Negro League Stats included in official MLB records

[anchorednw]

Originally Posted by BigfootIsReal

Hmmm, we'll see how this affects some prices

This won't affect anyone's prices. Cobb, Ruth or any of the all-time greats.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by anchorednw

This won't affect anyone's prices. Cobb, Ruth or any of the all-time greats.

+1
It will probably increase some of the Negro League players prices.

Not so much Cobby etc....

[aljurgela]

... I think that it is Artie Wilson now....

[oldjudge]

Ty who? Gibson now has the highest batting average ever. I think this is ridiculous--the competition was not the same. This is just a botched attempt to atone for past injustices.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Ty who? Gibson now has the highest batting average ever. I think this is ridiculous--the competition was not the same. This is just a botched attempt to atone for past injustices.

Given the sparsity of the stats, how could he have enough at bats to qualify?

[prestigecollectibles]

You can see and sort all the stats here:
Batting
https://www.mlb.com/stats/batting-av...ll-time-totals

Pitching
https://www.mlb.com/stats/pitching/wins/all-time-totals

[Touch'EmAll]

The legend of Satchell Paige is full of amazing stories. I want to believe he may have been the best ever. I cherish the couple Paige cards I own ('48 Bowman & Exhibit)) It seems appropriate, based on the stories, to include him in the discussion of greatest pitcher ever.

A few years ago I tries to get a handle on Satchell's stats. Unfortunately, with whatever research I could find on the internet, I came to the conclusion that there just is extremely minimal concrete stats. There simply wasn't enough meat to be found that could justify his legendary status. So you live with the stories, accept the fact not much in the way of stats and move on.

So now, how in the world is MLB able to come up with enough detail and solid stats, comparable to actual MLB player stats, to start including all the amazing, fully worthy HOF caliber players that played in the Negro Leagues ?

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Given the sparsity of the stats, how could he have enough at bats to qualify?

That was my initial thought. Gibson played in 600 games lifetime….compared to Ruth’s 2500. The whole thing is silly, but whatever.

[Exhibitman]

I think the only real world lab we have to test the quality of Negro League play is what happened in the first ten years of integration.

ML ROY 1947: Robinson
NL ROY:
--1949: Newcombe
--1950: Jethro
--1951: Mays
--1952: Black
--1953: Gilliam

NL MVP:
--1949: Robinson
--1951, 1953, 1955: Campanella
--1954: Mays
--1956: Newcombe
--1957: Aaron

Notable black players who came into the game from 1947-56 and had an impact at the MLB level:
--Jackie Robinson
--Campanella
--Mays
--Irvin
--Minoso
--Doby
--Banks
--Aaron
--Frank Robinson
--Clemente
--Elston Howard
--Jim Gilliam
--Newcombe
--Joe Black
--Hank Thompson
--Luke Easter
--Satchel Paige

Probably some others who don't come to my mind readily (I usually see their cards in my head and remember who was who that way). There were also a number of NL players who got very short trials in MLB and were cut down immediately if they were not spectacular off the bat. Mays was one of the lucky ones in working with Durocher, who was not quick to pull that demotion trigger on him after he went 1 for 25 to start, yet the Giants kicked Artie Wilson back down to the PCL after 24 at-bats produced 4 hits.

My point is that the black players who entered the Bigs in that first decade comprised an all-star team that could have beaten any white team of the era. Carrying NL stats as MLB stats, I don't see a good argument for not doing that given the quality of the players who were or would have been in the NL had there not been integration. Bottom line for me is that if NL stats are MLB stats, you can't make distinctions between seasons given how the game was played at a time of segregation. The NL players played the game they had available to them.

Oh, and a card:

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Ty who? Gibson now has the highest batting average ever. I think this is ridiculous--the competition was not the same. This is just a botched attempt to atone for past injustices.

I think a bigger concern is the incompleteness of the stats. In some cases it seems to pick up only a small fraction of the games an individual played.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Ty who? Gibson now has the highest batting average ever. I think this is ridiculous--the competition was not the same. This is just a botched attempt to atone for past injustices.

And you think Ty Cobb's competition was the same as post-war players? lol

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

And you think Ty Cobb's competition was the same as post-war players? lol

Comparing players across eras is not the same as comparing contemporaneous leagues. Your point seems irrelevant to the one Jay raised. His point (and not commenting on its merit) would be as if MLB decided to include this year's minor league stats in determining leaders.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Comparing players across eras is not the same as comparing contemporaneous leagues. Your point seems irrelevant to the one Jay raised. His point (and not commenting on its merit) would be as if MLB decided to include this year's minor league stats in determining leaders.

I posted essentially the same thing that snowman did to Jay's comments. And I have never thought of MLB stats by era being relevant but when people are opposing the stats of a group of people who were outright denied the chance to play in the MLB, not because they were not good enough but because of the color of their skin, the argument comparing eras has some merit.

There is no perfect solution to this...sorta like the ML auction debate (though some very esteemed members did not see it as a debate)...I think most who look at stats take into account the era as well as the guys who are suspected of using PEDs.

In my personal opinion, having the stats included with MLB stats does not make those players any more legit than they already were. And at least our hobby shares that view if we take the prices alone for what the NL players' cards, postcards, etc sell for.

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Ty who? Gibson now has the highest batting average ever. I think this is ridiculous--the competition was not the same. This is just a botched attempt to atone for past injustices.

Jay - I agree 150%. An absolute joke!

[Exhibitman]

Your new single-season batting average leader, Tetelo Vargas .471:

[Republicaninmass]

Highest on base percentage


Eddie Gaedel. 1.000

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Your new single-season batting average leader, Tetelo Vargas .471:

single season batting leader -Not mine.



.

[Goudey]

With 30 games played that year. What a joke.

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Your new single-season batting average leader, Tetelo Vargas .471:

[jethrod3]

Originally Posted by anchorednw

This won't affect anyone's prices. Cobb, Ruth or any of the all-time greats.

I'm not sure about this. Let's say you had a ticket or program from Willie Mays' first hit 2 days ago. You likely had a ticket or program for the MLB game in which he got his first hit. But now a ticket or program for his first hit game would technically have to come from a Birmingham Black Barons game. If such a program or ticket exists, then that piece of memorabilia just soared in value, while perhaps the pieces from his first MLB hit game become a little less valuable. Card prices might not change much, but perhaps prices for other memorabilia might.

[Exhibitman]

I don't think prices will do much of anything. When the NL numbers were initially canonized, prices on a lot of guys spiked, Wilson among them. That cat is already out of the bag.

Oh, and a few Wilsons:




A snapshot too, taken on opening day 1949 in San Diego: