Here come the Forties. 1940's Hall of Fame Blog

The 1940's was an interesting decade for the Hall of Fame. Most of the candidates were actually elected by the Old Timer's Committee, which was the first iteration of the Veteran's committee. The committee seemed to have issues with separating a playing career from a managing career, and elected some players in as managers that couldn't possibly have been elected solely on their playing stats without the help of their managing career as well.

1949- Kid Nichols, Charlie Gehringer, Mordecai Brown

Kid Nichols- 1800’s player. He only spent 3 or 4 season past the 1900 decade. I am efforting greatly to improve my ability to judge players before 1900 but I am still lacking so I am still not voting yay or nay on this players. I will live it to the old tyme scholars.

Charlie Gehringer- Emphatically Yes- Charlie inevitably makes it into any conversation of the greatest second basemen of all time. He makes it into this discussions because of course, he was damn good. He ended with a solid career hit total of 2839 and over 1400 RBI’s. He was an excellent Gold Glove type defender and his percentage numbers are very, very good. He racked with a .320 .404 .480 line. Without question this man could play and belongs in the Hall of Fame.

Mordecai “Three Finger” Brown- Yes- I will always lament the fact that Mordecai’s rookie season was spent as a Cardinal and that he was traded to the Cubs for a bag of peanuts. He was possibly the greatest fielding pitcher of all time, and definitely the best at fielding the bunt. He spent hours working on this, even when a lot of people at the time neglected fielding practice for pitchers all together. But he knew he was a control pitcher, and that he was not going to strike a ton of guys out. He knew that limiting base runners was key, and that his ability to get them out with the glove would be an advantage. He was a great pitcher, he pedigree is not in question and who am I to kick a man with Three-Fingers out of the Hall of Fame?

1948-Pie Traynor, Herb Pennock

Pie Traynor-Yes- Pie Traynor is incredibly overrated. That being said he is still tough to kick out of the Hall of Fame. He gets some publicity as being the greatest defensive thirdbasemen. He was great defensively, but I think it’s a stretch to say he is the best. Jimmie Dykes, Clete Boyer, Brooks Robinson, and Scott Rolen are all very likely his equal or superior. A good part of his reputation was built on fond remembrances of his playing days by teammates, and that is a bit of a biased source of course. From what we have its hard to extrapolate that he was the greatest of all time, but its pretty clear that he was an excellent defender. He gets credit as a great hitter too, but that’s a bit inflated as well. He was a singles hitter that didn’t walk. Which leads to a career .320 batting average, but a pretty weak .797 OPS. I am including him, but he is definitely a marginal inclusion.

Herb Pennock-No- To be honest when I saw his name on the list I had to think about it a second. I really couldn’t remember much about him at all other than he pitched on some of the great Yankee’s Murderers Row teams. Then I looked up his stats and realized that that’s about his only redeeming quality and claim to fame. His career ERA is a less than impressive 3.60. Very high for a Hall of Fame level pitcher. His win-loss record was 241-162 for a very nice .598 winning percentage. But giving the fact that he played on mostly great teams in his career, that’s about where it should be, actually maybe a little low. He was an above average pitcher that benefited from playing on historically great teams. He has no place in the Hall of Fame.

1947-Carl Hubbell, Lefty Grove, Frankie Frisch, Mickey Cochrane

Carl Hubbell-Yes-Carl threw a screwball and is most often remembered for two things. Throwing at guys and striking out a zillion matters in a row in an all-star game that’s lineup looked like an All-Time greats list. Hubbell was a great pitcher. He lead the league in ERA 3 times and wins 3 times. He sported ERA’s of sub-3 and sub-2 in the early part of the 1930’s when even good pitchers were getting rocked for about five runs a game. His winning percentage was an excellent .622. I have no problems including him.

Lefty Grove-Yes- Lefty may be the greatest pitcher of all time, so obviously I am putting him in the Hall of Fame. 4 time leader in wins, 9 time leader in ERA. He won exactly 300 games with 141 losses for a spectacular .680 winning percentage. In 1931 he went 31-4. Winning 30 games when people didn’t really do that anymore. That season he tossed up a 2.06 ERA in a season when most teams hit over .300 as a team. This may very well be the most impressive season of all time.

Frankie Frisch-Yes- An excellent player and a good manager. He did a variety of things well, and he was an educated man. That’s where he got the nickname “The Fordham Flash.” He was an excellent defender, and excellent hit and run man, a good hitter, had great speed, had a little pop in his bat, and could steal some bases. He hit .316 for his career with a .369 OBP and .432 SLG. He stole 419 bags in his career and garnered 2880 hits. Not the greatest secondbasemen ever by a long stretch, but still one of the best there has ever been.

