Part 4
Of those who played in one hundred games and over in the League campaign, the following are the first seven in fielding averages:
FIELDERS.
POSITION.
CLUB.
Games.
Fielding
Per cent.
Average.
of
Base Hits.
----------+--------------+---------+------+--------+---------- Anson
First Baseman
Chicago
134
.985
.343 Richardson
Second Baseman
New York
135
.942
.226 Nash
Third Baseman
Boston.
104
.913
.283 Gla.s.sc.o.c.k
Short Stop
Ind'polis
109
.900
.269 Hornung
Left Fielder
Boston
107
.947
.239 Slattery
Center Fielder
New York
103
.917
.245 Tiernan
Right Fielder
New York
113
.959
.293
Of the pitchers who took part in 50 games and over, the following led in fielding averages:
No pitcher or catcher played in 100 games.
PITCHERS.
CLUB.
Games.
Fielding
Per cent.
Average.
of
Base Hits.
---------+---------+------+--------+---------- Keefe
New York
51
.785
.127 Galvin
Pittsburg
50
.758
.143 Morris
Pittsburg
54
.732
.102 Clarkson
Boston
54
.678
.195
Of the catchers who took part in 60 games and over, the following led in fielding averages:
CATCHERS.
CLUB.
Games.
Fielding
Per cent.
Average.
of
Base Hits.
---------+------------+------+--------+---------- Bennett
Detroit
72
.941
.263 Daly
Chicago
62
.880
.191 Clements
Philadelphia
84
.874
.247 Ewing
New York
78
.861
.306 Mack
Washington
79
.843
.186 Miller
Pittsburg
68
.805
.277 Kelly
Boston
74
.796
.318
THE BASE RUNNING RECORD.
Those of the League championship players who are credited with not less than 50 stolen bases in the pennant race, are as follows:
BASERUNNERS.
CLUB.
Games.
Stolen Bases.
------------+------------+------+----------- Hoy
Washington
136
82 Seery
Indianapolis
133
80 Sunday
Pittsburg
119
71 Pfeffer
Chicago
136
64 Ryan
Chicago
130
60 Fogarty
Philadelphia
120
58 Kelly
Boston
105
56 Ewing
New York
103
53 Tiernan
New York
113
52
The above are the leaders in seven of the eight League clubs. Hanlon led in the Detroit team, but he only scored 38 stolen bases in 108 games. The Detroit team was singularly weak in this respect.
Mr. R.M. Larner of Washington has made up an interesting table from the figures of the League averages, which presents some very interesting statistics of the base running in the League during the championship season of 1888. Mr. Larner says:
"The official averages of League players contain the number of bases stolen by each player during the season, but furnish no means of comparison between the clubs in that most important department of the game. A glance, however, shows that the three tail-end clubs possess the three most successful base-runners in the League, in Hoy of the Washingtons, Seery of Indianapolis, and Sunday of Pittsburgh, the latter of whom would probably have finished first had an accident not prevented him from playing during the last two weeks of the season."
The following table includes in its first column all those methods of reaching first base, except the force-outs, which cannot be ascertained, and would not materially affect the record, in this comparison.
Indianapolis and Washington still lead, Pittsburgh comes well to the front, pushing the next three clubs down a peg each, and the Phillies and Detroits keep their places at the foot:
CLUBS.
Reached 1st Base.
Stolen Bases.
Percentages.
------------+-----------------+-------------+----------- Indianapolis
1,589
350
.220 Washington
1,515
331
.218 Pittsburg
1,474
282
.191 New York
1,772
315
.178 Boston
1,719
292
.170 Chicago
1,720
285
.166 Philadelphia
1,569
246
.157 Detroit
1,843
193
.105
Mr. Larner says. "The simple total of bases stolen is misleading as to a club's proficiency in base running, since the strong batting clubs having more men who reach first base have more chances to steal, and hence excel in totals, while in percentages they fall below clubs which are weaker in batting. The true measure is the relation between the number of bases stolen and the number of chances offered for the attempt, which is the whole number of those who reach first base, whether on hits, b.a.l.l.s, errors, hits by pitcher, illegal delivery, or force-outs."
THE CLUB RECORD OF STOLEN BASES.
The record in stolen bases in championship games, showing the first man of each club in base stealing for 1888 is appended.
WASHINGTON.
PITTSBURG.
