Now That's A Nickname

Dave Foutz

The "Mephistophelian Foutz" is the way they refer in Louisville to the Browns' new pitcher.

-St. Louis Globe-Demcorat, August 5, 1884

Hitting off Foutz was like hitting off the Devil himself.

I think that Foutz' accepted nickname was "Scissors" but we need to petition B-Ref to change it to "Mephistophelian Foutz."  I know that now and forever I will refer to him by that name.

Von der Ahe Secures Foutz

Dave Foutz

President Eugene Fifield and E.W. Bennett, Secretary and Treasurer of the Bay City, Northwestern League, Team, are in town, the guests of President Von der Ahe, of the Browns.  They come to see to-day's game. 

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, July 20, 1884


Now, what could this be all about?  Oh, wait.  I know:

David Foutz, of the Bay City Northwestern League club, whom President Von der Ahe, of the St. Louis Browns, has just secured, is a remarkable twirler for a young man of 23 years.  He first made a hit with the Leadville Blues in 1881, and of fifty-four games played by them that year Foutz pitched forty, and lost but one. He played with the Bay Citys last year, and up to date with them this year.  Last year he played in 43 games, and this year he has pitched 21 games, only 4 of which were lost.  He is tall and slim, standing 6 feet 2 inches in his stocking feet and weighing about 165 pounds.  He played with Bay City against the Browns last April, and but four hits were made off him.  He is quiet, gentlemanly, and cool and calculating in his work.  He not only pitches, but plays any position outside of a catcher.  President Von der Ahe is enthusiastic over his success in securing him, and says he will play his first game in Cincinnati July 29, when his ten days are up.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, July 20, 1884

Some Final Thoughts On The Browns' 1887 Player Sales

The first thing I should mention is that I no longer know what to call the events that took place in the fall of 1887. I used to call it a fire sale but it really wasn't that. A fire sale implies that the seller is being forced to sell because of financial stress and that wasn't what these moves were about. So I've taken to generically calling it a players sale. That's esthetically unpleasing but more accurate. Regardless, what I want to do here is give a quick summary of what took place and then look at the reasons for why the sales happened.

By the time the 1887 world's championship series ended, it was clear that the Browns were going to make some changes to their roster for the 1888 season. There had been rumors going back to the summer that some players were unhappy and wanted out of St. Louis. The events surrounding the players' refusal to play the Cuban Giants damaged the relationship between players and management. Von der Ahe was disappointed in the performance of some of the players in the world's series loss. A few players complained about their world's series share and others felt unappreciated. Essentially, the relationship between management and some of the players had broken down. The egos of players who had won three consecutive championships and the egos of management were in conflict and it was evident by the time the season ended that some players were going to be sold.

On November 22, it was reported that Curt Welch and Bill Gleason had been sold to Philadelphia. On November 24, Charles Byrne stated that he had completed the purchase of Doc Bushong and, a day later, it was reported that St. Louis had sold Bob Caruthers to Brooklyn. On November 29, Dave Foutz was sold to Brooklyn. In eight days, Chris Von der Ahe had sold the rights to five of the core members of his championship club for approximately $21,000 and the rights to Fredd Mann, Chippy McGarr and Jocko Milligan.

I think that the conventional historical wisdom is that Von der Ahe made the moves for financial reasons and out of a general unhappiness with some of his players. Financially, the club had seen its profits decline from 1886 to 1887 and there were rumors that Von der Ahe was going to move the club to New York for the 1888 season. However, the club was profitable. Von der Ahe, himself, stated that his club never lost money except during the 1890 Players' Revolt. It's true that attendance had declined somewhat but the club had made money and there was no reason to believe that it wouldn't continue to do so in the future.

Money certainly played a role in the sales. But the reason the players were sold for cash is that that was the way players were moved from team to team during the era. The rights to players were sold, not traded for other players. Brooklyn could not obtain Caruthers, Foutz and Bushong without purchasing their rights from St. Louis. Money was the means by which player transactions were conducted. So if Von der Ahe wanted to move his players for reasons other than financial, he was still going to receive money for their rights.

I think that people saw the fact that the players were sold and the amount of money the Browns received and naturally believed that the transactions were financially motivated. I do believe that finances played a part in the sales. The Browns were a successful club with many star players and there was stress placed by the players on management to increase salaries. By moving many of his stars, Von der Ahe removed some of the financial stress on the club. By replacing those stars with younger and cheaper players, the Browns became more profitable. But I don't believe that the transactions were motivated specifically by the money the club was receiving in return for the players. There was a financial motive in moving the players but it's not the one that most people believe.

As to Von der Ahe's unhappiness with his players, that absolutely played a role in the transactions. He was not happy with the world's series loss and the play of some the players, specifically Gleason, during the series. He was not happy with the players' refusal to play the Cuban Giants. He was not happy with the constant complaints about salary. Von der Ahe was unhappy with some of the players and some of the players were unhappy with Von der Ahe. In the end, Von der Ahe owned the team and the players got shipped out. In this clash of egos, the owner won, as they tend to do.

However, there's another aspect of this which doesn't fit neatly into the story of Chris Von der Ahe the greedy and egomaniacal owner who dumped his stars for cash and that is the role of Charlie Comiskey in all of this. Comiskey, while a player, ran the club on the field and was, for all intents and purposes, a part of management. The extent to which Comiskey was involved in the management of the club as a whole has been overblown historically, as a slight to Von der Ahe, but he did play a role. He had, for the most part, a good relationship with Von der Ahe and the Browns' owner respected his captain as a person and a baseball man. So if club management was unhappy with some of the players and wanted to move them, I think a relevant question is to what extent was Comiskey, as a part of the management team, involved in the decision to the move the players?

The evidence is conflicting and doesn't lend itself to an easy answer. Contemporary accounts at the time the transactions were happening state that the moves came as a surprise to Comiskey and that he was unhappy with the moves. However, a few months later, it was reported that Comiskey had been unhappy with some of his players. He felt that their egos had gotten a bit too large, that they were no longer manageable and he wanted them gone. According to these accounts, Comiskey was the driving force behind the moves. While it's difficult to resolve the contradictions, I don't believe that the moves would have been made without Comiskey's knowledge and approval. There are reports that Von der Ahe had wanted to sell Latham in the fall of 1887 but Comiskey disapproved and the sale never went through. I believe that Comiskey's reported unhappiness in December of 1887 has to do with the sale of Foutz, specifically, rather than the sale of the players in general.

While there had been rumors that Foutz was going to be one of the players moved, after the Caruthers' sale, Von der Ahe stated that he was finished moving players. Less than a week later, Foutz was sold to Brooklyn. The reasons for the Foutz sale are, to me, obvious. After Caruthers was sold to Brooklyn, he refused to sign and presented the club with financial demands. When the club met those demands, Caruthers still refused to sign. At that point, the Foutz deal was made. I believe that Brooklyn went back to Von der Ahe and bought Foutz because it was not clear that they would be able to sign Caruthers. The Foutz deal was not part of the original plan and was made only after the Caruthers deal looked like it was falling through. I think this was the source of Comiskey's unhappiness. Losing Foutz left him with an unexpected hole in right field.

Regardless of Comiskey's specific role in the transactions and his level of approval for the moves, it's clear that the ego of management was one of the reasons for the sale of the players. But there are a couple of other reasons for the sales, one of which has been brought up by other historians and one which seems to always be overlooked.

One of the reasons for the sales which has been brought up in the past is that Von der Ahe was attempting to strengthen some of the other teams in the American Association and, by doing so, strengthen the league as a whole. As mentioned earlier, attendance in St. Louis was down in 1887. The reason for this, it appears, is due the uncompetitive nature of the AA race in 1887, when the Browns won the league by fourteen games. In 1885, the Browns won the league by sixteen games and, in 1886, they won by twelve games. The Browns were the class of the AA and had run away with the championship for three straight seasons. By 1887, a sense of boredom or inevitability may have set in among the St. Louis baseball fans and driven down attendance. By strengthening Brooklyn and Philadelphia, Von der Ahe may have hoped to create a more balanced league and a more exciting pennant race. Also, by strengthening those two specific clubs, he was making the league stronger in two of the most important baseball markets in the country. If this was one of the goals of the sales, and Byrnes stated that it was, Von der Ahe succeeded to a certain extent. In 1888, the Browns still won the pennant but by only six and a half games. Brooklyn and Philadelphia finished second and third, respectively. In 1889, the AA experienced one of the great pennant races in baseball history with Brooklyn winning the pennant by two games over St. Louis and Philadelphia finishing a distant third. Von der Ahe, through his moves, strengthened the league in Brooklyn and Philadelphia, got a more competitive league and his club remained profitable. If these were indeed the motivating factors for the sales then Von der Ahe's moves succeeded.

The one thing that always gets overlooked when the sales are discussed is the possibility that the moves were made for pure baseball reasons. Doc Bushong was being phased out as the starting catcher in 1887 and the club had Jack Boyle to replace him. Bill Gleason had his worst year as a professional in 1887 and was in permanent decline. Curt Welch had a poor year at the plate that season and was a drunk. Both he and Gleason had been involved in altercations with their teammates, effecting the chemistry of the club. Dave Foutz had suffered a thumb injury to his throwing hand and it was unknown if he would ever be an effective pitcher again. Comiskey held to a theory of pitching that believed that pitchers, after a few years of hard use, quickly lost their effectiveness. He had ridden Caruthers and Foutz hard for several seasons and the club had good, young pitching in reserve so the Browns' two star pitchers were replaceable.

The Browns had an abundance of young talent and Von der Ahe, in the fall of 1887, was gathering more. They had Silver King and Nat Hudson on the mound and bought Icebox Chamberlain, giving Comiskey three pitchers who were twenty years old or younger. They had Jack Boyle, who was 22. They picked up the young Tommy McCarthy and had the players they obtained from Philadelphia. On top of that, Von der Ahe was putting together the St. Louis Whites and stocking the club with guys like Jake Beckley, Jack Crooks, Jim Devlin, Harry Staley and Joseph Herr. If you consider the Whites to be a farm club for the Browns, Von der Ahe's AA team was loaded with young talent and could afford to cycle out older stars. By selling some of the older guys, the Browns got younger and the payroll got smaller, without much of a loss in quality. By making these moves, the Browns remained a competitive club through the 1891 season. It's not certain that if they had kept Caruthers, Foutz, Welch, Bushong and Gleason, the club would have been anymore successful. That has to be the bottom line. The Browns, through these sales, got younger and cheaper and remained successful for four more seasons.

One could make the argument that if Von der Ahe had continued his experiment in farming players with the Whites, the club would have remained competitive throughout the 1890s. For some reason, it appears that, within a historical context, the player sales and the collapse of the club in the 1890s are linked, the common thread being Von der Ahe's suppossed mismangement of the team. Obviously, the two events have nothing to do with each other and it's interesting to consider how Von der Ahe's legacy would be different if he had continued operating the Whites and phased in their young players in the early 1890s.

In the end, there is no one reason for why the sales took place. It was a complicated series of transactions that involved multiple motives and I don't think it's possible to explain them in one simple sentance. It's wrong to say that Von der Ahe sold off his players for the money but money was one of the motivating factors. The players were also sold because Von der Ahe was attempting to manage not only his own club but also because he was involved in the management of the American Association as a whole. Where there altruistic reasons behind the sale? Sure. Von der Ahe was trying to strengthen the league so that it could succeed but, at the same time, it was selfish in that by strengthening the league, Von der Ahe strengthened his own position. The club, on the field, was strengthened in the long term by these moves and, in the short term, they rid themselves of some of the more egotistical, problem players. All of these motives came together in the fall of 1887 and led to the sales.

One point that I think is important to make is that if you look at all the things motivating Von der Ahe in the fall of 1887, the player sales were a success. The club won the championship in 1888. They continued to be profitable. There were more competitive pennant races. The club got younger. The payroll went down. They shipped out some, if not all, of the problem players. The AA was strengthened by having two good clubs in Brooklyn and Philadelphia. These transactions have historically been portrayed negatively and Von der Ahe criticized for them. But the club was successful until they moved to the National League in 1892, which probably says more about the comparative quality of the AA and the NL than it does about Von der Ahe's management of the club in the late 1880s and early 1890s. The sales were a bold move and I think they worked. I think they achieved every imaginable thing that you could possibly have wanted them to achieve. Instead of viewing them as a negative product of Von der Ahe's baseball management, they should be seen as a daring, unconventional and successful move by one of the great figures of 19th century baseball.

Caruthers Vs. Foutz

For years, I've gone round and round regarding the question of who was the better player: Bob Caruthers or Dave Foutz? I've argued on numerous occasions that the two were reasonably equal as players but I believe that the general consensus is that Caruthers was better. Having listened to some rather intelligent people putting forth logical arguments, I came to accept the conventional wisdom to a certain extent. However, I'm back again in the muddy waters of indecision. It's a fantastic question that can be sliced up many different ways and I think the answer to the question depends on which question you ask.

Complicating the matter is the nature of the two men's careers. They were pitchers who also hit well enough to play everyday in the field. Baseball-Reference actually considers Foutz to be a hitter rather than a pitcher. For whatever reason, I view both as pitchers or, more specifically, as pitcher/outfielders. And even that's not totally accurate as Foutz played more games at first base then he did in the outfield. So I guess the most accurate description of Foutz would be that he was a pitcher/first baseman/outfielder or a first baseman/outfielder/pitcher. Caruthers can be described, without complicating things, as a pitcher/outfielder. Regardless, when looking at the two men, you have to take into account not just their pitching but also their hitting, fielding and base running. These men were complete ballplayers who succeeded at all aspects of the game.

The other problem when comparing Caruthers and Foutz is the difference in the lengths of their careers. Foutz had a much longer career than did Caruthers. Foutz played in 1168 games while Caruthers played in only 728. This is a substantial difference. However, their careers were not constructed in exactly the same manner. Caruthers pitched in 340 games and Foutz in 251. The difference in the length of their careers comes mostly from the time Foutz spent as a full time first baseman with Brooklyn. So while Caruthers pitched in almost a hundred more games than Foutz, Foutz had two thousand more at bats than Caruthers.

I tend to see the two players as being very similar and I think that others do as well. This leads to a natural comparison of the two. But were they really that similar? They were both baseball players who played for St. Louis and Brooklyn. They were both pitchers who, at times, played other positions. They were both well-rounded players. But leaving out the teams they played for, that describes any number of players. It describes Babe Ruth. It describes Rick Ankiel. I don't feel the need to compare Ruth and Ankiel but it's a natural inclination to compare Caruthers and Foutz.

But I think that there are more differences between the two men than similarities. Caruthers was a small man, standing five foot seven and weighing around one hundred and forty pounds. Foutz was tall and thin, at six foot two and one hundred and sixty pounds. If the two were standing side by side, you would never mistake one for the other.

There are other differences. Foutz was older than Caruthers by about seven years. Caruthers reached the major leagues by the age of 20 while Foutz didn't join the Browns until he was 27. Caruthers was, to put it as nicely as possible, sometimes difficult to deal with while I've never read anything about Foutz being much of a problem. Caruthers came from money. I don't know a lot about Foutz's personal life but considering that he spent time working in a gold mine as a young man, I doubt his family had a lot of money. The two men seemed to have led very different lives and to have had very different personalities.

And, as I've already mentioned, while their baseball careers seem superficially similar, they really had very different careers. Foutz suffered a hand injury in 1887 that essentially ended his time as a pitcher and forced his move to the field. Caruthers career was extraordinarily short but, with the exception of his final full season in 1892, he was a pitcher who played in the field when not pitching. While that describes Foutz at the beginning of his career, after 1887, he was really a first baseman. Again, we see more differences than similarities.

But we tend to focus on the ways in which they were alike. They were teammates for eight years. They both pitched. They both could hit. They both could play the field. They were both key contributors for several championship teams. And they were two of the best players in the history of 19th century baseball. So we find it natural to compare Bob Caruthers and Dave Foutz and to link the two in our minds.

However, the question at hand is who was better?

I. Caruthers vs. Foutz as Pitchers

On the surface, this doesn't seem to be close. Caruthers appears to have been a much better pitcher than Foutz, over the course of their careers.

Caruthers pitched over 2828 innings in nine seasons (and 2645 innings in seven seasons) while Foutz only threw 1997 innings in eleven seasons. However, Foutz threw 1835 of those innings in only six seasons, for an average of 306 innings pitched per season. Caruthers, throwing out his first and last seasons, threw 378 innings per season. That's a substantial difference but not as great as one would think, looking at their raw IP data.

Caruthers had 52.6 WAR for his career as a pitcher and Foutz 30. Again, this is a significant difference. At his peak, Caruthers had 10.9, 9.6, 8.3, 6.8 and 10.3 wins above replacement. Foutz, during his pitching peak, had seasons of 3.0, 6.2, 12.3, 3.9 and 2.5 WAR. Caruthers was a more valuable pitcher than Foutz every season of their peaks, except for 1886 when Foutz had his monster season.

Looking at other numbers muddies the waters somewhat. Foutz has a better FIP than Caruthers, 3.69 versus 3.88, and I find that rather odd. Foutz struck out more batters and gave up fewer homers than Caruthers but Parisian Bob walked fewer batters. They played in front of the same defense for most of their careers and this was the 19th century, when you didn't have a lot of walks, strikeouts and home runs (relatively speaking), so I didn't expect such a big difference in their FIP numbers. Maybe because there are few walks, strikeouts and home runs, any difference in the numbers will have a greater effect on FIP. Regardless, this tells us that Foutz may have been a more effective pitcher than Caruthers, independent of the defense they played in front of.

If you look at ERA+, the two men are dead even. Caruthers has a career ERA+ of 123 and Foutz of 124. I'm not certain how much that really means but I think it's more evidence that Foutz was just as effective a pitcher as Caruthers.

Just for fun, I'll give you their career winning percentages. Dave Foutz has a career winning percentage of .690 and Bob Caruthers of .688. They rank tied for third and fifth, respectively, on the all-time list. Now that tells us that they played for good pitchers who played for good teams for most of their career but I think it also tells us something else. It again shows that that they were about equally as effective as pitchers in that neither, while playing with the same clubs, were able to raise the winning percentage of their club much higher than the other could.

Caruthers was the more valuable pitcher but almost all of his value comes from his ability to throw more innings than Foutz. At his peak, Caruthers started 228 games (completing all but eight) while Foutz started 185 (completing all but ten). If we accept the idea that the two were equally effective as pitchers, the fact that Caruthers remained healthier than Foutz and pitched more is significant. Foutz may have been just as good a pitcher as Caruthers but Caruthers was able to utilize his pitching skills more often than Foutz and therefore had more value.

In the end, I don't think it's accurate to say that Caruthers was a better pitcher than Foutz but it is a fact that he was the more valuable pitcher.

II. Caruthers vs. Foutz as Hitters

Both Caruthers and Foutz were outstanding hitters who were good enough at the bat to play everyday for multiple championship clubs. When I started looking at this, I figured that this is where Foutz would make up some ground on Caruthers. While both were fine hitters, Foutz essentially had a second career as a full time first baseman. I thought that the runs that Foutz created with his bat in the second half of his career would erase, to some extent, the advantage that Caruthers had as a pitcher. Since Caruthers only real advantage as a pitcher was his durability, it made sense that Foutz's ability to continue to play and rack up at bats after Caruthers was retired would help erase the gap between the two. However, that's not what I find.

There is simply no way to argue that Foutz was a better hitter than Caruthers. Let me that another way: looking at any imaginable metric, Caruthers was simply a much better hitter than Foutz.

In 2906 plate appearences, Caruthers accumulated 18.8 WAR. In 4859 PA, Foutz accumulated 18.1. Caruthers was more productive than Foutz while using 2000 fewer PA. However, WAR includes base running and defense, which we'll look at in the next section. If we take that out and just look at their productivity as hitters, the difference between the two becomes clearer.

Looking at their weighted on base average, Caruthers had a career wOBA of .380 while Foutz's was .332. At his peak, Caruthers was putting up a wOBA of .453, .464, .317, .381 and .371. Foutz's peak wOBA was .400, .319, .352, .384 and .330. Caruthers simply got on base more and had more power than Foutz did. You can take a quick glance at their OPS+ and see this. Caruther's career OPS+ was 133 and Foutz's was 102.

Batting Runs shows the same thing. Caruthers put up 166 Batting Runs over his career while Foutz put up only 64. The large difference there comes not only from Caruthers being a better hitter but also from Foutz being a below replacement level hitter over the last 1800 plate appearances of his career. You can see that in his career OPS+, which shows Foutz to have been basically a league average hitter over the course of his career.

Of course, Foutz really wasn't a league average hitter. At his peak, he was an outstanding hitter and put up Batting Runs of 4, 31, 16, 26 and 38 before he stopped hitting in 1891. But Caruthers, during his peak, put up 47, 51, 9, 15 and 15.

Foutz was a good hitter. He finished in the top ten in batting average once, on base percentage once, slugging percentage twice, OPS once, hits once, total bases twice, double twice, triples twice, RBI four times and extra base hits twice. That's a good career with the bat. Caruthers was just better. He finished in the top five in batting average twice, in the top ten in on base percentage three times (leading the league in 1885), finished second in slugging percentage twice and he led the league in OPS in 1886 and finished third in OPS in 1887. He also finished in the top ten in home runs twice, triples once and walks three times.

Foutz had the opportunity, with his extra 2000 at bats, to erase the difference between he and Caruthers. Caruthers was a better hitter at his peak but Foutz had the opportunity to put up a better career as a hitter. He simply failed to do so. Beginning in 1891, Foutz was a below replacement level hitter every season until he retired in 1896. That's a full 1800 plate appearances as a below replacement level hitter. He didn't get much value at of those PA's and put up -46 Batting Runs over the period. Dave Foutz the manager should have benched Dave Foutz the player and given those PA's to a more productive hitter.

III. Defense and Baserunning

This is the one area where Foutz beats Caruthers hands down.

The modern metrics show that Foutz was a better base runner and better defensively than Caruthers. Foutz, for his career, had 11 Baserunning Runs and a TZ rating of 10. Caruthers was -8 and -19 respectively.

And please don't ask me to explain Baserunning runs and TotalZone. I have a basic understanding of what they mean but I couldn't explain how they're calculated. Also, there are probably some problems with calculating this for 19th century players due to a lack of data. But, regardless, I'm going with the numbers and saying Foutz was a much better defensive player and base runner than Caruthers.

IV. Miscellanea

A few items that I think should be mentioned:

-Caruthers was a bit of a jerk. The way he left the Browns in 1887 didn't exactly cover him in glory and there's the whole fake trip to Paris thing. Foutz may have been a jerk but I haven't seen much evidence of it (at least during his St. Louis days). Al Spink wrote that Foutz was "a thoroughly gentlemanly player" and that "no one saw him lose his temper or heard him speak a harsh word..."

