Image: B-. Already starting off with one of my pet-peeves, a cap-less player. Burkett's model is clearly based on this portrait, but I've always thought his plaque added the smallest hint of a smile.
Name: A-. His middle name Cail is abbreviated "C."
Teams: C. All of his teams are listed, just in the body paragraph without the corresponding years.
Text: B+. Okay, well it says that Burkett joins Cobb and Hornsby as the only trio to hit .400 or better three times. The only problem is that Burkett only did this twice, in 1895 and 1896 as the plaque states at the end. I'm assuming the other season they're talking about is 1899 when he hit .396, but .396 ain't .400. There was most likely a record keeping error. He did win three batting titles, and at least all of his teams are mentioned.
Tommy McCarthy
Text: A. All the words in the plaque are correct, really the only thing wrong is that its missing his years played and four of his five teams. He gets and "F" for the teams, but an "A'" for everything else.
Text: B+. Okay, well it says that Burkett joins Cobb and Hornsby as the only trio to hit .400 or better three times. The only problem is that Burkett only did this twice, in 1895 and 1896 as the plaque states at the end. I'm assuming the other season they're talking about is 1899 when he hit .396, but .396 ain't .400. There was most likely a record keeping error. He did win three batting titles, and at least all of his teams are mentioned.
Image: A.Looks like its based on this image. Not bad.
Name: A. Including a full name is always good. The only thing missing is his nickname of "The Peerless Leader"
Teams: C. While the Cubs are mentioned in the first line of the plaque text, his other teams are buried at the bottom. Also, this was before the Hall designated inductees by position, so while the Hall currently places Chance as a first baseman, his plaque doesn't even specifically say that he was a player at all.
Text: C-. I almost gave this an F. As I just mentioned, you don't even know Chance was a player based on his plaque. While Chance had a noteworthy managerial career, and in my opinion, the only way he is deserving of Cooperstown is if you lump his playing and managerial career together, you can't just gloss over his first base accolades. Chance was solely a Cubs' player from 1898 to 1904, then became Chicago's player/manager from 1905 to 1912. In 1913 and 1914 he managed he Yankees, while also playing in 13 games. Finally in 1923, he skippered the Red Sox. By WAR, he was actually far and away the best first baseman in baseball from 1898 to 1911, leading Fred Tenney by a full 7.0 WAR.
Also, note how Chance is the only member of the "Tinker to Evers to Chance" doubleplay combination not to even mention the famous poem or his teammates by name. Johnny Evers and Joe Tinker's plaques do, which we''ll get to in a minute. Chance's plaque not bringing it up is kind of fitting to me, as I think he is the most deserving of the men if you combine his playing and managerial career.
However it's the last line that kills me. "Shares record for making most singles in four game World Series." This is hilarious. First off, "shares record," means he doesn't even have this record by himself. The record is for singles, the easiest of all the hits, in not a 7-game World Series, but in the shortest possible series, just four games. Why not just say he hit .438 in the 1914 World Series, and .316 across 20 series games during his career? Who cares that he hit a bunch of singles in four games.
Also, note how Chance is the only member of the "Tinker to Evers to Chance" doubleplay combination not to even mention the famous poem or his teammates by name. Johnny Evers and Joe Tinker's plaques do, which we''ll get to in a minute. Chance's plaque not bringing it up is kind of fitting to me, as I think he is the most deserving of the men if you combine his playing and managerial career.
Image: A. I've looked everywhere for the inspiration image behind Chesbro's plaque and have come up empty. Perhaps the closest I can find is this shot which is attributed to his lone game with Boston in 1909, but I don't think it's the source.
Name: A+. Full name followed by nickname. Great job.
Teams: C. The teams are buried in the text with no mention of timelines for each club.
Text: A. His plaque is off by a few wins and losses, as his career record was 198-132, not 192-128.
Image: B. Here's my guess for the source image, and if that's true, it looks like he's in a Boston Braves uniform. While he did win an MVP with Boston, the Chicago Cubs are clearly his primary team. He should be wearing a cap with the Cubs' "C" logo.
Name: A. Full name followed by nickname. Good job, even though his common name "Johnny" isn't found anywhere.
