Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

Philadelphia Athletics, 1928-1932

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Philadelphia Athletics, 1928-1932

    I would like to throw some love to the team that I have long-considered the Greatest Team of them all. The 1929-32 Philadelphia Athletics. I think it is time to give them some much over-due props and respect.

    I am aware that I am probably the only Fever member who feels this way.

    1928 A's---98-55, .641, 2nd Pl, 2.5 g behind
    1929 A's---104-46, .693, 18 g ahead, (WS: W 4-1 over Cubs)
    1930 A's---102-52, .662, 8 g ahead, (WS: W 4-2 over Cardinals)
    1931 A's---107-45, .704, 13.5 g ahead, (WS: L 4-3 to Cardinals)
    1932 A's---94-60, .610, 2nd Pl, 13 g behind


    The Second Dynasty (1927–1933)
    After that, Mack began to build another winner. In 1927 and 1928, the Athletics finished second to the New York Yankees, then won pennants in 1929, 1930 and 1931, winning the World Series in 1929 and 1930. In each of the three years, the A's won over 100 games.

    As it turned out, this would be the Athletics' last hurrah in Philadelphia. Mack again sold or traded his best players in order to reduce expenses. The Great Depression was well under way, and declining attendance had drastically reduced the team’s revenues. The construction of a spite fence at Shibe Park, blocking the view from nearby buildings, only served to irritate potential paying fans. However, the consequences did not become apparent for a few more years, as the team finished second in 1932 and third in 1933.
    59
    1926-29 New York Yankees
    15.25%
    9
    1929-32 Philadelphia Athletics
    18.64%
    11
    1936-43 New York Yankees
    20.34%
    12
    1917-20 Chicago White Sox
    3.39%
    2
    1910-14 Philadelphia Athletics
    0.00%
    0
    1921-24 New York Giants
    0.00%
    0
    1894-96 Baltimore Orioles
    1.69%
    1
    1955-58 New York Yankees
    0.00%
    0
    1949-56 Brooklyn Dodgers
    3.39%
    2
    1949-53 New York Yankees
    15.25%
    9
    1997-2002 New York Yankees
    5.08%
    3
    1906-10 Chicago Cubs
    5.08%
    3
    1970-76 Cincinnati Reds
    6.78%
    4
    1988-92 Oakland A's
    0.00%
    0
    1972-74 Oakland A's
    3.39%
    2
    1976-81 New York Yankees
    0.00%
    0
    1930's Pittsburgh Crawfords
    0.00%
    0
    1930's Homestead Greys
    1.69%
    1

  • #2
    Mack/McGraw:

    I rate Connie Mack as the Greatest Manager Ever. I rate McGraw as having the greatest record ever compiled. Contradiction? Not in BurgessLand.

    1. Connie Mack - Pirates (1894-96), Phil. A's ('01-50) BB's closest thing to a saintly person.

    2. John J. McGraw - Balt. (1899-1902), NY Giants (1902-32); From '03-31, 28 yrs., came in lower than 3rd only 5 times.

    Explanation. From '03-31, 28 yrs., McGraw came in lower than 3rd only 5 times. That is a record I doubt can be broken. His strength came from having been a very good player. He was able to routinize his teaching of the different skills, such as fielding, sliding, throwing the ball in on one bounce, etc.

    Since he played in a big market (NY), he seldom had financial problems. He was acknowledged as a master of the trading market. Not a winter would pass by, without him trying to strengthen his squads. He tried in vain since 1920 to buy Rogers Hornsby from Branch Rickey, who wouldn't sell him, even when offered $300K. McGraw also tried to get Cobb in Dec., 1926. But Landis told him, "Lay off, Cobb." Landis intended to restore TC to Detroit, to shove it up Ban Johnson's butt, who had sworn TC would never play in the AL again.

    So the question might be, why would I put Mack over McGraw, if I think McGraw had the better record? Simple. They didn't have a level playing field. McGraw had advantages Mack didn't. And Mack couldn't level the conditions out.

    McGraw, in NYC, had no "blue laws", prohibiting activities on Sundays, after 1919. Mack did not receive his liberation from blue laws until Nov., 1933, and it caused, indirectly, Mack having to break up his teams in 1914, and 1933-35.

    McGraw had fans who supported the Giants no matter what. Mack had fans who refused to come out to the games, and support their local team. And since Mack was legally prevented from playing games on Sundays until 1934, his attendance stunk. Even when he won pennants, he had attendance problems. I put in red, where he won the pennant.
    Code:
    -Yr.---Attend.
    1925-----1st
    1926-----2nd
    1927-----4th 
    1928-----2nd 
    1929-----3rd
    1930-----2nd
    1931-----2nd
    1932-----3rd
    1933-----6th
    1934-----6th
    So one can see from the above chart that Mr. Mack had a real problem getting his fan base to turn out and support their team. And in the days before TV money, fan attendance forms the foundation of a teams income.
    It was bad enough to not be able to play on Sundays until 1934, but poor fan interest really killed the A's. Connie had good teams in all of the above yrs. except perhaps 1934. And he failed to come in the top 3 in attendance 7 times out of 20. This is the reason why he couldn't afford to pay his players well.

    In 1914, the A's finished 1st, but placed only 5th in attendance. When his players wanted increases to match what the Federal L. was dangling in front of them, he couldn't match the Fed's offers. So Plank and Bender jumped to the Federals. And to keep the rest from doing the same, Connie sold his players off, before they could jump, and leave him with nothing.

    I believe that if Mack had no blue laws to cramp his attendance before 1934, he would not have felt compelled to break up his 2 great teams, and hence would have surpassed John McGraws great record. So that is how I justify placing Mack on top, while still feeling that McGraw had the most impressive record, on paper. Different conditions. At least that's how it looks to me.

    Since it bears so heavily on how teams create wealth, I give the following.

    The following cities received their liberation from no-Sunday baseball games "blue laws" in the following years.
    Detroit - 1910,
    Cleveland - 1911,
    New York - 1919,
    Boston - 1929,
    Philadelphia/Pittsburgh - Nov. 8, 1933.
    Wash. DC before 1919.

    Comment


    • #3
      A's/Yankees:

      The late 20's A's vs. Yankees rivalry is one of the fun subjects for me. The Yanks hit their high water mark in 1927, the A's in 1929. Both teams merit all time status. They were very fierce rivals.

      1927 Yankees - 110-44 - .714 - 19 games ahead of Phil.
      1929 A's----- - 104-46 - .693 - 18 games ahead of Yanks.

      1927 Yankees' Hall of Famers - Ruth, Gehrig, Pennock, Lazzeri, Combs, Hoyt, Huggins,
      1929 A's Hall of Famers----- - Foxx, Cochrane, Grove, Simmons, Collins, Mack,

      Mack/Ruppert were exceedingly determined men. Ruppert had the edge financially. I'd like to insert a few sentences from my Ty as Manager article, which I warehouse in Ty Cobb Thread. It's only a couple of paragraphs.
      --------------------
      Another critical issue that one must look at is how much a team invests to keep improving. Certain other teams were going all out to bolster their clubs. For example, in NY, Jake Ruppert was conducting operations like a mad scientist. He brought almost the entire Red Sox team to NY. Ruppert was serious about his club. In pitchers alone, he raided these from Boston: Carl Mays, Herb Pennock, Sam Jones, Waite Hoyt, Joe Bush, Ernie Shore. He also raided shortstop Everett Scott, catcher Wally Schang, left fielder Duffy Lewis. These alone will win you a pennant.

      When the '25 Yankees collapsed to 7th place, Huggins and Barrow got rid of some players and started their '26 spring training with others. While Ty was making do with the scraps from other teams leftovers, Jake Ruppert was just barely beginning to flex his wallet. During Ty's days managing the Tigers, Jake Ruppert armed his Yankee dugout with Lou Gehrig, Tony Lazzeri, Bob Meusel, Earl Combs, Marty Koenig, Joe Dugan, as well as the championship Red Sox team from '15-18. Jake was intent on making his team the envy of Balldom.

      Meanwhile, over in Philadelphia, hardly less earnest activity was in progress to meet the Yankees challenge on even terms. Mack suddenly was spending like Ruppert in an exclusive men's clothing shop. Mack & Ruppert turned the '20's into dueling checkbooks, & neither were bouncing any checks. Over in Philly, Mack was rebuilding & Connie wasn't kidding. In '21 he got Eddie Rommel, in '22, Bing Miller & Joe Hauser, '23 Rube Walberg, in '24, he got Al Simmons & Max Bishop.

      For 1925, he picked up Grove, Cochrane, Foxx, veteran pitcher Jack Quinn. For '26, he got shortstop Billy Wambsganss and vet pitcher Howard Ehmke, whom Ty had discarded after '22. These players proved that Connie wasn't fooling about bringing pennants home. He paid $100K for Grove in 10 installments, $50K for Cochrane( plus $150K invested in Portland team, just to sign Cochrane). These were major moves.

      Both these teams, the 20's Yankees and Phil. A's were only 2 of the teams that Ty's men had to face on the open battlefield. Coping with 2 of the greatest baseball teams of history, is utterly germane to whether Ty was a good manager. To this day, most of the most respected, authoritative baseball minds consider the '29-31 Phil. A's & the '26-28 Yankees as 2 of the very finest baseball teams in all-around balance, that ever played the game.
      --------------------------------------
      Back to basics.

      Here I'd like to show the results of the Yanks/A's rivalry for the era.

      -------------A's-Yanks---------------Shibe---Yankee S.
      1926----------13-9--------------------5-6----------8-3
      1927-----------8-14-------------------5-6----------3-8
      1928----------6-16-------------------2-9----------4-7
      1929----------14-8--------------------7-4----------7-4
      1930----------12-10------------------12-10---------5-6
      1931----------11-11-------------------7-4----------4-7
      1932-----------8-14-------------------6-5----------2-9
      totals-------82-72-1----------------39-38-------33-44
      (numbers taken from baseball-reference)

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Connie Mack, on his decsion to play Cobb/Speaker in 1927/1928
        Originally posted by Originally Posted by BaseballHistoryNut
        Well, I don't think I'd put Connie Mack's opinion at the top of the list. By almost ALL historians' opinions, it was his love for the ancient Cobb and Speaker which cost the 1928 A's the pennant to the fantastic-hitting, but very mediocre-pitching 1928 Yankees. So his opinion's value is a bit compromised, wouldn't you concede?

        BHN Jim
        Well, we all have those who's judgment we feel was the best. When I provided the link, you don't have to single out Connie. Look who it includes. Speaker himself. Babe too. When taken collectively, it is over-whelming. Hardly leaves anyone out. Owners, players, umps. When we consider that not a single person had a single reason to lie for Cobb, it leaves us without an ulterior motive for saying Ty was their #1.

        We must also note that those 250 Prominent BB figures were some of the most competitive guys we had. Speaker, Sisler, Collins, Hornsby, Mack. It just goes on and on.

        So, I cannot in all honesty, even begin to think that Mack's judgment in playing Cobb in 1928 was flawed. Connie had choices. He could play Ty, Mule Haas, Simmons, Bing Miller, Tris Speaker, Walter French. In any combination of 3 he chose.

        Who Connie put in there was based largely on how they did in 1927. And by any stretch, only Simmons did better.

        Here's how Connie's OFers stacked up in 1927.

        Simmons - .392 - 106 games
        Cobb - .357 -134 games
        Haas - didn't play
        Miller - .325 - 143 games
        Speaker - .327 - 141 games (for Washington)
        French - .304 - 108 games
        ------------------------------------------------
        So, how did Connie's OFers do in 1928?

        Simmons - .351 - 119 games
        Miller - .329 - 139 games
        Cobb - .323 - 95 games
        Haas - .280 - 91 games
        Speaker - .267 - 64 games
        French - .257 - 48 games
        --------------------------------------------
        Now, to be really fair to the opinion that you've read, that Connie erred in playing Ty/Tris in 1928, (and I've also read that opinion often), I must bring some objective info to the table.

        Cobb was known as a slow starter, and was one of a relatively small % of hitters who was well-known to come on towards the end of the season. And when he was taken out of the lineup in mid-season in 1928, he was deprived of his usual phase were he would have his normal late season drive.

        Cobb played as a regular up until July 27, 1928. It was his 86th game of the year. He was hitting .332. He hit better when he was playing regularly.

        I have also read that Tris/Ty had slowed down so much in the OF, that Connie had to sit them on the bench in 1927/28. So, to that end, I will provide a piece of fan mail that addresses Ty's fielding in 1927.

        Baseball Magazine, December, 1927, pp. 334.
        Mr. Lane,
        Dear Sir:--
        As I am one of those who pulled for the Philadelphia Athletics to win a pennant this year I want to take the present opportunity to say that I think Ty Cobb was a tower of strength for them. He deserves all the credit in the world. He has played a brilliant game, and has worked wonders with the batting of the others on the team. He brought ten of the Athletics up over the .300 mark this year, more .300 batsmen than any other Major League club this season. Philadelphia club batting at the close of last season was .269--this season it is .303, an improvement of 34 points. But for this improvement in the batting this year which Cobb brought about there is no doubt in my mind but that the A's would have been much lower in the race than they were. Cobb's own playing has been marvelous.

        When Simmons was injured July 24, Ty was put in center field, and he fielded so brilliantly that the Athletic pitchers were able to pitch seven shut-outs, their only shut-outs of the season, and during the rest of the season with Cobb in centerfield the Athletics looked like a new team and won almost all their games; to be exact, they won 35 games and lost only 15 during the time Cobb played center until he left on his hunting trip. This was a tribute to Ty's defensive ability in the outfield, while he was shining as an offensive star also, getting 3, 4 and even as many as 5 hits a game.

        Yes, Ty Cobb has played a wonderful game for the Athletics this year, has helped the other players to bat much better, and in every way has been a very present inspiration. And I hope he remains with the Athletics. A Fan.
        --------------------------------------------------------------------
        At the end of the day, I must support Connie decision to use Ty in 1928. Tris was showing his age a lot more than Ty.

        Thanks, SO VERY MUCH, BHN for giving me a chance to go back into my old backyard and dig cool stuff out of my Bill Burgess' Cabinet of Wondrous Forgotten BB Lore! It sure felt good. Like going home after a long vacation away.

