Could you or I have dominated the 1880s?

[Mountaineer1999]

Just for fun and if this takes up valuable front page space with silliness i apoligize in advance.

How many of you see pictures of pitchers from this era and think , i couldve hit .400 off this guy? How good were these players? Could they have beaten todays college teams? I guess no one really knows but would be interested in thoughts. Was there a decade when the switch was flipped and talent exploded or has it just been a gradual growth.

Pictures stolen from Facebook feed today.

[irv]

I can't speak for baseball but I know in hockey, most/all teams nowadays would simply slaughter any hockey team from 20+ yrs ago imo, let alone a 100.

I can vaguely remember players smoking on the bench and drinking Coca Cola!

The speed, condition of the players, talent is 10 fold nowadays imo, but of course, there were always exceptions.

[boneheadandrube]

Based on some of the mechanics of the 19th century players (pitching motion & delivery, batting stance etc.) it doesn't look like the game was very advanced physically. I'd say a good college team would smoke all comers in 1880...

[coolshemp]

They may look not as strong, but I would wager that these dudes were a lot scrappier and tougher than today's players. The time that they lived in was more rough, in general, and it was the rare exception that a college educated youth would be involved in sports at a professional level. These guys lived fast and strong, an most likely had the IDGAF attitude towards life in general.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by coolshemp

They may look not as strong, but I would wager that these dudes were a lot scrappier and tougher than today's players. The time that they lived in was more rough, in general, and it was the rare exception that a college educated youth would be involved in sports at a professional level. These guys lived fast and strong, an most likely had the IDGAF attitude towards life in general.

I was thinking along the same lines. You might end up hitting better, but how long would you last doing so if one or more of them decided to take you out.

[mooch]

I'd like to think I'd do well, but honestly they likely had elite hand-eye coordination and speed, especially lateral quickness and agility. If not, someone else would have taken their place. These players may not have been big and bulky, but it is the coordination and quickness that distinguished them in their time. I doubt most of us would be able to hang with them unless one of us was at least a college level player. A big college, but not mlb player, would likely hit further and maybe run well, but they might struggle a little on contact and the nuances of small ball. Also, imagine trying to catch after being spoiled with modern gloves. Great thought experiment, nonetheless. What we'd all give for a shot!

[boneheadandrube]

Originally Posted by boneheadandrube

Based on some of the mechanics of the 19th century players (pitching motion & delivery, batting stance etc.) it doesn't look like the game was very advanced physically. I'd say a good college team would smoke all comers in 1880...

I mean a college team of today.

[rhettyeakley]

I doubt any old Joe Schmo from today would dominate if they were transported to the past. I think We see the mustaches and posed images and just assume they were terrible because they look awkward, some people really do have natural god given talent and they did then just like they do now.

Players bridge the gap from the 1880's to the 1900's and those people played alongside players from the 1900's that played alongside players from the 1920's and on and on. I can't ever remember a player saying that the players at the end of their careers were just so much better than when they started so I have a hard time believing that things change as much as we think. I am sure players today are better trained but just assuming everyone in the past would suck compared to today is silly. Some sports today barely resemble the same sport from 100 years ago but baseball is perhaps the one sport that has changed the least amount.

Nobody looking at a picture of Kent Tekulve in the 1970-80's thought he looked like a great athlete but the guy was a decent pitcher! I think we would be surprised at the ability of some of the players of yesteryear if we were to see them play.

-Rhett

[sycks22]

I remember hearing recently somewhere that they did some formulas to figure out that Walter Johnson threw 92-93 mph and he was "unhittable" during his time. If the fastest pitcher threw 92 back then wouldn't it be assumed that the average pitcher threw mid 80's or d-3 college?

[jason.1969]

Love the question. One way to think about it is not to transport us back in time but to bring early players (will skip the 1880s and go with Cobb, Wagner, and Jackie Robinson) into the present.

Could those guys compete in today's bigs? I believe so. Cobb maybe doesn't finish at .367 but still wins batting titles. Wagner does everything but hit for power and is a throwback to a bygone era. Robinson is still an elite athlete.

So if these guys could do it today, guys like us definitely couldn't do it back then.

1880s though? Hmmm. Maybe. Teams would drool for a 6'0" 225 lb lefty like me!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[z28jd]

I always laugh when this question comes up because 99% of people frame it as those players coming to play now and not being able to keep up with the speed.

If you could transport a current player back to that period, I don't think there is a single Major League player today who would last an entire season in the 1880's, let alone be a star. They would probably fear for their lives and not be able to adjust to life without all the amenities. Imagine someone now going to play a summer game in those uniforms under those conditions. They would be waving a white flag by June 1st. But on the opposite end, someone from that era might be overwhelmed by how pampered the players are now.

As far as a team of Net54 All-Stars, I can't imagine we would have a shot in hell against them and you can bet when I say "we" that I'd be playing in that game if it could happen. You have to remember how small the majors were back then and how popular baseball was, so there weren't many bad players in the league like there are now.

Then you look at the disaster some players turned out to be when given a trial. Michael Corcoran is a great example. He was the brother of the team's star pitcher in 1884 for the White Stockings, and he was also a minor league pitcher at the time. He gave up 14 runs to the 28-84 Detroit Wolverines. If a 25-year-old minor leaguer got crushed by the worst MLB team, what chance would the Net54 Keyboard Warriors have.

[Mountaineer1999]

Originally Posted by z28jd

As far as a team of Net54 All-Stars, I can't imagine we would have a shot in hell against them and you can bet when I say "we" that I'd be playing in that game if it could happen.

This would be one of the most fun/terrifying opportunities one could imagine! Real life Field of Dreams!

Fun discussion...

[slidekellyslide]

While the average person may not be as fast or as strong as the average person today we have to remember that the major leaguers of the 1800s were not average. Everyone grew up playing baseball, every town had a team, and these guys were the best of the best. There are probably very few Net54 members who in their athletic prime were as good at baseball as an 1800 major leaguer.

I vote NO

Now basketball on the other hand. I would have definitely dominated.

[drmondobueno]

I have family who played in various levels of baseball around and after the turn of the century, the steel leagues in Pittsburgh, so maybe, yeah. But reality tells me no, as Penicillin saved me as a tot more than once. Ergo, no medicine, no me.

Funny, as I get older I am fine with what I am. And I love baeball cards more than ever.

Just my two cents.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by z28jd

I always laugh when this question comes up because 99% of people frame it as those players coming to play now and not being able to keep up with the speed.

If you could transport a current player back to that period, I don't think there is a single Major League player today who would last an entire season in the 1880's, let alone be a star. They would probably fear for their lives and not be able to adjust to life without all the amenities. Imagine someone now going to play a summer game in those uniforms under those conditions. They would be waving a white flag by June 1st. But on the opposite end, someone from that era might be overwhelmed by how pampered the players are now.

As far as a team of Net54 All-Stars, I can't imagine we would have a shot in hell against them and you can bet when I say "we" that I'd be playing in that game if it could happen. You have to remember how small the majors were back then and how popular baseball was, so there weren't many bad players in the league like there are now.

Then you look at the disaster some players turned out to be when given a trial. Michael Corcoran is a great example. He was the brother of the team's star pitcher in 1884 for the White Stockings, and he was also a minor league pitcher at the time. He gave up 14 runs to the 28-84 Detroit Wolverines. If a 25-year-old minor leaguer got crushed by the worst MLB team, what chance would the Net54 Keyboard Warriors have.

Great post, John. Dan's also. I also like your newly-coined phrase.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Wasn't there a Tom Clancy book that had a virtual/simulated games of the All-Time greats and there was like an attack and Ruth or someone got shot? I can't recall too much more, I was in 6th grade when I read it.

Thread kind of reminded me of that a little.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Don't care how I'd do, just think it would be amazing to play with those guys with early rules and go have some brews afterwards. Maybe get some OJ's signed while I'm at it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe_G.]

1880s baseball wasn’t as some are portraying here. It was fiercely competitive landscape with owners and managers scouring the country for the best players. By the 1880s, the men playing the game were surrounded by it their whole life, it was America’s game. And it was a brutal sport, not for the weak at heart.

Many pitchers were throwing hard long before 1884, the curve ball was established in the 1870s (try to curve a ball with an underhand lob). The League finally allowed overhand delivery (pitching restrictions lifted 1884) as many pitchers were already pushing the envelope and delivering the ball north of a side arm motion.

A quick note on pitching distance, the transition to 60’-6” (1893 to present) is estimated to be only 4’ -3 ½” longer than the pitching distance of the 1880s (not the 10’ -6” often quoted). Pitchers of the 1880s had to deliver the ball from within a box, releasing the ball behind a line that was 50 feet from the center of home plate. The 1893 to present pitching distance of 60’ -6” is measured from the pitching rubber to the back of home plate. When you consider the average release point off the rubber and the difference in measuring from center of home plate vs back of home plate you get a difference of 4’-3 ½”. (this being a paraphrase of several John Thorn and SABR articles)

The link I provided earlier in the thread discusses Rusie’s amazing speed, estimated at low to mid 90s. This extra 4’-3 ½” gave the batters a little better chance to react to a pitch (or get out of the way of a wild one). I’d hate to be facing Rusie in 1892. So the batters of the 1880s were standing 4’ 3 ½” closer to a pitcher who could, prior to 1887, hit the batsmen without penalty. Tim Keefe had a reputation of keeping batters honest. Sam Thompson described Tim Keefe as a pitcher with speed to burn . . . Keefe may not have intended hitting as many men as he did, but he kept us black and blue just the same.

The pitchers of the 1880s used all the tricks of the trade. Another Sam Thompson story (I recently finished Roy Kerr’s biography on Big Sam) relates to the pitching talents of John Clarkson, both mental and physical. With trash talking a plenty, Clarkson always seemed to throw what you least expected, alternating between an in or out shooting curve and a fast one straight as a string. Sam also mentions how Clarkson would dig a hole in the pitchers box to leverage off of; using every and all advantage he could dream up.

There are countless 19th century stories of a prodigy that could throw faster than the speed of light or a batter that hit over .500 on a college team that just couldn’t cut it in the NL, AA, or even leading minor league. Most every boy played the game, only the best advanced.

[boneheadandrube]

For the record, I thought the title of the thread was hilarious when I read it, so I decided to play the devils advocate and "talk of dominating" these guys in a couple posts for fun. For their time these men were certainly the best, and are to be respected as such, but lets not take this too seriously.
I do think that a good common sense analysis of that time vs now is to simply understand that the game, and people physically have both evolved and improved, just as almost anything else has since then. Also, I don't think that statistics or tales from the past are an accurate resource for judging their abilities, but thats what baseball fans use as gospel for these discussions.

GB

[Rookiemonster]

Bottom line men have evolved since then . We are bigger , stronger , faster , smarter , healthier , live longer , we have a longer prime age . It's a joke to compare . They were not raised playing tee ball , little league etc . Don't take the stats they put up to serious . Even well in to the 1900s if you truly think most of those guy would hit off Gibson , Koufax, Spahn your not in touch with reality . ( forget about Ryan , Clemens , Seaver , ) . Just flip the senarios send them in to today's game . They would be laughed off the field . These were not athelites .

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by Rookiemonster

Bottom line men have evolved since then . We are bigger , stronger , faster , smarter , healthier , live longer , we have a longer prime age . It's a joke to compare . They were not raised playing tee ball , little league etc . Don't take the stats they put up to serious . Even well in to the 1900s if you truly think most of those guy would hit off Gibson , Koufax, Spahn your not in touch with reality . ( forget about Ryan , Clemens , Seaver , ) . Just flip the senarios send them in to today's game . They would be laughed off the field . These were not athelites .

Actually, men have not evolved at all. There has been no meaningful genetic change over such a short period of time. Men now are the same as men then. Certainly they are not any smarter.

What has changed is nutrition (though not all for the better), health care and the science behind athletic training and performance. The apparent result of this is an overall rise in the average performance of serious athletes (as evidenced, for example, in track and field results).

Batting averages during the Deadball Era were generally low. However there were huge outliers like Wagner, Cobb, Lajoie. We don’t seem to have outliers like that now because the average guy is better due to the above mentioned factors (BTW - this is not an original thought by me). That does not mean that the very top players now are better than those early outliers. There is no reason to think that these top performing Deadball era outliers (and 19thC outliers as well) would not be top players now.