Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [baseball-databank] franchise IDs

Expand Messages
  • Sean Forman
    ... I wouldn t be opposed to using ballclub_ID or any other semantically correct term. I guess I was a little lose on the use of franchise. Personally, I
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 2, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Paul Wendt wrote:

      > OK. Do you certainly want to go with franchise ID, not ballclub ID?
      > A franchise is granted by a league[*], whereas a ballclub may enter a
      > league (acquire a franchise), exit a league, change leagues. It may be
      > founded without entering a league and it may disband without exiting a
      > league, which is to say that a ballclub may not have a franchise.
      >
      > [*] in this sense, the two major "leagues" are no longer leagues but
      > conferences, division, etc.
      >
      > --
      > For 1871-75, I understand that the association annually sold entries to
      > all comers at a posted price. Since NA1871-75 is the only exceptional
      > "league" included, it is OK to identify its sale of entries with the grant
      > of franchises by later leagues (I think). When you expand scope beyond
      > the major leagues, to include data on independent clubs, ask me again.
      >
      > --
      > If you know that you want franchise ID, hence different ID for St Louis
      > AA1882-1891 and St Louis NL1892-2002, then all of the answers to this
      > question are firmly established (I think; I don't have all memorized).
      >
      > If you want ballclub ID, with some gain of predictive power re continuity
      > in ballparks and players, then you want one ID for St Louis 1882-2002, at
      > least, and some instances are open to historical research (I believe).
      >
      > ----Paul
      >
      > Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>


      I wouldn't be opposed to using ballclub_ID or any other semantically
      correct term. I guess I was a little lose on the use of franchise.
      Personally, I think keeping the clubs together across league changes
      makes the most sense.

      Sincerely,
      Sean Forman

      Baseball Stats! http://www.Baseball-Reference.com/
      Baseball Analysis! http://www.BaseballPrimer.com/
    • kjokbaseball
      ... ID? ... enter a ... may be ... exiting a ... but ... entries to ... exceptional ... the grant ... beyond ... again. ... Louis ... this ... memorized). ...
      Message 2 of 14 , Apr 2, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In baseball-databank@y..., Sean Forman <sean-forman@b...> wrote:
        > Paul Wendt wrote:
        >
        > > OK. Do you certainly want to go with franchise ID, not ballclub
        ID?
        > > A franchise is granted by a league[*], whereas a ballclub may
        enter a
        > > league (acquire a franchise), exit a league, change leagues. It
        may be
        > > founded without entering a league and it may disband without
        exiting a
        > > league, which is to say that a ballclub may not have a franchise.
        > >
        > > [*] in this sense, the two major "leagues" are no longer leagues
        but
        > > conferences, division, etc.
        > >
        > > --
        > > For 1871-75, I understand that the association annually sold
        entries to
        > > all comers at a posted price. Since NA1871-75 is the only
        exceptional
        > > "league" included, it is OK to identify its sale of entries with
        the grant
        > > of franchises by later leagues (I think). When you expand scope
        beyond
        > > the major leagues, to include data on independent clubs, ask me
        again.
        > >
        > > --
        > > If you know that you want franchise ID, hence different ID for St
        Louis
        > > AA1882-1891 and St Louis NL1892-2002, then all of the answers to
        this
        > > question are firmly established (I think; I don't have all
        memorized).
        > >
        > > If you want ballclub ID, with some gain of predictive power re
        continuity
        > > in ballparks and players, then you want one ID for St Louis 1882-
        2002, at
        > > least, and some instances are open to historical research (I
        believe).
        > >
        > > ----Paul
        > >
        > > Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@w...>
        >
        >
        > I wouldn't be opposed to using ballclub_ID or any other semantically
        > correct term. I guess I was a little lose on the use of franchise.
        > Personally, I think keeping the clubs together across league changes
        > makes the most sense.
        >
        > Sincerely,
        > Sean Forman
        >
        > Baseball Stats! http://www.Baseball-Reference.com/
        > Baseball Analysis! http://www.BaseballPrimer.com/

        I've actually done some research in the area of franchise/ballclub
        histories. What I have researched matches what Sean F. has presented
        in every instance EXCEPT the Cincinnati Reds, and on that one, I
        tend to believe that Sean F. is correct. So, I think we actually
        HAVE good franchise ID data and just need to verify the correct
        franchise ID matches the correct team/year in every instance.

        P.S. The story on the Reds is that in 1880 after the other 7 NL clubs
        voted to totally ban alcohol sales, the Reds refused to go along and
        were kicked out of the NL. The team/franchise resurfaced in 1882 in
        the AA. The current Cincinnati Reds and MLB consider the 1880 and
        1882 teams to be the same franchise and claim that the current Reds
        go all the way back to the Cincinnati Red Stockings of 1869.

        THANKS,
        KJOK
      • kjokbaseball
        ... continuity ... 2002, at ... believe). ... Just to follow up on my last post, I didn t mean to dismiss this comment: 1. What you describe above is certainly
        Message 3 of 14 , Apr 2, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          > Paul Wendt wrote:
          > ..............................> >
          > > If you want ballclub ID, with some gain of predictive power re
          continuity
          > > in ballparks and players, then you want one ID for St Louis 1882-
          2002, at
          > > least, and some instances are open to historical research (I
          believe).
          > >
          > > ----Paul
          > >
          > > Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@w...>
          Just to follow up on my last post, I didn't mean to dismiss this
          comment:

          1. What you describe above is certainly what I am talking about - one
          ID for the current LA Dodger "franchise" from 1884 - 2002, one ID for
          the Angels from 1961-2002, one for the Braves from 1871 (or '76) -
          2002, etc. This makes several different types of 'team" related
          queries much easier to do.

          2. Although I've resolved the issues of what teams "belong" to what
          franchises to my PERSONAL satisfaction, it's certainly true that
          someone else looking at exactly the same data I've looked at could
          interpret the data differently. In addition to the Cincinnati
          question, there were a lot of "unusual" franchise issues pre-1900,
          such as owners owning multiple teams re-assigning whole groups of
          players between their teams, teams folding in mid-season and/or
          being "replaced" in mid-season by "new" teams with many of the same
          players, teams being replaced in the offseason by "new" teams that
          look a lot like the old team, teams switching leagues, etc. However,
          I think these potential areas of interpretation are relatively minor
          vs. the gain in querying power that can be obtained by having
          franchise/Ballclub ID's...

          THANKS,
          KJOK
        • Paul Wendt
          ... . . . ... Tom Tom noted instances in Ottawa (hockey) and Montreal (football). In MLB history, others in this venue(?) have noted Cincinnati NL1880, Chicago
          Message 4 of 14 , Apr 21, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            2 Apr 2002, tom tom wrote:

            > This is a fascinating discussion!
            >
            > I would consider franchise/ballclub in terms of
            > continuity of players/city/team name/management.
            . . .
            > I'm more interested in hearing about some of the
            > strange cases where teams are "revamped". If we can
            > look at them case-by-case, I think we can agree on
            > what we want to consider as a franchise/ballclub (aka
            > Continuity).

            Tom Tom noted instances in Ottawa (hockey) and Montreal (football).

            In MLB history, others in this venue(?) have noted Cincinnati NL1880,
            Chicago FL1915, Saint Louis FL1915. Elsewhere, Chicago NA1871 and
            Cincinnati 1890-91 in two leagues have received attention.

            Here are two news items from The Baseball Chronology, March 1887
            http://www.pubdim.net/baseballlibrary/chronology/1887MARCH.stm
            which illustrate two species in the Dissolotion Menagerie, or is the
            Continuity Menagerie, on successive days.

            >>
            Tuesday, March 8th

            IN THE NEWS: The NL franchise in St. Louis is sold to a
            group from Indianapolis for $12,000, including players.
            The Maroons will now become the Hoosiers.

            Wednesday, March 9th

            IN THE NEWS: The Kansas City Cowboys (NL) go out of
            business with the sale of its players to the league
            for $6,000. The club's spot in the league has already
            been taken by Pittsburgh.
            <<

            (The next item in the chronology is March 13th, "the Detroit team begins a
            6-week spring exhibition tour through the South and Midwest". Opening Day
            was 16 April in the AA, 28 April in the NL. On April 17th, Saint Louis AA
            purchased one of the NL1886 Kansas City Cowboys from the NL: 19-year-old
            pitcher Silver King, 34-11 in 1887.)

            ----Paul

            Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>
            Chair, 19th Century committee, SABR
            Owner-Administrator, 19cBB (egroup at Yahoo)
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.