        What a pleasure to chat about the old stuff.

        Comment


        • #5
          1929 Philadelphia Athletics; 104-46, .693, 18 g ahead, (WS W 4-1 over Cubs)--- BB-Reference

          Top Row: L-R: Edmund 'Bing' Miller (RF), Bill Breckinridge (P), George 'Mule' Haas (CF), Eddie Collins (coach), Bill 'Kid' Gleason (coach), Jimmy Foxx (1B), Robert 'Lefty' Grove (P), Howard Ehmke (P), Al Simmons (LF).

          Middle Row: L-R: Homer Summa (OF), George 'Rube' Walberg (P), Carroll Yerkes (P), Connie Mack (Mgr.), George Burns (1B), George Earnshaw (P), James 'Jimmy' Cronin (2B).

          Bottom Row: L-R: Sammy Hale (3B), Gordon 'Mickey' Cochrane (C), Walter French (OF), Jimmy Dykes (SS/3B), John 'Joe' Boley (SS), Ralph 'Cy' Perkins (C), Earl Mack (coach).



          1929 Philadelphia Athletics; 104-46, .693, 18 g ahead, (WS W 4-1 over the Cubs)---BB Reference---Player identifications provided courtesy of Gary Livacari (GaryL).

          L-R: Eddie Collins (coach), Kid Gleason (coach), Walter E. French (OF), Jimmie Dykes (3B), Jim Cronin (IF), Homer Suma (RF), Max Bishop (2B), Sammy Hale (3B), Bevo LeBourveau (OF) , Mickey Cochrane (C), Cy Perkins (C), Bill Breckinridge (P), Jimmy Foxx (1B), Connnie Mack (Mgr.), Bing Miller (RF), Al Simmons (LF), Eddie Rommell (P), Rube Walberg (P), Lefty Grove (P), Howard Ehmke (P), George Earnshaw (P), Jack Quinn (P), Mule Haas (CF), Bill Shores (P), George Burns (1B), Joe Boley (SS), Earle Mack (coach).
          Front: Lawrence Moard? (mascot)


          Last edited by Bill Burgess; 12-18-2011, 10:17 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            1930 Philadelphia Athletics; 102-52, .662, 8 g ahead, (WS W 4-2 over Cardinals)---BB Reference

            Top Row, L-R: Eric McNair (IN), Lefty Grove (P), Max Bishop (2B), Mule Haas (CF), Joe Boley (SS), Rube Walberg (P), Wally Schang (C), Charlie Perkins (P), Jim Moore (LF), Homer Suma (RF), Dib Williams (IF), George Earnshaw (P), Lee Roy Mahaffey (P), Jack Quinn (P), Eddie Rommell (P).

            Bottom Row, L-R: Frank 'Pinky' Higgins (IF), Cy Perkins (C), Mickey Cochrane (C), Jimmy Dykes (3B), Connie Mack (Mgr.), Al Simmons (LF), Bing Miller (RF), Jimmy Foxx (1B), Eddie Collins (coach), Kid Gleason (coach).



            1930 Philadelphia Athletics; 102-52, .662, 8 g ahead, (WS W 4-2 over Cardinals)---BB Reference---Player identifications provided courtesy of Gary Livacari (GaryL).

            Top Row, L-R: *Doc Edward E. Ebling (trainer), Lee Roy Mahaffey (P), George Earnshaw (P), Mule Haas (CF), Bill Shores (P), Wally Schang (C), Earl Mack (coach), Jack Quinn (P).

            Middle Row, L-R: Charlie Perkins (P), Pinky Higgins (IF), Homer Suma (RF), Jimmie Foxx (1B), Dibrell Williams (IF), Bing Miller (RF), Lefty Grove (P), Jimmy Moore (OF), Cy Perkins (C).

            Bottom Row, L-R: Joe Boley (SS), Max Bishop (2B), Jimmie Dykes (3B), Eddie Collins (coach), Connie Mack (Mgr.), Bill 'Kid' Gleason (coach), Eddie Rommel (P), Al Simmons (LF), Mickey Cochrane (C).

            Rube Walberg/Eric McNair are not pictured.

            *Doc Edward E. Ebling joined the Philadelphia A's in 1915. He died February 11, 1938 at the age of 63. He was their trainer/chief masseur.

            Comment


            • #7
              1931 Philadelphia Athletics; 107-45, .704, 13.5 g ahead, (WS L 4-3 to Cardinals)---BB Reference---Player identifications provided courtesy of Gary Livacari (GaryL).

              Top, L-R: Roy Mahaffey (P), Dib Williams (SS), Doc Cramer (OF), Waite Hoyt (P), Mule Haas (CF), Hank McDonald (P), Eddie Rommel (P), Lew Krausse (P), Johnnie Heving (C), Jim Peterson (P).

