This era was full of unusual occurances, resourcefullness,

[ItsOnlyGil]

and zany situations.
Tell me about one.
Here is one which I came across:
mid-1886. Browning on first. Foutz pitching, Comiskey playing a deep 1B. Engages Browning in light conversation. Pete has a comfortable lead, with Charlie so deep.
Suddenly, Foutz races off of the "mound" right at a flat footed Browning. He tags him, before he could get back to the bag.
The only unassisted pickoff ever.

[ipitch]

and zany situations.
Tell me about one.
Here is one which I came across:
mid-1886. Browning on first. Foutz pitching, Comiskey playing a deep 1B. Engages Browning in light conversation. Pete has a comfortable lead, with Charlie so deep.
Suddenly, Foutz races off of the "mound" right at a flat footed Browning. He tags him, before he could get back to the bag.
The only unassisted pickoff ever.

I was a little skeptical of that claim, and it appears to be untrue.

http://www.cbssports.com/print/mlb/gamecenter/recap/MLB_20060529_WAS@PHI
"Condrey had an unassisted pickoff of Soriano at second base."

I'd be surprised if it's only happened twice.

[Beady]

What strikes me about the Condrey-Soriano play is the matter of fact way it's reported. Browning at least probably had the excuse that he was drunk.

[rrhersh]

I am given to understand that Tris Speaker made several unassisted double plays from the outfield. I would like to see that happen nowadays.

[Buzzaldrin]

I've often heard about things King Kelly did or supposedly did- like jumping out of the dugout when a batter hit an popfoul and announcing "Kelly now catching for Chicago" and making the play. I've never questioned that, but did that happen?

[Beady]

I can't recall precisely, but I know someone has found that the specific details of the story as it is commonly reported don't work. I think the problem is that the catcher Kelly is supposed to have called himself into the game to replace was actually his teammate only before the rules allowed any substitutions at all except in cases of injury.

[TonyK]

Many cities and towns incorporated a baseball game into their fundraising events. One of the most popular type of these games pitted the Fats against the Leans. In one Upstate NY town the Fats took the field wearing Mother Hubbard costumes including bonnets and flour sacks. Members of the business community typically played in these games and the crowd came for a good time and to support a good cause.

[Beady]

The one-legged men vs. the one-armed men. Not that this particular matchup was very common, but it did happen, and the games were regarded as great fun.

Modern writers are particularly uncomfortable with such an idea, but I think it's just fine. Nobody was compelled to participate, I'm sure, and I don't think it would have been preferable if they had sat on the sidelines and their disabilities were regarded as so shameful that everybody just pretended they didn't even notice.

[TonyK]

The one-legged men vs. the one-armed men. Not that this particular matchup was very common, but it did happen, and the games were regarded as great fun.

Modern writers are particularly uncomfortable with such an idea, but I think it's just fine. Nobody was compelled to participate, I'm sure, and I don't think it would have been preferable if they had sat on the sidelines and their disabilities were regarded as so shameful that everybody just pretended they didn't even notice.

They may have been Civil War veterans in their 40's and 50's. The game may have been a tribute to the sacrifices they made?

Other popular games had the Married Men against the Single Men and the Talls against the Shorts. Newspapers usually had a team that faced other teams for charity.

[Beady]

They may have been Civil War veterans in their 40's and 50's. The game may have been a tribute to the sacrifices they made?

At least one or two references I've seen emphasize the amusement everyone took (the players themselves presumably included) at the spectacle of one-armed and one-legged men trying to play baseball. So probably the idea of tribute is a little too solemn. But it's certainly true, whether or not these players were veterans, that a lot of men came out of the war alive but lacking limbs. The sight of amputees must have been a considerably more common, garden variety experience in late 19th century America than it is today.

[ringo-dog]

I found this a while ago, guess it fits here. It is the Calumet, Michigan Red Jacket "fat man" team. The date I have on it is 1904. All I know!

[RuthMayBond]

I was a little skeptical of that claim, and it appears to be untrue.

http://www.cbssports.com/print/mlb/gamecenter/recap/MLB_20060529_WAS@PHI
"Condrey had an unassisted pickoff of Soriano at second base."

I'd be surprised if it's only happened twice.
And my info says
Sutter did it to Madlock
Clemens AND Cerutti did it to Joe Carter
Sutcliffe did it to Brett Butler :eek:
Leibrandt did it to Biggio

OF unassisted DP:
Joe McEwing
Al Simmons
Ty Cobb
Paul Hines
Tommy O'Brien
Smead Jolley
Bobby Bonds
Adam Comorosky at least twice
Andy Van Slyke (twice?)
Jose Cardenal at least twice
Elmer Smith
Sam Mertes
Ty Tyson
Jack Smith
Curt Walker
Socks Seybold (at least twice)
Tilly Walker

[Buzzaldrin]

Smead Jolley once made three errors on the same play in the outfield. How the heck did he manage an unassisted DP?

[ItsOnlyGil]

And my info says
Sutter did it to Madlock
Clemens AND Cerutti did it to Joe Carter
Sutcliffe did it to Brett Butler :eek:
Leibrandt did it to Biggio



Wow. That is an eye opener.
So between Browning and more recent history, noone managed this level of stoopidity on the basepaths. But since the 70s there have been at least six instances of baserunners allowing themselves to be tagged by the pitcher.
See? I should pay some attention to modern baseball!
Nah.
These guys are obviously too dumb to be worthy of any attention.
Juice on.

[RuthMayBond]

Wow. That is an eye opener.
So between Browning and more recent history, noone managed this level of stoopidity on the basepaths. But since the 70s there have been at least six instances of baserunners allowing themselves to be tagged by the pitcher.
See? I should pay some attention to modern baseball!
Nah.
These guys are obviously too dumb to be worthy of any attention.
Juice on.It doesn't mean those were the ONLY ones that actually happened, they are the only ones I've HEARD about

[ipitch]

It came very close to happening yesterday. Brad Lidge ran off the mound and could have tagged out John McDonald (he was only a foot or two away), but he opted to throw the ball instead.

[ItsOnlyGil]

Well, I guess that I should conclude that unassisted pick offs are relatively commonplace.
:reporter:

Afterall, with the multiple investment decisions facing the average baseballist, it is a wonder that they can remember which base is next.
:happy:

[agate type]

I am given to understand that Tris Speaker made several unassisted double plays from the outfield. I would like to see that happen nowadays.

Oscar Charleston pulled off an unassisted double play from center field in the Cuban League on November 7, 1927.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Wow. That is an eye opener.
So between Browning and more recent history, noone managed this level of stoopidity on the basepaths. But since the 70s there have been at least six instances of baserunners allowing themselves to be tagged by the pitcher.
See? I should pay some attention to modern baseball!
Nah.
These guys are obviously too dumb to be worthy of any attention.
Juice on.

Right. Only the nice, pure, segregated all-white baseball of the early days is worth paying attention to, darn these modern times and progressive ideas. It's merely charming what McGraw, Hal Chase and co. did then. "Get that n***er off the field!" So glorious those times.

[ItsOnlyGil]

Right. Only the nice, pure ..... It's merely charming what McGraw, Hal Chase and co. did then. "Get that n***er off the field!" So glorious those times.

I am not convinced that you have sufficient evidence to indict deadballers for a status which predated them and continued for long after their passing.

We have a history of haterd which encompasses all which we fail to understand, and extends beyond those boundaries. Persons of divergent ethnicities, religions, class, education and other catagorizations have suffered because of our failings.

I prefer to focus my study on the eras which include these mistakes, over those of current, and potentially future vintage.

Certainly the segment of history which I prefer to learn more about, is open to ridicule. And I do not object to ribbing and similar friendly jibes.

