Moonlight Graham

[brianp-beme]

The prior post about the Zeenut of Pennington reminded me of my post almost three years ago, pasted below, which surprisingly showed/revealed the six 1911 Obak cards of players who only appeared in a single MLB game.

Phil Cooney - 1905 New York Yankees 3 AB
Lee 'Flame' Delhi - 1912 White Sox 3 IP
Monty Pyfl - 1907 Giants 1 PA
Hunky Shaw - 1908 Pirates 1 AB
Dave Skeels - 1910 Tigers 6 IP
Con Starkel - 1906 Senators 3 IP

Brian

[seattlerainiers]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

The prior post about the Zeenut of Pennington reminded me of my post almost three years ago, pasted below, which surprisingly showed/revealed the six 1911 Obak cards of players who only appeared in a single MLB game.

Phil Cooney - 1905 New York Yankees 3 AB
Lee 'Flame' Delhi - 1912 White Sox 3 IP
Monty Pyfl - 1907 Giants 1 PA
Hunky Shaw - 1908 Pirates 1 AB
Dave Skeels - 1910 Tigers 6 IP
Con Starkel - 1906 Senators 3 IP

Brian

One of my favorite real photo postcard pairings includes two of these fellows, Hunky and Phil. 1912 Spokane Indians, Northwestern League. Taken at Dugdale Park in Seattle. Love their road uniforms.

[rhettyeakley]

Dave, i love that 2nd postcard you posted with the players goofing around (especially Phil Cooney). Cool to see a candid shot of Native American William Cadreau, who played in the Majors briefly under the name Chief Chouneau. Probably the best images of him I have ever seen.

[brianp-beme]

Those are really awesome Spokane team postcard photos Dave, and I love the team shot with Moonlight Graham, who just seemed to know he should keep his cap off to make himself easier to pick out 100+ years later.

Brian

[Tripp Trapp]

A ca. 1906 Scranton Minors pre-linen PC. Might the good ol’ doc be in right field?! The closest I’ll ever get to owning anything “Moonlight” related!

[piecesofthegame]

Just getting around to reading this thread. I, too, am fascinated by the divide between those obsessed with Graham memorabilia and those who could care less. As an antique auto collector, I often relate sports to the car hobby.

When trying to grasp the Graham hype, think of the Delorean. The Delorean was a rather futuristic car when released but ultimately turned out to be a hunk of junk by a new car company that went down in flames. (Google John Delorean if you don’t know the story.) Nonetheless, if you were 7 years old when you saw Back to the Future like I was, it left an indelible mark on your childhood. To this day, when I see one, it evokes the feelings of seeing that movie and being mesmerized by the car. I would love to own one someday. The car collector in me knows it’s a hunk of junk, but the kid in me loves the memories it evokes.

For those who love Graham and his story, I’m sure he evokes the same emotions of watching the movie, and perhaps even falling in love with baseball nostalgia.
For those who are purely collectors, he’s a nobody who played an inning and should be valued accordingly.
Just my two cents!

[Snapolit1]

Collecting is all about irrational attachments to material things. I don't see how an obsession with chasing a Moonlight Graham card is any different that chasing Eddie Plank or King Kelly or 1000s of other players who have no larger cultural significance today. Something speaks you or it doesn't. To chase tobacco cards of obscure players and then obscure backs of tobacco cards of obscure players makes no more "sense" to me than trying to chase a phone book from Chisholm, MN that has Graham listed in it.

[z28jd]

One strange thing about Moonlight Graham that most people don't know because of the movie (and because of his Baseball-Reference page) is that he actually played two innings on defense, not one.

I wonder if his correct stats were known back then if he would have actually been the player chosen. It may have been Cy Neighbors used instead, as he actually did only play one inning in the outfield without getting a chance to bat. Neighbors actually got left out of some boxscores from his only game.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by z28jd

One strange thing about Moonlight Graham that most people don't know because of the movie (and because of his Baseball-Reference page) is that he actually played two innings on defense, not one.

I wonder if his correct stats were known back then if he would have actually been the player chosen. It may have been Cy Neighbors used instead, as he actually did only play one inning in the outfield without getting a chance to bat. Neighbors actually got left out of some boxscores from his only game.

Many aspects of the movie (preumably the book) that were totally wrong . . . really disheartening. Wasnt last game of the season. Didn't retire from baseball after the game. Etc. Etc. Why I have never watched the famous Gehrig or Ruth movies. When film people start making shit up to make it more "dramatic" I ask for my check.

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Many aspects of the movie (preumably the book) that were totally wrong . . . really disheartening. Wasnt last game of the season. Didn't retire from baseball after the game. Etc. Etc. Why I have never watched the famous Gehrig or Ruth movies. When film people start making shit up to make it more "dramatic" I ask for my check.

I think some of the errors were just due to the available research at the time, though I don't know why the year he played was changed other than so he knew who the players were on the field...though I'm sure everyone here rolls their eyes when he knows who Gil Hodges is.

I think the one inning part really stands out because it seems important to the story. That's why it makes me wonder if it was known back then that he actually played two innings, would he still be the player they used? Let's face it, it wasn't easy to fact check the now known errors back when the movie came out. You had to go along with it.

I didn't realize until somewhat recently that he was actually a lefty hitter, even though I've been on his Baseball-Reference page countless times before noticing it.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Many aspects of the movie (preumably the book) that were totally wrong . . . really disheartening. Wasnt last game of the season. Didn't retire from baseball after the game. Etc. Etc. Why I have never watched the famous Gehrig or Ruth movies. When film people start making shit up to make it more "dramatic" I ask for my check.

Well to be fair it is a fictional movie, not a biopic.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Many aspects of the movie (preumably the book) that were totally wrong . . . really disheartening. Wasnt last game of the season. Didn't retire from baseball after the game. Etc. Etc. Why I have never watched the famous Gehrig or Ruth movies. When film people start making shit up to make it more "dramatic" I ask for my check.

Steve,

No judgement here, but you never watched Pride of the Yankees? Even if some of it is dramatized, Gary Cooper gives an incredible performance. I understand wanting to separate fact from fiction though.

- James

[byrone]

There sure would be an interesting story to be written about Harry O’Neill, should someone ever get around to writing it

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Collecting is all about irrational attachments to material things. I don't see how an obsession with chasing a Moonlight Graham card is any different that chasing Eddie Plank or King Kelly or 1000s of other players who have no larger cultural significance today. Something speaks you or it doesn't. To chase tobacco cards of obscure players and then obscure backs of tobacco cards of obscure players makes no more "sense" to me than trying to chase a phone book from Chisholm, MN that has Graham listed in it.

You really can’t grasp someone being motivated by fact over fiction? This right here is what’s wrong with the world today. Fiction is given as much weight as fact. What freaking lunacy.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by glynparson

You really can’t grasp someone being motivated by fact over fiction? This right here is what’s wrong with the world today. Fiction is given as much weight as fact. What freaking lunacy.

Ha. That’s gold. My views on collecting baseball cards just captured everything wrong with the world. In a few lines. Touché. Love it. Not sure I’ve ever been so proud of myself.

[jingram058]

Uhhh...totally contrived piece here, but since we're on the subject of fantasy vs reality, here is the only "Moonlight" Graham piece I could afford.

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by glynparson

You really can’t grasp someone being motivated by fact over fiction? This right here is what’s wrong with the world today. Fiction is given as much weight as fact. What freaking lunacy.

The Fact that fiction can paint broader brush strokes of Truth in the human soul than Fact, as I'm sure you would describe it, can - is why myth exists. I wouldn't want to live in a world bereft of all the beautiful colors of imagination, myth and transcendent truth. But go ahead, by all means, enjoy your black and white-dom.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Snapolit1]

Well said.

Originally Posted by redauto5

The Fact that fiction can paint broader brush strokes of Truth in the human soul than Fact, as I'm sure you would describe it, can - is why myth exists. I wouldn't want to live in a world bereft of all the beautiful colors of imagination, myth and transcendent truth. But go ahead, by all means, enjoy your black and white-dom.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk