98 Responses to “2000+ Games Played For One Team Only”

1. Jeff Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 7:25 pm

   Wagner doesn't belong. There's a post 1901 thing going on, which eliminates his Louisville years. Anson would join the list too.

2. Johnny Twisto Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 7:50 pm

   Jeff, just submit to the belief that MLB began in 1901.....submit.....submit.....

3. Raphy Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 7:51 pm

   Steve - You could have saved yourself a lot of work. Just set "franchises played for"=1.
   http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/Rfr2Z

4. oneblankspace Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 8:37 pm

   I'd like to see a similar list for pitchers.

5. Brian Leonard Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 8:49 pm

   Darn--Roy White just misses the cut.

6. DavidRF Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 9:32 pm

   In the 19th century...

   Bid McPhee played 2135 games only for Cincinnati. The team jumped from the AA to the NL in the middle of his career, though. I would count it, but depending on how you make the rules.

   Cap Anson played 2276 games for Chicago in the NL. If you count the NA, then he drops off the list.

   Thats it for guys who played at all before 1901. It drops off pretty quickly after that. Mike Tiernan 1476, Bug Holliday 928 (same CIN issue), Bill Lange 811 and then it goes below 500.

   Its been pointed out that Honus Wagner gets disqualified for his play in Louisville, although as a footnote, the Colonels and Pirates had the same owner and teams were basically merged when the NL contracted in 1900.

7. DavidRF Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 9:34 pm

   I did a scan for franchises instead of teams and Pee Wee Reese is the only player I found who would be added to the list. He played his last year for the Dodgers in Los Angeles.

8. DavidRF Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 9:44 pm

   Pitchers... using franchises instead of teams (I don't know how many that changes, doing it that way because that's how I had it set up for batters):

   Mariano Rivera - 978
   Walter Johnson - 802
   Red Faber - 669
   Bob Stanley - 637
   Ted Lyons - 594
   Mel Harder - 582
   Bob Feller - 570
   Jim Palmer - 558
   John Hiller - 545
   Hooks Dauss - 538
   Carl Hubbell - 535
   Bob Gibson - 528
   Don Drysdale - 518
   Eddie Rommel - 500
   Whitey Ford - 498

   Guys who played before some 1901:
   Sam Leever - 388
   Charlie Ferguson - 183 (who only played four seasons)

9. Johnny Twisto Says:
   January 13th, 2011 at 9:58 pm

   I was embarrassed for a moment because Faber is a HOFer who only played for one team and I couldn't remember which one. But fear not, I came up with it.

10. Johnny Twisto Says:
    January 13th, 2011 at 9:59 pm

    How nice that he and Ted Lyons are among each other's most similar pitchers.

11. Neal Says:
    January 13th, 2011 at 10:04 pm

    The Reds had a lot of stability at shortstop over a thirty-year period - Concepción, then Larkin.

12. Steve Lombardi Says:
    January 13th, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    Jeff, Raphy - good catch. Mea cupla.

13. Hartvig Says:
    January 13th, 2011 at 10:35 pm

    It's a little odd that of those great Dodger infields that were together for so long in the 70's & early 80's (Garvey, Lopes, Russell & Cey) the one who lasted the longest was Russell, who was by far the weakest player of the 4.

    Virtually every name on the list above at least belongs in the discussion for the Hall of Fame with the exception of Russell.

14. DoubleDiamond Says:
    January 13th, 2011 at 11:23 pm

    @9 And I had known that there had once been a baseball player named Urban Faber, and upon seeing Red Faber in this list, decided that there must have been two guys named Faber from that time period. Curious also as to what team Red Faber played for, I looked him up and realized that he and Urban are the same guy!

15. barkie Says:
    January 13th, 2011 at 11:41 pm

    This is a really important list, and becoming more important every year IMHO. For God's sake, look at that list!

    I think it's one of the intangibles the Hall is right in considering.

    I've heard people say that Al Kaline's #s are a little weak for the Hall. Maybe that's right. But of all the Tigers in the Hall, I know I speak for MANY Tiger fans when I say we consider him the greatest Tiger ever.

    He still has an active role with the team.

    Now just think of Guys like Jeter. 2000 plus games in the era of free agency.

16. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:24 am

    @15 Barkie

    It definitely doesn't hurt you HOF chances to play for only one team for the bulk of your career.

    Bill James listed being traded as a possible reason for someone to be underrated. The theory is has to do with something like camouflage in that its hard for people to get a clear picture of the player when he moves around to a bunch of different teams and wears different uniforms.

    The only underrated players I see on that list are Lou Whitaker, Alan Trammell, and Barry Larkin.

    Playing a middle infield position and playing in the mid-west contributed to those 3 players being underrated. Also being strong in on base percentage contributed and playing in an era that preceded the Steroid era hurt as well.

    Bagwell was underrated which is odd for a 1B who played 2000+ games on one team. The Astrodome didn't help and playing in a small market didn't help as well. His rumored PED use may have contributed to his Underrated status.

17. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:36 am

    @13 Hartvig,

    The Cey trade was really a horrible trade that's rarely talked about. Cey was still productive and they traded him to the Cubs for Vance Lovelace in January 1983. I guess it was an attempt to put Guerrero at third which was a big mistake because he was just horrible. They should have left Guerrero in the outfield and kept Cey.

    And its odd how things worked out because the trade of Cey to the Cubs essentially pushed Ryne Sandberg to Second Base.

    I can't see Frank White or Bernie Williams being in the HOF discussion. I can't really see Concepcion in the HOF and Rice and Mazeroski were a mistake.

18. barkie Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:59 am

    Hartvig and John Q

    God, I loved those Dodgers teams! I was a Detroit kid hopelessly addicted to west coast Dodger baseball.. When I pitched in Little League, I imitated Tommy John's delivery. Burt "Happy" Hooton, brings back great memories.

    Hartvig- I disagree. First of all, like you, I agree that when you look at those teams' infields, we're talking about "that group", "that infield". You can't mention Garvey without mentioning Cey. They were incredible. But I think most people were like me and saw how special Russell was. I will now utter THE MOST un-sabremetric words EVER!!!!

