Passing Cobb is all the more poignant. Wow
Yes, Cobb was a lifelong advocate for racial tolerance and treating everyone equally, as was his father, so he would probably appreciate the recognition being given to them. (edit: I see Sumner covered it, and his link is to the
same article that I'd have offered, which I found most helpful in rounding out my understanding of Cobb from this perspective - I'll just link to
my summary of it, in case that's still useful).
---
That said, while it's true that white MLB players of the pre-integration era weren't facing all of the best ballplayers in the land, it's also true (probably more true) of Negro League ballplayers. I'm finding it hard to regard the achievements as being the same, from a competitive perspective. A full season for
Josh Gibson, outside of war years, ran between 39 and 69 games per year. His .373 career batting average was put up over 602 games / 2500 PAs, or a little less than 4 full 154-game MLB seasons; Cobb had over 13,000 PAs, 5x the amount of work, and that particular
B-Ref leaderboard even sets a minimum threshold of 3000 PAs. That's not to say I want to maintain some sort of "separate but equal" status for the recordbooks - I agree that if we're going to regard the Negro Leagues as being Major Leagues, as MLB
announced in 2020, then this decision is a natural consequence that flows from that. But the stat person in me thinks this ends up with a somewhat silly result. Even though I can also see that the decision clearly does more good (in terms of dignity) than it could possibly cause any sort of harm, in terms of clouding the degree-of-difficulty that these leaderboards represent. I guess count me a tepid and conflicted supporter of the decision.
I don't actually like this. You can't throw the old Negro League stats in the same bucket as AL and NL stats from the same era. The schedules were wildly different. More than half of the games that a NAL or NNL team would play were exhibitions against anyone they could to make money. Those aren't included in the stats, but it was physically draining and impacted what they were able to do in the games that counted. It's better than ignoring them entirely, but showing them separately preserves their context in a way that combining doesn't.
I'm not sure that's a weighty objection to their inclusion. The hitters were just as tired as the pitchers. Even if you doubled the amount of games they participated in per year, it still amounted to less than a full MLB calendar (but then, also consider the extent of difference in terms of how draining travel were, how nice the accommodations were for players, and other stresses). There are probably decent arguments for not merging the stat leaderboards, but I'm not sure this is one of them.