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

Sunday, October 16, 2005

1962 Results: Feller and Robinson, HOF Class of ‘62, Are Now Part of the Hall of Merit Class of ‘62!

In his first year of eligibility, Cleveland Indians ace Bob Feller easily obtained immortality with 98% of all possible points. He also becomes the first player (and Hall of Famer) to win the honor who is still with us today!

Also in his first year on the ballot, legendary Dodger star Jackie Robinson was inducted into the Hall of Merit with the very strong percentage of 93% of all possible points.

Another newbie, Negro League and ML outfielder Monte Irvin, placed himself in a good position to be elected himself next “year” by becoming the top runner-up comfortably.

HOFer Phil Rizzuto didn’t make too much of an impression in his first year on the ballot at #46.

Rounding out the top-ten were: Wes Ferrell, Red Ruffing, Joe Medwick, Eppa Rixey, Biz Mackey, Clark Griffith, and George Sisler.

RK   LY  Player                   PTS  Bal   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1  n/e  Bob Feller              1151   49  31 17        1                              
 2  n/e  Jackie Robinson         1105   48  17 29     1           1                     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3  n/e  Monte Irvin              489   35      1  8  3  4     3  4  1  3  3  2     2  1
 4    4  Wes Ferrell              369   30         2  4  1  4  2  1  5  1  1  2  2  3  2
 5    2  Red Ruffing              361   26         5  2  1  3  3  6     3  1        1  1
 6    3  Joe Medwick              360   30         3  4  2  2  2     2  1  4     5  3  2
 7    6  Eppa Rixey               299   23         2     6  2  2  1  3  1  2     2  1  1
 8    5  Biz Mackey               287   24         1  2     3  2  1  3  4  3  2     3   
 9    7  Clark Griffith           278   20         5  2  2  1  2  2  1     1  1  2     1
10    8  George Sisler            249   20      1     1  3  2  1  3  1  1  1  2  1  1  2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11    9  George Van Haltren       246   20         1  2  3  3  1  1  2        2     2  3
12   10  Cool Papa Bell           235   20         1  3     1  1  2  1  4  1  2     3  1
13   11  Jake Beckley             232   17      1  2  3     3     2        3     1  1  1
14   13  Hugh Duffy               217   19            1  2  2  1  3  1  1  2  1  1  1  3
15   12  Cupid Childs             212   17            1  2     3  1  4  2  2  2         
16   14  Pete Browning            198   15         2  2  2  1  1        2  3  1        1
17   15  Cannonball Dick Redding  195   18         1     1  2  1  2  2  1     1  1  3  3
18   16  Willard Brown            190   18         1     1  1  3        1  3  1  3  1  3
19   17  Bobby Doerr              174   15            2  2     2     2     1  2  2     2
20   20  Dobie Moore              165   13         1  2  2     1  1     2  1     1  2   
21   19  José Méndez              161   14         1        2  3  1  1     1     3     2
22   18  Joe Sewell               160   14         1  1     3     1     2     2  1  1  2
23   23  Mickey Welch             158   11         4  1  2     1           1        1  1
24   21  Ralph Kiner              157   15                     1  2  2  1  4  4        1
25   25  Alejandro Oms            141   11         1     2  1  1     3     1  1     1   
26   22  Joe Gordon               138   14            1     1  1  1           5  2     3
27   26  Charley Jones            129   10         1  2        1     2  2  1        1   
28   24  Bucky Walters            128   10            2  2           1  4              1
29   29  Tommy Leach              102    8         1     1  1     1  1     1  2         
30   28  Edd Roush                 99   10         1           1           2  2  1  3   
31   30  Burleigh Grimes           99    8         1        1  1  1     1  2     1      
32   27  Rube Waddell              98    9         1        1     1     1  1  1  2     1
33   34  Larry Doyle               91    7            2     1  1  1              1  1   
34   31  Gavy Cravath              88    7   1           1     1        1     1  1     1
35   35  Quincy Trouppe            85    8                  2     1     2           2  1
36   33  Wally Schang              80    7         1           1     1  1     1  2      
37   32  Roger Bresnahan           78    7            2              1  1     1        2
38   36  Bob Elliott               68    7                  1     1     1     1  1     2
39   39  John McGraw               52    4               1     1     1     1            
40T  40  Tommy Bridges             42    4                           1  2        1      
40T  38  Bob Johnson               42    4               1           1           1     1
42   42  Jimmy Ryan                41    5                           1     1        1  2
43   37  Bill Monroe               41    4            1                       1  1  1   
44   45  Charlie Keller            39    3                     1  1  1                  
45   43  Vern Stephens             37    3                     2              1         
46  n/e  Phil Rizzuto              36    5                                    1     3  1
47T  51  Luke Easter               36    3                  1     1              1      
47T  46  Dizzy Trout               36    3                        2        1            
49   55T Vic Willis                31    3                        1     1           1   
50   48  Sam Rice                  30    3                           1  1           1   
51   47  Ed Williamson             28    3                           1           2      
52   50  Carl Mays                 25    3                                    1  2      
53   44  Ernie Lombardi            25    2         1                                1   
54T  55T Chuck Klein               24    2                        1     1               
54T  53  Dutch Leonard             24    2                           2                  
56T  52  Addie Joss                23    2                     1              1         
56T  49  Ben Taylor                23    2               1                          1   
58   41  Dizzy Dean                22    2                  1                       1   
59T  58T Leroy Matlock             17    1            1                                 
59T  58T Pie Traynor               17    1            1                                 
61   54  Bobo Newsom               16    2                                       2      
62T  64T Ed Cicotte                16    1               1                              
62T  58T Fielder Jones             16    1               1                              
62T  64T Johnny Pesky              16    1               1                              
65T  64T Tommy Bond                15    1                  1                           
65T  68T Frank Chance              15    1                  1                           
65T  64T Bobby Veach               15    1                  1                           
68   61T George J. Burns           13    2                                          1  1
69   70  Dolf Luque                13    1                        1                     
70T  61T Lefty Gomez                9    1                                    1         
70T  72T Joe Tinker                 9    1                                    1         
72T n/e  Bus Clarkson               8    1                                       1      
72T  71  Fred Dunlap                8    1                                       1      
72T  68T Hack Wilson                8    1                                       1      
75   72T Sam Leever                 7    1                                          1   
Dropped Out: Tommy Henrich(75), Dick Lundy(57), 
Rabbit Maranville(74), Tony Mullane(76), Dom DiMaggio(61T).
Ballots Cast: 49

 

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 16, 2005 at 04:54 PM | 101 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.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:20 AM (#1689659)
Congratulations to Rapid Robert and Jackie! Excellent choices, I must say.

Nice to see Monte position himself for the next election, too.
   2. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:21 AM (#1689661)
BTW, nobody sent any of their results my way, so there might be some discrepancies.
   3. Guapo Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:39 AM (#1689702)
Is Feller the first living HoMer?
   4. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:44 AM (#1689714)
OK, I'm running into some discrpancies. I have Ferrell in 4th place ahead of Ruffing at 363. I have Ferrell with 4 6th place votes but only 1 15th place vote.

And I have Medwick with at 360 with 4 4th place votes.

Those do check out: 4 6th place votes for Ferrell, 4 4th place votes for Medwick. I can tell you who cast them, if that will help.
   5. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:48 AM (#1689726)
Those do check out: 4 6th place votes for Ferrell, 4 4th place votes for Medwick. I can tell you who cast them, if that will help.

If you don't mind, OCF.

Is Feller the first living HoMer?

Thanks for reminding me, Guapo. I addeded that tidbit at the top.
   6. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:56 AM (#1689740)
Ferrell 6th place votes: Kelly in SD, andrew siegel, Chris Cobb, Max Parkinson. The only Ferrell 15th place vote I have is Thane of Bagarth

Medwick 4th place votes: sunnyday2, Adam Schafer, Mike Webber, Jeff M.
   7. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:13 AM (#1689787)
Ferrell 6th place votes: Kelly in SD, andrew siegel, Chris Cobb, Max Parkinson. The only Ferrell 15th place vote I have is Thane of Bagarth

Medwick 4th place votes: sunnyday2, Adam Schafer, Mike Webber, Jeff M.


I made the correction for Medwick, but you missed Sean Gilman's last place vote for Ferrell.

Thanks, OCF!
   8. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:21 AM (#1689797)
We're still disagreeing by a Ferrell 6th place vote. I have Ferrell at 369 now.
   9. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:28 AM (#1689810)
Found it, OCF. Thanks again!
   10. Howie Menckel Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:46 AM (#1689844)
All-time 'vote points totals' leaders, through 1962. Active for 1963 vote in CAPS

Jennings 16976
VAN HALTREN 16403.5
BECKLEY 15747
DUFFY 15607.5
GRIFFITH 14920
BROWNING 13589.5
Pike 13399
Thompson 12349
WADDELL 11862
Bennett 11503

CHILDS 11464
WELCH 11407
RYAN 10742.5
Caruthers 10704
Beckwith 9920
H Stovey 9576
RIXEY 8659
Start 8378.5
McGinnity 8232
Pearce 8073

McVey 7985.5
SISLER 7980
Grant 7969.5
BRESNAHAN 7805
Suttles 7696
(TLeach 7660, C Jones 6818, Ferrell 6376, Sewell 6311, Monroe 5443, Redding 4903, Mendez 4787, Roush 4730, Doyle 4665, Williamson 4430, Ruffing 3707, Medwick 3518, CP Bell 3506)
   11. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:51 AM (#1689852)
OK. Now it checks. (One last mistake to root out turned out to be mine. yest voting for Redding would be a surprising development. It was actually Browning.)
   12. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:00 AM (#1689865)
Consensus scores:

Max possible: +14.

Average: +1.9

Howie Menckel: 10
DanG: 10
dan b: 9
andrew siegel: 8
TomH: 8
Chris J: 7
...
David Foss: 2 (median)
...
EricC: -3
Dolf Lucky: -3
Gadfly: -8
karlmagnus: -9
yest: -17

I was at +5. Some others: Chris Cobb: +6, sunnyday2: 0, John Murphy: 0, PhillyBooster: -1.

For all the eccentricities of his ballot, Gadfly did get most of the top candidates in there somewhere. Leaving Robinson completely off is the main thing that makes yest such an outlier.

This was a case of great agreement about the top two spots papering over wild disagreements below that.
   13. Brent Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:55 AM (#1689964)
Question:

Now that we've made it through most of the WWII generation (Williams still to come), has credit for military service made any difference in the voting? For all our discussion and hand-wringing, it seems to me that the players we've elected with significant war-time interruptions (Feller, Robinson, Greenberg, Appling, DiMaggio, Herman, Mize) would all have it even without war credit. Greenberg is the only one I see any question about. On the other hand, the players for whom I thought war credit might have made a difference between election and also-ran status, such as Gordon and Rizzuto, haven't done well in the voting.

