Old Hoss Radbourn - Stats inconsistency?
1 Attachment(s)
I was looking up some information about Charles "Old Hoss" Radbourn and found what I believe to be some sort of statistical anomaly and/or error.
According to Baseball-Reference.com, in 1884, Old Hoss pitched in 75 games and started 73. Of the 73 he started, he completed all 73 (wow)! What doesn't make sense to me, however, is that his W-L record that season was 59-12. Incredible, yes. But how come there are only 59+12 = 71 decisions when he completed 73 games? By definition, if the game has been completed, wouldn't he have factored into the Win or Loss for the team? I don't see any mention of ties back then although I presume some games were suspended due to darkness/weather. Even so, the delay of a game wouldn't have resulted in a Complete Game for Radbourn (to my knowledge). Thoughts, comments, snide remarks? |
If you look at their schedule and results, you'll see a tie on June 6 and another on July 31. Doesn't appear they were made up or anything - just ended in a tie. Assuming Ol' Hoss pitched all of those games before they were called for darkness, that'd do it!
|
Quote:
Incredible season to say the least (for Radbourn and the team). |
Off-topic, but didn't the Elias Sports Bureau credit him with a 60th Win (for one of his relief appearances, I think)? Not sure if MLB ever formally adopted it, though.
|
Quote:
|
Hoss
Hoss did indeed lose a victory. It was a victim of careful scrutiny of the boxscores. A wonderful book on the season and Hoss is "Fifty-Nine in '84" by Edward Achorn.
The story has it all- deceit, deception, debauchery. It's quite a good read. Plus there's an excellent appendix listing all of Hoss' games and results. |
Cool. Thanks, guys!
|
Quote:
I read the book, and while it had some good parts, there was a lot of filler that had nothing to do with his season. Writer put together a lot of speculation that was unnecessary and he breezed right by numerous games during the season by just saying the score. It would have been a much better book if it was half as long and stuck to the pertinent facts. He was much more interested in describing 1884 life off the field than talking about specific games. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
So it was more than just the concentration on non-baseball stuff. As someone mentioned, talking about the beer vendor is great because that's baseball related. Him going in depth on the town and things around it, was not for me. Really took away from the subject. You can set the mood for the era fairly quickly and then get to the subject. He broke away from the main subject numerous times to go on tangents. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:46 PM. |