MLB teams that deserve more founding year historical credit

[scooter729]

Since the Orioles were originally the St. Louis Browns who moved in '53 or '54, why doesn't that date them to 1901 instead of 1894?

The Temple Cup teams from 1894 with Hughie Jennings et al aren't the same Orioles as the team there today, so is there an older connection than 1901?

[drumback]

The Baltimore Orioles of the 1890s eventually became the New York Yankees.

[zljones]

Originally Posted by drumback

The Baltimore Orioles of the 1890s eventually became the New York Yankees.

From my understanding the Baltimore Orioles from 1892-1899 were dead in 1899. The Baltimore Orioles from 1901 that became the New York Highlanders in 1903 then the Yankees by 1912 were not the same group at all as the 1882-1899 Orioles, not any part of it from my understanding.

[zljones]

Originally Posted by scooter729

Since the Orioles were originally the St. Louis Browns who moved in '53 or '54, why doesn't that date them to 1901 instead of 1894?

The Temple Cup teams from 1894 with Hughie Jennings et al aren't the same Orioles as the team there today, so is there an older connection than 1901?

Before they were the St. Louis Browns in 1901, they were the Milwaukee Brewers in the Western League which became the American League.

[drumback]

I stand corrected. Wasn't thinking clearly. . However, it was a couple of the 1890s Orioles, McGraw and Robinson, who led the way in bringing about the 1901 Orioles, who eventually became the Yankees.

[zljones]

Originally Posted by drumback

I stand corrected. Wasn't thinking clearly. . However, it was a couple of the 1890s Orioles, McGraw and Robinson, who led the way in bringing about the 1901 Orioles, who eventually became the Yankees.

Yes they did. And 19th Century Baseball can be confusing as heck because they kept using the same names.

[esd10]

i believe that the 1919 cincinnati reds need to get more credit they where a very good there record was 96-44 and had some great players and a hofer in edd roush.

[jalex]

Originally Posted by esd10

i believe that the 1919 cincinnati reds need to get more credit they where a very good there record was 96-44 and had some great players and a hofer in edd roush.

Agreed, the 1919 Reds were better than history tells. Unfortunately we'll never know how good because the Sox were crooked...

And just because it's my area of collecting interest and my hometown, Indianapolis has had a pro team since 1876. The franchise changed several times, spent several years in the early NL, WL, AA, etc... as the Blues and the Hoosiers and the current Indians franchise began in 1902. Apparently, and I don't have much info on it, but the Chicago White Stockings (Cubs) played games in Indianapolis in 1878. My hometown has a rich Pro ball history...

The midwest was swarming with teams in the early baseball years. I love that era, impossible to completely understand, but fun...

Cheers,

Jim

[Hot Springs Bathers]

Zach- All 8 of the original American League teams were formed on their own and not teams migrating from the National League or the American Association where many of the owners were rounded up.

I don't know where you found the starting dates but all eight of the 2012 Media Guides for the original 8 AL teams simply list their origins back to 1901 and Ban Johnson's new league.

Until recently the Yankees have even been reluctant to add the 1901 season in their history though it was certainly their start in Baltimore!

[zljones]

Originally Posted by Hot Springs Bathers

Zach- All 8 of the original American League teams were formed on their own and not teams migrating from the National League or the American Association where many of the owners were rounded up.

I don't know where you found the starting dates but all eight of the 2012 Media Guides for the original 8 AL teams simply list their origins back to 1901 and Ban Johnson's new league.

Until recently the Yankees have even been reluctant to add the 1901 season in their history though it was certainly their start in Baltimore!

None of the A.L. teams came from the National League at all. They either formed in 1901 or they formed with Western Association League of Western League. The White Sox and Twins stem back to Western Association days. While the Tigers, Indians, and current Orioles stem stricktly from Western League. White Sox and Twins were added to the Western League in 1894 after time spent in the Western Association. The White Sox (back then Sioux City Cornhuskers) won the 1891 Western Association Championship or Pennant. They also beat the Chicago Colts and St. Louis Browns in postseason showdown with Cap Anson and the Colts and Charlie Comiskey and the Browns. That says to me the 1891 Cornhuskers were damn good!

[triwak]

I agree about the St. Louis Cardinals origins dating back to 1875, although as you mentioned, they were pretty sporadic until joining the AA in 1882. But why the modern team DOES NOT credit the AA years is beyond me - and pisses me off?! (Most memorabilia and "authorities" state 1892 as the origin year). This totally discounts 4 additional league pennants, which are not recognized on the walls of Busch Stadium. Should be 22 instead of 18. I've often wondered if they did not want any connection to Charlie Comiskey (player/manager of the AA team), because of his later Chicago connection? I'm getting ready to have a St. Louis Brown Stockings jersey made, with "Comiskey" on the back. Can't wait to see people's reaction when I go to Busch - which I do, often. Huge Cardinal fan!