Similarly, on the issue of adjusting war-time performance for quality of competition, again I can't think of anyone we haven't elected because of inflated wartime numbers. Newhouser, Boudreau, and Hack have been elected; Trout probably wouldn't have been even with full credit for his wartime statistics.

Irvin may turn out to be the exception - if he's elected next year, I assume it will be based in part on credit for his military service.
   14. Howie Menckel Posted: October 18, 2005 at 03:02 AM (#1689996)
Amazing.
From below average to top of the heap in only a few years, after previously also having been a 'high scorer.'

I didn't like the mid-1940s IFs as much as most, which cost me. But they're all in or out now. Plus my guys like Rixey and Griffith and Beckley and Browning and Childs are holding steady, or better.
I suspect I'll be near the top for a while now...
   15. DavidFoss Posted: October 18, 2005 at 03:49 AM (#1690229)
David Foss: 2 (median)

This is my first time showing up in OCF's posts -- and it's to tell me I'm the median. I've never been on either of the consensus or non-consensus lists. I suppose its not really good or bad, just average in my averageness.
   16. Trevor P. Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:38 AM (#1690404)
Similarly, on the issue of adjusting war-time performance for quality of competition, again I can't think of anyone we haven't elected because of inflated wartime numbers.

Had Bob Johnson posted his 174 OPS+ in 1934 rather than 1944, I think he would be approaching a Medwickian level of support.

Bobby Doerr's another interesting case for a candidacy ruined by inflated wartime stats (though I think he may have been borderline, anyways).
   17. EricC Posted: October 18, 2005 at 10:40 AM (#1690580)
Now that we've made it through most of the WWII generation (Williams still to come), has credit for military service made any difference in the voting?

Enos Slaughter in 1965?
   18. Chris Cobb Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:17 PM (#1690637)
Pee Wee Reese in 1964; Larry Doby in 1963.

And I don't think we're done with Gordon/Doerr yet by any means.
   19. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:58 PM (#1690699)
<u>Scooter</u> Posted: October 18, 2005 at 09:17 AM (#1690638)

Holy Cow! Unbelievable!

I don't believe only five of these huckleberries wanted to elect me!

I bet it's that White's fault.... I'll never hear the end of this one from Yogi the next time we play golf.
   20. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 04:03 PM (#1690912)
Nice, Eric. :-)
   21. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: October 18, 2005 at 04:28 PM (#1690954)
He also becomes the first Hall of Famer to win the honor who is still with us today!</b>

Freudian slip?
   22. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:18 PM (#1691031)
He also becomes the first Hall of Famer to win the honor who is still with us today!</b>

Freudian slip?


Nope. Of any player who is in the HOF in Cooperstown, Feller is the only one who is still around that is now in the HoM.

Irvin should be #2 in '63.
   23. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:20 PM (#1691035)
Of course, he's is the first HoMer that is still alive, so you are also correct. In fact, I think I'll adjust that parargraph above.
   24. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:24 PM (#1691042)
Wes Ferrell jumped up a couple slots this year, retaining his fourth slot despite 3 new candidates ahead of him.
   25. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 06:20 PM (#1691143)
The status of Ferrell, Ruffing, and Medwick in 1962 should be considered roughly a 3-way tie, although Dr. Chaleeko is correct to note that Ferrell was clearly behind Ruffing and Medwick in 1961. He did gain on the other two in a year's time. I don't know what that means, and I'm not going to make any predictions about which of those three is likely to be elected first.
   26. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: October 18, 2005 at 08:22 PM (#1691334)
I gave Ferrell 10 points he wasn't otherwise getting, by jumping him from #20 to #11 this week. That's the entire difference between his finishing 4th vs. 6th . . .
   27. Daryn Posted: October 18, 2005 at 08:24 PM (#1691338)
I did the same.
   28. DavidFoss Posted: October 19, 2005 at 02:52 PM (#1692469)
HOF Class of '62, Are Now Part of the Hall of Merit Class of '62!

I believe this is a first, the five year wait is becoming fairly standard now and they seem to have worked through their backlog enough to allow for first ballot elections. It will probably happen again, but not for a while it appears.

I wonder which induction ceremony Feller & Robinson will choose to attend? :-)
   29. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 02:56 PM (#1692476)
I wonder which induction ceremony Feller & Robinson will choose to attend? :-)

Ours, because they received more votes from us. :-)
   30. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 03:02 PM (#1692489)
BTW, David, do you think '69 will be the next dual HOF/HoM induction ceremonies?
   31. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 03:07 PM (#1692495)
Another thing: Jim gave me permission to post all election results simultaneously between our blog, Baseball Primer, and the Baseball News Blog from now on.
   32. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 03:17 PM (#1692510)
I believe this is a first, the five year wait is becoming fairly standard now

FWIW, Feller and Robinson in 1962 became the first two guys ever inducted in their first year of eligibility after the five-year wait was established. (Joe DiMaggio, a few years earlier, was elected on his third (!) try.)
   33. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 03:49 PM (#1692567)
(Joe DiMaggio, a few years earlier, was elected on his third (!) try.)

I suspect there were a few voters who felt he should wait a few more years before induction. I wouldn't be surprised if they were the ones that yelled the loudest for the changes that were enacted in the '60's, too. IOW, if DiMaggio had his ballot debut in '57 instead, I would imagine he would have been elected that year fairly easily (or was '57 a non-BBWAA year?)
   34. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 04:32 PM (#1692646)
I agree that DiMaggio would have gotten in on his first try had the five-year rule been in effect then.

Considering the modestness of Jackie's raw career totals -- and the general social climate of the country in 1962 -- it's fairly surprising that he was the first player to be elected in his first year of eligibility.

For some reason, I once took it upon myself to go through all the 1962 HOF ballots and record who did or didn't vote for Robinson. Nothing really noteworthy there, although Dick Young, who was famous for hating Jackie, not surprisingly left him off the ballot.
   35. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 04:40 PM (#1692668)
Nothing really noteworthy there, although Dick Young, who was famous for hating Jackie, not surprisingly left him off the ballot.

Do you know why Young hated him, Eric? He wasn't known as a racist, so I'm assuming it was Robinson's personality that grated on Young.
   36. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:00 PM (#1692714)
He wasn't known as a racist, so I'm assuming it was Robinson's personality that grated on Young.

I think it was a combination of the two. Young was a big fan of black players as long as they were the yassuh-boss type of black player. A lot of what he wrote about Robinson criticized him for being too outspoken, too temperamental, etc.

Young's very favorite player of all time was Roy Campanella.

Robinson, of course, was the anti-Campanella personalitywise. Where Campy was cute, Jackie was scary. Where Campy was cuddly, Jackie was abrasive. Where Campanella was nonconfrontational, conflict followed Jackie around like Pigpen's black cloud. Where Campy liked to do everything he could to please The Man, Jackie did everything he could to tear down The Man. Et cetera.
   37. DavidFoss Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:02 PM (#1692719)
BTW, David, do you think '69 will be the next dual HOF/HoM induction ceremonies?

Campy was HOF-1969, Berra was not until 1972. Berra had a token appearance in 1965 that delayed him (not sure why the BBWAA took an extra year on top of that, though as he went in with Koufax... not in a position to look that up right now).

Aaron-FRobinson in 1982 should be an easy one. It might happen before that, but that's one appears certain.
   38. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:06 PM (#1692727)
The writers simply passed on Berra in 1971. He was the top vote-getter in the election, but 270 votes were necessary and he only got 242.
   39. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:10 PM (#1692736)
Campy was HOF-1969, Berra was not until 1972.

Obviously, you're correct, David. I remember Berra's induction in '72, so that was my bad.

I also forgot that Johnny Bech is the only catcher ever to be elected in his first year of eligibility. Will Piazza be the second?
   40. sunnyday2 Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:11 PM (#1692742)
Berra got 242 votes in 1971 well short of the 270 needed. Cannot imagine why, except as late as '71 there may have been some prejudice about players getting in on their first time.

Ford got 255 in his first try in 1973, short of the 285 needed. That was because they wanted to elect him with the Mick in 1974, which they did by a fairly slim margin, BTW (Ford, not Mick = 284 with 274 needed).

Campy only got in on his sixth try! Snider his 7th, Reese back door, Hodges never. Cooperstown was not so impressed with the boys of summer I guess.
   41. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:11 PM (#1692743)
Theoretically, Buck Ewing was also inducted in his first year of eligibility (which was the year the HOF opened).
   42. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:14 PM (#1692747)
Ford got 255 in his first try in 1973, short of the 285 needed. That was because they wanted to elect him with the Mick in 1974, which they did by a fairly slim margin, BTW (Ford, not Mick = 284 with 274 needed).

Will there be more of this kind of strategic HOF voting in 2011, to get Bagwell and Biggio in together? Bagwell is clearly toast, while Biggio is clearly not. (Five years ago, we all expected it would be vice versa.)
   43. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:16 PM (#1692758)
Also, and pardon me if this has been discussed elsewhere, but it kind of blows that the HOM has been reduced to a drop-down selection instead of the formerly prominent sidebar link on the site.
   44. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:18 PM (#1692762)
Thanks, Eric, though I'm not comfortable with the Campy-as-Stefin Fetchit image, however. He was certainly no where near as confrontational as Jackie, but his Italian father may have been the reason for that. I see Campanella in the Lou Gehrig-Joe DiMaggio corporate-type player, for better or for worse.
   45. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:22 PM (#1692768)
Also, and pardon me if this has been discussed elsewhere, but it kind of blows that the HOM has been reduced to a drop-down selection instead of the formerly prominent sidebar link on the site.

That's only temporary, Eric. I had a chat about it with Jim yesterday and he also wants a more prominent spot for us, too.
   46. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:25 PM (#1692773)
Theoretically, Buck Ewing was also inducted in his first year of eligibility (which was the year the HOF opened).

Doesn't count, Eric. :-)

The writers simply passed on Berra in 1971. He was the top vote-getter in the election, but 270 votes were necessary and he only got 242.

Once again, indicating the lack of context when comparing catchers to other position players by some.
   47. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:31 PM (#1692784)
Campanella, for better or worse, always, always went out of his way to avoid conflict and please the establishment. In that way he was very unlike DiMaggio; perhaps like Gehrig but with a lot more personality. He told everyone what they wanted to hear, particularly reporters, who loved him for it. Stepin Fetchit might be going a little bit too far; Campanella never did anything to dehumanize himself. But neither did he try to do anything to change the establishment or the world around him.

Interestingly, Campanella's son, who went to Harvard in the 1960s, grew up to be something of a black militant intellectual, much closer to Robinson's perspective than his own father's.

