DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum How Negro Leagues stats change MLB record books: Jackie Robinson and more notable names get updated numbers

Approximately 3,400 players who played in the Negro Leagues are now part of MLB's official record

On Wednesday, Major League Baseball announced that Negro League statistics have been officially incorporated into the Major League record. Seven Negro Leagues were elevated to "Major League" status in 2020 and the statistics of approximately 3,400 players who played in the Negro Leagues between 1920-48 are now part of MLB's official record.

"We are proud that the official historical record now includes the players of the Negro Leagues," commissioner Rob Manfred said in a statement. "This initiative is focused on ensuring that future generations of fans have access to the statistics and milestones of all those who made the Negro Leagues possible. Their accomplishments on the field will be a gateway to broader learning about this triumph in American history and the path that led to Jackie Robinson's 1947 Dodger debut."

Seven leagues comprised the Negro Leagues from 1920-1948: Negro National League (I) (1920-1931), Eastern Colored League (1923-1928), American Negro League (1929), East-West League (1932), Negro Southern League (1932), Negro National League (II) (1933-1948), and the Negro American League (1937-1948). Experts estimate records from these leagues are 75% complete.

Countless individual player totals and several of baseball's all-time statistical records have changed as a result of the integration of the Negro Leagues into the Major League official record. Here are the most notable changes to baseball's record.

Gibson becomes leader in AVG, SLG, OPS

Josh Gibson, a standout catcher who played for three Negro League teams from 1930-45 -- Memphis Red Sox, Pittsburgh Crawfords, Homestead Grays -- is baseball's new single-season and career leader in batting average, slugging percentage, and OPS. Here are the new batting average leaderboards:

Career;

1. Josh Gibson: .372

Single Season;

1. Josh Gibson, 1943: .466

Career;

2. Ty Cobb: .367

Single season;

2. Chino Smith, 1929: .451

Career

3. Oscar Charleston: .363

Single season;

3. Hugh Duffy, 1894: .440

Career;

4. Rogers Hornsby: .358

Single season;

4. Oscar Charleston, 1921: .434

Career;

5. Jud Wilson: .350

Single season;

5. Charlie Blackwell, 1921: .432

Gibson's .974 slugging percentage in 1937 is now the single-season record, beating out Mule Stuttles' .898 mark in 1937. His career .718 slugging percentage takes the top spot from Babe Ruth and his career .690 slugging percentage.

As for OPS, Gibson now has the two best single-season marks: 1.474 in 1931 and 1.435 in 1943. Barry Bonds previously held the record with a 1.421 OPS during his record 73-homer season in 2001. Gibson's career 1.177 OPS is the new all-time record. The previous record was Babe Ruth's 1.164 OPS.

In parts of 14 Negro League seasons, Gibson authored a .372/.458/.718 batting line with 166 home runs in 602 games. He was a 12-time All-Star and is widely considered one of the greatest catchers in the history of the game.

Robinson, Mays pick up more hits

Before breaking the color barrier with the Dodgers in 1947, Jackie Robinson played one overlooked season with the Kansas City Monarchs of the Negro Leagues, and in that season he hit .375/.449/.600 in 34 games. According to Elias, he had 49 hits in those 34 games. Add those to his 1,518 hits with the Dodgers from 1947-56, and it gives Robinson a new total of 1,569 career hits.

Willie Mays, arguably the greatest all-around ballplayer ever, briefly played with the Birmingham Black Barons in 1948. He went 10 for 43 (.233) in 10 games, per Elias. Mays played parts of 23 MLB seasons with the Giants and Mets from 1951-73. He amassed 3,283 hits in those 23 seasons. Add in his 10 Negro League hits, and Mays' new career total is 3,293, the 13th most in history.

Paige adds 97 more wins

In 1971, Satchel Paige became the first Negro Leaguer inducted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame. He won 97 games with six Negro League teams from 1927-47 -- Birmingham Black Barons, Cleveland Cubs, Pittsburgh Crawfords, Kansas City Monarchs, New York Black Yankees, Memphis Red Sox -- before getting an MLB opportunity with Cleveland at age 41 in 1948.

Paige plays parts of five MLB seasons with Cleveland and the St. Louis Browns from 1948-53 -- he also pitched one game for the Kansas City Athletics at age 59 in 1965 -- and went 28-31. His new official career win total is 125, per Elias.

Miñoso clears 2,000 hits

Minnie Miñoso, the Cuban Comet, began his professional career with three seasons with the New York Cubans from 1946-48. He slashed .313/.364/.479 with 150 hits in 113 games during his three seasons in the Negro Leagues. Miñoso made his MLB debut with Cleveland in 1949 and played 17 seasons with four teams from 1949-80. In those 17 seasons he racked up 1,963 hits.

Now that Negro League statistics are part of the Major League record, Miñoso joins the 2,000-hit club and has 2,113 career hits. Miñoso, who died at age 91 in 2015, was voted into the Hall of Fame by the Golden Days Era Committee in December 2021. He was part of the 2022 Hall of Fame class.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/...-more-notable-names-get-updated-numbers/

I got into an argument about this very topic. MLB and the Negro Leagues were two different leagues.
Yes it was deplorable that it had to be that way, but the entire thing stinks of Woke. Josh Gibson didn’t play in the majors. He set no MLB records at all.

And I've also heard that argument made. I'm just not sure when it was decided that when you include everyone instead of only some it would be labeled as woke.

I honestly don’t know what you mean when you say “include everyone instead of only some…..”
I believe guys like Gibson and Satchel would have flourished in the Majors - in some ways, Satchel did when he got there - but as I said, I believe that MLB and the Negro Leagues were two separate entities.

On the basis that they were forced to be separate entities, yes. I'm not sure forcing it to remain that way is a solution.

Solution happened when guys like Robinson and Doby entered the leagues. I don't know that combining numbers is any type of solution. Pacification possibly.

As they can't go back and change things, they will always have been separate. Putting Negro League records in the MLB records effectively "whitewashes" that reality. It effectively says that nope, we didn't keep them out back then. They were with us. They're ours.

-This thread may need to be moved to the political forum.
Also-Agreed ‘Peen. Pacification and in my opinion, a pointless talking point. Bringing up terms like “Negro League” when in this day and age it should be referred to as African American League. - All in a clever attempt to paint the African American leagues as dependent on White people to achieve any sort of notoriety. Woke liberals, like the person who wrote this article hate the notion that Africans can take care of themselves. Rather than encouraging the growth and development of the African American League, liberals wanted to halt it so that they can absorb and control the players into being dependent on their systems.
While we’re at it, we might as well compare the Asian and Hispanic Leagues to the mlb as well. For years, people from these communities experienced the same sort of discrimination in baseball. But see, Asians and Hispanics by and large have proven that American minorities can build their own leagues, in their own countries.-Proving to have the ability to organize and build successful institutions similar to those in the USA. But woke liberals will do everything they can to encourage African Americans to feel like victims, rather than encouraging their independence.

j/c

People can look at it both ways and I'm not sure which one is correct. One can say this was done to pacify a minority or they can see it as righting a wrong.

As was pointed out there eventually became exceptions of Negro league players that were brought into the majors. But only the very best of the best. While there were marginal white players all throughout teams in MLB who weren't the best of the best. That's certainly not an "all things being equal" situation.

As with all sports you have your all star players and then you have other players who fill in the gaps. Certainly qualified to be on the roster but well below star status. A lot of players in the Negro leagues could have filled some of those roles as good if not better than many of the white players in MLB did but they were never considered.

And Muni, if you can't see that at that time in our nations history that it has nothing to do with this... "hate the notion that Africans can take care of themselves" you've just taken strike three of your turn at bat.

j/c...

I basically agree with Lamp -- 100%

We've now included stats that completely water down the meaning of the older stats. It was hard enough to compare eras, now we've included stats from seven new leagues. Some long-standing, some quickly defunk, some with terrible accounts of what happened. Some that were pitchers' leagues, some that were batters' leagues.

I've always recognized JG as the all-time single-season batting king. But what about Tetelo Vargas? He batted .471 in a different negro league in 1943 (Negro National League II)... the same year Gibson hit .466. Baseball Reference (the bible for most people) now has him listed as the all-time for single season batting average. Maybe some will say no because his league only plated 30 games. But that's not his fault, right?

Coming in at second (depending on the stat source) is now 'Chino' Smith with his incredible .451. He played in the American Negro League in 1929. The very first year of the league's existence. There were SIX teams and the season consisted of 80 games (he played 66). I guess you played each team 16 times? Advantage batter? All we know is the league wide ERA was 5.26 and the league wide batting average was .299


We were on the right track with making sure the leagues were recognized and making sure the names were known. Making sure there was a "yeah, but keep in mind Josh Gibson..." I mean, I've known his stats and accomplishments since I was a kid. There was subtext in my 1976 Guinness Book under the MLB stats. They recognized him as the "king" way back then. That prompted me to go get library books to learn more.

We were on the right track.
We've jumped the shark.

Well deserved

You are a fence rider. I agree with you that we will never know. Many of the negro players have been inducted. 35 is the number..

The point isn't inclusion. The point is MLB records.

They didn't play in the MLB. Dispute that all you want.

They didn't play in MLB, wrong as it might have been in todays standards.


Different leagues, different standards. In hockey the NHL had a cod lock on players. AHL players like Freddy Glover aren't throw up the NHL stat line. He played for the Barons. Freddy was a great player but got pushed down by the Red Wings GM for personal reasons.