Teams: C-. A few of his teams are buried in the text with no mention of timelines for each club, and some of them aren't even named. He played for the Phillies in 1917, suited up for one game with the White Sox in 1922, and then managed the ChiSox for 124 games in 1924.
Text: B. I mentioned before that both Evers and Joe Tinker's plaques bring up "Tinker to Evers to Chance," while Chance's does not. It is a bit odd, since clearly they were all put in together. Not too many plaques mention scouting, but since that role is not one of the qualifiers for induction, it really didn't have to be on here.However it's the last line that kills me. "Shares record for making most singles in four game World Series." This is hilarious. First off, "shares record," means he doesn't even have this record by himself. The record is for singles, the easiest of all the hits, in not a 7-game World Series, but in the shortest possible series, just four games. Why not just say he hit .438 in the 1914 World Series, and .316 across 20 series games during his career? Who cares that he hit a bunch of singles in four games.
Image: A. This image of Griffith with the Washington Nationals looks like the basis for his plaque. Looks good.
Name: A-. Middle name of Calvin is abbreviated.
Teams: N/A. Another person elected who's career was combined as a player/manager/executive. The Hall currently treats Griffith as an executive/pioneer, but his playing career alone is, at worst, borderline. Griffith played for seven teams, but mostly with the Chicago Colts/Orphans. He followed that up with a 20-year managerial career which began while he was still playing. Griffith's time managing Washington from 1912 to 1920 led to his ownership of the club until his death in 1955.
Text: B+. Griffith had a lot going on during his lengthy baseball career. He doesn't neatly fall into one category, so his plaque does a good job of mentioning all his major roles. His playing stints with the St. Louis Browns and Boston Reds of the American Association in 1891 are not on his plaque, but more importantly, however, is that his pennant winning club of 1901, when he managed the White Sox, plus his pennants and 1924 World Series titles he captured while owning Washington go unnoticed as well. Tommy McCarthy
Image: F. Everything about Tommy McCarthy and the Hall of Fame is wrong.
Okay, that was mean. But, seriously, McCarthy is probably
the single-most randomly undeserving player in the entire Hall. There are a
lot of dubious choices: Candy Cummings was considered a top pitcher
for about a decade, even though he's in the Hall for possibly inventing the curveball. Rick Ferrell made eight All-Star teams. Ray Schalk received
MVP votes four times. Jesse Haines won 20 games three times and has World
Series glory. Hell, even Freddie Lindstrom is neck-and-neck with PieTraynor and Willie Kamm for highest WAR among third basemen for a ten-year window, and
almost won an MVP in 1928.
But Tommy McCarthy, and his hilariously diminutive 14.6
career WAR, 1273 career games, and 102 OPS+ is by far the least-valuable player in the
Hall of Fame who was inducted solely for their playing career. I don't care how
much he popularized small-ball and strategy, or who his famous teammates in St.
Louis and Boston were. He does not belong here.
Now, this project isn't about the worthiness of the
inductees, but instead about their plaques. So, how does McCarthy's plaque hold up?
Well, it's bizarre. Like, maybe the weirdest of them all.
This
is 100% the basis for McCarthy's plaque image. Now, this plaque and the
source image itself clearly show McCarthy older in life, years removed from his
playing days. It is definitely not showing McCarthy with the Boston Beaneaters
from 1892 and 1895, not the Brooklyn Bridegrooms during his final season of
1896. Not only does he look too old here for the image to be from that era, neither teams wore that style cap
during those years.
I've long thought that this image must show McCarthy as a
Brooklyn Dodgers/Robins coach, judging by the iconic Brooklyn "B"
logo. However, I cannot find reference to McCarthy having any association with
that club after his playing days. Maybe because this photo's appearance on the 1990
All-Time Dodgers card set has thrown me off all these years and made me
assume that this showed him with Brooklyn.
He did, however, scout for the Boston Braves from what I
believe to be around 1913 to 1917. Sure enough, Boston's white
caps and pinstripes from 1915-1917 look to match McCarthy's photo. I cannot
find this image on Getty or any site that has a caption. And perhaps I am
wrong, but I think this makes the most sense.
