Username:	Password:

Remember me

Forgot your username/password?

Print Email

Home>Articles

From Lajoie to Doerr

By Bill James

January 2, 2018

2018-1

57. The Nap Lajoie Era

Oversimplifying yet further, the history of Second Base from 1900 to 1940 can be reduced to four eras. 1900 to 1910 is essentially the Nap Lajoie Decade, 1910 to 1920 is the Eddie Collins Decade, 1920 to 1930 is the Rogers Hornsby Decade, and 1930 to 1940 is the Charlie Gehringer Decade. After Gehringer second basemen will fall in to the normal pattern of (a) domination by players for three to five years, or (b) no clear number one player at the position, but somebody has to rank first.

There is a virtue in the single-player straight-decade domination, in that it enables us to focus on the secondary players at the position in a different way. From 1900 to 1908 the top second baseman in baseball was Nap Lajoie. The other top second basemen of the era were Danny Murphy of Connie Mack’s Athletics and Johnny Evers. Evers was still fairly early in his career by 1908, although that was his peak season.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1900	1	Nap	Lajoie	7	92	.337	.362	.510	29.95
1900	2	Tom	Daly	4	55	.312	.403	.414	22.29

1901	1	Nap	Lajoie	14	125	.426	.463	.643	38.21
1901	2	Tom	Daly	3	90	.315	.371	.444	23.63
1901	3	Jimmy	Williams	7	96	.317	.388	.495	23.40
1901	4	John	Farrell	3	63	.272	.336	.386	20.26
1901	5	Claude	Ritchey	1	74	.296	.357	.354	20.17

1902	1	Nap	Lajoie	7	65	.378	.419	.565	33.76
1902	2	Sammy	Strang	3	46	.296	.387	.364	22.81
1902	3	Jimmy	Williams	8	83	.313	.361	.500	21.83
1902	4	Claude	Ritchey	2	55	.277	.370	.328	19.93
1902	5	Heinie	Peitz	1	60	.315	.369	.406	17.75

1903	1	Nap	Lajoie	7	93	.344	.379	.518	35.57
1903	2	Jimmy	Williams	3	82	.267	.326	.392	22.32
1903	3	Danny	Murphy	1	60	.273	.295	.382	22.09
1903	4	Sammy	Strang	0	38	.272	.376	.333	21.90
1903	5	Claude	Ritchey	0	59	.287	.360	.381	21.57

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1904	1	Nap	Lajoie	5	102	.376	.413	.546	36.93
1904	2	Danny	Murphy	7	77	.287	.320	.440	26.17
1904	3	Claude	Ritchey	0	51	.263	.338	.347	21.54
1904	4	Jimmy	Williams	2	74	.263	.314	.354	20.68
1904	5	Miller	Huggins	2	30	.263	.377	.328	19.73

1905	1	Nap	Lajoie	2	41	.329	.377	.418	29.36
1905	2	Danny	Murphy	6	71	.278	.340	.390	25.23
1905	3	Miller	Huggins	1	38	.273	.392	.326	22.88
1905	4	Charlie	Hickman	4	66	.277	.311	.405	21.65
1905	5	Claude	Ritchey	0	52	.255	.324	.332	20.20

1906	1	Nap	Lajoie	0	91	.355	.392	.465	32.45
1906	2	Danny	Murphy	2	60	.301	.341	.400	23.92
1906	3	Miller	Huggins	0	26	.292	.376	.338	22.41
1906	4	Sammy	Strang	4	49	.319	.423	.435	20.50
1906	4	Jim	Delahanty	1	39	.280	.371	.364	21.94
1906	5	Johnny	Evers	1	51	.255	.305	.315	20.34

1907	1	Nap	Lajoie	2	63	.299	.345	.393	32.24
1907	2	Johnny	Evers	2	51	.250	.309	.313	23.19
1907	2	Jim	Delahanty	2	60	.279	.350	.361	21.91
1907	3	Danny	Murphy	2	57	.271	.317	.345	22.42
1907	4	Ed	Abbaticchio	2	82	.262	.357	.331	19.13
1907	5	Miller	Huggins	1	31	.248	.346	.289	19.12

1908	1	Nap	Lajoie	2	74	.289	.352	.375	33.09
1908	2	Johnny	Evers	0	37	.300	.402	.375	27.74
1908	3	Danny	Murphy	4	66	.265	.309	.364	23.47
1908	4	Germany	Schaefer	3	52	.259	.304	.342	20.83
1908	5	Amby	McConnell	2	43	.279	.343	.335	20.11

No one was really close to Lajoie in any of those seasons. . ..no one was on his heels.

I was never sure how to pronounce "Lajoie" until I worked with his grandson, Bill Lajoie, with the Red Sox. Bill pronounced it "La-Joy" with just a hint of an "uh" sound after it, "La-Joy-uh", but really just "La-Joy". Not Lah-Joe-A or anything like that.

58. The Eddie Collins Decade

After Lajoie the top second baseman in baseball was Eddie Collins. Eddie Collins was perhaps the closest thing ever to a perfect player, Collins or Willie Mays or maybe Stan Musial. Collins did not hit for power, but in his era there was really no power. He hit for an extremely high average, was tremendously fast, walked a lot while rarely striking out, was an outstanding defensive second baseman, and played something close to 154 games every season. He was the best bunter in baseball, in an era in which the bunt was a huge part of the game. In my view he was a greater player than Lajoie, which is not to put down Lajoie, who was the dominant second baseman in baseball for a decade, which is a long, long time to dominate a position.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1909	1	Eddie	Collins	3	56	.346	.416	.449	35.60
1909	2	Nap	Lajoie	1	47	.324	.378	.431	32.57
1909	3	Johnny	Evers	1	24	.263	.369	.337	27.27
1909	4	Danny	Murphy	5	69	.281	.332	.412	25.46
1909	5	Larry	Doyle	6	49	.302	.360	.419	24.93

1910	1	Eddie	Collins	3	81	.322	.381	.417	37.51
1910	2	Nap	Lajoie	4	76	.384	.445	.514	37.20
1910	3	Larry	Doyle	8	69	.285	.369	.412	26.35
1910	4	Danny	Murphy	4	64	.300	.338	.436	25.61
1910	5	Johnny	Evers	0	28	.263	.413	.321	24.59

1911	1	Eddie	Collins	3	73	.365	.451	.481	38.38
1911	2	Larry	Doyle	13	77	.310	.397	.527	27.96
1911	3	Danny	Murphy	6	66	.329	.398	.461	24.55
1911	4	Heinie	Zimmerman	9	85	.307	.343	.462	23.67
1911	5	Buck	Herzog	6	67	.290	.365	.418	22.89

1912	1	Eddie	Collins	0	64	.348	.450	.435	37.84
1912	2	Larry	Doyle	10	90	.330	.393	.471	27.45
1912	3	Nap	Lajoie	0	90	.368	.414	.462	24.77
1912	4	Johnny	Evers	1	63	.341	.431	.441	24.21
1912	5	Del	Pratt	5	69	.302	.348	.426	22.12

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1913	1	Eddie	Collins	3	73	.345	.441	.453	38.76
1913	2	Larry	Doyle	5	73	.280	.364	.388	24.91
1913	3	Del	Pratt	2	87	.296	.341	.402	24.40
1913	4	Jim	Viox	2	65	.317	.399	.427	23.47
1913	5	Johnny	Evers	3	49	.285	.361	.372	22.25

1914	1	Eddie	Collins	2	85	.344	.452	.452	38.82
1914	2	Duke	Kenworthy	15	91	.317	.372	.525	26.61
1914	3	Frank	LaPorte	4	107	.311	.361	.436	24.73
1914	4	Del	Pratt	5	65	.283	.341	.411	24.17
1914	5	Larry	Doyle	5	63	.260	.343	.353	23.57
1914	6	Johnny	Evers	1	40	.279	.390	.338	23.09
1914	7	Baldy	Louden	6	63	.313	.391	.399	22.06
1914	8	George	Cutshaw	2	78	.257	.297	.346	20.98

1915	1	Eddie	Collins	4	77	.332	.460	.436	33.25
1915	2	Larry	Doyle	4	70	.320	.358	.442	27.38
1915	3	Del	Pratt	3	78	.291	.323	.394	22.97
1915	4	Lee	Magee	4	49	.323	.356	.436	21.97
1915	5	Baldy	Louden	4	48	.281	.372	.367	20.45
1915	6	Duke	Kenworthy	3	52	.298	.355	.432	20.11
1915	7	Heinie	Zimmerman	3	62	.265	.300	.379	19.58
1915	8	George	Cutshaw	0	62	.246	.293	.309	18.04

1916	1	Eddie	Collins	0	52	.308	.405	.396	31.15
1916	2	Larry	Doyle	3	54	.278	.323	.403	23.34
1916	3	Del	Pratt	5	103	.267	.331	.391	23.31
1916	4	George	Cutshaw	2	63	.260	.292	.320	17.73
1916	5	Buck	Herzog	1	49	.264	.327	.333	17.14

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1917	1	Eddie	Collins	0	67	.289	.389	.363	29.51
1917	2	Larry	Doyle	6	61	.254	.323	.353	21.18
1917	3	Del	Pratt	1	53	.247	.301	.338	20.81
1917	4	George	Cutshaw	4	49	.259	.292	.347	18.54
1917	5	Bill	Wambsganss	0	43	.255	.315	.313	16.54

1918	1	Eddie	Collins	2	30	.276	.407	.330	26.50
1918	2	Del	Pratt	2	55	.275	.327	.356	21.85
1918	3	George	Cutshaw	5	68	.285	.326	.395	20.17
1918	4	Larry	Doyle	3	36	.261	.354	.354	18.39
1918	5	Bill	Wambsganss	0	40	.295	.345	.356	17.51

1919	1	Eddie	Collins	4	80	.319	.400	.405	28.67
1919	2	Del	Pratt	4	56	.292	.342	.393	22.97
1919	3	Larry	Doyle	7	52	.289	.350	.433	19.30
1919	4	Bill	Wambsganss	2	60	.278	.323	.344	18.00
1919	5	George	Cutshaw	3	51	.242	.287	.320	17.44

Other than Collins, the leading second basemen of this era were Laughing Larry Doyle and Del Pratt, who are not Hall of Famers but who were fine players. The only other Hall of Fame second baseman of the Collins era was Johnny Evers, who won a National League MVP Award with the Braves in 1914, and who of course was part of the Tinker to Evers to Chance combination.

Eddie Collins would remain one of the top second basemen in baseball for years after he was pushed out of the #1 spot by the Rajah. He was the same player in the 1920s that he was in the teens, more or less, but there were a lot more runs in the game in the 1920s, so the 110 runs a year that Collins created had less impact in the 1920s.

59. The Rogers Hornsby Decade

Rogers Hornsby, of course, was one of the greatest hitters of all time, and was the greatest second baseman of the 1920s. Early in his career he was a shortstop, but moved to second base in 1920:

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1920	1	Rogers	Hornsby	9	94	.370	.431	.559	36.61
1920	2	Eddie	Collins	3	76	.372	.438	.493	31.31
1920	3	Del	Pratt	4	97	.314	.372	.427	23.98
1920	4	Joe	Gedeon	0	61	.292	.355	.366	18.73
1920	5	Bucky	Harris	1	68	.300	.377	.381	17.01

1921	1	Rogers	Hornsby	21	126	.397	.458	.639	39.80
1921	2	Eddie	Collins	2	58	.337	.412	.424	25.74
1921	3	Del	Pratt	5	100	.324	.378	.461	22.34
1921	4	Aaron	Ward	5	75	.306	.363	.423	17.91
1921	5	Bucky	Harris	0	54	.289	.367	.354	17.19

1922	1	Rogers	Hornsby	42	152	.401	.459	.722	42.30
1922	2	Frankie	Frisch	5	51	.327	.387	.438	25.49
1922	3	Eddie	Collins	1	69	.324	.401	.403	24.59
1922	4	Marty	McManus	11	109	.312	.358	.459	21.52
1922	5	Del	Pratt	6	86	.301	.361	.427	19.82

1923	1	Rogers	Hornsby	17	83	.384	.459	.627	37.10
1923	2	Frankie	Frisch	12	111	.348	.395	.485	29.02
1923	3	Eddie	Collins	5	67	.360	.455	.453	24.32
1923	4	Marty	McManus	15	94	.309	.367	.481	22.97
1923	5	Cotton	Tierney	13	88	.312	.343	.447	19.18

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1924	1	Rogers	Hornsby	25	94	.424	.507	.696	37.27
1924	2	Frankie	Frisch	7	69	.328	.387	.468	28.18
1924	3	Eddie	Collins	6	86	.349	.441	.455	24.54
1924	4	Marty	McManus	5	80	.333	.409	.441	22.30
1924	5	George	Grantham	12	60	.316	.390	.458	19.13

1925	1	Rogers	Hornsby	39	143	.403	.489	.756	35.40
1925	2	Eddie	Collins	3	80	.346	.461	.442	23.66
1925	3	Marty	McManus	13	90	.288	.371	.457	21.78
1925	4	Eddie	Moore	6	77	.298	.383	.413	18.17
1925	5	Bucky	Harris	1	66	.287	.370	.358	17.58

1926	1	Rogers	Hornsby	11	93	.317	.388	.463	30.60
1926	2	Frankie	Frisch	5	44	.314	.353	.409	24.80
1926	3	Eddie	Collins	1	62	.344	.441	.459	19.27
1926	4	Sparky	Adams	0	39	.309	.367	.375	18.50
1926	5	Bucky	Harris	1	63	.283	.363	.395	18.16

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1927	1	Rogers	Hornsby	26	125	.361	.448	.586	36.26
1927	2	Frankie	Frisch	10	78	.337	.387	.472	28.28
1927	3	George	Grantham	8	66	.305	.396	.454	23.60
1927	4	Tony	Lazzeri	18	102	.309	.383	.482	22.93
1927	5	Charlie	Gehringer	4	61	.317	.383	.441	19.89

1928	1	Rogers	Hornsby	21	94	.387	.498	.632	34.23
1928	2	Tony	Lazzeri	10	82	.332	.397	.535	25.01
1928	3	Frankie	Frisch	10	86	.300	.374	.441	24.81
1928	4	Charlie	Gehringer	6	74	.320	.395	.451	23.12
1928	5	Max	Bishop	6	50	.316	.435	.432	19.37

1929	1	Rogers	Hornsby	39	149	.380	.459	.679	35.01
1929	2	Tony	Lazzeri	18	106	.354	.430	.561	26.27
1929	3	Charlie	Gehringer	13	106	.339	.405	.532	25.14
1929	4	George	Grantham	12	90	.307	.454	.533	24.21
1929	5	Frankie	Frisch	5	74	.334	.397	.484	23.69

Hornsby, of course, had trouble catching pop ups; he would get a little dizzy when he looked up in the air. I say "of course" because all baseball fans knew that 40 years ago; I would guess a lot of you now don’t know it. Anyway, I was wondering if this would cause him to have a lower ratio of putouts to assists, since this would mean that there were putouts that he didn’t get on Pop Ups. Strange that I had never thought to look at that before.

The answer is, yes, it shows. A typical second baseman has 79% as many putouts as assists. Hornsby had only 62% as many, which is the lowest ratio for any long-term second baseman except Ryne Sandberg. Contemporaries to Hornsby: Bucky Harris, 88%; Buddy Myer, 86%; Eddie Collins, 86%; Marty McManus, 85%; Billy Herman, 84%; George Cutshaw, 84%; Billy Wambsganss, 81%; Hobe Ferris, 79%; Oscar Melillio, 77%.

Let’s say that 79% is the norm in Hornsby’s era, as it appears that it wasn’t any less than 79%. If that is true, Hornsby is 861 putouts short of the norm. We can’t assume that all of those were lost plays, of course; it is possible that many of them or most of them were pop outs taken by some other fielder because Hornsby had trouble with them. But it does seem likely that there was some loss of effectiveness there.

The primary reason that we study statistics is so that we are not misled by them. Before sabermetrics, baseball historians saw Hornsby’s big hitting numbers as proof that he was greater than the best second basemen of the dead ball era, because his hitting numbers were bigger. With sabermetrics, we learn to translate the hitting stats into runs, and to express the runs as wins. We now understand that when there are more runs, it requires more runs to win a game; thus, that Hornsby’s advantage may not be as large as it appears.

Eddie Collins is the only second baseman of the Eddie Collins era who is in the Hall of Fame. But in the Rogers Hornsby era, the 2nd-best and 3^rd-best second basemen (in the late 1920s) are also in the Hall of Fame (Frisch and Lazzeri), although it might be more accurate to say that Frisch was the 2^nd-best second baseman of the Hornsby era and Lazzeri was the 2^nd-best second baseman of the Gehringer era. Anyway, the same is true at all of the positions; there are also more first basemen and catchers and left fielders and center fielders in the Hall of Fame. It is likely that this is because the inflated hitting numbers of the 1920s have historically misled people into believing that these players were greater than they actually were, relative to the stars from other eras.

61. Charlie Gehringer’s Short Decade

Charlie Gehringer was only seven years younger than Rogers Hornsby, so he didn’t quite get a full decade to be the #1 second baseman in baseball.

Gehringer was a consummate gentleman who lived with his mother and went to the church to pray literally every day. He was very much respected by those who knew him, but the nickname which is associated with him, The Mechanical Man, was not intended as a compliment. It was like the term that people use for Kansas City quarterback Alex Smith, a "Game Manager". It suggests what he was not more than what he was. He played the game without passion, without anger or without evident joy; he was just there, going through his motions, doing his job. In the early 1950s he was thrust into the role of Detroit’s General Manager simply because the owner had so much respect and affection for him that he implored him to be the General Manager, but Gehringer had no training or background to be a GM and was really awful at the job, which led to a down phase for the Tigers.

The other interesting thing about him is that Gehringer got steadily better, 3% better every year, more or less, for an exceptionally long period of time. He may have had the longest period of getting consistently a little bit better of any player in major league history. Frank White was like that as well.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1930	1	Charlie	Gehringer	16	98	.330	.404	.534	25.42
1930	2	Frankie	Frisch	10	114	.346	.407	.520	24.13
1930	3	George	Grantham	18	99	.324	.413	.534	23.50
1930	4	Tony	Lazzeri	9	121	.303	.372	.462	22.14
1930	5	Max	Bishop	10	38	.252	.426	.408	20.69

1931	1	Frankie	Frisch	4	82	.311	.368	.396	22.34
1931	2	Tony	Lazzeri	8	83	.267	.371	.401	20.74
1931	3	Charlie	Gehringer	4	53	.311	.359	.431	20.53
1931	4	Max	Bishop	5	37	.294	.426	.400	20.18
1931	5	Buddy	Myer	4	56	.293	.360	.406	20.11

1932	1	Charlie	Gehringer	19	107	.298	.370	.497	25.15
1932	2	Tony	Lazzeri	15	113	.300	.399	.506	24.26
1932	3	Buddy	Myer	5	52	.279	.360	.426	20.95
1932	4	Billy	Herman	1	51	.314	.358	.404	20.07
1932	5	Frankie	Frisch	3	60	.292	.327	.372	19.76

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1933	1	Charlie	Gehringer	12	105	.325	.393	.468	28.18
1933	2	Buddy	Myer	4	61	.302	.374	.436	23.84
1933	3	Tony	Lazzeri	18	104	.294	.383	.486	23.30
1933	4	Frankie	Frisch	4	66	.303	.358	.398	20.56
1933	5	Billy	Herman	0	44	.279	.332	.342	19.73

1934	1	Charlie	Gehringer	11	127	.356	.450	.517	33.32
1934	2	Buddy	Myer	3	57	.305	.419	.416	22.69
1934	3	Billy	Herman	3	42	.303	.355	.395	22.28
1934	4	Odell	Hale	13	101	.302	.357	.471	20.88
1934	5	Tony	Lazzeri	14	67	.267	.369	.445	20.42

1935	1	Charlie	Gehringer	19	108	.330	.409	.502	32.46
1935	2	Billy	Herman	7	83	.341	.383	.476	28.21
1935	3	Buddy	Myer	5	100	.349	.440	.468	27.21
1935	4	Odell	Hale	16	101	.304	.361	.486	22.20
1935	5	Lonny	Frey	11	77	.262	.352	.437	17.88

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1936	1	Charlie	Gehringer	15	116	.354	.431	.555	32.77
1936	2	Billy	Herman	5	93	.334	.392	.470	28.30
1936	3	Odell	Hale	14	87	.316	.380	.506	22.51
1936	4	Buddy	Myer	0	15	.269	.427	.327	17.70
1936	5	Tony	Cuccinello	7	86	.308	.374	.402	17.38

1937	1	Charlie	Gehringer	14	96	.371	.458	.520	30.21
1937	2	Billy	Herman	8	65	.335	.396	.479	28.20
1937	3	Buddy	Myer	1	65	.293	.407	.384	18.87
1937	4	Odell	Hale	6	82	.267	.335	.371	18.70
1937	5	Tony	Cuccinello	11	80	.271	.341	.405	17.38

1938	1	Charlie	Gehringer	20	107	.306	.424	.486	27.07
1938	2	Billy	Herman	1	56	.277	.342	.359	23.22
1938	3	Buddy	Myer	6	71	.336	.454	.465	21.32
1938	4	Joe	Gordon	25	97	.255	.340	.502	18.95
1938	5	Odell	Hale	8	69	.278	.338	.399	16.59

62. The Joe Gordon Era

Although Charlie Gehringer still played great in 1939 and 1940, Joe Gordon took over as the #1 second baseman in baseball in 1939, and remained so until he was drafted or joined the Army between the 1943 and 1944 seasons. He missed the 1944 and 1945 seasons, but his backup, Snuffy Stirnweiss, emerged as the #1 second baseman in baseball during the war—in fact, I believe that Stirnweiss actually won The Sporting News version of the MVP Award in 1944 or 1945. Stirnweiss, who was called "Snuffy" because he used lots of snuff, played at a near-MVP level both seasons, finishing fourth and third in the BBWAA MVP voting.

Gordon was the best second baseman in baseball in that era, but was not as great a player as Lajoie, Collins, Hornsby or Gehringer. After he returned from the war he had a poor season in 1946, so the Yankees traded him to the Indians and put Stirnweiss at second. Gordon then had two of his best seasons with the Indians, 1947 and 1948, but Bobby Doerr had edged past him as the top second baseman in baseball, breaking up the four-decade pattern of domination of the position by one superstar.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1939	1	Joe	Gordon	28	111	.284	.370	.506	23.50
1939	2	Billy	Herman	7	70	.307	.378	.453	22.94
1939	3	Charlie	Gehringer	16	86	.325	.423	.544	22.57
1939	4	Lonny	Frey	11	55	.291	.387	.452	18.65
1939	5	Bobby	Doerr	12	73	.318	.365	.448	17.32

1940	1	Joe	Gordon	30	103	.281	.340	.511	25.54
1940	2	Bobby	Doerr	22	105	.291	.353	.497	19.75
1940	3	Billy	Herman	5	57	.292	.347	.376	19.72
1940	4	Lonny	Frey	8	54	.266	.361	.371	19.04
1940	5	Charlie	Gehringer	10	81	.313	.428	.447	19.01

1941	1	Joe	Gordon	24	87	.276	.358	.466	25.95
1941	2	Billy	Herman	3	41	.285	.361	.371	20.03
1941	3	Bobby	Doerr	16	93	.282	.339	.450	19.43
1941	4	Lonny	Frey	6	59	.254	.345	.359	18.72
1941	5	Jimmy	Brown	3	56	.306	.363	.406	17.20

1942	1	Joe	Gordon	18	103	.322	.409	.491	27.72
1942	2	Bobby	Doerr	15	102	.290	.369	.455	23.38
1942	3	Billy	Herman	2	65	.256	.339	.333	20.97
1942	4	Lonny	Frey	2	39	.266	.373	.344	17.76
1942	5	Don	Gutteridge	1	50	.255	.320	.339	15.76

1943	1	Joe	Gordon	17	69	.249	.365	.413	25.51
1943	2	Bobby	Doerr	16	75	.270	.339	.412	24.66
1943	3	Billy	Herman	2	100	.330	.398	.417	23.11
1943	4	Lou	Klein	7	62	.287	.342	.410	21.01
1943	5	Don	Gutteridge	1	36	.273	.335	.366	16.50

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1944	1	Snuffy	Stirnweiss	8	43	.319	.389	.460	29.05
1944	2	Bobby	Doerr	15	81	.325	.399	.528	27.10
1944	3	Eddie	Stanky	0	16	.273	.375	.325	16.10
1944	4	Pete	Coscarart	4	42	.264	.315	.354	15.82
1944	5	Don	Gutteridge	3	36	.245	.304	.342	15.63

1945	1	Snuffy	Stirnweiss	10	64	.309	.385	.476	28.36
1945	2	Eddie	Stanky	1	39	.258	.417	.333	23.49
1945	3	Frankie	Gustine	2	66	.280	.335	.370	17.88
1945	4	George	Hausmann	2	45	.279	.356	.339	16.64
1945	5	Don	Johnson	2	58	.302	.343	.361	16.35

At the other positions I was breaking in every 40 years to summarize the best players of the era (breaking about 1940 and 1980), but I think I’ll switch to just one break, which would be 1960.

63. A Window for Bobby Doerr

In the late 1940s the late Bobby Doerr was baseball’s #1 second baseman.

Gordon, Doerr, and the next person who will be the #1 second baseman in baseball were all basically the same age, within a few years, and were all basically from Los Angeles. Among the three of them they dominate the position from 1939 to 1952.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1946	1	Bobby	Doerr	18	116	.271	.346	.453	26.18
1946	2	Eddie	Stanky	0	36	.273	.436	.352	25.33
1946	3	Joe	Gordon	11	47	.210	.308	.338	19.46
1946	4	Billy	Herman	3	50	.298	.395	.413	19.34
1946	5	Frankie	Gustine	8	52	.259	.318	.378	17.95

1947	1	Bobby	Doerr	17	95	.258	.329	.426	23.67
1947	2	Eddie	Stanky	3	53	.252	.373	.329	22.71
1947	3	Joe	Gordon	29	93	.272	.346	.496	22.58
1947	4	Snuffy	Stirnweiss	5	41	.256	.358	.342	19.43
1947	5	Frankie	Gustine	9	67	.297	.364	.409	18.92

1948	1	Bobby	Doerr	27	111	.285	.386	.505	26.01
1948	2	Jackie	Robinson	12	85	.296	.367	.453	25.97
1948	3	Eddie	Stanky	2	29	.320	.455	.417	22.21
1948	4	Joe	Gordon	32	124	.280	.371	.507	21.99
1948	5	Jerry	Priddy	8	79	.296	.391	.443	19.14

COMMENTS (21 Comments, most recent shown first)

CharlesSaeger
Just piling on Rogers's fielding, focusing on the 1920-1929 period, he comes off as an average fielder. First up is assists as a percentage of team assists. Crediting Hornsby with the whole team, he's +9 assists for the decade as a whole. Errors as a percentage of total chances? Also +9 for the decade as a whole. Singles per ball in play? -36. (I'm sure it would be more even if I made a park adjustment. Hornsby mostly played in good places to hit.) Double plays versus chances? -12. I figured chances as, for the whole team, A*(1B+BB+HBP+Err*0.6)/BFP, and using team double plays turned. Were I doing a more formal analysis, I'd use only DPs by the second basemen, lob out steals and caught stealing (or half of catcher assists), as well as SH, though I'd have to adjust the last one for the weird rules in use for crediting those in the decade, so I kept it simple.

If I bothered with POs, Hornsby would be at about -40 each year. His teams averaged 329 POs by second basemen, while an average NL team in the decade had 368 POs at second base.
10:14 PM Jan 3rd

JT11505
In my recollection, Sandberg would just kind of let Shawon Dunston, who was really good at fielding popups, take anything he could get to.
4:10 PM Jan 3rd

bhalbleib
@jaybracken, my guess is all the foul territory that Wrigley doesn't have compared to most stadiums of his day. There isn't a whole lotta of room to catch Fo4 behind first base at Wrigley
2:22 PM Jan 3rd

jaybracken
Maybe Bill will get to this later on in the series, but what's the explanation for Sandberg's low rate of putout/assist? All the day games?
1:12 PM Jan 3rd

Brock Hanke
CharlesSaeger - Thanks for all the good info, especially about league differential. I used BB-Ref because I am VERY careful about mentioning a site name on another site that may regard the one I have as competition. That's why I didn't check Retrosheet. I know I can cite BB-Ref here and, since you comment here often, I now know I can cite Retrosheet. The reason I restricted my study to 1920-1926 is that those are the only years that Hornsby payed in Sportsman's Park. The Cardinals moved in as tenants of the Browns in 1920, and Hornsby went to New York in 1927. I don't know if there are ballpark factors in Putouts and Assists at 2B, so I was careful about that. Also, I've ignored your regression analysis because I don't really trust regression as much as most people who have math degrees. When I studied regressions in college, I actually found it easier to take the problems and cast them into matrix form and solve for eigenvalues. I got correct answers doing that, but wasn't sure that it was completely valid until Dr. Walt Davis, a math professor who comments on baseball, told me that it was, while also telling me that I was the only person he had ever heard of who found the matrix method easier. I love matrix theory.

ODD NOTE: It's possible that the ballpark move has a lot to do with Hornsby's hitting greatness. The ballpark that he moved FROM had a huge left field. Even in the 1920s, it would have been all but impossible to hit righty homers in that cow pasture, except for inside the park ones. Sportsman's, which had a small right field territory, had a normal left field. So Hornsby went from homer hell to homer OK at just the same time as Babe Ruth started the homer explosion. Hornsby may just have been the first really good hitter other than Ruth to figure out the power of the homer.

Bill discusses fly balls and second basemen in his Nap Lajoie comment in the New Historical, explaining why Lajoie's stats are so astonishing late in his career. I find the comment completely convincing.

The various notes about Hornsby's defense surprise me. Even in the whitewashed version of his career that my dad passed to me, Hornsby's inner-ear balance problems and his inability to go back for popups were part of his legend - just about the only negative in that story. My dad said that his teams, after 1923, actually had a special play for this. When a popup was hit behind 2B, the 1B and the SS and the RF would take off for it right away, while Hornsby covered second and the pitcher covered first. That way, Hornsby never had to go backwards to get a popup. Thinking about KaiserD2's comment, the idea that Hornsby played close to 2B and was, therefore, good at the DP, makes sense. There was no reason for him to play back away from second, He wasn't going to chase popups anyway. If you read Bill's Lajoie analysis, you realize that the number of popups that a normal 2B can get to by backing up, but neither the SS nor the 1B nor the RF can get to, even if they start right away, is small. That is, the cost of Hornsby's inability to go backwards doesn't have huge consequences. It does have some, but not many.
12:42 PM Jan 3rd

CharlesSaeger
Brock: Retrosheet is your friend for double plays. And, frankly, for loading times as well.

For the period from 1920-1929, Hornsby's putouts were 62.8% of his double plays. For the NL at the same time, that number is 69.3%; for the AL, 78.3%. For some reason, infielders stopped making as many putouts in the late 1970s. I did a regression once of third basemen versus left fielders (few 3b PO are assisted) in the post-war era, and it definitely looked like the left fielder was taking putouts from the third basemen, so maybe the ball is going farther or something.

The gap between the leagues is definitely interesting. NL second basemen had 29434 PO and 42474 A in that time, and AL ones had 30883 PO and 39459 A. OK, Hornsby, with his playing style, is about a tenth of the NL totals, but the gap in the ratio was bigger between the league than it was between the NL and Hornsby. If I take PO as a percentage of PO-SO, the NL percentage is 9.9% and the AL's 10.5%, which makes sense as the K rates are similar (34221 NL, 35105 AL). If I take A as a percentage of all A, I get 26.9% NL, 25.6% AL. NL second basemen, on average, made 38 assists more per team/year than the ones in the AL, leading NL teams to post 41 more assists per team/year.
10:01 AM Jan 3rd

KaiserD2
LaJoie was not simply the greatest second basemen of the 00s, he was the greatest player in the American League until Cobb came along, and I think he is the greatest player who never played in postseason in the post-1901 era. He was very unlucky in that respect--the Indians were probably the best team in the AL in a couple of years in the late 00s but always managed to lose out, most notably in 1908. Lajoie was very comparable to Honus Wagner in overall value, in my opinion. Among their generation they tie with 10 seasons of 4 WAA or more, one more than Matthewson, and no other position player comes close at least in the post-1901 era.

DER shows Hornsby to be a fully adequate second baseman. I appreciate Bill noting that the popups he didn't catch were almost surely caught by some one else--nearly all of them, anyway. It seems to me that Ty Cobb was more responsible than anyone else for the idea that Hornsby couldn't catch pop flies, and since they played in different leagues I don't think Cobb's testimony is worth that much. I think Frisch got a bit slighted by the way Bill set up the study. He was nearly as good as Gehringer, although no, he wasn't as good as Hornsby. I too had noticed that Gehringer peaked surprisingly late in his career. I don't think Lazzeri belongs in the Hall of Fame. Gehringer had five seasons of 4 WAA or more, Frisch had 4, and Lazzeri had only 2. Doerr, by the way, didn't have any, although he repeatedly just missed it. Gordon and Jackie Robinson both had 5 such seasons.

Hornsby. for me, ranks with Dick Allen as the great player whom no one seemed to want to have around for very long in the second halves of their careers. And both of them had addiction problems, although Hornsby's was not chemical. He was a gambler.

DK
8:33 AM Jan 3rd

johnc
To me, Cobb (who is clearly reading his answers) sounds like a Georgia boy who has spent a lot of time in the North and trying to suppress his drawl. Pretty standard, but I'm used to it.

Grantland Rice, on the other hand, sounds slightly comical with his "foist" and "poisonally" and "woik."
12:43 AM Jan 3rd

Brock Hanke
chuck - I took a little trip over to BB-Ref (the one site I know I can cite here). Either their data entry process has a big hole in it, or the National League didn't track double plays in the 1920s. It's just a blank column. Bill may have better sources.
10:46 PM Jan 2nd

hotstatrat
Thanks for the Cobb interview, Ventboy. Yes, it sounds as though Cobb was prepped for the questions and had the answers ready, if not read verbatim.

Most recorded 1930s conversations sound a little corny to modern ears. This is no exception, but I found it enlightening nonetheless.
9:54 PM Jan 2nd

chuck
A second-hand copy and paste- the source says it's from Charles Alexander's bio of Hornsby:
The reputation of not being comfortable going back on pop flies "resulted partly from the fact that with a runner on first base, Hornsby liked to position himself well in on the infield dirt and "cheat" toward second, in anticipation of a ground ball that could be turned into a double play. As a consequence, sometimes pop-ups that should have been caught fell between Hornsby and his right fielder.

Everybody agreed that Hornsby's forte as an infielder was in turning the double play. He made himself into an absolute master at getting to and across the base, taking the throw from the shortstop or third baseman with only the instep of his left foot in contact with the bag, and delivering the ball to the first baseman with an almost unerringly accurate flip across his chest."

