Washington Nationals Retired Numbers?

[bryanac625]

The situation of the Washington Nationals and retired numbers is an interesting one. When the club was the Montreal Expos, they retired three numbers (#10 was retired twice, for Rusty Staub and Andre Dawson). However, I believe since the franchise moved and changed everything (city, team name and team colors), I think those numbers should be available to the Washington Nationals. I see a retired number as a retired uniform- i.e., #8 is not retired; Montreal Expos' #8 is. Allowing Nats players to use 8, 10 and 30 today does not take away from the greatness of those Expos players. But this team really has nothing to do with Montreal anymore. No, the history of the franchise can never be denied- nor should it be. For example, if Andre Dawson is ever elected to the Hall of Fame, his plaque should have him in an Expos cap, not the Nats' "Curly W."

And on this subject of retired numbers, I would like to offer that #33 should be retired by the Washington Nationals for Frank Howard.

[freedougsisk]

The situation of the Washington Nationals and retired numbers is an interesting one. When the club was the Montreal Expos, they retired three numbers (#10 was retired twice, for Rusty Staub and Andre Dawson). However, I believe since the franchise moved and changed everything (city, team name and team colors), I think those numbers should be available to the Washington Nationals. I see a retired number as a retired uniform- i.e., #8 is not retired; Montreal Expos' #8 is. Allowing Nats players to use 8, 10 and 30 today does not take away from the greatness of those Expos players. But this team really has nothing to do with Montreal anymore. No, the history of the franchise can never be denied- nor should it be. For example, if Andre Dawson is ever elected to the Hall of Fame, his plaque should have him in an Expos cap, not the Nats' "Curly W."

And on this subject of retired numbers, I would like to offer that #33 should be retired by the Washington Nationals for Frank Howard.

totally agree with everything you said.

[bigtime39]

The situation of the Washington Nationals and retired numbers is an interesting one. When the club was the Montreal Expos, they retired three numbers (#10 was retired twice, for Rusty Staub and Andre Dawson). However, I believe since the franchise moved and changed everything (city, team name and team colors), I think those numbers should be available to the Washington Nationals. I see a retired number as a retired uniform- i.e., #8 is not retired; Montreal Expos' #8 is. Allowing Nats players to use 8, 10 and 30 today does not take away from the greatness of those Expos players. But this team really has nothing to do with Montreal anymore. No, the history of the franchise can never be denied- nor should it be. For example, if Andre Dawson is ever elected to the Hall of Fame, his plaque should have him in an Expos cap, not the Nats' "Curly W."

And on this subject of retired numbers, I would like to offer that #33 should be retired by the Washington Nationals for Frank Howard.

I'm going to disagree. The team has almost 40 years of history made outside of Washington, and that history should be honored. (I'd feel the same way about St Louis Browns retired numbers in Baltimore, but the Browns never retired any numbers). After all, it's extremely unlikely MLB is going to put another franchise in Montreal any time soon. That bridge wasn't just burned, it was napalmed.
I like your idea of retiring #33 to honor Frank Howard. He's a part of Washington baseball history, and should be honored. Same for Walter Johnson, while we're at it. Given that it's likely 15 years or more before the number of anyone who plays for the Nationals gets retired (I'm guessing Zimmerman, if he stays in DC his whole career) I think the club can handle taking six numbers out of circulation.