Because a question like this always brings out the nitpickers, I can't resist adding. In 1901, it was still the tail-end of an era where team nicknames weren't universally embraced. I note that this Cleveland team is listed by bb-ref.com as simply the Blues. Often the newspaper accounts would still refer to teams as the plural of the city name - e.g. the Clevelands might face the Washingtons for a game. Team nicknames were often assigned playfully by newspaper writers or others, and if a name found public acceptance it might last a few weeks or even become permanent (e.g. the Superbas became the Trolley Dodgers more or less this way). The Pirates' name was bestowed originally as a dig, for their having raided other professional teams too aggressively around 1890, and at some point the team adopted the name as a reverse badge of honor (or opprobrium). Cleveland in particular went through a succession of nicknames: Bluebirds/Blues, Bronchos, Naps (in honor of their star Napoleon Lajoie), before finally becoming the Indians, apocryphally in honor of Louis "Chief" Sockalexis who had played for an NL incarnation in that city late in the 19th century, but more likely because the team owner just liked the name. Baseball has amazing lineage and continuity, which is an important aspect of its charm. But, as with any major human enterprise, there are often interesting non-linear details beneath the surface.