Every time I do a Monster Card from the deadball era, it seems like I learn something new. I suppose it’s because if it’s a player like Ruth or Eckersley, I assume I know the player well enough (hint: I probably don’t). With a player like 1905 Mike Donlin, I like to take some extra time and look up some info on him. Info like where did he get the nickname “Turkey Mike”?
If Mike Donlin’s name is familiar, it’s probably because you’ve seen Scott Fennessy write about him in his recaps of his 1905 replay here and here. It was Scott who suggested Turkey Mike for this Monster Card Monday. Good suggestion!
First things first… why the funny nickname? Apparently, he got it in Baltimore because of his strange gait while walking. I’m guessing there was nothing wrong with his running going by his 33 steals in 1905 and 213 career thefts.
Only 5’ 9”, Donlin played 12 years in the pros from 1899-1914 (yes, he missed a few years). He played the best of his years for the New York Giants from 1904-1911. Of his 12 years in baseball, he hit .300 or better in ten including .340 in 1901 for Baltimore, .351 in 1903 for Cincinnati and .356 in 1905. He also led the league in runs scored with 124 in ‘05.
Donlin was primarily an outfielder throughout his career though he occasionally spelled at first base when needed. Sadly, Donlin was apparently an incurable drunk and even asked for a sobriety incentive clause to be written into his 1907 clause. Management refused and he sat out the 1907 season.
| Year | Tm | G | PA | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | BB | SO | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1905 | NYG | 150 | 676 | 606 | 124 | 216 | 31 | 16 | 7 | 80 | 33 | 56 | 41 | .356 | .413 | .495 |
With the possible exception of 1903, Donlin’s performance in 1905 was his best season of his career. His batting average (.356) was the highest of his career and he supplemented it with some decent gap power (31-16-7). As a result, his APBA card is quite fun.
It certainly isn’t a powerful card. His numbers come out to about 2.8 EBH per 36 PA so it works out. But you’re not looking for power in 1905 anyway. Donlin DOES have speed (11-10-10) and bat control (three 31s and just one 13). Oh did I mention the the hit numbers? Aside from the three 0s and the speed numbers, Donlin has FOUR sevens plus the requisite three 8s and two nines. That last seven hits the magical top row.
There are two error numbers on Donlin’s card. One 21 on the usual 53 and one 21 at 21. I haven’t confirmed this but I believe this is uniform throughout the 1905 card set.
Thanks again to Scott for the suggestion. I hope he’s having fun with this card!
Error chances are two per card in the 1901 set as well, which makes perfect sense because the average team did indeed make more than 2 errors per 36 batters faced.
They have scaled back the errors in the recently-released 1903 set. Out of the 8 position players in the primary lineup for each team, between 1 and 5 cards have an extra error number. Mostly the second error number is a 22, but in rare cases it is a 23.
Hi Bob,
I think the difference in the error numbers is due to when the 1905 set was printed vs. when the 1903 set was 1905=1988 1903=2012. Every card has the two error numbers and they are pretty much the same variety
As the 53 error spot depending on position. The 1901 set which was also printed in 88 was set up the same way.
FYI in the 1901 set Donlin had a pretty good card as well 4 0’s and a 15 7 just off the top of my head.
I was going to purchase the 03 set but it was not available and I wanted to start a new season ASAP. How are you liking this set?
I am liking the set a lot. I have rolled about 20 games so far, and it just feels like there is a healthy amount of hitting going on, with runs being manufactured by hits and walks (few HRs). And not too many errors–I’ve had two games with four errors total, and the rest were about 2 per game. Not sure if these initial trends would hold up over the course of a season, but so far so good for my taste.
P.S. I exaggerated. I checked my records and have played only 12 games, but my observations are the same.
I’ve started logging my plays on Boardgame Geek, so if you’d like to check out the line scores for my small sample of games, they’re there.
http://boardgamegeek.com/plays/thing/895?userid=26946
Thanks for the info. I will check the link later. I plan on having an update once I complete the month of May. Just starting games on the 20th.
Scott, I find it unusual that Donlin has a better card than Cy Seymour in a year that Seymour was the dominant offensive player in the NL in 1905. I am a Seymour fan, so maybe I am a little biased, but the numbers are there. Also, do you know if Seymour is rated a (2) in the OF in 1903 ? Also, is Jake Weimer graded an A for that same season ? If so doeshe have a W. Great talking to you Scott.