Well, this group will be easier than Group 3.

For those of you new to the threads, Lip Pike is accidentally listed as an inductee in 2003, when in fact he was enshrined in 1940, his 42nd year on the ballot.

I'll be curious to see how Dick Lundy will rate after the unveiling of his true greatness.

Joe Jackson first?

Joe Jackson first?

Over Pete Rose? I can't see that.

For those of you new to the threads, Lip Pike is accidentally listed as an inductee in 2003, when in fact he was enshrined in 1940, his 42nd year on the ballot.

Thanks for picking that up!

I do have Rose over Jackson, but not by much...Jackson has all sorts of peak on him.

I'm career over peak, NgL rep almost as much as stats, and I ding guys for things like tossing a WS or benefitting from a rule (fair-foul bunt) that was not in effect for the past 130 yrs, or being preceived as a detriment to your team. Pete's crimes have little to do with his ranking as a ballplayer.

prelim
The Gambler
McVey
Barnes - would be #2 based on game impact alone, higher if I were a peak voter
G Johnson
J Jackson
Pearce
Beckwith
Pike
Lundy
Trouppe
--PhOM line--
Oms
Moore

First Cut:

Top 50-60 All-Time

(1) Rose--Forgetting the gambling, underrated

60-125 All-Time

(2) Jackson--Forgetting the gambling, overrated.
(3) Grant Johnson--In the top half of the HoM, but I'm not sure where.
(4) Beckwith--Even with his baggage, top 10 3B.
(5) Barnes--Very short career, but easily the best player in baseball. Would rank first if he played at that level for four more years.

125-180 All-Time
(6) McVey--I was one of his biggest backers but still have him as a slightly below median HoMer.

175-230 All-Time
(7) Trouppe--Big dropoff after the top six. Very close with Lundy and Oms.
(8) Lundy--For these ranking it matters very much whether he was a 106 OPS+ guy or a 98.
(9) Oms--A nice catch on our behalf.
(10) Pike--Made my PHoM during one of the softer ballot periods and I'm happy to keep him there, but there are enough issues with his career to sort him to the bottom of this tough list.

Not PHoM
(11) Moore--I voted him #1 for several years but ultimately dropped him when our later numbers showed him to be not quite as dominant for not quite as long as I originally thought. For peak/prime candidates, those little differences matter a lot.
(12) Pearce--Sorry. I still think he was the best kid on the block where this newfangled games happened to be invented who turned out to be a solid but unspectacular player once the rest of the world cottoned to the game.

Well, Pearce had OPS+s of 106 and 100 at age 38 and 39. That would be solid but unspectacular at age 28 and 29. It's quite impressive at his actual ages, though.

I suspect I'll have Jackson No. 1 on prime basis.
Rose is pretty peakless, and benefits in some systems for irrelevant "wouldn't quit" mediocre performance (he's hurt in other systems for same; I pretty much throw the latter part of his career away, taking a middle ground there).

Barnes and McVey I like better than Pike.
Johnson and Beckwith among the NeLers.

Tough but streamlined ballot ahead....

1. If I decide a priori to look the other way on Petey's crimes but not Jackson's, well, yeah, Pete comes out ahead.

2. And if I decide a priori that 1876 is magic and that the rules that pertained in those days make it not baseball, then a lot of these guys are beyond discussion. (I could ding a lot of guys for pitching off a high mound by this logic. The fair-foul rule was in force about as long.)

In short, there will probably be a lot of volatility in these rankings because here is where different rules of engagement a) are out there and b) affect the outcomes pretty decisively.

My rule is to be fair to all eras, but I don't know yet what that means for a ballot.

Well, Pearce had OPS+s of 106 and 100 at age 38 and 39. That would be solid but unspectacular at age 28 and 29. It's quite impressive at his actual ages, though.

What shortstop performed as well at such a late stage of his career during the 19th century? None. That Pearce was able to still be in the game contributing during that rough-and-tumble era is a testament to his greatness, IMO. IOW, I'm with you, Howie.

He'll easily be in the top half of my ballot.

What does my adjusted RCAA system say about Jackson and Rose? Jackson was a LF/RF; Rose had other positions but included some LF/RF.

Here's the chart:



I wouldn't call Rose peakless; there some very good years there. Offensively, I have his best year as 1969, followed by 1972, 1973 and 1968. But Jackson's offensive peak was higher. Make of this whatever you want to; more than one spin is possible.

