I do not mean he employs any so-called half-balk-move to hold a runner close to a bag, but he has the quickest, most unpretentious style of delivery, so that nine times out of ten a base runner is not started before the ball is in the catcher's hand. Furthermore, in the point of effectiveness he is right up with the leaders, being tied with his team-mate Russell for third place in the ranking of the American League pitchers for the season of 1913, and like his team-mates, Cicotte, Walsh, and Russell, the Athletics and yours truly have learned to respect him, too.

In discussing these pitchers I have faced, I have been forced to omit Waddell, Cy Young, and Chesbro, because at the time of my entrance in the American League they were on the decline. Mordecai Brown of the Cubs is another in their class. I may as well state frankly that not one pitcher of the Chicago Cubs impressed me in comparison with those already mentioned when I faced them in the World Series of 1910. Of the Giant pitchers whom we faced last fall, it would not be fair for me to comment upon Tesreau or Demaree, as the true worth of a pitcher can hardly be determined by the work he does in just one game,--and that is all I have ever seen either of the two men in.

With Mathewson and Marquard, however, it is different, as I have batted against both of them several times, and I selected Matty unhesitatingly, for reasons previously stated. Rube must be a very capable pitcher to win the number of games he does annually for New York, and a record of "nineteen straight' speaks for itself, but my readers, when you stop to recollect that Rube has never been able to go the regulation nine innings against the Athletics, let alone beat us, you cannot expect me to hold him in as high esteem as those I have mentioned.

Seaton and Alexander of the Philadelphia Nationals I have batted against in the spring series between the two Philadelphia clubs, but I never considered their performance seriously then, as they would be apt to be holding something in reserve so early in the year. In fact the series is more of a conditioner than one to decide the city champion. Bender, Plank and Coombs, naturally, I cannot include, as I have never face them in competition. But you know, as well as I, that they would be up with all those I have chosen.

I wish to make it clear that the order in which I have presented these different pitchers is not my idea of the order of their ability. Beyond stating that Johnson is the superior of any pitcher I have ever batted against, I have shown no preference.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------Vean Gregg----------------------------Russell Ford-----------Eddie Cicotte--------------Ed Walsh
------(Below) Jim Scott---Lefty Russell

[wrgptfan]

These are fabulous reading, man, thanks a lot.

I've been trying to find- with no success- an article from Baseball Magazine from January 1912 entitled "Who is the Greatest Player in the History of Baseball?" by F.C.Lane. Apparently, the five guys up for the honor are Cobb, Lajoie, Tip O'Neill, Billy Hamilton, and Harry Stovey.

I don't suppose anyone has that, do they?

Check out http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/BBM/1912/bbm83m.pdf

They have most of, if not all of the Baseball Magazines from 1908 thru 1918 digitized.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ubiquitous 10-24-2005, 09:53 AM

Great site,
Read an article from 1913 in which the author was complaining about how baseball was only looking for big thumpers in the game nowadays. How hitting the long ball was becoming more prevalant then getting a small guy to run out a hit.

The Home run hitter was coming regardless of Babe.

Also there was an interesting column about Fogel and how he wanted to destroy Baseball with his accusations against the Giants.

There is also an article about the gambling problem in baseball. It was written in 1912. Though the author believes it would be impossible to fix a baseball game.

To continue on there is an article from 1915 in which they state that the fans think their is too much pitching and that they want more hitting. So again the pitcher/dynamic was being talked about before Babe came about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle is online, free, 1841-1902.

http://eagle.brooklynpubliclibrary.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ubiquitous 11-01-2005, 07:58 AM

Great site.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buzzaldrin 11-01-2005, 08:36 AM

Here we are, kids- Brooklyn Eagle, October 20th, 1862, page 2, second column, about halfway down. It won't let me copy from the article for some reason so I'll write it by hand:

Even a good thing may be carried too far. Base-ball, that was at first commendable as furnishing an agreeable outdoor exercise for our young men, has been run into the ground. One of the most proficient players of Brooklyn, and one of the most estimable young men of our city, last week ruptured himself while engaged in playing a match game, died in a day or two afterwards, and was buried yesterday. In the melancholy death of James Creighton there is a warning to others. Exercise is a good thing, but like other good things, one may take too much of it.

Now, it makes a little more sense why Excelsiors owner Dr. Jones tried to pin it on the cricket match- this doesn't make baseball look too hot.

Thanks again for the link.
--------------------------------------
Glenn 11-01-2005, 10:42 AM

http://www.ulsterpublishing.com/inde...ticleID=343040
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

In 1909, Cap was asked to give his 1909 team, and as it turns out he'd been giving his yearly teams for many years. So to say he stopped following the game is just uninformed. I will give his two interviews, for your education.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

All-American Professional Baseball Team

Selecting the Stars of the Diamond for 1909, by A. C. Anson, One-Time Captain of Chicago

I have been picking All-American teams, lo, these many years, but this is the first time I have been called upon to give my selection to the public; that is, with the single exception of nearly forty years ago. It may be of passing interest to recall that among the coterie of stars whom I then regarded as the best exponents of our now greatest national pastime were Al Spalding, with Jim White, his battery mate of the old Bostons; Cal MacVey, Ross Barnes, George Wright, and Jim O'Rourke - names I now recall as appearing in the roster of that first galaxy of star performers.

My team of all-stars must, above all else, be a hitting team. My contention has always been that it is the hitting team that wins out, and this is borne out by the team averages of this season's pennant winners.

Always looking with favor upon the fellow who can hit the ball, I am sometimes given to overlooking the speed marvel, whose work in the field entitles him to equal consideration with his brother who drives out a safe hit every third time at bat.

In my selection of a 1909 team it has been my endeavor to choose men whose individual records, taken together with my personal knowledge for their abilities in the various departments of the play, entitle them to their respective positions upon the "All-America."

The 13 Star Team:

Catcher - Gibson - Pittsburgh
Pitcher - Mathewson - Giants
---------Brown - Chicago
---------Mullin - Detroit
---------Walsh - Chicago
---------Plank - Philadelphia
1B Chance - Chicago
2B Collins - Philadelphia
SS Wagner - Pittsburgh
3B Lord - Boston
RF Cobb - Detroit
CF Hofman - Chicago
LF Crawford - Detroit

In the selection of a catcher one man stands out alone the peer of all backstops in the major leagues during the closing season--Gibson of the "Pirates" is my choice. I do not, however, feel that his work has been superior to or even the equal of that of Kling during the preceding season. The scarcity of really first class catchers is surprising. I am sure that the bones of those masters of the art of catching, Mike Kelly and Buck Ewing, should rest uneasy in their graves were they to witness the work of some of the wearers of the "big mitt" in the game to-day.

I like very much the work of Archer, who is very accurate in his throwing to bases, and but little inferior to his predecessor, Kling.

As a pitching staff there are a number of "slab artists" in both leagues whose work has been consistent, but the winnings of "Matty," the "Miner," and "Big Ed" give them the preference in the National--the first has been as effective as formerly since rounding to after his injury. Brown's run of 10 straight games won is worthy of especial mention, and did much to make the "Cubs" the contender in the pennant race. Plank, Connie Mack's mainstay on the mound, is on season's form easily the "southpaw" star of the big leagues. Ed Walsh, whom I have held for several years past to be the leader of present-day pitchers, proved ineffective during the greater part of the season, but has rounded to his old-time form, and I feel, is entitled to a place in my line up.

-----------------Chance for Captain---------------------------------------

FRANK L. CHANCE--the "Peerless Leader"--would, I believe, be the choice of the greater percentage of "fans" and players for the "initial sack" position; and by reason of his proven ability as a handler of men, his generalship, and cool judgment, is easily my pick for captain.

Collins, a star of the first magnitude in all branches of the game--a batter to my liking, with an average of more than .350--is entitled to first consideration upon his record for the second base position. Lajoie looms up almost as formidable as ever, and with the managerial cares removed can be looked upon to exceed his best previous effort another season. Johnny Evers, one of the brainiest players in the game, quick to think and execute a play, if batting above the .300 mark would be the logical choice.

Wagner--the great "Honus," king pin of them all--the one man in the game to-day who, more than any other, reminds me of the "old-time." Seven times leader of his league. A record indeed! I am for the big German, and who would not be?

The batting, base-running, and fielding of Bush gives him the second call.

Harry Lord, captain of the Boston "speed-boys," is my choice for the far-corner sack: he fields his position faultlessly, is a hard hitter, heady, and fast on bases. Devlin punches close for second choice.

For right field, Tyrus Cobb--"Georgia Peach"--the bright satellite of the outfield, ranking batsman is the American League quite likely the fastest man in either league, as indicated by his wonderful base-stealing record. "Ty," on account of his daring on bases and the fact that his spikes have often connected with some unfortunate baseman, has been accused of playing "dirty ball." The writer can not place credence in the stories told, but would be the first to denounce any one employing such tactics upon the diamond

---------------------Many Good Men Omitted--------------------------

ARTIE HOFMAN'S work in the outfield this season entitles him to the center garden position. With an arm that gets the ball to the bag just ahead of the base-runner, his batting prowess clinches him the job. I like Magee next best.

Crawford, one of the premier "stickers" in his league, fast in the field and on base, draws the remaining outfield position.

It would be beyond the limtis of possibility to select an all-star National-American League team to meet with the approval of all the "fans" and players. The team outlined above will hit well above the coveted .300 mark, and the men selected seem to me to possess the necessary qualifications for playing the game as it should be played. The names of many good men must necessarily be omitted. Many players outside of the above list are stronger in certain points of the game than those I have selected; but, to my mind, the chosen team presents the most formidable array of talent possible to gather together to-day. (Collier's, Saturday, October 16, 1909)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Another interesting article, giving Cap's opinions follows.

--------------Old-Time Ball Players Superior, Anson Holds-----------------

Rusie, Ewing and Lange best Men Game Has Known, He says.


Cap. Anson, one of the daddies of baseball, believes the old-time ballplayers were superior to the modern crop. "Good baseball was played 20 years before the game was taken in hand by the National League in 1876," said Anson, recently. "But, of cousrse, in those days there were not so many ball players to be had.

"Yet with the present wealth of material in the big leagues there are comparatively few really good players. In my opinion, Wagner and Lajoie, though they are growing old, possess more natural skill than the younger stars of to-day, with the possible exception of Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker."

When asked if he had ever seen any pitchers better than Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, Alexander and other modern stars, Anson said, "Yes." He believes that Amos Rusie, who pitched for the Giants form 1890 until 1899, was the greatest of them all.

"Rusie had as much speed as Johnson, better control and the fastest curve ball I ever saw," said Anson. "He was physically the superior of Johnson, Mathewson and Alexander and was built like Jeff Tesreau, of the Giants. There was no limit to his endurance".

"Tim Keefe, who was with the Giants back in 1888, was also a master. He was among the first pitchers to perfect what is known as 'change of pace.'

"The best catcher I ever saw was Buck Ewing, who caught for the Giants when they won the world's championship in 1888 and 1889. I have never to this day seen his equal, but little Walters, of the New York Yankees, reminds me of Ewing's throwing on bases".

"Ewing was a quick thinker and a natural born leader. Bill Lange, who played for me when I had charge of the Chicago National League club, was in a class by himself as an outfielder. He was a better outfielder than Cobb or Speaker and a phenomenal thrower, and one year he stole 106 bases."

"How about Billy Sunday?" Cap was asked.

"Billy is a better evangelist than a ball player," was the reply. "He was the fastest runner that ever drew on a spiked shoe when we played on the Chicago team, but he didn't always exercise the best judgment in stealing bases. He was an excellent outfielder and a fair hitter and his influence among the Chicago players was good." (The Washington Post, June 3, 1917, pp. S18, " Old-Time Ball Players Superior, Anson Holds)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cap chose his All-Time team for the Sporting News, on Jan. 17, 1918, pp. 8.

His lineup consisted of:

1B - Cap Anson
2B - Fred Pfeffer
SS - Ross Barnes
3B - (Ned) Ed Williamson
OF - Bill Lange
OF - George Gore
OF - Jimmy Ryan
OF - Hugh Duffy
C - Buck Ewing/King Kelly
P - Amos Rusie
P - John Clarkson
P - Jim McCormick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

So there you have some opinions from the very famous Cap Anson. Some pearls (Ewing/Lange) mixed in with his obvious "old fogey" rhetoric.

Baseball historian/statistician Ernie Lanigan was quoted in Sporting News twice as stating that old Cap Anson had selected Ty Cobb as the best ever before he died in 1922. But in all my research, I have never turned up the quote. Which would have shown good growth in Cap. So we have from 1918-22, for Cap to evolve to that perception, if Lanigan is to be believed.

Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

You, Bill, like to show us results of various surveys of baseball men that showed Cobb being the #1 player of all time. Almost all of those surveys were done prior to 1950, because after that Ruth seemed to carry the polls.

Not so my friend.

Only 4 were prior to 1950.
11 were during the 1950's.
2 were from the 1960's.
7 were from the 1990's.
1 is ours, on Fever, 2005.

And as proof, here they are again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Historical Polls/Surveys:

As a service to the good guys of Fever, the best-informed fans I've had the good luck to run into, I'm going to dip deep into the storied Bill Burgess musty, dusty File Cabinet of Baseball Lore. I'd like to share some of my personal collection of past surveys/polls. So here is another Historical File. Hope you enjoy it. I have included it into my All-Time All-Star Teams File. Available to all who request it. Just provide a private email address & it will be emailed to that address.


1931 Poll, conducted by the Philadelphia Public Ledger, C. William Duncan. July, 1933;

Cobb 55 points, Wagner 38 points, Ruth 17 points, Lajoie 13, Collins 12, Keeler 7, Simmons 6, Speaker 4, Joe Jackson 3, Sisler 3, Klein 3, Hornsby 2,
Parent 2, Ferguson, Chase & Terry = 1 point.

(Voters: Connie Mack, John McGraw, Clark Griffith, Wilbert Robinson, Dan Howley, Bucky Harris, Joe McCarthy, Bill McKechnie, Kid Gleason, Walter Johnson, Jim Burke, Gabby Street)

Tabulation went thusly: 1st place vote = 5 points, 2nd place = 4 votes, 3rd place = 3 points, 2nd place = 2 points, 1st place = 1 point.


1936 --- Original Hall of Fame vote, Feb. 2, 1936, votes counted at the Commissioner's office in Chicago, IL.

226 Total Voters;
Cobb 222, Wagner 215, Ruth 215, Mathewson 205, Johnson 189, Lajoie 146, Speaker 133, Young 111, Hornsby 105, Cochrane 80, Sisler 77, E. Collins 60, J. Collins 58, Alexander 55, Gehrig 51, Bresnahan 47, Keeler 40, Waddell 33, Foxx 21, Walsh 20, Delahanty 17, Traynor 16, Frisch 14, Grove 12, Chase 11, Ross Youngs 10, Terry 9, Kling 8, Lou Criger 7, Evers 6, M. Brown 6, Chance 5, Schalk 4, McGraw 4, Simmons 4, Bender 2, Roush 2, Joe Jackson 2, and one each for Crawford, Baker, Bradley, Elberfeld, Connie Mack, Marquad, and Nap Rucker.

Sporting News staff, Jan. 20, 1938, 17 voters
1B Gehrig 8, Sisler 7, Chase 2
2B Lajoie 8, Collins 4, Hornsby 3, Gehringer2
SS Wagner 17
3B Collins 9, Traynor 8
LF Cobb 17
CF Speaker 14, Jackson 1, Delehanty 1, Clarke 1
RF Ruth 17
C Cochrane 12, Bresnahan 6, Ewing 4, Kling 4, Harnett 3, Dickey 2, Schalk 2, M. Kelly 1
P Johnson 13, Mathewson 12, Grove 8, Young 4, Alexander 4, Hubbel 4, Waddell 3, Plank 2, Coombs 1

1942 - Sporting News, April 2, 1942, 102 former players, managers.

Cobb 60, Wagner 17, Ruth 11, Hornsby 2, 10 players received 1 vote each: Delahanty, Gehrig, Speaker, DiMaggio, Ott, Sisler, E. Collins, Johnson, Mathewson, Jerry Denny.


1950 Christy Walsh Survey of 500 Sports Writers
Connie Mack, 7 sports writers Announced July 8, 1952

1B Sisler
2B Collins
SS Wagner
3B Traynor
LF Cobb
CF Speaker
RF Ruth
C Cochrane / Dickey
U IF Frisch, U OF DiMaggio
P Johnson, Mathewson, Young, Alexander
Hubbell, Grove


1950 Sports Writers Poll: Who Was the Greatest Baseball Player Ever?

Ruth 253, Cobb 116, Gehrig 8, Walter Johnson 7, DiMaggio 5, Wagner 2, Mathewson 2.


1952, Feb., Baseball Writers Ass. Of America, 164 spwr.
Big Time Baseball (Magazine), 164 Spwr. & 76 celebrities

1B Gehrig 124, Sisler 56, Terry, Chase, Foxx, Greenberg
2B Hornsby 107, Gehringer, Collins, Lajoie, Frisch, Gordon
SS Wagner 192, Marion, Cronin, Maranville, Rizzuto, Appling, Boudreau 27
3B Traynor 118, Collins 50, Baker, Rolfe, Dykes, Dugan
LF Cobb 224, Jackson
CF DiMaggio 107, Speaker 105
RF Ruth 234, Williams
C Dickey 109, Cochrane 92, Bresnahan 20, Schalk, Harnett, Kling, Ruel, Schang, Campanella
P Johnson 117, Mathewson 72, Alexander 16, Grove 11, Dean, Hubbell, Pennock, Waddell, Feller


Sport Magazine, May 1951
National League
1B Terry
2B Hornsby
SS Wagner
3B Traynor
LF Musial
CF -
RF Ott
C Hartnett
P Mathewson

Sport Magazine, May 1951
American League
1B Sisler
2B Lajoie
SS Boudreau
3B Collins
LF Cobb
CF DiMaggio
RF Ruth
C Cochrane
P Johnson



Complete Baseball (Magazine), Fall, 1951, AL, voted on by panel of 7 spwr.

1B Sisler, Gehrig, Foxx
2B Collins, Lajoie, Gehringer
SS Boudreau, Appling, Cronin
3B Collins, Baker, Kell
LF Cobb, DiMaggio, Keeler,
CF Speaker, Simmons, J. Jackson
RF Ruth, Simmons, Williams
C Cochrane, Dickey, Schalk
RHP Johnson
LHP Grove


Complete Baseball (Magazine), Summer, 1951, NL, voted on by panel of 7 spwr.

1B Terry, Chance, Bottomley
2B Hornsby, Frisch, Evers
SS Wagner, Marion, Bancroft
3B Traynor, Lindstrom, Hack
LF Musial, Ott, Wilson
CF Waner, Youngs, Hafey
RF Roush, Clarke, Medwick
C Harnett, Bresnahan, Kling
RHP Alexander, Mathewson, Dean
LHP Hubbell, Rixey, Marquard


Sporting News, Jan. 2, 1957

1B Sisler
2B Hornsby
SS Wagner
3B Collins
LF Cobb
CF Speaker
RF Ruth
C Cochrane
P Mathewson, Young, Johnson, Alexander



Sport Magazine, Oct., 1958, over 120 total votes
National League

1B Terry 89
2B Hornsby
SS Wagner
3B Traynor
LF Musial
CF Waner 54, Mays 46
RF Ott
C Harnett
P Mathewson, Hubbell 95



Sport Magazine, Sept., 1958, over 120 total votes
American League

1B Gehrig, Sisler
2B Collins
SS Cronin
3B Collins, Baker
LF Cobb 104
CF DiMaggio 48, Speaker 47
RF Ruth 107
C Dickey 59, Cochrane 50
P Johnson, Grove 105
M. McGraw 105, Stengel 53, Mack 35, McCarthy 33, Huggins


Baseball Writers Ass. Of America, Jul. 6, 1958, 238 total votes

1B Gehrig 124, Sisler 78
2B Hornsby 125, Collins 60, Gehringer, Lajoie, Frisch
SS Wagner 216, Cronin 7
3B Traynor 199, Collins 23
LF Cobb 211, Williams 40
CF Speaker 111, DiMaggio 52
RF Ruth 228, Musial
C Dickey 105, Cochrane 93, Harnett, Berra
P Grove 213, Johnson 196, Hubbell 173, Mathewson 135, Mathewson 135, Young 56, Alexander 36, Feller 29


Sept. 7, 1963: Academy of Sports Editors, a private survey organization which solicits votes from 100 sports editors of papers in the 100,000 plus class.

Greatest Ever Player: AL: Cobb 91%, Ruth 90%, DiMaggio, 63%; W. Johnson 48%, T. Williams 45%, Gehrig 43%, Speaker, 43%, Sisler 20%, E. Collins 18%, Feller 17%.

Greatest Ever Player: NL: Wagner 71%, Musial 70%, Mathewson 57%, Alexander 53%, Spahn 42%, Mays 38%, Terry 23%, Ott 20%, Frisch 15%.


1969 Sporting News Centennial, All-Time Team

1B Gehrig, Sisler, Musial
2B Hornsby, Gehringer, Collins,
SS Wagner, Cronin, Banks
3B Traynor, B. Robinson, J. Robinson
OF Ruth, Cobb, DiMaggio, T. Williams, Speaker, Mays
C Cochrane, Dickey, Campanella
RHP Johnson, Mathewson, Young
LHP Grove, Koufax, Hubbell

Oct., 1992 Sports Illustrated, Steve Wulf's personal team for Sports Illustrated

1B Gehrig
2B Robinson
SS Ripken
3B Schmidt
LF Cobb
CF Mays
RF Ruth
C Cochrane
RHP Mathewson
LHP Spahn
RP Eckersley
M; Stengel

1994, June, Inside Sport Magazine

Ruth, Cobb, Mays, Aaron, Williams, W. Johnson, DiMaggio, Gehrig, Foxx, Mathewson, Alexander, Musial, Mantle, Seaver, Feller, Young, Carlton, Rose, Ryan, Koufax


Baseball Digest's All-Time Top 10 by Position - 1994

1B - Gehrig, Foxx, Sisler, Greenberg, McCovey, Terry, Mize, Perez, Cepeda, Murray
2B - Gehringer, Sandbeg, Frisch, Hornsby, Morgan, Collins, J. Robinson, Lajoie,Herman, Mazeroski
SS - Smith, Aparicio, Wagner, Appling, Ripken, Boudreau, Banks, Cronin, Reese, Rizzuto
3B - Schmidt, B. Robinson, Brett, Mathews, Traynor, Nettles, Santo, Hack, Boggs, Kell
LF - Williams, Musial, J. Jackson, Henderson, Bonds, Simmons, Medwick, Yastrzemski, Brock, Goslin
CF - Cobb, Mays, DiMaggio, Mantle, Speaker, Snider, Combs, Roush, Puckett, Blair
RF - Ruth, Aaron, Clemente, F. Robinson, Winfield, Dawson, Kaline, R.Jackson, Ott, Gwynn
C - Bench, Campanella, Berra,J . Gibson, Dickey, Carter, Fisk, Harnett, Schalk
RHP - Johnson, Seaver, Gibson, Alexander, Mathewson, Feller, Palmer, Marichal, Young, Paige
LHP - Koufax, Carlton, Grove, Spahn, Hubbell, Plank, Ford, Waddell, Gomez ,Kaat
RP - Gossage, Fingers, Marshall, Sutter, Eckersley, Wilhelm, Radatz, Perranoski, Tekulve, Lee Smith

BBWAA - July, 1997 - All-Time All-Star Team (numbers show 1st place votes)

1B - Gehrig 31, Foxx3, Sisler 2, McCovey, Greenberg, Terry, Musial, Murray, McGuire, Thomas
2B - Hornsbby 17, Morgan 6, J. Robinson 6, Gehringer 4, Lajoie 3, Collins 1, Carew, Sandberg
SS - Wagner 23, Ripken 6, O. Smith 5, Banks 1, Boudreau, Appling
3B - Schmidt 21, B. Robinson 6, Mathews 4, Brett 1, Traynor, Rose, Baker, Rosen, Boggs
LF - Williams 32, Musial 4, Rose, Kiner, Henderson, Bonds
CF - Mays 25, Cobb 7, DiMaggio 3, Mantle 1, Speaker
RF - Ruth 31, Aaron 5, F. Robinson 4, Kaline, Clemente, Gwynn
C - Bench 24, Berra 4, Campanella 4, Cochrane 1, Dickey 1, Hartnett, 1 Fisk
RHP - Johnson 9, Young 12, Mathewson 5, Feller 4, Gibson 2, Ryan 2, Seaver 1, Maddux 1, Alexander, Marichal
LHP - Koufax 11, Spahn 11, Grove 8, Carlton 4, Hubbell, 6, Ford 1, Plank 1
RP - Eckersley 16, Fingers 9, L. Smith 4, Wilhelm 3, Gossage 3, Sutter 1, Quisenberry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
October, 1998
Sporting News, 100 Greatest Baseball Players
Only listed Top 55 of their 100.

1. Ruth
2. Mays
3. Cobb
4. W. Johnson
5. Aaron
6. Gehrig
7. Mathewson
8. T. Williams
9. Hornsby
10. Musial
11. DiMaggio
12. Alexander
13. Wagner
14. Young
15. Foxx
16. Bench
17. Mantle
18. Josh Gibson
19. Satchel Paige
20. Clemente
21. Spahn
22. F. Robinson
23. Grove
24. E. Collins
25. Rose
26. Koufax
27. Speaker
28. Schmidt
29. Lajoie
30. Carlton
31. Gibson
32. Seaver
33. Sisler
34. Bonds
35. Joe Jackson
36. Feller
37. Greenberg
38. Banks
39. Maddux
40. Berra
41. Ryan
42. Ott
43. Simmons
44. J. Robinson
45. Hubbell
46. Gehringer
47. Buck Leonard
48. Reggie Jackson
49. Gwynn
50. Campanella
51. Henderson
52. Whitey Ford
53. Clemens
54. Heilmann
55. Brett
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
25 Member Team
ML BB's 1999 All-Century Team

1B - Gehrig ( 1,207,992), McGuire,
2B - J. Robinson, Hornsby,
SS - Ripken (669, 033), Banks, Wagner,
3B - Schmidt, B. Robinson,
LF - Rose (629, 742), Williams, Musial
CF - Cobb, Mays, DiMaggio, Mantle, Griffey,
RF - Ruth (1, 1,158, 044), Aaron
C - Bench, Berra,
RHP - Ryan, Yong, Clemens, Gibson, W. Johnson, Mathewson
LEP - Koufax, Grove, Spahn,

In this fan survey, a special panel had to add Wagner, Mathewson,
Grove, Spahn, Musial,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1999, SABR ran a poll, and here are their results.


--Position Players-----------------Pitchers
1. Ruth -----2,743-----------------W. Johnson----591
2. Cobb------1,135-----------------Grove---------139
3. Mays--------964-----------------Mathewson-----118
4. Williams----711-----------------Young---------112
5. Wagner------611-----------------Joss-----------53
6. Gehrig------375-----------------Koufax---------52
7. Aaron-------270-----------------N. Ryan--------37
8. DiMaggio----213-----------------Maddux---------29
9. Mantle------115-----------------Spahn----------26
10. Musial-----102-----------------Alexander------20
11. Hornsby-----82
12. J. Robinson-58
13. Clemente----44
13. J. Jackson--44
15. Rose--------42
16. Bonds-------37
17. Lajoie------36
18. Foxx--------23
19. McGuire-----22
20. Bench-------20
20. Griffey-----20

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have tabulated our 2005 Fever votes. So far, here's what I've got for Fever.


Ruth ------------ 84 supporters (57.53%)
Cobb ------------ 44 supporters (30.13%)
Mays ------------ 10 supporters (06.84%)
Charleston-------- 3 supporters (02.05%)
Williams-----------2 supporters (01.36%)
Bonds--------------2 supporters (01.36%)
Gehrig-------------1 supporters (006%)
---------------------------------------
----------------146 total supporters


So at present, Babe is picking up almost 3 out of 5 Fever members support, as the best, while Ty is only picking up 1 every 4 members.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

Miller Huggins's All-Time Team

Cobb, Speaker,
Ruth Best Outfield
-------------------------------------------
Yankee Pilot Selects
Greatest Players in
History of Game
---------------------------------
Names Chase at First
Base; Johnson and
Waddell Pitchers
---------------------------------
by William J. Dunn
United Press Staff Correspondent
New York, Feb. 4, 1929 (U.P.). --Miller Huggins, diminutive but
mighty manager of the champion New York Yankees, tried his hand at selecting an all-time ball club.

His skill in that line appears not less than his uncanny ability to judge his own men and get the greatest effort out of them year after year.

Starting with Hal Chase at first base, Huggins builds a mythical team that would be hard to equal either in defensive or offensive power. Chase, Huggins believes, is the greatest first baseman that ever drew on a glove. Equally high are his ratings of Eddie Collins, whom he places at second, and Jimmy Collins, his choice at third.

At shortstop he names Hans Wagner, Pittsburgh old infield star, terming him the "greatest infielder that ever lived," and possibly the greatest ballplayer.

Little Time Lost in Naming
The Greatest Outfield.

It took him nearly two seconds to name his outfield -- Ty Cobb. Tris Speaker and Babe Ruth. "Who else could hope to compete with a set of outfielders like that?" he asked. "Cobb, of course, has first call as the greatest all round man in the trio."

Roger Bresnahan gets first call among the catchers, in Huggins opinion, with Johnny Kling a close second. Kling for catching ability was in a class by himself. Huggins believes but the fact that Bresnahan was a powerful hitter in addition to being exceptional as a catcher, makes Roger a little more valuable in the eyes of Huggins.

Rube Waddell, eccentric southpaw, and Walter Johnson are the greatest left and right handed pitchers, respectfully, he claims. He also rates his own Herb Pennock right behind Waddell as a south-sider and completes his pitching staff with two other right handers. Christy Mathewson and Grover Cleveland Alexander.

Good Infielder Rated More Vital
Than Good Outfielder.

His team would line up as follows:

First base--Hal Chase, New York Americans
Second base--Eddie Collins, Philadelphia Americans
Third base--Jimmy Collins, Boston Americans
Shortstop--Hans Wagner, Pittsburgh Nationals
Right Field--Babe Ruth, New York Americans
Center Field--Tris Speaker, Boston Americans
Left Field--Ty Cobb, Detroit Americans
Catcher--Roger Bresnahan, New York Nationals
Catcher--Johnny Kling, Chicago Nationals
Pitchers--Rube Waddell, Philadelphia Americans
Walter Johnson, Washington Americans
Christy Mathewson, New York Nationals
Grover C. Alexander, Philadelphia Nationals

The greatest player of all time? 'Wagner or Cobb', take your choice. Still I'm inclined to consider a good infielder more important to a team than a good outfielder." said Huggins. (Washington Post, February 5, 1929, pp. 20)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

McGraw's Views on Pitching/Catchers:


A mere 2 wks. before his death on Feb. 25, 1934, John J. McGraw was interviewed by Sporting News. He gave his views on his top pitcher/catcher batteries. Following here are his selections as his top batteries.

1. Christy Mathewson / Roger Bresnahan - Giants - 1902-1908

2. Lefty Grove / Mickey Cochrane - Athletics - 1925-1933

3. Walter Johnson / Gabby Street - Senators - 1908-1911

4. Mordecai Brown / Johnny Kling - Cubs - 1904-1911

5. Sadie McMahon / Wilbert Robinson - Orioles - 1889-1896

6. Rube Waddell / Ossie Schreckengost - Athletics - 1902-1907

7. Addie Joss / Harry Bemis - Indians - 1902-1910

8. Joe McGinnity / Roger Bresnahan - Giants - 1902-1908

9. Rube Marquard / Chief Meyers - Giants - 1909-1915

10. Carl Hubbell / Gus Mancuso - Giants - 1933-1938 (McGraw saw Gus 1 yr.)

11. Tim Keefe / Buck Ewing - Giants - 1880-82, 1885-1891

12. Amos Rusie / Buck Ewing - Giants 1891-92

13. John Clarkson / Michael "King" Kelly - Boston Nationals - 1888-1892

14. Kid Nichols / Charlie Bennet - Boston Nationals - 1890-1893

15. Nap Rucker / Bill Bergen - Dodgers - 1907-1911

16. Ted Breitenstein / Heinie Peitz - Reds - 1897-1900

17. Cy Young / Lou Criger - Red Sox - 1901-1908

18. Ed Walsh / Bill Sullivan - White Sox - 1904-1914

19. Chief Bender / Doc Powers - Athletics - 1901-1909

20. Eddie Plank / Jack Lap - Athletics - 1908-1914

21. Cy Young / Chief Zimmer - Cleveland -1890-1898


McGraws Top Pitchers:

1. Christy Mathewson

2. Lefty Grove

3. Walter Johnson

4. Rube Waddell

5. Rube Marquard

6. Carl Hubbell

7. Joe McGinnity

8. Sadie McMahon

9. Nap Rucker

10. Mordecai Brown

11. Addie Joss

12. Ed Walsh


McGraw's Top Catchers:

1. Roger Bresnahan

2. Mickey Cochrane

3. Johnny Kling

4. Buck Ewing

5. Bill Dickey

6. Wilbert Robinson

7. Michael "King" Kelly

8. Charlie Bennett

(Sporting News, February 8, 1934, pp. 4, column 3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

My only surprise here is that he ranked Mordecai Brown only 10th as an individual pitcher and 4th as a battery. And he rated Buck Ewing 4th here, but had him #1 in 1922.

In 1919, John McGraw had this to say about Buck. "Roger Bresnahan was the greatest catcher I ever saw, always excepting Buck Ewing." (Baseball Magazine, May, 1919, pp. 14)

"Roger Bresnahan was a close second to Ewing in all that goes to make a great catcher." (John J. McGraw, My Thirty Years in Baseball, by John J. McGraw, as told to Bozeman Bulger, 1923, pp. 214)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

I thought that I'd bring you some cool material from long ago. A juicy tidbit concerning defense, from one of my favorite sports writers, who passed in 1930.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
John B. Sheridan, St. Louis spwr. (1888-1929)
Sporting News column, "Back of Home Plate", 1917-29
(Sporting News, February 11, 1926)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"(Joe) Vila adds, that in his opinion (Hugh) Jennings was the greatest of shortstops. Again I must disagree. Jennings was a great shortstop, bar one very serious shortcoming, a weak arm. That weakness forced Hugh to play a shallow field, where Wallace and Wagner could play a deep field, 40 feet deeper than Jennings could. True, Jennings made a wonderful job of short, his limitation of arm power considered. But Wallace, Wagner and Herman Long could play so much deeper than Jennings that they naturally could get grounders that Jennings could not get, and make, also go farther back for fly balls than Jennings could go.

Why, about 1893, Jennings' arm was so weak that he was forced to play almost on the grass behind the pitcher. At that, Hugh could do everything but throw, go either way, back for flies, etc. I never saw any infielder who could make putouts on long, wild throws from the catcher as Jennings could. He'd make a putout on a low throw that other infielders would "high low" to the center fielder.

Wallace was, I have always believed, the greatest of shortstops in a fielding sense. He could do all the things that Wagner could do and one that Wagner could not do, get a ball behind the third baseman, and by quick righting of the body and sheer power of arm, make the assist at first. Wagner could do all these things, save right his heavy body in time to make the throw.
-----------------------------------
(Joe) Vila also questions the equality of Roger Bresnahan as a catcher to Buck Ewing, Mike Kelly or Charley Bennett. I have had doubts between Bresnahan and Ewing, but none about Bresnahan or Ewing's superiority to Kelly or Bennett. To my mind, Kelly was a great personality rather than a great ball player. He was, when fit, a good hitter, a clever base runner or or entertaining player, but he never appealed to me as a great technician behind the bat. Charley Bennett was slow, and a good mark to pitch to, a good thrower. Ewing could receive, plan, throw, hit and run bases. I have always agreed Buck was one of the three greatest catchers, Bresnahan and Kling being the other two. I believe that Ewing and Kling had technically, better hands, were better receivers and takers of throws than Bresnahan, but Lordy, no man, except perhaps Cobb, exerted so great an individual force in a ball game, either behind the bat, at the bat or on the bases as Bresnahan.
----------------------------------
Kling has not been given credit for his greatness as a catcher. Between Ewing, Bresnahan and Kling there was little to choose, but Bresnahan was by far the greater all around ball player, and that should get him the call. By the way, little Ray Schalk, weak arm and all, cannot be kept out of any discussion of great catchers, nor can Lou Criger. Of course, the relative merits of players is purely a matter of personal opinion, but when Vila puts down McGraw, the greatest single influence in baseball, as a great third baseman, I believe that his opinion is so far out of line as to be ruled out. As for a great combination at short and third, Vila forgets Wagner and Leach. Of course, as far as energy, dash, brilliancy, will-to-win, etc., goes, no team ever equaled the Orioles, of which McGraw was the spark plug. In this respect it was the greatest team of all time. Given three good pitchers, the Orioles, with Robinson and Clark catching. Jack Koyle, Reitz, Jennings and McGraw in the infield: Kelley, Keeler, and Brodie in the outfield, were by all means the "winningest" team I have ever seen. Any one of them, save Reitz, would cheerfully break a leg to win a game of baseball. But , as a rule, the Orioles lacked pitching.
----------------------------
Got a letter from a man last week who picked several all-time teams and never mentioned Chase for first base. Maybe Chase's name has been erased from the guides, but Hades, I have seen scores of great first baseman and --- Chase. I can believe that there will be another Cobb, several greater than Cobb was. Sisler, had he hustled, had it in him to be greater than Cobb, but I'll have to see the equal or superior of Chase play some 1,000 games of ball before I'll concede that he is equal or superior to that son of Limbo. Yes, lots of great first basemen. Then Chase. As Miss Barrymore said in "A Country Mouse," "There isn't any more. There isn't any more."
----------------------------------
As for the greatest third baseman--there was only one--Jimmy Collins. He was the only man I ever saw that could back up on a ball, yet play it surely. Collins was not so much more effective than Tommy Leach, Arthur Devlin, Bill Bradley, Jerry Denny, etc., but he did the things they did much more gracefully and easily that I must concede him superiority. Then none of them could back up and make the play as Collins could. I have seen Joe Dugan play a wonderful third at times. And Heinie Groh. Bob Wallace played third for a time, 1898-99, and I believe was the closest thing to Collins I have seen." (Sporting News, February 11, 1926)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Herman Long: His case.

But Wallace, Wagner and Herman Long could play so much deeper than Jennings that they naturally could get grounders that Jennings could not get, and make, also go farther back for fly balls than Jennings could go. (Sporting News, February 11, 1926, John B. Sheridan, St. Louis spwr. (1888-1929) Sporting News column, "Back of Home Plate", 1917-29)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"With a powerful arm, a quick release, and outstanding range, speed, and agility, Long played shortstop, according to the Boston Globe, "like a man on a flying trapeze." . . . His career chances-per-game (6.4) tops all shortstops.

. . . twice knocking in over 100 and scoring over 100 seven times. His 149 runs scored led the NL in 1893 and his 12 HRs led in 1900. Noisy and uncouth on the field, he urged teammates to greater efforts, ragged opponents, and stirred up fans. He always played all out, once breaking Pittsburgh catcher Connie Mack's leg with a ferocious slide when there was no play at the plate.
(The Ballplayers, ed. by Mike Shatzkin, 1990, pp. 633.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1889 shortstop Herman Long made 117 errors. Today he would never have the chance to make so many without being booted back to the minors, but the game was different in 1889, when Long's numerous miscues didn't even lead the league. In more than 16 major league seasons he accumulated an astonishing 1,070 errors at SS alone, plus another six when he filled in at other positions. Add his minor league bobbles and he probably made more errors than any other man in BB history.

Yet Long was regarded as one of the best shortstops of his day, and many authorities place him at the top of the list. Although he made scads of errors, he also covered more ground than any of his counterparts. Many of his misses came on balls that other shortstops could only watch go by from afar. Long was spectacularly acrobatic as he pursued batted balls, cutting off some hits with moves more likely to be seen at the circus. He ranks second all-time in total chances per game. The outstanding plays that occasionally resulted from his attempts made the extra errors worthwhile. (Baseball: The Biographical Encyclopedia, ed. of Total Baseball, David Pietrusza, Matthew Silverman, Michael Gershman, 2000, pp.674)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
". . . Long played shortstop more than any other position and was famed for the amount of ground he could cover and for his accurate fielding. (excerpted from his obituary, Chicago Daily Tribune, September 17, 1909, pp.14)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Denver, September 16, --Herman Long, said to be the greatest shortstop of the country, died here today of consumption (Tuberculosis)(TB). He made his reputation with the Boston Nationals.) (excerpted from his obituary, Washington Post, September 17, 1909, pp. 9)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hugh Jennings was a great shortstop but how many know that Herman Long was an even better one, and that Long, until the arrival of Wagner, was recognized as the greatest shortstop of all time? (H.G. Salsinger, Detroit New, 1936: as quoted in "The History of Baseball: Its great Players, Teams and Managers, ed. By Allison Danzig & Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 276)

In that same book, same page, we find this. Of Long, Jack Doyle said to John Kieran, "You can't tell an old Bostonian there was ever a better shortstop." Walter Barnes wrote in the Boston Globe in 1936, "Herman Long was never excelled in the brilliancy of his fielding at short-stop." Joe Vila in 1930 reported Kid Nichols as saying of Long, "He was the greatest shortstop I ever saw. He covered more ground than Hans Wagner or Hughie Jennings. He fielded grounders no other shortstop could have reached and he threw out the fleetest base runners. He was a fine hitter and lead-off man, and once he stole more than 100 bases."

Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

John B. Sheridan on Relative Value of a Player:

A topic that is very controversial today is the relative value of a player. A-rod gets $25m/yr. Many, like I, consider that an extremely gross over-valuation of his value. $25m/162 games equals out to $154,320/game, $38,580/at-bat. And that is preposterous value for a mere baseball player!

The following article, gives a very insightful analysis of a player's worth in any sport.

John Brinsley Sheridan, St. Louis sports writer, 1888-1929
Sporting News, December 8, 1927, pp. 4, column 6

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A very good friend, and competent critic, writes from Houston,Tex., that so long as charge is made for admission to see baseball games, players are entitled to salaries commensurate with the paid attendance, that it is the players, who draw the money paid for admission to baseball games. I cannot wholly agree with this position. While it is true that Ruth, as a member of a championship team, does attract huge crowds, Ruth on the Boston Red Sox or St. Louis Browns would lose a great part of his drawing power.

Ruth is the only player I have known, except Waddell, to possess extraordinary personal drawing powers. Ruth plays every day. Waddell pitched once in four days. Spectators never were informed exactly as to what day he would pitch. Often when the day of Rube's appearance was announced, he failed to show up. Cobb, I figured, did draw 7,000 more people to the average game than the Detroit team minus Cobb would have drawn. Outside of Ruth, Waddell and Cobb, I have not known any individual player to draw large crowds.

-------------------------------------------------

Mike Kelly, Anson, Mathewson, Walter Johnson, were all more or less drawing cards. All of these men, except Johnson were members of teams always high in the championship races. They drew well with a championship team.

Put Ruth, Cobb, Kelly, Anson, Mathewson, Waddell, on a tail-end team on a barnstorming team in a bush park, no high-powered publicity, to what degree would their drawing powers be diminished? Let any of these men drop out of the limelight of the big leagues, and what would they draw? It is, in my opinion, entirely logical to attribute to the player, the players, or the team all drawing power displayed by the teams. Organized Baseball, regular scheduled games, good teams, in winning form, to play against, form the basis of the baseball structure. It is all very well to say "Americans love baseball." Not so. Americans do love organized league baseball. They don't care much for unorganized lot baseball, not even if every player on the lots was a Ruth.

------------------------------

Organization is the fundamental of the drawing power of baseball. Take away organization and you take away the drawing power of baseball. Ruth will pass on, as Kelly and Anson passed on, yet Organized Baseball will continue to attract its millions. Take away organization and a million unorganized Ruths will not draw the big money they will draw as members of Organized Baseball.

Then comes as part of organization, the good baseball city, the good team, the good park, a good press--the grand old ballyhoo.

The people who invest money, who organize winning teams, who construct good parks, who have good relations with the public and with the press, the result of which is a favorable press, the great organized ballyhoo, contribute much to the drawing power of the individual player or of the teams.

When I remember the days of Fielder Jones' White Sox, the amazing personal attractiveness and, popularity of Comiskey, the manner in which that personally made and held friends, the Woodland bands, organized rooting, I believe that Comiskey's labor contributed much to the drawing powers of the White Sox. But for Ed Walsh, the White Sox did not possess a single outstanding individual drawing card. As a winning team, they constituted a strong, collective drawing card. As individuals, as a team they played winning but unattractive baseball.

----------------------------

The newspaper ballyhoo is of enormous importance. True, to draw, to create interest, to make ballyhooo possible, you must have (1) a winning team; (2) play an attractive style of baseball; (3) possess players who make good copy for the newspapers; (4) be fortunate enough to have with you baseball writers who are capable of putting on a good ballyhoo. A pleasant, commodious, clean, comfortable accessible park, has decided values in drawing power.

What value would Ruth have in the small Cubs' park at Chicago, compared to the enormous value he possesses in the huge Yankee Stadium? One-half, I believe, because Wrigley Field can accommodate only one-half as many people as the Yankee Stadium.

What is the value of the mere name New York as a drawing card? Considerable. That is a New York team will draw more people than a St. Louis, Detroit, Washington or Cincinnati team of equal standing and playing attractiveness. The words New York Cast have a distinct drawing value.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ruth certainly does draw large additional sums at the gate as a component part of a potential world's championship team, of a New York team, as the best "ballyhooed" man in the world. What percentage of Ruth's unquestionable drawing power are attributable to (1) Ruth himself; (2) a world's championship team; (3) New York Cast; (4) the ballyhoo; (5) good teams to play against; (6) good parks to play in?

The fact that an attractive player, who does possess a drawing value of his own is a member of a New York team confers enormous drawing values upon him. The very name New York--the metropolis--has a distinct value. New York is the center of an enormous stable and floating population; of an amusement seeking population; such as no other city in the United States has. New York is the center of news distribution, of features, special stories, cartoons and all the rest of the ballyhoo.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The attractive player on a New York team gets the benefit of all this huge volume of publicity, of the enormous concentrated population, of the metropolitan district of the huge buying crowds, convention-attending crowds, of the crowds attracted by the general ballyhoo, which has attained infinitely greater volume in New York than anywhere else in the world. Surely, no one would claim that the ballplayer, individually, is entitled to cash in on these things

If drawing capacity counted, Lou Gehrig would not get $5,000. a year, although Gehrig followed Ruth closely in home runs, hit in more runs than Ruth did, etc. I have seen 15,000 women out, free on ladies day, to see Ruth. At the time, Gehrig was leading Ruth in home runs. No one seemed to know that Gehrig was in the game that day. It was Ruth, or the ballyhoo about Ruth, the Abysmal Brute ballyhoo, the stories told about his Rabeinisan life, of his exploits d'amour, not Gehrig, who drew the crowds.

Summing up, I'd say that the drawing power of Ruth is constituted thus:

Personality and prowess (Ruth himself)..... 25%
Prestige of a winning club in New York...... 30%
Good stands, pleasant surrounding............10%
Ballyhoo.......................................... ....35%
----------------------------------------100% total"


Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

In 1931, George Sisler chose his all-time all-star team for Baseball Magazine.

-------------------The Greatest Players I Ever Saw-------------------------------

An All-Star Team of Baseball's Best Performers as They Appeared to the Keen Eye and Shrewd Judgment of a Veteran Who Was Himself, A Super-Star
------------------Comprising an Interview with GEORGE SISLER-------------
------------------Baseball Magazine, April, 1931, pp. 483, 484

George Sisler in reminiscent mood, recently picked an all-star team of the greatest players he had ever seen. His views are interesting because Sisler was always a close, keen student of the game. And they carry weight because he was, himself, a member of that little group of super-stars who stood at the pinnacle of their profession.

Modesty forbade Sisler to set forth any claims for himself as the star first baseman. But when we consider his amazing batting feats, his brilliant base-running, his kinship with the highest genius of the diamond is evident enough.

Sisler said, "Hal Chase had passed his prime before I ever put on a major league uniform. He also spent his decline days in the National League. I saw Chase only in a game or two and was not particularly impressed with his work. No doubt he deserved his great reputation, but I should not feel competent to pass an opinion on any player unless I saw him perform before my own eyes.

"Bill Terry, of the Giants, on the remarkable showing he made last year, stands out in my memory as the pick of all first basemen I have known. Terry's batting speaks for itself. He hit .401 and that failed to tell the story. Terry is a slashing line-drive hitter and the Polo Grounds doesn't favor his style a bit. Out-fielders lay for Terry and spoil many a safe hit for him.

In the field Terry is fast and mechanically a great performer. There are a few minor defects about his work, but he seems to realize them and worked hard last season to overcome them. Undoubtedly he's the greatest first baseman in the game. (Author's note: By 1954, he had replaced Terry with Gehrig, on his all time team.)

"At second base Lajoie was also passing when I broke in. I recall his beautifully graceful fielding and his forceful hitting. He had slowed up somewhat, however, and didn't seem to cover much ground. Unfortunately, I did not see him in his prime.

"A number of fine second basemen have appeared. In recent years. Frank Frisch is one, although he has a tendency to fumble the ball, which mars his work, in my opinion. Hugh Critz is a brilliant fielder, though possibly somewhat overrated. He is particularly good on ground covering.

"Hornsby has one or two weaknesses. He doesn't shine in going back after pop flies. But he has the best throw to first base that I ever saw. And he's also a good man on double plays. Hornsby was never a base-stealer, but he's really a great base-runner. His speed has never been recognized by the public, but he was phenomenally fast, in his prime. As a hitter, Hornsby stands out. He is doubtless the greatest hitter the National League has produced since the days of Hans Wagner, if not beyond.

"I would rate Hornsby somewhat above Eddie Collins, with due respect to Collins' all round ability. Collins was a better base-stealer, but I wouldn't say that he was a better base-runner than Hornsby. Collins was also a clever fielder, though his work impressed me as somewhat erratic. And he was, of course, a good hitter. But Hornsby's long range hitting far excelled anything that Collins ever showed, and I would prefer him on all round form at second base."

My selection of shortstop may appear odd to some people, for I think Glenn Wright is the best shortstop I ever saw. He always did impress me favorably. The only other shortstop I'd rank in his class is Travis Jackson and I think Wright was the better of the two. In his prime he had the greatest throwing arm I ever saw. He covered all kinds of ground and he was a much better hitter than people think. He was a hard hitter and he showed to advantage in the pinch. In fact, he was just the kind of player you want, a fellow who does his best work when you need it.

"There were a number of famous shortstops in the American League, Deacon Scott perhaps the most so. Scott had a sure throw to first base, but he was a weak hitter and didn't cover the ground that some shortstops do. Wright is my pick for the position.

"At third base I have never seen a player who equaled Pie Traynor, of Pittsburgh. And I do not believe that his superior ever lived. Pie has everything, a rangy build, a great throwing arm, a sure pair of hands, a baseball sense and much more than average ability at bat. In fact, he is a long, dangerous hitter. Pie wasn't so good last season because of defective eyesight and other troubles. Lindstrom had a better year. And Lindstrom is a great third baseman, also, though I wouldn't rank him quite in Traynor's class.

"In the outfield Babe Ruth belongs on any man's team. Babe is doubtless the most dangerous slugger that ever lived. And that would insure him a position in the outfield, where batting punch is so important. But that doesn't express Babe's talents. He's really a great outfielder, one of the greatest. He plays batters correctly, covers a lot more ground than you'd think he'd be able to do with his bulk, and has one of the deadliest throwing arms ever known. Besides, Babe has an accurate baseball judgment and never throws to the wrong base.

"Tris Speaker belongs on an all-star outfield. Speaker was a wonderful hitter, a good base-runner and a marvelous fielder. There seems a general impression that he was the greatest fielder who ever lived. Perhaps he was. He was certainly one of the best. And his all round ability makes him a second choice.

"For third place you simply must make room for Ty Cobb. Ty was the most brilliant ballplayer baseball has produced, the most daring, the most spectacular. Ty was poison on the base-paths. He completely disrupted infield defense. At bat he always mixed mechanical ability with brains. He had the most versatile batting attack on record. I have publicly said many times that Ty was my own batting model, and he was. I tried to learn place hitting by watching him. No one that I ever heard of taught Ty how to bat. But dozens of players owe a good deal of their batting success to Ty's teaching.

"In the outfield Ty was not supposed to be a star, but he always impressed me favorably.

He was fast and could cover acres of ground. He certainly knew how to judge opposing batters as well as anyone ever did.

"But Ty's extraordinary batting and base-running threw his fielding into the shade. This didn't mean he wasn't a great outfielder. It meant that he was an even greater batter and base-runner.

"On the hurling mound Walter Johnson, in his prime, is my choice. Unfortunately, I saw Grover Alexander only a few times. I can see how he might well have been preferred, even to Johnson. He had greater all round talents, though he lacked Johnson's blinding speed. In sheer mechanical ability, I doubt if Johnson ever had an equal.

"You need more than one pitcher, however, and I'd make a place for Dazzy Vance. Vance has received a good deal of publicity from time to time. But at that I doubt if his ability has been as widely recognized as it deserves. Vance, at his best, had nearly as much sheer stuff as Walter Johnson. And he had a far better curve than Johnson ever knew. Vance's overhand curve, thrown with the full sweep of his powerful arm, is a terrifying object. I do not doubt for a moment that it breaks as much as three feet. It comes at you like a bullet, with a terrific down sweep. I do not believe Vance's overhand curve has ever been equaled.

"Behind the plate I have vivid recollections of Ray Schalk, a great catcher. In fighting spirit, in generalship, in ability to handle pitchers, he was a marvelous performer. At bat, however, Schalk was not impressive.

"Beyond a doubt, Gordon Cochrane, of the Athletics, is the greatest catcher I ever saw. Cochrane has fully as much fight as Schalk and just as much confidence in handling pitchers. Schalk was nimble and active. But I'd say Cochrane was even faster. And Cochrane is what Schalk never was, a great hitter.

"They talk a great deal about Lefty Grove, Al Simmons and others, but Cochrane is the spark plug of the World's Champions." (Baseball Magazine, April, 1931, pp. 483-484, The Greatest Players I Ever Saw, Comprising an Interview with George Sisler)

[janduscframe]

Bill, I like the article by Sheridan on fielding.

There is nothing really new in this article from a 1904 "Americana"(encyclopedia) But it may be of interest..

Baseball, a popular sport in the u.s. of such general interest as to be known as the National game. It had its origin in the old English game of rounders but developed on American soil into a very different sport. In Philly an early form was played under the name of town ball and a similar game was known in upper Canada as early as 1838. It was in the neighborhood of New York, however that basball received its greatest development,regularly organzied clubs contesting in the Elysian Fields at what is now the site of the city of Hoboken N>J> as early as 1845. It was not until 1857 however that the first baseball convention was held for the purpose of framing uniform rules out of the various methods of each district and club and in the following May the first National Baseball Association was organized. The first real series of games played beytween organized clubs was that between teams picked from the various clubs of New York and Brooklyn on the old Fashion Racecourse at Flushing L.I in 1858, the first authorized code of rules being formulated and published for their direction. From the present view piont these rules were crude. For instance, the regulation ball weight 6and a quarter ounces and measurexd ten and a half inches in circumference. It was a lively ball being made with 2 and a half ounces of rubber covered with yarn and leather. The bat was unlimited as to length but was decreed not to exceed two and a quarter inches in diameter. In the delivery of the ball there was a greater difference than in any other respect as compared with the later development of the game: for the ball could only be pitched: all throws and jerks being prohibited. The pitcher was at liberty to take any number of steps before delivery and his limit was anywhere behind a line twelve feet across and 45 feet from the home base. Then,too, he could pitch his ball almost with no limitation so long as he pitched as near as possible to the home base. As then played, none but amateurs participatied. indeed no one could represent his club unlesss he had been a member for 30 days and money,place or emolument was a bar. Games were orginially played on free grounds, but on the establishment of the Union Ball Ground and the Capitoline Club of Brooklyn in 1863, the admission money went to the proprietor, the players later have a share and thus was laid the foundation of professional play. So matters drifted for six years with a gradual tendency to greater restrictions in rules, greater skill in play and more and more professionalism until 1869, when for the first time a salaried team the Red Stockings of Cincinnati began a tour of games and naturally carried everytbing before them. Through 1869 and up to June of 1870 they played without losing a single game. The delivery of the pitcher had been gradually developing. As early as 1860 the disguised underhand throw had come into vogue and by 1866 Arthur Cummings of the Esxcelsior Junior nine introduced a curved delivery.With the advent of the swifter playing professional and the reduced size and weight of the ball,came into necessity the various safeguards of padded gloves,cathers mitts,breast pads and masks.
By 1871, the game had become so extensive and the professioanl element so popular that a National Association of Professional Baseball Players was formed and in 1875 the various club owners took control of the professional players and organized The National League of Professional Ball Clubs which continued in undispouted possession of the professional field until 1890 when a rival association The American League was founded. Tharer are several other leagues of minor importance. Baseball naturally found favor in American universities and colleges but its technique in the early days was crude, even among the best teams. Team play as now interpretred was almost unknown. As late as 1867, when two college nines made respectively 13 and 8 it was considered a phenomenon. As late as the mid sixties socores of 50 runs were not uncommon.

It then goes on and explains how the rules work in 1904 and adds that it has become quite popular in Australia.

Nothing real earth shattering but the encyclopedia version sort of pulls things together. It took a whole page which is a clue as to how popular the game was becoming.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gee, it would be nice if I used paragraphs wouldn't it?

[GaryL]

Hi Bill:

I'm new to Baseball Fever. As an avid "baseball historian" - or, at least that's how I think of myself - I just want to thank you for posting theses great articles! I absolutely love to read about the old days. These articles were a treasure trove of information. I hope you're considering posting some more. For me, "the older the better," although my favorite period right now is the dead ball era.

Thanks again,
Gary

[Bill Burgess]

------------------------------ The Twenty-Five Greatest Players

------------------------Here's a Careful, Critical Analysis of an Interesting Subject
-----------------------------------by One of Baseball's Veteran Scribes
--------------------------------------by William Blythe Hanna
--------------------------------------Baseball Magazine, June, 1924, pp. 300-301

Naming the greatest or best, whichever adjective is the more fitting, twenty-five baseball players is a more difficult task than naming the greatest fifty. There are enough to go around in naming fifty, whereas in naming twenty-five the question constantly arises, who can I leave out? The list is a harder one to prune than to enlarge. But twenty-five is a much better number, a much better limit, if the selection is to have that choice quality which makes such a list distinctive. A roster of this sort loses its distinction, its its selectness, in proportion to its length. One could, of course, name what he considered the greatest ten baseball players, but in such a case he would have to leave out many who belong in a select circle of this character.

(garbled) forty years observation of professional baseball, of which more than thirty have been spent in writing the game. The list he selects covers almost forty years and takes in several eras of professional baseball.

There were as good baseball players forty years ago as now--Curtis Welch of the old ST. Louis Browns by way of convincing instance --and as good baseball players now as then--Frisch, Cobb, Sisler, Hornsby, Ruth and Speaker--by way of illustrious example. These men were or are all so eminent, so skilled and versatile, as to be preeminent; and I don't think of any masters in any other line or sport who have been more so.

I often wonder if the thousands who attend professional baseball are fully appreciative of the fine balance of quick, keen mental and bodily adeptness that the great baseball players represent; and in that connection this seems a good time to say that the flippant and heedless use of "bone head" with regard to ball players often is utterly unfair and positively is overdone. The contemptuous frequency with which it is used bespeaks baseball ignorance on the part of the user.

Alphabetically the greatest twenty-five, in the writer's opinion, are:

Anson, E. Collins, J. Collins, F. Clarke, Cobb, Comiskey, E. Delahanty, Ewing, Chas. Ferguson, Frisch, Hornsby, Walter Johnson, Keeler, Lange Lajoie, McGraw, Mathewson, Ruth, Radbourne, Sisler, Speaker, Wagner, C. Welch, Cy Young.

The term "great" in this article is used in a rather broad and comprehensive sense. To illustrate, Adrian C. Anson was greater as a man than as a ball player pure and simple. His was a rugged striking personality, his moral influence was extensive and lives after him, and was a strong, vivid figure in the game's growth and of the good of the game. In a playing way Anse was best as a batter.

There have been many better fielding first basemen. Charles Comiskey was one of these. Commy, the guiding genius of one of the most efficient and picturesque baseball units of all time, the original St. Louis Browns, was not the hitter Anson was, but he was a pioneer and creator in modern first base play. He was the first to develop its fielding possibilities to play the bag deep--and, like Anson, he was a leader. He and Anse were great leaders because they handled and lead bands not only of players of unusual ability as players but of conflicting natures that only a strong man could hold them together and get the best out of them as a team.

The most brilliant first baseman the game ever had is not in my list, but certain occurrences in his big league career which preclude the possibility of listing him among the great are too well known to be mentioned here.

One of the most distasteful things the writer experienced in framing his list was to leave John Evers off of it, but if there were such a thing as naming a first understudy to Eddie Collins, and Napoleon Lajoie and Frank Frisch at second base his choice would be Evers. As a smart ball player and student of the game, and in the possession of that requisite for greatness, love of playing, Evers is as great as any of them.

Collins, Lajoie and Frisch are all better batter and more steadily brilliant as fielders. All three, to my way thinking, play the base better and make more out of it than did Dunlap or Pfeffer. I never saw Ross Barnes play, so don't know how they compare with them.

Second basemen are right frequent on the forgoing list, and among them is Rogers Hornsby. Hornsby is a better fielding second baseman than many people think--he makes no fuss and no fancy motions. He is a wonderful batter and a very fast man running bases. He is too valuable and too big a menace to any opposing pitcher to be left out of the charmed circle.

We have outfielders Fred Clarke, Bill Lange, Billy Keeler, Tris Speaker, Babe Ruth, Curt Welch, Ed Delahanty and Ty Cobb, a rare array indeed. Clarke, Lange, Keeler, Welch and Delahanty are of a past age. Clarke is the only left fielder in the lot, though Joe Kelly pressed him close, and great outfielders have been so numerous and so capable that Harry Stovey, Jim Ryan, Ed Roush, Pep Young, Elmer Flick, Max Carey, Jimmy Fogarty, Jim McAleer, Zack Wheat, Chick Stahl, Hugh Duffy, and Dickey Johnston could be pressed into service without detracting any from the class of the company.

The outfielders of the original list could do all tings well. Charles Comiskey once told the writer that Welch could do anything fully as well as Speaker can do it. He could go back further for a fl ball than any outfielder I ever saw except McAleer, could throw like Bob Meusel or Jimmy Ryan, was a brilliant hitter and base runner, only Speaker outdid him at coming in, and he was first class on ground balls.

Keeler's claim to greatness included his skill at bunting and at place hitting. Moreover, he cold throw and bat and run and seize flies, and was one of the fastest men to first base in the history of the game. McGraw thinks he got away from the plate faster than anybody. Like most of the old Orioles, he was trained to do things when they counted most--he was, in brief, a money player.

At the Polo Grounds once I saw Delahanty, then directing the playing of the Phillies, order a dangerous batter passed (it may have been George Van Haltren or Mike Tiernan) and a run forced in. There was only one out in the ninth, the bases, of course, were filled: and the Phillies were ahead by a tally or two. The next man hit into a double play, and that is what Delahanty had in mind when he ordered the batter passed.

It wasn't orthodox as the game usually is played. These days you would hear more about how suicidal it would be to put the winning run on such and such a base, but in this particular instance a hit by the weaker batter wouldn't have been much more damaging than one by the passed batter. In any event, Delahanty was more than a slugger. He knew the game, he was bold and independent, and he was one of its very greatest batters.

Fred Clarke was an aggressive fighter, a brilliant fielder, a successful and capable manager and always a first class batter, real fast to first base. His gait was peculiar. He swing his arms in front of him when running. Like Cobb, he asserted to the full his right of way on the base paths.

Bill Lange covered as much ground as Speaker and was a sure catch and fine thrower. As a base runner only Cobb excelled him. He was an adept at getting a start on the pitcher. He wouldn't steal as many bases now. But the game, with the lively ball, is played differently, but even now he'd shine as a base runner. Six footer though he was, he was one of the cleverest slides in the game.

Ruth, Speaker and Cobb, first magnitude stars, are players with whose accomplishments the baseball world is familiar. I remember when opinion was divided as to whether Wagner or Lajoie was the greatest ball player of all time. Then Cobb happened along, and he held that position in popular opinion. Then Ruth.

Ruth is great because he is the most sensational batter of all time, the hardest hitter. the Babe is spectacular in everything, an operative of more than ordinary ability outside of his bating, a hustler and fighter and astute player, full of magnetism, the most sensational player of all time and the biggest card. He draw $52,000 a year, half of which according to his contract, can be withheld if he doesn't behave himself: and he is worth all of the $52,000.

Mike Kelly, unique sui generis, was an outfielder and catcher. Not only was he fist class in the physical requirements of he game but he was tricky, keen, full of pranks and personality, a tremendous favorite and with a bigger following than any player before or since except Ruth.

Kelly was versatile but not as much so as Charlie Ferguson, who did his ball playing in Philadelphia. Ferguson belongs in the "twenty-five" because he was the game's best all around player. There have been men who could look after as many positions, but none who could play them all so well. Ferguson was a good (garbled) regular of any ball club of the present; he was a good second baseman, not just a fill-er-in, but good: he could play the outfield well enough to make the absence of the regular no handicap, and he was a first class batter. There hasn't been an all around man since his day to equal him.

Eddie Collins is the best second baseman: Jimmy Collins, I think, was still greater as a third baseman. There has been but one Jimmy Collins--graceful, fast, easy, deft: a first class hitter, sure and quick fielder to the right or left, a thrower whose work stood out even in a position where fine throwers have been numerous, as witness Harry Steinfelft, Heinie Zimmerman, Harry Lord, Billy Nash, Jim Davis, Milt Whitehead, Pie Traynor, Bill Coughlin, Jimmy Dykes, Rube Lutzke, Larry Gardner and Joe Dugan.

Collins, McGraw and Dugan excelled at coming in fast and playing a bunt with one hand. Collins had other qualities of greatness. He was an earnest, determined and uphill fighter who knew how to put morale into his men, a clean, hard fighter. McGraw, the game's most successful manager, has had a non-playing career which, perhaps, obscures the exceptional ability has has as a player.

McGraw wasn't as stylish a fielder as some third basemen, but nevertheless he had good form. He was a winning element on the field, as well as on the bench. No nimbler or more far-seeing brain ever went on the field. He was a smart base runner, and with him batting was a science. As a batter he was in the .300 class, and for his inches he hit a ball as hard as any player that ever lived. He had the knack of meeting a pitched ball and of following through. He knew the value of the follow through before "follow through" became a shibboleth.

McGraw was an originator and knew all the fine points there were to know. He was as expert at tagging a runner and at playing a ball with one hand and saving time by getting it away with an underhand throw. Sisler and Frisch are natural born great players. They are all class. Their work speaks for itself.

Hans Wagner, with his long arms and big hands which could scoop up a ground ball other men couldn't reach without bending twice as far, was another of those players unique in their way. There's been no duplicate. Massive, fast, agile as an ape and of heroic mould, there's been no other like him. In his day he was on the pinnacle of greatness, and he was there a long time. The length of his service helped to prove his place.

No other player could have made a play he made against the Giants once in Pittsburgh, no other not built like him. With a man on first, he came up with a grounder and started to throw to second for a forceout. Then he saw he couldn't get the man at second, so with no apparent (garbled).

Buck Ewing, more than any other catcher, combined the four cardinal qualities of physical greatness as a backstop. He was A1 as a batter, fielder, base runner and in head work. If you'll think over the other catchers you will find few, if any, who had all of these virtues. Roger Breshanan came nearest, or Wally Schang, or Wilbert Robinson. They were faster afoot than most catchers. A number of receivers could hit and catch and throw as well as Ewing, possibly.

Bennett was great as a backstop. So were Johnny Kling, Lou Criger, Martin Bergen, Jimmy Archer, Billy Sullivan and Bill Killefer, and Doc Bushong. So are Schalk, O'Neill, Severeid, Bassler and O'Farrell, the last named one of the best of the day for all around excellence. None has made the intaglio-like impress of Ewing.

We have four pitchers on our list: Mathewson, Radbourne, Johnson and Young. All proved their sterling quality by long service. That isn't all. Not alone in pitching skill were they great. They were a credit to the game as men. Their long reigns and their long strings of victories, proof enough of their ability to pitch, and too prominently identified with the national game's history for any of them to be denied a place among the greatest twenty-five.

Thus we find engraved on the scroll the names of three first basemen, Anson, Comiskey, Sisler; four second basemen, Lajoie, Frisch, Collins and Hornsby; one shortstop, Wagner; two third basemen, Collins and McGraw; eight outfielders, Clarke, Cobb, Delahanty, Keeler, Lange, Ruth, Speaker and Welch; four pitchers, Mathewson, Johnson, Radbourne and Young; two catchers, Ewing and Kelly; one all around man, chiefly a pitcher, Ferguson. eight of the twenty-five are still active players in the game.
(Baseball Magazine, June, 1924, pp. 300, 301)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Author's Note on William Blythe Hanna):

As a sports writer, he was much admired for his beautiful vocabulary, and beautiful writing style. Wrote sports for 46 yrs., 1884-1930.

William Blythe Hanna
Born: June, 1866, Plattsmouth, Cass County, Nebraska
Died: November 20, 1930, Newfoundland, NJ, age, 64

Graduated: Lafayette College, Easton, PA (1878);

Kansas City Star (MO), sports writer, 1884-1888;
Arrived NYC (1888), NY Herald, NY Press (1893), NY Sun (1900-1916), NY Herald (1916-1924), Herald-Tribune (1924 - May,1930, death);

Acknowledged expert on baseball, football & billiards.

Father: Thomas King Hanna (born Kentucky about 1829), Dry goods store;
Mother: Judith Joyce Venable, born Indiana about 1836;
Bill was born in Nebraska, but family had relocated to Kansas City, MO by 1870. Was 6th child.

[GaryL]

Thanks Bill for another great article!

"The most brilliant first baseman the game ever had is not in my list, but certain occurrences in his big league career which preclude the possibility of listing him among the great are too well known to be mentioned here."

Who do you think he was referring to here? Hal Chase?

By the way, I really enjoyed that interview with Chick Gandil talking about the Black Sox Scandal of 1919. What a great article! I thought the whole article had a ring of truth to it, as he freely admitted his guilt, and said he deserved what he got, etc. So when he says that by the time the games were played, they had all basically "chickened out" of actually throwing the games, and were really playing to win, I tend to believe him. What do you think?
Best,
Gary

Thanks, Gary. There is no doubt he was referring to Hal Chase. I have no idea how much truth there was in Chick Gandil's account. He had Arnold Rothstein actively in the hotel! I just have no clue. But I showed it because it was so intriguingly provocative.

I have a few more which will be posted today and tomorrow. Stay tuned.

Bill

[Bill Burgess]

--------------------What the Baseball Records Mean to the Player
The Public Rates a Ball Player Upon His Batting Average and Upon Brilliant Fielding Player, Both are Inaccurate and Deceptive, The Players Realize This and are Inclined to Protest, but Few of Them Can Suggest Improvements

-------------------------From an Interview with William Kamm----------------------
-------------------------(Baseball Magazine, February, 1928, pp. 387, 388)

"The breaks decide" is a common saying among ball players, and that is true very often of a game or even a series. No doubt pennants have been won in a close race by the breaks, the element of luck that no one can forsee or prevent. Certainly the breaks are of the utmost importance in winning or losing ball games. But when you come to discuss a player's reputation, his general standing with the writers and the public, I would say that the dope decides. After all, it is the dope which separates good players from those who are just fair, and in particular, the dope decides who shall be known as baseball's stars.

Why is Ty Cobb called the greatest player who ever lived? There are a number of answers. His grand batting average is better than that of any other player. He hit over .300 for twenty-two years, a record. He made over four thousand hits. These and similar items of statistics come readily to any fan who is discussing the game's best. But such figures are plain dope. Was Cobb a better hitter than Joe Jackson? He himself has admitted that Rogers Hornsby was the greatest hitter he ever saw. Was Cobb a better player, say than Tris Speaker? What is the foundation of Cobb's great reputation? It's the dope.

I'm not offering any criticism of dope. I understand too well the value of dope to the ball player. It's really his stock in trade, the gauge of his ability. The public has eyes for the .300 hitter when it will virtually ignore the .290 hitter. Certain artificial standards have grown up in baseball. They are all drawn from the accepted dope. They have a value, but after all, rating players on the dope is a good deal like measuring brains by the circumference of a man's skull. Dope is an indication, but it's not necessarily proof.

The particular averages that baseball players prize the most are batting averages. When the weekly figures come out during the season, you'll find most of the players in the hotel lobby scanning the column to see what they're hitting. And literally millions of other people are scanning those columns. I doubt if there is any one thing printed in the papers during the summer time that attracts such widespread attention as the batting averages of Big League ball players.

But just what do the batting averages tell the reader? Something, to be sure, but how much? Batting averages are not only the most popular of baseball statistics, but I believe they're the most accurate. And still they're only half accurate, at best. To a considerable extent they are the sport of circumstance. They give a crude idea of a player's ability with the stick at the precise moment when they are issued. But they are, for all that, colored by other considerations than batting eye or timeliness of swing.

Take the one factor of ball parks, for instance. In some ball parks a right field hitter would get most of the breaks. Such parks might not help a left field hitter a particle. They might even be a handicap to a straightaway hitter. But the batting average don't say anything about that. Not that the situation isn't pretty well understood by the baseball public. They know that the shape and size of the ball park has a considerable influence on the batting of certain ball players. They also know that other players far from being helped, are handicapped by the same conditions. But who will undertake to say how many batting points a particular park will add to one player's average or subtract from another player's average?

The condition of the infields in various parks is also a factor to be reckoned with. Some infields are as hard as a brick. The ball is much more apt to break through the inner defense at such parks than at certain other parks. A hard line hitter is a good deal more apt to come through with a single on certain fields than he is on other fields, simply because the nature of the infield is suited to his particular style of batting. Such an infield might be a positive detriment to the fleet runner who beats out infield hits. Such an infield would not help the fellow whose average drive is a long belt to the outfield. But what expert goes through the records with a fine toothed comb and decides how many points he should allow on some batter's average for a particularly favorable infield?

Even the climate has some influence on batting. At Salt Lake City slugging records, due to the altitude, the light air and a variety of other factors, became something of a joke. At Chicago where I have played for several years, the strong lake wind which blows usually from one direction, is a thing to be treated with respect by a lot of hitters. Veteran players have told me that their averages suffered thirty points or more because of this peculiar condition at Chicago.

A batter's position in the line-up colors his average considerably. Everyone knows that the lead-off man suffers somewhat from his position. He can't always hit, because he is expected to wait the pitcher out. The second man in the line-up is also handicapped. He is supposed to sacrifice. Hazen Cuyler complained, I understand, because he was called upon to bat in the two-hole. There is no doubt that batting in that position would cut down the average player's mark a number of points. But just what credit do the league statistics give the fellow who led off the batting list or hit in the two-hole?

Batting averages are open to even graver criticism than any I have hinted at. For one thing, they fail to take into consideration the length of a hit. I am aware that a player gets a certain credit for total bases. Of late years there has also been a disposition to figure out a slugging average which would rate players according to the force, as well as the frequency of their hits. But the time honored old system of dividing number of hits by times at bat is still the prevailing one.

It is this system which determines the .300 hitter. But what, after all, does that tell you about a batter's ability? If he made twenty homers and forty-five two-baggers, how would you contrast him with a fellow who, say, made two homers and eighteen two-baggers? It would not take the opposing pitcher long to size up those two batters, even though they both hit for exactly the same average. Nor would it cause the rival managers much study to decide which of the two was the better hitter. But records are silent on that point.

Babe Ruth, this year, hit around .350. [.356]That is a good average. But there were a number of other fellows who hit around .350. [5 hit above Ruth in AL that yr. 1. Heilmann, .398, Simmons, .392, Gehrig, .373, Fothergill, .359, Cobb, .357] There were several who hit far above that figure. Were they better hitters than Babe Ruth? You would get a laugh anywhere if you claimed any such absurdity. But the batting averages do that very thing and get away with it.

And here again any attempt to rate slugging averages, though a step in the right direction, would bring you face to face with fresh difficulties. Certain ball parks unquestionably favor the sluggers. Where would justice draw the line between a pop fly that just floated over the fence, beyond the reach of the waiting outfielder, and a solid smash that would be good for four sacks on an open field?

Personally I have always felt that a base on balls should be recognized in batting averages. It is now, but in a purely negative way. A player gets a certain amount of credit for the number of passes given him during a season. But these passes do not help to fatten his batting average any. They should, in simple justice, for a batter is passed usually either because the pitcher fears him, is which case he has won his transportation to first, by his acknowledged batting ability, or else he is crafty enough and has a keen enough batting eye to wait the pitcher out, in which case he has certainly earned his base.

Firmly as I am convinced, however, that passes should figure in a batting average, I would be at a loss to explain how. They are not hits. Are they half as valuable as hits? Just what value would you assign to a base on balls? Who know? I'm sure I don't.

There is another conspicuous weakness in batting averages. The batter who advances the runner get no particular credit, unless he drives that runner home. Even there that credit does not affect his own batting average any. A certain negative credit is given him for a sacrifice, but a sacrifice does not help a batter's average. It merely doesn't work against that average.

A batter may be retired himself, but at the same time advance one or two runners, perhaps drive home a winning run. You'd never know this from looking at his average. Take a good hit and run player. Even when such a player fails to come through, he will generally advance the runner or runners, though he is thrown out himself. He batting was really important, in some cases decisively so, but he gets no credit. Is this fair to him?

Give me the names of two players I never saw before. Tell me that one fellow hit .310 and the other .290. Ask me which is the better hitter and I would say, "I don't know." Aren't the records there? Surely .310 is better than .290. Is it? Who knows? The .290 hitter might be, for all practical purposes, far the better hitter of the two. Everybody who ever saw a ball game knows that. And yet the dope decides. The .310 hitter would outrank the .290 man with nine-nine out of one hundred.

Whatever you can say against batting averages, and you can say plenty, goes double when you discuss fielding averages. Fielding averages are so notoriously unfair that few people pay any attention to them at all. Ball players, among themselves, never even discuss fielding averages. Why should they? They unusually mean nothing, because if you follow them literally, you are pretty sure to go astray in your estimates.

The system of rating fielding averages, as everyone knows, is to divide the chances accepted by the total chances offered. The errors that a player makes are the black marks against his record which bring down his average. Take third Base, for example. That is my position and I know more about third base than any other position on the field. Pick out of a hat the names of two Minor Leaguers that I never heard of. Tell me both are third baseman, that one of them fielded .960 and the other .930. Ask me to pass judgment upon their respective class As a fielders. Could I do it? Could anyone else do it? It is perfectly possible in any league for a second baseman, say, to field 1.000 and be fired for incompetence. If he stands in his tracks, handles only easy chances and keeps his mind on his record, he may go on from day to day, as long as the manager tolerates his presence in the line-up, without ever making an error.

There are not a few outfielders every year who have a fielding average of 1.000. That is, they have accomplished their work without an error. Are they the best outfielders in the game? You can give odds of one hundred to one that they are not. The best outfielders in the game never have a perfect fielding average. Very often you will find their names rather well down toward the bottom of the list.

The system of reckoning fielding averages is so unjust that a number of other systems have been suggested. The number of chances accepted is perhaps a better gauge of a player's ability than the present fielding average. But even that is open to grave criticism. The underlying theory seems plausible enough. A hustling player who covers a lot of ground will handle more chances, other things being equal, than a fellow who doesn't. But how can you be certain that other things are equal?

The type of pitching makes a profound difference to a fielder's chances. When Thurston wore a White Sox uniform and toed the slab for us, I might get seven or eight chances in a single game. Thurston depended very largely upon the screw ball and the batters naturally pounded that towards third. When Al Thomas is on the slab with his fast ball, I'm lucky to get one or two chances in a game. Batters connecting with the fast ball generally drive it to the outfield or through the box. They seldom pull it to third base.

Over a period of years it might very well follow that a fielder's ability could be determined roughly by the number of chances he handled. But there would be grave inequalities along the line and the final summing up would be far from exact.

I have even heard it suggested that a fielder should be rated on the number of difficult or brilliant plays he makes. I think the crowd is inclined to rate him that way. They see a fellow pull a phenomenal play one day and perhaps toward the end of the week they see him pull another. They are convinced that he is a great fielder. They talk about him and the impression gains ground that he is an uncommon fielder. But such plays, however they may thrill the spectators, are very misleading. More often than not a difficult play was really the result of bad judgment. The fielder either neglected to play the batter properly or he misjudged the ball.

The underlying principle is much the same as in championship billiard matches. A great billiard player will run off a long string of easy shots with monotonous regularity. Once in a while he'll make a difficult shot. But even a mediocre player can do that, once in a while. What the great player did was to assure himself a lot of easy shots, because he played the game as it should be played.

A great fielder will generally do the same. He may not have a particularly difficult chance to handle throughout a whole series. Some other player of far less ability, covering the same position, may have three or four difficult plays. And yet his work may be ragged and inefficient in contrast with the player who knew his job, who played his batters properly and who by his superior generalship, avoided the necessity of risking difficult plays.

Personally, I would say, without hesitation, that an indifferent fielder would make more brilliant plays in a season, that looked good to the stands, than a capable fielder.

Besides, there are certain tricks in the trade which wise fielders understand. Baseball has become an acknowledged show business. The player must advance himself and he often does by playing to the galleries. When he knows he has a play well in hand, he may start a little late, take a spurt at the finish and make an easy play really look hard. A certain amount of speed and flashy effort will make one player look like a million dollars in contrast with another fielder as good, who does his work in a more methodical, less spectacular way.

Sometime ago was discussing averages with a man of long experience. He gave his advice with a good deal of conviction. "Let the manager decide," was his vote. "The manager knows his own players better than anyone else. He knows which are the valuable players, what fellows are underrated and those who are inclined to be overrated. His judgment should rule."

There's no fault with his logic, so far as it goes. But I'm afraid in practice such a system would not go very far. In the first place the manager is handicapped at the outset. He can't really tell all he knows. It wouldn't be fair to his men, if he did so. Besides, managers are human. They can make mistakes. Some of the greatest players who ever lived have been passed up by wise managers. No doubt managers aim to be fair, but they can't wholly get away from preferences and bias any more than other people. Managers occasionally get down on a player. Besides, managers see the faults in their own men a little too clearly and are inclined to magnify the good points of players on other clubs that they do not know so well. It's the old case of distant pastures looking the greenest. Many a manager has traded a player because he has certain faults for a player on another club who had far more serious faults that he knew nothing about.

What can be done for fielding averages? I have no definite suggestions to offer. But I imagine that an improved system, if there ever is any such system, will be a combination of several things. It isn't just to rate a fellow on the errors he makes. It isn't just to rate him wholly upon the number of chances he accepts. But if you tell me that an unknown third baseman in a league that I never saw had fewer errors than any of his fellow third basemen, and at the same time handled more chances, I'd say, without knowing any more about him, that he was a good fielder.
(Baseball Magazine, February, 1928, pp. 387, 388)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Author's Note on Willie Kamm.

Born: February 2, 1900, San Francisco, CA
Died: December 21, 1988, Belmont, CA

5'10 1/2", 170 lbs. B/R, /T/R

AL 3B:
White Sox, 1923 to May, 1931
Indians, 1931 1935.

Willie Kamm's Baseball Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/k/kammwi01.shtml)

Hit .308 in 1928. Known as sharp glove. career BA .281. 1,692 games, 1,643 hits, 347 doubles, 85 triples, 29 HRs, 802 Runs, 826 RBIs, 126 SB, single until 1955, died of Parkinson's disease.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GaryL expresses his appreciation.

Thanks Bill

I thought it was a great article and really enjoyed it! Sounds like he was a pretty intelligent guy. I remember reading a chapter about him in the wonderful book The Glory of Their Times. I tend to agree with his overall thrust - that batting average and fielding percentage are overrated as an indicator of a player's ability. I'm sure he would have been pleased, as I am, with the OBP as a better gauge of a player's offensive contribution, where walks are positively rewarded.

I wouldn't make too much about that line about 1.000 fielding percentages. I think he was just referrring to the fact that there are always a few guys who don't make many errors during the season but it's common knoweldge that they really aren't very good fielders. I think he just exaggerated a bit for effect. These guys don't have much range and don't get to many balls. For years here in Chicago that was the rap on Ryne Sandberg - high fielding percentage, but not a lot of range, especially in his later years, so he wasn't as good as the stats might indicate. That was one of the things Joe Morgan used to criticize him about, plus the fact that he hardly ever dove for balls.

Thanks again - and keep the great articles comming!
Best,
Gary

[Bill Burgess]

Ed Cicotte: I Did Wrong, but I Paid for It"


In February, 1966, Joe Falls of the Detroit Free Press, traveled to visit Ed Cicotte, at his home, outside Detroit. Mr. Cicotte was 81 at the time.

Greeting him at the door, "Mr. Cicotte? I said hesitantly. "Yes," he said. "I'm Joe Falls of the Free Press." "Oh, yes," he said brightly. "won't you come in?" He gripped my hand . . . gripped it like a vise . . .and in that precise instant I relaxed.

He was dressed in a plaid shirt, blue denims, and tan shoes. His hair was white, and his eyes seemed to twinkle behind his spectacles.

He introduced me to his daughter and to his granddaughter--a redheaded doll of three--and for five minutes we chatted about nothing. I asked him about the Tigers and yes, he said he still followed the game, although he didn't think much "of this rubber ball they're playing with nowadays."

We talked about Babe Ruth. He told me how the Babe never hit a home run off him.

Finally, I said: "Ed, does anyone ever come around and ask about the Black Sox thing?"

He smiled. "Yes, they come around," he said. "From time to time they come around."

"What do you tell them?"

He sat forward on the edge of his chair. The smile was gone. He looked straight at me.

"I admit I did wrong, but I've paid for it," he said in a soft, even voice. "I've paid for it for the past 46 years.

"Sure, they asked me about being a crooked ballplayer. But I've become calloused to it. I figure if I was crooked in baseball, they were crooked in something else.

"I don't know of anyone who ever went through life without making a mistake. Everybody who has ever lived has committed sins of his own.

I've tried to make up for it by living as clean a life as I could. I'm proud of the way I've lived, and I think my family is, too.

"That's all I think about, my family. I think they're proud of me--I know they are. I know they look up to me. And my friends, they feel the same way . . ."

His daughter came into the room with a small bronzed trophy and handed it to him.

"Here," he said, "look at this. The Old-Timers' association gave it to me."

It was a plain trophy, showing a batter and catcher. The inscription read: "To Ed Cicotte. Old-Time Baseball Players' Association."

Those were the only words. It didn't say what the trophy meant, what it stood for. It didn't have to.

"They've invited me to every gathering," said Cicotte.

Cicotte spends these twilight years raising strawberries on the five-and-a-half-acre farm behind his house. He's not as active as he used to be, but he still runs his tractor the year round, tilling the soil in summer and clearing his neighbors" driveways in the winter.

He spends much of his spare time answering letters from youngsters all over the country.

"I still get two or three letters a week," he said, his face lighting up in delight. "I answer every one of them--every one."

"Do they ask you about the Black Sox?"

Some of them do," he said.
"What do you tell them?"
"I tell them I made a mistake, and I'm sorry for it. I try to tell them not to let anyone push them the wrong way."
He is proudest of the letter he got from a lad in Germany. "All he wanted was my autograph," he said. "Imagine that, all the way from Germany."
The hour was growing late, and Ed Cicotte was on his feet again calling for his daughter.
"Virginia, give Mr. Falls some strawberries for his youngsters. He's got five kids, and they like strawberries."

We shook hands again as we reached the door.
"Listen, now," he said, "if you need more strawberries or more news, you know where to come. This door is always open."
As I went down the steps, I waved good-bye to the man in the plaid shirt, the blue denim pants, and the tan shoes, but what I noticed for the first time were his socks.
They were white.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Randy expresses his appreciation:

Wow. Thanks for the glimpse Bill. God, I can't get enough of stuff like that. Everyone makes mistakes, maybe even one or two really big ones in their life, and it just so happens that some of those guys made theirs on the largest stage possible. I love how "human" players back then were.

[Bill Burgess]

Introducing John B. Foster

Born: July 16, 1863, Norwalk, OH
Died: September 29, 1941, Washington, DC, age 78

Sports writer, (Cleveland, 1887 - 1896), (New York, 1896 - 1941)
Credited with promoting Army Navy game at the Polo Grounds into national interest.

Years on BB's rules committee. Considered an authority on BB law, rules, admin. Credited with answering 500,000 questions on BB rules, laws, and various phases of BB. Wrote digest of rules for the French. Was named official authority for rules for Japan.

In 1910, he was suggested as President of the National League. Mentioned frequently between 1910 - '19, for that position.

Official scorer at Polo Grounds almost all his career. Couldn't attend games after 1932, due to right side paralyzed. Followed BB via radio, newspapers.

NY Giants' Secretary & business manager (Jan. 6, 1913 - Dec. 4, 1919);

When Henry Chadwick died in 1908, John succeeded him as Editor-in-Chief of Spalding Official NL Base Ball Guide (1908-1941) and held it until he died.

Foster was a close second to his dear friend Frances Richter in the baseball accomplishments he was able to achieve in a long BB lifetime. Like Richter, a must for Spink Award.

Mr. Foster was one of the most able, responsible, and competent administrators/executives baseball ever produced. Along with his close friend, colleague and ally, Francis C. Richter in Philadelphia, whatever they touched turned to order & harmony. They were constantly sought after for a myriad number of authoritative positions. Their opinions on all things baseball were the most highly respected, august & authoritative. Almost revered.

Mr. Foster was often asked his all time all star team. He always declined, until in 1938, he finally relented and chose his A & B teams. He published them in his NL Spalding Official Base Ball Guide, pp. 14. I'd like to share them with you, including his notes.

---------------------------A Nine for All Time-------------

---------------------------Selected by JOHN B. FOSTER
---------------------------Fifty Years as an Observer

---------------------------All-Time Nine.-------------Substitutes.--------------------
Catcher----------WILLIAM B. EWING------------------Roger P. Bresnahan
First Baseman----HENRY LOU GEHRIG------------------Fred Tenney
Second Baseman-NAPOLEON LAJOIE-------------------Edward T. Collins
Shortstop--------JOHN (HANS) WAGNER--------------Herman Long
Left Fielder-------George H. (Babe) Ruth--------------Fred C. Clarke
Center Fielder----TRISTRAM SPEAKER-----------------H. Earl Averill
Right Fielder------TYRUS R. COBB--------------------Willie Keeler
Pitcher-----------DENTON T. YOUNG-----------------Christy Mathewson

I have been asked many times to name what I thought was the best nine to be composed from all the ball players that I ever saw. Even that is not exactly correct, because I saw many a player before I began to write about them. That was in 1887. So I have fifty years to form my judgment, and it is no easy matter to concentrate on the individuals.

My opinion is based on the first team which I saw as a writer, the Detroit National League team of 1887, which made its boast that "the pitchers didn't count; they would bat their way to victory, pitcher or no pitcher." They not only boasted that they could defeat any pitcher who crossed their path, but they did--not once, but many times, and often when their own pitchers were batted quite hard enough to be beaten by what might be called just average support.

The first game that I saw was one between the Chicagos and the Athletics; that is, the first organized game. That was in the initial year of the National League. My father had taken me to the Centennial at Philadelphia. My recollection of the event is dim. I went there to see my heroes--Al Spalding and Ross Barnes--but I became quite impressed by McVey, who played first base.

I saw several games after that, mostly at Cleveland, before I began as a base ball writer. The town where I was born, Norwalk, Ohio, was a faithful and staunch supporter of Cleveland. Some of my base ball was imbibed from George W. Howe of Cleveland, who, up to the time of his death (October 13, 1901) was one of the most widely informed men on our national game. He it was who showed me what the finer things were that make base ball such an interesting and instructive outdoor sport. He was one of the first men to recognize the ability of Denton T. Young, and he actually turned snow white when it was rumored that Frank DeH. Robison had sold the pitcher's release, for what was then a fabulous sum, to Adrian C. Anson of Chicago, on the day Young pitched his first game in Cleveland. The offer was made--a great amount for a young and untried pitcher for those days, but Robison kidded Anson along with no real intent to sell the great pitcher's release: in fact, the higher that Anson increased his offer, the more determined Robison was that Young could not be had at any price, because he looked better at every fresh offer.

In making this selection I freely admit that another nine might be chosen that would make almost as good a showing if it were possible to face the one which I name. I am picking these nine men because of their experience, their base ball ability--not so much another requisite, for there are plenty who could qualify in respect to smartness -- their speed, for there is but one in the lot who is the least bit slow, and their adaptability to any situation that might arise during a game.

--------------------------WILLIAM BUCKINGHAM EWING-------------------------------------

The first to be picked, and the first who should be selected in this stretch of fifty years, is William Buckingham Ewing, better known as "Buck." He is to be the catcher. He has been called the greatest all round player ever connected with the game. I think that he was. He pitched, played every position on the infield and played the outfield. He did not play at them put played them. I was ready to laugh at his efforts when he essayed to pitch, but he quickly cured me of the inclination. Although he did not have the finesse of Tim Keefe, the great pitcher who was his contemporary, he showed that he had the art, was thoroughly conversant with the batter's weakness, and was doing his level best to pitch to it. The great speed of Keefe, the curves of Mickey Welsh and the cannonball service of ponderous Ed Crane were missing in Ewing, yet he had an effective style of his own and the batter was not slow in ascertaining it. He was a good adviser to his brother "Long John."

As a thrower to bases Ewing never had a superior, and there are not to exceed ten men who could come anywhere near being equal to him. Ewing was the man of whom it was said, "He handed the ball to the second baseman from the batter's box." George W. Howe, treasurer of the Cleveland club, once asked the manager of the team, Oliver Tebeau, why the runners of Cleveland, who were very good, did not steal bases more often when they played against New York. "Because they're out before they start," was the quick reply. "That man behind the bat for New York can't be fooled. He knows when a runner is going to start practically as soon as the runner decides to make the attempt, and he shoots the ball down to Richardson, who catches the best man we've got. He stands up and waits for him to come, and makes our runners look foolish."

What was said by Tebeau voiced the sentiment of every other captain in the league. Even the famed Mike Kelly used to study Ewing for minutes at a time, trying to find out how he managed to get the ball to second so smoothly and quickly.

--------------------------------HENRY LOUIS GEHRIG--------------------------------------

Henry Lou Gehrig for first base.

Almost fifty years in the life of the same city and a first baseman blooms who is just a little better than Roger Connor, who was first baseman when Ewing was catcher. Connor was the "big Man" physically on the old Giants. Gehrig is the big man physically of the modern Yankees.

Since he first began to play regularly for his present team Gehrig has not missed a game. For more than 1,900 consecutive games he has been the first baseman of the New York club of the American League. That is far in excess of any first baseman of any club, and far in excess of any player in any capacity in base ball.

No, he did not start out to make a record. It grew up with him. He never thought much about the record until he was a participant in nearly as many games as the man who formerly held it. Then he was suddenly fired with an ambition--to break the other man's record, if possible. He did break it and then went on to make his own. Occasionally a twinge about he shoulder bothered him, but it couldn't deter this man of iron, and at the close of the past season his string remained unbroken at 1,965 consecutive league games.

Gehrig is a left-handed first baseman. Before he was born the left-handed man had been given certain principal parts in base ball, but this specialty had not been extended to include first basemen. He could do this and do that better than his right-handed neighbor, but it had not yet been learned that he could make a double play better, and could handle the ball better, too.

Gehrig does a thing over and over and never varies it. Isn't there a good reason? He does it so nearly perfect the first time that there is no cause to vary it. The only way to vary perfection is do a thing worse, and Gehrig has schooled himself not to be an worse.

He has led his league in batting and has come close to doing so on several other occasions. The first year that he hit over .300 for the season a newspaperman tried to compliment him on his skill, but while he was getting ready to make a flowery speech Gehrig escaped through a side door into a hotel. When cornered later Gehrig said: "Wait about four or five years until I do something: maybe you won't speak to me then."

----------------------------------NAPOLEON LAJOIE-----------------------------------

There comes the selection of a second baseman. Nap Lajoie, of course.

Why "of course"? Because he is Lajoie.

Everything that a ball player can do, or is supposed to do, came easy to Lajoie. He could run, catch a ball, throw it, scoop it up off the ground or stop it with ease as it came hurtling through the air like a projectile shot from a gun.

Perched upon a fence watching a game one afternoon he said to another sittee: "Look at those fellows out there; they call that work and get paid for it. Why it's nothing but play. I am going to quit cab driving and go and get a piece of that before it gets away." He did.

He had not been playing two weeks in professional base ball before his skill astounded the critics. Colonel Rogers of the Philadelphia Nationals was the most elated owner in the business until Lajoie jumped his club for one that was more congenial in a rival league. Lajoie was too good not to be desired by a club of the opposing organization, so for a while he was sort of a homeless player, for he dared not, on account of a court decision, play for the club that first got him.

Lajoie's play seemed so effortless that many folks thought he was without ambition. But, was he? Certainly not! It was simply his manner of doing things. The hardest hit ball was caught by him in the easiest way and was perfectly natural. The longest fly was snagged after the longest run and pulled down in a half lazy fashion that had the spectator enraged at his seeming tardiness until he saw that Lajoie always did it that same way. Even at bat he seemed to strike at the ball in a powerless sort of manner, but better let the man who tried tao handle it say whether it came to him without speed.

He played positions other than second base. He could fit in at first base very nicely, but he isn't wanted to play first--not on this nine. It is safe to say that, had he played second base as well with an effort as he did play it, he would have been crowned king of the second basemen long ago. It was no effort for him to play ball: he was apparently playing just because he wanted to. Yet, seemingly loafing and just getting close to the ball, he never let the ball elude him. If it did get away from Lajoie it was so far away that only a superman could have gotten it, and there were just two supermen of the times who illumined the diamond--one was Lajoie, the other was Wagner.

---------------------------JOHN HENRY WAGNER-------------

And the other of this brilliant pair we will choose for shortstop of our very best nine: Hans Wagner!

Practically unanimous this selection is. Go the whole country through and you will find a loud, deep and prolonged "yes" for Wagner as the most popular choice for best shortstop in the history of base ball.

It makes no difference how awkward, how ungraceful, how clumsy he may have seemed on the diamond. He could reach any hit that any other shortstop could, and many more that others could not touch. He had arms of tremendous length and hands that were fashioned with long, prehensile fingers that could be hooked around anything as if caught in a snare from which there was no escape. Wagner's arms and hands were the wonder of observing players.

Wagner could throw from any position at any angle, underhand or overhand, jerk the ball or toss it forward like a boy throwing it any way to get it away, and fast, too. In a pinch he had been seen to toss it backward over his head, so determined was he to get the runner.

Harry Pulliam, once president of the National League, was prouder of the fact that he dug Wagner up for the Louisville club, of which he was then the secretary, and Louisville a member of the older organization in base ball, than price that would have to be paid today for a player of like caliber. There can be no true estimate of what he was worth. Nearly all of the great players broke into base ball for ridiculously small sums. They made good with the club that got them, and once placed nothing could separate them from their first alliance.

Just for a guess, if Wagner's potentialities as a ball player had been known when he was purchased by Louisville, $250,000 could not have bought his release two months after that time. He would practically have been unobtainable. Barney Dreyfuss was not in base ball to make money that way. He wanted players and would not sell them when they added strength to his team and attracted more patrons to the park.

Year after year Wagner led the National League as a batter. He could hit a low ball, and when the pitchers observed that they pitched them to him high. Wagner hit them out just the same. When the pitcher tried to give him a base on balls Wagner let out three or four more links and hit the ball out of the diamond. The only thing to do was to prepare all the fielders and trust to luck.

-----------------------------James J. Collins--------------------------------------------

James Collins, pretty much of Boston, although Louisville claims a share of developing him, is named for the third base position.

There have been many good third baseman, too. Ned Williamson was good; Jerry Denny was good, and in one accomplishment could not be excelled--he fielded equally as well with his right hand as he did with both of his hands; Bill Bradley was good; Arthur Devlin was good; Joe Dugan was good, much could be named who proved to be expert enough to be rated very high among the third basemen who have been identified with the game. There is a something which stamps a man as a good third baseman almost from the start of his career.

Collins was not good to begin with; not in the eyes of the Boston triumvirs. How they used to be scolded! When they set out to give Boston a championship team, though, they managed to get there.Frank Selee, their manager, did not agree with the triumvirs. It was neither the first time, not the last. He told them they were letting a very good man to, and so instead of releasing Collins outright they tied a string to him.

One year at Louisville and no one would have known him. Some one complimented Arthur Soden upon keeping Collins in the Boston club. "We didn't keep him, it was Selle," thus giving credit where it was due. When Collins came back to Boston his fame spread through the National League at the first round-the-circuit trip of the clubs.

It was the custom to bunt more often in those days, and a player who could not bunt well did not play ball acceptably. Few bunts were made so skillfully that Collins could not make a play on the ball. Either the runner would be out at second base or the batter would be retired at first. With a swoop like that of a chicken hawk Collins would gather up the ball and throw it accurately to whoever should receive it. He could pick off the runner at second with the same ease that others would get the batter at first. The beauty about Collins was that he could throw from any angle, any position, on the ground or in the air. The ball went unerringly to the mark he had set for it.

Collins was a model for every young player who was breaking in and he was an example that even the older player tried hard to follow. There was something about his style that immediately suggested a master at his position. The unstudied grace of the professional dancer characterized Collins' every movement while in pursuit of the ball. He could not bend ungracefully if he made an effort to do so. Every movement of the arm or leg was unstudied poetry of motion.

And now the outfield.

What an array to select three men from!

And how quickly they can be named, yet one will have to be sidetracked because another has been longer in service. Willie Keeler is entitled to the honor, but Ty Cobb is selected because of his more years in the national game.

The three who will practically be conceded as most acceptable for the positions are George (Babe) Ruth, left field; Tris Speaker, center field, and Ty Cobb, right field. Ninety-nine out of one hundred of the older base ball fans if asked to make the selection would name these three stars for the places.

----------------------------George Herman Ruth----------------------------------------

Babe Ruth is nominated for left field. It is true that he played right field, but we cannot have both Ruth and Cobb as right fielders on the same team, and as Ruth was much better of the two in ability to shift from one field to another, he is transferred from right to left and becomes the left fielder of this all-time best team.

Ruth could make marvelous catches of fly balls that were as spectacular in their cleverness made by any outfielder playing ball. Especially was this true of those long high flies which, to a slower man, it would have been impossible to get under.

His fielding, however was dwarfed in comparison with his extraordinary batting prowess. He is the acknowledged "home run king" of base ball. No man before him had equaled his record for driving out hits that passed over the barriers of ball grounds, or went to the extreme end of the deepest outfield ground, or a National League ground, has at some time been surmounted by one of Ruth's stupendous hits. He batted left-handed and his ability to hit home runs was due to his rare good eyesight, which enabled him to center the ball. That is all the secret there is to long distance batting aided, of course, by a pair of tremendously powerful shoulders.

Ruth ran fast considering his weight. The latter was not well adjusted to his frame. He was thick and heavy about his shoulders and thin and poorly supported from his thighs down. The lack of proper balance to his legs ended his career as a ball player five years too soon. Perhaps that is an underestimate and he might have played longer.

------------------------------Tristram Speaker------------------------------------------

For center fielder we shall name one whom we think will be the choice of everybody--Tris Speaker. He fits naturally into the picture. There are four or five luminaries who have made lasting impression over the years, but in spite of their cleverness and their ability to get over the ground, which every center fielder must have, be he a brilliant star or a lesser light, Tris Speaker outshines them all. There is Curt Welch, away back. How he could travel over the greensward and what astonishing one-hand catches he could make!

Then there was Dicky Johnson. Remember him? He would run for and do it so smoothly that one forgot all about the distance he was covering and expected naturally enough that he would be under the ball when it came down. Later on there was Hugh Duffy, who almost equaled his batting by his excellent fielding. And then there was another,who could cover more territory than Speaker when it came to going out for the ball--Jimmy McAleer of Cleveland, almost a ten-second man, who made some of the most astounding catches, back over his head,that mortal man ever saw.

Pass them all by the hook on to Speaker. He could not go as far back for the ball as McAleer, perhaps, but he could come in and cover second base when necessary while he was supposed to be playing center field, and that is when the crowd gasped and cheered. Add to his smooth fielding his rugged batting over the long stretch of years that spanned his career and you have the reason why he is such a popular choice among all-time selectors.

-----------------------------Tyrus Raymond Cobb-------------------------------------

For the right fielder of this all-time team there can be no other choice than Ty Cobb. All of us say "no other," but if Willie Keeler had been as much of a record-maker as Cobb was, it might be a closer race between them to patrol right field for this mythical team.

Cobb began to play professionally when quite a youngster and he kept on improving almost to the day that his knees, which play a very importantly part in a ball player's life, began to go back on him. During nearly all of these years he was with the Detroit club, part of the time as manager and captain. He led the American League in batting so many years that it became an old story to the general public, but never so to Cobb. His keenness to win the title always stayed with him.

Cobb's marvelous eyesight made him a great hitter, and, if we may go a step farther, a superhuman batter. He would not strike at a bad pitch unless he desired to for some strategical purpose. He could bat either low or high, and he cared not whether the ball was pitched to him fast or slow. Of course, he had a preference and the pitchers were not slow in finding that out: but it seemed to make little difference in his batting. When he had to make a play on the ball he would connect with it by bunting or slugging, or just by "plain hitting," and the pitcher had to suffer.

He was released by Detroit and played during the last 2 years of his base ball career with Philadelphia in the American League. When Cobb ceased playing he had made more than 4,000 hits. To tie that record a man must begin playing pretty early in life.Take him as he is and there has been no player like him. He is without doubt the right fielder of this team.

---------------------------Denton Tecumseh Young----------------------------------

And now, last of all, we are put to find a pitcher for the team.

There are plenty of candidates, but they quickly narrow down to three. In order of service they are Denton T. Young, a product of the gay nineties, so to speak; Christopher Mathewson, of somewhat more modern date, and Walter Johnson, of about the same era. Modernists, it is true, might declare a pitcher like Hubbell eligible, but after a little time has elapsed and they have passed the stage of modernity, they will see in retrospect that they rather overstepped the ground of rightful authority by their claim.

Young is entitled to the position, or rather should be chosen to it, because he is the record holder in point of service. In company with two others he had been a pitcher, and a normal one, the greatest number of years--twenty-two. He began in the latter part of 1890, with Cleveland, and finished in 1911, with Boston. Unlike most beginners his first game was a "howling success." He struck out Anson, the batting star of his age. He struck him out fairly and squarely. He was not greeted by a tremendous crowd, for that was the season when tremendous crowds were conspicuous by their absence. Yet after, when it was known he was to pitch, a crowd of more than ordinary size was in attendance.

Young pitched 874 games in his lifetime. He is given credit for that number by the official figures from which his record has been compiled. He won 511 games, of which 291 were in the National League and 220 in the American. He leads all pitchers in the number of successive innings pitched without a hit being made against him--twenty-three-equivalent to two full games and over. He pitched one perfect game, not a hit being made off of his delivery and not a player reaching first base, and two more in which not a hit was made against him. Only one other pitcher ever succeeded in holding three clubs hitless, and that was Larry Corcoran of the Chicago's years ago, when Anson was their captain and they were known as the invincible White Stockings.

On July 4, 1905, Young pitched twenty innings for the Boston Red Sox and did not give a base on balls. He struck out 2,836 men in his lifetime and led the two leagues with his combined total, yet he was not known as a strikeout pitcher. These figures are given as part of the reason why Young is picked as against Mathewson or Johnson. They, too, were great pitchers. Against certain clubs they were almost invincible. Young gave of his best all of the time. He worked as hard against the weakest club as against the strongest. He was as lion-hearted as any pitcher who ever stepped into the box to play a game, and he was never appalled by the reputation of the players who were scheduled to face him.

On the first day he appeared in Cleveland to pitch, the mighty Anson, who was with Chicago as the leader, came to bat. Young took a rather close scrutiny of him and then, the first time he had ever faced him as a pitcher, proceeded to strike him out. Anson swung viciously at the ball, too.

He was always the same. Big, tall, straightforward in manner, little to say, he was always ready to take his regular turn in the box. In his later years, because his arm had been called upon so often, his regular turn became as frequent as he felt fit to serve.

Doubtless there are many who will disagree with the writer's selections. Home favorites will have their place with some who think their rating a little better than of someone who had been selected in this group of celebrities. But not an exception may be taken to any one of them on the ground that he cannot bat. Nor will any man be rejected because he is morally unfit to be the associate of honest players. There are no "ifs, ands or buts" about this team of a lifetime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------The End.--------------------------------------------------

[GaryL]

Wow!!! Thanks again, Bill. I can't tell you how much I enjoy these "old-timer" articles and interviews.

In the Cicotte interview, he freely admits his guilt, as did Chick Gandil, although Gandil says they really played the games to win. I also think it's neat that they both seemed to put the incident behind them and went on to lead normal lives.

Interesting that Mr. Foster puts Ruth in left field on his all-time list. I always thought of him as a right fielder. The only name on his list I'm not familiar with is Herman Long. I'll have to check him out in my baseball encyclopedia.

Glad to see that you and some others have as much interest in the "old days" as I do. I realy appreciate the great effort you're making!
Best,
Gary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blackout805 answered this correctly.
Ruth played 1057 games as a left fielder, and 1131 as a right fielder

[janduscframe]

Bill,
Thanks for posting those articles. I also like the average Joe stuff. Not sure if any of you other folks do. Gotta type fast as these old papers stink and I'll di if the wife catches me with them in the house.

7/4/48 Revampted Saints to Face Millers

Tje faces will be the same, with the notable absence of Roy Campanella , but the Saints will present a revamped batting order this afternoon at Lexington Park at 3pm when they resume the series with Minneapolis.

Johnn Douglas who gets his hits but drives in few runs, probably will lead off. Manager Walt Alston said after returning from a successful by usual standards, road trip in which St Paul played .500 ball.

Johnn Jorgenson will be in the lineup at third base and batting fifth. Jorgenson did not have an assist in his last two games against Columbus so the injured throwing arm has yet to meet the test.

Al Brancato who has broken into the .300 batting class will replace ace fielding George Fallon at second base in an attempt to pep up the batting strength lost by Campanella's recall to Brooklyn. Dave Pluss will bat third in place of Earl Naylor.
Toby Atwell the .343 hitting catcher purchased from Fort Worth is scheduled to join the Saints today but will not see action until Monday, if then.
Disaster almost struck theSaints in the final game at Columbus when hard hitting Eric Tipton caught a spike in the dugout and turned his knee. The injury was painful but not disabling and Eric who has driven 67 runs will be at his spot in left field.
Phil Haugstad will draw the pitching assignment this afternoon. Billy Herman, making his first appearance at Lexington as the Miller's manager will call upon Otrie Clark has has won 8 and lost 6.
The July 5th baseball progrm starts at Nicollet Park at 10;30am with Bpob Ross facing Mario Picone. In the aftternoon game at 3 at Lexington field, it will be Lefty Morri Martin against Rube Fischer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SNIDER HITTING .349

SOCKING INternational league pitching at a .577 clip for the past 8 games, outfielder Duke Snider of the Montreal Royals has taken over the lead in the battle for individual batting honors.
Including games of Wednesday June 30, Snider owned a .349 mark a jump of 48 points from his average of a week ago. During the week, Snider collected 15 hits in 26 officials trips.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot Handed Extra Rap for Spitting

Cyril Pfiefer manager of Rockford in the Central Association lost his appeal Saturday from a thirty day league suspension for allegely spitting at an umpire and was given an extrra thirty days.
George M. Trautman, president of the National Assoc of Professional Baseball leagues said he was making the sus[ension total 60 days because of the manager's past record of offenses.
Pfiefer on June 12 appealed to Trautman over a thirty day supension imposed by Frank Hearn, Central Assoc preseident. Hearn ruled Pfeifer spit tobacco juice in the face of the umpire Bill Fleming during an Rockford Clinton game on June 8th.
Trautman quoted Hearn as saying "there could be no possible doubt as to the fact Pfeifer did spit tobacco juice in Fleming's face". Hearn said Pfeifer had been ejected from four games during the 47 season. Twice this season before the Fleming incident, Pfeifer said called umpires profane names Hearn told Trautman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superior Evening Telegram 5/26/36 (ap)

OLD MEN IN BASEBALL HAVE BRILLIANT DAY
One foot on the bench and the other in the minors, the old men will come back on sunny days.
Consider a few of them: Charlie Grimm of the Cubs aged 36, Kiki Cuyler Reds 36, Ethan Allen Cubs 32, Red Lucas Pirates 32, Heinie Manush Red Sox 34, Bob Grove Red Sox 36, Bill Terry Giants 37 and a few more like Sam Leslie Giants or Fred Ostermueller Red Sox who are getting near the age when baseball players are considered old men.
Monday in the majors the old boys had a reunion. Lucas once the pride of redland field went back there with the Pirates and pitched a four hit ball game against the Reds to win 9-2.
Ostermueller, the much discussed question mark of the Red Sox pitching staff did the same against the Senators and Boston won 6-0 to cut the Yankees margin to one and a half games.
Leslie who made five hits in five times at bat against the Phillies Sunday gave the Giants a 1-0 vicotry over the same club by banging out a home run and Ripper collins condemned to the bench by the excellent play of young Johnny Mize won a ball game for the Cards when he came up out of the dugout in the ninth and hit a pinch single to gaive the Cards a two to one win over the Cubs.
Even Grimm who counted himself out of the game last year, was back in there Monday and got a double and a single in three times up, while allen who was bartered away at the waiver price several years ago because he had to wear a back support, made his debut with the Cubs by pounding out three of the ten hits made off Paul Dean.
youngsters held forth in the other two games however. Lee Ross 19 year old rooke from the North Carolina Textile league pitched the Athletics to a 10-7 victory over the Yankees after the a's had taken three straight trouncings and Johnny Lanning rookie Boston Bee's hurler blanked the Dodgers 8-0.
So far this season the old men have held the spotlight . Grove's pitching performance has been the highlight of the season,while the great batting feat of Tony Lazzeri Saturday and Sunday against the Athletics is likely to keep the youngsters swinging for years. Yesteray however, Lazzeri was limited to one hit after hitting six home runs and driving in 16 runs in two days.
One of the most suprising moves of the season was the acquisition of Johnny Vergez veteran third baseman by the Cards from tehe Philllies. Leaders for years in movement toward young players, the St Louis team finds itself in the position of having to drop one of its youngsters in order to make room for a veteran turned away by the Giants and then the Phils.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
St Paul Daily News April 11 1933

Major Magnates say beer will bring fans back to ball parks;

After weeks of experimentation, 16 major league baseball clubs today were going through the final stages of preparation for the season opeing today.
The club owners, particularly in the National League were hopeful of a close race which will insure profitable attendance. Some of the magnates of either league pin hopes on the return of beer, believing its sale at the parks will stimulate patronage. Beer will be sold at 8 baseball parks.
In the American league, the world champion Yankees are general favorites to repeat with major opposition Washington,Philadelphia and Clevaldn.
In the National, Pitswburg, Chicago, Brooklyn,St Louis and Philadelphia all have a fair chance at top honors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Drop in Attendance Expected:

With the athletes tanned and hardened by weeks of training where the sun shines and the warm winds blow, 16 major league clubs will inaugurate another baseball season Wednesday.
The eve of the 33 season found the owners in the most pessimistic frame of mind since 1920 when the Black Sox scandal threatened to do away with the pastime. The owners almost without exception,expect a decided falling off in attendance and have prepared themselves for the shock by slicing salaries and operating expenses.
This feeling of doubt is examplified in the official communique issued by Pres John Heydler of the National league. In the past Mr. Heydler as is the custom with presidents, always confined his preseason announcements to a description of what a great game baseball was and how magnificently the people were going to respond to its lure. But this year's official bulletin intimated that baseball's back was against the wall and nothing but the old eternal hustle on the part of the players would make it attractive enough to cause the citizens to part with their money.
This feeling of dout on the part of Heydler may be sadly misplace for his own National eauge promises to put on te closest race in years. And its no secret that a wide open race with several teams battling for the pennant until the late days of the campaign never has failed to bring the customers out. The national league appears as n even battle between no less than five teams, Chicago,defending champions, Pittsubrgh,Brookly,St Louis and Philadelphia
probable openind day batteries:
Boston, Andrews and Gooch at New York, Gomez andDickey
Philadelphia Grove and Cochrane at Washington, Crowder and Sewell
Clevandl, Brown and Spencer at Detroit, Bridges and Hayworth
Chicago, Lyns and Grube at St Louis, Hadley and Ferrell

New York, Hubbel and Mancusco at boston, Betts and Hogan
Brooklyn, Clark and Lopez at Philadelphia, Rhem and Davis
Pittsburgh, Swift and Grace at Cincinnati, Johnson and Lombardi
St Louis, Dean dnJ. Wilson at Chicago, Warneke and Hartnett.eteriesoinmg ef
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
St Paul Dispatch 10/13/44

Coast Umpire nearly mobbed

An umpires decision on a close play nearly touchedoff a riot Wednesday night during a game between Vince Dimaggio's major league team and the Negro Kansas City Royal Giants.
The incident occurred when Arbiter Connie Conrad ruled DiMaggio safe at home in the ninth with a run that gave the major leaguers a 5-4 victory.
Members of the Royal Giants joined by fans from the grandstand surrounded Conrad screaming vigerous protests. A call was put in for police squads but calmer heads among white and Negroes broke the tension.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Breadon Kept Marty Marion in St Louis:

Sam Breadon, president of the St Louis Cardinals claims credit for the fact that Marty Marion, the world champion's great shortstop still is in St Louis instead of with the Cubs.
When Marion was serving his apprenticeship at Rochester, Branch Rickey, so the story goes proposed a deal whereby the Cuhs would get Marion and pitcher Ken Raffensberger for Steve Mesner, another player and 50,000 dollars.
At the time, Rickey was high on Bobby Sturgeon playing shortstop for Columbus. He felt Sturgeon was a better prospect than Marion and suggested the deal. The cubs insisted on getting Sturgeon, but Rickey balked.
Breadon wanted to retain Marion and Rickey insisted he would not be responsible for letting Sturgeon get away. "That's all right" Breadon is reported to have said. I'll take the reponsibility. And Marion remained with the Cardinals to become the greatest of the modern day shortstops.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Landis Improves:

An improvement in the condition of Judge Kenesaw M Landis high commissioner of baseball confined to st lukes hospital in chicago for treatment of a severe cold Was reported today.
Landis was unable to attend the 'world 'series because of his illness. It was the first series he had missed since becoming czar of the sport 23 yeaRS AGO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
St. Paul Pioneer Press 5/26/49

Sore arm bothers Taylor

When you're down the breaks are all bad. Manager Walter Alston back in St Paul with his Saints for the second home stand starting with first place Milwaukee at 8pm today, had more news, all bad. Pitcher Harry Taylor has a sore arm.
Taylor down from the Dodgers for a second straight year and relied upon to give the Saints one of the Big Four starters first complained of pain in the arm after pitching part of the long and cold game against Milwaukee a week ago Sunday.
Whether it is a recurrence of an old injury, the only thing that has kept him from being a major league player or just a severe cold awaits further examination.
Mineawhile there was a ray of good news. Eric Tipton hitting left fielder who has his average up but not his distance blows may be ready to start. Tipton suffered a sprained hand sliding back to first base. The hand is still swollen but he may start.
Al Brancato, reliable second bseman probably will be sidelined for a few more days with a spike wound. He was still limping when the team returned from a road strip that neted the Saints only four victories against 11 defeats and dropped them into second place.
Buddy HIcks was still heavily taped, the result of a pulled side muscle in spring training. Other shifts tonight will give Lexington park fans their first glimpse of Hanke Schenz down from the Cubs at second base. Danny Ozark will start at first to give extra base punch.
Alston was very favorably impressed by the spirit of Schenz. Unlike many returnees from the major league, Schenz reported full of spirit, even carried his own bats on the plane. Alston belieives he will give the team more speed. It is the same factor that will keep Jim Pendleton in center field for what may be his final try at Lexington park. Jim had been playing much better at home than on the road.
Grady Wilson the other infield newcome who came from Indeianapolis on the Nanny Fernandez deal has not been in enought for Alston to pass judgement, although his batter average of .352 speaks for itself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
St Paul Dispatch 3/11/43

Tigers lost two more

The Detroit Tigers today removed the names of twomore players from a roster that my be no larger than 30 for the start of spring training next Monday(I never knew of a 30 player limit??)
Pitcher Clarence Gann a big winner in 41 with Muskegon of the Michigan State league is in the Navy giving the Tigers 21 stars on their service flag. Gann was purchased a fortnight ago from Beaumont of the Tesxas League.
Shortstop Bob Henny former Detroit sandlotter who was utility infielder at Beamont, has decided to remain on the war job.
The Tigers start work Monday under Manager Steve O['Neill who headed an official party that left last night for Evansville.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reds to take pills, Quit hurling machine

The Cincinnati Reds emulating the vitamin capsule training diet of the St Louyis Cardinals of last season will go on a similar diet when they begin training at Bloomington next Monday General Manager Warren Giles announced today.
Giles said that thousands of vitamin capsules had been ordered which he hoped would impart to the Reds the vim and vigor the Cards had in winning the pennant.
Giles also announced that a mechanical pitching machine purchased last year at an approximate cost of fourteen hundred dollars would not be used in spring training this season.
The Reds hit for a team average of .247 in 41 and then dropped to .231 in 42 after using the mechanical hurler in the spring, Giles pointed out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waners together again with Brooklyn Codgers

The Brooklyn Codgers known in pre war days as the Dodgers have brought the Waner brothers together for the third timne on a major league baseball club.
The outfield act that wowed the fans for fourteen years in Pittsburgh and for a short time in Boston now is going into a rehearsal for a Brooklyn appearance. Pauls was picked up during the winter as a free agent and Lloyd was acquired Tuesday in the trade that sent Babe Dahlgren to Philadelphia.
Paul,older by four years and now aproaching 40 joined the pittsburgh club in 26 and preceded his brothers to the big top by one season.

My fingers are tired.. I've got some 1910 stuff out in the granary and may haul in if there is any interest..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
9/23/10 Albuquerque Morning Journal

HAL CHASE CHARGED WITH LYING DOWN

The vapor of gossip that has surrounded the quarrel of Hal Chase captain of the New York American League baseball team and George T Stallings manager was dispelled today by a statement from Frank J Farrell president of the club.
Stallings was in conference with Farrell today in obedience to a telegram summoning him from Cleveland and took the opportunity of making grave charges.
He accused Chase of withholding his best services while on the field and quitting when he was most needed.
President Farrell thought the charges so grave that he took the first train for Cleveland where the club now is, to make a complete investigation.
Stallings wanted to accompany him, but was refused permission. If the charges were sustained Farrell said,that there would be no place for Chase on the New York team or in his opinion, any other team.
If they fail, he reserves the right to deal with Stallings as he thinks fit. He denied that Chase had been appointed manager of the club.

Note(I just checked on the web and see 9/23/10 was the date Stallings got the boot. So while this story was being published,Stallings was being shown the door)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
9/8/10 FAMOUS TY COBB HAS TROUBLE WITH EYES.

Slug (Cle)That Tyrus Cobb outfielder on the Detroit American League team is in danger of losing the use of his right eye , was the anouncement made by manager Hugh Jennings today. Cobb did not come here (Cle) with the team for the four games series that opens today,but remaining in Detroit to consult a specialist.

Slug(Det)
According to Ty Cobb's doctor,the inflamation of his eye is but a trifling matter,but the player has been ordered to take a rest. A few days are expected to remove the trouble. An examination of Cobb's eyes disclosed that the famous batsman uses but one eye in batting. His left eye is normal, but the right is near sighted and is partially closed when he stands at the plate..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I found the above interesting... A manager saying one of his players may lose his sight in an eye, while the doctor says it's really nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
St Paul Daily News 11/12/34

Boost Babe As Manager Of Boston

Babe Ruth who broke into baseball as a pitcher with the Red Sox mayreturn to Boston as manager of the Braves.
Belief that Ruth will succeed Bill McKechnie spread today following Col Jacob Ruppert's reported statement at French Lick Springs,Ind last night that his aging Yankee star expects to manage a National league club in 35.
Added to this was a report that Judge Emil Fuchs,president of the Braves admitted at the National league meeting in New York last week that he would like to have Ruth managing his club, but would not think of removing McKechnie with whom he is understood to have a verbal five year contract.
Fuchs, who returned to Boston yesterday insisted that he hadn't talked with either Ruth or Rupoert, but admitted that mutual friends had suggested bringing Ruth to Boston.
As long as Bill McKechnie cares to, he can manage the Braves said Fuchs.
Fuchs is known to have the highest regard for McKechnie's abilities as a manager. But there is an imression that they have reached an agreement under which McKechnie will resign...if he can go out as manager of another club.
Braves' finances have been at low ebb for years and many believe that Fuchs is ready to gamble on the chance that Ruth as manager and occasional pinch hitter will retain much of his box office value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drastic Methods Need to Save Big League Baseball,Veeck Says.

St Paul Daily News 8/23/33

Major league baseball still struggling to climb out of the red must adopt the proposal for a midsummer series of inter league games or do something equally drastic in order to reserve interest in 1934 is the belief of Wiliaml Veeck,president of the Chicago Cubs.
ther is no use kidding ourselves any longer veeck told the AP Tuesday. Only one big league club out of 16 made money last year. Some of us have hopes of breaking even this season unless the pennant races continue to fall out from under us.
We can't go on operating on the same basis as we did 25 years ago. If we don't cut admission prices or make the game more attractive we certainly will be up against a further loss of patronage.
I can speak definitely for the Cubs when I say we are heartily in favor of helping solve the situation and create a wider interest by arranging a series of inter league games in midseason. In my opinion it would be a positive and natural development.
It is a fact now, undisputed by any club owner who studies the returns that from July 5 to the middle of August major league baseball is in the doldrums. These five or six weeks are the games dog days os far as public interest in a sort that runs for so long...too long if I may express another conviction of mine.
What then is more natural than to break up this monotony of midseason by scheduling a series of games betwen clubs of rival leagues?. Leet the Yankees and Athletics play the Cubs and the Giants, thetigers play the Pirates,The White Sox meet the Cardinals and so on.
I don't mean exhibition games either, but games that will count in the standings of the clubs. They wouldn't be worth three loud cheers unless ther was just as much at stake as ther is in a regular league game. The whole picture would be refreshened an livened.Don't you think Giant rooters would flock to see their favorites try to flatten the Yankees now or vice versa?
Veeck's attitude toward the necessity of a radical prescription for baseball's health is well known but the Cubs president's emphasis upon the inter league proposal was accompanied by indications that the magnates are seriously turning in the ideas.If it isn't adopted at the league meetings this winter, Veeck thinks the split season schedule will be considered.
Just because the minor leagues have tried the split season successfully is noreason why the majors could not do the same thing remarked Veeck. If another fellow has a good idea in the business, I'm not prejudiced.
We are all agree that we do not want to cheapen baseball but the fact now facing us is that something must be done unless we be compelled to cheapen it. Major league baseball is expensive. Salaries although theyhave been cut still are high.but to get and keep the best talent andbuild up winning teams, moneyhs to be spent and good salaries paid.To do that we have got to revive general interest by natural means. It looks to me like a good time to try something else besides a hope that the good old days will soon be back.They won't come back unless we take steps to bring them back.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deal is off

St Paul Daily News 11/16/34

Sam Breadon, president, of the St Louis Cardinals announced that negotiations with Lewis H Wentz, Oklahome oilman, looking toward the latter's possible purchase of the club had been called off temporarily. He gave no reason.
I'm going to Florida in a few days Breadon told the United Press late today in announcing tht the deal is off at least temporarily. He added that he did not know what plans Wentz had in mind and indicated the whole transaction had been shelved.
Ther never was an official anouncement of the bid and asked price, although intimations were the Breadon sale level was about $1,250,000. Wentz, reputedly worth $15,000,000 said he had no thought of making money out of the Cardinls, gut wanted the club for sheer love of the game. He used to coach baseball at Pittsburgh PA.
Hartford Daily Courant 1914

Ed Barney, the sailor lad who came to the Hartford team in 1913 has proven all the prophets have said, leading the team and the league in batting with the general average of .329 for 118 games,every game being played which the team played. His fielding average of .967 is a very good average for being in as many games as he was in and he has proved to be the best all around man Hartford has had in several years outside of High and Kauff.Barney also leads the team in stolen bases, having passed Curry two weeks ago, and now having 44,one more than Curry.
Three men,Barney,Hoey and Keliber played in every game the team played and established a record for the season in that respect.

Now views from his hometown in Wisconsin

8/12/15

The New York Yankee American league team has purchased Ed Barney from the Jersey City team of the International league. Edman through his high class consistent work has climbed from a class D team to the top in three years. Here's hoping that he will be the brightest star in organized baseball.

5/4/16
Edmon barney, who is playhing high class ball with the Pittsburgh Nationals is third high in the batting averages on his team and is at the top as a purloiner of bases.
The Pirates showed a lamentable lack of offensive power again yesterday. They had several chances to sew up the game, but were shy on basehits when they were needed.This defect has been noticeable in most of the games they have lost, but it is difficult to see how any improvement can be made with the material at hand.
Callahan has shifted his men about to bring the most hitting possible into the games, but the team is still short in this most important detail.
In this respect, one bright spot is the work of Eddie Barney, who is likely to remain in middle field.In yesterdays game, he had a batting average of 1.000,getting two hits, walking twice and stealing a base besides scoring two of the Pirates' three runs.

10/7/15
Edman Barney who has been playing gilt edge ball with the Pittsburg National League baseball team this season returned home Tuesday evening. Mr Barney's ascent from a class D organization to the big show in two years was so rapid that it is hard for his friends to realize what wonderful an athlete he has become. His fielding while with Pittsburg has been of the highest order;he is 9th from the top out of 170 men in the batting averages and is acknowledged to be one of the fast ones on bases.

4/20/16
Have you been following Edmon Barney's work with the Pittsburgh Nationals so far this season?If not, you are not loyal and are missing some real baseball. His work in Saturday's game;4 timesup,2 hits and 3 put outs. And his Monday's game;3 times up,2 hits,2put outs and 2 stolen bases show special class. Ed is making good in his chosen profession even past our most sanguine expectations and we are more than proud of him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Senseless Squabble 9/18/24 (I'm assuming the Grimes in this article is a relative of Burleighs? Maybe a brother? Anyone know?)

The more or less senseless squabble between Amery and Clear Lake over scheduling baseball games came to a head the last of the week when Nick Grimes,manager of the Clear Lake team, refused to come to Amery for a gamme,on Sunday last, as prviously agreed,unless his demands(which the Amery management believed exorbitant and which were contrary to Mr Grimes agreement with the Amery management) were met.
The Free Press does not claim to know all the minor details, but the fact remains that the Clear Lake management agreed to come to this city for a game Sunday at a specified amount and under specified conditions, agreed to by both sides and they refused to fullfill his agreement unless they were paid of money double the amount agreed upon. This of course theAmery people refused.
Mr Grimes then issued a very ungentlemanly and decidedly unsportsmanslike circular with the evident intention of placing the Amery management in a bad light and hoping to exonorate his own actions.
As we mentioned above the Free Press does not know all of the details and it is probable that both sides are partially at fault, but after looking the matter up at some length we are convinced that the burden is decidedly upon Mr Grimes;but even so why crab?
Give and take a little.Get the cips off your shoulders. If ther are slivers in the cellar door don't slide. This goes for both managements. Why embroil the community in a needless and senseless quarrel because of a darned old ball game. Get together on friendly terms or stay apart altogether
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------St Paul Dispatch 2/19/43

Veeck Will Try Morning Baseball
Enterprising Bill Veeck, the young owner of the Milwaukee Brewers whose innovations have helped triple his baseball club's home attendance, has pulled another one out of the hat he doesn't wear.
He's going to put on morning "American Assocation baseball games for night shift war workers.
Hatless and sport shirt clad Veeck has been making the rounds of industrial plants and selling the idea to their executives and wherever he broached the idea, he said, he was greeted with enthusiastic response.
They're all for it, he said.
We feel that we've got a job to do. One reason for baseball's existence in wartime is to provde recreation for war workes, so we are going to make it possible for all of them to see some games.
We can start the games about 10;30am,givng both the men on the early and the late night shifts a chance to get to the ball park. Those who work from four to midnight will have plenty of sleep before game time and those on the midnight to 8 am shift can have their breakfast,come out to the park and then go home for their rest.
It has never been tried anywhere so far as I know and our city with all the defense plants we've got working nights, is a good place for the experiement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------St Paul Dispatch 2/19/43

National Loop Closes Deal For Phillies

The National league took over ownership of the debt ridden Philadelphia Phils today and named a five member board to operate the club until a new owner is found.
Ford Frick,president of the league said he was hopeful the resale would be completed within seven days,perhaps sooner.
Frick said the league took over and paid for 4,690 of the 5,000 shares outstanding including 2,600 held by Gerry Nugent,president of the club since 1932.
The purchase price was not disclosed,but was reported to be ten dollars a share.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BALLPLAYERS DO STUNTS FOR WIDOW

Albuquerque Morning Journal 7/1/10 (Doc Powers)
Twelve thousand spectators attended the Powers day celebration at Shibe park today where the memory of the dead player was commemorated by a benefit for his widow and children.
Players from Washington,Boston,New York and Philadelphia american league teams participated in the various events.
Lord of Boston won,beating a bunt to first,time of 3 1-5 seconds. Donohaue of Philadelphia won the prize for the most accurate throwing.
In the base circuiting contest Collins,Philadelphia equaled the worlds record of 14 1-5 seconds. Austin New York and Speaker,Boston tied for second with 14 2-5 seconds.
Hooper, Boston won the long distance throwing contest with a throw of 356 feet and 4 inches. Speaker was second with 345 feet and 7 and a half inches.
Austin won the one hundred yard dash on the turf in 10 3-5 seconds. Hooper was second.
Stahl,Boston won the 100 yard dash for men weighing more than 200 pounds with Vaughn New York second. Time 11 2-5.
Dygert,Philadelphia won the fungo hitting contest.
Austin was the only contestant who succeeded in throwing the ball over second base from the catcher's position beneath a bar six feet high at the pitcher's slab.
In the relay racing circling the bases,Boston and Philadelphia tied at 14 2-5 seconds.In the runoff both teams tied again at 14 2-5. The local team won the toss.

Question?? Is 14 2-5 then fourteen and two fifths seconds? Or what?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4/28/42

Babe Ruth whose chief worry two weeks ago was pnuemonia came home today from the west coast confronted with a new problem, how to reduce his daily consumption of ten to fifteen cigars.
The doctors says cut down on cigars and no beer or highballs,the former homerun king said , as he arrived by train from Los Angeles. Ruth was stricken while playinging in a film based on the life of the late Lou Gehrig, but made a rapid recovery. He appeared brown and healthy and said that he would register immediately in the fourth selective service registration. He is 47 years old.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9/15/37

Raymond Dumon,president of the National Semi-Professional Baseball congress announced today that under a new system of contracts effective January 1,semi-pro players must obtain releases before joining professional teams during the current seasons.
The action, he said, was to prevent semi pro teams from being raided during the regular playing season. He said the congress expected to have 250,000 semi pro players undedr contract in 1938.
Dumont previously announced at St Louis after a conference with Branch Rickey, vice president and general manager of the St Louis Cardinals that the major and minor league club owners would be solicited to respect semi pro contracts as a means of stimulating more sponsors into the semi pro ranks in 1938.
A national system of contracts which prevented clubs from raiding competitivie semi pro organizations was created by the congress this year. Dumont said, However, there had been no provisions until the new clause had been announced today which prevented scouts in organized baseball from breaking up semi pro clubs during the regular playing season.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bkmckenna

september 19, 1886 - atlanta constitution

sporting life accuses the western union telegraph company - which has a monopoly of the baseball business - of furnishing information to gamblers, by which pool selling on its games is made possible and thus breaking its agreement with the league and association
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

Ed Barrow: His top 5 Players

Ed Barrow(Babe Ruth manager, 1918-19,Yankee GM, 1921-34)
Detroit manager, 1903-1904, Red Sox' manager, 1918-1920
Yankees' GM & Business manager, October, 1920-1947)

1929 - Barrow selected his 5 Greatest Ever Players. 1. Wagner, 2. Cobb, 3. Lajoie, 4. Ruth, 5. Speaker (Sporting News, Feb. 28, 1929, pp. 4, column 6) Confirmed order in his autobiography (My Fifty Years In Baseball by Ed Barrow, 1951, pp. 33)

1951 - "Hans Wagner is the greatest ballplayer of all time. The Flying Dutchman stands alone. Babe Ruth was the game's greatest personality, and its greatest home run hitter. Ty Cobb was the greatest of the hitters and the only man I ever saw who could unnerve a whole ball club single-handed, though I have always had a tremendous admiration for Larry Lajoie and consider him only a step behind Cobb as the greatest batsman of them all. But there is no question that Wagner was the greatest all-around ballplayer who ever lived. (My Fifty Years in Baseball by Edward Grant Barrow with James M. Kahn, 1951, pp. 33)

1951 - "When I saw Cobb at the gathering of old-timers for the seventy-fifth anniversary party of the National League, he was a reserved and poised man of sixty-five, somewhat mellowed by the years. But the vision of him running wild on the bases, harassing the pitchers, taunting the catchers, and announcing boldly he was going to steal second on the next pitch, fighting, clawing, and generally throwing the whole other side into confusion, can never be erased from the minds of those who saw him through the many years of his greatness. He was the man of a half century. I doubt that baseball will ever see his like again." (pp. 194-195)

Lajoie, to me, was only second to Ty Cobb as the American League's top hitter, and as a fielder he was the surest and the most graceful of them all. He was a big fellow, over six feet tall and weighing close to 200 pounds, and Gehringer is most often compared to the French Canadian from Woonsocket, Rhode Island, because he, too, was tall and rangy. but Lajoie was no Mechanical Man. He was full of spirit and animation, and an alive figure on the ball field. He was vibrant, and had some of the same qualities of Cobb for upsetting the opposition. (pp. 194)

Speaker just had too much over too long a time to be pushed out of center field yet. He is the most vulnerable of the threee. I don't know who ever will come along to dislodge Cobb or Ruth. But, as I pointed out before, DiMaggio might have challenged Speaker if he had been sounder or played as long, and someone yet may come along to do it. But old Spoke, who was of the old breed, fighting, spirited, and durable, is still tops, with a lifetime batting average of .345 for some twenty years in the big show, as yet unmatched skill at coming in and going back for fly balls, for strong and accurate throwing, and for base running that was of the type of Cobb's, Collins' and Lajoie's. (pp. 195)

(My Fifty Years in Baseball by Edward Grant Barrow with James M. Kahn, 1951, pp. 194)

[Bill Burgess]

Who is Baseball's Greatest Player? by C. William Duncan (The Philadelphia Public Ledger, July 5, 1931, Magazine section, pp. 7)

A majority of a jury of twelve good men and true, chosen for their experience and standing in the Nation's great game, hereby pronounces Tyrus Raymond Cobb as Baseball's Greatest Player." Seven out of the twelve give first place to the "Georgia Peach," whose line drives, streaks of speed and fall-away slides thrilled the Nation's fans for nearly a quarter of a century. "There never will be another Ty," they sigh in unison. Three of the twelve designate Hans Wagner, "Flying Dutchman" of the old Pittsburgh Pirates, as the greatest, and four name him runner-up to Cobb, bringing Hans in a good second in total points. Babe Ruth, famous home-run pounder of the present day, runs third by virtue of two first choices and being placed in the "Big Five" by several other jurors. Nap Lajoie and Eddie Collins finish close behind Ruth, with Willie Keeler, Al Simmons and Tris Speaker following in the order named.

The jury is composed of John McGraw, Wilbert Robinson, Walter Johnson, Connie Mack, Kid Gleason, Bill McKechnie, Joe McCarthy, Jim Burke, Gabby Street, Dan Howley, Bucky Harris and Burt Shotton, all well known to followers of baseball. I asked each man the question, "Whom do you consider the greatest baseball player of all time?" waiting for his opinion without telling him the views of any other juryman. Five points were given for first place, four for second, three for third, two for fourth and one for fifth.

John McGraw, manager of the Giants, the first man approached for his views, named Hans Wagner as the greatest. "Wagner could do everything required of a ball player." said McGraw as he sat in the Giants' dugout in the Polo Grounds. "He had tremendous hands, and in addition to his great playing ability, had a wonderful disposition and was easy to handle. I'll place Cobb second and Keeler third. Al Simmons is my next pick, as I consider him the greatest ball player of the present day. Like Wagner he is a right-handed hitter of power and can field his position splendidly and throw fast and accurately. Simmons is no dumb ball player, either. My own first baseman, Bill Terry, is included in my selection. He is really a great ball player and the best first baseman I have ever seen."

Bill McKechnie, manager of the Braves, strung along with McGraw on Wagner as the greatest of them all. McKechnie, one-time Pirate infielder, piloted Pittsburgh to a pennant in 1925 and won another gonfalon for the St. Louis Cardinals in 1922. Oddly enough, neither club retained him for long after his success. Tired of being shunted by the Cardinals to Rochester and then recalled, McKechnie signed a four-year contract with Boston and is developing a team there. "I don't see how a National Leaguer could pick any one but old Honus Wagner as the best that ever lived," said McKechnie as we sat in his hotel room in Philadelphia. "I played in the infield with him for six or seven years and will pay him the splendid tribute of saying I never saw him make a mental error. He made "boots," of course. Every ball player makes fielding errors. But Honus always threw to the right base; he always did the correct thing at the proper moments. As to physical ability, he was a marvelous fielder, the hardest-hitting shortstop in history and a splendid baserunner. Wagner was in his prime from about 1904 to 1912.

"Cobb gets second place. Really, I think those two stand by themselves for this century, at least. Speaker didn't have the natural speed of Cobb, so I must place him third. I give Lajoie fourth. He, like Speaker, wasn't as fast as Cobb. Of the present-day ball players I consider Hornsby and Ruth the best I've seen. Hornsby has many great qualities, but he is surprisingly weak on fly balls that are too close to the infield for outfielders to get. I have been astonished at Hornsby's inability to overcome this weakness during his many years in the majors. It is hard to choose between Hornsby and Ruth, but I'll give it to Hornsby."

While McGraw and McKechnie have been spending their lives in the National League, Connie Mack has been devoting his time to the American. "I haven't had the chance to see many of the great stars of the other league," the Philadelphia Athletics leader said. "But picking the greatest player that ever lived is easy, I think. I pick Ty Cobb. I guess every one will do the same. Cobb was a good fielder, the greatest baserunner in the game's history, the fastest thinker and the most consistent hitter. How can you name any one else? Eddie Collins, the keystone of my great infield of the old Athletics, is my second choice. Eddie was a marvelous ball player. I can't say too much for him.

I'll name Lajoie third. Of the present-day players I pick Al Simmons first, and he is my fourth man of all time. I hate to leave off Mickey Cochrane, but I must name Babe Ruth, so he goes fifth. If there was a sixth place in your selections, Cochrane would get it. When I picked my all-time team last year, I named Buck Ewing as the best catcher I ever saw. I put Buck ahead of Mickey because of the latter's comparatively brief service in the majors. But you can say for me, and this is the first time I've said it for publication, that I now consider Cochrane the greatest catcher that ever lived. You can't take it away from him."

Kid Gleason, former manager of the White Sox and now coach of the Athletics, who has spent a lifetime in baseball, was very brief. Evidently his mind rushed back over the past and he feared to slight some of the great ones with whom he played years ago. At least that's what I thought, and so didn't press him for an entire selection when he said: "Ty Cobb is the greatest ball player I ever saw. Hans Wagner is next. That's all I want to pick. Go see Connie Mack and find out what he says."

Joe McCarthy, former manager of Louisville and the Chicago Cubs and now pilot of the New York Yanks, selects his own star, Babe Ruth as the best of all time. "Ruth is more than a home-run hitter," says McCarthy. "He can play the well, is a deadly thrower and can cover first base and pitch. He is a far better all-round ball player than he is generally credited with being. I'll place Cobb second, then Wagner, Collins and Lajoie in the order named. After you get past Wagner it is very difficult to make selections, as there have been so many great ball players. You may also say for me that I consider Mickey Cochrane and Gabby Hartnett as the leading catchers of the day."

Cobb received another first-place vote from Walter Johnson, former great right-handed pitcher and now manager of the Washington Senators. Johnson was lavish in his praise of the "Georgia Peach." He gave Wagner second place and then named Jackson, Ruth and Collins. He had a hard time deciding between Collins and Speaker, with Eddie winning by a shade.

Uncle Wilbert Robinson, manager of the Brooklyn Robbins, voiced his opinions under protest. "But, Mr. Robinson," I said, "no one cares whom I'd name as the greatest. The fans want to read your opinions. You've been in this game for years and your views mean something. Mine don't." "All right then. If that's the way you feel about it, go ahead and name Ty Cobb as the best of them all," replied Uncle Robbie. "I didn't see him play much because he was in the other league, but from what I did see and from what I've heard from others who do know ball players when they see them, Cobb deserves first place. Put Willie Keeler in there next to Ty. Willie was a great all-round ball player and the best place hitter the game ever knew.

And you can't leave out this big fellow, Babe Ruth, when speaking of all-time wonders. He can pitch, play first base, play the outfield and hit home runs. He's a wonder. It's hard on the others to name just a few, because the world has seen many greats.

Hans Wagner was one. Back in the old, old days the Phillies had a man who could pitch like a streak and play the infield, too. His name was Charley Ferguson. You can't leave him off. There's Hughey Jennings, too. He was an unbeatable shortstop. As I said before, it's unfair to name just a few. Think of the many good ones I've never seen! But if I have to name the best five you can put down Cobb, Keeler, Ruth, Wagner and Ferguson for me."

Jim Burke, ruddy-faced coach of the Yanks, has been in baseball thirty years. He played in the American and National Leagues and the American Association. He managed the St. Louis Browns, 1917-1920, and has also been a double A leader. When Joe McCarthy went up to take charge of the Cubs, he took Burke along as coach, and the two have remained together since. He should know his ball players. "I give Wagner first place," he says. "He could do everything and is the greatest I've ever see. Cobb gets second place with me Why name more? They stand alone."

"But I want five selections, Mr. Burke," I said. "Well, that's a tough assignment. When you get through with Wagner and Cobb, you run into trouble. Old Nap Lajoie was a swell ball player. We can't leave him off the list. Eddie Collins was another. Put him down for fourth. Now it's getting tougher and tougher. We'll give fifth place to Hornsby, although you may as well name the fifth man yourself, there have been so many good ones."