Also interestingly, Robinson and Campanella were always very close friends despite being about as polar opposites as two people can get.
   48. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:36 PM (#1692790)
Actually, Dontrelle Willis is about the perfect comp for Campanella, personality-wise. Friendly, loves everybody and everybody loves him, never has an unkind or critical word about anything, does his best to please the media, and just seems to be a genuinely warm, happy, intensely nonconfrontational person.
   49. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:40 PM (#1692796)
Jackie's temperament, on the other hand, was very much like Milton Bradley's without the wife beating. Intense, hard-nosed, doesn't give a flip if you don't like him, sees the media mostly as an annoyance, speaks his mind without a filter, prone to arguing with umpires, prone to getting in fights, has an extraordinary temper (although Jackie controlled his better), often sees racism both where it exists and where it does not.
   50. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:45 PM (#1692805)
But neither did he try to do anything to change the establishment or the world around him.

I've always felt that both ways (Campanella's and Robinson's) were needed in the long run. I assume there were quite a few people who looked at African-Americans differently with the Campy approach, while the Robinson approach was needed for the others.

Interestingly, Campanella's son, who went to Harvard in the 1960s, grew up to be something of a black militant intellectual, much closer to Robinson's perspective than his own father's.

Not surprising, but still interesting, Eric.

Actually, Dontrelle Willis is about the perfect comp for Campanella, personality-wise. Friendly, loves everybody and everybody loves him, never has an unkind or critical word about anything, does his best to please the media, and just seems to be a genuinely warm, happy, intensely nonconfrontational person.

That's a great comp, Eric.
   51. Steve Treder Posted: October 19, 2005 at 05:46 PM (#1692807)
I agree with your characterizations of Campanella and Robinson, Eric. The one thing I would add is that they were quite different sorts in terms of intelligence as well as temperament. Campanella certainly wasn't a dumb guy, but there was nothing about him that suggested anything more than average intellect either. Robinson, on the other hand, radiated sharp intelligence; he was almost always the smartest guy in every room, and that knowledge provided him with both confidence and frustration.
   52. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 06:11 PM (#1692834)
Here's an excerpt from a manuscript I've been working on, which may shed more light.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Campanella was a man who collected toy trains and tropical fish; Robinson was a man who kept company with writers and thinkers. While Robinson raised money for black causes by speaking at NAACP events, Campanella was selling booze at a Harlem liquor store and letting the slum tenement in which the store was housed fall into disrepair. Once, when Robinson got into an argument with an umpire, Campanella chided him: “Come on, Jackie, don’t be like that. Let’s not take any chances. It’s nice up here.” Sportswriter Milton Gross thought Campy had “the ideal personality for the furtherance of integration in baseball. Campy was meek without being humble... he was conscious of his color without being obsessive.” In 1957, when racial unrest broke out near the Dodgers’ Florida training camp, Campanella said, “I don’t like that stuff, not one bit. But you can’t make a man see things your way by banging him over the noggin with a stick.”

“Of all the Negro players the Dodgers have had, Campanella has been the easiest to handle and get along with,” Dodgers farm system official Mel Jones said in 1952. “He has an easy-going nature which immediately makes him liked by every man on the ball club. I don’t mean to infer that Roy is not aggressive. But he has learned to accept certain things, and to adjust to the various insults which his race is subjected to by some people. Those things don’t bother him the way they do Robinson. Jackie probably never will adjust to such things. His pride won’t permit it.”

Campanella was Booker T. Washington to Robinson’s W.E.B. DuBois. Or, as Robinson himself supposedly once said, “There’s a little bit of 'Tom' in Roy.”

“I’m a colored man,” Campanella said in 1957. “I know there are things I can do and things I can’t do without stirring up some people. But a few years ago there were many more things I couldn’t do than I can today. I’m willing to wait. All this came by waiting. A man got to do things the way he sees them. No other way.”
   53. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: October 19, 2005 at 06:48 PM (#1692904)
Considering the modestness of Jackie's raw career totals -- and the general social climate of the country in 1962 -- it's fairly surprising that he was the first player to be elected in his first year of eligibility.

I've looked this up and based on the voting results it seems like they changed the voting rules sometime in the mid/late 1950s. Previously it was fairly common for guys to get a handful of votes before they'd been retired for 5 years, and then explode with 40-60% or whatever after 5 years had passed. It was like the guideline was in place, but not strictly enforced. This came to an end shortly after DiMaggio got elected 3 years after retiring. IIRC, Phil Rizzuto of all people was the last guy to get an official pre-five year vote (it came to him before he stopped playing IIRC). Robinson & Feller benefitted from being the first guys to retired once they'd started strictly enforcing the five year rule. Again, this is all conjecture based on voting results - I've never looked at their rules nor how they were enforced.

Theoretically, Buck Ewing was also inducted in his first year of eligibility (which was the year the HOF opened).

Didn't they have a 19th century ballot in 1936 that elected no one?

diee - DId you ever look up who left Ruth & Cobb off their ballots?

Campanella, for better or worse, always, always went out of his way to avoid conflict and please the establishment. In that way he was very unlike DiMaggio; perhaps like Gehrig but with a lot more personality. He told everyone what they wanted to hear, particularly reporters, who loved him for it. Stepin Fetchit might be going a little bit too far; Campanella never did anything to dehumanize himself. But neither did he try to do anything to change the establishment or the world around him.

How'd this compare to Ernie Banks?
   54. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 07:00 PM (#1692918)
53.
outoforder,
Your presumption about the rule change is in fact correct -- the five-year wait was instituted in 1954, with an exception made for candidates who had already received 100+ votes in a previous election. Still, it took eight years after that for them to elect anybody in their first year of eligibility -- Jackie and Feller.

I never looked up any ballots other than tracking Robinson's and Satchel Paige's elections. Paige, FWIW, received a handful of votes each year from the late 1950s through his election in 1972, although those votes were never tabulated because he was officially ineligible for the HOF. To my knowledge, those Paige votes have never been recorded or documented anywhere other than my hard drive. Stan Isaacs of Newsday voted for Paige every year.

I do think the Banks-Campanella comparison is a pretty good one.
   55. jimd Posted: October 19, 2005 at 08:08 PM (#1693043)
Eric, you've examined actual ballots. What do they look like? Preprinted names with checkboxes, and space for write-ins? A list of eligibles? Guideline sheet with no names? Does it change over the years?

Just curious. Thanks.
   56. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 19, 2005 at 08:34 PM (#1693090)
OCF,

How did my 1962 consensus score compare to my 1961 consensus score in terms of how far from the consensus I was?

Thanks!
   57. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 10:23 PM (#1693312)
jimd,

The ballots are extremely simple, just a mimeographed sheet of paper with 11 blank lines, one for the voter's name and 10 for the players. No explanation, no voting instructions, no list of eligibles, no nothing. Of course, all that information might originally have been attached when the ballots were mailed, but not by the time I got to look at them.

Of course, I didn't bother to look at any post-1972 ballots, so all this has likely changed.

I did find it amusing that Willard Mullin had a vote.
   58. OCF Posted: October 19, 2005 at 10:40 PM (#1693335)
Year         1958  1959  1960  1961  1962
Average       -10    +1   -10   -14    +2
Dr. Chaleeko  -17    -3   -18   -19    -1

   59. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 10:46 PM (#1693349)
Eric, you've examined actual ballots. What do they look like? Preprinted names with checkboxes, and space for write-ins? A list of eligibles? Guideline sheet with no names? Does it change over the years?

How many used crayons?

I did find it amusing that Willard Mullin had a vote.

Amusing is not the word that comes to mind, Eric. :-0
   60. jimd Posted: October 19, 2005 at 10:54 PM (#1693369)
IMO, the ballot paraphenalia (or lack thereof) would have an influence on the election, particularly during the pre-encylopedia days. Guides tend to list the #1's for a year, those who come close eventually forgotten. Those who were still active, managing, coaching, etc., would have an advantage over those who went on to other occupations. Those who had been attention-getting in whatever way (positive or negative, colorful, irritating, the best at whatever, important parts of winning teams) would remain in the memory while quiet, all-around guys faded away.

In part, I'm trying to explain away the failure to elect players like Arky Vaughan, who seem so outstanding in retrospect, when contrasted to elected players like Rabbit Maranville. This would seem to provide at least part of the story.
   61. BDC Posted: October 19, 2005 at 10:57 PM (#1693379)
Campanella was Booker T. Washington to Robinson’s W.E.B. DuBois

You may want to adjust that analogy, Eric, as Robinson's politics were about a light-year to the right of DuBois's. It's not that the analogy is bad qua analogy, just that it gets confusing because the real DuBois was very much alive and politically active during Robinson's career.
   62. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 19, 2005 at 11:00 PM (#1693389)
I did find it amusing that Willard Mullin had a vote.

Amusing is not the word that comes to mind, Eric.


In fact, Willard Mullin probably contributed a lot more to the enjoyment of baseball in his time than about half (or more) of the players on that above list.
   63. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 19, 2005 at 11:07 PM (#1693397)
Campanella was Booker T. Washington to Robinson’s W.E.B. DuBois

You may want to adjust that analogy, Eric, as Robinson's politics were about a light-year to the right of DuBois's. It's not that the analogy is bad qua analogy, just that it gets confusing because the real DuBois was very much alive and politically active during Robinson's career.


Since DuBois was literally a Communist during Robinson's entire playing career, that doesn't really reveal that much about Robinson's political beliefs. He was a Republican who voted that way because of the Dixiecrat domination of the Democratic Congress, but he bolted the GOP several times in presidential races. He was a completely independent man who always called em as he saw them, beholden to no one.

In terms of politics, Campanella was a typical apolitical baseball player.
   64. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 11:26 PM (#1693426)
You may want to adjust that analogy, Eric, as Robinson's politics were about a light-year to the right of DuBois's.

Yeah, I'm aware of Robinson's politics, and Dubois's, and Washington's. It wasn't meant so much as a political policy analogy, more like comparing and contrasting the way they went about achieving their goals -- Robinson and DuBois were both brash, militant fellows who wanted equality and wanted it now, dammit. Campy and Booker T., well, not so much.

Robinson was a Republican for a number of reasons, which we've discussed at length on these boards before. Basically, it amounted to (1) He didn't like Kennedy, (2) He liked Rockefeller a lot, considered him a close friend, (3) He felt it was a slap in the face to integration that the political parties were themselves so rigidly segregated, and (4) He was very much of the pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps, if-I-made-it-then-anyone-can mentality.

Although Robinson usually supported Republicans, he considered himself an independent and did campaign for Humphrey in 1968.

FWIW, Jackie's politics were anathema even within his own family; Rachel, Sharon and David were all what you would call yellow dog Democrats. Must have made for some great dinner table conversations.
   65. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 19, 2005 at 11:30 PM (#1693433)
Also, FWIW, by the time of his death in 1972 Robinson's politics had drifted so far leftward that he sent a telegram to Nixon that not only predicted imminent, violent revolution if faster progress was not made on civil rights, but also appeared to implicitly condone said revolution.
   66. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 11:48 PM (#1693476)
In fact, Willard Mullin probably contributed a lot more to the enjoyment of baseball in his time than about half (or more) of the players on that above list.

I wouldn't be surprised if you have, too, Andy. You don't belong in the HOF or HoM, either. :-)
   67. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:13 AM (#1693497)
Just to be clear, John, Willard was a voter and not a candidate. Looking back at my original phrasing, I can see it's kinda ambidextrous. Mullin was a BBWAA member, not a potential HOFer.
   68. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:20 AM (#1693506)
Just to be clear, John, Willard was a voter and not a candidate.

Okay, I understand now, Eric. That makes a little more sense. :-)
   69. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:32 AM (#1693529)
BTW, I knew that Mullin was a great sports cartoonist. That's explains post #59 a little bit better.
   70. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: October 20, 2005 at 02:21 AM (#1693739)
Since DuBois was literally a Communist during Robinson's entire playing career

Well, I got Pillar of Fire in front of me right now and it actually gives the date for W. E. B. DuBois's application for membership in the Communist Party of the USA - 10/1/61. I'm pretty sure Robinson's career predates that. . . . Yeah, I'm being needlessly anal here.
   71. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 03:46 AM (#1693915)
Since DuBois was literally a Communist during Robinson's entire playing career

Well, I got Pillar of Fire in front of me right now and it actually gives the date for W. E. B. DuBois's application for membership in the Communist Party of the USA - 10/1/61. I'm pretty sure Robinson's career predates that. . . . Yeah, I'm being needlessly anal here.


Not anal, just technical, but I do stand corrected, and should have remembered this. OTOH, DuBois contributed to Communist publications such as Masses and Mainstream at least as early as WWII, and never expressed any dissent from anything Stalin or any other non-"revisionist" Communist leader ever did after that.

Doesn't mean for a second that he wasn't one of the major figures of the 20th century in spite of this, just that it didn't take much to be well to the right of him during his last two decades, as Robinson was.

And OK, Willard Mullin doesn't belong in the HOM, just in whatever "wing," "branch" or "special section" of the HOF that other BBWAA members have been voted into. To end on a non-controversial note, let's just say he belongs in Cooperstown more than Mark McGwire.
   72. BDC Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:44 PM (#1694164)
Well ... OK ... maybe. I just think that analogies should come from disparate fields. Like maybe, "Campanella was Counselor Troi to Robinson’s Lieutenant Worf" :)
   73. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 20, 2005 at 01:18 PM (#1694183)
Campanella was C-3P0 to Jackie's R2-D2.
   74. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 01:22 PM (#1694184)
Or just Campanella's Mr. Smiley to Robinson's Mr. Frowney.
   75. sunnyday2 Posted: October 20, 2005 at 01:23 PM (#1694186)
Ah, now we're getting to theheart of the matter!
   76. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 01:49 PM (#1694211)
To end on a non-controversial note, let's just say he belongs in Cooperstown more than Mark McGwire.

(backs away slowly from that statement) :-)

Mullin should get the Ford Frick Award or whatever, though. I definitely would back that, Andy. He was a helluva lot more greater in his profession than some past recipients of writers' award, that's for sure.

Or just Campanella's Mr. Smiley to Robinson's Mr. Frowney.

:-D
   77. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 01:58 PM (#1694218)
BTW, John, what exactly is the status of the Frick award winners? I keep reading here that they're not in the HOF, but their names are displayed there, aren't they? This always has been a confusing contradiction to me, and I wonder if someone could clear it up once and for all.
   78. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 02:20 PM (#1694252)
BTW, John, what exactly is the status of the Frick award winners? I keep reading here that they're not in the HOF, but their names are displayed there, aren't they?

They're in the museum section, Andy, but not in the Hall of Fame itself. It's the same confusion that makes Abbott & Costello as HOFers, too, since they have an exhibit in the museum section. Both sections are in the same buliding, but they have two separate functions.

IOW, Peter Gammons is not a HOFer. :-) The only writer that can claim that honor is Henry Chadwick (Ford Frick, as you know, wasn't honored for his scribe duties).
   79. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 03:45 PM (#1694426)
But to further blur the distinction, isn't the panel that elects the "Fricks" sanctioned by the HOF? It seems to me that the Fricks represent a sort of grey area between the player's plaques (real McCoy HOF) and the memorabilia such as bats, or old World Series programs (honored guests, so to speak). In this sense, I don't see anything particularly wrong with referring to Leonard Koppett or Fred Lieb as "HOF sportswriters," even if they're technically not "in" the Hall of Fame itself.
   80. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:05 PM (#1694493)
Andy, I have no problem with actually having a Writer's Wing for the HOF, but it would have to be whittled down some from what we have now with the Ford Frick Award. With the latter distinction, if your career is long enough, you have an excellent shot at "immortality," despite a lack of true greatness.

In this sense, I don't see anything particularly wrong with referring to Leonard Koppett or Fred Lieb as "HOF sportswriters," even if they're technically not "in" the Hall of Fame itself.

Koppett actually would state that he wasn't in the HOF, though his column always mentioned it at the bottom.
   81. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:12 PM (#1694515)
Yeah, they long ago started giving the Spink and Frick awards to guys who are the broadcasting and writing equivalents of Mark McLemore or Aurelio Rodriguez.

