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

Monday, October 24, 2005

Sal Maglie

Eligble in 1964.

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 24, 2005 at 02:42 AM | 54 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 24, 2005 at 03:40 PM (#1701355)
Shave and a haircut...two bits!
   2. karlmagnus Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:00 PM (#1701391)
Double the visible career, and he's 238-124, in 3446 innings, with an ERA+ of 126, in other words HOM with a little to spare. The question is: to what extent is it reasonable to double the visible career?
   3. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:10 PM (#1701411)
Copying in post 111 from the Re-eva NgLPs thread with a little bit of editing and some league information added.

Maglie pitched very well in the Mexican league in 1946 and 1947:

Maglie
1946, age 29
20-12, 21 CG, 285.33 INN, 118/92 K/BB, 3.19 ERA
LgERA: 3.94, LgK/BB: .92

1947, age 30
20-13, 37 GS, 22 CG, 285 INN, 105/108 K/BB, 3.92 ERA
LgERA: 3.96, Lg K/BB: .74

When Maglie returned to the majors in 1950 (after serving the remainder of his suspension for playing in Mexico), his age 33-35 seasons went
18-4, 2.71, 206 INN, 151 ERA+
23-6, 2.93, 298 INN, 134 ERA+
18-8, 2.92, 216 INN, 127 ERA+

His Mexican numbers strongly echo what he did in the majors (and vise versa). His debut year was 1945 at age 28, making me wonder if he was in the war. If so, his case my be remarkably interesting to puzzle out, perhaps even unique among HOM pitchers.
   4. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:19 PM (#1701417)
Maglie pitched both Mexican seasons for Puebla, and during those seasons, it appears to be an essentially neutral park (at least for runs).

Also, in 1947, Maglie looks a little unlucky in the ERA department in as much as he was well above the league in K/BB. His H/9 rates were 7.99 (1946) and 9.15 (1947)---the former well below the lg avg (9.78), the latter around the league average (9.35), but a bit below.
   5. BDC Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:28 PM (#1701434)
From the Niagara Falls Reporter:

"Maglie had a brief stint in the minors in 1941, but after the United States entered World War II that December, he took a defense-related job in Welland [Ontario] and the military exemption that went along with it. While Maglie worked, and played baseball in the industrial leagues for a Canadian company, hundreds of stars and prospects served and fought."
   6. DavidFoss Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:31 PM (#1701441)
His debut year was 1945 at age 28, making me wonder if he was in the war. If so, his case my be remarkably interesting to puzzle out, perhaps even unique among HOM pitchers.

Yup. From this link

"Sal Maglie got off to a slow start. He first played minor league ball in 1938, at the age of 21. The next several years saw him climb the ladder in the minors, but he spent several years away from baseball during World War II, working in a defense-related position. At the age of 28 he made it to the New York Giants in 1945."

The transactions at bb-ref tell a similar story. He was bouncing around between the CLE, DET and NYG organizations as well as Buffalo of the International League. I don't have access to his minor league numbers, but they should be findable.

Tough case. The MeL is extrapolation as it is. Extrapolation of war credit beyond that is going to be a tough sell.
   7. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:38 PM (#1701456)
His debut year was 1945 at age 28, making me wonder if he was in the war. If so, his case my be remarkably interesting to puzzle out, perhaps even unique among HOM pitchers.

I forget who pointed it out here last year, but I think the Barber took some time to develop in the minors. His story doesn't appear to be one of a quality pitcher getting stuck in the minors prior to 1945.

Still, he may have a case for the HoM even without any minor league credit. How many hurlers have had the success that Maglie had age 33 and beyond?
   8. sunnyday2 Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:44 PM (#1701465)
Where does 238-124 come from?

Oh it's double 119-62, his actual WL, and double his actual 1723 IP.

1945 age 28 5-4, 167 ERA+ in 84 IP
1950-52 age 33-35 59-18 (!), 151-134-127 in 720 IP
1953-58 age 36-41 55-40, 124-138 in only ERA eligible seasons, in 919 IP

ML totals 119-62, 127 in 1723 IP in 303 G (232 GS)

So 1) where was he during the war? Is there any reason to think he deserves WWII XC? 2) was his suspension 2 full years? Did he pitch somewhere? Do we give him credit even if he didn't pitch (a la Charley Jones)?

