Question for Negro League experts

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I think most baseball historians agree that many Negro League players who aren't in the Hall of Fame would have made it if only they had been allowed to play in the majors. But I wonder if the reverse is true. Are there any Negro League Hall of Famers who would not have been elected to the Hall if they played their entire career in the majors? I've always thought that this might be the case with Monte Irvin. He played in the major leagues from age 30-37. You wouldn't expect him to rack up record breaking numbers in that short period of time. But we do know what other Hall of Famers did from age 30 to age 37, and Irvin's record does not compare favorably to many of them.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

I have this bookmarked, seems right on point to your question, lots of information and opinions.
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=16566&page=1&pp=25

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

imo(no expert,just fan)monte irvin was the big power hitter type that personified the 1950's.i imagine he would have similiar #'s to johnny mize, if allowed to play in the majors.so i'm sure he belongs in the hall. minnie minoso did not play in the majors until he was 28 ,i think he did play in the negro leagues,but not too long.his #'s and the level of his play deserves a place in the hall of fame. i think he is the all around best player not in the hof. look at his record(in 1962 he broke his leg,which should have ended his career,that explains his drop in production. http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/minosmi01.shtml sorry i had to get in the plug for minnie!

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I think alot of the negro league players wouldve struggled in the majors but not because of a lack of talent,because of the era and the way they wouldve been treated off and on the field. How many players couldve been as thick-skinned as Jackie Robinson when it came to the bigotry they wouldve encountered,especially in the 20s and 30s.Thats the main reason by far i never agreed with people saying"If Josh Gibson played in the majors he wouldve done this,and Satchell Paige wouldve done that".Im sure a few wouldve stood out but not for an extended period because of the harsh treatment

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I know this is difficult to express, and I mean no offense by it, but it is certainly possible that some negro leaguers with marginal Hall of Fame credentials were inducted as a way of righting some of the wrongs of the past. It's a noble gesture, but not everyone may agree it should be done. What do others think about this?

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

john/barry great posts

i think they picked the best black players against black players,we don't know which ones would have been great in the majors. "I hope that someday Satchel Paige and Josh Gibson will be voted into the Hall of Fame as symbols of the great Negro players who are not here only because they weren't given the chance."
TED WILLIAMS induction speech into the Hall of Fame, 1966.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

asking our thoughts on affirmative action!

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I think it's easy to answer Barry's question without stepping into a political debate. There's no reason to elect unqualified Negro Leaguers to the Hall of Fame when almost everyone agrees that there are plenty of well qualified Negro Leaguers still awaiting induction.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

In 1952, the Pittsburgh Courier, which appears to have been a leading voice of the Negro Leagues and advocate for breaking the color barrier in MLB, named Monte Irvin to its all-time FIRST team as left fielder.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I wasn't suggesting an unqualified negro leaguer has been elected, but simply wondered if the committee made a concerted effort to make sure that the careers of qualified negro leaguers were given a very close look. There are no shortage of players out there from the major leagues who have the credentials to get in and aren't- we've debated endlessly on all the great 19th century players who should be elected. But it is clearly not on the veteran committee's agenda to give an extra hard look at Harry Stovey or Ross Barnes, etc. It's just about setting priorities and acting accordingly.