    Russell's numbers were always the weakest of the team, but he was always the most important player.

    John Q.

    I was sure that you were wrong, and that the Penguin's numbers weren't that important. I loved Ron Cey, but I never really thought he would've stood out with another team. Then I went backed and used the mini-summary tool the site just touted.

    Damn, Cey put up some really strong numbers as a Dodger third baseman. He played among giants like Schmidt, but he definitely earned his keep with his bat.

    Here's proof of how the group made the players better as a whole, but look at Garvey. When he was a Dodger, he was freakin famous! Moved to San Diego, had some decent seasons, but freakin disappeared.

    Tommy LaSorda!!!

19. barkie Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:07 am

    oh, and by the way.

    Swear to God this is true.

    Saw the Penguin getted plunked in the head by the Goose in the World Series.

    you know what I mean!

20. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:35 am

    Barkie,

    I followed those Dodger teams quite a bit because I grew up in NJ and there were still a ton of old Dodger fans back in the 70's. And then the Mets were pretty horrible by '77 so you had to have something to look forward to.

    In retrospect Cey was the best player on those teams and a very underrated player overall. He's probably around the 15th best 3b of all time and if the HOF actually voted for 3b he'd be considered a borderline HOF. Good power and on base numbers and his power numbers actually got hurt from playing at Dodger stadium. Good glove when he was young and Cey really should have won a GG or two instead of Doug Rader or Ken Reitz.

    Garvey was very overrated. He was good not great and I always thought he was a selfish player. Obsessed with 200 hits to a fault and he never walked. He didn't deserve the MVP in '74, Jimmy Winn should have won the award. Like you said his skills deteriorated quickly and he was a bust with the Padres.

    Lopes was a very good player who's kind of been forgotten. Good on base perctage, The Best Percentage base stealer I ever saw before Beltran and Raines came along, decent power for a 2b for back then.

    Russell was a good solid player. Not a great player but a good solid everyday player who played everyday. He couldn't really hit but he was a good defensive player that deserved a GG or two.

21. Mike Felber Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 4:32 am

    Barkie, who does not think Kaline does not deserve the Hall? Long career, excellent peak, 134 OPS + with a great glove...whether seen by traditionalists or certainly saber guys, he was excellent. he did not lead the league often in offensive #s? But he was often near the top in many things. I know i am preaching to the converted, but who ever said he is not HOF material? It is not even close.

    Ted Williams faulted him for not taking his suggestion re: wrist strengthening for power. So many be could have hit more HRs, but he was great as it was.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/kalinal01.shtml

22. Hartvig Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 7:08 am

    John Q @ 17

    I didn't necessarily mean the belong in the HOF but:

    1) While Concepcion never got a lot of support for the Hall he did manage to stay on the ballot for 15 years. Except for the first couple of years on the ballot his support has been about the same as Mattingly's.

    2) Frank White is Bill Mazeroski. Maz was better on the double play but White had a little more range. It's one case where it's next to impossible to explain why one player belongs & the other one doesn't (yes, I know it's because everyone thinks "double play" when they hear Mazeroski's name but I would love to hear a Maz supporter for the HOF try to explain then why White doesn't belong. and yes, I know that neither of them probably belong).

    3) I agree that Rice doesn't belong in the HOF. But he is IN the HOF so... that's got to put him in the discussion.

    4) You're probably right about Bernie Williams but he's one of my all-time favorite Yankees and he's good enough & popular enough that when his name is mentioned you don't generally hear the: "Well HE certainly doesn't belong in the HOF" comments that you sometimes do for even more qualified candidates.

    I'm actually in complete agreement with your assessment of who on that list belongs & who doesn't (I think) but I still stand by my point that all of them except Russell (people must be getting the idea that I really hate him or something- I really don't-sorry Barkie) at least have a place in the discussion of where the line of who belongs in & who doesn't should be drawn.

23. Larry R. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 9:24 am

    @11

    Your comments remind me of Boston and LF. Three guys (Williams, Yaz, Rice) manned it for about 50 years.

24. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:28 am

    DavidRF @6 brings up an interesting point about Honus Wagner going from Louisville (which disbanded) to Pittsburgh. I think that the decision whether to include Wagner in a discussion of "one-franchise players" depends on the underlying point of that discussion. I guess my default definition of a "one-franchise player" would be one who never (a) was traded, or (b) changed franchises of his own volition.

    But even that is hard to pin down for Wagner. One might assume that Louisville's players were simply assigned or sold to other teams (mostly Pittsburgh). But according to B-R, the biggest transfer of Louisville players, which included Wagner, was a trade -- in December 1899, Louisville sent 12(!!) players to Pittsburgh, and got back 4 players plus $25,000. Now, the practical meaning of Louisville's acquisition is unclear: the club never played another game, the one big name they got (Jack Chesbro) was "assigned" back to Pittsburgh in March 1900, and the other three players were never seen again in the majors. So perhaps the transfers to Pittsburgh were filed as a "trade" for some purely administrative reason

    Bottom line: I would consider Wagner a one-franchise player unless the context of the discussion made it clear that he did not belong.

25. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:31 am

    Mike Felber Says: "Barkie, who does not think Kaline does not deserve the Hall?... I know i am preaching to the converted, but who ever said he is not HOF material? It is not even close."

    Yes Mike, I agree about Kaline being a no-doubt HOFer. I've sometimes seen it suggested that both he and his contemporary Yaz were more "compilers" than all-time greats*, who piled up their career stats by being merely good for an extremely long period of time, as opposed to being truly great. Inevitably they will be compared toTy Cobb and Ted Williams, respectively, and found lacking.

    I've said it here before and so have many others, but the likes of Ty Cobb and Ted Williams are _not_ the standards of comparison for the HOF, at least after 1938. If those two were the standard, there would be 20/25 players in the HOF at most, and the likes of George Brett and Warren Spahn would be "marginal" candidates probably not elected.

