On You Tube, there is an episode from What's My Line in 1959 with Branch Rickey as the mystery guest. In fact, here is the link.

That was a wonderful vid. Thanks for sharing.

Heh. From Paul's obituary in the NYT (which ridiculously skips his Indians career entirely):

Of all his deals, Mr. Paul was particularly pleased with the time he got the best of that master trader Branch Rickey, obtaining the slugging outfielder Gus Bell for the Reds from Mr. Rickey's Pittsburgh Pirates before the 1953 season.

As Mr. Paul told it: ''Rickey didn't like Gus's wife. He thought she was extravagant. He once told me, 'She throws diapers away.' After we finally put the deal together, Gus and his wife came to Cincinnati for the announcement, and his wife had a baby in her arms. I remember she had to change the baby's diaper, and she put him on a blanket on a table in my office. 'These are something new,' she said. 'Disposable diapers.' If only Rickey had known.''

That baby was Buddy Bell.

Isn't there a line in one of Bill James's "Abstracts" in a biography on Joe Adcock that goes something like: Joe Adcock sums up Gabe Paul's career. Get a good young player, trade him away for very little, watch him hit 250 home runs for his new team and then trade for him when he is 35.

Gabe Paul's 1956 Reds contended but after that fell off the pace. It was Bill DeWitt who took over and made trades
that made the 1961 Reds the NL pennant winners.

Branch Rickey was furious with Gus Bell for missing the last day of spring training and the first game of the 1952 season to go to his mother-in-law's funeral.

102: There are a ton of WML episodes on YouTube, many with baseballers, including Phil Rizzuto, who was the very first mystery guest on the show's debut episode from 1950.

You can see DiMaggio, Williams, Musial (post-career), Maglie, Campanella, Robin Roberts, Duke Snider, Chuck Dressen, even the whole Cincinnati Reds team from 1956 (actually about a dozen team members with Klu as spokesman). Robin Roberts appears not as a mystery guest, but as a shrimp company president.

For those who aren't old enough to remember the show, WML was about a zillion notches above other game shows in terms of its class and erudition, and a cadre of fans have done a great job of posting hundreds of segments on You Tube.

More randomness - Still trying to find what the transaction was that sent Cuellar to St. Louis from Cleveland, I decided to check the SI Vault as it wasn't online when a lot of BBref (and others) transaction info was done. The oldest bit they have is from 1967, a little blurb ("Highlight") from Mark Mulvoy:

Around the National League, Gene Mauch, the volatile manager of the Philadelphia Phillies, has a reputation for baiting opposing players with a steady flow of unprintable verbiage that is designed to needle, anger and, in short, distract the players from the job at hand—beating the Phillies. Mauch was at his blue best last week in the Astrodome as he directed his fire at Mike Cuellar of Houston, who was pitching a one-hit shutout against the Phils and leading 1-0 as the ninth inning began, "He was calling me a very bad name," said Cuellar. "I no take that from any man." Cuellar started toward the Philadelphia dugout, which was exactly what Mauch wanted. Out of the dugout he charged, hoping for a fight that would get them both tossed out of the game. After all, what more can a manager do for his team than to personally get rid of an opposing pitcher who is throwing a one-hit shutout? But Eddie Mathews, Houston's battle-wise third baseman, was alert to the situation. As Mauch approached, Mathews scooped him up on the short hop (right), and the fight was prevented. Still, the incident seemed to have rattled Cuellar, who gave up a run. Then Mauch opened up again, and again Cuellar started for the Phillie dugout. But Mathews was still on guard and there was no fight. Much to Mauch's disgust, Houston won the game 2-1 in the 11th. "There are limits as far as name-calling is concerned," said Mathews later, reflecting a view held by many a major leaguer. "I respect Mauch's right to agitate, but you can't call people any name you want and expect them to take it. I think he stepped over the boundaries this time." Replied Mauch: "All I was trying to do was win the game." No doubt. But the question is: Does the end justify the means?

Should we mention that Charlie O Finley is not on the ballot? Now THERE was a controversial yet effective owner (until the players won free agency)!!

Isn't there a line in one of Bill James's "Abstracts" in a biography on Joe Adcock that goes something like: Joe Adcock sums up Gabe Paul's career. Get a good young player, trade him away for very little, watch him hit 250 home runs for his new team and then trade for him when he is 35.

Except that was basically a sale of Adcock by the Reds. Four team deal in which Adcock is ridiculously the most talented player involved, and the Reds got Rocky Bridges (coming off a .196 season) and cash from the Braves, who also got cash from the Phillies. So presumably it was both teams' cash that went to the Reds.

Then in 1962, he traded Don Dillard, Frank Funk, and Ty Cline for Adcock and Jack Curtis. Dillard had another 146 PAs in MLB, Funk had 43 IP, and Cline (the PTBNL) had 1550 PAs...of 71 OPS+...from an outfielder. Adcock gave them 283 PAs of 106 OPS+, then was traded again. Barry Latman (350 IP, 12-24, 93 ERA+ after trade) and a PTBNL for Leon Wagner. Adcock was the PTBNL. After that in his career, he still had 1067 PAs of 133 OPS+ left in him. But Daddy Wags gave Cleveland 2380 PAs of 119 OPS+.

So he sold Adcock once, and then came out the clear winner in two subsequent Adcock trades. In a year, he basically turned 1700 PAs of ~73 OPS+ and 43 IP of 120 ERA+ (trade 1) plus 350 IP of 93 ERA+ and 1067 PAs of 133 OPS+ (trade 2, so weighted averages of 2067 PAs of 96 OPS+ and 400 IP of 95 ERA+) for 2850 PAs of 118 OPS+.

(EDIT) And for it even to be that close, Joe Adcock at age 36 had to all of a sudden start hitting like he hadn't since he was 32 or 33.

For those who aren't old enough to remember the show, WML was about a zillion notches above other game shows in terms of its class and erudition, and a cadre of fans have done a great job of posting hundreds of segments on You Tube.

WML also comes on Game Show Network at 2 AM on Sunday nights/Monday morning. I know this because I would finish watching the second airing of WPT, neglect to turn off the TV, and end up watching WML every week. It's followed by "To Tell the Truth". Tivo is now convinced I like them without my ever having rated them, so it even does its thing and tapes them for me.

(This is why my mom hates it when I visit her, because for weeks afterwards, her Tivo is out grabbing poker shows, college football magazine shows, and half of BBC America.)

Gabe Paul's 1956 Reds contended but after that fell off the pace. It was Bill DeWitt who took over and made trades
that made the 1961 Reds the NL pennant winners.

Unless he did this in secret while he was assistant GM of the Yankees from 1955-1958 and GM of the Tigers from 1959-1960, no he didn't. Unless you're claiming that his 1961 deals are what sealed it more than the talent already there. Sure Joey Jay had a great year, but Blasingame was historically awful that year, Gene Freese was a below-average fielding 3b with a 101 OPS+, and Gernert was a non-entity.

Something tells me Post/Pinson/F-Robby/O'Toole/Brosnan/Purkey had a little more impact.

#110 From Bill James "Historical Abstract", 1988 paperback edition pp 240-245

"Gabe left him (DeWitt) a few pieces but he didn't leave him much of a ball club. The Reds in 1960 had finished 67-87, a .435 percentage. They were 28 games out of first place, 15 games out of the first division.....The Reds were not just a team having a bad year, they were a bad team, going down." They had finished under .500 three straight years."

Over the winter DeWitt traded away pitcher Cal McLish and got pitcher Joey Jay and third baseman Gene Freese in return. They moved Frank Robinson for first (arm injury in 1960) to right and promoted Gordy Coleman. They moved third baseman Eddie Kasko to short to play Freese. With second base troubles, in April they traded Ed Bailey for Don Blasingame.

"DeWitt, in sum, simply kept everyone who hit better than .265 or had an era under 4.00 and got rid of everybody who didn't. Only one regular, Vada Pinson in center, was still in his 1960 position."

"In retrospect, two of the moves DeWitt and Fred Hutchison made were the keys to the pennant.One was the decision to shift two players rightward along the defensive spectrum....the other key was the acquisition of Joey Jay."



Reading Marty Appel's book on page 108 he says "There was no warning that the Yankees were for sale." Apparently the talks for CBS to buy the team started in summer of '72 "And then the wheels started to turn. Slowly at first, then rapidly..but at all times, very quietly."

There is also this tidbit after the Yankees lost the 1974 AL East race. Appel found Gabe Paul to be more upbeat and jovial than he expected. When he mentioned this to one of Paul's former employees, the man said "Oh, Gabe would have hated to win. A good, solid second place sells lots of tickets for the next year and doesn't overdo expectations. It's all business with him. To win would mean to spend all that money entertaining, being the host, instead of being the guest, working the room, glad-handing people. That's why he was pretty happy in Cleveland-no expectations, no pressure, just show up at the other guy's parties and work a trade here or there. And no big raiss for next season."

The 1950 Red Sox: 31-28 under Joe McCarthy, 63-32 under O'Neill.

Clearly, O'Neill >> McCarthy. Which makes him an obvious Hall of Famer.

I'd choose Marvin Miller (hugely important figure) and Billy Martin (a manager like no other and not a bad player either). If allowed a second choice, I'd go with Jacob Ruppert and I guess Doug Harvey. No umpire in his day was more respected.

Obviously, I would be in favor of Doug Harvey.

Doug Harvey's not in the HoF? WTF?

GGa30 - You said:

It was Bill DeWitt who took over and made trades that made the 1961 Reds the NL pennant winners.

This is not correct. Sure, getting Jay was big. But Blasingame, again, had a historically terrible season. Since 1920, only 38 second basemen have had as many PAs as Blasingame and thrown up a worse OPS+. You could easily argue that any gains from Jay were wiped out by Blasingame. In fact, given that Blasingame was -31.6 Batting Runs and -1.6 fielding runs, and that Jay was only a 115 ERA+ over 247 IP, I will argue that. Freese was an average hitting third baseman (amongst all hitters) and slightly below average in the field. These are not moves that made the Reds winners. The Reds won in 1961 because of Gabe Paul's talent acquisition, plain and simple.

(EDIT) If we're being binary, that is. If it has to be one or the other, there is zero.zero question.

Gene Autry had the LA market dumped in his lap,

Well, he had the team dumped into his lap, but the market certainly needed to be cultivated. Initially, Autry was a share cropping serf in Lord O'Malley's kingdom. He was hogtied until he could move out of Dodger Stadium. Unlike the Dodgers, who were an established product when they came to Los Angeles, the Angels were a joke, thrown together in a rushed, haphazard function to make sure the Continental League didn't get a foothold on the West Coast -- and were treated as a joke by the locals.

>>>got placed in the weakest division in baseball<<<<

There weren't two divisions in the AL until 1969. THe AL West wasn't the weakest division in baseball back then --- the NL divisions flipped flopped on that for most of the 70's.

That being said, Autry was mostly a clown of an owner in terms of running his team. He wanted to win, but didn't know how.

If it were just a matter of the early expansion years, I wouldn't have dismissed Autry as a joke of an owner. But by 1969 that excuse had run its course. When division play came along, it took him ten years of competing with mini-markets like Kansas City, Oakland and the Twin Cities before he could even win one goddam division title. The only reason it wasn't even worse is because of the equally bad ownership situation in Chicago. Then comes free agency and he essentially buys himself a few division titles. Big Whoops.

Ask yourself this: Who were the Angels' best players during the Autry era? And how many of them came up through the farm system?

Gabe Paul FTW

Billy Martin can go in the psychopaths wing if there's any room.

I've said this before, but; Marvin Miller belongs in Cooperstown only if he can pony up the cash for a ticket. He did more to destroy baseball than anyone since Hal Chase.

Should we mention that Charlie O Finley is not on the ballot? Now THERE was a controversial yet effective owner (until the players won free agency)!!

And he very well may have been successful in free agency if his sale of Rudi, Fingers, and Blue hadn't been illegitimately shot down by Kuhn. The UPI story on the sales quotes Finley saying, "We will rebuild -- and fast."

I've said this before, but; Marvin Miller belongs in Cooperstown only if he can pony up the cash for a ticket. He did more to destroy baseball than anyone since Hal Chase.

I've said this before, but: Marvin Miller's misplaced zeal was instrumental in ushering in the era of greed and excess that has not been beneficial for major league baseball. He did nothing for the game itself, and accomplished nothing worth celebrating within the game, leading this observer to find his Hall of Fame case rather laughable. If we're to let him in because he worked the system to make players richer, why not Scott Boras, for his advancement of the arts of deceitful negotiation and unapologetic, Teixeiraesque mercenaryism?

Who were the Angels' best players during the Autry era? And how many of them came up through the farm system?

From 1961-95, the Angels only had eight players with 3000 PAs and OPS+ above 100, and only two came up with the club: Wally Joyner and Jim Fregosi. OK, Fregosi was underrated, and Joyner could really rake there for a while, but still: this all you got?

Hmm. Let's compare with the Halos expansion cousins:

Senators/Rangers: Nine players with 3000 PAs and OPS+ above 100 between 1961-95, two homegrown: Ruben Sierra and Toby Harrah.

Amazins: Seven, with three homegrown: Darryl Strawberry, Lee Mazzilli, Cleon Jones. (We'll give 'em partial credit for John Stearns and Mookie Wilson [OPS+ 100 even].)

Astros: Twelve, including a whopping nine homegrown stars: Jimmy Wynn, Bob Watson, Glenn Davis, Cesar Cedeno, Joe Morgan, Rusty Staub, Terry Puhl, Bill Doran and Doug Rader. And with that clutch of talent, the Astros went on to win multiple pennants and World Series. (Wait, what?)

Moral: Finding kids who grow up to longtime star baseball players is hard, and even harder if you're a brand-new team.

It's comical beyond words that Gene Autry would be on the ballot and not Charlie Finley. Not only did Finley have a wealth of innovative ideas, but he was also the de facto GM that put together the great A's teams of the 1970s. What did Gene Autry, of all people, ever actually do, say, or suggest that would make anyone think for even a second he belongs in the HOF? Are they just going to start letting people in who were around for a long time?(**)

(**) Marvin Miller, of course, wasn't an "executive" in the sense of owning or building a baseball team -- as are all the others in the "executive" category. Why are they phonying him into a category in which he doesn't belong?

Doug Harvey better get elected this time

It's comical beyond words that Gene Autry or Jim Frey (?!?!?!) would be on the ballot and not Charlie Finley. Not only did Finley have a wealth of innovative ideas, but he was also the de facto GM that put together the great A's teams of the 1970s. What did Gene Autry, of all people, ever actually do, say, or suggest that would make anyone think for even a second he belongs in the HOF? Are they just going to start letting people in who were around for a long time?

Not really. They've been doing it for quite awhile---nothing "just going to start" about it.

And of course you're right about Finley and Autry (not to mention Frey), but Finley ticked off the owners, and Autry didn't. It may just be as simple as that.

What did Gene Autry, of all people, ever actually do, say, or suggest that would make anyone think for even a second he belongs in the HOF?

Autry was of course a celebrity long before he bought the Angels, for a number of reasons. (He's the only person with five stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame: for TV, movies, live theatre, radio and as a recording artist.) He was by all accounts a very gracious and likeable man, and his fellow owners thought the world of him -- unlike Charlie Finley, who was not only a jerk but kept beating them!

I'd elect Billy Martin before Autry: at least Billy won him some baseball games...

And of course you're right about Finley and Autry (not to mention Frey), but Finley ticked off the owners, and Autry didn't. It may just be as simple as that.

That's the best explanation. I have a natural aversion to bureaucrat types -- public or private -- who don't do anything but "preside" over a "process." Those types of people often get awards and the like, but I'm dead set against quality institutions like baseball, where people do and accomplish real, tangible things, letting in their type. There's nothing to celebrate in a guy who's just around, even if important and influential things happen. I'd put Marvin Miller in before Gene Autry.

I'd put Marvin Miller in before Gene Autry.

Hell, I'd almost put in Wild Bill Hickok before Gene Autry.