-Foutz was a better manager than Caruthers. Foutz managed Brooklyn for four years and had a 264-257 record. He wasn't exactly John McGraw but he wasn't bad. Caruthers managed the Browns in 1892 for 50 games. He won 16 and lost 32. At some point, I'll have to post something on Caruthers' return to the Browns and his adventures in management. I'm certain it'll be interesting.

-The two men were teammates for eight years and played on five championship clubs.

-Neither are in the Hall of Fame, although I think there is some consensous that Caruthers is one of the best 19th century players outside the Hall. I'd put them both in.

-Spink mention in The National Game that Foutz was the tallest pitcher of his day. Don't know if that's true but I thought I'd mention it.

-Both Caruthers and Foutz were right-handed pitchers. Foutz also hit right but Caruthers batted left-handed.

V. Conclusion

I don't think there's any doubt that Caruthers was a better baseball player than Foutz. At his peak and over the course of his career, he was a better pitcher and a better hitter. Foutz may have been a better base runner, defender, manager and teammate but that's not nearly enough to make up for Caruthers' advantages at bat and on the mound.

If you had to choose one, I think you have to take Caruthers. Chris Von der Ahe essentially said as much when, talking about the player sales that included Caruthers and Foutz, he said "(The) only man I regret losing is Caruthers."

Foutz Signs With Brooklyn

David Foutz, of the St. Louis Browns, has signed a contract to play with the Brooklyn club next season.

-Atchison Daily Champion, December 8, 1887

Just a quick post today, noting the fact that Foutz signed with Brooklyn. And that, at this point, Caruthers still had not.

Tomorrow, I'll have the long awaited and much overdo Caruthers vs. Foutz post.

Dave Foutz=Roy Oswalt

Foutz, it appears, is to play first base for the Brooklyns. He has for a year or so wanted to get out of pitching and go to playing either at first base or in the outfield, and it is probable he has talked over the matter with Manager Byrne.

-Milwaukee Sentinel, December 5, 1888

This is not entirely accurate. Foutz played 78 games in the outfield in 1888 and only 42 at first. He pitched in 23 games and, despite the arm injury, was rather effective. But the general point is true. Foutz was on his way to transitioning from being a pitcher/outfielder to being a first baseman.

Foutz just has the strangest stats and it's tough to make sense of them. In the next couple of days, I'm going to write up something comparing Foutz and Caruthers and I'll try to sort out the weirdness. But I'll leave you with this: according to B-Ref, the most similar pitcher to Dave Foutz is Dizzy Dean. The fifth most similar pitcher is Roy Oswalt, which makes absolutely perfect sense to me in a way that I don't think I can really explain. But on a gut level, it just seems right. Roy Oswalt is Dave Foutz without the bat.

Von der Ahe On Caruthers, Foutz, the Whites And The Browns Chances In 1888

"Can you confirm the sale of Foutz?"

"I can. Foutz has been signed by Brooklyn already. The price paid for him was even more than the $5000 first published."

"How do you feel over the sale of your players?"

"Well, the only man I regret losing is Caruthers. He is a great ball player, but very stubborn and hard to manage..."

"Do you still think that the Browns are as strong as ever?"

"I think they are stronger and will again win the pennant. I do not say this for a boast, but I mean every word of it."

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, December 4, 1887

This was part of an interview that Von der Ahe gave just before he left for the annual league meeting. One of the interesting things that he said was in response to the reporters question about the possibility of raising ticket prices to 50 cents. Von der Ahe said that he was in favor of raising ticket prices (naturally) and that, if prices were raised, fans in St. Louis would still have the option of seeing his new Western League club, the Whites, for 25 cents. This probably explains why the Whites lost money. If tickets to see both clubs were 25 cents in 1888, why would anyone pay to see the Whites when you could see the Browns for the same price?

He Will Sign With Brooklyn

Bob Caruthers failed to leave for home last night, notwithstanding his reiterated assertion that he would do so. He now states that he will positively leave for Chicago to-night. He seems to have changed his mind in regard to Brooklyn, and said last night that he would just as soon play in Brooklyn as not, although his offer from Cincinnati was a better one. He states that when he arrives home he will go to work, and his office hours will be from 8 to 5. The outcome of the matter will be that he will sign with Brooklyn, but not until late in the spring.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 30, 1887

Since I just argued that the reason Foutz was sold to Brooklyn was because Caruthers refused to sign, would it be weird if I now argued that the reason Caruthers suddenly changed his tune was because Foutz had just been sold to Brooklyn?

I don't have the source for this and it may be something that I'm just making up but I don't believe that the two men had the best relationship. That Browns' clubhouse doesn't seem to have been the closest and it just seems that it would be within the character of the two men not to get along. I don't know but the idea that Foutz and Caruthers didn't like each other is something rattling around the back of my head.

And if that's true, how likely would it be that Caruthers would want to sign with Brooklyn after they just picked up Foutz? Would he sign just out of spite? I can see Caruthers, thinking he had played everything perectly, suddenly very upset that Brooklyn had bought Foutz. He would sign and show them that he couldn't be replaced by the likes of Dave Foutz.

Honestly, I don't even know what I'm arguing anymore. All I know is that trying to get into Bob Caruthers' head is very tiring.

Foutz Sold To Brooklyn

Notwithstanding Mr. Von der ahe's assertion that he had no more players for sale, he has all but made arrangements for the transfer of Foutz to Brooklyn, receiving $5000 in return. The transfer of Foutz confirms the opinion that Mr. Von der Ahe is financially interested in the Brooklyn team. The negotiations for Foutz have been of recent date, and were probably commenced as soon as Byrne saw that Caruthers was likely to slip from his grasp. This makes the third player released to Brooklyn, but Foutz's loss will be little felt. He is no good as a pitcher and is a good fielder. His only redeeming feature is his batting. When questioned in regard to the matter, Mr. Von der Ahe stated that he would receive no players in exchange for Foutz. The consideration was purely a monetary one. Should the lean pitcher recover the use of his arm he may be a valuable man next year, but his arm has commenced to draw up like Charley Sweeney's did, and it is probably lost.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 30, 1887

The sale of Foutz shouldn't have come as a surprise. It was reported in the Globe on November 13 that he would probably be sold and it was reported on the November 20 that he was "anxious to get away" from the Browns. However, on November 26, Von der Ahe stated in an interview that "I have no more players for sale" and that he was going to retain Foutz for the Browns. So while Foutz was one of the players who wanted out and there were rumors that he was going to be sold, it appeared, after the Caruthers sale, that Foutz was going to remain a Brown.

