How do you like your baseball stirrups?

[johnnysama]

 

Hi, all. Here's a question to you all: I love baseball stirrups.  And they come in all different "cuts", with the arch going higher with each cut.

With that said, how do you like your stirrup stockings?

Me: I'll take the 5, 7, 9 and 12 inch cuts. The 4 is too low, 15 too high, and those ribbon stirrups: Eh......

[Clintau24]

9-inch cut is best cut

[oldschoolvikings]

I'm a five or seven.  The question that goes hand and hand with this one is how low do you want the pants leg  to go?  If the pants legs end at the ankle (which has been in fashion for far too long in the majors) the height of the stirrup doesn't make any difference.

[8BW14]

5”, 7”are perfect, 9” is pushing it for me. 4” looks like you really won’t even see it above the top of the shoe, so what’s the point? 12” says 1980’s skin tight capri pants to me, which I thought was a terrible look and 15” looks like those fake stirrups we all wore in tee ball and little league.

[MJWalker45]

5 or 7. 

[Fitzy0220]

12" - 15" for me. I like my pants to stop at the knee. To me the high Stirrup Socks add to the Uniform

[Ark]

Like this

 

 

If the pants stop at the knee, I prefer no stirrups. 

[bbush24]

9 inch 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

I prefer strirrups to be worn the way they are worn by the players who define baseball, for both good...

 

 

...and evil.

 

 

 

To be more serious about it, I can go for a little variation. If some guys pull their stirrups up really long, I am cool with that. I can even live with two-in-ones. And I am slowly warming to the solid-sock look (though I cannot say that I am fully there yet).

 

The one timeless absolute is that a properly-dressed ballplayer shows some sock. No one should ever be allowed on the field with his pants down to his shoes, or with pant legs missing the elastic.

[Lights Out]

I don't. Stirrups look really dumb and striped socks are a better alternative.

[infrared41]

Despite the fact that I usually lean heavily towards traditional looks, I don't really care for stirrups at all. When compared to the full length pants look, I think stirrups look kinda silly. I'll head on over to the city gates now to get ready for my public stoning. 

[The_Admiral]

Stirrups serve no purpose now that sock manufacturers have switched to non-lethal dyes, and besides, they look stupid hiked up so high. I'm glad they're mostly gone, but the move toward Justin Trudeau Whimsy Socks is a move too far.

[Ark]

Stirrups can add an extra design element to uniforms.

 

I just dislike when the curve shows.

[gimmick]

5". The Cincinnati "Big Red Machine" of the 1970s wore the perfect stirrups IMHO.

[Olmec]

Socks > Stirrups. Case closed

[GriffinM6]

When I played I always wore short pants. I wore regular tube socks throughout a lot of my time playing, but around the age of 11 I started to wear stirrups too. I wore '5 and '9. The five inch ones were for cooler days and the '9 ones were for hot, humid Georgia springs and summers. I'll say this though, stirrups with stripes need to be '5 or else it'll look weird. 

 

Finally, I'm glad more players in MLB have started to wear short pants again. It was far too long that we had the baggy ankle pants look. My only gripe is that there's no uniformity among teams and how the striping looks on players' socks. 

[Kramerica Industries]

High stirrups are silly. We're supposed to see more of the actual color, not the sanitary sock underneath it. 7 inches is a hard limit for me. Ideally, the 4-5 inch range is where it would stop.