That's essentially the only information I have to share; I have so little confidence in the relative ranking of the Negro League and very early players that I may sit the vote out.

I never post in these types of discussions, but I can't resist this time. How is a barehanded C/1B with a career 152 OPS+ not one of the top 10 most amazing players of all time? And a 161 ERA+ pitching one year as a bonus. I mean Jackson and Rose were great and all, but hardly unprecedented.

I never post in these types of discussions, but I can't resist this time. How is a barehanded C/1B with a career 152 OPS+ not one of the top 10 most amazing players of all time?

Because the OPS+ has to be taken in context? Deacon White was a bare-handed catcher for the whole length of McVey's career, except for one season at first base. He was an excellent defensive catcher--52 FRAA, according to BP's WARP1, while McVey was an average defensive catcher---2 FRAA, according to BP's WARP1.

Here are their OPS+ scores, 1871-79, best to worst:

McVey 194, 177, 161, 158, 151, 143, 139, 132, 111
White 191, 179. 156, 149, 145, 138, 132, 130, 114

McVey was a little bit better as a hitter than White, but White's defensive edge of more time and catcher and better defense at catcher, surely makes him the better player of the two.

So were two of the ten most amazing players in baseball history active at the same position during the decade of the 1870s? It's not impossible, of course, but I think a more likely interpretation is that playing catcher did not have quite the same offense-suppressing quality in the very early game (for one thing, catchers didn't crouch, and catchers didn't start losing playing time vs. other positions on a seasonal basis until the 1880s, though they were more injury-prone), although it was clearly the weakest hitting position after pitcher, except perhaps for shortstop. Also, standard deviation on OPS+ was very high in those days. Both McVey and White earned only 5 top-10 OPS+ finishes for their gaudy totals (McVey 2, 3, 4, 5, 5 and White 1, 3, 4, 6, 8), all for seasons of 145 OPS+ and up. So a 150 OPS+ in the 1870s (esp. 1871-75) is probably equivalent to a 130 OPS+ in the 1970s.

Thanks that helps, and I inexplicably forgot about White. Hitting that well with the same hands as you use to catch pitches barehanded still amazes me though. Foul tips and all must have really hurt. I'm imagining it was something like a wicketkeeper's job in cricket and they're really padded up.

Prelim ballot

Player BallotPts
Pete Rose 134
John Beckwith 119
Quincy Trouppe 110
Grant Johnson 101
Dick Lundy 92
Dobie Moore 86
Alejandro Oms 86
Joe Jackson 81
Ross Barnes 59
Cal McVey 59
Lip Pike 35
Dickey Pearce 0

I've never taken the time to get the bottom four "correct" like I have with the rest. That will be the focus of this period. Jackson isn't getting credit for the years he played after throwing the World Series. If I gave him that credit it would boost him to just behind Grant Johnson.

I agree with the majority in putting Barnes and Johnson at the head of the two groups. For Johnson that is based largely on his role for teams of such quality for so long. That's enough to put the point estimate up there above those with better records.

Why McVey over Pike? Is the catcher role decisive?

Regarding the bare hands, White probably played some "up close" and probably used some protection for the hands. When Spalding used a glove as regular 1Bman in 1877 that was only for sissies and catchers. We don't know how universally how quickly in the 1870s catchers adopted some protection, nor how much protection. According to the SABR biography of White by Joe Overfield in 19c Stars, "White was said to be the first to move up under the batter." (In the margin I pencilled "everyone was first". I think White's debut at catcher was earlier than the others in my reading experience.) Overfield continues, "While with Buffalo in 1884 he and Jim O'Rourke designed a rubber chest and abdomen protector."

McVey probably used a glove sometimes as catcher. He was a regular at first base in 1875 and 1876 on Spalding's teams, so he was one of the last high-level professional bare-hand firstbasemen. I presume he used a glove as 1B-manager a couple years later, and that professional 1Bmen adopted gloves quickly.

Some glove in the early 1870s might be as little as a woolen winter glove with the finger tips cut off, I suppose.

Why don't the Pearce backers above mention his age 35-37 and 40-41 seasons?