So what happened? Given the timing, it does appear that Foutz was sold to Brooklyn after it appeared that they wouldn't be able to sign Caruthers.

Caruthers was sold to Brooklyn on November 24 and was expected to sign a contract the next day. But that didn't happen. He held out for either a higher salary or a larger piece of the sale price. Brooklyn finally gave in to his demands on November 28 and thought they had a deal. At that point, even after all his demands had been met, Caruthers stated that he couldn't sign without the consent of his family, who promptly told him not to sign. He also mentioned that if he was going to sign at all, it would probably be in Cincinnati. Brooklyn was getting the run around and was no closer to signing Caruthers than it had been at the beginning of the process.

I find it completely believable that, at that point, Brooklyn went back to Von der Ahe and told him that they couldn't sign Caruthers and wanted their other pitcher/outfielder. The sale happened quickly because they had already talked about the possibility of Foutz a couple of weeks earlier. The groundwork for the deal had already been laid and they were able to get it done in twenty-four hours.

This seems to me the most logical explanation for why Foutz was sold to Brooklyn.

The Browns Were Still On Tour?

Although there was a counter attraction of a game between the New Yorks and the local club, the Greenhoods and the Morans, an enormous crowd gathered to see a game of base ball at Central Park [in San Francisco] this afternoon between the champions of the American Association, the St. Louis Browns, and the Philadelphias.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 25, 1887

I'm not going to give you all the game details because my point here is that, as the big deal was going down, the Browns were still traveling around the country playing baseball. Since the end of the 1887 world's series, they had travelled to Memphis, New Orleans, Charleston and El Paso. And they played a Thanksgiving Day game in San Francisco. That's crazy.

But the game got a nice crowd, reported to be over 20,000. There wasn't a box score but it was mentioned that Foutz (who hadn't been sold yet) pitched and Bushong (who the club had agreed to sell) caught. Latham and O'Neill also played in the game. And the Browns won 12-3.

A Deal In Progress

A big base ball deal is in progress of materialization at the present time, but all information pertaining to it is being carefully suppressed by those interested. The deal is said to be the largest ever made from a financial standpoint, and will involve between $30,000 and $40,000. Five clubs are interested in it, and there will probably be an interchange of players and money between them during the coming week. The clubs are the Athletic, St. Louis, Brooklyn, Baltimore and Louisville. President Christ Von der Ahe, of St. Louis, and Charles H. Byrne, of Brooklyn, are engineering the trade, which is expected to startle the base ball world. The Athletics are after at least six new men, and Manager Wm. Sharsig's trip to New York this week was made on behalf of his club. Mr. Sharsig returned from New York today. To a reporter of the Globe-Democrat he said:

"Yes, I have been trying to make a deal for some new men, but until I secure their names to contracts I will not make their names public."

While in New York Mr. Sharsig had several long talks with Mr. Byrne, and there is no doubt but that arrangements were made for the transfer of one or more of the Brooklyn and Metropolitan players to this city. The Athletic Directors held a secret meeting this afternoon and listened to Manager Sharsig's report, but action was deferred until the arrival of Mr. Von der Ahe in [Philadelphia] on Monday.

Changes in the St. Louis Team.

It is known that President Von der Ahe intends to make a number of changes in his champion team next season, and that he will dispose of a number of his crack players. The arrangements for the transfer of these men were partially made when Von der Ahe was in the East a week ago, and he is now on his way East again and is expected in [Philadelphia] Monday. Rumor has it that the Browns' best battery, Caruthers and Bushong, are among the players to be disposed of. Bushong will go to Brooklyn, that much is certain, as Mr. Byrne has made a standing offer of $5000 for the great catcher. It is probable that Byrne will also bag Caruthers, as he has made an offer of $10,000 for him, as much as Boston paid for Mike Kelly. The Athletics started the bidding on Caruthers at $5000, Baltimore offered $8000, and Brooklyn wound up with a bid of $10,000 for the great battery. Bushong is a native of [Philadelphia]. where he graduated from the famous Archer club. Curtis Welsh, Foutz, "Yank" Robinson and "Brudder Bill" Gleason are the other St. Louis players that are reported as anxious to get away.

"Robinson will not be sold or released to any club," said Von der Ahe, when in this city. The Athletics are after Welch and Gleason. Manager Sharsig is particularly anxious to secure the great centerfielder, and speaks hopefully of doing so. Von der Ahe likes McGarr, and is also said to be after one of the Athletic catchers. It is probable that Welch will play in [Philadelphia], and that the Athletics will trade two of their men for him.

The Purchase Of Gleason.

