T206 Southern Leaguers and Joe Jackson Redux

[Abravefan11]

During the recent T202 “Lord Catches His Man” hype several threads about Joe Jackson were spawned. One that I posted in quite a bit concerned why Joe was not included in many of the T and E card sets during his playing time. I took the position that Joe couldn’t have been included in the T206 set due to when and where he played and by not being included in this set it eliminated him from being in other sets that used the same images. During this debate I used timelines and distribution information that I have since found to be inaccurate. While I still maintain the belief that Joe’s absence from T206 set precludes him from being in other similar sets such as T213, T214, and T215, I think his absence from the T206 set is explained by where Joe was from January 1909 – April 1909.

First it is important to understand that the southern leaguers were one group of 48 selected during the same period and not two different groups selected at different times. Though 14 of the players were absent from the initial offering with Hindu cigarettes this was not planned. The best evidence of this is the Hindu ads themselves as they state, “This collection consists of a large assortment of colored lithographs of baseball players in the Southern, South Atlantic, Texas, and Virginia Leagues.” The Texas League was included in these Hindu ads but all 6 representatives of the league missed the Hindu offering and first appeared in the 350 series along with 8 other players in early 1910.



Next let’s look at when and where the 48 players played for the teams that they represent in the T206 set. The chart below shows in green when the players played for the teams they represent in the T206 set and red shows when they played for another team.



I believe this chart shows that all of the players were selected based on where they were playing in 1909 with the 1908 season having no bearing on their inclusion. All of the players started the 1909 season with the team they represent however many of them played for different leagues in 1908 and some were even contracted to play for other teams in early 1909.

-Shaughnessy played for Reading in 1908 and wasn’t contracted to Roanoke until late January 1909.

-Stark played for San Antonio in 1908 but his contract was sold to Columbus in January and then bought back by San Antonio in February.



In 1908 Ellam played for Connellsville and Bastian for Albany. Lafitte and McCauley did not play for any team in 1908.

I believe these details show that the 48 Southern League players began being chosen for the T206 set in late January into February and early March of 1909 as the players signed with their respective teams for the coming season.

As we look at all 48 players, including the 14 that were not printed until the 350 series, we will see that many of them changed teams during 1909 season, yet these changes were not reflected in their team designation in the T206 set.

A list of some of the SL’ers who changed teams during the 1909 season gives us an indicator to when the contracts and players had been decided upon as they all represent the team they started the season with but not who they represented at the time of printing in the 150 or 350 series :

Carey from Memphis to Little Rock prior to the end of June.
Foster was called up to Cleveland in July.
Fritz from New Orleans to Montgomery in June/July.
Manion from Columbia to Jacksonville in July.
Kiernan from Columbia to Jacksonville in July.
Paige from Charleston to New Orleans in June.
Person from Montgomery to Little Rock in July.
Smith from Shreveport to Indianapolis in July/August.

Once we agree that the players included in the set represent the team that they were playing for at the time they were asked to be in the set the most telling inclusion is Foley White.

Foley represents the Houston team and was not printed until the 350 series. He was listed on the Houston roster on 04/11/1909 however he did not play for Houston after the Texas League season started on 04/18/1909 and played his first game for Waco on 05/30/1909.



Considering all of the above information I propose that all 48 Southern League players were chosen and included in the set between January 1909 and April 1909.

So what does this mean for Joe Jackson?

Joe spent the early part of 1909 in Philadelphia.



Since Joe wasn't sent down to Savannah until late April 1909 and by that time the 48 Southern Leaguers had been decided upon he couldn't have been included as a Southern Leaguer in the T206 set.

I have more details but tried to keep this as short as possible. I would love to hear what others that are interested have to say about this.

[mybuddyinc]

Tim,

GREAT research !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I gotta' agree with this theory.


Now, can you please explain how one gets blood poisoning from being hit with a pitched ball ??

[T206Collector]

...is just about as good as anything I've ever seen on here. I appreciate the articles and contract signing dates. Far from being another imagined theory about the origins of T206 and its players, your post provides concrete markers and shines just about conclusive light on this subject.

Thanks!

[Ladder7]

Great digging!

[botn]

Now THAT is some research. Great effort Tim.

[Leon]

Wow....Tim, that is awesome research. I haven't see that kind of research since Joe G did his on the board several years ago. Very, very nice job. Thanks for sharing!!

[D. Broughman]

Thanks for the time and effort you put into this research Tim.

[slantycouch]

Great stuff! Thanks for posting a good read!

[teetwoohsix]

Amazing research Tim !! Thank you for posting this, I have learned alot from it. Very interesting to be able to tie everything together with facts.....thanks again!!

Sincerely,Clayton

[tedzan]

Tim

Great research....but I'm somewhat confused, if your contention is that all the T206 Southern Leaguer's (SL)
were issued the same time, then please explain why only 34 of the SL were printed with the HINDU back in
the 150 Series ?



TED Z

[ethicsprof]

Excellent work, Tim.
This is research that is a pleasure to read!!
I would think that this deserves to be on the pages of Old Cardboard or
Collector Magazine.
Congratulations.
all the best,
barry

[tedzan]

......the report of his 1/4/09 contract nothwithstanding, Joe's Major League debut was on August 25, 1908.
Connie Mack purchased Joe from Greenville (Carolina Association) for $1,000 on July 30, 1908. Connie Mack
was impressed with Joe's all-around ball playing for Greenville. Mack told Joe to report to the Phila. A's at
the end of the 1908 Carolina Association season. Joe played in several games for the A's in Aug-Sept 1908.
Reference....Connie Mack and the Early Years of Baseball (by Norman Macht)

These dates are consistent with the fact that the 1st series of the American Caramel set (E90-1) was printed
and issued late in 1908. Shoeless Joe was printed in the E90-1's first series (along with the majority of A's
players). Joe's "ugly" picture in the E90-1 set was derived from the 1908 Greenville team photo. Somewhere,
I have that photo, and will try to post it when I find it.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Thanks everyone for the kind words, I genuinely appreciate them.

Originally Posted by tedzan

Tim

Great research....but I'm somewhat confused, if your contention is that all the T206 Southern Leaguer's (SL)
were issued the same time, then please explain why only 34 of the SL were printed with the HINDU back in
the 150 Series ?

TED Z

I believe there is a lot of evidence that the fourteen 350 Only series players were selected at the same time as the other 34 to be in the set. Why they were not printed in the first run of Hindu backs remains a mystery but I don't feel their omission from the Hindu set proves in anyway that they were selected at a different time from the other 34.

Ted - Regarding your second post, I don't disagree with anything you say however it's not relevant to Joe's inclusion in the Southern League group. If ATC decided to select the 48 and did so as I propose between January and April of 1909, then Joe wasn't a member of any of those teams at that time. One could make an argument for him being in the set as a Philadelphia A, but not a Southern League representative.

[tedzan]

I am reluctant to revive my theory regarding the player's rights conflict between American Caramel Co. (ACC) and
American Litho. because it drives some people "nuts" on this forum (including one who has already posted on this
thread).
Nevertheless, to me (and others on this forum) it is evident that ACC had exclusive rights to portray the A's ball-
players in their E90-1 first series. With the exception of Bender, Amer. Litho. did not print any of the A's players
in their 150 series of the T206 set that are depicted in the 1st series of the E90-1.

According to my Connie Mack reference, Joe Jackson started the 1909 season with the A's, but was sent down to
Savannah shortly thereafter. This indicates to me that if my above theory has no merit....then there is no reason
why Amer. Litho. could not have depicted Shoeless Joe either as an A's subject or a Savannah subject.


TED Z

[dstudeba]

Very nice Tim, I enjoyed this thread. That is extremely rare for a T206 thread, well done!

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

According to my Connie Mack reference, Joe Jackson started the 1909 season with the A's, but was sent down to
Savannah shortly thereafter. This indicates to me that if my above theory has no merit....then there is no reason
why Amer. Litho. could not have depicted Shoeless Joe either as an A's subject or a Savannah subject.

TED Z

According to my timeline Joe couldn't have been included as a Savannah player since he wasn't sent down until the last week of April and by that time the 48 Southern Leaguers had been selected.

As far as Joe being depicted as an A I couldn't make a case for or against it at this time.

[cfc1909]

this is great-thank you so much for your research-now we need to figure out why the 14 were not printed in the first run.


there has been much progress on this set in the last few years-thanks to all for your efforts.

[D. Broughman]

Tim you have Roy Ellam listed with Birmingham and Connellsville but his card has Nashville on it. Any ideas about this player. D.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by D. Broughman

Tim you have Roy Ellam listed with Birmingham and Connellsville but his card has Nashville on it. Any ideas about this player. D.

I'm glad you caught that. His team designation is an error in the T206 set. He played for Birmingham in 1909. He did eventually make it to Nashville in 1916.

All Southern Association teams have at least two representatives in the set if you list Ellam with Birmingham.

[Abravefan11]

I'm sorry if it's a little hard to see but in the layout below the 350 Only players team designations are shaded in gray. I believe this helps give perspective to how the 350 Only players were part of the whole picture from the beginning. It's especially evident in the VSL group.

[Brian Weisner]

Hi Tim,
Great research.....

Be well Brian


PS How do the 8 SL proofs that were auctioned off to Keith several years ago fit into your pattern??? It seems as though they may have planned on more SLers at one time....

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Brian Weisner

How do the 8 SL proofs that were auctioned off to Keith several years ago fit into your pattern??? It seems as though they may have planned on more SLers at one time....

I haven't included the 8 proofs to this point because ATC didn't included them in the actual production.

Several of the eight played for a different team in 1908 (Fleet Mayberry didn't play anywhere) and all played for the team they represent on the proof at the beginning of 1909. Tim Dwyer moves from Jacksonville to Columbia in the same transaction that sent Manion to Jacksonville in early July. So these eight appear to follow the same timeline I proposed for the other 48.





If I were to try and fit the eight proofs into the existing set it would throw off the balance of the team distributions except in the case of the two Chattanooga players. Chattanooga is the only team from the South Atlantic League without a representative.

Adding 3 Jacksonville players, 2 Montgomery players, and 1 Danville player seems to upset the weight of each league teams representation to me.

Also the number 48 fits the 12 card sheet theory. There were only 34 cards in the original printing but as I've said before I don't think that was the original plan.

[D. Broughman]

Thanks for for the followup and answering my question. Just shows how much research you have put into this set. Thanks! D.

[sreader3]

Tim,
Nice work. The early '09 selection time you have identified for the SLers corresponds neatly with the selection time for the 150-only and 150/350 major league subject groups.
Scot

[Bridwell]

Hi Tim,
Great work!

I wonder why only 1 or 2 from the teams were selected. I could theorize that ATC wanted to increase it's marketing reach into the southern states so wanted to add a few players there.

Were these SL players some of the biggest minor league stars of 1909? Could selection have been based on their stats from 1908 or their stats in the early portion of the 1909 season?

Ron

[wonkaticket]

Tim, super job! Wonderful post.

Cheers,

John

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Bridwell

Were these SL players some of the biggest minor league stars of 1909? Could selection have been based on their stats from 1908 or their stats in the early portion of the 1909 season?

Hi Ron -

Some of them were stars and some of them were not and I don't think the 1909 season had any bearing on who was selected. If my timeline of Jan - April for selecting the group is correct than the 1909 season for the leagues were only a few weeks old by then.

Southern League Opening Days:

Southern Association - April 15th
Virginia State League - April 22nd
South Atlantic League - April 15th
Texas League - April 17th

Also when you consider several of the players that changed teams early or midway through the 1909 season were released from their original club due to poor performance it seems less likely.

I don't believe the 1908 season had any bearing either as many of the players played in other leagues in 1908 and a few no where at all.

[DixieBaseball]

Tim - Thank you so much for the research and making it easy to understand. I really appreciate your efforts and thank you for sharing !

A few questions re :

If I were to try and fit the eight proofs into the existing set it would throw off the balance of the team distributions except in the case of the two Chattanooga players. Chattanooga is the only team from the South Atlantic League without a representative.

What did you mean by this statement above ? Are you saying that in the T206 set, Chattanooga is the only team not depicted with a card from the SAL ? Help me compute...

Since none of these Proofs are actually in T206, I suppose the only other identical images (to the T206 proof) would be T210 & T211 ? Pepe-Montg & Lee-J'Ville are the same image as T210, but a more close up image. I believe the Osteen Image is the same as his Montgomery card as well. Do the other players match up with their T210 images (Not including the 2 Chatt players) ?

I have a Chattanooga PC here that shows Alcock (2nd top left) & Meek (Top Right) and their likeness to the SL Proof cards are spot on. The stamp date on reverse says May 17, 1909.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by NashvilleBaseball

A few questions re :

If I were to try and fit the eight proofs into the existing set it would throw off the balance of the team distributions except in the case of the two Chattanooga players. Chattanooga is the only team from the South Atlantic League without a representative.

What did you mean by this statement above ? Are you saying that in the T206 set, Chattanooga is the only team not depicted with a card from the SAL ? Help me compute...

Thanks JJ.

Yes, that is what I am saying. In 1909 the South Atlantic League added two teams, Chattanooga and Columbus giving the league a total of eight teams. Seven of the eight have a representative in the T206 set with Chattanooga being the one left out. So adding two Chattanooga players to the list below stills maintains a pretty even balance. Adding three additional Jacksonville players throws off that balance in my opinion. The Leagues aren't perfectly balanced other than the VSL but looking at them it does appear ATC tried to include everyone fairly evenly within each league.

Originally Posted by NashvilleBaseball

Since none of these Proofs are actually in T206, I suppose the only other identical images (to the T206 proof) would be T210 & T211 ? Pepe-Montg & Lee-J'Ville are the same image as T210, but a more close up image. I believe the Osteen Image is the same as his Montgomery card as well. Do the other players match up with their T210 images (Not including the 2 Chatt players) ?

Yes other players share the same image in the T206 and T210 sets however team changes are reflected for the T210's for their 1910 season where they were not in the 350 printing of the T206 set.



I hope this answered your questions, if not let me know and I will try again.

[DixieBaseball]

One subtle difference on the Lee - J'Ville SL Proof from the T210 is the Uniform. Same pose, but different uni...

[rebelsart]

Tim,
Great thread and tremendous job on researching the T206 Southern League players.
I have notes on these going back many years and have always believed there are more T206 Southern league players to be discovered.

Briefly, here is a breakdown:

Virginia League
Class C, 6 teams
Danville - 2 cards (King, Westlake)
Lynchburg - 2 cards (Hooker, Orth)
Norfolk - 2 cards (Otey, Seitz)
Portsmouth - 2 cards (Guiheen, McCauley)
Richmond - 2 cards (Lipe, Revelle)
Roanoke - 2 cards (Ryan, Shaughnessy)

So we have 6 teams and each team has 2 cards. Every team is represented evenly. Seems to make sense.

South Atlantic League
Class C, 8 teams
Augusta - 1 card (Coles)
Charleston - 2 cards (Foster, Paige)
Chattanooga - 0 cards
Columbia - 2 cards (Kiernan, Manion)
Columbus - 1 card (Helm)
Jacksonville - 2 cards (Mullaney, Violat)
Macon - 1 card (Lafitte)
Savannah - 1 card (Howard)

This distribution/selection does not make sense. Why not 2 cards per team
as established by the Virginia league (also a Class C league)?
There are 6 "missing" cards from this league. (1 from Augusta, 2 from Chattanooga, 1 from Columbus, 1 from Macon, 1 from Savannah).

Now factor in the 8 proof cards and you find the 2 "missing" players from Chattanooga! Coincidence?
I believe that the other 6 "missing" cards will be found one day.

The other breakdowns from the Texas league and Southern Association reveal similar "missing" cards based on cards distributed and the imbalance of known cards from team to team.
I show a total of 28 "missing" T206 Southern Leaguers (before the 8 proofs were discovered). And 1 of these missing cards is from New Orleans! Maybe Joe Jackson?

I believe that possibly due to poor sales the T206 Southern league cards were stopped in mid-production. Only 48 were distributed, but many others that existed in proof form were not issued. The T206 Southern League project was then moved to the T210 red border series which DOES include Joe Jackson, New Orleans.

Hope this makes some sense.
Art M.

[teetwoohsix]

Thanks Art, what a great contribution you've just added to this thread. Very interesting theory.

Sincerely, Clayton

[Abravefan11]

Hi Art and thank you for posting.

The "proofs" are proof that other southern league cards were created but not printed for distribution. How many? I don't think we will ever know but I do believe it was more than the eight that were discovered.

Following the "two players for each team" trend there should be another image for Augusta, Columbus, Macon, and Savannah. (The two for Chattanooga were found with the proofs.)

Given the majority of the proofs were of Jacksonville and Montgomery players, two teams already well represented in the set, there could have been any number of additional images for each team.

Was Joe Jackson one of those images? I don't think so, but if he was it would have been as a Savannah player and a different image than his T210.

[teetwoohsix]

I know there are some newer T206 collectors on the board and after reading through this thread I thought I'd bump it for the excellent content regarding the T206 Southern Leaguers.

Sincerely, Clayton

* Tim, again- amazing job on this !!!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

I know there are some newer T206 collectors on the board and after reading through this thread I thought I'd bump it for the excellent content regarding the T206 Southern Leaguers.

Sincerely, Clayton

* Tim, again- amazing job on this !!!

Clayton,

Thank you. I just read through the entire thread...better than the morning paper.

Tim - your content was superb. Amazing job!

Best,

Eric

[E93]

Tim,
Outstanding research!
JimB

[g_vezina_c55]

Wow Tim verry nice and interresting thread for a relatively new T206 collector like me !

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Clayton,

Thank you. I just read through the entire thread...better than the morning paper.

Tim - your content was superb. Amazing job!

Best,

Eric

No problem, this thread really helped me and I figured it would help others as well.

There are other great threads about T206's on the board, but this one has always been one of my favorites.

Sincerely, clayton

[toppcat]

Nice work Tim-what a fascinating read!

[Abravefan11]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the kind words. I apologize that some of the images aren't as clear as they used to be and will look into correcting that if possible.

I really enjoyed the research into the southern league group of the T206 set. Jimmy and I have worked together on some similar research, with other parts of the set, but getting the info together in a post is still in the To Do pile. I'll try to get some of that together soon to share.