Bill, does Hornsby look like his forte as a fielder was in turning the DP?
7:21 PM Jan 2nd

Brock Hanke
As part of the sanctified story, I was told that Hornsby's vision problems developed as the result of his physical problems in 1923. He was hurt in 1923, played only 107 games, 96 at 2B. But here are his PO/A percentages from 1920-1926, which was his last in the St. Louis ballpark:

1920 - 65%
1921 - 64%
1922 - 84%
1923 - 68%
1924 - 58%
1925 - 69%
1926 - 57%

If you're trying to sanctify Hornsby, you'll say that this represents two years of learning how to play 2B as opposed to SS, followed by one year, 1922, at an average rate for a 2B of the time, a drop due to inner ear problems in the partial year of 1923 followed by a collapse in 1924, a little recovery in 1925, and back to real bad in 1926. Yeah, well, you can squint at anything from the right angle and get what you're looking for. The real outlier here is the 1922 season, which is the good one. Overall, you're really pushing it to attribute the problem to what happened in 1923. I keep having to remind myself that my dad was born in 1911. In 1923, he was a serious baseball fan, but he was also 12 years old. In 1926, he was 15; when Hornsby got traded, you could easily sell him on a story that sanctified a superstar idol. And they did.
6:11 PM Jan 2nd

MichaelPat
Urinating in the shower... In the Historical Abstract James wrote about the players complaining about Hornsby urinating in the shower.
A few years later it turns up in a Seinfeld. Season five, March 1994....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0VK7frCiCs

I always wondered who was the Bill James reader... Seinfeld? Larry David? Lawrence Levy?
6:09 PM Jan 2nd

Brock Hanke
The surprising one (well, two) to me is that Hornsby was still the best 2B in the game in 1926, when he had, for him, a miserable off year (which his fans blamed on his focusing on managing the team to its first pennant), and in 1927, when Frisch had his best year ever, trying to not get booed out of town.

Regarding unlikability, I was taught, by my father, who was a teenager during Hornsby's career, a full history of Hornsby's career which whitewashes his personality. His leaving St. Louis is attributed to a fight between him and Branch Rickey over who was responsible for the 1926 pennant (Hornsby did became the manager in mid-1925, and did turn a mediocre team around instantly). His lasting only one year in New York is attributed to his wanting another manager's job so he could prove that he was a great manager and Rickey a credit-hog; Rickey is supposed to have traded him to the one team in baseball (McGraw's Giants) where the manager's job was NOT open. He did, in fact, become the manager of the Boston Braves that the Giants traded him to, but the team had no talent other than him. The interesting thing about the sanctified story is that it covers his whole career, and is completely plausible until you read Hornsby's own autobiography, My War With Baseball. The sanctified story is absolutely incompatible with Hornsby's own self-portrayals, much less any other reputations he acquired.
5:35 PM Jan 2nd

Brock Hanke
I feel dumb about the Lajoie pronunciation, which I have had wrong until this very day. If you look at it, it's a French name composed of two words: "la", which means "the", and "joie", which probably means something like "joy." In constructs like this, the "the" word is virtually always given the lesser emphasis; if you pronounce it like you'd say "the joy", you'll get it right. As for what the French would do with three vowels in a row, well, French doesn't really have spelling or pronunciation, so I can't say.
5:23 PM Jan 2nd

JohnPontoon
Say, does anybody have any tales about Rogers Hornsby's unlikability? I know, I know, I enjoy nonsense too much, but it's FUN. Seriously, folks, let's dish on the Rajah! True stories, apocrypha, rumors, it's all fair game. We readers & site authors have a LOT of collective baseball history & myth in our heads here. Make it so!
1:41 PM Jan 2nd

price499
Knowing that second base was more of an offensive position than third base in the early days, I have always found it interesting that Hughie Critz was given so many accolades for his play in the 20's despite having a weak bat. He twice finished in the top four in MVP voting for the Reds in 1926 and 1928 and finished in the top 20 another time before the New York Giants traded for him after dealing away both Frisch and Hornsby.
12:23 PM Jan 2nd

ventboys
I heard a Ty Cobb interview with Grantland Rice on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqnH5BrRWnk where he used the older pronunciation that you guys are talking about. Part of the difference might be Cobb's accent. The pronunciation is at 4:09.

Cobb's accent is fascinating; he sounds like a cross between Nipsy Russell and Mitch Hedberg. Listening back to the interview, it almost sounds like he's reading the answers, rather than speaking extemporaneously.
12:17 PM Jan 2nd

78sman
Bill, the methodology for this series is interesting, and I am enjoying reading each installment.

11:14 AM Jan 2nd

steve161
And I've heard 'la-zhwah', which is presumably how his francophone ancestors pronounced it. But foreign names almost always regress to the local language, the only question is how long it takes. It's not certain that Nap and Bill pronounced it the same way, but I'll take the grandson's word for it.

Leading me to a question I've been trying to get answered for 50 years: did the Meusel brothers retain their father's pronunciation (MOI-zel) or had Americanization already set in?
7:20 AM Jan 2nd

sansho1
Somewhere I'd heard "LA-zho-ay" where "la" is like laugh.
6:18 AM Jan 2nd

From Lajoie to Doerr

COMMENTS (21 Comments, most recent shown first)

Leave a comment

Report inappropriate comment


Type of Abuse:
Comments: