I decided to pick only guys who never played anywhere else: Williams, Yaz, Rice, Doerr. I thought hard about Ortiz, but decided to leave him out because he started as a Twin, and he's still playing. In twenty years, I will be glad to replace Doerr with Pedroia (unless seantoo gets his way and Pedroia is traded away this month).
RetractableRoof said:
I'll second this from a different perspective. I grew up in New Jersey in the 60s as a Mets fan. Even from that remove, Yastrzemski's '67 season made him legendary. If you asked any New York area kid at the end of the 60s who the great baseball players were, it would have been a very short list. Five guys, all outfielders. Willie Mays. Hank Aaron. Frank Robinson. Roberto Clemente. Carl Yastrzemski. Maybe Al Kaline makes that list after 1968, but Yaz was a bigger name. So I can only imagine what it was like when he played for your home team.
I absolutely loved this.jose melendez said:
I went with the obvious 4. Yaz and Ted are this teams defining icons stretching into the past. They are Boston Red Sox baseball to anyone with a passing knowledge of the history of the club. They are obvious.
Beyond that, Ortiz has been king of this city for a decade
And Pedro is god.
Since this thread is somewhat reminiscing anyway, I quote this to laugh at myself - because like no player I remember since - Yaz didn't have a classic swing. He had like 5, seemed like he was always screwing around with his swing/stance. But we all copied whatever the current version was.RetractableRoof said:
Young, Williams, Yaz, Pedro. The championship number total is silly. Pedro would've won more championships if he had the cast to help him with it, so it came down to Papi v.Pedro, and Pedro is God. I went with the idea that two guys from pretty much the same era couldn't both be on Mount Soxmore. Maybe I'm biased with Pedro wearing a Sox uni, but I haven't seen anyone pitch like him at his peak since his peak.
There are 3 no-brainers, Williams (Washington), Papi (Jefferson), and Pedro (Lincoln).
Teddy R , Mr. big stick, is Manny. 2 guys from 2004 isn't enough.
Teddy R , Mr. big stick, is Manny. 2 guys from 2004 isn't enough.
I went with Williams, Papi, Pedro and then Dewey Evans to serve as my mustache president.
Yeah, I probably should have put Yaz or Cy but Evans had a hell of a career and may be one of the most underrated Sox players in 100 years. I'll still never forgive Duquette for giving 24 to Kevin freaking Mitchell.
Yeah, I probably should have put Yaz or Cy but Evans had a hell of a career and may be one of the most underrated Sox players in 100 years. I'll still never forgive Duquette for giving 24 to Kevin freaking Mitchell.
Drocca said:
Me too. I thought a bunch of people would vote for him, although of course I didn't. Boggs was my favorite player growing up, and I basically tried to copy everything he did on the baseball field. Later, in college, I tried to copy some of his (less famous) off the field exploits.
I mean, I get it, he was a Yankee, and the horse stuff, but I think I was on a brief baseball hiatus when that stuff went down so I still love the guy and all his weirdness. I think it's a real bummer that he isn't a bigger part of Red Sox history.
I'm also amazed so few people voted for Jimmie Foxx, who is probably the 2nd best player on that list behind Williams.
Everyone is clamoring for Pedro, and I get it, but such little support for Grove. Grove, like Pedro, didn't pitch for an exceptional amount of time in Boston, but was still one of the best pitchers ever. The big difference is that Pedro pitched in Boston in his prime and Grove ended his career here. Still, Grove was pretty dominant in Boston, capturing 4 out of the 5 league ERA titles from 1935-1939. Pedro is probably a better candidate for Mount Rushmore than Grove, but I don't think the gap is as big as the poll suggests. FWIW, I think Grove was the better pitcher overall, hersey I know, but I think it's true.
I voted for Yaz, Williams, Ortiz and Pesky. The first three I think are obvious, and like many of you I struggled to pick the fourth. I ended up picking Pesky because nobody loved the Red Sox more than he did, and he probably could have made the HOF if it wasn't for the war.
I voted for Yaz, Williams, Ortiz and Pesky. The first three I think are obvious, and like many of you I struggled to pick the fourth. I ended up picking Pesky because nobody loved the Red Sox more than he did, and he probably could have made the HOF if it wasn't for the war.
FWIW, career ERA/FIP
Grove, 3.06 / 3.36
Pedro, 2.93 / 2.91
And of course Pedro pitched in the steroid era
Grove, 3.06 / 3.36
Pedro, 2.93 / 2.91
And of course Pedro pitched in the steroid era
PrometheusWakefield said:
Pedro being the 1 to Ted Williams 1A of greatest athlete to ever wear the Red Sox uniform doesn't necessarily mean he's on the Mt. Rushmore.
