hot topics

Let's not forget about Newt Allen.

Newt Allen Data

Teams: 22-44 KC Monarchs, Stl 31, Det 32, Homestead 32

Seasonal Data from Holway

1923 no data
1924 .277 for KC; 2b
11-39 in World Series vs. Hilldale
1925 .307 for KC; 10 3b (4th), 16 sb (3rd); 2b; all-star
11-27 in playoff vs. Stl.
7-27 in World Series vs. Hilldale
1926 .232 for KC Monarchs; 2b
5-28 in playoff vs. Chi Am
1927 .330 for KC Monarchs; 2b, all-star
1928 .280 for KC Monarchs; 12 sb (3rd); 2b
1929 .284 for KC Monarchs; 24 2b (3rd), 23 sb (3rd); 2b, all-star
1930 .333 for KC Monarchs; 2b, all-star
1931 .300 for KC Monarchs; ss
12-33 in World Series vs. Grays
1932 .268 for Homestead; 7 sb (3rd); 2b
.364 for KC Monarchs; 2b, all-star
2-2 vs. Major-league competition
1933 No Data (Monarchs barnstorming)
1934 No Data (Monarchs barnstorming); ss
1935 No Data (Monarchs barnstorming); 2b
4-12 vs. major-league pitching (backed by semipro teams)
1936 .385 for KC Monarchs; 2b, all-star
1937 .389 for KC Monarchs; ba 2nd, 6 2b (4th), 7 sb (3rd); 2b, all-star
5-21 in playoff vs. Chi Am Giants
3-11 in World Series vs. Homestead
7-15 vs. major-league competition
47-175 in Cuban Play
1938 .267 for KC Monarchs; 2b
1939 .265 for KC Monarchs; 2b
1940 .323 for KC Monarchs; ba 5th, 4 2b (2nd); lf
1941 .245 for KC Monarchs; ss and manager
1942 .318 for KC Monarchs; rf
4-15 in World Series vs. Homestead
1943 no data
1944 .247 for KC Monarchs; lf

Career
.300 mean avg. for 17 seasons with batting statistics

Black Ink/Gray Ink from Holway
0/25

Career Data from MacMillan 8th

792 g, 3250 ab, 961 hits, 135 2b, 42 3b, 20 hr, .296 ba, .382 sa.

Career Fielding Summary from Holway

2b 24, 26-30, 32, 35-39
3b 25
ss 31, 34, 41
lf 40, 44
rf 42

Brief analysis: Probably didn't hit enough to be a strong HoM candidate, but he's missing almost all of 4 years out of the middle of his career when the Monarchs were barnstorming rather than playing in a league, so that may underrate him a bit. We also don't have much analysis of offensive conditions in the NeL in the 1930s (we need as much of that as we can get!), so the numbers we have might not be telling the whole story. But clearly he's not anywhere near Stearnes and Suttles as hitters, nor was he ever one of the top hitters in the NeL. But his reputation was as an outstanding defensive player.

1928 Newt Allen
NNL Kansas City Monarchs

Batting
G-72 (team 74)
AB-286
H-78
D-13
T-4
HR-1
R-40
W-21
HP-2
SH-10
SB-18 (4th in league)
AVE-.273 (NNL .278)
OBA-.327 (NNL .333)
SLG-.357 (NNL .384)

KC's Muehlebach Park seemed to be more or less neutral that year.

Fielding (shortstop)
G-72
DI-632.2
PO-184
A-260
E-28
DP-34
RF-6.32 (NNL ss 5.59)
FPCT-.941 (NNL ss .922)

KC shortstops (all but 2 games Allen) accounted for 32.8% of KC assists (not counting catchers and OF); the NNL average was 30.1%.

Note that Allen played only shortstop in 1928 (not 2b, Holway has it). Also, Macmillan 8 has Allen at 2b in 1925 and ss in 1927.

Allen led NNL shortstops in range factor and putouts, btw. He was second in assists and double plays and third in fielding pct.

Also, it should be noted that the Monarchs were probably the best fielding team in the Negro Leagues; their DER in 1928 was .702, the best in the NNL. Second was Chicago, at .698 but in an extreme pitchers' park; third was Memphis, at .671.

The Monarchs also turned a lot of double plays (52 recorded, third in the league behind St. Louis at 55 and Memphis at 53), despite allowing fewer baserunners than any other team--their opponents' OBA was .295, best in the league (Chicago's .309 was second).

So: 1924 to 1944 at the highest available levels of competition. Clearly excellent defense. A good hitter for parts of his career, but without power, and a snapshot taken in the year Gary A has investigated doesn't show off his offense.

Is he Rabbit Maranville?

Or Bingo DeMoss?

How exactly did history prefer Bingo DeMoss (BA around .240 with no power) to Newt Allen (BA .300 with at least a little power)? Hard to see. I mean, how much better would DeMoss' defense have to be to make up that difference? And while DeMoss may have been the better defensive player, Allen seems to have been quite good too. Let's say DeMoss was an A and Allen a B. Does that make up for 100 points or more of OPS?

DeMoss has long since dropped out of my consideration set. I don't think he's top 100 among today's eligibles. Allen I don't think matches up to Bill Monroe, but I think he's top 100 today at least.

Bingo DeMoss played much of his career in the deadball era, and much of it in an extreme pitcher's park (Schorling); whereas Allen played his career in a high-offense era in what it seems was a fairly neutral park. I don't know whether DeMoss would match Allen as a hitter if we could make proper adjustments; but I do think the two are closer than it appears at first.

Another point is that the bulk of stats we have for DeMoss are from the league period, 1920 and after; I think Gadfly says over on the Beckwith thread that DeMoss was born in 1885, making him 35 at the start of the most well-documented part of his career. That might also help to explain his anemic offensive numbers.

You might also want to check out a few other recent comments on DeMoss on the Beckwith thread.

I just posted this info to the FILES section of the HOM yahoo egroup yesterday (Indiannpolis ABC's stats of 1916) which included DeMoss:

G-23
AB-68
H-20
2B-0
3B-4 (!)
HR-0
Sac-7
Ave- .294 (team ave .291)
Slg - .412 (team slg .373)

I'm definately intrigued to learn more about Newt. If he turns out to have Maranville-esque career value, that has a chance to get him on my ballot. Maranville is just off of my ballot currently, and what's holding him back is a lack of peak. I may be misreading the numbers, but 1932-1937 look like a potentially strong peak for Newt (I know park factors need to be weighed in, so I'd defer to expert analysis).

At a minimum, a longer career Dick Lundy?

I may be misreading the numbers, but 1932-1937 look like a potentially strong peak for Newt (I know park factors need to be weighed in, so I'd defer to expert analysis).

I'm not an expert, but I've learned enough from gadfly's posts on the MLE subject to suggest that we need to be wary in assessing Allen's 36-37 seasons because of the issue of league environment and league quality. gadfly's analysis of the 1940s game strongly suggests that the Negro American League, the new western league that formed in 1937 was a higher-offense, lower-quality league with more young players and fewer established stars than the eastern Negro National League. I'm sure batting and slugging averages from this environment should not be viewed in quite the same way as averages from the 1920s, when there were two strong leagues or the one-league environment of the early 1930s.

Allen definitely had a longer career than Lundy, and the snapshot of fielding data we have is truly impressive. But Lundy, at least for the first half of his career was a strong hitter who placed occasionally among the league leaders in batting average and in power categories. We have no strong evidence that Allen could match that level of hitting.

gadfly, Gary A., and other experts can give firmer judgments.

For some reason Newt Allen is reminding me a lot of Frank White: Golden Glove, a decent but not great hitter, occasionally hit for power, good speed. That's a valuable player, but not a HOMer.

I don't usually like to make comparisons between NeL and MLB players, because if you get it fixed in your mind, it can mislead just as much as it can help (see Beckwith). That said, I've always thought of Newt Allen as a kind of Frank White of the Negro Leagues, too--similar in style, value, and longtime service for a KC team.