Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame - 1920 Elections

[dt35456884]

The names below represent pitchers and hitters who hung up their Tigers uniforms for the final time by the end of the 1920 season, logging at least 300 innings or 1,000 at-bats during their time with Detroit. It also includes non-players who were significant to the organization.

Between these names and the position players below, let's agree upon a list of 10-12 players which will make up the pool of 1920 nominees.

We will be voting on the 1920 nominees as well as the nominees from the 1915 class who were not elected but who met the minimum vote percentage to remain on the ballot.


Pitchers
1916-1920

Player YR From To W L WL% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB SO ERA+
Bill Donovan 11 1903 1918 141 96 0.595 2.49 261 242 19 213 29 3 2137.3 1862 802 591 27 685 1079 109
Jean Dubuc 5 1912 1916 72 60 0.545 3.06 184 130 45 90 11 9 1145.0 1026 523 389 13 448 354 98
Bernie Boland 6 1915 1920 67 49 0.578 3.09 202 113 51 59 10 12 1035.0 891 424 355 11 404 358 94
Harry Coveleski 5 1914 1918 69 43 0.616 2.34 157 125 22 68 9 8 1023.3 887 385 266 12 270 400 123
Bill James 5 1915 1919 35 36 0.493 3.01 96 71 12 29 4 2 548.0 500 247 183 7 283 192 92
Geo. Cunningham 4 1916 1919 16 25 0.390 3.13 123 36 65 19 0 8 477.0 444 248 166 2 178 167 88
Willie Mitchell 4 1916 1919 20 16 0.556 2.83 57 42 13 19 7 0 330.7 306 131 104 5 109 146 97

Position Players
1916-1920

Player YR From To G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS OPS+
Sam Crawford 15 1903 1917 2114 7984 1115 2466 402 249 70 1264 646 104 .309 .362 .448 317 30 144
Ossie Vitt 7 1912 1918 767 2763 417 671 75 40 3 214 323 97 .243 .324 .302 99 26 86
Davy Jones 8 1906 1918 646 2175 412 586 47 19 0 138 272 0 .269 .355 .309 140 0 100
George Burns 4 1914 1917 496 1756 206 467 76 24 15 220 91 170 .266 .313 .362 47 16 101

Managers
1916-1920

Manager YR From To G W L WP BstFin WstFin PostSsn Pennts WrldSer
Hughie Jennings 14 1907 1920 2127 1131 972 0.538 1 7 3 3 0

Final 1920 nominees as chosen by voting committee appear in blue.


Carryover Nominees
1901-1915

Player YR From To W L WL% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB SO ERA+
Ed Killian 7 1904 1910 99 74 0.572 2.38 204 172 29 142 19 6 1536.7 1402 561 406 8 469 498 109
Ed Siever 5 1901 1908 60 54 0.526 2.61 143 123 19 93 11 2 1036.0 1070 460 301 15 207 303 121
Ed Summers 5 1908 1912 68 45 0.602 2.42 138 112 22 79 9 3 999.0 930 404 269 19 221 362 111

Player YR From To G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG SB CS OPS+
Matty McIntyre 7 1904 1910 795 2997 412 783 109 54 3 211 331 0 .261 .338 .337 89 0 112
Jimmy Barrett 5 1901 1905 589 2259 383 660 59 30 10 174 309 0 .292 .382 .358 92 0 118
Germany Schaefer5 1905 1909 626 2236 279 558 75 25 8 195 158 0 .250 .300 .316 123 0 94
Jim Delahanty 4 1909 1912 375 1336 213 409 70 18 6 200 158 0 .306 .394 .399 48 0 129



Committee Members:

Voting Deadline - Friday, February 16th at 11:59 PM
Vote for up to 5 of the player nominees listed in blue above (1920 Pitchers, 1920 Position Players, and 1901-15 Carryover Nominees).
Votes for non-players (managers, owners, presidents, broadcasters, etc.) do not count against your 5-vote limit.

[dt35456884]

I have increased the minimum IP to 300 innings. If anybody thinks they can make a case for nomination of a pitcher who logged less than 300 IP as a Tiger, feel free to try.

[Mudman]

I have increased the minimum IP to 300 innings. If anybody thinks they can make a case for nomination of a pitcher who logged less than 300 IP as a Tiger, feel free to try.
I believe there could and should be an exception made when we move up a few decades and are considering men that lost time during the war years.

[dt35456884]

My recommendations for nominations:

Bill Donovan
Jean Dubuc
Bernie Boland
Harry Coveleski
Bill James
Willie Mitchell
Sam Crawford
Davy Jones
George Burns
Hughie Jennings

[dt35456884]

I believe there could and should be an exception made when we move up a few decades and are considering men that lost time during the war years.

Believe me when I tell you that the list of pitchers who threw between 200 and 300 IP for the Tigers is not an impressive one. I took some time to look it over, and Doug Brocail is the cream of the crop. Nobody else comes particularly close to him.

As always, though, committee members are more than welcome to offer other names that I do not include among my initial lists.

[DTroppens]

I am guessing "The Bird" must be at about 350 innings? A ton of innings in 1976, a decent number of starts in 1977 and some games here and there the next few years.
Just made it over. Probably not 400 but more than 350

[cruzer1]

Davy Jones never struck out and never got caught stealing? Incredible!

[DaYooperASBDT]

DT, looks like you have it well covered once again. I would even consider paring James, Mitchell, and Burns from the list, but that would only leave 7 candidates. Looks like six candidates deserve close scrutiny, at first glance, counting a couple of "no-doubters" in my mind.

[dt35456884]

I am guessing "The Bird" must be at about 350 innings? A ton of innings in 1976, a decent number of starts in 1977 and some games here and there the next few years.
Just made it over. Probably not 400 but more than 350

412.3 IP

[dt35456884]

DT, looks like you have it well covered once again. I would even consider paring James, Mitchell, and Burns from the list, but that would only leave 7 candidates. Looks like six candidates deserve close scrutiny, at first glance, counting a couple of "no-doubters" in my mind.

Sometimes there will not be 10 really good candidates for nomination. That just means a few sub-par guys will be put up for a vote. Not a big deal in my mind. Boss Schmidt already received a nomination, and his career wasn't impressive.

[tiger337]

Davy Jones never struck out and never got caught stealing? Incredible!

He played the game the right way.

[estrepe1]

It looks like a good list to me. I have 4 no doubters that I will be voting for this time around. And a couple others to look closely at.

I think the 300 ip increase was a good idea. Because I don't think the candidates need to be pared down.

I think all of these guys should be up for nomination.

[tiger337]

I would put all 12 up for consideration. That's a managable list so I don't think you need to exclude anyone.

[Edman85]

The five I wanted to make sure are nominated are:

Donovan
Coveleski
Crawford
Jones
Jennings

I'm not lobbying for their votes, just making sure they are on the ballot.

[dt35456884]

I would put all 12 up for consideration. That's a managable list so I don't think you need to exclude anyone.

I'm not unequivocally opposed to this. A list of 10 just means I avoid having to hunt around for George Cunningham pictures.

If most everybody is in agreement that we should just nominate all twelve, then I suppose that's fine.

[NATE]

My recommendations for nominations:

Bill Donovan
Jean Dubuc
Bernie Boland
Harry Coveleski
Bill James
Willie Mitchell
Sam Crawford
Davy Jones
George Burns
Hughie Jennings

Although I believe some of these players are no-brainers to be left out of the Hall, it is a good list for the ballot.

[Mudman]

I would put all 12 up for consideration. That's a managable list so I don't think you need to exclude anyone.
I agree with keeping all 12.

[DTroppens]

Darn,
I was way off on my Bird innings. I wouldn't have done well if that was the question to be on the Greed team.

I say anytime the number is less than 13 why even cut? I bet we will rarely have more than that.

[Johnny Mac]

Crawford
Donovan
Jennings
Coveleski

[redshark63]

I'm not unequivocally opposed to this. A list of 10 just means I avoid having to hunt around for George Cunningham pictures.

If most everybody is in agreement that we should just nominate all twelve, then I suppose that's fine.


Here you go:

George Cunningham (http://www.tigerscentral.com/players.php?pnum=10405)

[Mudman]

Davy Jones never struck out and never got caught stealing? Incredible!
How many times he was caught stealing and struck out are unknown...if you look closely in any encyclopedia you will notice that there in a blank space not a zero in those columns. These are two stats that were overlooked and unrecorded in many box scores of the day.

[dt35456884]

I would only vote for

We've been trying to avoid people blurting out their selections during the voting process. Please wait until the results are in.

[dt35456884]

Here you go:

George Cunningham (http://www.tigerscentral.com/players.php?pnum=10405)

Is the guy who runs TigersCentral a member here at Motown? I tried to avoid thieving his pictures in the 1915 thread because I didn't want to be accused of ripping off the guy's site.

[DaYooperASBDT]

We've been trying to avoid people blurting out their selections during the voting process. Please wait until the results are in.Was he actually revealing his ballot, or lobbying? :cheeky:

[DaYooperASBDT]

I'm good with 10-12 nominations, but let's not overload DT and the rest with more than that, if we can help it.

I'll try to post some season breakdown stats later tonight, if those will help. (Tigers seasons only)

[Mudman]

I would put all 12 up for consideration. That's a managable list so I don't think you need to exclude anyone.
I changed my mind...I don't want to be a pain but in the Q&A thread it was stated that the players in question had to be retired from baseball to be considered for any ballot. If this is our rule then Ossie Vitt retired from the majors after 1921, George Burns played until 1929 and Bernie Boland was still playing in 1921.

[estrepe1]

I thought it was agreed that it was the player would be eligible after they had stopped playing for the Tigers.

Since their Tiger career is what matters that makes sense to me.,

[dt35456884]

I changed my mind...I don't want to be a pain but in the Q&A thread it was stated that the players in question had to be retired from baseball to be considered for any ballot. If this is our rule then Ossie Vitt retired from the majors after 1921, George Burns played until 1929 and Bernie Boland was still playing in 1921.

At the time that was proposed, the impression was that it would be easier to pull player data based on the year they left baseball rather than the year they left the Tigers. I found this was not the case, and at the end of the day it doesn't particularly matter to us what the player did after they left the team. Hence, we settled on this.

This may be an issue we have to deal with as we get to the annual elections and modern players. We may run into a player who has left the Tigers but is still in baseball and could potentially return to the team at some point.

[Johnny Mac]

We've been trying to avoid people blurting out their selections during the voting process. Please wait until the results are in.

sorry, but I really meant that those should be the only ones on the ballot. I dont think Id vote for all 4 to put in the HOF

[estrepe1]

Crawaford

I can't believe you misspelled Crawford. :classic:

[Mudman]

At the time that was proposed, the impression was that it would be easier to pull player data based on the year they left baseball rather than the year they left the Tigers. I found this was not the case, and at the end of the day it doesn't particularly matter to us what the player did after they left the team. Hence, we settled on this.
My apologies for not reading thoroughly the first post on this thread...I skipped it and went directly to the nominations list!

[DaYooperASBDT]

I changed my mind...I don't want to be a pain but in the Q&A thread it was stated that the players in question had to be retired from baseball to be considered for any ballot. If this is our rule then Ossie Vitt retired from the majors after 1921, George Burns played until 1929 and Bernie Boland was still playing in 1921.That may have been my fault, DT has it right.

[Johnny Mac]

I can't believe you misspelled Crawford. :classic:

i really screwed up that post, now the second time i had to edit it. might as well just delete it before I find something else wrong with it :dead:

[cruzer1]

How many times he was caught stealing and struck out are unknown...if you look closely in any encyclopedia you will notice that there in a blank space not a zero in those columns. These are two stats that were overlooked and unrecorded in many box scores of the day.
Thank you for the explanation. I guess it should have a (-) instead of a zero.

I'm guessing that Bill James gets in just for his SABR work. :cheeky:

[squid]

I agree with keeping all 12.

[redshark63]

I agree with keeping all 12.

Likewise

[DTroppens]

So do we say everyone must get their votes in by Friday Feb. 16 at 11:59 p.m.?

[dt35456884]

So do we say everyone must get their votes in by Friday Feb. 16 at 11:59 p.m.?

Yes.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Sounds good to me Dave, that keeps it moving. And don't forget folks, we will have annual elections to catch any that were "overlooked" (more likely crowded out though).

[DaYooperASBDT]

EDIT: Process changed on 2/1/07, fixed my post from another thread, to avoid misinformation.

Mudman, to try to clarify one question, the player must have ended his Tigers career during that five year span, in order to be nominated. For example, Cobb played with Detroit from 1905-1926, so he can not be nominated until 1930.

Your vote should be based upon their entire career with Detroit. Keep in mind that if a player gets 15% of the vote, they stay on the ballot for the next election.

Our next election will be "1920", for players who retired from 1916-1920. But those who got 15% to 74% in the 1915 election will be carried over.

[dt35456884]

Also, since a non-player is making the ballot for the first time, please remember:

A vote for a non-player does not count against your five-vote limit.

You don't have to vote for Jennings, obviously. But if you decide to, you still have up to 5 votes to use on players.

And I probably don't need to explain this, but a vote for a player carried over from a previous class does count against your five-vote limit.

[whitecapwendy]

It looks like a good list to me. I have 4 no doubters that I will be voting for this time around. And a couple others to look closely at.

I think the 300 ip increase was a good idea. Because I don't think the candidates need to be pared down.

I think all of these guys should be up for nomination.
I have 3 no doubters, and one I am 99% sure I will vote for. Looks like I will be voting for four this time too. Nice having the stats in front of me. Saves me a lot of time. Thank you dt35458468.

[whitecapwendy]

Was he actually revealing his ballot, or lobbying? :cheeky:
I am glad I looked carefully at the stats and had my mind made up before reading post #2 and on. I wasn't influenced at all.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Right now I'm at three that I will probably vote in, and one I need to research more. So that leaves 1 or 2 votes for guys from 1901-1915, unless of course all "my guys" made it. Long odds on that, as two of my picks were borderline at best.

[whitecapwendy]

Right now I'm at three that I will probably vote in, and one I need to research more. So that leaves 1 or 2 votes for guys from 1901-1915, unless of course all "my guys" made it. Long odds on that, as two of my picks were borderline at best.
By the way, when do we get the results of that vote?

[tiger337]

So that leaves 1 or 2 votes for guys from 1901-1915, unless of course all "my guys" made it. Long odds on that, as two of my picks were borderline at best.

I think only one of them will make it.

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/photos/headshots/Boland_Bernie.gif
Bernie Boland
Pitcher, 1915-20

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0665/s066547.jpg
George Burns
First Baseman, 1914-17

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://tigerbaseball.us/images/C/COVELESKI_HARRY1909.jpg
Harry Coveleski
"The Giant Killer"
Pitcher, 1914-18

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0030/s003089.jpg
"Wahoo" Sam Crawford
Right Fielder, 1903-17

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

George Cunningham
Pitcher, 1916-19

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0030/s003022.jpg
[b]"Wild" Bill Donovan
Pitcher, 1903-18

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0622/s062239.jpg
Jean "Chauncey" Dubuc
Pitcher, 1912-16

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/photos/headshots/James_Bill.gif
Bill James
"Big Bill"
Pitcher, 1915-19

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0548/s054802.jpg
Hughie Jennings
"Ee-Yah"
Manager, 1907-20

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/photos/Jones_Davy.jpg
Davy Jones
"Kangaroo"
Outfielder, 1906-18

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://tigerbaseball.us/images/M/Mitchell_Mitchell1916.bmp
Willie Mitchell
Pitcher, 1916-19

[dt35456884]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0605/s060580.jpg
Ossie Vitt
Infielder, 1912-18

[dt35456884]

I'd love to see Leyland rock the Hughie Jennings button-up sweater.

[mancity09]

I'd love to see Leyland rock the Hughie Jennings button-up sweater.
That would be sweet. Maybe dark blue with the area around the buttons and neck white, with a white Olde English D on the front.

[DaYooperASBDT]

By the way, when do we get the results of that vote?Voting deadline is midnight tonight, so Dave indicated sometime tommorrow (Saturday)

[DaYooperASBDT]

BERNIE BOLAND - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1915 23 DET AL 13 7 45 18 8 1 16 2 202.7 167 86 70 2 75 72 6 3 808 0 3.11 3.02 97 1.194
1916 24 DET AL 10 3 46 9 5 1 12 3 130.3 111 69 57 1 73 59 4 3 539 0 3.94 2.85 72 1.412
1917 25 DET AL 16 11 43 28 13 3 14 6 238.0 192 89 71 0 95 89 6 0 952 0 2.68 2.63 98 1.206
1918 26 DET AL 14 10 29 25 14 4 4 0 204.0 176 69 60 1 67 63 6 1 834 0 2.65 2.66 100 1.191
1919 27 DET AL 14 16 35 30 18 1 5 1 242.7 222 93 82 7 80 71 3 4 960 0 3.04 3.19 105 1.245
1920 28 DET AL 0 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 17.3 23 18 15 0 14 4 2 0 82 0 7.79 3.71 48 2.135


GEORGE BURNS - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
1914 21 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1914.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1914.shtml) 137 478 55 139 22 5 5 57 23 13 32 56 .291 .351 .389 119 186 22 12
1915 22 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1915.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1915.shtml) 105 392 49 99 18 3 5 50 9 3 22 51 .253 .301 .352 91 138 17 5
1916 23 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 135 479 60 137 22 6 4 73 12 22 30 .286 .327 .382 109 183 19 7
1917 24 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 119 407 42 92 14 10 1 40 3 15 33 .226 .264 .317 77 129 14 6



HARRY COVELESKI - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1914 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1914.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1914.shtml) 22 12 44 36 23 5 6 2 303.3 251 109 84 4 100 124 12 6 1217 1 2.49 2.82 113 1.157
1915 29 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1915.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1915.shtml) 22 13 50 38 20 1 9 4 312.7 271 123 85 2 87 150 20 5 1269 0 2.45 3.02 123 1.145
1916 30 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 21 11 44 39 22 3 4 2 324.3 278 105 71 6 63 108 11 5 1248 1 1.97 2.85 145 1.051
1917 31 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 4 6 16 11 2 0 1 0 69.0 70 39 20 0 14 15 2 1 280 0 2.61 2.63 101 1.217
1918 32 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1918.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1918.shtml) 0 1 3 1 1 0 2 0 14.0 17 9 6 0 6 3 0 0 62 0 3.86 2.66 69 1.643

"WAHOO" SAM CRAWFORD - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
1903 23 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1903.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1903.shtml) 137 550 88 184 23 25 4 89 18 25 .335 .366 .489 158 269 25 2
1904 24 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1904.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1904.shtml) 150 562 49 143 22 16 2 73 20 44 .254 .309 .361 114 203 11 0
1905 25 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1905.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1905.shtml) 154 575 73 171 38 10 6 75 22 50 .297 .357 .430 148 247 3 3
1906 26 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1906.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1906.shtml) 145 563 65 166 25 16 2 72 24 38 .295 .341 .407 131 229 8 1
1907 27 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1907.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1907.shtml) 144 582 102 188 34 17 4 81 18 37 .323 .366 .460 159 268 11 2
1908 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1908.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1908.shtml) 152 591 102 184 33 16 7 80 15 37 .311 .355 .457 159 270 23 3
1909 29 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1909.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1909.shtml) 156 589 83 185 35 14 6 97 30 47 .314 .366 .452 153 266 25 1
1910 30 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1910.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1910.shtml) 154 588 83 170 26 19 5 120 20 37 .289 .332 .423 130 249 24 1
1911 31 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1911.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1911.shtml) 146 574 109 217 36 14 7 115 37 61 .378 .438 .526 163 302 13 0 MVP-14 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1911.shtml#ALmvp)
1912 32 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1912.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1912.shtml) 149 581 81 189 30 21 4 109 41 42 .325 .373 .470 143 273 19 2 MVP-14 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1912.shtml#ALmvp)
1913 33 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1913.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1913.shtml) 153 609 78 193 32 23 9 83 13 52 28 .317 .371 .489 152 298 10 0 MVP-14 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1913.shtml#ALmvp)
1914 34 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1914.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1914.shtml) 157 582 74 183 22 26 8 104 25 16 69 31 .314 .388 .483 158 281 22 1 MVP-2 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1914.shtml#ALmvp)
1915 35 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1915.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1915.shtml) 156 612 81 183 31 19 4 112 24 14 66 29 .299 .367 .431 134 264 16 0
1916 36 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 100 322 41 92 11 13 0 42 10 37 10 .286 .359 .401 124 129 9 0
1917 37 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 61 104 6 18 4 0 2 12 0 4 6 .173 .204 .269 44 28 4 0


GEORGE CUNNINGHAM - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1916 21 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 7 10 35 14 5 0 14 2 150.3 146 71 46 0 74 68 3 7 619 0 2.75 2.85 104 1.463
1917 22 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 2 7 44 8 4 0 24 4 139.0 113 73 45 2 51 49 4 4 561 0 2.91 2.63 90 1.180
1918 23 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1918.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1918.shtml) 6 7 27 14 10 0 12 1 140.0 131 68 49 0 38 39 5 2 578 0 3.15 2.66 84 1.207
1919 24 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1919.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1919.shtml) 1 1 17 0 0 0 15 1 47.7 54 36 26 0 15 11 5 2 205 0 4.91 3.19 65 1.448

"WILD" BILL DONOVAN - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1903 26 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1903.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1903.shtml) 17 16 35 34 34 4 1 0 307.0 247 104 78 3 95 187 5 7 1231 0 2.29 2.90 127 1.114
1904 27 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1904.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1904.shtml) 17 16 34 34 30 3 0 0 293.0 251 111 80 5 94 137 11 11 1205 0 2.46 2.54 104 1.177
1905 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1905.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1905.shtml) 18 15 34 32 27 5 2 0 280.7 236 111 81 2 101 135 10 4 1173 0 2.60 2.73 105 1.201
1906 29 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1906.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1906.shtml) 9 15 25 25 22 0 0 0 211.7 221 92 74 4 72 85 8 2 923 0 3.15 2.77 88 1.384
1907 30 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1907.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1907.shtml) 25 4 32 28 27 3 4 1 271.0 222 96 66 3 82 123 8 2 1103 0 2.19 2.59 118 1.122
1908 31 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1908.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1908.shtml) 18 7 29 28 25 6 1 0 242.7 210 78 56 2 53 141 6 3 997 0 2.08 2.41 116 1.084
1909 32 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1909.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1909.shtml) 8 7 21 17 13 4 4 2 140.3 121 50 36 0 60 76 6 4 595 0 2.31 2.52 109 1.290
1910 33 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1910.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1910.shtml) 17 7 26 23 20 3 3 0 206.7 184 74 56 4 61 107 7 2 849 0 2.44 2.62 107 1.185
1911 34 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1911.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1911.shtml) 10 9 20 19 15 1 1 0 168.3 160 83 62 4 64 81 3 3 726 0 3.31 3.47 105 1.331
1912 35 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1912.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1912.shtml) 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 10.0 5 2 1 0 2 6 1 0 37 0 0.90 3.27 363 0.700

JEAN DUBUC - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1912 23 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1912.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1912.shtml) 17 10 37 26 23 2 9 3 250.0 217 106 77 2 109 97 7 16 1038 0 2.77 3.27 118 1.304
1913 24 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1913.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1913.shtml) 15 14 36 28 22 1 8 2 242.7 228 111 78 1 91 73 8 11 1099 0 2.89 2.93 101 1.315
1914 25 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1914.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1914.shtml) 13 14 36 27 15 2 8 1 224.0 216 124 86 3 76 70 6 4 921 0 3.46 2.82 82 1.304
1915 26 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1915.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1915.shtml) 17 12 39 33 22 5 4 2 258.0 231 116 92 6 88 74 10 11 1040 0 3.21 3.02 94 1.236
1916 27 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 10 10 36 16 8 1 16 1 170.3 134 66 56 1 84 40 5 4 663 0 2.96 2.85 96 1.280

