Which Memorable Player's Number SHOULD be retired that ISN'T?

[JayMac]

For my teams:

Cowboys - 9, 82, 88, 94 will for sure be put in the RoH. Of those 4, only Romo isn't a lock to make the Hall of Fame. If our o-line keeps producing pro-bowlers and all-pro players, some of them could make it.

Lakers - 24 will be, and I can't imagine the Lakers would allow 8 to be worn again.

you are saying dez has deserved the HoF already? Hell RoH isn't even guaranteed yet

Not yet, but if he manages to keep up his current level of play for a while, most definitely.

He probably won't be in Dallas soon since he can't feed his family on his measly multi-million salary.

[OnWis97]

For my teams:

Cowboys - 9, 82, 88, 94 will for sure be put in the RoH. Of those 4, only Romo isn't a lock to make the Hall of Fame. If our o-line keeps producing pro-bowlers and all-pro players, some of them could make it.

Lakers - 24 will be, and I can't imagine the Lakers would allow 8 to be worn again.

I always figured that was why he changed. Maybe even "I can have TWO numbers retired." But that's probably how it'll go; one in the rafters and one not issued. (That made me curious about #45 for the Bulls and that has been worn since) http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/numbers.html

For football, I tend to agree that numbers should not really be retired. There are a lot of potentially-worthy players with numbers that have been reissued. And they have to be out of necessity sometimes given the number of roster players and positional requirements. Just for fun, I checked the Vikings. Generally, fans tend to think of two names as "the best": Tarkenton and Page. I'll add Cris Carter.

• Tarkenton's #10 was retired and he's the last one to wear it (it was worn between Tarkenton's two stints with the team, though)
• Page's #88 was issued to five players, most recently in 1987. Retired in 1988.
• Carters #80 has not been issued since Carter and is retired.
• They've also retired numbers for Tinglehoff (since issued, a lot), Marshall (the only person to ever wear 70...20 years before they retired the number, but they were obviously not re-issuing it), and Stringer (last player to wear it; retired because of his untimely death).

With the new-ish ability for WRs to go to the teens, maybe there is less issue than there used to be. But a lot of teams have a lot longer list of greats than the Vikes. I think I'd support the ring of honor and then "trying not to" issue those numbers.

[DustDevil61]

I was pretty shocked to discover that Gil Hodges' number still isn't retired by the Dodgers. I mean, c'mon....what? I'm glad at least the Mets did so. But unless there's some issue I'm unaware of, there's no reason for Hodges to not have his number up at Dodger Stadium.

I feel like Andrei Kirilenko might get his retired for the Jazz eventually. He had a good run in Utah, and of all the best players the Jazz have had over the past 15 years (not named Hayward - he's still young and has a lot of good career ahead of him), AK47 is the one that probably left on the best terms and is still admired by most fans. D-Will though? Ehhh....forever the guy that ran Sloan out. That'll be tough. I say no. Boozer? DOUBLE NO. Okur would be cool, but he probably didn't play long enough and didn't make as much a splash as others, nor near enough to really make a case. I'd say most fans still love him a lot, though. So if we're looking for best shots from the recent past regarding the Jazz, AK47 has the best shot I believe (not a guarantee, though). I do personally believe Hayward will be in the rafters eventually if he keeps improving, becomes the player I believe he'll become, and maintains his hero status here in Utah.

I agree that Andrei Kirilenko's 47 should be retired by the Jazz, but I think that, without a doubt, Memet Okur's 13 should be retired. While unconventional, Okur is one of the best Jazz centers in history, not to mention beloved by the Jazz fanbase.

As for other teams, it baffles me that Michael Irvin's 88 isn't retired by the Cowboys nor is Terrell Davis' 30 by the Broncos. It's a bit early, but would the Cardinals retire Albert Pujols' 5 when his career is done, or did the his leaving to the Angels hamper that?

[tBBP]

Not for nothing, but Drew Pearson also wore that #88 for the Cowboys--and he was a pretty doggone good player for that franchise as well...

[Rockstar Matt]

Not for nothing, but Drew Pearson also wore that #88 for the Cowboys--and he was a pretty doggone good player for that franchise as well...

As did Michael Irvin. I think the Cowboys reserve that number for their game changing WR's.

[pmoehrin]

But would the Cardinals retire Albert Pujols' 5 when his career is done, or did the he left to the Angels hamper that?

It would be a damn crime if they didn't.

IMO he's overtaken Lou Gehrig for the greatest first baseman in baseball history.

Three MVP's with the Cards which is as many times as Stan Musial won it. Four times he led the NL in total bases. He's second only to Musial in team history in home runs, RBI's and doubles and every year he was with the Cards he was in the top ten in OPS in the NL. He also has two Gold Gloves to his credit but should have at least double that amount.

I'd love to know what the argument against him is. The only two Cardinals I'd put in front of him are Stan Musial and Rogers Hornsby, both of whom are two of the ten greatest position players in baseball history.

He's not in HOF territory, he's in Mount Rushmore territory.

[FinsUp1214]

I was pretty shocked to discover that Gil Hodges' number still isn't retired by the Dodgers. I mean, c'mon....what? I'm glad at least the Mets did so. But unless there's some issue I'm unaware of, there's no reason for Hodges to not have his number up at Dodger Stadium.

I feel like Andrei Kirilenko might get his retired for the Jazz eventually. He had a good run in Utah, and of all the best players the Jazz have had over the past 15 years (not named Hayward - he's still young and has a lot of good career ahead of him), AK47 is the one that probably left on the best terms and is still admired by most fans. D-Will though? Ehhh....forever the guy that ran Sloan out. That'll be tough. I say no. Boozer? DOUBLE NO. Okur would be cool, but he probably didn't play long enough and didn't make as much a splash as others, nor near enough to really make a case. I'd say most fans still love him a lot, though. So if we're looking for best shots from the recent past regarding the Jazz, AK47 has the best shot I believe (not a guarantee, though). I do personally believe Hayward will be in the rafters eventually if he keeps improving, becomes the player I believe he'll become, and maintains his hero status here in Utah.

I agree that Andrei Kirilenko's 47 should be retired by the Jazz, but I think that, without a doubt, Memet Okur's 13 should be retired. While unconventional, Okur is one of the best Jazz centers in history, not to mention beloved by the Jazz fanbase.

Okur is definitely one of the best centers the Jazz have ever had, I'll agree to that. I'd say he's second behind Mark Eaton. And I'm one of those fans that still loves him too (I even met him once in Salt Lake. Not to throw the saying around, but truly one of the nicest guys you'd ever meet). I too would absolutely love to see 13 in the rafters, I just don't know how likely it'll be. I'd be cool with it though!

I do think he's got an infinitely better chance than Ostertag at the very least!

[pmoehrin]

Both Wade Boggs and Roger Clemens should have their numbers retired with the Red Sox.

One guy has 3 Cy Young's with the team. The other hit .338 over 11 years. If those numbers aren't worthy of an honor like that I'm not sure what is.

I can't think of any other player in baseball that's even close to what those two did that isn't active, doesen't have their number retired already, or isn't already honored in some other way.

It's also kind of a shame to. After Ted Williams I'm not sure Clemens and Boggs aren't 2 and 3 for the greatest Red Sox of all-time and its almost like those two don't even exist as far as the Red Sox are concerned.

The Red Sox have been historically strict about their retirement policy.

The general requirement is 10 seasons with the sox, ended your career with the sox, and are a Hall of Famer. (Johnny Pesky is the only exception, but he with the team for 61 years, so he kinda deserved it... Fisk technically worked for the team at the end of his playing career).

Neither Boggs, nor Clemens ended their careers here, and Clemens isn't in the Hall. Therefore

The you need to be a Hall of Famer based on your stats with the team should be a qualification across the board for everyone. I get Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio for the Astros. Not so sure I fully understand Jose Cruz or Mike Scott.

But the ended your career here requirement comes off as being just flat out silly. Babe Ruth didn't end his career with the Yankees, Ty Cobb didn't end his career with the Tigers, Willie Mays didn't end his career with the Giants and Albert Pujols probably won't end his career with the Cardinals.

The ten year thing I don't think is quite as dumb, but still you have Randy Johnson only played eight years for the D'Backs and I didn't hear any uproar when the D'Backs retired his number. But why would there be? The man won four Cy Young's with the them. You know who else has won four Cy Young's with one franchise? Nobody. So even though not as bad, its still a criteria that can eliminate great players for no reason.

The Red Sox can do what they want. Its not going to change my opinion on their players one way or another. But I think the retired number losses some meaning when you have Bobby Doerr, Joe Cronin, Johnny Pesky and Jim Rice up there, but not Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, Lefty Grove or Pedro Martinez.

I know both Pesky and Cronin did a lot of work for the club after they retired. But retired numbers if nothing else should be a true representation of the all-time greats in the franchise's history and in the case of the Red Sox its not.

Both Wade Boggs and Roger Clemens should have their numbers retired with the Red Sox.

One guy has 3 Cy Young's with the team. The other hit .338 over 11 years. If those numbers aren't worthy of an honor like that I'm not sure what is.

I can't think of any other player in baseball that's even close to what those two did that isn't active, doesen't have their number retired already, or isn't already honored in some other way.

It's also kind of a shame to. After Ted Williams I'm not sure Clemens and Boggs aren't 2 and 3 for the greatest Red Sox of all-time and its almost like those two don't even exist as far as the Red Sox are concerned.

The Red Sox have been historically strict about their retirement policy.

The general requirement is 10 seasons with the sox, ended your career with the sox, and are a Hall of Famer. (Johnny Pesky is the only exception, but he with the team for 61 years, so he kinda deserved it... Fisk technically worked for the team at the end of his playing career).

Neither Boggs, nor Clemens ended their careers here, and Clemens isn't in the Hall. Therefore

The you need to be a Hall of Famer based on your stats with the team should be a qualification across the board for everyone. I get Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio for the Astros. Not so sure I fully understand Jose Cruz or Mike Scott.

But the ended your career here requirement comes off as being just flat out silly. Babe Ruth didn't end his career with the Yankees, Ty Cobb didn't end his career with the Tigers, Willie Mays didn't end his career with the Giants and Albert Pujols probably won't end his career with the Cardinals.

The ten year thing I don't think is quite as dumb, but still you have Randy Johnson only played eight years for the D'Backs and I didn't hear any uproar when the D'Backs retired his number. But why would there be? The man won four Cy Young's with the them. You know who else has won four Cy Young's with one franchise? Nobody. So even though not as bad, its still a criteria that can eliminate great players for no reason.

The Red Sox can do what they want. Its not going to change my opinion on their players one way or another. But I think the retired number losses some meaning when you have Bobby Doerr, Joe Cronin, Johnny Pesky and Jim Rice up there, but not Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, Lefty Grove or Pedro Martinez.

I know both Pesky and Cronin did a lot of work for the club after they retired. But retired numbers if nothing else should be a true representation of the all-time greats in the franchise's history and in the case of the Red Sox its not.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/12/21/red-sox-retire-wade-boggs/iQXIUJI6usQYPqxiqwHelK/story.html

[2001mark]

I think the Raptors should finally retire Vince Carter's #15. He represented the most prolific era of the team's existence, not least helping to inspire this new slew of local homegrown talent.

I for one love when teams don't merely retire numbers based on statistics alone... that's boring.

[VikingsNotMinnesota]

For the seahawks, the obvious is Wilson, Lynch, and Sherman. They're going up in the rafters no question, possibly even the HOF. But I'd like to pitch in a retirement of matt hasselbeck. He led them to their first super bowl, and was their first star qb they ever had. Shaun Alexander is another possibility, but he only really had 4 years that were worth a damn out of the 7 he played with the team. Marcus Trufant would be a good one too maybe.

[JayMac]

I think it is still too early to say Wilson and company are definitely going into the Seahawks HOF. I would say most likely. I would like to Hasselbeck get the honor.

[KittSmith_95]

Shane Doan will soon have his number up for Arizona.....

Should Jagr's 68 get retired?

One other guy who should get honoured is Bernie Nicholls by the Kings. I mean, one of 8 guys to get 150 points.

[jc...]

Only one player on the Patriots since Aaron Hernandez has worn his number.....

In all seriousness, I've become one of those who don't like seeing numbers retired. I think it's Notre Dame football that gives you a card with a list of players who have worn your number. I like that. Imagine the responsibility and pride you'd feel if you were a young rookie linebacker and the Giants gave you #56 to wear? Or whoever.

[Almighty]

A crime that the sabers have not retired Alexander Mogilny´s #89

[smith03]

have the Lakers ever retired 99 for George Mikan?

[johnnysama]

The Cincinnati Bengals should retire #78 for Anthony Munoz- the guy was a force as an offensive lineman!

[PacificCoastRL]

Although having his #14 not retired yet by the Maple Leafs is partly his own doing, Dave Keon deserves to have his number retired. Rookie of the Year, two time Lady Byng winner, Conn Smythe Trophy winner, captain of the team at one point, and Hall of Famer. Considered by many to be the greatest Leaf ever.

[2001mark]

Only one player on the Patriots since Aaron Hernandez has worn his number.....

In all seriousness, I've become one of those who don't like seeing numbers retired. I think it's Notre Dame football that gives you a card with a list of players who have worn your number. I like that. Imagine the responsibility and pride you'd feel if you were a young rookie linebacker and the Giants gave you #56 to wear? Or whoever.

Inside every single Team Canada World Jr locker this year is a list of every Canadian Jr roster player who's worn your number.

[masterchaoss]

I know he wasn't the greatest pitcher the Dodgers had and it's probably not gonna happen because of the Dodgers HOF only policy, but I really do feel that Fernando should have his number retired.

[BBTV]

The Sixers announced that they will be retiring #4 for Dolph Schayes.

Nerlens Noel currently wears the number and will "represent Dolph on the court" by continuing to wear it.

Lame.