Mickey Cochrane-Yes- One of my favorite players of all time he was one of the greats. He has a shortened career due to injury, but since he was a catcher it is about the same as all the others. Mickey was a rarity, even back then, he was a catcher with some good speed. He didn’t really steal bases, but he could scoot around the basepaths pretty well. He was an excellent defensive catcher and one of the best throwers of his time but where he truly excelled was as a hitter. His percentage numbers are a very solid .320 .419 .478. It is kind of funny that his numberes are nearly identical to Charlie Gehringer’s career numbers, they teammates in Detroit.

1946- Ed Walsh, Rube Waddell, Joe Tinker, Eddie Plank, Joe McGinnity, Johnny Evers, Jack Chesbro, Frank Chance, Jesse Burkett.

Ed Walsh-Yes- Big Ed was pretty ridiculous. He had an ERA of 1.82 and won 40 games once. Yep that’s 40 games. Also had the misfortune to go 18-20 while leading the league in losses AND ERA. That is one hell of a tough luck season. He lost 20 with an ERA of 1.27. Ridiculous.

Rube Waddell-Yes- Known primarily for being one of the premier strikeout artists of his generation. He led his league in k’s 6 years in a row with some very respectable totals. He was hard to hit, because players just didn’t strike out that much back then. He was a quality pitcher, who didn’t put up many big win totals, but nonetheless was a great pitcher.

Joe Tinker, Johnny Evers, and Frank Chance- Tinkers, Evers, and Chance all went into the Hall of Fame in the same year, all elected by the Veteran's Committee. Part of the reason, I believe, they were all elected is because it is hard to separate them from each other. They are associated together more than any 3 players in history, and Tinkers and Evers is the most famous double play combo by far. So the question is do all three of them belong in the Hall of Fame? I am going to analyze these guys all under the same column, because it just seems appropriate. First up is Joe Tinker. Tinker was the less fiery of the double play combo, and apparently much easier to get along with than Evers, whom wasn't particularly popular amongst anybody who knew him. However, putting him into the Hall of Fame is a stretch at best. He really just didn’t hit very well. His percentage numbers were a paltry .262 .308. .353 for an incredibly anemic .661 OPS. That is pretty terrible, even for the time. He had one very good year, but also a good half of his years were just pretty darn terrible. He was a plus defender, being above the league fielding percentage for his position pretty much every year, and had marginally above average range. By the subjective accounts he was an excellent defender, and there is no real evidence to dispute that that is possible. However, with anemic hitting, and less than 1700 career hits, his defense does not seem anywhere near enough to merit inclusion in the Hall. Joe Tinker DENIED. Next up is Johnny Evers Evers is probably best known for being the one who recovered the ball and got the umps attention to get the force out in the famous Merkle's Boner play versus the New York Giant's. Evers is similar to Joe Tinker, not quite as good a defender, and quite a bit better hitter. The other numbers are similar but Evers could get on Base quite a bit better with a career .356 OBP. He could also steal you a base pretty frequently. The difference between Tinker and Evers though is this. Evers had some pretty damn good years. One was truly great and another was very good, oddly, he won an MVP award in his second best season. The fact he has an MVP award and was generally a much better player than Tinker, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt. Johnny Evers ACCEPTED Frank Chance Known as the peerless leader because he was the team leader turned manager for the great Cubs teams in the early part of the 20th century. He started out as a catcher, he was pretty terrible at it, and was smart enough to realize he needed to move himself to first base when the team got Johnny Kling. The question is, I believe Chance got in as a player. Which is just preposterous. He played in less than 1300 games, which is just not enough time to be a Hall of Famer as a player. As a player he was a good defensive first basemen and a much better hitter than either of the other two. He his .294 with a .394 OBP. These are damn fine numbers for the time, and in one season he had an amazing .450 OBP. But the career is just not long enough or distinguished enough to merit being in the Hall of Fame. If you give him credit as a manager then perhaps you can include him, he was the manager for some legendary teams as well as playing for them. So my final verdict Chance as a player DENIED Chance as a player manager ACCEPTED. Poor Joe Tinker, I guess that leaves him as the odd man out.

Eddie Plank-Yes- Eddie plank was a hell of a pitcher. When I think of him, the first thing that pops into my mind has absolutely nothing to do with his playing career, its that his card is the second most valuable in the T-206 set, second only to the famous Honus Wagner card. That probably is an injustice to Mr. Plank. He put up a 326-194 record for his career, for a very nice .627 winning percentage. He also had a career ERA of 2.36. With that amount of wins, with such a good winning percentage, it would be hard for anybody to rationalize him not being in the Hall of Fame.

Jack Chesbro-No- I have a hard time including Jack Chesbro because he only played for 9 seasons. Two of those 9 seasons were fantastic, legendary even. But the rest was merely good, not great. He never won an ERA title. Which I think is telling, as he was never truly the best, which I believe you need to prove if you are going to get in with a tiny sample size.

"Ironman" Joe McGinnity-Yes- This guy is known primarily for his ability to pitch a ridiculous number of innings a year. Perhaps if he hadn’t pitched so many innings his career would have lasted longer than ten years. Actually that’s not really fair, because he got a late start to his career. I am inclined to take him where I didn’t take Chesbro because he pitched about twice as many innings in the same span. Ok that is an exaggeration, but he really did start a ton more game than any pitcher during that time. He lead the league in wins 5 times of his ten years in the league. This would not be impressive given the number of innings he pitched except for the fact that he did it with a good winning percentage. At time with a GREAT winning percentage.

Jesse Burkett-Yes- I generally don't judge players before the turn of the century, but with this guy I am making an exception. He like Delahanty, is a sure thing, because this guy could just knock the cover off the ball.

1945-Ed Delahanty, Jimmy Collins, Fred Clarke, Roger Bresnahan.

Ed Delahanty-Yes- Another Pre-1900 type player, but like Jesse Burkett he is a no-doubter. Ed Delahanty is one of the all time greats, and his death is one of the great mysteries of history.

Jimmy Collins-Yes- Jimmy was one of the best third basemen of his time, both offensively and defensively. .294 .343 .409 is a very good line for a player of his time period. Plus he was an excellent defensive third basemen. During this period of baseball third base is probably the premier defensive position on the diamond due to the high number of bunts down the line.

Fred Clarke-Yes- A good hitter, a good defender, and a good manager. His percentage numbers are a very solid .312 .386. .429. He was one of the most well respected players of his generation by his peers.

Roger Bresnahan- Yes- Roger looks like he shouldn't be a Hall of Famer, but he was probably the best catcher of his time. He could hit a bit, and he had a good OBP to boot, but this was at a time when catchers were some of the worst players on the field due to all the injuries.


1942-Rogers Hornsby- Yes- Another no doubt Hall of Famer, his percentage numbers are phenomenal .358 .434 .577. He won six straight batting titles and he hit over .400 3 times. That’s just silly good.

Retro Movie Review: Yojimbo 10/10

When one watches this movie for the first time its easy to be look at it and go "huh, I am see all of this before." Well, thats because you have. Yojimbo is one of the most revered and influential movies ever. Mifune of course is fantastic, as he always is, and I am sure the "man with no name" plot is not original with Yojimbo, however, it is the movie is most thought of as inspiring all of the others that came after. Movies, frankly, just don't get better than this one. The film techniques are amazing, and the plot and dialogue is fantastic. The acting is spot on as well, with not just Mifune shining. The plot might be most recognized in the Clint Eastwood-Sergio Leone classic spaghetti western "A fistful of Dollars." There is a good reason for this as Kurosawa successfully sued Leone for ripping off his movie. Everyone who appreciates good film should see this movie. YES it is in black and white, YES it is subtitled, and unfortunately many people have a problem watching black and white films and watching subtitled films. However, this is one of the greats of all time, and you owe it to yourselves to get over this hitch and watch. It is currently available on Netflix streaming.

Top Five Movies of 2009.

As we get closer to Academy Award time I though it was just about time for me to whip out a list of my choices for the five best movies of the year. Personally I think this is a down year, and there isn't a single movie as good as last years Slumdog Millionaires or The Wrestler, but there were some decent flicks out there. I feel better though, that after I put my list together 4 of the 5 I chose were also nominated for best picture. That is probably the most the movies I though were good were also nominated for an Oscar.

5. District 9 - This movie made me feel like crap. It made me realize that humans aren't nice, and that I truly bought the way humanity reacted in this movie. It made the list because I have never encountered a movie that made me feel like such trash just for being a human.

4. Star Trek - I don't like Star Trek. I don't like any of the other movies, and I didn't like the show. But this movie was really great, really enjoyable, and made me excited to see if the reboot would live long and prosper.

3. Up - There isn't much to say about this movie, I think its Pixar's best effort, and that they have really created a masterpiece here. Cartoons aren't supposed to make adults cry damn it!!!!

2. Inglourious Basterds- In my opinion this is Tarantino's master work. Brilliant paced and of course it has amazing dialogue, written in about 17 languages. This movie should count as a foreign entry.

1. The Hurt Locker - This is the best film of the year, hands down I think. Incredibly tense, gritty, and believable. The type of war movie that I enjoy, because it delivers believable drama. Plus I think Jeremy Renner is exceptional. If I were going to recommend someone only watch one movie this year, it would probably be Inglourious Basterds, because it will probably remain somewhat iconic due to the director and actors, but I believe this movie is the most well crafted, well written, and well acted movie of the year.

Honorable Mentions: Up in the Air, An Education (yea I watched it, thanks Market Cinema)

Edge of Darkness Movie Review 5.79/10!

Mel Gibson graces us with his presence once again on the silver screen. What's it been, like ten years? Of course he has directed and been in the news, but this is his first screen appearance in quite some time. This is pretty vintage Mel Gibson. A role that he can play well falling out of bed after a hard night of drink at a Bar Mitzvah. It is his bread a butter, a revenge flick. A wise man once told me that almost all movies can be broke down into only three categories: Love stories, coming of age stories, and revenge stories. This man is for the most part right, and as far as crazy ass revenge goes, Mel Gibson has cried over more lost children and dead lovers than most Hollywood stars. He does what he always does in this movie. If you like him in that roll then you will like this movie, if you don't and that annoys you then this movie isn't for you. The story is interesting, although none of the characters are really fleshed out and it feels like you only get snapshots of each one. The story feels like there should be a lot there, and there is a reason for that. This was a six part BBC miniseries that was compressed into one not very long movie. So you get a skeleton outline of a story that was supposed to be much more complex and interesting, and instead is only mildly intriguing. Its a decent movie, worth passing a couple of hours with if you have nothing better to do, but I would recommend that you wait for netflix and watch it on a night when your snowed in.

Book of Eli Movie Review 5.5/10!

This movie was kind of a disappointment. I thought that having Gary Oldman and Denzel Washington opposite each other in a pseudo-biblical post-apocalyptic battle field would be highly entertaining. I was disappointed. It was somewhat entertaining, but it was nearly as good as I thought that it would be. The movie is your standard post-apocalyptic nightmare. Basically a Mad Max/Postman/The Road standard fair kind of stuff with a bit of Fahrenheit 451 thrown in. Of course nothing is ever really explained as to what happened in the world to make it this way except for some vague allusions to things that happened like "a whole was ripped in the sky" and "after the big flash." I guess, that's ok as it wasn't all that important to the plot, but still that sort of sets the tone for this movie as it seems to have lots of things that just are with no explanation for what the heck is going on. This movie was bad, and would have received rating probably of 6.5 or 7 except for a couple of things. There is a big twist of sorts and the end and to be honest it was bad for the movie as it really just didn't make that much sense. My issue with can't really be discussed without giving out a ton of spoilers which I prefer not to do, and the ending just left me with to many unanswered questions and to much Why the hell did this happen this way to get more than a slightly above average rating. As is kind of a theme it seems with the movies I have watched this year this movie had a lot of potential but underachieves and fails to reach that potential.

Legion Movie Review 4/10!

From the previews I really didn't think this movie was going to be that good, but since I have a mancrush on Paul Bettany I knew I was going to go see it as soon as I saw the first trailer. Essentially this is a Zombie apocalypse movie but instead of some virus the zombies are created by Angel possession. Yea, I know, sounds silly, it was pretty silly when I was watching it. Listening to an audience can sometimes give you a clue as to the quality of a movie. If the entire audience is laughing at inappropriate times then its probably a good example of a poorly written script. I don't expect my action movies to have Oscar quality scripts, but I do expect them to no be so painfully bad as to make the audience laugh when it should be feeling something else. There isn't really that much action in the movie, and the dialogue scenes between the characters are painfully cheesy and forced. The one bright spot of the film is how they implemented the angel wings into the big fight scene. Basically the bottom line on this film is that it had an interesting idea but do to poor, poor pacing, cheesy melodramatic over acting, and a script that lacked the proper cohesion to tell the story kept it from actualizing any of he potential that was there. If your going to the theatre and you have to choose between this movie and Book of Eli, see Book of Eli, its better, although only marginally. It somehow manages to take itself far less seriously, which is saying something considering how seriously Book of Eli took itself.

Five Movies you should see right now.

5. In Bruges- An odd but incredibly well made little flick with a lot of good acting and a drunken midget. Can't go wrong with that combination.

4. Grey Gardens- Creepy, disturbing, and utterly fascinating. I know not everyone is interested in documentary film making, but if you are this is one to see without a doubt.

3. Dances With Wolves- Not only is it a very good movie it will remind all of you who watched Avatar that its a complete rip off of this movie.

2. L.A. Confidential- It has Guy Pierce, Kevin Spacey, and Russell Crowe, how can you go wrong there? This is a really great movie with an excellent script and snappy acting from the ensemble cast. Its my favorite cop movie by far.

1. Twilight- PSYCH!!!! You should never see that trash. The real number one is YOJIMBO. A great samurai movie from possibly the greatest director of all time Akira Kurasawa. It stars Toshiro Mifune as the samurai with no name. This is the inspiration behind Leone's Dollars Trilogy, and in fact the first movie of said trilogy was a complete rip off of Yojimbo, so much in fact that Kurasawa sued his ass in court, and won. This is an excellent movie, and is a little lighter than Sanjuro, or some of his other works like Throne of Blood.