Let's say that he gets 2 years of war credit and full credit for 2 years suspended and let's assume he goes 80-40, 150 through all of those years. This has to be a best case. (And give him 100% credit for the MxL, just for the sake of argument.) Now he's about:

Maglie+ 239-127, .653, 139, 3240 IP
Ford 236-106, .690, 133, 3170 IP
Newhouser 207-150, .580, 130, 2993 IP
Koufax 165-87, .655, 131, 2324 IP
M. Brown 239-130, .648, 137, 3172 IP

Of course Maglie+ is at this point a figment of my (and karl's) imagination. So 1) does he deserve any WWII XC? 2) And can somebody fill us in on the suspension? Is there any argument for credit for those 2 missing years?

If the answers are yes and yes, this suggests he is absolutely a candidate. If he gets only half that much credit and of course his MxL numbers should be adjusted at about .9, then what. Then

Maglie+- 195-104, .652, 134, 2600 IP

Which is still pretty good.
   9. Chris Cobb Posted: October 24, 2005 at 04:52 PM (#1701484)
So Maglie was in the majors in 1945, in Mexico in 1946 and 1947, and back in the majors in 1950.

Where was he pitching, and how well, in 1948 and 1949?

Double the visible career, and he's 238-124, in 3446 innings, with an ERA+ of 126, in other words HOM with a little to spare. The question is: to what extent is it reasonable to double the visible career?

We probably have the data to project him a bit more precisely than just extrapolationg from his ML play, but it terms of volume, it's reasonable to project him for between 800 and 1000 innings 1946-49, depending on what we learn about his play in 1948-9. That increases his career by 50-55%. To increase his career any more than that would entail giving him WWII credit. He was clearly not ready for the majors in 1941 but more than ready in 1945.

It seems to me that some war credit is called for, but how much?
   10. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 05:26 PM (#1701537)
I just did a little reading at my lunch hour. Here's Maglie's career in four acts.

ACT I---RISING UP
Maglie signed late in life (age 21) with a minor league team and posted good seasons in various stops including the Eastern League. He was drafted by NYG and promoted to Jersey City of the IL in 1942.

ACT II---THE WAR YEARS
He returned to the Niagra Falls area to work in the defense industry, 1943-1944, and may have played in the local industrial leagues as well. He returned to Jersey City in 1945 and was promoted to the big leagues.

ACT III---THE EXILE
He signed with the Mexican League in 1946 and was promptly banished from baseball (with all the other jumpers). He pitched very well for two seasons with Puebla (numbers above), then returned to the states. In 1948, he is said to have opened a filling station, having no organized ball to play as a blacklistee. In 1949, he went to Quebec's outlaw Provincial League, where several other jumpers as well as Negro Leaguers went, temporarily making the league of reasonably good quality. Maglie turned in an 18-9 record for 1949, easily pacing the circuit in wins. (Teammate Max Lanier went 8-1, by the by). [thanks to Christien for these numbers.]

ACT IV---THE HOMECOMING
Maglie was un-blacklisted by 1950 and returned to the Giants. He was placed in rotation by Leo Durocher and had a great year, beginning the run that would make him one of the better pitchers of the 1950s.
   11. DanG Posted: October 24, 2005 at 05:29 PM (#1701547)
From Baseball Library:

"Now classified as Triple-A, the Mexican League is regarded in Mexico as the domestic major league. There have actually been six Mexican leagues of note. The first was an outlaw circuit directed by Jorge Pasquel from the late 1930s until 1953. Having major league ambitions, Pasquel stocked his teams with Negro League greats, then raided the U.S. major leagues for additional talent when a player surplus and pay cuts there followed the WWII player shortage. Pasquel's raids netted 23 ML regulars, most of whom jumped to the Quebec Provincial League in 1948-49, and were reinstated by the majors in June 1949. Struggling financially, Pasquel's league dissolved in 1953. The northern clubs merged into the Arizona-Texas and Arizona-Mexico leagues of 1953-57. The Mexican League proper reorganized in 1955, and has operated continuously since."

Players who jumped were blackballed by MLB. Besides Maglie, some other players of note are Mickey Owen, Max Lanier and Ace Adams.
   12. sunnyday2 Posted: October 24, 2005 at 05:36 PM (#1701558)
Thanks, Doc. My fairly conservative approach would be to give him the additional 1.5 years (1944 and other half of 1945) during WWII. As was said, he was more than ready in 1945 but can't say he was ready in '42. 1943 up in the air but again I am conservative with this.

As for '48-'49, it would appear that he absolutely should be given credit for playing during those years.

So overall he looks pretty close to being the player karl posited and that I described as Maglie+. Being a big fan of ERA+, he will get a looong look from me, and just off the top his ERA+ and IP (including XC) looks like it makes him a top 10 pitcher. But #2 or #10, who knows right now?
   13. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 05:45 PM (#1701571)
Taking the narrative and thinking about credit....

There's two different places to assign credit, right? 1943-1945 and 1946-1949.

The second one is much easier to deal with. Maglie was pitching in a high-level league in 1946 and 1947 (a league his participation in was supposed to help make major), and he was pitching in the highest league available to him in 1949. So at the very least, a case can be built for those three seasons. I would argue for 1948 as well to be consistent with Charley Jones or Tony Mullane, or anyone like that who's been given a blackballing when they've tried to exercise their rights in the free market.

So you'd have to figure, as Chris suggests, that from the records Maglie put up, we're talking about 800 or more innings for 1946-1949.


But then there's the question of 1943-1945. To give credit for these seasons is to say that Maglie was clearly, obviously, beyond the shadow of a doubt ready for the big leagues and that the war interefered with his climbing the ladder.


Was he ready? In 1945, after his callup, he pitched 84 innings with a 167 ERA+. Nothing in his stat line is way out of place with his other MLB seasons, especially when you consider that this, his age-28 season, would have been a peak/prime year from a baseball-age point of view. Further considering his subsequent Mexican performance and his 1950 full-year MLB performance (151 ERA+), there's a very strong case to be made for his being very obviously ready.

But how much did the war push him back? I'd reckon at least 1/2 season to start with. Somone with the IL encyclopedia should look up his Jersey City numbers (mine's at home, and I won't be home until after 8 pm tonight), but I think he only spent 1.5 years in the IL (1942 and 1945). In the intervening years he was not facing advanced competition to hone his game against, so if his numbers for 1942 and 1945 in the IL are indicate readiness, there's a real strong case to be made that Maglie merits as little as 1/2 year or as much as 2.5 years of WW2xc. Or to put another way, 100 to 500 innings of xc.
   14. sunnyday2 Posted: October 24, 2005 at 06:28 PM (#1701670)
There's an article about the Provincial League in a recent SABR publication: "Dominionball: Baseball Above the 49th." Maglie pitched for the Drummondville Cubs for $600 a month.

Drumnmondville also had Quincy Trouppe, ex-NYG Danny Gardella and Roy Zimmerman, Max Lanier and Vic Power (who played under the name Victor Pellot). Drummondville won the pennant by 9 games and Maglie wentg 18-9.

In the play-offs Drummondville took a semi-final series as Maglie beat Walter Brown, formerly of the St. Louis Browns, in the final game. In the finals against Farnham, Maglie threw a 4-hit, 2-0 shutout in game 5. After 8 games of a best-of-9, it was 4-4. Maglie, who was 4-0 with a save in 5 starts in the play-offs, would pitch game 9.

Willie Pope, former NeLer, pitched for Farnham. Maglie gave up an inside-the-park HR to Al Wilson as Power and Gardella, in CF and RF, misplayed his fly ball. Farnham led 1-0 into the 7th, but Drummondville scored 5 and won 5-1. Maglie gave up 4 hits and struck out 10. Sal won 5 of the Cubs' 10 play-off wins.

Then there's another article with a little more info. In 1948, Bobby Estalella hit .375 for St-Jean. NeLers Joe Atkins and Willie Pope also played for Farnham. Bus Clarkson hit .399 with 28 HR for St-Hyacinthe.

In 1949, along with Maglie and Lanier, Alex Carrasquel and Lou Klein joined St-Jean, and Woody Williams St-Hyacinthe. Happy Chandler reinstated the "jumpers" in June and most bolted the PL, including Lanier, but Maglie was paid $20,000 to stay on. A half dozen American MiLers are mentioned as coming into the PL at that time.

Most of the players are described as local Canadians, or guys who came up from the MxL.

PS. Maurice "The Rocket" Richard played 3B for Drummondville in 1947 and hit .241. Just before WWII, Del Bissonnette, Joe Boley, Pete Gray, Pinky Hargrave and Wally Schang played iin the PL. Bissonnette was a Quebecois. Schang caught a few games at age 51
   15. jimd Posted: October 24, 2005 at 07:59 PM (#1701845)
How many hurlers have had the success that Maglie had age 33 and beyond?

Age 33 and beyond:
Maglie 114-58 1639 IP 125 ERA+
Vance 161-109 2407 IP 130 ERA+

He's a definite cut below Vance, though that hardly disqualifies Sal.
   16. jimd Posted: October 24, 2005 at 08:46 PM (#1701935)
A few more comps:
Ruffing 121-55 1543 IP 1.26 ERA+
Haines 114-67 1596 IP 1.13 ERA+
Moyer 146-76 2023 IP 1.14 ERA+

Ruffing is at about the same level, Haines and Moyer another cut below (though Moyer is quite durable).
   17. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 08:50 PM (#1701942)
Here's a chart of the top WS-getters from age 33 onward, pitchers only. These are raw WS, by the way.

TOP 50 PITCHERS, WS AGE 33 ONWARD
NAME            WS
------------------
1.  Young      303
2.  Niekro     267
3.  Spahn      233
4.  Perry      215
5.  Alexander  210
6.  Vance      205
7.  Quinn      203
8.  Wilhelm    197
9.  Hough      170
10. Wynn       169
11. Grove      166
12. Plank      165
13. Ryan       161
14. R Johnson  155 (through 2002)
15. John       152
16. Faber      151
17. Carlton    149
18. Clemens    148 (through 2002)
19. Rixey      140
20. Lyons      138
21. W Johnson  136
22. D Martinez 134
23. Leonard    133
24. Gibson     132
25. Kinder     131
    Ruffing    131
27. MAGLIE     130
28. R Sewell   129
29. Sutton     124
30. Hubbell    121
31. Adams      120
32. Eckersley  119
33. Seaver     117
34. Koosman    116
35. Haines     115
    Moyer      115 (through 2002)
    Tiant      115
38. McGinnity  114
    Niekro     114
39. Blyleven   113
40. Reynolds   112
41. Grimes     111
42. 3 Brown    110
43. S S Jones  107
    Root       107
45. Cu Davis   106
46. Cicotte    105
47. D Wells    104 (through 2002)
    Kermer     104
49. Bunning    103
50. Kaat       102

So Maglie falls right in the middle of this list, which means he's in some very elite company. There are HOMers (or probable HOMERs) above him, and beneath him.

This backs up JimD's claim also that although Maglie wasn't unprecedentedly good, he was nonetheless stellar.
   18. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 09:01 PM (#1701964)
Some thinking aloud about how credit could work for Maglie.

Maglie earned 139 career win shares over 1722 MLB innings. That's about 8.5 per 100 hundres. If you credit him with 800 innings for 46-49, that's 65 WS (rounding up). If he also gets 1.5 years credit for the war at 200 IP per year, that's another 300 innings and 24 WS by his career rate.

CURRENT WS TOTAL: 139
WITH 1946-1949 CREDIT: 204
WITH WAR-TIME CREDIT: 228

I think that using his career rate might undersell him a bit since all we have of him is his decline phase, in addition, I think his 1946-1949 rate should probably be applied to more than 800 innings. He actually pitched 570 in Mexico alone. And I'm guessing in Quebec he probably also hurled 200+ to go 18-9. I think 900-950 innings might be a more realistic total.

Let's call it 925, now we're at 75 WS for 1946-1949, which would raise his career total above to 238.

Again just noodling on this theme---personally I don't know yet how I'll handle this for my ballot. MLEs will help clear a lot of this up, and they should be pretty straightforward, right?
   19. sunnyday2 Posted: October 24, 2005 at 09:21 PM (#1701990)
His is a complex case because it's a peak case and his peak was not all in the MLs. I don't give peak credit for years a player didn't play (e.g. WWII), but he was pitching 1946-49, so MLEs will be everything. I mean he's got 3 great years, but needs 2 more to have much of a case. If his MxL and PL record translates to >151<167 like his bookend ML seasons, then he is for real. This is more like Monte Irvin than anybody else. Or dare I say, Luke Easter. Except without the MiLs.
   20. Cblau Posted: October 24, 2005 at 09:36 PM (#1702017)
1945 IL
3-7, no ERA listed. 88 IP, 91 H, 33 W, 41 K
Most of his teammates had more walks than K's; twice as many in some cases. Hits per inning similar to most of his teammates.

1942 IL
Relieved in 43 games, started 7. 165 IP, 2.78 ERA (3rd on team.) 142 H, 74 W, 92 K. He was clearly worse than his teammate the immortal Ray Coombs, who led the league with a 1.99 ERA in 258 IP. K/W ratios were closer to even.
   21. sunnyday2 Posted: October 24, 2005 at 10:02 PM (#1702055)
>3-7, no ERA listed. 88 IP, 91 H, 33 W, 41 K
Most of his teammates had more walks than K's; twice as many in some cases. Hits per inning similar to most of his teammates.

They musta been using the real strike zone!

1.41 WHIP in 88 IP in AAA followed by 1.15 in the bigs! How did they know he could pitch?

Coombs BTW (real name Raymond Franklin but widely known as Bobby) threw 21 G in the bigs in 1933 and 9 more in...1943. No starts. 0-2, 9.32 in 47.1 IP. OOB .448.
   22. TomH Posted: October 24, 2005 at 10:23 PM (#1702077)
I dunno guys, his MLB record doesn't impress me as much.
---Seems like his mates played pretty good defense, based on my look at personnel (some guy named Mays) and BP numbers. Check out his 1954; he posted a 124 ERA+, but most of his teammates' ERAs were better (Sal 0.19 worse than rest of team).
---Not an innings-eater (finished in top 5 only once).
---Not a long career.
---No bonus points for good bat or great post-season performance.

Can someone post his Win Share career and rate numbers please?
   23. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 24, 2005 at 11:27 PM (#1702169)
Can someone post his Win Share career and rate numbers please?

WS: 139
WS/162 Games: 22.35*

* That's what I come up with using James' formula (WS/((Games Started + (Relief App. / 2)) / 43)). However, I can't get my totals to match the ones in the NBJHA, so I don't know if I'm screwing something up or not. Maybe Mike Webber might know since he works for the big guy. :-)
   24. karlmagnus Posted: October 24, 2005 at 11:41 PM (#1702181)
'42 and '45 figures suggest he definitely isn't twice his visble career, but 47-49 suggests he probably is 150% of it. Borderline, slightly below, I think.
   25. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 25, 2005 at 02:12 AM (#1702276)
A little more on the IL numbers
1942
Maglie's K/BB was 1.24; league was 1.04
League R/G was 4.22

1945
Maglie's K/BB was 1.24; league was .74

Also, he played in Cuba.
1945-1946 he went 9-6 (.600) in 20 G and 9 CG for Cienfuegos (team .617).

1947-1948 in the Players Federation, he went 11-9 (.550) in 23 G and 18 CG for Cuba (.509) and 2-3 (.400) in 3 G 2CG for Alacranees (.483).
   26. Howie Menckel Posted: October 25, 2005 at 04:38 PM (#1703137)
Maglie only cleared 220 IP once, and was only in top 10 in IP in a season once, both in 1951. And that's with a 134 ERA+ in a year when Jansen, Roe, and Spahn also have a good case to claim that they were the best NL pitcher.
Sal wasn't even in that conversation in any other year, unless I overlooked something. Usually you had guys with similar ERA+s and 100 more IP, which is way better of course.
Starting 20 to 30 games in that era just doesn't get it done, even if you pitch quite well.
   27. OCF Posted: October 29, 2005 at 06:12 AM (#1710251)
For Maglie's major league time, his RA+-Pythpat record is 117-75. Others near that number of equivalent FWP: the first (and lesser) Dutch Leonard, Firpo Marberry, Tom Zachary, Allie Reynolds, Rey Kremer. His best year was 1951, at an equivalent 21-12. He did have an unusually high number of IP per decision, at 9.52, so some extra decisions show up in his equivalent record.

I've gotten used to writing "AL" or "NL" in the first year of someone's career and copying that label all the way through - up through now, people just don't change leagues. In that contexts, it was rather startling to see Maglie's four mid-season leaugue changes in four seasons.
   28. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 29, 2005 at 03:26 PM (#1710390)
So what's anyone think xcwise about Maglie's 1946-1949 years? How much? 600 innings? 700 innings? 800 innings? 900 innings? 1000 innings? And at what kind of ERA+? Keeping in mind that these seasons fall roughly when he would be peaking.
   29. Flynn Posted: October 29, 2005 at 03:34 PM (#1710408)
Possessor of one of the all-time great curveballs.
   30. Mister High Standards Posted: November 09, 2005 at 05:49 PM (#1725072)
As someone who really only reads the HOM for players who specifically interest me I thought I would ask a questions.

Why would Maglie get credit for 47-49? He was banned from the league because of a course of action he took. This wasn't a situation like negro leaguers or a war, this is a player who specifically took action that led to his black listing. In essence he decided to trade legacy for currency.
   31. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: November 09, 2005 at 05:58 PM (#1725084)
Why should Maglie be penalized for offering his services on the open market? Isn't capitalism what supposedly makes America great? And the ultimate expression of a capitalist vision is an open global market, yes? So why should Maglie be penalized for accepting a more competitive salary?

Wouldn't anyone take the better salary?

He was blacklisted (with the other guys who did the same) because their actions threatened MLB's hegemonic and anti-competitive position in the marketplace, not because they did something terrible to besmirch the game. Where's RICO when you needed it?
   32. Mister High Standards Posted: November 09, 2005 at 06:14 PM (#1725106)
Wouldn't anyone take the better salary?

No. Most people don't at the drop of a dime change jobs willy nilly. They realize that with every job comes pluses and minuses, and they make the choice that offers them the best match for their specific wants and desires. The downside of the mexican league compared to MLB was prestige, and level of competition.

Basicly while I have no personal problem with Maglie doing what he did, nor do I think he should be villified for it. However, I don't think he should be given "what if" credit for it either.

In other words while I don't fault him for taking the money, he made a choice to play in relative obscurity, against inferer competition. The choice had costs and they should be recognized not ignored.

Also I think it's important to recognize that Maglie choice very well might have been bad for the game as we know it. If more players followed Maglie's path they no doubt would have been better off for it personally, however, the fabric of this game could be very different, perhaps with major league baseball falling into NHL level obscurity, and that concerns me. Perhaps I'm being a bit overly dramtic, but the "what if" game can be played both ways. Again I don't think the player should be punnished for it, but he shouldn't be rewarded either.
   33. andrew siegel Posted: November 09, 2005 at 06:26 PM (#1725119)
I agree with Dr. Chaleeko--but, more importantly, it's not extra credit--the guy was pitching and pitching at an elite level. Our job here is to figure out who the best players were, not who put up the best stats for the 30 franchises who call themselves Major League Baseball. 99% of the time, the best players are playing for those teams. And a substantial percentage of the remaining 1% are obscured from our view b/c/ we have never heard of the guys or can't be sure of their abilities b/c/ they never played against better competition. But when a guy who was a great major league pitcher chose to pitch elsewhere and put up numbers consistent with being a great major league pitcher, noting those seasons is giving him credit, not extra credit.
   34. Mister High Standards Posted: November 09, 2005 at 06:40 PM (#1725133)
What the heck? Where did my reply go. Darn it. I'm sure I'll forget something now. Yup this post isn't nearly as good as the one which got eated.

Wouldn't anyone take the better salary?

The answer is of course no. Most people don't change jobs at the drop of a dime. They realize that with each specific employer there are pros and cons, and they make a choice to change employers based on their specific goals, needs, wants ect. Not just total dollars. I don't harbor any personal ill will towards Maglie for making the choice he did, but with it comes cons. Playing in a lower quality league and with less prestige,.

Also their is a hidden cost, that while it doesn't specific effect him it effects the population. If more players jumped the course of baseball as we know it could have changed, with baseball potentially falling into irrelevance similar to that of the NHL. Perhaps I'm being overly dramatic in the potential effects of mass exodus, however, mlb owners too steps to protect their investment, which intentionally or not protected the interests of the general public.

To be clear I don't vilify Maglie, nor hold anything against him. But I don't think he should be punished, nor do I think he should be rewarded. His career should evaluated in terms of his mlb contribution, like every other player who made a choice to play some where else. Its not a Grove situation where he was forced, or a Negro league situation. It is more like a Roberto Petegine situation where he chose to play in Japan rather than the US.
   35. Mister High Standards Posted: November 09, 2005 at 06:46 PM (#1725143)
Andrew - How many Cuban greats have been elected to Hall of Merit? How many have been on the ballot? How many Japanesse greats?

The precedent weather deliberate or unintentional is that MLB production is the baseline except in cases beyond the control of the player. At least that’s how I interpret it from 30,000 feet away. Perhaps I'm missing something.
   36. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: November 09, 2005 at 07:14 PM (#1725189)
Is it possible to go beyond the raw numbers?

I don't see how you can give Maglie any extra credit for his years in Mexico and in exile, since they were either a result of a conscious decision he made or a byproduct of it. That dosn't mean that I agree with the blacklisting for a second, only that he chose to skip the Majors in the first place.

OTOH, between 1950 and 1956 he was either the best or a close second best pitcher on a series of teams which won three pennants against teams with superior overall talent. He had one bad start in four World Series appearances.

And talk about clutch---Maglie's teams were involved in five tight pennant races in his career. Here's his record against his team's key rivals in those races:

1950: vs. Phila 3-0; vs. Bkln. 4-0
1951: vs. Bkln. 5-1
1952: vs. Bkln. 6-2
1954: vs. Bkln. 4-2; vs. Milw. 2-1
1956 (with Brooklyn): vs. Milw. 2-0; vs. Cinci. 3-2

That's a total of 29 and 8 against the very teams which were involved in tooth-and-nail fights with Maglie's teams in those five years.