Yeah but he's really more of a career Athletic than Red Sox. Over 1000 more ABs, 9 full seasons and 3 partial (vs 6 and 1 in Bos), 2 titles, and a triple crown with Philly (and 2 MVPs there vs 1 in Boston).alwyn96 said:
I don't know why I laughed so hard at this.Harry Hooper said:
I chose:
Cy Young - the award is named after him for a reason
Williams - of course
Yah - of course
Pedro - in hindsight, Ortiz belongs here.
SumnerH said:
Sure, I get that to an extent. For some reason I thought people might give more weight to overall player quality. I mean, Foxx is inner circle. So is Speaker, really, but for some reason it seems like Speaker is even less associated with the Red Sox.
My first thought on seeing this thread wasn't to look up WAR or OPS+ or other stats, it was: when you think of the great players who define the Red Sox, who are the first names that come to mind? If the question was "who were the 4 best Red Sox players?" we could just look at the stats, and it wouldn't be that interesting. I voted Young, Martinez, Yastrzemski, and of course Williams.
Of course others like Foxx, Dewey... heck, all of the choices listed come to mind as well.
Ted is the probably the best hitter ever - Ruth is the only other in the running - and defined the Red Sox for an era. Pedro is the best pitcher ever - unless you consider RP, then Rivera is in the conversation. So what Pedro began and ended his career elsewhere? He peaked with the Red Sox and won championships here. Cy Young is as iconic as they come. Yaz was my first favorite ball player so he makes my list no matter what, but he deserves it anyway.
It's tough to leave off so many of the others, but that is why this is such a good question. If I had a fifth vote, it'd be for David.
Of course others like Foxx, Dewey... heck, all of the choices listed come to mind as well.
Ted is the probably the best hitter ever - Ruth is the only other in the running - and defined the Red Sox for an era. Pedro is the best pitcher ever - unless you consider RP, then Rivera is in the conversation. So what Pedro began and ended his career elsewhere? He peaked with the Red Sox and won championships here. Cy Young is as iconic as they come. Yaz was my first favorite ball player so he makes my list no matter what, but he deserves it anyway.
It's tough to leave off so many of the others, but that is why this is such a good question. If I had a fifth vote, it'd be for David.
If this is based on the players' performance with the Red Sox, it's tough to make an argument for Cy Young or Lefty Grove over Pedro. Young pitched for the Sox for 8 seasons, won 192 games and lost 112 (.632 winning %), had an ERA of 2.00, struck out 1342 and walked 299 in 2728.1 innings. His ERA+ (era adjusted) was 147. Grove also pitched in Boston for 8 seasons, won 105 games and lost 62 (.629 winning %), had an ERA of 3.34, struck out 743 and walked 447 in 1539.2 innings. His ERA+ was 143. Pedro pitched 7 seasons for the Red Sox, won 117 games and lost 37 (.760 winning %), had an ERA of 2.52, struck out 1683 and walked 309 in 1383.2 innings. His ERA+ was 190.
Also, I'm surprised Mo Vaughn is not an option. He had some great seasons with the Sox, and was a huge reason (along with Dan Duquette) the team was able to lose its (much deserved) perception as a racist organization.
Also, I'm surprised Mo Vaughn is not an option. He had some great seasons with the Sox, and was a huge reason (along with Dan Duquette) the team was able to lose its (much deserved) perception as a racist organization.
I'm a little surprised to see all the Cy Young love (currently 5th on the list). What's the appeal there? I know the award is named after him, but:
- He only played for the Sox for 8 years of his 22 year career
- A huge amount of his value came from pitching a LOT (350-450 innings/season), which helped him accumulate a lot of WAR (and wins). By ERA+, he's tied for 17th all time-- elite, HOF, no doubt, but behind Clemens, and way behind Pedro.
If a huge chunk of what makes him great is his longevity and endurance, but most of that was accumulated elsewhere, I'm not sure he deserves a spot here. For comparison, stats accumulated with the Sox:
Pedro: 7 seasons, 117-37, 190 ERA+, 53.8 WAR
Clemens: 13 seasons, 192-111, 144 ERA+, 81.3 WAR
Young: 8 seasons, 192-112, 147 ERA+, 66.2 WAR
Pedro was obviously the most dominant of the 3 (of any starting pitcher ever), but had the shortest tenure. Clemens has more IP & WAR than Young with the Sox, with nearly identical W-L and ERA+. It's hard for me to see an argument for Young over Clemens other than "Clemens is a jerk, and Cy Young has an award named after him".
Of course, I don't like Clemens either, so I left them both off.
- He only played for the Sox for 8 years of his 22 year career
- A huge amount of his value came from pitching a LOT (350-450 innings/season), which helped him accumulate a lot of WAR (and wins). By ERA+, he's tied for 17th all time-- elite, HOF, no doubt, but behind Clemens, and way behind Pedro.
If a huge chunk of what makes him great is his longevity and endurance, but most of that was accumulated elsewhere, I'm not sure he deserves a spot here. For comparison, stats accumulated with the Sox:
Pedro: 7 seasons, 117-37, 190 ERA+, 53.8 WAR
Clemens: 13 seasons, 192-111, 144 ERA+, 81.3 WAR
Young: 8 seasons, 192-112, 147 ERA+, 66.2 WAR
Pedro was obviously the most dominant of the 3 (of any starting pitcher ever), but had the shortest tenure. Clemens has more IP & WAR than Young with the Sox, with nearly identical W-L and ERA+. It's hard for me to see an argument for Young over Clemens other than "Clemens is a jerk, and Cy Young has an award named after him".
Of course, I don't like Clemens either, so I left them both off.
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
No. The two no-brainers are Williams and Yaz. You can have debates about anyone else, but not those two.
I'm seeing Williams as Washington, Yaz as Jefferson, Pedro as Teddy (little guy with big drive) and Papi as Lincoln (the tall guy who emancipated the franchise).
DrewDawg said:
Yeah, Cronin mystifies me. He didn't even spend his prime here; if he belongs on anybody's Rushmore it's Washington/Minnesota's. I wouldn't have voted for Foxx or Grove for the same reason. They belong to the A's.
Williams and Yaz are already carved in stone.
the other two guys?
I'm still mulling it over.
fwiw (very little) Tim Wakefield should be on the ballot, for longevity, wins and generally being a good soldier.
the other two guys?
I'm still mulling it over.
fwiw (very little) Tim Wakefield should be on the ballot, for longevity, wins and generally being a good soldier.
bankshot1 said:
The Allented Mr Ripley said:
Longevity is overrated. .285/.841 isn't exactly awe-inspiring.
Before reading this thread I voted for Ted and Yaz first, contemplated for about 30 seconds then picked Pedro and Ortiz.
That seems to be the general consensus. After reading this thread, I can't really imagine any argument that would back me off these four, or more truly any argument that could persuade me that Pedro and Ortiz are less deserving than other candidates. Anyone trying to tell me that Ted and Yaz were not on the Rushmore would be dismissed out of hand.
That seems to be the general consensus. After reading this thread, I can't really imagine any argument that would back me off these four, or more truly any argument that could persuade me that Pedro and Ortiz are less deserving than other candidates. Anyone trying to tell me that Ted and Yaz were not on the Rushmore would be dismissed out of hand.
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
When a .301 batting average leads the league, you need to allow for some historical context.
finnVT said:
I think part of it is representing the very early Red Sox. Sure it was a different type of game, to some extent, played by different players drawn from a smaller nation.
It seems to me that to be on Soxmore, you should be an historical standout as a player, and, if possible, have special meaning for the club. Pedro fits the bill. I'm not sure Clemens does. Some of that is not really Clemens' fault - had they won in 86, he'd be more of a shoe in.
If Pedro re-upped with the Sox, and/or was around in 2007, he'd clearly edge out Young. The problem with putting Pedro on Soxmore is that Ortiz has a sort of overlapping significance.
Personally, Pedro and Evans were my favorite players on the Sox. Neither made the mountain for me though.
dbn said:
This seems contradictory. Cy Young is the definitive Cleveland Spider; he played there longer, came into the league with them, and went into the Hall of Fame with their cap on. Nobody's first thought hearing his name is "Red Sox".
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
While ignoring stellar defense and his role in making Red Sox Nation what it is today. Here's a news flash: if Yaz doesn't have his 1967 season, there is no Sons of Sam Horn.
Williams, Yaz, Pedro and Smoky Joe Wood.
Because listen my friend, there's no man alive that can throw harder than Smoky Joe Wood.
Because listen my friend, there's no man alive that can throw harder than Smoky Joe Wood.
The Allented Mr Ripley said:
Average attendance at Fenway Park:
1961: 10,437
1962: 9,164
1963: 11,710
1964: 10,905
1965: 8,052
1966: 10,014
1967: 21,331
1968: 23,960
1969: 22,633
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
A little misleading because he played too long at the end of his career.
A lot of people get the idea, because of Yaz's longevity, that he's a career-value guy. The length of the career did pad some of the counting stats, but it also takes the spotlight off the fact that what he was, really, was a peak-value guy. Through his prime, from his age 23 through age 30 seasons, he racked up a .301/.402/.513 slash line in one of the toughest eras for hitters in baseball history (1963-70), good for a 153 OPS+ in 5314 PA. Through that stretch, he also won five of his seven career Gold Gloves. And an MVP. And a Triple Crown. While leading the league in OBP five times and OPS four times out of those eight seasons. And oh, yeah, restoring a near-moribund franchise to relevance. He also racked up 58.8 rWAR and 55.7 fWAR in those eight seasons, an average of about 7 per year.
At his peak--which was not of the blink-and-you'll-miss-it variety--Yaz was a dominant player.
hlord: