Third Basemen of 1900 to 1950

By Bill James

January 18, 2018

78. The Delayed End of the 19^th Century

In 1900 and 1901 the #1 third basemen in baseball were 19^th century holdovers:

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1900	1	John	McGraw	2	33	.344	.505	.416	26.51
1900	2	Jimmy	Collins	6	95	.304	.352	.394	23.03

1901	1	Jimmy	Collins	6	94	.332	.375	.495	26.23
1901	2	Lave	Cross	2	73	.328	.358	.465	23.35
1901	3	Bill	Bradley	1	55	.293	.336	.403	22.35
1901	4	Fred	Hartman	3	89	.309	.355	.431	20.09
1901	5	John	McGraw	0	28	.349	.508	.487	19.75

79. The Bradley-Devlin Era (1902-1908)

For three years each, Bill Bradley and Art Devlin were the best third basemen in baseball. Bradley was a big guy, a Cleveland native who starred for the Indians. Devlin, listed as about the same size as Bradley although Bradley was thought of as a big athletic guy and Devlin as more of a scrappy guy, was the third baseman for the Giants. I think they’re both figures in The Glory of Their Times, although it has been 30 years since I read The Glory of Their Times. They were both very good players, although they didn’t stick at the top long enough to be Hall of Famers. The only Hall of Fame third baseman of this era was Jimmy Collins.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1902	1	Bill	Bradley	11	77	.340	.375	.515	26.47
1902	2	Jimmy	Collins	6	61	.322	.360	.459	25.65
1902	3	Tommy	Leach	6	85	.278	.341	.426	25.14
1902	4	Lave	Cross	0	108	.342	.374	.440	24.46
1902	5	Bill	Coughlin	6	71	.301	.348	.414	20.74

1903	1	Bill	Bradley	6	68	.313	.348	.496	28.06
1903	2	Jimmy	Collins	5	72	.296	.329	.448	27.42
1903	3	Tommy	Leach	7	87	.298	.352	.438	24.09
1903	4	Lave	Cross	2	90	.292	.304	.356	21.17
1903	5	Wid	Conroy	1	45	.272	.322	.372	19.64

1904	1	Bill	Bradley	6	83	.300	.334	.409	26.69
1904	2	Jimmy	Collins	3	67	.271	.306	.379	26.01
1904	3	Tommy	Leach	2	56	.257	.316	.335	23.95
1904	4	Art	Devlin	1	66	.281	.371	.354	23.09
1904	5	Lave	Cross	1	71	.290	.310	.379	20.36

1905	1	Art	Devlin	2	61	.246	.344	.310	25.18
1905	2	Jimmy	Collins	4	65	.276	.330	.368	23.17
1905	3	Bill	Bradley	0	51	.268	.321	.354	21.48
1905	4	Tommy	Leach	2	53	.257	.309	.345	21.41
1905	5	Wid	Conroy	2	25	.273	.329	.395	19.72

1906	1	Art	Devlin	2	65	.299	.396	.390	30.26
1906	2	Harry	Steinfeldt	3	83	.327	.395	.430	25.93
1906	3	Tommy	Leach	1	39	.286	.333	.342	23.10
1906	4	Jim	Delahanty	1	39	.280	.371	.364	21.94
1906	5	Wid	Conroy	4	54	.245	.304	.332	19.41

1907	1	Art	Devlin	1	54	.277	.376	.324	25.42
1907	2	Jim	Delahanty	2	60	.279	.350	.361	21.91
1907	3	Harry	Steinfeldt	1	70	.266	.323	.336	21.75
1907	4	Dave	Brain	10	56	.279	.324	.420	19.50
1907	5	Wid	Conroy	3	51	.234	.279	.315	18.16

1908	1	Tommy	Leach	5	41	.259	.324	.381	28.11
1908	2	Hans	Lobert	4	63	.293	.348	.407	25.51
1908	3	Art	Devlin	2	45	.253	.346	.313	24.34
1908	4	Harry	Steinfeldt	1	62	.241	.294	.306	19.84
1908	5	Harry	Lord	2	37	.260	.298	.319	16.22

80. Home Run Baker (1909-1914)

From 1909 to 1914 the best third baseman in baseball—and the best third baseman in baseball history up to that point—was Frank Baker.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1909	1	Home Run	Baker	4	85	.305	.343	.447	24.65
1909	2	Art	Devlin	0	56	.265	.362	.336	22.32
1909	3	Harry	Lord	0	31	.311	.345	.360	20.98
1909	4	Harry	Steinfeldt	2	59	.252	.331	.337	20.68
1909	5	Bobby	Byrne	1	40	.226	.327	.290	19.24

1910	1	Home Run	Baker	2	74	.283	.329	.392	28.04
1910	2	Bobby	Byrne	2	52	.296	.366	.417	24.38
1910	3	Harry	Lord	1	42	.267	.315	.333	20.88
1910	4	Mike	Mowrey	2	70	.282	.375	.368	20.34
1910	5	Art	Devlin	2	67	.260	.353	.327	19.06

1911	1	Home Run	Baker	11	115	.334	.379	.508	34.27
1911	2	Harry	Lord	3	61	.321	.364	.433	23.61
1911	3	Bobby	Byrne	2	52	.259	.342	.366	22.66
1911	4	Larry	Gardner	4	44	.285	.373	.376	20.97
1911	5	Roy	Hartzell	3	91	.296	.375	.387	19.55

1912	1	Home Run	Baker	10	130	.347	.404	.541	37.32
1912	2	Heinie	Zimmerman	14	99	.372	.418	.571	29.37
1912	3	Larry	Gardner	3	86	.315	.383	.449	23.83
1912	4	Bobby	Byrne	3	35	.288	.358	.405	21.64
1912	5	Eddie	Foster	2	70	.285	.345	.379	21.20

1913	1	Home Run	Baker	12	117	.336	.412	.492	36.77
1913	2	Heinie	Zimmerman	9	95	.313	.379	.490	26.71
1913	3	Red	Smith	6	76	.296	.358	.441	23.92
1913	4	Larry	Gardner	0	63	.281	.347	.359	20.83
1913	5	Tillie	Shafer	5	52	.287	.369	.398	20.12

1914	1	Home Run	Baker	9	89	.319	.380	.442	33.12
1914	2	Ed	Lennox	11	84	.312	.414	.493	25.03
1914	3	Red	Smith	7	85	.272	.346	.395	23.66
1914	4	Bill	McKechnie	2	38	.304	.368	.377	23.05
1914	5	Heinie	Zimmerman	4	87	.296	.326	.424	23.04
1914	6	Eddie	Foster	2	50	.282	.348	.351	19.28
1914	7	Larry	Gardner	3	68	.259	.303	.385	18.60
1914	8	Fritz	Maisel	2	47	.239	.334	.325	18.17

If I was doing this again I might discount the Federal League numbers by 15, 20%, I think. Anyway, Baker was a true superstar, a man who hit .363 in six World Series as well as regularly leading the league in RBI. His "value" numbers peak around 37, which is superstar territory. He had tremendous value to his teams. There won’t be another third baseman who reaches that level for another half a century. He dominated for six years, which is a good long time, although he was only 28 when he took a season off, and was never quite the same player after that.

81. Grohs on You

In 1915 Baker didn’t play; my memory is that he sat out the season in a salary dispute, related to the breakup of the A’s, which is related to the Federal League. Anyway, with Baker out Heinie Groh of Cincinnati became the best third baseman in the game. Groh used the "bottle bat", a bat which looked as if it had swallowed a smaller bat, and hit .474 in the 1922 World Series. He usually hit around .300 and once led the league in walks, so he had very high on base percentages, plus he was a very, very good defensive third baseman.

Groh was the best third baseman in baseball from 1915 to 1920. In 1921 Groh missed 40% of the season with an injury, his first major injury, so Frankie Frisch emerged as the best third baseman in baseball, for the New York Giants, but that winter the Giants traded for Groh and moved Frisch to second, Groh to third. For one year Jimmie Johnston ranks as the #1 guy, although he is just there on a somebody-has-to-rate-first basis:

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1915	1	Heine	Groh	3	50	.290	.354	.390	24.06
1915	2	Red	Smith	2	65	.264	.345	.352	21.85
1915	3	Wally	Schang	1	44	.248	.385	.343	18.90
1915	4	Eddie	Foster	0	52	.275	.329	.348	18.80
1915	5	Mike	Mowrey	1	49	.280	.367	.359	18.47
1915	6	Fritz	Maisel	4	46	.281	.342	.357	17.87
1915	7	Ossie	Vitt	1	48	.250	.348	.334	17.60
1915	8	Larry	Gardner	1	55	.258	.327	.326	17.56

1916	1	Heine	Groh	2	28	.269	.370	.374	26.67
1916	2	Rogers	Hornsby	6	65	.313	.369	.444	25.94
1916	3	Home Run	Baker	10	52	.269	.344	.428	25.89
1916	4	Red	Smith	3	60	.259	.333	.348	20.99
1916	5	Larry	Gardner	2	62	.308	.372	.387	20.14

1917	1	Heine	Groh	1	53	.304	.385	.411	32.47
1917	2	Home Run	Baker	6	71	.282	.345	.365	23.29
1917	3	Red	Smith	2	62	.295	.369	.392	21.78
1917	4	Heinie	Zimmerman	5	102	.297	.317	.391	21.75
1917	5	Larry	Gardner	1	61	.265	.341	.345	20.35

1918	1	Heine	Groh	1	37	.320	.395	.396	31.72
1918	2	Home Run	Baker	6	62	.306	.357	.409	22.96
1918	3	Larry	Gardner	1	52	.285	.346	.365	20.64
1918	4	Red	Smith	2	65	.298	.373	.373	19.40
1918	5	Milt	Stock	1	42	.274	.325	.314	18.90

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1919	1	Heine	Groh	5	63	.310	.392	.431	31.68
1919	2	Rogers	Hornsby	8	71	.318	.384	.430	30.60
1919	3	Buck	Weaver	3	75	.296	.315	.401	23.59
1919	4	Larry	Gardner	2	79	.300	.352	.393	21.96
1919	5	Home Run	Baker	10	83	.293	.346	.388	20.27

1920	1	Heine	Groh	0	49	.298	.375	.393	27.23
1920	2	Buck	Weaver	2	74	.331	.365	.420	22.32
1920	3	Larry	Gardner	3	118	.310	.367	.414	21.61
1920	4	Milt	Stock	0	76	.319	.360	.382	20.12
1920	5	Jimmy	Johnston	1	52	.291	.338	.361	18.15

1921	1	Frankie	Frisch	8	100	.341	.384	.485	25.98
1921	2	Heine	Groh	0	48	.331	.398	.417	21.40
1921	3	Larry	Gardner	3	115	.319	.391	.437	20.86
1921	4	Jimmy	Johnston	5	56	.325	.372	.460	20.31
1921	5	Milt	Stock	3	84	.307	.360	.388	20.03

1922	1	Jimmy	Johnston	4	49	.319	.364	.400	19.27
1922	2	Milt	Stock	5	79	.305	.352	.418	18.48
1922	3	Joe	Dugan	6	63	.287	.318	.383	17.79
1922	4	Heine	Groh	3	51	.265	.353	.350	17.74
1922	5	Tony	Boeckel	6	47	.289	.349	.410	16.50

Groh was a great player, and in my view he could be a Hall of Famer, although he isn’t.

82. The Pie Traynor Era

We talk about Pie Traynor a lot here. I’ve never questioned that Traynor was a legitimate Hall of Famer; he was the best third baseman in baseball, basically, for ten years. That’s a long, long time to be the top dog.

Most of the baseball books I read in the early 1960s were written between 1945 and 1960. In that era basically everybody who wrote about the issue wrote that Pie Traynor was the greatest third baseman of all time. My only real point was that he wasn’t all that. He wasn’t as great a player at his best as Home Run Baker was, although he stayed on top longer, and he doesn’t match up well against the 1950s/1960s third basemen like Eddie Mathews, Ken Boyer, Brooks Robinson, Ron Santo and others. His peak seasons are not the equal of Jimmy Collins, Bill Bradley or Heinie Groh. He wasn’t really fast (his stolen base percentages are not good, and he grounded into quite a few double plays). He didn’t walk, hit only 58 homers in his career, did not have a particularly long career (less than 2,000 games). He was a .320 hitter and an exceptional fielder; it’s a good player. Forbes Field helped his batting average; he was a career .332 hitter at home, .308 on the road. He wasn’t a dominant player, but he held a value in the 23-24 range for a long time, and there just wasn’t anybody in that era who was better. I think most people now understand that. Fred Lindstrom had a couple of exceptional years, and follows the usual rule that the #2 players of this era have made the Hall of Fame, while the #2 players of the 1900s, 1910s, 1940s and 1950s mostly did NOT make the Hall of Fame. The other top third basemen of the era were Willie Kamm, Jimmie Dykes, Joe Dugan, Marty McManus and (later) Pinky Whitney.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1923	1	Pie	Traynor	12	101	.338	.377	.489	22.58
1923	2	Jimmy	Johnston	4	60	.325	.378	.426	18.70
1923	3	Heine	Groh	4	48	.290	.379	.385	18.13
1923	4	Joe	Dugan	7	67	.283	.311	.384	17.86
1923	5	Bernie	Friberg	12	88	.318	.372	.473	17.43

1924	1	Pie	Traynor	5	82	.294	.340	.417	20.98
1924	2	Andy	High	6	61	.328	.390	.448	17.69
1924	3	Joe	Dugan	3	56	.302	.341	.390	16.96
1924	4	Heine	Groh	2	46	.281	.354	.360	16.87
1924	5	Willie	Kamm	6	93	.254	.337	.364	16.59

1925	1	Frankie	Frisch	11	48	.331	.374	.472	25.73
1925	2	Pie	Traynor	6	106	.320	.377	.464	24.39
1925	3	Jimmy	Dykes	5	55	.323	.393	.471	18.52
1925	4	Willie	Kamm	6	83	.279	.391	.393	17.63
1925	5	Les	Bell	11	88	.285	.334	.422	17.16

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1926	1	Pie	Traynor	3	92	.317	.361	.436	23.25
1926	2	Les	Bell	17	100	.325	.383	.518	21.59
1926	3	Marty	McManus	9	68	.284	.350	.424	20.72
1926	4	Freddy	Lindstrom	9	76	.302	.351	.420	19.69
1926	5	Willie	Kamm	0	62	.294	.396	.385	18.02

1927	1	Pie	Traynor	5	106	.342	.370	.455	24.81
1927	2	Freddy	Lindstrom	7	58	.306	.354	.436	22.19
1927	3	Les	Bell	9	65	.259	.320	.426	18.59
1927	4	Sammy	Hale	5	81	.313	.358	.423	17.74
1927	5	Willie	Kamm	0	59	.270	.354	.378	17.73

1928	1	Freddy	Lindstrom	14	107	.358	.383	.511	26.96
1928	2	Jimmie	Foxx	13	79	.327	.416	.547	24.36
1928	3	Pie	Traynor	3	124	.337	.370	.462	23.45
1928	4	Marty	McManus	8	73	.288	.355	.430	19.77
1928	5	Pinky	Whitney	10	103	.301	.342	.426	18.60

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1929	1	Pie	Traynor	4	108	.356	.393	.472	23.10
1929	2	Freddy	Lindstrom	15	91	.319	.354	.464	22.64
1929	3	Pinky	Whitney	8	115	.327	.390	.482	20.65
1929	4	Jimmy	Dykes	13	79	.327	.412	.539	20.30
1929	5	Marty	McManus	18	90	.280	.347	.451	19.95

1930	1	Freddy	Lindstrom	22	106	.379	.425	.575	23.97
1930	2	Pie	Traynor	9	119	.366	.423	.509	22.86
1930	3	Marty	McManus	9	89	.320	.396	.475	19.91
1930	4	Pinky	Whitney	8	117	.342	.383	.465	18.96
1930	5	Jimmy	Dykes	6	73	.301	.414	.425	18.93

1931	1	Pie	Traynor	2	103	.298	.354	.416	21.20
1931	2	Pinky	Whitney	9	74	.287	.331	.433	19.20
1931	3	Jimmy	Dykes	3	46	.273	.371	.389	16.99
1931	4	Willie	Kamm	0	75	.290	.384	.386	16.94
1931	5	Pepper	Martin	7	75	.300	.351	.467	16.52

