Brooklyn weeps tonight

[jimsumner]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3195497

[devildeac]

Whew, Jim, you had me quite worried there for a moment. I thought the Brooklyn Brewery had run out of their Black Chocolate Stout or their Brooklyn Monster(a very, very good barleywine). On a more appropriate, serious note now, it was sad to read of Johnny Podres death. What a player/legend.

[Lavabe]

Too young to have seen Podres play, but old enough to know how much he meant to my parents and the rest of their Brooklyn family.

Seems as though a number of legends have died recently. Sadly, news of Podres gets lost in the daily news cycle, even on sports channels. I guess people would rather know about T.O.'s crying for Tony Romo.

Sad.

Lavabe

[Olympic Fan]

Podres (with major help from Sandy Amoros) was responsible for one of the most devastating losses ever for the Yankees.

Not a great player, but he led the NL in ERA in 1957 -- an amazing feat for a guy who pitched half his games in Ebbets Field. He had a great 18-5 record for the Dodgers in 1962 and ended up winning 148 games in his career.

The 1955 World Series was the high point of his career -- the Yankees took a two game lead in Yankee Stadium, but Podres won game three as the Dodgers took the three middle games. The Yankees evened the series with a win in Yankee Stadium, but had to use Whitey Ford to win game six.

Podres beat Tommy Byrne (a crazy lefthander who played at Wake Forest and lived most of his life in the town of Wake Forest) in the seventh game. He shut out the Yankees -- although I must say as a Yankee fan that Mickey Mantle was hurt and missed four of the seven games, including game seven (Bob Cerv played CF). They key play came with the Dodgers up 2-0 -- Martin and McDougald reached to open the sixth and Yogi Berra (a lefthanded batter) sliced a curving drive down the left field line. Sandy Amoros -- a defensive replacement for Jim Gilliam who started the game in left, then moved to second to replace Don Zimmer -- caught the ball at waist level on the run, then threw back to the infield to double McDougald, who was going all out to try and score from first.

Hard as it is to believe, that was the ONLY World Championship the Dodgers won in Brooklyn. You can imagine how the community felt about Podres, the MVP of that series.

[greybeard]

His delivery was past 180 degrees over the top. I mean he made Warren Spawn look like a side armer. Kids playing stick ball the next Spring trying to emulate Johnny all nearly broke their backs. Those, including yours truly, practicing a Podres type fastball with an actual hardball in the gutter (we called the entire street the "gutter" on my block (couldn't speak for my neighborhood, just my block)) threatened the windshields of anyone foolish enough to leave his car parked on the street in the daytime.

Vote Carl Furillo into the Hall!

The guy was blackballed from the game for demanding to be traded when they wouldn't pay him after he single handedly won the world series in 59 for the freakin LA Dodgers, may he with no name live in the dark place for moving the team and then for refusing to pay or trade Furillo. Best numbers of any outfielder not in the Hall!

[jimsumner]

It's Spahn and Larry Sherry had an awful lot to do with that '59 title.

Ironically, Tommy Byrne died just a few weeks ago.

Perhaps more than anyone else, Podres bridged the Brooklyn-Los Angeles move. L.A. stars like Koufax, Drysdale, and Gilliam were just coming into their own in Brooklyn, while Brooklyn stars like Snider, Hodges, and Furillo were past their peak when the team moved west.

I was a seven-year old in North Carolina when the move took place but I understand the sense of betrayal and abandonment felt by Brooklyn fans. But he-whose-name-shall-not-be-mentioned did try to work with local officials on a new ballpark and was rebuffed. Maybe MLB should have put some expansion teams out west but the move to California was overdue and inevitable and shook up a system that was stale and badly in need of a shake-up.

[Olympic Fan]

Vote Carl Furillo into the Hall!

The guy was blackballed from the game for demanding to be traded when they wouldn't pay him after he single handedly won the world series in 59 for the freakin LA Dodgers, may he with no name live in the dark place for moving the team and then for refusing to pay or trade Furillo. Best numbers of any outfielder not in the Hall!

C'mon ... no problem with you advocating a childhood favorite, but Furillo's numbers aren't close to the best of any OF not in the hall.

The guy didn't hit .300 lifetime ... he didn't get 2,000 hits or 200 HRs.

He had a great arm and he won one batting title. But he never finished in the top 5 of the MVP vote -- in fact, he only finished in the top 18 twice -- a 6th place finish in 1949 and a 9th place finish in '53. He was never the leader in the MVP vote on his own team.

I don't know about the claim that he "single-handedly" won the 1959 World Series ... in that he had one hit in the series -- although it was a big one (a pinch-hit single to drive in two runs in a 3-1 Game Three victory).

I also don't know what you mean about his so-called blackball. He retired at age 38 and he was clearly washed up -- he played in 50 games at age 37 -- mostly as a pinch hitter. When he tried to play the field, he was awful -- a .920 fielding percentage. He did hit .290, but with just four doubles (no homers and triples). He hung on through part of 1960 (when he was 38) and batted .200.

A nice player, but if you're going to put Furillo in the Hall of Fame, you're going to have to put Tony Oliva, Al Oliver (batted four points higher with 800 more hits, 300 more RBIs and 30 more HRS), Vada Pinson, Minnie Minoso, Ben Chapman, Rico Carty, Ken Griffey Sr. -- not to mention Jim Rice. There are a ton of guys with batting stats as good or better than Furillo who are not -- and should not be -- in the Hall of Fame.

[greybeard]

It's Spahn and Larry Sherry had an awful lot to do with that '59 title.

Ironically, Tommy Byrne died just a few weeks ago.

Perhaps more than anyone else, Podres bridged the Brooklyn-Los Angeles move. L.A. stars like Koufax, Drysdale, and Gilliam were just coming into their own in Brooklyn, while Brooklyn stars like Snider, Hodges, and Furillo were past their peak when the team moved west.

I was a seven-year old in North Carolina when the move took place but I understand the sense of betrayal and abandonment felt by Brooklyn fans. But he-whose-name-shall-not-be-mentioned did try to work with local officials on a new ballpark and was rebuffed. Maybe MLB should have put some expansion teams out west but the move to California was overdue and inevitable and shook up a system that was stale and badly in need of a shake-up.

Furillo batted over 300 that year and hit up a storm in the final game, at least drove in the winning run, if I remember right. Clem Labine had a whole lot to do with the 55 win also, if we are talking Larry Sherry in 59.

The Duke was "on the decline" only because the right field fence might just as well not have been there it was so far away in the Collesium or wherever the heck it was that the Dodgers played for the first few years in the diaspera.

And, if Furillo was so on the decline why was he a full time starter in 59 and out of the league in 60, even though he was a lifetime 299 hitter and, by anyone's measure, an extraordinary right fielder?

Richie Ashburn is in the g-d damn Hall; vote Furillo in!

[jimsumner]

Didn't say Snider was in decline. Said he was past his peak. Snider hit 42,
40, 42, 43, and 40 home runs in his last five seasons in Brooklyn. He hit 15, 23, 14, 16, and 5 in his five seasons in L.A. Do you seriously want to argue that he wasn't past his peak in L.A.?

Hodges had two decent seasons in L.A. and batted .198 in his third season.

RE: Furillo. "The guy was blackballed from the game for demanding to be traded when they wouldn't pay him after he single handedly won the world series in 59 for the freakin LA Dodgers." Your words. As pointed out Furillo had one hit in the 1959 World Series. He played 50 games in 1959, played 8 games in 1960 and retired at the age of 38. Your evidence that he was blackballed? Or that he single handedly won the 1959 World Series.

Maybe you meant to say 1955. I wouldn't presume to guess. But given that Furillo played 149 games in 1956, it would be hard to argue that Brooklyn blackballed him after the 1955 World Series.

As OLF pointed out, numerous retired outfielders have an equal or greater claim to baseball HOF status.

BTW. Johnny Podres. Rest in Peace.

[Olympic Fan]

And, if Furillo was so on the decline why was he a full time starter in 59 and out of the league in 60, even though he was a lifetime 299 hitter and, by anyone's measure, an extraordinary right fielder?

Richie Ashburn is in the g-d damn Hall; vote Furillo in!

You'd have a good argument if the facts were anywhere near what you state.

But Furillo was not a fulltime starter in 1959. Not even close. He played in 50 games, but 25 of those were as a pinch hitter. He appreared in the field just 25 times and (as I stated earlier) was dreadful. He was also pretty useless at the plate -- a .290 average with absolutely no power (a .666 OPS).

Furillo's last full season was 1956 (149 games). He played just 119 games in his last season in Brooklyn and 122 in his first season in LA. His career shows normal decline (he was 35 in 1957).

It's hard to see him as a key player on the 59 world champs -- the starting outfield was Snider, Moon and Demeter, who all played in at least 126 games. The fourth outfielder was Ron Fairley, who appeared in 88 games in the outfield. The fifth outfielder was Rip Repulski, who appeared in 31 games in the outfield. The sixth outfielder was Norm Larker (also the backup first baseman) who appeared in 30 games in the outfield. Furillo was the seventh outfielder in terms of games played.

Furillo was a key player on the Boys of Summer Brooklyn teams, but he was a pretty minor cog in the '59 Dodgers. And he was out of the league midway through the 1960 season because he washed up -- a 38 year old outfielder who couldn't play the outfield and wasn't a factor at the plate.

As for the comparison with Ashburn ... well, Ashburn hit 10 points better for his career and ended up with 600 more hits. Furillo was an all-star twice ...Asburn was an all-star six times. Furillo won a batting title. Ashburn won two batting titles (and finished second twice). Furillo was a good defensive rightfielder (so-so range, but a great arm) ... Ashburn was a great defensive centerfielder (one of the great statistical oddities is the Ashburn has the best range factors of any CF in modern times -- far better than Mays, DiMaggio or Mantle).

Asburn was a better player than Furillo. And since we're so hung up on the 1959 pennant race -- Ashburn starred as the last-place Phillies beat the Braves three times in September, giving the Dodgers their eventual two-game margin -- so you could argue that Ashburn played a bigger role in the LA pennant than Furillo.

[dkbaseball]

But he-whose-name-shall-not-be-mentioned did try to work with local officials on a new ballpark and was rebuffed.

Rebuffed by the arch-villain of post-WWII American life -- Robert Moses.

Koufax came straight over the top also. Wonder if he went to school any on Podres' motion. Always thought of him as sort of an understudy. I actually saw both of them pitch in San Francisco. God, we're old.

[jimsumner]

Don't remind me DK.

That 1963 Dodgers staff, with Koufax, Drysdale, Podres, Miller and Perranowski and Sherry out of the pen was one of the best ever. As a 13-year-old Yankees fan I was stunned at how they shut down the Bronx Bombers in the Series. Come to think of it, I still am, 44+ years later.

[greybeard]

Didn't say Snider was in decline. Said he was past his peak. Snider hit 42,
40, 42, 43, and 40 home runs in his last five seasons in Brooklyn. He hit 15, 23, 14, 16, and 5 in his five seasons in L.A. Do you seriously want to argue that he wasn't past his peak in L.A.?

Hodges had two decent seasons in L.A. and batted .198 in his third season.

RE: Furillo. "The guy was blackballed from the game for demanding to be traded when they wouldn't pay him after he single handedly won the world series in 59 for the freakin LA Dodgers." Your words. As pointed out Furillo had one hit in the 1959 World Series. He played 50 games in 1959, played 8 games in 1960 and retired at the age of 38. Your evidence that he was blackballed? Or that he single handedly won the 1959 World Series.

Maybe you meant to say 1955. I wouldn't presume to guess. But given that Furillo played 149 games in 1956, it would be hard to argue that Brooklyn blackballed him after the 1955 World Series.

As OLF pointed out, numerous retired outfielders have an equal or greater claim to baseball HOF status.

BTW. Johnny Podres. Rest in Peace.

As noted, right field in the collesium made home runs for the duke in half the games played an impossibility. Therefore, the number of home runs he hit upon his arrival in LA reflects only the ridiculous dimensions of the park he was playing in, not his skills, declining or otherwise.

Furillo had better stats than any number of outfielders who made the Hall in his era, way better. A 299 hitter, lead the league in 53 batting over 350, and used to throw out batters at first base from right field.

As for 1959, in LA, I think that you will find that he single handedly won the 6th and final game with his bat and had a great, as in terrific series. In fact, he literally drove in the winning run.

It is well known that he was blackballed from baseball because he refused to sign for I think it was 9 grand that the Dodgers put on the table. Demanded a trade and ended up working in a grocery store even though he had at least several good years left in him. The Dodgers' treatment of Furillo lead Sandy and Don to jointly hold out for 100 thou each, which was baseball's first strike although nobody called it that, most of all the scions that ruled the game, who took a hard one to the chin as a direct result of the stand that Carl had made.

Furillo was Curt Flood before there was a Curt Flood. Compare his stats to the outfielders who made the Hall from his era and you will see that he belongs. He was not even mentioned, ever. BLACKBALLED.

There is a guy who published a book on famous people from Brooklyn. A great Dodger fan, he dedicated the entire book, the history of the Brooklynese people, to Carl. The fans of that era are mostly all gone, as is Carl himself. Personally, I still have signed photos of Carl, Duke, and Gil, which I got at a bank opening in Bensonhurst when I was 7 or 8. There is an episode in a series done about Bensonhurst in that era that makes a story around just such a bank opening.

Duke was my hero, but every kid who played make believe in that era was no. 6 for at least one play in which he played one off the wall and threw a guy out at the plate. And, oh, those throws were not on no one hop, not by Furillo they were not!

[Olympic Fan]

Furillo had better stats than any number of outfielders who made the Hall in his era, way better. A 299 hitter, lead the league in 53 batting over 350, and used to throw out batters at first base from right field.

As for 1959, in LA, I think that you will find that he single handedly won the 6th and final game with his bat and had a great, as in terrific series. In fact, he literally drove in the winning run.

Greybeard, I hate to keep picking on you, but you get throwing out "facts" that are dead wrong!

First, a minor thing -- Furillo's NL league leaging batting average in 1953 was .344, not "over 350". Still a very good season -- although it's interesting that Furillo finished 9th in the NL MVP vote that year behind No. 1 Campy, No. 3 the Duke and No. 8 Erskine (and just ahead of No. 11 Reese and No. 12 Robinson).

The major thing ... you have this hangup about the 1959 World Series and how the Furillo "single-handedly won the sixth and final game" and "had a great, terrific series. In fact, he literally drove in the winning run."

In real fact (and not your fictional universe), Furillo drove in the winning run in game three ... not game six. And that was his only hit in the series -- he played in four games and had four at bats (so clearly he was nothing more than a pinch hitter) and had that single hit -- a single in the seventh inning of the third game. The score was 0-0 when he drove in two runs that were the key in a 3-1 Dodger victory.

I don't know where you are getting the ridiculous theory that Furillo was blackballed in 1960, unless you're taking it verbatim from some crackpot book written by a Brooklyn fan. Look, I know the guy was a Brooklyn hero, but that doesn't make him a Hall of Famer. And he was clearly released from the Dodgers in 1960 not because of any blackball but because he was a 38-year-old has been.

Don't believe? Check out his career stats -- any reasonable person would see the obvious decline from his prime in the early to mid-50s and 1959 -- when he was hanging on by a fingernail:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/f/furilca01.shtml

(BTW, you can also get stats and play-by-plays from the 1959 series at that site if you want to check the real details of the series)

Finally, I'm glad you've changed you boast "Best numbers of any outfielder not in the Hall!" to the latest claim "Compare his stats to the outfielders who made the Hall from his era and you will see that he belongs."

Well, I have compared those stats and it's clear he does NOT belong. I'm wondering which Hall of Fame outfielders from that era that you think have comparable numbers -- Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Al Kaline, Enos Slaughter, Duke Snider? We've already talked about Ashburn, whose numbers were better.

I suppose you could argue that Monte Irvin's numbers are comparable, although he was largely inducted as a Negro League star (he was 30 years old when he got to the Giants and 32 when he finished third in the MVP race (which is still higher than any Furillo finish).

Please, give me one Hall of Fame outfielder whose career centered on the 40s or 50s who has comparable numbers to Furillo???

[greybeard]

Greybeard, I hate to keep picking on you, but you get throwing out "facts" that are dead wrong!

First, a minor thing -- Furillo's NL league leaging batting average in 1953 was .344, not "over 350". Still a very good season -- although it's interesting that Furillo finished 9th in the NL MVP vote that year behind No. 1 Campy, No. 3 the Duke and No. 8 Erskine (and just ahead of No. 11 Reese and No. 12 Robinson).

The major thing ... you have this hangup about the 1959 World Series and how the Furillo "single-handedly won the sixth and final game" and "had a great, terrific series. In fact, he literally drove in the winning run."

In real fact (and not your fictional universe), Furillo drove in the winning run in game three ... not game six. And that was his only hit in the series -- he played in four games and had four at bats (so clearly he was nothing more than a pinch hitter) and had that single hit -- a single in the seventh inning of the third game. The score was 0-0 when he drove in two runs that were the key in a 3-1 Dodger victory.

I don't know where you are getting the ridiculous theory that Furillo was blackballed in 1960, unless you're taking it verbatim from some crackpot book written by a Brooklyn fan. Look, I know the guy was a Brooklyn hero, but that doesn't make him a Hall of Famer. And he was clearly released from the Dodgers in 1960 not because of any blackball but because he was a 38-year-old has been.

Don't believe? Check out his career stats -- any reasonable person would see the obvious decline from his prime in the early to mid-50s and 1959 -- when he was hanging on by a fingernail:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/f/furilca01.shtml

(BTW, you can also get stats and play-by-plays from the 1959 series at that site if you want to check the real details of the series)

Finally, I'm glad you've changed you boast "Best numbers of any outfielder not in the Hall!" to the latest claim "Compare his stats to the outfielders who made the Hall from his era and you will see that he belongs."

Well, I have compared those stats and it's clear he does NOT belong. I'm wondering which Hall of Fame outfielders from that era that you think have comparable numbers -- Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Al Kaline, Enos Slaughter, Duke Snider? We've already talked about Ashburn, whose numbers were better.

I suppose you could argue that Monte Irvin's numbers are comparable, although he was largely inducted as a Negro League star (he was 30 years old when he got to the Giants and 32 when he finished third in the MVP race (which is still higher than any Furillo finish).

Please, give me one Hall of Fame outfielder whose career centered on the 40s or 50s who has comparable numbers to Furillo???

You must have been a Yankees fan when you were a kid. Brooklyn Dodger fans do not let things like facts get in their way. Furillo did bat 299 career, is that right? Was the best defensive outfielder of his time, right? Threw people out at first base on line drives to right, right? Was left by he with no name a broken man.

I forget, what did Ashburn do that was "better" such that he should be in and Furillo not. I ain't gonna put down the Duke, but aside from bunting balls into Bedford Av more frequently than Carl could hit them out in left, how was he that much "better" than Carl that he should be in and Carl not.

Carl was not a 40s outfielder. He was a 50s outfielder. And, I stopped following baseball when I was 8 and the Dodgers moved, and before that was never interested in statistics. I used to flip baseball cards, not read them.

Good points; just the old Dodger/Yankee arguer in me.

[Olympic Fan]

Don't mean to cause confusion about the 1940s and 1950s -- but Furillo did play over 100 games in the Brooklyn outfield every year starting in the 1946. I merely included the 40s guys to give you more of a chance to find a comparison.