In case you don't know, the Barons were the Cleveland team in the AHL.

You came to quite an odd conclusion about me as a fence rider. I'm amazed that you would call a person who can see both sides to an argument something with such a negative connotation. People used to refer to that as being open minded enough to be objective and see that both sides have some valid points. But looking around I can see how much that has changed.

The Browns weren't excluded from the NFL based on their race. But I know you wish to make it sound like it's the same thing.

Sad, but for many posters on this board that doesn't matter.

That's a cheap shot.

The reality is those players didn't play in MLB. No fault of their own, but they didn't.

As I indicated earlier over 30 players from the Negro league have been inducted in to the HOF. Maybe the quality of competition was as good, better, or worse. Who knows? I highly suspect it wasn't better, maybe close to equal, and probably worse to some degree.

I don't like the way that it was, but it was, you can't change the past.

Over the weekend my wife and I saw the Broadway touring edition of "To Kill a Mockingbird". A great play about racial injustice, and racial justice. Richard Thomas starred and Atticus Finch. Thomas for those who don't know played "John Boy" on the Waltons. It was a wonderful play and had everybody in deep thought about the racial injustice that existed in the past and also had us giving thanks it isn't anywhere near that today.

For those who don't know about "To Kill a Mockingbird", it's a great book and I suggest you read it as I have several times over the last 50 years. If you don't like to read, you can stream up the movie. It was a damn good movie. Actually, the girl who played Scout in the movie starred in the touring production in another role.

LMAO.. ' "I have a black friend so Im not racist" angle... Good stuff man.

But certainly the direct fault of others.


That's the typical response when people try to claim a wrong can't be righted. The same thought process when people say "Move on there's nothing we can do now" so we remain stagnant and never move forward.

I this case something was done to help right that wrong and maybe it's time everyone move forward from there.

I think both you and hotB are being unfair to peen. The only "something" that was done was the creation of an alternate reality that never existed and never will. Again, Josh Gibson did not play in MLB, and he built no statistics in MLB.

So the fact that segregation forced them not to play in MLB should never be righted? No matter which decision is made someone comes out the loser. All people are doing is picking which side they think should win and which side they think should lose. One side has lost from the beginning and now a decision was made to right that wrong. People can feel anyway they want to feel about it but that's what happened here.

I'm no expert, but I've read a lot about this topic online the last couple days+

I see comments about the MLB, and different leagues. Curious .... When did the MLB come into being? What was before it? Whose in the MLB records ( before this recent addition/amendment?) ... And were those leagues combined or separate?

Hmmmm.

Those are some very interesting questions. But then you can do a google search as well as I can.

Seeing as they can't go back in time and let them play in the MLB, it will never be righted. It can just be glossed over by people who want to feel better about themselves and history.

But some people like pleasant fictions over harsh truths. Honestly, I get it. Knowing something bad happened and you can't really do anything about it leaves an unpleasant sensation. Making that history "go away"/"changing it" post hoc makes one not have to deal with that.

Pit, some things can't be changed in regard to the past. Different era, different accepted norms and culture.

Things have changed and I think you know that.

I think all of the players who have been added are in the HOF. That is recognition.

These stats came from somewhere. Now that people are included in the MLB books, should the Negro League record books be shredded? If not, should all players in MLB be included in the Negro League record books? Maybe we should say that league never existed?

The Negro league was a proud league that should be celebrated for what it was in segregated times.

On a note that we all might understand, the Browns AAFC records are recognized by the HOF, but are not included in the NFL record books. Why? They weren't established while playing in the NFL. It's pretty simple stuff.

And now we must ask ourselves if we continue to accept it. If we continue to let those things stand as they were or change them to reflect what we have learned since then.


They have. And hopefully we apply what we've learned. If not we allow the injustices of the past to remain.


I suppose that's as good of an excuse as any not to do anything more if one so chooses.


So at the time the reason there was a negro league is because they were segregated and not allowed into MLB makes you question if people who were not segregated should be allowed in their record books? I suppose if you can find some great social injustice placed upon those white players. But one doesn't exist. I'm amazed you even asked this question.


There does seem to be a movement that's growing of how we should celebrate times from the past when social injustices were rampant. Maybe we should go back and celebrate times when they couldn't vote either.


And nobody prevented the Browns from joining the NFL due to their race. They weren't forced into forming their own leagues to play the sport because of the color of their skin. It is pretty simple.

Yes, and if we remove confederate war statues everyone will forget about the Civil War and it will be erased from the history books. You're providing a rather worn out false narrative.

That's a lovely false equivalence. What does removing something harmful have to do with adding something that didn't actually happen? I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you're all for making things up and presenting them as having happened. I mean you do that in your arguments as a standard operating procedure.

