Bob Caruthers And The HOF

[bbcard1]

Judging by several of the recent selections, the rules for both inclusion and exclusion have changed.

[mrreality68]

From my understanding it is still 10 years and from everything I am reading it still says 10 years for any player from any generation regardless of which committee they might be voted thru

But there is one site that he is next eligible in 2025
http://hallofstats.com/player/carutb...ee%20in%202025.


So I do not know

[Kidnapped18]

Simple answer...Caruthers had a 10 year career 1884-1893
1884 1st year
1885 2nd year
1886 3rd year
1887 4th year
1888 5th year
1889 6th year
1890 7th year
1891 8th year
1892 9th year
1893 10th year

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Kidnapped18

Simple answer...Caruthers had a 10 year career 1884-1893
1884 1st year
1885 2nd year
1886 3rd year
1887 4th year
1888 5th year
1889 6th year
1890 7th year
1891 8th year
1892 9th year
1893 10th year

Yes, his record is a little deceptive when viewed on baseball-reference site, as his tenth year in 1893 he did not pitch, and thus is shown having only played 9 seasons in the pitching group of statistics that leads off his entry on the site, but he played outfield in 14 games for two different NL teams in 1893, which shows up in his batting group of stats.

Brian

[Tomi]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Yes, his record is a little deceptive when viewed on baseball-reference site, as his tenth year in 1893 he did not pitch, and thus is shown having only played 9 seasons in the pitching group of statistics that leads off his entry on the site, but he played outfield in 14 games for two different NL teams in 1893, which shows up in his batting group of stats.

Brian

This would still be a 10th season, right? Unless his at bats was so low that it didn't qualify as a year. Kind of a head scratcher as he did play 10 years even though 1893 was not a full year due to at bats total.

[mrreality68]

Wow mystery solved and I did not know about the 10th season

[GaryPassamonte]

Caruthers is one of about a dozen or so 19th century players that should be in the Hall of Fame. Some are pioneer players whose careers started before recognized major leagues started and have less than 10 seasons. Others came later and meet the 10 year rule. Unfortunately for 19th century players, it seems the space they once occupied has been filled by Negro league and pre- Negro League players today. I believe the Hall has done away with the 10 year rule for Negro League and pre-Negro League players, but not for 19th century players. This is good for the Negro League and pre-Negro League players. However, early 19th century players shouldn't be punished for being born too early and deserve the same consideration. There should be room enough for both groups in the Hall. I'm happy Negro and pre- Negro league players are getting long overdue attention. I only hope the 19th century players will not be the losers because of it.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Tomi

This would still be a 10th season, right? Unless his at bats was so low that it didn't qualify as a year. Kind of a head scratcher as he did play 10 years even though 1893 was not a full year due to at bats total.

He played 13 games, why wouldn't it count? Ross Youngs played 10 seasons and only played 7 games his first season. That didn't keep him out of the HOF. Dizzy Dean played 12 seasons, but 3 of his seasons he only pitched in 1 game and he is in. Addie Joss only pitched 9 seasons but was on the Indians roster for his 10th season, but passed away on the 3rd day of the season.

[oldjudge]

Parisian Bob sure deserves to get in--I hope he does.