PDA

View Full Version : Best Baseball Player Depicted in T206 Not in the Hall of Fame


Archive
07-22-2008, 11:35 AM
Posted By: <b>Darren</b><p>My votes are <br /><br />Pitcher--Ed Reulbach<br />non-Pitcher--Sherwood Magee<br /><br />

Archive
07-22-2008, 11:43 AM
Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p><P>Hal Chase&nbsp; (5 of 'em, I think).</P><P>&nbsp;</P><br><br>martyOgelvie<br /><a href="http://www.nyyankeecards.com">New York Yankee cards</a>

Archive
07-22-2008, 11:57 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Heine Zimmerman won the Triple Crown.

Archive
07-22-2008, 11:58 AM
Posted By: <b>Darren</b><p>Marty, <br /><br />Yes there are five different poses of Hal Chase in T206, but I'd take Magee over him as a player. I'd probably take Donlin, Daubert, Schulte, and a few others over him as well. I chose Reulbach as my pitcher but could have been just as happy with Cicotte.

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:06 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Now that I think about, Bill Dahlen was the best non-HOfer.

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:08 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Turkey Mike Donlin and Big Ed Reulbach, tie.

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:09 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>Gavvy Cravath

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Anthony S.</b><p>Deacon Phillippe<br /><br />189-109<br /><br />Six 20-win seasons

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>"Heine Zimmerman won the Triple Crown."<br /><br />I thought that was Seattle Slew?

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:39 PM
Posted By: <b>Lance</b><p>Black Sox, anybody?

Archive
07-22-2008, 12:58 PM
Posted By: <b>Sean BH</b><p>I second Gavvy Cravath!<br /><br />Does he make it now? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-22-2008, 01:08 PM
Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>I third Cravath but only based on his HR title statistics. That many HR titles is deserving of some recognition. He was hitting HRs in the greatest amounts when it wasn't envogue to do so...

Archive
07-22-2008, 01:32 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>Reulbach and Cravath<br />

Archive
07-22-2008, 01:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Sean BH</b><p>Motion carries. <br /><br />Cravath is in the HOF!

Archive
07-22-2008, 01:44 PM
Posted By: <b>E. Angyal</b><p>What about Ed Cicotte?

Archive
07-22-2008, 01:47 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Seattle Slew and Heinie Zimmerman, in a dead heat! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-22-2008, 02:11 PM
Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>Barry--Zimmerman's "Triple Crown" was actually stripped from him, supposedly scoring errors resulted in him finishing third to Honus and Bill Sweeney in RBI's..

Archive
07-22-2008, 02:14 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Dave- interesting. Never heard that one before.

Archive
07-22-2008, 02:46 PM
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>As a kid, I read how Hal Chase (from 1st base) would field a bunt down the 3rd base line and throw the runner out......<br />It left me with a deep impression.<br /><br />As an adult in 1977, the first T206 that I acquired was the Hal Chase blue portrait. Thought he looked like a "cool dude".<br /> Haven't stopped collected this card since.....it's become an obsession.<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://s22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/nudan92/net54%20resized%20photos/?action=view&current=teddyz.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/nudan92/net54%20resized%20photos/teddyz.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a><br /><br /><img src="http://www.freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/abchaseepdg.jpg"><br /><br /><br />T-Rex TED<br /><br />

Archive
07-22-2008, 03:04 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>can we see al the fronts displayed in one scan?!?! That would look cool. Be interested to see any color variation in the blues...<br /><br />Just curious about his fielding bunts along the 3B line...that doesn't speak highly of the Highlander's third-sacker, does it!? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />

Archive
07-22-2008, 03:11 PM
Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>Barry-Here ya go:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Heinie_Zimmerman" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Heinie_Zimmerman</a>

Archive
07-22-2008, 03:40 PM
Posted By: <b>ali_lapoint</b><p>my vote goes to Jesse Tannehill. 20-6 in 1902 with a 1.95 era. won 20 games 6 times. finished with a 197-116 record and lifetime 2.79 era.

Archive
07-22-2008, 04:00 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I learn something new every day.

Archive
07-22-2008, 04:05 PM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Reulbach as the pitcher, and<br /><br />Donlin as the player.<br /><br /><br />But I'd agree that Tannehill is a strong contender. Zimmerman had good skills, but there's a cloud over his activities. With Chase it wasn't merely a cloud, but a full blown hurricane, great skills, crooked as can be. Imagine what Chase would do today on eBay if he were a retired player... he'd be selling Roger Clemens' medicine bottles on eBay.<br /><br />Both Reulbach and Donlin could have had longer, fuller careers, but for intervening matters. They could have piled up more impressive numbers. I think Reulbach is better HOF material than some of what is already in there.<br /><br />

Archive
07-22-2008, 04:26 PM
Posted By: <b>David R</b><p>Wasn't Hal Chase the lead in the Titanic movie? I don't have the photoshop skills but I swear that Leonardo Dicaprio in Titanic is really the ghost of Hal Chase. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-22-2008, 06:31 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Based on HOF voting totals, definitely Hal Chase. In the inaugural vote he received more votes than Mordecai Brown, Sam Crawford, John McGraw, Hughie Jennings, Mike Donlin, and Rube Marquard. In the next year's vote his total went up and he still received more votes than many HOFers. By the next year he was off the ballot due to revelations about his misconduct in baseball.

Archive
07-22-2008, 07:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Craig W</b><p>Hooks Wiltse<br /><br />W-L: 139-90<br />ERA: 2.47<br />K's: 965

Archive
07-22-2008, 07:51 PM
Posted By: <b>John S</b><p>My votes are for Phillippe and Leever.<br /><br />

Archive
07-22-2008, 08:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Shawn Chambers</b><p>With regards to pitching, I agree with Reulbach, Tannehill, and Phillipe, but I can always seem to think of deserving pitchers in any era more often than the sticksmiths.<br /><br />For position players, I'm still on the Hal Chase bandwagon. It is hard to ignore account after account of his on-field heroics from star players of the day, the press, and national publications. I just can't imagine the "Greatest First Baseman of All Time" slogan being bandied about lightly by the likes of Ruth, W. Johnson, as well as many less famous, but no-less important contemporaries. With his often discussed "banishment" which really doesn't even seem to be true, he should at least be on the ballot.<br /><br /><br />Edited for more David Rudd solidarity.

Archive
07-22-2008, 09:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Mark L</b><p>Larry Doyle and Deacon Phillippe were crucial pieces of two all-time great teams. I'd vote for them.

Archive
07-22-2008, 09:40 PM
Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p><P>Love those card pics Ted, you da man!</P><P>My vote was for Chase, not because I think he deserves to be in the HOF.&nbsp; He certainly does NOT but&nbsp; I do think he was the Best player from the T206 set NOT alreday in the HOF.&nbsp; If not for his questionable ethics, he would certainly have been in by now. I find it enlightning that he consistantly led the league in errors at 1st base yet was he still considered by most all of his peers as the best fielding first baseman of his era!</P><P>There are players not in the HOF that deserve to be in the HOF from the T206 set, Chase is not one, although&nbsp;I think he was the best not already in.&nbsp; It's a shame that many of these deserving players will likely never get enshrined, the voters/writers today simply do NOT put the time in needed to research these players..</P><br><br>martyOgelvie<br /><a href="http://www.nyyankeecards.com">New York Yankee cards</a>

Archive
07-22-2008, 09:46 PM
Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>Cicotte and Chase.

Archive
07-22-2008, 11:13 PM
Posted By: <b>ali_lapoint</b><p>i don't think sam leever has a card in the t206 set.

