Kiki Cuyler

[Eddie Collins]

Is he the least talked about HOFer ever? I have never seen nor heard anyone discuss his worthiness or lack thereof.

So....
Is Cuyler deserving of the honor?

[Cougar]

Sure, absolutely. He's probably a bit below the median HOF (particularly adjusting for era), but really not much so. Solid HOF player.

We'll talk about Kirby Puckett about as much 75 years from now. The fact that he's forgotten doesn't mean he's not a great player.

[tibber]

i've never understood why he's considered a lower-tier HOFer. he seems pretty solid to me.

[leecemark]

--Cuyler obviously isn't a first tier Hall of Famer, but he isn't one of the worst either. He was a very good hitter, the best base stealer of his era and a very good corner outfielder who could play center if needed. Offensively he was pretty similar to Lou Brock, but didn't play nearly as many games and missed Brock's 3,000 hits by quite a bit (although it kept his rate stats higher). Defensively he was much better than Brock.

[dgarza]

Is he the least talked about HOFer ever?

I think this honor belongs to Stan Coveleski

[Eddie Collins]

No, because Stan had a chapter in one of the most opular baseball books ever, The Glory of Their Times

[tibber]

how about luke appling? or heinie manush, a guy i feel is really underated (and not just because i'm protective of my fellow alabamians.)

[abacab]

Billy Herman? Earl Averill? Joe Sewell? Early Wynn? We could go through a long list of HoFers that nobody ever talks about. They need a name - "Average HoFers" seems an oxymoron. The C level players?

That's going to be the fun part of the BBF HoF, I think, when we start to debate these guys. It's gonna take a while to get there though, since we can't even seem to agree on the B+ level HoFers.

[dgarza]

No, because Stan had a chapter in one of the most opular baseball books ever, The Glory of Their Times

Well, see, I had never ever ever ever even heard of Stan Coveleski until maybe last month! How wrong is that? All other HOFers I have at least known to exist.

[leecemark]

--Of the guys mentioned above (in all posts) Luke Appling is the only "B" level Hall of Famer. Coveleski is the next best at a "B-/C+". The rest are C- to D, although all will get my vote eventually for BBF if we work our way down that far as a group.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Well, see, I had never ever ever ever even heard of Stan Coveleski until maybe last month! How wrong is that? All other HOFers I have at least known to exist.

At least Coveleski will be remembered for his 3 W.S wins in 1920.

I'd rank Cuyler with Averill and Herman, as I can't think of what to associate any of them with. Joe Sewell was hard to strike out. Early Wynn took forever to win his 300th and copped a CYA in 1959. Old Aches and Pains Appling won a batting title late in his career and went deep at age 75 in the Old Timers' Game. Manush, well, he's up there, too.

I'd rank Cuyler ahead of Averill, Herman and Manush, though, which is why I have to concur with EC.

[Imapotato]

Vic Willis

I still forget that he is a HOFer most of the time

Roger Connor, the man who held the Career HR title the longest, also held the 3B record, he tends to be forgotten

[tibber]

just curious, what is it about manush that puts him on the lower tiers? his numbers seem to warrant better.

[leecemark]

--He is best known as a high average hitter in an era when they were a dime a dozen. To be fair,he was one of the better guys at doing it. However, he wasn't nearly the best BA man of his time - leading the league only once. He had little power and barely over league average OBP. He was primarily a LF with no better than average defensive skills and he didn't steal bases. He isn't the top 100 in either Black or Grey Ink.
--I don't think he was one of the very worst choices for Cooperstown, but he is closer to the bottom than the top. He barely cracks my top 25 LFers. Which numbers do you think merit him ranking higher?

[J W]

Imapotato has a good point about Roger Connor, the other great first baseman of the 19th century. I think it's the very fact he's a 19th century player that makes him forgotten to Joe Baseballfan... who frankly may or may not even recognize Cap Anson or Dan Brouthers.

I could go a step further. There may be an argument that "real baseball" began in 1900, but Joe Baseballfan may not realize that the sport existed prior to Babe Ruth.

Kuyler and Manush are each other's most similar player... they played relatively the same position, at the same time, but in different leagues. I'm not really sure which one was the better player (yet) but I can definitely say that Joe Baseballfan has never heard of either guy.