Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Red Sox Retired Numbers?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Jim Rice, Dwight Evans & Dom DiMaggio. These guys played all their careers (or most all in Dewey's case) in a Sox uniform. They each gave all they had to make their teams a contender. These guys should have had their numbers retired before Pudge. I believe he's up there mostly due to the '75 WS homer. Dom D. would have gunned down Slaughter in '46. The outcome of the '75 series would have been different had Rice not had the broken bone and was able to play. There is no one else who put up the numbers during their Red Sox career to warrant being honored...Not Foxx, Tony C., Lonborg, Lefty Grove, Mo, Greenwell or Freddie Lynn.

    Comment


    • #17
      Sure, and why don't we not retire numbers at all!
      Last edited by The Kid; 09-10-2006, 09:20 AM.
      "He studied hitting like a broker studies the stock market, how a scribe studies the scriptures" - Carl Yastrzemski on Ted Williams

      "The greatest clutch hitter in Red Sox history has done it again! Big Papi!" - Don Orsillo's call of Ortiz's walk-off single

      Comment


      • #18
        Foxx, Tony C., Lonborg, Lefty Grove, Mo, Greenwell, Freddie Lynn, Clemens, and Boggs should have their #s retired. and then retire Cy Young as 0, and
        Tris Speaker as 12
        "He studied hitting like a broker studies the stock market, how a scribe studies the scriptures" - Carl Yastrzemski on Ted Williams

        "The greatest clutch hitter in Red Sox history has done it again! Big Papi!" - Don Orsillo's call of Ortiz's walk-off single

        Comment


        • #19
          I like the numbers they have retired now, and out of all the numbers above, i would only approve of Grove. Dont get me wrong, these were all great players, but i dont want it to become like the Yankees where in 20 years they arent going to have any numbers left to give out.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DoubleX
            I agree, the Yankees (assuming that is who you are talking about) have gone a bit overboard with the numbers retiring. However, I don't see anything wrong with honoring tradition. I think there are too many teams that don't properly honor their past. The Athletics are a great example. It's as if the team totally disavows some of its great history in Philalephia. Is there any mention in Oakland of Connie Mack, Jimmie Foxx, Lefty Grove, Al Simmons, Mickey Cochrane, Eddie Collins, Frank Baker, Eddie Plank, Rube Waddell, and Chief Bender? I don't believe so. Heck, it wasn't even until a year or two ago that the team finally acknowledged Reggie Jackson.

            That being said, I think the Red Sox have done a pretty good job honoring their heroes. Jim Rice probably deserves the honor too, but I think the case for anyone else (such as Dwight Evans and Dom DiMaggio) is not as strong as Rice's.
            I find it ironic that the Dodgers never retired Garvey's #6, while the Padres did long ago. The Brewers retired Aaron's number, but so did the Braves.

            Welcome back ARod. Hope you are a Yankee forever.
            Phil Rizzuto-a Yankee forever.

            Holy Cow

            Comment


            • #21
              All right, then let's take out Tony C., Lonborg, Greenwell. But ya have to retire Foxx's, Grove's, Clemens, and Boggs number. And, like I said, retire Young as 0 and Speaker as 12, for his 1912 season.
              "He studied hitting like a broker studies the stock market, how a scribe studies the scriptures" - Carl Yastrzemski on Ted Williams

              "The greatest clutch hitter in Red Sox history has done it again! Big Papi!" - Don Orsillo's call of Ortiz's walk-off single

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by keepthefaith3
                All right, then let's take out Tony C., Lonborg, Greenwell. But ya have to retire Foxx's, Grove's, Clemens, and Boggs number. And, like I said, retire Young as 0 and Speaker as 12, for his 1912 season.
                Why Foxx and Grove? Can someone explain to me why Red Sox fans associate Foxx and Grove with the Sox? The bulk of their careers, and the bulk of their best years, were with the Athletics, where they helped lead the team to two World Series and three straight pennants.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by DoubleX
                  Why Foxx and Grove? Can someone explain to me why Red Sox fans associate Foxx and Grove with the Sox? The bulk of their careers, and the bulk of their best years, were with the Athletics, where they helped lead the team to two World Series and three straight pennants.
                  Grove played 9 with Philly and 8 with Bos. 5-time all star with Bos. 4 time ERA champ. He had great seasons with Philly too, but we cant NOT also remember him as a sox because he played 1 more season with Philly.

                  Foxx broke the sox HR record, so that might have something to do with it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by EvanAparra
                    Grove played 9 with Philly and 8 with Bos. 5-time all star with Bos. 4 time ERA champ. He had great seasons with Philly too, but we cant NOT also remember him as a sox because he played 1 more season with Philly.

                    Foxx broke the sox HR record, so that might have something to do with it.
                    Grove

                    - 195 of his 300 victories with the A's
                    - Won 20 or more games 7 straight years with the A's, topping at 31, compared to just one 20 win season in Boston.
                    - 1523 of his 2266 strikeouts with the A's.
                    - 402 of his 616 games were with the A's.
                    - 2401 of his 3941 IP were with the A's.
                    - 5 ERA titles with the A's, in full seasons; his last two ERA titles with the Red Sox came while pitching under 200 innings.
                    - MVP with the A's
                    - 2 Pitching Triple Crowns with the A's
                    - 7 Strikeout Titles with the A's (none with the Sox)
                    - 2 World Series Titles and 3 Pennants with the A's; 0 Pennants with the Red Sox

                    Basically, yeah he had some good seasons with the Red Sox, and technically he did play just one less season with the Red Sox, but for most of his time with the Red Sox he was injured and used infrequently. Hardly his peak period other than a couple of years. When people think of Lefty Grove, the dominant pitcher, they think of what he did with the Athletics.

