The Future of Negro League Players in the Hall

[aljurgela]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

By my calculation, 68% of the top 50 players in NBA history have been black men, compared to about 12% of the U.S. population (demographic average across the history of the NBA), so the average American black man is about 5.6 times as likely to be an elite basketball player as his white counterpart. Presumably you were aware of the outcome, though perhaps not its precise magnitude, a priori. In any case, it's a good point, even if you intended it rhetorically, and perhaps a baseball Hall of Fame in which the average black man in the pre-integration era is 5.6 times as likely as the average white man to be included in the Hall could serve as a good upper bound. And the NHL on the other hand (at 0%) could serve as the strictest lower bound. The correct number, then, if we were to theoretically construct a Hall without any racial bias in the selection process should fall somewhere between those two extremes.

Probably the NFL gives a better comparison than either the NBA or NHL, and in that case, I calculate that 52% of elite players are black, which would suggest that indeed the numbers of white and black Hall of Fame players from pre-integration era baseball should be basically equal.

Someone should check my numbers here, but what I come up with if you throw out the people who were inducted as umpires/executives is that there are 129 white men in the Hall who played exclusively or primarily in the pre-integration era. This is compared to 31 men from the Negro Leagues, so while the black men make up a disproportionately high percentage of the Hall members relative to their demographic numbers, they are well below the NFL proportion.

A better number to look at than the NFL though is from baseball itself. Just look at who made it to the Hall from the 1950s and 1960s. There you find 13 black men and 28 white men. And that, I would suggest, is a better guideline for what the pre-integration ratio should look like if we could judge the players fairly on their merits.

So if we set aside the fact that there are both some bad inclusions and bad omissions among the pre-integration white players and just accept that the 129 number is about right, then there should be 60 Negro League players -- and we should induct 29 more than we have already.

But, if you want to compare the different techniques I walked through above, here's what would be most appropriate based on each ratio:

NBA indicates: We should add 133 Negro Leaguers.
NHL indicates: We should remove 31 Negro Leaguers.
NFL indicates: We should add 98 Negro Leaguers.
MLB indicates: We should add 29 Negro Leaguers.

Pretty interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing. I do believe that the 1950s may not be the best time to look at black participation as many MLB teams still would only "allow" one or two black players on the team, thereby constraining to opportunity for many other players (who could have potentially made it to the HOF). You could argue that only the best black stars were allowed the MLB opportunity and therefore there are a disproportionate amount of them were successful (as they were already the cream of the crop).... though I imagine it has always been tougher for blacks in MLB than white (think the Aaron run up to the Ruth record)

Another point, I do not believe that we can include the NHL at all as the economics of hockey have been the main reason for the dearth of African American, in my opinion.

I do not pretend to know the answers or even be an arm chair historian, but I am convinced that there are many other Negro Leaguers who were likely far superior baseball players than some of those already enshrined in Cooperstown, and it would be fair to given them another look.

Nonetheless, interesting "math", and a fascinating perspective.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by aljurgela

Pretty interesting perspective. Thanks for sharing. I do believe that the 1950s may not be the best time to look at black participation as many MLB teams still would only "allow" one or two black players on the team, thereby constraining to opportunity for many other players (who could have potentially made it to the HOF). You could argue that only the best black stars were allowed the MLB opportunity and therefore there are a disproportionate amount of them were successful (as they were already the cream of the crop).... though I imagine it has always been tougher for blacks in MLB than white (think the Aaron run up to the Ruth record)

Another point, I do not believe that we can include the NHL at all as the economics of hockey have been the main reason for the dearth of African American, in my opinion.

I do not pretend to know the answers or even be an arm chair historian, but I am convinced that there are many other Negro Leaguers who were likely far superior baseball players than some of those already enshrined in Cooperstown, and it would be fair to given them another look.

Nonetheless, interesting "math", and a fascinating perspective.

These are points that I considered as I was writing the post. I decided to include the 1950s as there were far more black players than black Hall of Fame players allowed in by that point, so you're correct that the ones who are included were more likely to be All-Star/Hall of Fame caliber than the rest of the league or else would not have gotten the chance, but I think by the 1950s if you were not only good enough to be a successful day-to-day player in MLB but actually good enough to reach the Hal of Fame that you'd almost certainly have been one of the handful of players given a roster spot.

Certainly I'm not suggesting that because all of the best hockey players have been white we shouldn't have any Negro Leaguers in Cooperstown, only pointing out the flipside to Ryan's suggestion to look at the NBA. The NBA is the flipside to your point about the effects of economic hardship on one's chosen sport. I have no doubt that if hockey were the only game in town and the price of entry were not an issue that there would be plenty of elite African-American players in the NHL.

There are many relatively weak players currently in the Hall (Rube Marquard, Rick Ferrell, Rabbit Maranville...), and I'm convinced there are dozens of Negro League players who have not yet been inducted but are better than that threshold, but I'm convinced of more than that. I believe there are roughly 300 players past and present who have been (or currently are) good enough that they belong in the Hall and that right around 60 of those players are men who were excluded from MLB by the color barrier.

[aljurgela]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

These are points that I considered as I was writing the post. I decided to include the 1950s as there were far more black players than black Hall of Fame players allowed in by that point, so you're correct that the ones who are included were more likely to be All-Star/Hall of Fame caliber than the rest of the league or else would not have gotten the chance, but I think by the 1950s if you were not only good enough to be a successful day-to-day player in MLB but actually good enough to reach the Hal of Fame that you'd almost certainly have been one of the handful of players given a roster spot.

Certainly I'm not suggesting that because all of the best hockey players have been white we shouldn't have any Negro Leaguers in Cooperstown, only pointing out the flipside to Ryan's suggestion to look at the NBA. The NBA is the flipside to your point about the effects of economic hardship on one's chosen sport. I have no doubt that if hockey were the only game in town and the price of entry were not an issue that there would be plenty of elite African-American players in the NHL.

There are many relatively weak players currently in the Hall (Rube Marquard, Rick Ferrell, Rabbit Maranville...), and I'm convinced there are dozens of Negro League players who have not yet been inducted but are better than that threshold, but I'm convinced of more than that. I believe there are roughly 300 players past and present who have been (or currently are) good enough that they belong in the Hall and that right around 60 of those players are men who were excluded from MLB by the color barrier.

(not that it matters to you or anyone else), but I agree on all points... though I do not profess to have a list of 300 players (past and present) or 60 from the negro leagues who deserve to be in the HOF... I'll just have to trust you on that one... I probably couldn't pick out more than 20-30 negro leaguers who have a legit case (in my opinion), but again I am not a historian. Thanks for your perspective. Al

[packs]

You'd have to look at the careers differently. You couldn't use the same magic numbers you would for the MLB players. For example, because the Negro League played fewer games in their seasons, it would be almost impossible for someone to get 3,000 hits or 500 homers.

[theshleps]

Resurrecting this thread- if someone from the Negro League makes it next year who are the people you think have the best chance?

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by theshleps

Resurrecting this thread- if someone from the Negro League makes it next year who are the people you think have the best chance?

In no particular order, John Donaldson, Dick Lundy, Grant Johnson, John Beckwith, Alejandro Oms, Spottswoods Poles, Wild Bill Wright, Nip Winters, Perucho Cepeda, Dick Redding, Oliver Marcelle. I could see Bruce Petway, Quincy Trouppe, Pancho Coimbre (who Clemente idolized and said was better than he was), Buck O'Neil, Bingo DeMoss, George Scales, Sammy T. Hughes, Newt Allen, William Bell, Chet Brewer. I'm sure I've forgotten some. Much as I wish that would occur, I doubt that it will.