Meanwhile, Warren Spahn ducked the Dodgers the way a mobster ducks a summons server. Spahn went entire years without even tippy-toeing on the field against the Dodgers.

I'm not saying that Maglie should necessarily be in the HOM, but I'd like to see any other pitcher match those percentages in the most important head-to-head games of his career.
   37. Mister High Standards Posted: November 09, 2005 at 07:20 PM (#1725202)
Andy - Good stuff. Personally I put a ton of weight on things of that ilk.
   38. Gary A Posted: November 09, 2005 at 07:26 PM (#1725212)
Anybody feel free to jump in and correct me, but this is my understanding: the idea behind the HOM is to figure out who the best players were, regardless of where they played. That's the baseline. Since Maglie was playing in a well-documented league for 1947-49, the fact that Organized Baseball at the time had banned him for jumping his contract is trivial and has nothing to do with how *good* he was. In fact, that would put him at a disadvantage vis-a-vis players in other eras who played under less restrictive contractual situations, or even, say, his Negro League contemporaries--many of whom effectively jumped their Negro League teams to join Latin American teams or, eventually, white baseball. The Negro Leagues just didn't have the clout or money to do much of anything about it.

Declaring Maglie's Mexican League career valueless because of his legal situation would be without precedent in the HOM, as far as I can tell. The closest precedents would be the Black Sox players and Charley Jones, I suppose--and it seems like plenty of voters give Jones credit for his blacklisted years, and I think a couple give Cicotte credit for a few post-1920 years (Jackson didn't need it, and it's arguable how relevant this is to Cicotte, who was 36 in his last season anyway).

The only restriction on HOM membership is that a player must have played some substantial time in North America, in order to preserve the parallel with the actual HOF. Play in leagues elsewhere, however, can be counted for purposes of establishing the player's quality--which is really what's most important.
   39. Gary A Posted: November 09, 2005 at 07:33 PM (#1725224)
Correction on Maglie: from Doc's post above, he played in the MxL in '46-'47, and in the Quebec Provincial League in '49, but nowhere in '48. Since it seems he wasn't playing at all in '48, it would be up to individual voters to decide to credit him or not (as in the case of Charley Jones, although Jones may well have been playing somewhere while blacklisted--I don't know the details there).

Another point: in those leagues Maglie played against and alongside several Negro Leaguers whose years in those leagues form important parts of their career records. It would be a little strange, wouldn't it, to say that their play counts but Maglie's doesn't?
   40. sunnyday2 Posted: November 09, 2005 at 08:17 PM (#1725301)
Just for the record, I am absolutely with Doc and Gary. It doesn't matter where Maglie pitched or why. (One could even argue it doesn't matter IF he pitched, but in this particular case we don't need to go there.) What matters is whether he was one of the X best pitchers ever, or more to the point really, whether he is one of the 15 best players available to put on a ballot in a given year.

Any and all evidence is welcome toward this end. And in his case, it is not extra credit, it is simply giving credit for the innings that he pitched.
   41. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: November 09, 2005 at 10:34 PM (#1725564)
And if Sal's case allows the puny and petulant little would-be radical in me to hurl anti-corporate invectives at a bunch of anti-competitive, anti-worker, profit-puffing, fat-cat reactionaries, all the better! (Even if they're all dead.)
   42. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: November 09, 2005 at 11:02 PM (#1725602)
Anybody feel free to jump in and correct me, but this is my understanding: the idea behind the HOM is to figure out who the best players were, regardless of where they played.

Correct, Gary.

As for Latin American and Japanese players, Joe's idea was to set up an alternate Hall of Fame. To do that, we would need to look at players who performed in the major leagues and the NeL only (though Black Latin American players are eligible if their color denied them an opportunity to play in the Negro Leagues). Going outside of Cooperstown's range of eligible candidates would distort the comparitive effect of Joe's vision.

We do hope to set up another wing of the HoM that will address the players not eligible at the present time, however.
   43. favre Posted: November 09, 2005 at 11:26 PM (#1725643)
Maglie's Mexican league totals:

1946: 285.3 IP, 124 ERA+
1947: 285 IP, 101 ERA+

The ERA+ is how Maglie pitched compared to the rest of the *Mexican* league; they are not adjusted to the ML, because I have absolutely no idea how I would do that. His innings pitched totals are high; they would have been 1st in the NL in '46, 2nd in '47, although I don't know how many games there were in a MexL season. I don't know what a 124 ERA+ in the '46 Mexican league is going to look like in the '46 NL; I know a 101 ERA+ MexL comes out below league average in the NL. IOW, Maglie seems to have pitched a lot, but not particularly well, certainly not in'47. Given Maglie's small career totals, even giving him credit for those years doesn't really make his case.
   44. OCF Posted: November 10, 2005 at 12:00 AM (#1725705)
A short paraphrase of favre's point; of course it all counts - the Mexican League, the Quebec Provincial League - but put it all together with his major league record, and it's not enough to put him on my ballot.
   45. Mister High Standards Posted: November 10, 2005 at 01:43 AM (#1725796)
John - I guess I see a liitle logical disconnect. If the mandate doesnt cover foriegn leagues, then Malgie's foriegn league exposure shouldn't be a plus or a negative.
   46. sunnyday2 Posted: November 10, 2005 at 02:16 AM (#1725816)
MHS, it's all pretty clear to the voters. We are electing a North American HoF. But anybody who played in North America gets to have their entire record considered. Players who never played in North America a not being considered for the simple reason that they were not considered for the Coop. And as a practical matter, each of us personally lacks the bandwidth to become experts in Japanese baseball and/or whatever whatever.
   47. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: November 10, 2005 at 04:05 AM (#1725935)
MHS, it's all pretty clear to the voters. We are electing a North American HoF. But anybody who played in North America gets to have their entire record considered. Players who never played in North America a not being considered for the simple reason that they were not considered for the Coop. And as a practical matter, each of us personally lacks the bandwidth to become experts in Japanese baseball and/or whatever whatever.

Marc summed it up pretty good, Matt.
   48. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: November 10, 2005 at 12:36 PM (#1726120)
Wow, busy day over here yesterday!

They pretty much hit it Matt. If you had a significant North American career, we then look at everything you did. When Ichiro! is eligible, for example, we'll give him credit for what he did in Japan.

As for the blacklisting thing, I'm with Doc Chaleeko there. He was blacklisted because he tried to make more money. In no way can I penalize him for that.

If players had started leaving in larger numbers for the Mexican League, it wouldn't have been bad for baseball. Baseball would have started paying their players better to keep them and then crushed the other league like a bug, just like what happened with the Federal League, the USFL, the WHL (or was it WHA?), etc.. This isn't any different.
   49. karlmagnus Posted: November 10, 2005 at 02:25 PM (#1726163)
If you give credit to Maglie for making more money in Mexico, don't you have to give credit to Leever for making money teaching school? Both were responses to weird economic conditions at the time they became eligible.
   50. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: November 10, 2005 at 03:50 PM (#1726230)
Karl,

Not unless Leever was posting an ERA+ of about 2200 in the 2nd grade league...

And I agree with everyone here about Maglie. It isn't like he will be on more than 5 ballots anyway. If we are giving credit to NeL players from playing in the MxL (when it could be argued that they should have been plaing the NeL) than we should give credit to Maglie.
   51. karlmagnus Posted: November 10, 2005 at 03:58 PM (#1726243)
If Leever pitched nothing but shutouts coaching ur-Little League, his ERA+ would be infinite, wouldn't it? -- at which point he should shoot up above the crowd and be first on everyone's ballot...
   52. sunnyday2 Posted: November 10, 2005 at 04:04 PM (#1726253)
Other than WWII (and WWI and Korea which affect very few) I don't give XC to anybody if they weren't playing. Not even Charley Horse Jones. You can't trip me up, karl, that inconsistency. But of course consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, anyway.

But you do have a good point. If he had pitched little league that year his 0.00 ERA at a conversion rate of....that would help him overall!

(Signed) Sm;-)ll Minded
   53. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: November 10, 2005 at 10:06 PM (#1726866)
For anyone who might be interested, here's a post by the Baseball Crank on the pitchers with the lowest league-leading ERA+. Maglie makes the list twice.
   54. Paul Wendt Posted: November 11, 2005 at 07:33 PM (#1728018)
My interpretation is that subjection to "circumstances beyond his own control" is crucial for some voters; playing baseball somewhere is crucial to some (see David Jones on credit for military service time); they are jointly crucial to some.

Both the player who clearly chose to leave MLB and the player who carried a gun rather than a bat in the military garner less support than they would if they had played "normally" in the North American majors.
--not because the rules require it, but because some voters give them "full extra credit" and some don't. The term "full extra credit" is itself contentious but I don't know how to make the point otherwise.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.3725 seconds
49 querie(s) executed