Semantic search

As a sample of the expenses of a ball team it may be stated that Cleveland's 1883, in which were McCormick, Dunlap, Glasscock, Bushong, Daily, and other stars, cost for salaries less than $16,000, and the present team, in which there are no stars, costs $31,000. With the same men under contract this season as played in Cleveland during 1883, the salary list would be $50,000. And yet the tendency is to increase still more, because the pace for $50,000 towns is set by $150,000 towns., quoting the Boston Globe

[from R. M. Larner's column] Almost every League player, whose contract has been promulgated by the genial N. E. Young, is to receive a substantial increase in salary for next season's work. Some of the amounts paid to second and third-rate players for the season of 1890 are enormous. Wilmot's contract calls for $2,500, but I am informed upon unquestionable authority that he is to receive something in excess of that amount.

[quoting John Rogers] We hope to win the case, and in my mind it is quite probable that we shall. Everything, however, hinges on the interpretation of the word “reserve.” If the court takes our definitions one of intent, we have the case. Should it take that the word is only binding on the different clubs of the League and not on outside clubs, then the Brotherhood will win.

The Baltimore base ball club will open the season with a roster of 15 men. The pitchers are Matthew Kilroy, Edward Cunningham, Frank Foreman and William Whittaker. The catchers are Chris. Fulmer, Edward Tate, Joseph Quinn and Bart Cantz. The first baseman is Thomas Tucker; second baseman, Joseph Mack; third baseman, William Shindle; short stop, Jack Farrell, left fielder, Joseph Hornung; centre fielder, Michael Griffin; right fielders, Joseph Sommer. The captain of the club has not yet been determined upon. It will probably be Mack or Farrell. St.

[discussing the meeting of the rules committee 11/12] Rules 12, section 2...was changed to “The moment the umpire delivers a new or alternate ball to the pitcher it comes into play, and shall not at any time be intentionally discolored with the soil or otherwise.” This change was made to prevent the prevailing habit of throwing a new ball around the field so as to make it have the appearance of an old ball.

The changes in the playing rules have operated so as to increase the batting, and heavy batting and brilliant fielding have been the rule in a very large majority of the games. With the abolition of the foul tip, and the reduction of the number of balls allowable, the pitcher has not had the batsman so completely at his mercy, and the hitting, which is, after all, the most enjoyable feature of the game, has been by far the best seen in any season since the curve ball came into use.

A special meeting of the American Association of Ball Clubs has been called for Friday in New York to consider the status of the Louisville Club, which is reported to be in a bad way. The charge is being made that President Davidson is trying to dispose of his best players and then let the club shift for itself. To prevent the team from going to pieces and thereby losing the eighth club in the Association it is proposed to put a stop to the sale and President Wickoff has been requested not to ratify the sales of any players until after the meeting of the Association.

Von der Ahe, the president of the St. Louis Club, was the first to have his suspicions aroused and after consultation with Manager Barnie and some wiring to Eastern managers it was decided to settle the business in a special meeting. President Stern is now said to be negotiating for the release of Hecker, Stratton and Shannon. It is claimed that with these players out the Louisville will be only an amateur club, certainly not better. Davidson has lost heavily right along, and it is thought he wants to get out of the hole as best he can.

The News had another base-ball rumor yesterday afternoon. It was to the effect that the Indianapolis League club was to be transferred to New York. Mr. J. T. Brush was asked what, if any, foundation there was for such a fairy tale. “None whatever,” was his answer. “No one here ever dreamed of such a thing, and I cannot be responsible nor answer for every insane rumor set afloat.” Indianapolis Journal December 4, 1889

There has been a good deal of talk hereabouts of late about a possible transfer of the players of the Indianapolis Base-ball Club to New York to fill up the gaps in the local league team. It is all bosh—that is, if the positive statements of the gentlemen most interested in any such transfer are to be accepted as true. President Brush, of the Indianapolis club, says without qualification that he is in the League to stay, and that means that he proposes to hold on to each and every one of his players. President Day, of the New York club, says that he does not contemplate securing the Hoosier hard-hitters and all-round performers on the green diamond, and that ought to settle it. Indianapolis Journal February 16, 1890, quoting the New York Herald

Some one telegraphed from Boston last night that there was a great row among the members of the Indianapolis ball team because they had not been paid off in that city on the 15th. President Brush was seen by a reporter and asked regarding the matter. He said there was no trouble whatever, and if any member of the club wanted money all he had to do was to ask Manager Bancroft for it. “It has been our custom this season,” he continued, “to pay our men on the 1 st and 15th of each month, no matter whether they are at home or abroad. There is probably not another club in the League that does this, as it is not required, and we only did it to accommodate the players. The contracts of the men specify that they are to be paid on the dates named when they are at home, but not while they are away on their trips. We intended to pay off in Boston on the 15th, as usual, but as the club is to be at home on the 25th we concluded to wait until that time. We telegraphed this to Manager Bancroft with instructions to advance the men any amounts they might want. I think no one can complain of this and it is probable that the report is simply the work of some sensational idiot who wants to get into the papers.” Indianapolis Journal July 17, 1889

a ground rule for a puddle

[Indianapolis vs. New York 7/20/1889] The final ball game of the New York-Indianapolis series was played under very discouraging circumstances at the Polo grounds this afternoon. There was a heavy rain-fall last night, and the ball field was in a very bad condition in consequence. There was a small lake in left field, and on that account a ground rule was made, under which a hit to that territory, no matter how long, could only yield two bases. Boys, with trousers rolled up, were engaged to fish the ball out when it went into the miniature lake. In trying to get a fly ball, Sullivan went into the water once nearly up to his knees. Indianapolis Journal July 21, 1889

Secretary Douglass, of the Young Men's Christian Association, thinks the solution of the Sunday base-ball question can be found in the athletic park it is proposed to open within a few weeks. But to make the enterprise a success in that respect, he says a half-holiday will be necessary. If all the time of young men is used in business during the week days they cannot get the full benefit of the park, and, therefore, he urges a half holiday for the summer months. He has already a list of 600 young men who will make use of the grounds, provided their employers give them the time for recreation desired. More than one thousand, he says, can be induced to go to the park, and forgo Sunday ball-playing if the half holiday is obtained. Beginning to-day Saturday afternoon, recreation is to be given to the employees of W. B. Burford.

[New York vs. Pittsburgh 7/5/1889] Dunlap's hitting was of the scientific kind, because every time he went to bat there were men on bases, and Fred just placed hits in nice comfortable localities.

Eddie Von der Ahe's score card was composed of sixteen pages last season—reading material and “ads.” combined. He now contemplates enlarging it to twenty-four pages and increasing the reading matter. An interesting score card is a good thing to glance over “between the innings, “ and young Von der Ahe says that his score card will be “one of the finest.

[New York vs. Boston 5/8/1889] For nine innings the champions swung their bats and strained their eyes trying to see the home plate around the remaining three corners of the diamond, but they were doomed to disappointment, and saw the scorer hang up goose eggs until he had nine of them on the string.

The Sporting Life's Columbus correspondent, Frank W. Arnold, has resigned the official scoreship of the Columbus Club and the sporting editorship of the Columbus Dispatch. President Wikoff's brother, Charles, is his success on the paper.

[from Chadwick's column] There are two amendments required in the scoring rules to the national code to make the averages what they are not now, viz., reliable data on which to base an opinion of a player's ability as a batsman; and one of these is to introduce a special record, giving the figures of the runs each player bats in from base hits. Another is the elimination of fielding and base-running figures from the data on which earned runs are based. The record of earned runs is useless except as giving figures on which a criterion of a pitcher's skill can be arrived at, and the only reliable data for this is the record of safe hits made off the pitching. As it is now a pitcher is charged with runs earned off the fielding and by base-running as well as from base hits, and in nearly every instance the estimate is unjust to the pitcher, as it brings into the calculation the plays of the fielders as well as the work of the pitchers. The only proper data for earned runs is the record of base hits made off the pitching, a pitcher's battery errors—called balls and wild pitches—not being included.

[from Ren Mulford's column] That idea of the Wilkes-barre official scorer in summarizing the hits that net runs is a good one. I have accepted Manager Hart's “reached base” column for the Times-Star's individual score... Tebeau has not been making many hits, but he reaches first base pretty often on balls and errors, and is the best waiter in the club.

[from Chadwick's column] I notice that President Young decides that a base-runner should be credited with a stolen base under the following circumstances:--For instance, Quinn was on first base and Ganzel at bat with two strikes and three balls called. As the next ball is pitched, Quinn makes a dive for second without knowing whether the umpire would call a ball or a strike. It turned out that the umpire called four balls, but Quinn gets credit for a stolen base. This is a correct decision. In estimating stolen bases, there cannot well be any arbitrary rule to govern every case, as circumstances so frequently alter cases. The effort to steal must go into the calculation largely. For intsance, the moment the runner at first sees the pitcher's arm move to pitch, and he starts for second, he has attempted a steal without regard to the action of the catcher or the batsman; and if he reaches the base safely, he is entitled to the credit of the steal, irrespective of a wide throw, a muffed ball, a passed ball, a called ball or a wild pitch; as the very effort to steal may help to cause either the wild throw or the passed ball, as also the muff at second. There are ordinary steals and clean steals, and the latter comprise the minority. But no base can be justly credited as stolen, where the runner at first is induced to start for second after seeing the error made by the pitcher or catcher. To limit the credit of a stolen base to clean steals, would be discouraging to base stealing. A runner will not take the risks under such circumstances that he will when he is given credit for his effort to steal irrespective of the fielding errors the effort may have led to. In order to encourage base-running, I think, a latitude should be allowed, which may justly be reduced hereafter.

[from an article on the new rules by Chadwick] In the case of a fair ball to the outer field when a runner is on third base and only one run is required to win the game the new rules now forbid the umpire from calling “game” until the play following the long hit is completed. Last year in such a case the moment the runner reached home and the winning run was scored the game ended then and there, thereby cutting off the credit of the three-bagger or home-run hit which brought in the winning run. Now the game cannot end until the fair hit ball has been fielded in to the pitcher, thereby giving the batsman full credit on the score for his hit.

[from Questions Answered] According to rules, yes, but in this respect we do not go by the rules in scoring. If the third strike is a wild pitch it would be manifestly unjust to give the catcher a missed third strike on it. In all such cases we give the error to the pitcher and not credit him with a strike-out.

The score of Saturday’s game sent from St. Louis was made out in violation of the new scoring rules, which throw out all assistances for strikes from the assistance column, which can now only contain the record of fielding assistances. Terry is credited with ten assistances, eight of which were on strikes, and Chamberlain with seven, of which five were from strikes.