In reference to Gleason, Manager Sharsig said: "I think Bill Gleason is as good as he ever was. I would like to have him to play short-stop and captain the team." Gleason's release will cost the Athletic club at least $3000. Dave Foutz, the Bay City pitcher, who cost Von der Ahe $8000, will probably play in Baltimore. He has many friends in the Monumental City, and Vonderhost and Barnie are reported to have offered $4000 for his release. Louisville will also have a finger in the big deal and it is reported that Guy Hecker, their best pitcher, will be sold to the Brooklyn club for $8000. Kerins, the first baseman and catcher, would like to get away from Louisville and the Athletic and Brooklyn clubs have bid as high as $4000 for him, but he will probably remain where he is. McTamany, of the Brooklyn club, is another player who is likely to wear the blue stockings of the Athletic club next season, and one of the Brooklyn or Metropolitan pitchers may come along with him. President Von der Ahe is rapidly adding to his already long list of new players. Following up his engagement of James McCormick, the agent of the St. Louis President in [Philadelphia] to-day signed Bart Cantz, one of the Newark club catchers. Cantz is a good general player and hard hitter, a strong thrower to bases, and formerly caught for Knouff, who is now with the St. Louis club. Cantz's contract calls for $1700, of which $300 is in advance.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 20, 1887

Bushong And Foutz Are On The Block

Mr. Von der Ahe is still in New York. It is probable that he will exchange Bushong for Smith, and Foutz for Terry, before he returns.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 13, 1887

The club, at this point, was still on their southern tour, playing the Chicagos in New Orleans.

The 1887 World Series: Game Eleven

The second game of the doubleheader was played in Baltimore and the victory by Detroit was their eighth win, clinching the series.

The Browns have lost their title as World's Champions, having given up that proud title to Detroit. They played very little like a champion club this afternoon, and an amateur team could have defeated them. They could not hit a balloon or catch anything, while the indifference of Foutz was disgusting. he seemed to care little whether he won or lost, and played a slovenly, don't care sort of game that disgusted even his warmest admirers. The whole team played poor ball, with the exception of Robinson, Latham and Comiskey. The former's work was really brilliant. He fielded in marked contrast to his associates, and made half the hits credited to his side. The Detroits played poorly in the field, but batted well and won in this way. Kelly was in the field this afternoon and Gaffney behind the bat. The weather was clear, but cold, and the attendance 2500.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, October 22, 1887

I don't have much to say about this game except that it was an old fashioned whipping.

Foutz had a bad game and, while I wouldn't say that his play was indifferent, I would say he appears to have been rattled in the middle innings when the game was lost. After giving up a two-run homer in the fourth, he walked two guys and missed a return throw from Boyle. In the fifth, he missed a cut-off throw because he had his back turned to the outfield and then later failed to cover first on a grounder, all of this while allowing four runs. In the sixth, he gave up four more runs, had a wild pitch, hit a batter and walked one. The Globe called his play "execrable" and his play was so bad that reading the game account made me wince.

And I'm not sure if I've mentioned this or not but there were rumors in St. Louis of game fixing and by calling Foutz's play "indifferent," I think the Globe may have been implying that Foutz was throwing the game. There is no evidence of game fixing and these rumours always started flying when a favored team lost or a good player made a couple of errors in a game. Is it possible that the Browns threw the series? Yes. Is there any real evidence to support this? No.

The 1887 World Series: Another Storyline

In the palmy days of the old Northwestern League there were three pitchers whose fame had spread all over the section of the country in which they twirled the sphere. Dave Foutz was then the Bay City's mainstay, and came very nearly being the whole team. So well was this recognized that when Mr. Von der Ahe wanted to buy Foutz, the management said, "Well, the team goes with Dave" and the Browns' President was compelled to buy the entire team before he could secure Foutz. At the same time Getzein, the "pretzel pitcher," of the Detroit Club, was doing yeoman work for the Grand Rapids team and some of the battles between Getz and Fouz are talked of to this day in that portion of the country. During this time Bob Caruthers was doing the pitching for Minneapolis, where he first gained fame as a twirler. Now these great pitchers are to battle once again for supremacy, not in Union League Clubs, however, but on the two crack clubs of the world. Certainly history repeats itself.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, October 9, 1887

So there are several nice storylines to follow in the 1887 world's series. We have the battle between Foutz/Caruthers and Getzein. We have Dunlap returning to St. Louis. We have the sluggers vs. the defense/base running club. We have the champions trying to retain their crown. We have the usual League vs. Association stuff. And we have the possible negative impact of high ticket prices. I'm sure there will also be some gambling/pool related stories as well.

This is some good stuff. The series seems to lack the intensity and high-profile of the St. Louis/Chicago battle of 1886 but there's more than enough here to keep our interest. Plus, there's the possibility that the Globe will turn on Von der Ahe and the Browns once they start losing. I wasn't all that excited about this series and thought it was a bit of a letdown after the 1886 series but I'm looking forward to seeing how this all shakes out.

The 1887 World Series: Caught On The Fly Style

Fred Dunlap, of the old Maroons, is giving out tips on the pitching points of Foutz and Caruthers to the Detroit nine. The sluggers (in their mind) have the matter of knocking out the Browns' twirlers all mapped out.

It will be a rare sight to see the greatest hitters in the country, Tip O'Neill and Dan Brouthers, pitted against one another. Tip leads all players in hitting this season, his average being at high-water mark-above .490...

President Stearns, of Detroit, telegraphed yesterday that if Dave Foutz pitched in Detroit, the city of Bay City, Mich. [where Foutz had played in 1883], would suspend business on that day and the people would attend the game en masse. Dave is worshiped in Bay City, and Foutz street is one of the prettiest there.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, October 8, 1887

There's some interesting stuff here:

-I can't really see Dunlap sitting around giving pointers to his teammates. It doesn't fit what we know about his personality.

-O'Neill's batting average for 1887 was .435 but his OBP was .490.

-Was Foutz street in Bay City, Michigan named after Dave Foutz?

Take Us Up To The Fourth Floor And Cut The Rope

The great showing Long John Reilly is making at the bat now recalls to mind an incident which happened in St. Louis last year. The Cincinnatis had just been shut out 8 to 0, getting but four hits off Foutz. The club had been losing right along and the players had become very sore in consequence. When in the elevator at the hotel, Fred Lewis said to the boy: "Take us up to the fourth floor and cut the rope." Long John, who was sitting over in the corner, raised up and said: "Oh, that won't do any good; we would not hit anything anyhow."

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, September 8, 1887

If this is anything more than just a story, it most have taken place in 1886, which was the only year that Lewis and Reilly were teammates. Lewis played with the Browns in 1883 and 1884 and the Maroons in 1884 and 1885.

The 1886 World Series: Von der Ahe's Challenge

Towards the end of September of 1886, the Browns were running away from the rest of the clubs in the American Association and were up double digits in games. At the same time, Chicago had a strong lead in the National League and it looked like both of the 1885 championship clubs were going to repeat. Naturally enough, the thoughts of many began to turn to the idea of a rematch of the 1885 world's championship series. However, an 1886 World Series was not a given and the details of the series had to be negotiated.

President Spalding, of the Chicago club, has stated in several interviews recently that he would not permit his club to play the Browns a series of games for the championship of the world under any circumstances. The reason he gives for not consenting to such a contest is because the players would wager money on the result, and he does not want any gambling in his club. Perhaps, however, the real reason that Mr. Spalding does not want to play the Browns is simply because he is afraid that he will be beaten and as to the remark that he does not want his pets to put up any money, he is probably looking to their own interests, and does not want to see them lose their hard-earned cash. At any rate, Mr. Von der Ahe sent a challenge to President Spalding last night, in which he requests that a series of games be arranged, and sincerely hopes that the noted President of the celebrated "babies," which may become more famous by beating the Browns, will think favorably of the proposition, and not disappoint thousands of patrons of the game, both in this city and Chicago, who are dying to see the two clubs come together. Mr. Von der Ahe's challenge is as follows:

A.G. Spalding, President Chicago League Club, Chicago, Ill.: Dear Sir-The championship season is fast approaching an end, and it now seems reasonably sure that the Chicago White Stockings and the St. Louis Brown Stockings will win the championship of their respective associations. I therefore take this opportunity of challenging your team, on behalf of the Browns, for a series of contests to be known as the world's championship series. It is immaterial to me whether the series be composed of five, seven or nine games. I would respectfully suggest, however, that it would be better, from a financial standpoint, to play the entire series on the two home grounds, and not travel around as we did last season. I would like to hear from you at your earliest convenience, in order that the dates and other details may be arranged. I am yours respectfully,

C. Von Der Ahe.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, September 26, 1886

Interestingly, these two clubs had a bit of a run in when Chicago was in St. Louis in mid-July to play the Maroons. At that time, Anson was asked how the Browns would do in the League and he said something along the lines that they would finish fifth or sixth. The Browns didn't take that too kindly. Comiskey just pointed out the results of the 1885 series but Foutz and Caruthers confronted Anson at the Lindell Hotel and offered to bet $1,000 that St. Louis could beat Chicago. Jon David Cash writes that "a week after Fouts and Caruthers dared Anson to put his money where his mouth was, White Stocking shortstop Ned Williamson responded to the offer of the Browns' aces: 'Anson and the rest of us will stand ready to cover all bets which Foutz and others of the Brown Stockings wish to make.' The St. Louis Merchants Exchange got into the act by claiming that it would wager ten thousand dollars on the Browns in a series with the White Stockings. Then the Chicago Board of Trade engaged in a bit of one-upmanship by offering to bet up to one million dollars on the White Stockings. While dismissing most of these maneuverings as 'a big game of bluff,' the Sporting News editorialized, 'If the Chicago folks think that their team can beat ours, they have simply to put up their stuff. Ours has been up...Anson and others were asked to cover it, but they politely declined. Money is the only thing that talks nowadays so our Chicago friends will do well to either put up or shut up.'"

I would guess that this incident and the subsequent talk of money and betting was what Spalding was talking about when he stated that he didn't want to play the series because of the influence that gambling would have on his club.

Photos of Bob Caruthers And Dave Foutz

These pics of Caruthers and Foutz were cropped out of the 1889 Brooklyn team photo which, being the nice guy that I am, I am also posting. The original team photo comes from the Vintage Panoramic Pictures thread at BBF.

1888 Browns Ad

This ad for a series between the Browns and Brooklyn appeared in The Sporting News on July 7, 1888. The player pictured in the ad is Doc Bushong, who along with Dave Foutz and Bob Caruthers had been traded to Brooklyn prior to the 1888 season.

News Of Such A Startling Character

A dispatch from St. Louis says the proposed new baseball League in the East is creating alarm among the stockholders of the St. Louis Browns. President Von der Ahe, since his return from the East, has had several conferences with other stockholders in the club, and he has imparted to them news of such a startling character that many of them are publicly asserting that baseball in the West next year will be practically dead. The President of the Browns says that Day, Byrne, and Barnie are heartily in favor of the scheme, and that if they pulled the other strong Eastern clubs into line the scheme would be adopted. "Without the big Eastern clubs," said he, "the business would go to smash, and if war was declared the East would have the advantage from the beginning." Foutz, Welch, and Bushong of the home team are to be traded off or sold, and if the proposed Eastern League is an assured fact the stars of the Browns will doubtless be sold and St. Louis will be contented with its little Western League Club.

-The New York Times, November 20, 1887


The rumor about the Eastern clubs splitting off to form their own league is relatively interesting and I was vaguely aware of it but the idea that this potential threat was one of the reasons for the Browns' sell-off in 1887 is a new one to me. I'm not certain that I'm buying it. There were already enough reasons for the fire sale (which I've written about before on a few occasions) without complicating the matter with rumors of potential threats to the Browns' viability. Most likely, this news was disseminated to the stockholders and the public in order to lessen a potential uproar over the breaking up of the championship team. It was probably easier to say that we need to move these players to strengthen our financial position in the face of a grave threat from the Eastern clubs rather than to talk about how Von der Ahe needed to squeeze more money out of the Browns' in order to fund his other ventures, how Comiskey was unhappy with attitudes of some of his star players, and how Von der Ahe felt it was in the Browns' best interests to strengthen some of the other AA clubs.