Shoeless Joe Jackson

[quinnsryche]

Originally Posted by fkw

Haha
Screw Mickey Mantle, Aaron, Maris and the rest of them too, they were "jacked up" daily on Greenies (Amphetamines)

Greenies do not make you hit the ball 100 ft. further, grow your body to the size of a professional wrestler or throw a ball 10-15 mph faster. The sad thing about Bonds and the others is that they were very talented before the drugs. Bonds may very well have broken the record clean, but we'll never know because he chose his path to artificially enhanced fame. Stop protecting these clowns, plenty of guys are worth our admiration that didn't go that way, we all know which ones did and which ones didn't.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Maybe he was innocent too.

[Bilko G]

Originally Posted by quinnsryche

Stop protecting these clowns, plenty of guys are worth our admiration that didn't go that way, we all know which ones did and which ones didn't.

We do??

[mybuddyinc]

As pretty much stated already, people love infamy.

I don't know much about non-sports cards, but I do know the Hitler cards in the Horrors of War set have a heck of a higher demand and price.
Also the good old 1956 Adventure set. Any non-boxing card hardly has any value, the boxers go for $10-20, but throw out a Schmelling (Swastika) and you in the $500 range.


The worst thing that could happen to the value of Jackson cards, would be IF he was inducted in the HOF.


A lot of no-goodness is now baseball legend: From the 1876 Louisville Four to the 1890's Baltimore Orioles (they not only worked the Balt. chop, and the hit and run, but were also famous for cutting across the infield when going from 1st to 3rd), to the Phillies in early 1900's using electric buzzers and Morse code at 3rd base coaching box, Etc. Etc.


A very notable amount of games were fixed, the Black Sox was just an ultimate zenith. Not saying it's right, just that it was (or is).


My favorite answer to cheating allegations was when early 1900 middleweight Philadelphia Jack O'Brien was accused of throwing fights. His response was something like: "Yes, I have thrown many fights in my career. I have fought Bob Fitzsimmon, Marvin Hart, Tommy Burns, Stanley Ketchel, and Jack Johnson. Who do you want to talk about first ??" All charges were dropped !!

[mighty bombjack]

I can't find them right now, but I have seen the splits for Jackson on the games that the Sox won and lost in that series. I believe that the fixers instructed the players as to which games were to be lost, and Jackson not only hit poorly in those games but also committed fielding errors. It speaks to his talent how well he hit when he was allowed to, and that's why he had such a high average for the series.

Can anyone find those splits for us?

Also, I'd like to add that not every collector is a moralist. Talent often comes with great personality flaws, and humanity can be very collectible.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

I believe that the fixers instructed the players as to which games were to be lost, and Jackson not only hit poorly in those games but also committed fielding errors. It speaks to his talent how well he hit when he was allowed to, and that's why he had such a high average for the series.

I find this counter-argument to Joe's .375 average incredibly implausible. That any MLB hitter was so gifted that he could hit .375 in a World Series, while all the while throwing away at bats - would infer he would have been able to hit something like .700 or .800 if he was actually trying; it is absurd. To me whether he took the money or not is open for discussion - whether he threw the games is not.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by Matt

I find this counter-argument to Joe's .375 average incredibly implausible. That any MLB hitter was so gifted that he could hit .375 in a World Series, while all the while throwing away at bats - would infer he would have been able to hit something like .700 or .800 if he was actually trying; it is absurd. To me whether he took the money or not is open for discussion - whether he threw the games is not.

Well, here are the splits:

Game 1, Reds win 9-1, Jackson goes 0-4
Game 2, Reds win 4-2, Jackson goes 3-4
Game 3, White Sox win 9-1, Jackson goes 2-3
Game 4, Reds win 2-0, Jackson goes 1-4
Game 5, Reds win 5-0, Jackson goes 0-4
Game 6, White Sox win 5-4, Jackson goes 2-4
Game 7, White Sox win 4-1, Jackson goes 2-4
Game 8, Reds win 10-5, Jackson goes 2-5

In White Sox wins, Jackson goes 6-11 for .545 avg
In Reds wins, Jackson goes 6-21 for .285 avg

From Baseball Almanac: "Joe Jackson had batted a Series-leading .375 but acknowledged that he had let up in key situations."

From wikipedia: "Some believed that most of his offensive potency came in games that were not fixed and/or when the game appeared out of reach." (The World Series by Cohen, Neft, Johnson and Deutsch cited)

So many point to that .375 and say he couldn't have been involved. I say differently.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

In White Sox wins, Jackson goes 6-11 for .545 avg
In Reds wins, Jackson goes 6-21 for .285 avg

You realize that in games where your star hitter doesn't do well, you have a significantly smaller chance of winning, and that has nothing to do with cheating, right?