                    Foxx
                    - 303/534 Homeruns with the Athletics; 222/534 Homeruns with Red Sox
                    - 4397/8134 ABs with the A's; 3288/8134 with Red Sox
                    - 1492/2646 Hits with the A's; 1051/2646 with the Red Sox
                    - 1075/1922 RBI with the A's; 788/1922 with the Red Sox
                    - 2 MVPs with the A's; 1 with the Red Sox
                    - Triple Crown with the A's
                    - 3 HR Titles with the A's; 1 with the Red Sox
                    - 2 World Series Titles and 3 Pennants with the A's; 0 with the Red Sox

                    I'll say that Foxx is much more reasonable than Grove, as Foxx did have a number of real dominant seasons with the Sox, including an MVP campaign. But when most people think of Foxx at his best, they think about what he did on the A's.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by DoubleX
                      Grove
                      - 5 ERA titles with the A's, in full seasons; his last two ERA titles with the Red Sox came while pitching under 200 innings.
                      Pedro Martinez only had 4 seasons with over 200 Inn with the Sox, doesnt mean the rest of the stellar season he had in Boston mean any less, and if he pitches for another 3 years in NY over 200 Inn, it wont make me remember him any differently..

                      I dont know if you are saying that these guys shouldnt be remembered as RedSox or if you are saying they should ONLY be remembered as As.... But i think they both had great years in both cities, and should be though of that way.

                      Comment


                      • #26

                        Pedro Martinez only had 4 seasons with over 200 Inn with the Sox, doesnt mean the rest of the stellar season he had in Boston mean any less, and if he pitches for another 3 years in NY over 200 Inn, it wont make me remember him any differently..

                        I dont know if you are saying that these guys shouldnt be remembered as RedSox or if you are saying they should ONLY be remembered as As.... But i think they both had great years in both cities, and should be though of that way.
                        I'm saying that when I think of Grove and Foxx, I think of them as Oakland Athletics much more than I think of them as Red Sox, and as such, don't believe retiring their numbers as Red Sox would be appropriate. Maybe I can concede Foxx, but definitely not Grove. Back when Grove was pitching, pitchers would regularly pitch 250-300 innings a year, so pitching under 200 back then was a sign of an off and/or injury plagued year. It's also a sign of dominance. With the Red Sox, Grove was a 190 inning pitcher. With the Athletics, Grove was 280 inning pitcher. That's a huge difference and reflects how much more dominant and valuable Grove was while with the Athletics than with the Red Sox.

                        Now that sad thing with both players is that the A's haven't done anything to acknowledge them (or others like Simmons, Cochrane, Collins, Baker, Plank, Waddell). The Dodgers and Giants honor the greats that played for them in New York, but the A's have left their greats without a team.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DoubleX
                          I'm saying that when I think of Grove and Foxx, I think of them as Oakland Athletics much more than I think of them as Red Sox, and as such, don't believe retiring their numbers as Red Sox would be appropriate. Maybe I can concede Foxx, but definitely not Grove. Back when Grove was pitching, pitchers would regularly pitch 250-300 innings a year, so pitching under 200 back then was a sign of an off and/or injury plagued year. It's also a sign of dominance. With the Red Sox, Grove was a 190 inning pitcher. With the Athletics, Grove was 280 inning pitcher. That's a huge difference and reflects how much more dominant and valuable Grove was while with the Athletics than with the Red Sox.

                          Now that sad thing with both players is that the A's haven't done anything to acknowledge them (or others like Simmons, Cochrane, Collins, Baker, Plank, Waddell). The Dodgers and Giants honor the greats that played for them in New York, but the A's have left their greats without a team.
                          I wouldnt retire their numbers either, just so were on the same page.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            To hell with Cooperstown. #14 SHOULD be retired for Jim Ed.

                            Retire #7 for Dom with the provision that Nixon can keep it...kind of like when MLB retired #42 with the provision that active players wearing it could keep it (Mo Vaughn). Of course, Nixon could always show some class and pull a Ray Bourque (Bruins fans know what I mean).

                            Retire #6 for Pesky AND Petrocelli. Have a special day to honor both guys. Hey, if the Celtics could retire #18 for both Loscutoff and Cowens...

                            Tony C's #25. I have been screaming this for years...more out of respect than anything else. Assuming he never got beaned, imagine his overall numbers. I know a lot of other people that agree with me.

                            #43 for Eckersley. If they could bend the rules like they did when they retired #27 for Fisk, they could do the same for The Eck. Isn't NESN partially owned by the Sox?

                            #23 for El Tiante. I know it won't happen, but I can dream, can't I?
                            sigpicMan, do I *HATE* the Yankees!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by BoSox Rule
                              Nomar, Pedro, and Clemens should be retired.
                              Maybe Pedro and Clemens, but nomar just plain wasn't good enough to receive the honor, and didn't spend enough time with the team (pedro's ridiculous effectiveness makes his short tenure less of an issue with me)
                              Gelatin Fernandalism

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by PhilWings24
                                Maybe Pedro and Clemens, but nomar just plain wasn't good enough to receive the honor, and didn't spend enough time with the team (pedro's ridiculous effectiveness makes his short tenure less of an issue with me)
                                He might not have spent enough time, but wasnt good enough?? He was plenty good when he was here.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X