Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why no attention to Larry Doyle?

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

  • Fuzzy Bear
    replied
    Originally posted by mwiggins View Post
    The Dodgers of the Ott/Hubbell era are probably largely forgotten in NYC, as well. I would guess that Ott and Hubbell have more name recognition among NYC baseball fans than the Dodgers stars of their that era like Camilli and Mungo.

    And the Robins/Superbas/Dodgers stars from before that like Wheat, Rucker, Herman, Grimes, Vance, and Daubert are largely forgotten as well.

    Compare how much Brooklyn fans push Gil Hodges for the Hall vs. how much they push Jake Daubert. Daubert had nearly as good a career in Brooklyn as Hodges did, but he gets none of the "Brooklyn Dodger" hype.
    True enough. The sportswriters of that era have all passed from the scene, and most all of them have now died. It was the Roger Kahns et al that kept the memory alive. I grant you that 51 years in a city is a long time, but that's how long the Dodgers have been in Los Angeles; indeed, if you base your count from 1901, the Dodgers have been in LA only 6 fewer years than they were in Brooklyn.

    Leave a comment:


  • mwiggins
    replied
    Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
    Mel Ott is pretty much forgotten in NYC, as is Carl Hubbell, but people still remember Jackie and the Duke.
    The Dodgers of the Ott/Hubbell era are probably largely forgotten in NYC, as well. I would guess that Ott and Hubbell have more name recognition among NYC baseball fans than the Dodgers stars of their that era like Camilli and Mungo.

    And the Robins/Superbas/Dodgers stars from before that like Wheat, Rucker, Herman, Grimes, Vance, and Daubert are largely forgotten as well.

    Compare how much Brooklyn fans push Gil Hodges for the Hall vs. how much they push Jake Daubert. Daubert had nearly as good a career in Brooklyn as Hodges did, but he gets none of the "Brooklyn Dodger" hype.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Wendt
    replied
    historical memory (not living memory)

    The Brooklyn Dodgers with Jackie Robinson will always have fans because of the integration story. Today, however, their place in baseball history is still shaped importantly by the very large numbers of active baseball fans who remember them, or remember growing up in Brooklyn during the next several years without the experience of a local team that was so recent and apparent for everyone a little older.

    Which teams do have many fans today without the benefit of living memory? Local or long distance may not be crucial. People who read about historical baseball action, one part of baseball history, probably become fans of some teams without needing any link to their current editions if any.

    Apropos of Hubbell & Ott, do they Cubs of their time have fans today? Under managers McCarthy, Hornsby, and Grimm from 1926 to 1938 they were a good team every season and they won four pennants. Root & Hartnett were the constants but there were many good players.

    Apropros of Larry Doyle and the 1910s Giants, how unusual is their rather forgotten status, among rather good players and good teams from before 1940? Are most equally successful players or teams better "remembered" or "known" today, or only a few of them?

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
    Mel Ott is pretty much forgotten in NYC, as is Carl Hubbell, but people still remember Jackie and the Duke.
    I think part of it is that because the Dodgers moving to LA seemed more painful to Dodger fans than the Giants moving to SF to Giants fans. The old time Dodger fans still are angry today over the Dodgers leaving. I don't see the same level of despair in old time Giants fans. Or least they are not as vocal about it.
    Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 09-23-2009, 03:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Wendt View Post
    I think the New York Giants are better remembered than the Brooklyn Dodgers before Jackie Robinson and the Boys of Summer. The Giants are closely associated with John McGraw, as much as the Dodgers with Robinson. From the time between McGraw and Robinson, neither team is much remembered today, I believe, but Carl Hubbell and Mel Ott are more famous than any contemporary Dodgers.
    To many, Brooklyn Dodger history began in the 1940s. If you go to the Brooklyn Dodgers forum most of the threads are about the Brooklyn Dodgers of the 1940's-1950's. The 1916 and 1920 NL Champion Dodger teams are never discussed it seems. Babe Herman and Dazzy Vance are rarely discussed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fuzzy Bear
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Wendt View Post
    I think the New York Giants are better remembered than the Brooklyn Dodgers before Jackie Robinson and the Boys of Summer. The Giants are closely associated with John McGraw, as much as the Dodgers with Robinson. From the time between McGraw and Robinson, neither team is much remembered today, I believe, but Carl Hubbell and Mel Ott are more famous than any contemporary Dodgers.

    Here and for all posterity, I suppose, McGraw overshadows all of his players except Matty. The triple winners of 1911-1913 were famous for their spectacular running game (347, 319, and 296 steals!) but the sabrmetric record reveals a dominating staff of pitchers (era+ 125, 131, 129!). None but Matty maintained his performance for long, so it isn't surprising that they are forgotten. Well, Rube Marquard is remembered because he is a popular candidate "worst player in the Hall of Fame".

    On the other hand, in those few places where anyone does agonize over star ballplayers of the distant past, such as this forum, Larry Doyle gets plenty of attention. See the preceding article.
    Mel Ott is pretty much forgotten in NYC, as is Carl Hubbell, but people still remember Jackie and the Duke.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Wendt
    replied
    Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
    Doyle is surprisingly forgotten, but, to a large degree, so are the New York Giants as a rule. Despite the fact that the Giants were the better NL team in NYC for most of their time in NY, the Dodgers were far more colorful, and far more memorable.
    I think the New York Giants are better remembered than the Brooklyn Dodgers before Jackie Robinson and the Boys of Summer. The Giants are closely associated with John McGraw, as much as the Dodgers with Robinson. From the time between McGraw and Robinson, neither team is much remembered today, I believe, but Carl Hubbell and Mel Ott are more famous than any contemporary Dodgers.

    Here and for all posterity, I suppose, McGraw overshadows all of his players except Matty. The triple winners of 1911-1913 were famous for their spectacular running game (347, 319, and 296 steals!) but the sabrmetric record reveals a dominating staff of pitchers (era+ 125, 131, 129!). None but Matty maintained his performance for long, so it isn't surprising that they are forgotten. Well, Rube Marquard is remembered because he is a popular candidate "worst player in the Hall of Fame".


    On the other hand, in those few places where anyone does agonize over star ballplayers of the distant past, such as this forum, Larry Doyle gets plenty of attention. See the preceding article.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Wendt
    replied
    Doyle in the shadows

    Larry Doyle is in the Baseball Fever Hall of Fame (see this forum for the annual election in November) and in the ongoing Progressive HOF (currently at 1960 in this forum). Those two shadow halls are not tied to the size of Cooperstown's hall and they seem to be slightly larger.


    The Hall of Merit has identified 57 players not in Cooperstown who would be worthy in a Hall of Fame of the current size. There is some support for Doyle but he is not a contender, 47th in the last annual election (2009 results). No secondbaseman is a contender but that group has previously named Ross Barnes, Hardy Richardson, Cupid Childs, Bobby Grich, Willie Randolph, and Lou Whitaker.

    The Purgatory project nearing a conclusion in this forum (Purgatory round 8) has identified 54 players not in Cooperstown who would be worthy in a Hall of Fame of the current size. There was some support for Doyle but he, Carl Mays, Dave Parker, and Randolph have been rejected as the first members of the "hall of the very good". That group, too, has previously named six secondbasemen, the same ones named by the Hall of Merit except Roberto Alomar instead of Randolph.

    Probably Cooperstown and the Hall of Merit will both elect Roberto Alomar this fall. (Alomar at HOM)


    The Ultimate Quest for Candidates in this forum ranked Larry Doyle thus among players not in Cooperstown.
    - third behind Sherry Magee and Heinie Groh from the 1910s (November 2007)
    - fourth behind Carl Mays, Magee, and Groh from the 1910s-20s
    - tie fourth with Groh, behind Magee, Stan Hack, and Joe Gordon from the 1910s-40s (Where is Carl Mays? )
    - tie 14-15-16 (last) with Mays and Wes Ferrell in the runoff for four places in the top 20 eligible players not in Cooperstown. That seems to slot him around number 30 in Cooperstown's foyer.
    Last edited by Paul Wendt; 09-21-2009, 09:51 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • PVNICK
    replied
    At one point I was very high on Doyle but any measure of his defense (admittedly its pre-PBP) has him as below average. That puts him behind Pratt, for one, and maybe closer to say George Grantham or some of his skilled defensive contemporaries like Miller Huggins than he is to Grich.

