why wasn't eddie collins banned from baseball?

[Archive]

Posted By: eric p.

i have never understood why eddie collins was never banned from baseball like his fellow team mates from the 1919 blacksox, he played like crap during the postseason, joe jackson, buck weaver, chick gandil and fred mcmullin performed better at the plate than eddie collins did, eddie knew about the fix just like buck did but he ended up going to the hall of fame unlike buck, wow, if eddie can find his way into the hall of fame i think buck should as well, it's just like in life, it's not what you know but who you know and that alone can help you get into the hall of fame (along with a little lying)!

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

Collins suspected there was a fix, Weaver knew there was one, as he sat in on the meetings, he never took the $$$ nor did he report it. Catcher Ray Schalk suspected there was a fix too, he's also in the Hall.
And just because Collins is in the Hall of Fame why should Weaver be elected? Even if he knew nothing about the fix his #'s were hardly Hall Of Fame calibre. Collins had over 3000 hits and hit almost .340 lifetime.

Collins was hated by his teammates since he made $15K in 1919 and virtually everyone else made about half to 2/3 of that, he wasn't one of the boys by any means. And just cause he hit poorly in the series it didn't mean he was on the take. If thats the case Dave Winfield who hat 1 hit in the 1981 World Series shouldn't be in the Hall either ...jay

[Archive]

Posted By: eric

jay, thanks for your insight, the only reason buck didn't have hall of fame #'s was because his career was cut short by being banned, collins would not have had the numbers either if he would have been banned, collins simply had the numbers because he was able to continue playing.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

"the only reason buck didn't have hall of fame #'s was because his career was cut short by being banned, collins would not have had the numbers either if he would have been banned"

ERIC - Not so sure I agree!
Weaver played 9 full season and hit .300 once and that was right on the nose, his career average was .272
In Collins first 9 season he hit .300 seven times and averaged about .335
as many of those seasons he hit in the .340's and as high as .365
He was a bonafide star when he signed w/ the White Sox and he made his own contract for the higher $ than his teammates alienating himself from them.

Granted Collins wouldn't have played 25 seasons and got well over 3300 hits
if his career was cut short, but in the same span as Weaver he hit 50-60 points higher. We'll never know if Weaver would have improved on his average if he played longer....jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Daniels

right to the point and a great comparive. Winfield, I loved the guy though I guess "The Boss" was not too impressed with him.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

Weaver was no HOFer in the making. Other than 1920, his numbers were good to very good at best, not great by any means. He was thirty when he was banned. To think he would have put up HOF numbers after having failed to do so for 8 seasons is a stretch, IMO.

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

While I think it's a sad situation that Buck Weaver found himself in he was not really a HoF player. If not for the 1919 Series fix he would be hardly known. I wouldn't really call it infamy either since most people sympathize for his situation and there is little if any proof that he was in on the fix.

Eddie Collins on the other hand is one of the most underrated players of all time.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe P.

Eric, you have to hit the books just a little bit harder.

Collins was in the majors in 1906, and Weaver started in 1912.
By 1920, that would give Collins 14 years, and Weaver 8 years.
Like what has been already stated, Collins was establishing his credibility and numbers all along.
He added another 10 years after 1920 and maintained the pace to the HOF.
There is no comparison between Collins and Weaver.

Someone said it best, "If it were not for the scandal, we might have not recalled who the hell was Weaver."

You can look it up.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh Adams

"And just cause he hit poorly in the series it didn't mean he was on the take. If thats the case Dave Winfield who hat 1 hit in the 1981 World Series shouldn't be in the Hall either."

On first blush, that does have some appeal. However, I will have to disagree with you Jay. While Winfield only had one hit in the '81 Series, there was no fix or conspiracy to throw the entire World Series. Alternatively, there WAS a conspiracy to fix the 1919 World Series, where only select games were fixed.
Based upon the numbers from the games in the 1919 Series, certain players hit better in games that were not fixed, and hit worse in games that were not. If Cicotte pitched poorly in Game 1 and lost (a game that was fixed), why can it not stand that Jackson, Weaver, Gandil, et al., also played poorly in a fxied game, but then hit well in games that were not fixed?
While hitting well/poorly is not 100 % proof that certain players were in on the conspiracy, it raises the presumption of such in 1919, while has some superficial appeal in 1981.



Go Go White Sox
2005 World Series Champions!

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

There is no way Buck Weaver was heading for the HOF.

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

Collins performed poorly in the 1919 series, but he was never implicated by anyone. Collins was not in on the fix.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Here is a statistical comparison for both players over the first 5 seasons:

Buck Weaver:

Games Ab R H 2B 3B Hr RBI AVG OBP SLG

147 523 55 117 21 8 1 43 .224 .245 .300
151 533 51 145 17 8 4 52 .272 .302 .356
136 541 64 133 20 9 2 28 .246 .279 .327
148 563 83 151 18 11 3 49 .268 .316 .355
151 582 78 132 27 6 3 38 .227 .280 .309

Eddie Collins:

Games AB R H 2B 3B Hr RBI AVG OBP SLG

102 330 39 90 18 7 1 40 .273 .312 .379
153 571 104 198 30 10 3 56 .347 .416 .450
153 581 81 188 16 15 3 81 .324 .382 .418
132 493 92 180 22 13 3 73 .365 .451 .481
153 543 137 189 25 11 0 64 .348 .450 .435

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

Pretty much everyone knew something was amiss in 1919. After the Game 1 loss, manager Gleason went to Comiskey with his suspicions. Comiskey sought help from NL President Heydler and AL Pres. Ban Johnson, but got nowhere.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

but even if someone had known Collins was going to bat .345 in the Series, which they didn't and he didn't, none of the guys in on the fix would have given Collins the time of day, cause, as has been pointed out, he was not their best beloved of men.

It's true that Collins was so consistantly good at the plate, and the field, that his lapse in the '19 World Series is really odd...

Sorta ugly, wasn't he?

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard

That t202 makes Collins actually look really good. I think he was far uglier than that.

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

Not the best looking dude, but man could he play ball.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

Is that Connie Mack behind Collins?



Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

Great Stories.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Gross

Collins is the man ----

"... To my way of thinking, no contest at second base, Hornsby counldn't catch a pop fly, much less go in the outfiled after them, could not come in on a slow hit, Lajoie could not go out, nor come in, and did not cover much ground to his right or left. Collins could do it all ..." -- Ty Cobb.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anson

That T202 does do Collins a favor. However "Home Run" looks to have the serious unibrow going on.

I have to say, the E98 Collins is one of the ugliest cards ever.