Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Hall of Merit > Discussion
Hall of Merit
— A Look at Baseball's All-Time Best

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

1937 Election Results: Heilmann and Torriente Become the Hall of Merit’s Newest Members!

Tiger slugging star Harry Heilmann earned the most points this election to become inducted into the Hall of Merit in only his second year of eligibility.

In his fourth year of eligibility, Negro League talent Cristóbal Torriente comfortably snatched the second spot for HoM induction. He has the honor of being the seventh Negro Leaguer to gain immortality so far. 

Heinie Groh and Stan Coveleski should follow in Heilmann’s and Torriente’s footsteps next “year.” Nobody else were close to them during the election and they will face a weak group in ‘38.

Rounding out the top ten were returnees Max Carey, Lip Pike, Jake Beckley, Hughie Jennings, Rube Waddell and George Sisler (he switched spots with the faltering George Van Haltren this “year”).

RK   LY  Player                   PTS  Bal   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1    3  Harry Heilmann          1131   52  19 20  5  3  2  1  1  1                     
 2    4  Cristóbal Torriente     1101   51  22 15  4  5  2  1     1     1               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3    5  Heinie Groh              650   47      2  7  5  6  5  3  2  1  3  3  4  2  3  1
 4    6  Stan Coveleski           605   45         5  5  8  4  4  3  3  2  3  2  2  1  3
 5    8  Max Carey                455   34      3  6  1  3  1  2  1  3  3  1  3  3  3  1
 6    9  Lip Pike                 414   28   2  1  5  2     5  3  2  1  4           2  1
 7    7  Jake Beckley             389   27   1  2  1  5  2  3  1  1  2  5  1  1  1     1
 8   12  Hughie Jennings          357   25   3  1  1  3  1  4  2  1  1  1  1     3  1  2
 9   11  Rube Waddell             328   27      1  1  1     4  2  3  4  2  3  2     1  3
10   14  George Sisler            327   25   1     1  2  4  3  4  1     2     2  1  1  3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11   13  Clark Griffith           322   27         1  2  4  1  1  3  3  2  2  3  1  1  3
12   15  Mickey Welch             319   20   2  3  4     1  3        2     3     1  1   
13   16  Pete Browning            291   20      1  1  6  3  1  1  1  2        3     1   
14   10  George Van Haltren       288   23         4  2  3  1  1     2     3  2     3  2
15   17  Cupid Childs             285   26   1           4  1  2     1  2  3  3  3  3  3
16   18  Hugh Duffy               257   21      1     3  1  1  2  4           3  4  1  1
17  n/e  Edd Roush                247   22            1           5  4  3  5  3     1   
18  n/e  Cannonball Dick Redding  243   24            2           1  3  4  3  2  6  2  1
19   19  Roger Bresnahan          216   21            1  1  1  1  1  2  2  3  2     5  2
20   21  Tommy Leach              209   19               1     4  3  1  2  2     3  2  1
21   22  José Méndez              191   18         1     1     1  1  2  3  2  2  2  1  2
22   20  Jimmy Ryan               172   14               2  1  1  4  1  2     1  2      
23  n/e  Wally Schang             147   14   1                 2     2  1  1     3  2  2
24   23  Charley Jones            144   11      1  1  1        3  1     1           2  1
25   25  Larry Doyle              134   10         3        1  1  1  1     1  1     1   
26   26  Harry Hooper             113   11                  2  2     1     1     1  1  3
27   24  Bill Monroe              110   10               1  1  2     1     1     2  1  1
28   29T Carl Mays                 95   10                           4     1  1  1  2  1
29   31  Bobby Veach               88    9                  1     1     2     1  2  1  1
30   28  John McGraw               73    5      1              1  2        1            
31   27  Ben Taylor                72    6                  1  1  2     1              1
32   29T Addie Joss                60    6                        1  1     1  1  2      
33   38  George J. Burns           57    6                     2           1        1  2
34   34  Vic Willis                55    6                        1           3  1  1   
35   36  Fielder Jones             55    5                     1  2           1        1
36   33  Urban Shocker             53    6                              1  1  2  1     1
37   32  Spotswood Poles           53    4               1  2                       1   
38   40  Ed Cicotte                50    5                  1        1     1        1  1
39   37  Frank Chance              50    4         1              1  1              1   
40   39  Ed Williamson             44    5                           1        2  1     1
41   35  Gavy Cravath              44    4                  1     1        1           1
42   43  Dave Bancroft             28    4                                       1  2  1
43  n/e  Ed Konetchy               26    3                                 1  1     1   
44   42  Wilbur Cooper             24    2            1                             1   
45   44T Ray Schalk                21    2                              1  1            
46   53T Dobie Moore               17    2                                    1  1      
47   41  Lave Cross                17    1            1                                 
48   46  Tommy Bond                16    1               1                              
49   47  Donie Bush                15    1                  1                           
50   44T Fred Dunlap               14    1                     1                        
51   49T Tom York                  12    1                           1                  
52T n/e  Jack Fournier             11    1                              1               
52T  49T Sam Leever                11    1                              1               
54   51  Jim McCormick             10    1                                 1            
55T n/e  Del Pratt                  8    1                                       1      
55T      Ross Youngs                8    1                                       1      
57T  48  Mike Griffin               6    1                                             1
57T n/e  Herman Long                6    1                                             1
57T  52  Tony Mullane               6    1                                             1
57T n/e  Mike Tiernan               6    1                                             1
Dropped Out: Roy Thomas(53T).

