It's not Cobb

[molenick]

I don’t want to muddy up the other threads about IDing photos, so here is my cautionary tale.

Years ago, I purchased this postcard at a show from a very reputable dealer. He showed it to me and asked if I wanted it. I said, sure, it's a nice image, but I was surprised at the price he quoted. He pointed to a person in the photo and said "it's Cobby" (for some reason I remember him saying Cobby).

There were no smart phones (or cell phones of any kind), no laptops where we could search for images. I didn't know what the McGraw Tigers were (the back is blank), but he said it was Cobb and after he said that I thought, wow, that's Cobb (I won't tell you which one it is, but there is one guy that looks like Cobb, to me at least). So, I bought it (luckily not at today's Cobb prices but for much more than a generic postcard would cost).

Years later I remembered it and did some modern-day research. The McGraw Giants were a local team that was based in Detroit! This was a baseball player that looked like Cobb on a Detroit team in the same era when he played!

Unfortunately, I found an article in a 1910 Detroit paper which identifies "Cobb" as "Anderson, catcher". I guess I could come up with some reason that this was still Cobb (it was an off day for the Tigers and Cobb was walking by and thought it would be funny to "photo bomb" the team picture) but realistically I had to admit that it was not him and that the more logical explanation is that there were two people in Detroit that looked similar at the time.

[brianp-beme]

Hold on one darn minute! You actually have 2 Ty Cobbs in that photo, the guy standing to the left of the man in the suit, and the one lying down on the left side.

Team photos with two Ty Cobbs pictured are exceedingly rare...you definitely have a keeper!

Brian (nice photo anyways)

[ajjohnsonsoxfan]

hmm I don't see anyone in that array that looks like Cobb?

[molenick]

Well, I guess I was even more of a sucker than I thought. To my eye the fifth man from the left (the fourth in uniform) looked like Cobb. At least 30 years ago (or whenever it was I bought this).

And to be clear I KNOW no one is Cobb, I was not looking to be rescued from my bad purchase. It was just an example of how people (me and the dealer...although he did have financial motive for his assessment) can come to an incorrect conclusion based on facial similarity.

[edjs]

Originally Posted by molenick

Well, I guess I was even more of a sucker than I thought. To my eye the fifth man from the left (the fourth in uniform) looked like Cobb. At least 30 years ago (or whenever it was I bought this).

And to be clear I KNOW no one is Cobb, I was not looking to be rescued from my bad purchase. It was just an example of how people (me and the dealer...although he did have financial motive for his assessment) can come to an incorrect conclusion based on facial similarity.

I can see it. Especially when you really want it to be. I’ve done it myself.

[SteveS]

Here's something that's neither here nor there, but it looks like Not-Cobb's jersey says "Tigerz," while everyone else's says "Tigers."

[molenick]

Okay, new theory. It's an inside joke. The Z is the indicator. And the picture is labelled as "Anderson, catcher" as part of the joke because everyone in Detroit would know it was obviously Cobb. Thank you, I will give you a percentage of any proceeds I get from selling it as a Cobb postcard .

[JollyElm]

Wow, it's more than just a passing resemblance. It looks like a younger version of Cobby. Any chance the date of the photograph is wrong?

Screen Shot 2021-09-08 at 9.16.48 PM.jpg

[molenick]

I don't have a date on the photograph, just a date when the photo appeared in the paper. It's possible the photo was taken earlier, but I doubt much earlier based on matching the lineup to the photo (below is a link to the article, where you can blow it up bigger than I can post it).

Based on enlarging the clipping page, I see that six of the players in the lineup are in the photo. Of the three that are not, one is the shortstop (no one is labelled as shortstop in the photo); one is the pitcher (there is only one pitcher in the photo, and I assume they had more than one); and one is the catcher (oddly, there are three catchers in the photo but none of them is the catcher in the lineup).

It would have to be at least five years older for Cobb to be playing on a local team. But even that wouldn't make sense, because he was playing in the minors on southern teams before he started playing for Detroit (or, I imagine, before he was even in Detroit). So, for some reason, in 1905, he would have to be trying to break into the big leagues and also playing on a local team for fun.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/?cl...FMCQedy53XGGks

[Yoda]

Cobb was at least 6' 1' and that fellow is no where near it.

[BeanTown]

Let’s not forget that Ty Cobb had a younger Brother who played semi pro baseball.