Which Game Did You See?

By Cary Smith

I was working in the SABR-Rucker collection, trying to add missing information, and I came across the photograph above. When I searched the internet, I found it had previously been identified as Game 3 of the 1943 World Series at Yankee Stadium. After reexamining the photograph, I realized it is neither from 1943 nor from the World Series. I will go step-by-step to show the research done to determine which game this photograph is from. To all my school math teachers who said, “Please show your work.” Well, here it is.

The first task was to confirm that it is Yankee Stadium. The facing of the second deck, featuring rectangular designs and numbered sections, clearly distinguishes it as Yankee Stadium.

The biggest clue that the photograph is not from the 1943 World Series came from the bunting hanging on the facing of the third deck.

This photograph shows a well-known incident that occurred during Game 1 of the 1943 World Series when a plane flew over Yankee Stadium. Overlayed with the red border is the bunting from our photograph. The bunting in our photograph includes pennants with stars and stripes hanging down, whereas the bunting in the 1943 photograph does not. So our photograph is probably not from 1943.

I started looking to see if I could find images of the Yankee Stadium bunting for other World Series of that era. After examining photographs from several World Series in which the Yankees participated, I was able to rule out 1939, 1942, and 1943 based on the bunting. This photograph from the October 3, 1941, Daily News proved to be a match to the bunting from our photograph. So our photograph has to be from the 1941 World Series, right? Well no. Let’s see how that was determined.

It took some work to rule out the 1941 World Series. Only Games 1 and 2 were played at Yankee Stadium, which helped narrow down the amount of information I needed to be weeded out. I wanted to determine which team was in the field and which team was batting, so I looked closer at the pitcher on the mound. The pitcher is wearing a New York Yankees uniform. With this in mind, we can begin examining the other players on the field and matching them up with play-by-play game records.

When looking at our photograph, I can tell that the play started with runners on first and third base. The batter hit the ball to the shortstop, who flipped the ball to the second baseman for what was probably a double play. Using Baseball-Reference.com, I searched the play-by-play records for the first two games of the World Series to identify a matching situation. Runners on first and third, and a 6-4-3 double play by the visiting team. I found nothing! Coming up blank, I started to look more closely at the players and their uniform numbers.

I focused on the Yankees’ second baseman and the runner heading to second base. Refer to the photo in question with magnified insets below. The Yankees’ second baseman is wearing number 6, which matches up with Joe Gordon. However, Gordon played in five World Series with the Yankees: 1938, 1939, 1941, 1942, and 1943. The unknown base runner is wearing number 3. The player who wore number 3 for the Brooklyn Dodgers in the 1941 World Series was Pete Coscarart. Great, except for the fact that Coscarart did not play in Game 1 or 2 of that year’s World Series. That ruled out Coscarart. Checking the teams that played in the World Series against the Yankees in 1938, 1939, 1942, and 1943, and the players that wore number 3 for those teams, also ruled out those years.

I started thinking about other games besides the World Series that might have bunting around the field. They would normally bring out the bunting on opening day and maybe on the Fourth of July. I delved into the Yankees’ 1941 home opener, which was played against the Philadelphia Athletics on April 15. Looking at the boxscore, I found Joe Gordon played second base for the Yankees, so that fits, and Pete Suder wore number 3 for the Athletics, so that fits.

A jersey number that had escaped me was that of the first base coach. He is wearing number 27. Since Baseball-Reference does not list the jersey numbers of coaches, I looked on eBay until I found a 1941 Philadelphia Athletics scorecard. There, I found that Coach Earle Mack wore number 27, another match for our photograph. See the scorecard just below with a magnified inset from the photo in question.

Looking back at Baseball-Reference for the play-by-play of the 1941 New York Yankees home opener, we find the Athletics hit into two double plays. One by Al Brancato in the Top of the 5th inning and one by Eddie Collins Jr. in the top of the 6th inning.

The double play hit by Brancato is interesting because Pete Suder is the runner on first base. However, according to this play-by-play, Dick Siebert is on second base, and we are looking for a runner on third base. Could Siebert really have run from second base almost all the way to home plate as shown in our photograph? Even with a running start, could Siebert have gone that far?

So close and just one mystery to solve in Dick Siebert. Then I found the missing piece in the April 16 edition of the Morning Post Newspaper (Camden, NJ). “Siebert led off with a double and gained third as Chapman grounded out.” The play-by-play on Baseball-Reference was incomplete; Siebert was on third base, not second base, when Brancato hit into a double play. (Baseball-Reference and Retrosheet have already been informed about the new information) Now all the pieces fit. The bunting on the grandstand was from 1941, not 1943. Pete Suder was the runner wearing jersey number 3 on his way to second base. Al Brancato did hit into a 6-4-3 double play. And Dick Siebert was on third base, not second base.

