Does 'integrating' a league REALLY increase the 'league quality'?

[willshad]

It has become almost a cliche' around here. So and so played in an 'integrated league', so he must be superior to the other guy. Frankly, I think it is a bunch of nonsense. it is just assumed that only the 'best' players are being added to the mix, but in reality, you have a few stars, a lot of average players, and a bunch of borderline major leaguers. It is really no different than expansion, which, strangely enough, people believe LOWERS league quality. The way I see it, the overall quality remains about the same.

So, now we have guys from all over the world in the major leagues..but does that make the league stronger than if only whites were playing? For every 10 latin or asian guys who is filling up space on a roster there are 10 white guys in the minors who don't get the chance . Would they be stars? Who knows?

[3and2Fastball]

yes, adding the best players of other races or cultures always increases the quality of a league. It is really a simple matter of mathematics

If you want to look at it logically: would adding Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and other greats to the Negro Leagues in the 20's have increased the quality of the league? Of course. So why wouldn't that be the same in adding Black player & japanese players & Latin-American players to the white league?

[willshad]

yes, adding the best players of other races or cultures always increases the quality of a league. It is really a simple matter of mathematics

If you want to look at it logically: would adding Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and other greats to the Negro Leagues in the 20's have increased the quality of the league? Of course. So why wouldn't that be the same in adding Black player & japanese players & Latin-American players to the white league?

Because you are adding the best players of a league that could be inferior, and we have no idea how they will perform at a major league level. If we added a bunch of the best minor leaguers suddenly to the MLB, would it increase the league quality?

[Freakshow]

For every 10 latin or asian guys who is filling up space on a roster there are 10 white guys in the minors who don't get the chance . Would they be stars? Who knows?

So are you saying that teams have a preference for filling their bench with non-white players? That they would rather give more chances to Latinos and Asians? I see zero evidence to believe this. If anything, the opposite is true.

[fenrir]

If you don't believe integration improves league quality, then you must take Sadaharu Oh's statistics at face value, because I haven't seen any legitimate evidence that the MLB during Babe Ruth's player career was of stronger quality than the Japanese major leagues during Oh's career. I'm open to changing my opinion though if you have a good argument as to why Ruth statistics should be taken at face value, while someone like Sadaharu Oh's stats shouldn't. It just doesn't seem fair to me.

FTR, I'm singling out Ruth because he's by far the best player who played pre integration, thus he will always be the first player talked about when discussing how much impact integration has had on league quality.

[willshad]

So are you saying that teams have a preference for filling their bench with non-white players? That they would rather give more chances to Latinos and Asians? I see zero evidence to believe this. If anything, the opposite is true.

That's not what Im saying. I'm saying that nobody really knows if we are getting the 'best' players making it to the majors. The guys stuck in the minors could end up being better than the majors leaguers if given a chance. This holds true with regards to expansion, with integration, and with the normal process of minor leaguers being called up.

I see no real difference between obtaining players from the negro league, from japan, or from the minors. In all of these cases, you are getting a mixed bag of stars, flops, and decent players. Theoretically, you are only getting the 'best' players, and guys who SHOULD be great at the major league level..but it seldom works out that way.

[GiambiJuice]

Larger talent pool to choose from = more talented league.

[Jackaroo Dave]

That's not what Im saying. I'm saying that nobody really knows if we are getting the 'best' players making it to the majors. The guys stuck in the minors could end up being better than the majors leaguers if given a chance. This holds true with regards to expansion, with integration, and with the normal process of minor leaguers being called up.

I see no real difference between obtaining players from the negro league, from japan, or from the minors. In all of these cases, you are getting a mixed bag of stars, flops, and decent players. Theoretically, you are only getting the 'best' players, and guys who SHOULD be great at the major league level..but it seldom works out that way.

Well, one big difference historically was that black stars and only stars played in the early days of integration, not a mixed bag of stars, flops, and decent players. As a poster on another thread showed, there was a disproportionate amount of win shares assigned to black players on the early days. This itself is prima facie evidence of discrimination, and you see it everywhere. I don't know if MLB ever reached a state of integration such that there were proportionally as many mediocre or poor black players as white (i.e. a period when win share/player was the same for minorities, black or latin, or whatever as it was for whites).

Who was the first black ballplayer to have a lousy career? The first black Bob Kennedy, say?

[willshad]

Well, one big difference historically was that black stars and only stars played in the early days of integration, not a mixed bag of stars, flops, and decent players. As a poster on another thread showed, there was a disproportionate amount of win shares assigned to black players on the early days. This itself is prima facie evidence of discrimination, and you see it everywhere. I don't know if MLB ever reached a state of integration such that there were proportionally as many mediocre or poor black players as white (i.e. a period when win share/player was the same for minorities, black or latin, or whatever as it was for whites).

Who was the first black ballplayer to have a lousy career? The first black Bob Kennedy, say?

That could be just coincidence. Of course only the 'stars' were going to the majors, just like how only the 'stars' from the minors are ever called to the majors. What's the difference?

[Jackaroo Dave]

That could be just coincidence. Of course only the 'stars' were going to the majors, just like how only the 'stars' from the minors are ever called to the majors. What's the difference?

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. You could only take a job away from a white player and give it to a black player if the black player was much better. The reason black players had a disproportionate number of win shares was that mediocre black major leaguers were not allowed to exist to any extent like mediocre white major leaguers. In fact, not all the best black players were taken. There were stars more highly thought of than Robinson, but they were older or didn't fit the pattern.

There was a minor stink raised when Jim Gilliam (Jim Gilliam!) joined the Dodgers and it looked like Billy Cox was going to lose his job.

How many black players rode the bench for, say, the Brooklyn Dodgers or the Milwaukee Braves, or the Cleveland Indians? Coincidence? Please.

[EdTarbusz]

Who was the first black ballplayer to have a lousy career? The first black Bob Kennedy, say?

Probably Dan Bankhead. Or maybe Willard Brown.

In the first year of integration there were five black players. One was a superstar (Jackie Robinson). One became a star player (Larry Doby). One resurfaced later as a decent everyday player (Hank Thompson). Two were busts: Dan Bankhead and Willard Brown.

[EdTarbusz]

How many black players rode the bench for, say, the Brooklyn Dodgers or the Milwaukee Braves, or the Cleveland Indians? Coincidence? Please.

The Indians had a few that did. Dave Pope, Harry Simpson and Luke Easter come to mind.

[3and2Fastball]

Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Roy Campanella, Satchel Paige, Jackie Robinson, Monte Irvin, Larry Doby all wave "hello"

[willshad]

Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Roy Campanella, Satchel Paige, Jackie Robinson, Monte Irvin, Larry Doby all wave "hello"

The amount of early integration black stars has nothing to do with it. Any of these guys could have flopped in the majors, gotten hurt, or whatever. I think it's coincidence more than anything else that so many great black players debuted about the same time.

[Jackaroo Dave]

Probably Dan Bankhead. Or maybe Willard Brown.

In the first year of integration there were five black players. One was a superstar (Jackie Robinson). One became a star player (Larry Doby). One resurfaced later as a decent everyday player (Hank Thompson). Two were busts: Dan Bankhead and Willard Brown.

Right, and they were gone. There weren't any quadruple a black players or career bench riders.