Frank Chance

[The Dude]

Does Frank Chance deserve to be in the Hall of Fame as a player, a manager, not at all, or combine both of his performances?

Of the Tinkers/Evers/Chance three-some, he has the best player credentials IMHO. For a time in the 1900's, he was in the top 10 in AVG/OBP/SLG. He has gray ink in a lot of areas.

As a manager, he won 4 pennants and 2 world series managing the Cubs dynasty. In the 8 years he managed the Cubs, he finished 1st 4 times, 2nd twice, and 3rd twice. Pretty good for 8 team leagues. However, in his 3 years managing in other places, they were all losing seasons. His career WP was .593.

Either way he's not really the best of all time in either candidate, and he's not a top 10 manager or 1bman. HOwever, does he deserve to go in as either?

[leecemark]

--He was a great player, but not for long enough to earn the Hall. He was a good manager, but not Hall worthy there either. However, as the best player AND manager of the best team of his era, he puts together a Hall worthy combo.
--Had he managed that team after he retired as a player, I'd say no. Post playing career accomplishments can't be added to a players resume for me (although I'm more flexible about crediting playing accomplishments to a contributors resume). Being a player manager can be considered as part of a playing resume though.

[cubbieinexile]

Frank Chance played and managed the Cubs during the greatest stretch of dominance the baseball world as ever seen. From 1904 to 1913 the Cubs won more games then any other team in any other 10 year run. Not only that but they hold the record going all the way back to one year. Meaning most wins in a year, two years, three years, so on and so on. They did all this while playing a schedule with less games then most of their competition. During that 10 year stretch run Frank managed the team for 8 of those seasons, while playing for them for all but the last season. That team went to the World Series 4 times in 9 years (No World Series in 1904), won the pennant 4 times and never finished below second with Frank as the leader for the full season. During that time Frank was a very good first basemen, similar to Keith Hernandez in that he was a really good defender who can hit as well but not as great as his defense. The rare John Olerud/Mark Grace/Keith Hernandez style of first basemen.

Put the two together and you have a unique player that deserves the hall, because of both achievements. Times were different back then and I don't think and either or is fair in this case. While nowadays it would be because there is a clear delineation between player and manager. Like Joe Torre going in as either a manager or a player but not because of both.

[rockin500]

I'd have to say yes. Because he was a manager while playing, and being quite successful at both, he deserves it.

obviously, if you separated them, he wouldnt be a HOF candidate in either category.

[Imapotato]

Yes he like Tinker and Evers, were the 1st stars of the NL in the the post AL mosern day MLB.

He was a defensive genius and set up ways to take away the bunt and hit and run...the two main offensive weapons of the day (and something that can't be seen in a stat)

All 3 of those players are and should be in, despite what today's experts believe.

Ask any baseball historian who specializes in deadball if those 3 are locks and they will all respond with a YES

[Fuzzy Bear]

Yes he like Tinker and Evers, were the 1st stars of the NL in the the post AL mosern day MLB.

He was a defensive genius and set up ways to take away the bunt and hit and run...the two main offensive weapons of the day (and something that can't be seen in a stat)

All 3 of those players are and should be in, despite what today's experts believe.

Ask any baseball historian who specializes in deadball if those 3 are locks and they will all respond with a YES

I would rate Chance as Hall-worthy, given his role as a key offensive and defensive player on one of the greatest teams of all time. And as his role as player-manager. The Cubs didn't win UNTIL Chance managed them and didn't win AFTER he left.

Tinker is not my idea of a HOFer, but I think Johnny Evers belongs.

[RedSoxVT92]

I would have to say yes. As a manager of the Cubs his team never finsished below 91 wins and the Cubs was above a winnning percentage of .600 every year but once which they finsished .597 under his rule. He even managed to win with the hittless wonders(they did have an awsome pitching staff though). And as player manager he usaully led the cubs in many offensive catagorys. Didnt have a whole lot of power (not many did in the dead ball era) But was fast and pretty solid deffensivly as first. Alone as a player he wouldnt be a HOFer and alone as a manager he probably wouldnt be a HOFer but in the combined effort I think he is worthy of cooperstown.

[KCGHOST]

This may be one of those cases where the passage of time has cost us the value of Frank Chance's career. He was certainly one of the 5 best 1B's in the 1876-1919 time frame. That would seem to make him hall worthy. Since 1920 the game has changed and the 1B position has been totally redefined as one of almost pure offense and power.

I am extremely loathe to give anyone extra points because they managed.

[flash143817]

I would have to say yes. As a manager of the Cubs his team never finsished below 91 wins and the Cubs was above a winnning percentage of .600 every year but once which they finsished .597 under his rule. He even managed to win with the hittless wonders(they did have an awsome pitching staff though). And as player manager he usaully led the cubs in many offensive catagorys. Didnt have a whole lot of power (not many did in the dead ball era) But was fast and pretty solid deffensivly as first. Alone as a player he wouldnt be a HOFer and alone as a manager he probably wouldnt be a HOFer but in the combined effort I think he is worthy of cooperstown.

I thought that was the nickname of the White Sox team that beat Chance's Cubs?

[RedSoxVT92]

I thought that was the nickname of the White Sox team that beat Chance's Cubs?

Yeah, hehe my bad :o

[Fuzzy Bear]

This may be one of those cases where the passage of time has cost us the value of Frank Chance's career. He was certainly one of the 5 best 1B's in the 1876-1919 time frame. That would seem to make him hall worthy. Since 1920 the game has changed and the 1B position has been totally redefined as one of almost pure offense and power.

I am extremely loathe to give anyone extra points because they managed.

Chance posted a .689 career OWP, with 5 straight years over .700. Not much different than Albert Belle, in terms of OWP, actually.

[Paul Wendt]

As FB says, the case for Frank Chance as a player is essentially the case for Frank Chance as a batter. The case against him is essentially that he didn't play much; not so much as Albert Belle, for example.

Contrary to KC, redefinition of the firstbase position doesn't have much to do with Frank Chance. People who are happy to judge players at their best with little or no weight on durability or longevity will probably be happy to support Frank Chance purely as a player; others probably will not.

A few of those others will go for his teammate Jimmy Sheckard, a very good batter with greater durability and very good longevity. Some sabrmetrics estimate that Sheckard was one of the best leftfielders ever --"historically great", we commonly say here. I don't know of any that make Frank Chance outstanding, much less a defensive genius.

Any case for Chance as a "defensive genius" must be that he orchestrated the Cubs in the field. I believe that Harry Wright orchestrated the defense of his Red Stockings teams forty years earlier but I doubt that much of that was still possible in Frank Chance's time.

Frank Chance used a big staff of pitchers with great success but he came too late to be a radical innovator in that regard. The immediately preceding champion Giants relied heavily on Matty and McGinnity but Fred Clarke had used more starting pitchers under the 140 game schedules of 1900 to 1903. Ned Hanlon sometimes gets credit for using more pitchers, including his 1894-96 championship seasons under the 132-game schedule.

[Chadwick]

Almost certainly the toughest player/manager (not "player-manager") candidate to judge as he's borderline in both categories.

I'm not sure that I'm ready to give a player-manager extra credit because the player also managed or the manager also played, though I admit that's not a hard "no."

I'm curious to what extent Chance helped build his championship clubs as most of the key pieces (including himself) had been brought in by Frank Selee. I've read that owner Charles Murphy acted as his own business manager, but that he regularly consulted Chance before making his moves; it sounds to me as if Murphy, not Chance, however, was acting in the capacity of the GM.

[jalbright]

One thing Chance did as a manager was to keep his team at or very near the top for several years. Even with a good corps of players (and Chance had that, to be sure), keeping a team that sharp isn't easy. One thing he had to deal with was that his keystone combo didn't really get along on a personal level, but somehow he and they managed to keep it together on the field.

[brett]

A few of those others will go for his teammate Jimmy Sheckard, a very good batter with greater durability and very good longevity. Some sabrmetrics estimate that Sheckard was one of the best leftfielders ever --"historically great", we commonly say here. I don't know of any that make Frank Chance outstanding, much less a defensive genius.

Sheckard has a pretty good hall of fame case.

His 120 OPS+ was built on a 112 relative on-base percentage which would make him worth a little more with the bat, like 125 or so. He stole bases. He apparently had speed and he is at least the best per-game defensive left fielder in history.

If he had another 200 games, I think he would be of sure-fire hall of fame value.

Chance is like Mark Grace, or Don Mattingly or Keith Hernandez with far less playing time. Going 2 for 4 in world series as a manager is making him a borderline hall of fame manager, though he only got to 900 or so wins.