The Standard To Which All Others Were Held

The Troy Times in comparing Ferguson's record with that of Dunlap, says:

"The chronic grumblers who so strenuously urged a short time ago that Mr. Ferguson, Troy's second baseman and manager, was played out-too old for active service and unable to control his men-have changed their minds, and well they might do so. Comparing Mr. Ferguson's record with that of Dunlap, who is claimed to be the best second baseman in the country, it is found that Ferguson excels him at every point..."

-Brooklyn Eagle, August 16, 1880

This has to be one of the earliest reference to Dunlap as the best second baseman in the country. It's certainly the earliest that I've seen. While the article goes on to compare Bob Ferguson to Dunlap, the important thing is not whether or not Ferguson was better than Dunlap but that Ferguson was being compared to the young Dunlap. Fred Dunlap was the standard to which all other second baseman were held. Even years after his playing days were over, baseball writers were still comparing young second basemen to Dunlap.

I think it was Bill James (ironically) who wrote about Satchel Paige and said that all Negro League pitchers were compared to him. This pitcher or that pitcher was as good as Paige or better than Paige or was faster than Paige; the point being not that these men were better than Paige but that Paige was the standard to which all other Negro League pitchers were held. Paige was, most likely, the best pitcher in the history of the Negro Leagues and it was natural to hold him up as the standard. The same seems to be true of Dunlap. While Dunlap may or may not be the best 19th century second baseman, he was for some time the best second baseman in the game and, in 1883 and 1884, the best player in the game. There are several people who saw him play and believed that he was the best player of all-time and his play set a standard for second basemen that lasted until the days of Nap Lajoie.

The Best Second Basman In The Country

Second bag was guarded by Fred Dunlap, who was a wonderful fielder...Fred Dunlap was at one time, I refer to his engagement at Cleveland before he came to Detroit, the best second baseman in the country.

-Ned Hanlon, quoted in Sporting Life, September 11, 1897

I feel that it's my role in this life to collect every single quote that I can find proclaiming the greatness of Fred Dunlap. Luckily, these quotes exist in abundance.

The King Of Second Base

Filed under "beating a dead horse":

Fred Dunlap has at last succumbed to the inducements of Nimick. The famous second baseman was visited by the Pittsburg magnate last Sunday, and the two held a conference in the Continental. Dunlap will not admit that he was agreed to play at a much lower figure than what he said he would. But it is true nevertheless. He clung to the last moment to the price of his salary last season, $5,000, but now the once "king second baseman" has fallen like all other big men of history. He is to get, so a good authority says, the sum of $3,500 for his season's work.

-Chicago Tribune, March 30, 1890

Fred Dunlap Signed

The King of Second Base Will Play With the Washington Team

...The terms of Fred Dunlap were accepted tonight, and he will play with the National Club, of Washington, next season.

-Washington Post, February 6, 1891

Charley Sweasey, Al Reach, Jimmy Wood, Ross Barnes, John Burdock and Fred Dunlap were the great second basemen of the past...

-Boston Daily Globe, November 1, 1891

Here we have Dunlap described as "famous," "the once 'king second baseman,'" "The King of Second Base," and one of "the great second basemen of the past" but, remember, he was never a legitimate star in a legitimate league.

An Almost Universal High Estimate of Dunlap's Skill

...(Seeking) facts from the old sports who have seen the rise and fall of baseball players for nearly fifty years, it is surprising upon how few points these old experienced men agree. But his difference of opinion serves to show that these old fans have formed opinions of their own and have not blindly followed the lead of others.

Hence, when a very large majority of those ardent followers of the game, who live as fully on the bleachers today as they ever did in the days of their youth, who watch the fine points of the game as keenly and as critically as ever, and who give their judgment of the relative merits of players of this year impartially and justly-when these men agree that any individual was the one greatest player that the game has ever known, the historian of the game must give great weight to their opinions.

If this is to be one's guide in deciding what second baseman was the greatest in the history of the game, one is forced to say that the honor belongs to Fred Dunlap. And as one seeks to verify this almost universal high estimate of Dunlap's skill and searches the professional record of this idol of the old fans, there is much to justify the enthusiastic praise, even in the cold-blooded official records.

...If ever there was a scientific baseball player it was Fred Dunlap.

In fact, he knew nothing else but the game for which he had neglected everything, himself included, and his quickness of action and the sureness of his throwing were surpassed only by the alertness of his mind and the accuracy of his judgment. He caught equally well with both hands and could put the ball on a player sliding to second as well with his left as with his right hand. The great suppleness of his splendidly developed body and his prodigious and unsuspected strength enabled Dunlap to cover an area around second that, in the opinion of men who have seen them all, has never been equaled.

-Los Angeles Times, January 22, 1911

Sadly, both the versions of this article that I was able to find were in rough shape and I wasn't able to read the entire thing. While the author writes of all the old-timers who believed Dunlap was the greatest second baseman of all-time, I was unable to decipher the basis for his assertion. To say the least, this was rather frustrating.

However, looking on the bright side, here is more evidence (as if any more is needed at this point) that Dunlap was not only considered a star player but was in fact considered one of the greatest second basemen who ever played the game. There were many of his contemporaries who considered Dunlap the greatest second baseman who ever lived and several who believed he was the greatest player of all-time.

Dunlap On Original Hall Of Fame Ballot

Since I haven't beaten the dead horse in awhile:

So the original plan for the Baseball Hall of Fame was to select ten players from the 1900-1935 era and five players from the nineteenth century. A player had to get seventy-five percent of the vote from the BBWAA to be inducted and, as the story goes, no nineteenth century player met that threshold so they dropped that part of the plan. Both of the original ballots are rather interesting and worth taking a look at.

But, lo and behold, who was one of the second basemen named on the original nineteenth century ballot? None other than Fred Dunlap. Dunlap and Ross Barnes were the only two second basemen on the original nominating ballot. So whoever put the ballot together, whether it was Henry Edwards, the secretary of the American League's Service Bureau, or a committee, certainly considered Dunlap to be one of the two best second basemen of the nineteenth century.

It would be rather interesting to see how the vote on the nineteenth century players went and how much support Dunlap received.

Beating A Dead Horse (Again)

I thinks it's been more than two weeks since I beat the dead horse that is my disdain for the conventional wisdom regarding Fred Dunlap. I'd give you links to all the other posts where I methodically destroy the idea that Dunlap was not a great player but who has time for that? If you're interested in my obsessive rantings on the subject, check the tag over there in the sidebar.

Over at Walk Like A Sabermetrician, Brandon has finished his excellent series on the 1876-1881 National League. It's fantastic stuff (I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it before) and you should definitely head over there and check it out. Even better, he's promised to continue the series and include data for the American Association which I'm sure will provide me with all kinds of posting fodder.

Anyway, since Dunlap was a rookie with Cleveland in 1880, Brandon has data for his first two seasons in the major leagues and, surprise, has concluded that Dunlap was one of the best players in the NL. In 1880, he had +4.2 WAR (wins above replacement for those of you who are metrically challenged) good for fourth best in the league. Brandon has Dunlap as the best second baseman in the league in 1880 as well as the best rookie hitter.

In 1881, Dunlap was even better. He was second in Runs Created, WAR, WAA, and ARG (how's that for sabermetricly geeking out). Again, Brandon rates him as the best second baseman in the league and it's pretty clear that Dunlap was the second best player in baseball behind Cap Anson.

While he hasn't posted his work on 1882 and 1883 yet, I can tell you that Brandon's work rates Dunlap as the best second baseman in the NL for both seasons. He also said that he has Dunlap as the MVP in 1883.

So, metrically, Dunlap was the best second baseman in the National League from 1880 through 1883, from his rookie year until he bolted to the Maroons. We all know what he did with the Maroons in 1884. And this is one of the things that kills me about the CW surrounding Dunlap. One of the arguments in downgrading Dunlap's achievements is that his 1884 season should be dismissed because of the league quality issues surrounding the Union Association. If someone like Dunlap, the argument goes, can dominate the league, how good could it have been? But the metrics now show that Dunlap was one of the very best players in baseball between 1880 and 1883 and there's an argument to be made that he was the very best player in the game at the time. This was a great player in his prime putting up one of the best seasons baseball has ever seen. Since adjustments can be made for league quality, there is no reason to dismiss Dunlap's 1884 season. It's part of the record and must be accounted for.

I'm interested in seeing how Brandon interprets Dunlap's numbers for 1885 and 1886 and I suspect that Dunlap will still rate as a top player during those seasons. From 1887 until his retirement, Dunlap was no longer the same player due to a series of leg injuries. However, when all is said and done, I think Dunlap's numbers will show him to have been one of the best players in the game from 1880 to 1886, a nice run of seven seasons as the best second baseman in the game.

Previously, I've stated that I wasn't pushing for Dunlap's inclusion in the Hall of Fame or saying that he needed to be recognized as the best player in the game or anything like that. I was simply trying to counter the CW. But we can throw all of that out the window now. Dunlap was arguably the best player in the game from 1880 to 1886 and should be recognize as such. The Jamesian argument that Dunlap was "never a legitimate star in a legitimate league" holds no water whatsoever. Both the metrics and the historical evidence is now on the side of proclaiming Dunlap the best second baseman of the 1880's.

The proper way to recognize these facts would be to put Fred Dunlap in the Hall of Fame.