Conclusion: The photograph is not from Game 3 of the 1943 World Series at Yankee Stadium as originally described. It is from the April 15, 1941 Yankee Stadium home opener against the Philadelphia Athletics.

Find the Al Brancato Hits into Double Play Photograph in the SABR-Rucker collection.

Antedating West Side Grouds Photos

We also present a view from the 1902 season that depicts Jim St. Vrain on the mound with a clear view of the left field line grandstands, just below. An image of Dusty Miller from the same year provides a view of the roofed grandstands just behind home plate. Though the ballpark opened in 1893, we had never seen any earlier WSG photos anywhere. The 1890s at WSG were oddly dark.

Jim St. Vrain and Dusty Miller

A few known woodcut images from Chicago newspapers did create some illumination. The WSG grandstand under construction is shown below as it appeared in the 04-14-1893 Chicago Record. The description therein reads:

New West Side Ball Grounds…Seats for Thirteen Thousand…A small army of workmen is engaged on the new ball grounds of the National League club at Lincoln and Polk streets…put in readiness for the opening Sunday game on May 13.

These grounds will be the scene of the Sunday games played by the league club this year…The present calculation is for a seating capacity of 13,000…Mr. Hart says that no more will be admitted to games than can be supplied with seats…Experience has shown…[that] crowds are much more unruly if not seated, and inasmuch as we expect to have the best decorum at Sunday games, we will not tempt the disorderly element by letting them in without having a place for them to sit.”

The grandstand is to be the largest in the country, but no work has yet been done on the bleachers [take note of that]…they may eventually skirt the entire outfield…The worst defect about the grounds is a short right field…

The grandstand faces southeast, the main entrance being at the corner of Lincoln and Polk streets, but there will also be gates at which tickets will be sold to the bleachers.

A contemporary 1893 drawing of the plan for West Side Grounds appeared in the Chicago Tribune as the ball park neared completion.

The caption read: The above cut shows the plan of the new West Side baseball grounds at Lincoln and Polk streets, now rapidly approaching completion. The grounds can be reached by the Ogden Avenue, Van Buren, Harrison, Taylor, and Twelfth street cars. They [the grounds] are 475 feet square, exclusive of the carriage yard [i.e. parking lot]. The seating capacity is enormous, consisting of 3,000 folding arm chairs, 500 arm chairs in fifty-six private boxes, 4,500 seats in a covered pavilion, and 5,000 open ones. Eight hundred thousand feet of timber were used in the construction of the stands. The diamond will be 90 feet from the grandstand. The right field and left field fences are 340 feet from the home plate, the extreme center filed is 560 feet. The Cincinnatis will open the park May 14. It is probable that after this season all the games will be played there.

We should take note of the planned capacity of 13,000. That’s all very nice, but still no photo.

My jaw dropped when collector/researcher Jim Chapman sent me this scan:

It was in a scrapbook with a label below the photo reading, “Ball Park West Side – Chicago.” Though there is some difference in ballpark structure when compared to the 1902 version of West Side Grounds, it was apparent that this was indeed an image of the same place, and if the seemingly contemporary caption written on the photo is to be believed, this dates to when the N.L. had a team in Baltimore. So, when would a Chicago vs. Baltimore matchup been possible at the West Side Grounds? That would have been between 1893 and 1899, after the West Side Grounds were built and both teams played in the National League. Let’s first compare this photo to West Side Grounds in 1902.

Below we have the left field line area seating from the photo in question at top, and the left field line seating at West Side grounds as seen in 1902 at bottom. For spatial reference, the dotted black line squares denote the same building in both images. The green and red boxes outline the same sections of seating in both images. The yellow outlined section of seating is present in 1902, but is missing from the photo in question. It is reasonable to think that the scrapbook photo is therefore at least pre-1902. Note particularly the double dividing fences between the red and green sections (white arrows) which seem to have a unique structure and are identical in both photos. Also note that matching details for the fencing in front of the seating (solid base for bottom half, screen with fence posts for top half, light blue arrows).

The March 13, 1896 edition of the Chicago Tribune, page 8, is reproduced below. Also, a permit for the new construction was reported in the Tribune on April 3, 1896. While we can’t be sure whether or not any seating was actually provided for the red and green areas when the park opened in 1893, it appears that the red and green sections in the photo in question matches that in the 1902 photo (and, as previously stated, this includes the details of the dividing fence and fencing in front of the seating areas). Therefore it is a good bet that the photo in question depicts these new “bleachers” dating it to 1896 or later.

A woodcut depicting the new construction (above) appeared in the Chicago Tribune on April 30, 1896. The red and green seating areas are marked and the photo in question is again reproduced below the woodcut. The date of the further addition of the yellow section remains unknown. We only know that was after 1896 and earlier than 1902.

The Tribune’s phrase “double the seating capacity” raises some confusion. As previously shown, the original plan was for 13,000 seats. We can be certain that the 1896 construction did not come close to expanding the ball park to 26,000 seats. One source* pegs capacity at 14,200 in 1908, and that is after the addition of the yellow section, expanded outfield bleachers, and a modest amount of upper deck seating. Our best guess is that when it opened in in 1893, the park had substantially less than the planned for 13,000 seats (initially no seats in red and green areas?). We expect that the initial planned capacity may have been reached after the new construction in 1896. Then, a crowd of, say, over 15,000, would still result in noticeable fan overflow onto the field.

For Chicago, the 1896-1899 seasons were pretty miserable. To the contrary, for Baltimore, there was a National League pennant in 1896 (as well as 1894-5) and 2nd place finishes in 1897 and 1898. It seems like a good guess that one of those squads could draw an overflow crowd to WSG. Let’s see if we can narrow down the date. We can start by focusing in on the uniforms.

Zooming in on our photo, the truth is we can’t see much. One team is all in white, the other appears to be a few shades darker (like road gray) with dark caps and socks.

The all white uniform above left is dated 1896-1897 on Craig Brown’s Threads of Our Game site:
https://www.threadsofourgame.com/1896-chicago/ It surely matches what we see in the 1896 team photo from the 1897 Spading guide above right. For 1898, Craig shows a change to colored socks and cap bills (below left). This is verified in the 1898 team photo below right. See https://www.threadsofourgame.com/1898-chicago/

For 1899 things are a bit more interesting with the addition of a logo on the cap. If you are interested as to why there is a “Y”, it was a recognized representation used for the City of Chicago. Details are here, again courtesy of Craig Brown’s site. https://www.threadsofourgame.com/1899-chicago/

Given the lack of sharp detail for the photo under discussion, all we can say is that any of the above uniforms are consistent with it.

In the WSG photo the visitors are wearing dark caps and socks. Comparing this to Craig Brown’s road uniform renderings below, this is again consistent with the 1896 and 1897 seasons, but not 1898. The 1898 Baltimore team photo, taken on the road, does show white (or gray) caps. The 1899 team photo and also Threads rendering far right does show a reversion to dark caps and socks. This also indicates a likely date range for the WSG photo to 1896-1897, with 1899 still possible.

Given the large overflow crowd present in the WSG photo, let’s take a look at attendance figures for Baltimore visits to WSG in 1896, 1897 and 1899. These numbers are from the Chicago Tribune and The Daily Inter-Ocean reports. Note that the largest crowd for a Baltimore visit in 1898 was only 7,500, so that along with the uniform mismatch for both teams adds certainty to the elimination of 1898 from contention. The three candidates are shown in red.

1896
May 14 Thur2,500
May 15 Fri4,500
May 16 Sat9,000
May 17 Sun18,921
July 7 Tue4,600
July 8 Wed6,100
1897
May 30 Sun17,800
May 31 Mon2,650
July 15 Thur4,135
July 16 Fri5,184
July 17 Sat10,280
July 18 Sun12,250

1899
May 19 Fri2,700
May 20 Sat7,000
May 21 Sun17,617
July 22 Sat7,500
July 23 Sun 9000
July 24 Mon2,700
July 25 Tue3,000

Red indicates an expectation of considerable fan overflow onto the field.

It appears from the photo that the Baltimore pitcher was a right-hander. For the dates in red, righty Bill Hoffer pitched in 1896 and 1897, and righty Joe McGinnity was the hurler in the 1899 game. That is consistent with the photo, but no help in narrowing down the date.

The largest crowd was for the 1896 game, and the May 18, 1896 Chicago Tribune described the overflow of fans onto the field (see right). For the 1897 game, The Daily Inter Ocean described a crowd “which poured out on the field.” Given the attendance figures, it seems that this must have also occurred for the 1899 game.

The 1899 game seems the less likely of the three due to the home team in the photo wearing light colored socks. What we can say is that, to date, this the earliest known photo of West Side Grounds and that it is a National League Baltimore vs. Chicago game action image that took place on one of three possible dates in the 1890s. That’s not bad.

Additional reading:
1900 snapshots of West Side Grounds