Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Red Sox Retired Numbers?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    DoubleX
    Just a Fool

  • DoubleX
    replied

    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • EvanAparra
    Team Veteran

  • EvanAparra
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • DoubleX
    Just a Fool

  • DoubleX
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • EvanAparra
    Team Veteran

  • EvanAparra
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • DoubleX
    Just a Fool

  • DoubleX
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • The Kid
    Rays= Public Enemy #2

  • The Kid
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • soberdennis
    Registered User

  • soberdennis
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • EvanAparra
    Team Veteran

  • EvanAparra
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • The Kid
    Rays= Public Enemy #2

  • The Kid
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:

  • The Kid
    Rays= Public Enemy #2

  • The Kid
    replied
    Sure, and why don't we not retire numbers at all!
    The Kid
    Rays= Public Enemy #2
    Last edited by The Kid; 09-10-2006, 10:20 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • yazfan88
    Prospect

  • yazfan88
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

  • DoubleX
    Just a Fool

  • DoubleX
    replied
    Originally posted by pesky6
    I think part of the problem with the A's is that because they've been in three cities, it's hard for the fanbase (and maybe the execs?) to embrace players who, in fact, played in another city. Not saying it's right, just a theory.

    As far as the Yanks, what I was trying to say that it just seems weird that they have retired numbers of Elston Howard with the likes of Ruth, Mantle, etc.
    I totally agree with your point about retiring the Yankees numbers. There are certainly a number of Yankees that are deserving of the honor - Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, Berra, Dickey, Ford, Stengal, even Mattingly (Joe McCarthy should probably have his number retired too), and there are a bunch of also-rans - Martin, Maris, Rizzuto, Howard, Guidry, and Jackson (I really, really don't think of Reggie as a Yankee). Munson is on the fence. Great player and heart of the team (really the Jason Varitek of the 1970s Yankees), likely not a Hall of Famer though. But if you open the door to all these guys, why stop there? There are tons of Yankees that are at least on the level of these other players. I think it's pretty ridiculous.

    Leave a comment:

  • pesky6
    Team Veteran

  • pesky6
    replied
    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 think part of the problem with the A's is that because they've been in three cities, it's hard for the fanbase (and maybe the execs?) to embrace players who, in fact, played in another city. Not saying it's right, just a theory.

    As far as the Yanks, what I was trying to say that it just seems weird that they have retired numbers of Elston Howard with the likes of Ruth, Mantle, etc.

    Leave a comment:

  • DoubleX
    Just a Fool

  • DoubleX
    replied
    Originally posted by efin98
    There was a rumor a few years ago that Dom DiMagio may be the next guy to get his number retired, provided Trot Nixon change numbers. That turned out to be bogus.
    There's a push by a local radio host to retire Pesky's number despite not being eligible due to not being in the Hall of Fame. He should be a shoo-in for number retirement in his last years of his life unfortunately...
    Dom isn't in the Hall either. Rice has the best chance to be the next Red Sock in. I'd say he has a decent shot to get in this year, but probably not. Evans deserved a lot more respect from the voters than he received. Is he a Hall of Famer? No. But he is certainly among that group right on the outside.

    Leave a comment:

  • efin98
    Registered User

  • efin98
    replied
    There was a rumor a few years ago that Dom DiMagio may be the next guy to get his number retired, provided Trot Nixon change numbers. That turned out to be bogus.
    There's a push by a local radio host to retire Pesky's number despite not being eligible due to not being in the Hall of Fame. He should be a shoo-in for number retirement in his last years of his life unfortunately...

    Boggs' honoring is the olive branch that sets in motion his number retirement, just as Fisk did back when his number was retired. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a job working for the Red Sox to qualify for number retirement...

    Clemens' number is a tough area, since he may not come back to the system in the same way that Fisk did and Boggs may do. If he doesn't, 21 will remain unused in honor of him but won't be retired.

    Rice's number is still "occupied" in that he works for the team, thus no one can use the number. Same for Peskey. Evans' number was unused until a certain hard hitting LF came to Fenway in 2000, but that could become available in the offseason...

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X