View Single Post
  #18  
Old 08-15-2010, 10:14 AM
Joe_G.'s Avatar
Joe_G. Joe_G. is offline
Joe Gonsowski
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: IA (formerly MI)
Posts: 1,206
Default

Great hearing other arguments. And you Gary, you are sticking up for another one of my favorites in Ross Barnes. If I had to pick one of the two, however, I would go with Deacon White even if we only compared the two players during the nine seasons Barnes played.

Ross Barnes had some great years over his short career enjoying 3 batting titles over nine seasons. During those same baseball seasons Deacon White likewise had some good years, leading the league twice in batting average. 1876 was perhaps Barnes best, but injury and banning of the fair-foul hit would never allow him to return to his previous glory. For his career, Barnes would hit .3597 to Deacon Whites .3442 (again, comparing the same seasons). During this stretch, Deacon White actually played more which is no small feat for an 1870s catcher. A closer look at Deacon's stats show he hit best when he caught the least. In 1877 (the only season in which he didn't play most of his games catching), he led the league with a .387 BA. Had Deacon White played another position during his prime, his offensive numbers would have been more impressive. However, playing another position would have diminished Deacon's greatness for he was the game’s best catcher at a time when catching was critical to a team's success. Unfortunately, it is hard to demonstrate Deacon's defensive greatness with stats. He played the position like no other, often with higher risk than others dared (playing right behind the batter to keep runners from advancing). At times this would lead to more errors, but Deacon still averaged well under an error/game caught (remarkable considering). Personally, I'd like to see both in the HOF, but if I had to pick one, I would vote in Deacon White for his 1870s catching dominance. Add to it his offensive numbers and longevity at another position and I don't see anyone more deserving of enshrinement.

By 1936, the voters certainly didn't recall the game as it was played in the 1870s. Unfortunate for Deacon, they far more likely remembered the farce catching became during the 1890s. By then, catching was considered the place you'd stick your least talented player. Throw a couple pillows on your largest poor lug and ask him to stand in the way of every pitch. As iconic as catching was in the 1870s, it disappeared during the 1880s until by 1890 it was often made a mockery of.
__________________
Best Regards,
Joe Gonsowski
COLLECTOR OF:
- 19th century Detroit memorabilia and cards with emphasis on Goodwin & Co. issues ( N172 / N173 / N175 ) and Tomlinson cabinets
- N333 SF Hess Newsboys League cards (all teams)
- Pre ATC Merger (1890 and prior) cigarette packs and redemption coupons from all manufacturers
Reply With Quote