Don't Believe Everything You Read and Hear: Ty Cobb, A Terrible Beauty

Photo: from the book's Goodreads page (and from my review)


I've got a major sinus infection and fever, that the doctor said looked like strep or the flu, and and she just said she thinks I should be out of action for at least three days, so forgive the lack of structure here. Doing my best...

As Shakespeare's Caesar showed us (and Orwell's Animal Farm), when someone in charge repeats something often enough, the masses believe it. (Defense Exhibit A: Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. Exhibit B: Everything Mr. Orange said to win the chair he never sits in.)  Charles Leerhsen's Ty Cobb: A Terrible Beauty attempts to show that everything we've thought, read and seen in a movie lately about Ty Cobb is either fiction, exaggerated, or misleading.

He largely succeeds, but he gets carried away with his own success. He inserts lame jokes into the text. He happily shows how he's correct and writers like Al Stump aren't. He's right, but does he have to be so gleeful and boastful about it? And most of the errors he points out about Cobb aren't direct falsehoods, but errors of degree. Was Cobb the psychotic we've learned about? No, he wasn't. But would you choose him over Honus Wagner to be on your team? No, you wouldn't. The Tigers desperately needed him, so they coddled him for as long as they needed to, but that was not a happy family in Detroit. Speaking of happy families, Cobb's mother did shoot his father, and Cobb apparently was emotionally and perhaps physically abusive to his kids, and perhaps his wife.

He favors Cobb with such a bias that he writes: "In Honus Wagner [the Pirates] had a marquee star who had almost all of Cobb's ability and none of his charisma..." (223). Now, there's a lot wrong there. Not so fast. Wagner had ALL of Cobb's abilities--including hits (Cobb 4,189; Wagner 3,420) average (.366 to .328) and stolen bases (963 to 897). The point isn't that Wagner surpassed the numbers; the point is we're talking about 2 all-time greats playing at the same time, amassing very similar numbers. And Wagner never saw the live ball era of the 1920s as Cobb did. Wagner retired in 1917 while Cobb hung up his spikes in 1928. Had they played during exactly the same years, their numbers would be closer. Though Cobb may have a slight edge with the bat, the numbers show that Wagner could have matched them, but didn't. Why? Perhaps the Pirates didn't need him to.

But the point Leerhsen never makes in his whole 400+ page book is that on defense for his career, Cobb owes 10 games to the Tigers (his defensive WAR is -10), while for his career Wagner gives his team +21 wins on defense. That's a swing of 30 games, which Cobb's 38 points of batting average, 700 hits and 66 stolen bases don't compensate for. (Cobb played 3 more years than Wagner, and Honus never saw the lively ball of the 20s.) Cobb was known as an average to below-average defender, at best, while Wagner made other players' jaws drop at shortstop. He played Gold Glove- caliber defense every day, according to his contemporaries, in The Glory of their Times. All of the players said Wagner was better than Cobb because of Wagner's defense, and that they all stood around and watched as Wagner hit. Nobody says that about Cobb.

Also consider Cobb's behavior. Leerhsen makes it clear that he was nowhere near the crazy butthole everyone thinks--but he also makes it clear that he was a pain in the ass to his own teammates, to anyone who got in his way on the basepaths (I can let that slide, as the players did. See what I did there?), to the team management that usually coddled him and adopted him, and to fans, both for him and against him. Did Cobb assault a black waiter? No, he didn't. Did he dislike African-Americans in general? The evidence says No, that he was indifferent, and that he was for them if they were good ballplayers, like how he spoke in favor of Jackie Robinson. Did he kill 3 people, as has been said? Nope.

But did he jump into the stands and beat the crap out of a paraplegic? Yes, he did! Did he slide with his spikes up? Yes, he did, but only if you were in his direct line on the basepaths. And if you were at a base, including home, he usually slid away from you. Did he say bad things to almost everyone, including his teammates, kids and wives? Yes. Did he drink too much as he got older and turn nasty? Yes, he did. You get the idea. Now, did Wagner do any of those things while active? Was the whole Pirates team against him? Did he piss off his ownership? Did he assault the disabled and chase after umpires and fight almost every guy he knew? Nope. And does that translate into a better team, so that it could be said that he helped his team by not being a butthole like Cobb was? You bet. (Though, like Cobb, Wagner drank too much when he got old. But while alcohol made Cobb angry, bitter and mean, the sauce just made Wagner babble incessantly, and start baseball stories that could last an afternoon.) In a nutshell, that's the argument Bill James makes when he says that Ted Williams was a better hitter than Stan Musial, but not a better ballplayer (or left fielder).

It's not clear by the numbers that Cobb was that much better than Wagner with the bat (though I'll concede the point that he may have been a little bit, like Ruth over Gehrig), but it's also very clear that Wagner was the much better defender and clubhouse presence. I don't give much credence usually to the latter, but I do when we're talking about a chronic problem like Cobb, though he may not have been the psychotic we've been led to believe he was. Having read this book, I see him now as a Jimmy Piersall type of neurotic, a nervous and anxiety-ridden guy, with an ability ten thousand times that of Piersall. But essentially the same temperament.

So that's what we've got here. The author makes the mistake of celebrating himself too much--ironic, since that's what he shows Cobb did too much, which made his teammates dislike him. He was better than they were, and different, and smarter, and faster, and that also made them dislike him. In fact, the T206 guys on his team actively bullied him, to the point that a few of them were suspended by the team. I don't criticize Cobb for this, though one would think he could have somehow handled it better. After all, Wagner was better than all of the Pirates of his time, and nobody taunted him or beat him up, even when he was a rookie. But Leerhsen says at least 12 times (I stopped counting) that Wagner (and Lajoie, and Elmer Flick, and other HOFers of the time) were grunts with a lunchpail, guys who would be in the mines without baseball, boring guys with no personality--I'm not making this up, or exaggerating. Leerhsen calls them these things.

Well, hell, I used to know a lot of people I thought were interesting, who did a lot of crazy things, who hurt a lot of good people, either emotionally, mentally or physically (or all of the above), but weren't they fun and exciting? But then I grew up, and I saw that stable and consistent behavior is a helluva lot more interesting than the crazy, destructive and self-destructive crap I saw the "exciting" people do. Those latter people flamed out, or exited from my life, stage left, (or both) and I replaced them with stable and consistent people with different things about them that were exciting and interesting.

Which ones would you rather work with for 20+ years? Exactly. Turns out, consistent and stable people make your job (and therefore your life) easier. Leerhsen gets caught up in his own cult of personality, like Cobb did in his, and it made them both pale in comparison.

So if you like the T206 era as I do, and you're interested in who Ty Cobb was, like I am, you should read this, and you'll find it interesting. It's informative, it sets the matter of Cobb straight, and it's a good read.

But like those guys who keep repeating the same thing, and it's believed because it's on the internet, or it's in print, or it's what you want to hear, or it's said by someone in some sort of power--Well, don't believe everything you read, you know? Ironic, because that's the point of this book, and Leerhsen proves his point in a way that he doesn't want to. But there it is.

M101-2 Sporting News Supplement Bob Harmon

Photo: 1911 M101-2 Sporting News Supplement Bob Harmon of the St. Louis Cardinals, from my own collection.

First, I had a helluva time getting this picture into my computer, as it would only scan as a .pdf, and then wouldn't load into this software for this website.  I had to scan it again, CONTROL + ALT + PRINT SCREEN, save it into Paint, then crop that, then save that as a jpeg., then bring it to this page. I don't know if you can see the big size of it like you could my other cards written about here.  If someone knows of a better way around this for me--or how I can make my scanner not scan larger images as a .pdf, please comment here and let me know.  Or send me an email, if you'd prefer.  I appreciate it!

Anyway, I saw lots of these images up for bid on ebay from PWCC, where I get a lot of stuff.  I've heard of these before, but had never seen them.  The inages were striking, and I saved them all from my Watch screen on Ebay before I deleted them from it when the bids climbed too high.  In good condition, these can go for hundreds, and a good condition HOFer, like Ty Cobb, can bring crazy prices.  I really wanted a Jake Stahl one of these, and I forget why I deleted it.  I didn't know much about the cost and value of these, and this one climbed over $30, so I backed off.  It was one of the best shots I saw, right up there with Clark Griffith standing on the dugout steps, and Connie Mack standing in his suit.  Truly awesome pics, but they got really expensive.  If only I were rich.

So this one of Bob Harmon is ripped in the lower left corner, as you can see, so it cost me only $9.50. The shipping was $12, but when I won other cards (some Ted Williams and Clementes and a few others), those were only $.25 more after that, so it averaged out to $1.15 for each of the 13 (yes, I know it's crazy) items I got.

These very large photos are not considered cards, per se, as there were actual Sporting News cards published after these supplements proved popular with the public.  The photographers must've been amongst the best of their time, because these images are all classically striking.  I wish I could've gotten them all. Unfortunately, this is the only one I got.

These supplements were just that: included in issues of The Sporting News between 1909 and 1911, which in itself looked more like a newspaper than a magazine, just like it does today.  They were often folded, which is not considered a detriment to their value, but they are extremely thin and therefore very fragile.  Mine would've sold for over $30 had it not been a little torn, and Bob Harmon was just a common player.

He was a tough-luck pitcher who could've done much better, or much worse.  He led the league in 1911 in game starts, earned runs and walks, but finished 23-16 with a 3.13 ERA and was 14th in the MVP voting.  His WHIP was a bad 1.35, and he walked more than he struck out, so this was a rather lucky season.  His luck would not last, though, as he went 13-17 and 16-17 for Pittsburgh a few years later, but with ERAs of 2.53 and 2.50.  He had losing records every year and spent 1917 out of the majors, but returned with Pittsburgh in 1918 and had the best WHIP of his career, a very good 1.06--though he still walked more than he struck out.  He finished 2-7 that year, which proved to be his last.

His career record was 107-133, with a 3.33 ERA and a 1.3 WHIP, but only gave up 1,966 hits in 2,054 innings.  If he could've found the strike zone a little more often, he may have been one of the best, because they couldn't often hit him.

But, then again, had he been much better, I wouldn't have been able to afford him.

2015 Red Sox 78-84, and My Playoff Picks

A few thoughts about your last-place 2015 Boston Red Sox

--Had the season started after the All-Star break, the Sox would be in the playoffs.  But it doesn't work that way.

--Letting Don Orsillo go is a travesty.  I'm actually angry about it and I'm going to miss him.  Finishing last place 3 out of the last 4 years is bad enough; without the pleasant silliness from Orsillo and Remy, it would have been unbearable and unwatchable.  Despite the last place finishes, they've been a mainstay for me at 7pm most nights.  It was nice just to hear their silliness.  And it wasn't all inane banter, like Sean McDonough used to do.  (And he was miserable, too.)  Orsillo and Remy, and not the team, were the most consistently good 3 of the last 4 years.  (And let's face it: 2013 was an awesome overachievement, as was the 2013 ALCS, especially.)

--And firing Arnie Beyeler is a mystery.  The first base coach is essentially an irrelevant position.  His primary responsibility is waving runners on to second base.  Since I don't recall a tremendous number of Sox players thrown out at second this year, he seems to have done a decent job.  I saw him time the pitcher like he's supposed to.  Not a lot of runners got picked off.  He carried the players' elbow pads.  And the third base coach, bench coach and manager are all coming back--all of whom have much more to do with the Sox record than Beyeler does.  Plus, Beyeler was the PawSox manager for a few years, so he knows many of the Sox players pretty well.  Unless the players asked for him to be let go because of some kind of lousy clubhouse presence, or unless he said the wrong thing at the wrong time to the wrong person, this firing is a mystery.  I won't care as much as Orsillo going, but I have 2 Beyeler autographed balls because he was at the Pawtucket HotStove a few years.

--Speaking of Orsillo, he got a six-year contract and a huge raise each year from the San Diego Padres, so he has the last laugh.  But I'll still miss him.

--David Ortiz led the majors in RBIs after the All-Star break.  He had such a terrible first half, I thought he had no chance for 30 homers and 100 RBIs.  I was wrong.  But the sudden and inexplicable upsurge is curious, if you know what I mean.

--Tory Lovullo deserved the 2-year extension he just got.  He'll be the manager should Farrell be physically incapable of managing--or if Farrell is told to take more time off and get well, if you catch my drift.  I wouldn't be surprised if that happened.  In fact, I hate to say it, but I'd be in favor of it.

--Hopefully, Betts, Bradley and Castillo are the outfielders next year.  But if the Sox want a #1 starter, one or two of those are going to go.  The best overall player is Betts, so I hope he stays.  (I need a Betts autographed ball with a COA, if any of you care.)

--Bogaerts and Bradley were completely different players this year.  Bogaerts had almost 200 hits (the vast majority of them singles) and became almost a Gold Glove-caliber fielder.  Bradley always was Gold Glove, but improved his average by about 50 points (!!!) and finished with a slightly-above .500 slugging percentage (!!!!!).

--Having said that, Betts was still overall a more valuable player than either Bogaerts or Bradley.

--Pedroia looks healthy again, and he fielded and hit like he never missed about two-thirds of the season.  But he needs to stay healthy, which he hasn't done since he signed that mega-contract.  They're honest injuries, but he has to stay healthy for the whole year.  When he does, the Sox finish with a great record.  When he doesn't, they don't.

--Buchholz also has to stay healthy all year and win the 17+ games he's capable of, every year.  When he stays healthy, the Sox finish with a very good record.

--I'm hearing that Hanley Ramirez has played his last game for Boston.  He had a tremendous first half--but he was a disaster in left.  He'll be terrible at first, and I've heard he's terrible in the clubhouse.  I've heard that the Sox players have complained about his attitude all year.  I can't wait to see him go.  The word is that the Sox will deal him for almost nothing and eat most of his contract.

--And Sandoval needs to go, too.  I wrote at the beginning of the year that I was concerned that nobody on the Giants was sad to see him go.  And I wrote that I didn't like the idea of someone winning 3 World Series in 5 years with one team, and then leaving that team.  Sandoval gained weight all year and purportedly weighs more than Ortiz (!) and is also a disaster in the clubhouse.  I wasn't wrong about him since the beginning of this year.  He needs to go.

--As of a few games ago, Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez were tied as the worst WAR players in the American League.  Dealing them and eating their contracts would be addition by subtraction.

--I'm more than happy with Travis Shaw--and his almost-.500 slugging percentage and his slightly above average defense--at first base and Brock Holt at third, even if Holt has to platoon with Merrero and / or Rutledge.

--Merrerro and Rutledge are basically paler versions of Brock Holt, and I mean that as a compliment.  You probably can't keep both of them, but they are great back-ups.  They field very well, hit decently to well, and do the little things well, like hit-and-run and bunt.  I hope they can stay.  If just one stays, I prefer Rutledge, but I don't know if he can play short and / or third.  Holt can be my third baseman, or back-up infielder and outfielder, until he retires.  Love his hustle, his defense, and his ability to do all those little things that win games: move the runner over; drive him in from third with less than 2 outs; bunt; hit-and-run.  His defense is almost Gold Glove, and he can even steal a few bases.

--My guess is that Tazawa and Uehara are both done.  Tazawa's not automatic in the 8th for me if he comes back, and Uehara is the closer only because nobody else on the current roster can do it.

--Rich Hill should start the year on the team.  He or Steven Wright is my #5 starter.  Either one would eat lots of innings and overall be a very good #5.  But I don't know if the Sox can keep both in the rotation.  Probably neither is good enough to be #4.  Hill, maybe, but I'm concerned about how well he'll hold up all year.

--The highlight of 2015 was the outfield.  Defensively, especially, but at the plate, too.  They made me want to watch.  Speaking of that, Bradley might have been one of the best #9 hitters in the majors.  How many #9 guys had over a .500 slugging percentage?

--And Mookie Betts has one of the best baseball names in the majors.

--For umpires, it's Fieldin Culbreth, of course.

--You know you've seen a lot of ballgames if you know most of the umpires' names.

--Besides being traded during the 2014 or 2015 season, what do Jon Lester, John Lackey, Mike Napoli, Andrew Miller, Andrew Bailey and Jonny Gomes all have in common?  They're all in the 2015 playoffs.  And Shane Victorino missed by a game or two with the Angels.

--But Miller's trade to the Orioles for the rookie Rodriguez this year might end up being a steal for the Sox.  Last-place teams don't need good closers, and a good starter is more important than a good reliever, even a closer.  Starters pitch 200+ innings if they're #1s or #2s.  Closers pitch maybe 70 innings.  A closer would have to be Mariano Rivera not to make that trade a win for the Sox.  Miller isn't quite there yet.  But he'll have a very long career after his closing days are over if he doesn't mind going back to the lefty specialist he used to be.

--Speaking of relievers, Ross may have a good career if he can tone down his act.  Ogando finished well this year, but I'd show him the door if I ran the team.  Overall, the entire relief corps needs to be revamped.

--That, and somehow, at any cost, getting rid of Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval, and getting a #1 starter, are this team's most important needs.

--If there are any Sox developments, come back here and you'll hear about it.  I'll post a lot about baseball in general, the Patriots, and baseball cards.

--Although the Wild Card Game in the A.L. will be in Yankee Stadium, look for the Astros to win.

--Toronto and Kansas City will play in the ALCS.  Winner: ...Kansas City, despite Toronto's home field advantage.  I say this only because of the theory that good pitching and defense will beat good hitting in one series.  But if it goes 7, it's a flip.

--The N.L. is a tougher call.  The Cubs won 8 straight to end the season, and Pittsburgh and Chicago are awesome teams and are not limping into the Wild Card Game like the Yankees are.  It's unfair that the Yanks may go on, but either the Cubs or Pirates must go home, despite each winning at least 10 more games than the Yanks.

--It's hard to count the Dodgers out, and the Mets could surprise, but I pick the Cardinals to play the ...Cubs in the NLCS.  Winner: St. Louis.

--World Series winner: St. Louis.  I'd never bet on the playoffs, because I know better ways to waste and lose my money, but this year's playoffs, especially in the N.L., are especially tough to pick.

--Feel free to comment on how wrong you think I am about my picks.  You'll probably be right.