worcat

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

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No number should ever be retired, nor held out of circulation, in any sport.

Well, if you play in Toronto, you won't have that problem.

Leafs won't, Jays won't, Raptors meh... TFC? lols

I guess their 'honoured number' nonsense has been around so long, I don't know any better.

Actually I lied. The Jays retired Alomar's #12. The Leafs have retired Barilko's #5 & Bailey's #6. Both teams have a slew of 'honoured' numbers hanging the rafters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot think of any. It took the A's forever to retire Ricky Henderson...I had assumed it was retired until I saw Jermaine Dye wearing #24. I think they finally retired it in 2009 or so. In Minnesota it took a while to retire Bert Blyleven (considering HOF is not a requirement). The number was issued at least once (Jesse Crain) and I was surprised to see it worn, figuring it would eventually be retired.

But for the most part the list of retired numbers that should not be is much, much longer.

My teams:

  • Wild: #1 (for the fans). Are you kidding?
  • Timberwoves: #2 for Malik Sealy who was killed by a drunk driver while playing for the T-Wolves. I am OK with it, though he is not the calibur of player that usually gets a number retired. It's very sad that it even came up.
  • Twins: #14 Kent Hrbek. Hrbek, despite his weight, should have won multiple gold gloves but he is not quite that calibur of player. He's from Minnesota, though, and I don't think any other team would have retired his number for the same career. He came out smoking and tapered off as his body started to decline. Kinda like Mauer, who will also have his number retired, in a bit of a stretch, due to being hometown as well.
  • Twins: #10 Tom Kelly (Manager). Manager for two World Champions. This is borderline at best. Also manager in the moribund 90s. The silver lining to the Twins not winning a World Series during the 2000s is that nobody will be trying to suggest we retire Gardy's number. That's a world I could not live in.

Future retirements in Minnesota: Kevin Garnett and Joe Mauer.

I entirely agree about Hrbek. I've always thought he receives too much love from Minnesotans, especially nowadays. However, that might be due to my young age, as I wasn't old enough to remember his playing days..I only know him for his ridiculous roles in local TV commercials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York Jets:

I think Jets will eventually retire #24 for Darrelle Revis.

I think that will depend heavily on how he does during his second stint. If he plays All Pro football for a few more seasons, then maybe, yeah.

Is he even that well liked among Jet fans? (I honestly don't know) 2 hold outs and winning a title with the arch rivals can't be viewed too highly, right?

Many Jets fans are still butt hurt over the holdouts/signing with Pats (I'm not one of them, in fact I never viewed Revis negatively because pro sports is a business) but they will get over it. He's already a Hall of Fame player who's best years were in green and white.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot think of any. It took the A's forever to retire Ricky Henderson...I had assumed it was retired until I saw Jermaine Dye wearing #24. I think they finally retired it in 2009 or so. In Minnesota it took a while to retire Bert Blyleven (considering HOF is not a requirement). The number was issued at least once (Jesse Crain) and I was surprised to see it worn, figuring it would eventually be retired.

But for the most part the list of retired numbers that should not be is much, much longer.

My teams:

  • Wild: #1 (for the fans). Are you kidding?
  • Timberwoves: #2 for Malik Sealy who was killed by a drunk driver while playing for the T-Wolves. I am OK with it, though he is not the calibur of player that usually gets a number retired. It's very sad that it even came up.
  • Twins: #14 Kent Hrbek. Hrbek, despite his weight, should have won multiple gold gloves but he is not quite that calibur of player. He's from Minnesota, though, and I don't think any other team would have retired his number for the same career. He came out smoking and tapered off as his body started to decline. Kinda like Mauer, who will also have his number retired, in a bit of a stretch, due to being hometown as well.
  • Twins: #10 Tom Kelly (Manager). Manager for two World Champions. This is borderline at best. Also manager in the moribund 90s. The silver lining to the Twins not winning a World Series during the 2000s is that nobody will be trying to suggest we retire Gardy's number. That's a world I could not live in.

Future retirements in Minnesota: Kevin Garnett and Joe Mauer.

I entirely agree about Hrbek. I've always thought he receives too much love from Minnesotans, especially nowadays. However, that might be due to my young age, as I wasn't old enough to remember his playing days..I only know him for his ridiculous roles in local TV commercials.

Hrbek was really good for a few years. He was AL MVP runner-up in 1984 (and lost out to a pitcher, making him arguably the AL's best offensive player that year). This shows that he received MVP votes in 1986 as well. He put up sold power numbers through most of his career, but his BA/OBP/OPS started declined quickly after 1991 (as did his games played). His body started breaking down a bit early and he retired at 34.

