Pie Traynor cards and memorabilia are awesome

btcarfagno · #1 10-23-2017, 11:42 AM

I recently sold a Pie Traynor side written game used bat. This is all the more rare because Traynor is infamous for never ordering bats of his own, instead he constantly "borrowed" bats from others. He bragged about never placing a bat order of his own over like the last 15 years of his career or something like that. So a sidewritten bat with his name is one of the only ones that can 100% be linked to him.

Also, and I say this as a lifetime Pittsburgh Pirates fan, Traynor is one of the least Hall Of Fame worthy players enshrined in Cooperstown.

Tom C

John V · #2 10-23-2017, 01:05 PM

I always dig out my personalized autograph for threads like these.

nat · #3 10-23-2017, 02:27 PM

I don't have any Traynor items, but I can talk about him a little bit.

IIRC he had a sterling defensive reputation, and was a big star in his day. History has not been so kind to him. Defensive measures are always dicey, and the older they are the dicier they get, but our best attempts to quantify his defense has it come out looking not good. A bunch of 100 RBI seasons probably helped his reputation, but having Paul (and to a lesser extent Lloyd) Waner in the line up probably helped with that. (Grantham too.)

bbcard1 · #4 10-23-2017, 03:03 PM

A beneficiary of the inflated offensive numbers of his time, I alway thought it curious that he was chose for the Sporting News all time team in the 1976 Topps set. One of these things is not like the others...

Exhibitman · #5 10-23-2017, 03:44 PM

Radio station premium:

rats60 · #6 10-23-2017, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbcard1

A beneficiary of the inflated offensive numbers of his time, I alway thought it curious that he was chose for the Sporting News all time team in the 1976 Topps set. One of these things is not like the others...

He was a gold glove 3rd baseman who hit .320 over his career. At the time he was the only 3rd baseman elected to the HOF by the BBWAA. He was also elected as the 3rd baseman Baseball's All Time Team in 1969. His numbers today suffer because he played in a pitcher's park and didn't hit many home runs. Eddie Mathews would have been a better choice, but it was probably too close to the end of his career and he wasn't even in the HOF yet.

btcarfagno · #7 10-23-2017, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

He was a gold glove 3rd baseman who hit .320 over his career. At the time he was the only 3rd baseman elected to the HOF by the BBWAA. He was also elected as the 3rd baseman Baseball's All Time Team in 1969. His numbers today suffer because he played in a pitcher's park and didn't hit many home runs. Eddie Mathews would have been a better choice, but it was probably too close to the end of his career and he wasn't even in the HOF yet.

He was a .320 career hitter. The NL overall batting average over his career was .283. That includes pitchers hitting. His career slugging percentage was .435. The NL overall slugging percentage over his career was .396.

He was a slightly above average hitter (as is shown by his career OPS+ of 107...7% above average) and seems to have been overrated as a defender.

Tom C

rats60 · #8 10-23-2017, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

He was a .320 career hitter. The NL overall batting average over his career was .283. That includes pitchers hitting. His career slugging percentage was .435. The NL overall slugging percentage over his career was .396.

He was a slightly above average hitter (as is shown by his career OPS+ of 107...7% above average) and seems to have been overrated as a defender.

Tom C

The people that saw him play voted him into the Hall of Fame. They elected no other 3rd baseman until 30 years later. Those who saw him play said he was an elite defensive player. I would say you are under rating his defensive ability since you didn't see him play and you don't know. His slugging percentage suffered from playing in a big park and not benefiting from cheap home runs that other NLers did. He was top 10 in hitting 6 times, hits 7 times, total bases 5 times and RBIs 9 times. He was much better than an average hitter, he was exceptional for his position in his era. That is why he was elected to the Hall of Fame and none of his contemporaries at the position were. Brooks Robinson had an OPS+ 104, I guess he stinks and should be kicked out of the HoF.

Mark · #9 10-24-2017, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I recently sold a Pie Traynor side written game used bat. This is all the more rare because Traynor is infamous for never ordering bats of his own, instead he constantly "borrowed" bats from others. He bragged about never placing a bat order of his own over like the last 15 years of his career or something like that. So a sidewritten bat with his name is one of the only ones that can 100% be linked to him.

Also, and I say this as a lifetime Pittsburgh Pirates fan, Traynor is one of the least Hall Of Fame worthy players enshrined in Cooperstown.

Tom C

I agree that the best bat is the side-written bat. Nothing like it. I have also heard that Pie didn't order bats for himself, but that claim is belied by the shipping records. He ordered at least 14 shipments, up to his later playing years. So, I must disagree with the claim that side-written bats are the ONLY bats that you can associate with old Pie. If you have a Traynor bat that matches his orders, then you have a pretty cool bat. (I'm keeping mine).

Also, you are wrong about Traynor not deserving his place in the Hall. In the pre-war era, clubs considered third base to be a key defensive position. It wasn't far behind ss. Traynor was one of the few who were good enough to excel at third AND to hit in the top of the order. As has been said here, the people who knew baseball during Pie Traynor's era considered him to be a great fielder and a great hitter for his position. He was considered to be the best third baseman ever. That counts for something.

I had the pleasure of talking to him 3 or 4 times when I was a little kid. I sat in the same row with him at the last game at Forbes and at game 3 of th 71 WS. He was a very genial and dignified man. He was the kind of man who makes you proud to be a Pirates fan.

btcarfagno · #10 10-24-2017, 08:12 AM

An outstanding argument can be made the Traynor wasn't even the best Pittsburgh Pirates third baseman of all time by the time of his retirement. Let alone of all 16 teams.

See also: Leach, Tommy.

Tom C

rats60 · #11 10-24-2017, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

An outstanding argument can be made the Traynor wasn't even the best Pittsburgh Pirates third baseman of all time by the time of his retirement. Let alone of all 16 teams.

See also: Leach, Tommy.

Tom C

Lol. Leach was such a great 3rd baseman that is why he played most of his games in the outfield.

btcarfagno · #12 10-24-2017, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

Lol. Leach was such a great 3rd baseman that is why he played most of his games in the outfield.

He played almost 1000 games at third base. Granted, that is half of what Traynor played at the position. But if you take the totality of his career versus Traynor's, or if you extrapolate Leach's 3B numbers to a 154 game schedule and do the same for Traynor, Leach is the better player.

I will grant you that he was not a 3B his entire career (basically half of his career) and that perhaps that should take him out of the discussion. But Leach was a better player at 3B for the Pirates than was Traynor, and he did so over a fairly large number of years.

Tom C

Edit:

Also, total games played by position for Leach as a member of the Pittsburgh Pirates:

3B 850
OF 630

Mark · #13 10-24-2017, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

He played almost 1000 games at third base. Granted, that is half of what Traynor played at the position. But if you take the totality of his career versus Traynor's, or if you extrapolate Leach's 3B numbers to a 154 game schedule and do the same for Traynor, Leach is the better player.

I will grant you that he was not a 3B his entire career (basically half of his career) and that perhaps that should take him out of the discussion. But Leach was a better player at 3B for the Pirates than was Traynor, and he did so over a fairly large number of years.

Tom C

Edit:

Also, total games played by position for Leach as a member of the Pittsburgh Pirates:

3B 850
OF 630

I guess you are very well-informed, since you know more about baseball than Barney Dreyfuss. Poor, benighted Barney traded Leach (and a talented Lefty) to the Cubs for a washed up 4th outfielder and a bad pitcher but neglected to trade the immensely over-valued but unproductive Pie Traynor.

btcarfagno · #14 10-24-2017, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark

I guess you are very well-informed, since you know more about baseball than Barney Dreyfuss. Poor, benighted Barney traded Leach (and a talented Lefty) to the Cubs for a washed up 4th outfielder and a bad pitcher but neglected to trade the immensely over-valued but unproductive Pie Traynor.

Holy overreaction Batman.

A few things.

1. Yes I (and all of us) know a crapton more than Mr Dreyfus did 100 years ago.
2. Who said Traynor was unproductive? I certainly haven't. Strawman argument.
3. I have said in the thread that during Traynor's career he was overall the best 3B in baseball. I have also said that that isn't saying much given his competition at the time.
4. I have been arguing that Traynor is not a worthy HOFer. Which, as the links I have provided show, I am far from alone in so feeling.
5. It has been said in this thread that Traynor was the best 3B of the first 80-90 years of baseball. Which is certifiably insane when Frank Baker is part of the equation.
6. Tommy Leach was a more productive third baseman than Pie Traynor. Traynor played the position for a longer time, I get that. I simply said that Leach, while a third baseman for the Pirates, was more productive than Traynor . Not sure how that means that Traynor was unproductive.
7. Not sure your point regarding the trade you mention. To me it shows why we know more now in some ways than Barney did then. It was a smart trade in as much as Dreyfus got the team younger. He took a chance that the year Solly had two years prior (when he was one of the top four hitters in the NL) was not a career year. Turned out it was. He took a chance on King Cole who two years prior had been the toast of the league in his rookie season. 20-4 with a league leading ERA. Barney may have been a bit fooled by Cole's pedestrian sophomore season because he went 18-7 and wins were everything back then. Today we know that Cole's peripherals were way down from his rookie year and that should have been a warning sign. It wasn't a bad trade as, like I said, they got younger and took two players with potentially higher upside. It didn't work out and Leach had a couple solid years left in him.
8. As an aside, I bet the Pirates wish they had traded Traynor at the same age as they traded Leach. Traynor wasn't very good thereafter whereas Leach actually had some better than average years remaining.

Tom C

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FS/FT: Pie Traynor, Mantle, Banks, Boyer, Aaron cards	esiason14	Autographs & Game Used B/S/T	2	02-13-2014 02:31 PM
Cards and Memorabilia for sale	tlwise12	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	2	11-27-2012 07:04 PM
Cards vs. Memorabilia	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	23	03-25-2009 06:12 PM
Graded memorabilia other than cards	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	6	01-15-2007 09:46 AM
Baseball Memorabilia Cards..............	Archive	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	04-01-2006 11:50 AM