    #6/ DavidRF: I would agree with you on the 19th century guys that Bid McPhee belongs on this list - it wasn't his fault his team changed leagues. I would also include Honus Wagner, as Louisville was basically merged with Pittsburgh in the contraction after the 1899 NL season, as you wrote; this would also make Fred Clarke eligible for this list (2246 games).

    I wouldn't include Anson, as I do not consider the NA "major league".

    *I think Yaz's 1967 MVP/Triple-Crown/all-time great year would throw a monkee wrench into that argument.

26. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:36 am

    @15, Barkie: "I've heard people say that Al Kaline's #s are a little weak for the Hall."

    Barkie, I trust that you took down their names and addresses....

    Kaline may not be in the Ruth-Cobb-Wagner class of HOFer, but anyone who thinks he does not belong in the HOF is completely ignorant of at least one of the following, and probably more:
    -- the typical caliber of a HOF player;
    -- Kaline's defensive value;
    -- the offensive context of the American League from about 1963-72; and
    -- the difference between one's ass and one's elbow.

27. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:52 am

    One counterpoint to the comments about the Dodgers trading Cey:

    It may be that they felt his defense had gone downhill, and WAR supports that case. Cey's dWAR in his four Cubs years was brutal, -4.5 combined, which wiped out over 40% of his oWAR.

    And I think Cey was looking for a big contract that the Dodgers didn't think he deserved. The Cubs gave him a 4-year deal for about $1.25 million per year; his 1985 salary was the 8th-highest in the NL, and he clearly wasn't "worth" anything like that.

28. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    @22 Hartvig,

    Valid points all around and I wasn't necessarily contradicting your original post. I think you're right in that Russell was the weakest player on this list, though not an insult because there are mostly great players on this list.

    Concepcion got some pretty good HOF support mainly because he played a long time and he was a member of the Big Red Machine. He was a very good SS but overrated defensively. My problem with Concepcion's HOF candidacy is that there are about 10-12 similar SS not in the HOF: T. Fernandez, Wills, Dark, Bartell, Donnie Bush, Peckinpaugh, Belanger, Freddie Parent, Reneria, and J. Valentin. I can't see Concepcion as definitively better than any of those players.

    Then there are 4 non HOF SS that were clearly better than Concepcion: Nomar, Vizquel, Tejada, and Fletcher. Vizquel will get some HOF support but I don't think Nomar or Tejada will get any support.

    Then there are two what I would consider borderline HOF SS candidates not in the HOF: Campaneris & Fregosi.

    Then there are two (IMO) solid HOF SS candidates in Larkin & Trammell not in the HOF.

    The mistake of Mazeroski's selection is highlighted by Frank White because as you say there essentially the same player. Maz & White are around the 30-35th best 2b in baseball history, there are about 20 better 2b not in the HOF.

    Whitaker and Grich are the two most notable HOF omissions at 2b.

    Rice was a mistake no question. Rice=George Foster about the 25-30th best LF in BB history. There's probably about 10 better LF than Rice who are not in the HOF.

    Raines & Minosa are the most notable HOF omission at LF.

    I was a big fan of Bernie Williams, he was an underrated hitter but he was a pretty awful defensive center fielder. He probably should have been moved to LF in the late 90's or at worst he should have replaced O'neill in Rf. He was about average fielder when he was young but then got progressively worse as time went on. His offensive just kind of suddenly disappeared in 2003. He went from being a career .308 hitter to a .263 hitter during his last 2000 plate appearances from 2003-2006.

    There are a bunch of borderline HOF type center fielders like Cedeno, W. Davis, Beltran, Damon, Vada Pinson, Fred Lynn, Chet Lemon, Ellis Burks, Mike Cameron, Bernie Williams, Brett Butler.

    It's interesting to note that this group is about the same or better than 4 similar CF in the HOF: Roush, Averill, Puckett and Combs.

    It's going to be interesting to see how Jim Edmonds and Adruw Jones do in HOF voting.

    The only notable omission I see in the HOF among CF is Jimmy Wynn.

29. 704_Brave Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    I've often wondered why Jim Rice was elected to the HOF while being generally perceived as a jerk to the media but someone like Dale Murphy, one of the all time nice guys, has been soundly ignored by HOF voters. I'm not saying Dale is a HOFer, but Jim Rice instead?

30. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:25 pm

    Steve noted in the intro: "It's pretty interesting that 21 of the 34 on the list had years in their careers that were, at some point, post-1977."

    Or, to put it explicitly: 21 of the 36 played in the era of free agency.

    I continue to marvel at how many of the things Bill James noted 25 years ago and more continue to be (a) true, and (b) contrary to common belief. In particular, the dawn of free agency spawned two widespread beliefs:

    (1) That there was now less continuity between players (especially stars) and their original franchises. And not just less continuity; many believed (and many still believe) that free agency destroyed such continuity. That is simply not true, and this chart is one of the things that proves it.

    (2) That the sharp rise in player salaries would almost eliminate the 20-year career, because many players would earn enough to retire by their early 30s. This view overlooked the fact that hardly anyone ever decides that they've made enough money, no matter how much they've already made, if the potential is there to make a lot more. And so, we've seen an increase in the number of very long careers.

    Predictions like those often flow from personal biases: People who looked askance at the explosion in player salaries came up with all kinds of reasons why it would be bad for the game. Most of them had no idea what they were talking about.

31. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    #28/ John Q Says: " ...The only notable omission I see in the HOF among CF is Jimmy Wynn."

    John Q, not only is he not in the HOF, he never got a single vote! Wynn is probably the best "never got a single vote" candidate listed on a HOF ballot, along with perhaps Mike Cuellar and Cecil Cooper. Yet Don Larsen was on the HOF ballot the full 15 years...

32. Frank Clingenpeel Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:39 pm

    Jeff {#1}

    By your standards {and mine}, Anson doesn't belong on this list either. He began his career with Rockford in the National Association {where, by the way, he was known as "Baby"}, and spent four seasons with the Philadelphia Athletics before transferring to Chicago in the "upstart" National League.

