7.19.25 for Wright5

[Frayed Knot]

wright for sure. Nobody else for a long time.

Not even #52 for Weisman?

[ashie62]

Very happy for Davis. It will be nice to see him back at the stadium to celebrate and DH

[Gwreck]

They were rightfully so stingy with # Retirements for so long.
I’m not happy that the Mets are finally retiring so many numbers and I think a few of NONE OF the ones they’ve done RECENTLY, OTHER THAN DAVID are the right ones.

[batmagadanleadoff]

They were rightfully so stingy with # Retirements for so long.
I’m not happy that the Mets are finally retiring so many numbers and I think a few of NONE OF the ones they’ve done RECENTLY, OTHER THAN DAVID are the right ones.

Are you endorsing FK's re-write of cooby's post? Really? The guy that thinks the Mets should retire Carter's number is complaining about the Mets retiring too many numbers and that nobody among the recent honorees but Wright deserves the honor? If Carter deserves to have his number retired, then Dwight Gooden should have the stadium named after him and Jerry Koosman should have the Borough of Queens named after him.

[metirish]

[whippoorwill]

They were rightfully so stingy with # Retirements for so long.
I’m not happy that the Mets are finally retiring so many numbers and I think a few of the ones they’ve done are the right ones.

Really you didn’t think so? They stood at 5 or whatever until they finally got to Jerry Koosman

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

The Mets are embracing team history and I'm in favor. Good for Wright.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

Wright deserves it. The other guys belong in the team Hall of Fame.

That the Mets have a shitty history without a lot of truly great, long-tenured team-associated players is their fault and papering it over by elevating guys who don't meet the criteria isn't going to change that.

[Edgy MD]

I have a lot of affection for Jerry Koosman, but I never once looked at Grant Roberts or Colin McHugh in 36 and felt it was wrong that the number was still in circulation. Nor have I heard anybody anywhere voice such sentiments.

What happened is Steve Cohen's research netted him not the opinion of the wisest fans, but the loudest, and those were the ones projecting silly manufactured grievances over petty jealousies.

I don't like that there aren't a lot of great legacies in Mets history. Elevating good legacies does not change that.

Beyond that, there are thousands ways to honor people, but because of the franchise-to-franchise sameness wrought by running our leagues as cartels, our teams only exercise three — team halls of fame/rings of honor, retired numbers, and statuary.

It's a shame, as there's so much opportunity to distinguish themselves in character as well as performance.

[Frayed Knot]

Really you didn’t think so? They stood at 5 or whatever until they finally got to Jerry Koosman

And what's wrong with five?

Personally I could have stopped at Seaver.
Could go either way on Piazza or Wright.
Wouldn't have endorsed Kooz, Straw, Gooden, or Keith.

And read Bucket's and Edgy's posts.

[stevejrogers]

I have a lot of affection for Jerry Koosman, but I never once looked at Grant Roberts or Colin McHugh in 36 and felt it was wrong that the number was still in circulation. Nor have I heard anybody anywhere voice such sentiments.

What happened is Steve Cohen's research netted him not the opinion of the wisest fans, but the loudest, and those we're the ones projecting silly manufactured grievances over petty jealousies.

FWIW though, Koosman’s was announced during the last vestiges of the Wilpon era, with the expectation of a ceremony during the 2020 season. At the same time the Seaver statue project was given the public greenlight. Both during the 50 Anniversary extravaganza of the 1969 Champions.

Also Mays’ was more about making good on a long ago promise from nearly 50 years in the past.

So really we are just talking about the number retirements of Hernandez, Gooden, Strawberry (all had previously been enshrined in the Met Hall) and Wright (who is getting enshrined the same day) and finally being able to get around to adding a memorial Murphy mic to go next to Ralph’s and SHEA in the retired numbers area.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Really you didn’t think so? They stood at 5 or whatever until they finally got to Jerry Koosman

And what's wrong with five?

Personally I could have stopped at Seaver.
Could go either way on Piazza or Wright.
Wouldn't have endorsed Kooz, Straw, Gooden, or Keith.

And read Bucket's and Edgy's posts.

I think that part of the reason for lower standards for retiring numbers is that teams are adapting to changing times. Free agency has made it less likely that a player will spend most of his career with one team. Do youse think that Ruth and Gehrig and Berra and Mantle and Dimaggio would have all spent the bulk of their careers with the same team if free agency had existed back then and player salaries were anywhere near today's levels? Or put another way, would they all have stayed with one team in today's game? I doubt it.

Its obvious that the threshold for retiring numbers has come down greatly since my early days of being a baseball fan, at least with the Mets. It is what it is. OTOH, if they're gonna mothball Carter's number, then they might as well retire everybody's number. Cleon's and Agee's and Clendenon's. Dickey's and Olerud's, too. Personally, I'm not convinced that Carter even belongs in the Mets HOF.

[G-Fafif]

I have a strong memory of an eighth-grade discussion, mid-June 1977, during one of the final ceramics classes of the year, all of us Mets fans. As we painted our clay mugs, we agreed that the now departed 41 would surely be retired someday. And 36. And 3. And 7. And probably 15. None of them had belonged to anybody except important, tenured Mets in our collective experience, so how could anybody else ever again wear them? We agreed we might have added 45 and 21 had they not been already reissued since their rightful bearers had been dispatched, which we assumed meant they couldn’t be retired. (24 was a coach at the time, so it already appeared reserved in perpetuity.)

None of us in our 14-year-old demo knew what it looked or felt like for a Mets player to have a number retired, but we had a sense of what it should be. Of course 41 led our conversation, given the mid-June 1977 event that inspired it. When 41 indeed became the first, it set an impossibly high standard to match. Calibration was in order if you ever wanted to believe the Mets organization cared about any of its greats. We in ceramics had been ready to go with the numbers we knew sitting around that table. I’m glad that the Mets have more or less caught up to our little mug-painting posse in spirit, prorating for the fact that the franchise has a lot more seasons behind it now, and the realization that there are important Mets and there are vital Mets.

Two from the era of miracles. Three from the powerhouse days. One from a period of memorable successes. One whose significant lifetime achievement in baseball is a 100% match for his Met career. And one for the immortal of immortal players whose situation here is singular. Eight players as we near the midpoint of our seventh decade. I’m comfortable with every call the Mets have made.

Anyway, I’m deighted for David.

[Gwreck]

What happened is Steve Cohen's research netted him not the opinion of the wisest fans, but the loudest, and those were the ones projecting silly manufactured grievances over petty jealousies.

It’s worth remembering that the plan to increase number retirements is a Wilpon initiative. Koosman (and the plan to retire more) dates back that far — the actual Koosman retirement occurring in 2021 was a COVID delay.

As for the loudest and not necessarily wisest fans: Howie Rose is chief among them in championing the number retirements.

[Edgy MD]

So really we are just talking about the number retirements of Hernandez, Gooden, Strawberry (all had previously been enshrined in the Met Hall) and Wright (who is getting enshrined the same day) and finally being able to get around to adding a memorial Murphy mic to go next to Ralph’s and SHEA in the retired numbers area.

Indeed, Koosman's, Gooden's, Strawberry's, and Hernandez's are the ones falsely elevated.

All wonderful players. All perfect fits for the team's hall of fame. All dubious reasons to take a number out of circulation.

I obviously shouldn't have specified Cohen. Indeed, the more-number-retirements-is-better standard is not unique to him, but it is a standard he has explicitly endorsed, and explicitly noted that his commitment to it is largely based on feedback from fans.

[Centerfield]

Wright deserves it. The other guys belong in the team Hall of Fame.

That the Mets have a shitty history without a lot of truly great, long-tenured team-associated players is their fault and papering it over by elevating guys who don't meet the criteria isn't going to change that.

Exactly this.

[metirish]

https://www.mlb.com/news/mets-who-could ... -in-future

Link

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think deGrom will get his number retired if he finishes his career with the Mets, or if he becomes part of the Mets community after he retires.

But if he stays in Texas and never looks back, I think it will be less likely.

I agree with DiComo's takes on Lindor and Alonso. Not so sure about Nimmo.

I think the next number that will go up there will be 12. But obviously not for quite a while.

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

Beltran's going in the Hall of Fame. If he goes in with a Mets cap, I think his No. 15 goes up on the wall.

[whippoorwill]

Wright deserves it. The other guys belong in the team Hall of Fame.

That the Mets have a shitty history without a lot of truly great, long-tenured team-associated players is their fault and papering it over by elevating guys who don't meet the criteria isn't going to change that.

Exactly this.

Explain Willie Mays

[Edgy MD]

After David Wright, which other Mets could have their numbers retired?

And there is the problem.

[metirish]

Beltran's going in the Hall of Fame. If he goes in with a Mets cap, I think his No. 15 goes up on the wall.

I agree , although it could be several years , curious to see if he jumps up again in this years voting

[batmagadanleadoff]

I think deGrom will get his number retired if he finishes his career with the Mets, or if he becomes part of the Mets community after he retires.

But if he stays in Texas and never looks back, I think it will be less likely.

I agree with DiComo's takes on Lindor and Alonso. Not so sure about Nimmo.

I think the next number that will go up there will be 12. But obviously not for quite a while.

And Carter? That one stays in no-man's land? Jeez, the guy was a liability for the majority of his Mets career. Majority. As in most. As in more than half of it. For most of Carter's Mets stint, he was a below league average hitter, sucking up precious at-bats from the heart of the order on teams that had World Series aspirations. Yes, he had some memorable, wonderful accomplishments for the franchise. But so did many, many other Mets who will never be in the conversation to have their numbers retired. He had two good seasons and you'd think he was Mickey Fucking Mantle for the Mets the way he's worshipped.

[metirish]

[Bob Alpacadaca]

Danny Abriano of SNY weighs in on who might next have their number retired at Citi Field on No. 5 takes its rightful place.

https://sny.tv/articles/two-more-mets-n ... vid-wright