The Chicago team of that season outclassed all of its competitors, it being made up as follows: Corcoran and Goldsmith, pitchers; Flint, catcher; Anson, first base; Quest, second base; Williamson, third base; Burns, shortstop; Dalrymple, Gore and Kelly in the field, and L. T. Beals, substitute.
Unlike the majority of the clubs the Chicago Club did not have to depend upon the services of one first-class pitcher, but had two, both of whom were "cracker-jacks," and were therefore able to play them on alternate days instead of breaking them down or laming them by continued and arduous services.
In catchers, too, the club was especially fortunate, as Flint, who ranked as one of the best of his day, had an efficient ally in Mike Kelly, who could fill the breach when necessary.
This was an especially strong team, too, at the bat, as is shown by the records, Gore leading the League with an average of .365, with myself second with .338, Dalrymple third with .332, Burns fifth with .309. In fielding Williamson led the third basemen with an average of .893, while the fewest hits of the year were made off Corcoran's pitching. Among the first basemen I held second place with a percentage of .977. Sullivan of the Worcester team being first with .982 to his credit.
The Chicago Club that year made a little money, but it was the only one of the lot that did, the others losing, that is, some of them, more because of bad management than for any other reason.
In consequence of an agreement in regard to the sale of liquors in club grounds the Cincinnati Club that season forfeited its membership, and at the annual meeting of the League held in New York December 8th, 1880, the Detroit Club was elected to the vacant place.
The team that had represented Chicago in 1880 was good enough for me, and also good enough for the club directors, and that we were able to hold the players was a matter for self-congratulation.
The only new man on the list in 1881 was Andrew Pearcy, who took T. L. Beal's place as substitute, and who cut but little figure, as he was called upon to play but seldom.
That the Chicago Club again won the pennant in 1881 was due to two reasons. First, its strength as a batting organization, and in this respect it was undoubtedly the superior of all its rivals, and, secondly, the superb team work, the entire team playing together as one man and having but one object in view, and that the landing of the championship. Record playing was entirely lost sight of by the members of the club, and sacrifice hitting was indulged in whenever a point could be made by so doing.
The race throughout the season for everything except the last place was a close and exciting one, and up to the very last week the result was in doubt, so close together were the four leaders.