Stolen
Stolen
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
-+--------+------+------++-+--------+------+------- 1
Hoy
136
82
1
Sunday
119
71 2
Wilmot
119
46
2
Smith
130
32 3
Donnelly
117
44
3
Dunlap
81
24 4
Daily
110
44
4
Mider
103
27 5
Mack
85
31
5
Beckley
71
20 6
Schock
90
23
6
Carroll
96
18 7
Myers
132
20
7
Kuehne
137
17 8
Irwin
37
15
8
Coleman
115
15 9
O'Brien
133
10
9
Fields
44
9 -+--------+------+------++-+--------+------+------- Total
315
Total
228
NEW YORK.
PHILADELPHIA.
Stolen
Stolen
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
-+----------+------+------++-+-------=-+------+------- 1
Ewing
105
53
1
Fogart
120
58 2
Tiernan
113
52
2
Delahanty
74
38 3
Ward
122
38
3
Andrews
123
35 4
Richardson
135
35
4
Farrar
130
21 5
Connor
134
27
5
Wood
105
20 6
Slattery
103
26
6
Irwin
124
19 7
O'Rourke
107
25
7
Mulvey
99
18 8
Gore
64
9
8
Sanders
57
13 9
Whitney
90
8
9
Bastian
80
12 -+----------+------+------++-+---------+------+------- Total
280
Total
234
Taking the total bases stolen by each club nine as the criterion, Indianapolis takes the lead, with Washington second and New York third, followed by Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Detroit in regular order, the latter club being the weakest of the eight League teams in base running. Here is the record in full:
INDIANAPOLIS.
BOSTON.
Stolen
Stolen
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
-+----------+------+------++-+---------+------+------- 1
Seery
133
80
1
Kelly
105
56 2
McGeachy
118
49
2
Brown
107
46 3
Gla.s.sc.o.c.k
112
48
3
Johnston
135
35 4
Denny
126
32
4
Wise
104
33 5
Hines
132
31
5
Hornung
107
29 6
Myers
66
28
6
Morrill
134
21 7
Bossett
128
24
7
Nash
135
20 8
Daily
57
15
8
Quinn
38
12 9
Esterbrook
64
11
9
Sutton
28
10 -+----------+------+------++-+---------+------+------- Total
318
Total
263
CHICAGO.
DETROIT.
Stolen
Stolen
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
PLAYERS.
Games.
Bases.
-+-----------+------+------++-+----------+------+------- 1
Pfeffer
136
64
1
Hanlon
108
38 2
Ryan
130
60
2
Brouthers
129
34 3
Burns
134
34
3
Campau
70
27 4
Anson
134
28
4
Twitch.e.l.l
130
14 5
Williamson
132
25
5
Richardson
57
13 6
Van Haltren
81
21
6
White
125
12 7
Duffy
71
13
7
Ganzell
93
12 8
Daly
65
10
8
Rowe
105
10 9
Sullivan
75
9
9
Getzein
45
6 -+-----------+------+------++-+----------+------+------- Total
264
Total
166
The following table is for immediate reference. It shows the winning club for each season from 1871 to 1888 inclusive; as also the manager of each of the champion clubs of each year:
Year.
WINNING CLUB.
MANAGER.
Victories.
Defeats.
Games
Played.
-----+-------------+---------+----------+--------+------- 1871
Athletic
Hayhurst
22
7
29 1872
Boston
H. Wright
39
8
47 1873
Boston
H. Wright
43
16
59 1874
Boston
H. Wright
52
18
70 1875
Boston
H. Wright
71
8
79 1876
Chicago
Spalding
52
14
66 1877
Boston
H. Wright
31
17
48 1878
Boston
H. Wright
41
19
60 1879
Providence
G. Wright
55
23
78 1880
Chicago
Anson
67
18
84 1881
Chicago
Anson
56
28
84 1882
Chicago
Anson
55
29
84 1883
Boston
H. Wright
63
35
98 1884
Providence
Bancroft
84
28
112 1885
Chicago
Anson
87
25
112 1886
Chicago
Anson
90
34
124 1887
Detroit
Watkins
79
45
124 1888
NewYork
Mutrie
84
47
131
It will be seen that in the old Professional a.s.sociation the Boston club won the pennant four times, and the Athletics once, while in the League the Chicago Club won it six times, the Boston Club three times, the Providence Club twice, and the Detroit and New York once each. The best percentage of victories was made by the Boston Club in 1875, that being the best on record in professional club history.
THE CHAMPION LEAGUE TEAM OF 1888.
Though the New York Club's team for 1888 included over twenty different players, only seven of them took part in one hundred championship matches and over, and these were Richardson, 135; Connor, 134; Ward, 122; Tiernan, 113; O'Rourke, 107; Ewing, 103, and Slattery, 103. Whitney took part in 90; Gore in 64; Keefe in 51; Welch in 47; Foster in 37; Murphy in 28; Hatfield in 27; t.i.tcomb in 23; Brown in 17, and Crane in but 11. All the others played in less than ten games. The first nine were Keefe p, Ewing c, Connor 1b, Richardson 2b, Whitney 3b, Ward ss, O'Rourke lf, Slattery cf, and Tiernan, rf, these playing the nine positions respectively. The appended table presents an interesting epitome of the work done on the field by the New York team in the championship contests of the past season:
NEW YORK. vs.
P
I
h
n
i
d
W
l
P
i
a
a
i
a
s
C
d
D
t
n
h
h
e
B
e
t
a
i
T
i
l
o
t
s
p
n
o
c
p
s
r
b
o
g
t
a
h
t
o
u
l
t
a
g
i
o
i
r
i
o
l
o
a
n
t
g
s
n
s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
--------------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---++--- Victories
8
14
12
11
10
14
15
84 Defeats
11
5
8
7
7
5
4
47 Drawn Games
1
1
0
2
2
0
1
7 Series Won
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
5 Series Lost
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 Series Unfinished
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
6 Victories by Forfeit
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1 "Chicago" Victories
2
1
1
2
4
3
6
19 "Chicago" Defeats
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
3 Single Figure
5
12
10
11
8
11
14
71 Victories
Single Figure
11
4
8
5
7
5
4
44 Defeats
Double Figure
3
2
2
0
1
3
2
13 Victories
Double Figure
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
4 Defeats
Extra Inning Games
1
2
3
1
1
0
1
9 Victories at Home
4
8
5
5
6
7
8
43 Defeats at Home
5
1
5
3
4
2
3
23 Victories Abroad
4
6
7
5
4
7
7
40 Defeats Abroad
6
4
3
4
3
3
1
24
THE PITCHING RECORD.
The pitching record of the champion team of 1888 is worthy of note in regard to the figures showing the victories won and defeats sustained by each pitcher in his games with the seven opposing clubs. Here is the record in full, the names being given in the order of percentage of victories. Despite this method of estimating the pitching strength there is no questioning the fact of the superiority of Keefe, Welch and t.i.tcomb according to the record each made against the clubs they were opposed to:
[Ill.u.s.tration: NEW YORK TEAM.
1 t.i.tCOMB 2 KEIFE* 3 WHITNEY 4 * 5 WARD 6 RICHARDSON 7 FOSTER 8 WELCH 9 MUIRIL * 10 CRANE 11 GEORGE 12 EWING 13 CONNOR 14 HATFIELD.
15 GORE 16 O'ROURKE 17 TIERNAN 18 MURPHY 19 BROWN]
[**Proofreaders note: In some cases the caption identifying the players was indecipherable. These are marked with an *]
P
I
P
h
n
e
i
d
W
r
l
P
i
a
V
a
i
a
s
c i
C
d
D
t
n
h
e c
h
e
B
e
t
a
i
T
n t
i
l
o
t
s
p
n
o
t o
c
p
s
r
b
o
g
t
. r
a
h
t
o
u
l
t
a
i
g
i
o
i
r
i
o
l
o e
o
a
n
t
g
s
n
s
f s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----++-----+-----
W.
L.
W.
L.
W.
L.
W.
L.
W.
L.
W.
L.
W.
L.
W.
L.
-------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+----- Keefe
3
4
5
1
5
4
5
0
3
1
8
2
6
0
35
12
.744 George
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
1
.666 t.i.tcomb
1
1
2
0
1
1
3
3
2
2
1
0
4
1
14
8
.636 Welsh
3
6
5
4
6
3
1
2
4
2
3
1
4
1
26
19
.577 Weidman
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
.500 Crane
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
2
1
2
5
6
.450 -------+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--++--+--+----- Totals
8
11
14
5
12
8
11
7
9
7
14
5
15
4
83
47
[1]
[Footnote 1: The game forfeited by Pittsburg is, of course, not included.]
In the pitching averages, based on the existing method of estimating earned runs off the pitching, the record stands as follows:
