Mets to Retire 16, 18 (merged with Oh Holy Hell, Retire #7 NOW!!!)

[Edgy MD]

There are plenty of fans I run into online who deny from their heads to their toes that Beltran ever particularly earned member-in-good-standing status.

Virtually none of them have a point, but they have voices that can be awful loud.

[Frayed Knot]

answering GWreck here


Yes, Beltran is better than those I lumped him with, I was pretty much throwing out names I've heard thrown out here (Ceetar was a big 'Retire Beltran Yesterday!' proponent) and elsewhere.

I wouldn't retire Beltran but I wouldn't have done Piazza either and this is certainly part of what gets opened up once they went the Piazza route where it's decided that the NYM HoF isn't enough for <50% NYM careers who are better known, or at least AS well known, for what they did elsewhere, Not as bad as five-season Reggie in the Bronx but at least he is HoF.

The overall issue for me is that Cohen has obviously decided that more retired numbers = better so rather than keep it for elite status only he's back-filling with fan favorites who had a handful of elite (or even just very good) seasons with the team while also continuing the mothballing of others (5, 7, 8, 48) for future use.
When this new one(s) every year pace is through will the stadium be big enough to hold them all?

[batmagadanleadoff]

This criteria that a player ought to be in Cooperstown to have his number retired by a team never resonated with me. In my fantasy world where I own the Mets and get to pick and choose and decide which Mets get to have their uniform numbers retired, if any, I don't think I'd ever consider that as a factor.

Simply put, a player is or isn't enshrined in Cooperstown based on his baseball accomplishments over his entire baseball career. Why would I care about what he did with teams other than the Mets when deciding whether or not to retire his Mets uniform number?

[Frayed Knot]

Saying HoF status, 'or something close to it', is merely meant to say that I want an elite level player rather than merely a good one
before deciding that no one else can ever soil that uniform #.
I'd have less problem with Keith or Beltran, even though less than HoF, had they also not been short of 45% of PAs as a Met (Keith)
or 35% (Carlos) and won their MVPs and performed WS heroics elsewhere, while Carter's actual HoF inclusion isn't enough to make
up for his barely 25% of time as a Met.
These are guidelines, not absolutes. But it also means that longtime Mets -- Kooz, Grote, Mookie, Krane, Reyes, etc. -- sometimes
touted here and elsewhere wouldn't be on my list either because of their lack of elite status..

[whippoorwill]

I’ve never understood retiring numbers.

There should be a way to honor players (ok Hall of Fame is good) without taking numbers out of circulation.

Pictures on corridors, statues, what have you.

[roger_that]

I’ve never understood retiring numbers.

There should be a way to honor players (ok Hall of Fame is good) without taking numbers out of circulation.

Pictures on corridors, statues, what have you.

It's a silly tradition, and sillier for being begun by the Yankees. I enjoy players wearing other players' numbers. When I saw Beltran, I was always reminded of Jerry Grote, and I liked that reminder. Likewise HoJo and Agee.

[Frayed Knot]

It's the idea that some players are so special to a particular team -- or, in the case of Jackie, to MLB itself -- that the team decides
that his number should be associated with only him after he retires. It's a nice honor but it should be rare (IMO of course).
But what's happened, in recent years especially, is that teams have opted for the 'more is better' philosophy driven, at least to some
degree, by a desire not to have fewer numbers on your wall than other teams have on theirs.

There should be a way to honor players (ok Hall of Fame is good) without taking numbers out of circulation.

Exactly. The team HoF (Ring of Honor, whatever) is there to honor past stars. By plucking those from the team HoF roster,
particularly when it's for the sole purpose of beefing up the slate of retired numbers, you wind up cheapening both.

[Edgy MD]

There are indeed hundreds (perhaps more) of ways to honor a player without taking his number out of circulation, but it seems that marketing has come down to we all have to do it the way others do it.

Won't you join me in advocating for novel, original honors to be undertaken by the Mets in honoring their players?

Let me add that honoring a player by building a statue of his number is numbskulled nine ways to Sunday.

[Fman99]

Let me add that honoring a player by building a statue of his number is numbskulled nine ways to Sunday.

A thought I have each time I enter Citi Field via the rotunda.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The Mets' announcement that they plan to retire the numbers of Dwight Gooden and Darryl Strawberry in separate ceremonies next summer came with the customary follow-up: What's next?

Back in 2020, when the Mets announced that they would retire Jerry Koosman's No. 36, I wrote this piece outlining which other numbers the team might consider setting aside. At this point, everyone on the list has either already had the honor or will have it soon, with the exceptions of David Wright and Gary Carter.

First, it's worth addressing Carter, who was inducted into the Mets Hall of Fame in 2001. Although no one can deny Carter's impact as a player and leader on the 1980s teams, he spent just five years with the franchise and appeared in merely 600 games. That's a notably lighter body of work than Strawberry or Keith Hernandez, who also spent less than half their careers in Queens. As such, it would not be surprising to see the Mets pass over Carter for the organization's highest honor.

That leaves Wright, who retired after the 2018 season and is not yet in the Mets Hall of Fame. Since 2021, the Mets have held Hall of Fame ceremonies and number retirements in alternate years, making 2025 a likely Hall induction summer. Might the Mets put Wright and others into the team Hall of Fame at that time, as a prelude to an eventual Wright number retirement? Or would they break recent tradition and hold both ceremonies for Wright on a single day?

Those answers should become clearer over the next year or so. It's obvious that Wright will have his No. 5 retired at Citi Field eventually. The only question is when.

Beyond that, the Mets are probably done retiring numbers for the time being. Next up is anyone's guess. Jacob deGrom complicated his candidacy by moving to Texas, and others, such as Francisco Lindor, are a long way from such considerations, with plenty of work left ahead of them.

[stevejrogers]

Dates have been announced

Dwight Gooden #16 April 14th Sunday vs the Royals

Darryl Strawberry #18 June 1st Saturday vs the Diamondbacks

[MFS62]

Dates have been announced

Dwight Gooden #16 April 14th Sunday vs the Royals

Darryl Strawberry #18 June 1st Saturday vs the Diamondbacks

I guess they didn't anticipate strong ticket sales for those games.
Later

[The Hot Corner]

Retiring so many numbers dilutes the significance.

The Mets’ Hall of Fame is for Doc and Darryl and Koosman.

Retired numbers should be strictly limited to individuals who make the Baseball Hall of Fame as a Met. You could maybe make an exception for a beloved player who played an entire career with the team.

I agree with this. I'd make the exception for David Wright.

I would agree with both of your sentiments.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Some absurd reader comments from The Athletic piece on the Mets retiring Doc and Darryl's uni numbers:

William C.

3h 24m ago

This is awful that Gary Carter has not been honored yet.

Carl C.

3h 25m ago

Can someone please explain to me why Doc’s and Darryl’s numbers are being retired, but still no Kid? The Mets should be ashamed of themselves!

https://theathletic.com/5209082/2024/01 ... tirements/

[metirish]

[Edgy MD]

It's all good when Luis Guzman is calling the shots.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

Mets are trying really hard to sell tickets. I don't think Opening Day sold out

[kcmets]

I don't think Opening Day sold out

The Magic Ain't Back! (yet)

[batmagadanleadoff]

4