 

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 26, 2004 at 12:34 AM | 29 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 26, 2004 at 01:28 AM (#937187)
hot topics
   2. Reidmar the Mediocre Posted: October 26, 2004 at 02:15 AM (#937225)
The 14th-place and 15th-place vote columns aren't showing up for me. I'm guessing the "Cannonball Dick Redding" is pushing them behind the hot topics bar. Resolution is 1280x800, FWIW.
   3. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 26, 2004 at 03:14 AM (#937271)
Both columns are showing up on my screen, Reidmar. For some reason, a few people have had problems with this page (sometimes temporarily) for the past few elections.
   4. thok Posted: October 26, 2004 at 07:03 AM (#937362)
The area in the red box is a frame. If you can't see the full results, click somewhere inside the red box with your mouse, hold down the left mouse button, and move the mouse right. You'll see the right edge of the box (but not the left edge).
   5. Sean Gilman Posted: October 26, 2004 at 07:39 AM (#937372)
The HOM Game for 1937 features the Boston Red Sox and the St. Louis Cardinals.

The Sox are led by future HOMers Lefty Grove and Jimmie Foxx, while the Cardinals star Dizzy Dean, Johnny MIze and Ducky Medwick.
   6. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: October 26, 2004 at 09:53 AM (#937382)
I'm really disappointed with Wally Schang finishing 23rd.

Will some of the people who voted Bresnahan ahead of him try to convince why I should be able how that could be possible?
   7. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: October 26, 2004 at 09:54 AM (#937383)
Wow, I need to learn how to type. That should read:

Will some of the people who voted Bresnahan ahead of Schang try to convince why I should be able to see how that could be possible?
   8. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: October 26, 2004 at 09:56 AM (#937385)
Jeez!

you know what I meant! How can anyone vote Bresnahan ahead of Schang - show me what I'm missing!
   9. TomH Posted: October 26, 2004 at 12:37 PM (#937410)
see 38 ballot discussion
   10. PhillyBooster Posted: October 26, 2004 at 01:54 PM (#937478)
For me, the case against Schang was simply that he wasn't the best catcher. This is my Post #61 (with only typos corrected) from the 1937 discussion thread. No one countered any of my points, so I just stuck with my initial analysis. I would be happy to reconsider if someone wishes to make a strong counterargument. The stats below are all based upon WARP-1:

-----------------------------------------------

Okay, I'm having the same problem others are having with Schang. I was all prepared to put him on my ballot, and then I did a season-by-season analysis.

Here's what I got:

Career: 1913-1929

Best catcher in the AL: Once (1919)
Second best catcher in AL: Twice (1914 and 1917)

Head to head with Ray Schalk, who had exactly same career, except 2 years shorter (AL catcher, 1912-1926).

Here's how they did, in their 14 overlapping years:

Schalk better 8 times: 1913-1917, 1920, 1922, 1925
Schang better 5 times: 1918-1919, 1921, 1924, 1926
Tied one time: 1923
The post-1922 years are pyrrhic, however, as neither player were among the best catchers in the league (Ruel and Cochrane were).

Conclusion: Despite my initial assumptions, Schang will not make my ballot. More interesting question, though, is whether this comparison upgrades Schalk enough for HIM to make my ballot. Schalk was the best catcher in the AL five times, and second best another 4 times. That should get him up into the Bresnahan 10-15 range.

--------------------------------

Essentially, Schang was a "Top 2" catcher in the AL times (1 first, 2 second).

HoFer Ray Schalk was a "Top 2" catcher 9 times (5 first, 4 seconds).

Bresnahan was a Top 2 catcher 4 times and a Top 2 Centerfielder twice.

Schalk and Bresnahan both have higher peaks. Schalk is in the HoF, and when you look at his year by year you can see why. Schang certainly has a lot of Win Shares (for a catcher), but he earned them by being the 3rd, 4th, or 5th best catcher year after year after year.
   11. OCF Posted: October 26, 2004 at 04:58 PM (#937716)
Average consensus score of the 52 ballots cast for 1937 was 4.9: sharply down from the run of 21.9, 15.8, 15.3 of the last three years, but above the run of lower scores from 1926 through 1932. Next year is likely to be down in that range, but still well above the low point of -3.4 in 1931. The top scores this year: jschmeagol, Howie Menckel, and Brad G, at 15, 15, and 14. The three lowest scores: yest, Guapo, and KJOK at -10, -6, and -4. My own score was a little above average: 10.

There were no new voters in 1937. Voters who have voted in the last 5 years but didn't in 1937: Brad Harris, Bryce B (Tanketra), Chris J. (!???), Eric Enders, Michael D, RMc, Sean M, TheGoodSamaritan.

James Newburg hasn't voted now for 5 years; he apparently joins the list of those, like Seaver 1969, stephen, and zapatero, who dropped in for a few years but then left. Tanketra may be on the same path.

I've got records going back to 1921. 32 voters have voted in all 17 of those elections. Here are those 32, sorted by total consensus score for the 17 years: Howie Menckel, favre, Brad G, Chris Cobb, daryn, Dan G, Devin McCullen, Tom H, Joe Dimino, Philip, Don F, Rusty Priske, Andrew Siegel, Al Peterson, Esteban Rivera, Sean Gilman, Adam Schafer, Ron Wargo, Rick A, PhillyBooster, OCF, Rob Wood, dan b, Jeff M, Dolf Lucky, robc, karlmagnus, Jim Sp, Eric C, jimd, John Murphy, KJOK.

Ken Fischer, Chris J, mdb1mdb1, Patrick W, and sunnyday2 have voted in 16 of those 17 elections. If they were appropriately ranked on the above consensus list, Ken Fischer and Chris J would rank 2nd and 3rd from the top, while sunnyday2 would be 3rd from the bottom.
   12. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 26, 2004 at 08:18 PM (#938159)
Wow, I don't know how to take this...

I mean, submitting the ballot most like everyone else's, it's like an honor or something right? (tears flow)
   13. KJOK Posted: October 26, 2004 at 11:50 PM (#938469)
The consensus scores are very interesting, and got me wondering...

Is it possible to calculate on which PLAYER we have the greatest and least consensus on?
   14. OCF Posted: October 27, 2004 at 12:09 AM (#938482)
Is it possible to calculate on which PLAYER we have the greatest and least consensus on?

Yes and no. I have a "disagreement score", but it tends to follow a predictable curve, reaching a maximum somewhere between #3 and #10 on the ballot and doing a slow fade after that. By this score, we disagree very little about someone like Tony Mullane or Tom York - the system is based on recorded votes and can't see whether you have such a candidate at #16 or #160.

Taking that score at face value, in 1937 the candidate with the most disagreement was Welch - and I think that makes sense, that he does deserve that title. The next few after Welch were Pike, Jennings, and Beckley. Those notable for lying under the curve (that is, having less disagreement than would be typical for the ballot position): Waddell, Griffith - and probably also Groh and Coveleski, although it's hard to see that part of the curve. C. Jones and McGraw have disagreement scores a little above those near them on the ballot.
   15. Howie Menckel Posted: October 27, 2004 at 01:17 AM (#938647)
Interesting.
I think I win because I get bored with 'favorites' who fall out of the top 20. They aren't going to get elected anyway, and I focus a little more on the newbies, instead. If I like those guys, they tend to slot in ahead of the oldies.
I also focus a lot on anyone who IS in the top 20 or so, and sometimes that leads me to renewed interest in someone like Tommy Leach.
Takes all kinds to have good elections. I accept my role - and the equal value of the 'nonestablishment' types.
   16. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 27, 2004 at 02:06 AM (#938849)
The two players I disagree with the most are Beckley, who is in the mid 30's for me and Welch, mid forties. But while there is a big difference between top 10 and mid thirties, the only difference that is calculated is where on the ballot they are and whether or not they are on the ballot. so #16 gets the same weight as #35.
   17. The Erskine Thomason of UBW Posted: October 27, 2004 at 06:08 AM (#939306)
Just incase you didn't know . . . whenever I click on 1937 it takes me to Google; however, when I click on discussion or the Hot Topics link I end up here.

Not to nitpick or anything. . . .

Also, I hope you don't mind that I may participate in the 1938 election. My "system" won't be very complex; my choices will probably be based primarily on warp1 and WS--both career totals and top 5. Whatever I do, I'll be sure to post it in the discussion thread first!
   18. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 27, 2004 at 02:06 PM (#939523)
Just incase you didn't know . . . whenever I click on 1937 it takes me to Google; however, when I click on discussion or the Hot Topics link I end up here.

Not to nitpick or anything. . . .


I don't understand this crap sometimes. Thanks for the headsup.

Also, I hope you don't mind that I may participate in the 1938 election. My "system" won't be very complex; my choices will probably be based primarily on warp1 and WS--both career totals and top 5. Whatever I do, I'll be sure to post it in the discussion thread first!

Welcome!
   19. sunnyday2 Posted: October 27, 2004 at 02:49 PM (#939584)
How the hexx does one compare Lip Pike to Stan Coveleski? Well, one doesn't.

With that in mind, here is a different cut at the results. The question is whether each of these lists is in the correct order in-group?

20C ML Position Players
1. Groh
2. Carey
3. Sisler
4. Roush
5. Bresnahan
6. Leach
7. Schang
8. Doyle
9. Hooper
10. Veach

The top 10 happens to coincide with players on 10 or more ballots. I have no major issues with this list other than Sisler and Doyle seem to be a bit low.

19C Position Players
1. Pike
2. Beckley
3. Jennings
4. Browning
5. Van haltren
6. Childs
7. Duffy
8. Ryan
9. C. Jones
10. McGraw

In this case, McGraw has fewer than 10 ballots, the others have 10 or more. Here the shorter seasons amplify the differences for peak vs. career voters and as a result I believe that Beckley is especially overrated and C. Jones especially underrated. My list varies in other places, but all the others are within the margin of error.

20C ML Pitchers
1. Coveleski
2. Waddell
3. Mays
4. Joss
5. Willis
6. Shocker
7. Cicotte
8. Cooper
9. Leever

Only the top 3 have 10 ballots. I think we've got the right 2 guys at the top but I think the timelining here is a little strong, i.e. with Mays ahead of Joss and Willis. But this is difficult.

19C Pitchers
1. Griffith
2. Welch
3. Bond
4. McCormick
5. Mullane

Only the top 2 have 10 ballots. I think the top 4 are the right guys to be thinking about though I don't agree with the order, and I don't think Mullane is the #5 guy. This group might not matter, OTOH.

NeL
1. Redding
2. Mendez
3. Monroe
4. Taylor
5. Poles
6. Moore

Top 3 have 10 ballots. These are the right guys and probably even the right order, though I personally think all are underrated, along with Sol White and Chino Smith.

So now all we have to do is argue about these 5 lists, and then integrate them. What's the problem? If I HAD to rank order the top guy on each list, it would be:

1. Groh
2. Pike
3. Redding
4. Coveleski
----(big gap)
5. Griffith
   20. Michael Bass Posted: October 27, 2004 at 09:07 PM (#940438)
Seems like if I had to name one underrated player, I'd go with Poles right now. We inducted Pete Hill (correctly, IMO), and I think Hill is slightly better than Poles, but is there anyone who thinks Hill is miles better than Poles? And if not, why did Hill get in on his 1st ballot while Poles finished 37th and on a grand total of 4 ballots? Even if one believes that Hill went in too fast, is there any possible explanation for this difference?

And don't give me weak electorate, because he's below (well below) a lot of people that Hill beat soundly when he was elected. It seems at least possible to me that Poles was dropped off a lot of ballots in 1934, then forgotten about when we started bringing those guys back on. In 1933, Poles was on 18 ballots. Just hard to explain.
   21. KJOK Posted: October 27, 2004 at 09:36 PM (#940505)
I think the same could be said for Bobby Wallace and Dave Bancroft. Wallace is in and Bancroft hardly gets on any ballots...
   22. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 28, 2004 at 01:12 AM (#940969)
Michael,

I for one am not a fan of Poles. I just don't like his rate stats, a corner outfielder with no power and an OBP that is good but not great doesn't do it for me. 1935 was my first ballot so I wasn't someone who forgot about him.

Where am I going wrong here? I have read his thread and am not impressed. If you can say anything that would move him up I would be glad to hear it.

Thanks
   23. Michael Bass Posted: October 28, 2004 at 02:21 AM (#941297)
Well, I'll start by saying that he was not a corner OF, but a centerfielder, in fact considered an excellent defensive centerfielder.

I'm not the one to speak with about anything other than that, other than to say that Chris estimated him at around 330 career WS with a peak higher than the Carey and Van Haltren types. And that reading between the lines of the NBJHA, it's pretty clear he'd have had Poles in his top 125 players of all time if it had been extended that far. Of course, I'm the first to acknowledge problems with those rankings...
   24. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 28, 2004 at 01:34 PM (#942242)
I am not sure why I had him as a corner outfielder. The position change will bump him up. I guess I just wasn't terribly impressed by his I9's. Is there any reason to believe that he was better than his I9's indicate?
   25. Michael Bass Posted: November 01, 2004 at 07:18 PM (#947317)
Mainly WARP3, with some Win Shares emphasis to my analysis. OPS+ and RA+ (basically ERA+ with an eye out for high unearned run totals) are also used as a sanity check.

No new guys are anywhere close.


1. Hughie Jennings (3) - The argument I used for Caruthers all those years works even better for Hughie. Crammed so much value into a short career that he's more valuable than guys with productive careers twice or three times as long. First (probably of many times over the next 50 votes) time he's been #1 for me.

2. Heinie Groh (4) - Great player, great peak, position where we could use some inductees.

3. Stan Coveleski (5) - Great pitcher with whom I wasn't even all that familiar. Great peak, obvious HOMer.

4. José Méndez (7) - Very similar to Waddell pitching-wise. His hitting as a pitcher moves him to one spot above him, but he doesn't get credit in my system for his offensive rebirth (I don't think he'd have had it in the big leagues).

5. Rube Waddell (8) - Love the Ks, and his RA+ is very good (though obviously not as good as his ERA+, which is inflated). The intangibles argument holds no weight with me.

6. Pete Browning (9) - I reexamined the 3 "bat" candidates from the earlier days, him, Jones, and Pike, and Browning comes out on top. Just one hell of a hitter. If we elect Beckley before him, we should be embarassed.

7. Bobby Veach (10) - Love his peak, was super-strong both offensively and defensively.

8. Spotswood Poles (6) - A slightly lesser Pete Hill. Worthy of election. With that said, I'd let him drift a little higher on my ballot than he should have been. Bat puts him down here.

9. Dick Redding (11) - Of similar value to Mendez, but below him because of Mendez's bat, and Redding is a touch lighter on the peak.

10. Dobie Moore (12) - Really, anyone who has Jennings in their top 5 should have Moore somewhere on the ballot. I understand those who have neither, but Moore, while not Jennings, is close enough that there should never be more than 10 or so spots separating them.