    And before any of you smart-alecks ask, no, I do NOT remember those days.

33. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:40 pm

    @29, 704_Brave: "I've often wondered why Jim Rice was elected to the HOF while being generally perceived as a jerk to the media but someone like Dale Murphy, one of the all time nice guys, has been soundly ignored by HOF voters."

    Brave, I'll take a stab at that one, though my opinion may prove controversial:

    Dale Murphy was a Mormon, and religious bigotry is far more common than many people think. I'm not saying that baseball writers in general, or any particular one, held Murphy's religious beliefs against him, per se. But I think his standing among writers probably suffered from specific aspects of his religion that were reflected in his everyday lifestyle. For lack of a better word (and without meaning this pejoratively), Murphy was a prude.

    From his Wikipedia page:
    "Murphy's clean-living habits off the diamond were frequently noted in the media. A devout Latter-day Saint, or Mormon, Murphy did not drink alcoholic beverages, would not allow women to be photographed embracing him and paid his teammates' dinner checks (as long as alcoholic beverages were not on the tab). He also refused to give television interviews unless he was fully dressed."

    Baseball writers of Murphy's day may have praised that sort of "clean living" in print, but I don't think it really scored any points with them.

34. dukeofflatbush Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:41 pm

    I only skimmed the entries, but has anyone mentioned that Trammel and Whitaker both debuted in the same game. Sept 9, 1977.
    I wonder if their is a way to check 'most games played as teammates'.
    Not games in which one guy was in the lineup and the other guy had an off day, but both players credited with an official game.

35. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    @27 John A.

    Valid points on Ron Cey. It's hard to know all the nuances of past trades because things like Free agency etc, don't factor into the information on BR.

    One major problem for the Dodgers was that there was no adequate contingency plan if the Pedro Guerrero at third experiment failed. Guerrero was horrible at third which left the Dodgers scrambling to find a replacement by 1985. The Cey trade in effect started a 15 year revolving door of mostly mediocre 3b for the Dodgers only ending when Andrian Beltre took over the position in 1999.

    The Dodgers traded for an over-the hill Bill Madlock in 1985 who actually gave them a great 1/3 season & '85 post season but was mediocre in '86 and awful in '87. The Dodgers had to give up 3 players, Reynolds, Espy, Bream to get Madlock. Not great players but Bream was a solid player and Reynolds was a starter that could have been used to acquire someone else.

    The Dodgers went on the have a 3b carousel of D. Anderson, Sharperson, Hamilton, Hansen, a 35 year old Tim Wallach, and Mike Blowers from 1986-1998.

    It's also interesting to think about how Cey might have helped the Dodgers in the '83 NLCS.

36. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    On the other end of the spectrum are guys who played 2000 or more games not with just 1 team, but with 11 teams. 11 teams is the highest amount of teams for any player with 2000+ games...and the three players in that club are:

    Todd Zeile - 2158 games
    Royce Clayton - 2108 games
    Kenny Lofton - 2103 games

37. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 12:59 pm

    @34 Dukeofflatbush - I believe Whitaker & Trammell hold that distinction for most games as teammates where both guys played. I feel like I've heard that a time or two, though I can't think of a definitive way to prove it.

    And that's pretty cool that they debuted in the same game.

38. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:04 pm

    Fleshing out my #33, about the difference in perception between Jim Rice and Dale Murphy:

    Think of the phrase so commonly used by Rice's HOF supporters? "In his prime, he was the most feared hitter in the game."

    "Feared."

    So I'll just ask the question: Did that "fear" trace only to Rice's hitting? Or did some of it come from his skin color?

    Of course, there are so many different factors in how a player comes to be perceived.
    -- Team halo effect: The Red Sox were overall a much better team during Rice's career than the Braves during Murphy's, and particularly so during their early years.
    -- Boston is a more influential media market.
    -- Early success: Rice was a star in his first full year. The main attention Murphy generated in his first few years in the big leagues was for his throwing problems as a catcher, which drove him from that position; and in his first full year, Murphy batted .226.
    -- Iconic moments: Rice was involved in the 1978 playoff game and the 1986 World Series -- both against New York teams. Murphy made the postseason once, and the Braves got swept.

39. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:08 pm

    @31 Lawrence A.

    Wynn was just in the wrong place at the wrong time playing CF in the Astrodome during the 1960's-early 70's. Also, he should have won the '74 MVP.

40. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    #29/ 704_Brave Says: "I've often wondered why Jim Rice was elected to the HOF while being generally perceived as a jerk to the media but someone like Dale Murphy, one of the all time nice guys, has been soundly ignored by HOF voters. I'm not saying Dale is a HOFer, but Jim Rice instead?"

    Brave Star:
    A) His Triple Crown stats made it look superficially as if he had more "big" years than Murphy; of course walks, GIDP's, and defense aren't factored into that.
    B) There was an extensive campaign by the Red Sox publicity department the last several years of his candidacy to get him in. I don't think Murphy had something similar promoting his candidacy.

41. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    @39 John Q - I was just looking at the results of the 1974 NL voting after your comment. That is one weird MVP vote. How did Steve Garvey win?? I know the voters didn't know what WAR was back then but just looking at traditional stats, I don't see how Garvey won it. He shouldn't have even been Top 5 based on the stats. Now I see the Dodgers did win 102 games that year and finished in 1st place, so I guess he got a big boost from team effect. But what's crazy is Wynn was on that same Dodgers team. I guess Garvey having 3 more RBI, a lot less K's and a good edge in BA (he had the 'magic'; 200 hit mark) was more important than Wynn having 11 more HR's, way more BB's, a much better OBP and SLG %...

42. 704_Brave Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    @John Autin -
    Wow, controversial indeed. I'm not going to touch most of that although you may be right on many accounts and I get your points.

    Murphy's biggest problems IMO were playing on bad teams and tailing off towards at the end of his career...I don't think he's a HOFer, but then again I don't think Rice is either.

    Murphy: 2 MVP, 7 AS, 5 GG, 4 SS
    Rice: 1 MVP, 8 AS, 0 GG, 2 SS

    I guess the biggest question I've always had about HOF voting is why living members don't have a vote. I believe they should have a say (outside the veterans committee).

43. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    #39/ John Q Says: "@31 Lawrence A. Wynn was just in the wrong place at the wrong time playing CF in the Astrodome during the 1960's-early 70's. Also, he should have won the '74 MVP."

    John Q, Wynn did finish 5th in actual MVP voting and 3rd in WAR behind Mike Schmidt and Joe Morgan - no way he's actually winning the MVP then with a .270-ish BA, unless he has a Killebrew/1969-type year.

    You'd think the guy would get at least _ONE_ HOF vote, when he's better than dozens of players who did get HOF votes.

44. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    Murphy was an odd player in that his career is made up of 6 great seasons and the rest of his career is made up of average-poor seasons. He needed 3-4 good/very good seasons mixed in with the great ones to make the HOF. Murphy's career is a little like Nomar Garciapara in that regard where his HOF case is all based on Peak value. Tony Olivia had a smaller similar version of Murphy's career.

    Murphy is one of the few players to meet or surpass the average HOF score for both Black & Gray ink and not be in the HOF. I think Murphy, Tony Oliva & Dick Allen are the only other two post 1947 players to meet or surpass the HOF Black & Gray ink standard and not be in the HOF.

    I think a lot of the writers essentially concluded back in 1980 that Jim Rice was a HOF and then never made an honest assessment of his entire career or his HOF case when the time came to vote for him.

    I've also found it odd that the same writers who will not vote for Edgar Martinez because he was a DH had no problem overlooking the 1/3 of Rice's career spent at the DH position.

45. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    Lawrence A,

    Valid points on Wynn, he deserved the MVP but like you said it would have been difficult to give the award to a .270 hitter back in 1974 even though he finished 3rd/4th in HR/RBI.

    Valid point on the lack of a single HOF vote which is just insane.

    He had 5 basic problems as far as the HOF is concerned.

    1-He was an offensive player in a terrible hitter's era.

    2-He played in two of the worst hitter's park in baseball.

    3-His strength was on-base percentage & slugging percentage not batting average.

    4-He played CF which is among the most underrated positions because its in the middle of the defensive spectrum.

    5-He didn't have an exceptionally long career and the writers tend to skew the vote towards career value and round number milestones.

46. Artie Z Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:50 pm

    @41 - I think part of the reason that Garvey won the MVP is because the Dodgers had finished second a few years in a row and then Garvey finally played a full season and they win 102 games and finish first. In 1973 Lopes, Russell, and Cey had all had almost 600 PAs so they were not "newcomers" and Jimmy Wynn wasn't on the team in 1973. So I think the "newness" of Garvey, coupled with a good/great season, and the Dodgers winning 100 games and the NL West helped to propel him to the MVP.

47. John Autin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:51 pm

    Getting back to the "2,000 games with one franchise":

    As interesting as the number who've done it with at least one foot in the free-agency era is this fact:

    Unless we count Honus Wagner, no player did it who played at all in the years 1900-1922.

48. JDV Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 1:53 pm

    @34...interesting note regarding Whitaker and Trammell debuting together. Another pair of 2,000+ who debuted together was Griffey / Vizquel (April 3, 1989), but obviously they both later left Seattle. Anyone know of others?

49. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 2:00 pm

    @41 Dave V.

    The '74 vote is strange partly because Mike Marshall had such a strange season. He pitched 208 innings appeared 106 games didn't start a single game but only had 21 saves. I think his appearance in the rate stat categories is a bit misleading considering he finished 29th overall in innings pitched. I think the writers were just blown away by the 106 appearances which I think in retrospect was kind of overrated as far as actual importance.

    I think that Marshall, Garvey and Wynn essentially split the vote among the Dodgers. It is crazy that Marshall even finished 3rd in the MVP vote. Morgan or Schmidt were probably the best player in '74 but I always thought Wynn should have been the MVP.

    I always thought Messersmith should have won the Cy Young over Marshall.

50. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:01 pm

    While I think Jimmy Wynn should have gotten some HOF votes considering some of the guys who have received votes, I don't think he should be in the HOF overall. While the points you you made, John Q, are noted, one thing that stands out to me is Wynn's average. As you mention, his strength was OBP and SLG, not BA...but his BA is REALLY low. It's only .250. That would be the worst BA for a position player in the HOF (currently Ray Schalk holds that honor coming in with a .253 BA).

    Also, while a strength of Wynn's was OBP, his career OBP is only .366. While he played in a bad hitter's era and bad hitter's ballparks, .366 in Danny Tartabull territory (Tartabull is at .368). They played in different era's but overall, .366 just isn't special. I looked at OBP from 1963 to 1977 and Wynn's .366 comes in as the 29th best OBP amongst guys with at least 2000 AB's.

    Looking at Wynn's closest comps overall, its not a favorable list. His ten closest comps are M.Cameron, Gant, Brunansky, Murcer, R.Sanders, Brady Anderson, R.Monday, Frank Thomas (the old one), Sal Bando and Larry Parrish.

    Wynn might be underrated but I don't think he was a Hall of Famer...just my opinion though.

51. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:04 pm

    John Q - I wonder how many teams have had 3 guys finish in the Top 5 of the MVP voting...I may have to check that out.

    I also wonder if Garvey is one of the worst MVP selections ever? I might have to check that out too 🙂

52. Kelly Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    RE: Kaline

    I'd be shocked if anyone has been an All Star for 13 straight years and not eventually made the HOF. If that's "compiling" then I wish my Nats would get themselves some compilers.

53. barkie Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:16 pm

    Hey, hey, hey... Barkie NEVER said he didn't think Kaline was a HOFer.

    I worship the man.

    I merely pointed out, and others have supported, that some on this board have posted that he was a marginal HOFer.

    Also, damn it was fun reminiscing over those 70s Dodger teams.

54. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:20 pm

    Dave V,

    Olerud, Molitor and Alomar finished in the top 6 in the 1993 mvp race, I can't think of any other ones off the top of my head. Maybe the Big Red Machine or the Phillies of the late 70's finished in the top 5, Maybe the '47-56 Dodgers or the Yankees of the 50's.

    Garvey '74 was a pretty bad choice, Marion '44, Dawson & Bell in '87 come to mind, Kotstanty '50, Hernandez in '84, Fingers in 81, Eckersly in '92 as well. I simply can't fathom how you can vote for a relief pitcher as an MVP.

55. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    As several other people above have stated (notably #22/#28), being on this list is a pretty good indication of a player's excellence - everyone except Bill Russel on this list has some sort of HOF case, and Russell was a pretty good player on many good teams (one of his comps is Maz).

    Another characteristic these players share is being on winning teams - only Ernie Banks (and Like Appling?) played on losing teams, I'm guessing... Makes sense, since if you are the best player on a bad team, there must be pressure to trade you for future prospects.

    **Active one-team players close to the 2000+ game minimum**
    Todd Helton (1930)
    Jorge Posada (1714)
    Ichiro! (1588) (not counting the Japaneese leagues)
    Albert Pujols (1530) - this could change in 2012...
    Jimmy Rollins (1494)

    Three of these have won MVP awards...

56. DavidRF Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    @53
    Perhaps we're getting a bit semantic here, but Al Kaline is no where near "marginal". I get what you are trying to say... he's nowhere near the inner circle of corner OF-ers, several of whom were his direct contemporaries (Aaron, FRobinson) or had careers that overlapped his by quite a bit (TWilliams, Musial). But Kaline is also way above the in-out line. His career is comparable to Clemente and Yaz.

57. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    @51/@54 - three players on a team in the top-? in the MVP voting:
    2007 Phillies:
    #1 - Jimmy Rollins
    #5 - Ryan Howard
    #8 - Utley

    According to WAR, Rollins and Utley were both deserving, but Howard shouldn't even be in the discussion.

    For "bad MVP choices", 1987 in both leagues has gotta be up there; if I could go ancient ,the 1925 AL (Roger Peckinpaugh) is rather curious. I did notice that only three players on the pennant-winning Senators got MVP votes, and Roger P. was second amongst those.

    @53 - Al Kaline's HOF-worthiness: I do not recall anyone posting here suggesting he (or Yaz) wasn't a HOF-er, just some nit-wit sports -talk callers, and perhaps a writer or two. That's pretty weak criticism.

58. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    #57/ meant to write : "Roger P. was second amongst those IN WAR". Sorry!

59. Tmckelv Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    @23,

    Don't forget about Mike Greenwell as Boston LF. He was good for a little while.

60. Jeff J. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    @34 "I wonder if their is a way to check 'most games played as teammates'.
    Not games in which one guy was in the lineup and the other guy had an off day, but both players credited with an official game."

    There's a GREAT thread on baseball-fever.com

61. Jeff J. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 5:10 pm

    @15 "Now just think of Guys like Jeter. 2000 plus games in the era of free agency."

    Why WOULD he move?
    Now GWYNN staying with his team, THAT is amazing!

62. DavidRF Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 5:46 pm

    Plus there's more free-agent-era names on the list than post-free-agent era names. Players moved around a lot under the reserve clause, too.

63. Andy Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    JA at #30--my thoughts exactly. (Actually it's a little creepy just how similar our thoughts on this are.)
    When guys like Yount and Brett retired, we were told again and again how they were a dying breed--lifers with one team. And yet, the data doesn't bear that out. We're seeing it just as often today as ever. I would love to do a study on it.
    Off the top of my head---some active players with a great chance to have long careers with a single team...Pujols, Chipper, Helton, Posada, Howard, Jeter....Chavez, Vernon Wells, .....Varitek, Mauer, Morneau,....Mike Young, Rollins, ....hmm...Buehrle, Rivera, King Felix....
    Certainly not all of these guys will do it, but these are just the veterans who already have a good shot.

64. dukeofflatbush Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:00 pm

    Dave V. and others,

    Just thought this was cool.

    1977 Tigers
    Steve Kemp: debuted April 7th.
    Dave Rozema: debuted April 11th.
    Went 15-9. Finished 8th in Cy Young, and 3 in ROY
    Jack Morris: debuted July 26th.
    Lance Parrish: debuted September 5th.
    Alan Trammel: debuted September 9th.
    Lou Whitaker: debuted September 9th.

    The last 4 on that list would play ten years together, on the same team, and they all had their first game in a 45 day span.

    I guess the late '90 Yankees were similar in that they brought up their core guys around the same time.

65. dukeofflatbush Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:09 pm

    Someone mentioned earlier, guys who played for different teams, but same franchise or city - what about Eddie Mathews?
    He played his first year on the Braves during their last year in Boston, played through the Milwaukee years, then played their inaugural season in Atlanta, before moving to Detroit.
    But how many guys can say they played for 1 team in three cities.
    I think Garret Anderson, may well be able to say the same because he went through all the silly phases of the renaming of the Angels.

66. SocraticGadfly Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:16 pm

    Hoping, hoping hoping, that a certain Prince Albert is on that list eventually!

    Point to note - all of the recent players to do this are from mid-market teams. The real stars get traded by small-market teams before they're unaffordable, and usually to big-market teams, I believe.

67. Johnny Twisto Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:27 pm

    I guess the late '90 Yankees were similar in that they brought up their core guys around the same time.

    Very true. Debuts of

    Andy Pettitte - 4/29/95
    Mariano Rivera - 5/23/95
    Derek Jeter - 5/29/95
    Jorge Posada - 9/4/95

    Pretty amazing and fortunate that they're all still around (we're waiting on you, Andy...)

68. Andy Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    Dukeofflatbush, Tim Salmon I believe.

69. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    @64 Dukeofflatbush - that's very cool. Quite a year for the Tigers in 1977!

    You mentioned the Yanks in the 90s and their big year was 1995:

    Andy Pettitte: debuted April 29, 1995
    Mariano Rivera: debuted May 23, 1995
    Derek Jeter: debuted May 29, 1995
    Jorge Posada: debuted September 4, 1995

    Two sure-fire HOF'ers who debuted within 6 days of each other. And 2 other possible HOF'ers who debuted within the same season as well. Not too bad.

70. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    Do'h, you beat me to it Johnny Twisto! 🙂

71. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:39 pm

    @54 John Q - agreed on relievers winning the MVP. Cy Young is one thing but MVP, I don't know. Good find with the '93 Blue Jays.

    I found that the '61 Yanks really dominated the MVP race. Granted there were less teams then but what they did that year was pretty insane...

    --1961 MVP vote:
    #1 Roger Maris
    #2 Mickey Mantle
    #5 Whitey Ford
    #6 Luis Arroyo
    #10 Elston Howard

72. Dave V. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 6:47 pm

    The Big Red Machine...

    --1975 Reds:
    #1 Joe Morgan
    #4 Johnny Bench
    #5 Pete Rose

    --1976 Reds:
    #1 Joe Morgan
    #2 George Foster
    #4 Pete Rose
    #8 Ken Griffey Sr.

73. DavidRF Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 7:15 pm

    Writers used to give more of a premium to guys on 1st place teams.

    1946 Red Sox - 1-3-4-7-9-11-13
    1959 White Sox - 1-2-3-7-9
    1966 Orioles 1-2-3-9-11
    1968 Tigers 1-2-4-7

    That's just the AL and I'm stopping there... likely much more.

74. Johnny Twisto Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 7:23 pm

    People always talk about teammates "splitting the vote," which I've never thought really happens. I'm not even sure how one could prove it either way. The best way might be to use one of those MVP predictor models (or design a new one) and see whether players get fewer votes than expected when their teammates are good candidates too.

75. Dr. Doom Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 8:18 pm

    I don't think anyone's mentioned this, but the pre-expansion guys were at about a 5% disadvantage because of the 154-game schedule. 2000 games in the post-1961 world is equivalent to 1901 games. So that's something worth considering as far as the gap between early-generation players and those more recent.

76. rico p Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 9:06 pm

    is it true that wagner never GDP'd and gehrig 2x? How is that possible

77. dukeofflatbush Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    They were both very fast.

78. Jeff J. Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 9:25 pm

    @66 "all of the recent players to do this are from mid-market teams."

    I'll go out on a limb and say Jeter, Rivera & Posada are from slightly larger than mid-market teams.

79. flyingelbowsmash Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 9:56 pm

    Cool Steve Garvey factoid: He was the opposing first baseman in the games that Henry Aaron broke Ruth's HR record and when Rose surpassed Cobb for all-time hits.

    I was thinking about the Dodger infield lately and was surprised to see them come up here. For a group of guys (Garvey, Cey, Lopes, & Russell) who didn't accumulate many Wins Above Replacement, they sure won a heck of a lot of ACTUAL baseball games. From 74 to 81 they went to the World Series four times, and that with The Great Red Machine in their division for most of that. Pretty amazing that there are no HOFers. Though, had Garvey not blown out his hip, he probably would have stuck around for his 3,000th hit and may very well have been inducted on the first ballot. His numbers aren't impressive now but he was a major player for a decade in the game.

    Player today that most reminds me of Steve Garvey: Derek Jeter (Ok quit laughing) - they are both contact hitters, not a lot of power (except in the postseason when their team was facing elimination), overrated as fielders, may be "over popular" as personalities though both transcended the game (my mom knew who Steve Garvey was, even before the affairs), both with their "good guy" image, Jeter from Michigan and Garvey attended MSU. An interesting thought. . .

80. donburgh Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 10:22 pm

    @51 and others,

    1960 NL MVP

    Dick Groat 1st
    Don Hoak 2nd
    Vern Law T6th
    Roberto Clemente 8th

81. John Q Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:00 pm

    Steve Garvey-Derek Jeter???

    One guy was a first baseman with a .329 on base percentage the other guy is a short stop with a .385 career on base percentage. Not even close! Garvey was never as good as Jeter. Jeter is a first ballot HOF, one of the 50 best position players in BB history.

    It's hard to even find a contemporary match for Garvey. At his peak '74-80 he was James Loney type with a slightly better batting average and more power. From 1981-1987 he was Loney with less power and a much lower on base percentage.

    Garvey was a very good player from 1974-1980 never great. His career was already on the down turn by 1981 before his hip injury. His batting average was down his power numbers were down. Other than his 1984 NLCS he was pretty awful for the Padres. He was a full time 1b with a .309 on base percentage and 61 HR in about 2500 plate appearances.

82. kds Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:18 pm

    For teammates splitting MVP votes look at 1954 AL. Remember that Cleveland set an AL wins record and beat the Yanks by 11 games.

    Garvey is high on my list of most overrated players. (As a longtime Dodger fan.) By WAR, (rWAR here and fWAR at Fangraphs), he never was the most valuable Dodger, not one year.

83. Dr. Doom Says:
    January 14th, 2011 at 11:42 pm

    @76

    GDP was not counted for any of Wagner's career, and only existed in Biscuit Pants' last season (if you don't know who Biscuit Pants is, search it in the search bar on this page. You'll be pleasantly surprised).

84. John Autin Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 1:01 am

    @82, Kds, well done -- that is a perfect example of vote splitting. Doby, Avila and Lemon each got 5 first-place votes, combining for 15 of the 24 top spots. Berra got 7 firsts and won the award by a very thin margin, 230 points to 210 for Doby and 203 for Avila.

    The irony is, Chicago's Minnie Minoso had the highest WAR (8.3), followed by Mickey Mantle (7.8) and Ted Williams (7.2).

85. Hartvig Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 1:19 am

    Dr. Doom- I've read a ton of books on baseball history and I am a huge fan of goofy nicknames but I had NEVER heard of Biscuit Pants. And speaking of Goofy, he was one of Biscuit's teammates. Classic!

86. John Autin Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 1:24 am

    P.S. re 1954 AL -- The highest pitcher WAR (5.4) belonged to Detroit's Steve Gromek, from Hamtramck, MI; the next three were Cleveland's Early Wynn, Mike Garcia and Bob Lemon. Wynn, despite having the same 23 wins as Lemon, virtually the same ERA, and 12 more innings, got no first-place votes, while Lemon got 5.

    Gromek, by the way, had almost the same ERA and IP as Lemon, but an 18-16 record; Detroit went 68-86 and was near the bottom in scoring. He registered a single point in the MVP voting. A final oddity: Gromek got a decision in each of his 32 starts, going 16-16. In 4 relief appearances, he had 2 wins and 1 save. Only 4 pitchers since Gromek have made 30+ starts and gotten more decisions than starts; the last was LaMarr Hoyt in '82, the year before his CYA season.

87. John Autin Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 1:25 am

    @85, Hartvig -- I don't know where "Biscuit Pants" came from, but it sure sounds like something Babe Ruth would have hung on Gehrig!

88. John Autin Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 1:34 am

    Re: "Biscuit Pants" --

    "Lou was called Biscuit Pants by his teammates. In Gehrig's time ball players were encumbered in heavy, sweaty wool uniforms that were about as chic as old bloomers hanging on clotheslines. Suited up, Gehrig looked bovine, unathletic. His appearance earned him the uncomely nickname of 'Biscuit Pants.'"
    (http://askville.amazon.com/Lou-Gehrig-nickname-Biscuitpants/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=2396054, citing a geocities page that is no longer available)

    Jonathan Eig's biography says the name was given to him as a rookie.

    There are many citations online to the fact that Gehrig was called Biscuit Pants, but so far I haven't found any particular player credited with the dubbing. So I'm going to continue in my utterly unfounded belief that it was Ruth....

    There's a funny picture of some Gehrig pants here; they were sold at auction last year. The page mentions the nickname.
    http://sports.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7024&LotIdNo=32001

89. Mike Felber Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 5:01 am

    Really John? I would have guessed that it was because he an actual biscuit or 3 in his pants courtesy of his adored mama.

90. Jeff J. Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 10:14 am

    @37

    The top 5 are supposedly

    Bagwell/Biggio 2029
    Santo/Billy Williams 2015
    Trammell/Whitaker 1918
    Brett/Frank White 1915
    Clemente/Maz 1879

91. SocraticGadfly Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 4:18 pm

    @78 Jeff ... yeah, I gave the list a bit of a cursory read.

    Interesting that they're all from the same big-big market team, too.

92. Yippeeyappee Says:
    January 15th, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    Looks like this inspired a game at sporcle.com (or was it the other way around?) http://www.sporcle.com/games/seventhsamurai/2000_games_one_team

93. John Autin Says:
    January 16th, 2011 at 4:37 am

    @89, Mike Felber --

    Kind Sir,

    Thank you for notifying me that the quote I posted about the origin of "Biscuit Pants" did not meet your standards of pithiness and originality.

    Please know that I am deeply chagrined by my failure. As you surely have surmised, each of my posts is crafted with the sole aim of earning your approval and esteem; but in this instance, I have fallen well short of the prize. I must redouble my efforts.

    But perhaps I have misunderstood you. I confess, my mood was one of puzzlement whilst reading the clause, "because he an actual biscuit or 3 in his pants," which seemed (to my untutored eye) to lack a necessary verb. But no; it must be that my own petty resentment has blinded me to the subtle brilliance of that turn of phrase. And so, once more, you teach me that I ... must ... do ... BETTER!

    I am fortunate, indeed, to have such a devoted instructor. With deepest gratitude, I remain,

    Most sincerely,

    John Autin

94. Mike Felber Says:
    January 17th, 2011 at 12:21 am

    Mr. Austin: I would like to believe that you were not miffed & just joking around, but I honesty am unsure. If so, that was well wrought.

    Forgive my density, but IF you mistook my words as any sort of critique, I have no indication why. You reported facts of interest, I was not even jesting: I actually guessed that this devoted mama's boy would have biscuit(s) from her in his pants early on, & thus acquired said moniker.

    I could see how you might think I was kidding, but I was not. Even a joke there would not imply any dig at you! Though I see no rational cause for you to have interpreted my post as sarcastic or mean spirited.

95. John Autin Says:
    January 17th, 2011 at 12:49 am

    @94, Mike Felber -- Alas for me, I did, indeed, think you were being sarcastic and sort of putting me down for posting the bit about Biscuit Pants. I did try to have fun with my reply, though, so I'm glad you did find it amusing. (No sarcasm intended!!!)

    I seem to be not so good at discerning sarcasm from sincerity in online commentary. Usually I err in the other directions, taking seriously something that the writer meant as sarcasm. Perhaps my latest goof was an unconscious attempt to be "a more balanced person." In any case -- I must do better.

    🙂

96. John Autin Says:
    January 17th, 2011 at 12:53 am

    P.S. to Mike Felber -- Have you heard about the time that Gates Brown (portly Tigers backup in the '60s & '70s) slid into second base and came up with mustard & ketchup smeared all over his pants? He'd been eating a hot dog in the dugout, not expecting to be called upon, and when he was tabbed to hit he just stuck the frank down his pants.

    Bill Freehan tells this story in his diary of the '69 season, "Behind the Mask."

97. Mike Felber Says:
    January 17th, 2011 at 9:56 am

    I did not hear that John, though Raines was rumored to have slid in at least sometimes with some white powder that was not line chalk!

    I agree with the commentary on your last link-how would anyone know his nickname had to do with his physique? If he had actual biscuits in his pockets, that would actually be humorous & less likely to be found insulting. Also, 6' 200 lbs., & clearly had upper body mass-there is just not that much weight left over for an enormous butt. This & the Tarzan comment seems to show how different the standard size, & general & athletic aesthetic was then.

98. What Do You Want from Ducksnorts? | Ducksnorts Says:
    January 21st, 2011 at 10:58 am

    [...] 2000+ Games Played For One Team Only (Baseball-Reference). Tony Gwynn makes an appearance, as do San Diego natives Alan Trammell and Ted Williams. [...]