    Leave a comment:


  • Freakshow
    replied
    Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
    If you want to go down the history of the Giants in both SF and NY, we have to also consider Jeff Kent. With Hornsby, Kent, and Frisch on the Giants, Doyle is no better than the 4th best second baseman in Giant history. Perhaps this explains how a guy like Doyle, who was very high-profile while active, seems to have faded into anonymity.
    Giants' 2B, playing a majority of their games with the team at the position, >1500 PA
    Code:
      Cnt Player            OPS+   BA   OBP   SLG    PA  From  To
    +----+-----------------+----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----+----+
        1 Jeff Kent          136  .297  .368  .535  3903 1997 2002 
        2 Larry Doyle        127  .292  .359  .411  6793 1907 1920 
        3 Frankie Frisch     117  .321  .367  .444  4447 1919 1926 
        4 Ray Durham         105  .276  .352  .445  2958 2003 2008 
        5 Robby Thompson     105  .257  .329  .403  5235 1986 1996 
        6 Ron Hunt           103  .262  .374  .335  1661 1968 1970 
        7 Danny Richardson    93  .258  .304  .347  2915 1884 1891 
        8 Mickey Witek        89  .277  .323  .346  2324 1940 1947 
        9 Billy Gilbert       85  .247  .340  .285  1866 1903 1906 
       10 Tito Fuentes        80  .262  .304  .345  4183 1965 1974 
       11 Davey Williams      78  .252  .320  .351  1993 1949 1955 
       12 Burgess Whitehead   75  .268  .307  .334  2703 1936 1941 
       13 Kid Gleason         74  .270  .312  .318  2845 1896 1900 
       14 Chuck Hiller        70  .241  .302  .311  1651 1961 1965 
       15 Hughie Critz        64  .255  .285  .330  2987 1930 1935
    Hornsby played for the Giants for only one year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fuzzy Bear
    replied
    Doyle is surprisingly forgotten, but, to a large degree, so are the New York Giants as a rule. Despite the fact that the Giants were the better NL team in NYC for most of their time in NY, the Dodgers were far more colorful, and far more memorable. The Dodgers went through a long period where they just plain stunk.

    One reason for Doyle's surprising anonymity is that he was succeeded at 2B on the Giants by Frankie Frisch. Frisch was later traded to the Cards, but Frisch's successor at 2B on the Giants was Rogers Hornsby. Then there were other second basemen of note in New York; there was Tony Lazzeri of the Yankees, and, of course, Jackie Robinson of the Dodgers.

    If you want to go down the history of the Giants in both SF and NY, we have to also consider Jeff Kent. With Hornsby, Kent, and Frisch on the Giants, Doyle is no better than the 4th best second baseman in Giant history. Perhaps this explains how a guy like Doyle, who was very high-profile while active, seems to have faded into anonymity.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueBlood
    replied
    Wow. That's very interesting stuff. The H-Factor is a really good predictive tool for HOF voting and now it makes sense why Joe Gordon is in the running. He actually does well beyond the sabermetric analysis, great career stats and consistently strong at his position. Afterall, he was a nine time All Star at second base in his eleven year career. Also can't hurt that he was a Yankee and won five World Series championships while there.

    From this, it at least looks like Alomar, Biggio and Kent should all have no trouble making it into Cooperstown within their first ten years on the ballot. I guess if the Hall elects Gordon and those three, they'll feel they've wrapped up the book on second base since the others are well below via this metric. A shame because Doyle is truly deserving and is hurt by a shorter career.

    Leave a comment:


  • henrich
    replied
    Doyle 21st 2Bman of all-time with an H-Factor score of 8265.

    Of people not in Alomar 12,264, not eligible, Biggio 11,199 not eligible, kent 10,583 not eligible, Gordon 10,265 oversight soon to be corrected???, Gilliam 9189, Knoblauch 9082, Whitaker 8691, Randolph 8545, then Doyle.

    hall of Famers above and below him within his range
    Collins, Hornsby, Frisch, Morgan and LaJoie are all over 13,000
    Gehringer over 11,000, Lazzeri and Sandberg over 10,000, J. Robinson 9253, Schoendienst 8664, Fox N. 8602, Herman 8425, and below Doyle in 25th place is Bid McPhee at 8121 and Bobby doerr 8115. With Doyle at 8265 he is in that discussion justifiably.

    Of note two of the most pointed out mistakes, Mazeroski is at 7827 and just above him is Evers at 7971- 29th and 28th respectively.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cowtipper
    replied
    Another one that can be combined.

    http://www.baseball-fever.com/showth...ighlight=Doyle

    Leave a comment:


  • Fuzzy Bear
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Wendt View Post
    Do you have a reference for that? Or is that an inference from something (presum. not the election results)?

    Bill Deane says that Cobb and Schulte opted out in 1912 and he doesn't mention a Chalmers rule. (In the History of Awards Voting and in the Awards and Honors section of Total Baseball.)

    If Chalmers's point was that a Chalmers automobile is durable, so who needs another, why award them to Cobb in 1910 and 1911?
    I believe that I read this in Bill James' 1984 Historical Baseball Abstract.

    I think that the rule of one win per lifetime was set after Cobb won back-to-back awards.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X