              Middle: Lefty Grove (P), Bing Miller (RF), Mickey Cochrane (C), Eddie Collins (Coach), Connie Mack (Owner/Mgr.), Bill (Kid) Gleason (Coach), Earl Mack (Coach), Al Simmons (LF), Max Bishop (2B), Jimmy Moore (OF), Jimmy Dykes (3B).

              Bottom: Joe Palmisano (C), Eric McNair (UT), Jimmy Foxx (1B), Rube Walberg (P), Marcucci (mascot), *Doc Edward E. Ebling (trainer), Joe Boley (SS), Phil Todt (1B).




              1931 Philadelphia Athletics; 107-45, .704, 13.5 g ahead, (WS L 4-3 to Cardinals)---BB Reference
              ---Player identifications provided courtesy of Gary Livacari (GaryL).

              Top, L-R: Roy Mahaffey (P), Dib Williams (SS), Doc Cramer (OF), Waite Hoyt (P), Mule Haas (CF), Hank McDonald (P), Lew Krausse (P), Johnnie Heving (C), Jim Peterson (P).

              Middle: Lefty Grove (P), Bing Miller (RF), Mickey Cochrane (C), Eddie Collins (Coach), Connie Mack (Owner/Mgr.), Bill (Kid) Gleason (Coach), Eddie Rommell (P), Al Simmons (LF), Max Bishop (2B), Jimmy Moore (OF), Jimmy Dykes (3B).

              Bottom: Joe Palmisano (C), Eric McNair (UT), Jimmy Foxx (1B), Rube Walberg (P), Marcucci (mascot), *Doc Edward E. Ebling, Joe Boley (SS), Phil Todt (1B), Earl Mack (Coach).



              Al Simmons, 1924-27.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bing Miller, 1924


              Jimmy Dykes, Philadelphia A's IF, 1924-27---BB Ref


              March 17, 1934: Fort Myers, FL spring training; L-R: Jimmy Foxx, Dib Williams, Eric McNair, Frank Higgins.

              Comment


              • #8
                Weak Sisters:

                One of my past posts, concerned the issue of lack of competitive balance in eras past (1900-1930). Here was the thrust of my argument.
                --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                10. Another important factor in attracting the fans to come out is to have attractive, competitive teams, featuring good players.

                Around the turn of the century, BB lacked competitive balance. In the AL, the Browns, Senators, Highlanders, were the weak sisters in the league, upon whom the others beat up on. It was hard for those teams to compete for fans.

                In the NL, the Phillies, Braves, Dodgers, Reds, Cards were the weak sisters. The Cubs, Giants, Pirates, were the strong teams.

                And that lack of competitive balance contributed to low attendance. Plus the lack of stars to go all the way around. There were no good stadiums until the Pirates built Forbes Field in '09. First modern steel/concrete park.

                To summarize: A fan in 1905 Pittsburgh/Detroit had little money to go to a game, which were only held in afternoons, where he'd sit on wooden stands, which held around 15,000 fans, enjoyed primitive concessions facilities, had to fight rush hour traffic to get home.

                --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Jeffrey made response to my above argument:

                Weak sisters? Anyone heard of Tampa Bay, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Montreal, Kansas City, Texas for the most part. Strong teams? Anyone heard of the Yanks, Braves, Twins, Oakland, Boston?
                --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                In order to bolster my arguing points, I'd like to submit the following data.
                An example of the lack of competitive balance in a league is demonstated by the following data.

                Code:
                1927 New York Yankees------------------1929 Philadelphia Athletics
                St. Louis Browns------21-1----.955-----Boston Red Sox--------18-4---.818
                Boston Red Sox--------18-4----.818-----Detroit Tigers--------18-4---.818
                Chicago White Sox-----17-5----.773-----Washington Senators---16-4---.800
                Philadelphia A's------14-8----.636-----Cleveland Indians-----14-7---.667
                Detroit Tigers--------14-8----.636-----New York Yankees------14-8---.636
                Washington Senators---14-8----.636-----Chicago White Sox-----13-9---.591
                Cleveland Indians-----12-10---.545-----St. Louis Browns------11-10--.524
                --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                So, this is an example of the lack of competitive balance, which rendered it difficult for the bottom weak sisters to draw on their fan base.

                One of the reasons why I always resist singing the praises of the High & Mighty 1927 New York Yankees, is because as one can see at a glance, they were able to roll up the score on a league which had a team which couldn't defend themselves that yr. So the Yanks were able to appear like gods, and finish 19 games ahead due to the extreme weakness of the Brownies, BoSox and White Sox, not because they were gods. So much for hype.

                Curiously, 2 yrs. later, the Brownies were the hardest team for the mighty A's to beat up, but they also beat the snot out of the 3 weak sisters in the league.
                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                1927 Yankees Pitchers/1929 Athletics Pitchers:

                Now that we've all agreed that a pitcher's W-L record is so team-dependent, as to be devoid of all meaning in showing a pitcher's value, I think the next stat to go into the rubbish bin, would have to be his team's W-L record without him.