:highfive:


But really, the stuff which I most enjoy are the anecdotes, tidbits of trivial occurances dotted theoughout baseball history. Such as: although five players have achieved three hits in an inning thus far (well, as far as I know); three of them accomplished this feat in the same game, for the same team, in the same inning: Williamson, Burns and Pfeffer - the 7th inning of a 26 - 6 rout of Detroit 9/6/1883.
Or - Although Charlie Sweeney, and one month later Hugh Dailey each hurled 19 strikeout pitching performances during the summer of 1884; three years later Toad Ramsey attained a 17 strikeout game in 1887 (when 4 strikes were required to attain a K).

These comparatively unimportant footnotes in our baseball lore, bring attention to players who otherwise may go unnoticed, and add points of sparkle to the important struggles and developments underway throughout the 1800s.

Tell me: which is more impressive to you?
Two 19 strikeout games in 1884, or
a 17 K game requiring 4 strikes for each K ?

[Beady]

Right. Only the nice, pure, segregated all-white baseball of the early days is worth paying attention to, darn these modern times and progressive ideas. It's merely charming what McGraw, Hal Chase and co. did then. "Get that n***er off the field!" So glorious those times.

This misses the point entirely. There is one reason and one reason only I pay no attention to modern baseball and, believe it or not, I don't mean the wave. I just cannot stand those inane first initial-first syllable nicknames. A-Rod was bad enough, but J-Roll is just over the top. The Mets had a rookie who had never played an inning of minor league ball recently, and either they or their fans had already started calling him F-Marts. That's ridiculous. It's an abomination. It's absurd, outrageous, preposterous. It's the sort of thing that ought to cause every person of good will to view contemporary baseball with a simultaneously blind and jaundiced eye.

Okay, it isn't an abomination, that's overstating it, but "abomination" is a word I just really like to use. Try it yourself, and you'll see what I mean. Anyway, believe me when I say my commitment to 19th century bb is exclusive but it is absolutely not absolute. The first time, I mean the very first time, I see somebody writing about those great hitters D-Brouth, Ed-Del and P-Brown, or saying that Chicago sold Boston M-Kell and J-Clark, I am out of here. I am giving up baseball history and taking up origami or amateur theater. Or maybe checkers, which I understand C-Matt was really good at.

[TonyK]

From David Voigt's America Through Baseball:

Mike "King" Kelly amazed a crowd by trudging to his soggy outfield post carrying a heavy board. While his fellow fielders slipped and slogged, Kelly stayed high and dry, laughing at the boos and mudballs thrown at him by fans.

During Brooklyn's upset 8-7 win over the undefeated Cincinnati Red Stockings on June 14, 1870, one overeager fan jumped on the back of outfielder Cal McVey as he attempted to field a ball, thus assisting one of the Brooklyn runners in scoring in the eleventh.

[bulldogbats]

Here is another one credited to him. John McGraw was known for things like holding onto a player's belt to keep him from tagging up on a fly ball. One time Browning was on 3rd - knowing it would happen, he unhooked his belt, then scored on the fly ball while McGraw was left there holding Browning's belt.

[TonyK]

In 1888 John M. Ward wrote:

"Until within a few years ago this sign (between the pitcher and the catcher) was always given by the pitcher...I think the old method was better (pitchers giving the sign to their catchers)."

"In giving this sign the catcher, standing with his hands resting on his knees, makes some movement with the right hand, or a finger of that hand, or with the right foot, to indicate an "out" ball, and some similar movement with his left hand or foot for an "in" ball."

In his example of the catcher giving the signs he must have been using a right handed pitcher pitching to a right handed batter.

I don't know if he meant the catcher signalled while standing up, or if he meant the catcher was in his crouch with his hands resting on his knees?

[Buzzaldrin]

Here is another one credited to him. John McGraw was known for things like holding onto a player's belt to keep him from tagging up on a fly ball. One time Browning was on 3rd - knowing it would happen, he unhooked his belt, then scored on the fly ball while McGraw was left there holding Browning's belt.

