View Poll Results: PLEASE READ RULES, LIMIT TO 15 VOTES, AND POST BALLOT IN THREAD

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Babe Adams, SP (1906-1907, 1909-1916, 1918-1926) - 4th Year

    2 7.14%
  • Chief Bender, SP (1903-1917, 1925) - 13th Year

    10 35.71%
  • George H. Burns, 1B (1914-1927) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • George J. Burns, LF (1911-1925) - 5th Year

    5 17.86%
  • Joe Bush, SP (1912-1928) - 2nd Year

    1 3.57%
  • Max Carey, CF (1910-1929) - 1st Year

    23 82.14%
  • Wilbur Cooper, SP (1912-1926) - 4th Year

    15 53.57%
  • Stan Coveleski, SP (1912, 1916-1928) - 2nd Year

    25 89.29%
  • Gavvy Cravath, RF (1908-1909, 1912-1920) - 10th Year

    6 21.43%
  • Bill Doak, SP (1912-1924, 1927-1929) - 1st Year

    1 3.57%
  • Johnny Evers, 2B (1902-1917, 1922, 1929) - 9th Year

    9 32.14%
  • Jack Fournier, 1B (1912-1918, 1920-1927) - 3rd Year

    2 7.14%
  • Larry Gardner, 3B (1908-1924) - 6th Year

    2 7.14%
  • Wally Gerber, SS (1914-1915, 1917-1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Hank Gowdy, C (1910-1917, 1919-1925, 1929-1930) - 1st Year

    2 7.14%
  • Heinie Groh, 3B (1912-1927) - 3rd Year

    17 60.71%
  • George Harper, RF (1916-1918, 1922-1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Harry Hooper, RF (1909-1925) - 5th Year

    6 21.43%
  • Baby Doll Jacobson, CF (1915, 1917, 1919-1927) - 3rd Year

    0 0%
  • Ed Konetchy, 1B (1907-1921) - 9th Year

    4 14.29%
  • Tommy Leach, 3B/CF (1898-1915, 1918) - 13th Year

    17 60.71%
  • Rube Marquard, SP (1908-1925) - 5th Year

    5 17.86%
  • Carl Mays, SP (1915-1929) - 1st Year

    14 50.00%
  • Lee Meadows, SP (1915-1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Johnny Mostil, CF (1918, 1921-1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Art Nehf, SP (1915-1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Del Pratt, 2B (1912-1924) - 6th Year

    4 14.29%
  • Ed Reulbach, SP (1905-1917) - 13th Year

    2 7.14%
  • Ray Schalk, C (1912-1929) - 1st Year

    7 25.00%
  • Bob Shawkey, SP (1913-1926) - 3rd Year

    2 7.14%
  • Urban Shocker, SP (1916-1928) - 2nd Year

    10 35.71%
  • Jack Smith, CF/OF (1915-1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Billy Southworth, RF (1913, 1915, 1918-1927, 1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Joe Tinker, SS (1902-1916) - 14th Year

    7 25.00%
  • Hippo Vaughn, SP (1908, 1910-1921) - 9th Year

    6 21.43%
  • Bobby Veach, LF (1912-1925) - 5th Year

    11 39.29%
  • Ken Williams, LF (1915-1929) - 1st Year

    2 7.14%
  • Ivey Wingo, C (1911-1926, 1929) - 1st Year

    0 0%
  • Joe Wood, SP (1908-1915, 1917, 1919-1920) - 8th Year

    3 10.71%
  • Ross Youngs, RF (1917-1926) - 4th Year

    3 10.71%
  • None of the Above (Blank Ballot)

    0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 112

Thread: BBF Progressive HoF Election: 1934

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    Paul, I'm not going to change White's listing. I still believe his primary position is C, but there is enough to say that he isn't a catcher in the same sense that someone like Charlie Bennett was.
    Leaving White as a catcher is fine, but just realize that it is a big reason why 3B seems so underrepresented.

    That, and just the coinicidence that three great hiting 3Bmen of the 19th century had very short careers, and other great players who played some 3B ended up playing more at other spots.

    I can't wait to get Groh in now so we can get past the 3B discussions.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --White had a pretty full career as a superstar catcher. that was followed by a second career as an okay thirdbaseman. Had he played third instead of catcher in the 1870s he would have been the best 3B of the 18th century - and possibly of all time. He didn't though and is claim to greatness is almost entirely based on his play as a catcher.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by leecemark View Post
    --White had a pretty full career as a superstar catcher. that was followed by a second career as an okay thirdbaseman. Had he played third instead of catcher in the 1870s he would have been the best 3B of the 18th century - and possibly of all time. He didn't though and is claim to greatness is almost entirely based on his play as a catcher.

    I didn't know there was base ball already in the 18th century.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by SavoyBG View Post
    I didn't know there was base ball already in the 18th century.
    I think they were calling it rounders back then. :

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,316
    Carey
    Cooper
    Coveleski
    Cravath
    Leach
    Veach
    Wood

  6. #66
    Bumping up.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    Bumping up.

    What does "bumping up" mean?

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by SavoyBG View Post
    What does "bumping up" mean?
    Posting to keep the thread at the top of the queue.
    Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
    Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
    Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
    Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
    Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

  9. #69
    Here's who I have eligible for next year:

    Pete Alexander
    Dave Bancroft
    Hal Carlson - May not be on ballot
    Eddie Collins
    Hank DeBerry - Likely won't be on ballot
    Howard Ehmke
    Ira Flagstead
    Patsy Gharrity - Likely won't be on ballot
    Sammy Hale - Likely won't be on ballot
    Bubbles Hargrave
    Carmen Hill - Likely won't be on ballot
    Bob Meusel
    Johnny Morrison - May not be on ballot
    George Sisler
    Earl Smith - May not be on ballot
    Homer Summa - Likely won't be on ballot
    Curt Walker
    Cy Williams

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    Here's who I have eligible for next year:

    Pete Alexander
    Dave Bancroft
    Eddie Collins
    Howard Ehmke
    Ira Flagstead
    Bubbles Hargrave
    Bob Meusel
    George Sisler
    Curt Walker
    Cy Williams
    Some good new arrivals, although they could stall the chances of some guys who were close this year, like Groh.

    Definites - Alexander, Collins
    Probables - Sisler
    possibiles - Bancroft, Williams

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    Here's who I have eligible for next year:

    Pete Alexander
    Dave Bancroft
    Hal Carlson - May not be on ballot
    Eddie Collins
    Hank DeBerry - Likely won't be on ballot
    Howard Ehmke
    Ira Flagstead
    Patsy Gharrity - Likely won't be on ballot
    Sammy Hale - Likely won't be on ballot
    Bubbles Hargrave
    Carmen Hill - Likely won't be on ballot
    Bob Meusel
    Johnny Morrison - May not be on ballot
    George Sisler
    Earl Smith - May not be on ballot
    Homer Summa - Likely won't be on ballot
    Curt Walker
    Cy Williams
    Of your cut list, Hal Carlson was a good pitcher who was the victim of poor run support. He deserves his 1 and done honors. Sammy Hale was a scrappy 3rd baseman who had excellent range, but also committed a lot of errors. He was a B at 3B in defensive win shares and was an effective hitter. He's very borderline for inclusion, but I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. Of course, it's highly improbably that either one will receive even a token vote.

    The rest of the maybes or probably not's I'd cut, giving us this for the very interesting looking class of 1935 candidates:

    Pete Alexander
    Dave Bancroft
    Hal Carlson
    Eddie Collins
    Howard Ehmke
    Ira Flagstead
    Sammy Hale
    Bubbles Hargrave
    Carmen Hill
    Bob Meusel
    Johnny Morrison
    George Sisler
    Curt Walker
    Cy Williams

    Pete Alexander and Eddie Collins are 1st ballot shoe ins. Dave Bancroft, Bob Meusel, George Sisler and Cy Williams also will probably have their share of supporters and might benefit from some discussion about their cases. Now that Babe Ruth has turned baseball upside down with his home runs, will Cy Williams get any extra attention? What do the folks here think of this new emphasis on power and home runs? It's looking like the Babe will no longer be a Yankee when the '35 season rolls in. He's getting old and looks overweight and clumsy. Does he have anything left in the tank?
    Last edited by jjpm74; 01-14-2009 at 03:21 PM.

  12. #72
    I'd be pretty surprised if Sisler didn't make it. He was held in very high regard at this point in time, and really for decades after.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    6,399
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    I'd be pretty surprised if Sisler didn't make it. He was held in very high regard at this point in time, and really for decades after.
    Up until Gehrig burst on to the scene, has there been a better first basemen this century?

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    I'd be pretty surprised if Sisler didn't make it. He was held in very high regard at this point in time, and really for decades after.
    Didn't Jake Beckley almost not get elected? Isnt George Sisler a similar 1st baseman.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    6,399
    Quote Originally Posted by bambambaseball View Post
    Didn't Jake Beckley almost not get elected? Isnt George Sisler a similar 1st baseman.
    Sisler was significantly better than Beckley pre-injury/illness. And even taking Sisler's career numbers at face value, and ignoring their peak seasons, he looks to have a better case than Beckley.

    Beckley - 10,470 PA's, .635 OWP, 125 OPS+, Black Ink (1), Grey Ink (165)
    Sisler - 9013 PA's, .672 OWP, 124 OPS+, Black Ink (29), Grey Ink (198)
    Last edited by mwiggins; 01-14-2009 at 05:27 PM.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southeastern PA
    Posts
    19,813
    Blog Entries
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by bambambaseball View Post
    Didn't Jake Beckley almost not get elected? Isnt George Sisler a similar 1st baseman.
    Well, Beckley had a better career OPS+ of 125 to Sisler's 124, and he did it in more PA (10,470 to 9013, without any extra credit for playing in the shorter schedules of the 1800's). So, in that sense, you are correct. In fact, if you limit the discussion solely to career, I'd probably go with Beckley, who would look even better with an adjustment for the shorter 19th century seasons.

    But there's a huge difference in how they got there. Beckley was quite consistent, only twice achieving an OPS+ of 140 or more in a season of over 75 games (and never over 152 in more than 75 games). He only had a few seasons of over 100 games where he wasn't between 112 and 133 in OPS+. Sisler had a much better peak. From 1916 to 1922, his OPS+ was only below 140 once, at 132, and five times was 155 or better. The flip side is that after he missed 1923 with a sinus infection that affected his vision, he wasn't HOF caliber, to say the least. He was never over 117 in OPS+ after that, and four times he was under 100. For those who consider peak, many see Sisler as more impressive, especially since his decline was illness-related. If you base it solely on peak, there's no comparison.
    Last edited by jalbright; 01-14-2009 at 05:44 PM.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

  17. #77
    Thanks for that explanation. I never understood why Beckley always struggles for exceptance but Sisler gets praise. That makes a lot of sense.

  18. #78
    Chief Bender
    George Burns
    Max Carey
    Stan Coveleski
    Gavvy Cravath
    Johnny Evers
    Harry Hooper
    Rube Marquard
    Carl Mays
    Ray Schalk
    Joe Tinker
    Bobby Veach
    Ross Youngs
    Ken Williams

    1. Bobby Veach
    2. Stan Coveleski
    3. Carl Mays
    4. Gavvy Cravath
    5. Max Carey
    6. Chief Bender
    7. Ken Williams
    8. George J Burns
    9. Ross Youngs
    10. Rube Marquard
    11. Harry Hooper
    12. Johnny Evers
    13. Joe Tinker
    14. Ray Schalk
    Last edited by dgarza; 01-14-2009 at 06:55 PM.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    D-town, MI
    Posts
    6,644
    Blog Entries
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleX View Post
    Here's who I have eligible for next year:

    Pete Alexander
    Dave Bancroft
    Hal Carlson - May not be on ballot
    Eddie Collins
    Hank DeBerry - Likely won't be on ballot
    Howard Ehmke
    Ira Flagstead
    Patsy Gharrity - Likely won't be on ballot
    Sammy Hale - Likely won't be on ballot
    Bubbles Hargrave
    Carmen Hill - Likely won't be on ballot
    Bob Meusel
    Johnny Morrison - May not be on ballot
    George Sisler
    Earl Smith - May not be on ballot
    Homer Summa - Likely won't be on ballot
    Curt Walker
    Cy Williams
    Also, eligible in 1935 by the age rule is catcher Mike Gonzalez. Of course, I understand if you leave a guy off the ballot who has Kirt Manwaring and Billy Ripken on his "most similar" list.
    Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam, circumspice.

    Comprehensive Reform for the Veterans Committee -- Fixing the Hall continued.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by mwiggins View Post
    Up until Gehrig burst on to the scene, has there been a better first basemen this century?
    Nope. Between the Anson/Brouthers/Connor trio and then Gehrig/Foxx/Greenberg (who's in just his second year in 1934), 1B really wasn't that much of an offensive position in those 30 or so years. Sisler, offensively was better than anyone, and he had a very well rounded skillset.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

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
  •