                Example: Pitchers on teams which win over 100 games, obviously have some other good pitchers. 1927 Yanks & the 1929 Athletics had:

                Code:
                1927 NY Yankees pitchers-------------1929 Philadelphia Athletics pitchers
                Waite Hoyt,-----22-7, 146 ERA+-------Lefty Grove,      20-6,  151 ERA+
                Urban Shocker,--18-6, 136 ERA+-------George Earnshaw,  24-8,  129 ERA+
                Wilcy Moore,----19-7, 169 ERA+-------Rube Walberg,     18-11, 118 ERA+
                Herb Pennock,---19-8, 128 ERA+-------Ed Rommel,        12-2,  149 ERA+
                Dutch Ruether,--13-6, 113 ERA+-------Bill Shores,      11-6,  118 ERA+
                George Pipgras--10-3,  94 ERA+-------Jack Quinn,       11-9,  107 ERA+
                Myles Thomas-----7-4,  79 ERA+-------Howard Ehmke,      7-2,  129 ERA+
                Bob Shawkey------2-3, 133 ERA+
                Their hitting got them runs, but great pitching/defense suppressed the other teams runs-producing potential. So it wasn't all done with offense alone. But team W-L minus pitchers record, makes it appear their team won their games for them, which is a very insideous half-truth. It was mutually beneficial.

                Of what real value can it have, since it so utterly favors pitchers on weak teams (Young, Johnson, Alexander, Carlton, Vance), while it makes pitchers on strong teams (Matty, Brown, Ford, Grove, Pennock, Hoyt, Shawkey) appear good only due to team strength. Team WPCT minus the pitcher's W-L PCT. gotta go, guys.

                Comment


                • #9
                  AG2004 contributed this analysis to beautifully refute my above theory:
                  The Browns weren't a last-place team in 1927; Boston finished last in the AL that year.

                  In 1927, the Yankees went 14-8 against 2nd-place Philadelphia, 14-8 against 3rd-place Washington, and 14-8 against 4th-place Detroit. That's an impressive performance against the better AL clubs.

                  Competitive balance in a league does play a role - if the league as a whole is better, that makes the overall record of the champion more impressive than otherwise. However, since the 1927 Yanks did so well against the league's top clubs, their 21-1 record against the Browns doesn't matter a lot.

                  The 1954 Indians, by contrast, really beat up on the bottom-feeders. The Indians went 111-43, but there were only three AL teams better than .450; the league was very unbalanced. (The 1927 AL had four teams with winning records and five teams above .450.) The 1954 Indians went just 11-11 against the second-place Yankees, and 11-11 against the third-place White Sox. They proceeded to get swept by the Giants in the World Series.

                  The 1927 Yankees were impressive against the top teams. Beating up on the 7th-place Browns and 8th-place Red Sox helped their record, but they would still be legendary had they lost a few more games to the bottom-feeders. The 1954 Indians, however, needed to dominate the bottom teams in order to get their impressive record; they were just average against the better teams that year.

                  As I pointed out earlier, the 1927 Yankees had a better winning percentage against upper-division teams than the 1929 Athletics had. The Yankees' performance against St. Louis doesn't count towards that record, since the Browns were 7th. If one were to ignore the games against lower-division clubs, the 1927 Yankees would still have a better record than the 1929 Athletics, despite the abolition of the league competitiveness issue.
                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  let's see how the teams did against the just the top teams in baseball.
                  Let's throw out all the games against the bottom-feeders, and just focus on how
                  the teams did against clubs that finished in the top four in their league.

                  1927. The Philadelphia Athletics finished second in the AL, the Washington
                  Senators finished third in the AL, the Detroit Tigers finished fourth in the AL,
                  and the Pittsburgh Pirates won the NL. Against only those four teams , the
                  New York Yankees went 46-24, for a .657 winning percentage.

                  1929. The Yankees finished second in the AL, Cleveland finished third, the
                  Browns finished fourth, and the Cubs won the NL pennant. Against only those
                  four teams , the Philadelphia Athletics went 43-26, for a .623 winning
                  percentage.

                  1917. Boston finished second in the AL, Cleveland third, and Detroit fourth.
                  The Giants won the NL pennant. Against only those four teams , the Chicago
                  White Sox went 45-26, for a .634 winning percentage.

                  And, out of curiosity,

                  1998. Boston, Cleveland, and Texas all finished among the top four in winning
                  percentage in the AL. San Diego and Atlanta finished among the top four in
                  winning percentage in the NL (they were the only such teams that the Yankees
                  played that year). Against only those five teams , the New York Yankees went
                  36-16, for a .692 winning percentage. If you look at the regular season alone,
                  the New York Yankees went 25-13, for a .658 winning percentage.

                  So, here's a short list of how various clubs did against only those teams that
                  finished in the top four in their league:

                  1998 New York Yankees, .692 winning percentage (including postseason)
                  1998 New York Yankees, .658 winning percentage (regular season only)

                  1927 New York Yankees, .657 winning percentage (including postseason)
                  1927 New York Yankees, .636 winning percentage (regular season only)

                  1917 Chicago White Sox, .634 winning percentage (including postseason)
                  1917 Chicago White Sox, .630 winning percentage (regular season only)

                  1929 Philadelphia Athletics, .623 winning percentage (including postseason)
                  1929 Philadelphia Athletics, .609 winning percentage (regular season only)

                  From this we see that:

                  1) The 1927 Yankees did a better job against the league's top teams than the
                  1929 Athletics.

                  2) The 1998 Yankees were even better against the league's top teams than those
                  earlier squads, despite the fact that the overall standard of teams was better
                  in the 1990s than it was pre-integration.
                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  1927 Yankees - Reported Salaries


                  Miller Huggins, Manager $37,500
                  Ed Barrow, GM $25,000

                  Babe Ruth, OF $70,000
                  Herb Pennock, P $17,500
                  (plus $1,000 bonus if attained 25 wins)
                  Urban Shocker, P $13,500
                  Bob Meusel, OF $13,000
                  Joe Dugan, 3B $12,000
                  Waite Hoyt, P $11,000
                  (plus $1,000 bonus if attained 20 wins)
                  Earle Combs, OF $10,500
                  Bob Shawkey, P $10,500
                  Benny Bengough, C $8,000
                  Tony Lazzeri, 2B $8,000
                  (plus round trip train fare for he and his wife at the beginning and end of season)
                  Lou Gehrig, 1B $7,500
                  Mark Koenig, SS $7,000
                  Pat Collins, C $7,000
                  Ben Paschal, OF $7,000
                  Myles Thomas, P $6,500
                  John Grabowski, C $5,500
                  Mike Gazella, IF $5,000
                  Joe Giard, P $5,000
                  Cedric Durst, OF $4,500
                  George Pipgras, P $4,500
                  Wilcy Moore, P $2,500
                  (plus $500 bonus if finishes year with club)
                  Julie Wera, IF $2,400

                  Total Payroll (est.) $250,000
                  Average $10,000
                  Median $7,000

                  Each player received a 1927 World Series winner's share of $5,592.17.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My Greatest Teams:

                    Connie Mack once said that anyone can win a pennant, but only the really good teams repeat, and only the great ones can win 3 in a row. Which is how I think of my greatest teams.

                    1. 1929-31 Philadelphia Athletics
                    2. 1917-19 Chicago White Sox
                    3. 1910-14 Philadelphia Athletics
                    4. 1926-28 New York Yankees
                    5. 1936-43 New York Yankees
                    6. 1921-24 New York Giants
                    7. 1894-96 Baltimore Orioles
                    8. 1955-58 New York Yankees
                    9. 1949-56 Brooklyn Dodgers
                    10. 1949-53 New York Yankees
                    11. 1997-2002 New York Yankees
                    12. 1906-10 Chicago Cubs
                    13. 1970-76 Cincinnati Reds
                    14. 1988-92 Oakland Athletics
                    15. 1972-74 Oakland Athletics
                    16. 1976-81 New York Yankees
                    17. 1930's Pittsburgh Crawfords (Negro Leagues)
                    18. 1930's Homestead Greys (Negro Leagues)
                    Originally posted by RuthMayBond
                    Yeah, those 1918 Chisox were world beaters

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Bill Burgess
                      My Greatest Teams:

                      Connie Mack once said that anybody can win a pennant, but only the really good teams repeat, and only the great ones can win 3 in a row. Which is how I think of my greatest teams.

                      1. 1929-31 Philadelphia Athletics
                      2. 1917-19 Chicago White Sox
                      3. 1910-14 Philadelphia Athletics
                      4. 1926-28 New York Yankees
                      5. 1921-24 New York Giants
                      6. 1894-96 Baltimore Orioles
                      7. 1955-58 New York Yankees
                      8. 1949-56 Brooklyn Dodgers
                      9. 1936-43 New York Yankees
                      10. 1997-2002 New York Yankees
                      11. 1906-10 Chicago Cubs
                      12. 1970-76Cincinnati Reds
                      13. 1988-92 Oakland Athletics
                      14. 1972-74 Oakland Athletics
                      15. 1976-81 New York Yankees

                      great list

                      but it is missing the only team to win 5 straight world championships the 1949-53 Yankees, and if you add that in 1954 they won more games than any of the 5 world champs, then won pennants in 55-58 (listed) and 60-64 (not listed), that is quite impressive

                      I would add the 1969-71 Baltimore orioles and the A's of course won divisions in 71 and 75
                      Originally posted by Bill Burgess
                      If memory serves, didn't Al Lopez win a pennant in that run? And didn't the Dodgers win in 1955?
                      Originally posted by ol' aches and pains
                      Actually, that's incorrect. The Milwaukee Braves won the Series in '57, and even in all the other years you mentioned, although NY teams won those Series, they didn't win every game. Only the 1950 (Yankees) and 1954 (Giants) won in 4-game sweeps in that period.
                      1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                      2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                      3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        My criteria is one more - 4 consecutive pennants, like Von der Ahe and McGraw achieved, but the Yanks were striving for (unsuccessfully) since Ruth showed up.
                        Their first run met head up with the unstoppable Walter Johnson, getting his rightful time in the World Series, in the mid-20s. Then, after building up another head of steam, culminating in the renouned 1927 Yankees, Mack was Back - as was pointed out - to firmly turn them away once again. By 1935 Ruth was gone, and Gehrig only had four years left.
                        Each of Gehrig's last four years (and parts) were successful in achieving that milestone which perhaps only I recognize.
                        And yes, the Yanks did go on to surpassing this performance level in the 50s. But that era was a tremendous baseball period for NYC. They won every World Series game from '49 - '57 - forty seven straight games, if I recall correctly.

                        So although my view may be more anti-yankee, than pro-Athletics; I support your assessment wholeheartedly.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          One of the most essential components of a baseball winner is the willingness of an owner, and the depths of his pockets, in bringing a winner to his town.

                          Connie Mack and Jake Ruppert turned the 1920's into dueling checkbooks.

                          Later owners, like Tom Yawkey or Powel Crosley, were likewise determined to bring home winners, but it took more than money. It also required baseball acumen, the ability to size up prospects. Many an owner or GM has thrown bonus money at hot prospects, only to see that prospect fizzle under the pressure of the Big Time.

                          Here are some sentences I wrote about the Mack/Ruppert gi-normous, titantic spending frenzy of the 20's.
                          --------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Mack/Ruppert were exceedingly determined men. Ruppert had the edge financially. I'd like to insert a few sentences from my Ty as Manager article, which I warehouse in Ty Cobb Thread. It's only a couple of paragraphs.
                          --------------------
                          Another critical issue that one must look at is how much a team invests to keep improving. Certain other teams were going all out to bolster their clubs. For example, in NY, Jake Ruppert was conducting operations like a mad scientist. He brought almost the entire Red Sox team to NY. Ruppert was serious about his club. In pitchers alone, he raided these from Boston: Carl Mays, Herb Pennock, Sam Jones, Waite Hoyt, Joe Bush, Ernie Shore. He also raided shortstop Everett Scott, catcher Wally Schang, left fielder Duffy Lewis. These alone will win you a pennant.

                          When the '25 Yankees collapsed to 7th place, Huggins and Barrow got rid of some players and started their '26 spring training with others. While Ty was making do with the scraps from other teams leftovers, Jake Ruppert was just barely beginning to flex his wallet. During Ty's days managing the Tigers, Jake Ruppert armed his Yankee dugout with Lou Gehrig, Tony Lazzeri, Bob Meusel, Earl Combs, Marty Koenig, Joe Dugan, as well as the championship Red Sox team from '15-18. Jake was intent on making his team the envy of Balldom.

                          Meanwhile, over in Philadelphia, hardly less earnest activity was in progress to meet the Yankees challenge on even terms. Mack suddenly was spending like Ruppert in an exclusive men's clothing shop. Mack & Ruppert turned the '20's into dueling checkbooks, & neither were bouncing any checks. Over in Philly, Mack was rebuilding & Connie wasn't kidding. In '21 he got Eddie Rommel, in '22, Bing Miller & Joe Hauser, '23 Rube Walberg, in '24, he got Al Simmons & Max Bishop.

                          For 1925, he picked up Grove, Cochrane, Foxx, veteran pitcher Jack Quinn. For '26, he got shortstop Billy Wambsganss and vet pitcher Howard Ehmke, whom Ty Cobb had discarded after '22. These players proved that Connie wasn't fooling about bringing pennants home. He paid $100K for Grove in 10 installments, $50K for Cochrane( plus $150K invested in Portland team, just to sign Cochrane). These were major moves.

                          Both these teams, the 20's Yankees and Phil. A's were only 2 of the teams that Cobb's men had to face on the open battlefield. Coping with 2 of the greatest baseball teams of history, is utterly germane to whether Ty was a good manager. To this day, most of the most respected, authoritative baseball minds consider the '29-31 Phil. A's & the '26-28 Yankees as 2 of the very finest baseball teams in all-around balance, that ever played the game.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Great thread Bill.

                            My head won't let me consider them the greatest team ever, but they've always been my favorite of the great teams of history.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I consider the 1929 A's a top 5 all time team

                              1931 would have been great if they had won the series
                              1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                              2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                              3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X