hot topics

Cuyler would seem to fall to Jimmy Ryan/Sam Rice territory. An average fielding RF/CF'er, so no fielding bonus...

This might be the only place on earth where most of people correctly read his name as "K-eye, K-eye" and not "Kee-Kee".

I do like this version, from baseballlibrary.com, better than the common "he was a stutterer" version.
"Cuyler was called "Cuy" by his school teammates. It was while winning the MVP title of the Southern Association with Nashville in 1923 that he acquired the euphonious Kiki nickname. Fans heard the players shout for him to take the ball when he rushed in a short fly. The shortstop would yell, "Cuy," and the second baseman would echo the call."

I wrote this in the Goslin thread--doh! So I'll repeat it here. I love Cuyler in a certain irrational way. Clearly he's borderline, probably below in/out, but probably ballot worthy some day. I mean, he clearly is NOT a HoF mistake though in the lower ranks of HoFers who are not obvious mistakes, but clearly above the average lower end of HoFers.

But I acknowledge that he may be below our normal lower edge because we are electing more NeLers and more 19C players rather than the gross numbers of players from the Golden Age that the HoF did.

Nevertheless, I love KiKi. First, I guess I just love the sound of his name. But second, and the real point of this post: I once sat at a game in Wrigley next to a real old-time Cub fan. He said he'd been coming to Wrigley since the 1930s, so I quizzed him on the whole Cubs history. The one guy he just absolutely raved about was KiKi Cuyler. He didn't say he was the best Cub of them all, but he was the guy's favorite Cub over a 60 year period. I've probably been influenced too much by that.

Here's my favorite offense-only ranking scheme, applied to some flank outfielders. Modified context-scaled RC. First column is based on RCAA; second column is a big years bonus; third column is based on RC above 75%; last column an arbitrary composite. It's a peak-friendly measure, and much less sensitive to season length than WS.

Player Avg. BigYr 75% composite
P. Waner 64 46 93 227
Clarke 60 39 88 206
Magee 54 40 78 192
Simmons 50 41 78 190
Flick 52 44 70 188
Goslin 49 30 78 173
Wheat 50 28 79 171
Kelley 46 33 69 166
Keeler 42 26 70 151
Tiernan 41 29 61 146
Sheckard 39 23 65 138
Cuyler 39 24 62 137
Klein 36 28 57 134
Thompson 35 24 58 132
Burns 34 25 57 128
Manush 35 22 60 128
Herman 37 23 54 126
Cravath 36 27 49 126
Browning 37 22 52 122
Youngs 33 25 47 118</pre>
Goslin is a career case. Comparisons to Wheat seem apt, but Goslin was in a stronger league than Wheat. Simmons has a peak advantage on Goslin, but with Goslin likely to be elected before Simmons is available, that debate may never happen. I suppose you didn't really need me to tell you which Waner that was; on this measure Waner is closely comparable to Heilmann.

Cuyler did play 700 games in CF; the context for him would seem to be Van Haltren/Duffy/Ryan. What do others make of his defense?

Ironic (ok, actually, just coincidental) that Goslin and Cuyler went into the Hall of Fame together in 1968..

The one guy he was really really enthusiastic about was KiKi. No, he didn't say he was the best Cub ever, but he was the guy's favorite Cub of all-time.

Fred Lynn! Maybe it is a common local fanomenen re a sensational rookie. When the player doesn't fulfull his early promise, national fans, who didn't entirely catch on early, end up saying "huh?" (I wasn't local when Fred Lynn arrived. I was one of the people later saying "huh?" It's Lynn and Rice for some local fans.)

Ok...now that I've been corrected on the pronunciation of his first name, how do I pronounce his last name?

K-eye-ler?

Nomar may well hold a similar position in Boston fans' minds in 50 years time -- 1999-2000 he was truly extraordinary.

Some OPS+

Gehrig 182
Browning 164
Dave Orr 162
C. Jones 150
Hack Wilson 145
Fred Dunlap 132

Okay so there aren't many above 130, 125-130 ain't bad, but still there are an awful lot of them.

Goslin 128
Veach 127
Roush 126
Doyle 126
Bresnahan 126
Cuyler 125
Sisler 124
Bottomley 124
Duffy 121
Van Haltren 121

Add in defensive WS, the following are all within 5 OPS+ AND 5 DWS of Goslin:

Goslin 128 50
Cuyler 125 47
Doyle 126 49
Veach 127 48
Bresnahan 126 55

And then are some who do better than that on one or the other:

Roush 126 60
Duffy 121 59
Van Haltren 121 89

Again, on total career WS only Gehrig and Frisch beat the Goose, but I'm not sure he was ever as "dominant" as I thought. He is no Al Simmons and not even Ducky Medwick. The numbers upon which his legend mostly lies tend to be those that reflect the high offensive environment of the time, I think. So I'm tempted to find me a couple middle infielders to move up above the Goose from my prelim #3. I just gotta remember Sewell only played SS for 8 years, Sewell only played SS for 8 years....

Oops, forgot I was on the Kiki thread and not the Goose thread. Bottom line: comparing Goose to Kiki might move the Goose down (get it? Goose down!?) rather than move Kiki up.

When listing OPS+ numbers, don't forget:

Mike Tiernan 138

Don't forget Beckley 125, for longer than any of them, either!

...and Jimmy Ryan at 124, and Mike Griffin at 123...

...not to mention John Paciorek at 495...

...okay, I know Paciorek is not eligible yet...

He is no Al Simmons and not even Ducky Medwick.
(true of both Goose and Kiki)

Simmons and Medwick were dominant players for a moderate time and a short time. In practice, the case for Cravath, Klein, Wilson or Berger should be undermined if it seems that "he is no Al Simmons and not even Ducky Medwick." But Goslin?

The Goose will be elected if the voters think he belongs with O'Rourke, Clarke, Sheckard and Wheat rather than with Sam Rice (and GVH, for those who are happy to mix in a CF, not me). I think he will be elected and the case for Country Slaughter or whoever will someday be undermined if it seems that "he is no Clarke, not even Goose Goslin."

Cuyler isn't easy to classify by type, neither a peak nor a career candidate, neither a CF nor a corner --{Hugh Duffy, Kiki Cuyler, Reggie Smith}?. But it is easy to rank him below pure CFs Roush and Averill, so he isn't a viable HOM candidate.

(Jim O'Rourke and Reggie Smith? Sorry, I am not conversant with players born in the 1910s-20s, who will arrive here in the next twenty-five years: Medwick, Slaughter, et al.)

Howie Menckel wondered (in the 1944 ballot thread):
What did he do in 1922 in majors? No AB, no position in field, just "1 G."

Most likely, he pinch-ran. Possible that he pinch-hit, and sacrificed, or was pinch-hit for before completing the plate appearance.