
05-29-2024, 11:26 PM
|
Jeff Lazarus
Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,282
|
|
Thoughts:
- The question of the level of play in the Negro Leagues has been researched extensively. "Outsider Baseball" is one book that covers the topic. It seems quite safe to accept that the Negro Leagues were on par with the AL/NL or quite close.
- There are many sources of data to support this. Looking at the black players who integrated the league and their success is one of them. (It also points to the strength of the hitting but possible deficiency in the pitching). Throw in barnstorming games and other sources and the picture is pretty strong. The only places that might have had similar level of play were Puerto Rico and Cuba at times. (My view, I don't recall what the book says about those leagues.)
- The Major Leagues was already a conglomeration of different leagues, so adding a few more that did not play each other is not outside of what already existed. The National (which launched in 1876), the American (1901), the American Association (1882-1891), Union Association (1884), Players' League (1890) and Federal League (1914-1915). Throw in the fact that the AL and NL were entirely separate until the World Series. Players like Ernie Banks literally never played a game against a team in the American League.
- The move brings a lot more attention to the Negro Leagues and their players and for that alone this move might be worthwhile.
- I struggle to understand the logic of combining the stats. The differences between the leagues as far as games played etc is enormous even if the players were of similar caliber. I wonder whether having Josh Gibson first on some rate stats while having very pedestrian counting totals is a bigger gain or loss.
- Because of the point above, even as an avid Negro League fan and someone who believes that many more black players from before integration deserve to be enshrined in Cooperstown, I don't love the move which I think confuses the narratives by erasing the differences between them.
|