Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 49 of 49

Thread: 1902 St. Louis Browns

  1. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Brownieand45sfan View Post
    The 1902 season is one of what I would call three or four "should've would've couldves" of the Browns existence. If they had hung on from August 13, and won the pennant, they would've permanently shaken off the loser tag from the very first year of their existence. And they would've been in a position to take advantage of the Cardinals' pennant dearth for the next quarter century. Superior attendance, superior spending, etc. would've ensued. Quite likely, St. Louisans would be watching an American League team today rather than a National League one.
    In the Brooklyn Dodgers forum I've posted a bunch of photos from their Washington Park days (1898-1912), and included excerpts that I quoted from Sporting Life that indicated that a few years after the Baltimore Orioles and Brooklyn Superbas had effectively merged, plans were afoot to move the Brooklyn team back to Baltimore. These plans were thwarted by Charlie Ebbets and another Brooklyn businessman who purchased controlling interest (between the two of them) from a Baltimore-based owner. (Manager/part-owner Ned Hanlon had led the effort to move the team south.)

    Had Hanlon been able to purchase controlling interest in the team and move them south, then the Browns obviously would never have moved to Baltimore. I think it is unlikely that Walter O'Malley would have bought the NL Baltimore Orioles in the 1950s and moved them west. The least successful of the two St. Louis teams would have instead (in all probability) moved to California, or perhaps to Houston (which was in the discussion stages in the early '50s). If no other NL team had moved to California, then the Giants may have stayed in New York, or moved to Minneapolis. The expansion teams of the early 1960s might have all been on the West Coast!

  2. #27
    Dto7 had previously posted this photo of the 50th anniversary celebration of the American League in 1951, with IDs by GaryL. Several of the 1902 Browns were at this gathering; I've highlighted their names in bold. I've also italicized the names of a few later Browns. (The numbers are on the second copy of the photo.)

    1A. Harry Gleason 1. Mike Brother 2. Unknown 3. Tommy Leary 4. Bill Hoffer 5. Roy Patterson 6. Cy Young 7. Fred Mitchell 8. Unknown 9. Unknown 10. Wm. “Dummy” Hoy 11. George McBride 12. Charlie Hemphill 13. Paddy Livingston 14. Unknown 15. Bill Friel 16. Harry Howell 17. Sport McAllister 18. Jimmy Williams 19. Joe Sugden 20. Bill Bradley 21. Joe Cronin 22. Ollie Pickering 23. David Fultz 24. Freddy Parent 25. Connie Mack 26. Governer Paul Dever 27. Clark Griffith 28. Billy Maloney 29. Earl Moore 30. Wid Conroy 31. Hugh Duffy

    1951 AL.jpg1951 AL w numbers.png

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    I still think that the St. Louis teams being the last two to gain pennants in the modern era is too weird to be put down to coincidence. Perhaps it is some other factor than distance/travel.

  4. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Brownieand45sfan View Post
    I still think that the St. Louis teams being the last two to gain pennants in the modern era is too weird to be put down to coincidence. Perhaps it is some other factor than distance/travel.
    I agree that the remoteness could be a contributing factor to their lack of success; I just don't know if there is enough data to determine that the location is statistically significant.

  5. #30
    1902 St. Louis Browns formal photo (from the St. Louis Republic)

    1902 AL St. Louis.jpg
    Last edited by RUKen; 02-05-2013 at 03:13 AM.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    >>15. Bill Friel

    The only guy to play his entire major league career with *both* the Milwaukee Brewers and the St. Louis Browns.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    Why is Frank Donahoe in the picture? Is he just there to fill out the back row? Is he Jiggs Donahoe's 16-year old brother from back in Ohio? A "Frank" did not even get to the minors until 1905 with the Springfield Babes.
    Quote Originally Posted by RUKen View Post
    1902 St. Louis Browns formal photo (from the St. Louis Republic)

    1902 AL St. Louis.jpg

  8. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Brownieand45sfan View Post
    Why is Frank Donahoe in the picture? Is he just there to fill out the back row? Is he Jiggs Donahoe's 16-year old brother from back in Ohio? A "Frank" did not even get to the minors until 1905 with the Springfield Babes.
    That is Red Donahue, whose first name was Francis.

  9. #34
    Pre-season composite of the 1902 St. Louis Browns

    1902 AL St Louis composite.jpg

  10. #35
    1902 Browns (left to right) P Bill Reidy, C Billy Maloney, and OF Jesse Burkett

    1902 Reidy Maloney.jpg1902 Burkett.jpg

  11. #36
    1902 St. Louis fans

    1902 AL St Louis fans.jpg

  12. #37
    1901 Milwaukee Brewers

    After the 1901 season, the franchise was shifted to St. Louis to become the Browns. Of the players in this team photograph, only Bill Reidy, Billy Maloney, and John Anderson played for the Browns in 1902. Three other players not pictured here also moved with the team.

    1901 AL Milwaukee.jpg

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    Bill Friel and Jiggs Donahue played as well. I wish they had kept Ned Garvin instead of Reidy. Garvin had a 2.09 ERA in 1902. they should've known he was hot stuff because he led the American League in strikeouts per nine innings in 1901.

    If they had had Garvin, probably would've won pennant in 1902. Throwing off the loser stigma early might've changed franchise history.

    in fact, it's not clear from the transactions section exactly how Garvin left the franchise for the White Sox
    Last edited by Brownieand45sfan; 03-03-2013 at 10:28 AM.

  14. #39
    Davy Jones was the other Brewer/Brown, and he went on to a successful career as an outfielder with the Orphans/Cubs and the Tigers.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    I wonder if there was any attempt to keep the memory of the 1901, Brewers alive in Milwaukee subsequent to their leaving. For example, reunions, etc. or did they just go down the memory hole like a 19th century team? No city was longer between major league franchises than Milwaukee: 52 years.

  16. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Brownieand45sfan View Post
    I wonder if there was any attempt to keep the memory of the 1901, Brewers alive in Milwaukee subsequent to their leaving. For example, reunions, etc. or did they just go down the memory hole like a 19th century team? No city was longer between major league franchises than Milwaukee: 52 years.
    I don't know. The franchise began as a minor league team in 1894 in the Western League. The Western League became the American League in 1900 and became a major league in 1901. The Brewers drew fewer than 2000 fans per game (7th in the league in attendance) and were then transferred. The franchise was then replaced with a new minor league team.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    Good point about Milwaukee's WL history. Reidy and Waldron, in particular, had some history with the WL Brewers/Creams. And future Brownie Rube Waddell played his first full professional season with the WL Brewers.
    Quote Originally Posted by RUKen View Post
    I don't know. The franchise began as a minor league team in 1894 in the Western League. The Western League became the American League in 1900 and became a major league in 1901. The Brewers drew fewer than 2000 fans per game (7th in the league in attendance) and were then transferred. The franchise was then replaced with a new minor league team.

  18. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Brownieand45sfan View Post
    Bill Friel and Jiggs Donahue played as well. I wish they had kept Ned Garvin instead of Reidy. Garvin had a 2.09 ERA in 1902. they should've known he was hot stuff because he led the American League in strikeouts per nine innings in 1901.

    If they had had Garvin, probably would've won pennant in 1902. Throwing off the loser stigma early might've changed franchise history.

    in fact, it's not clear from the transactions section exactly how Garvin left the franchise for the White Sox
    Looking at the Sporting News, from the Jan. 11, 1902 edition, Garvin was not listed among on the roster Jimmy McAleer planned to bring to St. Louis (although technically the move to St. Louis wasn't official yet). Later, there was a note of a possible Garvin trade to the White Sox for Joe Sugden, who will play for the Browns in 1902 (listed as a purchase in February according to baseball-reference.com). A quick search of later issues didn't turn up the exact transaction, but in the Feb. 8 edition Sugden is mentioned by McAleer as one of the team's catchers.

  19. #44
    So if Veeck had been able to move the Browns to Milwaukee in '53 before the Braves did

    would have been a belated restoration of a franchise

    I never realized that

  20. #45
    I've just come across another photo of Jiggs Donahue in the Chicago Daily News archive that is listed as being from 1904, but he is clearly wearing the coat worn by the Browns from 1902 through 1905. He played for St. Louis only in 1902, so that must be the correct date of the picture, and he appears to be wearing his left-handed catcher's mitt. The photo has been added to post #9 on page 1 of this thread.
    Last edited by RUKen; 04-18-2013 at 05:22 AM.

  21. #46
    Program (Scorebook) from the 1902 Season

    1902 Cle at StL program.jpg

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    Very cool scorebook. Could we possibly get a peek inside?

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    805
    Blog Entries
    2
    Interesting. New York gains one from Baltimore (Yanks) then almost lost one (Dodgers).

    Also, Babe Ruth probably doesnt couldnt sign with his hometown IL Orioles. But then who? He wouldnt have been ready for major leagues at his age. Probably would have signed with the Fed Lg Terrapins.

    As a footnote, the Houston discussion was concerning the Cardinals moving not the Browns

    Quote Originally Posted by RUKen View Post
    In the Brooklyn Dodgers forum I've posted a bunch of photos from their Washington Park days (1898-1912), and included excerpts that I quoted from Sporting Life that indicated that a few years after the Baltimore Orioles and Brooklyn Superbas had effectively merged, plans were afoot to move the Brooklyn team back to Baltimore. These plans were thwarted by Charlie Ebbets and another Brooklyn businessman who purchased controlling interest (between the two of them) from a Baltimore-based owner. (Manager/part-owner Ned Hanlon had led the effort to move the team south.)

    Had Hanlon been able to purchase controlling interest in the team and move them south, then the Browns obviously would never have moved to Baltimore. I think it is unlikely that Walter O'Malley would have bought the NL Baltimore Orioles in the 1950s and moved them west. The least successful of the two St. Louis teams would have instead (in all probability) moved to California, or perhaps to Houston (which was in the discussion stages in the early '50s). If no other NL team had moved to California, then the Giants may have stayed in New York, or moved to Minneapolis. The expansion teams of the early 1960s might have all been on the West Coast!

  24. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Brownieand45sfan View Post
    Very cool scorebook. Could we possibly get a peek inside?
    'Sorry, not from me. You'll have to bid on it at the Robert Edwards Auction that has just opened.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •