|
Post by RI Richmark on Feb 16, 2020 17:56:34 GMT -5
Recently the Boston Celtics announced that they will retire Kevin Garnett's #5. This led to a lively debate from fans on whether it should be retired. After all, some argued, Garnett only spent 6 seasons in Boston and only won one championship. In my opinion, HELL YEAH HIS NUMBER DESERVES TO BE RETIRED! While his time in Boston wasn't as long as some others his arrival heralded the Celtics' return to prominence after years as an afterthought. That alone should qualify him.
But it does lead to other questions. If Garnett's number goes up should Ray Allen's or Rajon Rondo's? And many claim that the Celtics have retired too many numbers over the years. The Celtics currently have 22 numbers retired (along with one nickname and a radio microphone). The Lakers, by comparison, only have 11 numbers (and two are retired for Kobe Bryant). Do Ed Macauley, Cedric Maxwell or Jim Loscutoff belong up there? Should Walter Brown or Red Auerbach have numbers retired even if they nevered played? What's the criteria for a number to be retired? Should there be a critera?
The Red Sox, for comparison, had a strict critera at one time. A player needed to play 10 years with the Red Sox, retire as a member of the club and be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. But given the way baseball has changed over the years these rules were altered and later abandoned.
In my opinion, I'm mostly fine with whoever a team chooses to honor. Retired numbers are not meant to be a Hall of Fame. They should be allowed to honor people who made a significant contribution to the team even if they're not a Hall of Famer.
There are exceptions though. A team shouldn't retire the number of a great player who only spent a short, insignificant time with the team. For example, the Rays retired Wade Boggs #12 even though he was far from the player he was in his prime. It was just an attempt to give themselves some instant history.
Numbers should not be universally retired throught the league. The only one who should have that honor is Jackie Robinson for what he had to endure to open the door for so many. I don't care how great Wayne Gretzky was no player is bigger than the game.
And don't retire numbers for fans. It's just pandering.
I also think that American football teams shouldn't retire numbers. Because rosters are so large a team risks running out of numbers. Some teams like the Dallas Cowboys have a Ring of Honor to reward thier greats and I think that works fine.
But those are just some of my thoughts. What do you think about this?
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Posts: 38,560
|
Post by fw91 on Feb 16, 2020 23:58:55 GMT -5
Nobody is worse than the Yankees. They are going to have to start giving out spring training numbers, although all the single digit numbers DO deserve to be retired.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Feb 17, 2020 5:00:49 GMT -5
Recently the Boston Celtics announced that they will retire Kevin Garnett's #5. This led to a lively debate from fans on whether it should be retired. After all, some argued, Garnett only spent 6 seasons in Boston and only won one championship. In my opinion, HELL YEAH HIS NUMBER DESERVES TO BE RETIRED! While his time in Boston wasn't as long as some others his arrival heralded the Celtics' return to prominence after years as an afterthought. That alone should qualify him. But it does lead to other questions. If Garnett's number goes up should Ray Allen's or Rajon Rondo's? And many claim that the Celtics have retired too many numbers over the years. The Celtics currently have 22 numbers retired (along with one nickname and a radio microphone). The Lakers, by comparison, only have 11 numbers (and two are retired for Kobe Bryant). Do Ed Macauley, Cedric Maxwell or Jim Loscutoff belong up there? Should Walter Brown or Red Auerbach have numbers retired even if they nevered played? What's the criteria for a number to be retired? Should there be a critera? The Red Sox, for comparison, had a strict critera at one time. A player needed to play 10 years with the Red Sox, retire as a member of the club and be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. But given the way baseball has changed over the years these rules were altered and later abandoned. In my opinion, I'm mostly fine with whoever a team chooses to honor. Retired numbers are not meant to be a Hall of Fame. They should be allowed to honor people who made a significant contribution to the team even if they're not a Hall of Famer. There are exceptions though. A team shouldn't retire the number of a great player who only spent a short, insignificant time with the team. For example, the Rays retired Wade Boggs #12 even though he was far from the player he was in his prime. It was just an attempt to give themselves some instant history. Numbers should not be universally retired throught the league. The only one who should have that honor is Jackie Robinson for what he had to endure to open the door for so many. I don't care how great Wayne Gretzky was no player is bigger than the game. And don't retire numbers for fans. It's just pandering. I also think that American football teams shouldn't retire numbers. Because rosters are so large a team risks running out of numbers. Some teams like the Dallas Cowboys have a Ring of Honor to reward thier greats and I think that works fine. But those are just some of my thoughts. What do you think about this? Gretzky is still the face of the game of Hockey is why. When people talk about the game of Hockey 9 times out of 10 he the first player that would come up. He took the NHL to a whole new level when he came in. So I understand why but as a big time hockey fan I get it. He still also a great Ambassador to the league and the game. The Blues for example have a couple numbers they retired and the player isn't in the HOF but if you know the history of The Blues, you understand why. Example the last number they retired a couple years ago was #5. Bob Plager, is he in the NHL Hall Of Fame? No but the man spend his whole career from the time the Blues was founded to now a part of the team. Way after the playing days he been with the team. As a Blues fan you get why his number went up there. The next one is 44 next year. Which is Pronger who was a former captain and of course HOFer, so not surprising. I agree any number retired has to be someone who meet a ton to the team and was there a long time. The St. Louis Cardinals have several coming I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by The Barber on Feb 17, 2020 5:42:05 GMT -5
I don't think numbers should be retired. They're probably gonna unretire them anyway. Do you think people in 100 years would give two shits about someone on the Bulls wearing Scottie Pippen's number? I'm not so sure.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Feb 17, 2020 8:09:18 GMT -5
I'm down with it being the ultimate honor a team can bestow, and I agree it's smart to pair it with a team Hall of Fame or something like that so that you can honor some big names without having to go the whole nine yards.
Honestly, I know I'm biased because they're my main teams, but I do like the way the Mets and Devils have approached it:
-The Mets retired a couple numbers early on for managers who were integral in establishing the team's identity in New York, given that the Mets and Colt .45s/Astros were the first NL expansion teams and thus treading new territory: ergo, they retired Casey Stengel's #37 and Gil Hodges' #14, made all the more poignant because Hodges managed the 1969 World Championship team and then succumbed to illness so much before his time.
Since then, they've pretty clearly tried to maintain one of those "only retire their number if they go to Cooperstown with a Mets hat on" standards, only leading to the retirement of Tom Seaver's #41 (there's a reason they still call him The Franchise) and Mike Piazza's #31. They've also spent years not letting anyone wear #8, feeling that was Gary Carter's number and that, before the Hall of Fame changed the rules about players picking the cap they want on their plaque, Carter's initial desire was to go to Cooperstown with a Mets hat instead of an Expos one (I think there may be a couple other numbers like this, i.e. Willy Mays' #24).
However, two developments occurred over the years: one was the establishment of a Mets Hall of Fame, which allowed the team to honor off-field figures (owners, GMs, announcers), as well as beloved players who either weren't here forever, but had great moments and whom the fanbase deeply identifies with. Guys like Doc Gooden and Daryl Strawberry, who never fully hit their Hall of Fame potential but are still identifiably Mets, are honored here, as are guys like Keith Hernandez, Gary Carter, Ed Kranepool, Tug McGraw, Mookie Wilson, etc.
Now, however, with the finishing of David Wright's career, the team realized they might have to expand their number retirement criteria, since there's no guarantee that Wright will make it to Cooperstown given how injuries shortened his career, but as the best position player the team's ever produced fans will demand he be honored. This has led the team just this year to announce they're going to "make up for lost time" in retiring a few numbers that likely should be put aside, and they're starting with Jerry Koosman's #36 (he was the left-handed compliment to Tom Seaver back in the day), and it won't shock me if we then get numbers done for Hernandez (17), Carter (8), and Wright (5). Hernandez is an interesting case since he was a captain during the 80s and a leader of the '86 championship team, but his post-playing career is almost just as important to his relevance to the team (e.g. his Seinfeld appearance, his return to the Mets as a color commentator, etc).
-The Devils had a glorious run from the late 80s through 2012, a stretch of time where they won the Stanley Cup three times, the Prince of Wales trophy five times, and produced multiple Hall of Fame talents.
The club went out of its way to ensure that the first number retired was Scott Stevens' #4 - he was the captain of all the Cup teams, and was going to the Hall of Fame mostly on the strength of his long tenure as a Devil. They then circled back and retired a number for a non-Hall of Fame player, Ken Daneyko, who retired before Stevens but who got the honor because, well, he's "Mr. Devil", one of the first players produced by the franchise and a guy who came up as a rookie during the team's first year in New Jersey and who only retired after the third Cup win, and who has stuck around the organization ever since. Like the Casey Stengel example above for the Mets, I do think it can be important to honor early contributors to a franchise's identity, and the gritty Daneyko, part of a dying breed of players who spent their entire careers on a single team, fit that bill.
Since then it's been a few more numbers, but again, all players who are in or will be in the Hockey Hall of Fame mostly or entirely for what they did as Devils: Scott Niedermayer (most dynamic defenseman in team history, 3 time Cup champ with the team), Martin Brodeur (the GOAT, three time champ), and Patrik Elias (two time champ, best offensive player in franchise history).
They've also begun a "ring of honor" style system, beginning with John McMullen, the guy responsible for bringing the team to Jersey - it'll eventually honor Lou Lamoriello, I'm sure, and I'd love it to eventually honor long time announcer Doc Emrick. There's a lot of fans who want to see a team HoF to honor a lot of guys who were big figures in team history but don't hit the same storied heights or get as identified with the team as the guys whose numbers are retired, but I guess that remains to be seen.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Feb 17, 2020 18:15:30 GMT -5
Didn't the Devils have a big ceremony for Doc Emrick a few years ago? I don't know the specific honor he was given, but I remember it being a pretty big deal for him.
|
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,299
|
Post by Sam Punk on Feb 17, 2020 21:02:20 GMT -5
Didn't the Miami Heat retire Dan Marino's number at one point?
But anyway I hate retiring numbers. Have a team hall of fame if you want to honor somebody.
|
|
J. Hova
Don Corleone
Emotionally exhausted and morally bankrupt
Posts: 1,956
|
Post by J. Hova on Feb 17, 2020 22:31:08 GMT -5
I'm fine with retiring numbers for elite players or players important to the history of the club. I'm not a big fan of Jackie Robinson's number being retired across baseball. That just seemed to be Bud Selig's way of giving himself a warm fuzzy feeling.
I look at the Cubs and so few have been retired (Maddux and Jenkins shared the same number so it was retired in one ceremony, Sandberg, Santo, Banks, and Billy Williams). All of those deserved it as they are all hall of famers who spent significant time with the Cubs. Now why they haven't retired Dawson (HOF) or Grace (best first baseman they had until Rizzo) is beyond me. I get why they haven't retired Sosa's number.
|
|
|
Post by Toilet Paper Roll on Feb 17, 2020 23:03:16 GMT -5
Celtics are going to have to do something eventually. I get retiring Garnett in comparison to a lot of the other guys who you’ve retired but it does sound more like a ring of honor thing would be more apropos
Outside of Russell and Bird none of those numbers really need to be retired
|
|
rocket
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,801
|
Post by rocket on Feb 18, 2020 7:14:00 GMT -5
Didn't the Miami Heat retire Dan Marino's number at one point? But anyway I hate retiring numbers. Have a team hall of fame if you want to honor somebody. They retired Michael Jordan's. I wonder if the Yankees or Celtics at one point have to start issuing 3-number jerseys.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Feb 18, 2020 13:08:09 GMT -5
Not every player makes it to the HOF so i'm fine with it as it is up to each team what their criteria is. For example, Bernie, Andy and Posada aren't making the HOF but they are on the list of Yankee all time greats. Professional sports has been around how long and there is still plenty of numbers. They won't run out
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Feb 18, 2020 15:32:26 GMT -5
The original criteria for numbers being retired by a team was if they died tragically while an active player. So I'm glad it's become a way of honoring living players, too.
That said, there are definitely some numbers on the Yankees I would un-retire, though that doesn't include any of the single digits. All those retirements are well-earned.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Feb 18, 2020 15:41:37 GMT -5
The original criteria for numbers being retired by a team was if they died tragically while an active player. So I'm glad it's become a way of honoring living players, too. That said, there are definitely some numbers on the Yankees I would un-retire, though that doesn't include any of the single digits. All those retirements are well-earned. Like who? The only real borderline ones are like Reggie Jackson (He is in for his all time great playoff performance) Bernie has the postseason Yankee numbers to back him up and Posada the rings and offensive numbers
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Feb 18, 2020 16:30:55 GMT -5
Didn't the Devils have a big ceremony for Doc Emrick a few years ago? I don't know the specific honor he was given, but I remember it being a pretty big deal for him. I was there for that, I believe; it was a whole pregame thing to honor him, but I was kind of hoping they'd do a bigger ceremony and maybe raise one of those banners with an old style microphone on it with "DOC" as the call letters. The Mets actually did one like that for Ralph Kiner, since he was technically active in the announce booth from the beginning of the team's existence until he passed, albeit only for a couple innings at a time on weekends by the end and mostly to share stories and observations with the SNY guys. Loved how Keith Hernandez would geek out getting to talk hitting with Ralph, and how 90 year old Ralph Kiner was more in tune with advanced stats than any of the younger announcers...seriously, the Mets have a great booth, but that's their one deficiency.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,770
Member is Online
|
Post by BRV on Feb 18, 2020 19:50:21 GMT -5
Nobody is worse than the Yankees. They are going to have to start giving out spring training numbers, although all the single digit numbers DO deserve to be retired. I'm looking through their list of retired numbers and having a hard time coming up with which ones should be unretired. Of all of them, you could make the case to make available Don Mattingly's no. 23, as he is the lone Yankee to have a retired number who never won a World Series. He was a big fish in a small pond as the lone star of those lousy 1980s and early 1990s Yankees squads and he never really came close to being a Hall of Famer. That said, I know a number of Yankees fans who would flip the f**k out if the organization decided to unretire Mattingly's number, as he was the bridge between the dynasties of the 1970s and 1990s.
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,417
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Feb 19, 2020 7:49:24 GMT -5
Celtics are going to have to do something eventually. I get retiring Garnett in comparison to a lot of the other guys who you’ve retired but it does sound more like a ring of honor thing would be more apropos Outside of Russell and Bird none of those numbers really need to be retired I know I will sound like a complete asshole....but....Regge Lewis' number needn't be retired. I get it, his death was a horrible tragedy and he very well may have earned that retired number...but if we're looking at his career, that's a no from me, dawg
|
|
|
Post by Toilet Paper Roll on Feb 19, 2020 7:55:40 GMT -5
Celtics are going to have to do something eventually. I get retiring Garnett in comparison to a lot of the other guys who you’ve retired but it does sound more like a ring of honor thing would be more apropos Outside of Russell and Bird none of those numbers really need to be retired I know I will sound like a complete asshole....but....Regge Lewis' number needn't be retired. I get it, his death was a horrible tragedy and he very well may have earned that retired number...but if we're looking at his career, that's a no from me, dawg I agree. And the TD Garden has a ring of honor behind the seats. I totally get giving him a spot. His death was tragic and he went to college in Boston too.
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,417
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Feb 19, 2020 8:04:51 GMT -5
I know I will sound like a complete asshole....but....Regge Lewis' number needn't be retired. I get it, his death was a horrible tragedy and he very well may have earned that retired number...but if we're looking at his career, that's a no from me, dawg I agree. And the TD Garden has a ring of honor behind the seats. I totally get giving him a spot. His death was tragic and he went to college in Boston too. Right. Have a ring of honor for the 'not quite good enough for the retired number" crowd and keep the rafters for guys who truly transcended the game for the franchises in the Garden.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Feb 23, 2020 8:32:59 GMT -5
For as many things as the Phillies bungle, their retired number/Wall of Fame polciy is pretty fair.
You gotta to go to Cooperstown to get your number retired, but the fans vote for a Wall of Fame inductee every year. So the Wall of Fame is all your popular/good Phillies players/managers, but the retired numbers (only 5; Ashburn, Bunning, Carlton, Roberts and Schmidt with spots for Grover Cleveland Alexander and Chuck Klein, who were pre-numbers era) are for the Cooperstown elite.
|
|
|
Post by Heeltown, USA on Feb 23, 2020 17:25:25 GMT -5
For as many things as the Phillies bungle, their retired number/Wall of Fame polciy is pretty fair. You gotta to go to Cooperstown to get your number retired, but the fans vote for a Wall of Fame inductee every year. So the Wall of Fame is all your popular/good Phillies players/managers, but the retired numbers (only 5; Ashburn, Bunning, Carlton, Roberts and Schmidt with spots for Grover Cleveland Alexander and Chuck Klein, who were pre-numbers era) are for the Cooperstown elite. Add Halladay to that list, number 34 is going on the outfield wall this season.
|
|