Trivia

[NiceDocter]

Every name can be a source of mockery but I would have to say McWeeny is up there at the top!!

[molenick]

I don't know the answer but my understanding was that Ruth was sold for $100K (not $125K), which is why Grove was later sold for $100,600 (in order for it to be the highest sale price).

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by molenick

I don't know the answer but my understanding was that Ruth was sold for $100K (not $125K), which is why Grove was later sold for $100,600 (in order for it to be the highest sale price).

History.com says 125K
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-...SV&OCID=MY01SV

[molenick]

Wikipedia and Baseball Reference say $100K (of which $25K was in cash, which may account for the disparity?).

[jingram058]

McWeeny, wow, what a name.

Here's Shovel Hodge. A name like that, you would think a great fielder, as in human vacuum cleaner. But not so, a pitcher, and not a great one.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by NiceDocter

Every name can be a source of mockery but I would have to say McWeeny is up there at the top!!

McDonalds is selling hot dogs now?

[molenick]

I have seen "reliable" sites use the $100K number and "reliable" sites use the $125K number. It's hard to know who is getting their information second-hand from whom, but here is a link to an auction of the contract promissory note in relation to the sale https://goldinauctions.com/LotDetail...entoryid=10213.

It appears that the $100K number is based on the fact that "The $100,000 payment was to be distributed with $25,000 in cash at the signing, plus three promissory notes each for $25,000, payable over the next several years at a rate of 6% per annum."

Again, I can't say which is correct but it wasn't a straightforward cash deal, which may have resulted in the confusion of the actual number.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by molenick

I have seen "reliable" sites use the $100K number and "reliable" sites use the $125K number. It's hard to know who is getting their information second-hand from whom, but here is a link to an auction of the contract promissory note in relation to the sale https://goldinauctions.com/LotDetail...entoryid=10213.

It appears that the $100K number is based on the fact that "The $100,000 payment was to be distributed with $25,000 in cash at the signing, plus three promissory notes each for $25,000, payable over the next several years at a rate of 6% per annum."

Again, I can't say which is correct but it wasn't a straightforward cash deal, which may have resulted in the confusion of the actual number.

That is my understanding also
But amazing how history can be so different with the same result and so well “documented “

[molenick]

I think $100K was the number known at the time...it was the reason Grove was sold for $600 more (although if you count interest, it actually was not more than Ruth).

But I still have no idea of the answer to the original question.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

McDonalds is selling hot dogs now?

Well, they are offering onion rings as of now, or they are here in Fort Myers.

[cammb]

So much for the answer

[molenick]

I still think it would be interesting to know the highest amount paid for a player before Ruth. The only information I could find was that Ruth's sale was the highest up to that point. Maybe I misunderstood but I thought that's what the original question was asking.

[cammb]

Prior to the Ruth trade , The Philadelphia Athletic s sold Eddie Collins to White Sox for $50,000 in 1914.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by cammb

Prior to the Ruth trade , The Philadelphia Athletic s sold Eddie Collins to White Sox for $50,000 in 1914.

Would never have guessed that Eddie Collins sold for that much.

I never followed the sales/trade of players before

But this is an interesting part of baseball history