Yes, he put up 106 and 100 OPS+ seasons at 38 and 39, but he was 76-38-88 as a fulltime player from 35 to 37 and 53-26 in a parttime role at 40 and 41. Take it all together and (even overweighing his two big seasons due to an expanding schedule) you get a good SS who put up an 80 OPS+ after age 35. Even in today's game, that isn't an HoMer; it's Omar Vizquel, only with 10 points less OPS+. Given that Vizquel isn't in my top 400 and that OPS+ numbers of the best players were much gaudier in that era, I have Pearce substantially behind Vizquel, somewhere between 600 and 100 All-Time. Sorry.

Both McVey and White earned only 5 top-10 OPS+ finishes for their gaudy totals (McVey 2, 3, 4, 5, 5 and White 1, 3, 4, 6, 8), all for seasons of 145 OPS+ and up. So a 150 OPS+ in the 1870s (esp. 1871-75) is probably equivalent to a 130 OPS+ in the 1970s.

What is that in this Big Playoff Era?

In his seven full league seasons, Lip Pike copped league ranks 2--2138 (1871-77). That '8' is for OPS+ 142 and the top threes are his four seasons at 170 and higher.

In his twenties, nine seasons with overall OPS+ 149, Jim O'Rourke copped -8TT64-56 (1872-80).

Prelim

Jackson is not as high as some because I am a career voter and I don't give any credit for time missed while banned. He is still an HoMer. The only non-PHoM player on the list is Oms.

1. Pete Rose
2. John Beckwith
3. Ross Barnes
4. Grant Johnson
5. Quincy Trouppe
6. Cal McVey
7. Joe Jackson
8. Dick Lundy
9. Dobie Moore
10. Dickey Pearce
11. Lip Pike
12. Alejandro Oms

Why don't the Pearce backers above mention his age 35-37 and 40-41 seasons?

Well, I have mentioned it hundreds of times in the past, Andrew. Take his whole career from age 35 onward and compare it, warts and all, to any other shortstop that played at the same age during the 19th century. He's the champ.

Preliminary Ballot

1. Pete Rose. Nice peak, and just too much career for anyone else here to catch.
2. Grant Johnson. It's possible he was better than Rose, but we'd need to see his peak to be certain.
3. Ross Barnes. Placement depends partly on how much pre-1971 credit he gets. This is with two seasons. With three, he has an argument to pass Johnson, and I can see why a peak voter would have him #1. He was a barracuda in a bathtub, but he was still the best.
4. Joe Jackson. Awesome decade of play, but nothing else, and not nearly as dominant as Barnes.
5. Dickey Pearce. Hard to place, but he was the first ballplayer of sustained excellence.
6. John Beckwith. Great hitter, and played third base.
7. Dick Lundy. Deserving HoMer, but lower-tier, as are all the rest here.
8. Quincy Trouppe. Strong hitter, versatile defender.
9. Alejandro Oms. Fine prime; lost early years could have put him higher.
10. Lip Pike. Second best hitter of his era after Barnes. Four years of pre-1871 credit puts him ahead of the more versatile McVey.
11. Cal McVey. Deacon-White lite.
12. Dobie Moore. Coulda bin a worthy HoMer, but he wasn't great enough for long enough with his career cut short as it was. Not comparable to Barnes or to Hughie Jennings among pure peak candidates.

6. John Beckwith. Great hitter, and played third base.

What positions did he play, really? Was he mostly a SS in NgL play? I know most of us were evaluating him as probably not a ML SS, but what does his playing record say?

Here is Jim Riley's listing and explanation (pages 69, xxi).

Beckwith, John
Career: 1916-38
Positions: ss, 3b, c, of, 1b, 2b, p, manager
>>
The positions played by the individual are listed in order of frequencyof appearances. Boldface type indicates the position at which a player is most strongly identified. Normal print indicates a position he played on a reasonably regular basis at some time in his career. Italicized type indicates a position played infrequently in his career, with his appearance possibly resulting only from injury to another player or other special circumstances relating to the team situation.
<<

Re Beckwith's positions: I'm sure there's a thorough discussion of this in the Beckwith thread, along with about 10,000 other things . . .

From Holway

1920 UT for Chicago Giants
1921 SS for Chicago Giants
1922 UT for Chicago American Giants
1923 3B for Chicago American Giants
1924 SS for Baltimore Black Sox
1925 SS for Baltimore Black Sox
1926 3B for Harrisburg Giants
1927 3B for Harrisburg Giants and Homestead Grays
1928 SS for Homestead Grays
1929 UT for Homestead Grays and NY Lincoln Giants
1930 3B for NY Lincoln Giants
1931 3B for Baltimore Black Sox and Newark Browns
1932 n.d.
1933 3B for NY Black Yankees
1934 3B for NY Black Yankees

Make of it what you will, but Holway makes it appear that Beckwith started as a shortstop, but gradually moved to 3B.

I could ding a lot of guys for pitching off a high mound by this logic. The fair-foul rule was in force about as long.

The 15" mound was in the rule book from 1903-1968.

to be fair to sunnyday, I assume he referred to the trend to ignore mound height infractions that were purportedly common to some teams in the 60s.

right, about 62-68....

Yes, thanks.

Prelim

And who says this is easier than group 3?

19C--I've got Barnes, Pearce, McVey, Pike, am willing to listen to reason

NgL--Johnson, Moore, Lundy, Beckwith, Trouppe and Oms, am probably not willing to listen to reason ;-) I mean, I still remember these debates. The 19C, hell, didn't we talk about that in the, well, 19C?

20C--Rose beats Jackson easily, more easily than I thought

Overall, and I do mean that this is a prelim though, like I say, I'm pretty happy with my rank order of the NgLers and Rose over Jackson. Not 100 percent on the 19C and the integration of the 3 groups.

1. Pete Rose--I tried hard to avoid this but couldn't; doesn't have the peak that some do, but he's so far ahead on career it's just silly

2. Grant Johnson--the only guy I could possibly think of as a threat to Petey

3. Dobie Moore--awesome peak
4. Ross Barnes--awesome peak, comparable to Bob Gibson (get it?)
5. Joe Jackson--good peak, not quite awesome

6. Dickey Pearce--career
7. Cal McVey--prime
8. Dicky Lundy--career

9. John Beckwith--prime
10. Lip Pike--prime, Beckwith and Pike make a nice pairing I think, the arguments against being pretty darn similar (a Jew and an uppity black man). I understand that many will prefer Beckwith to Lundy but I still say if I'm building a team I put Lundy out there first, not because anybody is uppity but because one has a Hoover for a glove.

11. Quincy Trouppe--career with position bonus or else he's #12, not PHoM
12. Alejandro Oms--career, not PHoM

We did not agree that Pike being Jewish turned out to be an urban legend?

I could be wrong on that, though.

There is a weirdness to their careers, though, a little Richie Allen-esque in great but moved around and such.

sunnyday--Joe Jackson's peak was "not quite awesome?" Didn't he have back-to-back 192 OPS+ seasons?? If that's not awesome, I don't know what is...

Did Jackson fight in WWI?

Jackson top 5 OPS+s, and full top 5, in CAPS if in HOM or named Jackson

1911 - COBB JACKSON CRAWFORD COLLINS SPEAKER
1912 - COBB JACKSON SPEAKER BAKER COLLINS
1913 - COBB JACKSON SPEAKER BAKER COLLINS
1914 - COBB SPEAKER COLLINS CRAWFORD JACKSON
1915 - COBB Fournier COLLINS SPEAKER JACKSON
1916 - SPEAKER COBB JACKSON Strunk COLLINS
1917 - COBB SPEAKER SISLER Veach JACKSON
1919 - RUTH COBB JACKSON Veach SISLER
1920 - RUTH SISLER SPEAKER JACKSON COLLINS

Rose top 10 OPS+s, and full top 10, in CAPS if in HOM or named Rose
1968 - MCCOVEY ALLEN WYNN MAYS AARON CLEMENTE ROSE BWILLIAMS FAlou CJones
1969 - MCCOVEY AARON CLEMENTE WYNN Staub ALLEN STARGELL ROSE CJones MJones
1976 - MORGAN Madlock SCHMIDT Foster Watson Cey ROSE Griffey Cedeno Luzinski

29. Howie Menckel Posted: March 04, 2008 at 08:41 PM (#2706316)
We did not agree that Pike being Jewish turned out to be an urban legend?

We did not.
This is the first I've heard it. Martin Abramowitz doesn't agree and I believe he is working hard to keep up with findings by all the primary researchers on this matter.
Jewish Major Leaguers (baseball cards and lecture circuit by Martin Abramowitz.

Lipman Pike, brother Jacob Pike (mlb).
Research a few years ago on whether brother Israel Pike existed, or played baseball professionally - vaguely I recall that reported in SABR Bibliography Cmte newsletter.

1911 - COBB JACKSON CRAWFORD COLLINS SPEAKER
1912 - COBB JACKSON SPEAKER BAKER COLLINS
1913 - COBB JACKSON SPEAKER BAKER COLLINS
1914 - COBB SPEAKER COLLINS CRAWFORD JACKSON

What that says to me is he was clearly < Cobb, Speaker, Collins and Baker and about = Crawford.

Prior to my prelim I see Jackson #2-4-5-7-8. The voter who has him #2 says he was "overrated." Chris says he was in fact "awesome" but "not nearly as dominant as Barnes." I said Barnes was "awesome" and Jackson "not quite awesome."

I think I'm with the consensus here.

imperfect memory there, but it's no legend.

"Jay Pike" by Peter Morris (SABR biography of Israel Pike, brother of Lipman)

Thanks - no dog in the Pike fight here, oops, just noticed my pseudonuym's possible 'ancestry.'

I once saw Pike's heritage questioned, but can't say it was legit. So best for all of us to clear it up, for those who it matters in a pride sort of way.

Read the Jay Pike bio. Wow. Somebody looked up the attendees at Lip Pike's funeral in an effort to verify who the various Pikes are. I've done some family history work but never looked at a funeral guest list. Great work.

I was also struck by this.

After his baseball career -- if he indeed had one -- Israel Pike led an apparently uneventful life. He married Rebecca Fox, raised five children and worked as a haberdasher. He passed away on February 10, 1925, in Nassau County, New York.

So the poor SOB lives 70+ years, is married with children, works and pays his own way in this world and all some GD biographer can say is he lived an uneventful life. What kind of obscurity awaits the rest of us? ;-)

Did Jackson fight in WWI?

From my 1927 ballot:

15Tie) J. JACKSON -- Penalizing him for 1919 (why play the season and then toss the championship?) and 1920 (the indictments and suspensions came down with the Sox in 2nd and trailing by 1 game with 3 games to play; disruptive ain't a strong enough word). Substituting 1919 for 1918 to give credit for war work; Jackson played a number of benefit games to raise money for the Red Cross while hitting .393 in the Bethlehem Steel League; somehow, that doesn't seem like a good season for him so he may be getting too much credit.

Wow. Somebody looked up the attendees at Lip Pike's funeral in an effort to verify who the various Pikes are. I've done some family history work but never looked at a funeral guest list. Great work.

Actually, the guest list is included in an article in the Brooklyn Eagle that's available on on line</url>. It looks like HoMer Dickey Pearce attended Pike's funeral; the article says "Bob Ferguson... and Joe Start... were missed."

It's great to see archives of more old newspapers becoming available on-line. The entry point for the Brooklyn Eagle is [url="http://www.brooklynpubliclibrary.org/eagle/"]here.

What can I say...the link worked in the preview window. To find the article, click on the "entry point" link, then on "Enter the Site," then on "Keyword Search," and then type "Lipman Pike" on the search line. The article on his funeral should be the first one to come up.

Dickey Pearce at Lip Pike's funeral - that is very cool....

Vaguely I recall that the Atlantics kept in touch. Maybe that was true of other prominent New York and Brooklyn clubs from the amateur era.

I know that Dickey Pearce circulated in baseball until the month just before his death. Not for the first time, in 1908 he attended the annual old-timers game and reunion that was played on an island in Boston Harbor. This time he caught cold and died a few weeks(?) later.

FYI,

I am fiddling with lists that will break down HOMers by team and by year, producing a variety of ways of looking at the same info.

Samples:

picking a year

1875 (12/14/14)
Boston - P Al Spalding, C Deacon White, 1B-OF(C) Cal McVey, 2B Ross Barnes, SS George Wright, OF-3B Jim O'Rourke
Philadelphia Athletics - 1B-OF Cap Anson, 3B Ezra Sutton
Hartford (Charley Jones* 1 G/2T)
St. Louis - P-OF Pud Galvin*, SS Dickey Pearce, OF Lip Pike
Philadelphia Whites
Chicago - OF-2B Paul Hines
New York - 1B Joe Start
New Haven
Washington
St. Louis
Philadelphia Centennials
Brooklyn
Keokuk - OF Charley Jones*(2T)

That's 12 regulars, 14 part-time/regular, and 14 including token appearances (2T indicates played for two teams that year). asterisks for part-time.
................

picking a franchise

BROOKLYN NL (thru 1925)
1900 - P Joe McGinnity, 1B Hughie Jennings, SS Bill Dahlen, OF Willie Keeler, OF(1B) Joe Kelley, OF Jimmy Sheckard
1901 - 1B Joe Kelley, SS Bill Dahlen, OF Willie Keeler, OF Jimmy Sheckard
1902 - SS Bill Dahlen, OF Willie Keeler, OF Jimmy Sheckard(2T**)
1903 - SS Bill Dahlen, OF Jimmy Sheckard (Hughie Jennings 4 G)
1904 - OF Jimmy Sheckard
1905 - OF Jimmy Sheckard
1906
1907
1908
1909 - OF Zack Wheat*
1910 - OF Zack Wheat (Bill Dahlen 3 G)
1911 - OF Zack Wheat (Bill Dahlen 1 G)
1912 - OF Zack Wheat
1913 - OF Zack Wheat
1914 - OF Zack Wheat
1915 - OF Zack Wheat
1916 - OF Zack Wheat
1917 - OF Zack Wheat
1918 - OF Zack Wheat
1919 - OF Zack Wheat
1920 - OF Zack Wheat
1921 - OF Zack Wheat
1922 - P Dazzy Vance, OF Zack Wheat
1923 - P Dazzy Vance, OF Zack Wheat
1924 - P Dazzy Vance, OF Zack Wheat
1925 - P Dazzy Vance, OF Zack Wheat

another angle - HOMerless pennant winners, 1871-1925

1871 Philadelphia NA
(1884 UA)
1888 St. Louis AA
(1890 AA)

1914 Boston NL
1917 New York NL

Charley Jones played 1 game with 2 teams. What inning did he switch sides? ;-)

Charley Jones played 1 game with 2 teams. What inning did he switch sides? ;-)

That's interesting. IIRC, during the teens, there was a trade completed between games of a double-header; the players involved switched sides during the break. Don't remember who they were though.

Charley Jones was not a part-time player for the Westerns of Keokuk. He played every game but one. The club went out of business after (memory warning) two Eastern clubs refused to play games two and three of their three-game series.

Jones played out the season (ie, played most of the season) with one or two teams in his old stomping grounds and played one game with Hartford, most likely when they visited Cincinnati.

Max Flack (Cubs) for Cliff Heathcote (Cardinals), May 30, 1922.

JTM,
Can you diagnose and correct the very wide page?
I don't see the expected preformat code.

Well, Charley Jones was not a full-time player in the NA that year - he only played a handful of games in the league compared to his rivals.
The asterisk says you were only a relative part-timer in the main league - not that you didn't play a lot of games overall.
A guy called up in August who plays 40 MLB games will be listed as "part-time," even if he played 120 minor league games.
Standard is playing at least half the games in the field of a typical team in that league.

Also, the 1G/2T designation is:
1 G describes play for THAT TEAM.
2T describes the fact that he also played for another team.

more triviality:

HOM P teammates (each must pitch at least 1 IP per team game), from 1871-1929:

1882 Providence NL - Charley Radbourn (33-20) and John Ward (19-12)

1888 Boston NL - John Clarkson (33-20) and Charley Radbourn (7-16)
1889 Boston NL - John Clarkson (49-19) and Charley Radbourn (20-11)
1890 Boston NL - Kid Nichols (27-19) and John Clarkson (26-18)
1891 Boston NL - John Clarkson (33-19) and Kid Nichols (30-17)

1892 Cleveland NL - Cy Young (36-12) and John Clarkson (17-10)
1893 Cleveland NL - Cy Young (34-16) and John Clarkson (16-17)
1894 Cleveland NL - Cy Young (26-21) and John Clarkson (8-10)
1895 Cleveland NL - Cy Young (35-10) and Bobby Wallace (12-14)
1896 Cleveland NL - Cy Young (28-15) and Bobby Wallace (10-7)

1902 New York NL - Christy Mathewson (14-17) and Joe McGinnity (8-8)
1903 New York NL - Christy Mathewson (30-13) and Joe McGinnity (31-20)
1904 New York NL - Joe McGinnity (35-8) and Christy Mathewson (33-12)
1905 New York NL - Christy Mathewson (31-9) and Joe McGinnity (21-15)
1906 New York NL - Joe McGinnity (27-12) and Christy Mathewson (22-12)
1907 New York NL - Christy Mathewson (24-12) and Joe McGinnity (18-18)
1908 New York NL - Christy Mathewson (37-11) and Joe McGinnity (11-7)

1902 Philadelphia AL - Rube Waddell (24-7) and Eddie Plank (20-15)
1903 Philadelphia AL - Eddie Plank (23-16) and Rube Waddell (21-16)
1904 Philadelphia AL - Eddie Plank (26-17) and Rube Waddell (25-19)
1905 Philadelphia AL - Rube Waddell (27-10) and Eddie Plank (24-12)
1906 Philadelphia AL - Eddie Plank (19-6) and Rube Waddell (15-17)
1907 Philadelphia AL - Eddie Plank (24-16) and Rube Waddell (19-13)

1912 Philadelphia NL - Grover Cleveland Alexander (19-17) and Eppa Rixey (10-10)
1913 Philadelphia NL - Grover Cleveland Alexander (22-8) and Eppa Rixey (9-5)
1915 Philadelphia NL - Grover Cleveland Alexander (31-10) and Eppa Rixey (11-12)
1916 Philadelphia NL - Grover Cleveland Alexander (33-12) and Eppa Rixey (22-10)
1917 Philadelphia NL - Grover Cleveland Alexander (30-13) and Eppa Rixey (16-21)

1924 Chicago AL - Ted Lyons (12-11) and Red Faber (9-11)
1925 Chicago AL - Ted Lyons (21-11) and Red Faber (12-11)
1926 Chicago AL - Ted Lyons (18-16) and Red Faber (15-9)
1928 Chicago AL - Ted Lyons (15-14) and Red Faber (13-9)
1929 Chicago AL - Ted Lyons (14-20) and Red Faber (13-13)

1925 Washington AL - Stan Coveleski (20-5) and Walter Johnson (20-7)
1926 Washington AL - Stan Coveleski (14-11) and Walter Johnson (15-16)

Years that GROUP IVs were on HOM ballots (* if elected that year)
in order of finish by year within this ballot group
no votes in that year, name in parentheses

FYI, Barnes finished 4th on the original 1898 ballot behind Group 3 winners White, Hines, Gore - but ahead of Group 3 contenders Start, Sutton, Richardson.
Pike led Pearce from 1898-1924, then they flipped.
Moore fell off the ballot entirely in 1934-35; Lundy did the same in 1962-63 and 1971-95 and 1997-2000. Interesting that he first returned the year after Trouppe, the last of the other Negro Leagues-type stars to get elected. Lundy got only 1 vote in 2005; by 2008, he was elected.

Group IV ballot orders

1898 - Barnes*//McVey, Pike, Pearce

1899-1913 - McVey, Pike, Pearce
1914 - McVey*//Pike, Pearce

1915-20 - Pike, Pearce

1921-24 - GJohnson, Pike, Pearce
1925 - GJohnson*//Pearce, Pike

1926 - Pearce, Pike, JJackson

1927 - JJackson*//Pearce, Pike

1928-30 - Pearce, Pike
1931 - Pearce*//Pike

1932-33 - Pike, DMoore
1934-35 - Pike (DMoore)
1936-39 - Pike, DMoore

1940 - Pike*//Beckwith, DMoore

1941-42 - Beckwith, DMoore

1943 - Beckwith, Lundy, DMoore
1944 - Beckwith, DMoore, Lundy
1945-50 - Beckwith, Lundy, DMoore
1951-55 - Beckwith, DMoore, Lundy

1956 - Beckwith, DMoore, Oms, Lundy
1957 - Beckwith*//DMoore, Oms, Lundy

1958-61 - DMoore, Oms, Trouppe, Lundy
1962-63 - DMoore, Oms, Trouppe (Lundy)
1964-70 - DMoore, Oms, Trouppe, Lundy
1971 - DMoore, Oms, Trouppe (Lundy)
1972-90 - DMoore, Trouppe, Oms (Lundy)
1991 - DMoore*//Trouppe, Oms (Lundy)

1992 - Rose, Trouppe, Oms (Lundy)
1993 - Rose*//Trouppe, Oms (Lundy)

1994 - Trouppe, Oms (Lundy)
1995 - Trouppe*//Oms (Lundy)

1996 - Oms, Lundy
1997-2000 - Oms (Lundy)
2001-05 - Oms, Lundy
2006 - Oms*//Lundy

2007 - Lundy
2008 - Lundy*//

Lundy's last-minute vault was due to the calculation of new MLE's.