Gabby Street, one-time battery mate of Walter Johnson at Washington and now manager of the St. Louis Cardinals, 1930 champions of the National League, was the fifth man to name Cobb for first honors. "I spent seven years in the American League and two in the National and Cobb is my pick, without question," he said. "Cobb had a ninety-horsepower brain, which, in my opinion, was his greatest asset. He always thought a fraction of a second faster than any one else and, therefore, was always ahead of the game. One day he was on third base when the batter hit a high fly back of shortstop. George McBride, our shortstop at Washington in those days and a very good fielder, caught the ball. As the ball struck his glove Cobb started for home. McBride raised his arm to throw. Cobb stopped. McBride, assured that Cobb had given up the idea of trying to score, let his arm drop to his side. Quick as lightning, Cobb was off for home again, scoring the winning run despite McBride's hurried throw. His brain had worked once again and Detroit had won another ball game.

Another time we had a second baseman playing third base. Cobb hit safely five times past third base. After the game I asked him about it and he said: "That was easy, your third baseman was out of position. I know he's a second baseman. Why should I try to hit to right field?' That was Cobb in his prime. Modern fans who saw him only in the closing days of his career can't appreciate him. "I'll give old Honus second place and Eddie Collins third. They say Jimmy Collins was a great ball player, but I never saw him. Freddy Parent, Boston Red Sox infielder, wasn't a spectacular player, but he's my fourth choice. And I can't leave out Hal Chase. He could do everything," concluded Street.

Dan Howley, manager of the Cincinnati Reds and former leader of the St. Louis Browns and 1926 pennant-winning Toronto Leafs in the International League is another Cobb admirer. "Ty first without a doubt," he said. "No one ever approached him. I'll give Wagner second and that's all I'll name. I think Al Simmons is the best ball player in the game right now. I might name Al, but what about Mickey Cochrane, Frankie Frisch, Rogers Hornsby, Babe Ruth and Bill Terry among the present-day players, and Eddie Collins, Nap Lajoie and Tris Speaker among the older fellows? I can't include them all in your list, so I'll pick only Cobb and Wagner."

Bucky Harris, who was called the "boy wonder" when he led Washington to two pennants and who now pilots Detroit, is the youngest man on the jury. He gives first place to Babe Ruth, being the second man on the jury so to honor the famous slugger, and places Cobb second, with Sisler third, Simmons fourth and Speaker fifth. Harris wants it known that his opinions are based on players he has seen in action.

Chuck Klein, one of the stars of the present day, breaks into the list of "greats," due to the selection of his manager, Burt Shotton, of the Phillies. Shotton names Cobb first and Lajoie second, with Klein third, Wagner fourth and Ruth fifth.

This symposium was an intensely interesting one for me to procure. I wasn't surprised with Cobb winning first honors and Wagner second." I wasn't surprised, either, with Ruth finishing as low as third in an all-star contest:
I was surprised, however, at the few votes cast for Speaker, Sisler and Jackson. (copyright by Public Ledger)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of the above article's results in June, 1931, C. William Duncan conducted survey of Philadelphia Public Ledger

B.Shotten Mack K.Gleason Howley W.Robinson G.Street
Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb
Lajoie Collins Wagner Wagner Keeler Wagner
C.Klein Lajoie Ruth Collins
Wagner Simmons Wagner F.Parent
Ruth Ruth Ferguson Chase
Cochrane

B.McKechnie J.Burke J.McCarthy B.Harris W.Johnson McGraw
Wagner Wagner Ruth Ruth Cobb Wagner
Cobb Cobb Cobb Cobb Wagner Cobb
Speaker Lajoie Wagner Sisler Jackson Keeler
Lajoie Collins Collins Simmons Ruth Simmons
Hornsby Hornsby Lajoie Speaker Collins Terry
Ruth Speaker

[Ubiquitous]

The Sporting News, February 25, 1978, pp. 43

This report, on race relations, submitted August 28, 1946, to ML BB. This is an excerpt from a 25 page report, prepared by a special committee composed of Ford Frick, Will Harridge, Sam Breadon, Tom Yawkey, Phil Wrigley and Larry MacPhail.

Thank you so very much, Ubiquitous!!!

This sickening attempt to make themselves appear concerned about the welfare of the Negro players. Such feigned innocence can only be the product of wealth hiring the most high-powered advertising/marketing whores to make bald-faced hypocrisy/cynicism sound reasonable, as business as usual.

[Bill Burgess]

Introducing Martin Bergen,
Born: October 25, 1871, North Brookfield, Mass
Died: January 19, 1900, North Brookfield, Mass., age 28
Red Sox catcher, 1896 - 1899, 5'10", 170, BL/TL

William B. Hanna, Oct., 1956? - Nov. 20, 1930; NY sportswriter, 1888-1930
Bennett was great as a backstop. So were Johnny Kling, Lou Criger, Martin Bergen, Jimmy Archer, Billy Sullivan and Bill Killefer, and Doe Bushong. So are Schalk, O'Neill, Severeid, Bassler and O'Farrell, the last named one of the best of the day for all around excellence.

None has made the intaglio-like impress of Ewing. (Baseball Magazine, June, 1924, pp. 300)

Marty was listed on the All-Time All-Star Teams of Roger Bresnahan in 1936 and Hugh Duffy's in 1936, along with Mike "King" Kelly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tonight, I'd like to tell the story of Martin Bergen. It's a very interesting tale, but I warn you, it's a very sad story. A very good man, who killed. It's a story long forgotten, yet one I feel is worth remembering. A good man who fought the scourge of mental illness. May I present:

The Sad Story of Marty Bergen.
Chicago Daily Tribune, January 20, 1900, pp. 5
CRIME OF A BALLPLAYER

Martin Bergen of Boston Team Kills Self and Family

Slays Wife and Two Children at North Brookfield, Mass., While Insane--Uses Ax and Razor--Was A Great Catcher in National League--His Strange Actions During Last Season Caused Comment Among His Fellows.

Boston, Mass., Jan. 19.--[Special.]--Martin Bergen, the famous catcher of the Boston Baseball club, murdered his entire family, consisting of his wife and two children, and then killed himself, at their residence, two miles from the village of North Brookfield, Mass., some time during last night.
Bergen's father, who lived with him for a long time, had been away for several days. This morning he returned to the farm, and on entering the house found his son Martin stretched on the floor with the little daughter, Florence, by his side, with their throats cut. On the table was a razor, which explained the implement with which the father and child had met their deaths. For a few minutes the old man was so overcome he could only sink down in his weakness. After a little, however, he recovered strength to make further investigation, and on entering the bedroom of the mother he found her lifeless body across the bed, with her little son Martin almost in her arms. The life had long before left them.

The aged man hurried to the house of a neighbor and the alarm was spread. No one knows exactly just how it all happened, but it is evident from the way things were found at the Bergen residence the ball player was suddenly seized during the night with an insane frenzy, and jumping from the sofa on which he had been sleeping he rushed into his wife's bedroom, where he killed her and their son with the blunt back of an ax.

He evidently cut the throat of the little girl, Florence, and completed the tragedy by taking his own life with the razor, which he threw on the table as he fell to die on the kitchen floor. All four bodies were in their night clothes, showing that the deed had been committed some time after the family retired last evening and before breakfast this morning.

Acts Indicated Insanity

For a long time Bergen has been acting in a strange manner, but many attributed his actions during the last season as simply due to his eccentricity. These who knew him best, however, always said that there was something wrong with Martin's head.

He had been especially despondent at times since the death of his little son George, which took place during the summer. Since then he has not been like himself, but never showed the slightest tendency to violence. His insanity was shown by his great despondency at times and his difficulty to get along with people with whom he had daily business.

His one dream of life was to make a home for his family they might be proud of, and that after he had retired from the ball field and the cheers of the thousands he could live there in contentment.

Well Liked in Village

His first idea of a farm in the country was to secure a home for his aged father, who understood the work of a farm. The father had quite an influence over Martin, and the son held his father in high esteem. Among the people of the village he was considered an ideal citizen. Everybody had a good word and a kind tribute to pay to his energies. He was known by everybody and everybody liked to stop him on the village street and have a chat with him. It was when he got among ball players he seemed to lose the gentle nature which pervaded him when he was among the people of his own village.

The tragedy of today ends the life of one of the best ball players who ever stood behind the plate.

Strange Acts In Boston

President Soden of the Boston club tonight said he was well aware Bergen had absolutely no control of himself at times, for Bergen himself told him that when asked to explain his absences from the team. Bergen told Mr. Soden that at times he would be seized with an uncontrollable impulse to go home, and when the impulse came on him he would not say a work to any one, but just go. When the club was to go away on a trip there was no telling whether Bergen would be on hand or not, and on more than one occasion he left the club during a trip. It was on account of the belief the player could not control himself every allowance was made for him.

Bergen was such a superb player that his shortcomings were overlooked, as they would not be in any other case. When the difference arose last season between Bergen and his fellow players, and the players said they would not play under him, the directors stood by Bergen, well knowing that he was wholly irresponsible and unable to control his actions.

Manager Selee was astonished when he heard of the tragedy. He said he had no serious trouble with Bergen, and considered him a tractable man. Even when the player absented himself from the team, which was as often as to cause comment, there were no words when he returned, and the relations with the players would be resumed exactly where they left off.

The winter baseball colony in Chicago was shocked at the news of Martin Bergen's act. Yet the impression was general among National league players that the Boston catcher was not quite "right." His peculiar actions during the last playing season had been extensively commented on in the newspapers, and it then had been charged that Bergen was slightly insane.

Players of other clubs had noted the morose disposition of the man. In 1898 Bergen was the best catcher in the National league, and his gingery work behind the bat did a great deal to win the pennant for the Boston team that season. Last year there was a slight falling off in Bergen's play; he was unlucky at times, and had a bad season. He frequently told visiting players he did not have a friend on the Boston team, and his refusal to associate with his fellow-players was the subject of comment.

"It's too bad," said Catcher Donahue of the Chicago Club. "Bergen was a good fellow at heart, but he was a victim of imagination, and while I never expected anything of this kind I am not surprised at it after all." (Chicago Daily Tribune, January 20, 1900, pp. 5)

Afternotes: His Career on the Diamond:
Bergen's professional career was begun with the Wilkes-Barre Club of the Eastern League in 1893, but later on he was sold to the Pittsburgh Club, of the National League. In 1894 he was with the Lewiston Club, of the New England League. At the close of that season the Washington Club, of the National League, and the Kansas City Club, of the Western League, laid claim to him, but the national board decided in favor of the latter, and Bergen remained with Manager Manning's team until his release was secured by the Boston Club in September, 1895, in exchange for Shortstop Connaughton and a bonus of $4,000. He was not in good shape in 1896 to do himself justice, but in 1897 he caught in nearly all the championship games in first-class style.

Bergen was one of the greatest catchers that ever donned a mask. Possessed of an arm of steel, he snapped the ball around the infield like a shot, and was regarded as the equal of Buck Ewing in point of throwing ability. He was well-nigh perfect on foul flies, and a timely, reliable batsman. He has a younger brother, Bill, also a backstop, and a promising young player. Bergen was a strict Roman Catholic, temperate and frugal, and managed to save quite a snug income from his earnings as a catcher. (Washington Post, January 20, 1900, pp. 1)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marty Bergen's Gold Glove Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1896 - 1
1897 - 2 (Warner)
1898 - 3 (Criger)
1899 - 6 (Bowerman)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

Early Player Proflies:

Introducing Buck Ewing:
October 27, 1859 - October 20, 1906;
NL catcher, IF, OF, 3B, 2B, P, 1880-97
NL manager, 1890, 1895-1900

Bill James; Nov. 5, 1949 - Still Alive;
Prolific author of BB books, popularized new study of BB stats, called "sabermetrics", amazingly widely-read on BB subjects.

First called my attention to Buck Ewing, in his 1st Hist. Abstract, pp. 33-35. Bill points out that many respected BB men considered Ewing to be the greatest all-around PLAYER ever, not simply the greatest catcher. John B. Foster, Mickey Welch and Monte Ward all thought Buck was the greatest ballplayer ever to play the game, until the day they died. That got my attention. Sadly, Bill now down-rates Buck as a catcher due to so few games caught.

John P. McCarthy, Jr. also chooses Buck as his catcher on his A team, from his book, Baseball's All Time Dream Team, 1994.

Connie Mack,
Dec. 22, 1862 - Feb. 6, 1956;
NL catcher (1886-96), Phil Athletics' manager (1901-50)
Had Ewing as his catcher as late as Dec. 24, 1931, and John McGraw had Buck as his catcher until he died.

John McGraw,
April 7, 1873 - Feb. 25, 1934;
ML 3B (1891-06); Baltimore Oriole man. (1899 , 01-02), NY Giants man. 1902-32)
Had Buck as his catcher until he died.

Grantland Rice,
Nov. 1, 1880 - July 13, 1954;
(Atlanta, Cle., Nashville, NY spwr. 1902-54) Most loved, and widely read sports writer of all time.
Put him on a All Time team in 1918. (Sporting News, Jan. 10, 1918, pp. 5, column 2.)

4. Clark Griffith,
Nov. 20, 1898 - Oct. 27, 1955;
(ML pitcher,1891-14), (Senators manager,1901-20), Senators owner,1920-55
Chose Buck as his catcher of his scientific team in 1952, and Cochrane / Dickey for his "power" team. (Sporting News, July 23, 1952, pp. 12)

A 3rd book describing Buck is The Greatest Giants of Them All by Arnold Hano, 1967. The section describing Buck is superb and too long to insert here. But one can read this cool fascinating stuff on Buck Ewing through inter-library loans, for almost free.

Buck Ewing has been my catcher for about 17 years now. He was reputed to have been the best all-around PLAYER of the 1800's.

John B. Foster,
July 16, 1863-Sept. 29, 1941;
NY sports writer, 1888-1941, Editor-in-Chief of Official Spalding Baseball Guide(1908-41), NY Giants business manager/secretary, 1912-1919.
In spring, 1938, John B. Foster, the long time editor of Spalding Official Baseball Guide, from 1908-41, finally chose his all-time team, and chose Ewing as his choice for the Greatest Ever Player. Foster had been watching players come and go since 1887.

Here is John Foster's entry for Ewing, from that 1938 Guide.
The first to be picked, and the first who should be selected in this stretch of fifty years, is William Ewing, better known as Buck."

He is to be the catcher. He has been called the greatest all-round player ever connected with the game. I think that he was. He pitched, played every position on the infield and played the outfield. He did not play at them but played them. I was ready to laugh at his efforts when he essayed to pitch, but he quickly cured me of the inclination. Although he did not have the finesse of Tim Keefe, that great pitcher who was his contemporary, he showed that he had the art, was thoroughly conversant with the batter's weakness, and was doing his level best to pitch to it.

The great speed of Keefe, the curves of Mickey Welsh and the cannonball service of ponderous Ed Crane were missing in Ewing, yet he had an effective style of his own and the batter was not slow in ascertaining it. He was a good adviser to his brother "Long John."

As a thrower to bases Ewing never had a superior, and there are not to exceed ten men who could come anywhere near being equal to him. Ewing was the man of whom it was said, He handed the ball to the second baseman from the batter's box. George W. Howe, treasurer of the Cleveland club, once asked the manager of the team, Oliver Tebeau, why the runners of Cleveland, who were very good, did not steal bases more often when they play New York. Because they're out before they start, was the quick replay. "That man behind the bat for New York can't be fooled. He knows when a runner is going to start practically as soon as the runner decides to make the attempt, and he shoots the ball down to Richardson, who catches the best man we've got.

He stands up an waits for him to come, and makes our runners look foolish."
What was said by Tebeau voiced the sentiment of every other captain in the league. Even the famed Mike Kelly used to study Ewing for minutes at a time, trying to find out how he managed to get the ball to second so smoothly and quickly." (Spalding NL Official Base Ball Guide, 1938, pp. 14)

Francis C. Richter,
Jan. 26, 1854-Feb. 12, 1926;
Philadelphia sportswriter (1876-1926), AL Reach Baseball Guide Editor-In-Chief (1901-1926, death)

John B. Foster's counterpart, Francis C. Richter, who had been watching ballplayers since the 1868, chose Ewing as the Greatest Player Ever in 1919.
Mr. Richter was a Phil. spwr. since 1872, and served as the Editor-In-Chief of the AL Official Base Ball Guide from 1902-1926. He had started sp. dept. at newspapers, and was of the most influential movers & shakers in baseball. Even though by 1925, Richter had evolved to Cobb, that only served to prove that he had never allowed himself to grow stale. Here is the quote from Richter, taken from the 1919 Reach AL Baseball Official Guide.

"It is a difficult, not to say ungrateful, task to select any one player as superior to all the rest, though we have always been inclined to consider Catcher-Manager William (Buck) Ewing in his prime, from 1884 to 1890, as the greatest player of the game. From the standpoint of supreme excellence in all departments-batting, catching fielding, base running, throwing and base ball brains-a player without a weakness of any kind, physical, mental, or temperamental. . . ."

I have seen all the players in the major leagues in action since 1868, and . . . Ty Cobb appears to me to be, with two exceptions, just a trifle superior to all the rest. . . these two exceptions are Buck Ewing, the greatest catcher that ever stood in shoe leather and Hans Wagner, the super-excellent shortstop of the Pittsburgh club." (Reach AL Baseball Official Guide, 1919)

John McGraw,
April 7, 1873 - Feb. 25, 1934;
ML 3B (1891-06); Baltimore Oriole man. (1899 , 01-02), NY Giants man. 1902-32)
In 1919, John McGraw had this to say about Buck. "Roger Bresnahan was the greatest catcher I ever saw, always excepting Buck Ewing."
(Baseball Magazine, May, 1919, pp. 14)

Four years later, In his autobiography in 1923, John J. McGraw, had this to say about Buck Ewing. He came as near to being a catcher without a single weakness as the game has ever known. In fact, Buck Ewing was a Ty Cobb behind the bat. He had a mental capacity equal to his playing ability. Ewing could handle a team perfectly. He had an uncanny knack of getting the jump on the pitchers.

No player ever studied a rival pitcher's delivery closer and was so quick to take advantage of the slightest false move. As a thrower Buck excelled. He got the ball away from him with a quick round arm snap, no time being wasted. Buck threw what is known as a very "heavy" ball, one that dropped in the baseman's hand like a lump of lead. Ewing had so much confidence in his throwing that I have seen him deliberately roll the ball away from him just to tempt the base runner into a steal. He was hard hitter as well as a scientific place hitter. Roger Bresnahan was a close second to Ewing in all that goes to make a great catcher." (John J. McGraw, My Thirty Years in Baseball, by John J. McGraw, as told to Bozeman Bulger, 1923, pp. 214)

In a truly wonderful article for The Sporting News, dated Feb.18, 1932, John B. Foster, gives a glowing description of Ewing. I've cherry-picked a few choice tid-bits from that article.

"There are some who think Charley Bennett was a trifle superior to Ewing and some who incline to Mike Kelly. Of these two, Bennett was much the better. Kelly was popular with the crowd, but, as a technician, he was not the equal of Bennett, and the latter was not the equal of Ewing in brilliancy as well as in physical attainments.

One day, he was talking about throwing and about his arm. "I can snap them just as easy as I can throw them." he said. What's the use of standing up every time you want to catch a man off the bases. You have got to lose two steps on the runner while you are straightening yourself out. You see, my forearm is pretty strong," extending his arm for inspection, as he said it.

"I've got good muscles below the elbow and around it. I'll bet that I can throw into the outfield using my forearm only, nearly as far as some players can throw if they put all they have into an overhand motion." "But don't you think that some day you will hurt your arm by so much of this forearm snapping of the ball?" "I don't see why. It's there, and good. Tell me what difference it makes if you use the muscles of your lower arm, depend upon them, you might say, and don't use the muscles around your shoulder." It may not make any difference, but some baseball men, you know, have a hunch that your forearm will give out quicker than your upper arm."

I'm still goin'," was the reply. Yet that was the very thing that happened. (Spring, 1892) His forearm did give out and he could no longer snap the ball as he had, but he could throw fairly well overhand and so he played in the outfield after he had finished catching.

Ewing could handle the delivery of any pitcher. He was as remarkable in that respect as he was in others. Ed Crane, who was called Hercules in his day--and he was the model of a Hercules--had more speed than any other pitcher in the National League, but did not know how to control the ball, and to try to catch him was a task and something of a physical feat, for he had the reputation of tearing up the hands of a catcher because of his speed. Ewing could handle him and escape the punishment that other catchers seemed to receive and he could get winning games out of him where others failed to keep him steady.

As a field general, Buck brought the Giants into the championship class. John Ward had tried it and failed. Ward was a good leader, but not of the type of Ewing, and not qualified to handle a team like the Giants as successfully as Ewing could handle them. Buck knew the plays and the players of other teams. I doubt whether any catcher ever knew opposing batters more thoroughly than he did and that helped to make him great.

One day, I told him I thought he led all the catchers in baseball history . . . "I'm glad you think so," said Buck. "I tried to do the best I could and oh, man, but I did love to play with the old Giants. I used to think that if I could catch as well as Charley Bennett was catching for Boston, we could win the championship. We only beat 'em a game in 1889, so there couldn't have been much difference between me and Charley." (The Sporting News, Feb.18, 1932, pp. 5, "Buck Ewing Called Greatest Catcher in Game's History, by John B. Foster)

John M. Ward - "There will never be another Ewing. He is on top. He was a great hitter and a brilliant man back of the plate."

Ward was being quoted by Granny Rice. (The History of Baseball, by Allison Danzig and Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 255, column 1)

Tim Keefe - Upon Buck's death on Oct. 21, 1906, his former pitcher, Tim Keefe had these comments. "The other players on the team would go through fire and water for Buck, and I believe no better captain ever stepped upon a ball field. The game has not in its ranks to-day any one who can approach him. I say most unhesitatingly that I never knew his equal as an all-around ball player.

"He was a fine fellow both on and off the field. While the greatest catcher of ancient or modern times, he could do a smart trick in the box, and once almost killed Roger Conner with one of his fast ones. He could play any infield position skillfully. I never saw any one play a deeper short than he. He was a great man for his pitcher, for he knew how to steady him, and no one ever made a deeper study of the weaknesses of opposing batsman." (Washington Post, Oct. 28, 1906, pp. S4)

Cap Anson,
April 11, 1852 - April 14, 1922;
(ML 1B, 1871-97), (ML man., 1875, '79-98)
The best catcher I ever saw was Buck Ewing, who caught for the Giants when they won the world's championship in 1888 and 1889. I have never to this day seen his equal, but little Walters, of the New York Yankees, reminds me of Ewing's throwing on bases. "Ewing was a quick thinker and a natural born leader. (Washington Post, June 3, 1917, pp. S18)

Sam Crane,
Jan. 2, 1854-June 26, 1925;
ML 2B, 1880-90. NY sportswriter, 1990-25
"Buck Ewing was the best catcher I ever saw," says Crane. "He had everything." (Baseball Magazine, April, 1918, pp. 475)

4. Clark Griffith,
Nov. 20, 1898 - Oct. 27, 1955;
(ML pitcher,1891-14), (Senators manager,1901-20), Senators owner,1920-55
"In the catching line, the stars of the present day, are not as good as those of the other days. Buck Ewing never has known an equal as a catcher. I call him the best ball player the world ever has known. The only man who ever approached him was Mike Kelly, of the old Chicago White Sox. Kelly, too, was a wonder, but not quite equal to Ewing." (Washington Post, April 26, 1914, pp. S2.)

Ned Hanlon,
Aug. 22, 1857-April 14, 1937;
ML OF 1880-92, NL man. 1889-1907, exc. 1890 player's L. manager.
"No man ever had anything on Buck Ewing as a catcher. He had a wonderful arm, a great head, and was, in my opinion, the best all-round player that ever lived." (Washington Post, Oct. 28, 1906, pp. S4) By 1909, Ned had evolved to Ty Cobb, as his number one ranked player, all time.

John B. Sheridan,
Jan. 22, 1870-April 14, 1930;
St. Louis spwr. (1888-1929), Sporting News column, "Back of Home Plate", 1917-29

(Joe) Vila questions the equality of Roger Bresnahan as a catcher to Buck Ewing, Mike Kelly or Charley Bennett. I have had doubts between Breshahan and Ewing, but none about Bresnahan or Ewing's superiority to Kelly or Bennett. To my mind, Kelly was a great personality rather than a great ball player. He was, when fit, a good hitter, a clever base runner or entertaining player, but he never appealed to me as a great technician behind the bat. Charley Bennett was slow, and a good mark to pitch to, a good thrower. Ewing could receive, plan, throw, hit and run bases. I have always agreed Buck was one of the three greatest catchers, Bresnahan and Kling being the other two. I believe that Ewing and Kling had technically, better hands, were better receivers and takers of throws than Bresnahan . . . (Sporting News, February 11, 1926, pp. 4, column 6)

William B. Hanna,
June, 1966 - Nov. 20, 1930;
NY sportswriter, 1888-1930
"Buck Ewing, more than any other catcher, combined the four cardinal qualities of physical greatness as a backstop. He was A1 as a batter, fielder, base runner and in head work. If you'll think over the other catchers you will find few, if any, who had all of these virtues.

Roger Breshahan came nearest, or Wally Schang, or Wilber Robinson. They were faster afoot than most catchers. A number of receivers could hit and catch and throw as well as Ewing, possibly Bennett was great as a backstop. So were Johnny Kling, Lou Criger, Martin Bergen, Jimmy Archer, Billy Sullivan and Bill Killefer, and Doe Bushong. So are Schalk, Severeid, Bassler and O'Farrell, the last named one of the best of the day for all around excellence. None has made the intaglio-like impress of Ewing. (Baseball Magazine, June, 1924, pp. 300, "Did you ever stop to realize that Roger Bresnahan is the second Buck Ewing of Baseball?" I hadn't, having created a sacred pedestal for Ewing. They broke the Ewing mould. (NY Herald Tribune, Dec. 31, 1926, From an Oldtimer's Notebook, by W. B. Hanna)

Joe Vila,
Dec.16, 1886 - April 27, 1934;
NYC sports writer, 1893-1934
"A six footer, weighing 180 pounds, Ewing was noted for his all-around skill. He was a smart backstop, possessing a complete knowledge of the weak points of enemy hitters, a magnificent thrower to bases, always a .300 hitter and rated among the fastest base runners. Ewing not only was superb catcher, but he played every infield position capably and on several occasions showed that he would pitch with more than ordinary skill. "The History of Baseball: Its great Players, Teams and Managers, ed. By Allison Danzig & Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 256) Joe Vila wrote the above quote in the NY Sun in 1934.

Lee Allen,
(Jan. 12, 1915 - May 20, 1969);
(Cincinnati spwr. 1945 - 1958), (Hall of Fame Historian, 1959-69);
"But Detroit also had Charlie Bennett, considered the greatest catcher in the game except for Buck Ewing;" (The National League Story, by Lee Allen, 1961, pp. 61)

On more than one occasion he caught a brilliant game on one day, and on the following afternoon put in Bill Brown behind the bat and went into the box himself. In the fall of 1888 Ewing went to California as one of the star attractions of the Championship Giants, assisted by Mike Kelly, Jerry Denny, and Tom Brown. Ewing performed the remarkable feat of pitching every game played on that trip, sometimes two in a day, and winning all except one. The following year he caught eighty championship contests for the Giants without missing a game.

As aggressive a player as Buck was, he was never a rowdy in an age of unruly players. He didn't verbally abuse anyone and hence was extremely popular with all. One day in the spring of 1892, when he went to Connecticut to play an exhibition game with the New York's. It was snowing and the wind was cold and raw. Ewing made a quick throw to second base and something snapped in this shoulder. He never fully recovered the use of his throwing arm afterward.

During his career, he accumulated a small fortune that allowed him to live in comfort after he retired from the game. In the 7 yrs. After he retired from baseball until his death, he lived well-to-do, owning considerable property throughout the West. He had always had the good common sense to put away a good part of each year's stipend.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buck Ewing's Gold Glove Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1880 - 16
1881 - 3 (Bennett)
1882 - 5 (Bennett)
1883 - 2 (Bushong)
1884 - 2 (Gilligan)
1885 - 1
1886 - 4 (Bennett)
1887 - 13 (Boyle)
1888 - 2 (Bennett)
1889 - 2 (Zimmer)
1890 - 3 (Farrell)
1891 - NR
1892 (1B) - 7 (Virtue)
1892 (C) - 23
1893 (RF) - 5 (Treadway)
1894 (RF) - 6 (Bannon)
1895 (1B) - 10 (Beckley)
1896 (1B) - 2 (Tebeau)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill James, in his 1st Historical Abstract, 1985, said that while he wasn't including players from pre-1900 and the Negro leagues in his top 100 All-Time list, he considered players Buck Ewing, Satchel Paige, and Oscar Charleston, not beneath his list, but in the top 10 in some other invisible theoretical list, alongside of it. Sadly, in his 2nd Historical Abstract, 2001, he doesn't include Ewing in his top 100 list, due to his catching only 636 games in 13 yrs. He rates Buck only 17 among catchers all-time. I first discovered Buck Ewing in Bill's 1st Historical Abstract. And I've seen no reason to down-rate him since. Buck stopped catching at age 32, because he threw his famous forearm out in spring, 1892.

Most people today don't remember that in 1936, there were supposed to originally be 5 pre- 1900 players elected along with the Original 5. It didn't work out that way. Needing 59 votes to get in, the leading vote getters were Buck Ewing with 40, Cap Anson 40, Keeler 33, Young 32 Ed Delahanty 22, McGraw 17, Herman Long 16, Charlie Radbourne 16, Mike Kelly 16, Amos Rusie 12. So none got elected.

So, in 1939, Judge Landis, Ford Frick and William Harridge selected Buck Ewing, Cap Anson, Al Spalding, Candy Cummings, Comiskey, Radbourne for inclusion in the Hall. Less desirous way to get in. Apparently, the post 1930 world has forgotten why 40 original voters thought Buck Ewing was fully the equal of Anson, as a player. I plan to remind them.

Most well-informed baseball fans now consider Buck Ewing the best all-around player who played pre-1900.

Bill James once considered Buck Ewing to be among the top 10 all-around position players of a theoretical All-Time list.

Author John P. McCarthy, Jr., who wrote Baseball's All-Time Dream Team, 1994, considers Buck Ewing the greatest catcher of all time.

I contend that the immortal Buck Ewing was the greatest catcher of all time, and until 1892, among the Top 10 All-Around Position Players of All Time, and the greatest All-Around Player of the 1800's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chancellor's analysis of catchers:

Bennett was regarded as the best catcher (i.e. not player as Buck Ewing or Roger Bresnahan were, but catcher) of the 19th century (and on into the deadball era.)

Ewing played more games at catcher than at other positions in the following seasons: 1881, 1883-86, 1888-90. In total, Ewing was behind the plate for only 636 out of 1,345 games. Bennett, on the other hand, played 954 of 1,084 career games at catcher.

Ewing, interestingly enough, is also credited with 4 "gold gloves" (as determined by defensive win shares), the same number as Bennett.

I poured over Win Shares for a few minutes, gathering the following:

From 1881-83, Charlie Bennett was the best catcher in the National League each of those three seasons. (Buck Ewing was usually second-best.)

From 1884-86 and from 1888-89 Buck Ewing was the best catcher in the National League each of those five seasons. (Charlie Bennett was usually second-best.) Also, in 1890, Buck Ewing was the best catcher in the Players League.

From 1881-89 either Bennett or Ewing was the best catcher in the NL with the sole exception of 1887, when Jim O'Rourke played 40 games at catcher, more than at any other position. (O'Rourke also played 38 games at third and 28 games in the outfield.) If you wanted a minimum percent of games played to qualify, then, you could technically crown Ewing the best catcher in the NL that year, too.

In their declining years in the 1890s, both Bennett and Ewing were eclipsed by Chief Zimmer, Jack Clements and Duke Farrell as the best catchers in baseball.

For a little over a decade, however, Bennett and Ewing were neck-and-neck as the best catchers in the game.

Editors Note: After Bill's comments made me look I must concede that Ewing's value as a catcher is diminished somewhat less by his 636 games than I had first thought.

Of the three names you mentioned - Bennett, Ewing and Kelly - I would have to rate them as offensive players in the following order:

Mike "King" Kelly
Buck Ewing
Charlie Bennett

Ewing, who is closer to Kelly than to Bennett offensively, played many more seasons primarily as a catcher and finished his career with more games at catcher than anywhere else (though he, too, was used at a number of other positions on a regular basis.)

Bennett was a full-time catcher, but his OPS+ of 118, while much better than most players, wasn't as good as Ewing - even if you just include Ewing's "catcher seasons".

So, I'd rate Ewing an edge over Bennett where I would tend to keep Kelly out of the ratings at all (though he was a better hitter than Ewing, if you're just talking about offensive ability.

Also...I would rate Deacon White in between Ewing and Bennett. White was the best catcher of the early years of professional baseball and was one of the game's first stars.


In the 19th century, only Charlie Bennett, Buck Ewing and Pop Snyder led catchers in their league in defensive excellence four times. No catcher in history did it for a fifth time until Ray Schalk, at the end of the deadball era.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Jimmy Archer,
May 13, 1883 - March 29, 1958
ML catcher, 1904, 07-18

William B. Hanna,
Oct., 1966? - Nov. 20, 1930; NY sportswriter, 1888-1930
Bennett was great as a backstop. So were Johnny Kling, Lou Criger, Martin Bergen, Jimmy Archer, Billy Sullivan and Bill Killifer, and Doe Bushong. So are Schalk, O'Neill, Severeid, Bassler and O'Farrell, the last named one of the best of the day for all around excellence. None has made the intaglio-like impress of Ewing. (Baseball Magazine, June, 1924, pp. 300)

Joe Williams,
Dec. 17, 1889 - Feb. 15, 1972; Cleveland & NY sportswriter, 1910-1964
How many catchers from 1900 on would you name above Bresnahan? Who were the star catchers the period developed? Johnny Kling, Jimmy Archer, Ray Schalk, Steve O'Neill, Bob O'Farrell, Gabby Hartnett, Mickey Cochrane and a few others. (The History of Baseball: Its great Players, Teams and Managers, ed. By Allison Danzig & Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 255; Writing in 1937 of the players who had failed to qualify for the Hall of Fame, Joe Williams said in the NY World-Telegram:)
"Jimmy Archer became a great pitcher through an accident. . . . Much has been printed this winter about the marvelous throwing ability of Archer.
Jimmy can throw from a crouch position and he uses simply his forearm in making the "peg" to second or third or first. At catching runners trying to steal or runners off base he is equally good.
The wonderful record he made while catching for the Cubs last year was due to the fact that he can throw by using simply his right arm and without taking a standing position. Other catchers have tried the Archer method without success. They find they cannot throw unless the entire body is brought into action. The time it takes them to get into an upright position and take proper aim gives the base runner the necessary opportunity."

Archer explained that several years before he had been badly burned and the scar tissue remained. And that scar tissue enabled him to snap the ball to his infielders. The snap travels at the same speed as the many muscles in other catchers throwing from an upright position. For other catchers to try to throw like Archer would tire them out in a short time. (Washington Post, March 6, 1910, pp. M7)

The Chicago Cubs, when they won pennants for Frank Chance, had two superb catchers in Johnny Kling and Jimmy Archer. (The History of Baseball: Its great Players, Teams and Managers, ed. by Allison Danzig & Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 256)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jimmie Archer's Gold Gloves Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1904 - 27 (B. Bergen)
1907 - 20 (Schreckengost)
1909 - 4 (Gibson)
1910 - 6 (Gibson)
1911 - 1
1912 - 3 (O. Miller)
1913 - 5 (Killifer)
1914 - 10 (Gowdy)
1915 - 5 (Snyder)
1916 - 8 (Gowdy)
1917 - 10 (Schmidt)
1918 - 7 (Schmidt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chancellor's analysis of catchers:

Jimmie Archer and Billy Sullivan won a single "gold glove" each while Marty Bergen never led his league in defensive wizardry behind the plate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Charlie Bennett,
(Nov. 21, 1854 - Feb. 24, 1927)
(NL catcher, 1878 - 1893)

On January 12, 1894, at the age of 39, while still active as a ballplayer, he was run over by a train at Wellsville, KA, and had to have both his legs amputated. Detroit's ballpark was subsequently named after Charlie.

In the superb book, "The History of Baseball: Its great Players, Teams and Managers, ed. By Allison Danzig & Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 255,
we find this introduction to its CATCHERS section;
The GREAT CATCHERS of baseball have included Bill Dickey, Roger Bresnahan, Mickey Cochrane, Gabby Hartnett, Buck Ewing, Johnny Kling, Ray Schalk and Roy Campanella. Also, Jimmy Archer, Lou Criger, Martin Bergen, Wallie Schang, Steve O'Neil, Bob O'Farrell, Charlie Bennett, Rick Ferrell, Mike (King) Kelly, Gabby Street, Billy Sullivan, Jimmy Wilson, Hank Gowdy, Bill Killifer, Wilbert Robinson, Walker Cooper, Al Lopez, Yogi Berra and Ernie Lombardi.

William B. Hanna,
June, 1966 - Nov. 20, 1930; NY sportswriter, 1888-1930
Bennett was great as a backstop. So were Johnny Kling, Lou Criger, Martin Bergen, Jimmy Archer, Billy Sullivan and Bill Killefer, and Doe Bushong. So are Schalk, O'Neill, Severeid, Bassler and O'Farrell, the last named one of the best of the day for all around excellence. None has made the intaglio-like impress of Ewing. (Baseball Magazine, June, 1924, pp. 300)

Francis C. Richter, Philadelphia sportswriter (1876-1926), AL Reach Baseball Guide Editor-In-Chief (1901-1926, death)
Charley Bennett was listed with Buck Ewing as the 2 best catchers from 1880-1890, by Francis Richter.

Robert Sensenderfer,
(Dec. 31, 1883 - Jan. 3, 1957) (Philadelphia spwr. 50 yrs.)
In the Philadelphia Bulletin in 1936, listed Buck Ewing and Charlie Bennett among the great players of baseball prior to 1900.

3. Tim H. Murnane,
June 4, 1851 - Feb 7, 1917;
ML 1B, 1872-78;
Boston spwr. 1888-1917 of the Boston Globe listed the game's
Listed Bennett on his All American team in 1900.

Kid Nichols,
(Sept. 14, 1869 - April 11, 1953)
(NL pitcher, 1890 - 1901, 04-06)
"Charley Bennett was the best catcher during my time. He worked with me in Boston until he lost his legs in a railroad accident. He went through several seasons without having a passed ball. He never had an equal as a throw to bases." Bennett was the catcher of the world champion Detroit Team of 1887. He went through several seasons without having a passed ball. He never had an equal as a throw to bases."

Bennett was the catcher of the world champion Detroit Team of 1887.

I also suspect that they caught so few games per season because of injuries. With the doctored balls they were allowed to throw, a lot of errand ball hit their hands, split their nails, banged their shins, rickocheed off their knees, etc. It is known that a lot of the old catchers ended up with gnarled, grotesquely distorted fingers. Here is an excerpt from my Charlie Bennet post from my Ty Cobb Thread.

"When he was forced to give up baseball, Bennett came back to Detroit and became adept at painting chinaware. First he tried it as a pastime and later as means of livelihood. It was with characteristic patience that Bennett trained his distorted fingers in the delicate art of china painting. . . . it is certain that Bennett ranked with the greatest catchers of his period. Above all else, he was loyal to his job, frequently sticking behind the plate when suffering intense pain from injuries sustained in the line of duty.

James Hart, manager of the old Boston club, has told how Bennett once insisted on catching though his hands were torn and bleeding. In fact, Bennett had caught several innings before it was known he was injured. The knowledge did not come from Bennett but from John Clarkson, his pitcher, who griped that when the ball was returned to him, it was stained with blood. Even when Clarkson reported it to Management, Bennett protested against leaving the game and it was only after much insisting that he consented to leave." (Thursday, Sporting News, March 3, 1927, pp. by Sam Greene)

It is the author's contention that Charlie Bennett was the 2nd greatest defensive catcher of the 1800's, after the immortal Buck Ewing, although not the equal as an all-around catcher of King Kelly, due to offense. I hold that Charlie Bennett deserves to rank among the very greatest defensive catchers of all time. I do not advocate Charlie Bennett for the Hall of Fame.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlie Bennett's Gold Gloves Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1878 - 8 (Snyder)
1879 - NR
1880 - 2 (Clapp)
1881 - 1
1882 - 1
1883 - T3 (Bushong)
1884 - 7 (Gilligan)
1885 - 5 (Ewing)
1886 - 1
1887 - 4 (Daly)
1888 - 1
1889 - 4 (Zimmer)
1890 - 2 (Zimmer)
1891 - 3 (Zimmer)
1892 - 22 (Zimmer)
1893 - 14 (Farrell)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chancellor's Analysis of catchers:

Munson had a 116 OPS+ in 5,900 plate appearances. Bennett had a slightly higher OPS+ in roughly 1,500 fewer PAs. The difference, however, in playing time has everything to do with the eras in which they played.

Bennett was the starting catcher on his teams from 1881-91, through eleven seasons.

Bennett, on the other hand, stole 42 bases from the age of 31 on; there's no verifiable data on CS for those years or for SB totals prior to 1886. It isn't difficult to imagine that Bennett's career steals would look a little bit better if all the data were available.

Bennett, playing many generations before the award was invented, won none of course.

According to defensive win shares, however, Bennett should have won 4 - in 1881-82, 1886 and 1890. Bennett receives an "A".

Bennett also won 2 post-season championships (and with two different teams) and had 13 hits and 10 RBIs in the 13 post-season games he appeared in.

Bennett was regarded as the best catcher (i.e. not player as Buck Ewing or Roger Bresnahan were, but catcher) of the 19th century (and on into the deadball era.)

Bennett meets 26.3 of the Hall of Fame's standards (where an "average" Hall of Famer meets 50.0).

Bennett's career was abruptly interrupted by his losing both legs in an accident when he slipped crossing train tracks in 1894. Bennett was, in fact, so highly thought-of at the time that his former team, the Detroit Wolverines (later Tigers), named their ballpark after him; to this day Bennett remains the only player ever to receive that honor.

Ewing played more games at catcher than at other positions in the following seasons: 1881, 1883-86, 1888-90. In total, Ewing was behind the plate for only 636 out of 1,345 games. Bennett, on the other hand, played 954 of 1,084 career games at catcher.

Ewing, interestingly enough, is also credited with 4 "gold gloves" (as determined by defensive win shares), the same number as Bennett.

I poured over Win Shares for a few minutes, gathering the following:

From 1881-83, Charlie Bennett was the best catcher in the National League each of those three seasons. (Buck Ewing was usually second-best.)

From 1884-86 and from 1888-89 Buck Ewing was the best catcher in the National League each of those five seasons. (Charlie Bennett was usually second-best.) Also, in 1890, Buck Ewing was the best catcher in the Players League.

From 1881-89 either Bennett or Ewing was the best catcher in the NL with the sole exception of 1887, when Jim O'Rourke played 40 games at catcher, more than at any other position. (O'Rourke also played 38 games at third and 28 games in the outfield.) If you wanted a minimum percent of games played to qualify, then, you could technically crown Ewing the best catcher in the NL that year, too.

In their declining years in the 1890s, both Bennett and Ewing were eclipsed by Chief Zimmer, Jack Clements and Duke Farrell as the best catchers in baseball.

For a little over a decade, however, Bennett and Ewing were neck-and-neck as the best catchers in the game.

Editors Note: After Bill's comments made me look I must concede that Ewing's value as a catcher is diminished somewhat less by his 636 games than I had first thought.

Of the three names you mentioned - Bennett, Ewing and Kelly - I would have to rate them as offensive players in the following order:

Mike "King" Kelly
Buck Ewing
Charlie Bennett


Ewing, who is closer to Kelly than to Bennett offensively, played many more seasons primarily as a catcher and finished his career with more games at catcher than anywhere else (though he, too, was used at a number of other positions on a regular basis.)

Bennett was a full-time catcher, but his OPS+ of 118, while much better than most players, wasn't as good as Ewing - even if you just include Ewing's "catcher seasons".

So, I'd rate Ewing an edge over Bennett where I would tend to keep Kelly out of the ratings at all (though he was a better hitter than Ewing, if you're just talking about offensive ability.

Also...I would rate Deacon White in between Ewing and Bennett. White was the best catcher of the early years of professional baseball and was one of the game's first stars.

In the 19th century, only Charlie Bennett, Buck Ewing and Pop Snyder led catchers in their league in defensive excellence four times. No catcher in history did it for a fifth time until Ray Schalk, at the end of the deadball era.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Herman C. Long:
Born: April 16, 1866, Chicago, IL
Died: September 17, 1909, Denver, CO
NL SS, 1889-1904

All time glove. Scored lots of runs in his peak, hit well 1894-97.

But Wallace, Wagner and Herman Long could play so much deeper than Jennings that they naturally could get grounders that Jennings could not get, and make, also go farther back for fly balls than Jennings could go. (Sporting News, February 11, 1926, John B. Sheridan, St. Louis spwr. (1888-1929) Sporting News column, "Back of Home Plate", 1917-29)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"With a powerful arm, a quick release, and outstanding range, speed, and agility, Long played shortstop, according to the Boston Globe, "like a man on a flying trapeze." . . . His career chances-per-game (6.4) tops all shortstops.

. . . twice knocking in over 100 and scoring over 100 seven times. His 149 runs scored led the NL in 1893 and his 12 HRs led in 1900. Noisy and uncouth on the field, he urged teammates to greater efforts, ragged opponents, and stirred up fans. He always played all out, once breaking Pittsburgh catcher Connie Mack's leg with a ferocious slide when there was no play at the plate.
(The Ballplayers, ed. by Mike Shatzkin, 1990, pp. 633.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1889 shortstop Herman Long made 117 errors. Today he would never have the chance to make so many without being booted back to the minors, but the game was different in 1889, when Long's numerous miscues didn't even lead the league. In more than 16 major league seasons he accumulated an astonishing 1,070 errors at SS alone, plus another six when he filled in at other positions. Add his minor league bobbles and he probably made more errors than any other man in BB history.

Yet Long was regarded as one of the best shortstops of his day, and many authorities place him at the top of the list. Although he made scads of errors, he also covered more ground than any of his counterparts. Many of his misses came on balls that other shortstops could only watch go by from afar. Long was spectacularly acrobatic as he pursued batted balls, cutting off some hits with moves more likely to be seen at the circus. He ranks second all-time in total chances per game. The outstanding plays that occasionally resulted from his attempts made the extra errors worthwhile. (Baseball: The Biographical Encyclopedia, ed. of Total Baseball, David Pietrusza, Matthew Silverman, Michael Gershman, 2000, pp.674)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
". . . Long played shortstop more than any other position and was famed for the amount of ground he could cover and for his accurate fielding. (excerpted from his obituary, Chicago Daily Tribune, September 17, 1909, pp.14)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Denver, September 16, --Herman Long, said to be the greatest shortstop of the country, died here today of consumption (TB). He made his reputation with the Boston Nationals.) (excerpted from his obituary, Washington Post, September 17, 1909, pp. 9)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hugh Jennings was a great shortstop but how many know that Herman Long was an even better one, and that Long, until the arrival of Wagner, was recognied as the greatest shortstop of all time? (H.G. Salsinger, Detroit New, 1936: as quoted in "The History of Baseball: Its great Players, Teams and Managers, ed. By Allison Danzig & Joe Reichler, 1959, pp. 276)

In that same book, same page, we find this. Of Long, Jack Doyle said to John Kieran, "You can't tell an old Bostonian there was ever a better shortstop." Walter Barnes wrote in the Boston Globe in 1936, "Herman Long was never excelled in the brilliancy of his fielding at short-stop." Joe Vila in 1930 reported Kid Nichols as saying of Long, "He was the greatest shortstop I ever saw. He covered more ground than Hans Wagner or Hughie Jennings. He fielded grounders no other shortstop could have reached and he threw out the fleetest base runners. He was a fine hitter and lead-off man, and once he stole more than 100 bases."

Herman Long's Gold Gloves Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1889 - 3 (Beard)
1890 - 3 (B. Allen)
1891 - 1
1892 - 2 (B. Allen)
1893 - 2 (G. Smith)
1894 - 3 (Jennings)
1895 - 6 (Jennings)
1896 - 3 (Jennings)
1897 - 3 (Jennings)
1898 - 2 (Dahlen)
1899 - 1
1900 - 3 (Ely)
1901 - 1
1902 - 1
1903 - 7 (Parent)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of Herman Long's record from BB reference.

On-base %
1891-.377-9

OPS
1891-.785-10

Runs
1889-137-6
1891-129-2
1892-115-8
1893-149-1
Car-1455-66

Hits
1891-163-6
1892-181-5


Total Bases
1891-235-3
1892-244-9

Doubles
1889-32-5
1892-33-2
1897-32-6
1899-30-4

Triples
1891-12-10

Home Runs
1890-8-4
1891-9-4
1895-9-10
1898-6-8
1899-6-10
1900-12-1

RBI
1896-100-8
1898-99-7
1899-100-7

Bases on Balls
1891-80-4

Stolen Bases
1889-89-3
1890-49-9
1891-60-4
1892-57-6
Car-534-29

Runs Created
1891-87-4

Extra-Base Hits
1891-42-8
1892-45-9
1899-44-8

Times on Base
1891-251-3

Hit By Pitch
1889-10-10
1891-8-9


Sac. Hits
1895-21-3
1897-17-7
1898-17-10
1899-25-4
1900-18-8
1901-15-9

Power/Speed Number
1890-13.8-4
1891-15.7-4
1895-14.3-8
1898-9.2-10
1900-16.4-2

At Bats per Strikeout
1895-44.6-10

Not a terrible hitting record from a SS, who was thought the greatest defensive SS who ever lived.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Edward Nagle "Ned" Williamson:
Born: October 24, 1857, Philadelphia, PA
Died: March 3, 1894, Mountain Valley Springs, AR, at the age of 36, from liver/heart illness.
NL 3B/SS: 1878-1890

Played 8 seasons at 3rd, then 4 at SS, and finished with 52 g. at 3rd/21 at SS. Great glove, led league once each at doubles, HRs, Walks. In 1894, Reach Guide cited a 9 person poll, and James Hart, James O'Rourke and Arthur Irwin called Ned Williamson the games greatest player.

Cap Anson put him on his all time team in Jan., 1918, and Tim Murnane, a former 1st baseman, turned sports writer, put him on his team, in 1914, but at 2B!

He was also named in a 1938 article in Spalding Guide as one of the best ever 3Bmen. He died March 3, 1894, at the age of 36, from liver/heart illness.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ned Williamson's Gold Gloves Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1878 - 4 (Hague)
1879 - 1
1880 - 2 (Bradley)
1881 - 1
1882 - 2 (Denny)
1883 - 2 (Denny)
1884 - 1
1885 - 1
1886 (SS) - 3 (Irwin)
1887 (SS) - 12 (Ward)
1888 (SS) - 12 (Iwrin)
1889 - NR
1890 - 11 (Tebeau)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Bill Lange:
June 6, 1871 - July 23, 1950
NL OF, 1893-1899


I've dug deep into the legendary, fabled, storied, musty, dusty, Bill Burgess' File Cabinet of Forgotten Lore. Hopefully, Bill Lange's case as a forgotten truly great player will find favor here.

Bill Phelon wrote the following piece on Bill Lange in Baseball Magazine in 1915.
Chicago, New York, Cincinnati sports writer, 1889-1925
1915 - After seeing them all come and go for nearly thirty years: after seeing the great ones and the little ones, those who starred for years and years, and those who passed early from the game, two figures of them all persist in forcing themselves upon my memory, and in plain opposition to each other--the forms of Tyrus Cobb and William Lange. Somehow, some way, these two always present themselves before me for comparison, and, despite all the praise they lavish on the Georgian today, I cannot see where the gigantic Lange was his inferior!

Lest I seem biased in my love for old-time pals, I'll instantly add this: That I cannot see where Cobb is the inferior of Lange. If ever two men, of strangely different physical and temperamental types, were to be counted as an equal, well-matched pair, these two were Lange and Cobb.

Were Lange a youthful player of today, he'd be Cobb's greatest rival. Had Cobb played in the time of Lange, he'd have been big Bill's closest competitor. If Lange possessed the eel-like agility of Cobb, there would have been no chance to stop him. If Cob had the size of Lange, without impeding his own speed, he'd never get through scoring.


On the defensive, there was, to my way of thinking, no choice, between Lange and Cobb. Both could cover enormous outfield territories: both were marvelously sure when they got their hands upon the ball. I think Lange had the better throwing arm of the two. Moreover, Lange, originally a catcher by trade, could be brought in from the gardens and used anywhere in case of need, and played all the infield places capably for Chicago at one time or another.

At the bat: Considering the time when each played, and the rules, I can see small difference between the colossal Californian and the wiry wonder of the South. Lange had no foul-strikes to handicap him, but in his day a caught foul tip was an immediate out. Then, too, he faced great pitchers, who during at least part of his career, worked from a shorter distance, and there were no "sacrifice flies" in the score to help his average.

It was on the bases, though--in the wondrous way that both circled round the cushions--that the strange likeness between Lange and Cobb is most strongly demonstrated. It is said that Cobb does a lot of daring things, all his own invention, never tried by any other player.

I distinctly remember many of Cobb's tricks as exact duplicates of Lange's --tricks forgotten when Bill left the game, and revived long afterward by the Georgian. Nor do I call Cobb a copy-cat: he never saw Lange play ball, and his tricks are simply those that naturally found new roots in the mind of a thinker and great base runner. Lange stretched his his hits just as Cobb does now. Lange was lighting quick to rush for an adjoining base on the slightest fumble or lack of watchfulness--just as Cobb is today.

The smallest slowness of slovenliness in the throw-in, the pickup of the throw-in, or the guarding of bases, meant the sudden arrival of Lange at the next station--as is the case with Cobb when the smallest opening is given. In straightaway steals, both Lange and Cobb were marvels at getting away, or getting the jump on the pitcher's delivery. For a heavy man, Lange had terrific speed. Perhaps the lighter-built Cobb could actually out sprint Lange, but when it came to the instant of arriving at the base, Lange's immense size used to scare the infielders out of his way. He never spiked any one, because he didn't have to --they broke for cover when his 230 pounds bore down upon them.

Cobb makes up for lack of weight by the wicked impetus of his slide and the dangerous onrush of his spikes. Lange stole a few more bases, both on the season and in proportion to number of games and chances offered. But in those days they were accustomed to let a runner steal or fail, without trying the hit and run or bunting as he went--hence Lange had fewer blossoming steals killed off by the batsmen than is the case with Cobb.

In - short, Lange, in my humble opinion, was the full equal of Cobb--and, therefore, one of the greatest ballplayers that the game has ever known." (Baseball Magazine, August, 1915, pp. 47-48, "Handicaps of the Early Season, by William A. Phelon, pp. 41-50)

Bill James wrote a wonderful piece on Bill Lange in his "Bill James Historical Abstract, 1988, pp. 49-51, which he reprinted verbatim in his updated 2001 Abstract."

Hughie Jennings,
Apr. 4, 1869 - Feb. 1, 1928;
ML SS, 1B, 1891 - 1902; Detroit manager, 1907-20; Giants coach, 1921-25
"(Walter) Brodie, who played alongside of Keeler, had personality. Although he was not so good a fielder as Jimmy McAleer or Bill Lange or Tris Speaker, because he lacked their speed, I doubt if there ever lived a man who played batsmen as accurately as Brodie." (Los Angeles Times, Jan. 4, 1926, pp. B2)


1. Bill Lange's Sporting News obituary:
William A. (Big Bill) Lange, 79, regarded as one of baseball's all-time greats, . . . When informed of his death, Clark Griffith, president of the Washington Senator, said: "I played ball with Bill Lange on the Chicago National League club for some eight years. I have seen all the other great outfielders-Speaker, Cobb, DiMaggio--in action, and I consider Bill Lange the equal of, if not better than, all outfielders of all time. There wasn't anything he couldn't do." . . . known as "Little Eva," a name pinned on him by the late Hugh Fullerton, because of the graceful manner, in which he fielded his position, chasing down fly balls. (author's note; Little Egypt was a name of a famous belly-dancer.)

"Considered one of the greatest base runners of all time, . . . Here's what Honus Wagner once said about the Californian: 'I'll never forget the first time I tried to put the ball on Lange. He pulled the prettiest hook slide I ever saw and there I was standing sort of foolish-like, with the ball, nowhere near him.' "

At the height of his career, in 1899, he married (Grace Geiselman of Cal.) and entered the real estate and insurance business in San Francisco with his father-in-law. He had been making $3,000. a year from the White Stockings, who agreed to double his salary for 1900 if he would return, but he refused. (Sporting News, Aug. 2, 1950)

2. Alfred Henry Spink, Aug. 24, 1854 - May 27, 1928; founder and editor of The Sporting News (1886), described Lange as "Ty Cobb enlarged, fully as great in speed, batting skill and base running."

3. Tim H. Murnane, June 4, 1851 - Feb 7, 1917; ML 1B, 1872-78; Boston spwr. 1888-1917 of the Boston Globe listed the game's best outfielders up to 1914 as Cobb, Joe Jackson, and Lange.

4. Clark Griffith,
Nov. 20, 1898 - Oct. 27, 1955;
(ML pitcher,1891-14), (Senators manager,1901-20), Senators owner,1920-55
Comparing these stars with Bill Lange, of the old generation, the shows that the old generation suffers. Cobb and Speaker are Lange's superiors, and I think that Milan is almost Lange's equal. Among the other great outstanding stars of the past, and present were Willie Keeler, Fred Clarke, Fielder Jones, Jesse Burkett, Elmer Flick, Hugh Duffy, Mike Donlin, Jimmy McAleer, Jim Fogarty, and Dickey Johnson. (Washington Post, April 26, 1914, pp. S2)

William B. Hanna,
(June, 1966 - Nov. 20, 1930); (NY sportswriter, 1888-1930)
"Bill Lange covered as much ground as Speaker and was a sure catch and fine thrower. As a base runner only Cobb excelled him. He was as adept at getting a start on the pitcher. He wouldn't steal as many bases now, for the game, with the lively ball, is played differently, but even now he'd shine as a base runner. Six footer though he was, he was one of the cleverest sliders in the game.

Cap Anson,
April 11, 1852 - April 14, 1922;
(ML 1B, 1871-97), (ML man., 1875, '79-98) - "Bill Lange, who played for me when I had charge of the Chicago National League club, was in a class by himself as an outfielder. He was a better outfielder than Cobb or Speaker and a phenomenal thrower, and one year he stole 106 bases." (Washington Post, June 3, 1917, pp. S18)

J. Earl Wagner,
(61) - Nov. 11, 1943,
(Owned Philadelphia Phillies & Washington Senators in 1890's, for brief periods).
"Bill Lange, if he would cut out his monkey doodle business, as Chris calls it, would fit into my team as captain and I would pay a liberal price for the release of Lange from the Chicago club, and would give him a contract that would call for more money than is paid any player in the major leagues." (Washington Post, October 8, 1899, pp. 8)

The 10 year rule prevents Bill Lange from being considered for the Hall of Fame. I advocate that that rule be excepted for the case of Bill Lange.

I contend that he was the 2nd best defensive OF of the 1890's, after Jimmy McAleer, the 3 best all-around position player of the 1890's, after Buck Ewing and Cap Anson, and ahead of Willie Keeler. I further hold that Bill Lange is a top tier Hall of Fame player, irregardless of whether or not he is ever recognized by organized baseball as such. I personally place him in my Top 20 greatest all-around players of all time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey James (RuthMayBond) contributed this wonderful defensive analysis on Bill Lange's fielding stats, yet admitted that he had good rate stats.

1893-Play 40 G in the OF, but even more games @ 2B than OF.
(Though I don't have all stats on ALL outfielders, I'm just saying that Lange was NO BETTER than the rankings I'll give. If it looked like there was no way a guy would have any consideration, I didn't even write his stats down, even though he may have been really good in at least one area.)

1894-End up NO BETTER THAN tenth among only CF (NBT thirteenth among OF) in putouts, NBT sixth only among CF in assists, NBT sixth only among CF in errors, and NBT seventh only among CF in Fielding Range

1895-End up NO BETTER THAN sixth among only CF (NBT eighth among OF) in putouts, NBT seventh among only CF in errors, and NBT fifth only among CF in Fielding Range.

1896-Aha, but I've got you. I managed to finish third (among only CF) in putouts, and tied for third (only among CF). Don't mention that I had the most errors of all CF.

1897-End up NO BETTER THAN tied for fifth among only CF (NBT tied for ninth among OF) in putouts, NBT tied for third among only CF (NBT tied for fifth among OF) in assists, NBT tied for eighth among OF for most errors, and NBT sixth among only CF in Fielding Range (NBT eighth among OF).

1898-End up NO BETTER THAN seventh among only CF (NBT eleventh among OF) in putouts, and NBT tied for fourth among OF for assists.

1899-Don't even be a starting OF at all, just fill in in the outfield. And then retire. So have only five full-time years as an OF.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey James (RuthMayBond) contributed this wonderful defensive analysis on Bill Lange's fielding stats, May 17, 2004, 01:13 PM.

Lange in the top 40?

Here's the year-by-year breakdown of Bill's guy Lange:

1894: Just among CF, Lange is behind at least B. Hamilton, Abbey, TBrown, Duffy, Brodie, Stenzel, Hoy, and MGriffin in most categories.

1895: McAleer was either the 2nd or 3rd best CF behind MGriffin and maybe Duffy, but DCooley had close stats at the corner, and I haven't even gone through all corner OF. If McAleer rates a GG, it'll be close. Lange is behind all these plus at least BHamilton.

1896: Just among CF, Lange is probably 3rd behind MGriffin and Brodie, but he will have to get by ALL the corner OF.

1897: Just among CF, Lange is behind Hoy, MGriffin, DCooley, AND BHamilton in EVERY facet.

1898: Just among CF, Lange is behind Hoy, DCooley, and MGriffin.

1899: Lange only played 94 G so I doubt he had enough but I can go through the motions.

If Lange is an all-time CF, it isn't glaringly obvious. Mike Griffin deserved at least five Gold Gloves from 1891-1899, Selbach three, and Hoy & TBrown & BHamilton & Brodie at least two, and I haven't finalized their rankings yet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Lange's Gold Glove Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1893 (UT, prim 2B) - 8 (McPhee)
1894 - 7 (Van Haltren)
1895 - 5 (Brodie)
1896 - 2 (Brodie)
1897 - 7 (Hoy)
1898 - 1
1899 - 4 (Thomas)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Below are his number of games, which are a bit light to lead the league. To achieve leading the league, usually requires playing a lot of games.


Year------# of Lange's games--------# of L. games
1893-----------117---------------------130
1894-----------111---------------------130
1895-----------123---------------------132
1896-----------122---------------------132
1897-----------118---------------------135
1898-----------113---------------------154
1899-----------107---------------------154
-7 yrs.--------811-total--(83%)--------967 total

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Jimmie McAleer,
(July 10, 1864 - April 29, 1931);
(ML OF, 1889-98, 01-02,07), (ML manager, 1901-11)
1. James R. McAleer's entry in the 1932 Official Baseball Guide. Here is an excerpt.
"No outfielder has lived who could cover more ground than McAleer, and perhaps none who could cover as much
back of him and to either side. He made sensational catches appear easy."


John B. Foster - "There was at least one great performer among the 5 mentioned--Jim McAleer. John Foster thinks he was a better outfielder than Tris Speaker. John ought to know." (Sporting News, June 8, 1933, pp. 4, column 3)
If you knew who John B. Foster was, you listened to his perceptions, like EF Hutton. He & Francis Richter were to the sports writers, what Mack / McGraw were to managers. His credentials:
John B. Foster, NY sportswriter (1888-1941)
Editor-in-Chief of the Official Spalding NL Base Ball Guide(1908-41)
NY Giants business manager & secretary (1912-1919) Years on BB 's rules committee. Considered an authority on BB law, rules, admin. Credited with answering 500,000 questions on BB rules, laws, and various phases of BB. Wrote digest of rules for the French. Was named official authority for rules for Japan. Official scorer at Polo Grounds. Foster was like Chadwick in his understanding of the game & lifetime devotion to it.

Foster/Richter were mirror twins of each other's commitment to baseball.

Upon the passing of James R. McAleer, The Sporting News ran this.
Bert Walker, Detroit spwr. 1920-47
"Bert Walker of the Detroit Times commenting on the passing of Jim McAleer, writes: Old time baseball fans will deeply regret the passing of one of the greatest fly hawks baseball has ever known. In his day there were few outfielders who could equal his speed, judgments, and all-around out fielding ability. Down in Cleveland, where McAleer began his professional career, fans of another generation still compare outfielders with their old favorite (McAleer).

"It is astonishing, but true, when a new phenom flashes across the Cleveland outfield, the spectators gasp:
'He is another McAleer.' One would expect them to say 'another Speaker!' But though McAleer's heyday was past when Speaker was in his prime, the minds of the fans, when looking for superlatives, revert to the early days of the game when a 20 year old Youngstown boy began making outfield history." (Sporting News, May 7, 1931, pp. 4, column 5)

Upon his passing, Sporting News furthermore ran this editorial piece.
"Great, far beyond the average as a player . . . When he was at his zenith in Cleveland there was none like him. He was not the best batter in baseball, nor was he the best thrower, but how he could catch outfield flies!

Cy Young,
NL pitcher(1890-1900), AL pitcher(1901-11)
He saw Cy Young come in and when McAleer temporarily withdrew from baseball, and Young continued, Cy said: That man helped to make me. His catches of hits that no other man was good enough to make, saved many a
game when I was beginning and afterward, when I was successful enough to know it myself!

"No major league grounds (ballparks) in the U.S. was without some McAleer record when he was at his best. He was an aural outfielder, as well as one who judged fly balls by sight. He would start back with the ring of the ball and bat as they came together, and pursue a direct line in the course of the flight of the ball or toward an angle, and to the point where he thought it
would fall and he could reach it.

"Did I ever train my ear to do that?" . . . "No, I could do it when I was a kid." Some times he played left field, center field and right field in one afternoon, although he stood in center field from force of habit. (Sporting News, May 7, 1931, pp. 4, column 1)

Hughie Jennings,
ML SS, 1B, 1891-1902;
Detroit manager, 1907-20, Giants coach, 1921-25
"(Walter) Brodie, who played alongside of Keeler, had personality. Although he was not so good a fielder as Jimmy McAleer or Bill Lange or Tris Speaker, because he lacked their speed, I doubt if there ever lived a man who played batsmen as accurately as Brodie." (Los Angeles Times, Jan. 4, 1926, pp. B2)

I contend that Jimmy McAleer was the greatest defensive Outfielder of the 1800's, and one of the top 5 Ofs of all time, along with Tris Speaker, Willie Mays, Richie Ashburn. However, I do not advocate Jimmy McAleer for the Hall of Fame.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
McAleer in the top 40?

Last edited by RuthMayBond : 05-17-2004 at 01:13 PM

Here's the year-by-year breakdown of Bill's guy McAleer:

1889: I haven't started a new paper that would go back that far. McAleer played & it looks like he played a respectable CF but not sure if it's GG.
1890: Again, my paper doesn't go back that far. McAleer probably played a better CF than in '89 but only 86 G so not sure he would deserve an award either.

1891: Surprisingly they didn't trust McAleer with CF but he might have been the 3rd best OF although it is close (MGriffin at the top, then a dogfight among GDavis, McAleer and BHamilton).

1892: There is no denying that McAleer was the best OF that year, so one definite GG. Is he on a roll?

1893: Again, McAleer plays a short season. He had a good range while he was in (although he was a little heavy on the Es) but with only 91 G, at least six CF (and at least one LF) had way more putouts than McAleer.

1894: McAleer's 64 games is not even worth considering. Just among CF, Lange is behind at least BHamilton, Abbey, TBrown, Duffy, Brodie, Stenzel, Hoy, and MGriffin in most categories.

1895: McAleer was either the 2nd or 3rd best CF behind MGriffin and maybe Duffy, but DCooley had close stats at the corner, and I haven't even gone through all corner OF. If McAleer rates a GG, it'll be close.

1896: Just among CF, Lange is probably 3rd behind MGriffin and Brodie, but he will have to get by ALL the corner OF. McAleer is behind all these guys PLUS Hoy and Parrott.

1897: McAleer hardly plays at all.

1898: Finally we have both back (didn't happen that much). Just among CF, Lange is behind Hoy, DCooley, and MGriffin. McAleer is behind all the above CF PLUS AMcBride and probably Stenzel.

1899: McAleer is basically done by now.

McAleer was pretty good. Mike Griffin deserved at least five Gold Gloves from 1891-1899, Selbach three, and Hoy & TBrown & BHamilton & Brodie at least two, and I haven't finalized their rankings yet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jimmy McAleer's Gold Glove Estimates, According to Mathew Souder's PCA stat system:

1889 - 2 (Fogerty)
1890 - 5 (Brown)
1891 (LF) - 2 (Hamilton)
1892 - 1
1893 - 9 (Brodie)
1894 - 4 (Van Halteen)
1895 - 4 (Brodie)
1896 - 4 (Brodie)
1897 - 15 (Hoy)
1898 - 6 (Lange)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Burgess

[Blackout]

Managers choose the most clutch hitters in baseball:

Sport magazine: August 1956

Casey Stengel: Berra, nothing ever bothers him
Mike Higgins: Williams. He's the greatest
Al Lopez: Rosen is No. 1, but it was Al smith last year
Marty Marion: Minoso's the man I want. He's the best all-around
Bucky Harris: It's Boone, not Kaline or Kuenn
Lou Boudreau: Slaughter. He's experienced, realxed.
Paul Richards: Bob Boyd, when he mends. Hes a bear down player.
Charlie Dressen: Little Ernie Gravetz, in a tight spot, size doesn't matter.

Walter Alston: Campanella, on most days.
Charley Grimm: Mathews is the best in the NL
Fred Hutchinson: Musial can't be monkeyed with.
Bill Rigney: Mays, a real pro, consistant.
Birdie Tebbetts: Johnny Temple, for one great job.
Mayo Smith: Willie Jones drives in important runs.
Stan Hack: Ernie Banks easily, he gets good wood.
Bobby Bragan: No such thing as a clutch hitter, Thomas and Long are my best hitters.

[Bill Burgess]

Introducing Charles J. Ferguson:
Born: April 17, 1863, Charlottesville, VA
Died: April 29, 1888, Philadelphia, PA, at age of 25, of typhoid fever
BB/TR; 6'0, 165


He attracted attention while pitching for the independent Richmond, VA team. He shut out Boston's ML team on 4 singles.

In 1884, he signed with the Philadelphia Nationals.

In 1884, he went 21-25 for them. 3.54 ERA;

In 1885, he was 26-20. 2.22 ERA. In 61 games, he hit .308, .368, .379

In 1886, he was 30-9. ERA - 1.98. Finished with 11 straight wins.

In 1887, he was 22-10. 3.00 ERA; In 72 games, he hit .337, .417, .470, which included 14 doubles, 6 triples, and 3 homers, in only 264 ABs.

Now one might say that he was a fairly good pitcher, but others were even better. And you would be right. But, . . . pitching wasn't all of Charlie's talents.

He was a superlative player in the field too. In fact, when he wasn't pitching, he was doing duties elsewhere, and very well at them too.

He played OF 53 games, 2B 27 games, and 3B 8 games. His versatility was rare, even for a league in its formative stages, where specialization hadn't locked in yet, and many players were noted for their ability to be plugged in to a variety of utility positions, including pitching.

Twice he hit over .300 with power. He covered CF with good speed.

At the end of 1887, his team had the chance to finish 2nd. So Charlie played 2B for the final 17 games, when he wasn't pitching. He won 7 games, hit .361 and fielded .963. His team won 16 of its last 17 games and came in 2nd.

--------W-----L------PCT------G-----SH------INN-------BB----So----ERA
-------99-----64-----.607-----183----13-----1514-------290---726---2.67

Bill Hanna had this to say about Charlie, in a June, 1924 article for Baseball Magazine I posted earlier in this thread, post #23.

"Ferguson belongs in the "twenty-five" because he was the game's best all around player. There have been men who could look after as many positions, but none who could play them all so well. Ferguson was a good (garbled) regular of any ball club of the present; he was a good second baseman, not just a fill-er-in, but good: he could play the outfield well enough to make the absence of the regular no handicap, and he was a first class batter. There hasn't been an all around man since his day to equal him."

Wilbert Robinson had this to say about Charlie. In June, 1931, rated him 5th greatest player of all time.
"Hans Wagner was one. Back in the old, old days the Phillies had a man who could pitch like a streak and play the infield, too. His name was Charley Ferguson. You can't leave him off. There's Hughey Jennings, too. He was an unbeatable shortstop. As I said before, it's unfair to name just a few. Think of the many good ones I've never seen! But if I have to name the best five you can put down Cobb, Keeler, Ruth, Wagner and Ferguson for me."

[Bill Burgess]

Versatile Baseball Players:

In its early days, baseball produced some amazingly versatile ballplayers. Of course, since specialization hadn't set in so deeply, many players made the big time on the strength of their ability to fill in anywhere on the diamond and still perform at a high level. The Negro Leagues were also famed for the versatility of their players. Many pitchers played non-pitching positions, and many position players pitched very well. Some of the most versatile players then, and some of the ones since then were:


Honus Wagner---Buck Ewing---King Kelly----Jim O'Rourke
SS - 1,886 g----C - 636 g--OF - 750-------OF - 1,377
OF - 372 g---1B - 253-----C - 583--------C - 209
1B - 248 g---OF - 235----3B - 96-------3B - 119
3B - 209-----3B - 127----SS - 90-------1B - 103
P - ----2-----2B - 51----2B - 53--------P - 6
---------------SS - 34----1B - 25
----------------P - 9-----P - 12

Deacon White--Charlie Ferguson---P.Rose---Killebrew----Foxx------D.Allen
3B - 826 g----------P - 183----OF- 1,327---1B - 969---1B -1,919--1B - 807
C - 226 g---------OF - 53----1B - 939---3B - 791---3B - 141--3B - 652
1B - 131-----------2B - 27----3B - 634---OF - 470----C 108--OF - 256
OF - 112-----------3B - 5----2B - 628---2B - 11----P - 10
P - 2

Bresnahan--George Davis---M. Ward----T.Leach-----Biggio------Grich
C - 974---SS - 1,372-----SS - 826---OF - 1,087--2B - 1,746--2B - 1,765
OF - 281---3B - 527-----2B - 491---3B - 955---C - 427--SS - 159
3B - 42---OF - 303------P -292---SS - 64--OF - 363--1B - 71
1B - 33---2B - 113-----OF - 215---2B - 14 3B - 49
2B - 28---1B - 41-----3B - 46
SS - 8----P - 3
P - 9----

[Bill Burgess]

Walkaway for Speedster Cobb as 'Greatest Player of All Time'

Former Stars Cast Overwhelming Majority of Votes for Ty as Performer 'Who Could Do Everything Better;' Tributes Paid to His Fiery Competitive Spirit; Wagner Second, Followed by Ruth; One Ballot Each for Ott and DiMaggio


By J. G. TAYLOR SPINK
Sporting News, April 2, 1942, by J. G. Taylor Spink, pp. 1 & 13)


FOR MANY years we have been asked the same question over and over: "Who was the greatest player of all time?" For just as many years we have evaded the issue involved. We didn't know. We continued receiving the same query and so, finally, we decided to put it up to the ball-players themselves. We addressed letters to more than 100 former major league stars and managers and asked them the question. One hundred and two votes were cast and the answer is: TYRUS RAYMOND COBB.

Not alone did the old ace players and pilots of the nation select Cobb as the greatest player of all time, but they made him their choice by an overwhelming majority. He received 60 of the votes cast; the remaining 42 were divided among 14 players.

John Henry (Honus) Wagner ran second to Cobb, with a total of 17 votes. George Herman Ruth was third, with 11. Rogers Hornsby was picked by two voters, and so was Ross Youngs. Ten players, Ed Delahanty, Lou Gehrig, Tris Speaker, Jerry Denny, Joe DiMaggio, Mel Ott, George Sisler, Eddie Collins, Walter Johnson, and Christy Mathewson, polled one vote each.

Collins in Briefest Reply, Names Cobb as "Obvious"

The letter that The Sporting News sent to the players read as follows: "Who do you consider the greatest ball player of all time? Why?"

The reasons given for the selections were many, varied and illuminating. The shortest, or briefest, explanation came from Eddie Collins. He named Cobb and gave his reason: in one word: "Obvious."

Other selectors were more expansive. Clark Griffith voted for Cobb "because he was a hitter, a base-runner, a great fielder, and possessed the indomitable will to win and the aggressiveness that thrilled those who watched him play."

Walter Johnson gave as his reason: "He could do everything better than any player I ever saw. He was always the first one to detect weaknesses or mistakes of the opposition and benefit by the same."

Tris Speaker picked Cobb because "he could do all that any player should do and had, besides, great competitive spirit and the willingness to take chances at all times."

George Sisler's reason for voting for Cobb was: "If you played during the years that he was burning up the league, you could never forget the Georgian. I know that I never will."

I'll quote from some of the other players and managers who voted Cobb the game's all time greatest:

Connie Mack: "He surpassed all the players that I remember."

John Wesley (Jack) Coombs: "You know what he could do. I don't have to tell you."

Billy Southworth: "Cobb's base-running and all-round ability match Ruth's slugging."

Bill Carrigan: "I have yet to see anybody else who could do the things that he used to do."

Donie Bush: "He loved to win."

George J. Burns: "One of the most marvelous baseball machines I have ever seen. I never expect to see his equal."

Roger Peckinpaugh: "He wasn't the slugger that Babe Ruth was , but he could do everything else."

Al Simmons: "I never expect to see another player like him."

Larry Gardner: "He had the finest coordination I ever saw in a player. Because of his mental and mechanical ability and his marvelous application of the two, he could do everything exceptionally well."

Del Baker: "He went out and made his own breaks. He was a battler."

Steve O'Neill: "He could do everything asked of a ball player."

Clifford Clarence (Cactus) Cravath: "He could do everything a little better than the rest of the herd. He had color and the will to win. And he would chase half of the present-day players out of the park with his spikes today. He could dish it out and he could take it."

Steve Yerkes: "He was the greatest competitor who ever lived."

Bing Miller: "He had the baseball sense to grasp any situation."

Jimmie Dykes: "He did everything perfectly."

Ted Lyons: "He was a combination of everything."

Hazen (Kiki) Cuyler: "He not alone had natural ability, but baseball brains and the incentive to win."

Charles (Dick) Spalding: "He could run, field, throw, hit and think faster than anybody else, and that's about all a ball player needs to have to be great."

Clyde Milan: "You never knew what he was going to do next."

Charlie Root: "He was tough to pitch to. I don't think any pitcher ever found a successful way to pitch to him. I know that I didn't."

Ossie Bluege: "He was quick on the trigger and ten jumps ahead of you."

Carl Mays: "Cobb could do everything--bunt, drag, hit, run bases, field and think faster than a dozen ordinary ball players. He made no errors of judgment and was a fighter who never heard the word 'quit.' Babe Ruth was the greatest from the standpoint of drawing power, but he had many weaknesses."

Bill Friel: "All you have to do is look at the records."

Ira Thomas: "He was not only a great ball player, but he disrupted the other team's morale by the chances he took and usually got away with. Once he got on the bases, I would rather give him credit for a run than let him get around the bases and cause anywhere from four to five runs damage before he was through."

John (Red) Corriden: "He had baseball intuition. He was a hard, clean ball player. Sure, he was tough, but you had to be in those days."

Mickey Cochrane: "He had everything that goes to make up a great ball player."

Crafty, Brainy, Ty Starred in Era of Close Scores

Billy Evans: "Cobb was the brainy, crafty, sensational performer, who starred in the era of close scores when one run was usually the decisive margin. Ruth starred in the era of swat. Power was his greatest asset, although he had all the other attributes of a great ball player."

Jim (Death Valley) Scott: "Because he had no weakness."

Mike Kilroy: "He outguessed the other fellow all the time. There will never be another Cobb."

George Edward (Duffy) Lewis: "The greatest ball player was Ty Cobb--though none of us was crazy about him when he played. However, you had to admire him for his ability. Once he got on the bases, he had the pitchers up in the air until he got off. There didn't seem to be anything that he couldn't do."

Harry Davis: "He loved to play baseball for all he was worth every second of the game, regardless of the score. He was very fast and very smart."

Casey Stengel: "I think he was the most sensational base-runner who ever lived. He could get more base hits than any competitor simply by worrying the pitchers to desperation and crossing up the infielders."

Frank Shellenback: "I was only a kid when I came up with the White Sox, and here is what I heard at one of the first players' meetings I ever attended: 'Leave the George Peach alone. Don't ride him or he'll beat you single-handed.' And maybe you don't think that he couldn't!"

Max Bishop: "He may not have been a great fielder, but he could hold up his end."

Bob Johnson: "He appeared to be head and shoulders over anyone else."

Lena Blackburne: "He was good in the pinch. He could do everything but throw."

Amos Strunk: "His dash, color, aggressiveness, hitting and speed on the bases were beautiful to watch."

George Cutshaw: "He had the finest competitive spirit of any player I ever saw or heard about."

Floyd (Pep) Young: "He was a quick thinker, which enabled him to do things at an advantage."

Nick Altrock: "His never-say-die spirit and his nerve predominated."

George Mogridge: "He had everything, believe me."

Tom Daly: "Maybe he didn't have the best disposition in the world, but all great ball players are afflicted with crabbiness, I think."

Ray Fisher: "I never saw his equal in any department of baseball."

Sheckard for Wagner As "Most Valuable Player"

Jimmy SHECKARD, Cubs' outfielder of their pennant-winning years under Frank Leroy Chance, picked Wagner and gave his reasons: "Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker were two wonderful outfielders, but I think that Wagner was the most valuable. He could accept three chances to their one, maybe four to one. He could play anywhere too."

Wagner is also the choice of George (High Pockets) Kelly, a Giants first baseman under John J. McGraw. Reason for his choice: "He made everything look so easy, was always in front of the ball, and in the right place. He knew the batters and played them well."

One of the 11 who picked Babe Ruth was Bucky Harris, manager of Washington. His reason: "He could beat you single-handed, had good baseball instinct and brought into the game something that nobody else had."

Rube Walberg also cast his vote for Ruth and commented: "He could hit any kind of pitching and field with the best of the outfielders. If the score was tied and the Yankees needed a stolen base to put them in scoring position, the Babe would be the boy to deliver it although he wasn't a Ty Cobb on the base paths."

Waite Hoyt: "I pick Ruth for all-round unlimited general skill and drawing ability."

Lawton (Whitey) Witt, another former teammate of the Babe's, casts his vote for him, with the comment: "He made few mistakes on the playing field, and how he could hit."

Quoting from Jimmie Foxx's comments: "Ty was about washed up when I came up, while Ruth was the hottest man in the majors. I'd say Babe Ruth."

Bill McKechnie's choice is Hans Wagner, but he qualifies his selection with: "I'm going to stick to the National League because I didn't see many of the great players in the American League. And my choice is Wagner. I never knew him to do anything wrong, mentally or otherwise, on a playing field."

Carl Owen Hubbell ranks Rogers Hornsby first, commenting: "He gave me many a tough moment. I don't think there was ever another player who cold match his hitting, fielding and speed."

Frankie Frisch cast one of the two votes for Ross Youngs, explaining "From a standpoint of all-round team play, team spirit and team loyalty, and the will to win, never saw a man with more of those qualities than Ross Youngs had. His career wasn't long but is was brilliant while it lasted.

Bill Killefer also cast his vote for Youngs and recalled: "There was one fellow John McGraw had who always impressed me as a great runner, hitter, fielder and hustler. His name was Ross Youngs. He was a ball player of the old school."

John Walter Cooney believes that "as far as the greatest hitter goes, I'd pick Rogers Hornsby, and for all-around ability I don't think you can ignore George Sisler."

Stan Hack cast the lone vote for Joe DiMaggio and accompanied his ballot with the following prophecy: "In a couple more years, Joe DiMaggio will make the fans forget fellows like Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth with his all-round feats."

Eddie Collins got the vote of Carroll W. Brown, who used to pitch for the Athletics and the Yankees. He wrote: "When you get around to picking the best, you have to consider everything, including disposition, and while Ty Cobb was a great hit, Collins had the better disposition."

Charles (Big Jeff) Tesreau picked Tris Speaker, commenting: "He was the best, a great outfielder, thrower and hitter."

The vote for Lou Gehrig was cast by his teammate and friend, Vernon (Lefty) Gomez, who added: "He was a timely hitter, never knew what it was to take a day off, was a good team player, and was there when you needed him."

John (Bucky) Freeman came to the front for Ed Delahanty and paid him the following tribute: "He was the best right-handed hitter in the old days and there is no one in his class today. If the bleachers in the left field of the Philadelphia park had been where they are today, they would never have heard of Babe Ruth or myself." (Bucky Freeman hit 25 home runs with Washington in 1899--Editor's Note.)

From the more distant past, John Wesley (Pebbly Jack) Glasscock stepped to the ballot box and boldly cast his vote for Jerry Denny, a stranger to the present generation. He bolstered his choice with the following statement: "When I played, the distance between the pitcher and the batter (pitching rubber to home plate) was only 45 to 50 feet. Then, too, nobody but the catcher wore a glove. I guess I would pick Jerry Denny, a third baseman, as the greatest player of all time."

So, there you are. You know how the players stand. You know how they voted and why and and we sincerely hope that it will supply a lasting answer to the question. (Sporting News, April 2, 1942, by J. G. Taylor Spink, pp. 1 & 13)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Randy appreciates a good article.
Great stuff Bill ! :clapping :clapping
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill thanks Randy.
Thank you, Randy. This Sporting News poll was the famous one you're heard referred to so much. This poll, along with the one I posted on post #31, were 2 of the very famous surveys of the early times.

[Bill Burgess]

Childhood Idols:
(The Heroes' Heroes, The Literary Digest, January 2, 1932, by Frank Graham.)

Ty Cobb Was Rogers Hornsby's:

1931 - "Ty Cobb was Hornsby's hero, and this is what he had to say about him: "Of course, I never saw Cobb when I was a kid, because the Tigers didn't ever come to Fort Worth, and I didn't ever get very far from it. But as far back as I can remember, I wanted to be a great hitter, and I guess there never was a greater hitter than Cobb. So he was my hero and, on account of him,the Tigers were my favorite team, and I followed him and the Tigers through the newspapers every day. I first saw him in the spring of 1916, when I was with the Cardinals in training at San Antonio and we went to Waxahachie, where the Tigers trained, to play an exhibition game. I didn't say anything to him and he didn't say anything to me, but I got a thrill out of watching him because in those days he was plenty good. He handled a bat like a billiard-cue, and he was on fire every time he got on the bases. Later I got to know him real well, and to like him as much as I thought I would when I was a kid." (Baseball Magazine, May, 1931, pp. 347, "They Had Their Heroes, Too", by Frank Graham) (This article was excerpted in Literary Digest, Jan. 2, 1932)

1961 - "Cobb was the greatest ball player of all time and will never be equaled. (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, July 18, 1961)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Cobb Was Mickey Cochrane's:

1931 - "Ty Cobb," said Cochrane, "Growing up around Boston, I saw all the big leaguers and right from the start Ty was my hero. I went to as many ball games as I could and you may be sure I never missed one when the Tigers came to town if I possibly could help it. I became acquainted with him when I broke in with the Athletics and later, when he came over to our club, that acquaintance developed into a real friendship. If he were playing ball today he'd still be my hero, which is the tip-off on how he registered with me." (Baseball Magazine, May, 1931, pp. 347, "They Had Their Heroes, Too", by Frank Graham) (This article was excerpted in Literary Digest, Jan. 2, 1932)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Babe Ruth Was Pepper Martin's:

"Babe Ruth was my hero," said Pepper Martin. And he told Mr. Graham further, I first took a shine to him when he was pitching for the Red Sox and I was a kid in town in Oklahoma. I thought he was the greatest pitcher in the world. And I guess he was. Right then, anyway. The first big kick I ever got out of a World Series I got when he was pitching against the Cubs in 1918. And then he turned around and became the greatest home-run hitter, and that gave me another kick. He showed me he was not only the greatest pitcher of his time, but the greatest ball-player of all time."

Further, the Pepper-pot confided to the writer:

"Do I know him? Yeah. I met him down in Florida last spring when he Yankees came to Bradenton to play an exhibition game against us. I think he's a swell fellow. I don't know whether he'd know me or not. You know how he is, meeting so many people all the time. But a guess maybe he'd know me--now."

It seemed likely. At the moment Pepper Martin loomed so large on the American scene as to blot out the depression, the Japanese imbroglio, and about everything else, including the Cardinals and the Athletics.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christy Mathewson Was Babe Ruth's:

Well, then, who was Babe Ruth's hero?

"Christy!" boomed the Babe. "Sure, Christy Mathewson."

As we read on, we find the Home-Run King paying this tribute:

"Maybe there was a greater pitcher than Matty, but I doubt it.

"And if anybody had suggested it to me when I was a kid in Baltimore and he was pinning the boys' ears back in the National League, I probably would have taken a sock at him, because I was a rough kid in those days. Maybe I didn't always know my lessons, but I always knew how many games Matty had won and lost. I read everything about him that I could get my hands on.

"By the time I got up to the big leagues Matty was just about getting through as a pitcher, but I got to know him when he was managing the Reds, and saw quite a little of him after that, when he was coaching for the Giants and later, when he was president of the Braves. A great pitcher--and a great fellow who made an impression on baseball that won't wear off as long as the game lasts."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cy Young Was Tris Speaker's:

"Cy Young," said Speaker. "We didn't see any big-league ball-players down around Hubbard, Texas, where I was born and reared, but that didn't stop us from bing interested in the big-league teams and players. My favorite team was the Red Sox and my favorite player was Young, who was a sweet pitcher, believe me.

"And here's the strangest--and best--part of the story. When I was sold by Little Rock to the Red Sox in 1908, Young still was pitching for them, and when I reported he was the first to greet me and show a friendly interest in me. In those days a busher breaking in generally had no friends. He was figuratively--and sometimes literally--pushed around and made to feel by the other players that he wasn't wanted, and I got plenty of pushing around from the Red Sox.

"But Young and Lou Criger, his battery mate, took me in hand. I went to live at the same apartment-hotel where they lived, and the aid and encouragement they game me, both on and off the field, helped me tremendously to put myself over."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From a different source.

Walter Johnson Was Lefty Grove's:

"Walter Johnson. I used to go from home to watch that bugger pitch. We'd take a train from Lonaconing down to Washington--three-or-four-hour trip in those days--on Sundays to see him pitch. We idolized that guy. Just sat there and watched him pitch. Down around the knees--whoosh! One after the other. He had something all right. I pitched against a lot of guys and saw a lot of guys throw, and I haven't seen one yet come close to as fast as he was. (Baseball When the Grass Was Real, by Donald Honig, 1975, pp. 80-81)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Cobb Was Happy Chandler's:

Former Baseball Commissioner and member of the Hall of Fame, Happy Chandler, said Ty Cobb was his boyhood idol.

"Ty Cobb has to be recognized as the greatest ball player American baseball has had. He hit .367 for 24 years. If you needed a hit, he'd get you one, and he'd get you a good one. He had 4,191 hits and that has never been surpassed. He stole almost 900 base, stole home 54 times, was a great center fielder, and played for 24 years. Fellows nowadays are lucky if thy can play ten or twelve years.

"Yes, Tyrus Raymond Cobb from Georgia. Ty Cobb has to be No. 1 based upon the records. He was my idol. Opinions die, but his records live.

"And he was exciting on the field. He fought his own fellows first, then the umpires, then the fans. He fought everyone who would fight. He was a tremendous player and he fought fair. He was the fist man elected to the Hall of Fame." (Hall of Famers Recall Their Boyhood Idols, by Joan Culkin, Baseball Digest, December, 1983, pp. 28-31)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Cobb was Joe Sewell's:

"Ty Cobb. He was a great ballplayer," said Sewell. "He was just my idol. He was the greatest baseball player I've seen in the major leagues from the 1920s to the present day. Yes, Ty Cobb is the greatest ballplayer I've seen yet.

"I've played with Babe Ruth and roomed with Lou Gehrig, seen Tris Speaker, George Sisler, and a lot of those great players . . . DiMaggio, Willie Mays, but Ty Cobb could do more things, and do more things to beat ya. Babe Ruth is the greatest home run hitter I've ever seen. These other players couldn't carry Babe Ruth's glove as far as hittin' was concerned. Babe Ruth could hit a ball farther than any fellow born or ever will be born or that ever lived--consistently. some of these other fellows get a hold of a ball, hit it out of the ballpark, but then go for two months before they hit another one. Ruth would hit one out one day, go back and hit out another one, and then go back an hit out another one."

"Overall, Ty Cobb could do so many things to beat ya. He was fast, a great outfielder, great hitter, and he was highly intelligent. Don't forget that." (Hall of Famers Recall Their Boyhood Idols, by Joan Culkin, Baseball Digest, December, 1983, pp. 28-31)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Hornsby was Al Lopez's:

As a youth, Hall of Famer Al Lopez moods were affected by his idol.

"Rogers Hornsby was my idol," admitted Lopez who caught more games (1,918) than any other catcher n history. "I just took a fancy to him. To me he was the best hitter in baseball.

"The first thing I'd do in the morning was pick up the paper and see what Rogers Hornsby did. I didn't look to see if the team had won or lost. If he got a couple of hits, I'd feel good. If he went 0 for 4, I wouldn't feel so good." (Hall of Famers Recall Their Boyhood Idols, by Joan Culkin, Baseball Digest, December, 1983, pp. 28-31)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Cobb Was Eddie Collins's:

1915 - "His gifts are so unusual, so far above the next best, that he stands in a class by himself. I have never seen and never expect to see from any other person such wonderful playing as Ty Cobb has performed at his very best when facing the Athletics and that may be better than his usual average. I frankly admit that I never expect, have never expected to equal Cobb as a ball player. The best that any other player can hope for, in my opinion, is second place." (Baseball Magazine, March, 1915, pp. 63-63, "Collins the Great", by Ferdinand C. Lane, pp. 47-63)

1928 - "I find it a trifle difficult to express concisely my esteem for Ty Cobb. Since my entry into Baseball, he has been my Model and I have striven to imitate his style of play. To me, he seems Perfection, personified. It doesn't seem sufficient to to just say, "the greatest ballplayer of all time." At one time bitterest rivals, it is most gratifying to me to become a team mate of Ty's, in the closing years of our careers. I feel confident that this Most Excellent Biography of the game's Premier Player will fill a long-felt want among Mr. Cobb's great host of admirers." Edward T. Collins, Philadelphia American League Ball Club, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, (Introduction to Ty Cobb: The Idol of Fandom, by Sverre O. Braathen, of the Wisconsin Bar, 1928)

1962 - Barbara Tyler was private secretary to Collins for many years. According to Miss Tyler, Collins never talked in glowing terms about any other player the way he did about Ty. "If you ever wanted Mr. Collins to extol the virtues of a great ball player, " Miss Tyler stated, "all you had to mention was Ty's name. Then Mr. Collins would go on for hours telling about the greatest player who ever lived." (Sporting News, January 3, 1962, pp. 17, column 5)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Cobb Was George Sisler's:

1931 - "For third place you simply must make room for Ty Cobb. Ty was the most brilliant ballplayer baseball has produced, the most daring, the most spectacular. Ty was poison on the base-paths. He completely disrupted infield defense. At bat he always mixed ability with brains. He had the most versatile batting attack on record. I have publicly said many times that Ty was my own batting model, and he was. I tried to learn place hitting by watching him. No one that I ever heard of taught Ty how to bat. But dozens of players owe a good deal of their own batting success to Ty's teaching. (Baseball Magazine, April , 1931, pp. 484, "The Greatest Player I Ever Saw, Comprising an Interview With George Sisler, pp. 483-484)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Cobb Was Jimmie Dykes's:

1967 - "Picking the outfield is easy. In left, Ty Cobb, who knew every possible trick in the book that'd get him on and then show some new ones to us who got in his way. No one has yet surpassed Ty as a hitter and baserunner and no one ever will." ( You Can't Steal First Base" by Jimmy Dykes, 1967, pp. 205, 209)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bill Burgess]

--------------------------Many Underhanders, But None Like Mays
--------------------------John B. Foster Tells How Pitching of the Yankees'
--------------------------Submarine Star Differs From those of Old Boys

-------------------------(The Sporting News, Thursday, November 24, 1921, pp. 8)

Those of the younger generation of baseball patrons and players who see Carl Mays pitch for the first time marvel thereout and exclaim "How funny!" One or two of our modern essayists on the national game have been moved to say that Mays is the only pitcher of his peculiar style in baseball history. That is modern enthusiasm carried away with a peculiar desire to deny antiquity any claim of parity with the present, writes John B. Foster in the New York Sun.

Back in 1880, there were scores who pitched like Mays. Burkalow, who threw the ball for the Hop Hitters team about that time, stooped so low with his underhand delivery that he had to wear blinkers on his knuckles to keep the skin intact, because he scraped his hand so often on the ground. Jim McCormick, who was one of the great pitchers of baseball and who died not long ago in Paterson, N. J. pitched underhand when he began and if he had been pitching today he would have been a leader in one of the major leagues.

In 1878 and 1879 they were just beginning to break away from underhand pitching. Side arm pitching came in almost that time. Umpires not only had to watch the ball in the days when underhand pitching was the only kind that way legal, but they were also compelled to keep an eye on the pitcher's arm and tell him not to get it about the waist.

It was as common to yell at the umpire, "Make him keep his arm down, Mr. Umpire," as it is common now for the coach to yell at the batter, "Make it be over, old boy; the good one's left."

---------------------------Curves It From Below
Wherein Mays is not like the pitchers of the days that have gone to join Ptolemy and Julius Caesar, is the fact that he pitches a fast curve with an underhand motion. The old boys who threw underhand years ago did not know much about the curve and if they had known anything about it they would have had a lot of trouble to counterfeit Mays' curve.

Analyze pitching to its final separation of twists and squirming and you will find that there is really but one positive curve in baseball.

There is a heap of talk about screws, shoots, twists, slants and various other departures from a straight and narrow line, but there is just the one curve which the right-hand pitcher pitches to the right-hand batter, and which the left-hand pitcher pitches to the left-hand batter. The right-hand pitcher can throw the ball with a lot of speed so that it bears in toward the batter and the left-hand pitcher can throw the same way to make a left-hand batter gasp twice before the ball gets by him, but there is no positive curve to it.

The ball does drop. That isn't a curve. It is the application of the break of reverse English. If you are clever you can make a billiard ball do stunts of that character on the billiard table. There is no up curves and the nearest thing any pitcher ever came to one was Billy Rhines of Cincinnati. Not long ago a learned dissertation was written on Rhines' pitching by one who never saw him pitch, but a little thing like that doesn't matter between friends.

-------------------------------Same Principles After All

Mays excels because he curves the ball outside to right-hand batters and at the same time makes it break down like a drop ball. He is not the only pitcher who can do that, but he is one of the few pitchers who can do it with speed, and it is the ability to put smoke on the ball that is one of his great assets.

A. G. Spalding used to pitch the ball and put speed on it. He didn't throw it. He had the best record of any pitcher in the history of baseball and he served the ball to the batter exactly as you might start a ball up a bowling alley. All the pitchers in his day had to deliver the ball in that manner.

Some old fellows who are about 60 now can remember when they had to pitch like that, and they were good pitchers, too. It would surprise some of the haughty latter day ball players who become tragedians and all that sort of thing, if they got out on the ball field and tried to bat against some of those old boys. They would find that a little thing like curving the ball underhand with a straight arm delivery, just as if you were throwing knots down from the top of the woolpile, would stand them first on one foot and then on the other trying to hit safely." (The Sporting News, Thursday, November 24, 1921, pp. 8)

[Bill Burgess]

Introducing Frances Charles Richter

Born: January 26, 1854, Philadelphia, PA
Died: February 12, 1926, Philadelphia, PA, age, 72

Article on Richter's Impact on baseball (http://www.uga.edu/juro/2003/shaw.htm)
Francis' Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Richter)

Philadelphia sports writer/editor, 1872-1926---54 years;
Was Editor-in-Chief of Reach Official American League Base Ball Guide (1902-1926, Feb. 12, death); In those days, being a Guide editor was a position of enormous prestige/importance.

Mr. Richter was a noted amateur player in Philadelphia. In 1872, he started writing sports with the Philadelphia Day, eventually rising to managing editor. He moved to the Sunday World and Public Ledger in 1880, when The Day folded. He instituted the US's 1st full-fledged sports departments in the Phil. Public Ledger.

In 1876, the NL expelled the Phil. Athletics from the league. Consequently, Mr. Richter supported the the formation of the rival American Association (AA) in 1882. Mr. Richter founded the weekly Sporting Life in 1883, 3 years prior to the Spink Brothers founding The Sporting News, in 1886, in St. Louis, MO.

In 1883, Mr. Richter assisted organizing the Phillies as the NL came back to Philadelphia. He supported the Player's League in 1890, with his Sporting Life.

He wrote, "I have no very great cause to love the National League. What has it ever done for The Sporting Lie ... All the League ever did for The Sporting Life because it chose to act independently was to try and crush it."

When the AA folded in 1891, Mr. Richter was involved in several tries to break the monopoly of the NL. In 1894, he allied with Al Bckenberger, Fred Pfeffer & Billie Barnie in a failed try to revive the AA. Again in early 1900, he allied with Chris Von Der Ahe, Cap Anson & John McGraw to reform a new AA.

In 1901, he was named Editor-In-Chief of Reach Guide for 1902, which covered the AL. He continued in this role until he died.

In 1880, he started the 1st sports dept. ever in a newspaper, The Public Ledger.

Drew up National Agreement (1883),
Helped place Phil Club in AA (1882),
Helped place Phil club in NL (1883),
Helped assimilate AA into NL (1891),
Drew up Millenium Plan which ended BB war.

Mr. Richter was offered the Presidency of the National League in 1907. He declined due to his obligations to the AL Reach Guide & his own Sporting Life.

For many years, he was one of the official scorers for the World's Series games, sharing the honor with JG Taylor Spink, publisher of the Sporting News.

He founded Sporting Life in 1883, a weekly baseball paper, which became a great force in BB until he disposed of it in 1917, during the War. The motto of his publication, "Devoted to the Baseball Men and Measures, With Malice Toward None and Charity for All," sums up the character of Mr. Richter.

He was a columnist for Sporting News from Dec. 8, 1921 - Sept., 1925. His column, Casual Comment was often addressed to administrative matters. He was always at the top of the BB world, albeit behind the scenes, working for the betterment of the game he loved so much.

For a long lifetime of service to BB at its highest levels, I nominate him for the Taylor Spink Award. His every waking moment was happily devoted to BB. In April, 1946, he & 11 others were elected to BB Hall of Fame as sports writers (Honor Rolls).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some examples of Francis Richter's writings. In this case, on the subject of Babe Ruth, in the early 1920's.
(Sporting News, July 6, 1922, pp. 4, column 5; Casual Comment column)

1922 - "The recent additional disciplining of Babe Ruth by President Johnson for vile language to Umpire Dinneen, following other suspensions for offenses since his return to the game, has had a temporary quieting effect upon this inflated and ill-disciplined young man, but of the permanence of his reform there must be grave doubt, as his entire career shows that he has not the fundamental character to build real greatness in his chosen profession upon. Ruth has been spoiled by his popularity with the unthinking part of the public for excellence in one specialty: by the injudicious coddling and exploitation by his club; and by the incessant praise of the metropolitan writers--all of which he has not the brains, training or temperament to bear with becoming modesty or grace. His lack of ability to measure up fully to true greatness has been revealed throughout his career in recent years.

When the Boston Club gave him leeway in 1919 for his home run specialty by making him a regular instead of a pitcher, he broke the long-standing major league individual home run record, but proved such an insubordinate member of the team that Boston was glad to sell him to the New York Club. For that club in 1920 he broke the world's home run record, with the aid of the radical changes in the pitching rules, but the New York team won no pennant--owing largely to Ruth's discouraging effect on team work, though the club profited largely through his attraction as a drawing card. In 1921 he again bettered his world's record and the New York team finally won the pennant, however, not by reason of his home run hitting, but owing to the misfortunes of the Cleveland team; and that it lost the World's Series was largely due to Ruth's failure to measure up to form and expectation in that classic event.

Then came the famous "barnstorming" episode, in which Ruth defied both the laws of the game and Commissioner Landis, for which he drew a five weeks' suspension at the start of the 1922 season-- which marked the beginning of the end for Ruth. That five weeks' suspension was fatal to Ruth for the reason it prevented his proper development in condition and skill which comes only by participation in games; precluded all chance of equaling or making a new home run record this season, owing to his manifest decadence in batting; enabled other players to step into the home run picture, and demonstrated conclusively that he was not necessary to the New York team, as it jumped into and maintained the lead long before Ruth and Meusel rejoined it, and lost the lead not long after these two worthies got into the game, owing to the futility of their batting.

All this led to enormous shrinkage of Ruth's popularity with the fans, particularly of New York, many of whom turned from adulation to derision. The press, too, turned largely against the fallen idol--all of which had its effect upon a man of Ruth's limited intelligence, variable temperament, and colossal egotism, and undoubtedly led to his senseless rows with umpires, for which he has been properly disciplined by President Johnson, who threatens to repeat the dose, upon similar provocation, until Ruth either behaves or gets out. . .

In this event the brief reign of Babe Ruth, though highly profitable to the New York Club, will be memorable only for its evil effect upon the sport as a whole, as his constant exploitation as a home run hitter stimulated a home run craze in both public and players that led to temporary abandonment of scientific play; and militated vastly against team work and discipline; and, worst of all, made a popular hero of a specialty player who lacks every qualification of a truly great player." (Sporting News, July 6, 1922, Casual Comment column)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Followup piece by same writer, Mr. Francis Charles Richter.
(Sporting News, October 4, 1923, pp. 4, column 5, Casual Comment column)
"One of the biggest factors in the complete reversal of the Yankee team form was Babe Ruth, who amply made good his promise of reform made last winter, while still smarting under the ignominy of his pitifully inadequate World Series showing. This reformation, consistently carried out, embraced both conduct on & off the field and general play. His general conduct has been exemplary, not containing even one rebuke, while his entire method of play has been both revolutionized and his conception of his place in and duties to the scene of baseball has been changed and vastly enlarged. Ruth has become traceable, obedient to his manager's slightest wish, and a team player of the first rank, always willing to subordinate himself to the common good."

"Instead of confining himself to his former specialty of home run hitting (He hit 41 in '23) -- Ruth has all season resorted to every style of batting suitable to the occasion, not even excepting bunting: and consequently has proven one of the greatest batsman in the American League, running a season-long neck-and-neck race with Harry Heilmann of Detroit for the batting leadership. In addition his fielding has been both accurate and brilliant, and his base running excellent (17-21). Altogether a more striking and successful change was never witnessed in a star player between two seasons."

Ruth has now been rewarded for his subjugation of self, and a great and most fitting reward it is. Instead of being known simply as the great home run slugger he will go down in history as the most valuable player on all counts in the American League in 1923--the greatest tribute that could be offered any player, and one coveted by all players in that great organization.

This honor officially falls to Ruth by vote of the American League Trophy Committee, consisting of one scribe from each American League city, under the chairmanship of the veteran I. E. Sanborn of Chicago. A striking thing about this decision of the committee and at the same time a tribute to Ruth's complete in manner, habits and team play, was that the vote for Ruth was unanimous, whereas a year ago, his name was not even mentioned, which should convince the "American League's greatest player of 1923" of the enduring value of good conduct, personal subjection to discipline, and all round team play, so that he may persevere therein, and thus go down in history as one of the comparitively few really great players in conduct and all departments of play.(Sporting News, October 4, 1923, pp. 4, column 5, Casual Comment column)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Frances Richter, Reach AL Baseball Guide, February, 1926

------------------------A Base Ball Idol Dethroned---------------------------------------
-----------------------By the Editor of the Reach Guide----------------------------------

During the 1925 season Babe Ruth, the best advertised and most exploited base ball player of modern times, and consequently the most popular player for the time being, suffered his worst season both in health and playing skill, and toward the end of the season fell from his throne through disobedience of orders and through illness, caused in part through his regular defiance of living rules was ill for nearly two months in a New York hospital, and when he did report for duty, found his forces so much impaired that he suffered much in playing skill. His work in the field was decidedly mediocre and he fell off so greatly in batting that he fell from the pinnacle to a very mediocre place, his average for the major part of the season being about 260. But his real fall came on August 30, when on the same day that the veteran Ty Cobb was honored by the City of Detroit at a municipal dinner at which he was presented with a $10,000 check by the Detroit Club president, Ruth, Cobb's greatest rival for popularity was suspended indefinitely and fined $5,000--a record for breaches of club rules in staying out late at nights. This action was taken at the close of a Western trip and the Yankee team left for home without Ruth.

----------------------RUTH ADMITS HIS SHORTCOMINGS---------------------------------

Ruth stopped off in Chicago for the purpose of seeking Commissioner Landis' intervention n the matter of his indefinite suspension and record-breaking fine. Ruth failed to find Mr. Landis, who was at his summer home at Bent Lake, Michigan, but was advised that under the rules, Mr. Landis had no jurisdiction in the case for ten days, so Ruth decided to hurry to New York to lay his case before President Ruppert. While in Chicago, Ruth admitted that he had twice expressly violated Manager Huggins' orders while at bat, one time hitting the ball out when ordered to sacrifice, and the other time sacrificing when ordered to hit, thus willfully substituting his own judgment in violation of club rules and discipline. He also admitted having remained out an hour and a half late one night at St. Louis, but he contended that his suspension and fine -- was merely an attempt by Manager Huggins to shield his own managerial short-comings, and to make him - Ruth - the goat. Ruth charged that Huggins was an incompetent manager whose team won for three years through its internal strength and lost the pennant in 1924 by not getting the most out of the team--to all of which charges Manager Huggins refused to reply, merely pointing to Ruth's repeated refractions of league and club rules in the seasons of 1922 and 1924, and his latest escapades in 1925, all of which violated repeated promises to reform, promises which were only kept in 1923, when Ruth performed so well all season that he was voted the crown as "the most valuable player in the league."

---------------------------RUTH FORGIVEN AND REINSTATED--------------------------

When Ruth arrived in New York he made haste to lay his case before President Ruppert. To his surprise he met with a frosty reception, was reminded of his serious breeches of club rules in the past and was told his reinstatement was entirely up to Manager Huggins, with whom he would have to make his peace, else the indefinite suspension would continue. This plainly showed Ruth just where and how he stood and he at once decided to make overtures to Manager Huggins for reconciliation and reinstatement. He sought Manager Huggins after a game, apologized for his criticism of the manager, and asked pardon for his breeches of club rules, promising complete reformation if reinstated. Manager Huggins therefore shook hands with Ruth in forgiveness of his personal criticism and promised to take the matter of reinstatement under consideration. After letting Ruth sweat for several days Manager Huggins reinstated Ruth, on September 7, but according to all accounts the record fine of $5,000 was not remitted. In justice to Ruth, it must be admitted that for the balance of the season he played good ball and also showed such improvement in batting that by the end of the season it was .293--an improvement of thirty point over his mid-season batting. Ruth has undoubtedly been one of the greatest drawing cards in all of the history of the game, and in spite of the big pay he has received has probably been a good investment for his employers. His future depends largely upon himself. If he has "gone back" for good, the fickle public will soon be looking for some one to take his place. But if he has the ability and the desire to shine again both his employers and the patrons of the game are likely to be indulgent. The moral of it, however, is that if you want to succeed you have to be on the job constantly.

--------------------LOST FORTUNE THROUGH IRRESPONSIBILITY--------------------------
In an article in "Collier's Weekly," Ruth, after his reinstatement estimated that through extravagances and follies he had lost a large-sized fortune. Ruth, in his narrative recounts his "missteps" and really tremendous losses through gambling, ill-starred business ventures and in fighting legal suits, all of which he figures at $250,000 besides an equal amount estimated to have gone to "high living, parties, charities, gifts, etc." Once, he admits, he lost $35,000 on a single horse race. Ruth also disclosed that as early as 1922 Miller Huggins, manager of the New York Yankees fined him $9,000 for "continued violation of training rules, culminating in a wet party on Broadway." But the fine was later rescinded because Ruth was "riding the crest of one of my inspired batting streaks, hitting a homer almost every day." This was not known generally, late last season, when Ruth was fined $5,000 by Huggins for "misconduct off the field," while the Yankees were in St. Louis. "I have been the sappiest of saps", he adds. "But I'm going to make good all over again." As evidence of his intention to come back, Ruth, after finishing a hunting trip in the north woods, plans to go to St. Petersburg, Fla., the Yankees training camp, then to visit Hot Springs before joining his teammates in Florida for the regular conditioning grind.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the Memory of Frances Richter: John B. Foster Gives Estimate of Late Writer:
Veteran Historian and Authority Loved His Baseball and Wrote It with Understanding and Spirit. (Sporting News, February 25, 1926, pp. 6, col. 6-7.)

The following is a communication from John B. Foster, editor of the Spalding Guide, and one of the best known of the older chroniclers of baseball affairs in New York. It is a personal appraisement of the character and genuineness of Frances C. Richter, veteran baseball writer and historian of Philadelphia, who died the other day. Foster knew Richter intimately, knew his high ideals and purposes and knew his value and source to the game.

"I beg the courtesy of the columns of The Sporting News to express my personal grief over the death of Frances C. Richter, founder and editor of Sporting Life until it passed into the graveyard of newspaper enterprises. Francis C. Richter was one of the constructive geniuses of baseball with the pen. In the past 30 years we have had many commentators on baseball, some of them sincere, some purely frivolous, some penetrating, some shallow, some quick of perception, some not so keen, some prophetic, some fatalists.

"How could it be otherwise with all manner of men writing of baseball, and men thrown into the position of critics of baseball at the behest of managing editors who, because of the success of humorous and cynical writers--few of whom ever kept up the task very long--were imbued with the idea that baseball was closely related to the comic valentine, hence governed themselves accordingly.

-------------------------------------Game Close to Richter's Heart-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Richter was none of these. He loved baseball and he wrote baseball from the standpoint of the man who has found what a game really is. He permitted all manner of criticism to enter into the columns of his publication, if it were not libelous, even though at variance with his own opinions, and thus he helped the game of baseball mightily. His own personality was against destructive criticism, yet he conceded that out of the preaching of the opportunist there might come good for the stability of the sport.

"It was the custom in years gone by to predict from season to season that there would be 'no next season.' Often men who enjoyed the game of baseball would express their doubt as to its future. Again and again I heard some of them say--'How much longer will it last?' That was in the 'eighties' and if at that time some one had said there would be 50,000 spectators to see a ball game in the next quarter century, there have been doubts as to his sanity. even as late as the 'nineties' a statement made by the late Albert G. Spalding that 75,000 persons would soon see a ball game, which was made to me in the course of conversation, was ridiculed by the pessimists. Yet, Spalding was right. The 75,000 mark has not been actually reached, but if there were 100,000 seats available they could be sold, not only for World's Series games, but for occasional holiday games.

"Francis C. Richter was always of this group of firm believers in baseball future. He commented caustically at times and he wielded a pen that could put the truth home with a sharp point. However bitter his criticism might seem to be there was behind it a fight for the game of baseball itself and it was that surface cynicism of the writer who deals in personalities. A field of personalities is always easiest in which to volunteer as a commentator.

"When baseball needed the enforcement of certain regulations that had been forced upon it, because of its growth and its unexpected evolution as a magnet for the non-player, Richter was foremost in fighting for them.

"He entered losing battles when he essayed to play league politics and fight for separation of organizations, and the entry of newer organizations, but I have been told that he was forced into this condition by the business policy of his office management, which shifted its affiliation, if that is the better way to put it, and which erred grossly because it was this which ultimately led to the downfall of Sporting Life. The stability of the paper as an organ of baseball was undermined by the intervention of the business office and in his later days Richter deplored with sad words the end of one of the best newspapers devoted strictly to the game that had been introduced into current affairs.

-------------------------------------------GRACED WITH BROAD VISION-------------------------------------------------------
"When the American Association and the National League were amalgamated into a 12-club league in 1891, there were but two writers of those in the United States who knew every move that was being made from the first approach of the National League to absorb its rival, and one of the two was Richter. It was he who worked with the committee of the National League to prove to Von Der Ahe of St. Louis, that it would be better to weld the circuits into one. Richter was present when the final step was taken.

"He was a good student of baseball rules and it was largely through his insistence and splendid presentation of argument that the pitching distance was increased to 60 feet, six inches, although there were many who thought he was quite wrong. Even the pitchers thought so, but they shortly found out they could pitch better at the long distance than at the short, as their curves broke better for them.

"Almost without exception, as I recall it, Richter was right in anything which had to do with development of the game, per se, but some of us differed with his opinions about what is known as baseball politics. Whatever baseball politics may be, they have never been able to harm the pastime from tits standpoint, of good to man, although they have played a disastrous hand more than once to promoters of baseball clubs who have ventured into the sport with the idea that it is something which gains large earnings even if there is poor judgment in administration and complete lack of knowledge as to the requirements.

"Various men are designated as this and that in baseball. Some of them are entitled to the fine tributes that have been paid to them, yet I doubt if any one of them ever did as much and certainly not more, for baseball, when the game really needed support most of all, than Francis C. Richter.
---------------------------------------------Saw the Sport of the Thing------------------------------------------------------

"Those who are modern to the game have no conception of some of the early handicaps that attended it." Owners of baseball clubs, to a great extent in formative days, supported the clubs purely from the standpoint of local pride and at loan to themselves.' The local idea of a ball club was far different from that of the present era. The enthusiasts of baseball were so loyal to the game that time and again they subscribed to the support of a losing team, hoping for better results, but above everything desirous of retaining the club in the city which it represented. Men were out of pocket season after season merely because they realized that joy which men have in dabbling in anything that pertains to athletics.

"When baseball needed encouragement and assistance in moments of that period of the national game's existence, Richter elaborated not the need of money, but the good of baseball and interested other men and still others in it. A later generation began to comment of baseball, not as a game but as something placarded with the dollar mark, because it is easier to dabble with figures than it is to go to a ball game and see how it is played and why it is won.

"The huge sum received for World Series contests have had their share in change opinion. A game over-financed in reputation will sere quicker than one which is fresh with the thrill of its own performance.

"Francis Richter lived baseball and for baseball. Glory to his memory! It was not a joke to him, not the butt of a lapper, but something which had to do with the inner life of the youth of the United States, and he fought for it because of the splendid sentiment which was created on the fields of Philadelphia where they played baseball for the sport of a wonderful pastime and cherished its memories as no other city cherishes them. They are then today, some of those old fellows, some of the pioneers, with the same fondness for the national pastime, and always had and the same delight in recalling the fun which they accomplished when they were younger.

"Richter had courage and he had conviction. He fought losing battles, but he fought them with a fertile mind that brought argument to defend his position. He was a good loser, too, and accepted the inevitable with the resignation of a man who hopes to be justified by the future and feels that he has been sincere in the present." (Sporting News, February 25, 1926. Mr. Richter died on February 12, 1926. He had hosted a Sporting News column, tittled 'Casual Comment', largely dealing with the administrative side of the game, from December 15, 1921 - summer, 1925.)



----------Frances Richter/Taylor Spink: 1912 World Series

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing John B. Foster

Born: July 16, 1863, Norwalk, OH
Died: September 29, 1941, Washington, DC, age 78

Sports writer, 54 yrs. (Cleveland, 1887 - 1896), (New York, 1896 - 1941)
Credited with promoting Army Navy game at the Polo Grounds into national interest.

Years on BB 's rules committee. Considered an authority on BB law, rules, admin. Credited with answering 500,000 questions on BB rules, laws, and various phases of BB. Wrote digest of rules for the French. Was named official authority for rules for Japan.

In 1910, he was suggested as President of the National League. Mentioned frequently between 1910 - '19, for that position.

Official scorer at Polo Grounds almost all his career. Couldn't attend games after 1932, due to right side paralyzed. Followed BB via radio, newspapers.

NY Giants' Secretary & business manager (Jan. 6, 1913 - Dec. 4, 1919);

When Henry Chadwick died in 1908, John succeeded him as Editor-in-Chief of Spalding Official NL Base Ball Guide (1908-1941) and held it until he died.

Foster was a close second to his dear friend Frances Richter in the baseball accomplishments he was able to achieve in a long BB lifetime. Like Richter, a must for Spink Award.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing William Arlie (Bill) Phelon

Born: September 7, 1872, Chicago, IL
Died: August 19, 1925, Cincinnati, OH, age, 53, after 3 days of Bright's Disease

Chicago, NY, Cincinnati sports writer/sports editor (1889-1925);
(Chicago, 1889-1910); (NY, 1910); (Cincinnatti, 1910-1925), sports writer, 36 yrs.

Easily most colorful, eccentric sports writer ever lived. Rube Waddell of BWAA.
A great book should be written about him. As a writer, Bill was one of the best, and one of the most prolific.

He was an associate editor of Baseball Magazine (March, 1913 - November, 1924). He had replaced Jake Morse (Boston sports writer), who himself had encyclopedic BB knowledge of all things baseball.

Also was Cincinnati correspondent for the Sporting News. From 1889-1915, had scored over 3,500 ballgames. Made all road trips with Reds. Total home team rooter.

As a complete authority of baseball, he lived the game. Had been famous amateur ballplayer & boxer, was an actor, wrote for the stage, studied Indian lore, wrote baseball poetry, was twice married with a son; Contributed to Weekly BB Guide, Chicago BB News, NY Herald Examiner, NY World.
Cincinnati Commercial Tribune obituary----------------------------------Sporting News' article, ------------Sporting News' article,
August 20, 1925, pp. 10--------------------------------------------------March 16, 1933, pp. 4.-------------May 21, 1936, pp. 22.


-----------------American League Reach Guide, 1926--------------------------New York Times' Obit, August 20, 1925, pp. 15.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Sam Newhall Crane

Born: January 2, 1854, Springfield, MA
Died: June 26, 1925, Bronx, NY
NY Press, 1890-1898, New York Journal, 1898-1925, sports writer, sports writer, 35 yrs.

ML 2B, 1883-1890; NY spwr. 37 yrs., 1888-1925; Atlantic League president, 1895. Minor league manager, amateur player, 1875-82. Considered best fielding 2B for his time. Famous for how loved he was by all. (NY Journal, 1898-1925, at time, this paper had over 1m readers, largest daily in US.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Ferdinand Cole Lane

Born: October 25, 1885, near Moorehead, MN
Died: April 20, 1984, Hyannis, Cape Cod, MA
Baseball Magazine editor-in-chief, 27 yrs., 1910-1937; Wrote tons of articulate, technical articles, and winter articles with stars at their home.

Editor-in-Chief of Baseball Magazine (Boston,1910-12), (1912-38, NYC). Wrote probably close to 1,000 excellent detailed articles on baseball's technical side as well as interviews w/stars at home in winter. Hall of Fame must. After retiring in 1937 from the editor's chair, he returned to Cape Cod for his long life. Headed Piedmont College's Hist. Dept.(1941-43) at Demorest, GA. Established journalism program there. He traveled extensively with wife Emma, whom he married in June, 1914. Together they made many overseas voyages,circling globe 6 times. Wrote several books on geography & nature for adults & youths, 1940's-50's. Published his poems in 1958 (On Old Cape Cod). Lived their final yrs. in Cape Cod nursing home, she died 10 months after him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing Timothy Hayes Murnane

Born: June 4, 1851, Naugatuck, CT
Died: February 7, 1917, Boston MA
Boston Globe, 1888-1917

ML 1B, 1872-78; Boston sports writer 27 yrs., 1890-1917; New England League class C President, 1891-1915. Founded Nat. Ass. of Prof. BB Leagues, 1901-15, and served as its VP; NL ump, 1886.

Wright and Ditson BB Guide editor, 1889-1912, the official organ of the minor league National Ass.; Eastern League's 1st Pres., 1915. Chicago Cubs scout. Manager of Boston team, 1884, in outlaw Union Ass.

In 1884, he served as part owner, manager, captain, 1st basemen & recruiter for the Boston Union team. Organized the Boston Blues in 1886, but it wasn't successful.
New York Times Obituary (http://www.thedeadballera.com/Obits/Murnane.Tim.Obit.html)-----Wikipedia article (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:hckB3-yT_IEJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Murnane+Wikipedia+%22Tim+Murnane%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us)---Sporting News' Obituary (http://www.paperofrecord.com/paper_view.asp?PaperId=834&RecordId=1&PageId=7782292&iZyNetId={59F2F47E-F01A-437B-A969-988774AC485E}&iOrder=2&iOrderDir=0&iCurrentBlock=1)



New York Herald obituary, February 8, 1917------Chicago Tribune obituary, February 8, 1917.



Sporting Life obituary, February 17, 1917, pp. 3.[/B]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above 6 BB men, spent virtually their entire lives immersed in the National Pastime. They all so lived the game that their peers were all amazed that they could do one activity for so long without outside diversions. Richter/Foster started BB sections in many newspapers, which helped popularized the game across the country. Obscure now, very famous then.

[Bill Burgess]

The Sports Writers:

Who were the best/most influential baseball writers? I thought I'd take a shot. So here goes. First those who wrote the sport of baseball the best.

Henry Chadwick---1856-1908, NY sp.wr.,author; Family moved Brooklyn,NY(Sept.21,1837); NY Times cricket reports(1856), Brooklyn Eagle cricket,BB ed.(1856-94), NY Herald, NY World sp wr(13yrs), NY Sun(6yrs), Sp. News, Sp. Life, Yankee Clipper(1858-?) Ball Players' Chronicle(1867-69). In 1896, NL voted him pension for life.Editor-in-chief of NL Spalding baseball guide until his death(1881-08

Tim Murnane---1888-1917, Boston sports writer; former ML 1B(1872-78,84), Founded Boston Referee(1885), Boston Globe spwr. & sp.ed.(1888-1917,Feb.7, death). President: New England L. : 24 yrs. Buried: Old Calvary Cemetery, Roslindale, MA

Sam Crane-----1890-1925, NY sp. wr.; Studied civil engineering at MIT for 2 yrs.,ML best 2nd baseman(1880-90), managed Buffalo in NL(1879-80) & Cincinnati(U,1884). Old Atlantic League Pres.(1895), New York Press sp.wr.(1890-98), NY Journal(1898-1925).

Francis Charles Richter------1868-1926, Phil. sportswriter; Was editor-in-chief of Reach Official American League Base Ball Guide(1902-1926,Feb.12, death); Died the day after the manuscript of the 1925 Reach Guide was completed. Drew up National Agreement(1883), helped place Phil Club in AA(1882), Helped place Phil club in NL(1883),helped assimilate AA into NL(1891), drew up Millenium Plan which ended BB war. Richly deserves BB Hall of Fame.Whole existence-BB

William B. Hanna--------1884-1930, NY,Kansas City spwr.; Grad. Lafayette College,Easton,PA(1878);Kansas City Star,Arrived NYC(1888), NY Herald, NY Press(1893),NY Sun(1900-16), NY Herald('16-24), Herald-Tribune('24-May,'30,death);Acknowledged expert on baseball, football & billiards.

Jake Morse------------1884-1915, Boston sports writer; Grad. Roxbury Latin Sch.(1877), Harvard College(1881), Boston U. Law Sch.(1884); Boston Herald(1884-1907, sp.ed.1884-1901), Secretary of New England Baseball League, became insurance man(1915), Wrote a history of Baseball(Sphere & Ash,1888).Helped launch Baseball Magazine('08) & was one of its' Presidents & editors 'til 1912. Boston Traveler( ?-37, death).Managed Boston Nationals(U,1884)

Walter Barnes-------------1889-1939, Boston sports writer; Boston Post reporter(1889-1891), Boston Journal sp.ed.(1891-06,Oct.), Boston Herald sp.ed.('06-11), Boston Globe('11-33)(sp.ed.'14-33)(Emeritus,'33-40).

John B. Foster--------1888-1941, NY spwr.; Norwalk HS, OH; st. ed.; Clev. Press gen. rep. & state ed., Clev. Leader sp.ed.(?-1888), Arrived NYC (1896), NY Evening Telegraph sp.ed. & city ed.(1896-11), NY Journal, NY Herald, NY Sun (1920-31), Consolidated Press Ass. (1918-20), Credited with promoting Army Navy game at the Polo Grounds into national interest. Years on BB 's rules committee. Considered an authority on BB law, rules, admin. Credited with answering 500,000 questions on BB rules, laws, and various phases of BB. Wrote digest of rules for the French. Was named official authority for rules for Japan. Official scorer at Polo Grounds. Couldn't attend games after '32, due to right side paralyzed. Followed BB via radio,papers. Giants' Secretary & business manager(Jan. 6, '13-1919, Dec. 4); Paralyzed on his right side his last 9 yrs. Editor-in-Chief of Spalding Official NL Base Ball Guide (1908-1941).

Hugh Keough-------------1888-1912, Chicago sp.wr.; Hamilton Spectator(Ontario) reporter, 1881, Sporting Journal(1888-1890), Chicago Times reporter, sp.ed.(1891-94), San Francisco Chronicle sp.ed.(1895), New Orleans Item(1896), Lake County Times man.ed.(1900-05), d. after 6 wk. illness. Chicago Tribune sp. wr. & columnist (1905-12). While at The Chicago Tribune, he started and made famous The Wake of the News from 1905-12. It's thought to be the oldest, continuous sports column in the US. Worked newspapers 31 yrs.

John B. Sheridan--------1880's-1929, St. Louis spwr. (1880's-1929); Sporting News column, "Back of Home Plate", Dec.5,1918 - 1929,Apr.18; Started on St. Louis Globe-Democrat(1880's), Post-Dispatch, The Republic, Globe-Democrat. Missouri Committee on Public Utility Information manager,1921-. While on Committee, he blew the whistle on some corrupt practices, and then tendered his resignation. Shortly thereafter he suffered nervous disorders, and received profess. care in sanitarium. Buried: Catholic Calvary Cemetey., St. Louis, MO. Sherry's column for Sporting News "Back of Home Plate", 1917-29, gained for him national respect as a baseball writer. He also wrote with authority on boxing, golf, and most sports. Personally, I suspect that his physical problems, which started soon after he exposed government corruption, was a result of sabotage. I also suspect his so-called "suicide" may have been unsuspected homicide. He was found hanging in his room at Alexian Brothers Hospital, by a bathrobe cord.

Henry Edwards-------1898-1942, Cleveland sports writer, AL service bureau; Cleveland recorder sp.ed.(1898-1901,Apr.), Cleveland Plain Dealer sp.ed.(July 29,'01-'28,Feb.1), Amer. League service bureau, Chicago(Feb.1,'28-42,Feb.1).

Bill Phelon------------1888-1925, Chi. NY,Cincinnati sp.wr.;Chi. Daily News('88-05,Oct.),Chi. Daily Journal(Oct.'05-08),Chi. Tribune('08-10),NY Morning Telegraph(1910),Cincinnati Times-Star sp.ed.(spring,'10-25). Easily most colorful eccentric sportswriter ever lived. Rube Waddell of BWAA. A great book should be written about him. As a writer,Bill was one of the best,and one of the most prolific. He was an associate editor of Baseball Magazine(Mar.'13-24,Nov.). He had replaced Jake Morse(Boston sp.wr.),who himself had encyclopedic BB knowledge of all things baseball. Also was Cincinnati correspondent for theSporting News. From 1889-1915, had scored over 3,500 ballgames. Made all road trips with Reds. Total home team rooter. Died after 3 days of Bright's disease. As a complete authority of baseball, he lived the game. Had been famous amateur ballplayer & boxer,was an actor, wrote for the stage, studied Indian lore, wrote baseball poetry, was twice married with a son; Contributed to Weekly BB Guide,Chicago BB News, Herald Examiner, NY World,

Charles Van Loan---------1904-1910, SF,LA,NY sp. wr.; Was one of best baseball storytellers of his age. He was called the greatest baseball writer by several of his peers. d. chronic nephritis at Philadelphia Hosp., Was on East Coast on business

Grantland Rice------------1902-1954, Atlanta, NY spwr.; edu: Wallace Univ. Sch. Nashville,TN; Vanderbilt U. ed. The American Golfer; Nashville Daily News; Atlanta Journal sp.ed (1902-05); Cleveland News (1905-07); Nashville Tennessean spwr.(1907-10); NY Evening Mail sp. columnist (1910-13), NY Tribune spwr. & syndicated columnist (1913-24), NY Herald Tribune (1924-54). Wrote many books, and contributed to numerous magazines. The quinessential Southern Gentleman, Granny Rice was without a shadow of a doubt the most well-known & loved spwr. of his & perhaps all times. His autobiography was, "The Tumult & the Shouting: My Life in Sport", 1954. Buried: Woodlawn Cemetery, NY

Harry Salsinger-------1907-1958, Detroit News sports editor his whole career. Was Ty Cobb's biggest booster in print.

Ferdinand Cole Lane-------1910-1937, Editor-in-Chief Baseball Magazine(Boston,'10-12), ('12-38, NYC). Wrote probably close to 1,000 excellent detailed articles on baseball's technical side as well as interviews w/stars at home in winter. H of Fame must.

After retiring in 1937 from the editor's chair, he returned to Cape Cod for his long life. Headed Piedmont College's Hist. Dept.('41-43) at Demorest, GA. Established journalism program there. He traveled extensively with wife Emma, whom he married in June, 1914. Together they made many overseas voyages,circling globe 6 times. Wrote several books on geography & nature for adults & youths, '40's-50's. Publ. his poems in '58(On Old Cape Cod). Lived their final yrs. in Cape Cod nursing home, she died 10 months after him.

Fred Lieb--------------1910-1977, NYC Sports writer; Phil. News bureau(magazine & newspaper('10), New York Press, baseball ed.('11-16), NY Morning Sun('16-21), NY Telegram, baseball ed.('21-27), NY Evening Post(Mar.'27-34), moved to St. Petersberg,FL('34). Sporting News correspondent('35-58) & columnist('43-47), St. Petersburg Times(Florida)('65-77). Feb.,'80-Jun.5,1980 nursing home Houston,TX. World Series scorer('22-24), covered World Series('11-58). Sporting News historian for yrs. edu; Phila Central Manual Training HS, Pa. assoc ed, weekly Baseball Guide; writer, Christy Walsh Syndicate; past assoc ed, baseball Magazine, Sport-life. chief official scorer, World's Series, 1922-23-24;

Dan Daniel---------1910-1960's, NY spwr.; national correspondent for TSN, mainly covered Yankees, was as much an authority in boxing as BB. NY World-Telegram, NY World-Telegram & Sun, Helped found Ring Magazine in 1922, Could also handle FB. Pres. BBWAA, Baseball Rules committee, Won Spink Award in 1972, BB's Hall of Fame Veterans committee, Chairman of NY chapter of BWAA, more honors/awards than can be listed. buried: Forrest Lawn Memorial Gardens, Pompano Beach, FL

Frank Graham, Jr.-------1915-1964, NYC spwr; Born Harlem,NYC; NY Sun spwr('15-34), sports columnist('34-43), Look magazine sp. ed.('43-45), NY Journal-American sports columnist, Graham's Corner('45-65). Wrote 6 sports books. Boxing authority. d. Fractured skull in bathroom fall at home

Alan Gould---------1921-1963, NY spwr; Worked for papers in Elmira, Ithaca & Binghamton, NY; Ithaca Journal reporter (1917); Associated Press, NY sp. ed. , Executive editor, ('22-63). Moved Florida ('75). d. heart attack

Jack McDonald------1926-1986, San Francisco sports writer; Omaga Bee,Klamath Falls News, Sacramento Bee, Sacramento Union, San Fran. United Press Bureau, San Fran. Call('26-?),SF Call-Bulletin'26-59)('47-59, sp.ed.), SF News-Call Bulletin('59-65), San Francisco Examiner rewrite man('65-67,Jan. 25, retired), After retirement moved to Mexico to enjoy the good life, but just couldn't stop writing free lance. In 1978, moved back to San Diego.

Jimmy Powers-----1925-1959, NY spwr.; Cleveland Press, '25-26, NY sp. ed. NEA syndicate('27-28), NY News, '29--33, NY Daily News, 1936-59.

Sam Lacy----------1918-1990's, Wash, Baltimore spwr; His mother was Shinnecock Indian; Grew up Wash. DC, 5 blocks from Griffith stadium, Grad. Howard U., bachelor's in physical education('23). Devoted his early life to lobbying for integration of ML baseball & society. Washington Tribune: part-time spwr., reporter('18-20,23-30), managing ed., spwr.,('30-34), sp.ed., columnist('34-39); Baltimore Afro-American spwr., columnist('39-40), sp.ed., columnist('43-, Chicago Defender ass. national ed.('40-43), 1st Black in the Baseball Writers Association('48), Taylor Spink Award(Baseball Hall of Fame, 1997), Personally knew many black stars(J.Louis,J.Owens,A.Ashe), but never shirked from criticizing them if he felt warranted. Mentor: Father

Charles Michael Segar-------1920-1971, Brooklyn,NY sports writer; Born England, Brooklyn Citizen('19-26), New York Mirror('26-46), Manager of National Service Bureau, Secretary-Treasurer in Commissioner's office('65-71,Feb), administrator players benefit plan, Chairman Players Rules Committee('62-71,lJul.23), Blue Book revision committee. Loved golf, movies, TV, d. natural causes, cremated, buried: Pinelawn Cemetery, Long Island, NY

Shirley Povich-------1922-1998, Washington spwr.' Washington Post spwr. (1922-74), Even though he "retired" in '74, he continued his column "This Morning", very often.

Dick Young---------1942-1987, NY spwr.; NY Daily News sportswriter, columnist, sp. ed. (1942-82), NY post spwr. and sp. ed. NY Post (1982-87).

Walter Wellesley (Red) Smith-----1927-1982, Milwaukee Sentinel('27-28),St. Louis Star sp. wr. & copy ed.('28-33), St. Louis Star-Times re-write man('33-36), Phil. Record sp. rep. & columnist(''36-45), NY Herald Tribune sp. columnist('45-67, Publishers-Hall Syndicate.('67-71), NY Times('71-82). Similar to Grantland Rice in style. Grace, humor, brimming with gentle, lyrical prose. Much loved writer.

Bob Broeg----------1945-2000, St. Louis spwr.; St. Louis Post-Dispatch staff writer, 1945-58, sp. ed. '58-85, & ass. to publisher '77-85. His columns appeared in TSN until the 1980's.

Furman Bisher--------1938-2004, Atlanta sp. ed.; Lumberton Voice ed.('38-39),High Point Enterprise wire service & sp. ed.('39-40),Charlotte News(state ed.,'40-42, sp.ed.,46-50),Atlanta Constitution sp.ed.('50-57),Atlanta Journal & Sunday Journal-Constitution('57-pres.),Sp.News columnist

Leonard Koppett------1948-2003, Born Moscow, moved US 1928, NY Herald sp. wr.('48-54), NY Post sp.wr.('54-63), NY Times sp.wr.('63-73), NY Times correspondent in Palo Alto,CA('73-78), Peninsula Times-Tribune sp. ed.(Palo Alto,CA, '79-93). Spink Award (BB, Hall of Fame, '93). Leonard was vastly interested in history, opera, classical music, Marx Bros. movies. He thought expansion was a disaster for baseball. He was also vastly interested in a statistical analysis approach to baseball.

John Steadman--------1945-2000, Baltimore sports writer; Baltimore News-Post reporter(1945,sp.ed., - 1956), Baltimore News-American,Baltimore Evening Sun('80's), Baltimore Sun('95-2000,Dec.3). wrote 7 books, d. cancer

Joe Falls--------------1951-2004, NY & Detroit spwr; AP copyboy, NYC ('46-51), NY spwr.('51-53), AP sp. ed., Det.,('53-56), Detroit Times spwr.('56-60), Detroit Free Press spwr.('60-65) sp.ed. & columnist('66-78), Detroit News sp.ed. & columnist;Sporting News correspondent('65-85).


Next we had those who began as baseball beat writers, but went on to gain fame in other fields, far more than they ever had as BB writers. Ade, Adams, Dryden and Dunne gained fame as Will Rogers type whimsical humorists. They employed humor in much the same way as Mark Twain & Garrison Keillor (of Home Praire Companion fame). It was a form of humor that was irony. Dry, wry, ironic humor.

Charles Dryden---------1893-1921, Chicago sp.wr.; Chicago Sunday Times reporter(1889-1890), San Francisco examiner sp.wr.(1890), NY Evening Journal(1898-99), Phil. North American(1899-1905), Chicago Tribune('06-08), Chicago Examiner('08-17), Chicago Herald & Examiner('18-21). He was one of the 1st, most popular & most influential baseball writers who ever lived. Humorist influenced a generation of following baseball writers, such as Ring Lardner and Hugh Keough. Suffered devastating stoke('21) left him disabled. Awarded Spink award('65).

George Ade---------1890-1900, Chicago spwr.; Chicago Record (1890-1900) covered many sports. Grad. Purdue U. 1887, did newspaper work from 1887, moved Chicago June, 1890, moved quickly from cub to star reporter. In '93, collaborated with illustrator partner John McCutcheon at Chicago Morning News on editorial page columns describing Columbian Exposition, then he began his regular column "Stories of the Streets and of the Town". Paper became the Record. Began "fables in slang" in 1897. The Record published 8 collections of his columns. Left jornalism in 1900, did plays, musicals, screenplays. Was acknowleged as great master humorist.

Franklyn J. Adams------1919-1962, NY sp. wr.; Sporting News(St. Louis), New York Herald Tribune('27-30), NY Daily News sp. wr.('30-62,retired), After service in world War I, he began his sports-writing career, which included 15 newspapers.

Finley Peter Dunne-----1884-1904, Chicago writer; Political cartoonist created Mr. Dooley, saloon owner, wry observations on issues entertained readers for 30 yrs. His cartoons are collected in book forms. Chicago Daily News editorials & sports(1884-88), Chicago Times('1888-89) as political reporter,ed.wr. ,city ed.,Chicago Tribune reporter,ed.Sunday ed., Chicago Herald reporter(1890), Chicago Evening Post ed. page(1892), Chicago Journal managing ed.(1897-00), NYC Harper's Weekly/collier's Weekly('00-02), NY Morning Telegraph('02-04),American Magazine wrote dialect essays & monthly ed. In the Interpreter's House('06-13),Collier's Weekly political commentary('13-15,editor-in-chief '17-19). When Payne Whitney died in 1924, he bequeathed $500,000. to Dunne, far more than enough to enable Dunne to live the rest of his life in high lavish fashion without need of further work. d. throat cancer hemorrhaging after long battle.

Runyon gained fame as a free-lance novelist, who specialized in sketching broadway types & gangsters.

Damon Runyon---------1911-1917, NYC sp. wr. & author; Arrived NYC('11), served 1912-16 as Hearst foreign correspondent in Mexico & Europe. Made his name as author of novels with colorful Broadway characters. Many of his novels were used for movies,such as Guys & Dolls('55), Double Indemnity('44), Idyll of Miss Sarah Brown('55), Little Miss Marker, with Shirley Temple('34), Lemon-Drop Kid('51), Lady For A Day('33), A Slight Case of Murder('38), d. developed throat cancer('38), lost speech('44), after operation.

Lardner made it by syndicating his stuff, with BB characters who talked in slang dialects, spiced with lots of humor. His copy lost a lot of its punch in the 1920's. He had hit big in the 1910's.

Ring Lardner----------1907-1919, Chicago,NY,Boston sports writer; Chicago Inter Ocean('07-10), Chicago Examiner('10),Chicago Tribune('10), Sporting News man. ed.('10),Boston American,sp.ed.(Feb.'11-'11,Oct), Chicago American,copy reader,Chicago Examiner,sp.writer; Equally good at BB & FB
(Lardner, continued), Chicago Tribune(June,'12-19), Conducted The Wake of the News for the Chicago Tribune from June, 1913 to June, 1919, when he left for NYC. Oldest, continuous sp. column in US. NY Bell Syndicate of John N. Wheeler('19-27). When he went to work for the Bell Syndicate of John Wheeler, he wrote a weekly column, moved his family from Chicago to NYC, traveled the US covering major sporting events, continued his fiction for magazines. In 1932, he published a series of autobiographical articles for Saturday Evening Post. Ring was diagnosed with TB. He died following a heart attack. He became extremely disillusioned with baseball after 1920, due to the live ball style of HRs.

Broun gained his most renoun as a left-of-center social/political columnist.

Heywood Broun------1912-1919, NY s pwr.; NY Morning Telegraph reporter('08,10-11), NY Evening Sun('09), New York Tribune(copyreader, rewrite man,sports writer,sp.ed.,war correspondent, critic,columnist('11-21), NY World('21-28), NY Telegram('28-31), NY World-Telegram('31-39), NY Post('39), Early as Giants fan, he would root violently for his Giants. In '17-18, WWI, disliked Pershing & sent his copy directly to NY Tribune. Harvard niv. 1910. Lecturer on modern drama, Columbia Univ, 1920; Rand School, NY, 1921; dramatic ed, Vanity Fair; motion picture ed, Judge, NY Contributor to mags on the theatre, books, sports, and politics.

Broun's twin-mirror opposite was Pegler, who achieved his greatest notoriety as a right-of-center social/political columnist. His flavor was known as just plain mean. Much meaner than Rush Limbaugh today. Closer to Michael Savage, but without the unbridled hysteria.

Westbrook Pegler----1925-1933, NY spwr.; Des Moines newspaper, United Press office in NY('12),St. Louis,Dallas,TX as a reporter, buss. manager. Went to London, England as foreign correspondent with Amer. Expeditionary Force, '16. Enlisted US Navy. After war, returned to UP('19) in NY office, as spwr. & sp. ed. From 1925-33, Pegler was an extremely high-paid spwr. for the Chicago Tribune. In 1933, he was sent to Washington, DC, to write politics & politicians. He developed an extremely bitterly-biting, critical, ascerbic style of attack journalism. Became feared for his poisoned pen, or type-writer. In 1933, Pegler went nationally syndicated with his "Fair Eough" column for Scripps-Howard, within the Hearst family of papers. He targeted labor union bosses as a menace. In '44, went to NY Journal-American, with "As Pegler Sees It." Pegler became a 1930's & 40's version of Rush Limbaugh & Joe McCarthy. When the Political Right unleashed it's dogs of war, Pegler was the lead dog. In 1949, Westbrook Pegler attacked Quentin Reynolds so bitterly, that Quentin sued him for libel & won. Louis Nizer was Reynold's Jewish attorney, who won for him $175,000. and earned the enmity of Pegler for Jews. But after that Pegler's career didn't seem to have it's former impetus. The case had lasted 5 yrs.

Ed Sullivan started as a NYC BB beat writer, and was a sports writer for 12 yrs. before he became a TV personality.

Ed Sullivan-----------1936-1948, NY spwr; NY Mail, World, Morning Telegraph, Daily News(column "Little Old New York", which he continued till his death; Gained TV immortality for his long-running Sunday night TV variety show, "The Ed Sullivan Show" (June 20, 1948 - June 6, 1971); d. cancer

Gene Fowler left sports journalism after an 11 yr. career in baseball writing, under his mentor, Damon Runyon, (they both came from Denver, having been trained under Otto Floto), and became a highly sucessful biographer. He used a brightly colorful style.

Gene Fowler--------1917-1928, New York spwr.; NY American sports writer (October, 1917-24), NY Daily Mirror sp. ed.(1924-25), NY American man. ed. (1925-28), NY Morning Telegraph (1928), free lance biographer (1928-60). Himself a true character, known for his many affairs. Hollywood script writer. Biographies: William Fallon, famous NYC attorney (The Great Mouthpiece, 1931), John Barrymore (Good Night, Sweet Prince, 1943), Jimmy Walker, NYC mayor, 1926-32, (Beau James, 1949), Jimmy Durante (Schnozzola, 1951), W.C. Fields (Minutes of the Last Meeting, 1954); edu; West Denver HS, Colo; Univ. of Colo; Univ. of Colo Sch. of Journalism.

Taylor Spink seldom wrote anything himself personally. He'd have one of his writers to it for him. He was owner/editor-in-chief of Sporting News for 48 yrs. He made it into the greatest sports paper ever put out. It was baseball only from 1900 until WWII, and then broadened into an all-inclusive sports newspaper. He was a fanatical, relentless, perfectionist, inexhaustable boss. And his paper proved it. Doubt if there will ever be anything like it again.

JG Taylor Spink---------1914-1962, inherited The Sporting News from his Dad in 1914, and owned, guided the best sports publication ever until his death in Dec., 1962. After his death, an award was created for the best sports writers, the Spink Award. It's a lifetime achievement award for the sports writing profession.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, folks. Here are my candidates for the greatest, most influential, best sports writers, I've ever read. Some of their careers were relatively short & sweet. Others, like Lieb and Povich, lasted forever. But both were fantastic in shaping our national pastime & making it was it is today. There are many, many writers who I love, who are not mentioned here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above list of sports writers is excerted from my Sports Writers Index, which can be viewed in its entirety at:

http://bluestreak.pbwiki.com/f/Sports%20Writers%20Index.xls on the file called Sports Writers Index

Bill Burgess

[Brian McKenna]

amusing article about the 1940 yankees and clark griffith

[csh19792001]

BRIGHT SPORTING SEASON IS AHEAD

From: The Atlanta Constitution, piece done by Billy Evans, January 26, 1919


Is the game of baseball as played today, superior to that of a score of years ago? How do the stars of today shape up with the crack performers of twenty years ago? Who are the players of the past and present to stand out as the leading performers at their respective positions? I have my opinions as to the class of the present day players, but of course am not in a position to make a comparison between the stars of today and those of the dim distant past. So much has been written pro and con on this subject, that I wanted to be satisfied in my own mind, hence sought the opinion of three men, whom I believe eminently fitted to express an opinion.

Last summer when the opportunity presented itself, I talked the matter over with that once great star, Willie Keeler, who now lives by cutting the coupons off his bonds, and collecting rents from the tenants of his Brooklyn apartments. I sought an expression of opinion from Manager Hughey Jennings of Detroit, in his day one of the greatest shortstops in the game. Likewise, I interviewed Kid Gleason, a brilliant performer of a score of years ago, and recently appointed manager of the Chicago White Sox. This trio of stars all played with the old school, and have kept up a close association with the modern players, in some capacity or other.

All three, without the slightest hesitation, expressed the opinion that the game had made rapid strides forward in the last twenty years. They admitted that the brand of ball played was considerably faster. All were unanimous in the belief that pitching as a whole was much more difficult to hit consistently in these days than it was in the past. The reason given was that each major league club in these modern days had three or four high class pitchers, while in the old days a club that had more than one real classy boxman was indeed extremely lucky. To illustrate the point I am trying to make I will sum up what both Keeler and Jennings, who were with Baltimore when that club was winning pennants, had to say on the subject of reforms in pitching.

"Back twenty-five years ago when we were winning pennants with the then famous Baltimore Orioles, we had only one really high -class pitcher, Sadie McMahon. We had Hawke, Gleason, Esper and Hemming at the time, but McMahon was our mainstay. It was the same with all other clubs. In about one out of every three games a batter was forced to face the finest of pitching; on other days, it would be just ordinary. That, of course, made for higher batting averages. In the big leagues today, instead of carrying five pitchers, a good many clubs carry ten. Usually four or five of the pitchers are stars; the others second string men. It is much harder to pile up fat batting average facing high-class pitching every day than to see it only every third day."

Therefore, if you would take the word of Messrs, Jennings, Gleason and Keeler who, to my way of thinking are extremely competent to render on opinion, the pitching as a whole is much better today than it was in the past.

RUSIE THE EQUAL OF WALTER JOHNSON

What pitcher in the last twenty-five years had the most stuff on the ball? That question brought about some difference of opinion. Keeler, who faced in his day as a player, two of the admittedly fastest pitchers in the history of the game, Amos Rusie and Walter Johnson, rather leaned toward Rusie as having a bit the more stuff. He insisted that the curve ball of Rusie, was harder to hit than Johnson's hook. According to Keeler there was no wide break to Rusie's curve, but it broke sharply right in front of the batter, and was usually perfectly controlled. Kid Gleason was inclined to believe that Cy Young was about the last word when considering natural ability. According to Gleason, the way he could skim that fast ball of his under your chin, made you lose any desire you might have had to crowd the plate. Hughey Jennings, while admitting that Rusie had a fast breaking curve and terrific speed, said that Walter Johnson, when he cuts them loose, puts as much, if not a little more, stuff on the ball than did Rusie. Jennings also remarked that because Rusie was up over the head with his delivery most of the time, his ball was much easier to follow than that of Johnson, who is side arming you practically all the time.

When it came to considering first base men, the vote was unanimous in favor of Hal Chase. All three paid their respects to Fred Tenney, Tom Tucker, Frank Chance, Dan Brouthers, Pat Tebeau, Stuffy McInnis and Jake Daubert, but to each one Hal Chase stood out as the last word in the act of first basing.

In selecting Chase the trio received my approval, because to me it has always seemed that no human being other than Chase could possibly pull the remarkable plays I have seen him make around first base. Chase was one of the first guardians of the initial sack to come in close on an intended bunt, and instead of being satisfied with getting the batsman at first, Chase was getting them at second and third with such great frequency, that clubs did not look on the sacrifice with much favor when Chase was playing first base. In a great many cases Chase was thinking a fraction of a second ahead of the rest of his infield, and very often he would be made to look foolish on some remarkable performance because the man at the other end was unable to execute his part of the play.

LAJOIE AND COLLINS ABOUT EVEN UP

At second base it was declared a draw between Eddie Collins and Napoleon Lajoie. On first thought both Jennings and Keeler handed the honor to Lajoie, and then they began hedging slightly by paying all kinds of compliments to Collins. The superiority of Lajoie as a batsman was admitted, but even at that there was a question as to their value as hitters. Lajoie was conceded to be a more graceful fielder than Collins, but no more effective. Collins, of course, was given credit for putting a little more dash in his style, as Larry was of the easy-going type. Collins of course, was given credit for being by far the better base-runner. "Kid" Gleason adhered to the statement that I have often heard him make, that no more valuable ball player than Collins ever lived.

While admitting that a number of good third baseman have been developed in the major leagues in the past twelve years, all were of the opinion that no man has ever held down that position in the majors who could quite compare with Jimmy Collins. All insisted that he didn't have a weakness in the field. That he played fast or slow balls with equal skill, and that his throwing was a marvel of speed and accuracy. Although stockily built, which might make it appear that bunted balls would give him trouble, he was without a peer in coming in fast, grabbing a perfect bunt, and because of his ability to throw from any position, get many a runner at third of a seemingly impossible play. Bill Bradley was second choice as third sacker.

VETS AGREE THERE IS ONLY ONE WAGNER

Hughey Jennings, with becoming modesty, never mentioned himself when the shortstop question was being considered, but believe me, Keeler and Gleason had a lot of nice things to say about the Tigers' leader. Herman long also came in for some nice words, as did Bobby Wallace, but all three seemed to be perfectly satisfied that for all-around play, no man ever covered the shortfield to better advantage than Hans Wagner. With a style that was anything but graceful, Wagner covered a world of ground. Nature endowed him with a wonderful pair of hands, from a baseball point of view, and once he got a hold of the ball, it seldom trickled through his fingers. Possessed of a fine arm, he used it most carefully and never cut loose with the ball unless it was absolutely necessary to do so to get the runner.

While the old school had some remarkable outfielders in Jimmy McAleer, Bill Lange, Tommy McCarthy, Hughey Duffy, Harry Stovey and Billy Hamilton, there seemed to be no doubt as to who was the world's greatest outfielder. Keeler, himself a marvel in the field and at the bat, paid Cobb a nice tribute, when he remarked: "Cobb is the best ball player I have ever seen. Never expect to see a better one in my time. He does everything well, take a million chances, and yet never seems to get hurt. He is fast, hits all kinds of pitching, is a great fielder, and although his arm is not what it used to be, it is still good enough so the runners take no undue liberties."
Tris Speaker ran a close second and Hap Felsch was highly touted by Gleason, who considers Felsch a far greater player than he has ever received credit for. When it came to catchers, Buck Ewing was the chief topic of discussion. I regret very much that I never saw Ewing in action. If he was just half as good as the old-time players insist he was, there never will be another like him.

Undoubtedly some of the readers of this article may take issue with the composite selection of Messrs, Jennings, Gleason, and Keeler, but it strikes me as being a most excellent size-up of the situation. All of the trio, stars in their day, insist the game is faster, that the progress made has been remarkable, and see no reason why the popularity of the national pastime should not steadily increase under proper administration.

[Bill Burgess]

So, what exactly is Proquest? Is it a subscription service like Lexisnexis?

The Sporting News was the most important and best sports publication that ever was. Sadly, it isn't any longer, nor has been for a long time.

Alfred Henry Spink - founded Sporting News in St. Louis, MO, on March 17, 1886, where it has been ever since. He sold it to his brother Charles Spink in 1895.

Charles Spink was a fabulous owner/editor, and ran it from 1895, to his death on April 22, 1914.

Charles' son John George (JG) Taylor Spink inherited it, and ran it from April 22, 1914, until his death Dec. 7, 1962. He was as fantastic as his Dad had been. During WW II, he had sent free copies to US service men overseas, and expanded it to include all sports, mainly including boxing & football.

Upon his death, it was inherited by Charles Claude (CC) Johnson Spink, who ran it from December 7, 1962 until he sold it in January, 1977, to the Times Mirror Corporation for $18m. He did a respectable, credible job, but was not in the same league as his 2 immediate predecessors, who had been inexhaustible, relentless powerhouse perfectionists. In 1990, the paper stopped running obituaries, which to me was a bitter, devastating blow. That editorial decision caused me to abandon it.

From its inception in 1876 to 1937, it ran only 8-10 page issues. By WWII, it was up to around 40, during the 70's-80's it often ran up to 100 page issues. Today, it usually runs 68 page issues.

While it started out as a general sports publication, in 1900, it became primarily a baseball newspaper, and hence adopted the moniker, The Bible of Baseball. And it richly earned its title until 1942. In the fall of 1942, The Sporting News incorporated football, boxing, basketball and hockey into its regular lineup, and has kept them there ever since.

Policy-wise, TSN opposed the Players League of 1890, calling it "outlaw", supported Ban Johnson/Charlie Comiskey's launching of the American League, was a worthy adversary of Commissioner Judge Landis, always supporting AL President Ban Johnson, fully promoted BB stars such as Ty Cobb, Honus Wagner, Walter Johnson, & Babe Ruth, did not support Joe Jackson's or Buck Weaver's innocence in the Black Sox scandal, and supported the Yankees' in disciplining Babe Ruth.

In 1996, it incorporated 4 color photos.

Today, it sells around 520,000 copies every week, and is an important publication, but no longer stands out from its competition. It requires its obituaries section & interviews from former players to give it its former historical relevance, continuity & context.

Despite its decline, I must still highly recommend using it as a primary research resource.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few words for JG Taylor Spink:

The impact of a death, (outside one's own family), lies in its consequence. I stand by my opinion that his death was the most devastating to baseball as a whole, based on its impact of its coverage. It is difficult to equal the overall baseball impact of the loss of the guiding light of the sports most important publication.

Taylor Spink ran The Sporting News, from 1914, to his death on December 7, 1962. Oh unhappy day for baseball when he passed. His successor, Johnson Spink, lacked the greatness to keep up the standards. And all of the sport suffered greatly for the lack of it's chronicler.

All deaths are a loss, but some ripple on in their impacts forever. One would have had to be familiar with the paper to understand the profundity of the loss. He could not be replaced, and was not. Baseball was never covered, documented as well since. If it were, we would have had constant and continuous interviews with Aaron, Mays, Mantle, Frank Robinson, Jackie Robinson, etc. ever since they retired until they died. But we didn't. And how much the poorer are we all for those never conducted interviews!

We haven't come close to hearing what the best players since 1962 had to say about their sport, up to today. And that would never have been allowed to happen, if Taylor Spink had lived. He simply would not have allowed such a devastating blackout of the opinions of its most glittering ornaments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseball Magazine must come in second for most important BB publication. Available from the Library of Congress for around $2,000. I bought the 22 reels of microfilm, and have never regretted it. It ran from 1908-1954. And was a great publication up to around 1950.

One of the reasons it was such a dynamic, wonderful publication, was its editor-in-chief. From 1910-1937, 27 great years, Ferdinand Cole Lane guided its direction. After he left, it remained great for around another 10 yrs., under the able direction of Clifford Bloodgood. The Sports Library in Los Angeles is doing a project putting a lot of it online. So far, they have put 1908-1918 online. (323-730-4646) Wonderful reading. http://www.aafla.org/search/search_frmst.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SABR: Society for American Baseball Research.

It was formed in 1972, and one of its earliest main guys was Bill James. Today, it is located in Cleveland, OH, and has 7,000 members. Since 2004, it also accepted its members individual research. Those who put out Total Baseball are core SABR members.

Today, 2 of the most potent reasons for joining are its 2 subscriptions, Proquest/Sporting News.

Proquest:

Proquest is a company located in Ann Arbor, MI, which specializes in digitalizing printed publications, such as newspapers, magazines, books. It was formerly called Bell & Howell, and later UMI.

Are you aware that you can read the entire NY Times archives from the comfort of your own home? All members of SABR get Proquest for free.

Proquest contains the following in one massive database: They haven't finished the entire runs yet. Here is what is now posted.

NY Times, 1851-2003
Chicago Daily Tribune, 1849-1986
Washington Post, 1877-1990
Los Angeles Times, 1881-1986
Boston Globe, 1872-1924
Atlanta Constitution, 1868-1930
Chicago Defender, 1905-1975, black newspaper

And they have a fantastic search engine too!

This database is worth hundreds of dollars, and SABR members have full access, 24/7, free. A vast resource of incalculable value for researchers of all fields, not just sports.

Both of these databases, come with good search engines. Proquest has a much better one, but its search objects are not high lighted, while Sporting News' search engine is much more primitive, but does high-light its search objects.

SABR costs $60.00 per year's subscription.

Paperofrecord: Which includes The Sporting News, full run, among many others.
SABR members also get a discounted subscription to paperofrecord, which includes Sporting News, 1886-2003. One can access it via paperofrecord. Its full run, 1886-2003 is all there. SABR members receive a hefty discount. One pays $74.99 for a 2-year subscription. Or, if one preferred, only $16.75 for 31 days. It's an indispensable archival resource for reference & research. They have assured me that they are looking into an improved search engine.

Paperofrecord by the way makes available a lot more than Sporting News. They also have many, many newspapers online available. The Baltimore Afro, 1902-78, a black newspaper, is also available. It has lots of obits of black Negro League guys, like Santop, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the way Bill, exactly how many baseball books do you own?
Your tons of research indicates it's enough to open your own library!

Geoff,

It's funny you should ask that. Someone else once suggested that I have an extensive library of baseball books. That is hardly the case. But I wish I had!

My "baseball library" consists of about 5 book shelves. Plus a few vanilla files, and a 2-drawer file cabinet. Probably the smallest of any poster here.

The reason that I can post on such a range of topics/players in such an organized manner, is due to how I've organized my stuff.

For a very great number of years, where ever I went, I visited the local libraries, and scanned for my favorite subjects. Books on the old-timers. I'd take what they had to a table, scan the glossary for my favorite players/subjects, and xerox them right there. I'd take the pages home, and file them in my cabinet, according to player, subject, etc.

So whenever I want a player/subject, I go to my file and dig out what I need. I also have a good number of BB reference books, about 85 by my most recent count, all 24 of the SABR "National Pastimes, all 25 of their Research Journals, 9 assorted other SABR publications, 4 Total Baseballs, 1933 Who's Who In Major League Baseball, both Bill James' Historical Abstracts. I have 12 Cobb books, 7 Ruths, 6 McGraws, 4 Macks, 3 Joe Jacksons, 3 Wagners and 18 other assorted old timers' bios.

Where do I get my stuff? From all over, really. Books, magazines, online,
everywhere.

But I do have my Musty, Dusty Cabinet of Baseball Lore & Wonders.

I focused on Baseball from 1958-1965. Then my attention drifted to Track & Field, and professional Rock Dancing. When I refocused my attention on baseball around 1985, I discovered to my shock and dismay, that Ruth was being called the best. When I last followed Baseball in 1965, Cobb was called the best. So you can imagine my chagrin.

So I set about to disprove this heinous heresy. I began to go through the Sporting News, from around 1918, to find what those who had seen them both thought. Page by individual page, I crawled through each issue.

SABR would mail me 3 reels of microfilm at a time, and I'd go down to the Palo Alto Library, armed with a $20. roll of quarters, and junk food/soda, fortified for a long day at the library. On a stool in front of the microfilm reader, I fed quarter after quarter into it's hungry maw.

Whenever I found a relevant page, I'd download it. That went on from 1985-89, 1993-2003. And I'd visit all the surrounding libraries for relevant books, copying my pages. I got to 1990 in the Sporting News. Damn near bankrupted my piggy bank. So today, I have my cabinet stuffed with my countless articles.

Another good thing developed. With the advent of the INTERNET, collectible baseball books became used baseball books. The established market price structure collapsed. What before cost $30. due to specialized searches for out of print books, now became $5.-10. used books. Cleaned up my want list in a jiffy.
(www.bookfinder.com is the absolute final word for affordable used BB books.)

So, now, I have tools which could have saved my eyes/wallet in earlier times. And I use them every day. I also have other databases which I pay money for to assist me in gaining dates. Ancestry.com

So I can now get most of what I need from home. Interlibrary book loans are another way to save a lot of money.

I have also learned to enlist the research librarians across the country to assist me via email. If one wants to, one can bundle the email addresses of 20 of the reference librarians of the former 16 ML BB cities. With one click, I can request those librarians to assist me in searching for my research objectives. It pays to learn to be efficient.
----------------------------------------------------
Proquest/Sporting News alone allows anyone to access info like a researcher. I wish I had that years ago. Could have saved me a lifetime of library slavery.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JG Taylor Spink, Owner/Editor-In-Chief of Sporting News, 1914-1962. This shot was probably taken during WWII.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Bill, here are a couple of pieces from all the stuff that you sent me. I just took a few minutes and typed them out for the heck of it. Not sure if you even want them posted, or if there are any others that you want posted instead; let me know, k.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Baseball Digest, July 1970, By: Le Pacini

FOND MEMORIES OF TY COBB AND THE MIGHTY BABE RUTH:
Former pitcher recalls how it was with two of baseball’s greatest performers

Bert Cole pitched in the major leagues for six years, was traded out of the Pacific Coast League to Detroit for an entire team, and beat Walter Johnson in his major league debut. Obviously, the retired Californian has rich memories of his own career. That Cole-for-nine-men trade, for instance, is, as far as can be determined, an all-time baseball record. Charley Graham, the shrewd owner of the San Francisco Seals, who two years later broke another record by peddling Willie Kamm for $100,000 to the White Sox, engineered that one.

But Cole says his most cherished memories are of Ty Cobb, for whom he played, and Babe Ruth, against whom he pitched. And Cole tells previously unpublished stories of the legendary pair which add spice to an already well seasoned lore.

Cole chuckles that perhaps his greatest accomplishment in baseball was that he was able to get along with Cobb. His only complaint, and that half-hearted, is that Cobb “robbed” him of his best pitch, a sharp overhand curve, or “drop.”

“Ty had certain manias,” Cole says. “One was his love for fast ball pitchers. He told me that unless I developed my fast one better, I wouldn’t pitch for him. Well, I did develop a good fast ball, but Cobb had me concentrating on that so much, I lost my good drop.

“He also insisted, for some reason I have never figured out, that I pitch to Ruth high, even though I was essentially a low ball pitcher.

“One day in Detroit, at Ty’s insistence, I pitched Ruth a high one that he his through the box. It went over my head and kept soaring. At that time the Detroit center field fence was 480 feet away and had a 90-foot flagpole standing in front of it. The ball went over the flag pole.”

When Bert got to the dugout after the inning, in a fit of anger he threw his glove on the bench.

Cobb didn’t like it, perhaps feeling that Cole might be trying to show him up. “What in hell’s the matter with you!” Cobb shouted. “Nothing,” said Cole, “except I’ll never pitch Ruth high again.” The vexed and equally frustrated Cobb grumbled, “Pitch him any damn way you want,” thus loading the formidable problem back on Cole’s shoulders.

But, as Cole says, he got along better with Cobb than most. He discounts the stories about Cobb’s being penurious, mean and selfish. “Cobb wasn’t inherently mean or really stingy. He was just fanatical about winning. When he won, nothing was too good for us. There was steak for everybody. When we lost, he wouldn’t even give you conversation.

“Ty could have been anything he wanted to be. He was intelligent, well read, read all the classics. He made a fortune on the stock market.

“He could also have been a homerun hitter. He was big and strong enough. But he actually enjoyed outsmarting rather than over powering opponents.

“He was virtually impossible to get out with a runner on first if the first baseman was holding the runner. He could hit it through that little extra hold almost every time. I’ll bet he hit .500 in those situations.

“Another thing about Cobb, he wasn’t proud. When he was in a slump he’d accept advice from anyone. I remember one time he asked our batboy what the kid thought he was doing wrong. And when he was hitting, he would take no batting practice. His philosophy was, if you’re hitting, who needs practice.

“Of course, he was a master base runner. Not to take anything away from Maury Wills, who you have to put in Ty’s class as a baserunner, but Wills was talking once about how he had three or four different slides. Ty had six of ‘em!

“Cobb figured things to such a fine point that if we were playing on a field that was still damp from a previous rain, not raining, just a little damp, he would put on brand new spikes for the tiny bit of extra traction they’d give him.

“And a lot of people think he did it all on brains and guts. But he had great speed. He was once time – in a baseball uniform at 9.9 in a 100 yard sprint.

“He was often criticized for being out only for himself; like when he’d bunt for a basehit with Detroit either way ahead or way behind. The way Ty looked at it, his job was to get on base, no matter what the score; that if we were ahead, we should get further ahead, and that if we were behind, well, somebody had to start a rally some way.

“The only thing Ty was really selfish about was winning. When I broke in, he and Harry Heilmann were having a helluva race for the batting title, and suddenly Harry went into a month-long slump. Ty had Harry off in the corner of the park everyday for hours before each game trying to figure out ways to break him out of that slump. Well, Ty was a tremendous batting instructor, and he pulled Harry out of it.”

That was the year Heilmann his .394, Cobb .389, and Heilmann took the batting title.
Cobb and Ruth were antithetical, personally and professionally. Cobb had been in a class by himself, but Ruth created another class.

“Babe wasn’t just fantastically strong,” says Cole, “but he also had amazing reflexes. There wasn’t a pitcher born who could consistently put a fast ball by him. And you never fooled him twice on the same pitch. He’d look foolish on a certain pitch one time up, and if you gave it to him the next time, he’d lost it.”

Cole thinks Ruth may have been the greatest hitter of all time, pointing out his .342 lifetime batting average along with the homers.

“A lot of people don’t realize it, but when a single meant the game, the Babe could slap them out with the best of them. He used to ‘punch’ me, hit the opposite field.

“What power that guy had, though. I’ll never forget when they put the second deck on Comiskey Park I was talking to the architect one day, and he told me that with the deck nobody would ever again hit the ball out of the place.

“The next team in town was the Yankees. Tommy Thomas was pitching for us and the first time up, Babe strikes out. The second time up he hits it out of the park. The architect was never seen around the park again.”

Ruth as readers of the lore know, was an overgrown, good natured, prank-playing kid. He and Harry Heilmann were among the many stars, of course, who hit the post-season banquet circuit, and Babe often found himself on the same card as Heilmann. Babe hardly ever knew what he was going to say until he got to the podium, but the more deliberate Heilmann had a standard speech which he used at banquet after banquet. It was a good speech, and he had polished it to perfection.

Ruth had heard the speech so often that he knew it by heart. One night he was called on to speak first, and suddenly realized that he hadn’t the faintest notion of what he was going to say. So he gave Heilmann’s speech! Babe got an ovation and took his bows gracefully, leaving the blustering Heilmann literally speechless.

One time in Chicago some of the Yankees decided to retaliate for Ruth’s continuous pranks and instructed the batboy to leave Babe in the on-deck circle with only the lead-loaded warm-up bat.

The boy did as he was told, and when the Babe realized what was happening, instead of trotting back to the dugout to get a regular bat, as had been planned by his friends, he let out a loud laugh and without breaking stride went to the plate and promptly proceeded to slap one of Sarge Connally’s serves over the left field wall. And he laughed so hard going around the bases that he almost didn’t make it home.

Ruth did everything expansively; hitting, eating, spending.

Bert recalls the night the Tigers and the Yankees were waiting at the same station for an overdue train. Ruth had his golf clubs and a newly purchased box of golf balls with him, the best you could buy at the time.

Babe was a restless soul, so he decided to kill the monotony. It was an outside train depot, so he carefully lined up every new ball, took out his driver, and, before the bugged eyes of two teams of men, many of whom saw in a box of new golf balls at least something like a new pair of shoes for the children, methodically hit every ball out into the night, to the accompaniment of his own hardy chuckles of approval.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

From: Baseball Digest, December 1975, By: Don Kerr

TY COBB FOUND A ‘COUSIN’ IN BABE RUTH…..THE PITCHER:
The ‘Big Guy’ was quite a hurler in his youth, but the Detroit star hit him at a .381 clip

When young pitchers in the American League try to contain the game’s greatest home run hitter ever, they usually approach the task with considerable caution.

Even in ’75, it didn’t pay to get careless with the Brewers’ Hank Aaron. They – and other major league newcomers – have learned that lesson!
There was a hurler for the Boston Red Sox some 60 years ago who might have felt empathy with today’s young pitchers in the American League. He was a 20-year-old rookie who had drawn the assignment of pitching against the awesome Detroit Tigers. The Tigers were led by fiercely competitive Ty Cobb, who at 29, was on the way to his ninth straight American League batting title.

The young lefty wasn’t equal to the task on that long ago May day in 1915. He lasted only 5 2/3 innings, giving up nine hits, walking eight and absorbing a 5-1 defeat. He was duck soup to the lefty batting Cobb, who got two hits in three times up. A couple of months later the kid worked against the Tigers again and lasted only one-third of an inning as the Tigers romped 15-4.

You couldn’t have blamed Cobb at this juncture if he had said, “That guy won’t be around long.”

But he was. And in the end – with his bat – took the limelight from Cobb, becoming baseball’s Sultan of Swat, the ghost Hank Aaron chased for so many years, Babe Ruth.

The Babe was a pitcher in his first few years in the majors and no slouch at the task, either, compiling a career more of 94-46. And over a span of seven years, between 1915-21, this immortal pair faced each other as pitcher Babe Ruth and batter Ty Cobb – baseball’s classic confrontation – in 23 games.

But, as far as pitching went, Ruth was just another mortal to Cobb who finished his career with a .367 lifetime batting average. Cobb collected 32 hits in 84 at bats for a .381 average in these 23 encounters. Not all of these hits came against Ruth. In a couple of games the Babe lasted only one-third of an inning and he worked in relief in some others. Altogether he had 14 complete games in the 23, ending with a record of 12-9 against Detroit.

Ruth managed to blank Cobb only four times, one of these coming on July 11, 1917, when he limited the Tigers to just one hit, a smash through the box by Donie Bush, which he couldn’t handle. Cobb went 0-2 in that game, won by Boston 1-0.

Ruth had a span of 11 complete games against the Tigers, from July 11, 1916 to August 8, 1918, in which he won eight and lost three. A big reason for his success during this time was that he limited Cobb to 11 hits in 38 at bats for a modest (for Cobb) .289 average.

The last time the two faced each other as batter and pitcher came on June 14, 1921. The Babe – who had been traded to New York in 1920 – was on his way to an incredible season of 59 homers, 170 runs batted in, 177 runs scored and a .378 batting average.

Cobb was starting his first of six years as player-manager of the Tigers. His .389 batting average for 1921 was second in the league to teammate Harry Heilmann’s .394.

Yankee manager Miller Huggins had asked the babe to pitch because his staff was worn thin by injuries. Babe responded by limiting the Tigers to one hit in four innings, but retired to the outfield in the sixth, after giving up three runs in the fifth.

Ruth received credit for the 13-8 victory, helping his own cause with two homers, and the last time he would ever pitch to Cobb, in that fifth inning, he struck him out.

Cobb continued as an active player through 1928, but Ruth never faced him again, sticking to batting, winding up with his monumental 714 homers in 1935, when Hank Aaron was one-year-old.

And in 1975 Aaron continued to add to his record homer total against respectful youngsters, many of whom were in diapers when he hit his first major league round-tripper way back in 1954.

BABE RUTH (PITCHER) VS. TY COBB (BATTER)

Here is how they did during the years in which Babe Ruth pitched against Ty Cobb.

1915 – Boston won the pennant; Detroit was second, 2 ½ games back. Cobb led the league in batting with .369. Ruth was 18-8. Against Ruth, Cobb was 5-for-13 for .385.

1916 – Boston won the pennant; Detroit was third, 4 games behind. Cobb’s .371 was second to Tris Speaker’s .386. Ruth was 23-12. Against Ruth’s pitching, Cobb was 8-for-25 for .320.

1917 – Chicago won the pennant. Boston was second, 9 games out. Detroit was fourth, 12 ½ games back. Cobb led the league in batting with .383. Ruth was 24-13, his victory total second only to Chicago’s Eddie Cicotte, who had 28. Against Ruth, Cobb was 8-for-22 for .367.

1918 – Boston won the pennant; Detroit was 7th. Cobb led the league with .382. Ruth was 13-7. He had now started playing the outfield when he wasn’t pitching. Cobb was 2-for-7 for .286 in only two confrontations with Ruth the pitcher.

1919 – Chicago won the pennant. Detroit was fourth. Boston was sixth. Cobb led the league in batting with .384. Ruth was 9-5. In three meetings, Cobb was 8-for-12 against Ruth for .667. This was the last year Ruth was used regularly as a pitcher.

1921 – New York won the pennant. Detroit was sixth. Cobb’s .389 average was second to his teammate Harry Heilmann’s .394. Ruth was 2-0 as a pitcher, his final victory coming against Detroit as Cobb went 1-for-5.

TOTALS – Ruth was 12-9 with 14 complete games against the Cobb-led Tigers over six seasons. Cobb’s .381 average against Ruth’s pitching was 14 points better than his lifetime mark.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Source: www.stevesteinberg.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Damon Runyon on Who's the Greatest Pitcher: Christy Mathewson, Grover Cleveland Alexander, or Walter Johnson?

Before Damon Runyon became a famous short story writer in the 1930s, he was a popular sportswriter with the New York American in the ’teens and 1920s. In 1915, Christy Mathewson of the New York Giants was nearing the end of his brilliant career. Two other hurlers had emerged as greats: Walter Johnson of the Washington Nationals and Grover Cleveland Alexander of the Philadelphia Phillies.

When their careers came to a close, they ranked in the top four pitchers in career wins and shutouts, where they still rank in the 21 st century. Here are the top four:

Cy Young ------------------511 wins---76 shutouts
Walter Johnson ------------417 wins---110 shutouts
Christy Mathewson -------- 373 wins---79 shutouts
Grover Cleveland Alexander -373 wins---90 shutouts

On April 24, 1915, Damon Runyon wrote of these three great pitchers. In 1915, Alexander and Johnson still had more than a decade of pitching ahead of them. Baseball author Jim Reisler has edited and published a collection of Runyon’s baseball writing, Guys, Dolls, and Curve Balls, New York: Carroll and Graf, 2005.

Alexander vs. Johnson

Whenever we see Grover Cleveland Alexander pitching at top form, we conclude that he is the greatest right-handed pitcher in the land, and we cling to that conclusion until Walter Perry Johnson comes along with a line of his best pelting. Then we decide that Walter is the greatest, and we hold to that decision to the day that Alex reappears.

In short, our mind—probably none too stable at best—does a heap of vacillating between these Western wonders, and we are certain of only just one thing with respect to their ability—which is that it’s either Grover or Walter who is the greatest right-hander. On Mondays it might be Alex; on Tuesdays, Walter—but it’s one or the other so far as we are concerned.

This is merely a personal opinion to which you may not subscribe. You may think that Mathewson or Rudolph, or Bill James or Willie Doak is greatest, and we have no doubt that you can produce just as many arguments in support of your belief as we can offer in trying to bolster up our view, but it is our opinion that Johnson and Alexander today stand out head and shoulders above all the rest of the individual pitchers. [Note: Dick Rudolph and Bill James were stars of the 1914 champion Miracle Boston Braves. Bill Doak had a sensational 19-6 season with the St. Louis Cardinals in 1914.]

Not Yet Mathewson

We doubt if either of them will ever approach Mathewson when he was at his best, however, because we do not believe that either of them will ever make the study of their craft that Mathewson did. The Old Master will go down in baseball history as one of the greatest pitchers of all time, but neither Johnson nor Alexander has yet to make a place of that sort for himself in the memory of the game.

They are both great pitchers, but there have probably been many just as great—and there has been only one Mathewson. The oldest inhabitants of baseball rate the big Pennsylvanian right along with Radbourne [19 th century pitcher Hoss Radbourne, who also won more than 300 games]. Time is the big test of a pitcher, and in time Alexander or Johnson—or both—may prove as great as Mathewson, but that time is not yet.

For one thing, they have not had the opportunity. The mighty Mathewson was generally carrying a whole ball club on his back, and that ball club out in front, where it was most conspicuous. Time and time again it fell to him to fight the crucial battles of the big time outfit; to pitch the games on which hung the most important issues of the campaign, and he rarely failed.

Old Master Still Great

Even today you cannot count Mathewson wholly out when considering the question of the greatest pitcher in the country. In sagacity, in sheer mastery of his craft, he is probably still the greatest of them all; and it would be highly characteristic of the Old Master to bob up again this season with one of his best records, but he no longer possesses the physical strength that is behind the arms of the Kansas Cyclone and the Nebraska Thunderbolt. [Note: Mathewson finished 1915 with only an 8-14 record and would win only four more games after that.]

It happens that they have both been denied the glory that goes with a world’s series. Both gained fame with clubs that have since figured to a greater or less extent in the battles for the pennants, but in the main Johnson and Alexander had to fight their fight back behind the cheering. They were the Ruckers of the right-handers, so to speak, while Matty was nearly always up where the shouting was loudest. [Note: Nap Rucker was Brooklyn’s star pitcher since 1907 and had never been in the World Series. They would reach the Series the following year, Rucker’s final season.]

Some fans are dreaming this year of seeing Alexander and Johnson as opponents in the first game of the 1915 world’s series, but they are mostly Philadelphia and Washington fans who are having those dreams, and we doubt if the dreams will come true. It would be a grand sight, however, and it might help in solving the problem of which is greater—Johnson or Alexander. [Note: The Phillies were the surprise winners of the 1915 pennant, and Alexander did indeed start the first game of the Series. Johnson and Washington finally reached the World Series in 1924 and 1925, near the end of his career.]

Players Favor Alex

Ball players who have hit against both men—or rather those who haven’t hit against them, for there is never much hitting against Walter or Grover—say that the Nebraskan is the better of the two. They say that he has as much “stuff,” and knows how to use it better than Johnson.

In the matter of control last season they were about equal. Alexander passed seventy-six batsmen in forty-six games, while Johnson walked seventy-four in fifty-one pastimes. Alexander hit eleven, and Johnson nicked the same number. Walter cut loose fourteen wild pitches, and Alexander one. In point of average runs earned per nine inning game, Alexander shows up with 2.38, and Johnson with 1.71. [Note: Both men saw their earned run averages rise in the 1920s, the Lively Ball Era. Alexander finished with a career 2.56 e.r.a., and Johnson with a 2.17.]

Johnson had a much better club behind him last year than Alexander, and that undoubtedly helps a pitcher’s showing in the figures, but then Johnson was a great pitcher with a bad club, even as Alexander was great last season with a bad club.

The Nebraskan has none of what you might call the pitching style that marks the work of Johnson, or at least the pitching style that is favored by most baseball men. He tends to a side-arm motion in his pitching, and there are scouts in baseball right now who will not give a side-arm pitcher a second glance. They marvel that Alexander can have any control at all with that motion. On the other hand, Johnson has all the prescribed baseball “stance” to his flinging.

Alex Most Graceful

As a matter of personal choice, however, we would rather watch Alexander work than Johnson. To us it seems that he has more natural grace in the box, despite that motion, than the big Washington propeller. There are mighty few pitchers who come under the head of things of beauty when they are working, but Alex is one of them.

Mathewson is another. Rucker is still another. Rube Marquard is a pitching picture, So is Ray Caldwell. Spit ballers, like Jeff Tesreau, for instance, and the underhanded species do not interest the audience as much as the others, though they may be pitching better ball.

Johnson Works Today

This afternoon the New York fans will probably have the opportunity of seeing Johnson, as he is about due to work a game against the Yanks. There was a time when the Yanks could beat the big fellow with some regularity, and that was back in the time of George Stallings, but they usually did it through Walter’s catcher, Gabby Street, and the score was generally about 1 to 0.

Nowadays, with the club behind holding pennant aspirations, Johnson is about the hardest pitching proposition in the country, and no team entertains any great hope of victory when it stacks up against him. He is as hard as—well, say Alexander.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Sporting News, February 1, 1923

CENSUS OF FANS SHOWS BIG MAJORITY LIKES HOME RUNS

Among Men Prominent in Baseball Who Enter New Pleas for Present Day Hitting Style Are Branch Rickey and Fred Mitchell

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Players Who Are Always Hustling

There Are Not So Many Of Them As You Might Think. Just three, So Mr. Hanna
Believes, and He Names Them Thus --- Babe Ruth, Pep Young and Charlie Jamieson


By William B. Hanna, Baseball Magazine, 1925



Babe Ruth, Pep Young, and Charlie Jamieson – there we have the best three hustlers in Major League Baseball. They are always trying, those three, or so nearly always, that they give the impression. On apparently the most hopeless outlooks for making a play go through, they are trying and putting all they have into the effort.

--There are other hustlers who work hard and persistently, but none with the same appearance of constant enthusiasm for work as these three and their joyous energy stands out. Naturally they accomplish more than if they didn't go about it so energetically, and if they have no other reward they have the consciousness of work well done or of having done their best.

--Doubtless there are others fully as sincere and conscientious in their playing. Most of our professional baseball players work hard to win and try honestly to earn their pay. Take two men of superlative skill, Lajoie and Hornsby. No one can say that the former or the latter does not hustle just as faithfully as the three named, but if so they made their efforts look easier. Bob Meusel, for instance, covers ground fast without appearing to do so, and does his work with no apparently great expenditure of effort. Yet we all know there are players who frequently loaf going to first base and that there are few indeed who run out every ball hit.

--But did anybody ever see Jamieson loaf running to first base? I never did. He gives all his fine speed to that dash to first, and he is the most persistent, persevering, indomitable ____ter in running out hits I have ever seen. He will put more into that particular branch of ___rt than either Ruth or Young, though Young seldom runs them out at less than top speed. Ruth's hustling applies more to the other bases, and trying to the limit at bat and in the field, (missing word) __everlasting vigilance and to making bold and __ant use of the slightest break or lack of __y vigilance. Nobody can loaf on the Babe. He is a mental and physical hustler.

--Obviously, men who hustle in the outfield as ____ur three heroes cover a vast acreage. There (missing word) outfielders such as Speaker, Roush, Carey, and Cobb, who are greater natural ground coverers than Ruth or Jamieson, but I’ve never seen any of them run out hits as do Jamieson and Young. Kenneth Williams is a hard-working (missing word) never giving up, heart set on winning.

--(missing word) leftfielder I think of goes to his left as far and as hard as Jamieson and makes catches. And in the Cleveland park, where he had the room, he makes a surprising lot of catches at or beyond the foul line. As a hard fighter he stood out on one of the hardest fighting teams that ever won a pennant, The Indians of 1920. I've seen him going full tilt over to Speaker’s range and heard Speaker yell at him to "take it!" even though it looked like Speaker’s ball. Yet Jamieson doesn’t get in his boss's way.

--That last (not despairing, but seemingly so) stride and out-thrust hand of his have caught ball after ball which appeared beyond human endeavor. You'll see this thing more frequently done by infielders on ground balls – by Collins, by Frisch, by Jackson, by Dugan (in the frictionless way Joe has) by Lee, by Harris, by Gerber – the reward of indomitable purpose backed by supreme effort.

--Jamieson, Ruth and Young are three of the best throwers in the game, and that adds to their value as hustlers. Hustling adds to their likelihood of cutting off safe hits, and then, with a quick turn, powerful arm and determination to hold the runner, as well as instinctive knowledge of where he is, any one of them is apt to cut him down, or, if not that, to hold him so he won't take an additional base.

--Young operates wonderfully well in going out for a fly ball and in playing the Polo Grounds wall. I think he can go out faster than Jamieson on balls hit over his head, but no faster than Ruth. The Giant right fielder is a wonder at getting the ball back to the infield for plays. His throws are fast and true, and he is always on the watch to nip unwary base runners who take a lead in turning first or second bases.

--There was a run-up play once between first and second in which first, all of a sudden, appeared to be unguarded. The runner was on his way back there – to safety apparently. But the base wasn't unguarded. Young flashed into view from nowhere, took the throw and made the put-out. Moreover, he had started the play with a throw cut off by the pitcher for the express purpose of getting the base-runner. You don't see many outfielders starting and completing the same play.

--You know how Young runs, humping like a camel, ungainly, but all-fired fast. Rounding second on a three-bagger or possible home run, he is the soul of inspired action, jaw thrust forward, and symbolizing to the last degree zeal and speed. Worth watching? The fans will say he is!

--Of this three-part group of forceful, dynamic gentlemen, Ruth is the most so at the bat. Here he even hustles in repose, so to speak. His concentration is dramatic. At the plate he is the embodiment of power, all ready for the pressure on the trigger, deadly intent on hitting the ball. Yet his nimble, resourceful brain can shift to a bunt or tap to left if he so prefers.

--Ruth is a tireless, rapid-fire hustler on the bases, outwitting the smartest outfielders, tricked but seldom himself, and constantly giving evidence of quick thinking. I’ve seen him outguess Speaker and Cobb and other luminaries.

--The Babe in his desire to succeed, slides hard and with abandon. He never favors himself. Injuries or no injuries, he keeps on. He doesn't let injuries keep him out of the game. He goes hard in all directions for fly balls, and would go further at home for balls over his head did the right field fence of the Yankee ground permit it. This right field is a hard one to play. There is no harder hustler for a ground ball than Ruth, and the conscientiousness and speed with which he backs up a fellow fielder is shown by the number of times he relays from deep center.

--Larry Doyle and Frank Chance typified the zealous, resolute hustler. We all remember the buoyant, aggressive Larry, and how he loved to play baseball. And as present-day players whose hustling I've often admired, I should like to mention Goslin, Manush, Rigney, Adams (Cubs), Fred Hofmann, Schang, Gowdy, Hack Wilson, ____ckson, Frisch, Jimmy Johnson, Wheat, Pinelli, Henline, Hauser, Bottomly, Heathcote, Severeid, Traynor, Sewell, Combs, Mostil and Nixon.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

F.C. Lane discusses fence distances. Perhaps a little ahead of his time? Sounds like the building blocks for park factors.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

They Had Their Heroes, Too


Baseball Magazine 1931


By Frank Graham


Famound Diamond Stars are Always Stars to the Sand-Lot Kids. But When Those Stars Were Sand-Lotters Themselves They Also Had Their Heroes



Every big league ballplayer who has made the headlines is a hero to somebody. Some of them, like Pepper Martin, have turned a nation upside down overnight in a frenzy of enthusiasm bordering on hysteria. Others, like Babe Ruth, Rogers Hornsby, and Tris Speaker, have come marching down the years and millions have trailed them into the ball parks. Still others, less spectacular than Martin and Ruth, and Hornsby and Speaker, but splendid ballplayers just the same – men like Mickey Cochrane, Freddy Lindstrom and that perennial juvenile, Melvin Ott – have built up tremendous followings across the face of the land.

Heroes! Heroes to you and you and you. Well, they had their heroes too. Once each of them hung on ever move of some player particularly glamorous to them in a game they found most glamorous of all; clipped pictures and stories about him from the public prints; wanted desperately to know him; and strove mightily to emulate him in achieving fame.

It chanced that, in the days leading up to the last World’s Series and during the series itself there was an opportunity to ask these authenticated heroes who their heroes had been. All of them answered readily. Some of them, it appeared, had fixed upon their heroes without ever seeing them and then had had the thrill of catching up with them on some field of play. And not the least interesting phase of their replies lay in their earnest and sincere declaration that their heroes, upon close acquaintance, had not disappointed them in the least but, seen at close range, had retained both their glamour and their attractiveness.

“Babe Ruth was my hero,” said Pepper Martin. “I first took a shine to him when he was pitching for the Red Sox and I was a kid down in Oklahoma. I thought he was the greatest pitcher in the world. And I guess he was. Right then, anyway. The first big kick I ever got out of a World’s Series I got when he was pitching against the Cubs in 1918. And then he turned around and became the greatest home-run hitter and that gave me another kick. He showed me he was not only the greatest pitcher of his time but the greatest ballplayer of all time.

“Do I know him? Yeah. I met him down in Florida last spring when the Yankees came to Bradenton to play an exhibition game against us. I think he’s a swell fellow. I don’t know whether he’d know me or not. You know how he is, meeting so many people all the time. But I guess maybe he’d know me – now.”

It seemed likely. At the moment, Pepper Martin loomed so large on the American scene as to blot out the depression, the Japanese embroglio and about everything else, including the Cardinals and the Athletics.

“Christy!” boomed the Babe. “Sure, Christy Mathewson. Maybe there was a greater pitcher than Matty but I doubt it. And if anybody had suggested it to me when I was a kid in Baltimore and he was pinning the boys’ ears back in the National League I probably would have taken a sock at him, because I was a rough kid in those days. Maybe I didn’t always know my lessons but I always knew how many games Matty had won and lost. I read everything about him that I could get my hands on.

“By the time I got up to the big leagues Matty was just about getting through as a pitcher but I got to know him when he was managing the Reds and saw quite a little of him after that, when he was coaching for the Giants and , later, when he was president of the Braves. A great pitcher – and a great fellow who made an impression on baseball that won’t wear off as long as the game lasts.”

“Ty Cobb,” said Hornsby. “Of course, I never saw Cobb when I was a kid, because the Tigers didn’t ever come to Fort Worth and I didn’t ever get very far from it. But as far back as I can remember I wanted to be a great hitter and I guess there never was a greater hitter than Cobb. So he was my hero and, on account of him, the Tigers were my favorite team and I followed him and the Tigers through the newspapers every day.

“I first saw him in the spring of 1916, when I was with the Cardinals in training at San Antonio and we went to Waxahachie, where the Tigers trained, to play an exhibition game. I didn’t say anything to him and he didn’t say anything to me but I got a thrill out of watching him, because in those days he was plenty good. He handled a bat like a billiard cue and he was on fire every time he got on the bases. Later I got to know him real well and to like him as much as I though I would when I was a kid.”
“Cy Young,” said Speaker. “We didn’t see any big league ballplayers down around Hubbard, Texas, where I was born and reared but that didn’t stop us from being interested in the big league teams and players. My favorite team was the Red Sox and my favorite player was Young, who was a sweet pitcher, believe me.

“And here’s the strangest – and best – part of the story. When I was sold by Little Rock to the Red Sox in 1908, Young still was pitching for them and when I reported he was the first to greet me and show a friendly interest in me. In those days a busher breaking in generally had no friends. He was figuratively - – and sometimes literally – pushed around and made to feel by the other players that he wasn’t wanted and I got plenty of pushing around from the Red Sox.

“But Young and Lou Criger, his batter mate, took me in hand. I went to live at the same apartment hotel where they lived and the aid and encouragement they gave me, both on and off the field, helped me tremendously to put myself over. Need I say that my hero gained in stature?”

“Ty Cobb,” said Cochrane. “Growing up around Boston, I saw all the big leaguers and right from the start Ty was my hero. I went to as many ball games as I could and you may be sure I never missed one when the Tigers came to town if I possibly could help it.

“I became acquainted with him when I broke in with the Athletics and later, when he came over to our club, that acquaintance developed into a real friendship. If he were playing ball today he’d still be my hero, which is the tip-off on how he registered with me.”

“Tris Speaker and George Sisler ran a dead heat in my estimation when I was a kid on the South Side of Chicago,” said Lindstrom. “I was a White Sox fan, of course. In fact, the Cubs didn’t interest me at all and I seldom went to see them play except, occasionally, when the Giants were the visiting team. And then I’d cheer for the Giants.

“Probably a player’s form attracted me more than anything else and that’s why I picked Speaker and Sisler. Certainly there was no prettier sight in baseball than Speaker running down a fly ball or a line drive- unless it was Sisler guarding first base. I never rated one above the other. I never tried to. I simply had two heroes where most kids only have one. And from a standpoint of personalities – as I have discovered when I got to know them – I guess I picked two pretty good heroes, didn’t I?”

An element of humor was introduced into the investigation when the question was put to Ott in Lindstrom’s presence.

“Freddy Lindstrom,” said Ott, unhesitatingly.
“What!” exclaimed Lindstrom. “What are you trying to do, you young whippersnapper? Make an old-timer out of me just because I’ve been leading you around the league by the hand for the last five or six years? You- you- you ant, you!”

“No,” said Ott. “That’s on the level, Freddy. You were only eighteen when you broke in with the Giants, had a great year and starred in the World’s Series with Washington. But I was only fifteen and was still in school down in Gretna.”

He turned to the writer.

“He won’t believe me,” he said. “He thinks I’m trying to kid him about his being my hero but it’s true. I was fifteen and eager to be a big league ballplayer some day and here was a boy only three years older than I starring in a World’s Series. Is it any wonder I was more interested in him than I ever had been in any one ballplayer before?”

There was no need to inquire how Ott was impressed by Lindstrom upon meeting him. They have been roommates ever since Mel joined the Giants.

As long as persons parade before the public view there will be hero worship. What general has not looked up to Caesar, what navigator to Columbus? What young flyer has not taken Lindbergh as his model? Baseball players, public idols themselves, are not immune from hero worship. They have their idols, too.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

The Toughest I’ve Ever Faced


Baseball Digest


By William J. Guilfoile


Hall of Fame pitchers and batters reveal their most difficult opponents


Hall of Fame members were surveyed over recent years with the question, “Who was the toughest pitcher or batter you faced during your career and why was he a special problem?”

Here is how they responded:

Billy Williams: “Ray Sadecki. When Ray first came into the league with the Cardinals, I would get my hits off him when he threw hard stuff because I was an aggressive hitter, but when he started to learn how to pitch it was tough, because he threw a lot of off-speed pitches and I just couldn’t wait. It was a case of him knowing he could get me out.”

Ted Williams: “Any pitcher throwing sinkers and hard sliders.”

Ralph Kiner: “Ewell Blackwell. Toughest right-handed pitcher for right-handed batters. With his side arm delivery, gangly physique and the velocity of his fastball, it was most difficult to find the ball. It was on top of you before you knew it. He also would knock you down at the drop of a hat. He was lean and mean.”

Stan Musial: “Curt Simmons. Curt’s herky-jerky delivery was very hard to time. He threw hard with a tailing fastball.”

Roy Campanella: “Ewell Blackwell. He was so tough because he threw side arm, and had ‘good stuff’.”

Luke Appling: “Lefty Grove. His fastball had great speed and movement.”

Pee Wee Reese: “Ewell Blackwell. He was not only a problem for me but for anyone that ever faced him! He was 6-6, had long arms, came from third base, good curve, sinker ball and a little nasty on the mound. I bunted on him one time, it went foul; when he picked it up he said, ‘Pee Wee, I don’t like people to bunt on me.’ Needless to say I didn’t anymore. Didn’t want to wake him up. His best year was 1947 (22-8) I believe. If he had stayed healthy he would have been one of the greatest of all time. As Walker Cooper once said, ‘If all the pitchers were like Ewell we would be back on the farm plowing the fields and planting corn.’”

George Kell: “Bob Feller and Bob Lemon. These two were the very toughest for me – Bob Lemon because everything he threw broke in the same direction. It might be down and out or down and in or straight down but always down. He never pitched above the waist. Bob Feller threw harder than any man I ever faced and that alone was tough enough, but he also had one of the best curve balls I’ve ever seen. Plus he had a herky-jerky motion that hid his pitches well and he was just wild enough so you did not dare dig in.”

Enos Slaughter: “Walter (Jumbo) Brown. I just did not hit him.”

Al Lopez: “Hal Schumacher. He had a hard, fast sinker.”

Lou Boudreau: “Hal Newhouser. He never threw a straight ball – the pitch was either moving up, down, sinking or rising. P.S. I was fortunate not to have to bat against my pitching staff of Lemon, Feller, Garcia, Gromek, Bearden, Smith and Paige!”

Buck Leonard: “Satchel Paige. Because of his great speed.”

Yogi Berra: “Alex Kellner. I couldn’t pick up his delivery because of his strange herky-jerky style.”

Brooks Robinson: “Frank Lary. Sinking fastball. He liked to pitch inside a lot and then throw a little quick breaking ball away. I just could never hit him. He was very intimidating. I always felt when he pitched inside, he didn’t care if he hit you or not.”

Willie McCovey: “Bob Veale. He was about 6-6, a lefty hander and very wild. Being a left-hander didn’t pose a problem because I actually enjoyed hitting against left-handers since they made me concentrate more at the plate. But in the case of Bob, he wasn’t just wild low, or high, or inside, but wild in all directions which is a problem for any hitter. That fact that he was so tall made it a little tough for me to pick up his pitches and being wild besides is the reason he gave me so much trouble.”

Ernie Banks: “Sandy Koufax. Sandy was a special problem for me because he possessed exceptional control, speed, and a great curve ball. He was highly disciplined, extremely committed and a very private person. These qualities enabled him to concentrate on his profession without a lot of unnecessary distractions.”

Willie Stargell: “Juan Marichal. Juan had a fastball, curve ball, slider and screwball – each pitch he threw at any time, in any situation, and at various speeds. On any day that could be a combination of 9 to 11 different pitches. The key to hitting him is timing. When facing Juan sometimes there was no such thing as you getting your timing down. A note: Sandy, Gibson, Drysdale, Carlton, Seaver, Ryan, Sutton, Niekro, Jenkins, and many others need to know they were not a piece of cake either.”

Eddie Mathews: “Juan Marichal.”

Bobby Doerr: “Bob Feller. Had an overpowering fastball and a very good curve ball. A tough motion made it harder to pick up his pitches.”

Red Schoendienst: “Carl Erskine and Sandy Koufax. Both had deceptive deliveries; it was hard to pick up the ball upon its release. They could also mix up their pitches with great control. They seemed to have command of their fastball, change and curve and could use any pitch and put it anywhere over the plate when necessary. They were smart pitchers, and it was a great challenge to face them.”

Al Kaline: “Nolan Ryan. I was 38 years old and he could throw hard and he was wild.”

Mickey Mantle: “Too many to pick one out, but Dick Radatz supposedly K’d me 44 out of 66 times or some crazy amount. He could throw pretty hard and he kept the ball up and in.”

Johnny Mize: “Claude Passeau. He had a bad finger on the glove hand and they allowed him to rub the ball in the glove. He would throw the ball to the left-handed batter, and the ball would break inside on your fist. Players called it a sailer. I never used my favorite bat, because I would break it.”

Cool Papa Bell: “When my timing was off, they were all a problem.”

Rick Ferrell: “Bob Feller. I remember Feller when he first came into the American League and pitched at Old League Park in Cleveland – I think he was about 18 at the time. He used a big motion in his delivery and was very fast with a good curve ball. I have been told his fastball was once clocked at 105 mph. I didn’t see it but I don’t doubt it. The four years he spent in the Service prevented him from setting records they would still be shooting at.”

Billy Herman: “Buck Walters. He was a right-handed sinker ball pitcher and I didn’t like the ball breaking inside to me.”

Bill Dickey: “Dazzy Vance had a terrific fastball and a curve that was hard to follow. He wore a shirt with long floppy sleeves that distracted the hitter when trying to follow the ball.”

Charlie Gehringer: “We did not have speed clocks during my playing days. In my baseball career, I never hit against anyone who threw the ball with more speed than Lefty Grove, plus the fact that he rarely threw curves or changes of pace especially in his early years.”

Monte Irvin: “Ewell Blackwell. He was a right-hander, threw very hard, was mean and came at you from the side. Need I say more?”

Duke Snider: “Juan Marichal. His control and deceptive wind-up and delivery of his pitches were a problem. His fastball and curve were both high quality pitches. He later came up with a screwball but I was his teammate then and was able to see him confuse the other hitters instead of me! He and Koufax were the best I have seen.”

Harmon Killebrew: “Stu Miller. I faced a lot of tough pitchers in my career, but Stu Miller gave me more trouble than anyone else because of his great motion. The ball never seemed to get to home plate; it was as if it was on a string and he was pulling back. I believe I had only two hits off him in my career (one a home run). If I’d had to face him every day I’d have been back in Payette, Idaho real fast!”

Some Hall of Fame pitchers were asked, “What hitter gave you the most trouble during your career and why was he a special problem for you?”

Here’s how they responded:

Whitey Ford: “Nelly Fox. He never seemed to strike out and he had a good eye. He never over-swung, and just tried to hit singles and doubles. Nellie had no trouble against left-handers – he hung in very good against them. He was a great competitor.”

Hal Newhouser: “Ted Williams. The problem pitching to Ted was, he made you throw strikes in the zone he wanted, not the strike zone I wanted; and on top of that, he wouldn’t chase any bad balls outside of the strike zone if you got two strikes on him.”

Don Drysdale: “Way too many to name, but Willie McCovey comes to mind! I tried to throw him overhand, deep-cutting curves but my only problem was that I didn’t have one!”

Early Wynn: “Ted Williams. He was a great hitter every time he came to bat, day in and day out. He didn’t chase bad pitches in the dirt or above the letters. He had great eyesight and he knew where the strike zone was. He also knew what pitches every pitcher had and which was his best pitch.”

Rollie Fingers: “Harmon Killebrew. It didn’t make any difference what I threw – he hit it; and it just wasn’t that he hit it – it was where he hit it. If he had accumulated frequent flyer miles on fly balls off me, he could have gone to Europe and back at least four times.”

Bob Feller: “Tom Henrich. He never over-swung. He made a ball be a strike and he would swing at a low overhand curve now and then. Tom would go for the single and cut down his swing with two strikes. He was a good clutch hitter and hard to strike out – it seemed as if he was always looking for the pitch I was delivering.”

Ferguson Jenkins: “Roberto Clemente. He was an awesome hitter, a great talent, a super human being. Without him in Pittsburgh, in the ‘60s and ‘70s, the team would have just been another ball club. Roberto was the backbone of the team.”

Jim Palmer: “Rob Carew. He had a .328 lifetime average as a major leaguer.”

Catfish Hunter: “Tony Oliva of the Twins, because he could hit any pitch anywhere. He did not have a weakness.”

Bob Lemon: “Minnie Minoso. He’d stand right on top of the plate. You could hit him any time you wanted. I didn’t want to hit him, though, because he was a friend.”

Robin Roberts: “Ernie Banks.”

Tom Seaver: “Willie McCovey. He was a very aggressive hitter who looked for my best pitch – the low fastball. Since McCovey was essentially a low ball hitter, he had a high number of pitches in his ‘wheelhouse’ each time we faced each other.”

[Bill Burgess]

On January 11, 1924, Honus Wagner chose an All-Time Team for the Los Angeles Times. Here are two tid-bits. His remarks on Ty/Babe. Interesting article.

1924 - Ty Cobb is certainly entitled to an outfield position on account of his great hitting, base-running and general aggressiveness. In other words, Cobb comes mighty close to being the greatest ball player that ever lived. Until Babe Ruth came into the limelight, I guess Cobb was the greatest drawing card that baseball ever knew. And he never disappointed, either.

Cobb is simply a natural baseball wizard. He plays every game as if his life depended on it. He will take any sort of a chance to win and his moves are so unexpected and daring that he keeps his opponents on the anxious seat. Many players have knocked him for his roughness, but I never did. He took his chances and expected others to do the same. He was as game as they come.

Cobb believes in his own style of play and usually has proven that he is right. Cobb is a dangerous man to block. He is as hard as iron and insists on getting all that is coming to him. No man was ever able to get a better lead off a base than Cobb. Once he starts, he goes through. Gee! What a ball player.

No all-American team would be complete without Babe Ruth, either as a regular or extra man. His hitting alone gives him a place. And, let me tell you, Ruth is a much better fielder and a faster man on base than a lot of people think. He looks slow on account of his immense size, but that boy can get about. Babe Ruth is without a doubt the longest hitter that baseball ever knew.

I have seen all the long range boys but nobody in the world could ever hit a ball like Ruth. Many pitchers are justly afraid of pitching to Ruth. They fear he may hit a ball directly back at them that would be fatal. They pass him for that reason as any other. If I had him in the two-three hole you can bet I'd let him walk rather than put one in the groove.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Randy:
Thanks so much for that Bill. Love reading anything from Hans. His word carries so much weight. Love those old-school guys that pay attention to more than just slugging.

1924 - I believe that was the year he selected Babe as an extra outfielder on his all-time team. Then in 1930 he selected another all-time team and that time put Ruth as a starter. Guess Babe had to "prove it."

ps. Cobb knew not to try and "rough up" Wagner
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill:
It's my pleasure, Randy. I now go out of my way looking for quotes that cite Babe or Ty for more than the stereo-type. And it means so much more coming from the right people. Just love it when it comes from Hans, Matty, Anson, Hanlon, Huggins, etc. Those privy to the 'inside game'. This one fit the Bill to a T. Right up our ally.

And you're right on the money again. He selected Babe as his extra man, but the writeup was still cool.

Bill

[janduscframe]

Sultan, Thanks for posting. I could be mistaken, but I think I read somewhere that Aaron listed Simmons as his bane. That would make two mighty tough hitters in Aaron and Musial singing the praises of Simmon's hill work.

I like reading about the little guy. Here's an article on Bert Graham trying out with the Browns. Bill, note the article mentions that Doc White maybe had Cobb's number?


http://www.newspaperabstracts.com/link.php?id=27610

[Bill Burgess]

Interview with Harry Heilmann:

(How Slow Footwork Handicaps a Batting Champion: The Supreme Importance of Speed in Baseball--How Fast Runners Beat Out Many Close Hits-Why Ball Players Should be coached to Run, From an Interview with Harry Heilmann, January, 1926, Baseball Magazine)

"If you ask me," says Heilmann, "what is the most important single talent a ball player can have, I would say without hesitation, 'Speed.' It is all very well, for example, to talk of Ty Cobb's ambition, hitting ability and the like. What has been said on that theme is true. But he would never have been the player he became if he had been slow of foot. Cobb's success first and last, like the success of most unusually prominent ball players, has been based upon speed.'

"Speed is something that impresses the public from the very outset. Take a young rookie who has just joined the club. If he's fast and active and can go down to first base like a shadow, everybody is willing to concede that he has a future. Speed shows up in the field, no less than at bat. Perhaps it's even more important there. And, of course, it's the backbone of good base-running.

"Nature was not very kind to me when it came to handling out ability to cover the ground. I have never been fast. They talk about Ty Cobb's slipping, and of course he is not now the player he was five years ago. His legs won't stand the continual strain. But I'd hate to figure how much he could beat me in a hundred yard dash this very moment.

"Take the case of Young Al Simmons. He's a great player, no doubt a coming star. Moreover, he's a right-hander, like myself, which is a considerable handicap. But he's very fast. I can recall in the series that we have played with the Athletics this year no fewer than seven hits that Simmons made off our pitchers by fast foot work. On every one of those hits I would have been thrown out at first base. He was safe.

"Hornsby is also a right-hander. I'm willing to concede he's a greater batter than I am without any argument. But he has one thing in his favor that I lack. He's very fast.

"It's difficult to estimate just how much slow-footed running cuts down a batter's percentage. But I'll be conservative and say that I lost at least fifteen hits in an average season that I would make if I were fast. Add fifteen hits to my total and you'll notice a surprising bulge in my batting average.

"Another handicap which I share with Simmons, Hornsby and many other batters is the fact that I bat right-handed. That subject has been too thoroughly discussed to need say any more airing at the time. All authorities agree that the right-hander-loses a number of hits every season that the left-hander would have beat out simply because he was nearer first base and swung naturally into his stride. Batting right handed is an undoubted handicap as has been urged in Hornsby's case. But where you couple that with slow running, you have something to think about.

"I have been told that this handicap was more imaginary than real in my own case because I am naturally a heavy hitter. The inference is that my hits are solid smashes and I'd be safe anyway, no matter how slow I ran. My answer to that argument is that it's very interesting but it isn't true. The usual infield hit or the little bounder over the pitcher's head which the fast left-hander will beat out isn't really a hit at all. It's a mistake. The batter simply hasn't come through and he wanted to do, but his speed of foot has saved him and changed an easy out into a close scratch single. Grant that most of my hits are solid smashes, but also grant what is the truth, that I make batting mistakes just as well as the next man, that I send bounders over the pitcher's head or slow rollers to the shortstop. But here's the difference. Those plays, when I make them, are easy outs. They don't fatten my batting average by a single decimal point.

"Speed of foot has unquestionably handicapped my work in the outfield. I know it has quite as well as any of my critics. I'll say that a fast outfielder will cover a stride or so more than the slow one who plays the batter equally well. That extra stride will mean a fair number of base hits cut down in the course of a season. For even a fleet outfielder sometimes stops the ball that he is barely able to reach. The slow outfielder wouldn't have reached it at all. I'll say that the difference between a slow outfielder and a fast outfielder is a difference of at least three or four ball games in a season.

"With all this in view, people might well ask the question, 'Why aren't players coached in running as much as they are in fielding and batting? Some able runners have told me that any fellow could be coached to improve his speed. That doesn't mean that 'the natural ice wagon would ever be a star sprinter, but it does mean that even the natural ice wagon could have several faults corrected and improve his speed.

"In view of the pronounced value of speed, I believe it would pay any ball club to devote time and attention to coaching the men in some of the fine arts of running. But very little work is done on this point in any ball club with which I am familiar.

"And now the logical question is why don't I practice what t I preach? Why don't I improve my own base running, my own ability to get down to first? The answer is that I am too old. I'm as good as I ever will be, in all probability. The very first thing I should do, perhaps, is to take off twenty-five pounds. I don't do this because I am willing to let well enough alone. That's not a logical excuse perhaps, but it's my own mental reaction. Baseball is a great game, but it takes a lot out of a man. No, much as I appreciate the advantage of speed, I shall never be a fast runner. (How Slow Footwork Handicaps a Batting Champion: The Supreme Importance of Speed in Baseball--How Fast Runners Beat Out Many Close Hits-Why Ball Players Should be coached to Run, From an Interview with Harry Heilmann, January, 1926, Baseball Magazine)

[Bill Burgess]

Baseball's Popularity

To those who believe that BB is more popular today than in ages past, the subject is far more tricky than anyone can guess on first blush.

Yes, today, the numbers of folks attending games is vast. But is that the way we measure? Let's look deeper.

1. Population growth means there are far more potential fans.

2. Income growth means there are far more fans who can afford to go to games.

3. Bigger stadium means they can squeeze far more fans into the parks. And once inside, the fans will have a better time in a spacious, more comfortable park.

4. Integration means that far more blacks, ethnic fans have a rooting interest in the games.

5. Because of expansion, we need to divide fans/season by the number of teams.

6. Superior transportation means that fans can travel further to get to games. Fans in 1905 actually attended games by horses & buggies. The Model T, allowed a lot more blue-collar workers to own cars. And today, well, who doesn't have a car? Better trains, buses, carpools, etc. helps BB attendance.

7. A huge advantage is night games. Lets workers see games they couldn't before.

8. Today we have no Sunday "blue laws", which previously prohibited teams from playing games on Sundays. That one law helped ruin Connie Mack in the '25-33 era. Penn. refused to grant him a waiver from no-Sunday ball "blue laws", until Nov. 8, 1933.

The following cities received their liberation from no-Sunday baseball games "blue laws" in the following years. Detroit - 1910, Cleveland - 1911, New York - 1919, Boston - 1929, Philadelphia/Pittsburgh - Nov. 8, 1933. Wash. - 1918.

Chicago, Cincinnati and St. Louis permitted Sunday baseball in the 1880s. The National League lifted its ban against playing on Sunday in 1892. Until 1934, there were many one-day jaunts on Sundays to fit in a profitable game. For example, it was not uncommon for the A’s to travel to Cleveland or Washington after their Saturday game and then slide to another city on Monday.

9. Pre -1950 TV era, the media consisted mostly of newspapers, radio, billboards, word of mouth. Since then, we now have infinitely better organized, coordinated media systems to blitz the public. And one should never under-estimate the value of the media to put on the grand old ballyhoo. Works every time. Even tee-shirts, bumper stickers, & the web have an effect.

10. Another important factor in attracting the fans to come out is to have attractive, competitive teams, featuring good players.

Around the turn of the century, BB lacked competitive balance. In the AL, the Browns, Senators, Highlanders, were the weak sisters in the league, upon whom the others beat up on. It was hard for those teams to compete for fans.

In the NL, the Phillies, Braves, Dodgers, Reds, Cards were the weak sisters. The Cubs, Giants, Pirates, were the strong brothers.

And that lack of competitive balance contributed to low attendance. Plus the lack of stars to go all the way around. There were no good stadiums until the Pirates built Forbes Field in 1909. First modern steel/concrete park.

To summarize: A fan in 1905 Pittsburgh/Detroit had little money to go to a games, which were only held in afternoons, where they'd sit on wooden stands, which held around 15,000 fans, enjoyed primitive concessions, facilities, & had to fight rush hour traffic to get home.

The only positive was that games took a lot less time, but the time saved was used up in transit.

The numbers are very slippery.

A factor which slipped by was that BB was much more personally ingrained back then. Fights often broke out in the stands, garbage was rained down on the field if umps gave the "wrong" calls, and every town in American had their own "town 9" and took enormous pride in their teams.

There can be no comparison whatsoever in that the passion of the early century fans for their baseball was way more intense than is seen today. We are much more casual, removed observers. We watch from the comfort of our plush, living rooms; warm, safe, removed, detached.

Those early fans went out in the clean open air, or sat there in the rain, or listened at their radios. I've seen a photo of a burly Brooklyn fan pummeling a burly umpire on the ground. We have our brawls today, but I suspect that they had more. Those fans endured less disposable income, 2 world wars, a depression we can't appreciate, and STILL attended games.

The only way we can fairly compare gate attendance is for us to pare down to 16 teams, take away our disposable incomes, cars, night games, and in some cases Sunday ball. Get rid of our great big, comfortable ballparks, and go back to small "intimate" neighborhood ballparks.

Things are not always what they apper.
------------------------------------------------
Read read this article before voting, if you haven't voted yet. It's my argument as to why it seems that baseball is more popular today. Bear in mind that some cities couldn't play baseball on Sundays before 1933. The Pirates/Athletics had no-baseball Sunday blue laws prohibiting it. And don't forget night ball allowed working people to attend many more games also.

http://baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=297016&postcount=63

Part of the data that I think Chris (and a lot of other fans) misinterprets is that he reads in Total Baseball that in 1988, 70,589,504 fans attended ML games. And in 1930 only 10,132,262 fans attended ML games.

And in 1909 7,236,990 fans attended ML games.

Year - ML attend.--games--per game

1896 -- 2,900,973 - 1,306---2,221 fans/game.
1897 -- 2,885,631 --- 809---3,566
1898 -- 2,313,375 --- 921---2,111
1899 -- 2,541,485 --- 921---2,759
1900 -- 1,745,490 --- 935---1,866
1901 -- 3,603,615 - 1,913---1,883
1902 -- 3,889,466 - 1,115---3,488
1903 -- 4,735,250 - 1,114---4,250
1904 -- 5,688,299 - 1,872---3,038
1905 -- 5,855,062 - 1,237---4,733
1906 -- 5,719,289 - 1,228---4,657
1907 -- 6,038,984 - 1,233---4,897
1908 -- 7,123,474 - 1,244---5,726
1909 -- 7,236,990 - 1,221---5,927
1910 -- 6,206,447 - 1,249---4,969
1911 -- 6,571,282 - 1,237---5,312
1912 -- 5,999,390 - 1,232---4,869
1913 -- 6,358,336 - 1,234---5,152
1914 -- 4,454,988 - 1,256---3,546
1915 -- 4,864,826 - 1,245---3,907
1916 -- 6,503,519 - 1,247---5,215
1917 -- 5,219,994 - 1,247---4,186
1918 -- 3,080,126 - 1,016---3,031
1919 -- 6,532,439 - 1,118---5,842
1920 -- 9,120,875 - 1,234---7,391
1921 -- 8,607,312 - 1,229---7,003
1926 -- 9,832,982 - 1,234---7,968
1927 -- 9,922,868 - 1,253---7,919
1928 -- 9,102,285 - 1,231---7,394
1929 -- 9,588,183 - 1,229---7,801
1930 - 10,132,262 - 1,234---8,210
1931 -- 8,467,107 - 1,236---6,850
1932 -- 6,974,566 - 1,233---5,556
1933 -- 6,089,031 - 1,226---4,966
1934 -- 6,963,711 - 1,223---5,693
1935 -- 7,345,316 - 1,228---5,981
1936 -- 8,082,613 - 1,238---6,528
1937 -- 8,940,063 - 1,239---7,215
1938 -- 9,006,511 - 1,223---7,364
1939 -- 8,977,779 - 1,231---7,293
1940 -- 9,823,484 - 1,236---7,947
1941 -- 9,689,603 - 1,244---7,789
1942 -- 8,553,569 - 1,224---6,988
1943 -- 7,465,911 - 1,238---6,030
1944 -- 8,772,746 - 1,242---7,063
1945 - 10,841,123 - 1,230---8,813
1946 - 18,523,288 - 1,242--14,914
1947 - 19,874,540 - 1,243--15,989
1948 - 20,920,842 - 1,237--16,912
1949 - 20,215,364 - 1,240--16,302
1950 - 17,462,976 - 1,238--14,105
1951 - 16,126,676 - 1,239--13,015
1952 - 14,633,044 - 1,235--11,848
1953 - 14,383,797 - 1,240--11,599
1954 - 15,935,883 - 1,237--12,882
1955 - 16,617,383 - 1,234--13,466
1956 - 16,543,250 - 1,239--13,352
1957 - 17,015,820 - 1,235--13,777
1958 - 17,460,630 - 1,235--14,138
1959 - 19,143,980 - 1,238--15,463
1960 - 19,911,488 - 1,236--16,109
1970 - 28,747,332 - 1,944--14,787
1979 - 43,550,396 - 2,099--20,748
1990 - 54,823,768 - 2,105--26,044
1992 - 55,872,276 - 2,106--26,530
1993 - 70,256,456 - 2,269--30,963
1994 - 50,010,016 - 1,600--31,543 - (strike)
1995 - 50,469,240 - 2,017--25,021 - (strike)
1996 - 60,097,384 - 2,267--26,509
1998 - 70,589,504 - 2,432--29,025
2000 - 72,748,968 - 2,592--28,066
2003 - 67,630,052 - 2,430--27,831
---------------------------------------------------
Some subjective interpretations:

From 1900-1901, the emergence of the AL, albeit in most NL cities, encouraged a new wave of interest in fans, hence the doubling of ML attendance, but the fans/game remained constant.

By 1909, the ML attendance doubled again, and the fans/game tripled.

In 1918, a war year, the ML season is curtailed to only 130 games, causing total attendance to crash. But the fans/game also tumbles, reflecting the austere national mood. Detroit sports writer, EA Batchelor later wrote, "With kids being killed in the war, it suddenly didn't seem to matter if the Tigers were in 1st. place or last."

By 1919, with the war over, even with the season still shortened to 140 games, total attendance almost doubles from the year before as does fans/game . Fans wanted to put the austerity behind them, and the introduction of the lively balls allows offensive stats to increase, to the fans' delight. Babe Ruth causes a near hysteria with his 29 HRs despite not playing OF full time yet.

In 1920, the gloves come off. Ruth goes to a major media/fan base, destroys the old HR record, the owners had banned the spitball to all but those already using it, and the doctoring of the ball is enforced for the 1st time, allowing offensive stats to explode. The fans dance in the streets. NL attendance also reflects the new era, even without Babe goosing their gate.

In 1921, attendance cools just a little. The fans are unable to susten the white-hot frenzy of 1920, have gotten just a little used to the new hitting spree. Some believe that the 'Black Sox Scandal' is responsible for the slight dropoff in fans attendance, but the fans/game is almost the same, making this a disputed contention. Maybe it had some effect, but the failure of steroids to dampen modern attendance seems to show that fans will put up with almost anything to get their baseball fix.

1930. Offensive soars, attendance follows the curve.

1948. With the war over, and the return of baseball's stars, the economy booms, along with disposable incomes, pushing BB attendance to record levels. It was the good economy putting fresh dollars into cusumer's pockets which gooses the gate, along with the spreading of 'Baseball Under the Lights'.

1953. Attendance drops across the boards. Most attribute the drop to the advent of TV. Brooklyn, with a good team, leads attendance. But some might attribute the drop to latent racism. Impossible to distinguish the effect of either. Maybe a lot to TV, and a little to racism.

By 1960, attendance is back up and about to go higher with the addition of new teams. And teams that move also drive up the gate, as Milwaukee proved.

[Bill Burgess]

Number of newspapers in 1933 per city.


2. The effects of the grand, old, organized Ballyhoo. With 25 newspapers creating a media blitz, demand is created out of thin air. And no other city had near as many. Here is a breakdown of how many papers a city had. This is for 1933, from Who's Who of Professional Baseball, ed. by Harold (Speed) Johnson. New York lost 5 from the 1920's by 1933, thanks to Randolph Hearst buying papers & consolidating them.

Boston - 9 (Globe, Post, Herald, American, Transcript, Christian Science, Advertiser, Traveler, Record)

Brooklyn - 3 (Times Union, Citizen, Eagle)

Chicago - 10 (Tribune, Daily News, Herald-Examiner, American, Daily Times, Ass. Press, Howe News Bureau, United Press, International News Service, Consolidated Press)

Cincinnati - 3 (Esquire, Times-Star, Post)

Cleveland - 5 (News, Press, Plain Dealer, Newspaper Enterprise Ass, Central Press Ass.)

Detroit - 3 ( News, Free Press, Times)

New York - 20 (World-Telegram, Sun, Evening Post, Journal, American, Daily News, Herald-Tribune, Times, Mirror, Ass. Press, United Press, Bronx Home News, Al Munro Elias Baseball Bureau, International News Service, Chicago Tribune(NY office), Christy Walsh Syndicate, North American Newspaper Ass., Consolidated Press, Bell Syndicate, George Mathew Adams Service)

Philadelphia - 5 (Bulletin, Public Ledger, Inquirer, Record, Daily News)

Pittsburgh - 4 (Press, Sun-Telegraph, Post-Gazette, Tri-State News Bureau)

St. Louis - 4 (Post-Dispatch, Globe-Democrat, Star & Times, Sporting News)

Washington - 5 (Post, Star, Times, Herald, Daily News)
------------------------------------

Cleveland - 5 (News, Press, Plain Dealer, Newspaper Enterprise Ass, Central Press Ass.)

The NEA and Central Press may have been some kind of syndicates but they weren't actual papers. In Cleveland, it was the AM Plain Dealer and afternoon Press and News. The Press and News later merged and still later the Press became defunct. The Press was part of the Scripps-Howard chain.

[Bill Burgess]

Good Sports Writers Who Died since 1988:

It's always depressing to see reputable news outlets allowing amateurs to write pieces on subjects that are such a closed mystery to them.

I've seen more and better BB erudition here on The Fever than I've EVER seen in Sports Illustrated, ESPN, any BB announcer, or almost anywhere else, and that includes all the other BB websites I've visited.

Most BB books are a click better, but not much.

I'll tell you a great writer, John Kuenster, at BB Digest. The best writers I know of still alive are: Al Thoney, Herman L. Masin, Bob Broeg, Ernie Harwell,
Furman Bisher, Jesse Outlar, Jerome Holtzman & Joe Falls. Sports Writers are a special interest of mine. We have lost a lot of great writers in the last 15 yrs., including many Ford Frick Award winners. Some of the best were:


Albert Gillis (Al) Laney----------Jan. 11, 1896-1988, Jan. 31
Gustave Steiger-------------------Nov. 18, 1897-1988, Dec.22
William Wilson (Eddie) Edgar------Nov. 19, 1897-1986, My.
Alan Jenks Gould------------------Jan. 30, 1898-1993, Jun. 21
Jack McDonald---------------------Oct. 21, 1899-1997, Sept.14
Joseph Cashman--------------------Dec. 28, 1900-1993, Feb. 12
Kenneth D. Smith------------------Jan. 8, 1902-1991, Mar.1
Leonard Cohen---------------------Aug. 26, 1902-1989, Oct. 30
James J. (Jimmy) Powers-----------Feb. 9, 1903-1995, Feb. 11
Samuel Harold (Sam) Lacy----------Oct. 23, 1903-2003, My.8
Charles Michael Segar-------------Oct. 29, 1903-2001, Jun.1
James Timothy (Jim) Gallagher-----Jun. 9, 1904-2002, Apr.9
Shirley Lewis Povich--------------Jul. 15, 1905-1998, Jun.4
John K. Hutchens------------------Aug. 9, 1905-1995, Jul. 22
Sam Muchnic-----------------------Aug. 22, 1905-1998, Dec.30
Fred McFerrin Russell-------------Aug. 27, 1906-2003, Jan.26
Edgar Herman Munzel---------------Jan. 14, 1907-2002, Oct.4
Nathaniel Mortimer Gerstenzang----Oct. 10, 1907-1995, Aug.11
Edwin M. Rumill-------------------Sep. 28, 1908-1987, Sep.18
Harold F. Parrott-----------------Jan. 10, 1909-1987, Jul. 30
Bernard (Barney) Kremenko---------My. 8, 1909-1990, Jan. 20
Simon (Si) Burick-----------------Jun. 14, 1909-1986, Dec. 10
Harold Seymour--------------------Jun. 21, 1910-1992, Sep.26
Francis Edward Stann--------------Jan. 9, 1912-1987, Nov.18
Jack Sher-------------------------Mar. 26, 1913-1988, Aug. 23
Raymond (Ray) Kelly---------------Jan. 24, 1914-1988, Nov.22
Will Henry Grimsley---------------Jan. 27, 1914-2002, Oct.31
Bob Hunter------------------------Mar. 19, 1914-1993, Oct.21
Robert L. Burnes------------------Jul. 13, 1914-1995, Jul.11
Gene Schoor-----------------------Jul. 26, 1914-2000, Dec.13
Joseph L. Reichler----------------Jan. 1, 1916-1989, Dec.12
Herbert (Red) Goren (Old Scout)---Apr.5, 1916-1991, Feb.8
Allen Lewis-----------------------Dec. 16, 1916-2003, Sept.14
Robert E. (Bob) Stevens-----------Oct. 10, 1916-2002, Jan.2
Richard (Dick) Young--------------Oct. 17, 1917-1987, Aug. 31
Robert (Bob) Holbrook-------------Jan. 29, 1919-2004, Jan.13
Edward Earl (Ed) Fitzgerald-------Sept. 10, 1919-2001, Feb.11
James Patrick (Jim) Murray, Jr.---Dec. 29, 1919-1998, Aug. 17
Neal Russo------------------------Jun. 12, 1920-1996, Mar.9
Harold (Bud) Saidt----------------Nov. 11, 1920-1989, Apr. 8
Lawrence Stanley Ritter-----------My.23, 1922-2004, Feb.15
Edward Allen Linn-----------------Nov. 14, 1922-2000, Feb. 7
Early M. Lawson-------------------Feb. 1, 1923-2003, Jan.14
Leonard Koppett-------------------Sept.15, 1923-2003, Jun.22
David Rensing Condon--------------Mar. 4, 1924-1994, Dec. 5
John Dennis McCallum--------------Jun. 27, 1924-1988, Dec.17
Phil Collier----------------------Dec. 7, 1925-2001, Feb.24
John Francis Steadman-------------Feb. 14, 1927-2001, Jan. 1
Edward J. Chilinski (Ed Chay)-----Sept. 19, 1926-1997, Oct. 29


Bill Burgess

[Bill Burgess]

Historical Player Salaries:

All salaries are express in thousands; all figures under a person's name apply to that person until another name appears. The corresponding year appears at the collumn at the left.



Wagner
1898 1,5
1899 Lajoie
1900 6,0 Matty 2,1
1901 8,0 1,5 4,2
1902 8,0 3,0 5 McGraw
1903 5,0 5 11
1904 5 11
1905 Cobb 9,0 5 11 1,8-Bobby Lowe 2,7-S.Crawford
1906 1,8 W.Johnson 5 15 6,5-Bobby Wallace 3,0
1907 2,4 2,7 5 15
1908 4,8 3,5 10 15 4,0
1909 4,8 4,5 9 10 18
1910 9,0 7,0 9 10 18 Alexander
1911 9,0 7,0 M.Brown 9 10 18 Chase 1,5 Wheat
1912 9,0 7,0 7,0 Speaker 9 10 18 6 5,0 2,0 3,3
1913 12,0 12 9,0 9 10 30 D.Lewis 5,0 Hooper
1914 15,0 Ruth 12,5 Collins 18 pkg. 12,0 10 30 5 3,5 5
1915 20 3,5 16 15 18 pkg. Hornsby 10 30 Roush 5 7,5 3,5 5
1916 20 3,5 16 15 15 2,0 10 30 5,0 5 7,5 3,5 5 6,0
1917 20 5 16 15 15 3,0 40 Huggins 7,5 12,5 6,8
1918 20 7 16 15 15 4,0 40 12,5 8,0
1919 20 10 16 15 18 4,0 40 10 12,5 9
1920 20 20 16 5,0 40 Heilmann 10 Landis
1921 35 p/m 30 11 40 7,5 13,75 50,0
1922 35 p/m 52 18,5 Gehrig 50 8,8 12.5 13,75 50,0
1923 35 p/m 52 18,5 3,5 50 10,0 R.Youngs 13,75 Frisch Gehringer 50,0
1924 38 p/m 52 16-20 15-20 30? 18,5 3,0 50 19,0 16 15-20 10,0 17,5 3,5r 50,0
1925 50 p/m 52 20 40 p/m 33,3 3,75 50 16 Foxx 10,0 15,0 50,0
1926 50 p/m 52 20 35 33,3 6,5 50 Pennock 2 16,6-Dazzy Vance 50,0
1927 105* 70 20 20 35? 37 8,0 50 23,3 37,5 17,5 2,5 16,6 65,0
1928 35 70 retired 30? 40,6 25 50 23,3 8,0-O'Doul 3 16,6 65,0
1929 70 25-manager 40 25 23,3 8,5 5 65,0
1930 80 25-manager 40 25 held out 22,6-H.Wilson 20 Simmons 25,0 65,0
1931 80 25-manager 40 25 70 15,0 33 25-Terry 16,6 33,33 22,5 50,0
1932 75 40 25 70 16,5 15 16,6 33,33
1933 52 15 23 Klein Cochrane Hubbell 16,6 B.Rickey 33,33 30
1934 36,696 15 23 30 30,0 17,5 27,5 18 39,470 20
1935 DiMaggio 35 24 18 31 17,289 30,0 20 44,919 35 Greenberg
1936 7,5 20 24 18,33 31 45 30 43,907 16,5 25
1937 15 25 18,33 36 22,5 30 42,340 18,5
1938 25 Williams 40 5,0 36
1939 27,5 6,5 40 8,0 36
1940 32,5 12 55
1941 37,5 20
1942 43,75 35 9,0
1943 WWII military
1944 WWII military
1945 WWII military 6,0 Reiser
1946 43,75 50 12,5
1947 43,75 75 100
1948 70 90 30-Kiner
1949 100 100 J.Robinson Stengel 49,470
1950 100 100 65 35 18 50
1951 100 100 20manager 65
1952 100 40 10,36
1953 100 20,36
1954 100 18
1955 100 60
1956 100 61
1957 100 Musial 62
1958 125 100
1959 125
1960 90
1961

[538280]

On August 26, 2003, Nate Silver and Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus had an interview with Rickey Henderson, asking him various questions about baseball and his career:


Rickey Henderson is one of the 20 greatest players in baseball history. The major leagues' all-time leader in runs scored, walks, and stolen bases, the 44-year-old Henderson dons his Dodger uniform every day with a 54-year-old's wisdom, a 34-year-old's body, and a 14-year-old's boundless enthusiasm for the game.

Born into a single-parent home in Chicago in 1958, Henderson moved to Oakland at age seven, where he caught games at the Coliseum in between starring in two sports (Henderson was an All-American running back) and at Oakland Technical High School. Henderson was selected by the A's in the fourth round of the 1976 draft and progressed quickly up the minor league ladder, displaying his trademark speed and plate discipline at each level.

Henderson made his big league debut on June 24, 1979 against Texas--he went 2-for-4 with a steal in the first half of a doubleheader--and never looked back. In addition to his career records, Henderson's accomplishments include the single season stolen base record, a Gold Glove, an MVP award, 10 All-Star appearances, two World Series titles (Henderson has a 1.046 OPS in 14 World Series games), and the universal acknowledgement as the greatest leadoff hitter of all-time.

Recently, Nate Silver and Will Carroll had the opportunity to speak with Henderson while the Dodgers took batting practice at Wrigley Field. Speaking to a timeless player on a timeless field was a great opportunity for Nate and Will to get a candid look into what Henderson thinks about his past, his present, and what he sees for the game in the future.

Baseball Prospectus: You've been playing for a quarter-century now, something very few players have been able to approach. After a quick stop in the Atlantic League, you're back, this time with the Dodgers. How have you lasted this long?

Rickey Henderson: I think it comes down to my work habits and my passion for the game. When I first came up, I worked hard to get better and to keep myself flexible. I had guys tell me how to keep my hamstrings healthy and I've never had a problem with them. Guys today are all muscle-bound, and flexibility comes in way behind strength. It's not the same baseball game that I see out here.

BP: What's different about the game today?

RH: It's a power game. I see the game is changing, that there's no place for the stolen base or the bunt. Everyone wants to be on SportsCenter, and you do that by hitting the ball in the stands, not by executing the fundamentals.

BP: Is there anyone you see in the Rickey mold today?

RH: Juan Pierre in Florida, he's a player I like a lot. He's got the good first step and the instincts out there when he gets on first, but most importantly, he doesn't have any fear. He won't steal 100 bases--I don't think anyone will again any time soon. The home run overshadows everything--even little guys want to hit it out of the ballpark. They worry about how many home runs they have and not runs scored or driven in.

When I was coming up, I was focused as a leadoff hitter. We were taught--every position had a different role to fill. A number-two hitter had to know how to bunt, move the runner along. Leadoff hitters today don't have the on-base percentage because they aren't taught that way. They don't think like we did or have someone telling them 'get on base, work the count.' Teams go all the way down to the pitcher trying to get a three-run homer without wondering who the two men on base are first.

BP: Will anyone approach your stolen base record?

RH: I hope not! (laughs) I don't think there's anyone right now that can steal enough for as long to make it. No one is going to get up to the 100s anymore or stay up in the 50s and 60s until they're 40. Someone will get my record for leadoff home runs pretty quick.

BP: What about a guy like Alfonso Soriano as a leadoff hitter?

RH: I don't know. (Soriano) strikes out a lot. He'd make a good number-two, number-three hitter, putting the bat on the ball. He's got the speed and the skill, but a lot of people say he's more like Henry Aaron than a leadoff guy. He's got quick wrists and he can hit, that's for sure, but he swings at everything. With some discipline, I'm sure he could do almost anything he put his mind to.

BP (motioning over at Dusty Baker, who is standing nearby, on the field): Could you see yourself doing what Dusty is doing?

RH: When I was playing in the independent leagues, I got to do a lot of teaching. I was like another coach. I liked working with those guys, showing them some of the things I've learned. But I don't know that I'd have the personality to be the manager--it took a lot for Dusty Baker to get where he is. Managing is all about personality. What I'd like to do, what I'd be good at: I could be a first base coach. I'd have some great knowledge to share doing that. Show them what to do, work on reading pitchers and timing on those guys. Is there anyone you'd want more than me over there?

BP: Do you think players today have the same passion for the game?

RH: There are a lot of guys that still love the game. But (the passion that I have) has always been very rare. It's not about the money for most of them, but it's not about passion either. We're losing too many good players to basketball or football. I can't think of the last good player to come out of my hometown.

BP: How much of your success comes from your love of the game?

RH: Most of it. Most of my success comes from the love of the game. I wouldn't have stuck around if it weren't for passion, for love. It's not about records or money or history, it's just about putting on a uniform and getting on the field. I didn't mind if it was here in Chicago or Oakland or Newark. It's all baseball.

BP: When in your career did you start thinking about the runs record, and the stolen base record?

RH: I never thought about it at all. I never really started out with those goals. Year by year, it adds up. When I got close to them, the press let me know where I stand, but whatever happened was going to happen. I didn't change my game to get any records. I'm proud of them, but those weren't what kept me going.

BP: What do you think about Pete Rose? Should he be reinstated?

RH: Pete Rose did so much for the game. He was such a good player and had passion for the game but he did a bad thing. That sign's right on the wall everywhere. He's just got to face the consequences.

--

Postscript: In contrast to the lukewarm image of Henderson that has sometimes been floated in the media, he was unfailingly polite, engaging, and well-spoken throughout the course of our interview. The media hordes have left Henderson now--younger players like Sammy Sosa and Shawn Green received considerably more on-field attention that morning at Wrigley--but out of the spotlight, Henderson appeared to have achieved a tranquility and sense of being grounded that is unusual among world-class athletes. It was as though he had come full circle, taking the field as a teenager would in Boise or Modesto or the sandlots of Alameda County, just happy to be playing the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rickey Henderson is still making an impact in the major leauges today...read how his impact helped Jose Reyes to have a career year in 2006:

Notes: Henderson helping Reyes
All-time stolen base leader returns to mentor Mets' young star
By Chris Girandola / MLB.com

NEW YORK -- Jose Reyes said a huge part of his success in the first half of the season can be attributed to Rickey Henderson. Henderson, the all-time stolen bases leader with 1,406, was hired in the offseason to spend a week during Spring Training and a week during the season as a special instructor with the Mets.

"He's been a huge help," said Reyes, who leads the Majors with 34 stolen bases. "He's given me a lot of tips on how to read the pitcher and how to get a better jump. I'm still learning how to play the game, so it's great to have a player like that come around and share what he knows."

Reyes admitted it was originally tough to concentrate when Henderson arrived at camp during the spring because the young star used to watch Henderson on television and emulated his style of play.

"Oh yeah, at first, I kind of said to myself, 'This is Rickey Henderson,' but then I had to concentrate if I wanted to learn anything," said Reyes, who was named the National League Player of the Week two weeks in a row in June.

Reyes said he's learned how to read the slide step on pitchers better and he's developed a knack for paying attention to the certain tendencies of pitchers. He said Henderson has also instructed him on ways to improve himself at the plate.

"A lot of times, a pitcher is going to do the exact same thing and might change his approach to the plate just a bit," said Reyes. "I've learned to notice the little things about a pitcher. How he throws over to first, how he slide steps to home, how he makes adjustments.

"He's also talked to me this week about me leaning forward at the plate, which has hurt my chances of getting on. He's told me to read the pitches with my eyes as opposed to going forward. That way, I don't tip off the pitchers. I have to trust my eyes."

Henderson praised Reyes and said he is a fantastic player who just needs some more confidence to take his game to the next level.


"He's got a ton of ability, but I've told him to try not to do too much," said Henderson, who set the record for most career walks (2,190) before Barry Bonds broke it last year. "He's got to become more confident to hit with two strikes and to learn how to simply put the ball in play.

"He's a free swinger, so sometimes it's tough to accept just putting the ball in play to get on instead of getting a good swing on it. But, if he learns to do that, he'll create more chances to get more steals."

Henderson added that it felt good to put on a uniform again, and that he could help Alex Rodriguez deal with the Yankee fans.

"Rickey needs to help Alex out," said Henderson. "Rickey's got to help Alex understand these fans."

[538280]

This is an excerpt from Reggie Jackson's 1984 autobiography, Reggie:


How I Helped Billy Keep His Job and Other Interesting Tales”
from Reggie
by Reggie Jackson

Editor’s Note: Billy Martin and Reggie Jackson are having a meeting with the New York Yankees general manager, Gabe Paul, because of an altercation they had the previous Saturday in the dugout at Fenway Park. Billy thought Reggie dogged on a bal in the outfield, so he immediately benched him. When Reggie got back to the dugout, Billy screamed at him and wanted to fight. Luckily, both Reggie and Billy were held back, so they didn’t throw any punches. The story starts as Reggie gets off the elevator and into Gabe’s suite.

The meeting was at nine o’clock. When I got off the elevator at Gabe’s floor, Billy was standing there. He was wearing a tan suit and a white shirt without a tie. He looked terrible, like he’d been up all night.

He looked at me.

I looked at him.

Neither on of us said a word to each other. I walked down the hall toward Gabe’s suite with Billy a couple of steps behind me. The walk seemed about as long as the Boston Marathon.

Billy did most of the talking for the first ten minutes. I just sat there and listened. The monologue was a little incoherent at times. I wondered where the hell he was coming from. I know we’d both had a tough night, but this guy was really off the wall. In the middle of his rambling, though, he made a statement that got right to the heart of his position on Reggie Jackson.

“We won without him last year,” he said to Gabe as though it were only the two of them in the room. “We can win without him this season.”

Then he gave his version of the Rice play (the play Reggie was benched for) from Saturday’s game.

“He didn’t hustle, Gabe. He was trying to show me up. That’s what he does with the team, tries to show me up. The only thing I could do was show him up.”

It was then my turn to talk. I said to Gabe, “I did not loaf on that ball.”

Even I was getting exhausted hearing my own voice say those words.

I guess Billy must have been tired of hearing it, too. Because he snapped out again and jumped up out of his chair. Billy’s boiling point was obviously room temperature at that moment.

“You’re a f****** liar!”he yelled at me. “Get up, boy. I’m going to kick the s*** out of you right here!”

I didn’t move. We had already played this scene once, the afternoon before. I didn’t think we had to rehearse it again. I stayed where I was and looked over at Gabe. I was trembling with rage.

“Hey, Gabe,” I said calmly, “you’re a smart guy. Why don’t you tell me what you think he meant when he said ‘Get up, boy’?” You expect me to understand something like that? You expect me to deal with something like that? You tell me what to do, okay, Gabe? I’m all ears.”

Billy was still strutting around the room. He headed for the door to leave. Gabe firmly told him to sit down.

“’Boy’ is just an expression,” Billy said. “I’m from the South. I live in Arlington, Texas. It’s just something that’s said.”

I had to stop myself from smiling. Billy had grown up in Berkeley, grown up poor. But I guess if you grew up in Berkeley and played most of your career in New York, then managed in Detroit and Minnesota, then moved to Texas, it was perfectly acceptable in the year 1977 to call a black man “boy.”
I said, “Really now, Gabe. How do you feel about all of this?”

Gabe, of course, was being Gabe. When he wasn’t telling you to look at the whole donut, he had other Paulisms at the ready. If you went up to Gabe and said, “Do you think it will stop raining?” he had a standard answer.

“Always does.”
Now he looked at me and said, “Well, Reggie, I just don’t know.”

Perfect.

Absolutely perfect. At least Gabe was staying in character.

I had come to the meeting with good intentions. But my good intentions were wearing off quickly. I had gone to Gabe’s suite ready to tell both of them that I was going to play out the year, do whatever it took to win, and now Billy wanted to fight again.

Old Gabe? He, well, he just didn’t know.

“What do you guys think I am?” I said to Gabe and Billy. “Gabe, we’ve gone over this a thousand time already. George Steinbrenner, your boss, told me that if at any point I didn’t want to be a Yankee, then I didn’t have to be a damn Yankee. Listen, the uniform is great to wear. The Yankees are Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle and Whitey Ford and Lou Gehrig and Joe DiMaggio. But what you both don’t seem to understand is that it’s the guys who wear the uniform who make the Yankees. It isn’t the other way around. This uniform didn’t make Reggie Jackson. I appreciate that I got to wear it once in my life just to see what it feels like. But you know I don’t want to be in it once this season is over. I don’t want to be a Yankee, I don’t want to be in New York, I really don’t want to play for a man like this.”

I pointed to Billy when I said the last part.

“I actually came here to try and make peace with Billy,” I continued. “Maybe that’s impossible. What is also impossible is for me to play baseball the way I can with him treating me the way he does, trying to show me up, trying to break me down. I just want you to know where I am. I’m not going to demand anything. I know you’re not going to send me anywhere because you would have done that already. I assume Billy is going to stay. I’m going to stay. There’s not a damn I can do about it. The only recourse I could have, as a man, is to bust my ass for Billy regardless of what he tries to do to me, and take it from there. And that’s all I have to say.”

We all just sat there. Billy looked like he was sick.

Gabe finally said, “I’ll remember everything you said, Reggie. I’m going to talk to George, explain the way you feel, the way Billy feels. Just remember: There’s no substitute for talent. Things will work out somehow.”

I was pretty sure I’d heard that before.

I got up and walked toward the door. I didn’t shake anybody’s hand. I just left Gabe and Billy sitting where they were. As I opened the door, Gabe had one last thing to say.

“Don’t look at the hole in the donut, Reggie. Look at the whole donut.”

Honest to God.

[Ubiquitous]

July 25, 1951 Sporting News article about Mickey Mantle in the minors.

[Ubiquitous]

Here is the infamous Ted Williams-Joe Dimaggio trade

[Bill Burgess]

Introducing Frances Charles Richter:

Born: January 26, 1854, Philadelphia, PA
Died: February 12, 1926, Philadelphia, PA, age, 72

Philadelphia sports writer, 46 yrs., 1872-1926;
Was Editor-in-Chief of Reach Official American League Base Ball Guide (1902-1926, Feb. 12, death); In those days, being a Guide editor was a position of enormous prestige/importance.

Mr. Richter was a noted amateur player in Philadelphia. In 1872, he started writing sports with the Philadelphia Day, eventually rising to managing editor. He moved to the Sunday World and Public Ledger in 1880, when The Day folded. He instituted the US's 1st full-fledged sports departments in the Phil. Public Ledger.

In 1876, the NL expelled the Phil. Athletics from the league. Consequently, Mr. Richter supported the the formation of the rival American Association (AA) in 1882. Mr. Richter founded the weekly Sporting Life in 1883, 3 years prior to the Spink Brothers founding The Sporting News, in 1886, in St. Louis, MO.

In 1883, Mr. Richter assisted organizing the Phillies as the NL came back to Philadelphia. He supported the Player's League in 1890, with his Sporting Life.

He wrote, "I have no very great cause to love the National League. What has it ever done for The Sporting Lie ... All the League ever did for The Sporting Life because it chose to act independently was to try and crush it."

When the AA folded in 1891, Mr. Richter was involved in several tries to break the monopoly of the NL. In 1894, he allied with Al Beckenberger, Fred Pfeffer & Billie Barnie in a failed try to revive the AA. Again in early 1900, he allied with Chris Von Der Ahe, Cap Anson & John McGraw to reform a new AA.

In 1901, he was named Editor-In-Chief of Reach Guide for 1902, which covered the AL. He continued in this role until he died.

In 1880, he started the 1st sports dept. ever in a newspaper, The Public Ledger.

Drew up National Agreement (1883),
Helped place Phil Club in AA (1882),
Helped place Phil club in NL (1883),
Helped assimilate AA into NL (1891),
Drew up Millennium Plan which ended BB war.

Mr. Richter was offered the Presidency of the National League in 1907. He declined due to his obligations to the AL Reach Guide & his own Sporting Life.

For many years, he was one of the official scorers for the World's Series games, sharing the honor with JG Taylor Spink, publisher of the Sporting News.

He founded Sporting Life in 1883, a weekly baseball paper, which became a great force in BB until he disposed of it in 1917, during the War. The motto of his publication, "Devoted to the Baseball Men and Measures, With Malice Toward None and Charity for All," sums up the character of Mr. Richter.

He was a columnist for Sporting News from Dec. 8, 1921 - Sept., 1925. His column, Casual Comment was often addressed to administrative matters. He was always at the top of the BB world, albeit behind the scenes, working for the betterment of the game he loved so much.

For a long lifetime of service to BB at its highest levels, I nominate him for the Taylor Spink Award. His every waking moment was happily devoted to BB. In April, 1946, he & 11 others were elected to BB Hall of Fame as sports writers (Honor Rolls).


To the Memory of Frances Richter: John B. Foster Gives Estimate of Late Writer:
Veteran Historian and Authority Loved His Baseball and Wrote It with Understanding and Spirit. (Sporting News, February 25, 1926)

The following is a communication from John B. Foster, editor of the Spalding Guide, and one of the best known of the older chroniclers of baseball affairs in New York. It is a personal appraisement of the character and genuineness of Frances C. Richter, veteran baseball writer and historian of Philadelphia, who died the other day. Foster knew Richter intimately, knew his high ideals and purposes and knew his value and source to the game.

"I beg the courtesy of the columns of The Sporting News to express my personal grief over the death of Frances C. Richter, founder and editor of Sporting Life until it passed into the graveyard of newspaper enterprises. Francis C. Richter was one of the constructive geniuses of baseball with the pen. In the past 30 years we have had many commentators on baseball, some of them sincere, some purely frivolous, some penetrating, some shallow, some quick of perception, some not so keen, some prophetic, some fatalists.

"How could it be otherwise with all manner of men writing of baseball, and men thrown into the position of critics of baseball at the behest of managing editors who, because of the success of humorous and cynical writers--few of whom ever kept up the task very long--were imbued with the idea that baseball was closely related to the comic valentine, hence governed themselves accordingly.

-------------------------------------Game Close to Richter's Heart-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Richter was none of these. He loved baseball and he wrote baseball from the standpoint of the man who has found what a game really is. He permitted all manner of criticism to enter into the columns of his publication, if it were not libelous, even though at variance with his own opinions, and thus he helped the game of baseball mightily. His own personality was against destructive criticism, yet he conceded that out of the preaching of the opportunist there might come good for the stability of the sport.

"It was the custom in years gone by to predict from season to season that there would be 'no next season.' Often men who enjoyed the game of baseball would express their doubt as to its future. Again and again I heard some of them say--'How much longer will it last?' That was in the 'eighties' and if at that time some one had said there would be 50,000 spectators to see a ball game in the next quarter century, there have been doubts as to his sanity. even as late as the 'nineties' a statement made by the late Albert G. Spalding that 75,000 persons would soon see a ball game, which was made to me in the course of conversation, was ridiculed by the pessimists. Yet, Spalding was right. The 75,000 mark has not been actually reached, but if there were 100,000 seats available they could be sold, not only for World's Series games, but for occasional holiday games.

"Francis C. Richter was always of this group of firm believers in baseball future. He commented caustically at times and he wielded a pen that could put the truth home with a sharp point. However bitter his criticism might seem to be there was behind it a fight for the game of baseball itself and it was that surface cynicism of the writer who deals in personalities. A field of personalities is always easiest in which to volunteer as a commentator.

"When baseball needed the enforcement of certain regulations that had been forced upon it, because of its growth and its unexpected evolution as a magnet for the non-player, Richter was foremost in fighting for them.

"He entered losing battles when he essayed to play league politics and fight for separation of organizations, and the entry of newer organizations, but I have been told that he was forced into this condition by the business policy of his office management, which shifted its affiliation, if that is the better way to put it, and which erred grossly because it was this which ultimately led to the downfall of Sporting Life. The stability of the paper as an organ of baseball was undermined by the intervention of the business office and in his later days Richter deplored with sad words the end of one of the best newspapers devoted strictly to the game that had been introduced into current affairs.

-------------------------------------------GRACED WITH BROAD VISION-------------------------------------------------------
"When the American Association and the National League were amalgamated into a 12-club league in 1891, there were but two writers of those in the United States who knew every move that was being made from the first approach of the National League to absorb its rival, and one of the two was Richter. It was he who worked with the committee of the National League to prove to Von Der Ahe of St. Louis, that it would be better to weld the circuits into one. Richter was present when the final step was taken.

"He was a good student of baseball rules and it was largely through his insistence and splendid presentation of argument that the pitching distance was increased to 60 feet, six inches, although there were many who thought he was quite wrong. Even the pitchers thought so, but they shortly found out they could pitch better at the long distance than at the short, as their curves broke better for them.

"Almost without exception, as I recall it, Richter was right in anything which had to do with development of the game, per se, but some of us differed with his opinions about what is known as baseball politics. Whatever baseball politics may be, they have never been able to harm the pastime from tits standpoint, of good to man, although they have played a disastrous hand more than once to promoters of baseball clubs who have ventured into the sport with the idea that it is something which gains large earnings even if there is poor judgment in administration and complete lack of knowledge as to the requirements.

"Various men are designated as this and that in baseball. Some of them are entitled to the fine tributes that have been paid to them, yet I doubt if any one of them ever did as much and certainly not more, for baseball, when the game really needed support most of all, than Francis C. Richter.
---------------------------------------------Saw the Sport of the Thing------------------------------------------------------

"Those who are modern to the game have no conception of some of the early handicaps that attended it." Owners of baseball clubs, to a great extent in formative days, supported the clubs purely from the standpoint of local pride and at loan to themselves.' The local idea of a ball club was far different from that of the present era. The enthusiasts of baseball were so loyal to the game that time and again they subscribed to the support of a losing team, hoping for better results, but above everything desirous of retaining the club in the city which it represented. Men were out of pocket season after season merely because they realized that joy which men have in dabbling in anything that pertains to athletics.

"When baseball needed encouragement and assistance in moments of that period of the national game's existence, Richter elaborated not the need of money, but the good of baseball and interested other men and still others in it. A later generation began to comment of baseball, not as a game but as something placarded with the dollar mark, because it is easier to dabble with figures than it is to go to a ball game and see how it is played and why it is won.

"The huge sum received for World Series contests have had their share in change opinion. A game over-financed in reputation will sere quicker than one which is fresh with the thrill of its own performance.

"Francis Richter lived baseball and for baseball. Glory to his memory! It was not a joke to him, not the butt of a lapper, but something which had to do with the inner life of the youth of the United States, and he fought for it because of the splendid sentiment which was created on the fields of Philadelphia where they played baseball for the sport of a wonderful pastime and cherished its memories as no other city cherishes them. They are then today, some of those old fellows, some of the pioneers, with the same fondness for the national pastime, and always had and the same delight in recalling the fun which they accomplished when they were younger.

"Richter had courage and he had conviction. He fought losing battles, but he fought them with a fertile mind that brought argument to defend his position. He was a good loser, too, and accepted the inevitable with the resignation of a man who hopes to be justified by the future and feels that he has been sincere in the present." (Sporting News, February 25, 1926. Mr. Richter died on February 12, 1926. He had hosted a Sporting News column, tittled 'Casual Comment', largely dealing with the administrative side of the game, from December 15, 1921 - summer, 1925.)

[Ubiquitous]

Article from December of 1961

[538280]

Here's an article on Morgan I was able to find, Bill.

Despite His Small Stature, Joe Morgan Was A Big Success - Interview
Baseball Digest, July, 2000 by Mickey Herskowitz

He won MVP honors and a place in the Hall of Fame through his consistent work as a hitter, fielder and base runner

JOE MORGAN WAS PLEASED TO BE an honoree last year in the Park series (commemorating Houston's final season in the Astrodome), grateful for the gifts of a cap, a replica of his old jersey with the shooting star on the front, and a cake in the shape of the Astrodome.

But purely as a fashion statement, Joe was appalled by the throwback uniforms he and his teammates supposedly wore in that historic year, 1965.

"Look how baggy those pants are," he complained. "They must think I played way, way back in the olden days. That's how the players wore them in '35, not '65. Look at Derek Bell. His pants are so baggy, he looks like Max Patkin."

The reference was to a well-known baseball clown who entertained fans for at least four decades with his rubbery legs and slapstick routines. I mean, being a clown was Patkin's real job, not a commentary on his talent.

No one ever accused Joe Morgan of associating with a circus, not in his days with Cincinnati's Big Red Machine, or even in his early, formative years in Houston.

"Our uniforms were more form-fitting," he said.

Smart, honest and custom-tailored, Joe would eventually make a seamless transition to the broadcast booth, where today he analyzes the action for ESPN.

This is truly a Hall of Fame story that ranges from the basement to the penthouse. It begins with his introduction to Houston fans in an incident that led to his being compared not to a clown but to a Little Leaguer. In September 1964, the Phillies were in Houston to meet a team then called the Colt .45s, still suffering from growing pains as an expansion club. With little else to occupy their interest, the .45s were taking an early look at next year's rookie crop.

As it happened, the Phillies were in the process of blowing the pennant--they led by six and a half games with 12 to play--in one of baseball's most historic crashes. Understandably, Gene Mauch, the Phillies' manager, was not in bubbly good humor when the kid at second base, Morgan, beat his team with a run-scoring single in the last of the ninth.

Inside the visiting locker room, Mauch was enraged by the sight of his players casually stuffing their faces at the buffet table. Without a word, he approached the table and cleared it with one sweep of his arm. Watermelon slices, barbecued chicken and spare ribs went flying. The suits in two nearby lockers were splattered with sauce.

"Boy," mumbled Phils outfielder Wes Covington, "the food sure goes fast around here."

Mauch stood there, his face reddening, and screamed at his startled players: "Have you no shame? You just got beat by a guy who looks like a Little Leaguer!"

Although there is no record of his ever again inspiring a food fight, Joe Morgan agitated more than his share of managers. The downside of these Astros romps through yesteryear is the knowledge that most of the players found their glory with other teams.

Many consider Morgan to have been the last missing piece that gave ignition to the Big Red Machine. With Little Joe joining the likes of Johnny Bench, Pete Rose, Tony Perez and Dave Concepcion, the Reds won their division five times, the National League three times and the World Series twice.

Playing alongside those top guns, Morgan won the Most Valuable Player award in 1975 and '76 and carried off five Gold Gloves. He was the take-charge guy, a phrase that has all but disappeared from the game.

"For the record," he said, "I didn't want to leave here. When they made the trade, I said I hoped I could come back someday and help Houston win a pennant. Well, I did come back, and we won the division in 1980, but we fell a little short."

At roughly 5-7 and 150 pounds, Morgan was himself judged a little short--by those who didn't look closely.

"To me he was never really a rookie," says his one-time roommate, Jimmy Wynn. "The way he handled himself, his poise, his knowledge ... he had the look of a veteran player.

"I remember the first time I knew he had a chance to be the player he became. A slender, awesome lefthander for the Dodgers was striking out everybody on our club. Sandy Koufax. But not Joe. He stepped in there and just blistered an inside fastball, ripping it over the scoreboard in right field, 10 rows deep in the red seats.

"I couldn't believe it, the quickness of it. This was Koufax. In the dugout, I said, `My God, look at this kid. What have we here?'"

Morgan went on to finish second in the National League Rookie of the Year Award voting in 1965, the same season the Big Bubble opened.

He played in 157 games, scored 100 runs, hit 14 homers and batted .271 in 601 at-bats, finishing behind second baseman Jim Lefebvre who hit .250 with 12 homers, 69 RBI, 57 runs in 157 games and 544 at-bats for the pennant-winning Dodgers.

In Milwaukee one day, Morgan went 6-for-6, a performance that earned him an interview on his next trip to New York with a struggling radio guy named Howard Cosell.

[Ubiquitous]

Joe Jackson (http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/BBM/1916/bbm165m.pdf#xml=http://www.aafla.org:8080/verity_templates/jsp/search/xmlread.jsp?k2dockey=/mnt/docs/SportsLibrary/BBM/1916/bbm165m.pdf@aafla_pdf&serverSpec=localhost:9900&querytext=)

The man who might have been the greatest player in the game.

Joe Jackson will be known in after years as the man who might have been the greatest player the game has ever known. To sum up his talents is merely to describe in another way those qualities which should round out and complete the ideal player. In Jackson, nature combined the greatest gifts any one ball player has ever possessed but she denied him the heritage of early advantages and that well balanced judgment so essential to the full development of his extraordinary powers. Joe Jackson is the most striking example in history of what a player can accomplish on sheer ability.

THE oddest character in baseball today is that brilliant but eccentric genius, Joe Jackson. Those who know him best are readiest to admit they know him least. So strange a medley of contradictory traits, of weaknesses and errors, sustained throughout by sheer natural ability no atom short of marvelous has never been seen elsewhere in that region of queer personalities and clay footed popular idols known as major league baseball. Jackson is unique unparalleled; dramatic in his rise to prominence, brilliant in his success, startling in his manifold failures. His is a character that has never been exploited, that probably never will be exploited until he has passed forever from the diamond and given the perplexed scribes a proper perspective of his mingled weaknesses and dazzling talents. But the public is impatient. It doesn't want to wait until a man is dead or gone from active life before it checks up its estimate of his worth. So we will endeavor, from an intimate knowledge of Joe Jackson's early surroundings and a close association with him personally ever since he broke into the major leagues, to trace the broken corners of that character which has so impressed its distorted image on the public fancy. We have interviewed numberless people about Joe Jackson, from Charles Somers and Charles Comiskey down. We Joe's favorite nephew, also named Joe

[Ubiquitous]

A link (http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/BBM/1916/bbm165h.pdf#xml=http://www.aafla.org:8080/verity_templates/jsp/search/xmlread.jsp?k2dockey=/mnt/docs/SportsLibrary/BBM/1916/bbm165h.pdf@aafla_pdf&serverSpec=localhost:9900&querytext=) to an article about the Joe Jackson trade from March of 1916.

[Bill Burgess]

In 1924 Honus Wagner picked an All-Time All-Star Team.

---------------------------------------Hans Wagner's Team of Baseball "Immortals"
--------------------------------------------------The Literary Digest, January 26, 1924

Baseball Players a plenty have come and gone since the national game got under way in these United States, but, says Hans Wagner, affectionately known as "Honus," the greatest of shortstops, it is not very difficult to pick out a team deserving to rank as "the best." John McGraw, Connie Mack, and Babe Ruth, recalls Honus, who is now writing a series of syndicated articles for the North American Newspaper Alliance, have picked their all-American, all-time, baseball teams. The official guide-book gives another selecting, but that, says, Honus, is made up in exact accordance with records, "the human element not being taken into account." He modestly adds that, "All of those baseball men and the guidebook have been good enough to place me at shortstop, a fact that is my greatest pride in life. It is not for me to pass judgment on myself, naturally." If his selection is not the best of all time, he goes on, at least it is his own idea of the best that can be p picked from the players of the last thirty years, during which time, nobody will deny, practically all of the supermen of baseball have appeared. His team-of-teams lines up in this way, as presented by the New York World:

Manager--John J. McGraw of New York.
Captain--Fred C. Clarke of Pittsburgh
First Base--George Sisler of St. Louis Browns.
Second Base--Bobby Wallace of the old St. Louis Browns.
Third Base--Jimmy Collins of Boston.
Extra Infielder--Eddie Collins of Philadelphia and Chicago.
Left Field--Fred Clarke of Pittsburgh.
Center Field--Tris Speaker of Cleveland.
Right Field--Ty Cobb of Detroit.
Extra Outfielder--Babe Ruth of New York.
Catcher--Johnny Kling of the Cubs, Roger Bresnahan of the Giants, Ray Schalk of the White Sox.
Pitchers--Walter Johnson of Washington, Christy Mathewson of the Giants, Grover Cleveland Alexander of the Cubs, Cy Young and Rube Waddell.
Pinch hitters--Sammy Strand and Ham Hyatt.

"To be prepared for a lot of arguments that are sure to come," continues Mr. Wagner:

I will explain in detail why I have made these selections. I have looked over the selections of others, but in no way have I allowed them to influence me in making my own. Whether or not you agree with me, these are my selections and, like the fellow who went home to his wife with a poor alibi, I'm going to stick to them.

I have selected McGraw as manager because of his great record and also because of his knowledge of every angle of the game as a player as well as a manager. He knows his business. McGraw also knows how to handle men. He is a great executive as well as a field manager. At no time in his life did McGraw ever allow club owners to influence him in the signing or purchase of players. His strong will-power made that possible.

With the team I have selected, however, little managing would be necessary. All my manager would have to do would be to make out a schedule and then come around on pay-day. Incidentally, it would be interesting to speculate on just how much a manager would pay each of those men according to present-day rates of salary. Who would get the most money?

Already I have a feeling that some of the critics will say that I have selected too many left-handed hitters. They may have an idea that this team would be weak on left-handed pitching. But I have taken that into consideration. Every man I have selected can hit left-handers as well as right-handers. I have purposely left out those left-handed hitters who have to be taken out against southpaws in a pinch. I never thought much of a ball-player as a star hitter who was weak against left- or right-handed pitching. A good hitter can hit any kind. Fred Clarke, for example, was the best left-handed hitter against left-handed pitching that I ever saw.

I have taken several qualities into consideration--batting, fielding, base-running, and love of the game. More important, however, are brains, aggressiveness, length of service and team-work.

Now, when you consider length of service, which is probably the most important of all, you will see that this club could be kept on the field for many years without falling apart. There would be no worry about filling up weak places ever year. Every one of those not playing now lasted fifteen years or more.

I have limited myself to five pitchers, because I consider that enough. All pitchers do better with plenty of work.

My reason for selecting three catchers is that I could use Bresenham, in a pinch, as a pitcher, an infielder or an outfielder. That is true also of McGraw. Even tho McGraw is my manager, he could be used in the infield, as a pinch-hitter or a base-runner. He is the best I ever saw to get on base either by walking, being hit by the pitcher, or hitting the ball.

I am assuming, of course, that all these players would be in their prime when I started my club on the field the first season. As a matter of fact, some of those had retired before the others were born. I guess old Cy Young was through when George Sisler was a baby. It's sort of funny, at that, to think of old Jimmy Collins and Babe Ruth on the same team.

They were putting Jimmy on the All-American teams of all time when Babe Ruth was born.

To my club I have added pinch-hitters because they are an important part of any team nowadays. I have selected Sammy Strang and Ham Hyatt. They were the best I ever saw. Sammy made eleven pinch-hits in a row one season.

To be a good pinch-hitter requires a peculiar sort of temperament, an easy-going , unexcitable disposition. Both Hyatt and Strang had that. Either of them could go into a game without warming up. Mighty few ball-players can do that. Nothing seemed to bother them, however.

The status of the game meant nothing to those boys, whether there were three on bases and a pennant depending on a hit or not. They would simply amble up there to the old pan as if they had not even heard about what was going on.

I have eliminated several wonderful players because of faulty dispositions. Also I have not even considered men who ever had done anything questionable in baseball. A man who does not give his best to a club is no good on a team, even if he is the best mechanical player in the world. I won't mention one or two that I have in mind, but I guess you can guess. They are better forgotten.

The hard part about this job was the elimination of certain players rather than the selection of others. It's awful hard, for instance, to leave off a man like Willie Keeler. I would like to give my reasons for leaving these old friends out, but, naturally, there isn't room here. I want you to remember, tho, that I have considered all of them as carefully and sincerely as I could. For every one left off I have a good reason.

There is no doubt in my mind as to the superiority of my pitching staff, even tho it doesn't agree with many others.

I'd like somebody to show me where they could dig up five better winning pitchers than Johnson, Mathewson, Alexander, Cy Young and Rube Waddell.

Picking this team has given me a laugh. I get a smile every time I think of what the opposing pitchers would be up against with John McGraw on one coaching line and Fred Clarke on the other.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1935, Honus picked an All-Time All-Star Team.

He had done one in the 1920's and later another in 1949.

1B - Bill Terry
2B - Larry Lajoie
3B - Pie Traynor/Jimmy Collins
SS - ?
C - Johnny Kling
LF - Fred Clarke
CF - Clarence 'Ginger' Beaumont
RF - Bill Lange
P - Christy Mathewson/Cy Young
--------------------
His Commentary.
He had picked this team for Sec Taylor of the Des Moines Register. And they constituted his choices for the Hall of Fame. If he selected a SS, it was considered silly to list his own name.

"Matty was the best of all pitchers because he never gave you all he had until he had to. Then he poured it on. The three shutouts he pitched in one world's series weren't accidents. Young won more than 500 games, the only pitcher who ever went over that mark. He had a fine fast ball--much faster than he was ever given credit for--and perfect control. His curve didn't break much more than a couple of inches, but he knew when to throw it, and it was enough to keep a batter fidgety.

In my day, the most important item on the catcher's calendar, in addition to his handling of pitches, was throwing out base runners. They ran hard and often. They don't run so much these days. I don't know anything Kling couldn't do. The one catcher today who reminds me of Johnny is Gabby Hartnett. They ought to find a place somewhere for him too."

He explained that he hadn't seen much of Mickey Cochrane and therefore wasn't competent to compare the Detroit receiver with the two he had named.

While he picked Traynor for third base, Wagner had high regard for Jimmy Collins, too, and added him to his team:

"Collins was the first third baseman to field a bunt with his bare hand and throw the ball underhand while running at top speed. The custom before that had been to take the ball with both hands. The next move was to stop and come out of the crouch. It all took time, and when Jimmy came along with his running toss he caught a lot of them before they got wise.

Lajoie was his pick at second base, both for his "efficient and graceful fielding and his heavy hitting." Commenting on his omission of Ruth, Cobb and Speaker from the outfield, Wagner said, "I'll just struggle along with Fred Clarke and Clarence Beaumont of the Pirates and Bill Lange of Chicago.

"Beaumont was a wicked hitter--he topped me by two points one season--and fast! He beat out six infield hits one afternoon, still a record, I guess.

"As for Clarke, he hit .300 or better eleven years and over .400 for two. That entitles him to something, I reckon."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1949, Honus Wagner picked his 3rd All-Time All-Star Team:

In 1949, Honus Wagner picked his 3rd and last All-Time All-Star Team. This time he limited himself to the National League.
He didn't feel qualified to judge AL players he hadn't, for the most part, seen.

1B - Bill Terry
2B - Lajoie/Hornsby
3B - Pie Traynor
SS - left blank
LF - Fred Clarke
CF - Clarence 'Ginger' Beaumont
RF - Willie Keeler
C - Roger Bresnahan/Johnny Kling
P - Christy Mathewson/Cy Young

"I haven't seen much of the American League, but I regard Stan Musial as one of the best young players I have looked at," Wagner says. "I hesitate to pass complete judgment on anyone until he's been in the majors at least ten years."

"When queried about a shortstop for this team, Wagner has a stock reply. "That team wouldn't need a shortstop." he says with a chuckle.
(The Sporting News, March 2, 1949, pp. 7.)

[Bill Burgess]

On January 13, 2007, Randy (Sultan_1895-1948) posted this award-winning post. It must have taken days to finish.
-----------------------------------------------
When first trying to post information from each and every one of Ruth's contracts, I quickly realized that it was too arduous a task. Both important and interestingly unimportant details could and would be left out and the read didn't turn out to be much fun. So, the job is best left IMO, to three of the best Ruth biographers in history, Creamer, Smelser, and Wagenheim. These books were published in 1974, 1975, and 1974 respectively.

All three authors deserve a read IMO, as they each offer their own unique writing style, research driven perspective and various side details to go along with expected over-lapping facts. For those interested in this aspect of the Babe's career, enjoy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1914 - 1 year/$600 ($50 payments bi-monthly for six months - received a raise to $1200 in May and to $1800 in June)

_______________



Smelser

Jack Dunn and Fritz Maisel, a Marylander who played with the Yankees and who came along for company, called at Mount St. Joseph's on February 14, 1914. Knowing Meadows would not sign, Brother Gilbert proposed to put Dunn onto the greatest left-handed pitching prospect in the world. Gilbert hadn't seen Ruth pitch, but he gambled that the left-handed catcher's throws in the infield foretold good pitching. Gilbert, Dunn, and Maisel drove over to St. Mary's and asked for Brother Matthias (who appeared in overalls). Gilbert wanted Dunn to meet Matthias because Matthias had managed the team on which Gilbert had seen Ruth play. When Gilbert told Matthias why they had come, Matthias said, succinctly, "Ruth can hit." But Dunn was after pitching. "Can he pitch?" "Sure he can do anything." (A sober statement of baseball fact.) Dunn and Gilbert now set out for Brother Paul's office, wading through a growing crowd of man-children attracted by news of professional ballplayers visiting the yard.

When the news of visitors reached High City Tailor, Ruth came running to join the crowd. He was wearing faded blue overalls and was careful to slide on every patch of ice he came to. Gilbert nudged Dunn and said, "There's our victim." Dunn gasped at Ruth's size and muttered to Maisel, "Fritz, there is a Rube Waddell in the rough." (A Rube Waddell in the rough would have to be something pretty rough.) He saw an oddly shaped, gangling, full grown man of nineteen, with obvious great strength in the swelling muscles of his chest and shoulders. Gilbert introduced Ruth to Dunn and told Ruth that Dunn had come to sign him for the Orioles. In later years Ruth said he was as surprised as if he had been invited to join the United States Senate. And one of the boys remarked, "There goes our ball club."

Dunn asked Ruth to throw some pitches. The two worked out in the Big Yard for perhaps half an hour, with Dunn, as Ruth said, "talking to me all the time, and telling me not to strain and not to try too hard." Then Paul, Gilbert, and Dunn talked for half an hour in Paul's office, while Ruth waited with a huddle of well-wishers. The elders sent for Ruth and told him of the legal guardianship question. Brother Paul was Ruth's legal guardian, by court order, until age twenty-one, but the Brothers had a routine for delegating the authority to employers so that Dunn could become guardian in fact. Dunn and Brother Gilbert arrived at a salary figure of six hundred dollars for the season of 1914 (forty dollars a month more than Gilbert's private minimum figure). It has been said, though it is hard to believe, that George was surprised to learn he would be paid money to play baseball.

The very first news of Ruth as a professional baseball player appeared in the Baltimore Sun on February 15, 1914:

The Oriole magnate signed another local player yesterday. The new Bird is George H. Ruth, a pitcher, who played with teams out the Frederick road. Ruth is six feet tall and fanned 22 men in an amateur game last season. He is regarded as a very hard hitter, so Dunn will try him out down South.




Wagenheim

The first contract was for $600 a season, not bad at a time when sirloin steak cost twenty-seven cents a pound and boys worked in sweatshops for forty cents a day. There were "certain legal difficulties," Brother Paul explained, because "George is supposed to stay here until he's twenty-one." But these were ironed out, and Jack Dunn, owner of the Baltimore Orioles, also became the guardian for his newest pitching prospect.

On March 2, 1914, Dunn waited outside the gate of Saint Mary's in his red roadster. There had been a terrible storm the night before, tearing the roofs off many homes, knocking down trolley car lines, making shambles of the harbor. But the trains south were running. George Ruth, carrying his few possessions in a cheap suitcase, stood behind the barred gate and shook hands with the Xaverian brothers. Matthias's last words to him were, "You'll make it George." As for the boys at Saint Mary's, we rely once more upon Brother Gilbert, who tells us, "Yes, friends, and those whole-souled youngsters, even in the loss of their idol, experiencing as they were commingled feelings of joy and sadness, sincerely meant all that was contained in their ardent wish...a sonorous chorus rent the air with, 'Best of luck, George!'"

As Dunn's car headed for Union Station and the train that would take them southward to the spring camp in Fayettevill, North Carolina, one of the Xaverian Brothers, in a neat, flowing script, wrote the final entry in George Herman Ruth's record at Saint Mary's: "He is going to join the Balt. Baseball Team."

And George Herman Ruth, wiping a tear from his eye, looked out the car's side window at the gray walls of Saint Mary's receding in the distance. And then, yes friends, came the grand revelation: Holy sh*t! No more slop on the supper table and fighting for seconds, no more sneaking a puff on a cigarette in the john, no more ---- off under the sheets after dark! Yoweeeeeee! Jack Dunn, his new guardian, was so terrorized by the barbaric yawp that he nearly drove his shiny red roadster off the road.




Creamer

On the big day there were flags and bunting everywhere. The school buildings and the grounds and the ball field had been swept and scrubbed and polished. The anticipated crowd was there, and, to the exultation of the boys, Ruth and St. Mary's walloped Morrisette and Mount St. Joe's 6-0, with Ruth striking out twenty-two batters during his shutout. After the game Dunn and young Ruth went into Brother Paul's office and talked for two hours, and the following February, a couple of weeks before the Orioles were to leave for spring training, Dunn came to St. Mary's again and signed George Ruth to a professional contract.

There are some colorful variations on the theme of Dunn's signing of Ruth, most dealing with Brother Gilbert, who for years received credit in the press for being Ruth's guiding light and for calling him to Dunn's attention. But Brother Gilbert was not even at St. Mary's (and Ruth's own praise was always for Brother Matthias). Yet Brother Gilbert did know Dunn, and the Baltimore owner may well have first heard of Ruth from him. In later years the Xaverians at St. Mary's, whenever they talked of Ruth, used to relish casting Brother Gilbert in the role of villain. One version held that Gilbert knew Dunn was very high on Morrisette and in a vain attempt to keep his own star pitcher in college and on his team for one more season touted Dunn onto Ruth. Dunn, of course, ended up with both.

A second version says that Gilbert wanted to borrow Ruth for a big game he had coming up (such casual comings and goings of college-level players were far from uncommon) but that Brother Paul of St. Mary's said no. Irritated by the refusal, Gilbert called Dunn's attention to Ruth so that St. Mary's couldn't have him either. A third version says that in the winter of 1914, six months after Dunn had signed Morrisette, he went to Mount St. Joseph's again, this time after another young pitcher, a strong, chunky left hander named Ford Meadows. Dunn eventually did sign Meadows (and in 1915 sold him to the New York Yankees for $5000), but at the time Brother Gilbert said, "Have a heart, Jack. Leave me one pitcher. If you need a left hander, why don't you go after that Ruth kid at St. Mary's." Gilbert then brought Dunn to the Home and introduced him to Brother Paul, Brother Matthias, and Brother Albin. Dunn knew of Ruth's record, saw the rangy youngster sliding on an ice slick, was impressed with his size and coordination and, after talking at length to the brothers and the boy, signed him to a contract. This seems far fetched, but Roger Pippen, for many years sports editor of the Baltimore News-Post and a young sportswriter in 1914, always insisted that Dunn told him he had never seen Ruth play baseball until he went to spring training with the Orioles. Ruth said in an autobiographical sketch written in the 1920s that "Dunn took me out to the Yard and had me pitch to him for half an hour."

The various strings of the legend come together in February 1914, when Dunn went out to St. Mary's on a cold, snowy Saturday, St. Valentine's Day, just a week after Ruth's twentieth birthday.

Dunn signed the boy to a contract that would pay $600 for the season, or $100 a month.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1915 - 2 years/$3500 per

_______________



Creamer

Ruth's off-field behavior was a problem for Carrigan. In part it was a result of Babe's natural ebullience, but it was aggravated by his new-found affluence. When Babe signed his first Red Sox contract in July 1914, his salary, which had already been tripled during his half year in Baltimore, was doubled again by Lannin To $3500, not bad for a rookie in that day. In return Ruth agreed to a three-year contract (actually two and a half years, since it would carry from July 1914 through the end of 1916). This pleased Lannin because it meant his prize rookie was less likely to be seduced by the Federals, who were growing wary of lawsuits. They preferred to go after players who had completed a contract and were held to a club only by the infamous reserve clause, the proviso that gave a team an eternal option on a player's future services.

But Babe was happy with the contract too, because now he was rolling in money, and there was no paternalistic Dunn to make him put it in the bank. Carrigan finally had to step in and bring Ruth back to earth. "He had no idea of money," the manager said. "You've got to remember his background - that orphan asylum and all - and that this was his first big job. He was getting $3500 and that was all the money in the world. He didn't seem to think it would ever run out. He'd buy anything and everything. So I would draw Babe's pay and give him a little every day to spend. That generally lasted about five minutes. At the end of the season I had to give him the rest of it. I calculated it wouldn't last too long, but that was the best I could do."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1917 - 1 year/$5000

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1918 - 1 year/$7000

_______________



Wagenheim

Barrow met Ruth in January of 1918, when the Babe and star first baseman "Stuffy" McInnis came to the Red Sox office to sign their contracts for the coming season. Ruth signed for $7,000 on the promise that he would receive $10,000 the next year if he made good. McInnis also signed up without great dispute. Barrow was so pleased that he gave Red Sox secretary Larry Graver a $5 bill and told him to take both men out to lunch. In those days, such a sum was enough for a sizable lunch for three. But later that afternoon Graver returned and told Barrow, "You owe me $2.85." When Barrow sputtered and asked why, Graver stared at him and said, "Have you ever seen that big guy eat? He had a whole custard pie for dessert!"




Creamer

Frazee too was busy with salary matters. He was eager to sign Ruth, who said he wanted a big raise. Frazee was worried because holdouts were popping up all over. In St. Louis, Rogers Hornsby was asking for $10,000. Grover Alexander, recently traded to the Cubs, wanted $12,000. Most of the unsigned players were simply resisting salary reductions, because the owners were being even more stringent than in 1917. The owners expressed shock at the "regiment of holdouts," having assumed "that during these war times the ballplayers would graciously accept a cut in salary. But again the players have disappointed the club owners for many of them have made it plain that they do not intend to accept any cuts."

And some, like Bodie and Ruth, were insisting on raises. Ruth wanted his salary doubled, to $10,000. Frazee, jollying him, expressed horror at such a salary. "I've never paid an actor that much," he said. He suggested $7000, with the promise that if the Babe had another good year the $10,000 would be his 1919. A $7000 salary meant a $2000 raise - a 40 percent increase - and Ruth finally accepted it. On January 14 he became the first Red Sox player to sign a 1918 contract. A few days later the newly purchased McInnis followed suit, and Frazee did not have too much trouble with the rest of the team.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1919 - 3 years/$10,000 per

_______________



Smelser

Harry Frazee again hired Ed Barrow to manage the Red Sox in 1919 but damped Barrow's hopes for an even greater year by sending three returning war veterans, Ernie Shore, Dutch Leonard, and Duffy Lewis, to the Yankees for fifty thousand dollars. Frazee's motive was to keep the payroll down.

Babe Ruth had a plan to keep the payroll up. In January, he told friends he wanted more money, on the ground that he had been the standout of the World Series. He said the figure he would mention "may knock Mr. Frazee silly..." The figure he had in mind was ten thousand dollars. (Frazee had once said he thought eight thousand was an absolute ceiling for anyone.) Neither budged for the next two months, and the Red Sox departed by sea for Florida on March 19 without Ruth. By this time Ruth had given Frazee a choice of two proposals: one year at fifteen thousand dollars, or three years at ten. The Boston fans sided angrily with Ruth against Frazee. There were published suggestions that other American League owners might chip in to make up the difference because Ruth filled their parks for them, or that Ruth's salary be raised by a public fund drive.

Ruth had now become a celebrity and had acquired a manager (who signed himself "secretary") named John Igoe. Igoe thought Ruth could make money as a boxer. After the smallness of the World Series split, any income would be welcome. Ruth began to work out in a gymnasium in the winter and had an offer of five thousand dollars to fight Gunboat Smith. Barrow could see the folly of letting his most promising ballplayer get his brains scrambled in the prize ring. He took Ruth to Frazee's office and mediated the salary dispute.

The parties came to agreement on March 21: three years at ten thousand a year. Barrow then talked Ruth out of the boxing venture. Ruth, in excellent physical condition, left for Florida by rail. Obviously feeling full of beans, he told reporters he hoped to play two or three positions and be in the game every day, because life was perfect only when he came to bat with men on base.




Wagenheim

By the fall of 1919, Ruth was acclaimed throughout the country as "the greatest batsman the game has ever known," the "mastodonic mauler."

In one ball park after another, though out the American League circuit and along the exhibition trail, his mighty home runs were called "the longest ever." The old era of bunts, hit-and-run, stealing bases, and scheming for the small advantage was being eclipsed by Ruth's raw power. The home run, as Tom Meany later observed, was like "the lethal knockout punch of Jack Dempsey...the broad, direct approach to victory, the shortcut so esteemed by Americans in sport and in business, in recreation and in war."

The year began on a note of uncertainty when Ruth, wintering at Sudbury, warned that his salary demands for the coming season "may knock Mr. Frazee silly, but I think I deserve everything I ask." The demands were humble in comparison with what he could earn in a few years. He wanted $15,000 for a single season (which would have made him the second highest-paid player in baseball, behind veteran star Ty Cobb), or $10,000 on the basis of a three-year contract. Frazee, who would hit the jackpot some years hence with his Broadway production of No, No, Nanette!, was now in tight circumstances. Despite Boston's fine showing in the previous two seasons, the attendance figures were disappointing. Frazee swore he would go no higher than $8,000 per season. So, when the steamer Arapahoe left New York harbor on March 18 to carry the Red Sox to their spring camp in Florida, Ruth was not aboard. His personal manager, Johnny Igoe, circulated tales that the Babe was working out in a Boston gymnasium and that promoters had offered him $5,000 (nearly five times more than his 1918 World Series share) for a single boxing match against heavyweight "Gunboat" Smith. Three days later, Frazee invited Ruth to a conference in Manhattan. The Babe arrived but didn't appear ready to sign, because he hadn't even brought a suitcase. Finally, they agreed on $27,000, spread over three years. The Babe picked up a phone, asked a friend in Boston to rush down with his baggage, and caught the next available train to Tampa.

Frazee felt better about Ruth's contract a few days later, after a Red Sox exhibition game against the Giants at the old fairgrounds in Tampa. Batting against "Columbia George" Smith, the Babe walloped a ball so far over right fielder Ross Youngs' head that those who saw the blow were awestruck. After the game, as Youngs stood where the ball fell, a group of writers - including Fred Lieb, Frank Graham, Paul Shannon, and Melvin Webb - observed as someone took a surveyor's tape and measured the distance to home plate: 579 feet!




Creamer

It was toward this world of wealth and social activity that Ruth began to move in 1919. He had acquired an agent of sorts, a Boston friend named Johnny Igoe, and he told Frazee he wanted his salary raised from $7,000 to $15,000. Only Ty Cobb, then in his fifteenth season, was being paid more than that. Ruth also said he wanted a two-year contract at that exalted figure. In other words, a $30,000 deal, astronomical in a day when a six-room house rented for sixty dollars and full-time "hired girl" received room and board and a few dollars a month.

Frazee said no, absolutely no, and for the first time in his career Ruth became a holdout. For Frazee it was not just a matter of his will and personality against Ruth's. It was a major battle in his struggle for economic survival. Frazee knew he needed Ruth, both for his play on the field and his draw at the box office. But Harry had overextended himself in 1918 and had lost a great deal of money. Attendance at Red Sox games had fallen off badly in 1917; and in 1918, even though Boston won the pennant, it dropped another 35 per cent. The dismal World Series receipts that so upset the players had been a financial disaster for Frazee. And his theatrical ventures were not going well. He was desperately in need of cash, so much so that during the winter he shifted from his earlier policy of buying ballplayers and began to sell them instead. Ernie Shore and Duffy Lewis had been released from service, and Dutch Leonard was back from his war job. Frazee sent all three to the Yankees in deals that netted him $50,000.

He resisted Ruth's demands. They met briefly in Boston one day, but otherwise the only contact between the two was through the press. Babe said he might quit baseball and devote all his time to improving his farm, which now had twenty head of cattle, a couple of dozen pigs, three horses, fifty hens and a collie named Dixie. He made a production of chopping wood left handed and wandering through the woods of the farm in a big fur coat. Frazee grinned and said, "Can you imagine him not playing baseball?"

But Ruth was adamant. He said he had been promised $2000 when he returned to the club after jumping it the July before, but that the contract he received from Frazee did not even show this. Through Igoe he issued a statement saying he did not think he was unreasonable in asking $15,000 and hoped that the fans understood that all he was doing was trying to get what he was worth. He said now he wanted either $15,000 for 1919 or a three-year contract at $10,000 a year. Frazee offered him $8500. Ruth also said he did not want to both pitch and play left field any more. Barrow, asked to comment on this, said, "If Ruth plays for the Red Sox in 1919, he will probably pitch and pinch-hit." Ruth answered by saying that he wanted to play left field only and that he felt he would hit better if he was in the lineup every day. "I'll win more games playing every day in the outfield than I will pitching every fourth day," he said.

Because of postwar turmoil the season was beginning late that year (the schedule called for only 140 games instead of the then standard 154), and the Red Sox did not leave for spring training until the middle of March. Late in February Babe said he was thinking of becoming a professional boxer. He claimed a Boston promoter had offered him $5000 to fight Gunboat Smith, a prominent heavyweight, and he came in from Sudbury to work out in a Boston gym, supposedly for the fight.

The other Red Sox players signed one by one and in March assembled in New York, where they were to board a coastal steamer for the trip south to Florida. Frazee had shifted the Red Sox training site from Hot Springs to Tampa, Florida, at the suggestion of John McGraw. McGraw, still angry because Jack Dunn had failed to sell him Ruth, was not so angry as to ignore the Babe's moneymaking possibilities. He suggested to Frazee that the Red Sox and the perennially popular Giants meet in Florida and barnstorm north together, and Frazee quickly agreed.

But, obviously, Ruth was the key to the tour, and when the Red Sox party, led by Barrow, steamed out of New York without him, Frazee realized something had to be done. That was a Wednesday March 19. On Thursday Frazee got in touch with Ruth and asked him to come to New York to see if they couldn't reach an agreement. The Babe, restive now that the team had gone south without him, which made him a genuine holdout, took the midnight train down from Boston and met with Frazee Friday morning. After a surprisingly short discussion the two came to terms and Ruth got his three-year contract at $10,000 a year. In retrospect it seems foolish for a rising young player to have tied himself to such a long-term deal, but it must be remembered that the major leagues had gone through three consecutive seasons of uncertainty and falling salaries, what with the death of the Federal League and the onslaught of war. Abrupt salary cuts were common practice. Too, for all his headlines, Ruth at this point in his career had only hit 20 major league home runs. Pitching had been his forte, and he was in the uncertain position of trying to give up pitching for hitting. He had not yet established himself as a full time batter. Under the circumstances a three-year contract at $10,000 a year, one of the top salaries in the game, was a marvelous plum for a young man.

After the signing a beaming Ruth told reporters he felt fine, and was in good shape. "I've been exercising by doing hard work on my farm all winter," he said, and in a dig at the absent Barrow added that he hoped he could be kept at one position all season instead of being switched back and forth.

Frazee, eager to get Ruth south to training camp, wanted him to leave at once for Florida. Ruth had come to New York without luggage. He phoned Boston, asked Helen to pack his things and had a friend bring them to New York. That night he left for Tampa on a midnight train, and Frazee wired Barrow that Tarzan had signed and was on his way.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1920- 2 years/$20,000 per + $1000 (upped 10k from old contract and received immediate $1000 bonus)
_______________




Smelser

At the end of the 1919 season Babe Ruth made himself a bother to Frazee. He let the sporting press know he thought his splendid playing of 1919 proved that he deserved a raise from ten to twenty thousand dollars. (The Times editorially noticed that Ruth's contract at ten thousand still had two years to run; he had taken a capitalist risk, and lost.) to further trouble Frazee's sleep, Ruth restated his ambition to be a professional boxer, tracing it back to his days as a preliminary body in the Baltimore fight circuit (pure flapdoodle, unless he meant that he boxed as a small boy at St. Mary's School). Then again, if he did not choose to be a boxer, perhaps he would become a full-time movie actor. The roads to the silver screen and the prize ring crossed when Kid McCoy, former boxer, and Al St. John, movie actor, announced that McCoy had contracted to train Ruth for thirty days. Then, if McCoy said Ruth was up to it, St. John would try to promote a match with - here it comes - Jack Dempsey. This press release may have worried Frazee. What it did for sure was to get Al St. John's name in the papers from coast to coaster, which was the true purpose.

A more certain torment of Frazee was Ruth's return (from California) of his contract, on Christmas Eve 1919, with a demand for a new contract at double the money. He added that it was no use trading him because he would play ball for no club but the Red Sox. When the reporters of Los Angeles County came hurrying to hear more, he told them he was "through with major-league baseball" unless the Red Sox paid him twenty thousand a year. After all, he had several pots boiling with deals, each worth more than ten thousand a year. No, he had decided not to become a prize fighter. Yes, he was still thinking of going into the movies. Meantime he was playing winter ball for money and golf for fun.

Yankees manager Miller Huggins had advised his owners that the best deed they could do would be to turn Ruth into a Yankee. Huggins' tastes were simple; he wanted the best ballplayer. Without knowing it, Ruth was helping Huggins. Frazee was loaded with debt and his notes held by Lannin, the former Red Sox owner, were due. The Red Sox had made money in 1919, mostly because of Ruth's home-run outburst, but Frazee lost more on Broadway than he made in Fenway. Ban Johnson was beginning to seek an eligible new owner for the Red Sox, just in case. On or about December 26, Frazee was trying to raise half a million dollars for some theatrical productions he had in mind. He called on Jacob Ruppert to ask for a loan. Ruppert suggested they talk about Babe Ruth. Then, on December 27, Frazee gave the press the magic words: the Red Sox were open to a deal for any player on the roster except Harry Hooper. that was three days after Ruth's ultimatum.

The rich but frustrated Yankees had looked at Boston as a warehouse of baseball talent since late 1918, when the Red Sox let New York have Ernie Shore, Dutch Leonard, and Duffy Lewis. that same year there was talk that the Yankees might buy Babe Ruth for $150,000. There had been no move in that direction by owners on either side; probably it just seemed logical. At the end of November 1919 Huggins let people know he expected to make some interesting deals in December, perhaps at the American League meeting in New York on December 10. It was during these weeks that Huggins advised Ruppert and Huston to try to get Ruth. Since the two owners were restless and fretful about the Yankees' years of mediocrity. Huggins' word were heard. Cap Huston was a convivial man who liked to drink beer and talk with engineers, writers, and ballplayers, and it was, perhaps, at some scientific, literary, and athletic symposium that he learned of Frazee's money shrinkage, perhaps even from Frazee himself. It would round out the story neatly to say Huston craftily sent Frazee to borrow some money from Ruppert, but that is unknowable.

Earlier hypothetical conversations about selling Babe Ruth had always been treated as comic monologues, but when the possibility became real it was not difficult to close the deal. The talk between Ruppert and Frazee in the last week of 1919 is not recorded, but the results are public.

The price was $125,000, of which $25,000 was immediately paid as earnest money. No players except Ruth were involved, because Ed Barrow - who was angry at the deal - told Frazee the Red Sox management would look like fools if they pretended to believe the Yankees had any players fit to throw onto a scale to balance Ruth. In addition to the $125,000, Ruppert promised to lend Frazee $350,000, secured by a mortgage on Fenway Park. (This brought Frazee pretty close to the half-million he had started out to raise.) Huston balked at the idea of the Yankees lending money on a ball park, so Ruppert, a shrewd real estate operator, made the loan on his own. It was ten months before Ruppert's personal interest in the prosperity of the Red Sox was discovered. The conflict of interest probably would not be allowed in organized baseball today, but, in fairness to Ruppert, we may say he did everything he could to ruin the Red Sox. (Ruth was the fifth of the Red Sox to leave for the Yankees, and in Frazee's time the total would reach twelve; the great Yankee team of 1923 could well be called the New York Red Sox.) In spite of the destruction of the Red Sox, Ruppert still held the mortgage as late as 1931 and found it profitable.

Ruth's contract was conveyed in the usual legal form by adding baseball's uniform agreement for the transfer of a player. Surprisingly, the addition was dated December 26, 1919, two days after Ruth's ultimatum which demanded the doubling of his salary, and the day before the publication of the statement in which Frazee had said all Boston players were available except Hooper. The Ruth deal was signed and sealed at the time Frazee made that announcement. The Yankees were the first to know and obviously had the inside lane in any race to loot the Red Sox.

Ruppert and Huston laid out more money for Ruth than they had for the Yankee franchise and the club, though most of the money was a well-secured loan. Tris Speaker had cost Cleveland fifty-five thousand dollars, Eddie Collins was sold to the White Sox for fifty thousand, and the White Sox paid thirty-two thousand and two players for Joe Jackson. Ruth's price of $125,000 (quite apart from the Fenway mortgage) was easily a new record. It was also the best investment ever made by any club, and, in the long run, it turned out to be relatively frugal and thrifty. Furthermore it was the most glaring act in the demolition of one of baseball's greatest teams, the Red Sox of the decade 1909-1919: four pennants, four world championships, five finishes in second, third, or fourth place, and only two finishes in the second division.


Above all, get the fans a star whom they may worship, no matter what he costs, by trade or purchase. Give them something for their money. (Anonymous owner, 1922)

On the morning of January 6, 1920, the New York Times carried an eight-column sports-page headline: RUTH BOUGHT BY NEW YORK AMERICANS FOR $125,000, HIGHEST PRICE IN BASEBALL ANNALS. The story ran to one and a quarter columns, mostly a review of Ruth's career. Manager Miller Huggins was in California to give the new Yankee a better contract. Ruth was to be the New York team's regular outfielder.


I believe the sale of Ruth will ultimately strengthen the team. (Harry Frazee, 1920)

Harry Frazee hurried into print to explain the sale of Ruth; the deal wasn't intended to weaken the Red Sox. Ruth's contract had been written just as he wished, but then he demanded a doubling of his pay. That made the idea of a contract meaningless; contracts were written just to prevent that sort of thing. Nobody was worth as much as Ruth was asking. The Red Sox were "fast becoming a one-man team," and one player didn't make a team, as proved by the sixth-place finish of 1919.

Boston's Royal Rooters were skeptical of all this. Their leader, Johnny Keenan, said "Ruth was 90 percent of our club last summer. It will be impossible to replace the strength Ruth gave the Sox." Frazee counterattacked: Ruth was "one of the most selfish and inconsiderate men that ever wore a baseball uniform." He added, "I could not get Joe Jackson for him in a trade." This must be Frazee's relative evaluation of Ruth and Jackson. There is not a jot of evidence that he tried or wished to trade Ruth for Jackson. He needed money, not players.


...a tremendous blow to the army of loyal fans. (Boston Post)

The Boston Post predicted the Red Sox would be "crowding the Athletics for eighth place in 1920"; true, the Red Sox had survived the departures of Cy Young and Tris Speaker, "but Ruth is different. He is one of a class of ball players that flashes across the firmament once in a great while."


I suppose I'll be sent to China. (Ping Bodie)

Frazee, trying to win back angry customers, went too far in saying Ruth was a poor team player who was interested only in bettering his own records. Runs-batted-in were not then tabulated, but Fred Lieb, in the New York Sun, showed what nonsense Frazee spoke. Lieb extracted Ruth's runs-batted-in from the box scores. The Red Sox scored 565 runs in 1919. Ruth scored 103 of them and drove in 114. From 114 we must subtract the twenty-nine home runs, because they are counted both as runs and as runs-batted-in. With that adjustment, Ruth was responsible for a net 188 runs, or almost exactly a third of all runs scored by the Boston Americans.

All of Frazee's counter blasts were useless. He was a poor man - for a baseball magnate - who literally didn't know where his next half-million was coming from. People believed he sold Ruth because Ruth asked for a raise. To men and women unborn in the 1920s Frazee is not remembered with gratitude as the producer of No, No, Nanette but rather as the fiend of the fens whose greed broke up the Red Sox.


Ruth is the greatest hitter I have ever seen. (Jimmy Burke, Manager, Browns, 1920)


Ruth has no particular weakness. (Eddie Cicotte, 1920)


In my opinion, Ruth is the greatest slugger of all times, and a dangerous hitter. He is a natural ball player. ( Jack Dunn, 1920)

The New York Times preached a short sermon on the bad example set by all parties to the sale, which showed that a good player with a weak team could hold out "for an imposing salary" and "get somebody in New York or Chicago to buy his services."


I was disgusted...All Frazee wanted was the money. He was short of cash and he sold the whole team down the river to keep his dirty nose above water. What a way to end a wonderful ball club! I got sick to my stomach at the whole business. After the 1920 season I held out for $15,00 and Frazee did me a favor by selling me to the Chicago White Sox. I was glad to get away from that graveyard. (Harry Hooper)

The decay of the Red Sox: They finished fifth in 1920 and 1921, eighth in 1922 and 1923. The club drew 417,000 in 1919 and 230,000 in 1924. To look at in another way, the 1919 Red Sox had one-ninth of the American League attendance, and their share was never again as high as one-tenth until Tom Yawkey bought the team in the 1930s. The club drew but a twentieth part of the American League attendance in 1923, the year when Frazee's sack of the Sox was complete.


1920 1/6. Contract increased $10,000 by agreement making total $20,000 - New York Yankee Salary and Transfer File

A move to the Yankees in 1920 was no step upward nor a particularly desirable change for Babe Ruth, who had put down roots in Massachusetts. Using Connecticut tobacco, his cigar factory made the Babe Ruth cigar with his picture on every wrapper, selling at five cents. Helen and he lived in rural Sudbury when at home. As the most admired player of baseball's greatest team of recent years, Ruth's standing in the New England sports world was agreeably high.

At the time of the sale to the Yankees he was in southern California to play winter baseball. In a batting exhibition at a Los Angeles ball park he set a curious record by batting continuously against a relay of pitchers for an hour and hitting 125 balls over the fence.

The eleven-day delay between the agreement of Ruppert and Frazee and the publication of the news was to give Huggins time to get to California and see Ruth. Huggins found him playing gold at Griffith Park in Los Angeles. He hadn't heard about the sale, but the news Huggins brought came as no surprise, considering the ultimatum to Frazee.

This first meeting suggested the poor relations that Huggins and Ruth were to suffer. Huggins felt called upon to preach on the ethics of life in New York, a place with many temptations for active, warm blooded young men in good physical condition, temptations which could lead to acts intolerable to the owners of the New York American League baseball club. Ruth listened, bored, and suggested that the only point to be talked about was his request for a raise. Huggins said it was all arranged: Ruth would get twenty thousand a year if he behaved himself.

Ruth looked on Huggins as a curious specimen who had been a player and managed in the National League and had recently moved over to the American League, displacing Ruth's friend Wild Bill Donovan, formerly the manager at Providence and more recently manager of the Yankees. Huggins was said to have been a good second baseman and lead-off man, but Ruth thought him pretty small, at five feet, six and a half inches and 140 pounds, to swing the old heavy bat and to come out ahead in the rough play around second base.

News of the Ruth-Huggins treaty cheered New Yorkers, And everyone knew that the Polo Grounds' right-field foul line measured only 257 feet from the plate to the wall - offering the cheapest home run in the major leagues for a left-handed pull hitter. Ruth had always liked to play there.

The new Yankee finished his winter sports early in February and started east after saying he wouldn't sign a contract unless Frazee gave him part of the sale price. Fifteen thousand dollars would be about right. All he did was to show himself boyishly naive. A ball player in Ruth's position has absolutely no leverage. If he wished to play baseball he had to play for the Yankees. He spoke acidly of Frazee, again bringing up Frazee's gift of a cigar (to George H. Ruth, cigar manufacturer) on Babe Ruth day in 1919, and adding that Mrs. Ruth had to buy a ticket to get into Fenway Park that day.

Ruth's arrival in New York was private. He didn't plan it that way, but all of the owners and writers were in Chicago at the baseball meetings.

Ruppert and Huston had not forgotten him, though. While baseball teams were insured as groups, one policy covering all the players on a roster, Ruth received special treatment. The Yankee owners had taken out a separate life insurance policy for him in the amount of $150,000. A fit sum for the most costly player in baseball.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1922 - 5 years/$52,000 per

_______________



Smelser

Landis came down to New Orleans to polish his public image by making himself conspicuous at a charity game where he was successful bidder at $250 for a baseball autographed by Ruth. The Yankees beat the New Orleans Pelicans 10-3. First-baseman Ruth had three singles in six times at bat. That month Ruth dined frequently with several of the old families of New Orleans, who thus wasted the Western hemisphere's best cuisine on the world's most famous fancier of hot-dogs-with-the-works. No record tells us where Helen Ruth was in the early months of 1922.

Ruth had not yet signed a contract but said he and Huston had come to terms.

After the World Series of 1921, when Ruth's contract expired, gossips of the sporting press spread the story that he would get a colossal salary in 1922, paid jointly by all of the American League clubs. This plain balderdash seemed real enough to annoy the Sporting News, which scolded the race of sportswriters for writing nonsense in dull times between seasons. But it showed what an interesting topic Ruth's salary was. John McGraw was probably the best rewarded of all men in the game. His salary was forty thousand dollars a year, and he shared the Giants' profits. The Cleveland manager Tris Speaker was "without exception the highest paid man in baseball," but they gave no figure.

Huston went to Hot Springs to talk with Ruth about salary. He opened with a sermon, calling on him to repent his wastrel life to stay away from the bright lights. Ruth eyed him with amusement and pointed out that Huston lived exactly as he lived. Round one was a draw.

Barrow kept a Yankee salary-and-transfer file on typewritten 4 x 6 cards, one to a player. The entries for Babe Ruth through 1921 were these:

1919, 12/26 - Purchased from Boston, A.L., $100,000. Payable in four installments of $25,000 each.

1920 - Cont. $10,000 as assigned by Boston (1919-20-21)
-------1/6 - Cont. increased $10,000 by agreement making total $20,000

1921 - Cont. $20,000

-------2/18 - Bonus for 1920 - $5000
--------------Bonus for 1921 - $5000

The bonuses of February 1921 could be called tips, for doubling the Yankee attendance in 1920. Ruth had a good case for a large raise.

Huston got down to serious talk in a Hot Springs bathhouse when he took the tub next to Ruth's and offered forty thousand a year for five years. (That was McGraw's deal with Charles A. Stoneham, to the dollar.) Ruth raised the figure to fifty-two thousand. Huston countered with fifty thousand for three years, and the club's option to renew for the next two years, and wanted to know why Ruth put on the extra two thousand. Ruth said he'd like to have a thousand dollars a week and suggested they flip a coin to settle the difference. There was a long wait while Huston telephoned New York and got Ruppert's approval of the six-thousand-dollar coin toss. Near midnight the coin arched in the air, Ruth called it, and won. Neither Barrow nor the owners would tell the salary, but Huston said they had flipped a coin and that Ruth would get five hundred dollars for each home run. This jocular tall tale became current myth and had to be denied repeatedly as late as 1925. The only reason for secrecy was that Ruth wished it secret.

Huston sent the terms to the office in New York, and secretaries prepared a draft for Ruppert's signature. When the paper arrived in New Orleans Huston called Ruth out of the Heinemann Park clubhouse to sign. Ruth borrowed a fountain pen from the grounds keeper, consulted no one, and signed it against a vertical post of the stands, as casually as if he were autographing a scorecard.

The agreement had some uncommon specific terms. Ruth was to get half his salary in fortnightly installments during the playing season. The other half of the year's money was due him at the end of the season. Christy Walsh, Ruth's financial adviser, told him he should put the postseason installments into a trust, but Ruth spent most of 1922's year-end pay to improve a piece of real estate. The document also regulated Ruth's private life. He was to "refrain and abstain entirely from the use of intoxicating liquors" and, during the season, to be in bed daily by one o'clock in the morning. If his behavior disabled him, the Yankees could cancel the contract and keep his withheld salary. Baseball people call this a contract, but a true contract is between freely bargaining parties. Ruth could sign, or quit baseball and look for a job making shirts.

Babe now had the written promise of a higher salary than any player had ever received. He also had one of the few player agreements that went beyond one year. The Yankees insured his life for three hundred thousand dollars and were to do so thereafter.

Along with the 59 percent pay raise he also got the title of captain. Thirty years earlier the title of captain had mean, roughly, assistant manager, but by the 1920s it was more honorary than real. Nevertheless it was pleasing because no player unpopular with his team would be named captain. No Yankee envied Ruth's salary. Right or wrong, they believed he was driving player salaries up. The Yankees, of course, were not paying him because of his skill. They paid him because he drew throngs. (If there were a true relation between playing skill and income, all international grand masters of chess would be rich.)

As soon as paydays came in April Ruth celebrated his raise by buying a Cadillac for St. Mary's Industrial School in Baltimore. It cost about five thousand dollars, or about 10 percent of his salary after taxes - a kind of tithe.




Wagenheim

Babe became the highest paid player in baseball in 1922, when he signed a three-year contract for $52,000 per season. He and the Yankees were a few thousand apart when Cap Huston came down to Hot Springs to smooth out the difference. Ruth and Hunt sat boiling out in adjacent tubs when Huston shed his clothes and made it a threesome. As the pounds dripped away and Hunt gave good-natured advice to both sides, they began to haggle. Huston swore he could go no higher than $50,000, and the Babe held-firm at $52,000 but agree to settle by flipping a coin. Huston phoned Barrow in New York, who put in a call to Ruppert in Tarrytown, and the coin toss was approved. Shortly before midnight, up in Huston's room, Cap flipped a half dollar into the air, the Babe yelled "Tails!" and so it was. Ruth's new contract contained a clause stipulating that

...he will refrain and abstain entirely from the use of intoxicating liquors and that he shall not during the training and playing season each year stay up later than one AM on any day without the permission and consent of the club's manager.

The three men stayed up much later than that, drinking toasts to the new contract.

The next morning, Huston proudly announced that Ruth now earned a salary "worthy of a railroad president." It was a lot of money in those times. A story in Collier's that spring estimated the total overhead of the Yankee team at approximately $600,000 a year. Of this amount, $120,000 represented player salaries, and Ruth earned about 40 per cent of the total!

That year, 5 million of the 6.7 million persons who filed a tax return reported an income of under $4,000; most of the millions who didn't bother to file earned even less. Ruth's salary was minuscule, of course, compared with the sixty-seven persons who reported incomes of $1 million or more that year (John D. Rockefeller, Jr., paid taxes of $7.4 million that year). It was far less than the income of Mary Pickford, who earned $1 million, or even Jack Dempsey, who raked in $300,000 for his bout in 1921 with Georges Carpentier. But it was far more than the $15,000 salary of the Chief Justice of the United States and equivalent to the combined salaries of five members of the President's Cabinet.

The Times, on its editorial page, noted: "Babe Ruth with his bat attracts more American citizens than Toscanini ever did with his baton...there are millions of American urchins who would rather be Ruth than Warren G. Harding...a democracy is willing to pay high for its amusements."




Creamer

Despite his Washington proclamation that he might say something in about a month, Ruth kept his mouth shut about Landis and the suspension. As for Ruppert and Huston, the two colonels were visibly relieved by the Commissioner's decision. It had taken him an unbearably long time, and the suspension could have been worse.

Babe's vaudeville tour ended in February in Milwaukee, and he went directly to Hot Springs, Arkansas, ostensibly to take the baths and get in shape, but actually to play golf, gamble at the casinos, play the horses and generally relax for a week or two before going on to the Yankee training camp in New Orleans. His holdover contract from the Red Sox had expired, and Huston and Huggins came down to Hot Springs to talk about a new one. Ruth was no intellectual, but he understood two things well: baseball and his own worth. He was a sharp, smart ballplayer, and he knew that he was the prime reason why two and a half million people had paid between 55 cents and $2.20 to get into the Polo Grounds in 1920 and 1921. He may not have sat down with a pencil and paper and figured out precisely what the Yankees made - they probably netted more than $1,000,000 a year after expenses in Ruth's first two seasons - but he wanted more of it than he had been getting, a lot more.

Rumors said Babe would be upped to $30,000 with bonus clauses to give him an extra $20,000. If that offer was made, Ruth rejected it out of hand. Huston did propose $40,000 on a straight salary, but on a five-year contract, a quarter-of-a-million-dollar package.

Ruth's big black eyes stared at Huston. "Make it fifty-two thousand and it's a deal."

"Fifty-two thousand?" Now it was Huston's turn to stare. "All right, agreed. But why fifty-two thousand?"

"Well, said Ruth, "there are fifty-two weeks in a year, and I've always wanted to make a grand a week."

The impact of $52,000 a year on America at that time can be better understood if it is compared with other players' salaries. The Yankees were wallowing in prosperity, a pennant-winning team with huge attendances and the prospects of more. They were not a bunch of rookies and young players just coming into their own, but a team of established stars; most had made their reputations on other clubs, notably Boston. The Yankees were paying top salaries. Yet Home Run Baker, one of the really famous names in the game and a man so stubborn in contract talks that he twice sat out an entire season, was making only $16,000, and that was much the highest salary on the club after Ruth. Wally Schang, one of the two or three best catchers in the game, a member of four championship teams, was making $10,000. Bob Shawkey, a 20-game winner three times who would win 20 again that year, was at $8500. Wally Pipp, the first baseman, going into his ninth big league season, a proved hitter who twice led the league in home runs, was making $6500; Whitey Witt, who came from Philadelphia in the spring of 1922 to become the regular center fielder, $4000; and Fred Hofmann, the reserve catcher, $3000. A man could live in a big frame house, own an automobile, raise a family and live comfortably on $75 or $80 a week. Even more than a decade later, after Ruth's retirement, the top player salary in baseball was Lou Gehrig's $30,000. Dizzy Dean was raised to $19,500 the year after he won 30 games. In 1957, after inflation had come in the wake of World War II, T. Coleman Andrews, the Director of Internal Revenue during the Eisenhower administration, said that Ted Williams, then baseball's highest paid player, would have to make a million dollars to equal the true value of Ruth's top salary.

In brief, Ruth's pay was enormous, and it fed the flames of criticism that were beginning to rise around him. Ruth said, "It isn't right to call me or any ballplayer an ingrate because we ask for more money. Sure, I want more, all I'm entitled to. The time of a ballplayer in short. He must get his money in a few years or lose out. Listen, a man who works for another man is not going to be paid any more than he's worth. You can bet on that. A man ought to get all he can earn. A man who knows he's making money for other people ought to get some of the profit he brings in. Don't make any difference if it's baseball or a bank or a vaudeville show. It's business, I tell you. There ain't no sentiment to it. Forget that stuff."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1927 - 3 years/$70,000 per
_______________




Smelser

At the end of this austere Hollywood career Ruth was in excellent physical shape. He was so pleased with his 1926 comeback that he stayed in condition. For example, his waistline was the same in early 1927 as it was in April 1926 (not quite forty inches). In California he and McGovern got it down to thirty-seven and a half inches. McGovern sent Ruth's measurements to owner Jacob Ruppert at the end of the California workouts, and the Yankee management was pleased at the figures. The physical report would be a trump card in the game of salary negotiation which was to start soon.


You fellows won't be able to play taps over Babe Ruth for five or six years yet. - Babe Ruth, March 3, 1927

Ruth's new contract probably provoked more column-yards of newspaper stories than there were clock-minutes of negotiation. It was news for a month but discussed by the parties less than an hour. Early in February the Yankees sent him another fifty-two-thousand-dollar contract, which, as he told reporters, he would not sign because he wanted more money. He suggested he already had enough money to quit baseball if he didn't get a raise. And he might even open a chain of gymnasiums with Artie McGovern. A rumor that Ty Cobb was to get seventy-five thousand may have stiffened his backbone.

Until February 26 all Ruppert knew was what he read in the papers, since Ruth grumbled only to reporters. Then Ruth returned the unsigned contract on February 22 (it reached New York on the 26th) with a letter giving his views on what he should get, and why. Ruppert had a convenient cold for the next few days and said nothing. Just before boarding the train from California to New York, Ruth said he wanted a hundred thousand a year; he spoke of how the Yankees made money out of him by playing exhibition games at every chance, and gave out Artie McGovern's favorable physical-condition report. A grievance which was news to all was that Huggins had collected, all told, seventy-seven hundred dollars in fines from him.

People didn't resent Ruth's attitude. W.O. McGeehan of the Herald-Tribune took a poll which showed agreement that the proper salary for Babe Ruth would be somewhere between a hundred and two hundred thousand dollars.

Ruth reached New York on March 2, met reporters and photographers at McGovern's gymnasium for three-quarters of an hour, and then went to visit St. Vincent's Hospital where poor Helen was ill again. Then he was off to settle his terms.

The Ruth-Ruppert treaty of 1927 was drafted in the Ruppert brewery offices at 91st Street and Third Avenue. Before getting down to words, the dickerers had to give up forty minutes to thirty news photographers. Once they got into the inner office they needed but thirty-five minutes to settle things. Ed Barrow opened the door to twenty writers and explained the terms: a three-year contract at seventy thousand a year (one imaginative reporter figured it, for a season of 154 games, at $454.54 per game, $56.67 per inning). Ruth told the newsman he'd be around for years, and Jacob Ruppert, in a moment of uncharacteristic weakness, added the startling remark, "The Babe is a sensible fellow." To Ruth the important fact may have been that the contract kept him the highest-paid man in baseball. Two days later, at the formal signing, he wrote his name with his right hand and tried an ad lib joke: he batted left-handed and signed contracts right-handed, getting the best results that way in each case.

Barrow went into his own office, got out the little "New York Salary and Transfer File," and brought Ruth's 4 x 6 card up to date:

1927)
1928) - Cont. $70,000 for each season
1929)

The table of Ruppert's baseball salaries in 1927 stood like this:

-Name--------Amount-------Remarks

Barrow------25,000
Huggins----37,500
Ruth-------70,000 - Three years
Pennock---17,500 - 1000 bonus if won 25
Shocker----13,500
Meusel-----13,000
Dugan------12,000
Ruether-----11,000 - 1000 bonus if won 15
Hoyt--------11,000 - 1000 bonus if won 20
Shawkey----10,500
Combs------19,500
Lazzeri------8,000 - plus round trip fare, California, for self and wife

Bengough----8,000
Gehrig-------8,000
Collins-------7,000
Koenig-------7,000
Paschal------7,000
Thomas------6,500
Grabowski----5,500
Gazella-------5,000
Giard---------5,000
Pipgras-------4,500
Durst---------4,500
Morehart-----4,000
Wera---------2,400
Moore--------2,500 - plus 5000 if lasted the season

Commissioner Landis and John McGraw each received sixty-five thousand that year. Rumor now said Ty Cobb was to get fifty thousand, and ten thousand more if the Tigers won the pennant. Rogers Hornsby's salary was forty thousand. Walter Hagen, the golfer, and Jack Dempsey, the boxer, were the only sports figures in the country who made more that year than Babe Ruth made.

Ballplayers like to think they are paid for their skill, and management says its high resolve is to field great teams. The gritty facts are that ballplayers are paid for their drawing power, not their artistry, and management - at least in the days before television contract and mysterious tax write-offs - wished only to sell tickets, food, and drink at its ball parks. Was Ruth's salary too high? Those who thought not said Enrico Caruso packed the Metropolitan Opera House every time he sang and got three to five thousand dollars each time. Yankee Stadium drew a lot more paying customers than the Met, and Ruth was paid much less per hour. Was a three-year contract prudent for the Yankees when Ruth was thirty-two? Huggins thought so: "He has the constitution of a horse."

Within a week of signing the new contract Ruth was in St. Petersburg. He played a round of golf in 92, asked sportswriter James R. Harrison to test his abdominal muscles with his fists, hit several baseballs out of the park in batting practice, and loosened up by pitching to Benny Bengough. The very sight of his health and vigor cheered everybody.




Wagenheim

He looked as fit as a bass fiddle. Out in Hollywood, Artie McGovern had him up every day at 6 A.M. and he walked and ran five miles to the studio. His diet emphasized fruit juice, toast, lean meats, and vegetables, with "snacks" of glasses of warm water. As his train rolled eastward, Ruth's manager gave the press a "measurement chart," which was displayed in sports pages across the country, showing that his weight was down to 224 pounds and giving dimensions for the Babe's neck, chest, waist, hips, thigh, calf, biceps, and forearms.

Over the years, these preseason announcements of Ruth's physical condition became as regular as Ground Hog day. And news of his contract, said one writer, was awaited by the public, "as eagerly as intelligence pertaining to corn crops, stocks, bonds, and rates of exchange."

When the Yankees had mailed him a $52,000 contract, he sent it back, saying that rather than accept such an amount he would open a string of gymnasiums with Art McGovern and start correspondence courses on "how to keep fit and play baseball." In New York, Colonel Ruppert explained that the $52,000 contract was a "mere formality"; league rules required that a club send every player a contract on or before February 15. If the deadline was missed, the player became a free agent. The Yankees were embarrassed by stories that the Philadelphia Athletics had offered $75,000 to Detroit's aging Ty Cobb. On that basis, it was widely commented, Ruth deserved $100,000. That's exactly what he asked for. In a long letter to Ruppert, he demanded $200,000 paid over two seasons and the refund of $7,700 in fines deducted from his past salaries.

When the train pulled into Grand Central Station on the morning of March 2, 1927, half a dozen gate tenders and a squad of private police had to clear Ruth's way through a crowd at the platform. Outside, and even larger throng cheered him as he walked the half-block to Artie McGovern's gym, where he posed for photographers. After calling Ruppert at the brewery to set up a meeting later in the day, he sped over to Saint Vincent's Hospital to visit his wife, Helen, who was confined there with an unspecified illness. He hadn't seen her in a few months.

Shortly before 2 P.M., the Babe "with the blush of Hollywood still upon his smile-creased cheeks" emerged from Colonel Ruppert's office after a fifty-five minute conference, "where they sat behind cigars with the pleasant odor of hops permeating the atmosphere." Ed Barrow herded the four dozen photographers and writers present into the Colonel's office to hear that Ruth had agreed to a three-year contract at $70,000 per season, making him the highest-paid player in baseball (it was learned that Cobb's contract guaranteed only $50,000 per year, with possible bonuses of $25,000). Regarding the refund of $7,700 in fines, Ruppert would only say, "Babe and I have fixed that up all right."

The story made front-page news, rivaling accounts of turbulence in Shanghai, which was described as "the Moscow of China," with "the conservative Northern war lords possessing and the radical Southerners aspiring to capture it." It made the front page again two days later, when Ruth signed the contract, and reporters professed "amazement" that he wielded the pen with his right hand. "I'm a left-handed hitter and a right-handed signer." Ruth explained amiably. His rise from rags to riches was discussed for a week in the nation's press. One paper had an illustrated chart showing that "every day Ruth earns $457.70, a trip to Europe; every week $3,304.53, a new auto; every month $11,666, a new home; and every season $70,000, enough to support twenty families like this (the photo showed a man and wife with twelve children)." His annual salary was "just a trifle more than seven times" the entire years wage of the original Cincinnati club of the 1870's. His three-year guarantee of $210,000 was only $50,000 less than what Ruppert and Huston paid for the entire Yankee franchise in 1915. The Albany Knickerbocker Press said that Ruth's salary was "not extravagant," since it amounted to less than $500 per game, while Enrico Caruso drew from $3,000 to $5,000 per performance. "The Babe will bring infinitely more business to the stadium than Caruso brought to the Metropolitan," it said. The Springfield Republican said Ruth's money was "honestly earned" but cautioned, "We make a mockery of the system of private profit...when the home-run king pockets his $70,000 a year, while the man who finally discovers a cure for cancer may be rewarded by having his picture printed badly in the newspapers."

To put things in even sharper perspective, it should be noted that the Yankee team's median salary that year was $7,000 per player, with Ruth's windfall driving the arithmetical average up to $10,000. Lou Gehrig was earning only $8,000 and would never go higher than $39,000 during his career. The salaries of men like Joe Dugan, Bob Meusel, Tony Lazzeri, Whitey Witt and Earle Combs ranged from $8,000 to $13,000 that season.

Eager to demonstrate his marvelous physique, the Babe challenged a reporter in Saint Petersburg to "hit me, hit me as hard as you can." The man doubled up his fist and "let go with a terrific hay-maker" that caught Ruth "squarely amidships and almost sank from sight." Smiling, the Babe said, "Feel those arms and shoulders; never been tougher in my life!" he was bursting with energy. In the mornings he played golf and even toured the course with his old nemesis Judge Landis. In batting practice he lined shots out of the park, dashed around the bases, and yelled, "I wanna get hot! Catch me, Barney!" Benny Bengough put on his catcher's mitt and the Babe turned pitcher, firing them in at "midsummer speed." He was looking forward to a great year.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1930 - 2 years/$80,000 per
_______________




Smelser

Babe Ruth's contract expired in 1929. In 1930, to get a raise, he staged his most renowned holdout.

Obviously Ruth's salary would never have been so high if there had been more men like him. In bars and around office water-coolers people compare what ballplayers make with what they could earn in some other kind of work. That overlooks the scarcity of players. About one in fifteen hundred American males aged eighteen, according to professional psychological testing, shows enough promise to be given a chance to start at the lowest minor-league level.

A better comparison of a player's salary is with the profits of baseball's owners. Since 1883 gross receipts of major-league clubs have grown eighty times while average salaries are only seven times higher. The players' share of the take was once half; now it is about a fifth. In the twelve years before 1927, by Jacob Ruppert's own calculation, the value of all clubs grew from something over twenty million dollars to fifty million.

From spring 1923 to fall 1927 the country had five prosperous years. Average major-league attendance rose 50 percent over the previous decade, a rate much faster than the growth of the population. Major-league baseball, looked at as one industry, made profits every single year of the 1920s, and only the deliberately wrecked Red Sox needed a great deal of red ink.

When Ruth joined the Red Sox in 1914 major-league attendance was 4,450,000; in 1927 it was 9,940,000, and it would reach 10,130,000 in 1930. In 1929 the customers spent $66 million for spectator sports, mostly for baseball and college football.

A reasonable person could believe Babe Ruth's stirring play helped baseball to prosper as a whole. It is even easier to think he helped the Yankees make money.

In Ruth's first year in New York the Yankees' attendance doubled, and remained at or near a million annually for the decade (excepting the wretched season of 1925). The Yankees had a sixth of the American League attendance in 1919. After Ruth came it jumped to one-fourth (again excepting 1925). T.L. Huston, rumor said, would have sold his half of the Yankees to Ruppert for a hundred thousand dollars in 1919. We have seen how many times that number he got when he sold in 1923. In the eleven years from 1920 to 1930 the Yankees made more money than any club - $3,517,000 - after paying the salaries of executives. Ruth's salary in eleven years was exactly six hundred thousand dollars. Whenever the Yankee management announced he was unable to play, they had a good many ticket cancellations, enough to notice.

For the first time a team financed its spring training from the tickets sold for scheduled exhibition games. In the years 1921-30 the Yankees spring exhibitions grossed $417,000 and cost $358,000, leaving a profit of $59,000. In pre-Ruth days there would have been a loss of roughly two hundred thousand dollars in the same period. The Yankees also scheduled exhibitions on every open date of the season. The behavior of the crowds proved they came to see Ruth. In all these years he missed only one such game, and that was because he underestimated his driving time from Sudbury to New Haven.

Here are the American League's profit-making teams of 1929 and the approximate profits: Athletics, $275,000; Yankees, $271,000; Tigers, $123,000, White Sox, $11,000; Browns, $5,000.

Did his reputation still stand high in 1929 and 1930? A most respected sportswriter, Hugh S. Fullerton, in the North American Review in 1930, rated him the best outfielder there ever was, "possibly excepting Speaker." More to the point, Grantland Rice, the writer most respected by players of the time, said that of all players from Cobb to Ted Williams, Ruth was the only one who could draw a capacity crowd in every city where the Yankees played.

In dealing with Ruth's bid for a raise, Ruppert had a weaknesses and strengths. (To judge by the way many other owners talked of players, the owners' chief weakness was the Thirteenth Amendment which prohibits slavery.) The reserve clause, giving Ruppert sole right to Babe Ruth's services, was the trump card. In the end Ruth would play baseball on Ruppert's terms or he could set up as, say, a shirtmaker. The reserve clause was a term of partnership called Organized Baseball, bound by a solemn covenant, the National Agreement. The owners worked together in private, sharing financial and tactical secrets on an exchange basis, while keeping players, press, and public in darkness.

Ruppert knew Ruth was worth plenty. But to give him more would spur the other Yankees to ask for more. Ruth's only true strength was the wish of Ruppert and Barrow to sign him early, because it made it much easier for them to deal with the other men on the roster. If Ruth stood firm, other Yankees might get balky at contract time.

Some cynics thought important holdouts were staged to get publicity. Not so in Ruth's case. He didn't need the attention. He was a living publicity stunt all by himself. The press covered holdouts at length, and Ruth may have enjoyed it, but Ruppert found it distasteful. Although he knew Ruth's great value to him, it irked him that a man who played games on summer afternoons cost him more than the best brewmaster.

Speculation about Ruth's next contract appeared in John Kieran's column in the New York Times in February 1929, eleven months before Ruth and Ruppert settled down to talk. In November Ruppert and Barrow went to French Lick, Indiana, where for several weeks they drank Pluto Water (the bubbly laxative spring water) to get in shape to argue with Ruth. Back in New York Ruth talked to his friends about motion-picture actors at two hundred thousand a year, of Jack Dempsey getting half a million for a fight while Babe Ruth had to play 154 games every year, half of them in a stadium specially built to hold the crowds he drew.

According to Stan Musial, at contract time a player has to show the probability of great things to come. It does no good to dwell on the past; the owners had already paid for the past. From others we know the three common elements of salary-bargaining are last year's playing record, the prospects of a better year to come and (one that didn't apply to Ruth vs the Yankees) the effect of low standing and poor attendance. Ordinarily the parties will let the talk roam over such points as the player's financial security - can we win the pennant? - the cost of living - the player's household budget.

Ruth, Ruppert, and Barrow settled down to talk in Ruppert's classic office at the brewery on January 8, 1930, the tenth anniversary of Ruth's first contract. It was friendly. Ruth smiled at the opening offer to renew the old contract for one year. Ruppert then suggested two years at seventy-five thousand. Ruth countered with three years at eighty-five thousand. Barrow said a three-year contract wasn't going to be written. The meeting adjourned. The issue really wasn't so much the money as it was the number of years.

Eight days later Barrow mailed all the Yankee contracts as yet unsigned or otherwise agree to. Ruth's was for two years at seventy-five thousand dollars a year. Silence followed for almost three weeks. Then Ruth (or Claire?) began a war of nerves by sending to each New York paper a financial statement which showed he could retire on an assured yearly income of twenty-five thousand dollars. He didn't have to play "for bread and butter"; if he wanted to work for work's sake he had many offers from outside baseball, "even from a circus." Ruppert and Barrow responded with mixed solemnity and scorn, saying they hadn't gotten a copy and had some doubt of its authorship since the signature was typewritten.

Babe and Claire went off to Florida where Babe made believe he was more interested in bettering his golf than in the status of his contract. By February 19 he was the last player holding out, though he continued to work out with the team. Ruppert decided the time had come to go to Florida. In Yankee Babe-fighting, Barrow was only the picador. Ruppert was the matador who came out for the kill. Ruppert and Ruth had a friendly haggle in the clubhouse, during which Ruth made a concession: he would accept a contract for two years instead of three years. Ruppert made a concession, too. He would raise his figure to eighty thousand. Ruth still asked eighty-five. They broke off the talk, still friendly, Ruth asked friends why Ruppert would quibble about "a mere five thousand dollars."


Well, I'll take eighty. (Babe Ruth, March 8, 1930)

The Yankees advertised that Ruth would play an exhibition game with the Braves. Ford Frick dined with Babe and Claire the night before. Frick said it would be folly to play, because if he were hurt he could not bargain. Babe saw the point and said if Ruppert would not agree by noon he would go home to New York. Frick told Dan Daniel the story, and Daniel sent it in fifteen hundred words to the New York Telegram. The next morning Babe told Daniel he had changed his mind and would play. He felt like playing ball and he liked Emil Fuchs, the owner of the Braves, who could use the money. Daniel, startled, told Ruth that to play without a contract would make Daniel seem a liar. Daniel was one of the Ruth's best friends, and this turn gave Babe pause. Daniel showed him a press description of a bread riot in New York, which surprised Ruth. He told Daniel he'd take the Colonel's offer.

To save Daniel by signing before noon, the Ruths came to St. Petersburg from their own headquarters to call on Ruppert at the Princess Martha Hotel at 11 A.M. Ruppert was at Crescent Lake Park where the Yankees trained. For forty minutes the Ruths waited in the lobby. When Ruppert came, he and Babe talked privately and at ten minutes to noon called in the reporters for the announcement. They then posed for photographers on the lawn. Dan Daniel had written his story, then made it come true. The actual signatures went on the contract a few days later. Babe usually signed himself "George H. Ruth" but this time signed the whole, "George Herman Ruth," which carries to this reader a sense of triumph.




Wagenheim

Puffing a long, black cigar, Babe drove his car down Riverside Drive on his way to talk turkey with Colonel Ruppert. It was early in 1930, and four million Americans were out of work. Just below Riverside Drive, along the shore of the Hudson, hundreds of jobless men hammered sheets of scrap metal and wood into a shantytown village and lit campfires to keep warm and cook their meals. But the nation's leaders had assured everyone that it was just a temporary recession.

"How much do you want, Root?" the Colonel asked.
"A hundred thousand a year."

Ruppert blinked, "You'd have thought I asked for the whole brewery," said Ruth. "He told me I must be out of my mind."

Ruth left for Florida, where he romped about on the golf course in his plus-fours or at the beach with Claire in his two-piece striped bathing suit. They went to the dog races, and they drove to Tampa, where the Babe loved to sample the spicy Cuban dishes.

At Saint Petersburg, he celebrated his thirty-sixth birthday with a mammoth dinner, the "appetizer" being a large silver tray piled high with telegrams from well-wishers. He hunted for quail, judged a boxing match, hobnobbed with celebrities such as ex-Governor Al Smith, cartoonist Billy de Beck and copper magnate Edward Guggenheim, and appeared totally unconcerned about his contract difference with Colonel Ruppert.

But then he shocked the sports press by issuing a long mimeographed "letter" in which he threatened to quit baseball unless Ruppert gave him a three-year contract for $85,000 per season. He claimed to have enough 'bread and butter" at home if he never touched another baseball. Without five cents from the Yankees, he said, he was assured of$25,000 per year from dividends and royalties. Claiming he'd saved $150,000 in the past three years, he said, "If you think that figure's padded, call the President of the Bank of Manhattan or the Equitable Life Assurance Company."

When Jake Ruppert came down to Saint Petersburg, he brought with him a peace offering: eight new Ruthian bats, fresh from the factory. But by March 10 both sides seemed intransigent. Exactly how they resolved their difference may be a prosaic tale, but the legend is far more fun. Sportswriter Dan Daniel allegedly got a "hot tip" from Ford Frick that Ruth would refuse to play the next day's exhibition game against the Boston Braves unless he was given an $85,000 contract. Without checking the story, Daniel filed it to the New York Telegram. The next morning, however, two hours before game time, Daniel saw Ruth strolling toward the ball park. he walked up to the Babe and blurted out his dilemma.

"Wotta ya want me to do?" said the Babe.
"Quit!" said Daniel.
"But I can't do that!"
"Then sign with Ruppert before noon!"
"But I want $85,000 and he's only offering $80,000."

Imagining how his "exclusive" story would sound if Ruth played without a contract that day, Daniel spun a long, impassioned tale of hungry people rioting for bread in Union Square, while they were quibbling over a lousy few thousand bucks! Finally, the Babe agreed to accept $80,000. But Ruth wasn't finished. He wanted the Yankees to refund the $5,000 fine that Huggins had slapped on him in 1925 (who said the Babe had a poor memory?). Ruppert hesitated, but Ruth insisted, "You promised me."

Ruppert said, "So long as Huggins was alive, Root, I'd never have given it back, but Miller's dead now and he'll never know."

Later in the day, before a phalanx of news photographers and reporters, Ruth borrowed a pen and signed a contract that guaranteed him $160,000 over two seasons. In terms of today's purchasing power, the Babe's $80,000 per season would be worth about $216,800. (That year, a YMCA official published a pamphlet on how a young man - a teetotaler, of course - could get by in Manhattan on $25 a week. It included such items as "breakfast 25c," "subway 5c," "talkie theater 50c," "ball game $1," "room at Y $1," and "dinner 75c," and even allowed for a Sunday church donation of a quarter.) But it was worth even more. Taxes are far higher today. In 1930, the federal government took only 15 per cent of the Babe's salary, leaving him with $63,360, which is worth $184,280 today. To earn an equivalent income after taxes now, one would need to gross $307,00 a year. No baseball player has ever received that amount.

Most papers said the Babe was well worth the money. While he earned more than many prominent citizens, said the Sun, "what president of a college, governor, or Supreme Court judge ever made 30,000 Americans spring up as one man in delirium of delight?" If the Yankees paid Ruth $100,000 a year "for life," said the Times, "it would not cut too heavily into the millions he drew to its ball park. If all the leagues contributed to such a pension they would be no more than acknowledging a debt far beyond payment."

Ruth earned about $200,000 in 1930. In addition to his $80,000 salary, he received a percentage of the gate for exhibition games. There were movie shorts (he did a series of two-reelers for Universal pictures with Notre Dame football coach Knute Rockne), ghosted articles, radio and personal appearances, and endorsements. A cigarette firm payed him $5,000 a year, despite the fact that he was one of the world's most famous cigar smokers.




Creamer

Ruth wanted very much to be named manager,but Barrow turned to Shawkey, who had been a coach under Huggins after his pitching days ended and who had managed in the minors. "Shawkey deserves the chance, " he told Ruth, mentioning the new manager's apprenticeship as coach and minor leaguer. Ruth was not happy about it. He liked Shawkey and he grudgingly accepted the fait accompli, but he decided that as long as his contract was up and he needed a new one, he would hit the Yankees for a lot more money.

He worked hard again that winter in Artie McGovern's gym and before he went south to spring training early in 1930 he told Ruppert he wanted $100,000. Ruppert refused out of hand, offering only a $5000 raise to $75,000. Ruth turned this down, and for the first time since his 1919 dispute with Frazee he became a serious holdout. Walsh composed a letter for Babe's signature, detailing Ruth's financial situation and nothing that "I'm good for $25,000 a year for life even if I quit baseball today." It was sent to the New York newspapers and to the Yankees. It received considerable play in the papers, but in the Yankee office it was ignored.

Ruth and Claire went to Florida and stayed at the Jungle Club in St. Petersburg, where Ruppert was staying too, and he worked out every day with the ball club. But the salary talks remained at an impasse. Babe came down to $85,000, but on a three-year contract, and Ruppert came up to $80,000 on two (and agreed to return the $5000 fine Huggins had slapped on Ruth in 1025), but that was as close as they came. Ruth was restless, and the night before the first exhibition game of the spring he felt particularly low. Things were so different. It was his first Yankee camp without Huggins and his first without a contract signed and in his pocket. He and Claire had some friends in for the evening, Alan Gould of the Associated Press among them, and Babe got to talking about the game the next day. Gould said, "Are you actually going to play, even though you're not signed?"

"Why not"
"Why not? Well, suppose you break a leg? You think Ruppert is going to give you $85,000 then? Or even $80,000?"

"I never thought of that," Babe said. Later he got to mulling about it. He had a few drinks, not many, but enough to get his naturally impulsive nature into gear. By God, he decided, he wasn't going to break his leg in an exhibition game for nothing. He made up his mind. If he did not have a contract by noon the next day, he was going to hand in his uniform, quit the squad and go back to New York.

Word of Ruth's decision reached Dan Daniel of the New York Telegram. Daniel wrote the story and sent it to his paper, which played it big in its first edition late the next morning. About the time New Yorkers were reading that Ruth would quit the Yankees unless he signed by noon that day, Daniel and Frick and a couple of other writers ran into him near the Jungle Club. It was a beautiful morning. The sun was shining. Ruth was cheerful.

"What a day," Ruth said. "I hope I hit one this afternoon."
"What do you mean, hit one?" Daniel said. "You're not playing."
"Why not?"
"You can't. You haven't signed. You said you weren't going to play unless you signed."
"Oh that was last night," Ruth said.
"The hell it was last night," Daniel said. "I'm all over page one with it today."

Ruth shrugged. "I'm sorry , Dan. I changed my mind. I decided to stick with the club."
"And leave me holding the well-known bag. You ought to stick to your word, Babe. If you're going to play this afternoon, you ought to sign. You and Ruppert aren't that far apart anyway."

Ruth looked at him. "You think I ought to sign?"
"Damn right."
"Okay. All right. Go find Jake, and I'll sign."

The writers deployed. Will Wedge of the Sun went to find Colonel Ruppert, who was taking a leisurely walk with an old friend of his named Colonel Alfred W. Wattenberg. Daniel raced to the Western Union office to clear the wires to New York for all the newspapermen. Frick and Slocum, the closest friends Ruth had among the writers, stayed with him to keep him from wandering off. After an interminable time, Wedge came back shepherding the two slow-moving colonels at all deliberate speed. Ruth and Ruppert greeted each other warmly, chatted for a few minutes in private, and Babe agreed to the $80,000 for two years. "What about the fine?" Ruth asked. Ruppert consulted Barrow, who said, "If it's up to me, the fine stays." Ruth reminded Ruppert that he had promised it, and Ruppert gave in. "If Huggins had lived," he said, "you would not be getting this. But Miller is dead now and he won't know."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1932 - 1 year/$75,000
_______________




Smelser

Although major-league attendance in 1930 had been the highest ever, ticket sales fell off in 1931. After the season the owners took collective action by voting to cut salaries and to lower the player limit from twenty-five to twenty-three aiming to lower their payrolls by a million dollars. The Giants asked Bill Terry, who hit .401 in 1930 and .349 with the deadened ball of 1931, to take a 40 percent cut. Commissioner Landis took a cut from sixty-five to fifty thousand while the league presidents and umpires also had their salaries lowered. Connie Mack said his payroll was higher than the Yankees'. He couldn't meet it and began to sell off his great team piecemeal.

The owners found their free lists swollen. In New York alone the Yankees, Giants, and Dodgers let in 250,000 people on passes in 1931, not counting schoolchildren. Passes were now sharply cut. The owners did not lower admission prices, arguing that they hadn't raised them during the good years. Around the leagues, from park to park, general admission tickets had gone from seventy-five cents to only a dollar in the past thirty years.

In early December Ruppert, once more thirsting for Pluto Water, went to Indiana to swig his autumnal draughts and to plot a money battle with Babe Ruth. His first blow was a public remark that Ruth would have to take a cut. Ruth wasn't indispensable. He had played in many games "where only a few hundred fans came out. I guess that shows the fans don't jam the parks just to see him play baseball doesn't it?"

Ruth believed he had had a very good year in 1931, good enough to earn a raise in normal times. The fair thing, he thought, would be to continue to pay him at his present figure.

Rud Rennie of the New York Herald-Tribune was having breakfast with all four of the Ruths on West 88th Street one January morning. Claire, in "pale green crepe pajamas and a green silk kimono," was seeing to it that Babe had a large ham steak before going out for golf. The mail came during breakfast, bringing a one-year Yankee contract for seventy thousand dollars. Babe asked Claire for a fountain pen. She feared he would sign it, but no, he needed a pen to send it back. He told Rennie he'd take the figure on a two-year contract but would have to get eighty thousand for one year.


A disinterested statistician has figured it out that Ruth earned $3,500,000 for Colonel Ruppert in the last twelve years. That stupendous sum represents Ruth's personal box office drawing power over and above what the club would have taken in without him! - George Trevor, Outlook and Independent, Jan 27, 1932

The Detroit sportswriter H.G. Salsinger figured the extra income from Ruth's presence in exhibition games in the years from 1927 on was alone enough to pay his salary for those years. A writer remembered T.L. Huston's guess that Ruth drew an average of twenty-five hundred extra customers per game. Counting all games that would mean the Yankees grossed about $280,000 a year drawn solely by Ruth.

These suppositions are plausible. The Yankees' share of American League attendance from 1911 to 1920 was about 13.5 percent. From 1921 to 1930 it was 22 percent. The nation's Muscle Hero probably had a lot to do with the growth.

Ruppert's defense was to speak of a decline in Yankee receipts in 1931 of 12 to 15 percent - an oddly vague figure from a man who had to know exactly how much in order to pay his taxes.

The discussions of Ruth's salary brought forth a joke for which we have no date, no place, no straight man. Legend says someone told Ruth his eighty thousand was more than the salary of the President, to which Ruth replied, "I had a better year than he did."

As usual, the contract difference remained until spring training was underway. Ruth and Ruppert had two short talks at the ball field and another at the Roliat Hotel where Ruppert lived. The third talk was in the hotel foyer, in full view of reporters watching from a hundred feet away. After borrowing a fountain pen, Babe, Claire, and Ruppert composed a theatrical tableau of signing, in the hotel patio near a wishing well. With anguishing corniness each tossed a coin in the well and made a wish, audible to the reporters, of course. [i]Babe: Another pennant so he could play in a tenth World Series. Claire: More Yankee contracts in the family. Ruppert: The coins in the bottom of the well, in order to buy another minor-league club. Then Babe played in an eleven inning exhibition game and went hitless.

Behind all the painful hokum was a real unpublicized touch of humanity. Ruth signed a blank contract, leaving it to Ruppert's sense of magnificence to guide him in filling in the amount. Magnificence is the only virtue reserved to the rich, and Ruppert was magnificent. he wrote in $75,000 and a percentage of the profits from exhibition games. It still stands on Barrow's worn 4 x 6 card:

1932 cont. $75,000 and 25% net receipts of ex. games




Wagenheim

As the depression gripped America, 14 million people (nearly one-third of the labor force) were without jobs. Men sold apples on street corners. Those with jobs were thankful; workers in sawmills toiled fifty hours a week for five cents an hour; many companies had put "Scotch Week" into effect, requiring employees to work one week per month without salary. Not far from the Babe's apartment, the ramshackle huts of the desperately poor continued to spread along the banks of the Hudson.

Baseball revenues were severely hit by the Depression. Colonel Ruppert estimated that Yankee gate receipts fell 12 to 15 per cent during the 1931 season. Losses were more severe for other clubs. The owners of the sixteen major league teams began a joint effort to trim $1 million from players' salaries. They cut the salary of baseball commissioner Landis from $65,000 to $50,000 a year. Umpires took reduced paychecks. Ruth's annual salary of $80,000 for the past two seasons was an irresistible target. If he continued to earn so much, other players would refuse drastic cuts. As one sports editor observed: "A player who's had a good year can always say at contract time, 'I'm no Babe Ruth, but I'm worth half as much, or a quarter as much.'" Another writer called Ruth "the logical storm center of this new era." So it wasn't surprising when Colonel Ruppert, in early 1932, said that "baseball can't afford such a salary." Ruth, he admitted, was "a good asset," but he wasn't the only drawing card on the club. Gehrig also brought out the fans, he said, and earned only $25,000, less than one-third of Ruth's salary.

A few days later, Ruth was chewing on a big ham steak at the breakfast table when the mailman came. Ruppert had sent him a one-year contract for $70,000.

"What's a guy gotta do in this league to satisfy people?" Ruth said to Claire. "I hit forty-six home runs, I'm second in the league in batting, and they want me to take a $10,000 cut!"

On his way to the Saint Albans golf course, Ruth personally returned the contract, unsigned, to the Yankee office. He and Ruppert haggled for a while but never fought. The Babe was bored with money - it was more a question of ego - and the Colonel was too much of an aristocrat to show passion over such a mundane topic. During that meeting, according to the legend, Ruppert remarked, "Root, last year you earned more money than President Hoover."

And the Babe is said to have replied, "Hell, I had a better year than Hoover!"

The next time-honored step in the Ruth ritual was the trip to Florida and his birthday party. His friends set up a huge square table in the patio of the Jungle Club Hotel, arranged to resemble a baseball diamond with flowers for baselines and bases. A mammoth birthday cake, in the shape of a baseball, occupied the center. Twenty-eight guests sat around the table, with the Ruths in the place of honor at "home plate."

Ruppert came down a few days later and, following a long tradition, sat with the Babe at a table on the sunny lawn of the Jungle Club with dozens of reporters and photographers gathered round for the contract signing. The Babe's pale winter complexion, after walking bareheaded on the Florida golf courses for several days, was now a flaming red. Ruth never had a pen, and this time is was supplied by Ruppert's friend, Colonel Wattenberg. He put his signature to the contract, which was for $75,000 a year, plus 25 percent of the net receipts from Yankee exhibition games. It was the first time in Ruth's long career - since the day in 1914 when he signed for $600 per season - that he had ever taken a cut in pay. The Depression had begun, indeed.




Creamer

Ruth went hunting every winter and in 1931 came back from North Carolina with three wild turkeys, twenty ducks and a deer, and had them all delivered to his butcher. "Send a turkey to Ed Barrow," he told the butcher, "and take care of the ducks. But don't let anybody touch that deer. I don't want somebody monkeying with it and spoiling the skin. I'll come back and skin it myself."

Claire told him to let Anton, the butcher, skin the deer, but Ruth said, "Him? What does he know about skinning a deer? He'd ruin it. I want the skin made into a rug for Dorothy's room, and the job has to be done by somebody who knows how to skin a deer."

He went to Anton's with Rud Rennie, who watched as Babe put on a butcher's apron, accepted the knife and prepared to operate, lecturing as he did like a surgeon in a hospital amphitheater.

"The way we usually do this," he said, "is to hang the deer from a tree. But I'll have to do it the way it is. Now, we start here."

He jabbed the carcass and Anton emitted a shrill cry of protest. "No, no," he said, and without ceremony took the knife from Ruth and made the proper incision. Ruth said, "Oh," and Anton continued, Ruth watching with interest.

When the butcher finished, Babe asked, "Where did you learn to skin a deer?"

"In Austria. Where I come from there are many deer. People eat them all the time. I skin many deer."

"Hell, if I'd have known that, I'd have stayed home. Hey, cut out a roast and sent it up to the house. Put those horns in a bag. I'll take them with me."

As he grew older, his hunting equipment became more elaborate. Ruth believed in roughing it in comfort, and often he would say, "You fellows go on out. I think I'll do my hunting on Mahogany Ridge today." Mahogany Ridge was the bar. One winter he took along his portable phonograph and fifty records, the old, heavy 78-rpm disks. He had a terrible time locating a container for the records and nagged Claire about finding something that would do.

"What about one of those big round cake tins?" he demanded.

"Haven't got a big round cake tin," she said. "Anyway, one wouldn't be enough."

"Well, call over and order half a dozen."

"Babe, cake tins don't come empty. They have cakes in them."

"All right," he said. "You can take the cakes out can't you?"

She gave up and ordered four big cakes, complete with tins. The cakes were jettisoned, the records safely packed and Ruth left for his hunting trip with three guns, three suitcases and four cake tins.

Ruth went to Los Angeles in the autumn of 1931 to make some short baseball films, and there he said he intended to retire after two more seasons (he wanted to complete twenty years as an active player). Asked if he hoped to own a club some day, he said, "Nope, but I want to manage one." His $80,000 contract had expired, and he and Ruppert soon were in another hassle. Ruppert sent Ruth a contract for $70,000, a cut of $10,000. Babe said he would refuse to consider anything but another two-year contract at $80,000. But he was not on as strong ground as he had been two years earlier. The Depression was two years old; jobs were generally scarce, and salaries in those that were around were being cut. Babe said, "I haven't noticed the Yankees in any depression," but it had little effect. No one was going to waste sympathy on Ruth having to get along on $70,000. After two months of disagreement he and Ruppert came to terms in the foyer of the Rolyat Hotel in St. Petersburg. They talked alone before the big fireplace at one end of the long room, while at the other end a cluster of people watched and tried to hear what they were saying. After ten or fifteen minutes Ruppert sent for Colonel Wattenberg, who supplied a pen and witnessed the signatures. They had compromised again. Ruppert went up $5000 and Ruth came down $5000. And he agreed to take the $75,000 on a one-year contract.

The photographers posed them outside afterwards and had Ruth and Ruppert and Claire toss coins into a wishing well. Ruth said, "I wish for another pennant, so that I can play in ten World Series." Claire said, "I wish for many more Yankee contracts." Ruppert said, "I wish I had the money in that well."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1933 - 1 year/$52,000 and 25% of net exhibition receipts
_______________




Smelser


They'll have to raise the ante to get me to sign (Babe Ruth, The Times, January 17, 1933)

The business depression deepened. Baseball attendance in 1932 was the lowest since 1920 by almost three million; it was almost four million below 1930. In the American League only the Yankees, it was said, made a profit. Other industries could lay off workers, but baseball needed a minimum number of them to make up eight games a day. As in most businesses, cutting the payroll offered the surest savings. Babe Ruth had stopped being a growth of industry.

Ruth in mid-January was working morning in McGovern's gymnasium and playing golf every afternoon. When his Yankee contract came in the mail on January 16 it was for fifty thousand dollars. Ruth mailed it back unsigned and went to a movie. He was in good condition, a pound or two above his playing weight. Reporters soon knew that all Yankees had been cut except a pair of newcomers who didn't make enough money to make any difference.

It had become the custom to have an annual press morning at McGovern's which drew writers and newsreel photographers and made for baseball talk. In 1933 it fell on January 19, three days after Ruth returned his contract. To questions he said he might take a 10 or 15 percent cut, but not one of twenty-five thousand dollars. That much "at one smack is no cut. That's what you fellows might call an amputation." Then, for the newsreels, he boxed a round with daughter Julia.

The January publication of the eighth annual selection of all star team by the Sporting News, which took a poll of sportswriters weakened Ruth's bargaining strength. For the first time he failed to make the team. The voters elected Chuck Klein their right fielder, giving him 111 votes to 63 for Ruth. It was the proper choice. Klein had led the National League in home runs (38) and stolen bases (20) while batting .348.

Thus matters stood until the scene shifted to Florida in March. Ruth again said he would take a 10 or 15 percent cut. What about fifty thousand dollars? BABE" Absolutely not!" CLAIRE: "No!" Doesn't the closing of banks make any difference? Well, said Babe, here turned economist, the banks wouldn't be closed forever.

Ruth joined the Yankee workouts but made no counter-offer to Ruppert. On the day Ruppert came to Florida he wouldn't see reporters, but he talked fruitlessly with Ruth the next day. After that Ruppert was available to reporters. He wanted them to know that reports of a Yankee profit in 1932 were incorrect, and he hoped they realized that fifty-thousand dollars would buy as much in 1933 as a hundred thousand would buy in normal times. The next move, he said, was Ruth's. Ruth was not stirred. "If it is fifty thousand dollars, and the next move is up to me, there is no move..." And there things stalled, briefly.

Only two days after his firm defiance Ruth told a friend he might take fifty-five thousand. The beginning of an exhibition series with the Braves may have weakened his will. Ruppert took up psychological warfare on March 18, saying Ruth must sign by Saturday the 29th or the offer would be reduced. Ruppert made a reasonable point; part of Ruth's salary was for drawing exhibition-game crowds the pay the cost of spring training. On one day during the holdout the attendance was only a hundred.

Ruth then suggested fifty-five thousand. Meanwhile, back in Manhattan, the Salvation Army polled 1,171 destitute men living in the army's shelter called Gold Dust Lodge, at 40 Corlears Street, citing the Ruth-Ruppert argument and asking what Ruth should get. Each man wrote down a figure. The range was from ten cents to a million dollars. The mean was $48,999. On the next question, whether anyone was worth eighty thousand a year, the division of the house was 599 aye, 572 no. The 599 then listed those who were worth eighty thousand. The results were: any U.S. President, 185; Babe Ruth, 140; President Roosevelt, 97; Al Smith, 12. Nobody else got as many as five votes. All this during the toughest winter in American history since the first winter endured by the Plymouth Pilgrims.

On the same day Ruppert and Ruth agreed to the figure of fifty-two thousand after ten minutes of talk. Then they came out for the hokey rite of signing in front of the newsreel cameras. Ruppert had won, but Ruth surely didn't suffer, since the price of everything was falling fast. By cutting Ruth's salary Ruppert also cut Ruth's stature.

In earlier years people bought tickets to Yankee games partly to see a man who was paid so much to play baseball. As cut followed cut Ruth lost that value, but it was too late in his career for it to matter.




Wagenheim

As he signed a stack of Christmas cards in McGovern's office (his list had now grown to more than one hundred thousand recipients) the Babe sounded optimistic about his contract for the 1933 season.

"Just give the Colonel the right to make good beer...he'll be so tickled, he'd be a soft touch for me!" Beer did become legal again that April, and Colonel Ruppert also spent $250,000 financing the second Byrd Antarctic Expedition that year (causing the flagship to be named after him) but as a hard-nosed businessman Ruppert kept each of his enterprises separate, and he insisted the Yanks were losing money.

That year brought the first of a series of setbacks for Ruth. The Sporting News's eighth annual poll of baseball writers dropped him from its all-star team for the first time; he was beaten for the right field spot by Chuck Klein of the Philadelphia Phillies, who drew nearly twice as many votes as the Babe.

The Yankees mailed him a contract for only $50,000. "That's not a pay cut, that's an amputation!" the Babe said indignantly as he dropped the unsigned contract back in the mail. Ruth was still unsigned on March 13 when Colonel Ruppert came to see him at Saint Petersburg. Both emerged unsmiling from a private meeting in Joe McCarthy's office at Miller Huggins Field. "We have not come to any agreement," said Ruppert, explaining that he had renewed his offer of $50,000 and Ruth had demanded $60,000. His offer, said Ruppert, was "equal to $100,000 in normal times," but Ruth would only say, "If they're willing to let me quit for $10,000 it's all right with me." Ruppert issued an ultimatum on March 19, warning Ruth to sign in ten days or not accompany to team on its trip north. He even threatened to reduce the $50,000 offer if Ruth didn't come to terms soon. Ruth relaxed his demands to $55,000, but the Colonel was unyielding, stressing that he and the Babe were "on the friendliest terms," but simply couldn't agree on a business matter.

By now, the salary dispute had blossomed into a national issue, as Americans - poorer than they'd ever been - took vicarious pleasure in imagining such sums. When a Salvation Army official in New York heard a number of destitute, jobless men arguing heatedly about Ruth's salary dispute, he took a poll of the shelter's 1,200 inmates, asking them to name those man who deserved $80,000 a year or more. First place went to "any President of the United States." Ruth placed second, far ahead of such men as John D. Rockefeller, Professor Albert Einstein, Henry Ford, William Randolph Hearst, Walter Winchell, Enrico Caruso, Tom Mix, and Benito Mussolini.

Finally, on March 22, Ruppert visited Ruth at his suite in the Jungle Club, and after a ten-minute conference the Babe agreed to sign for $52,000. Ruppert's "sob story," he said later, "nearly had me in tears." Despite the huge salary cut, he remained the highest-paid player in baseball. As the cameras clicked and the Movietones ground away at the contract signing two days later, Ruth said, "I've had three ambitions in my life. One was to hit seven hundred home runs, the other was to play twenty years, and the next was to be in ten World Series. I succeeded in one last year, makin' my tenth series. Next year will be my twentieth season. If I hit forty-eight home runs, I'll have an even seven hundred, and I'll sure be satisfied with everything."




Creamer

The joyful glow from the 1932 World Series did not last long. It was obvious that Ruth was going to have to take another salary cut for 1933, and probably a big one. The Depression was at its worst, and, as Barrow let everyone know, the Yankees had to refund more than $100,000 to holders of tickets to the unplayed sixth and seventh games of the World Series.

Ruth was unconcerned. "Jake and I will meet," he said, "and he'll say what he thinks I should get next season, and then I'll say. Then we'll talk for a little while, and then we'll come to an agreement. It's always been like that. Jake and I never have much trouble getting together."

But when Ruth received his contract in the middle of January, he was outraged. He had been cut 33 1/2 per cent to $50,000, a drop of $25,000. Babe phoned Barrow and said he was returning the contract and asked if it was okay if he told the papers about it. Barrow said, "No, I'd rather you didn't. I'll take care of that myself."

Ruth waited a few days but when nothing appeared in the papers he called reporters in. "I don't mind telling you and the world that the offer is $50,000," he said, "and that's a cut of 25 grand, and that's some wallop." He muttered about Barrow. "I don't believe Colonel Ruppert ever saw the contract, and I told Barrow that. Hell, I expected to receive a cut, but I can't believe Jake would go so far as a third off. I'll never sign for that."

Yet Ruppert had seen the size of the cut, and had approved it, although his only comment to inquiring reporters was "I have nothing to say, nothing to say, nothing to say at all."

A few days later Babe's anger subsided somewhat and he said genially, "I can see a 10 per cent cut or even a 15 per cent cut, but 15 per cent is as low as I'll go. I expected a cut, but $25,000 is no cut, that's an amputation."

Someone raised the question of the Depression, salary cuts, unemployment breadlines, and whether Babe had a right to complain about his salary. Ruth said, "Why shouldn't I kick? The Yankees made money last year, and I think I helped draw the crowds as much as I ever did. Oh, hell, we'll work this out in Florida. We always do."

He went south and played golf. He had a hole in one on the 185 yard third hold at Pasadena Golf Club near St. Petersburg and shot a 78 that day. He played a lot of golf, but nothing happened with his contract. One of those rumors that he was dead flashed around again, this one saying he had been killed in a plane crash. "Nah," said Ruth on the phone to a worried inquirer, "I haven't been in a plane in weeks. The worst accident I've had is that Yankee contract."

He and Ruppert met once in Florida, and Ruth offered to come down to $60,000. Ruppert refused to budge from his original offer of $50,000. Babe worked out with the club, but did not sign. The exhibition season began, and in the middle of March he and Ruppert met again. Babe, his resistance melting like a snowball in St. Petersburg, came down to $55,000. Ruppert still said no. he not only said no, he said, "If Ruth does not sign by March 29, he will not be taken north with the team. Furthermore, if he does not come to terms by then, the present offer of $50,000 will be lowered. Ruth has come down in his demands, but I told him I cannot possibly sign him for more than $50,000."

Four days later, on March 22, Ruth gave in and signed. Ruppert had the grace to let Ruth save face. "We have reached an agreement," the colonel told the press. "I asked Ruth what he wanted, and he said, 'I'll take $52,000.' I told him that was all right, and that ended the matter."

They both had compromised, said one newspaper. Ruth had come down $23,000 and Ruppert had gone up $2000. Yet there was little sympathy for Ruth. In March 1933 Franklin Roosevelt had just been inaugurated. Banks were folding. Savings were gone. And Ruth was still the highest paid player in the game.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Contract going into 1934 - 1 year/$35,000 and 25% of net exhibition receipts
_______________




Smelser

Ruth had some not very flattering offers from people who thought he wouldn't be playing with the Yankees in 1934 - a one year contract for thirty-five thousand to play for the San Fransisco team of the Pacific Coast League, and a curious suggestion that Ruth tour all the minor leagues as a designated hitter for every pitcher in every minor-league game he attended.

The American League, before 1933, had not suffered as much from the Depression as had business in general, but in that year its income was 31 percent below normal while the overall business index was down 25 percent. Good teams were now losing money. The Pirates, second in 1932 and 1933, lost money in both years. The Cubs lost money when they won the pennant in 1932 and lost much more in 1933 and 1934 with third-place finishes. The Senators won the pennant in 1933 and had to part with Goose Goslin because they couldn't pay his salary. The players' share of the 1933 World Series receipts was the smallest pool since 1922. After the Series Will Harridge, president of the American League, said owners would have to cut both salaries and overhead. They cut overhead by shortening the 1934 season a week, though the number of games remained at 154. As for the Yankees, their 1933 attendance was about three-quarters of the average attendance from 1920 to 1930.

For a change, in 1934 Ruth was not a holdout. He and Ruppert met at the brewery and signed a one-year contract for thirty-five thousand dollars on January 15, two months earlier than usual. They were so agreeable that some people believed it was the first stage in a palace revolution which would depose Joe McCarthy. Baseless rumors that Ruth was to be manager were, as they say, rife. Ruth grumpily observed to his sports writing friends that Ruppert had given Admiral Richard Byrd a quarter of a million dollars to go to the South Pole (Byrd named his flagship Jacob Ruppert) and let Ruth help underwrite the exploration with a seventeen-thousand-dollar pay cut. The average cut of major-league payrolls was about 25 percent in the years 1932-33. Because Ruth signed so quickly, other players signed easily.

The highest seven salaries of 1934 were:

Babe Ruth--------$36,696
Mickey Cochrane--$30,000
Chuck Klein-------$30,000
Bill Terry---------$27,500
Lou Gehrig-------$23,000
Carl Hubbell------$17,500
Rogers Hornsby---$15,000

Cochrane and Hornsby were playing managers. These figures were sharply lower than the same men would have gotten in the 1920s, but the average ballplayer, because of deflation, actually had about 4 or 5 percent more purchasing power than in the 1920s.

In any even, Ruth wasn't living at poverty level. He began to collect an annuity of $17,500 in February 1934, bringing him up to about fifty thousand. No American in the mid-1970s with three hundred thousand a year was as well off.




Wagenheim

He thought of spring training. Jesus, so many pals gone. Who was left from the great bunch of '27?

He felt like the last living dinosaur, tracked by museum curators waiting for him to drop. That week, a gallery in downtown Manhattan unveiled an eight-foot-tall sculpture of a younger Babe swinging his mighty bat, broad-shouldered and thin at the waist. The artist, Reuben Nakian, said, "The Greeks erected public statues to their athletic heroes, so why not Babe Ruth?" The Times art critic called it "a very arresting figure," and commented, "He looks like an American Hercules." It could be dangerous being an American institution.

Police that month arrested a man in South Dakota and claimed he was involved in the kidnapping and murder of the Lindbergh baby. In the man's home, they found a file of "famous persons," including a photo of the Babe with a marginal notation suggesting that he might be a future kidnap target.

It was a depressing day, but soon he'd be in Saint Petersburg, and the sun would warm his aching limbs. There would be no protracted salary battle to fill the sports pages this time. He'd already signed in a brief, colorless ceremony at Jake Ruppert's oak-paneled brewery office. Now it was for only $35,000, quite a drop from $80,000 just three winters before. But what could he do? The way he felt, he'd be lucky to play a hundred games this season. There'd been a touch of pathos when he put his name to the contract, but his old buddies from the press tried to put a bright face on things. They toted up all his contracts and World Series shares since 1914 and proclaimed that the Bambino's baseball earnings amounted to $918,477. And they dutifully quoted him when he smiled and said, "I'm making a lot of money outside of baseball now; I can afford to stick with a game that's done so much for me." Now, he even had his own half-hour radio show, "Babe Ruth's Club," three times a week over WOR, sandwiched between "The Adventures of Tom Mix" and "Amos 'n' Andy."

There were rumors that he might quit baseball altogether and become a golf pro. That spring, as the Yankees stopped in Atlanta on the tour north, the Babe played an exhibition golf match against the famous Bobby Jones, and played well. He liked golf, but he couldn't reconcile himself to the fact that his career in baseball, his whole life since adolescence, was coming to an end.

As the team continued north, Ruth dropped in to see his sister, Mrs. Mary Moberly, in Richmond, Virginia, who was recovering from a nervous breakdown. He sat down on the side of the bed, smiled, and said, "You ain't going goofy, are you, Sis?"

Mary could see the age wrinkles and a touch of sadness in his eyes when he said, "Sis, I'm getting old now, past forty, and my old legs ain't what they were."

But that spring the Literary Digest said Ruth was "still on his colossal feet...still capable of smiting the planetoid into the middle of next week and heaving his gigantic bulk around the bases like a playful St. Bernard pup." It was easy to write such drivel in an office somewhere, but a lot harder to stand sixty feet away from wild rookie pitchers who wanted nothing more than to blaze one past the famous Babe or knock him down and show him who was boss. That June at Yankee Stadium, a young Philadelphia pitcher fired a high hard once that the Babe couldn't duck in time. It caught him on the wrist and he fell to the ground. As he was helped toward the clubhouse, the 8,000 fans stood in silence, remembering times past.

There arose a wave of nostalgic affection for the Babe even before he was through. That summer, a nationwide poll of writers picked him ahead of all American League outfielders despite the fact that he was only a shadow of his former self. But every so often he made them remember how it once was. On Friday, July 13, almost exactly twenty years to the date that the first put on a big league uniform, the Babe appeared in a game before 20,000 fans at Detroit's Navin Field. When he came to bat in the third inning, Tiger pitcher Tommy Bridges stretched the count to three balls, two strikes. The Babe swatted the next ball far over the right field wall. It was his 700th home run, a great ambition realized, and the hit also helped the Yankees to win the game and climb back into first place. As he rounded third base, Ruth pointed toward right field and shouted to coach Art Fletcher, "I want that ball! I want that ball!"




Creamer

The Yankees again cut his salary drastically, Barrow preparing the way by talking loudly on the telephone when he knew Dan Daniel, who loved news beats, was within hearing. "I think $25,000 should be our top offer," he said, apparently to Colonel Ruppert. Daniel wrote the story, and $25,000 was the amount in the 1934 contract sent to Ruth. Babe made no extravagant statements, and he did not hold out. He went to see Ruppert at the brewery and meekly signed, although not for $25,000. In his customary post-meeting report to the assembled press, Ruppert said, "I asked the Babe if he would sign for $25,000, and he said he thought he should get $35,000. After further discussion, I agreed." Ruppert made it sound as though the Yankees had met Ruth's figure. But Ruth had taken another 30 per cent cut (32.5 per cent to be precise, after a 30.7 per cent cut the year before). In two years his salary had been chopped $45,000. And yet he was still the highest paid player in the majors. Most baseball salaries had been slashed. Gehrig, who made $23,000 in 1933, was given the same in 1934 with the promise that he would not be cut in 1935, which was flattering.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contract going into '35 - 3 years/$25,000 minimum (+ percentage of gate receipts)

_______________



Smelser

After Ruth's pitiable season of 1934 his future career was a matter of common talk, with sense and nonsense mixed. Nearly every club had its manager by November. An unnamed owner said few owners would gamble on Ruth's "ability to maintain discipline," and there were doubts that he had the patience to try to rebuild a weak team. Colone T.L. Huston, former co-owner of the Yankees, said he'd like to buy the Dodgers and make Ruth the manager. There was a rumor that the Yankees would trade Ruth to the White Sox for Al Simmons, and Ruth would manage the Sox.

A few days later after the White Sox rumor fluttered and died, the Ruths came hoe from their world tour to find the one-dollar contract. Babe went to see Ruppert. Was Ruppert satisfied with McCarthy? Yes, wasn't Babe? No, we could have finished closer in 1934. Ruth was asking for McCarthy's job. Ruppert found the conversation distasteful, but he was already nearing the final solution of the Babe Ruth problem. He advised Ruth to have a talk with Barrow, which turned out to be interesting to both.

Ruppert's transfer of Ruth helped the Yankees as a baseball team. Joe McCarthy was in full command, Gehrig was a free spirit, and team morale was high. Shirt No. 3 passed to George Selkirk, who heard himself booed when he first dutifully wore it. But many Ruth fans were wounded when Ruppert let Fuchs carry off their hero. Certainly the Yankees lost color and character. As late as 1972 an unforgiving admirer of Ruth said of the team he left, "They were as exciting as watching a master plummer tighten a joint."

Ruth probably made a bad choice. If he wouldn't leave while still a champion (and very few do), he would have been wise to take the advice of his close friend, the sportswriter Dan Daniel, to say nothing and let Ruppert stew. Daniel told him the Braves' finances were shaky and that if he stayed with the Yankees they would probably keep him for life. Another close friend, Bill Slocum, also advised against going to Boston.

But Ruth was one of nature's optimists who always figure the maximum profit instead of the minimum. He translated Fuchs's blurred promises as meaning he would certainly be a baseball executive, and he liked to accept the general belief that he would become the playing manager of the Braves.

As ballplayers would say, the Yankees got a lot of bad ink out of the deal. It would be useful to recapitulate the Yankee motives.

Ruth couldn't play well but was as popular as ever, which made him a nuisance. Ed Barrow had so much trouble getting along with him that he couldn't begin to think Ruth would ever be able to manage a ball club. Barrow was Ruppert's most trusted baseball adviser.

By asking for McCarthy's job Ruth brought on a showdown. McCarthy offered to quit in the winter of 1934-1935 if Ruppert thought it would help solve the Ruth problem. But Ruppert wanted McCarthy, and if he had to choose between McCarthy and Ruth the choice was easy.

On solution would have been to play Ruth at first base. If Lou Gehrig hadn't been born Ruth might have played a season or two more at first base. But Babe was through as a player. Even Claire didn't like to see him play anymore, always fearing to see him leave on a stretcher. "He was hurt three times last season and I want no more of that."

The Ruth problem was not a payroll problem. The Yankees drew a quarter of a million more in 1935 than in 1933. It was a problem of the discontented, worn-out star who despised his manager, made his manager think of quitting, and had to be sent away in some manner that seemed decent to the public.

Ruth and Fuchs worked out terms that satisfied both. The uniform baseball contract was for one year at a sum variously stated as twenty-five thousand and forty thousand. A separate three-year contract provided a share of gross receipts above the average of the previous five years. Fuchs said he believed Ruth would make between forty and fifty thousand a year. The agreement was of doubtful promise to any but the most wishful thinker.




Wagenheim

In late February of 1935, Boston Braves owner Emil Fuchs called Ruth and offered him a job. It was almost too good to be true. The Babe would be a player, assistant manager, and vice-president of the Braves; he would also share in the club's profits and have the option to buy stock.

Then Fuchs dangled the most tempting bait of all: the chance to manage the Braves in 1936, since the team's present manager, Bill McKechnie, was working on a one-year contract.

Ruth was elated, Suddenly he was converted from a washed-up slugger, a pariah as far as most club owners were concerned, into a baseball executive!

A few mornings later, at the Yankee office in New York, Colonel Ruppert handed Ruth a typewritten sheet of paper; his unconditional release from the team.
"But what is the price, what will the Babe cost me?" asked Fuchs.
"Do you think I would sell this man?" said Ruppert. "If he can better himself elsewhere, the Yankees won't stand in his way." Privately the Colonel was relieved, because Ruth had slipped badly as a player, and Ruppert didn't know what to do with him.

The next step was to secure waivers from the other seven clubs in the American League to permit Ruth's move to the National League. Ed Barrow sent out a flurry of telegrams and got approved in a matter of hours. When one owner balked, hinting he might exercise his waiver option and acquire Ruth's services, Ruppert got on the phone and swore he would "never" allow the Babe to play with another American League club; he would withdraw the waiver offer before it came to that.

The transaction was announced on February 26, 1935, at a press conference in the brewery, where Ruppert, Fuchs, and Ruth - all dressed in natty blue suits - praised each other to the high heavens. The reporters were given copies of an exchange of letters, Fuchs to Ruth, Fuchs to Ruppert, Ruppert to Ruth, Ruth to Ruppert, Ruth to Fuchs, with phrases of goodwill overflowing the paper like honey.

The reporters gagged on some of the cloying verbiage and demanded a few impromptu remarks. Fuchs blew a verbal kiss at Ruppert for his "generosity" in releasing Ruth, and the Colonel, with a sad smile, said he would never stand in the Babe's way. Then Ruth put both hands in his pocket, advanced his right foot and cleared his throat, "Ha-hum!" That was a good start. He said that despite their differences over the years, Ruppert had been "like Santa Claus" to him, evoking another sad smile from the Colonel. He tried to say that he'd always given his best for the Yankees, and would do likewise for Boston, but he became a bit confused and said "against the Braves," and Judge Fuchs whipped out a handkerchief and nervously mopped his brow. When someone asked Ruth exactly what his duties would be as vice-president of the Braves, he stammered, but Fuchs rushed to the rescue with: "Advisory capacity; be consulted on club deals and so forth."

"Babe Ruth is coming home!" said an article in Boston the next day. "Home to the folks who love him best, just as that other Boston sports hero, the mighty John L. Sullivan, did so many years ago, when the rest of America told him to step aside for youth." And the Boston Herald exulted: "He is that rarest of things, a living tradition!"

The Babe was ecstatic about his new career. "I've always wanted to manage a big league club, and this is my chance." When this statement was published, the Judge, contacted by phone in Boston, protested on the grounds that it was embarrassing to the Braves and to manager McKechnie, who still had a one-year contract. The reporter, told by Ruth that Fuchs had privately assured him of the manager's job next season, asked him directly: "Will Ruth manage the club in 1936?" The Judge shot back: "The letter speaks for itself." The letter was couched with "ifs" and "buts" and words like "mutual interest," but this was mere quibbling. What, possibly, could stand in the way?

That day, the Babe and Claire stepped aboard the train for Boston. Claire said she was "well satisfied" with her husband's new career. They would live in Boston while the Braves played their seventy-seven home games, "then I'll go on the road with them to see that the Babe gets his sleep...he gets absolutely no rest unless I watch him." The Babe, for the benefit of his press cronies, turned up his collar and mimed a sheepish expression, as though he'd just been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

It was like the triumphal return of a beloved monarch when their train pulled into Back Bay Station. A swirling crowd of thousands got beyond the control of police, who formed a flying wedge to protect them. Ruth was sweating freely when he arrived at the Copley Plaza, and moments later he signed a three-year contract with a minimum salary of $25,000 per season.




Creamer

Barrow, determined to get Ruth out of McCarthy's hair and off the Yankees, assured Ruppert that something could be worked out. Ruppert agree, perhaps wishing he had not been so adamant about saying he would not let another club have Ruth for nothing. A complex plan was worked out that would get the Yankees off the hook, would let Fuchs obtain Ruth for nothing, would let him keep McKechnie as manager, would satisfy Ruth's managerial ambitions and would still get Babe onto the field again as a player.

[Bill Burgess]

Wow! Well alright, now! You good brothers are all encouraging me, so I'll keep going on. I never tire of talking about how Ty Cobb played baseball.

I will give a story here that I may have not given before. I don't know. I forget sometimes. Anyway, this one comes out of the autobiography of Carl Mays. He wrote his autobiography around 1971. (Baseball's Great Tragedy, The Story of Carl Mays--Submarine Pitcher, by Bob McGarigle, 1972)

The game that Carl Mays describes below is the first time the Yankees played the Tigers, after Carl had hit/killed Ray Chapman, 1920. And it was the game where Cobb told the Tigers to crowd the plate. Didn't work too well, apparently.

Chapter 25 - Ty Cobb's Shocking Note (pp. 167-171)

The dressing room was almost empty as the last of the Yankees clattered out to the field for pregame batting and fielding practice. Not even the clubhouse boy was there. Only Carl, alone with god and his thoughts.

Neither fear nor agitation gripped him as he stared momentarily at the open locker, even though he was about to face the hardest-hitting club in the league, the Detroit Tigers with their vaunted Cobb, Veach and Heilmann---and Cobb one of he ring-leaders in an attempt to have Carl barred for life from baseball.

His thoughts wandered back to three days ago when he had warmed up for a short period while down the right-field foul line and had heard the warm patter of applause ripple through the stands. The wine of courage surged through his veins as he recalled it. The fans would be the final court of judgment. All the had to do was go out there and prove to them that everything said against him was either malicious or ill-advised.

Now the moment of truth was at hand. Carl reached into the locker and took out his spike shoes, shiny and neat-looking as they always were for a game. He slipped them onto his feet and started to tie the lacings. As he did so, he felt a light tap on his right shoulder. He paused, then looked around over the shoulder. It was the clubhouse boy. So deep had Carl's thoughts been that he had not heard the boy come in.

"Carl . . ."
"Yes?"
"Er--I've got a hote for you."
"A note?"
"Uh-huh," replied the boy. And as Carl straightened up and turned half around on the bench, the boy handed him the note.

It took Carl but two seconds to read it--and only one for his well-tanned face to turn white.

"You say Cobb gave this to you?"
"Yes, sir. I was on the dugout steps watchin' battin' practice when he came over, handed the note to me and asked me to pin it on your locker door."

"You're sure it was Cobb?"
"I couldn't be mistaken, Carl. There's only one Ty Cobb."

"All right, son, thanks. You better go on out now." And then Carl read the note again, the almost unbelievable words:

"If it was within my power, I would have inscribed on Chapman's tombstone these words: Here lies the victim of arrogance, viciousness and greed."

For just an instant the words blurred and seemed to dance before Carl's eyes as a fury gripped his brain. Then the words straightened out, came clearly into focus--and became indelibly imprinted in his memory as he fought to regain control of himself . . . Another of Cobb's tricks to try to upset him. Cobb would stop at nothing.

And then, as Carl stared into his open locker, his thoughts went back to that day in Fenway Park when Carl had decked the Georgia Peach in a tight situation and Ty had responded by throwing his bat at him. Cobb had needed police protection to get off the field that day.

Then there was the day in Detroit when Carl was leaving the dressing room to go out on the field and saw Cobb, filing his spikes, on the bench before the open door of the Tigers' dressing room.

"I hear you're pitching today, Mays. I hear you're pitching, but you won't be around very long," Cobb hollered as Carl and his teammates clattered along the corridor to the dugout. Carl hadn't paid any attention to Cobb then, but he let Ty know later that he'd herd him.

"The first time he came to bat I decked him but good," Carl recalled.

"The dirt really flew when he hit the ground and he came up wild with rage. He had a terrible temper and was always scrapping with somebody. If it wasn't the umpires or the other players he would scrap with his own teammates.

"But I made a mistake in sitting him down in that frame of mind. It nearly cost me my baseball career. I had to come in with the next pitch, in order to get even on the count, and he dragged a bunt down the first base line. I ran over, fielded the ball and turned to toss it to first base. But I never completed the play.

"Just as I was about to toss an underhand lob I was slammed into from behind and knocked sprawling on the foul line. At the same time I felt one of Cobb's spikes rip into the calf of my left leg while his other tore my pants from the belt line right down to the back of my knee. Cobb had run fight over me.

"I lay there stunned for a moment and then rolled over onto the infield grass and sat up. When I got courage enough to look at my leg, it was just a bloody mess. I remember wondering if I would ever run again.

"And when I looked up at Cobb, there he was, standing with both feet on top of the first-base bag. His chin was sticking out like a witch's and his eyes were nearly popping out of his head. I never before had seen any person with such a look of wild hatred in his eyes.

"What present-day fans don't know about Cobb is that he was like a big cat. If you turned your back to him he would strike--be off and running to the next base. You never could take your eyes off him. He was extremely fast and was running at full speed after having taken only one step.

"The mistake I had made was in getting in his way on the baseline. The baseline was his--according to him--and he just ran right over me after knocking me to the ground. I carry the scar of that spiking to this day. It is more than six inches long. The doctor, incidentally, did a wonderful repair job and I only missed a couple of pitching turns.

"There is one other thing I remember as I sat there on the ground looking up at Cobb. It is the thought that went through my mind: All right, mister, if that's the way you want to play this game, that's the way we'll both play.

"So the next time I face Cobb I hit him on the heel with the first pitch I threw. That was the time the papers came out the next day with the headline 'Mays Beans Cobb.'
But Cobb got my message, and he never again tried to cut me up.

"Yes, Cobb was a great player, one of the greatest. There can be no question about that. But I also will have to tell you that he was the most vicious player I ever encountered in my twenty years of professional baseball. I don't think there was an infielder in my time who didn't carry around for the rest of his life at least one scar from his spikes. If you will go up to Burlington, Vermont, Larry Gardner, who was our third-baseman on the Red Sox, can tell you about a scar he has on his hip! . . ."

And now here was another indication of how Cobb played the game. This shocking note. Another of Ty's many tricks to gain an advantage--by trying to get Carl upset even before he came onto the field for the most trying moment of his baseball career.

Slowly and deliberately Carl tore the note into little pieces and let them dribble through his fingers and down onto the floor with the rest of the dirt. Then he bent down and finished facing his shoes.

Straightening up, he picked his game glove from the locker shelf, pulled his baseball cap on and headed for the dugout. He got there just as Cobb, stepping into the pregame batting cage, was hit by a barrage of verbal tomatoes--an adverse decision as only the Supreme Grandstand court can render it. Now Carl knew where Cobb stood with the fans. The big question remaining was, how did Carl stand?

The answer wasn't long in coming. Batting practice over, first the Tigers took their infield turneup and then the Yankees. And when the Yanks started to sweep the ball around the infield Carl emerged from the dugout for his pregame warmup. Applause and cheers swept through the stands. The jury was giving its verdict.

It was a tremendous lift and Carl soon had his practice pitches spanking with old-time assurance into Muddy Ruel's big mitt. Opposing Carl today would be an old Red Sox teammate, Dutch Leonard, who later would be replaced by Johnny "Red" Oldham, the lefty the Tigers had selected from the Providence club in exchange for Carl some years before.

During those years Oldham had put together a total of nine victories for the Tigers while Carl, if won won today, would be recording his 100th major-league victory. And win it he did. It was one of the most amazing exhibitions in the history of baseball.

All Carl did was shut out the Tigers, 10-0, despite walking three men, yielding 10 base hits, including a leadoff triple in one inning, and not striking out a single batter. And all under great mental pressure.

"After reading that note from Cobb I wouldn't have let them score a run if I had to pitch twenty-seven innings to beat them," said Carl. "A couple of times when I thought my curve wasn't going to break properly I shouted to the batter to look out.

"The Yankees played great ball behind me, didn't make an error. And if my memory is as keen as I think it is, Del Pratt staked me to a good lead in the first inning by hitting a three-run homer. Or maybe it was the Babe. the Babe was always rising to occasion like that." (Pratt hit the homer.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To his credit, when the Sporting News mailed out questionaires to past players/managers in 1942, asking them to name their greatest player ever, Carl named Ty Cobb. Sporting News published the results of their famous poll in their April 2, 1942 issue, pp. 1 & 13. He always referred to him as the greatest, and the meanest player he had ever known.

The letter that The Sporting News sent to the players read as follows: "Who do you consider the greatest ball player of all time? Why?"

Carl Mays: "Cobb could do everything--bunt, drag, hit, run bases, field and think faster than a dozen ordinary ball players. He made no errors of judgment and was a fighter who never heard the word 'quit.' Babe Ruth was the greatest from the standpoint of drawing power, but he had many weaknesses." (Sporting News, April 2, 1942, by J. G. Taylor Spink, pp. 1 & 13)

[Bill Burgess]

Hal Chase's 1941 Sporting News' interview.

September 18, 1941, pp. 1 & 6, by Lester Grant, of the Oakland Post-Enquirer, Oakland, Calif.

September 25, 1941, pp. 5 & 6.

[Bill Burgess]

Tris Speaker's 1944 Sporting News' interview.

January 6, 1944, pp. 7, by Ward Morehouse.

[Bill Burgess]

Bobby Wallace's 1954 Sporting News' interview.

March 31, 1954, pp. 13, 14, 16, by Louis Lee Arms.

April 7, 1954, pp. 15, 16.

[Bill Burgess]

Bobby Lowe's 1951 Sporting News' interview.

July 11, 1951, pp. 13. as told to John P. Carmichael, of the Chicago Daily News.

[Bill Burgess]

Jimmy Sheckard's 1940 Sporting News' interview.

March 7, 1940, pp. 5, by Don Basenfelder.

[Bill Burgess]

Jimmy Collins' 1943 Sporting News' obituary/tribute article.

March 11, 1943, pp. 5, by Cy Kritzer, of the Buffalo (N. Y.) Evening News

[Bill Burgess]

Bill Bradley's 1950 Sporting News' Interview:

November 15, 1950, pp. 13, 14, by Ed Bang, Cleveland, O.

[Bill Burgess]

Amos Rusie's 1939 Sporting News' Interview:

December 28, 1939, pp. 5, by Louis Karnofsky.

[Bill Burgess]

Jimmy Burke's 1940 Sporting News' Interview:

December 26, 1940, pp. 5, by Edgar G. Brands

[Bill Burgess]

Zack Wheat's 1941 Sporting News' Interview:

November 20, 1941, pp. 5, by Harold Webster Lanigan

[Bill Burgess]

Frank Baker's 1955 Sporting News' Interview:

February 9, 1955, pp. 17, 18, by Bill Perry, Sports Editor of the Easton (Md.) Star-Democrat

February 16, 1955, pp. 17, 18.

[Bill Burgess]

Charlie Gehringer's 1951 Sporting News' Interview:

August 22, 1951, pp. 2 & 8, by Sam Greene, of the Detroit News.

[Bill Burgess]

Ed Walsh's 1957 Sporting News' Interview:

January 9, 1957, pp. 13 & 14, by Frank Monardo

January 16, 1957, pp. 13 & 14.

[Bill Burgess]

Clark Griffith's 1952 Sporting News' Interview:
July 23, 1952, pp. 11 & 12, by JG Taylor Spink

July 30, 1952, pp. 11 & 12.

August 6, 1952, pp. 11 & 12.

[Bill Burgess]

Nap Lajoie's 1942 & 1953 Sporting News' Interviews:

November 4, 1953, pp. 13 & 14, by Lee Allen.

November 11, 1953, pp. 11 & 12.

February 26, 1942, pp. 7 & 8, by Eugene J. Whitney, of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

[Bill Burgess]

Pete Alexander Interview, Baseball Magazine, July, 1929, pp. 339, by Ferdinand C. Lane.

[Bill Burgess]

-----------------------------------------Is Hornsby Baseball's Greatest Hitter?

In the Following Racy Narrative There Are Many Shrewd Observations of Major League Stars of Both Circuits, by Carl Mays (Baseball Magazine for February, 1925, pp. 391, 392, 424.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mays was undoubtedly the most unpopular player who ever wore an American uniform. He was a storm center with players and owners alike and not a few will agree with him in his claim that he was railroaded out of the American League. However that may be and whatever his enemies have said about him, they (to quote his own phrase) never called him a fool. And Mays, who watched American League batters for years, makes the unqualified claim that Rogers Hornsby is the greatest hitter he ever saw. Ty Cobb says the same thing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was railroaded out of the American League, I won't deny it was something of a disappointment. But now I'm glad it happened for I am with a club where I am better satisfied and better treated than I have ever been before. And at my age, after all the trouble I have had, that is something to be considered.

There is no use in mincing terms at all. The disagreements I have had in the American League are too well known. Ban Johnson naturally held something against me on account of the trouble that resulted when I went to the Yankees. He has a long memory and I guess all the other owners agreed with him. I wasn't very popular with American League owners.

And it's no state secret that I didn't get along with Miller Huggins. I'm not going to say anything against him here. We didn't agree. That's all. A year ago he didn't think he needed me. He had five good pitchers anyway, so he kept me inactive most of the year. When I did pitch I wasn't extra good. No pitcher would be who only gets in there once in a while at uncertain intervals. But I think I won enough ball games for the New York Club, regardless of any differences I had had with the management to get a little better break at the finish. However that's all water past the mill and as I say, I am glad I am with the Cincinnati Ball Club.

A lot of people figured I was through, but I don't know how they got that way. My arm was never better and outside of a little sickness which sent me to the hospital for a few days, I never felt better. I must have something left for among other things I won nine straight ball games, even if nothing much was said about it. I guess maybe I'm not over popular with the sport writers either. Well, it's a queer world and you can get many a kick out of it by sitting on the side lines and looking it over. I have been a winning pitcher for a long time and nobody is going to take that away from me. The records, once written, stay written. Personal feeling or bias or unpopularity or anything else won't change them.

The first of the year a lot of people said I wasn't going so good. Perhaps they didn't analyze the situation quite so closely as they might have done. It would have been a little fairer to say that the Club wasn't going good. Not that I blame the other fellow at all. We were crippled with accidents and such a team as we could put onto the field did the best work it could. But that work was a little rough on the pitchers. In my first fourteen games the Club scored exactly 19 runs and they made exactly 48 errors. You're not going to win too many games on that kind of a break. You see, I have to tell my own story because I haven't any hard-working press agents broadcasting what I do for the eager press.

There is still another reason why I am glad now that it is all over to find myself outside the American League. I always had a curiosity to know more about the National League. You see the ball player in one League is about the last person to have an opportunity to see the other League in action. He's playing on his own circuit all the time.

Probably people will think that I am sore at the American League so that my judgment is warped. But that's ridiculous. I may not feel over friendly to some individuals in the American League but surely with the great mass of ball players in that circuit I have no possible differences.

First off, I will go on record with a statement that I believe the two leagues are about as near on a par in player ability as it is possible to get. I'm not going to say the National League is superior to the American League because I don't believe it is. But I'm going to say that it's just as good, because that's my honest conviction having played in the American League for years and been a member of the National League last season. It is a privilege and a pleasure to see star players that you have read about but never had the opportunity to observe doing their stuff before your eyes. You can then size them up yourself and see whether or not, in your opinion, they deserve the credit they have been given, or more, or less. I have enjoyed watching Frank Frisch play though he's been a thorn in our sides. He's undoubtedly a wonderful ball player. I have heard a lot about Max Carey's ability as a base stealer. I frankly confess I used to think National Leaguers exaggerated his ability, but I don't now. I think he is absolutely the greatest base runner who ever lived. I know he's the greatest runner that I ever saw.

I have been particularly interested in Rogers Hornsby. When I was in the American League and he was the National League batting Champion, I used to wonder how he would stack up with American League Champions. Then I naturally had an opinion. Now I think I know.

Rogers Hornsby, in my own opinion, is the greatest batter in a baseball uniform today. I do not say that he will ever match Ty Cobb's wonderful record. I doubt if he does. I do not say he can hit a ball as hard as Babe Ruth. He can't do it. But I do say, he's the greatest batter in baseball.

Before I am accused of running out on my own League and boasting the star of a rival circuit just because I happen to be in it myself, let me explain what I mean by the greatest batter. Ty Cobb has hit throughout his career for an average of .370 or thereabouts. I do not think Rogers Hornsby will quit baseball with such an average, but he may. At the rate he is going now, anything is possible. But Cobb's great advantage was not entirely built upon batting ability. Cobb was a daring, brainy player who was a wonderful base runner. He made everything help his batting average. If he couldn't hit a pitcher, he would bunt. He studied opposing pitcher' weaknesses and peculiarities and took all sorts of advantage of them. This was legitimate, of course, but it helped his hitting. I would say that Cobb was not naturally a .370 hitter throughout his career. He was perhaps a .320 hitter. The other fifty points were due to the fact that he utilized his speed of foot in beating bunts and infield hits and the rest of it was due to nervy headwork on his part. Of course, in a sense those things are a part of batting. But what I mean by batting and what the ball player means by batting is sheer ability to hit. Cobb's batting average, I believe the greatest that baseball will ever know, at least in my lifetime, was mainly ability to hit, but very much improved by speed of foot and phenomenal headwork.

Babe Ruth I ought to know about as well as the next man. I was with him on the Red Sox and with him as a member of the Yankee Ball Club, and I shall give him his due, no more and no less. Ruth, as I have said before, is in a class by himself. He's an abnormality, a freak. There never was a batter like him and very possibly there never will be a batter like him. He has a good batting eye and he can hit a ball harder than any man who ever lived. But Ruth is not a hard man to fool from a pitching viewpoint. In fact, I think he's rather easy to fool.

There's no sense at throwing brick bats at me for making that statement. Anybody who has ever seen Ruth bat in half a dozen games and wasn't blind, knows this. Ruth will swing at a ball and miss it by two feet sometimes. Why? Because the pitcher fooled him on that ball. Now don't think that I make any claim that Ruth isn't a great hitter and perhaps the most dangerous hitter who ever lived. He is all of that, but you can fool Ruth on a ball and he can still hit it safe. I've seen him top a ball so bad that for the average player it wouldn't have gone ten feet, but Ruth hit it so hard with that terrific lunge of his, and drove it to the ground so hard that it bounded along and cleared the infield for a safe hit. I have seen him not a few times, hit under a ball so much that it would naturally have been an easy out, but he hit it so hard that it went a mile into the air and still had carrying force enough to clear the bleacher fence for a home run.

Ty Cobb owes a lot of his batting success to speed of foot and using his noodle. Ruth owes a lot of his batting success to sheer brute strength and ability to hit harder than anybody the game ever saw. Now you can say, if you want to argue over hair-splitting points, that brute strength is a part of batting. Undoubtedly it helps batting, but in my opinion it's ability of quite another kind.

Now for Rogers Hornsby. What kind of a hitter is he? Hornsby is fast. I believe he's as fast as Ty Cobb was in his prime. But he's a right-handed hitter and that queers him in beating out bunts and infield hits as Ty Cobb used to do. I don't say he won't be safe on such a play sometimes, but I do say that the mere fact that he is a right-handed hitter prohibits him from using his speed as an aid to his batting as Ty Cobb always did. Rogers Hornsby is a smart ball player in my opinion, and I'm not throwing any rocks at him when I refuse to compare him with Ty Cobb. I think Ty is probably the brainiest ball player who ever lived. Hornsby is fast, but he can't use his speed as he would if he were a left-hander. He knows baseball, but he's not a Cobb. He has strength and hits the ball hard, very hard, but he's not a Babe Ruth. What is he? He's the best natural hitter in baseball by a city block.

Cobb's great record is part speed, part unmatched ability to think quick along original lines. Ruth's batting average, particularly the thing that looms up most, his home-run record, is very much mixed with pure brute strength. Hornsby's great record is batting ability, pure batting ability and nothing else. Now in my checkered career I have been accused of being all kinds of a bad actor and a troublesome player and a thorn in the sides of various people. But I think I am correct in claiming that nobody ever called me a fool. Whatever my critics have had against me, they always admitted there was something in my cranium besides mush and that I knew a few things about pitching, and about batters. I won't make any extravagant claims along this line. I'll just claim what the knockers are willing to give me.

Now I have faced Ty Cobb at bat plenty of times [39x116=.336], and I have faced George Sisler and Tris Speaker and Eddie Collins. I've been on the same ball club with Babe Ruth for years [1914-1923], and I know what those fellows can do and what they can't do. They are a great bunch of hitters. But there isn't one in the list that can shake hands on an equality with Rogers Hornsby when it comes to plain, unadulterated batting ability.

I have just said that it was not difficult, in fact fairly easy for a smart pitcher to fool Babe Ruth now and then. I won't say that it's difficult to fool Rogers Hornsby. I'll say it's absolutely impossible. It can't be done.

Now don't get the idea that Rogers Hornsby doesn't swing at a ball and miss. Of course he does, but that doesn't mean you've fooled him, because you haven't done anything of the kind. Take a golf ball for instance. It's resting perfectly quiet, waiting for you to hit it, but when you swing you can't always meet it exactly the same. There are a lot of people in the United States who will agree with me on that point, even though they're not authorities on pitching. Now it stands to reason that if you can't always swing and meet a stationary ball just as you want to you can't always swing and meet a moving ball that the best of human skill and ingenuity is trying to compel to jump and duck and dodge your bat. Rogers Hornsby will swing at a ball and miss it. It will break a little more or a little less than he thought it would break. That's all. You haven't fooled him. He knew what it was and he was just about meeting it, but didn't quite connect.

Rogers Hornsby has no batting weakness. Curves, slow balls, fast balls all look alike to him. Balls that are high or low or inside or outside, they're all the same. Having tried everything else, I have fed him balls high on the inside. That didn't phase him a bit. And he won't drop to the ground or sprawl around ducking a ball either. I've put a ball myself within four inches of his face and he didn't even step back. He merely turned his head to one side. He has absolutely the surest eye and is the best judge of a ball that I ever saw.

I saw a pitcher once throw at Hornsby's shins in an effort to dust him off the plate. That might disconcert Hornsby for he has a habit of standing away from the plate and stepping into the box as he swings. But Hornsby took it all as a matter of course and he said something about it. His words were to the effect that if the pitcher tried that again, he'd knock the ball back at him through the box. Well, the pitcher tried it again and like a shot out of a gun that ball went back to the pitcher off Hornsby's bat. It struck him on the shins, caromed off beyond the base lines and Hornsby got to second base on the hit.

I saw a pitcher try to fool Hornsby with a quick return ball when he wasn't prepared. The ball was on him before he saw it, but he gave that ball a sharp rap and drove it out past the left fielder for three bases. Any time a pitcher thinks he can fool Rogers Hornsby by some tricky stuff, he's taking a man's sized job on his hands.

I don't say that Hornsby never pops up. Of course he does. And sometimes he gets a Texas Leaguer. But anybody who has ever seen Hornsby bat knows his style. He's a straightaway hitter. He meets the ball fair on the nose and it goes like a shot. In other words, he's the most accurate hitter in baseball and he has an ideal batting form; easy, rangy, cool, self-confident. Not a self-confidence due to a swelled head, but a sure knowledge of his own powers. Hornsby's unspoken attitude to a pitcher is: "Put over anything you want to and I'll hit it. Take your choice. It makes not a particle of difference to me."

Hornsby has speed that helps him on extra base hits, but doesn't help his batting average much. Hornsby has strength, but no doubt there are dozens of stronger players in both leagues. His batting is plain batting with out any frills or any mixture of other gifts. He's been hitting .400 or thereabouts for the last five years. He's only twenty-eight and will doubtless improve. And he's one reason why I'm glad I am wearing a National League uniform. For that little adventure has given me a chance to observe the greatest natural hitter I ever saw.

A pitcher doesn't naturally like hitters. They're his hereditary enemies. But a pitcher can admire supreme ability in an opponent. And in Rogers Hornsby batting ability has reached absolutely the top notch. (Baseball Magazine for February, 1925, pp. 391.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have wanted to post this article for a very long time. I didn't think I had it. Found it while randomly rummaging through the legendary, fabled, storied, musty, dusty, Bill Burgess' File Cabinet of Forgotten Lore & Wondrous Articles. This one is for JBR, Bench 5, TRfromBR, and csh. ENJOY!
------------------------------------------------------------
As the article appeared in Baseball Magazine, February, 1925, after his first season in the NL.[/B]
Rogers Hornsby/Ty Cobb: 1927

[Bill Burgess]

------------------------------My Attitued Toward the Unfortunate Chapman Affair
------------------------------as Stated by Carl Mays (Baseball Magazine, November, 1920, pp. 575, 576, 577, 607.

[Bill Burgess]

So the charge that Ty didn't appreciate modern players is without basis, despite his publicized rants to the contrary. He also gave rave reviews to Roy Campanella, Willie Mays, Phil Rizzuto, Stan Musial, among other 1950's players.

Here is a typical article he gave out, to balance out the picture. It appeared in Sport magazine and came out in May, 1959.


--------------Ty Cobb Picks The greatest Ballplayers Since Ty Cobb--

-------The man baseball experts call "the greatest of 'em all" names Ted Williams, Stan Musial and Mickey Mantle----------------------------

Question: "Who's the greatest ballplayer since Ty Cobb?" writes Joseph M. Malpe, of Chicago.

We were willing to tackle the question, but at first we couldn't think of the right man to ask. Then writer Leslie Lieber said, "Why not ask Ty Cobb himself?" It was a little easier said than done, because the former Detroit Tiger star now is at home in two states, California and his native Georgia, and travels across the country with some of the speed he once exhibited on the basepaths. Finally trapped at his Georgia country place, he promptly gave us his answer:

"A lot of years and a lot of great players have come and gone since I hung up my glove 30 years ago. And picking the "best" of anything always does more harm to the hundreds overlooked than it does justice to the one you pick.

But I'll try to answer Mr. Malpe's question if he'll let me change "best player" to "best players." In my book, modern baseball has produced three real super-stars who are still playing ball this season. They are Ted Williams, Stan Musial, and Mickey Mantle. Of these three, Williams and Musial have already stood the test of time. Though he may turn out to be the greatest of the three, Mantle is still in the whiz-kid class. Mickey's been troubled by injuries, but if he's able to keep going at present pace, he'll go down as an all-time great.

----------------------------Today's Top Slugger---------------------------
Of course, Ted Williams has to be among the modern Big Three. On slugging alone, Williams, perhaps the finest batting craftsman of all time, and the only player active today to hit over .400, would have to be the top-seeded choice. What Ted would have accomplished if World War II, Korea, and injuries had not deprived him of several full seasons can only be guessed at. But the man who won the American League batting championship for the sixth time at the age of 39 in either league to turn the trick is certainly an all-timer.

The third member of my "team" would, of course, have to be the St. Louis Cardinals' great star, Stan Musial. Stan hold more baseball records than any other active competitor.

There you have my Big Three. But there have been many other greats since I quit the game. Who could forget Joe DiMaggio? And if you were to ask me about pitchers, I'd name three in particular - Carl Hubbell, Bob Feller and Dizzy Dean.

Baseball has changed a lot since my day. I bet if Larry Lajoie could swing on today's "live ball," he'd hit .450 and "Shoeless Joe" Jackson would be hammering as Babe Ruth's home-run record. But - for today - I'll stick with Williams, Musial and Mantle. Come to think of it, they would have been great in any era." - The End.

[Bill Burgess]

Bench 5 contributed this interesting article in the Roger Hornsby thread. Rogers Hornsby's response to an article that Ty Cobb had written for Life Magazine, March 24, 1952, 'They Don't Play Baseball Any More": Tricks That Won Me Ball Games, by Ty Cobb'.

TY COBB has publicly put modern baseball in the grease. He says we don’t play the game in the big leagues any more. He says only two of today’s players — Phil Rizzuto, New York Yankee shortstop, and Stan Musial, St. Louis Cardinal batting star—would have been standouts in the era of the dead ball, when Cobb won his fame. He says our modern players are lazy, dumb and soft. He says a lot of things. A few of them make sense, but not very many. So I’ve got some things to say to Cobb; some answers to his criticisms.

Cobb was my boyhood idol. Whenever the Detroit Tigers played an exhibition in Fort Worth, Texas, I was there, mostly to watch Cobb. There never has been a player like him for enterprise and daring. For competitive fire and determination. For always trying to outsmart the other fellow, and most of the time succeeding. Cobb wanted to win at any cost. I always wanted to win too. Maybe not as much as Cobb. I’ll tell you what I mean.

In 1923, when Cobb was still a star with the Tigers and I was in my prime with the St. Louis Cardinals, we played a spring exhibition game in Augusta, Ga. It was sort of a homecoming day for Cobb, a Georgia boy. About 4,000 or 5,000 jammed the stands and overflowed onto the field. They were there to see Cobb. They also wanted to see a game. In the sixth inning, Cobb got to first base and tried to steal second. We had him all the way. I was waiting with the ball when he slid in. It wasn’t even close. Cy Pfirman was umpiring on the bases, Steamboat Johnson behnd the plate. In the custom of those days, the Tigers, not the league office, had hired Pfirman and Johnson to officiate on their exhibition tour.

When Pfriman called Cobb out, Cobb raised hell in general and stormed at Pfirman. Johnson, who had walked out to the middle of the diamond, ordered Cobb off the field. Cobb refused to go. Since he had made the third out in the inning, he headed for center field. Johnson shouted after him:

“If you’re not off the field by the time I get back behind home plate, I’ll forfeit the game to St. Louis.”

Johnson kept his word. When he took up his position and saw Cobb standing out in center field, he forfeited the game. There was a terrific hassle. The management was forced to refund the entire gate receipts. Cobb had spoiled the afternoon for everyone. He liked to win all right. Liked to have his own way about everything.

Cobb boasts how he used psychology to beat out “Shoeless Joe” Jackson, of the Cleveland Indians, for the 1911 American League batting championship. Cobb and Jackson, both from the South, were friendly. With only a few weeks left in the season, Jackson had a good lead on Cobb. Then the Indians met the Tigers in a series. As usual, Jackson greeted Cobb. But Cobb ignored him until the series was over. Jackson was a simple fellow. Cobb’s tactics preyed on his mind and affected his hitting. Cobb went ahead of him and won the batting title.

Supremely Selfish Player
Batting championships were meat and drink to Cobb. He was supremely selfish ballplayer. Before he became manager of the Tigers, he was more interested in his own accomplishments than in his team’s. That’s why he has a nerve to criticize Joe DiMaggio. I’ll concede as Cobb says that DiMaggio didn’t hunt and trap the hills in the offseason to keep himself in shape. His injuries, many of them, came not so much from lack of condition as from bum breaks. Like getting burned in a trainer’s electric oven. Like having those bone spurs grow out on his heels.

Even with all his injuries, DiMaggio was a much better outfielder than Cobb. He covered a lot more ground and he could throw better. He also had more power at bat. But most of all, DiMaggio had something that was completely lacking in Cobb. I mean a deep sense of team play and team spirit. In his quiet way, DiMaggio was a tremendous competitor in the team sense. It was contagious. The rest of the team felt it and benefited from it, even when DiMaggio himself might not be having a good day.

DiMaggio Tops Cobb
DiMaggio over Cobb would have to be the choice of any manager interested in winning pennants and not individual batting championships. Cobb played 24 years in the AL but on only three pennant winners. In 13 seasons with the Yankees, DiMaggio played on 10 pennant winners.

You might argue that DiMaggio played on better teams for a wealthier, smarter organization, the New York Yankees. I still say, all or almost all, of those pennants couldn’t have been won without DiMaggio. I could give you all kinds of examples.

One of thje best was n 1949. DiMaggio was out the entire first half of the season. In late June, he got back in the line-up for an important series at Boston, and he hit four home runs to lead the sweep of a three game series with the Red Sox. If it hadn’t been for that, the Red Sox probably would have won the pennant easily. Instead, the Yanks won it, thanks to DiMaggio. He was a force on his team that Cobb never was on his.

Cobb was a law unto himself... off the field as well as on. Hughie Jennings, who managed the Tigers, realized the only way to handle Cobb was not to try. Cobb made his own rules. I don’t mean he didn’t keep in good shape. But he showed up at the ball park when he pleased. I don’t mean he missed many games. He'd play, if he could walk. But if he didn’t feel like taking batting practice or fielding practice, he didn’t. It was nothing unusual for him to show up just before game time.

That kind of stuff wouldn’t be tolerated today by any manager I know of. Cobb would show up at the ball park on time, like everybody else. If he didn’t, hed; be fined and suspended, and they’d make it stick. Which reminds me, didn’t the Yankee club fine DiMaggio once because he would’t pose for pictures? Baseball has changed but in ways Cobb never thought about.

Anyhow, I can’t see how Cobb qualifies to criticize modern baseball. How many games has he seen since he quit playing in 1928? Not too many. He gets to the World Series once in a while, but that’s about all. He plays golf. He’s a man of leisure. A millionaire with plenty of gilt-edged stocks. So why should he run around the country watching ball games? But why should he put the rap on the game that made him?

On the subject of money, Cobb likes it as well as the rest of us. That ties into the reason his criticism of Ted Williams of the Red Sox makes no sense either. I’ll tell you why. Cobb berates Williams for not hitting to left field when the defense overshift into right fields against him. Now, Williams is just as smart as Cobb and just as keen a student of batting. He knew what they were doing to him. If he wanted he could have pushed the ball to left field.

The reason Williams kept pulling the ball to right field most of the time, no matter the defense, was that as a left handed hitter, his pull power, his long ball power, his home run power were to right field. And Wiliams knew the fans came out to see him hit homeruns. For hitting the longball, Williams got paid $100,000 a year. Billy Goodman of the Red Sox is a fine hitter but he gets paid $20,000 a year. Goodman hits line drive singles and doubles.

Cobb himself was a scientific hitter, instead of a power hitter. His greatness as a player had established him in high salary brackets by the time the lively ball came into the American League around 1920. So he didn’t have to switch from science to power, to up his pay check. Even so, he occasionally went on a home run binge with the lively ball. One time he hit five homers in two successive days.

But the important point is this. If the deal ball had been lively, instead of dead, when Cobb came up to the big leagues in 1905 and for the succeeding 15 years, Cobb would have concentrated on power instead of placing the ball. Why? Because like Williams, he would have been after that long ball hitter’s salary.

Isn’t it sensible to figure that players of intelligence and natural ability, like DiMaggio and Williams, would have adapted their batting to fit the conditions of the deal ball, just as Cobb did? As a matter of fact, all of our modern players would have modified their play to fit the conditions of the time. What is Cobb talking about when he says Phil Rizzuto and Stan Musial are the only modern players who would have stood out in the dead-ball era. I can appreciate how Cobb feels about Rizzuto and Musial. Rizzuto, the scientific bunter, base runner, and hit behind the runner man is a great fielder as well. Musial worries all the pitchers. But there are others.

George Kell, Tiger third baseman, is almost as scientific a batter as Cobb was himself. Kell is not a long ball hitter. He is a spray hitter. Hits the ball where it’s pitched; to all fields. Goodman’s the same type. And there are several others in both leagues. All of them would have had higher averages with the dead ball than they have with the lively ball. Kell might have been a .400 hitter.

Does Cobb honestly believe Jackie Robinson, of the Brooklyn Dodgers, with his speed, power and fire wouldn’t’ have been a star in the old days? Robinson, Minnie Minoso, of the White Sox, and Sam Jethroe of the Boston Braves, says Cobb, wouldn’t have been able to steal bases against the old pitchers and catchers.

“Come Again, Cobb.”
Cobb gets himself involved in quite a contradiction here. In one breath, he says nobody, in the major leagues today is a first class runner. In the next breath he says no pitchers and catchers, today have learned how to stop a good base runner. Well, how could they, if there are none? Come again, Cobb.

Today, base runners don’t steal as many bases as the old-timers, for one very good reason; They dobn’t get the opportunities from their managers. Here is the main point of their whole argument and Cobb missed it; or deliberately skipped it. He says he knows the lively ball changed the game, yet he sounds off as if he didn’t know it.

Managers today play for the big inning. There are a few exceptions like when you want to play for one run late in a tight ball game. But mostly, you are going for the big inning. With the lively ball, if a batter gets hold of it, he can drive in a runner from first base just as easily from second. So why risk breaking up a rally, a big inning, by attempting a steal?

If Cobb were playing today, he’d never steal any 96 bases, like he did in 1915, or anywhere near it. Not that he wasn’t the greatest base runner of them all. But no modern manager could afford to give him that many opportunities to steal. Not with this lively ball and the emphasis on the big inning.

Whena modern manager occasionally has let a natural base runner go to town, he’s done all right. In 1931, when Joe McCarthy gave Ben Chapman of the Yankees his head, Chapman stole 61 bases. Robinson and other speed boys of today would have concentrated more on the art of stealing and base running if they had played in the era of the dead ball.

Long Ball Power Needed
It’s true, as Cobb points out, that the old fashioned game, bunting, stealing, hit and run – helped Paul Richards keep the White Sox in front for half of the AL race a year ago. I don’t say one-run baseball is extint today, but you can’t win with it alone. Richardson realized that. He went out after more long ball power for the club. That’s why he traded to get catcher Sherman Lollar. Lollar hits a long ball. And at the time this was writte, the White Sox were dickering for even more power.

Cobb also cites Leo Durocher, of the new York Giants, as a manager who leans to the old-fashioned game. Sure, Durocher wants speed, pitching, good defense. He reshaped his club to get it. But like Richards, he knows he can’t get along without long ball power. I suppose you’ve heard about Bobby Thomson’s home run against the Dodgers last year. I’ve heard more than enough about it. And did you notice how fast the Giants moved to get Bob Elliott and his long ball bat from the Braves after Monet Irvin got hurt?

Cobb criticizes managers today for shifting around so much to get a right handed hitter in there against a left handed pitcher and vice versa. Well, Cobb did the same thing when he was managing the Tigers, from 1921 through 1926. The Tigers, under Cobb, finished as high as second in 1923, but Cobb was too impatient to be a good manager. He couldn’t understand why all his players coulsdn’t do things the way he did them. Considering his record and shortcomings as manager, where does Cobb come off pointing at managers today?

Discussing pitchers in his day and now, Cobb contradicts himself again. He goes into detail about the emery ball, the shine ball, the spit ball and all of the other gimmick balls pitchers could use then but can’t today. He admits the ball is livelier than it was. In other words, he shows how all the advantages have been taken away from the pitcher and given to the hitter. Yet. Cobb says he can’t understand why there are more sore arms today.

Look at the Facts, Cobb
Steve O’Neill, who spanned the eras of the dead ball and the lively ball, first as a catcher and later as a manager, will tell you the old-time pitchers threw a lot fewer curve balls They threw the ball in there and let the batter hit it. They could rely more on their fielders, because there wasn’t the danger of somebody rocketing that dead ball over the wall or into the seats.

Fielding also has been changed by the lively ball. Tris Speaker used to play center field mighty close to second base. But when the ball got lively around 1920, Speaker had to back up.

Contrary to what Cobb says, the old days saw more football blocks and pile-ups around second base by runners trying to break up the double play than you see today. It had to be. The ball was deader. It took longer to get along the ground to the infielder. This delayed the force play at second until the runner was closer to the bag than he is today. So, naturally, there were more traffic jams.

Although Cobb cries out against the football block to break up the double play, he says the game otherwise has gone soft. Not only the pitchers but everybody gets hurt easier, begs oft quicker. Did Cobb ever hear of Eddie Stanky, and Country Slaughter, of the St. Louis Cardinals. Or how Red Rolfe played through the entire 1941 World Series for the Yankees when he could hardly stand up? I could name you all kinds of examples.

But maybe Cobb doesn’t regard Rolfe as a modern. He talks about Lou Gehrig’s fortitude in the face of a killing disease as if the famed Yankee first baseman was somebody from the dead-ball era. Gehrig didn’t get into the regular Yankee line-up until 1925, five years after the lively ball came in.

I’m not trying to claim everything Cobb says is wrong. He made some good points. I agree with him that too many players today just swing for the fences all the time, even the little guys. I weighed between 175 and 180 and stood five foot eleven when I was at my peak. That’s a pretty good size. But, I never tried for home runs, even in 1922 when I hit 42; even with the lively ball. I just tried to meet it solidly wherever it was pitched. Of course, I had good natural extra—base power. I got lots of doubles and triples. But I didn’t concentrate or home runs.

Cobb’s also right when he says there’s no excuse for pitchers and other players not learning how to bunt.

And I’ll go along with him that today’s players don’t love baseball like we used to. They have too many distractions: golf, automobiles, social obligations.

The big bonuses they give kids for signing are harmful. Don’t’ get me wrong. I want to see everybody get as much as they can. But some kids raw out of high school today have got more for signing than some old-timers and stand-out old-timers too, ever earned in their entire careers. These bonuses have caused trouble on ball clubs and have caused some kids to lose their incentive. The bonus certainly didn’t help Dick Wakefield and a lot of others.

I’ve got to agree also that there aren’t as many great players today as there used to be. But how could there be? Conditions are so different. And you’ve got to consider these conditions:

First, there’s night baseball. In Cobb’s time, all games were played in the afternoon. This year, 35 percent of major league games are played at night. This has a bad effect on hitters. You just can’t see the ball as well at night.

Furthermore, in the minor leagues, where most baseball, except on Sundays, is played at night, you are developing kids under a completely different set of conditions from those in the old days. You can’t gauge their abilities accurately off a steady nigh-ball diet. Sometimes, hitters will look worse than they really are, and pitchers better.

Night ball puts extra stress and strain on muscles. You cool off a lot quicker after a night game, and that’s not good. In Cobb’s time, the average big league player’s career lasted about six years. Nowadays, it’s about a year less, possibly even more. That’s due to a lot of night ball.

Then, there’s the general manpower situation. Cobb came up in 1905. For the next 12 years, baseball went along without any war threat cutting down manpower. And after WWI, we had 23 years without another outbreak. All that time, kids were being allowed to develop in the sand lots and in schools.

But take the last eleven years. We’ve had two wars. We’re still in the second one. Players leave baseball daily for service. Some of them served with homor in WWII and are now going back in action, into this so called police action in Korea. We can’t develop players and we can’t hold onto them. I’m not complaining, understand, I’m just stating facts. You don’t put together a major league team any more. You patch it together.

All Time Team
But I can still put together my all time teams, for each big league and for both leagues taken together. I’m picking only players I saw, as a player myself or as a manager. I’m not including anybody who is active today. I’m not including Cobb, either in the all-time All American League Team or the all-time team for both leagues together. Some old-timers will say Hornsby’s crazy or bitter or both. But I’m entitled to my opinion, and this is it.

My all-time AL and big league outfields are identical: Joe Jackson in left; Babe Ruth in right; and Tris Speaker in center. I’d also put Joe DiMaggio and Ted Williams ahead of Cobb. All five of these men had more natural ability than Cobb. If they were out for the same team, they would be chosen by a manager ahead of Cobb. This would be especially true in the lively ball era. Cobb, despite all his ingenuity and fire, just would not have had the natural talent to beat them out.

For my all-time AL infield; George Sisler on first, Eddie Collins, second, Luke Appling, shortstop, and Buck Weaver, third base. Weaver, like Joe Jackson was involved in the Chicago Black Sox scandal, but I’m discussing ballplayers and not their morals. My catchers would be Mickey Cochrane and Bill Dickey. My pitchers, Walter Johnson and Lefty Grove.

For my NL infield, I’d put Bill Terry on first, Frank Frisch on second, Honus Wagner at short and Pie Traynor on third. In the outfield: Mel Ott, Eddie Rousch and Paul Waner. Gabby Hartnett, catch. Grover Cleveland Alexander and Carl Hubbell, pitch.

For the all time team, both leagues, I’ve given you the outfield – Jackson, Speaker and Ruth. The infield would be Sisler, Collins, Wagner and Traynor. The catchers; Cochrane and Bill Dickey. The pitchers: Alexander, Johnson, Grove and Hubbell.

I’d be proud to be bat boy for that team.

Cobb could help me.

[Bill Burgess]

Eric (Bench 5) contributed this article in the Rogers Hornsby Thread. It's a little technical, but still fascinating.
------------------------------------------------------------
NY Times, April 10, 1927
"Rogers Hornsby has disposed of his Cardinal stock, thereby complying with the order of John A. Heydler, President of the National League. Hornsby now has removed the last obstacle and is eligible to represent the New York Giants during the regular league season, which opens on Tuesday.

Following a conference in the office of the New York Giants in the Hart Building at Forty-second Street and Sixth Avenue yesterday morning, it was announced that Sam Breadon, President of the St. Louis club, had purchased the stock. Leo J. Bondy, attorney for the New York Giants, who had threatened to apply for an injunction to permit Hornsby to play, acted as spokesman for the club. He said that a settlement had been reached, but nothing would be announced as to the compromise price.

However, it was learned on good authority that Hornsby had received $100,000 and $12,000 additionally for counsel fees. This would be in accordance with the announcement of the National League, after the Pittsburgh meeting last Friday night that the league had obtained an offer of $100,000 for Hornsby.

After the meeting President Heydler and Attorney Bondy issued the following joint statement; "An agreement has been reached for the purchase of Hornsby’s stock in the St. Louis club at a price satisfactory to all concerned. In bringing about this solution, concessions were made by Hornsby, the St. Louis and New York clubs and the National League. The stock will revert to Samuel Breadon for the benefit of the St. Louis club."

Thus in a few hours a compromise settlement was reached after more than twelve hours of conferring among the National League owners had failed to accomplish anything in Pittsburgh. Prior to that, the Giants, with the aid of Heydler, tried to effect a settlement in private, but both Hornsby and Breadon refused to make concessions. Hornsby had insisted his 1.167 shares of stock were worth $105 per share and ho refused to take any cut. He purchased the stock for $45 per share, and. according to one conversant with Hornsby’s affairs, the star second baseman paid down only $5,000 and to date he had paid in only $25,000 on the stock which when purchased by Hornsby had a valuation of $52,515.

The compromise settlement represents a profit for Hornsby of $47,485 taken on the basis of the $100,000 for his stock. Just what the settlement cost the Giants and the National League was not announced. For a time Breadon held out and repeatedly stated he would not pay more than $60 per share and Hornsbv was equally insistent he would take not take a cent less than $122,735.

While the parties to the settlement would not give any details it was learned on good authority that the $112,000 had been adjusted as follows:
Sam Breadon, $86,000; seven National League Clubs, $2,000 each, or $14,000, and the Giants, $12,000.

When and where the compromise was effected is not clear, but it is believed that the final terms were accepted on the train while returning from the Pittsburgh meeting and that the session in the Giants offices yesterday was a formal one to sign documents. Legal action, accordingly, has been avoided. This is the one thing that the National League wanted to do. When all negotiations had failed, President Heydler called a meeting of the owners in a last effort to keep out of court and Friday it appeared this had failled.

The Giants, through McGraw and Stoneham, have maintained that Hornsby was the property of the Giants, that the Giants should not be deprived of his services through no fault of the clubs, that there was nothing in the league by-laws covering the case and that the Giants would fight the case through the courts.

McGraw came out of the meeting smiling. "We got Hornsby to play ball, and now that we are sure he will be allowed to do this my duties from now will be on the ball field," McGraw said as he hastened for the Polo Grounds.

A few minutes later Hornsby came out of the meeting. He also was on his way to the Polo Grounds to play in the game against the Senators. "All's settled and that's another worry off my mind," he said.

"What was the price?" he was asked. He shook his head and said Heydler and Bondy would do the talking. His attorney, William H. Fahey of St. Louis, also was silent, but it is understood that Hornsby remarked that "he got his price and that he did not make any concessions." This was denied by Attorney Bondy, who said that the official statement covered that point when it read; "Concessions were made by Hornsby, the St. Louis and New York clubs and the National League."

There also was another report, but unconfirmed, that Hornsby received $100 per share, bringing the total to $116,700, out of which he would pay his own attorney fees.

Those present at the conference were President Heydler of the National League; Charles A. Stoneham. President of the Giants; John J. McGraw, manager of the Giants; Rogers Hornsby, William H. Fahey, attorney for Hornsby; Leo J. Bondy, attorney for the New York club, and Frank York, attorney for the Brooklyn club, who also acted as counsel for the National League. It was understood that President Heydler was authorized to act for Breadon.

There still are a few who insist that Hornsby paid only $43 a share for the stock, and that it was the cost of this stock which really brought about friction between Breadon and Hornsby. Hornsby bought the stock in the summer of 1925 and some time later he learned that Breadon had purchased some of the stock from Branch Rickey, now Vice President and business manager of the Cardinals, for $41 per share. Taken on a basis of $43 per share, then, the figures show that Hornsby made a profit of $51,019, with the understanding that he accepted $100,000 outright.

With the last of the off-season wars ended the National League can settle down to the war or playing ball for the balance of the season. Heydler recently said there had been too much talking about things other than baseball for the good of the game, and that it was time to cease injecting private business affairs, players and the league into public prints."

[Bill Burgess]

Would those who see this thread kindly rate it? The rating feature is at the top, right. Please?

[Bill Burgess]

While browsing my files this morning, I came across this interesting article, where Ty Cobb is asked, "Has the Lively Ball Been Good For the Game?
Baseball Magazine, December, 1925, pp. 295.

[Bill Burgess]

Does anyone else have an interesting, historical article to contribute to our collection?

[yanks0714]

Bench 5 contributed this interesting article in the Roger Hornsby thread. Rogers Hornsby's response to an article that Ty Cobb had written for Life Magazine, March 24, 1952, 'They Don't Play Baseball Any More": Tricks That Won Me Ball Games, by Ty Cobb'.

TY COBB has publicly put modern baseball in the grease. He says we don’t play the game in the big leagues any more. He says only two of today’s players — Phil Rizzuto, New York Yankee shortstop, and Stan Musial, St. Louis Cardinal batting star—would have been standouts in the era of the dead ball, when Cobb won his fame. He says our modern players are lazy, dumb and soft. He says a lot of things. A few of them make sense, but not very many. So I’ve got some things to say to Cobb; some answers to his criticisms.

Bill, I know you love Ty Cobb, so what did you think of Rogers Hornsby's criticisms of Ty ?

Personally, I felt like Rogers, always blunt, pretty much nailed it.

[Bill Burgess]

Bill, I know you love Ty Cobb, so what did you think of Rogers Hornsby's criticisms of Ty ?

Personally, I felt like Rogers, always blunt, pretty much nailed it.
When Ty published his article, he was saying the same things that Rogers had been saying for decades. Rogers had been saying that the modern game was inferior to the game he had played.

But the only thing that Rogers took exception to was that in Ty's piece he put Collins on his All-Time Team and mentioned that Rogers had trouble with popups. That one sentence really incensed Rogers.

Ty obviously didn't privately contact Rogers with a heads up. Ty obviously did contact DiMaggio/Williams, so they took it in stride. They were total complete buddies with Ty to begin with. Rogers not so much.

Anyway, Ty/Rogers met the next year at the Hall of Fame inductions, kissed and made up and Rogers promptly put Ty back on his All-Time Team and kicked Joe Jackson off.

The funny part of the story is that when Cobb wrote his autobio with Al Stump, he repeated almost verbatim the same words on his all time team. Repeated the Hornsby trouble with popups.

Anyway, Rogers obviously didn't read that book before he died, because Rogers wrote his own autobio in 1962 and then died. His book came out 6 months after he died. In his book, Rogers called Cobb the greatest player ever in 3 different places. And put him on his All-Time team.

Bet he wouldn't have if someone had put Cobb's autobio in his hands before he died!

He is what Rogers wrote when Ty died.

1961 - "Cobb was the greatest ball player of all time and will never be equaled. Most record books simply talk about his hitting and base stealing. Ty was a tremendous outfielder with a great arm. He was outstanding in everything. Cobb was called a dirty ballplayer because he went into a base with his spikes high but he never hurt anybody. It was his way of playing ball. He was a winner all the time. Ty would do anything to win a ball game, but when he got off the field, he was a perfect gentleman. He was outstanding in everything." (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, July 18, 1961.)

Here is what Rogers put into his book, the year he died.

1962 - "Ty Cobb, who in my opinion is the greatest player of all time, still holds the stolen-base record of 96 he set in 1915, the year I came to the major leagues. Now Cobb--I've played against him in exhibitions and managed against him in the 1921 Winter League in California when he managed the San Francisco Seals and I managed the Los Angeles Angels. He was a helluva competitor. . . He led the American League in stolen bases 6 times. Led the league in batting 12 times. And, as I've said all through this book, he was the greatest player I ever saw.

Now Babe Ruth. They may have written more about the Babe than about George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. All I can say new about Ruth is that he hit for power--not average--and had a lifetime batting average of .342. Dead ball or lively ball, he'd hit 60 home runs if they were pitching him softballs." ( My War With Baseball, by Rogers Hornsby, as told to Bill Surface, 1962, pp. 247.) (Author's note: Hornsby died January 5, 1963.)

[Bill Burgess]

-------------------------------------------------The Johnny Kling Story,
as told by Gil Bogen and Dave Anderson for the Bioproject.SABR.org

Johnny Kling
by Gil Bogen and Dave Anderson

Arguably one of the most overlooked star players of the Dead Ball Era, catcher Johnny Kling was key part of the great Chicago Cubs Dynasty of 1906-10. When his baseball career was over, Kling returned to his hometown of Kansas City, Missouri where he enjoyed a successful business career. A modest man, Kling never thought anyone would be interested in his accomplishments as a player once he retired.

John Kling fell in love with the game at an early age, but he was required to help his father with the family bakery business. His job was to drive a horse drawn wagon and deliver bread to waiting customers. Every morning, the clang of the family alarm started John on his route, making deliveries. The story is told that the route never grew in numbers and the elder Kling started to learn why. An irate housewife informed the bakery proprietor she would take bread from a competitor since the Kling wagon never reached her house on time.

One morning, Kling's father started out on the trail of Johnny and found the horse meandering down the road. Where was Johnny? A great deal of noise over in a corner field, where a baseball game was in progress, revealed the truth about the undelivered bread. Did the elder Kling use a paddle on youthful Johnny? Only history knows.
Those good old corner lot days were soon over. In 1890, at age fifteen, he pitched for the Haverlys and led the team to an amateur league championship. At age 16 Johnny got on a team that had real honest to goodness uniforms. It was the SIBER meat market team, sponsored by John Siber, a butcher. Two years later he joined the Schmeltzers, during the two-year term with the team he pitched, played first base and managed. In 1895 he was given a tryout with St. Louis but was not given a contract because he was too small.

In 1896 he joined Texas of the Texas League and in 1897 he was with the Emporia team. His size again played a role in 1898, when Rockford dropped him because he was too small. He then went back to the Schmeltzers. When he joined the team, they made him a catcher, where he was destined to shine brilliantly in the annals of the national pastime.
In 1899 he went on a barnstorming trip with Kansas City of the Western League. While at a game in Atchison he was noticed by Manager McKibben of the St. Joseph club. In 1900 he began to play with St. Joseph, but in late summer Ted Sullivan found him and signed him for the Chicago Colts. He made his major league debut in September 1900 with the team, he played fifteen games and hit .294 earning a chance to return to the major leagues. Sullivan, ironically was a boyhood friend of White Sox owner Charles Comiskey.

In 1901 Kling shared catching duties with Mike Kahoe and Frank Chance. He appeared in 69 games behind the plate, hitting a respectable .277. It was clear that manager Tom Loftus' catcher, Frank Chance, had difficulty in handling foul tips. In 1902 new Cub skipper Frank Sellee decided that Chance would be his permanent first baseman and Kling his full time catcher. The addition of Joe Tinker at shortstop established the nucleus of a team that would terrorize the National League later in the decade. Kling responded to full time duties by leading the league in putouts, assists and double plays. At bat in 1902 he hit .286 and led the Chicago Nationals in RBI with 57, while batting eighth in the order.

During the Dead Ball Era a strong defensive catcher was a key component of any great team, due to the emphasis on bunting and base stealing. Kling was the dominant defensive catcher during the first ten years of the twentieth century. From 1902 through 1908 he led the National League in fielding percentage four times, putouts six, assists twice and double plays once. Cub pitcher Ed Reulbach called Kling one of the greatest catchers to ever wear a mask. In June, 1907 he threw out all four Cardinal runners who tried to steal second, and in the World Series he gunned down 7 of 14 Tiger runners, holding base stealing champion Ty Cobb to no stolen bases.

As his 1902 figures showed, he was no easy out at bat and was a strong contributor to the Cub offense. In 1906 he hit .312 and batted in 46 runs on the Cub team that won more games than any other team in history. Kling had a career batting average of .272.

His contemporaries, team mates and opponents alike, marveled at his ability to defend, handle pitchers and take part in the psychological warfare which was baseball in the early twentieth century. Johnny Evers claimed Kling could tell pitchers what their best stuff was during warm-ups. He kept up a steady string of chatter earning him the nickname 'Noisy.' Evers praised Kling for his ability to work umpires on balls and strikes, yet Kling avoided antagonizing the men in blue, even warning them if an unusual play or pitch was coming.

In an era where many players could be best described as social outcasts, Kling was different. He did not smoke, chew or drink. His grandchildren say he was kind and tended toward spoiling his children. His eldest daughter was mascot of the Braves during the time her Daddy was manager. Some insight into Kling's character comes from the biography of former baseball commissioner Ford Frick. In Games, Asterisks and People, Frick describes attending an exhibition game involving the Cubs in 1907 in Kendallville, Indiana. As the Cubs were walking to the ballpark, Kling asked the young Frick if he wanted to go to the game. When Frick said yes, Kling had the future baseball tsar carry his shoes. Once at the game Frick was allowed to sit near the bench and see his Cub heroes in action and hear their bench talk between innings.

Kling's difference from other Dead Ball Era players extended to his approach to life. Baseball was a job that opened doors for other opportunities. In other words, he was not a baseball lifer. He had other skills to fall back on, thus his yearly contract talks with Cub owner Frank Murphy often resembled a game of chicken, more than a negotiation.

Following the Cubs' championship year in 1908, Kling won the world pocket billiards championship. He then invested about $50,000 in a billiard emporium in Kansas City, informed Murphy of the investment and requested an indefinite leave of absence. Murphy granted this in writing and Kling promised that if he could subsequently arrange his affairs so that he could leave his business in the hands of others, he would join the team. The arrangement was on the best of terms according to the investigative report by the National Commission in 1910, when Kling had applied for reinstatement into baseball. This story, as told in the Commission's report, varies with news articles that described Kling as a holdout, unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with Murphy. But those statements were not true. Kling had a valid contract for 1907, '08 and '09 as pointed out in the Commission's report. And in spite of receiving an indefinite leave from Murphy, Kling was held to be in violation of his contract for not playing. He was fined $700 and allowed to return to the Chicago team. He was given a $4500 salary, the same as in 1908.

The 1909 hiatus was costly for Kling and the Cubs. The year marked the first since 1906 that the Cubs did not win the pennant, they finished second to the Pirates. As for Kling, he failed to defend his billiards championship.

Kling always maintained that players should learn a lesson from him and stay in the game until they were ready to retire. Despite his clean living habits, Kling found it hard to regain the skills that he had just a few years previous. In 1911 he was traded to the Boston Braves, some claimed as punishment for his holdout and poor performance against Philadelphia in the 1910 World Series. He played and managed for the Braves in 1912. He hit .317, but the team finished dead last at 52-101. His playing career ended in 1913 in Cincinnati.

Upon retirement Kling returned to his native Kansas City where he continued on with a career in real estate, one he had started while playing baseball. He became a successful businessman. He had a knack for developing real estate and amassing wealth. Kling had a compassionate side as well, and would quickly make out a check when a friend was in need. During World War I, he volunteered his services to the military and taught and coached baseball at Camp Funston, Kansas. Kling was a doting parent and his family never wanted for the basic comforts, even during the height of the Great Depression.

In 1933 he bought the Kansas City Blues and promptly eliminated segregated seating at Meuhlebach Stadium, which happened to also be the home of the Monarchs of the Negro Leagues. This policy remained in effect until Kling sold the club in 1937 to Col. Jacob Ruppert of the New York Yankees.

Kling was a private man who preferred life out of the spotlight. We do know he cared little about what others thought or said about him. Some historians claim he was among the first Jewish baseball stars, but such an assertion is still a matter for debate. In a February 12, 1969 letter, Kling's wife said he was baptized Lutheran. In a December 2, 1948 letter, she claimed "he was baptized in the Baptist Church." Nobody seems to have questioned the contradiction nor her motivation for making these statements. Kling's grandson, also named John Kling, recently claimed that his grandfather was definitely Jewish. Membership records for B'nai Jehudah Temple, in Kansas City, Missouri, of close family members, in addition to other records, supports the Jewish heritage issue. Nevertheless, the issue continues to be matter for debate.

Who should one believe? Either way, Kling cared little about what people said about his religion. It was something he chose not to discuss. His focus was on the task before him. And overall, he was successful in whatever venture he took on, be it baseball, business or desegregating seating in the Kansas City ballpark. He was a man with ideas who met challenges head on. He was a man with lofty ideals, a man before his time.

Sources

Dave Anderson and Gil Bogan have had a number of conversations about Kling. Much of the material for this biography was from Dave's book More than Merkle and Gil's upcoming book on Johnny Kling's life.