He only made one All-Star game (his rookie year, but did not make in in his MVP-runner up year). He never won a gold glove and he was Doug Mientkiewicz before there was a Doug Mientkiewicz.

Really, looking at his numbers he was better than I'd realized and his decline started a bit later than I'd realized. I still think most teams would not have retired his number for that career, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randall Cunningham's #12 isn't retired by the Eagles, but they don't give it out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

That's why it's so silly to have such strict criteria regarding retired numbers -- you can't really define what it takes to deserve the honour, you'll just know it when you see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if they'll ever retire Clinton Portis's #26. (In Denver or Washington). I don't think he'll get into the HOF, though.

EDIT:Yeah, he won't get into the HOF. But either way he's still one of my favorite players.

Edited by 1insaneguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see teddy bruschi's 54 retired, he was the captain and heart of our defense for our "dynasty".

I wonder if they'll ever retire Clinton Portis's #26. (In Denver or Washington). I don't think he'll get into the HOF, though.

EDIT:Yeah, he won't get into the HOF. But either way he's still one of my favorite players.

he was a good back, but he never did enough for either team to have his number retired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Steelers have a ton. I've read in several places though, that they just don't reissue numbers rather than retiring them. As far as I know, no Steeler will ever wear 7, 12, 43, 47, 58, 59, 83, 86, 92, or 99 again.

The Pirates need to retire Dave Parker's number 39. He was a big part of the great 70's teams and played 11 season's there.

First, #3 should be retired throughout baseball in honor of Babe Ruth.

The Steelers, if anything, should've un-retired 60 and created a Ring of Honor-type recognition for players. Given NFL uniform number restrictions, that'd actually not be a bad idea league-wide.

I came into this thread actually thinking of Dave Parker. As much as I couldn't stand him (even while with my beloved Buccos), I think if not for the '85 drug trials #39 would've been retired years ago. #7, however, should certainly be retired in honor of Chuck Tanner, and a case could be made for the #27 of one Kenton Charles Tekulve; I could also argue that Billy Meyer's #1 should be unretired, but that's a point for another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see teddy bruschi's 54 retired, he was the captain and heart of our defense for our "dynasty".

I wonder if they'll ever retire Clinton Portis's #26. (In Denver or Washington). I don't think he'll get into the HOF, though.

EDIT:Yeah, he won't get into the HOF. But either way he's still one of my favorite players.

he was a good back, but he never did enough for either team to have his number retired

Yeah, he was my favorite player when he was in DC. But I'll admit he wasn't an all-time great. He also missed most of 09 and 10 with concussions/concussion symptoms, so he couldn't do to much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Steelers have a ton. I've read in several places though, that they just don't reissue numbers rather than retiring them. As far as I know, no Steeler will ever wear 7, 12, 43, 47, 58, 59, 83, 86, 92, or 99 again.

The Pirates need to retire Dave Parker's number 39. He was a big part of the great 70's teams and played 11 season's there.

I totally agree that the Pirates should retire #39.

The Steelers also have #1 for Gary Anderson, #52 for Mike Webster and #63 for Dermontti Dawson on the not issued list, I don't think Heath Miller's #83 will be taken out of circulation.

I have a feeling that Terry Bradshaw's #12 will be officially retired at some point maybe for the anniversary of Super Bowl XIII or XIV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit of a borerline choice IMO, but Bret Saberhagen for the Royals I think would be a decent choice.

Won two Cy Youngs for them over an eight year career. After George Brett he's argubly the next best player in Royals history, although admittingly its a bit of a dropoff from Brett to Saberhagen.

If it were me though I would just have George Brett and nobody else. Can honor John Mayberry, Carlos Beltran, Kevin Appier, Dan Quisenberry, Frank White, Willie Wilson, Jeff Montgomery, hell I'd even give you Freddie Patek as someone who should be in the team Hall of Fame. But Brett's the only truly all-time great that franchise has ever had to date and those are the only people I feel that are deserving of that honor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit of a borerline choice IMO, but Bret Saberhagen for the Royals I think would be a decent choice.

Won two Cy Youngs for them over an eight year career. After George Brett he's argubly the next best player in Royals history, although admittingly its a bit of a dropoff from Brett to Saberhagen.

If it were me though I would just have George Brett and nobody else. Can honor John Mayberry, Carlos Beltran, Kevin Appier, Dan Quisenberry, Frank White, Willie Wilson, Jeff Montgomery, hell I'd even give you Freddie Patek as someone who should be in the team Hall of Fame. But Brett's the only truly all-time great that franchise has ever had to date and those are the only people I feel that are deserving of that honor.

It's a shame Bo Jackson injured his hip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.