Master Index of Archived Threads


A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Frayed Knot Aug 30 2012 08:22 AM

Ah yes, Torve in the briefly-issued #24 That's another uni that should be taken out of mothballs and given to some guy as soon as possible ... but that's a whole 'nother argument. So any word-word-word on whether Hamels is recovered or are they sticking with Kendrick regardless?

Benjamin Grimm Aug 30 2012 08:24 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

Frayed Knot wrote: That's another uni that should be taken out of mothballs and given to some guy as soon as possible ... but that's a whole 'nother argument. Absolutely.

Ceetar Aug 30 2012 08:27 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: That's another uni that should be taken out of mothballs and given to some guy as soon as possible ... but that's a whole 'nother argument. Absolutely. Nimmo? Or are we talking like anybody anybody and have Baxter put it on next year.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 30 2012 08:28 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

I'd say anybody anybody. Same for number 8.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 08:32 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'd say anybody anybody. Same for number 8. Agree. Totally. "And Rickey says that circulation is good for the soul".

Ceetar Aug 30 2012 08:33 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

I'd say anybody anybody. Same for number 8. Works for me. I hate this partially retired stuff. I'm not much for pitches should wear numbers in "this range" either. get crazy! Anyway, Kelly Shoppach wants us to know the Mets haven't given up. They're going for it:

Swan Swan H Aug 30 2012 08:52 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'd say anybody anybody. Same for number 8. Agree. Totally. "And Rickey says that circulation is good for the soul". Retire it, or don't, but this pseudo-retirement of numbers is annoying. It brings to mind the ridiculousness when some Yankee ended up in 21 and their 'fans' game him all sorts of shit because it was Paul O'Neill's number. Retire it, or don't, but if it's not retired it should be issued. Do you want to have a sort of legacy for numbers, like some hockey teams do - 9 is almost always a scoring winger, 2-5 usually defensemen? I'm fine with that, but then they should be giving 16 to Harvey and not to Rob Fucking Johnson.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 08:57 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

Swan Swan H wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'd say anybody anybody. Same for number 8. Agree. Totally. "And Rickey says that circulation is good for the soul". Retire it, or don't, but this pseudo-retirement of numbers is annoying. It brings to mind the ridiculousness when some Yankee ended up in 21 and their 'fans' game him all sorts of shit because it was Paul O'Neill's number. Retire it, or don't, but if it's not retired it should be issued. Do you want to have a sort of legacy for numbers, like some hockey teams do - 9 is almost always a scoring winger, 2-5 usually defensemen? I'm fine with that, but then they should be giving 16 to Harvey and not to Rob Fucking Johnson. You're right. Give Rob Fucking Johnson fucking #8. He's a fucking catcher. Oh. And it makes my blood boil whenever a Met is issued O'Neill's "21". That was Warren Spahn's number. [/rolls eyes sarcastically]

Ceetar Aug 30 2012 09:06 AM Re: IGT 8/30@Phi Th-Th-Th Third, Third Third. Third is the W

Now 15, if you don't want to reissue that, fine. Of course, they already have. But it's gonna look odd when either A. they don't retire their third Hall of Famer's number, or B. he wasn't the last to wear it.

Edgy MD Aug 30 2012 09:27 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I appreciate the maddening ambiguity of "unofficial retirement" as much as anybody, but the promise not to re-assign it came from Payson herself to Mays. And a promise is a promise. So the most honorable ways to resolve it are (1) to get Willie to release the Mets from Mrs. Payson's pledge (do you want to ask him?), or (2) make the retirement official, and accept that it comes almost entirely from greater service to the cause baseball and baseball in New York and National League baseball in New York, much more than service to the Mets.

MFS62 Aug 30 2012 09:29 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

How did Hall of Famer Bill Dickey feel when they gave his 8 to that "kid" Yogi Berra? He probably didn't think much about it because I'm not sure if the Yankees (or any other team) had begun retiring numbers back then. If I were a rookie, I would consider it an honor to be given the same number as one of the team's all-time greats. I'd think the team had enough confidence to think I would carry on a great tradition. And I'd try to show them that they were right. Later

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 09:33 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Last time I checked, Joan Payson was dead. She held up her end of the deal. If I buy someone's house, aren't I allowed to change the furniture? Or re-paint the kitchen? There are no rules here. Anything goes. The owner can do whatever he wants to do.

sharpie Aug 30 2012 09:38 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Or they can wait until Willie Mays dies. Not that I think they should, they should use it for a September call-up, but if they want to honor Joan's "promise" then waiting til Willie passes might be enough.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 09:44 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Last time I checked, Joan Payson was dead. She held up her end of the deal. If I buy someone's house, aren't I allowed to change the furniture? Or re-paint the kitchen? There are no rules here. Anything goes. The owner can do whatever he wants to do. I mean, whatever the logic for mothballing #24, I don't think that the Wilpons, three or four owners removed, should be bound by Payson's promise. Personally, I doubt the Wilpons ever wanted to retire #24. I don't buy the tale about the team unwittingly assigning it to Torve. There probably isn't a player in all of baseball more closely associated with a uni # than Mays and 24. Especially 20+ years ago, and especially in NY. How could they not know? The story is lamer than the dog ate my homework. I think the Mets knew exactly what they were doing when they let Torve wear 24, but caved in to fan pressure when, reportedly, a large number of fans called the team to complain. They've had 20+ years since to officially retire #24. They don't wanna do it. Because if they did, what the hell are they waiting for? You don't make an 80 year old guy wait for this. They gave 24 to Torve because they didn't wanna retire it in the first place. But they didn't have the balls to follow through on their conviction.

Ceetar Aug 30 2012 09:46 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

They gave up the perfect opportunity to keep 24 going after Rickey left. Just keep issuing it..

Swan Swan H Aug 30 2012 09:49 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

The Toronto Maple Leafs have retired two numbers on their own, both players whose careers were ended abruptly (Bill Bariko, who died in a plane crash, and Ace Bailey, who suffered a severe head injury after being hit from behind by old-time hockey player Eddie Shore). 99 is retired league-wide. Instead, they honor (or honour, I suppose) numbers but continue to issue them. From Wikipedia: In 1993, the Leafs began a policy of honouring their greatest players by declaring their number an "Honoured Number" rather than retirement. MLSE CEO Richard Peddie formed a committee in 2005 to study the issue and announced the decision to continue with the honoured number program late that year, citing a desire to allow current players to build upon the legacy of those numbers. Ten numbers are on the 'honoured' list representing sixteen players (and one donut chain namesake). The Montreal Canadiens, for comparison's sake, have retired fifteen numbers for seventeen players, which is one the same number of numbers but one more player than the Yankees have. Their forwards now wear numbers usually associated with offensive linemen. The Habs will fall behind in this category once the Yankees get done with Torre, Jeter, Williams, Posada, Rivera, Sax, Swisher, Chamberlain, Sabathia, Pettitte, Cervelli, and Lidle.

Edgy MD Aug 30 2012 09:53 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Last time I checked, Joan Payson was dead. She held up her end of the deal. If I buy someone's house, aren't I allowed to change the furniture? Or re-paint the kitchen? There are no rules here. Anything goes. The owner can do whatever he wants to do. He certainly can. Rules aren't involved, but honor is. I don't think too many of us would be pleased if he unretired 37 or 14 because they were retired on somebody else's watch. I think you'd agree --- at least with regards to other issues (the stadium, the rotunda) --- that management would do well to think of themselves as stewards of a franchise and not merely holders who can dispose of, forsake, or realign the legacy with contempt for those who've invested in it. I think you buy the franchise, you buy the obligations, be they formal and contractual, or informal but honor-bound.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 10:01 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Edgy DC wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Last time I checked, Joan Payson was dead. She held up her end of the deal. If I buy someone's house, aren't I allowed to change the furniture? Or re-paint the kitchen? There are no rules here. Anything goes. The owner can do whatever he wants to do. He certainly can. Rules aren't involved, but honor is. I don't think too many of us would be pleased if he unretired 37 or 14 because they were retired on somebody else's watch. I think you'd agree --- at least with regards to other issues (the stadium, the rotunda) --- that management would do well to think of themselves as stewards of a franchise and not merely holders who can dispose of, forsake, or realign the legacy with contempt for those who've invested in it. I agree, totally. But 24 isn't retired. And personally, I've always resented the aggrandizement of the Mays Mets legacy. But perhaps older fans might disagree ... the Polo Grounds new breeders, or the even older fans who saw Willie play for the NY Giants. I see it narrowly. The Mets aren't the Giants. The Mets are the Mets. Though I wouldn't mind, and in fact would welcome a section of Citi Field that honors both the NY Giants and the Brooklyn Dodgers, more or less equally. And on a scale that's logically proportionate to the honoring of the Mets. (That was a shot at the Rotunda, whose honoree I shall not mention, and that I would tear down instantly, or downsize or remodel as soon as I was approved as owner).

Benjamin Grimm Aug 30 2012 10:15 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Willie, meanwhile, has not played the part of Mets alumnus at all. He returned for the Shea Goodbye, but it was made clear that he only came because they were paying him. If Mrs. Payson made a bargain with him, I could argue that Willie hasn't held up his end, even if there was nothing that he explicitly agreed to do.

Edgy MD Aug 30 2012 10:22 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

His end was to return to New York and play, rather than retire.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 30 2012 10:29 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Marty Noble mentions the promise here, but never gets around to telling us how Willie felt about Rickey Henderson wearing "his" number 24 for the Mets.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 10:29 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Edgy DC wrote: ... rather than retire. Never?

Edgy MD Aug 30 2012 10:32 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I'm not sure what the question means, something sporting at my expense I guess, but no, I mean following the 1971 season, at the time of the trade.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 30 2012 10:35 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 10:38 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Edgy DC wrote: I'm not sure what the question means, something sporting at my expense I guess, but no, I mean following the 1971 season, at the time of the trade. Just kidding. Not at your expense. Never. Are you saying that Willie would've retired after '71? Don't forget, he played almost the first third of '72 in SanFran. And his '71 season was highly effective, if not customary Mays. He altered his hitting approach to compensate for loss of bat speed, and would thus, foul off pitches purposely. He led the league in BB's and OBP in '71 with that approach and OBP'd over .400 in '72.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 10:41 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Edgy MD Aug 30 2012 10:44 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy DC wrote: I'm not sure what the question means, something sporting at my expense I guess, but no, I mean following the 1971 season, at the time of the trade. Just kidding. Not at your expense. Never. Are you saying that Willie would've retired after '71? Don't forget, he played almost the first third of '72 in SanFran. And his '71 season was highly effective, if not customary Mays. He altered his hitting approach to compensate for loss of bat speed, and would thus, foul off pitches purposely. He led the league in BB's and OBP in '71 with that approach and OBP'd over .400 in '72. Yes, I put that poorly. Of course he started 1972 in San Francisco. In my defense, I was being defensive.

metsguyinmichigan Aug 30 2012 11:10 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I think when someone who can possibly be considered the greatest player of all time wore your uniform, even for two years, you get to retire that number. I think it would be in partial recognition of his prior days in New York, since other traces of that NL team in New York are gone. (If other words, the Giants and Dodgers get treated differently than Yankees, especially for teams for which we share a cap logo.) I think the Brewers retried Hank Aaron's number. There might even be a statue at Miller Park. Mays falls in the same category with New York. I don't mind not issuing Carter's number, and I certainly don't mind not issuing Piazza's number, which should be on the wall next year.

Swan Swan H Aug 30 2012 11:24 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

metsguyinmichigan wrote: I think when someone who can possibly be considered the greatest player of all time wore your uniform, even for two years, you get to retire that number. I think it would be in partial recognition of his prior days in New York, since other traces of that NL team in New York are gone. (If other words, the Giants and Dodgers get treated differently than Yankees, especially for teams for which we share a cap logo.) I think the Brewers retried Hank Aaron's number. There might even be a statue at Miller Park. Mays falls in the same category with New York. I don't mind not issuing Carter's number, and I certainly don't mind not issuing Piazza's number, which should be on the wall next year. I agree totally on Piazza - when he goes into the HOF his number should be retired. Willie and Kid are the same case to me, as I stated before. Retire them, or don't, but this Sam Wheat state they are in makes me nuts.

Lefty Specialist Aug 30 2012 11:35 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Willie did enough to get his number retired with the Giants. He didn't do anything to get his number retired with the Mets. If the threshold is two years where a Hall of Famer was on your roster, do they retire #12 for Roberto Alomar?

Edgy MD Aug 30 2012 11:37 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

But the argument isn't that he's a Hall of Famer. (And he's far more than a Hall of Famer.) Neither is it that he did enough.

Ceetar Aug 30 2012 11:40 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Edgy DC wrote: But the argument isn't that he's a Hall of Famer. (And he's far more than a Hall of Famer.) Neither is it that he did enough. and the Mets have a history of retiring guys on value added beyond playing. Which is part of why I fall on the 'retire 17' side of the fence.

Swan Swan H Aug 30 2012 11:47 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: But the argument isn't that he's a Hall of Famer. (And he's far more than a Hall of Famer.) Neither is it that he did enough. and the Mets have a history of retiring guys on value added beyond playing. Which is part of why I fall on the 'retire 17' side of the fence. Who? They have retired one player number.

Ceetar Aug 30 2012 12:12 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Swan Swan H wrote: Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: But the argument isn't that he's a Hall of Famer. (And he's far more than a Hall of Famer.) Neither is it that he did enough. and the Mets have a history of retiring guys on value added beyond playing. Which is part of why I fall on the 'retire 17' side of the fence. Who? They have retired one player number. right. you don't think the other two's long legacy before the Mets had anything to do with retiring them?

metsguyinmichigan Aug 30 2012 12:15 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I don't think Roberto Alomar and Willie Mays are comparable. We're talking possibly the best all-around player in the game. And, I think of the Mets as the spiritual heirs of the Giants and Dodgers. Not that we would do something for all of their great players -- rotunda not withstanding -- but when there is a Mets connection...

Swan Swan H Aug 30 2012 12:18 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: But the argument isn't that he's a Hall of Famer. (And he's far more than a Hall of Famer.) Neither is it that he did enough. and the Mets have a history of retiring guys on value added beyond playing. Which is part of why I fall on the 'retire 17' side of the fence. Who? They have retired one player number. right. you don't think the other two's long legacy before the Mets had anything to do with retiring them? They were retired as managers, and Hodges in part due his untimely death. Even at that, it's three people, and none in twenty years. The Astros have had ten. If anything, the Mets have a history of not retiring numbers.

Mets – Willets Point Aug 30 2012 12:41 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I think it would be interesting if baseball followed the tradition of soccer by assigning numbers by position. This could be determined at the end of spring training once the team's regular starting lineup is determined. The numbers would be assigned as follows: 2 -catcher 3 - first base 4 - second base 5 - third base 6 - shortstop 7 - left field 8 - center field 9 - right field The pitcher's position number is 1 so all pitchers will be assigned numbers starting with 1. The starting rotation would be assigned numbers 11 through 15 with the ace getting 11, the #2 pitcher 12 and so on. 16 through 19 will be reserved for pitchers in the pen (perhaps saving 19 for the closer because he's the "9th inning guy"). The bench players and the rest of the bullpen would be assigned numbers starting with 2 from 20 to 29. The number 1 and the number 10 would only be issued for special recognition with 1 going to a pitcher if he won the Cy Young Award in the previous season or some other notable accomplishment and the 10 reserved for a batter who lead the league in multiple categories in the previous season and/or won the MVP (American League teams may also want to issue #10 to the designated hitter, but I think it should be saved only for the best hitters). As the season go along the numbers in the 30s can be issued to players called up from the minors and the numbers in the 40s issued to players acquired by trades, unless they take place of a player in the starting lineup in which case they would be issued the appropriate positional number.

Frayed Knot Aug 30 2012 12:50 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

My view on numbers 8, 17, & 24 1) either retire them or put them into circulation 2) put them into circulation

Mets – Willets Point Aug 30 2012 12:58 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Frayed Knot wrote: My view on numbers 8, 17, & 24 1) either retire them or put them into circulation 2) put them into circulation For the Mets, I like the idea of only issuing 24 to aging future hall-of-famers who join the team near the end of their careers. 8 and 17 should be in circulation. Carlos Baerga and Luis Lopez weren't that good.

metsmarathon Aug 30 2012 01:32 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT) Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Aug 30 2012 01:40 PM

how about 20 is your backup catcher, 30 your backup 1b, 40 your backup 2b, so on and so forth. starters are in the teens, relievers end with 9 (19, 29, 39, 49, etc.) and then start filling in with -8's.

Frayed Knot Aug 30 2012 01:36 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: My view on numbers 8, 17, & 24 1) either retire them or put them into circulation 2) put them into circulation For the Mets, I like the idea of only issuing 24 to aging future hall-of-famers who join the team near the end of their careers. 8 and 17 should be in circulation. Carlos Baerga and Luis Lopez weren't that good. I have no problem if they want to selectively circulate certain numbers, just as long as they actually do something with them.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2012 06:21 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Anybody know why Joan Payson didn't officially retire #24? Was she waiting for Mays' induction into the HOF? Payson didn't wait for Casey to be voted into the HOF before retiring #37. And the Payson family still owned the team in '79, when Mays was voted, and then inducted into Cooperstown. Did Joan's daughters bumble it up for Joan? (And Willie).

G-Fafif Aug 30 2012 07:10 PM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I didn't realize there was a crippling shortage of uniform numbers. By all means, get 8 and 24 on somebody's back pronto!

HahnSolo Aug 31 2012 07:19 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Anybody know why Joan Payson didn't officially retire #24? Was she waiting for Mays' induction into the HOF? Payson didn't wait for Casey to be voted into the HOF before retiring #37. And the Payson family still owned the team in '79, when Mays was voted, and then inducted into Cooperstown. Did Joan's daughters bumble it up for Joan? (And Willie). Was that around the time that Bowie Kuhn banned him for his casino work? [Nope, I checked, that was in 1983 and was reinstated in 1985]. So not sure what ol' Joan was doing. But maybe the ban had something to do with the Wilpons not officially retiring it?

Edgy MD Aug 31 2012 07:28 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Payson died in 1975, while Mays was still wearing the uniform as a coach. While I'm sure a few uniform numbers have been officially retired while a guy is still wearing it, it's certainly not the standard model (indeed, it's hardly necessary, as his very presence keeps the number reserved). And having transitioned seamlessly from player to coach, his use of the digits was uninterrupted. Mays' banishment took place in 1979, at which point he left the Mets dugout --- to be replaced by Bob Gibson as Joe Torre's legend-in-residence. Mantle was cut dead in 1983. The time to do it, if at all, was probably shortly after his banishment. But the outgoing and incoming ownership had more pressing matters than thumbing their noses at Bowie Kuhn, and the whole thing was probably underreported by the press, who had a hard enough time paying attention to the Mets at all.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 31 2012 07:39 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

I thought Mays and Mantle were banned at the same time?

G-Fafif Aug 31 2012 07:46 AM Re: A Whole 'Nother Argument (split from 8/30 IGT)

Evil Fucker Grant was running the show pre-Linda's one year at the helm. He was not a Mays fan (or a fan of anybody, one supposes) and would have done nothing to cement the late Mrs. Payson's wishes. Mays and Mantle signed with Bally's separately but were reinstated by Ueberroth simultaneously. Best thing he ever did as commissioner.