11. Cupid Childs (13) - Beneficiary of my realizing that aside from Veach, the OF glut doesn't separate itself out very much. Solid combo of career and peak.

12. Bill Monroe (14) - Still tied to Childs at the hip. Was a hell of a hitter in the early days of the organized Negro Leagues, when he was already up in age.

13. Hugh Duffy (15) - Hugh was a strong hitter with a good offensive peak and a hell of a defender. A+ rating from Win Shares, despite playing more corner than center? Sign me up.

14. George Van Haltren (--) - Back on my ballot after an absense. Gets little credit for his pitching from me, but his combo of hitting and fielding has a lot of career, and just enough peak to get him on the bottom of the ballot.

15. Tommy Leach (--) - Jumps up in a late reconsideration. Stats are generally around the middle of the OF glut pack, but his time at third separates him out some, and he moves up as a result. We can still use more 3B inductees, even if they are just half.


Top 10 Returners not on my ballot

Beckley - No peak. Never any better than an above average player. Would be a terrible choice for election.

Carey - In the portion of the glut likely to make my ballot one day. Just not yet. I think there should be other election priorities, but he would not be a real mistake.

Pike - Re-examined him, and it just didn't work out. Think Browning is the better choice. Not saying he'll never make my ballot, but he's about 5-10 spots off at this stage.

Sisler - Peak isn't good enough for his short productive career. Only one season of the superpeak that he needed 3-4 seasons of to make it.

Griffith - A little behind Pike. I still think Waddell is the correct choice of the long time ballot pitchers to be inducted.

Welch - No longer strongly opposed to him. Not a supporter, but I acknowledge the case for him and that I could be wrong.
   26. Michael Bass Posted: November 01, 2004 at 07:18 PM (#947318)
Oops...I'm a moron. Was getting last year's top 10 returnees off the page. Sorry. :)
   27. yest Posted: November 07, 2004 at 05:35 AM (#956629)
john not meaning to complain but what happened to your bringing back the comments that were lost in the move.
   28. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: November 07, 2004 at 04:35 PM (#956887)
john not meaning to complain but what happened to your bringing back the comments that were lost in the move.

In the immortal words of Professor Hinkle from Frosty the Snowman, I've been busy, busy, BIZ-ZEEEE!!!! :-D

I'll see what I can do, but I have a lot of things on my plate at the moment.
   29. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: November 08, 2004 at 08:50 AM (#957654)
I realize this should take place in the discussion but oh well . . .

Philly Booster, thanks for the reply, and sorry about my belated rebuttal . . .

I would say that Schalk comes out at 64.9 career WARP3, Schang at 76.0. WARP1 is a similar spread, though a touch tighter.

But look at the batting runs, Schang 356 BRAR, Schalk just 103. Schalk only moves closer on fielding runs. He did catch about 300 more games, even though their careers were of similar length, but I just think rating quality of catcher defense is quite suspect. While he was certainly a better defensive catcher, I think the degree that this impacted his teams is overstated by WARP.

Schang beats Schalk solidly on Win Shares, 245-191. This is with Schalk outpointing him 98-61 defensively.

I just don't see how it's possible to look at the two and see Schalk as close.

Taking the defensive advantage into account, I could see ranking them even through 1922. Comparing them seasonally, with Schang listed first:

1912: 0-3
1913: 13-13
1914: 19-17
1915: 17-18
1916: 12-16
1917: 15-20
1918: 10-7
1919: 19-17
1920: 20-21
1921: 20-11
1922: 18-22

Total 1912-22: Schang 163, Schalk 165 head to head seasons, not counting 1912, Shalk, 5-4-1.

Schalk was basically done as a productive player after 1922 (he was decent in 1925), totaling just 26 WS. Schang was Fisk-like in how long he was able to maintain his offense, rolling up 82 WS after 1922.

Schang was 39 years old in 1929, caught 55% of his teams games and still posted a 105 OPS+. Schalk had an OPS+ of 105 exactly once in his career, 1915.

Schang is miles ahead of Schalk, and as far as I can tell, any catcher of the era 1910-30 era.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Francis
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5139 seconds
49 querie(s) executed