Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by Chris Cathcar » Sat, 04 Sep 1999 04:00:00



I've been looking at auctions for any Rogers Hornby cards,
and there's almost nothing there.  Almost zero high-end PSA-
graded cards.  The only recent one that sold was a PSA 7
card for $500.  There are, on the other hand, lots of
auctions for Ruth, Williams, Mantle, and other major stars'
cards, many selling the quadruple digits (some in the
quintuple digits).

So why isn't Hornsby all that popular?  Has he become one
of the great forgottens?  He's put up a stat line that
ranks only with Ruth, Williams, and Gehrig hitting-wise,
and only with Ruth, Williams, and Bonds in his total game.  
The only guy to hit .400 with 40 homers in the same
season.  2nd in batting average to Cobb with a .358
lifetime batting average, and who averaged over .400 over
the course of 5 seasons.  Probably the greatest second
baseman, National League hitter, and right-handed hitter
that ever lived.  The guy is truly a baseball giant that
has earned a place among the top handful of players ever.

So why the lack of popularity or recognition?  That he
could possibly rank behind any second baseman with the
possible exception of Nap Lajoie is beyond me, yet he
trails Jackie Robinson (by no means a slouch in his own
right, but . . .) by a fairly wide margin in the All
Century Team voting for 2nd ba***.

I see that Sosa has just hit his 57th, by the way.

Chris

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.FoundCollection.com/ The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by Chris Cathcar » Sat, 04 Sep 1999 04:00:00


Isn't mentioned in the same breath as those guys *by whom*?

Incidentally, what is it about DiMaggio that people think
he should be mentioned in the same breath as those other
guys?  DiMaggio was a hell of a player, and in making a
list of top players ever, he comes in the top 20 somewhere,
but I wouldn't put him in the top 10 and definitely not in
the top 5.  Is it because he was a Yankee?  That he played
on several world championship teams (which, if that's the
criterion, doesn't even put Ted Williams in the top 20)?  
That his name is in a popular song?  Objectively, Mantle
was better than DiMaggio and deserves more credit for the
success of the several championship teams he was on, than
DiMaggio does for his teams.

I'd put a few -- not a lot -- names ahead of Gehrig and
Cobb, too.  One of those would be Hornsby.  So like many
others I guess I wouldn't mention Hornsby in the same
breath as DiMaggio, either.

Chris


Quote:

>hes got jimmy foxx disease, great player, nobody alive saw
him play (ok maybe
>some 90 year old), and he isnt mentioned in the same
breath as
>cobb/ruth/gehrig/dimaggio/etc
>--
>http://members.aol.com/maxdaaxejd/index.html

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by IUHOOSIER CARDS AND STAM » Sat, 04 Sep 1999 04:00:00


Try looking for NON graded cards....you will have better luck.
y 33 Goudey is one of my prized cards.  Nowadays people are too caught up in
the latest Pat Burrell to worty about the old timers in many cases.

   -**** Posted from RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com/?a ****-
 Search and Read Usenet Discussions in your Browser - FREE -

 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by Andy Kimbal » Sat, 04 Sep 1999 04:00:00


I'd say that DiMaggio being a Yankee has a lot to do with it.  Also, the 56
game hitting streak doesn't hurt.  Plus to some (not me), being married to
Marilyn Monroe helps his standing.
There are a ton of non-deserving Yankees in the Hall of Fame.
-- Andy
PS - I've noticed that you're not too e***d about Pete Rose possibly
making the All-Century Team as an outfielder, how about if he were listed at
one of his other positions instead (1B, 2B, 3B)?  I really feel that Rose
belongs on the All-Century Team, just not sure where he fits (every team
needs a utility guy or two).  He may not have had the greatest skills of
anybody who ever played, but he played the game the right way.  He did
probably hang around a little too long, but if he'd have retired at about
the normal retirement age, he'd still have the NL record for hits (he broke
Musial's record in '81 at the age of 40).  I think Rose is very deserving
and if not for his off-field troubles he'd probably be even more of a
shoe-in.


Quote:
> Isn't mentioned in the same breath as those guys *by whom*?

> Incidentally, what is it about DiMaggio that people think
> he should be mentioned in the same breath as those other
> guys?  DiMaggio was a hell of a player, and in making a
> list of top players ever, he comes in the top 20 somewhere,
> but I wouldn't put him in the top 10 and definitely not in
> the top 5.  Is it because he was a Yankee?  That he played
> on several world championship teams (which, if that's the
> criterion, doesn't even put Ted Williams in the top 20)?
> That his name is in a popular song?  Objectively, Mantle
> was better than DiMaggio and deserves more credit for the
> success of the several championship teams he was on, than
> DiMaggio does for his teams.

> I'd put a few -- not a lot -- names ahead of Gehrig and
> Cobb, too.  One of those would be Hornsby.  So like many
> others I guess I wouldn't mention Hornsby in the same
> breath as DiMaggio, either.

> Chris



> >hes got jimmy foxx disease, great player, nobody alive saw
> him play (ok maybe
> >some 90 year old), and he isnt mentioned in the same
> breath as
> >cobb/ruth/gehrig/dimaggio/etc
> >--
> >http://www.FoundCollection.com/

> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.FoundCollection.com/ The Internet's Discussion Network
*
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by MAXdaAXE » Sun, 05 Sep 1999 04:00:00


hes got jimmy foxx disease, great player, nobody alive saw him play (ok maybe
some 90 year old), and he isnt mentioned in the same breath as
cobb/ruth/gehrig/dimaggio/etc
--
http://members.aol.com/maxdaaxejd/index.html
 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by Thomas Whit » Sun, 05 Sep 1999 04:00:00


Quote:

> I've been looking at auctions for any Rogers Hornby cards,
> and there's almost nothing there.  Almost zero high-end PSA-
> graded cards.  The only recent one that sold was a PSA 7
> card for $500.  There are, on the other hand, lots of
> auctions for Ruth, Williams, Mantle, and other major stars'
> cards, many selling the quadruple digits (some in the
> quintuple digits).

> So why isn't Hornsby all that popular?  Has he become one
> of the great forgottens?  He's put up a stat line that
> ranks only with Ruth, Williams, and Gehrig hitting-wise,
> and only with Ruth, Williams, and Bonds in his total game.

   Hornsby lacks a sentimental hook in his story.  Ruth
was the original bad boy (in a more loveable way), and
was one-of-a-kind as a player, smashing monster home runs
like no one before.  Williams was simply excellence (and
has always given good quote, even into his physically-enfeebled
eighties), Cobb was a psychotic sonuva***, Gehrig had
his playing streak and the tragic ending.  Mantle and
DiMaggio were Yankees on multiple-championship teams.  Each
makes for GREAT press, stories that write themselves.
   Hornsby?  Er, ah, um... good hitter.  Lousy fielder by
reputation.  Royal pain in the ass by most accounts.
He was a great hitter, but that's ALL he was, or at least
that's the *** image that has survived to today.
Didn't hold any major lifetime records.  Didn't have a cute
nickname -- yeah, he was known as "The Rajah", but that's
just a slurred pronounciation of his given name.  It's not
evocative like The Georgia Peach or The Big Train or The
Iron Horse or The Yankee Clipper.
   Nothing much that captures the common imagination.
He doesn't even get continuing credit for batting .400+
a couple of times; whenever a player chases .400, Williams
gets the ink & electrons, as being the last one to do it.

Quote:
> The only guy to hit .400 with 40 homers in the same
> season.  2nd in batting average to Cobb with a .358
> lifetime batting average, and who averaged over .400 over
> the course of 5 seasons.  Probably the greatest second
> baseman, National League hitter, and right-handed hitter
> that ever lived.  The guy is truly a baseball giant that
> has earned a place among the top handful of players ever.

   True.  That's why he's got a plaque in the Hall.

Quote:
> So why the lack of popularity or recognition?  That he
> could possibly rank behind any second baseman with the
> possible exception of Nap Lajoie is beyond me, yet he
> trails Jackie Robinson (by no means a slouch in his own
> right, but . . .) by a fairly wide margin in the All
> Century Team voting for 2nd ba***.

   I voted for Hornsby and Morgan.
 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by Thomas Whit » Sun, 05 Sep 1999 04:00:00


[deletia]

Quote:
> PS - I've noticed that you're not too e***d about Pete Rose possibly
> making the All-Century Team as an outfielder, how about if he were listed at
> one of his other positions instead (1B, 2B, 3B)?  I really feel that Rose

   List Rose as any infielder, and he wouldn't even make the ballot.
Maybe, just maybe, as 3B, but he only played four seasons there,
he really sucked on defense, and the 3B category was pretty well
shafted on the ballot to begin with.  The ballot players at
2B ***le Rose (who played there for 4 seasons, and again sucked
on defense), and at 1B it'd be a joke.
   Understand that Rose was a very good player with some nearly-great
seasons in his career.  He was NOT a great player, not on the level
of many of the players who are on the ballot.  The All-Century Team
(which is a popularity contest) purports to elect the very best players
of the past 100 years, and when he's up against THE VERY BEST, Rose
falls short.  So it's a good thing, for him, that he's popular.

Quote:
> belongs on the All-Century Team, just not sure where he fits (every team
> needs a utility guy or two).  He may not have had the greatest skills of

   Actually, as a utility player, I would vote for him.  But this
position isn't on the ballot.  Versatility isn't a major asset, but
it is an asset.

Quote:
> anybody who ever played, but he played the game the right way.  He did
> probably hang around a little too long, but if he'd have retired at about
> the normal retirement age, he'd still have the NL record for hits (he broke
> Musial's record in '81 at the age of 40).  I think Rose is very deserving
> and if not for his off-field troubles he'd probably be even more of a
> shoe-in.

   Aw, c'mon.  Just look at the eight guys ahead of him on the
current results:  Aaron, Ruth, Williams, Mays, DiMaggio, Mantle,
Cobb, and Griffey.  Compare Rose to all of these guys, and who
could he readily replace?  (This is a real request, unless you
agree that Rose isn't par to any of them.  Even given that KGJ's
career is only half done, I'd rank him above Rose.)  Now look
at the guys below him: among the many are Musial, Reggie Jackson,
Yastrzemski, Frank Robinson, Henderson, Barry Bonds.  Does Rose,
as an outfielder player, outrank ANY of these guys?  The ballot
only allows for selecting nine, and right here there's 14 who
make for smarter, better selections than Pete.
 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by MAXdaAXE » Sun, 05 Sep 1999 04:00:00


Quote:
>> Century Team voting for 2nd ba***.

>   I voted for Hornsby and Morgan.

what, no delino deshields ???
--
http://www.FoundCollection.com/
 
 
 

Why isn't Hornsby popular?

Post by Thomas Whit » Sun, 05 Sep 1999 04:00:00


Quote:

> >> Century Team voting for 2nd ba***.

> >   I voted for Hornsby and Morgan.

> what, no delino deshields ???

   No, but I WAS tempted to write-in Chad Fonville.

   (gag)