James does a terrific write-up in his abstract of nicknames throughout the years. The further we go back in history the better they become, to the point that almost all of the great ballplayers from the 19th century are better known by their nicknames (Cap Anson, King Kelly, Old Hoss Radbourn, Buck Ewing, Pud Galvin, Wee Willie Keeler, etc.) than by their actual names. I think the trend that hurts nicknames the most is the standardization of the amateur game. All ballplayers today come up through rigorously organized amateur systems, either through high school, college, or the development programs in the Caribbean. Back in the days of barnstorming and amateur Sunday leagues, a player's reputation was garnered not through scouting reports and televised competition, but through word-of-mouth and near-mythical feats. Denton Young became Cy Young because he threw as fast as a Cyclone and James Galvin became Pud Galvin because his pitches turned opposing hitters into pudding. I don't think those names come along in today's society where everybody knows the top prospects. I think the same explanation can realize why Negro League players tend to have the best nicknames, because their legacy is built on those semi-mythical feats and character traits.
I also think the decline in the number of sportswriters has effected the creativity of nicknames. With less people writing about the sport, their is less creativity going into the development of nicknames. What is interesting is that in the social media age it seems like nicknames should be at an all-time high because so many people have a voice and even the smallest of trends can leave a huge footprint.
What I really miss is the lack of great team, or unit nicknames. In baseball you have so many great team names, the Murder's Row, The Whiz Kids, The Gashouse Gang, The Big Red Machine, The $100,000 Infield, The Pittsburgh Lumber Company. We need those to come back.
