With very few exceptions, offering an opinion on the appropriateness of the size of a jersey for a particular player is just that, an opinion. By this I mean there is very little in the way of historical ordering information available for jerseys as compared to the body of information that exists for bats. In the absence of team order sheets or photographs that reveal a size tag, there are a few aspects of this issue that can be considered helpful and that is what I would like to spend some time on today.
When I look at a jersey and am evaluating the appropriateness of the size, I try to use relevant references such as team yearbooks or period publications such as Street & Smith. I have found these very helpful as compared to biographical references that list a single height and weight for a player. The fact of the matter is our height and weight change over time. These year or period references gives me something to use a basis when I look at other period uniforms from the player in question or those players of approximately the same size. In short, I am always on the lookout for sizing information and this brings me to something I found rather interesting.
Issue 6 of the 1955 Rawlings Roundup has five pages devoted to sizing data. In this issue, Rawlings offers helpful hints on the sizing and ordering of uniforms. They also offer suggested size mixes for orders made for youth, high school, college, and professional teams. Rawlings based their numbers and recommendations on “more than fifty years’ experience in the making of quality athletic equipment…” The information provided by them for baseball uniforms was the most interesting for me:
“BASEBALL UNIFORMS: Baseball uniforms should be loose fitting. When ordering made-to-measure uniforms, specify one to two sizes larger than the actual chest and waist measurement. The suggested assortment of sizes for uniforms for professional teams in the table below are based on requirements of clubs in the Class A, B, C, and D, classifications. Major league teams, and those in AAA and AA, usually order made-to-measure uniforms.”
The high school, college, and professional charts provide data on various quantities and sizes that should be considered for those orders. In looking at a typical order for 18 uniforms you will see this suggested mix by size and quantity:
High School Baseball Jerseys
Size 36-1
Size 38-5
Size 40-7
Size 42-4
Size 44-1
College Baseball Jerseys
Size 38-2
Size 40-5
Size 42-6
Size 44-4
Size 46-1
Professional Baseball Jerseys
Size 38-1
Size 40-4
Size 42-8
Size 44-4
Size 46-1
I was curious how this suggested order by Rawlings compared to data I had on professional jerseys from 1955. Data for the fifty-six jerseys I have sizing information on from 1955 showed:
Size 38-0
Size 40-7
Size 42-24
Size 44-17
Size 46-7
Size 48-1
It appears Rawlings knew what they were talking about when the suggested teams go heavy on the size 42. Probably the best known of these “average size 42” players in 1955 was Willie Mays. This was probably the only thing you could link the word average to with respect to Mays and baseball.
Rawlings also offered the same type of information for caps in a quantity order of 18:
High School Baseball Caps
Size 6 3/4-1
Size 6 7/8-3
Size 7-5
Size 7 1/8-5
Size 7 1/4-3
Size 7 3/8-1
College Baseball Caps
Size 6 3/4-1
Size 6 7/8-2
Size 7-4
Size 7 1/8-5
Size 7 1/2-3
Size 7 3/8–2
Size 7 1/2-1
Professional Baseball Caps
Size 6 7/8-2
Size 7-5
Size 7 1/8-5
Size 7 1/4-3
Size 7 3/8-2
Size 7 1/2-1
Unlike the jerseys, there is more commonality across all three levels with respect the recommended cap sizes. If you look at all of this, relative to these sizes for 1955, Rawlings seems to suggest that anyone wearing a jersey larger than size 42 and cap larger than 7 1/8 is above the average.
As a means of comparison, in 1955 Ted Kluszewski was the biggest guy on the Cincinnati Reds roster and one of the largest men in the majors at 6’, 2, 236 lbs. Today, there are seven players on the Reds roster larger than “Big Klu” was in 1955. Kluszewski wore a size 46 jersey in 1955 and a size 46 jersey in today’s game hardly considered large.
One additional thing I would offer for collectors to consider when looking to determine the appropriateness of size is think about what imagery analysis has to offer. Unfortunately this won’t help in all cases, but if the player in question plays for team that features pinstripes on the jersey, count the pinstripes across the chest as a way assess size worn vs the tagged size you are looking at. In other words, if the jersey you are looking at is size 46 and it features twenty pinstripes from shoulder to shoulder, you should expect to find much of the same thing in the images from the same period/year in question you examine. You’d be surprised at how many folks don’t bother to do this, even when they claim a “photo match.”
Well, that about sizes things up for now. In the coming weeks we will look at the changes in cut and physical sizing of jerseys produced by a common manufacturer in a common size over a period of four decades. The size of the players isn’t the only thing that has changed and this is an equally important consideration.
As always, collect what you enjoy and enjoy what you collect.
Dave Grob
For questions or comments on this article, please feel free to drop me a line at DaveGrob1@aol.com