Read today that Negro League will be merged with MLB stats….

[jlzinck]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Maybe I spend too much time under a rock, but prior to reading that stuff about the term "thug" here in Blowout, I had no idea it had taken on a racial connotation. It's not like I use the word anyway, so that's probably why I didn't know.

.

The goalposts get moved and it's easier to call people "racist" or 'woke" when they move.

Growing up all the thugs I knew and called were melanin deficient people of Irish descent.

That being said this whole thread and the narrative on both sides is uber stupid.

MLB is letting the stats be recognized for players, who because they were born with more melanin, were not allowed to participate in Major League Baseball.

I don't need MLB to include the stats to know that Josh Gibson, Buck Leonard, Satchel Paige, Cool Papa Bell, Judy Johnson and MANY more players would have exceled against the players in the majors.

Imagine getting sand in your vagina over this issue.

Back to your regularly scheduled nonsense

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

It's one of those historical things that's obvious to anyone who follows the game and its past, but which non-fans have zero clue about. There was a ton of face-to-face competition in the barnstorming era from 1890-1940. MLB players went toe-to-toe against Negro League teams, Japanese teams, Cuban teams, female pitchers, religious cults, etc. in thousands of exhibition games. The notion that pro baseball prior to Robinson was a hermetically sealed, Whites-only bubble is historical fiction.



Most non-US countries institute some kind of foreigner quota in their prize pro leagues. The CFL also strictly limits how many Americans can play.

The US obviously has some deep flaws in its history of race and sports, but we do deserve credit for being so accepting of foreign players across our leagues.



I could go looking for the darkest-skinned player to suit up between 1887 and 1947, but the original statement was that "latin americans and asians" were barred from play.

If that's settled, I'm glad to move on.



It's a very messy topic that doesn't give us clean narratives one way or the other.

I just want to know how well the religious cults played baseball.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by jlzinck

The goalposts get moved and it's easier to call people "racist" or 'woke" when they move.

Growing up all the thugs I knew and called were melanin deficient people of Irish descent.

That being said this whole thread and the narrative on both sides is uber stupid.

MLB is letting the stats be recognized for players, who because they were born with more melanin, were not allowed to participate in Major League Baseball.

I don't need MLB to include the stats to know that Josh Gibson, Buck Leonard, Satchel Paige, Cool Papa Bell, Judy Johnson and MANY more players would have exceled against the players in the majors.

Imagine getting sand in your vagina over this issue.

Back to your regularly scheduled nonsense

I knew I liked you for a reason!

I can definitely see why the Negro Leagues are different from other leagues, since those weren't players who were denied a spot on MLB teams for lack of talent. It didn't matter how good they were, they were out. Some of them were worthy of MLB rosters for sure, and a few proved it. The Japanese and Mexican league players can't claim that. They could've come to MLB and proved their worth any time, if they were good enough and wanted it. so Ichiro is apples to oranges in this discussion.

Prior to learning more about the term thug, I just thought it was a ruffian, a bully. Those exist in all races, as far as I know. But if the meaning has changed over the years into something I never would intend to imply, I get that too. Language evolves and I need to evolve with it. It's my duty as a human.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by fulltritty

I just want to know how well the religious cults played baseball.

Here's the wikipedia page for the House of David baseball team. At one point even Satchel Paige was pitching for them (a few women also played for them).

There have been a dozen pieces written on the team and apparently they were pretty good for a barnstorming team.

[awz50]

Originally Posted by fulltritty

I just want to know how well the religious cults played baseball.

The house of David was a cultish but they could pitch and hit

[TheFrenzy]

A quick video (3 minutes) giving their history and some footage.

[cardsin47]

Originally Posted by jlzinck

Imagine getting sand in your vagina over this issue.

Quote of the Day ^

[SleepyWill]

Originally Posted by cardsin47

Quote of the Day ^

Looks at OP initial comment sparking this thread, and then finds this gem. . . .

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

A quick video (3 minutes) giving their history and some footage.

This guy teaches baseball history. So he knows what’s he’s talking about.

[mjekase]

Originally Posted by Noles939913

What on earth are you rambling on about? I never said Gibson wasn’t great. I said there’s no way he hits .372 for his career if he got to play against everyone and not just a small portion of the population. You don’t think Larry Bird would’ve had better stats if only had to play against white people? It’s the same concept.

Whether or not he hits for the same average isn't the point. Obviously more competition would affect it. But as other's have pointed out, it then becomes relative and affects the stats of the Major Leaguers, who would have to face more competition as well. The issue is that you're making some weird implication that the lower percentage of black players in the majors somehow proves lower quality of play in the Negro Leagues. Think of it this way: if there wasn't integration, some of the greatest players in history would not have been part of Major League Baseball talent pool. You could argue that almost half of the 20-30 greatest of all time would have been excluded.

[cardsin47]

I should have started this Thread with a Poll - for or against the merging of stats….. damn! Would love to see those results, based on the mixed bag of responses we have here

[Siberian13]

Babe Ruth stats should have an asterisk

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

I knew I liked you for a reason!

I can definitely see why the Negro Leagues are different from other leagues, since those weren't players who were denied a spot on MLB teams for lack of talent. It didn't matter how good they were, they were out. Some of them were worthy of MLB rosters for sure, and a few proved it. The Japanese and Mexican league players can't claim that. They could've come to MLB and proved their worth any time, if they were good enough and wanted it. so Ichiro is apples to oranges in this discussion.

Prior to learning more about the term thug, I just thought it was a ruffian, a bully. Those exist in all races, as far as I know. But if the meaning has changed over the years into something I never would intend to imply, I get that too. Language evolves and I need to evolve with it. It's my duty as a human.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

It's one of those historical things that's obvious to anyone who follows the game and its past, but which non-fans have zero clue about. There was a ton of face-to-face competition in the barnstorming era from 1890-1940. MLB players went toe-to-toe against Negro League teams, Japanese teams, Cuban teams, female pitchers, religious cults, etc. in thousands of exhibition games. The notion that pro baseball prior to Robinson was a hermetically sealed, Whites-only bubble is historical fiction.

Yeah, not sure if this link has been posted yet, but people may wish to consult the collection of essays titled "The Negro Leagues are Major Leagues" by Baseball Reference and SABR. It can be found online in its entirety here: https://www.baseball-reference.com/articles/

The essays explain how there are 7 Negro Leagues that have been deemed on par with the white MLB and therefore stats are considered only from those 7 Leagues.

As the essays detail, "Between 1866 and 1948, top-flight African American clubs played over 7,000 games with White semi-pro, college, minor league, and major league teams and beat them nearly 65 percent of the time....From the first year of the American League in 1900 through the last year of the second Negro National League in 1948, African American teams posted a record of 316-283-21 (.527) against White major league clubs and big-league All-Star aggregations. Against intact National, American, and Federal League teams, black squads posted a record of 47-60-8 (.443) However, from the inception of the Negro National League in 1920 through 1924, African American teams went 29-31-2 (.484) in head-to-head competition. Because the White mainstream press was often reluctant to print Black clubs’ successes, the Negro Leaguers’ overall tally is likely far better than what was recorded."

"in 1922, responding to the Black teams’ continued success against American and National League squads, Commissioner of Baseball Kenesaw Mountain Landis forbade big leaguers from appearing as under their team names or wearing their own uniforms, and insisted that they advertise themselves as All-Star teams, with only three individual teammates allowed to play together at any one time. Between 1900 and 1948, Black clubs defeated the best White batters, pitchers, and teams they were allowed to play nearly 55 percent of the time. The All-Star squads included in this tally were composed of five or more players with big league experience (including the starting pitcher) and at least three players who had appeared in the majors that particular season. The number of big leaguers involved in many of these games was actually higher as the major leaguers often resorted to the use of aliases to avoid detection. As for the farfetched notion that the big leaguers were not giving their all, it should be noted that between 1900 and 1948, White major league squads racked up a record of 2640-897-71 (.742) against minor league, semi-pro, college and military teams—Only the Negro Leaguers had their number"

"While Negro League teams more than held their own while playing major league squads, they absolutely dominated bush leaguers. From the turn of the twentieth century through 1948, Blackball clubs played well over 1400 games with minor league teams and All-Star outfits, beating them nearly 60 percent of the time."

[KhalDrogo]

I’ll chime in late here. Considering the counting stats are the stats most fans assign the heaviest weight to, this is more of a disservice to the Negro League than anything. HRs, hits, wins, strikeouts, etc.

[theshowandme]

How many people here know who Martin Dihigo is?

[JohnnyHatesJazz]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Maybe I spend too much time under a rock, but prior to reading that stuff about the term "thug" here in Blowout, I had no idea it had taken on a racial connotation. It's not like I use the word anyway, so that's probably why I didn't know.

I asked my husband about it and immediately he was like "Nooooo don't use that word!" He explained all about it and now I understand.

My ignorance had nothing to do with racism and again, I don't use that word anyway. Just, I had no idea. Thankfully now I do.

I understand language is fluid and I'm updating my current understanding of it quite often. This is one example of that.

My point was simply that some people just aren't aware of these things. I wasn't. I would've felt horrible had I misused the term and offended someone. I'm glad it didn't happen.

I'm never up to date with current trends and fads. I still use thug and I'm not racist.

Instead of calling people vile, contemptuous, criminal, I like to save a few words and syllables and call them a thug.

Villians in movies refer to themselves as thugs (Bob Le Flamer). Oftentimes people will say, "He a thug!" when somebody is acting abhorrently.

Someday I'll have some kid call me out on using the word punk. But I will not be having any of it.

[wwejhardyrox]

This is all very interesting. To call this woke is wild in my opinion. If the "white only" league stats count, how can there be any defense of not counting "black only" league stats other than racism?

[cardsin47]

Originally Posted by wwejhardyrox

If the "white only" league stats count, how can there be any defense of not counting "black only" league stats other than racism?

That’s exactly what happened - but Decades ago / before most of us here were even born. The issue is, now that it’s 2024, what do we do to right the wrongs of the past in MLB, if anything?

[JohnnyHatesJazz]

Originally Posted by wwejhardyrox

This is all very interesting. To call this woke is wild in my opinion. If the "white only" league stats count, how can there be any defense of not counting "black only" league stats other than racism?

If I'm a descendent, I'd probably sue MLB to get some kind of reparations. Pandora's box has been opened.

[JRX]

Originally Posted by wwejhardyrox

This is all very interesting. To call this woke is wild in my opinion. If the "white only" league stats count, how can there be any defense of not counting "black only" league stats other than racism?

Nobody is saying they don't count its whether it is appropriate to say they are records for the american and national league which is as silly as saying that stats from those leagues are records for the negro leagues.

[rms13]

Originally Posted by cardsin47

That’s exactly what happened - but Decades ago / before most of us here were even born. The issue is, now that it’s 2024, what do we do to right the wrongs of the past in MLB, if anything?

What you don't do is re-write history and pretend these guys all played in the MLB. If you do that then younger generations are never going to know the Negro League existed or why it existed and eventually you repeat history.

[cardsin47]

Originally Posted by rms13

What you don't do is re-write history and pretend these guys all played in the MLB. If you do that then younger generations are never going to know the Negro League existed or why it existed and eventually you repeat history.

Yes - exactly - at least I’m not on this boat alone / have someone to help me row!

[JRX]

Originally Posted by rms13

What you don't do is re-write history and pretend these guys all played in the MLB. If you do that then younger generations are never going to know the Negro League existed or why it existed and eventually you repeat history.

Not sure about the second half of your statement, but I guess what bothers me is it does pretend that these guys played together. They didn't, and there's no way to go back in time and change it. They weren't the same league, they have their own records and records in one don't make them records in the other. I would have no issue if they wanted to put an * next to every record that predates integration.

[marl1220]

I have 3 thoughts on the subject.

1. I don't completely understand the changes.
2. The changes don't bother me one way or another.
3. I don't think the changes are going to sway anyone's beliefs on who record
holders are.

In a nutshell, I really don't care. I have way too many other issues , which are actually important, to stress about.