Archive
07-22-2008, 11:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>He may have been the most talented of the non-HOFers in the T206 set, but he was also the biggest crook. I find it difficult to square the concept of the "best" with a player who routinely threw games. Baseball, like all sports, is all about winning. If you don't help your team win, and Chase pretty clearly did not (at least not when it counted), then I'm not sure how anyone can realistically call him the best.<br /><br />For my money, its Dahlen, Magee, Cravath and Doyle, in that order for position players. Philippe, Reulbach, Mullin and Tannehill for pitchers<br /><br />

Archive
07-23-2008, 12:47 AM
Posted By: <b>barry arnold</b><p>cicotte and chase<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />barry

Archive
07-23-2008, 05:24 AM
Posted By: <b>Mark Lutz</b><p>How can they be best if they were not ethical?

Archive
07-23-2008, 06:31 AM
Posted By: <b>Lance</b><p>The same way Mike Tyson was the best...without ethics being involved. The Black Sox made a grave mistake and paid dearly for it. So has Pete Rose, the all-time hit leader, in case you forgot. Ty Cobb was a racist, yet nobody ever has denighed his absolute greatness or place in the hall. These are all very different stories, gambling, fixing games, and hatred, but which is the worst of the three? The Black Sox and Rose belong in the Hall of Fame, based on what they accomplished in their careers on the diamond, not off. That part only happened when America started expecting TV and "Role Models" to raise their children. If ethics were involved in the original voting, how many play boys and drunks would now be diqualified? I can think of 2 real easy. It is not the Hall of ethics, obviously.

Archive
07-23-2008, 06:58 AM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>"Best" is not someone who might throw a game for money,<br />notwithstanding how well he may hit and field.<br /><br />Pete belongs in the Hall, anytime he buys a ticket, 363 days a<br />year. If one were to study the origins of the development of the<br />National League, the agreement between the 2 leagues, the effect <br />gambling had on the early game, the clear rules prohibiting it <br />that are conveyed to the players, the signs on the clubhouse <br />doors, the clear HOF requirements and disqualifications that <br />players know, and then honestly and without emotion looked at what <br />Pete did... then one cannot rationally envision Pete ever being <br />inducted into the Hall, but merely admitted whenever he buys a <br />ticket.<br /><br /><br />I think Chase may well be the best fielding first baseman ever; <br />and at least among the best. That is based upon what I've read <br />that contemporaries said about first basemen, from Beckley through <br />Gehrig. But the possibility of someone throwing a game is such a <br />significant, serious negative, that it offsets great fielding and <br />good hitting.<br /><br /><br /><br />2 DR solidarity edits.

Archive
07-23-2008, 07:12 AM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>on this, we completely agree.<br />Well stated!

Archive
07-23-2008, 07:43 AM
Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>Puckett and Carter then.

Archive
07-23-2008, 08:28 AM
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>Lance- i agree, especially about the whole Tyson analogy...you had me until this comment, however...<br /><br />"The Black Sox and Rose belong in the Hall of Fame, based on what they accomplished in their careers on the diamond, not off."<br /><br />i am a HUGE Black Sox fan, and do wish that Shoeless Joe would be enshrined, BUT let's not forget that the Black Sox issues WERE on the field.<br /><br />

Archive
07-23-2008, 08:33 AM
Posted By: <b>Lance</b><p>Michael,<br />I realized my error after I hit "Post". I have quietly waited for my lashes...<br /><br />Frank,<br />Very well stated, but would you agree "Best" would not be the man who would shoot another man, based on color, for stepping on his property? Are we looking for the "Best Players" or the "Best Human Beings" to represent the HOF? The Black Sox will never get in. Based on their offense, it's fair. Rose? Belongs in the Hall! His offense is definately the lesser of the 2 evils of the 2 greatest hitters ever to play the game.

Archive
07-23-2008, 08:35 AM
Posted By: <b>Darren</b><p>Leever is not represented in T206.

Archive
07-23-2008, 08:35 AM
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>Lance- no biggie, just had to call you out on that... <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-23-2008, 08:52 AM
Posted By: <b>Tim Sanders</b><p>Deacon Phillippe<br />And<br />"Noisy" Johnny Kling - Best Catcher of his day!!!!

Archive
07-23-2008, 09:48 AM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>Ha ha Ha!!!<br />very good.<br /><br />

Archive
07-23-2008, 12:00 PM
Posted By: <b>barry arnold</b><p>Hi Mark,<br />thanks for the question.<br />Dr. Darren's initial post asks for the best baseball player... not in the Hall of Fame. My picks were based solely on the criterion of talent,estimated largely via my analysis of their baseball statistics, since<br />I had the freedom to choose what I considered critical criteria. Also using<br />Dr. Darren's parameters, I chose those 'Not in the Hall of Fame' and 'those on<br />206s'. I believe,given my criterion, that they are the most talented. I am not saying they should be in the Hall of Fame. I would need to <br />incubate this a bit before I would make a decision since the criteria are no longer my own but the criteria delineated by the Hall of Fame itself.<br /><br />best,<br />Barry<br />

Archive
07-23-2008, 09:47 PM
Posted By: <b>Misunderestimated</b><p>Without wading into the ethical problems presented by some of the candidates the statistics pretty much lead me to the following list <br />(more or less in this order) :<br />Position players:<br />Dahlen (SS)<br />Jimmy Sheckard <br />Sherry Magee<br />Larry Doyle <br />Gavvy Cravath <br />Mike Donlin & Chief Meyers (Very good players for not long enough)<br />Harry Davis <br /><br />Pitchers<br />Cicotte<br />E Reulbach<br />Sam leever<br />D. Phillipe<br />O. Overall<br />Jack Quinn<br />Jack Pfiester (the Giant Killer)<br /> <br />Hal Chase:<br /><br />Hal Chase's stats are not really even that good -- including his fielding numbers<br /> His omnipresence in the T-cards was because he was the marquee player at the time for the NY AL team. . . Also he is the last guy you would ever want on your team. Forget that he threw games -- He <u>convinced</u> other players to throw games!

Archive
07-23-2008, 10:13 PM
Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>Now im the first to admit that hal chase doesnt deserve to be in the hall due to his throwing games. However, his lower fielding percentage (so Ive read) has a lot to do with actually being a good first baseman. A lot of players from the pre 1920 era have lower fielding percentages due to trying for impossible plays that a lot of other players wouldn't of even gotten close to. Player averages during the deadball era are deceiving as smaller gloves and wirey (spell check?) players (Johnny Evers, Hal Chase, Frank Baker, Solly Hofman, etc.) made for more errors that probably shouldn't have been counted as errors. Another factor in determining who should be in the hall is the people who saw them play that give them recognition i.e. Babe Ruth naming hal chase the best first player he ever saw or nearly everyone (including Ty Cobb, Mordecai Brown, Honus Wagner, etc.) from the deadball era picking Johnny Kling as the best catcher they ever saw.<br />My picks would be:<br />1. Johnny Kling<br />2. Ed Reulbach<br />3. Deacon Phillipe<br />4. Mike Donlin

Archive
07-24-2008, 08:05 PM
Posted By: <b>Misunderestimated</b><p>I guess the big thing -- I want to stress about "Prince Hal" was that even if it appeared that he <u>could</u> play first base as well as any of his contemporaries you were more likely to lose with him on your team because of what he did. True, all those players saw him at some time or another field the position as well as anyone, but he presence on a team was cancerous. The object of baseball is ultimately rather simple and no different than any other team sport: win. If you had Chase you were less likely to win. Chase's perfidy was generally unknown until near the end of his career when he played for Christy Matthewson, who managed the Reds. Matty knew just how dangerous Chase was and he knew when things were fishy. "In Eight Men Out," Eliot Asinoff explained that the terminally ill Matty was one of the first people to suspect that 1919 series was compromised and recorded each play that suggested a lack of effort by the ChiSox from the press area where he watched the games with legendary journalist Hugh Fullerton.<br /><br />Chase was ultimately suspended in the wake of the Black Sox scandal, not for throwing games but for fixing them. Chase's story has made him one of the most popular subjects for biography of his era and a great deal is now known about exactly what he did. These biographies and the statistics reveal that while he could play first base as well as anyone, he rarely did. Unlike Eddie Cicotte, Chick Gandil, Heinie Zimmerman, or anyone who threw a game or even the World Series, Chase essentially threw a career. His dishonesty and his "angling" were, according the biographies I have seen, an integral part of his play. He was never really good, even in pure terms of play either statistically or otherwise. The anecdotal evidence -- the stories of his contemporaries -- suggests that, at most, he had great potential. <br /><br />Johnny Kling provides a great contrast. As a catcher a lot of what he did eluded the box score (working with the Pitchers etc) and his individual hitting statistics are hardly remarkable. He was, however, the starting catcher for a team that made 4 straight post seasons and won regular season games at a incredible pace, the 1906-10 Cubs. The Cubs dynasty ended just before Kling left and as we all know they haven't won a World Series since Kling was their regular catcher.

Archive
07-24-2008, 09:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Kling was good. Really good. And he was good at pool, too, as<br />he won a championship during the year he was a hold out from<br />the Cubs.<br /><br />Kling ranks up there... But golly, Donlin was a ballplayer. And<br />Ed Reulbach was a great pitcher.<br /><br />To echo a bit, Leever isn't in T206 and Rose should not be in the Hall.<br /><br />

Archive
07-24-2008, 09:46 PM
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>"...not for throwing games but for fixing them."<br /><br />what is the difference between the two?

Archive
07-24-2008, 09:46 PM
Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>The deal with Chase though is that he wasn't corrup form the get go. It may have been brought on due to low salary or his fights with Kid Elberfield to be yankees manager, who knows? No, he doesn't deserve to be in the hall due to his throwing games. However, there is no doubt in my mind he'd be in the hall otherwise. some examples why: The people whom went after him (charles comiskey and John Mcgraw for starters) just to have him on their team. The few seasons where he showed his most potential (1906 and 07) and the later years (1916. stastically, we'll never be able to tell how good he was at first because we'll never know if it was due to him throwing games or due to someone trying harder than most and being credited with an error for trying to make an impossible play. In Hal's case this is probably 50/50. Such is the argument with a lot of hofers as to whether they deserve to be in the hall, no one today can make that call. These players were elected by people whom actually saw them play. The hofers with the low averages (maranville, tinker, bresnahan, etc.) had more to them than just whats written in a statistics book. Whether is was leadership skills, clutch hitting, circus catches, etc, they were elected to the hall by people who SAW them play. It says a lot for Hal that even after his reputation he STILL got votes for the hall.<br /><br />The big thing about Kling is that when he left the cubs, the cubs didnt make it to the pennant. When he returned, they did. Nuff said. regarding his hitting, he was no Cobb but few were. In comparison to other deadball era catchers (and even most non deadball catchers) he was a very good hitter. I honestly think the only reason he isn't in the hall is due to his holdouts (which were mostly Murphy's fault), which made him look bad in the press and made him the the cubs 1909 patsy. i'm still keeping up hope <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-25-2008, 10:01 PM
Posted By: <b>Misunderestimated</b><p>Actually my understanding is that Chase was dirty virtually from the moment he arrived in the majors. He did not merely throw games he enticed his teammates to throw games. This was hardly common knowledge and at least with respect to Chase's conduct the early voters knew a lot less than we do now. <br /><br />Bill James pointed out the most glaring statistic about Chase. When he joined a team it almost uniformly lost more games than the year before. Conversely, when he left a team it almost always did better the next season. No matter how flashy he could be in the field that means he was not a particularly good player. Would you want that kind of a player on your team? <br /><br />

Archive
07-26-2008, 10:19 AM
Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>well Im going off the 2 bios I read on him that could have left out information but In neither book do they have any proof of early corruption and to me it seems he slowly progressed into it. Regardless, when he wasnt being corrupt, he was a brilliant first baseman. its too bad we'll never know what he could have accomplished. Makes for great reading though!<br />

Archive
07-26-2008, 10:29 AM
Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>If a stock broker (or financial planner, banker, etc.) has a great eye for investments, knows the markets inside and out and is basically a financial genius, yet he instead chooses to steal his clients' life savings and head to South America, I doubt you'd find many people singing his praises based on all of the potential good he could have accomplished.

Archive
07-26-2008, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>but the question isnt does chase belong in the hall the question is was he a good firstbaseman? Answer- yes<br />Ironically he wasnt very good with funds so he'd a made a terrible banker <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-26-2008, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>oops, posted twice <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
07-26-2008, 11:07 AM
Posted By: <b>Cy</b><p>You can check any stats that you want about Chase and make up your mind. But if you get any accounts of his playing ability from his contemporary players, he was considered the best, right up there with Wagner and Cobb (among his contemporaries' opinions). Many players have praised him in written articles and a few players stated that he was the best, in their own words, on the Glory of Their Times CD.<br /><br />So he threw a game here and there. Let's get serious here. Many, many players cheated in that day. I just finished the book "Crazy 08" and there are a lot of references about cheaters across the board pre-1920. If you want to eliminate players from the Hall or even from consideration of being great because of cheating, then you need to toss Cobb and Speaker for sure. Joe Wood's first-hand testimony on the Glory of Their Times CD states without a doubt that they bet on games and it was not on the up-and-up. And the way Wood talked on the CD, this was common practice. So I would bet (Can I do this in this type of argument?) that Cobb and Speaker, and Joe Wood for that matter, bet on fixed games more than people want to believe. So should we disregard Cobb and Speaker from consideration of the best players in the game?<br /><br />Having said this, I feel that Chase was probably the best of the non-HOFers in the T206 set and probably better than many of the HOFers. And if you are going to check his fielding stats, just think how good they would have been if he didn't throw any plays on purpose? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Cy

Archive
07-26-2008, 11:07 AM
Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>Well, my financial guy has me knee deep in Hal Chase Starting Lineups.

Archive
07-26-2008, 11:15 AM
Posted By: <b>sean</b><p>awesome! tell your financial guy Ill trade em my mattingly's <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Craxy '08 is a great book. My fave is more than merkle. Gotta love the library!

Archive
07-26-2008, 11:36 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Cy is right. Chase was bad, but he was bad in a time when many players were bad (granted he was about the worst). As for his skills, all you need to know is what his contemporaries said about him and he was thought of as one of the best players in the game. Years after he was out of baseball, when all the revelations about him had come out, he still received more HOF votes than many future HOFers. Enough said.

Archive
07-26-2008, 12:38 PM
Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p><P>glad to see the the Prince (Hal Chase) stirring up as much debate today as he likely did during his playing days.</P><P>Hal Chase lives on.</P><br><br>martyOgelvie<br /><a href="http://www.nyyankeecards.com">New York Yankee cards</a>

Archive
07-26-2008, 12:56 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1217098568.JPG">

Archive
07-26-2008, 01:02 PM
Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>George Mullin won 228 games with a 2.82 era. He had 5-20 game win seasons. He pitched a No- Hitter in 1912. He won 3 World Series Games ( one being a shutout). I'm still looking for his auto. Any leads let me know.

Archive
07-26-2008, 01:15 PM
Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p><P>Found this Chase on eBay, looks like an angry fan took it out on his T206 perhaps after he blew a game for the Highlanders!</P><P><STRONG><A href="http://tinyurl.com/6qgdgt">http://tinyurl.com/6qgdgt</A> </STRONG></P><P><IMG alt=chase.jpg src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1217099664.JPG">&nbsp;</P><br><br>martyOgelvie<br /><a href="http://www.nyyankeecards.com">New York Yankee cards</a>

Archive
07-26-2008, 08:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Peter Spaeth</b><p>His .291 average didn't get him very far.<br /><br />Black Ink: Batting - 12 (191) (Average HOFer ¡Ö 27) <br />Gray Ink: Batting - 118 (165) (Average HOFer ¡Ö 144) <br />HOF Standards: Batting - 18.3 (715) (Average HOFer ¡Ö 50) <br />HOF Monitor: Batting - 26.0 (643) (Likely HOFer &gt; 100)