I find this one hard to credit. McGraw didn't settle in to third base until 1894 (except for 3 games there in 1892); Browning played all of 3 games in 1894 before retiring. I fail to see how 1) McGraw would be known for such a tactic in his first season at the position, and 2) one of Browning's total of 2 runs scored that season would have been in such a manner.

[Beady]

I find this one hard to credit. McGraw didn't settle in to third base until 1894 (except for 3 games there in 1892); Browning played all of 3 games in 1894 before retiring. I fail to see how 1) McGraw would be known for such a tactic in his first season at the position, and 2) one of Browning's total of 2 runs scored that season would have been in such a manner.

No doubt you're right, but the answer to your objection #1 is probably that McGraw was known for the tactic because McGraw himself was the one telling the story in after years to the New York writers.

From what I can tell by a little googling, it goes back at least to a 1934 article in Liberty magazine that appeared under McGraw's name.

[josh24]

Sutcliffe did it to Brett Butler :eek:
Leibrandt did it to Biggio

When?
I checked the play-by-play data on Retrosheet and BB-Reference and i found that the only time that Butler was CS while Sutcliffe was pitching was on August 31, 1991 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/LAN/LAN199108310.shtml), and it was a normal CS(C to 2B).
On Leibrandt, i found that the only time he CS Biggio was on July 24, 1990 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL199007241.shtml), and it was a pitcher-to-1st pickoff.

[ipitch]

When?
I checked the play-by-play data on Retrosheet and BB-Reference and i found that the only time that Butler was CS while Sutcliffe was pitching was on August 31, 1991 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/LAN/LAN199108310.shtml), and it was a normal CS(C to 2B).


I think it's this game. 9th inning.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN198807190.shtml

I don't think that all pickoffs count as a CS. Butler was picked, but he does not have CS in the game.

[josh24]

I think it's this game. 9th inning.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN198807190.shtml

I don't think that all pickoffs count as a CS. Butler was picked, but he does not have CS in the game.

Thanks, man :)

[josh24]

I think it's this game. 9th inning.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN198807190.shtml

I don't think that all pickoffs count as a CS. Butler was picked, but he does not have CS in the game.

I found that he was pickoff by the pitcher again on June 13, 1982, 3rd inning.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SFN/SFN198206131.shtml

[Hargrave]

I don't know if he meant the catcher signalled while standing up, or if he meant the catcher was in his crouch with his hands resting on his knees?

I am pretty sure they were standing. Deep crouches didn't really come into vogue until catchers moved closer to the batter.

The advent of protective gear and better catcher mitts, along with various game-play changes, moved catchers lower and closer to the hitter.

As an aside, I believe the deep catcher crouch should be abandoned.

Most catchers are finished by age 30, their athletic ability destroyed by knee and back damage from the deep crouch.

We all hear about Ivan Rodriguez and Bob Boone catching 2,000 games, which is thrilling and cool, but most break down after about 800.

Most of the damage to cartilage and joints occurs in the deep-knee bend phase, when they are giving signals, and then going even lower with no one on base.

Thing is, there is no reason for any of this deep squatting.

Catchers should give their signals standing up. Very simple signs, brushing or tapping the belt, mask, shin guard or thigh indicate the various pitches.

A very simple code and rotation of which one is the "hot" sign every so often would make it unbreakable to the opposition.

After the sign is given, the catcher should lower into a seated-in-chair position, the one most catchers use with a man on base.

The target will be plenty low enough. It is just the stance most already use with men on base.

Besides, what is magical about the glove as a target? Many pitchers use the knee cap of the shin guard or a spot low on the shin guard as the target, and more should do so.

This chair position is in no way damaging to the catcher. As long as the rump is even with the knees, or even just slightly lower, there is no shear pressure on the knee cartilage and no torquing of the hips and lower back.

In the chair position, the muscles of the thighs and glutes are doing the work, not the knee joint.

Those muscles can be trained and strengthened and the catcher can become a catching machine capable of catching effectively into middle age.

Muscle can be built. Muscle doesn't break down under loads it has been trained to withstand.

But no one has strong cartilage. Terminally bend your knee enough times, and it will weaken, break, and eventually disappear.

Also, the catcher never goes to his knees to throw the ball back to the mound. This causes more terminal bending of the knee. You catch it, stand up and throw it back. All muscle, all the time. Never any deep bending of the knee joint.

All told, eliminating the signal crouch, the deep receiving crouch and dropping to the knees for return throws saves the catcher hundreds of thousands of cartilage grinds over a career.

This will allow catchers to be productive at the plate and behind it for many more years.

It might not significantly prolong a lot of careers, but it would some. It would certainly mean a more productive decline phase for most.

It would also afford old catchers a pain-free retirement, instead of the knee-replacement surgery and cane so many suffer.

It is perhaps a sad fact of free-agency and the gap between rich and poor that teams have little incentive to view their players as long-term investments whose health should be guarded and protected.

Why go through all the rigamarole of proper training and injury prevention when he will just up and leave one day?

I don't know if anyone has ever thought of this before, but I have never heard it, and have been intimately involved with catching for many, many years.

I have personally supervised the implementation of this catching method and would be pleased to advise anyone who is interested, not that it is complicated in any way.

[TonyK]

I am pretty sure they were standing. Deep crouches didn't really come into vogue until catchers moved closer to the batter.

The advent of protective gear and better catcher mitts, along with various game-play changes, moved catchers lower and closer to the hitter.

As an aside, I believe the deep catcher crouch should be abandoned.

Most catchers are finished by age 30, their athletic ability destroyed by knee and back damage from the deep crouch.

We all hear about Ivan Rodriguez and Bob Boone catching 2,000 games, which is thrilling and cool, but most break down after about 800.

Most of the damage to cartilage and joints occurs in the deep-knee bend phase, when they are giving signals, and then going even lower with no one on base.

Thing is, there is no reason for any of this deep squatting.

Catchers should give their signals standing up. Very simple signs, brushing or tapping the belt, mask, shin guard or thigh indicate the various pitches.

A very simple code and rotation of which one is the "hot" sign every so often would make it unbreakable to the opposition.

After the sign is given, the catcher should lower into a seated-in-chair position, the one most catchers use with a man on base.

The target will be plenty low enough. It is just the stance most already use with men on base.

Besides, what is magical about the glove as a target? Many pitchers use the knee cap of the shin guard or a spot low on the shin guard as the target, and more should do so.

This chair position is in no way damaging to the catcher. As long as the rump is even with the knees, or even just slightly lower, there is no shear pressure on the knee cartilage and no torquing of the hips and lower back.

In the chair position, the muscles of the thighs and glutes are doing the work, not the knee joint.

Those muscles can be trained and strengthened and the catcher can become a catching machine capable of catching effectively into middle age.

Muscle can be built. Muscle doesn't break down under loads it has been trained to withstand.

But no one has strong cartilage. Terminally bend your knee enough times, and it will weaken, break, and eventually disappear.

Also, the catcher never goes to his knees to throw the ball back to the mound. This causes more terminal bending of the knee. You catch it, stand up and throw it back. All muscle, all the time. Never any deep bending of the knee joint.

All told, eliminating the signal crouch, the deep receiving crouch and dropping to the knees for return throws saves the catcher hundreds of thousands of cartilage grinds over a career.

This will allow catchers to be productive at the plate and behind it for many more years.

It might not significantly prolong a lot of careers, but it would some. It would certainly mean a more productive decline phase for most.

It would also afford old catchers a pain-free retirement, instead of the knee-replacement surgery and cane so many suffer.

It is perhaps a sad fact of free-agency and the gap between rich and poor that teams have little incentive to view their players as long-term investments whose health should be guarded and protected.

Why go through all the rigamarole of proper training and injury prevention when he will just up and leave one day?

I don't know if anyone has ever thought of this before, but I have never heard it, and have been intimately involved with catching for many, many years.

I have personally supervised the implementation of this catching method and would be pleased to advise anyone who is interested, not that it is complicated in any way.

Have you presented your view over in the Coach's Forum? I know Catching Coach appears on BBF from time to time.

[josh24]

Other unassisted pickoffs:

Tommie Sisk to Johnny Roseboro, Sep 15, 1964, 7th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/LAN/LAN196409150.shtml)
Chris Short to Frank Robinson, May 11, 1965, 2nd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHI/PHI196505110.shtml)
Bob Buhl to Frank Robinson, Jun 11, 1965, 4th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN196506110.shtml)
Jim Hannan to Roy White, Apr 10, 1969, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/WS2/WS2196904100.shtml)
Burt Hooton to Bill Russell, Aug 19, 1972, 2nd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/LAN/LAN197208190.shtml)
Bill Greif to Ron Hunt, Jun 13, 1973, 5th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MON/MON197306130.shtml)
Ray Sadecki to Mike Schmidt, Jul 4, 1974, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN197407042.shtml)
Ken Holtzman to Jose Baez, May 1, 1977, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYA/NYA197705010.shtml)
Dave Giusti to Buddy Bell, Jun 6, 1977, 8th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK197706060.shtml)
Nino Espinosa to Ted Simmons, Sep 19, 1978, 6th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SLN/SLN197809190.shtml)
Rick Mahler to Rodney Scott, Aug 23, 1981, 3rd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL198108230.shtml)
Dennis Leonard to Hosken Powell, May 2, 1982, 2nd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/KCA/KCA198205020.shtml)
Renie Martin to Brett Butler, Jun 13, 1982, 3rd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SFN/SFN198206131.shtml)
Dennis Rasmussen to Gary Pettis, May 23, 1986, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYA/NYA198605230.shtml)
Dennis Martinez to Eric Davis, Jul 12, 1986, 4th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MON/MON198607120.shtml)
Mitch Williams to Chet Lemon, Aug 8, 1988, 9th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/TEX/TEX198808080.shtml)
Norm Charlton to Vince Coleman, Aug 27, 1988, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN198808270.shtml)
Todd Stottlemyre to Ken Griffey Jr, May 26, 1990, 6th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SEA/SEA199005260.shtml)
Dennis Rasmussen to Doug Dascenzo, Jul 18, 1990, 3rd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN199007180.shtml)
Craig Lefferts to Delino DeShields, May 10, 1991, 9th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN199105100.shtml)
Greg Harris to Delino DeShields, Apr 29, 1992, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SDN/SDN199204290.shtml)
John Parrish to Damion Easley, Aug 7, 2000, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/DET/DET200008070.shtml)
John Halama to Bobby Higginson, Jul 30, 2002, 3rd inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SEA/SEA200207300.shtml)
Kyle Lohse to Ron Belliard, Aug 20, 2004, 5th inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MIN/MIN200408200.shtml)
Franklin Morales to Chris Young, Game 4, 2007 NLCS, 1st inn (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/COL/COL200710150.shtml)

[Beady]

Jeff Kittel's blog has a couple of good stories from Gus Schmelz today.

http://thisgameofgames.blogspot.com/

I have independent confirmation that the second one did take place, on August 1, 1887, with Jack Nelson of the Mets the unfortunate batter.

[ItsOnlyGil]

RMB, ipitch, Josh24, et al.: I find myself surprised that modern baseball finds that unassisted pickoffs by the pitcher (although not commonplace) are acceptable. At one time they were, rightfully imo, considered a source of embarassment.
Thank you for this input.

[RuthMayBond]

RMB, ipitch, Josh24, et al.: I find myself surprised that modern baseball finds that unassisted pickoffs by the pitcher (although not commonplace) are acceptable. Not sure where this came from :shrug:

[ItsOnlyGil]

And my info says
Sutter did it to Madlock
Clemens AND Cerutti did it to Joe Carter
Sutcliffe did it to Brett Butler :eek:
Leibrandt did it to Biggio

OF unassisted DP:
Joe McEwing
Al Simmons
Ty Cobb
Paul Hines
Tommy O'Brien
Smead Jolley
Bobby Bonds
Adam Comorosky at least twice
Andy Van Slyke (twice?)
Jose Cardenal at least twice
Elmer Smith
Sam Mertes
Ty Tyson
Jack Smith
Curt Walker
Socks Seybold (at least twice)
Tilly Walker

:ooo::waving

[RuthMayBond]

:ooo::wavingNot sure where you get that those are all modern OR acceptable :shrug:

[ItsOnlyGil]

:candle::faint:

[RuthMayBond]

:candle::faint:You don't say . . .

[Buzzaldrin]

And my info says
Sutter did it to Madlock
Clemens AND Cerutti did it to Joe Carter
Sutcliffe did it to Brett Butler :eek:
Leibrandt did it to Biggio

OF unassisted DP:
Joe McEwing
Al Simmons
Ty Cobb
Paul Hines
Tommy O'Brien
Smead Jolley
Bobby Bonds
Adam Comorosky at least twice
Andy Van Slyke (twice?)
Jose Cardenal at least twice
Elmer Smith
Sam Mertes
Ty Tyson
Jack Smith
Curt Walker
Socks Seybold (at least twice)
Tilly Walker

Again I ask- how did Smead Jolley manage to do this? A terrible fielder and a natural born DH. When and how did it happen for Jolley? I just can't imagine it.

[RuthMayBond]

Again I ask- how did Smead Jolley manage to do this? A terrible fielder and a natural born DH. When and how did it happen for Jolley? I just can't imagine it.I don't know how it happened, but supposedly it was on 5/27/1930 against the Indians :shrug:

[TonyK]

Jeff Kittel's blog has a couple of good stories from Gus Schmelz today.

http://thisgameofgames.blogspot.com/

I have independent confirmation that the second one did take place, on August 1, 1887, with Jack Nelson of the Mets the unfortunate batter.

Great stories!

He has some links on his site that I didn't know about.

[TonyK]

In 1894 sixteen percent of ML ballparks burned down during the season. In Boston, a fire started underneath the RF Bleachers at the South End Grounds during a NL game. Boston RFer Jimmy Bannon ran over to try and stamp out the blaze with his shoes and his baseball cap. Some spectators shouted "Play Ball! Play Ball!" while the flames attacked the seats and spread outside to the nearest building. Box seats along the 1B line were doused with water but the fire soon inched right past this barrier and towards the grandstand behind home plate.

Fans in the grandstand wouldn't budge until police warned them that the structure they were sitting on top of was now on fire too. Spectators left the stands and began exiting the grounds through a hole in the CF fence. Everyone made it out of the ballpark safely.

In less than three hours, 164 wooden houses, 13 brick houses, a school house, and a fire engine house would all burn down. Nearly 1,000 people would be left homeless.

Sully's Tower overlooked the RF fence of the South End Grounds. Mr. Sullivan charged fans 15 cents for the privilege of climbing up his rickety tower to catch a view of the ballgame. Sometimes as many as 500 people clung to the tower watching the game! The Boston Building Department finally got the structure torn down before the Fire of 1894.

[TonyK]

Rookies and younger ballplayers had to worry about the coachers at 1B and 3B. One common trick was the coacher at 3B would ask the pitcher to throw him the ball because he thought it was ripped. The pitcher would toss the ball over to him, he would step aside, and his baserunner at 2B would run to 3B.

Another common play described by John Ward occurred with a runner at 3B. A ground ball was hit and, as the infielder prepared to throw the ball, he would see the runner from third racing for the plate. So he would change his mind and throw the ball home. Only it was not the runner at 3B racing in but the coacher at 3B.

The famous potato trick was used in minor league games, but I'm not sure if it was ever tried in a major league game. The pitcher would toss over to 1B or 3B a few times to keep the runner close. Then his next toss would be well over his fielder's head and the runner would take off. The pitcher would meet him on his way to the next base and tag him out with the ball. The pitcher had switched a peeled potato with the ball in his glove.

[ipitch]

Another common play described by John Ward occurred with a runner at 3B. A ground ball was hit and, as the infielder prepared to throw the ball, he would see the runner from third racing for the plate. So he would change his mind and throw the ball home. Only it was not the runner at 3B racing in but the coacher at 3B.

:rofl: You would think that that would only happen once before they made a rule against doing it. It is against the rules now.

[Beady]

I seem to recall they did make it illegal pretty quickly, but I don't remember the details.

[TonyK]

One common exploit in the days of only one umpire was for a runner to pass first base and then cut across the infield and run straight to third base. Maybe that's why a few third baseman liked to grab onto their belts or delay them?

[rrhersh]

One common exploit in the days of only one umpire was for a runner to pass first base and then cut across the infield and run straight to third base. Maybe that's why a few third baseman liked to grab onto their belts or delay them?

Was this tactic actually common, or was it rare (or even unique) and the story oft-repeated? I honestly don't know, but it strikes me as unlikely that it was truly common, as it would have resulted in pretty much a total breakdown of the game. I also wonder of the runner actually cut across the infield, or if he merely cut the corner at second and the story got improved.

As I recall, the Players' League used two umpires. If shenanigans such as this were truly common in the other leagues, I would think that the difference in the PL would have received widespread attention, and perhaps even be reflected in the statistical record. But this isn't my period: perhaps this is truly the case.

[TonyK]

Was this tactic actually common, or was it rare (or even unique) and the story oft-repeated? I honestly don't know, but it strikes me as unlikely that it was truly common, as it would have resulted in pretty much a total breakdown of the game. I also wonder of the runner actually cut across the infield, or if he merely cut the corner at second and the story got improved.

As I recall, the Players' League used two umpires. If shenanigans such as this were truly common in the other leagues, I would think that the difference in the PL would have received widespread attention, and perhaps even be reflected in the statistical record. But this isn't my period: perhaps this is truly the case.

In newspapers I've read of four or five instances of it happening during games. I think it was done mainly in the minors or lower levels. It was still being done in the early 1900's before all minor leagues used two umpires.

One paper noted the runner cut straight across the infield. I can't believe a visiting player would try it since the home crowd would raise quite a fuss.

[Buntforahit]

I've often heard about things King Kelly did or supposedly did- like jumping out of the dugout when a batter hit an popfoul and announcing "Kelly now catching for Chicago" and making the play. I've never questioned that, but did that happen?
I don't know if that story is true, but Kelly must have been one helluva guy.
http://www.thedeadballera.com/BeerDrinkersKingKelly.html

[ziggy29]

I find this one hard to credit. McGraw didn't settle in to third base until 1894 (except for 3 games there in 1892); Browning played all of 3 games in 1894 before retiring. I fail to see how 1) McGraw would be known for such a tactic in his first season at the position, and 2) one of Browning's total of 2 runs scored that season would have been in such a manner.
We can limit the possibilities to 1 run in 2 games with St. Louis. Browning's last game was with Brooklyn (for which he played in one game) on September 30, 1894. Brooklyn played Louisville that day, so it couldn't have happened in 1894 while Browning was with Brooklyn.

That leaves one run scored in one of two games played with St. Louis. I don't know which two dates he played for them in 1894 or whether they were playing the Orioles.

[TonyK]

From Death at the Ballpark by Robert Gorman & David Weeks:

In an 1889 amatuer game in New Jersey, a center fielder fell head first into a nest of 32 garter snakes and was killed. The other ballplayers killed the snakes with their bats.

In a youth game in Pittsburgh in 1884 two players had an argument. The argument escalated and one of them punched the other. The player that was hit found a large lump of coal and threw it at his assailant. The throw was on target and the injured player died the following day due to a fractured skull.

A crowd of 3,000 was on hand for opening day at a ballpark in Indiana in 1895. In the first inning, the pitcher collapsed on the mound and died. It was suggested that heavy smoking may have been the cause of death. The pitcher was only 21.

This is an interesting book if you like this sort of thing.