Also, his
Perez-Steele postcard features this shot as well, and Dick Perez clearly
colorized his uniform in Dodger Blue. From what I can tell, Boston's
caps had a red "B," and since the original photo was black and
white, everyone, like me, assumed this was a blue Brooklyn cap.
Whatever team the photo represents, it is a very poor choice
for his plaque. Most of the solo studio shots of McCarthy are from early in
his career with St. Louis, who probably should be his primary team. But
Cooperstown lists Boston as his primary. If that was the case, there are several
team photos from the era that they could have used, too.
I am assuming that when McCarthy's plaque was crafted, they
had few photos of him. In fact, I am betting that this was the most recent
picture they had of him. They saw a "B" on the cap, and since they
knew he played for Boston, and even Brooklyn, that
this would be close enough, no one will care. And you know what, no one really
does, except me, maybe.
Tommy McCarthy is unquestionably more famous today for his
dubious Hall of Fame status than anything. There are many things wrong with his
selection, and his plaque image just adds to my frustration.
Name: B. Alright, now to the meat and
potatoes of his plaque. First, the name. His middle name of Francis is
abbreviated. Actually, McCarthy has two listed middle names, Francis Michael,
so I supposed they should have included both.
Also, here is where it is important to include nicknames. He
will go down in history as "Tommy McCarthy," not "Thomas" But you wouldn't know that from the plaque. And since McCarthy
is so obscure, some people only know him from his Hall plaque.
Look at both that Perez postcard, and this "baseball
immortals" card. They both have him as "Thomas McCarthy."
And you know why? I'd wager to bet it’s because his plaque lists it that way.
Teams: C-. I'm piling it on Mr. McCarthy here.
It’s not his fault, really. He died in 1922, long before a group of baseball
men bestowed upon him the sport's ultimate honor for almost no justifiable reason.
But, his plaque lists only two of his five teams, with no
mention of the tenures. Frankly, St. Louis and Boston are the only reason he's
in the Hall, but we only can tell he played for the former in 1888 and the
later in 1893 from the info here. He actually played for the Beaneaters for a 40-game spell in 1885 before seeing even less playing time
with the Phillies in 1886 and 1887. He patrolled the outfield for the American
Association’s St. Louis Browns from 1888 to 1891, then took his talents back to
Boston from 1892 to 1895. We already mentioned he ended his career with
Brooklyn in 1896.
One final team is the Boston Reds of the 1884 Union
Association, McCarthy's first season of what has subsequently been referred to
as Major League Baseball. McCarthy is the only player in the Hall who spent
time in the UA, which was given MLB status in 1969 from the Special Baseball
Records Committee. This committee decided that the UA and its lopsided talent
distribution and lack of star or even fringe players who would have any
meaningful career in either the NL or AA before or after the league's lone
season, deserved MLB status. At the same time, they decided that the National
Association from 1871-1875, baseball's first top professional league, did not.
This has been harshly criticized. Few at the time considered the UA a major
league, while the NA was literally the only major league in town, with a surplus
of well-known players and several Hall of Famers.
Either way, I personally don't think the UA should be a major
league, and if I ever became commissioner this would be top-priority for me.
That is only partially sarcastic.
The Hall clearly thought the UA was a major league, however,
as we'll see in the next section.
Text: F. Finally, the body paragraph.
First, I'll address the last sentence, which relates to his time in the UA I just
mentioned.
It says he played in 1,268 MLB games. I didn't even have to
look this one up to guess that it is incorrect from today's record keeping, and
sure enough it is 5 games off. That is actually a lot closer than I thought
it would be. But that number is important, because it tells me that the Hall
was including his games in the Union Association, of which he played in
53.
This plaque is so interesting; it is one of the reasons I
love to write about them. Going back to the top, it makes reference to the
now-legendary tandem of McCarthy and teammate Hugh Duffy as the "Heavenly
Twins" of the Boston Beaneaters outfield in the 1890s. So, wouldn't you
think that the plaque would mention Duffy by name here, to give you some
content as to who the hell the other "twin" was. No, because this
plaque was designed to give some nerd an ulcer in 2020.
To make matters MORE confusing and interesting, the plaque
then brings up Boston manager Frank Selee's name. So, you didn't think to add Duffy's
name, the name most associated with him and a name that would add context to
the previous line, but you added his manager's name?
Frank Selee became the second person directly named on a
Hall of Fame plaque who was not a Hall of Famer at the time. This
happened with Grover Cleveland Alexander's plaque when it mentioned he struck
out Tony Lazzeri (listed only as "Lazzeri") with the bases loaded in
Game 7 of the 1926 World Series after coming out of the bullpen. Lazzeri would
earn Hall status in 1991, while Frank Selee had to wait until 1999.
Then, it says he stole 109 bases for the Browns in 1888.
Baseball-Reference lists 93 swipes that year, which might or might not include
extra bases taken, as was custom for a time in the 19th century. I'm not going
to critique this one, because stolen base numbers from this time are too dicey
for my blood.
The plaque brings up his skills at trapping fly balls, which
is a hilarious thing to be put into the Hall of Fame for. For example, Bill Coughlin
has been regarded as the master of the hidden-ball trick, performing it multiple
times, including in the 1907 World Series. Should we put him in the Hall of
Fame, too? Obviously not, for his 8.3 career WAR is even less than McCarthy’s.
But you know what? Just 6.3 WAR separates the two players. That is less of a disparity
than between McCarthy’s WAR and the 25.3 career WAR of George Kelly, the
next-lowest Hall of Famer who solely was inducted for his major league playing
career. So, sure, why not, throw Coughlin in there, too!
Instead, this line should say something about pioneering the
hit-and-run, which is still not enough of an accomplishment for him to earn his
spot.
The plaque also says he held the record for outfield
assists, 53 in 1893. I have absolutely no idea what on earth this is talking about. Not
only did McCarthy not set a record for outfield assists in that year, he didn't even
lead the league. He finished fourth in the NL with 28, as Louisville's Tom Brown had 39. He did lead the league in outfield assists in 1888, with 42. This
was not a record for the time, for as recently as 1884, Hugh Nicol had 48, and
Hardy Richardson recorded 45 in 1881. There must have been a serious problem
with record keeping of assists, because this may be the most confusing aspect of
this out-of-this world plaque for baseball's most dubious Hall of Fame player.
Image: B-. Just like Jesse Burkett above, I'm not a fan of cap-less players on plaques. This shot of McGinnity appears to be the basis for the plaque, as the collar is a dead-giveaway. McGinnity's plaque image isn't bad, by any means, but I've always thought it makes him look like a teenager. McGinnity was at-least 30 when that photo was taken, but this plaque makes it seem like he was fresh out of middle or high school.
Name: A-. Full name is good, but would have preferred "Joe" somewhere here.
Teams: D+. All of his teams are mentioned, they are just buried in the text without any years. In fact, this may be the first plaque to not list a single year anywhere on it, which is why he gets a D+ here. Don't quote me on that, because I don't feel like going back and checking.
Like, how on earth are people supposed to know when this guy pitched? Were you supposed to infer the era? Based on the fact that he played for the Baltimore Orioles of the NL, which could only mean 1892-1899, and also Baltimore of the American League, which could have only meant the 1901-1902 Orioles, as the modern-day Orioles were still in St. Louis in 1946?
Text: C. McGinnity's plaque has at least one mistake. He won 20 or more games eight times, not seven as the plaque states. That whole point about there not being a single season mentioned his odd. As is devoting the first three-and-a-half lines to talking about how he pitched the most double headers in one day, doing so five times and winning both starts three times. That's nice and all, but that is not why McGinnity is in the Hall, and it doesn't deserve to take up almost half of his plaque. Like, how on earth are people supposed to know when this guy pitched? Were you supposed to infer the era? Based on the fact that he played for the Baltimore Orioles of the NL, which could only mean 1892-1899, and also Baltimore of the American League, which could have only meant the 1901-1902 Orioles, as the modern-day Orioles were still in St. Louis in 1946?
Image: A+. A great looking image. Looks to be based off of this shot by Charles Conlon.
Name: A-. Stewart, his middle name, is abbreviated. But he gets a bonus for the inclusion of a nickname which also has his common name "Eddie." this is always a good look in my book.
Teams: B. All of his teams are listed, along with the correct tenures, but they are buried in the text. At least they're there somewhere.
Text: A. I can't find anything really wrong with the body paragraph, or the plaque in general. Everything is factually correct. He was a great lefty, went straight to the majors from college and never pitched in the minors, and all of his listed pitching accolades are true.
Text: A. I can't find anything really wrong with the body paragraph, or the plaque in general. Everything is factually correct. He was a great lefty, went straight to the majors from college and never pitched in the minors, and all of his listed pitching accolades are true.
Image: A-. Clearly based on this image, the only problem would be that the Cubs' "C" is hidden from view.
Name: A-. Middle name, Bert, is abbreviated. Also including "Joe" would help novice fans.
Teams: B. Each of the three teams he played for are mentioned, including the Federal League's Chicago Chi-Feds/Whales, although its buried in the body paragraph without specific tenures listed . What is odd about the plaque is that it mentions him managing the Reds in 1913 and Cubs in 1916, but not managing with the Chicago Feds in 1914 and 1915. Interesting, especially when they included the Feds in his playing record.
Text: A. We get to the last member, alphabetically, of the Tinker-Evers-Chance trio. As I've already mentioned, Tinker and Evers' plaques mention the poem, while Chance's does not.
Tinker's plaque devotes nearly seven of its nine lines on Tinker to Evers to Chance, the teams he played for and managed with, and that he played from 1902 to 1916. Finally at the end, it says he was on for pennant winners.
There is not one thing on Tinker's plaque that would give you the impression that he was a great player. It says he was apart of the "greatest double play combination," but that alone does not make one great, let alone a Hall of Famer.
Tinker actually was a pretty good player, maybe even great, ranking second among all shortstops in WAR (53.2) during his career, far behind Honus Wagner, but comfortably above Bobby Wallace who ranked third.
But simply having notable teammates, playing on pennant winners, playing for 15 years and managing for a few more doesn't scream "Hall of Famer." They should have actually brought up some of his playing accomplishments, as he is regarded as an all-time great defender.
Image: A+. I love this plaque image. Whoever crafted it did a great job. Here is the inspiration behind it, they seemed to have just closed his mouth.
Name: A+. Full name and nickname are all here. Two for two so far.
Teams: D+. Sheesh, Rube, you started off so well. Only one of his five teams are listed, the Philadelphia Athletics. And just like Joe McGinnity before him, there is not a single year mentioned. Rube could have pitched anytime between 1901 and when the A's left Philly after 1954, since tehy're the only team mentioned by name.Text: A. All the words in the plaque are correct, really the only thing wrong is that its missing his years played and four of his five teams. He gets and "F" for the teams, but an "A'" for everything else.
Image: C+. We've finally reached the end of the class of 1946. And the last plaque has always bothered me. Not Ed Walsh himself, he is the all time ERA leader after all.
It is his plaque, well specifically his eyes. It looks like he's missing his eyeballs, or at least that he is squinting really bad. At one point I thought maybe they wore away due to age or something, but here is his plaque on the 1955 postcard set. He's all eyebrows there, too.
I can't find what image this was based on, but I am curious to see what his eyes look like in it.
It is his plaque, well specifically his eyes. It looks like he's missing his eyeballs, or at least that he is squinting really bad. At one point I thought maybe they wore away due to age or something, but here is his plaque on the 1955 postcard set. He's all eyebrows there, too.
I can't find what image this was based on, but I am curious to see what his eyes look like in it.
Name: A+. Everything looks good here, though.
Teams: B. He only played for two teams, the White Sox from 1904-1916 and briefly for the Boston Braves in 1917, and all are mentioned along with the tenures, just in the body paragraph and not at the top.
Teams: B. He only played for two teams, the White Sox from 1904-1916 and briefly for the Boston Braves in 1917, and all are mentioned along with the tenures, just in the body paragraph and not at the top.
Text: A. Not too bad, but it devotes over three lines to mentioning pitching and winning double headers on two occasions and a great double header performance in 1908. that's swell and all, but not really Hall of Fame plaque worthy. I'm not sure if the writers knew that Big Ed ranked first all-time in ERA when he retired, but that is definitely what he is known for today.
.jpg?id=9cdfc1ab-11a4-4dff-8df9-2a3a35af9fb9&size=biggerthumb){kind=link}