"BIG BILL" JAMES - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1915 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1915.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1915.shtml) 7 3 11 9 3 1 2 0 67.0 57 26 18 1 33 24 0 1 268 0 2.42 3.02 125 1.343
1916 29 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 8 12 30 20 8 0 4 1 151.7 141 76 62 1 79 61 11 6 642 1 3.68 2.85 78 1.451
1917 30 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 13 10 34 23 10 2 5 1 198.0 163 71 46 2 96 62 12 2 830 0 2.09 2.63 126 1.308
1918 31 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1918.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1918.shtml) 6 11 19 18 8 1 1 0 122.0 127 68 51 3 68 42 5 2 546 0 3.76 2.66 71 1.598
NOTE: James appeared in 2 games with the Tigers in 1919


DAVY JONES - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
1906 26 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1906.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1906.shtml) 84 323 41 84 12 2 0 24 21 41 .260 .347 .310 103 100 2 2
1907 27 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1907.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1907.shtml) 126 491 101 134 10 6 0 27 30 60 .273 .357 .318 112 156 11 4
1908 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1908.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1908.shtml) 56 121 17 25 2 1 0 10 11 13 .207 .284 .240 67 29 4 0
1909 29 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1909.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1909.shtml) 69 204 44 57 2 2 0 10 12 28 .279 .369 .309 111 63 6 1
1910 30 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1910.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1910.shtml) 113 377 77 100 6 6 0 24 25 51 .265 .362 .313 105 118 9 6
1911 31 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1911.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1911.shtml) 98 341 78 93 10 0 0 19 25 41 .273 .354 .302 80 103 7 2
1912 32 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1912.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1912.shtml) 99 316 54 93 5 2 0 24 16 38 .294 .370 .323 101 102 12 0

NOTE: Jones appeared in one game with the Tigers in 1918.

WILLIE MITCHELL - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg W L G GS CG SHO GF SV IP H R ER HR BB SO HBP WP BFP IBB BK ERA *lgERA *ERA+ WHIP
+--------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--+------+----+----+----+---+----+----+---+---+-----+---+---+-----+-----+----+-----+
1916 26 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 7 5 23 17 7 2 6 0 127.7 119 53 47 1 48 60 5 2 523 0 3.31 2.85 86 1.308
1917 27 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 12 8 30 22 12 5 7 0 185.3 172 66 45 2 46 80 13 0 747 0 2.19 2.63 121 1.176
1918 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1918.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1918.shtml) 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 4.0 3 4 4 0 5 2 0 0 20 0 9.00 2.66 30 2.000
1919 29 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1919.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1919.shtml) 1 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 13.7 12 8 8 2 10 4 1 1 58 0 5.27 3.19 60 1.610


OSSIE VITT - SEASON STATISTICS

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
1912 22 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1912.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1912.shtml) 76 273 39 67 4 4 0 19 17 18 .245 .297 .289 70 79 5 2
1913 23 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1913.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1913.shtml) 99 359 45 86 11 3 2 33 5 31 18 .240 .304 .304 79 109 23 2
1914 24 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1914.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1914.shtml) 66 195 35 49 7 0 0 8 10 8 31 8 .251 .354 .287 91 56 20 0
1915 25 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1915.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1915.shtml) 152 560 116 140 18 13 1 48 26 18 80 22 .250 .348 .334 100 187 42 4
1916 26 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1916.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1916.shtml) 153 597 88 135 17 12 0 42 18 75 28 .226 .314 .295 80 176 32 1
1917 27 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1917.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1917.shtml) 140 512 65 130 13 6 0 47 18 56 15 .254 .329 .303 93 155 31 1
1918 28 DET (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/DET/1918.shtml) AL (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL_1918.shtml) 81 267 29 64 5 2 0 17 5 32 6 .240 .321 .273 82 73 20 0

[dt35456884]

Wahoo Sam is one of the most criminally overlooked Tigers ever. Not on this board, and certainly not in Cooperstown, but for one of the five or six greatest players to ever wear the Old English D, I wonder how many casual Tiger fans even know his name. Same can be said for Heilmann (Class of '30).

Witness the embarassment:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e389/amchiche/alltime.jpg?t=1171069573

[whitecapwendy]

Does ERA+ work the same as OPS+? (I am assuming)

[dt35456884]

Does ERA+ work the same as OPS+? (I am assuming)

You assume correctly.

[DaYooperASBDT]

"Big Bill" James pitched briefly for the 1919 "Black Sox" of Chicago. He joined them toward the end of 1919 and appeared in one WS game. Those who have seen "Eight Men Out" might remember the manager Kid Gleason hollering, "James! Get your arm ready!".

[estrepe1]

Wahoo Sam is one of the most criminally overlooked Tigers ever. Not on this board, and certainly not in Cooperstown, but for one of the five or six greatest players to ever wear the Old English D, I wonder how many casual Tiger fans even know his name. Same can be said for Heilmann (Class of '30).

Witness the embarassment:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e389/amchiche/alltime.jpg?t=1171069573


Embarassing but not shocking. Terrible they would put someone that wouldn't even qualify in the top 6 of all time Tiger OF in the top 3. Travesty. Kirk had a pretty good career. Heilman and Crawford had great careers.

[tiger337]

Right now, I've got 3 definites and one guy on the fence although I plan to go through it again. I'll have to decide about the 1915 group that stays on the ballot too.

[dt35456884]

Embarassing but not shocking. Terrible they would put someone that wouldn't even qualify in the top 6 of all time Tiger OF in the top 3. Travesty.

For that matter, I think Tommy Bridges might have something to say about Morris's inclusion. The perks of being in people's recent memory, I guess.

[mancity09]

For that matter, I think Tommy Bridges might have something to say about Morris's inclusion. The perks of being in people's recent memory, I guess.
That is the problem with letting casual fans vote for all-time teams.

[dt35456884]

That is the problem with letting casual fans vote for all-time teams.

And one of the strengths of this effort.

[mancity09]

And one of the strengths of this effort.
Truer words have rarely been spoken.

[whitecapwendy]

Right now, I've got 3 definites and one guy on the fence although I plan to go through it again. I'll have to decide about the 1915 group that stays on the ballot too.
I have heard several "3 definites" comments. I am expecting that "some" of those will be amazingly similar.

[Mudman]

I have heard several "3 definites" comments. I am expecting that "some" of those will be amazingly similar.
not trying to be different but I have four definates!

[whitecapwendy]

not trying to be different but I have four definates!
(sigh) there always has to be one difficult one :cheeky:

[dt35456884]

Class of '20 fun facts:

Apr 17, 1916
Detroit scores a 12-inning 3-1 victory over Stan Coveleski‚ in his first year at Cleveland. Righthander George Cunningham fills in when Tiger ace Harry Coveleski refuses to take the mound against his younger brother. Sam Crawford's consecutive-game streak ends at 472. He played in every Tiger game in 1913 through 1915.

Coveleski's...2.34 ERA with the Tigers is still the franchise's all-time career record.

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballplayers/player.php?name=Harry_Coveleski_1886
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Coveleski

[estrepe1]

not trying to be different but I have four definates!

I do too.

[whitecapwendy]

I do too.
Hmmm, maybe I have to go back and look things over again.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Are you guys counting any managers in your four definites? :cheeky:

Really we have a minor dilemma. I've said I'm voting for three players, but if I vote for Jennings, I'm actually voting for four people, but only using three "player votes". So some of these posts are confusing, and if you clarify as to how many players, that means you must be voting for Hughie !! :cheeky:

[whitecapwendy]

Are you guys counting any managers in your four definites? :cheeky:

Really we have a minor dilemma. I've said I'm voting for three players, but if I vote for Jennings, I'm actually voting for four people, but only using three "player votes". So some of these posts are confusing, and if you clarify as to how many players, that means you must be voting for Hughie !! :cheeky:
No, I am not counting any non-players in the "three definites" because a vote for them does not count toward my five. Maybe we are all on the same page.

[Mudman]

Hmmm, maybe I have to go back and look things over again.
A hint...not one of my four choices has a last name starting with a vowel! Hope that helps:cheeky:

[whitecapwendy]

A hint...not one of my four choices has a last name starting with a vowel! Hope that helps:cheeky:
ha ha ha

[ToledoTigerFan]

1920 Detroit Tigers Hall of Fame Nominee

http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/s0030/s003089.jpg
"Wahoo" Sam Crawford
Right Fielder, 1903-17

That is a face that would be at home in the 21st century. Very contemporary looking.

[estrepe1]

Are you guys counting any managers in your four definites? :cheeky:

Really we have a minor dilemma. I've said I'm voting for three players, but if I vote for Jennings, I'm actually voting for four people, but only using three "player votes". So some of these posts are confusing, and if you clarify as to how many players, that means you must be voting for Hughie !! :cheeky:

I won't confirm or deny that I will vote for Hughie. However I would include a non-player when naming my definites if in fact I am voting for a non-player.

[DaYooperASBDT]

I won't confirm or deny that I will vote for Hughie. However I would include a non-player when naming my definites if in fact I am voting for a non-player.Well played :wink: I suspect Hughie will get a lot of votes, but you know what happens when I assUme.

[DTroppens]

Expect to have a lot of people added to the ballot tomorrow.

We have quite a few people that didn't vote. What do we do about that? They have about 50 minutes.

[dt35456884]

Expect to have a lot of people added to the ballot tomorrow.

We have quite a few people that didn't vote. What do we do about that? They have about 50 minutes.

Tally up the percentages without them.

If they don't show up for the 1920 elections, we should probably take them off of the committee.

[estrepe1]

First time you don't vote its a pm warning. Second time they come off the committee.

Just tally up the percentages without them if they don't get it in by 12:00 AM.

[dt35456884]

The carryovers from the 1915 class are now on the front page of this thread.

Please review all eligible nominees, 1901-1920, before making your selections.

[DTroppens]

Honestly, I think they should be gone. This was talked about for two to three weeks and they knew they were on this list. I don't want someone to be here that we have to "warn." I'm having a ton of fun doing this. But while I'm having fun I'm taking this very seriously. I've gone to about five bookstores and three libraries trying to find out info about the Detroit Stars. Who knows. The Tigers may see this and spark it. They may want some of us on their committee. I think some of us are probably as qualified as people involved with the Tigers.

I think I'm going to wait until we get at least 5 people voted in and then I'm going to email our results to the Tigers PR staff and maybe to radio stations. I want people to know we are doing this and we are taking it seriously. We are going to take our bumps a bit early but we're going to learn and get better. We are going to get 24-28 people that want to be here. I know I want to and I know I'm not going to do anything to jeopardize my position.

P.S. If anyone ever can't make it on the board to vote, send me a PM. I'll give you my office phone number that has voice mail. I will give you my email address. I will give you a mailing address. Heck, if you live close I'll meet you at a school while I'm working to get your results. I don't care how I get them. I just want to make sure we do.

[DTroppens]

I suggest before you send your list you wait a day if there is still time to wait. Then look at it again and see if you still like your list. We had quite a few people turn in a couple PMs and that can make it confusing and adds chance at getting the wrong votes. I will always use the oldest PM when I add votes if that happens. I pretty much knew who I was going to vote for but I waited until late Wednesday to make my vote. There's no rush to get them here. I'll probably check them on Thursday to make sure everything is easy to understand and it gives us time if there are any questions, but if you give it to me tomorrow, I won't open it until Thursday anyway.


Also please make your votes this way..

John Smith
John Doe
Larry Jackson

Only names of people you WANT. Please don't put lists with people you don't want and the ones you do highlighted. If you have more names than you are supposed to, I'll PM you if there is time. If there is not I'll use only the top five votes.

[estrepe1]

Dave I agree with everything you said there. I am taking this very seriously. I consider this a fun thing to do but at the same time I think there is a certain about of responsibility with this project. If we disagree on the players that should be in and not in thats fine. But I want everyone to research the players and make their decision. And I want everyone on the committee to make sure to vote.

After this point I am not sure about even warning people. This first election is a warning. Don't miss a vote.

[DTroppens]

I would suggest this as well. If you don't know if you should use more or less votes, error on the side of adding a vote.

[Tigeraholic1]

When is the vote deadline?

Also is there a way to create a thread to have the players we are voting for and there stats all together? I see people have added info about players which is great but it is spread out through this thread. The thread is only a day old and will grow leaps and bounds by the end.

I also think it will make it easier for the people who did not vote last time or at least take away an excuse not to vote.

[estrepe1]

The stats are on the first post of this thread. There is no excuse not to vote.

[Mudman]

Also please make your votes this way..

John Smith
John Doe
Larry Jackson

Couldn't find John Doe...maybe you meant Fred Doe from the 1890s:confused:

[tiger337]

Tally up the percentages without them.

If they don't show up for the 1920 elections, we should probably take them off of the committee.

I think this is the way to go. I figured there would be some drop outs. If people have to be reminded again and again, then it means they have lost interest. How many people did vote?

[estrepe1]

We had 23 vote out of 29 committee members.

[cruzer1]

And I probably don't need to explain this, but a vote for a player carried over from a previous class does count against your five-vote limit.
Does that mean that I would have to vote for the same person again? I think we should get our votes back, and re-vote.

[estrepe1]

Does that mean that I would have to vote for the same person again? I think we should get our votes back, and re-vote.


You don't need to vote for the same person again. If you still feel that one of the players you voted for is worthy you can vote for them again. If not you can vote for another player that has carried over.

[cruzer1]

You don't need to vote for the same person again. If you still feel that one of the players you voted for is worthy you can vote for them again. If not you can vote for another player that has carried over.
DT says it does count against your vote total, which doesn't make sense to me.

[Mudman]

DT says it does count against your vote total, which doesn't make sense to me.
Makes sense to me!

[tiger337]

DT says it does count against your vote total, which doesn't make sense to me.

That's how it works in the real Hall of Fame so I think it makes sense. I think I'll be using all 5 votes from now on because there should be enough worthy candidates including carryovers each year.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Same here, will definitely use up all my votes, as some of my choices did not make the 1915 cut. Cruzer, some guys will get crowded out, but we can review them in the annual elections.

[Tigeraholic1]

The stats are on the first post of this thread. There is no excuse not to vote.

Forget it... I was just a suggestion.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Forget it... I was just a suggestion.Your suggestions are very appreciated. But I hope you do understand that several of us here are genuinely pissed that so many people wanted to be on the committee, then failed to vote. I'm pissed. Six people is a significant number of non-voters.

But I'll get over it eventually. :cheeky:

[Doctor Detroit]

Hey I don't come here very often but I think all this talk of the voters applies to the 1915 elections correct? Can we please put the voting deadlines and maybe summarize what is expected of the committee (e.g. showing up, discussing, nominating, voting, limitations, and any other criteria you have established to make this somewhat official in nature)? I enjoy the discussions here and try to make it in as much as I can but I can probably contribute specific content and will always be here if I know the timeline. I know we have discussed it throughout the thread and yes I can read, but I want to separate the fodder from the treasure. Just a thought.

I'll go through some of the nominees for the 1920 class and post some thoughts tomorrow. Again I think this is a fine initiative and I'm happy to be part of the committee but just would like the first post to reflect a few things I think are necessary for continuity purposes.

[estrepe1]

You are only expected to vote by the deadline. Which for this vote is Friday at midnight.

[Doctor Detroit]

Thanks for the update dt35456884. That really simplifies and makes things a little clearer. estrepe>I am trying to figure out who is who so unless the original poster or Dtroopens posts something that looks official, that is fodder to me. I'm here, and I'll add and vote on time. :thumbsup:

[dt35456884]

I have put some basic voting information up on the first post of this thread.

[estrepe1]

Thanks for the update dt35456884. That really simplifies and makes things a little clearer. estrepe>I am trying to figure out who is who so unless the original poster or Dtroopens posts something that looks official, that is fodder to me. I'm here, and I'll add and vote on time. :thumbsup:

Sorry about that if it came across as rude. Dtroppens will be handling most of the deadlines and the vote count.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Whups, I see it now DT, thanks big fella.

[Doctor Detroit]

Sorry about that if it came across as rude. Dtroppens will be handling most of the deadlines and the vote count.

np. I'm a message board vet and do drafts for things like Sim leagues all the time so I know the challenges. I have very thick skin so don't worry about it.

[DaYooperASBDT]

I think the kinks are getting ironed out very nicely, good job all. DT, that first post is perfect!

For those late to the thread, DT and I have posted photos and season breakdown stats here as well
(posts #47-59, post #62)

[Doctor Detroit]

I think the kinks are getting ironed out very nicely, good job all. DT, that first post is perfect!

For those late to the thread, DT and I have posted photos and season breakdown stats here as well
(posts #47-59, post #62)
Nice job and thanks for pointing it out.

[Oblong]

To assist people, would anyone care if I added the text of this post (http://www.motownsports.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1016930&postcount=62) to the one listing the nominees? I think it's incredibly useful.

[dt35456884]

To assist people, would anyone care if I added the text of this post (http://www.motownsports.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1016930&postcount=62) to the one listing the nominees? I think it's incredibly useful.

I object unless you add the year-by-year stats for Killian, Siever, Summers, McIntyre, Barrett, Schaefer, and Delahanty. Those guys are all technically nominees and I'd hate to see them just tacked onto the first post announcing the nominees as if they were merely an afterthought.

I for one would like to keep the first post of these threads at a manageable length. People will need to do their own research and an entire laundry list of year-by-year statistics seems like something we can reasonably expect people to go searching for. The fact that DaYooper posted it later in the thread is much appreciated. But I don't know that we should be adding it to the front of the thread.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Can my post #62 be made into post #2 ???? Is that possible?

What would really clean it up would be DT's post #1, then DT's photos, then post #62 with season stats. But I think DT's post #1 is at max length now.

[Oblong]

alright. I just clicked the link and created a favorites folder called Detroit Tiger HOF Voting and subfolders for each vote. Then when I come across something useful I just add the link to that.

If anyone finds good info on the candidates on the web, I'd like to see the links too so that I can get as much research done and do a quality vote.

[squid]

Although he only had 3 good yrs as a Tiger, Harry Coveleski should merit thought.

65 wins in from 1914-1916 was 2nd to Walter Johnson. www.thebaseballpage.com
Arm injury ultimately ended his career in 1917. Also from thebaseballpage.
2.34 era as a Tiger is team record. wikipedia.com

In his 3 good yrs as a Tiger (14-16) his era+ was, 113,123,145

[DaYooperASBDT]

3 good years meets my current minimum. I like Coveleski. He also had strong peripheral numbers, like WHIP.

I suspect many of you will have two votes left, maybe three. We had a couple fall short in 1915 that I hope you will take another look at - Jimmy Barrett and Ed Killian.

I'm sure some of you will also be looking at Siever and Summers again as well.

Damn, this is fun!

[squid]

Here's something else to think about.
Wild Bill Donovan vs Ed Killian and Ed Summers.....
Figuring a 162 game avg... Wild Bill, Ed K, Ed S
W-L 17-13, 17-13, 18-12
era+ 106, 109, 111
IP 285.7, 276.3, 271.7
WHIP 1.245, 1.217, 1.152

yet baseball-reference has Wild Bill at 89.5 for likely HOF, Ed K at 33.0 and Ed S at 25.0....100 being the "magic #"

Although these stats are for entire career, one must remember that Wild Bill's first 3 seasons he only appeared in 27 games, when he went 3-10, then he caught fire going 25-15 and 17-15, before his Tiger career started.
Ed K played one season with Cleveland before coming to Detroit and went 3-4 in 9 games.
Ed Summers played his entire career with the Tigers.

[estrepe1]

Wild Bill gets a nod over the other two in terms of HOF Index due to his longevity.

[squid]

I forgot to mention that Ed Summers suffered from rheumatism and it ended his baseball career at age 27, and that he was the first Tiger rookie pitcher to start a WS game....it only took 99yrs to get the 2nd.

[squid]

I totally agree estrepe, but it amazed me to see how close the stats were.

[estrepe1]

I totally agree estrepe, but it amazed me to see how close the stats were.

Yeah those two really suffered from short careers.

[squid]

And that's where it gets difficult for me, should a 1 or 3yr wonder be in the HOF??? I've been struggling hard with Coveleski, should he or shouldn't he??? Still not sure, but I've done enough research on him today alone, that in my opinion.....not sure.

[squid]

Actually I think I've made up my mind on who gets my votes, after initially viewing the stats I pulled, I had 4 players and a battle for #5. I spent most of the night culling through websites to find the best, not to mention underlining stats and circling particulars, cross matching seasons and so forth.

[tiger337]

Coveleski really piled up innings and complete games. You could make a strong case that he accomplished as much in 3 years as Siever or Summers did in 4 years.

[squid]

I, for one think we should be able to vote for as many or as few as we wish...just like the real HOF. Why limit it, if I feel 6,7,8 should be voted for (maybe just to keep them on the ballot) I should be able to decide.
I've thought about it all day...should I keep Crawford off the ballot just to keep someone on...not fair because I think Crawford should be in (sorry, don't mean to tell my votes).

[squid]

I did some simple math on Coveleski...101 decisions in 113 games started. 25 other games he appeared in and had 8 saves.

[tiger337]

I, for one think we should be able to vote for as many or as few as we wish...just like the real HOF. Why limit it, if I feel 6,7,8 should be voted for (maybe just to keep them on the ballot) I should be able to decide.
I've thought about it all day...should I keep Crawford off the ballot just to keep someone on...not fair because I think Crawford should be in (sorry, don't mean to tell my votes).

The real HOF has a 10 player limit. Of course, they have more players to consider.

[dt35456884]

I, for one think we should be able to vote for as many or as few as we wish...just like the real HOF.

The real Hall of Fame does not have unlimited votes.

[dt35456884]

And Lee beat me to it.

This is what was agreed upon. If it's a minor quibble with the system, take it to the FAQ thread. Otherwise, deal with it.

[estrepe1]

Lee beat me to it. I thought it was 10 votes for every HOF committe member in real life. We cut it in half and are voting on 1 team. I think its more than fair.

[squid]

My bad.
I agreed to the limit and I'll stand by it, some years will be tougher than others.

[squid]

In my defense, I blame estrepe for pushing Ed (not Tom) Siever.

[estrepe1]

Its amazing how good Crawford really was. Look through the stats and you will see why he is one of the most underappreciated figures in Tiger history.

In my defense, I blame estrepe for pushing Ed (not Tom) Siever.

I didn't think he needed to be pushed. I thought he was a borderline candidate. To tell the truth I am not shocked he was left out. I thought that would be the case. I am just shocked that he received hardly any support at all.

[squid]

How about some Crawford records that will NEVER be broken...
12 inside the park home runs...in one season
51 career inside the park home runs
309 career triples

[estrepe1]

Closest to that career mark squid? Ty Cobb with 295 triples.

The closest active player? Steve Finley with 124.

I know that the parks were bigger but 12 inside the park homeruns in one season is ridiculous.

[squid]

Doing the research I am going to do on all the eligible candidates...shame on me.
I'll admit that I voted for 2 players that I shouldn't have, although Germany was a character (the dude stole first base legally, and MLB made a rule against it because of him). Like I said, shame on me for not doing my homework on something I feel very strongly about.

[dt35456884]

Bill James has a fun little exercise in his HBA which I'm sure a few of you are familiar with. He artificially moved Crawford's career up into the live ball era, and it corresponded to a 494-HR resume. Just an incredible player.

Wahoo Sam is one of the best players ever, nevermind Tigers.

[squid]

Closest to that career mark squid? Ty Cobb with 295 triples.
that's because the third baseman ran like a girl when he rounded 2nd lol

[squid]

dt, the #'s support that.

[DaYooperASBDT]

squid, some of these guys are more borderline, and it gets tough to cut down to five votes now, agreed.

My advice would be to form some "cutters" in your mind of what a Tiger HOF should have for numbers, and stick to those cutters consistently.

I suspect we will induct less than 100 players total, so that means we are looking at the top 5 to 10 percent of all Tigers. The top 5 percent should definitely get in. It's the next group, down through 10 percent, that will make for lively debates in here.

I'm learning a lot about how the actual HOF process works though this exercise. The real HOF only gets 10 votes for 30 teams worth of players, so our standards, by rough calculation, are 15 times easier for modern-day players, and eight times easier for old-timers.

We almost need a "HOF philosophy thread", don't we? I could really "philosophise" in that one! :cheeky:

“I coalesce the vapors of human existence into a viable and meaningful comprehenion”

“Oh, a bull**** artist!”

[estrepe1]

To be honest it the criteria stays around what it is right now. I am guessing the number will be way lower than 100. Probably around 30-40. Which means that we would be inducting the top 2.5 percent of players. (if it was 35)

I am fine with that personally but that is the pace we are on.

[tiger337]

My advice would be to form some "cutters" in your mind of what a Tiger HOF should have for numbers, and stick to those cutters consistently.



I don't think that works when you have radically different eras. It's hard to even make a career length criteria because modern day players tend to have longer careers than old timers. And, of course, the statistics of deadball versus modern are not comparable.

I think the only way to do it is to compare players to others of their era. I don't think we can compare Jimmy Barrett to Chet Lemon and Mickey Stanley. We need to compare him to other players in his era. OPS+ helps but then you have to consider the career length problem and other things.

A good example is comparison between third basemen. In the early part of the 20th C, third base was considered the most important position in the infield so you didn't have as many players with good offensive numbers back then compared to more recent eras.

[Doctor Detroit]

Its amazing how good Crawford really was. Look through the stats and you will see why he is one of the most under-appreciated figures in Tiger history.

When I first looked at his stats last year I was shocked at how little I had ever heard about him through the years from Tiger fanatics.

He had nine, NINE seasons where he has OPS + numbers above 130. He had twelve seasons where he had 50 or more extra base hits in the deadball era, and nine seasons where his slugging was above +140. Fifteen times he was in the top ten in OPS.

He also finished in the top five in batting seven times, twice lead the league in total bases, six times in triples, three time RBI leader, and was an above average fielder in just about all of his years. I think there is a good argument for him being a top five all-time franchise player. His contributions not on statistically but to the final results for the team were huge and alongside Cobb, were the real staples of the early teams of this franchise.

Build him a statue! Crawford>>Willie

[estrepe1]

I agree its crazy that Sam does not have a statue. Looking at the numbers reminds me that he should be the next one somewhere in the ball park.

For the everyday fan I would guess Sam wouldn't even be in the top 20 Tigers that they name. I guess thats what is good about this project. Get the word out on the street about players like Sam that have been overlooked.

[Doctor Detroit]

A good example is comparison between third basemen. In the early part of the 20th C, third base was considered the most important position in the infield so you didn't have as many players with good offensive numbers back then compared to more recent eras.

You especially can't compare fielding from era to era. Ty Cobb wasn't the greatest fielder if you compare him to any other era but he was one of the best in his era. League fielding percentages when Cobb came into baseball for outfielders were in the 940s.

In the the late 19th and early 20th centuries they guys played with a patch of leather. All of their fielding percentages pale in comparison to that of players today and really anything after the 1930s. Guys had awesome range ratings in this era but their FP were always in the gutter and it's almost without exception.

[tiger337]

You especially can't compare fielding from era to era. Ty Cobb wasn't the greatest fielder if you compare him to any other era but he was one of the best in his era. League fielding percentages when Cobb came into baseball for outfielders were in the 940s.

In the the late 19th and early 20th centuries they guys played with a patch of leather. All of their fielding percentages pale in comparison to that of players today and really anything after the 1930s. Guys had awesome range ratings in this era but their FP were always in the gutter and it's almost without exception.

Cobb was not one of the best fielders of his era. He wasn't bad but he wasn't great either. It's true what you say about fielding though. There is no comparison between different eras if you just look at the raw stats.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Lee, my comment about "numbers" was very unclear. My cutters are more about numbers of quality seasons, within the context of that player's "era". Sorry I failed to clarify that.

I've started a "philosophy of HOF voting" thread if anyone wants to weigh in over there also.

Crawford is definitely sold short. Maybe the writers hated him? :cheeky:

[tiger337]

My votes are in. I used all 5 on a mixture of 1915 and 1920 guys. I did vote for Crawford. That's all I'm saying.

[whitecapwendy]

My votes are in. I used all 5 on a mixture of 1915 and 1920 guys. I did vote for Crawford. That's all I'm saying.
I have been ready since last night, but have been holding off in case something discussed changed my mind about one of them. Actually, for three of them I have been ready for a while. I too will be voting for 5--mixture of 1915 and 1920. I just am not going to tell you all that I am voting for Crawford -- oops. :cheeky:

[squid]

I should hope that it's a foregone conclusion that Crawford will be in, (probably unanamous). I have 4 of my votes ready and am 99% sure on #5.

[whitecapwendy]

I should hope that it's a foregone conclusion that Crawford will be in, (probably unanamous). I have 4 of my votes ready and am 99% sure on #5.
I have three votes I think are foregone conclusions, but then, I thought the same about two of my votes last time, and was wrong.

[Oblong]

I'm almost done. I'll have to do some more homework, probably on Tuesday night. There's or two that I'm struggling with.

[estrepe1]

My votes are in. I used all 5 on a mixture of 1915 and 1920 guys. I did vote for Crawford. That's all I'm saying.

I voted and voted for Crawford as well. Big surprise there after all of my posts about how amazing his stats are.

[Edman85]

Upon doing some number crunching, I've found two players on the 1915 ballot that I didn't vote for that I probably should have. There are seven players right now that I feel are worthy of consideration, two of which are shoo-ins. The job now is to narrow those last five down to three.

[whitecapwendy]

Upon doing some number crunching, I've found two players on the 1915 ballot that I didn't vote for that I probably should have. There are seven players right now that I feel are worthy of consideration, two of which are shoo-ins. The job now is to narrow those last five down to three.
I struggled with six, and like you, two were ones I did not vote for in the 1915. I am in total agreement with the 5 vote limit, but I have a feeling that it will only get harder as guys carry over from vote to vote that we want in there.

[squid]

Billfers got a post at his weblog on the top 50 offensive seasons, Crawford is second to Cobb with 7 of the top 50 to 15 for Cobb. Not surprising is that in 1907-1909 and 1911-1913, they both made the top 50.

[estrepe1]

I think we have the formations of what will happen with the guys that carry over. Its really early to talk about and I think needs to be discussed a bit with Dtroppens. But I think there is going to be a contingency where if someone stays on the ballot for a certain length of time they will be discussed further by a committee or in the yearly elections.

[whitecapwendy]

I think we have the formations of what will happen with the guys that carry over. Its really early to talk about and I think needs to be discussed a bit with Dtroppens. But I think there is going to be a contingency where if someone stays on the ballot for a certain length of time they will be discussed further by a committee or in the yearly elections.
Yeah, I remember that being discussed. I just have one from 1915 that I did not vote for this time, that I would like to see come up at that time.

[dt35456884]

Just another reminder that a vote for Jennings (or any non-player in future elections) does not count against your 5-vote limit. Essentially it's a free sixth vote you can use at your own discretion.

[squid]

Kind of like a Veterans Committee? I was thinking about the same thing earlier.

While at work today I was telling an employee about what we're doing, they wanted to know what would happen if a player got enough votes to stay on the ballot long enough but then got booted because of a really good class? Had to tell them that we hadn't gotten that far yet but it got me thinkin.

[dt35456884]

I sent some ideas I've been bouncing around for a Veteran's Committee to DTroppens. I talked it over with estrepe too. Dave, check your PM's. Maybe we can roll out a plan this week if we get the details hammered out.

[Tigeraholic1]

My wife rented me "Cobb" form the library this weekend. I just love this era of america. The work your a** off and you will carve a path that you desire generation. It was also cool seeing Ernie Harwell and Roger Clemens.... I hope Cobb was the person Tommy Lee Jones brought alive in this movie. I also like the actor who played Stump, the agent dude form Aril$$.

[estrepe1]

I have been meaning to read Cobb. I think I will once I graduate.

[Tigeraholic1]

Crawford after doing a little research is now my favorite alltime Tiger. This guy played the game so well. I would have loved sitting in the stands and see one of his rocket shots (history says he was the hardest hitter of his era).


http://www.thedeadballera.com/Photos/crawford1.jpg

[Tigeraholic1]

I have been meaning to read Cobb. I think I will once I graduate.

Great book, I will send you my copy if you like send me a PM.

I always trade to hand off books once I read them. I am way to lazy to read them again!

[DTroppens]

I am sure a ton of these books are at your local libraries. I see a lot of them in the ones I go to.

[tiger337]

Kind of like a Veterans Committee? I was thinking about the same thing earlier.

While at work today I was telling an employee about what we're doing, they wanted to know what would happen if a player got enough votes to stay on the ballot long enough but then got booted because of a really good class? Had to tell them that we hadn't gotten that far yet but it got me thinkin.

I think that players who got enough votes to stay on the ballot at any time (even if thet later get dropped off) should go back in the pool for futute elections. I kind of got the idea we were going to do something like that but we haven't worked out the details of these future elections. We should probably do that soon.

[DTroppens]

Tiger337,
I was thinking we could do one thing to keep the vote from being spread out.
Have one at-large election with the players pre-1955 and then have one with 1960 to present to see if we can target one or two players better. We could have them in back to back weeks or spread them out six months so there is activity going on for a little bit.

[DTroppens]

You guys are fast. I have a lot of PMs that look like votes.

[Edman85]

DTropp, there was a glaring oversight in the first message I sent to you, just look at the second. Sorry for cluttering the PM Box.

[Edman85]

I think that players who got enough votes to stay on the ballot at any time (even if thet later get dropped off) should go back in the pool for futute elections. I kind of got the idea we were going to do something like that but we haven't worked out the details of these future elections. We should probably do that soon.

This is what I put forth a couple of weeks back.

"One more thing to consider are guys who may be the odd man out as a result of being in a strong class with 6 people and may not get 15% off the bat.

So, the January 2008 ballot would have

-2006 and 2007 departures nominated via the normal process

-Any players recieving 15-74% in the 2005 election

-Any players recieving at least 40% of votes in any of the 5 year elections done during the current phase.

-Any other players not recieving 40% in any election, but recieving a nomination from a committee member (*)


The January 2009 ballot would include

-2008 departures nominated via the normal process

-Any people recieving 15-74% of votes in 2008.

-Any other players not otherwise eligible may recieve a nomination from the committee (*)

*Players can only recieve two of these special nominations, after which they are no longer eligible for the Hall of Fame. Also, these nominations may not occur in consecutive years."

As far as who is voting. I would say anybody active in the voting who is still around at the time of election plus maybe a few more. Give people a couple of weeks in January and February and have it this time of year every year.

[estrepe1]

You guys are fast. I have a lot of PMs that look like votes.

I was pretty sure how I was going to vote on Friday night. I took a bit of time and sent it in on Saturday morning.

[DaYooperASBDT]

I still think the annual elections would be a good way to handle those that are "crowded out", and will work if you set the "veterans process" up properly, but I'm open to other ideas.

We should all get our proposals to Dave soon, suggest using the FAQ thread or send him a PM maybe.

[dt35456884]

I'm concerned about opening up the annual elections to people who were not heavily involved in the 5-year voting. Nobody will have a better historical perspective on the annual (and Vet Committee) nominees than the people who were researching all of the players from the beginning. And we sure as heck don't want a bunch of people suddenly glomming on to this process when their favorite player Pudge Rodriguez is up for a vote, if that makes sense.

I've got more ideas on the Veteran's Committee issue that I'll describe in more detail later today.

[DTroppens]

I am really flexible with this. I think there should be a qualifier for those who make the committee and I think the voting in all but one election is a good one.

A "veteran's committee" to select those players bumped out wouldn't be tough. I think there are probably people here that are learning and others that kind of already "know."

And I think I see what Edman is trying to get at (or maybe this is taking his proposal to a bit different swing):

1. People with 40% of the vote ever are automatically on it.
2. The Vet's Committe will then take the people that at one time got at least 10% of the vote and will nominate X number of people to fill the ballot. People that the committe would think is most deserving. The people who aren't selected that time aren't necessarily froze out for good as they could be selected the next year for the list. Keeping this list really won't be any challenge.

[DaYooperASBDT]

I am really flexible with this. I think there should be a qualifier for those who make the committee and I think the voting in all but one election is a good one.

A "veteran's committee" to select those players bumped out wouldn't be tough. I think there are probably people here that are learning and others that kind of already "know."

And I think I see what Edman is trying to get at (or maybe this is taking his proposal to a bit different swing):

1. People with 40% of the vote ever are automatically on it.
2. The Vet's Committe will then take the people that at one time got at least 10% of the vote and will nominate X number of people to fill the ballot. People that the committe would think is most deserving. The people who aren't selected that time aren't necessarily froze out for good as they could be selected the next year for the list. Keeping this list really won't be any challenge.Regarding "permanent" membership or "Vets Committee", the "only one missed vote" requirement makes sense, although I would suggest we give some people a pass on 1915, as it was hard to find the deadline date.

Also like the 10% list, as a source of nominees. Don't know if we even need the 40% and in requirement. I would table that until we know exactly how many make the 10%-74% list. Then we would know how many names we actually need to sift through.

Once we have a list, should we vote on each guy separately, or stick with current system and adjust the number of votes, if needed? Numbers of votes may have to flex, depending on how many nominees?

[whitecapwendy]

You guys are fast. I have a lot of PMs that look like votes.
For me, it was a pretty easy one. After researching I ended up with the same ones that caught my eye (stats wise) at the first. But I started looking things up right after the last time I voted (baseball season won't be so easy on me)
I think having the next class set up right away helped me a great deal. (hint hint)

[motownphilly]

I have been meaning to read Cobb. I think I will once I graduate.


I find Ty Cobb's book "My Life In Baseball" to be a better read. It's the book Cobb wanted you to read. It's full of great stories...and I think gets more in his mind than Cobb.

[DaYooperASBDT]

Won't tell you which way I voted yet, but I did vote for three from the current class, and two from 1915.

[DTroppens]

Mine is mixed. I have one more left if I choose to use it. I'll figure that out by tomorrow morning.

[estrepe1]

Don't forget the deadline to vote is Friday at midnight.

I find Ty Cobb's book "My Life In Baseball" to be a better read. It's the book Cobb wanted you to read. It's full of great stories...and I think gets more in his mind than Cobb.

I probably will read both.

[DTroppens]

Reading both is probably the thing to do.

[estrepe1]

Another book I have been meaning to read:

http://www.amazon.com/Hank-Greenberg-Story-My-Life/dp/1892049236/sr=1-2/qid=1171515767/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/104-5645277-1322313?ie=UTF8&s=books

Anyone read this one?

http://www.amazon.com/Ernie-Harwell-Baseball-Honoring-Detroit/dp/1572437170/sr=1-1/qid=1171516407/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-5645277-1322313?ie=UTF8&s=books

[DaYooperASBDT]

DEADLINE COMETH!!
Midnight tonight (Friday)

[DTroppens]

estrepe,
I've read them both. Greenberg is okay. It's not the greatest read but you aren't wasting your time reading it.
The Harwell book was like his audio thing. I've heard most of the stories before so it wasn't that big of a deal. Still it's probably worth getting - especially if you don't know all about Harwell's life.

[whitecapwendy]

Anyone read this one?

http://www.amazon.com/Ernie-Harwell-Baseball-Honoring-Detroit/dp/1572437170/sr=1-1/qid=1171516407/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-5645277-1322313?ie=UTF8&s=books
That is the Ernie Harwell book I bought (I am pretty sure, anyway). Since I bought it at the same time as the Tigers Encyclopedia, it will not be arriving until sometime late March or early April :disappnt: