Retired Numbers

Today the Mets announced that Jerry Koosman's #36 will be retired by the Mets some time in 2020. He would be the first person to receive such an honor as a Mets player that isn't a Baseball Hall of Famer (Gil Hodges had his number retired for his accomplishments as Manager, and I won't get into him deserving to be inducted as a player, but not wearing a Mets hat for that).

For me, this opens up a can of worms. Who's next? Where do they draw the line? Several years ago, I made a commentary of sorts on the subject in the form of an entry for Banner Day called "Citi Field Squares", where I had a parody of the old TV game show "Hollywood Squares" where each celebrity square was represented by a Mets would-be or actual retired number. The commentary was that there's a lot more potential retired numbers for the Mets, and I had to limit my game board to 9 squares (and 3 already retired numbers). From that list, 31 for Piazza was eventually retired (6 days after he was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame). And I didn't even include 36 for Koosman.


So who's next (after Koosman)? The implication from today's announcement was that there will be others.

Gary Carter is a Hall of Famer, who more or less earned it before coming to the Mets. He earned his World Series ring in Queens. A lot of people are going there. Carter passed away in early 2012. It would have been nice to honor him this way while he was still alive.

Many people want David Wright to be a baseball Hall of Famer. I thought he came up short on that, but he should be the next person inducted into the Mets (team) Hall of Fame. And have #5 taken out of circulation like #24 was taken out of circulation, but not retired. I might wait a couple years before holding David Wright Night and retiring his number just to see if he does make it to Cooperstown.

What about Doc Gooden & Darryl Strawberry (who were inducted together into the Mets Hall of Fame in 2010)? Or Keith Hernandez? Personally, I would have made the next Mets Hall of Fame induction be Gary Cohen this season (now just a few games shy of 31 complete seasons calling Mets games), with Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling following a year or two later (maybe 2021 in their 15th season calling games, or 2022 after 15 seasons were complete) with plaques that indicate for each that their longevity is as a broadcaster while each made a mark as a player. But Keith Hernandez is a borderline Hall of Fame player. So should he get his number retired at some point?

What about Bud Harrelson or Eddie Kranepool? They were both long-tenured Mets from the 1960s and 1970s. Buddy was the only person in a Mets uniform for both World Series championships (as a player in 1969, as a coach in 1986). And Buddy's not in good health. It would be good to honor him while he's still (physically) here. Hopefully the same would be true for "Steady Eddie" should they choose to retire his number.

Who am I missing? Am I wrong about any of these? I don't want to consider (yet, and for a while) the active players.


Leave a comment or drop me a line at DyHrdMET [at] gmail [dot] com. Your comments will fall into a moderation queue.
"Like" RememberingShea on Facebook.
Become a Networked Blog

Retired Numbers

There was one panel from yesterday's Queens Baseball Convention that really struck me. There were a lot of great panels to listen to, some of which I even got to see, but the retired numbers panel is worth its own blog post.

There's been a great debate among Mets fans, at least in the social media age, about what numbers the Mets should retire and why they haven't had a new one since Tom Seaver in 1988. I don't remember if I've written about this before, but I had some new thoughts about this. I should mention that I walked in about 15 minutes late to the hour-long panel.

I have 2 paths of thought on retired numbers. This is aside from the largely ceremonial numbers 37, 14, 42 and Shea.

One is that nothing should change with the retired numbers they have, and that the Mets Hall of Fame is considered the honor (though I think the Mets Hall of Fame should honor accomplishments as much as individual players - imagine Johan Santana No Hitter Day). Maybe if a player comes up through the Mets system, as Tom Seaver did, and has a Hall of Fame career, as Seaver did, even if they didn't finish their career as a Met, as Seaver, they should get their number retired. I don't think David Wright is destined for the Hall of Fame, but if he was, he'd be the candidate for this.

The other is that the Mets should open the floodgates and retire the numbers of several players. Then where do you start? Piazza when he gets into the Hall of Fame (he just had his Mets HOF day at the end of the 2013 season)? But what about Gary Carter, a Hall of Famer who spent a few years with the Mets including being a leader of the 1986 World Champions? As as noted in the panel yesterday, Keith Hernandez might be paired with Carter and might even go first, based on his tenure as a Met. Then what about Doc and Darryl? And why stop at the 1986 Mets when Buddy Harrelson and Jerry Koosman of the 1969 team might be even more deserving (longer tenures as Mets for sure). And if we're looking at long tenures, what about Eddie Kranepool and John Franco? Can you retire a number symbolically for multiple players (31 for Franco & Piazza...45 for Franco & McGraw)?

Where do you draw the line for this honor? What is the qualification for it? Every franchise has different qualifications. Every franchise has a different history too. That's why I lean towards the 1st train of thought that the earned retired numbers (only Seaver) is the highest honor for "The Franchise" and nobody else, and the Mets HOF is the honor equivalent to what we think retired numbers should be. That's the debate. And it wouldn't be any fun to have if we didn't have the debate.



Leave a comment or drop me a line at DyHrdMET [at] gmail [dot] com. Your comments will fall into a moderation queue.
"Like" RememberingShea on Facebook (the function formerly known as "Becoming a Fan").
Become a Networked Blog