Bill Donovan

[Cowtipper]

One of the top pitchers of the early 1900s, Bill Donovan played 18 years, although in only nine of them did he appear in more than 20 games. He posted a record of 186 and 139, with a 2.69 ERA. A two time 20 game winner and eight time 15 game winner, Donovan led the league in wins, saves and games in 1901 with 25, 3 and 45, respectively, complete games in 1903 with 34 and won-loss % in 1907 with .862.

He 73rd all-time in ERA, 50th all-time in complete games and 71st all-time in shutouts.

Statistically, he is similar to one Hall of Famer, Jack Chesbro.

So, does Bill Donovan belong in the Hall of Fame?

[jjpm74]

Donovan's best years came with the 1901 Brooklyn Superbas, and the 1902 Browns when he lead his team in wins and era. He also posted a 17 and 16 record in 1904 when his team was an abysmal 61-91. In 1907, his team were the champs in their league and he posted an impressive 25 and 4 record but only had the 3rd best era on his team. In 1908, he also had an impressive season and posted the 2nd best era on his team (George Winter and George Suggs also had better eras, but only had 13 games between them). Donovan only had 2 years when he was the best pitcher on his team and only 2-3 other impressive seasons beyond that. Granted, he played for some mediocre teams during his peak, but he wasn't the best pitcher on his team during their 3 year stretch as league champions and 3 really good years and no dominant years is not enough to consider a pitcher HOF worthy.

One thing he does have going for him is 12 black ink 110 points, but he did this in a era that was dominated by pitchers and where some of his gray ink scores came from the 9th best pitcher in his league making that score suspect. The fact that he appeared in only 3 WS games in 3 years during his peak suggests he was not the #1 starter on his team which also hurts his cause.

[STLCards2]

Saying that Donovan is staticaly similar to Chesbro makes me put him further out of HOf contention that he already is. Chesbro is right up there with Haines, Pennock and Marquard (though not quite as bad) as worst HOF selection for any player, much less pitchers.

At least Chesbro did have at leas one great year, something Donovan never came close to doing. Throw in Donovan's era adjustment and I could see about 120 guys I would put in the HOF before Donovan.

[Paul Wendt]

Contemporary Bill Dinneen is similar to Donovan by lifetime innings and ERA+. With a peak on the mound and a long career as umpire he might be a better conversation piece.

Dinneen isn't a "similar pitcher"(R) because he walked and fanned many fewer batters. He didn't get the nickname Wild Bill. I suspect that it was difficult for a man named Bill to be a professional pitcher and avoid the "Wild Bill" tag.

Dinneen too was not the best pitcher on his championship teams but in Cy Young he had a better excuse. That pitching staff could be one illustration in the dictionary. Take 1901 or 1904 for that but thruout his five-year run Dinneen was in good company on the mound.