1932	1	Pie	Traynor	2	68	.329	.373	.433	20.93
1932	2	Pinky	Whitney	13	124	.298	.335	.449	20.09
1932	3	Joe	Stripp	6	64	.303	.350	.438	18.12
1932	4	Willie	Kamm	3	83	.286	.379	.403	17.24
1932	5	Joe	Sewell	11	68	.272	.349	.392	16.80

83. The Stan Hack Era

For ten years after Traynor started to fail there isn’t a Hall of Fame third baseman, although there were Hall of Famers who played third base for a year or two. Sluggers were beginning to filter in to third base—Pinky Higgins, Harlond Clift, Mel Ott for a year, Jimmie Foxx for 141 games over the years, Odell Hale, Ken Keltner. Stan Hack wasn’t a slugger; he was kind of like Pie Traynor, except that he wasn’t as brilliant as Traynor at third base, but got on base much more. I might guess that Hack was a greater player than Traynor. If you have to say "Who was the best third baseman of this era?", it’s Stan Hack, although he wasn’t as high-impact as Clift.

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1933	1	Pepper	Martin	8	57	.316	.387	.456	22.27
1933	2	Mike	Higgins	13	99	.314	.383	.483	21.79
1933	3	Pie	Traynor	1	82	.304	.342	.372	18.41
1933	4	Pinky	Whitney	11	68	.250	.299	.366	16.53
1933	5	Joe	Stripp	1	51	.277	.312	.346	15.71

1934	1	Mike	Higgins	16	90	.330	.392	.508	21.98
1934	2	Pepper	Martin	5	49	.289	.337	.425	20.14
1934	3	Marv	Owen	8	96	.317	.385	.451	17.84
1934	4	Harlond	Clift	14	56	.260	.357	.421	17.16
1934	5	Stan	Hack	1	21	.289	.363	.366	15.55

1935	1	Mike	Higgins	23	94	.296	.350	.504	21.50
1935	2	Stan	Hack	4	64	.311	.406	.436	21.33
1935	3	Pepper	Martin	9	54	.299	.341	.447	21.30
1935	4	Harlond	Clift	11	69	.295	.406	.436	20.81
1935	5	Red	Rolfe	5	67	.300	.361	.404	20.02

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1936	1	Harlond	Clift	20	73	.302	.424	.514	24.59
1936	2	Red	Rolfe	10	70	.319	.392	.493	22.57
1936	3	Stan	Hack	6	78	.298	.396	.392	21.65
1936	4	Pepper	Martin	11	76	.309	.373	.469	20.20
1936	5	Mike	Higgins	12	80	.289	.366	.420	19.72

1937	1	Harlond	Clift	29	118	.306	.413	.546	25.93
1937	2	Stan	Hack	2	63	.297	.388	.375	24.19
1937	3	Red	Rolfe	4	62	.276	.365	.378	21.81
1937	4	Mike	Higgins	9	106	.302	.385	.425	19.93
1937	5	Buddy	Lewis	10	79	.314	.367	.425	18.77

1938	1	Mel	Ott	36	116	.311	.442	.583	33.89
1938	2	Stan	Hack	4	67	.320	.411	.432	27.97
1938	3	Harlond	Clift	34	118	.290	.423	.554	25.78
1938	4	Red	Rolfe	10	80	.311	.386	.441	22.68
1938	5	Buddy	Lewis	12	91	.296	.354	.431	20.50

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1939	1	Stan	Hack	8	56	.298	.364	.398	25.62
1939	2	Red	Rolfe	14	80	.329	.404	.495	24.36
1939	3	Bill	Werber	5	57	.289	.388	.389	22.71
1939	4	Harlond	Clift	15	84	.270	.402	.411	22.38
1939	5	Buddy	Lewis	10	75	.319	.402	.478	22.15

1940	1	Stan	Hack	8	40	.317	.395	.439	26.60
1940	2	Bill	Werber	12	48	.277	.361	.416	23.51
1940	3	Harlond	Clift	20	87	.273	.396	.463	22.39
1940	4	Ken	Keltner	15	77	.254	.322	.418	19.45
1940	5	Jim	Tabor	21	81	.285	.345	.510	19.00

1941	1	Cecil	Travis	7	101	.359	.410	.520	28.66
1941	2	Stan	Hack	7	45	.317	.417	.427	27.65
1941	3	Harlond	Clift	17	84	.255	.376	.430	21.80
1941	4	Ken	Keltner	23	84	.269	.330	.485	20.37
1941	5	Jim	Tabor	16	101	.279	.328	.446	19.30

