The Ultimate Quest for Candidates: Round 2 – 1890’s/1900’s

[Freakshow]

Welcome to The Ultimate Quest for Candidates – Round 2. This thread will have the third poll in the second round, combining the leading players from the polls for the 1890’s and the 1900’s. Refer to the earlier threads for discussion and links to biographies.

There will be 15 players on the ballot. You will be asked to vote for 5 (FIVE) players. These 12 players automatically advanced to this round by their top finishes in the Round 1 polls:

92% Jimmy Ryan
92% George Van Haltren
85% Bill Dahlen
82% Jimmy Sheckard
79% Cupid Childs
78% Tommy Leach
73% Roy Thomas
63% Herman Long
52% Cy Seymour
51% Mike Donlin
47% Fielder Jones
38% Lave Cross

We need to decide who will get the other three spots on the ballot. There are 11 runners-up who are under consideration:

36% Harry Davis
33% Mike Tiernan
29% Dummy Hoy
25% Bill Dinneen
22% Johnny Kling
21% Ginger Beaumont
21% Sam Leever
21% Jesse Tannehill
17% Kid Gleason
13% Nig Cuppy
13% Billy Nash

My personal picks are probably Tiernan, Hoy and Dinneen with his umpiring contribution. Your input on this issue is strongly requested as we look to develop a consensus.

Below are the players we voted as the top 23 HOF candidates whose careers centered in the 1890’s and 1900’s.

Pos	BJ	Player Name	 Win Shares	 WARP3	             Car WS Adj	
4	#26	Cupid	Childs 	(263: 33-33-32)	(78.2: 10.9-10.2-8.4)	+25	
5	#33	Lave	Cross	(299: 29-26-21)	(85.9: 9.1-6.9-6.4)	+21	
6	#21	Bill	Dahlen 	(426: 37-33-27)	(131.3: 11.1-10.5-9.4)	+32	
8	#52	Mike	Donlin	(180: 36-31-26)	(41.5: 8.8-8.4-5.6)	 +6	
9/8	#41	Fielder	Jones	(306: 32-29-28)	(83.9: 8.2-8.1-7.5)	+16	Mgr 8.3 yrs/.540 W%, 27th
5/8	#20	Tommy	Leach	(334: 31-30-29)	(81.5: 9.0-7.5-7.5)	 +6	
6	#34	Herman	Long 	(292: 32-31-28)	(84.4: 9.6-8.2-7.7)	+27	
8/9	#26	Jimmy	Ryan	(351: 37-29-28)	(82.4: 8.6-8.4-6.8)	+35	
8	#30	Cy	Seymour	(281: 42-26-26)	(65.7: 10.7-8.1-6.9)	 +9	
7	#24	Jimmy	Sheckard(353: 37-37-30)	(89.0: 10.3-9.6-8.8)	+14	
8	#29	Roy	Thomas	(270: 31-30-28)	(67.2: 8.2-7.9-7.3)	+10	
8	#28	Geo. Van Haltren(359: 29-28-27)	(81.0: 7.5-6.8-6.5)	+15	
							
8	#39	Ginger	Beaumont(238: 34-30-28)	(52.1: 7.4-6.9-6.6)	 +9	x
1	---	Nig	Cuppy	(202: 45-39-33)	(43.3: 10.3-8.6-6.5)	 +9	x
3	#60	Harry	Davis	(248: 31-26-21)	(63.5: 7.6-6.7-6.4)	+10	x
1	---	Bill	Dinneen	(211: 30-30-30)	(49.8: 7.9-7.8-7.3)	+11	Umpire 29 yrs
4/1	#72	Kid	Gleason	(263: 26-25-22)	(70.1: 10.6-6.1-6.0)	-31	x
8	#47	Dummy	Hoy	(278: 32-27-27)	(59.0: 7.1-6.6-6.0)	+24	x
2	#48	Johnny	Kling	(160: 24-22-21)	(53.0: 8.1-7.3-6.9)	 +5	x
1	---	Sam	Leever	(220: 30-28-22)	(41.7: 8.9-5.7-5.6)	 +8	x
5	#49	Billy	Nash 	(259: 29-26-24)	(70.6: 9.3-7.6-6.8)	+37	x
1	#99	Jesse  Tannehill(245: 35-28-26)	(60.4: 10.6-9.8-8.2)	+12	x
9	#49	Mike	Tiernan (288: 34-30-30)	(74.6: 9.4-9.2-8.4)	+37	x

Pos – primary position(s)
BJ – rank at his position in the New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract (2001)
Win Shares – shown are career total and best 3 years
WARP3 – from Baseball Prospectus; shown are career total and best 3 years
Other – Bill Dinneen’s umpiring career was the equal of some of the umpires in the HOF. Fielder Jones was a pennant-winning manager.

Some other things to be aware of:
1) Bill James’ rankings emphasize players’ peak years; this results in long steady careers being rated lower than what may seem right.
2) Win shares in seasons before 1904 are increased to adjust them to a 154-game season (actually, to a 152-decision level).
3) Win shares are discounted for the lower quality of play in certain leagues: AL 1901 (3%); AA 1890-91 (12%); AA 1886-89 (3%), AA 1885 (6%); AA 1884 (9%).
4) Pitching win shares before 1893 are discounted by 50% (the same adjustment used by Bill James for his system). These win shares should be assigned to fielding, but I have not attempted this.
5) The latest WARP revision sharply reduced most of these candidate’s numbers, in most cases about 15-20% from the previous polls' charts.

That leaves 13 players that dropped out of consideration after Round 1: Ted Breitenstein, Duke Farrell, Mike Griffin, Topsy Hartsel, Denny Lyons, Deacon McGuire, Al Orth, Jack Powell, Elmer Smith, Chick Stahl, Jack Stivetts, Fred Tenney and Jimmy Williams. Each of these candidates drew less than 13% support.

[jjpm74]

The candidate I support the strongest of those is Dummy Hoy. After him, Mike Tiernan and Jesse Tannehill.

[dgarza]

Tiernan, Beaumont, & Leever

[Chadwick]

No love for Johnny Kling? Best catcher in the early deadball era who isn't in the Hall. As many people have said, as "Charlie Bennett is to Buck Ewing, Johnny Kling is to Roger Bresnahan." Key component of those Cubs pennant winners in the Aughts.

At-large candidates: Tiernan, Kling and Tannehill. (I don't see how you can take Leever over Tannehill.)

As for the actual poll?
Bill Dahlen's a shoo-in
Cupid Childs has my vote

Sorting out the positional gluts here will be paramount to making smart decisions here. Love to hear anyone's thoughts on ranking the following outfielders - Mike Donlin, Fielder Jones, Jimmy Ryan, Cy Seymour, Jimmy Sheckard, Roy Thomas, and George Van Haltren - and the infielders (Lave Cross, Tommy Leach and Herman Long).

[Freakshow]

(I don't see how you can take Tannehill over Leever.)

Leever is better than Tannehill only if you believe that both win shares and WARP have them wrong.

Leever has a large ERA+ edge due to the defenses behind him, not his pitching.

Tannehill also has a very large edge in hitting, which must be considered in their value.

[Chickazoola]

Kling, Leever, Tiernan for me.

[Paul Wendt]

consultant

. . .
My personal picks are probably Tiernan, Hoy and Dinneen with his umpiring contribution. Your input on this issue is strongly requested as we look to develop a consensus.

Reading down the list I was going to say take three of Tiernan, Hoy, Dinneen, and Kling (who rank 2-3-4-5 by round one percent support). So consider it said. That is partly because it seems to me that first-round support should be one consideration. I voted for Billy Nash over Tiernan (and Lave Cross, one of the winners). If I were simply and alone choosing three of them to be honored in the real Hall of Fame it would be Hoy, Dinneen, and Kling.

[Paul Wendt]

preacher

Sorting out the positional gluts here will be paramount to making smart decisions here. Love to hear anyone's thoughts on ranking the following outfielders - Mike Donlin, Fielder Jones, Jimmy Ryan, Cy Seymour, Jimmy Sheckard, Roy Thomas, and George Van Haltren - and the infielders (Lave Cross, Tommy Leach and Herman Long).

"Love to hear anyone's thoughts . . ."
I wish there were time for that later but it seems that most votes are cast in the first few days.

While I do not press for Nash over Tiernan and Hoy now, I do urge everyone to be aware of fielding position when they vote. The Hall of Fame has honored a lot of outfielders from the 1890s, and all of the 300-game winners, and not many other 19th century players. Let's not vote for all the outfielders just because they finished with the most base hits.

Donlin didn't play enough to be here unless he batted like Charlie Keller, and he didn't. He doesn't deserve the CF credit some might give him, because he didn't play the position adequately.

Seymour, Thomas (two good career CFs), and Tiernan were very good but they didn't play long enough to advance at this stage. They should be good candidates because the Hall of Fame should have inducted a few more infielders (including catchers among the possibilities) from this score of years. But the Hall of Fame didn't. It took outfielders and 300-game winners from the 1890s, pitchers with very low ERAs from the 1900s, and lots of non-players.

Jones was historically great in CF, one of the best slap hitters, and he left the game in business dispute with Charles Comiskey. If you think much of his managing career then he should be in the mix with the long-career outfielders Sheckard, Van Haltren, Ryan, and Hoy. Sheckard was much superior relative to his colleagues; was that merely good fortune or something to credit here? Bill James rates him historically great in LF (#1 all-time). The other three are usually considered career CFs, Ryan the best(?) but none special in the field.

In my opinion it may be reasonable to vote for zero outfielders, or only Sheckard based on highest standing in his time, or only Jones based partly on his leadership.

So you may guess correctly that I am inclined to vote for Leach and Long; Cross probably not, on AG's observation that he didn't match his catching, or his years as a superb 3Bman, with his average-plus batting.

Anyway, no one should vote for two outfielders, two infielders, and a pitcher because that seems to be fair to all positions. Not to mention three outfielders because there are nine on the ballot, as seems likely.

Much of the "positional glut" in the outfield is already in the Hall of Fame.
Hamilton, Delahanty, and Thompson; Kelley and Keeler; Duffy and McCarthy; Jesse Burkett; Fred Clarke. Those are all from the 1890s. If the next decade is different enough --and the game turned from incredibly high to incredibly low scoring, 1894 to 1908-- then vote for some of its outfielders.

I haven't decided against Ryan and Van Haltren, but they aren't automatic.

[Chadwick]

Leever is better than Tannehill only if you believe that both win shares and WARP have them wrong.

Leever has a large ERA+ edge due to the defenses behind him, not his pitching.

Tannehill also has a very large edge in hitting, which must be considered in their value.

Good grief. That's what I meant. *sigh* I switched the names around somehow as I was typing that.

Getting older sucks. LOL

[Freakshow]

Good grief. That's what I meant. *sigh* I switched the names around somehow as I was typing that.

Getting older sucks. LOL

So are you going to edit post #4 and replace Leever with someone else?

The BPro numbers have Tannehill only slightly ahead of Leever purely on pitching. When you factor in that Tannehill was one of the top hitting pitchers in history, he blows Leever away.

[Chadwick]

At-large candidates: Tiernan, Kling and Tannehill.

That better?

[Paul Wendt]

That better?

I agree with Tannehill over Leever, Gleason, and Cuppy, for what that's worth.
In my opinion, my opinion is worth a lot but that doesn't get Tannehill on the ballot.

[Freakshow]

I'll probably put the poll up tomorrow. It would be nice to get a couple more folks chiming in to our straw poll to determine who should be on the ballot.

[jalbright]

I won't be voting for any of them, but, freak, your three choices seem as good as it gets, FWIW.

[leecemark]

--I'm with Jim on that. Nobody from the also rans is anywhere close to my ballot so whoever is fine by me.