Okay, you get bringing up Ashburn and ask what he did beter to get in --- okay, we've been through this, but basically he was a more effective player at his peak and he had a much longer peak. He batted .308 career to Furillo's .299 (and unlike Furillo, he did have a .350 season). He was a leadoff hitter with a .396 on base percentage. He finished with 2,574 hits -- 600 more than Furillo.

Ashburn did better in the MVP vote -- even though he usually played on worse teams. He was clearly the star of the Phillies, while Furillo was never the best player on the Dodgers. Ashburn won two batting titles and played in six all-star games (Furillo had the one title and two all-star games).

Defensively, Ashburn has the greatest range factors of any modern centerfielder. Furillo had a great arm, but he didn't have particularly outstanding assist totals, although it's fair to suggest that's because few players challenged his arm. On the other hand, a lot of old baseball men claim that Bob Meusal in the 20s had the best arm in baseball history and even though his batting numbers are better than Furillo's, he's not in the Hall (neither is Dave Parker, a better hitter than Furillo, who had the best arm in his era).

As for Snider, he batted .295 with MUCH more power -- 405 home runs (even if many were cheapies hit onto Bedford Ave). He was a gold glove centerfielder. His OPS with 70 points higher than Furillo's. He played in eight all-star games (to Furillo's two). He finished in the top 10 of the MVP vote six times (to Furillo's two) and was voted the 1955 Major League Player of the year. He almost always finished ahead of Furillo in the MVP vote.

Furillo was a nice player and I'm glad he's your hero ... but not a Hall of Famer. Hey, my favorite player was Don Mattingly and as good as he was, I can see that he's not a HOFer either.

[greybeard]

Don't mean to cause confusion about the 1940s and 1950s -- but Furillo did play over 100 games in the Brooklyn outfield every year starting in the 1946. I merely included the 40s guys to give you more of a chance to find a comparison.

Okay, you get bringing up Ashburn and ask what he did beter to get in --- okay, we've been through this, but basically he was a more effective player at his peak and he had a much longer peak. He batted .308 career to Furillo's .299 (and unlike Furillo, he did have a .350 season). He was a leadoff hitter with a .396 on base percentage. He finished with 2,574 hits -- 600 more than Furillo.

Ashburn did better in the MVP vote -- even though he usually played on worse teams. He was clearly the star of the Phillies, while Furillo was never the best player on the Dodgers. Ashburn won two batting titles and played in six all-star games (Furillo had the one title and two all-star games).

Defensively, Ashburn has the greatest range factors of any modern centerfielder. Furillo had a great arm, but he didn't have particularly outstanding assist totals, although it's fair to suggest that's because few players challenged his arm. On the other hand, a lot of old baseball men claim that Bob Meusal in the 20s had the best arm in baseball history and even though his batting numbers are better than Furillo's, he's not in the Hall (neither is Dave Parker, a better hitter than Furillo, who had the best arm in his era).

As for Snider, he batted .295 with MUCH more power -- 405 home runs (even if many were cheapies hit onto Bedford Ave). He was a gold glove centerfielder. His OPS with 70 points higher than Furillo's. He played in eight all-star games (to Furillo's two). He finished in the top 10 of the MVP vote six times (to Furillo's two) and was voted the 1955 Major League Player of the year. He almost always finished ahead of Furillo in the MVP vote.

Furillo was a nice player and I'm glad he's your hero ... but not a Hall of Famer. Hey, my favorite player was Don Mattingly and as good as he was, I can see that he's not a HOFer either.

Who said Furillo was my favorite player. Duke was and still is.

The way he'd climb the fence in center field; almost broke my shoulder trying to emulate it against a wall in an alley behind a huge building on 84th street where guys who lived in that building used to play ball. Served me right for going to a different block to play; I knew where every crack and crevis was on the stretch between two sewers on 83rd street that constituted the field where my boyz and I played. Going to a strange ball park to play punchball presents its challenges, you know.

So why did I throw the Duke under the bus in defending Furillo? For that, you'd have to "live long enough to know duh whole of Brooklyn. It'd take a lifetime to know Brooklyn t'roo and t'roo. An even den yuh wouldn't know it all." TW