White Sox all-time catcher

[Hammerin Hank]

Who should be the White Sox all-time catcher?

Carlton Fisk (1981-93)
Ed Herrmann (1967-74)
Sherm Lollar (1952-63)
Ray Schalk (1912-28)
Billy Sullivan (1901-14)
Mike Tresh (1938-48)

[Hammerin Hank]

It's gotta be Pudge! One of the best catchers to ever play the game.

[The Commissioner]

This was really tough. I went with Schalk, though. He lacks Fisk's power numbers, but was actually only 4 points lower in BA (.253 to .257) and actually had a slightly higher OBA. His slugging average is, of course, ridiculously lower than Fisk's though. In the end, Schalk's prowess behind the plate and on the basepaths made me go with him. Very tough call.

[Chisox73]

Fisk was undoubtably the team leadre during his tenure in Chicago.This man gave 100% to the game and wore the White Sox colors with class and dignity.

[AutoMick]

Originally posted by The Commissioner
This was really tough. I went with Schalk, though. He lacks Fisk's power numbers, but was actually only 4 points lower in BA (.253 to .257) and actually had a slightly higher OBA. His slugging average is, of course, ridiculously lower than Fisk's though. In the end, Schalk's prowess behind the plate and on the basepaths made me go with him. Very tough call.

This is why I love these message boards...... hardly anything gets by somebody without them catching it.

Ray Schalk (this is the correct spelling it's wrong on the poll) was a marvelous catcher who worked behind the plate with little or no equipment as compared to what Carlton Fisk had at his ready.

I will never take anything away from Pudge and I will give it to him but just slightly (just a little bit different take than yours Commissioner) because I got to see him day in and day out.... and I know that his work ethic could of been second to none as I don't believe Ray Schalk or any other player in his time worked out his body the way Fisk did daily...... Pudge gets it...Schalk 2nd.

[Eddie Collins]

I think we all hold something against Schalk for being in the Hall, which he obviously shouldn't be, but we often forget he was a marvelous catcher.

That being said, I chose Fisk.

[The Commissioner]

Originally posted by Eddie Collins
I think we all hold something against Schalk for being in the Hall, which he obviously shouldn't be, but we often forget he was a marvelous catcher.

I'd actually ahve to disagree with that statemenmt. Schalk does deserve to be in Cooperstown. His prowess behind the plate was lightyears ahead of others at his position.

[Kroxquo]

I agree emphatically with the Commish. Schalk often gets a bad rap for being in the Hall, but between Buck Ewing and the flood of great catchers in the 20's and 30's (Dickey, Cochrane, Hartnett et al) there was no one better at his position. His offensive number are lower than what we would look for in a catcher, but that has much to do with his era. Catcher at that time was primarily a defensive position, just like shortstop for many decades after that. There's no doubt in my mind that Schalk belongs.

Now if you want to talk about a catcher who doesn't belong, let's talk Bresnahan. . .

[AutoMick]

Originally posted by Kroxquo
I agree emphatically with the Commish. Schalk often gets a bad rap for being in the Hall, but between Buck Ewing and the flood of great catchers in the 20's and 30's (Dickey, Cochrane, Hartnett et al) there was no one better at his position. His offensive number are lower than what we would look for in a catcher, but that has much to do with his era. Catcher at that time was primarily a defensive position, just like shortstop for many decades after that. There's no doubt in my mind that Schalk belongs.

Now if you want to talk about a catcher who doesn't belong, let's talk Bresnahan. . .

So who was your vote cast for? Which White Sox catcher did you select? Was it Ray Schalk or one of the others....... like seeing your opinions, but would like to see your vote as well. Thanks.

[Hammerin Hank]

I'm bringing this old thing up again since we only got 10 votes.

[Chisox]

I'm bringing this old thing up again since we only got 10 votes.

You like to dig deep, don't ya'!

[KCGHOST]

I preferred Fisk by a nose over Lollar. Fisk ranks first in RCAA, OPS versus the league, and OWP.

[Hammerin Hank]

You like to dig deep, don't ya'!

I just didn't get the response I wanted.

[2007wschamps]

I definitely have to go with Pudge on this one.

[DoWnWiThTheSiCkNeSs]

Fisk all the way!

[Good Men wear Black and White]

A.J. should be on that list if he stays with the team a few more years

[SouthSideChamps05]

A.J. should be on that list if he stays with the team a few more years

I don't think so. Although AJ is one of my favlorite players I don't think so. Theres definetly much better hitting catchers than him. However, he's the best in the leagues at calling the game, and he's a very smart player.

[Good Men wear Black and White]

I don't think so. Although AJ is one of my favlorite players I don't think so. Theres definetly much better hitting catchers than him. However, he's the best in the leagues at calling the game, and he's a very smart player.

I disagree, Mike Tresh only coaugt more than 100 games 4 times, A.J. has already don that and has hit over .300, a feat Mike never completed, also mike has 2 career home runs while A.J. has 55, aj has a feiding pecentage of .995 while mike has a ,983, A.J. is much better than Mike tresh

[Chisox]

I disagree, Mike Tresh only coaugt more than 100 games 4 times, A.J. has already don that and has hit over .300, a feat Mike never completed, also mike has 2 career home runs while A.J. has 55, aj has a feiding pecentage of .995 while mike has a ,983, A.J. is much better than Mike tresh

Tresh played in 989 games for the White Sox over 11 seasons, A.J. in 128 over one season.
A.J. batted .257 this past season.

[Good Men wear Black and White]

Tresh played in 989 games for the White Sox over 11 seasons, A.J. in 128 over one season.
A.J. batted .257 this past season.

yeah, thats why i ment a few more years because he hasnt played for the team long enough

[Chisox]

yeah, thats why i ment a few more years because he hasnt played for the team long enough

I just wanted to clarify. It sounded like you were saying he's done all those things with the Sox. If he can play like in Minnesota for a few more years when he compiled those numbers, I'll say he should be included. Now, if he can combine those 20 HR with that .300 BA consistently for a few more years, I'll say he'd be 4th, behind Fisk, Lollar, and Schalk.

[ChiSox12345]

Carlton Fisk

[chicagowhitesox1173]

i would almost put piersynski number one here now. although that is a tough call.

[The Commissioner]

i would almost put piersynski number one here now. although that is a tough call.

He's definitely climbing up there on their all-time list of catchers, but he has quite a while to go still before he can be compared to Fisk, Schalk, or even Lollar for that matter.

[dominik]

He's definitely climbing up there on their all-time list of catchers, but he has quite a while to go still before he can be compared to Fisk, Schalk, or even Lollar for that matter.

really? he is a solid hitter for a catcher (not very good though), but defense ratings don't have him very good. I would say he is a little above average, but certainly no man that should be named in the same sentence as fisk.

fisk should be clearly the no.1.