1942	1	Stan	Hack	6	39	.300	.402	.409	25.92
1942	2	Arky	Vaughan	2	49	.277	.348	.341	22.89
1942	3	Bob	Elliott	9	89	.296	.358	.416	22.23
1942	4	Harlond	Clift	7	55	.274	.394	.399	20.26
1942	5	Mike	Higgins	11	79	.267	.362	.409	19.61

Hack also rates as the #1 third baseman of 1945, although we’re grouping that season in the next player’s claim. Harlond Clift is one of the few men to rate first at a position despite playing for one of the worst organizations in baseball. Pinky Whitney (Phillies) also almost made it to the top of the list.

84. The Bob Elliott Years (1944-1949)

Bob Elliott, like Stan Hack, is a player who could be in the Hall of Fame but isn’t. The National League’s dominant team in the 1940s was the Cardinals and later the Dodgers, at the end of the decade; anybody who didn’t play for the Cardinals or the Dodgers had little chance to play in the World Series, and never became as famous as he might have—whereas Pepper Martin and Whitey Kurowski, because they played for the Cards, became more famous than they really needed to be, although both Martin and Kurowski were very good players.

At this time the West Coast was the new talent source; the West Coast was then what Asia is now, the new place to find talent. The DiMaggios and Ted Williams were the best of the Californians, of course, but there were a bunch of them—Joe Gordon and Ernie Lombardi and Jackie Robinson and such.

Bob Elliott was one of those. He came up with the Pirates, who were kind of a messed-up organization, not really a bad team, but just never able to figure out what to do with their talent. Like the Mets are now. The Pirates already had a young third baseman, Lee Handley, so for several years Elliott would bounce back and forth between third base and right field with Handley or Debs Garms playing third, although Elliott was three times the player that Handley was, but bad organizations do things like that; they move around good players to accommodate guys who aren’t that good.

Elliott was a .290 hitter, walked a lot, was a good third baseman and had power. He drove in 100 runs six times. He played all of his career in poor home run parks, which cut his power numbers; he hit 63 homers at home, 107 on the road. Those three things kept him from being a Hall of Famer:

1) The Cardinals domination of the league, which kept him out of the World Series except for one year,

2) The fact that he played in poor home run parks,

3) The Pirates moving him back and forth to right field to accommodate Lee Handley.

In 1947 the Pirates traded him to the Braves. He was 30 years old by then, but had five good years with the Braves. He won the National League MVP Award in his first season with the Braves, and the Braves were in the World Series his second year there. He remained a productive player until the end of his career in 1953, although after 1949 he was no longer the best third baseman in the game:

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1943	1	Bob	Elliott	7	101	.315	.376	.444	24.03
1943	2	Stan	Hack	3	35	.289	.384	.366	23.74
1943	3	Whitey	Kurowski	13	70	.287	.330	.439	20.72
1943	4	Mike	Higgins	10	84	.277	.349	.377	18.79
1943	5	Ken	Keltner	4	39	.260	.317	.375	18.01

1944	1	Bob	Elliott	10	108	.297	.383	.465	24.57
1944	2	Whitey	Kurowski	20	87	.270	.341	.449	23.71
1944	3	Stan	Hack	3	32	.282	.369	.352	22.26
1944	4	Ken	Keltner	13	91	.295	.355	.466	20.20
1944	5	Mike	Higgins	7	76	.297	.392	.409	18.20

1945	1	Stan	Hack	2	43	.323	.420	.405	28.46
1945	2	Whitey	Kurowski	21	102	.323	.383	.511	26.25
1945	3	Bob	Elliott	8	108	.290	.366	.423	21.68
1945	4	George	Kell	4	56	.272	.306	.356	15.76
1945	5	Oscar	Grimes	4	45	.265	.395	.358	14.29

YEAR	Rank	First	Last	HR	RBI	Avg	OBA	SPct	Value
1946	1	Whitey	Kurowski	14	89	.301	.391	.462	25.27
1946	2	Snuffy	Stirnweiss	0	37	.251	.340	.318	20.90
1946	3	George	Kell	4	52	.322	.372	.432	20.46
1946	4	Stan	Hack	0	26	.285	.431	.350	20.19
1946	5	Ken	Keltner	13	45	.241	.294	.387	17.21

1947	1	Bob	Elliott	22	113	.317	.410	.517	25.16
1947	2	Whitey	Kurowski	27	104	.310	.420	.544	24.18
1947	3	George	Kell	5	93	.320	.387	.412	22.07
1947	4	Grady	Hatton	16	77	.281	.377	.448	19.27
1947	5	Bill	Johnson	10	95	.285	.351	.417	17.84

1948	1	Bob	Elliott	23	100	.283	.423	.474	26.01
1948	2	Johnny	Pesky	3	55	.281	.394	.365	23.09
1948	3	Andy	Pafko	26	101	.312	.375	.516	22.13
1948	4	Ken	Keltner	31	119	.297	.395	.522	21.40
1948	5	George	Kell	2	44	.304	.369	.402	20.20

1949	1	Bob	Elliott	17	76	.280	.395	.467	25.43
1949	2	George	Kell	3	59	.343	.424	.467	23.70
1949	3	Johnny	Pesky	2	69	.306	.408	.384	22.60
1949	4	Eddie	Yost	9	45	.253	.383	.391	17.88
1949	5	Hank	Majeski	9	67	.277	.326	.417	16.55

COMMENTS (19 Comments, most recent shown first)

CharlesSaeger
Yep. I figured this the last time Traynor's defense came up here. First rule of evaluating fielders using the traditional stats is to start from the team, because you can measure the team accurately.
12:10 PM Jan 21st

Manushfan
So Mr Seager, for those of us in the back, that would mean Pie's stats would come out to +80. That rings true.
7:31 AM Jan 21st

ksclacktc
Thanks Charles. The metrics I've seen on fangraphs and BR have him at -30 runs approx.
4:03 AM Jan 21st

CharlesSaeger
@ksclacktc: Traynor's fielding stats were good, specifically how often RHB got a hit. His fielding percentage was average and he was a whopping 72 assists better than league average (this is as a percentage of team assists) over 14 years, but the Pirates defense was consistently good, especially on his side of the infield, and you have to start from that. A rough estimate is that Traynor saved about 80 runs.
11:24 PM Jan 20th

W.T.Mons10
I don't buy the explanation that there few good hitting third basemen because it was a fielding-first position. Catcher is obviously a fielding-first position, but there were still good hitting catchers in that time such as Dickey, Cochrane, Lombardi, and Schang.
12:34 PM Jan 19th

ksclacktc
I've seen Pie Traynor rated well below average by defense metrics. Not saying I agree with it especially with regard to older numbers and reputation should be a consideration. You can take numbers so far that you ignore reality. I know people are trying to remove bias and I wholeheartedly support this. Not using information that has value, and ignoring the fact that much uncertainty exist with the metrics is just plain dumb.
11:20 AM Jan 19th

MarisFan61
Kaiser: What Bill said about giving some weight to contemporary views on players' fielding (as well as on anything else about those past players) didn't at all amount to what you're saying. It just meant that he thought such views deserved some consideration and some weight.
10:18 AM Jan 19th

Manushfan
I think it's pretty obvious Pie was a really good Def player. I've wondered if in fact Willie Kamm was the better however in the era.
8:31 AM Jan 19th

KaiserD2
Regarding reputations of defensive players:

When Bill broke into the public consciousness in the early 1980s, one of the things that got him the most attention (and the most criticism) was his argument, based on range factors, that certain highly regarded defensive players were average at best. The biggest argument I remember was about Larry Bowa. But I also distinctly remember Bill arguing that Dave Winfield was overrated, and arguing why. Winfield loved to play deep because he got great publicity when he leapt to take a home run away--but a lot of balls dropped in front of him.

Thus I was surprised in the Historical Abstract when Bill argued that when it came to evaluating players from past eras, we had to give contemporary opinions of their defense some weight. To me, that amounted to saying that the sportswriters and players and managers of the past were better observers than those of the present. Bill was showing that many contemporary opinions were wrong; it seemed to me just as easy to believe that opinions from earlier periods were equally wrong. That is what DRA has often confirmed (although not always, by any means.) It shows Traynor to have been a superior third baseman, but nowhere near Brooks Robinson.

DK
7:29 AM Jan 19th

rimus6464
Isn't the reason that great hitters almost never became third baseman in the early 20th century because this was before the shift in the defensive spectrum, when 3rd base was a position with higher defensive responsibilities than 2nd, with fewer double play opportunities, more bunts, etc?
8:13 PM Jan 18th

nettles9
Nettles is getting closer...
7:47 PM Jan 18th

ajmilner
Bill writes of Bill Bradley and Art Devlin: "I think they’re both figures in The Glory of Their Times, although it has been 30 years since I read The Glory of Their Times." Neither of them were still alive to be interviewed by Larry Ritter in the 1960s, but Harry Hooper listed Devlin as one of the many Deadball players who'd gone to college, and Bradley prominently appears in a Rube Marquard anecdote.
7:19 PM Jan 18th

ventboys
I don't think failed second basemen move to third, as a general rule. I'd guess, without studying it, that most failed defensive secondbasemen who can hit well enough to play move to left field.

Failed shortstops, on the other hand, usually move to third base. I can't count how many times I've heard about how some big shortstop with no range is going to move to secondbase, usually from some prospect analyst who forgot to look at the components of a player's skill set.

It's obvious why, in both cases: throwing arm. Good range, weak arm - second base. Bad range, strong arm - third base. Both good - shortstop. Both bad - left field.

That said, though, Astro, you are probably right. Hornsby was originally a shortstop, and Lajoie was a good fielder but a big guy, so he might have been more suited for third base in the modern game. Assuming he had a good arm, which would be hard to figure a hundred years after the fact.
5:13 PM Jan 18th

ksclacktc
"The common read of his glove was what Bill says here-exceptional. So I'm still a bit mystified at the downgrading of his defense in some systems. "

I'm glad to see you said this.

I feel like with the advanced hitting stats wOBA, RC, XR etc. that if a guy was believed to be a great hitter he shows up at least good, and if a player was a poor hitter he doesn't all of a sudden appear to be good.

I feel entirely the opposite with regard to so-called newer fielding sytems. All the time, you see a guy who was believed to be great and all of a sudden is awful by these metrics. I mean Dave Winfield is -91 runs and one of the 12 worst OFs ever, while BJ Surhoff is a robust +87.....who knew? Winfield sucked and Surhoff was a gold glover. We have all seen these examples they are plentiful. Bet you didn't know Rey Sanchez was the 6th best SS of all time as fangraphs says.

Too be fair many of the great fielders show up well. And vice versa poor reps, poor ratings. But, it is enough to make you wonder. I mean I can think of know examples of say Rogers Hornsby great hitter...new metrics he really sucked.
5:05 PM Jan 18th

astros34
Doncoffin and DK, Bill himself said as much in the Historical Abstract. It's why such good hitters as Nap Jajoie and Rogers Hornsby ended up at second whereas later in the century they might have become third basemen.
12:42 PM Jan 18th

Manushfan
I think this is more really good stuff from Bill. I think he's more than fair with Traynor, and it seems consistent with his prior rankings of the man. The common read of his glove was what Bill says here-exceptional. So I'm still a bit mystified at the downgrading of his defense in some systems.

Also-its fun to get a look at Red Rolfe's runs scored, quite a fine lead off guy for a great team.
12:39 PM Jan 18th

doncoffin
DK--I think part of it was the concentration on 3B as a defense-first position (because of the incredibly large number of bunts, both sac bunts and bunt-for-a-hit attempts. So offense seemed less important. (A corollary to this is that second base was a more offense-oriented position than it became later.)
9:54 AM Jan 18th

KaiserD2
Writing my book, one of the most remarkable findings was the paucity of talent at third base for the whole first half of the twentieth century. Using peak value I reached the same conclusion Bill did here: Home Run Baker was easily the top third baseman of that era.

Exactly why outstanding hitters almost never became third basemen in the first half of the twentieth century is a fascinating question for which I have no answer.

DK
8:19 AM Jan 18th

Third Basemen of 1900 to 1950

COMMENTS (19 Comments, most recent shown first)

Leave a comment

Report inappropriate comment


Type of Abuse:
Comments: