We need a quick runoff vote to resolve the tie at the top in the 1901 part 1 voting. Voting closes Sunday night, so vote early.
More after the jump.
This runoff vote is particularly interesting because the two candidates, Mickey Cochrane and Al Simmons, were contemporaries who debuted a year apart, both at age 22, and were teammates for their best seasons with the powerful Philadelphia Athletic clubs of the late 1920s and early 1930s. Both were also sent packing by the As for the identical sum of $100,000 when Connie Mack decided to cash in his chips when his best players were commanding top dollar (but had already started their career declines). The two would don the same uniform once more for the 1936 Tigers, when the younger Cochrane was also Simmons’ manager.
Cochrane posted 52.1 WAR (Baseball-Reference version), for a short time the top career mark for catchers, a feat more impressive for the relative brevity of his 13-season career, including only 11 years as a regular. Simmons compiled the heftier total of 68.7 WAR, but in over 50% more PA in the less demanding position of left-field (which he played quite well, by reputation and by traditional defensive metrics). Their career OPS+ numbers were also quite close at 129 for Cochrane and 133 for Simmons, with Cochrane having the edge in OBP and Simmons in SLG.
So, the choice is yours: Cochrane or Simmons. However you decide, your ballot in this runoff round, unlike the usual three-name ballot, should identify just one name, Cochrane’s or Simmons’. You will also need to add at least a little bit of extra verbiage though, because the WordPress engine that supports the site won’t accept comments of only one or two words.
This is a short-deadline runoff election. All votes must be in by 11:59PM EDT on Sunday night, April 5th. If the result of this runoff is still a tie, the tie-breaker will give the win to the candidate who received the most runoff votes immediately before the very last runoff vote cast. So it may not be advisable to wait till the end of the runoff period to cast your vote, because if your vote happens to be the last one cast, your vote may not count for tiebreaker purposes. If you would like to keep track of the vote tally for the runoff, you can check this tally spreadsheet: COG 1901 Part 1 Runoff Vote Tally.
Since I don’t want to forget and be scrambling to get my vote in at the last minute again, I’ll start this off by voting for Cochrane.
I think they both belong so I’m going with Cochrane because of the Tigers connection.
I’ll buck the trend and pick Al Simmons, then.
I’ll go for Mickey Cochrane.
2 philly stars
I vote Cochrane
Cochrane plus some extra words.
Mickey Cochrane
Like many others, I think they both belong, but I have to go with the very best player from my own hometown: Al Simmons.
It’s Simmons for me.
I choose Simmons, and the other guy will get in soon as well. Aloysius was such an offensive force on those great teams, cannot pass him up.
I’ll go with Mutt Mantle’s favorite player-Mickey Cochrane.
I’ll vote for Simmons.
Cochrane has my vote.
Cochrane by a hair.
Not much of a difference at all. I think if Connie Mack had to choose one of them and deal the other, he would have kept Cochrane. I will choose Cochrane on that basis.
I’ll vote for Cochrane.
Cochrane for me
Simmons…and a few more words.
Cochrane for me.
Bucketfoot Al. I can’t separate them based on regular season stats, but Simmons kicked butt in the Series, while Cochrane was just okay.
I couldn’t pick a winner from a position comparison for the era, 1920-45:
— Cochrane is one of three great catchers who are almost indistinguishable. He’s a hair behind Dickey and Hartnett on WAR and WAA totals, but just ahead of them on rates.
— Simmons would be my #1 LF. But he’s not far up on Goslin or Bob Johnson, balancing totals and rates. And if you include RF in the rankings, Simmons would clearly trail Ruth and Ott, with P.Waner and Heilmann also close to Al.
Mickey Cochrane vote
Went Cochrane in the regular vote, so Cochrane in the runoff.
Al, Ted or Curt. I vote Simmons.
Simmons has much higher peaks (three WAR >= 7.5 compared to none for Cochrane–indeed, Simmons has 4 higher WAR seasons than Cochrane’s highest) in addition to higher WAR, higher batting average, higher slugging percentage–and almost everything else, with the exception of OBP.
Vote for Simmons.
Cochrane and more respect needed for Catchers.
I’m going with Al Simmons
Mickey Cochrane for me. I believe Cochrane was the catcher on the 1869 – 1969 All Century/First 100 Years team, ahead of Dickey, Campanella, Harnett, Bresnahan, Schang, and Clay Dalrymple
If true, also ahead of Yogi Berra!
“The greatest all-time team included Lou Gehrig at first base, Rogers Hornsby at second, Honus Wagner at short, Pie Traynor at third, Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and DiMaggio in the outfield, Mickey Cochrane catching, Walter Johnson as right-handed pitcher and Lefty Grove as left-handed. John McGraw was the manager.”
…from the National Pastime Museum
I hope, when that teams plays the 1969-2069 team, that Ted Williams at least gets to DH.
34) Bryan,
I guess in the eyes of voters/sportswriters in 1969, the legend of DiMaggio and all those pennant winners exceeded Ted Williams’ hitting. I do rememeber articles of the period indicating “surprise” in Cochrane finishing ahead of Dickey…but, not necessarily Berra.
Back then, sportswriters were all over the “champions” and the good old days and the legends of the World Series. It’s always beneficial to have great team mates
@39;
Well, Yogi Berra both played in and won more World Series than anyone else, more than Dickey, far more than Cochrane.
I think the image of Yogi in 1969 was more of a short, dumpy funny-looking guy who happened to be a really good player, as opposed to an all-time great, winner of three MVPs, and probably the greatest catcher ever till then.
Paul, I’m sure you’re right about championships factoring heavily in the writers’ decision, but they also picked a centerfielder who never played for a World Series winner. DiMaggio had immense value as an elite-hitting centerfielder, but I’m surprised they chose him over perhaps the greatest hitter ever at that point when that guy filled the one position not otherwise represented.
Bryan (41)
They took DiMaggio over Mays, Cochrane over Yogi, and Traynor over Mathews. Mays was still playing, Yogi was only retired 5-6 years and Mathews had just retired. I guess it was retired “legends” over the superior “moderns”?
In that same vein, it’s probably difficult for a lot of current fans to regard Pujols as the superior of Jimmie Foxx…I dunno
Also among those skipped over in electing DiMaggio was Stan Musial, mostly a contemporary — while his career *ended* 12 years later, it began only 5 years later than Joe Ds, and Hammerin’ Hank, who, while still active, had already by the end of the 1968 season amassed career value well in excess of DiMaggio’s even giving Joe some *very* generous war credit, and Mickey Mantle who had just retired. Let’s not also forget Tris Speaker, a contemporary of Cobb.
From a 2015 perspective, I’d put Mays at least, ahead of even Cobb for sure, and tentatively could say the same of Aaron (though not as of 1969 — it requires his special, spectacular career denouement to get him there). Mays, even though his end of 1968 WAR was behind Cobb’s career, had probably already done enough to be considered his peer, especially considering the difference in baseline league quality.
@27, 28, 32;
In 1969, that’s not a bad team, with the exception of third (Eddie Mathews, Brooks, Frank Baker over Traynor, for starters). Also I’d take Yogi at catcher, Speaker over DiMaggio, maybe Eddie Collins over Hornsby, but otherwise it’s hard to argue over these choices.
Also remember that the first comprehensive baseball reference book had just come out that year, so there was a lack of reliable sources to research these players.
The writer of “56” Kostya Kennedy devotes a lot of space to DiMaggio being named the “greatest living player” more so than him being on the all-time team. He also gives a lot of credence to Mays’ apparent enthusiastic endorsement of DiMaggio at the banquet, though I don’t know what he expected ted Mays to say. Like Speaker for that time frame, would like to know how the HHS crown feels in Speaker vs. DiMaggio.
I think you’re right:
http://www.thenationalpastimemuseum.com/article/baseballs-centennial-greatest-players-ever-poll
But they were wrong. 😉
I heart Mickey Cochrane
Either one is fine — but I’ll go with Simmons
Mickey Cochrane: “You have to have a catcher, otherwise you will have a lot of passed balls.” – Casey Stengel
Someone else has probably mentioned this already, but I think we should pause and appreciate how amazing those A’s teams were from 1928 to 1932 – having not only Cochrane and Simmons but also Jimmy Foxx and Lefty Grove on them – not merely four HOFers, but four players all considered amongst the best-ever (top-10 at minimum) at their positions, and in their primes. Not only that, but the A’s also had a number of other fine players, including Max Bishop, Bing Miller, Jimmy Dykes and George Earnshaw.
LA 33,
Didn’t ESPN (or somebody else) do a series where they kind of had a computer-generated elimination tournament amongst the great teams (’55 Dodgers, ’27 Yankees, ’29 A’s, ’39 Yankees, etc…) and the ’29 Athletics won? Maybe I’m crazy but, I seem to recall something of this sort a few years back? Maybe Bill James?
My vote is for Cochrane.
They’re pretty close, but Elvin Charles Mantle didn’t name his son Aloysius after his favorite ballplayer. That’s tiebreaker enough for me.
Mickey Cochrane
Cochrane is out to a healthy lead, 21-11 (through #36), and a ten-vote lead is effectively an eleven-vote lead, given the tiebreaker rules.
I’ll go with Simmons.
_____________________
And if any of y’all are Allegiant pilots, please don’t freaking go on strike tomorrow.
Mickey Cochrane for the win
Tiger Champ hometown bias vote for Cochrane.
I’ll cast my vote for Simmons.
My vote is Cochrane. The Circle needs more catchers. Simmons will get in soon enough.
I will vote for Cochrane
Simmons for the win.
Cochrane is the man.
too close to call but I’ll say Mickey Cochrane.
Wisconsin Voters for Simmons
27-15 in favor of Cochrane right now, though I agree with the sentiment of brp’s comment!
simmons, his peak value was much more than mickey, and mantle played in the outfield he didnt catch.
mantle?
I don’t understand this comment.
Mantle did play in the outfield. OTOH, he’s not up for a vote (already went in as a slam dunk many elections ago) and NO WAY was Al Simmons peak value even CLOSE to mickey MANTLE’s peak value.
OTOH, this mickey COCHRANE guy that we’re actually voting on, was indeed a catcher.
Michael Sullivan – I assume this is a response to Bells #36.
simmons, his peak value was much more than cochrane, and mantle played in the outfield he didnt catch.
I thought that the Toronto Blue Jays early/mid-80s OF trio of George Bell (LF)/ Lloyd Moseby (CF)/ Jesse Barfield (RF) would make this list; however, they didn’t play together as regulars until they were all 25 years old. They were much discussed at that time.
I also thought that the Red Sox OF of Rice/ Lynn/ Evans would show up for 1975, 1976 and/or 1977 (2/3rds did), but I see that Rice didn’t have 3.5 WAR in 1975 or 1976, and was primarily a DH in 1977.
I think Simmons was the more valuable player. But, I’m happy either way since they both pretty clearly belong in the COG.
Simmons
Mickey Cochrane for the COG.
cochrane for me , need more catchers
Aloysius Szymanski, commonly called Al Simmons
Finally this comment shows up in the browser where I posted it.
If I haven’t missed anything, this is the 4th Tie + Runoff; in all 3 previous, the player who had been on the ballot longer won.
1941 Ryan over Rose (Rose won 2 rounds later)
1924 Smoltz over Snider (Snider won next round)
1905 Alomar over Cronin (Cronin won next round)
I’m not sure that I am going to vote- Cochrane and Simmons are hard to pick between- on a minor note, neither Massachusetts nor Wisconsin are that well represented among players’ birth states.
Apologies to David Horwich, whose work I have independently repeated here
(see the main 1901 pt 1. thread for his recap of the same voting history, which I knew was around somewhere, but forgot to check the main thread).
I just looked back at all of these elections, and I’ve voted for the loser in every one of these elections (and my current choice is handily behind). So next time we have a tie, just ask me who I’d vote for, and elect the other guy. WAY faster than holding the entire round over again.*
*Assuming that there’s about an equal chance for each of the two (there should be; they tied each time), then it’s a 50-50 shot for one or the other to win. We usually have about 64 voters. If those were the SAME 64 voters for each of these rounds, there’d be about 4 of us who have picked wrong every time, just with a random distribution. Still, it’s funny to look back and have chosen “wrong” each time.
I hope Hartnett has this much support when he comes up…
Simmons.
This tax season is killing me – But I still have time to vote for Cochrane.
Cochrane, and neither this, nor my previous attempt at a comment is too short, AHEM.
Through 50 votes (#71), it’s 31-19 Cochrane, and although it ain’t over ’til it’s over, it’s pretty much over – if we were to have, say, 20 more votes, Simmons would need to receive 17 of them to pull ahead.
This big swing for Cochrane after a tie vote seems to be from a “put in the catcher, we don’t have many” consensus. Nothing wrong with that – Simmons will likely follow next anyway. Both were great and deserving of a COG spot. Will be interesting to see who gets the few remaining “open” years left down the stretch.
Sure, they’re both worthy and they’ll both get in. But, I prefer Collins and, anyway, he’s the clear underdog in this race (which he shouldn’t be–should be nigh on tie again). So…
Collins
????? Collins ??????
I’m guessing from context you mean Simmons but I’m not certain
In the full election, Stubby voted for Simmons and not Cochrane. So I would tend to agree with Hartvig. But I think it’s best to wait for clarification.
Yeah, it was Simmons. Sorry. Didn’t make a difference, though, did it?
For some reason, my brain turns to swiss cheese at tax time.
Cochrane, but as with the other run-off elections, both players will be in the COG very soon.
My vote is for Simmons.
There are fewer left fielders (5) in the COG than catchers (6)- this should be closer.
Simmons
Al Simmons is my vote.
Not that he needs the support, but I’ll go with Cochrane.
Partially for position, but also because of his OBP advantage. I’ve always had a bit of an OBP fetish, and I cut my teeth as a teenager on internet baseball debates on the old ESPN message boards arguing that folks like Ferris Fain, Max Bishop and Eddie Stanky were woefully underrated because of their OBP skills.
Of course, all of those three had other deficits keeping them from being HoF quality. Cochrane combined great OBP skills with other aspects of his game to be a much better all-around player than most of the other guys known for being on-base monsters.