The Ultimate Quest for Candidates: Round 2 – 1890’s/1900’s

[Freakshow]

Welcome to The Ultimate Quest for Candidates (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=68815) – Round 2. This thread will have the third poll in the second round, combining the leading players from the polls for the 1890’s (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=72570) and the 1900’s (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=70907). Refer to the earlier threads for discussion and links to biographies.

There will be 15 players on the ballot. You will be asked to vote for 5 (FIVE) players. These 12 players automatically advanced to this round by their top finishes in the Round 1 polls:

92% Jimmy Ryan
92% George Van Haltren
85% Bill Dahlen
82% Jimmy Sheckard
79% Cupid Childs
78% Tommy Leach
73% Roy Thomas
63% Herman Long
52% Cy Seymour
51% Mike Donlin
47% Fielder Jones
38% Lave Cross

We need to decide who will get the other three spots on the ballot. There are 11 runners-up who are under consideration:

36% Harry Davis
33% Mike Tiernan
29% Dummy Hoy
25% Bill Dinneen
22% Johnny Kling
21% Ginger Beaumont
21% Sam Leever
21% Jesse Tannehill
17% Kid Gleason
13% Nig Cuppy
13% Billy Nash

My personal picks are probably Tiernan, Hoy and Dinneen with his umpiring contribution. Your input on this issue is strongly requested as we look to develop a consensus.

Below are the players we voted as the top 23 HOF candidates whose careers centered in the 1890’s and 1900’s.

Pos BJ Player Name Win Shares WARP3 Car WS Adj
4 #26 Cupid Childs (263: 33-33-32) (78.2: 10.9-10.2-8.4) +25
5 #33 Lave Cross (299: 29-26-21) (85.9: 9.1-6.9-6.4) +21
6 #21 Bill Dahlen (426: 37-33-27) (131.3: 11.1-10.5-9.4) +32
8 #52 Mike Donlin (180: 36-31-26) (41.5: 8.8-8.4-5.6) +6
9/8 #41 Fielder Jones (306: 32-29-28) (83.9: 8.2-8.1-7.5) +16 Mgr 8.3 yrs/.540 W%, 27th
5/8 #20 Tommy Leach (334: 31-30-29) (81.5: 9.0-7.5-7.5) +6
6 #34 Herman Long (292: 32-31-28) (84.4: 9.6-8.2-7.7) +27
8/9 #26 Jimmy Ryan (351: 37-29-28) (82.4: 8.6-8.4-6.8) +35
8 #30 Cy Seymour (281: 42-26-26) (65.7: 10.7-8.1-6.9) +9
7 #24 Jimmy Sheckard(353: 37-37-30) (89.0: 10.3-9.6-8.8) +14
8 #29 Roy Thomas (270: 31-30-28) (67.2: 8.2-7.9-7.3) +10
8 #28 Geo. Van Haltren(359: 29-28-27) (81.0: 7.5-6.8-6.5) +15

8 #39 Ginger Beaumont(238: 34-30-28) (52.1: 7.4-6.9-6.6) +9 x
1 --- Nig Cuppy (202: 45-39-33) (43.3: 10.3-8.6-6.5) +9 x
3 #60 Harry Davis (248: 31-26-21) (63.5: 7.6-6.7-6.4) +10 x
1 --- Bill Dinneen (211: 30-30-30) (49.8: 7.9-7.8-7.3) +11 Umpire 29 yrs
4/1 #72 Kid Gleason (263: 26-25-22) (70.1: 10.6-6.1-6.0) -31 x
8 #47 Dummy Hoy (278: 32-27-27) (59.0: 7.1-6.6-6.0) +24 x
2 #48 Johnny Kling (160: 24-22-21) (53.0: 8.1-7.3-6.9) +5 x
1 --- Sam Leever (220: 30-28-22) (41.7: 8.9-5.7-5.6) +8 x
5 #49 Billy Nash (259: 29-26-24) (70.6: 9.3-7.6-6.8) +37 x
1 #99 Jesse Tannehill(245: 35-28-26) (60.4: 10.6-9.8-8.2) +12 x
9 #49 Mike Tiernan (288: 34-30-30) (74.6: 9.4-9.2-8.4) +37 x

Pos – primary position(s)
BJ – rank at his position in the New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract (2001)
Win Shares – shown are career total and best 3 years
WARP3 – from Baseball Prospectus; shown are career total and best 3 years
Other – Bill Dinneen’s umpiring career was the equal of some of the umpires in the HOF. Fielder Jones was a pennant-winning manager.

Some other things to be aware of:
1) Bill James’ rankings emphasize players’ peak years; this results in long steady careers being rated lower than what may seem right.
2) Win shares in seasons before 1904 are increased to adjust them to a 154-game season (actually, to a 152-decision level).
3) Win shares are discounted for the lower quality of play in certain leagues: AL 1901 (3%); AA 1890-91 (12%); AA 1886-89 (3%), AA 1885 (6%); AA 1884 (9%).
4) Pitching win shares before 1893 are discounted by 50% (the same adjustment used by Bill James for his system). These win shares should be assigned to fielding, but I have not attempted this.
5) The latest WARP revision sharply reduced most of these candidate’s numbers, in most cases about 15-20% from the previous polls' charts.

That leaves 13 players that dropped out of consideration after Round 1: Ted Breitenstein, Duke Farrell, Mike Griffin, Topsy Hartsel, Denny Lyons, Deacon McGuire, Al Orth, Jack Powell, Elmer Smith, Chick Stahl, Jack Stivetts, Fred Tenney and Jimmy Williams. Each of these candidates drew less than 13% support.

[jjpm74]

The candidate I support the strongest of those is Dummy Hoy. After him, Mike Tiernan and Jesse Tannehill.

[dgarza]

Tiernan, Beaumont, & Leever

[Brad Harris]

No love for Johnny Kling? Best catcher in the early deadball era who isn't in the Hall. As many people have said, as "Charlie Bennett is to Buck Ewing, Johnny Kling is to Roger Bresnahan." Key component of those Cubs pennant winners in the Aughts.

At-large candidates: Tiernan, Kling and Tannehill. (I don't see how you can take Leever over Tannehill.)

As for the actual poll?
Bill Dahlen's a shoo-in
Cupid Childs has my vote

Sorting out the positional gluts here will be paramount to making smart decisions here. Love to hear anyone's thoughts on ranking the following outfielders - Mike Donlin, Fielder Jones, Jimmy Ryan, Cy Seymour, Jimmy Sheckard, Roy Thomas, and George Van Haltren - and the infielders (Lave Cross, Tommy Leach and Herman Long).

[Freakshow]

(I don't see how you can take Tannehill over Leever.)

Leever is better than Tannehill only if you believe that both win shares and WARP have them wrong.

Leever has a large ERA+ edge due to the defenses behind him, not his pitching.

Tannehill also has a very large edge in hitting, which must be considered in their value.

[Chickazoola]

Kling, Leever, Tiernan for me.

[Paul Wendt]

. . .
My personal picks are probably Tiernan, Hoy and Dinneen with his umpiring contribution. Your input on this issue is strongly requested as we look to develop a consensus.

Reading down the list I was going to say take three of Tiernan, Hoy, Dinneen, and Kling (who rank 2-3-4-5 by round one percent support). So consider it said. That is partly because it seems to me that first-round support should be one consideration. I voted for Billy Nash over Tiernan (and Lave Cross, one of the winners). If I were simply and alone choosing three of them to be honored in the real Hall of Fame it would be Hoy, Dinneen, and Kling.

[Paul Wendt]

Sorting out the positional gluts here will be paramount to making smart decisions here. Love to hear anyone's thoughts on ranking the following outfielders - Mike Donlin, Fielder Jones, Jimmy Ryan, Cy Seymour, Jimmy Sheckard, Roy Thomas, and George Van Haltren - and the infielders (Lave Cross, Tommy Leach and Herman Long).

"Love to hear anyone's thoughts . . ."
I wish there were time for that later but it seems that most votes are cast in the first few days.

While I do not press for Nash over Tiernan and Hoy now, I do urge everyone to be aware of fielding position when they vote. The Hall of Fame has honored a lot of outfielders from the 1890s, and all of the 300-game winners, and not many other 19th century players. Let's not vote for all the outfielders just because they finished with the most base hits.

Donlin didn't play enough to be here unless he batted like Charlie Keller, and he didn't. He doesn't deserve the CF credit some might give him, because he didn't play the position adequately.

Seymour, Thomas (two good career CFs), and Tiernan were very good but they didn't play long enough to advance at this stage. They should be good candidates because the Hall of Fame should have inducted a few more infielders (including catchers among the possibilities) from this score of years. But the Hall of Fame didn't. It took outfielders and 300-game winners from the 1890s, pitchers with very low ERAs from the 1900s, and lots of non-players.

Jones was historically great in CF, one of the best slap hitters, and he left the game in business dispute with Charles Comiskey. If you think much of his managing career then he should be in the mix with the long-career outfielders Sheckard, Van Haltren, Ryan, and Hoy. Sheckard was much superior relative to his colleagues; was that merely good fortune or something to credit here? Bill James rates him historically great in LF (#1 all-time). The other three are usually considered career CFs, Ryan the best(?) but none special in the field.

In my opinion it may be reasonable to vote for zero outfielders, or only Sheckard based on highest standing in his time, or only Jones based partly on his leadership.

So you may guess correctly that I am inclined to vote for Leach and Long; Cross probably not, on AG's observation that he didn't match his catching, or his years as a superb 3Bman, with his average-plus batting.

Anyway, no one should vote for two outfielders, two infielders, and a pitcher because that seems to be fair to all positions. Not to mention three outfielders because there are nine on the ballot, as seems likely.

Much of the "positional glut" in the outfield is already in the Hall of Fame.
Hamilton, Delahanty, and Thompson; Kelley and Keeler; Duffy and McCarthy; Jesse Burkett; Fred Clarke. Those are all from the 1890s. If the next decade is different enough --and the game turned from incredibly high to incredibly low scoring, 1894 to 1908-- then vote for some of its outfielders.

I haven't decided against Ryan and Van Haltren, but they aren't automatic.

[Brad Harris]

Leever is better than Tannehill only if you believe that both win shares and WARP have them wrong.

Leever has a large ERA+ edge due to the defenses behind him, not his pitching.

Tannehill also has a very large edge in hitting, which must be considered in their value.

Good grief. That's what I meant. *sigh* I switched the names around somehow as I was typing that. :(

Getting older sucks. LOL

[Freakshow]

Good grief. That's what I meant. *sigh* I switched the names around somehow as I was typing that. :(

Getting older sucks. LOL
So are you going to edit post #4 and replace Leever with someone else?

The BPro numbers have Tannehill only slightly ahead of Leever purely on pitching. When you factor in that Tannehill was one of the top hitting pitchers in history, he blows Leever away.

[Brad Harris]

At-large candidates: Tiernan, Kling and Tannehill.

That better? ;)

[Paul Wendt]

That better? ;)

I agree with Tannehill over Leever, Gleason, and Cuppy, for what that's worth.
In my opinion, my opinion is worth a lot but that doesn't get Tannehill on the ballot.

[Freakshow]

I'll probably put the poll up tomorrow. It would be nice to get a couple more folks chiming in to our straw poll to determine who should be on the ballot.

[jalbright]

I won't be voting for any of them, but, freak, your three choices seem as good as it gets, FWIW.

[leecemark]

--I'm with Jim on that. Nobody from the also rans is anywhere close to my ballot so whoever is fine by me.

[Brad Harris]

I'll probably put the poll up tomorrow. It would be nice to get a couple more folks chiming in to our straw poll to determine who should be on the ballot.

That week went by fast. ;)

[Freakshow]

That week went by fast. ;)
I wondered why nobody was voting. Actually posting the poll might help.:blush:

[Freakshow]

After a week's delay (sorry), the consensus of the straw poll favors Mike Tiernan, Dummy Hoy and Johnny Kling; they have been included among the top 15 candidates for the Hall of Fame from the 1890's and 1900's.

The poll will be open for one month. Again, we want your top 5 players in this poll, no more and no less. As always, go beyond the numbers and base your votes on the total contribution to baseball made by these men.

[Paul Wendt]

No pitchers. That seems right, almost one too many.

Keep in mind, it has been relatively easy for outfielders to get elected from this time, especially the 1890s. Infielders and catchers have depended on long service as field managers or on immortal doggerel in addition to their playing records.

Then Bill Dahlen from the 1890s and Tommy Leach from the 1900s should advance. (They "should" win by leading, in my opinion, but I'll be pleased if they simply win by finishing in the top five. I expect only the five winners to advance while 1870s/80s sweeps the discussion of honorable mentions.)

Otherwise the "inner" candidates are Cupid Childs and Herman Long from the nineties, Johnny Kling from the aughts. I am writing off Lave Cross. How many votes for them? And how many for the other first-round leaders, OF Ryan, Van Haltren, and Sheckard? That is six contenders for three spots, or seven with attention to Dummy Hoy's unusual circumstances. I am writing off Tiernan, Thomas, Jones, Seymour, and Donlin.

Here they are all laid out by fielding position with my "contenders" in bold. Donlin and Ryan played more center than left or right but played center less than half time. Each is listed in his more common corner with a pointer to centerfield.

LF CF RF
Sheckard Van Haltren Tiernan
Donlin ==> Hoy <== Ryan
Thomas
Jones
Seymour

3B SS 2B 1B
Cross Dahlen Childs --
Leach Long

P
--

C
Kling
The Hall of Merit has elected Sheckard, Dahlen, and Childs with Leach 3rd and Van Haltren 22nd among the ballot veterans who carry over to 2009 (elect three, ie Rickey Henderson plus two).

The Baseball Fever HOF has elected Van Haltren and Dahlen with support for Sheckard, Childs, and Leach now around 50% (tending to advance as others are elected, if not by direct argument).

[leecemark]

--Dahlen is the glaring ommission on this list. Sheckard and Leach I think are solid candidates. Those are the only 3 on the ballot I actually support. I did vote for the required 5, but the last 2 could have been almost anyone on the ballot and I'm indifferent as to whether they advance or not (they'd have to be in a very weak field to get a vote from me in the next round). I'm surprised Van Haltren's support is so strong in the early going (I'm the first NOT to vote for him). He was pretty good for a pretty long time, but was never a special player.

[Chickazoola]

I went with Sheckard, Dahlen, Van Haltren, Ryan, and Kling.

I really wanted to vote for Tommy Leach, but I went Kling instead, simply because early catchers are not well represented in the hall, and Kling has a similar argument to Tinker and Evers as being key members of a dynasty.

[Paul Wendt]

I went with Sheckard, Dahlen, Van Haltren, Ryan, and Kling.

I really wanted to vote for Tommy Leach, but I went Kling instead, simply because early catchers are not well represented in the hall, and Kling has a similar argument to Tinker and Evers as being key members of a dynasty.
(preliminary notes: 1) Jimmy Sheckard, same dynasty; 2) I might vote for Kling myself --over George Van Haltren)

Early thirdbasemen are not well represented in the hall.
Leach has a similar argument to Fred Clarke as key members of a dynasty.
Bill James gives Leach A+ at both third and center.(!)

About thirdbase as a position:
Catcher is a more distinct fielding position, more than any other but pitcher. Maybe there should be no concern for representing 3B; maybe a concern for treating catchers fairly is properly comparable to a concern for the three "throwing infield" positions together. If there were plenty of early SS and 2B in the Hall of Fame, one might then shrug about 3B in particular and happily elect a few more outfielders and pitchers. But it ain't so.

My guess is that outfielders are better represented even if we count all of George Wright, Monte Ward, John McGraw, and Hugh Jennings with the throwing infielders. But I need to check that, it's only an informed guess.

[Paul Wendt]

Quoting myself in part,

Keep in mind, it has been relatively easy for outfielders to get elected from this time, especially the 1890s. Infielders and catchers have depended on long service as field managers or on immortal doggerel in addition to their playing records.
. . .

LF CF RF
Sheckard Van Haltren Tiernan
Donlin ==> Hoy <== Ryan
Thomas
Jones
Seymour

3B SS 2B 1B
Cross Dahlen Childs --
Leach Long

P
--

C
Kling

I voted for Sheckard and the "bold" infielders, two from the aughts (the round one leaders here) and my top three from the nineties.

Lots of 1890s outfielders were better than Ryan and Van Haltren. Even as "best of the rest" these two stand out only by longevity --and GVH for early but mediocre pitching.
Bill James ranks Sheckard a little higher at left than Ryan and GVH at center. Clay Davenport rates Sheckard much superior and presumably one of the best players outside the Hall. Jimmy Sheckard at baseballprospectus (DT card) (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/dt/sheckji01.php)

[Freakshow]

This poll is now in its final week, so I'm giving it a bump up. We still have a few of the regulars that haven't checked in yet.

Remember, the weight of your vote in the final round depends on your level of participation in these preliminary polls.

[Freakshow]

This poll is now in its final week, so I'm giving it a bump up. We still have a few of the regulars that haven't checked in yet.

Remember, the weight of your vote in the final round depends on your level of participation in these preliminary polls.
Some of the regular and recent voters that we hope will chime in here include:

AG2004
AstrosFan
CaptainColdNose
ColoradoExpress
Dogdaze
Los Bravos
rsuriyop
wardawg
Westlake
zemtech

...along with anyone else that has a good understanding of the stars of 100+ years ago.

[Freakshow]

This poll has now closed. With 18 voters weighing in, there are five players assured of being on the ballot in Round 3, the best Hall of Fame Candidates from the 1890's and 1900's:

Bill Dahlen
Tommy Leach
Jimmy Ryan
Jimmy Sheckard
George Van Haltren

These five will be combined with the top five from the 1870's/80's poll, plus four at-large spots.

These four players have earned consideration for an at-large spot on the ballot in Round 3:

Cupid Childs
Mike Donlin
Johnny Kling
Herman Long

One voter cast a ballot with only four names. The corrections result in the slight differences between the ballots and points. Here are the official results of the 1890's/00's poll:


Advances to Round 3 Ballots Points Percent
Bill Dahlen 17 16.8 93.3%
George Van Haltren 13 13 72.2%
Jimmy Sheckard 12 12 66.7%
Tommy Leach 9 9 50.0%
Jimmy Ryan 9 9 50.0%
At-large Candidates
Cupid Childs 8 8 44.4%
Herman Long 5 5 27.8%
Johnny Kling 5 4.8 26.7%
Mike Donlin 4 3.8 21.1%
Also-Ran
Dummy Hoy 3 2.8 15.6%
Fielder Jones 2 2 11.1%
Lave Cross 1 1 5.6%
Mike Tiernan 1 1 5.6%
Cy Seymour 0 0 0.0%
Roy Thomas 0 0 0.0%

[Paul Wendt]

Congratulations to Johnny Kling, winner of five championships in five years (one at billiards and four in the National League). Winning only honorable mention in 1900s round one, he advanced to round two by discussion and here he surpassed four of the six round one winners, all but Sheckard and Leach. (He surpassed by holding most of his ground while they lost nearly all support in competition with the 1890s. For understanding look to the fact that he is a catcher and they are four outfielders. Roy Thomas slipped furthest, from a strong third to a goose egg.)

Dummy Hoy turned the same table on Lave Cross, with less consequence because he did not escape the also-rans.