Some history on baseball’s most racist team.
Tonight I stumbled upon an old Poynter.org column by Dr. Ink (aka Roy Peter Clark) about the best and worst team nicknames and I noticed the following reader comment:
The Indians were named for an American Indian player named Louis Sockalexis. The “Chief Wahoo” logo came along in the 1950, I think. The face is in the shape of a baseball glove, in case no one ever noticed. (Racist, my ass!).
Now, I’d never heard of Sockalexis, but Wikipedia says the commenter might have gotten his facts a little backwards, regarding how Cleveland got its name:
On the contrary, when the “Naps” sent longtime leader Napoleon Lajoie to the Philadelphia Athletics at the end of the 1914 season, owner Charles Somers asked the local newspapers to come up with a new name for the team. They chose “Indians” as a play on the name of the Boston Braves, then known as the “Miracle Braves” after going from last place on July 4 to a sweep in the 1914 World Series. Proponents of the name acknowledged that the Cleveland Spiders of the National League had sometimes been informally called the “Indians” during Sockalexis’ short career there, a fact which merely reinforced the new name.
So, that clears that up, to the extent that Wikipedia can reliably clear up anything.
But what about Chief Wahoo being shaped like a glove? I mean, maybe. But you really have to want it.
Can anybody see a baseball glove in the face of Cleveland’s mascot?
Of course, even if Wahoo’s face is shaped like a glove, that doesn’t make it any less racist.
NOTE: If you get a chance, click on the “Dr. Ink” hyperlink. It’s hilarious. Also, the Poynter column mentioned above includes a few errors by the usually reliable RPC. First of all, the Macon Whoopee were a hockey team, not a baseball team. And the Gonzaga team name, as a reader points out, is the Bulldogs, not the Zags.
October 29th, 2007 at 11:19 am
I mean, clearly A-Rod is going somewhere. But right now, he seems like Kryptonite. Players don’t want him on their teams. GMs don’t want to spend what Boras wants them to spend. No one wants to touch this man with a ten-foot pole! He’s an overnight baseball pariah!
The Red Sox are World Champions and A-Rod is a baseball pariah. It just doesn’t get any better than this.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Well, Paul, you’ve convinced me that the Mets probably *shouldn’t* go after A-Rod (but then, I was already pre-convinced), but what you haven’t convinced me of is that the Mets *won’t* go after A-Rod.
I wouldn’t say that Omar Minaya necessarily has a track record of always doing what he should be doing rather than what he wants to be doing…
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Moving him to short had seemed like a possibility to me. Until now.
Stupid stats question: Is it fair to make a direct comparison between a 3B and SS in RZR/OOZ? (I honestly don’t know. Enlighten me!)
If it is, A-Rod wouldn’t even register on the SS list.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
I agree with Paul that there’s probably no way A-Rod could go back to playing shortstop at this point. He’d be terrible!
But I don’t think it’s out of the question for him to play second base. I mean, if creaky, no-range Jeff Kent can still be playing second base for the Dodgers at 40, A-Rod could definitely do it. The additional time owing to the shorter throw to first can mask reduced range quite a bit.
And the Mets do need a second baseman.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Rich, here’s what I think about the RZR issue. Playing SS and 3rd base are VERY different experiences. I played middle infield for as long as I can remember but never felt comfortable when I gave 3rd base a try. You need to react quicker since your position is closer to the batter’s box AND learning to play the line is a big adjustment. Playing 2nd base and SS, I never had to worry about crashing into dugouts or charging bunts. And the mere physical presence of the 3rd base bag itself makes fielding down the line more difficult. So it may be unfair to use this as a sole criteria.
But what worries me about putting A-Rod back to short is the trend of his Zone Ratings. As he becomes more familiar with the position, shouldn’t the numbers improve? It’s a distinct decline over the last four years, which tells me that he’s losing any defensive value he once had. I can’t imagine that moving him to a more demandind position such as short is going to improve that.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
And Nick, I’m afraid you’re right. In fact, I’m not even fully convinced that they won’t pursue him. I do think that they should at least do their “due dilligence”. But come on. Where is he going to play?
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Paul, I think Nick is suggesting he’s going to play at second if he joins the Mets.
And yeah, A-Rod’s days at short are so over. Even if you try to move him back there next year, when he turns 33, there would be the “adjustment year” (or years, since A-Rod has claimed in the past that it took him years to adjust to playing third base). And after next year, I can’t see him suddenly returning to form at 34.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Paul, as I said, he can play second base.
Although most defensive stats can’t be compared across positions, I think it’s clear that A-Rod is no longer even close to the defensive player he once was. You can tell just by looking at him - he no longer has the build necessary to cover all the ground at shortstop.
But playing second base is a very different beast than short. Although you have to cover nearly the same amount of territory, the short throw to first means you have a lot more time to collect the ball and still make the play.
As your range declines, you just play a few more steps back, and you can still get to almost as many balls as before, and you still have enough time to get the outs at first.
I think in some ways second is even easier to play than third, because on a lot of balls at third you have to react very quickly, and time is always a factor because of the long throw, whereas at second, you have all the time in the world by comparison.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
Sarah, yeah, I noticed Nick’s comment after I submitted mine.
Basically, I just can’t see A-Rod doing this. Yes, he agreed to move to 3rd because of Jeter. So there is a precendent. Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen again, especially when it’s two players who are “lesser beings”. Politically speaking, I don’t think A-Rod would have moved for anyone else. And I can’t imagine A-Rod or Boras being OK with having runners crash into his legs during double plays.
Maybe I’m being dillusional. But I don’t see it.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Nick, of course second is easier to play than third. I don’t think that’s even a question, is it? I mean, third is “the hot corner.” Second doesn’t get its own nick name!
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Well, technically second does have it’s own nickname, the keystone!
Which is supposed to underline how important a position second base is, as it is the “keystone” to the infield. I’m guessing that nickname was made up by a second baseman…
But yeah, actually, second base is typically regarded as a more difficult position to play, which why you often guys like Ryan Braun who really shouldn’t be playing anywhere but DH playing third base and not second base (especially on teams that already have an established 1B).
I’d say the pretty much established difficulty of positions starting with most difficult (and excluding catcher and pitcher, which are totally different), is SS-CF-2B-3B-RF-LF-1B. I think Bill James actually “proved” this order once with fancy stats, if I recall correctly. As players age, they move down the line. Take Gary Sheffield, for example, whose career went SS-3B-RF-LF-DH.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Hmmmmmm. I’ve never heard this “the keystone” before, in decades of baseball-watching. I still think third base is harder to play than second, but maybe I’m just used to watching so many games at Fenway, were a ball that gets past the second baseman is often a single, but a ball that gets by the third baseman can become a triple.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Sarah, I know I’m biased when I say this, but 2nd base is a lot harder than you think. 3rd basemen don’t have to worry about covering any bag aside from 3rd. 2nd basemen have to often cover first too, which isn’t easy to do.
Plus, one really underrated aspect of playing second base is the fear, expecially for someone my size. Imagine me, a 5 foot 6, 145 lb guy covering 2nd on a double play ball hit to short or third. I have my back towards first base, knowing full well that a dude that’s a lot bigger than I am is coming at me down the baseline full steam. And that his job is to take my legs out of the play. When I catch the ball and turn to first to make the throw, I have no idea if he’s three feet away from me or is already sliding into my knees. It’s definitely not easy. Shortstops don’t really have to worry about this because they’ll always see the runner coming. 2nd basemen don’t.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
You are the same size as Dustin Pedroia!!! (I just got very excited for no real reason!)
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Oh, also, I don’t mean to sound like 2B is akin to first or left field or something. Clearly it’s important. It just seems from watching a lot of baseball that third base is a position where errors happen a lot; I assumed that was because the position was hard to field, but maybe it’s because stupid managers keep sticking guys like Braun over there.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
What about first base? Couldn’t the Mets sign A-Rod to play first? I’m pretty sure Carlos Delgado is in the final year of his contract. The Mets could trade Delgado (which would certainly involved agreeing to eat some his salary) for a pitcher or a second baseman or a bucket of baseball mud and in the process make room for A-Hole.
Eating some of Delgado’s salary would sting a little, but the Mets could rationalize it as just another $6-7 million invested in bringing A-Rod to the team.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
Well, it’s true, more errors tend to get made at third than at second, but it doesn’t follow that third is therefore harder to play than second. Defense in baseball is far more about how many balls you get to than how many errors you don’t make, which is why fielding percentage is one of the most worthless stats in baseball. After all, if you don’t get to many balls, you are going to have far less chances to make errors.
Can you imagine Ryan Braun at second base? He’d probably make less errors, but the Brewers pitchers would give up a lot more “singles” to right field.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
So Coley, you’re suggesting that the Mets cough up the $200 million it would take to sign A-Rod just for the pleasure of paying an additional chunk of Delgado’s $16 million contract for him to play somewhere else?
Besides, the Mets need lefty hitters. Assuming they’re not bringing Shawn Green back, they’re left with Reyes and Beltran hitting from the left side against righties (they’re both switch).
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
And Sarah, yes, I’m tiny. I am easier to store than an AbFlex.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Paul, I’m just saying that if the Mets are going to spend $200-$400 million on A-Rod, spending an extra $7 million to make room for him on the roster isn’t that big of a deal.
The Phillies ate way more of Jim Thome’s salary to make room for Ryan Howard. Of course, the difference is that Ryan Howard makes almost no money. I’m just saying, teams pay money to get rid of guys all the time. And there’s no better reason to get rid of a player than the chance to get A-Rod.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Coley, by your logic, you’d love to see A-Rod on the Phillies next year. Is this indeed so??
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
You’re right! A-Rod will not become a Met. He’s more likely to be seen in a Red Sox, Cubs, Giants or Angels uniform next season.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Just a big UmpBump love fest over here, huh?
Let me weigh in on this, if I may. Let’s put forth two givens: 1) A-Rod’s offense can play anywhere, even 10 years from now, when he’ll be playing first base or something. 2) His defense is limited to 3B and worse. Maybe he could play 2B, but that’s not a given.
Why not, having those two premises, could the Mets not find a place for A-Rod? Wright moves to second base for two-three years for A-Rod. A-Rod then moves to LF, and Wright moves back to third. At the end of the contract, A-Rod plays first base.
You got a problem with that?
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
A-Rod has always wanted to be a Met, so let him be a Met. Move Wright first–he can’t throw anyway.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Coping and Blastings, I swear I read this article this morning but now I can’t find it (argh argh!). In spring training, when asked about the possibility of the Mets getting A-Rod and moving Wright across the diamond, an unnamed Met actually said something like, “We don’t need A-Rod’s leadership on this team. We need Wright’s leadership on this team.” Now, players don’t get to make personnel decisions, obviously, but if A-Rod wants to be a Met he may have a lot of work to do to win over the guys already in that clubhouse. Displacing Wright—whatever the caliber of his arm—would make that even harder.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Sarah, I actually quoted and linked to that article in this post…
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
The players can deal. Wait, A-Rod’s really an American. Can he speak Spanish?
That’s a big deal.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Sarah, I would love to see A-Rod’s numbers come to town. But he would never survive in Philly. They radio talk show hosts would eat him alive.
Then again, playing in the Shitizen, he could hit anywhere from 50-50 million homers.
REPORT COMMENT
October 29th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Aha, Paul! I *knew* I’d read it somewhere! Wow, all of this winning and no sleep really has addled my brain. I’m high on baseball!
REPORT COMMENT
November 8th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
I think the market is much more dry then people realize when it comes to ARod. As a Met fan, I’d offer him 6 years, $192 mil guaranteed (32 mil per), with Year 7 and 8 options at 26 mil or 8 mil buyouts (bringing the guaranteed money to 200 mil or 33.3 mil per, and Year 9 and 10 options at 22 mil per, or 6.5 mil buyouts. That would bring the total value of the deal to 10 years, $288 mil. You can throw in 1.5 mil MVP clauses for the league, and each playoff round. 1.5 mil GG clauses, other stuff like that. 1.5 mil for reaching 600 PAs in years 6-10.
And I’d sign him with the express purpose of putting him at 2b.
REPORT COMMENT
November 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Can’t comment on the true pedigree of the Cleveland name but I remember reading about Sockalexis in SI many years ago. He was a fantastic player, but he was also an alcoholic and really liked to party. He hurt himself at a brothel and his career went downhill from there. Kind of a tragic story.
REPORT COMMENT