From the http://www.sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/the-red-sox-will-retire-wade-boggs-number-on-may-26.12251/ thread.
Should Wade Boggs' number 26 be retired by the Red Sox?
Should Wade Boggs' number 26 be retired by the Red Sox?
A different ownership made the arbitrary rules. Frankly I'm surprised the current group clung to them at all. Had they not, Boggs probably would have gone up as soon as he was enshrined in Cooperstown, just like everyone else since Yaz (except Pesky, of course).The people voting no because he didn't finish career with team would not have wanted to retire Pedro's?
The team came up with arbitrary "rules". They can arbitrarily change them.
This is where I'm at, except Cronin doesn't belong with the others; he was a marginal HOFer who played roughly half his career elsewhere.To me, retiring a number should just be an official acknowledgement of something already obvious to everyone: that a player is so iconic and revered that it would be absurd for anyone after him to ever dare to wear his number. It should be the ultimate honor, even greater than the HOF. Someone transcendent both in terms of accomplishment and legacy. Under that standard, I wouldn't retire Boggs' number, but then I wouldn't have retired Rice's or Fisk's either. I'd have just 4, 6, 8 and 9. 45 would be next. But given that Rice and Fisk are already up there, Boggs (and Clemens) should be as well.
Considering Williams was named "Teddy" at birth, I just found the choice of comparison funny here.Were Ted Williams and Yaz cuddly teddy bears?
Disagree. I actually think the number retirement -- a team-specific honor -- is perfect for guys who aren't nationally recognized in the Hall of Fame but deserve to be recognized by their franchise anyway.It should be the ultimate honor, even greater than the HOF.
With the current standards, I think Dwight Evans should be up there before Wade Boggs, with Clemens and Pedro to follow, then Ortiz.
What the flying fuck are you two talking about?If Fisk is in then Boggs should be too. No longer do you have to finish your career with Boston or even spend 80% of your career with them. This sets the stage for Pedro and Roger down the road.
No kidding. They're going to retire Pedro's number next but not Ted's?What the flying fuck are you two talking about?
I can't wait til we finally retire #45. What a glorious day that will be.What the flying fuck are you two talking about?
Interestingly, 24 hasn't been given out since 2009 (one year after Manny left). Also, Varitek's 33, Eck's 43, and Wakefield's 49 haven't been given out since 2011.As for Boggs, I feel like if he's up there, Evans should be up there. But I'm not sure either necessarily should be, plus some others after 9 4 1 8.
By today's standards, it's deserved, but the timing just feels weird. By past standards, it doesn't measure up at all.
I need a great baseball mind to help me understand something. Why is Ozzie Smith in the Hall of Fame and Dwight Evans isn't? He was a far, far, far superior hitter to Ozzie and he only had a few less gold gloves, yet Ozzie Smith is revered as one of the all-time greats and Evans is an after thought. Further, Ozzie Smith ranks 13th all-time in fielding shortstops. Here's a few nobody's that rank higher: Larry Bowa, JJ Hardy, Cesar Izturis, and Steven Drew. So yeah, talk me through this one.
Also, based on Ozzie Smith, Placid Polanco should be in the Hall once he is eligible. Polanco played 16 seasons (Ozzie played 19). Polanco is has the highest fielding % of any third baseman and of any second baseman ever. His overall fielding % is .990. Ozzie Smith's fielding % is .978. Yet Ozzie won 13 gold gloves and Polanco won 3. As a hitter, Polanco is light years ahead of Smith. That said, Polanco won't even get a sniff. I guess he should have done back flips.
PS, Ozzie Smith happens to be one of my favorite baseball players ever. But, his numbers don't warrant a Hall of Fame induction.
I'm looking at the HOF voting results for 1997, which I was Evans' first year of eligibility, and I'm having a hard time understanding how he didn't at least get more votes. He came in 18th, with no real "names" ahead of him. Phil Niekro was the only one who got in with 80.3% of the vote. Evans only had 5.9%...
Evans fared a bit better in 1998, with 10.4%, but Don Sutton was the only one voted in, on his 5th year on the ballot. It was pretty much the same Hall class of 1997.
1999 is what screwed Dwight over completely. There were new "big-name" HoF candidates, Nolan Ryan, George Brett, Robin Yount, and Carlton Fisk. The first three would all get in, and Carlton Fisk would be close. Since writers only have so many votes they can cast, a lot of these votes came at Evans' expense. He fell to 3.6%, and thus became ineligible for future ballots.
When Ozzie Smith made his HoF Ballot debut in 2002, he was going up against a lot of the same guys Dwight Evans was: Jim Rice, Bruce Sutter, Steve Garvey. And Ozzie steamrolled the competition, getting 91.7% of the vote. Gary Carter was the only one close to making it that season.
Over his career, Ozzie Smith generated 76.5 WAR, most of that coming from 1982-1991, a ten-year stretch during which he was elite. During most of that stretch, his bat was actually below average (based on OPS+) for a shortstop, with some above average seasons mixed in. He stole tons of bases, and walked a lot, so in a way, he was kind of a Rickey Henderson-lite. Had absolutely no power whatsoever, but still hit a decent amount of doubles, probably thanks to his speed. While is Fielding% might not be eye-popping, that's also possibly a function of his range. It's easier to make an error if you're getting your glove on a ball you have no business getting to.
Evans generated 66.9 WAR over his career, had good power numbers, won some gold gloves, but I think part of the problem was that his numbers were never especially eye-popping. He's probably borderline on being a HoFer or not, but he would have needed to be on the ballot for a long time (like Jim Rice) for it to happen. He didn't survive on the ballot long enough, thanks to the Ryan/Brett/Yount purge of 99. Never really had much of a chance.
Finally, it helps when a team champions your cause. Ozzie Smith started out in San Diego, but he played in St. Louis from 1982 until 1996, when he retired. I'm sure the Cardinals had plenty of "Ozzie Smith Days" or whatever leading up to the balloting. Dwight Evans almost played his whole career here, but left for Baltimore for that one last season. Considering the overall douchiness of the Red Sox' previous ownership, they probably reacted to Evans leaving by trying to erase his name from the annuls of history.
WAR is adjusted based on position, since typically a 1B who can hit isn't uncommon, and it's a less important defensive position as well... something like second base or catcher, good hitters are a lot less common, and they're more important defensively too.
WAR is calculated based on "runs" translated into "wins" - so batting runs, base running runs, and fielding runs. If you're a total derp on the base paths, you cost your team runs, and therefore a fraction of a win, etc... Adjustments are made for league and position as well.
Here are the positional adjustments:
Catcher: +12.5 runs (all are per 162 defensive games)
First Base: -12.5 runs
Second Base: +2.5 runs
Third Base: +2.5 runs
Shortstop: +7.5 runs
Left Field: -7.5 runs
Center Field: +2.5 runs
Right Field: -7.5 runs
Designated Hitter: -17.5 runs
Interestingly, "home park" adjustments are made for offense, and not for defense - so if Fenway's RF is truly as tough as CF to play, Evans' probably deserved a few more defensive runs than he earned. I'll have to look at it more later and see how, if at all, it affected his career WAR.
I suspect being flashy has a lot to do with it; I remember seeing Ozzie Smith on the news a lot for his backflips et al, whilst Dwight Evans appeared to quietly do his job, and do it well.As for Dwight Evans, a while back my cousin asked me "how is Ozzie Smith a first ballot hall of famer, and Dwight Evans didn't get in?"
You believe Ozzie Smith is a HoFer because he was flashy?I suspect being flashy has a lot to do with it; I remember seeing Ozzie Smith on the news a lot for his backflips et al, whilst Dwight Evans appeared to quietly do his job, and do it well.
I did not say that. I was putting out a thought as to why Ozzie Smith made it in on the first ballot, yet Dwight Evans never made it in.You believe Ozzie Smith is a HoFer because he was flashy?
I stand corrected. You think he was a first ballot HoFer because he did backflips.I did not say that. I was putting out a thought as to why Ozzie Smith made it in on the first ballot, yet Dwight Evans never made it in.
I also did not say that. Once again, I'm suggesting theories as to the gap between Ozzie Smith and Dwight Evans.I stand corrected. You think he was a first ballot HoFer because he did backflips.
I happen to think Evans was vastly underrated nationally. But your attempts to find artificial reasons for the gap between his HoF votes and Ozzie Smith's are incredibly simplistic. Smith is legitimately a Top 10 shortstop in the history of the game. Evans, as strong as he was defensively and, eventually, offensively, is not a Top 10 outfielder. Not even close. That's what this comes down to -- yet you want to focus on peripheral matters and stereotyping voters.I also did not say that. Once again, I'm suggesting theories as to the gap between Ozzie Smith and Dwight Evans.
And yes, perception does matter. The types of reporters/columnists who get knocked in the press forum on a regular basis were the ones who vote players into the Hall of Fame.
Happy to leave this side track alone, but you continue to manufacture false claims. I never said he wasn't a great player. I never said he didn't deserve to be on the first ballot.But, please, stop this nonsense that Ozzie Smith was elected because he was a fan or reporter favorite who was entertaining. The guy was a legitimate great player.
You should get right on that.Happy to leave this side track alone, but you continue to manufacture false claims. I never said he wasn't a great player. I never said he didn't deserve to be on the first ballot.
I would suggest that once Boggs' number is retired, we start a petition to the Red Sox to get Pedro's number retired: http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/bos/history/retired_numbers.jsp
I think you should do just thatI would suggest that once Boggs' number is retired, we start a petition to the Red Sox to get Pedro's number retired: http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/bos/history/retired_numbers.jsp
It's a waste of time. They're not going to do anything with Pedro's number.I think you should do just that
We'll see...perhaps we can fax the petition to the webmaster.It's a waste of time. They're not going to do anything with Pedro's number.