JTM,
Can you diagnose and correct the very wide page?
I don't see the expected preformat code.

On my end, it looks okay to me, Paul.

The problem is Brent's post #38 and the url tags that aren't working in it.

Lundy's last-minute vault was due to the calculation of new MLE's.

And that in turn resulted from a recognition that we had taken a way extreme hard line about his BB--i.e. he didn't get a lot of them, but then nobody did in the NgLs, where real men swung thebat. Once you adjust him into different contexts a little more realistically he becomes a much more valuable batter.

The problem is Brent's post #38 and the url tags that aren't working in it.

That sounds like a different problem than what Paul was describing, but I took care of that post for you anyway, OCF.

Good show, OCF. That has dissolved the problem, John.

Glad I could help, Paul.

one more for fun (not 100 pct vetted yet, but..)

check out the dominance of NL in this sense, in 1964

1964 NL (22/26/27)
St. Louis - SP Bob Gibson, 3B Ken Boyer
Cincinnati - 2B Pete Rose, OF Frank Robinson
Philadelphia - SP Jim Bunning, 3B Richie Allen
San Francisco - SP Juan Marichal, SP-RP Gaylord Perry, RP Billy Pierce*, OF Willie Mays, OF(1B) Willie McCovey, OF Duke Snider*
Milwaukee - SP Warren Spahn, RP Phil Niekro*, C-1B Joe Torre, 3B Eddie Mathews, OF Hank Aaron
Los Angeles - SP Sandy Koufax, SP Don Drysdale
Pittsburgh - OF Roberto Clemente, OF-1B Willie Stargell
Chicago - 3B Ron Santo, SS Ernie Banks, OF Billy Williams
Houston - 2B Nellie Fox, OF Jimmy Wynn* (Joe Morgan 7 G)
New York

1964 AL (9/9/10)
New York - SP Whitey Ford, OF Mickey Mantle
Chicago - RP Hoyt Wilhelm (Minnie Minoso 5 G/PH)
Baltimore - SP Robin Roberts, 3B Brooks Robinson
Detroit - C Bill Freehan, OF Al Kaline
Los Angeles
Cleveland
Minnesota - OF Harmon Killebrew
Boston - OF Carl Yastrzemski
Washington
Kansas City

Oops, I just posted comments on McVey (and the White brothers), Pike, and Grant Johnson in the ballot thread, in response to ballot comments by Howie Menckel and karlmagnus.

Howie,
If you read this in time and you have anything to say about the antisemitism, it probably belongs in the Jones and Pike thread.

Paul,
I'm just waiting on confirmation that a post that I remember claiming that Pike's ancestry was incorrectly perceived was itself inaccurate.

Granting that if he even was THOUGHT OF as Jewish, it would have affected his circumstances.

I didn't think there was any doubt about his Jewish faith anymore. I certainlly didn't when I "enscribed" on his plaque the tidbit that he was the first Jewish player to play professionally.

There was never any question of Pike's Jewishness. You may be thinking of Johnny Kling.

There was never any question of Pike's Jewishness. You may be thinking of Johnny Kling.

...or possibly Buddy Myer.

OCF ballot comments
3. Johnson: I started him low at 11 in 1921 but as the evidence accumulated, I jumped him over several others. Was #1 on my 1925 ballot, ahead of Magee, Sheckard, Wallace. The one the recent blackball HOF committee whiffed on.

blackball committee :-)
Didn't the National League set that up in 1879?

6. Trouppe: I was always much more sold on him than on Oms, Moore, or Lundy. Spent a long time in the 5-8 range on my ballot, #3 in his election year.

What sold you on him?
--in contrast to Oms, Moore, Bus Clarkson, Luke Easter, others who didn't have a straight Negro Major Leagues career.

The one the HOF or "everyone" whiffed on.
Not on the list of 94 (stage two) delivered to the extra-special committee of five for its consideration; 39 made the ballot for the special committee. Suggestions were open (stage one), their number never reported. I suppose that Dick Gregory, George Bush, etc, were among them.

I'm not sure I have a good answer to that, Paul. Sorry. I'm less certain of this ballot than of nearly anything else on this project.

Que sera.

I still consider all of these just preludes to a final full ballot that will attract far more voters. We are nailing down rough pecking orders.