They boxed themselves into the one-guy-per-year pattern, when in reality there's nowhere near that many guys who deserve enshrinement.
   82. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:13 PM (#1694519)
BTW, the award we should have been mentioning is the Spink's, not the Frick's. Eric reminded me of that fact in another thread.

When you think about it, the Ford Frick Award should really be the Red Barber Award or something like that.
   83. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:18 PM (#1694534)
They boxed themselves into the one-guy-per-year pattern, when in reality there's nowhere near that many guys who deserve enshrinement.

Just wait till Hawk Harrelson, Bill Madden, Chris Berman, and Skip Bayless are "duly" honored.
   84. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:22 PM (#1694548)
Berman's ineligible. But I will certainly cringe when the other three get the "honor."
   85. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:28 PM (#1694565)
Buster Olney for the Hall!!!!
   86. jingoist Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:28 PM (#1694566)
I am emphatically NOT a fan of the talk radio/TV arena but must comment about stumbling onto one of those sessions on ESPN where this Skip Baylee guy was prattling on inanely to the moderator and the viewers.
A more ill-informed/unenlightened individual who derives his paycheck from espousing half-baked ideas I have never seen.
What does a guy like Baylees do to get hired?
Does he have photos of key ESPN executives with animals?
Who would consider watching more than a passing few minutes of such prattle?
   87. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 04:31 PM (#1694580)
Berman's ineligible.

He'll get in. Just wait and see, Eric. :-)
   88. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:01 PM (#1694662)
Eric, is Berman really ineligible? He does announce baseball games, so he has the proper requisite. Has he made a "major contribution to baseball?" No, but that certainly wont stop them from voting him in judging from other past honorees.
   89. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:19 PM (#1694694)
Andy, I have no problem with actually having a Writer's Wing for the HOF, but it would have to be whittled down some from what we have now with the Ford Frick Award. With the latter distinction, if your career is long enough, you have an excellent shot at "immortality," despite a lack of true greatness.

That is a problem. I would begin with ten writers (just for argument's sake, Spink, Lieb, Koppett, James (I know he's technically not a "writer," but nevertheless), Runyon, Heinz, Angell (see James comment), Sam Lacy, Wendell Smith, and Lester Rodney, and pray that it doesn't go too downhill from there. But I'm afraid that large masses of human beings are hardwired to reward long-lived mediocrity and timeclock-punching, especially when the ones being so rewarded are their lifelong friends.
   90. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:30 PM (#1694729)
A friend of mine who works at the HOF has proposed having an annual lifetime achievement award, equivalent to Frick and Spink, for "Significant Cultural Contribution to Baseball" or something like that. This could honor not only those writers ineligible for the Spink award (James, Angell, Bouton, Ritter), but also people like Willard Mullin, Ron Shelton, Charles Conlon, Buck O'Neil, etc.

I think it's a good idea.
   91. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:31 PM (#1694730)
I would begin with ten writers (just for argument's sake, Spink, Lieb, Koppett, James (I know he's technically not a "writer," but nevertheless), Runyon, Heinz, Angell (see James comment), Sam Lacy, Wendell Smith, and Lester Rodney

Others might argue about your ten, Andy, but I don't see any Joe Falls here, so that's a plus already. :-)

Going over the honorees for the Spink and Frick Awards, my feeling is that the percentage of quality recipients is higher with the former than with the latter. Which makes sense since there have been more of the former than the latter.
   92. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:36 PM (#1694748)
I think it's a good idea.

I like it, too, Eric, as long as we don't get to the point that Kevin Costner and Billy Crystal are recipients. :-0
   93. The definitely immoral Eric Enders Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:38 PM (#1694756)
Much as Costner annoys me, I don't see how anyone could argue that he would not be a worthy recipient.
   94. BDC Posted: October 20, 2005 at 08:10 PM (#1695155)
The Cultural Hall should induct Mark Harris, while he is still alive.
   95. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 20, 2005 at 08:25 PM (#1695183)
I think it's a good idea.


Me too: Dr. Chaleeko for the Hall!
   96. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 08:34 PM (#1695202)
A friend of mine who works at the HOF has proposed having an annual lifetime achievement award, equivalent to Frick and Spink, for "Significant Cultural Contribution to Baseball" or something like that. This could honor not only those writers ineligible for the Spink award (James, Angell, Bouton, Ritter), but also people like Willard Mullin, Ron Shelton, Charles Conlon, Buck O'Neil, etc.

I think it's a good idea.


I second the idea, though also with John's caveat.

And no Kevin Costner, or the wolf he rode in on.
   97. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 20, 2005 at 08:43 PM (#1695225)
Bill James
Bernard Malmud
W.P. Kinsella
HOK Architects
Jim Beckett?

Does Marvin Miller qualify here?
Curt Flood?
   98. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 20, 2005 at 09:07 PM (#1695282)
Jim Beckett?

The baseball card price guide guy who helped to take a children's hobby and hand it over to an industry of magnifying glass-wielding yuppies? That Jim Beckett?
   99. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 20, 2005 at 09:14 PM (#1695300)
That's why I put a question mark there. Some folks would like it; some folks wouldn't. I'm on the fence myself.

Oh, there's an obvious one I forgot!

Max Patkin!!!!
   100. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 20, 2005 at 10:39 PM (#1695456)
Max Patkin!!!!

Without a doubt, Eric.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 1.0015 seconds
49 querie(s) executed