Are you trying to say that there wasn't segregation in MLB or are you saying that the same claim about.... .... isn't one that's being made to this day?

No, I'm obviously (at least to anyone without an agenda) not saying that there wasn't segregation. I am saying that you are effectively trying to make history go away right now. If you want to put the numbers side by side at the Baseball HoF, go for it. Putting them all together in the MLB record book is figuratively and literally re-writing history. If you want to make an American Baseball record book, go ahead and combine them. Putting people they wouldn't let play in the league in the league's record book pretty much is "cultural appropriation" and "whitewashing" what actually happened.

Pit - it wasn't "Google" - and I didn't go searching on the subject. I read The Athletic and they have several excellent articles on this topic. Each article generate a LOT of passionate discussion in the comments sections.

Not only did the articles themselves make a compelling case as to why the move was good - the comments were full of great insight and mostly very civil and knowledgeable debate. Some of the comments I have cut and paste below:

""MLB historians long ago came to the conclusion that the Negro Leagues were as good as the AL and NL in their heyday, if not a little better. And MLB has a long history of recognizing competitors to the AL and NL if they were deemed of similar quality, such as the American Association or the Federal League.
And now that the Negro League box scores have mostly been gathered and compiled in a single place, why should they be treated differently?""

""MLB played as 2 separate leagues for decades and combined the stats! Ted Williams never played against Warren Spahn and their careers completely overlapped. Their stats are right next to one another, in the same era as if they must have been competing against one another. Inequity in stats was built into the original stat system, only our perception made them equal.""

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

"" In 1969, MLB decided to include in its record book all the U.S. leagues it felt were played at the highest level going back to 1876. This included six professional leagues. It bypassed the Negro Leagues.
Since then statisticians and historians have painstakingly located statistical records for the Negro Leagues and validated that the level of play was equal to that of the American and National leagues.
This is a long overdue inclusion.""

Just me - but I find any of these points to be more compelling and sway my opinion more than anything I read on dawgtalkers.

As to the point that by including the Negro League stats into MLB you are 'whitewashing' history and separationism .... I find that incorrect. The Negro League Stats still exist and stand by themselves, just like the AL stats exist by themselves and the NL stats exist as well the Federal League stats - as well as the other leagues that were included into MLB stats in 1969. All MLB has done is put them into the mix with all the others, a place they rightly deserve to be based on their ability and based on the comments above (and many more). If you wish to disagree - that's no skin off my nose. Have at it.

I agree pretty much you can't judge GOAT - with rare exceptions. I mean Tom Brady and his 7 superbowls might pass the mustard for arguing he is the GOAT. But you can also compile talking points to debate that if you wanted to.

Tend to agree that it's up to the individual and maybe there is no right or wrong - but overall I'd say it's a positive for the segregation of the players stats to have ended. Inclusive is better - by all means put a mental Asterix by something if you choose - as I do with Barry Bonds for example.

As I said before, this is the same thing they say about removing confederate statues to keep perpetuating their presence in town squares.

The history of the Negro Leagues will not go away. They will not be forgotten any more than any other injustices done in our nations history. At least for anyone willing to hear it. It's not about who "they wouldn't let play in MLB" but why they wouldn't why they wouldn't let them play in MLB. And by MLB refusing to incorporate their statistics only perpetuates the very same thing.

I appreciate your post and hope that information helps others realize why those stats should be combined. You had made it clear that you had been reading articles on the topic and that too is the best way to inform yourself. My Google reference was addressing something else all together. From your post it gave the appearance to me that even after reading those articles you still had questions remaining....


If I was mistaken, my apologies. But this is what my Google suggestion was referring to.

Oh look, someone agrees with you!

I’d like to know which MLB historians, “long ago” concluded that the Negro leagues were on par with the majors? Who made that call? And even if that were true, they were separate leagues. Not the same, entirely different. Didn’t play against each other, not difficult to comprehend. At least, it shouldn’t be.

Maybe we should add Doug Flutie’s CFL statistics to his NFL numbers. That would put him in Canton. I mean why not, since we’re just making stuff up on the fly?

This thread was made to troll this forum.

Lamp - why not do some reading and see for yourself? From above:

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

And then there was this bit regarding the integration of stats into or under the 'MLB' umbrella.

In 1969, MLB decided to include in its record book all the U.S. leagues it felt were played at the highest level going back to 1876. This included six professional leagues. It bypassed the Negro Leagues.
Since then statisticians and historians have painstakingly located statistical records for the Negro Leagues and validated that the level of play was equal to that of the American and National leagues.
This is a long overdue inclusion.

Not really - a bunch of people having a conversation, but I guess you can only judge others by how you yourself behave so I understand why you would say that.