By Bryan Redemske
In 1997, marking the 50th anniversary of Jackie Robinson’s major league debut — and therefore the breaking of the color barrier — teams wore sleeve patches to mark the occasion. President Clinton participated in a nice ceremony honoring Robinson’s legacy, and all was well.
Since then, things have progressively gotten bigger and bigger, making me wonder how much longer it will be before every team requires its players wear only Robinson’s No. 42 on April 15, and whether the numbers 4 and 2 will also be the only ones allowed in that day’s boxscores. True, Robinson’s debut had a large impact both historically for baseball and socially for the nation. But couldn’t one say the same thing about, say, Babe Ruth’s legacy? Would there have been a stage for Robinson to grace if not for Ruth? And why did it take 50 years to honor Robinson across the game if April 15 was so important?
There’s a far-reaching — and likely heated — discussion that could be set off at this point, but let’s steer clear of that for now. It’s time to count the 42s. Be prepared — there were lots of them. According to this story (which also includes the full list of players on each team), nine teams had a full compliment of 42s — the Angels, Athletics, Rangers, Rays, Mets, Nationals, Cardinals, Pirates and Dodgers. All of the others had at least one representative, and all 42s were NNOB.
Some 42s of note:
• Ken Griffey Jr., who started the wearing of the 42 a year ago, obviously followed it up. Dusty Baker also wore it, but understandably didn’t venture out of the Wrigley Field visitors dugout too much.
• New York Governor David Paterson, who’s legally blind, threw out the first pitch at Shea Stadium. Insert your own inappropriate joke here. Oh, and he’s wearing a Cool Base jersey, too.
• Several teams — Phillies, Marlins, Braves, Brewers, Orioles, and Giants — only had one representative.
• The Mariners have only four players listed, but had more than that in uniform.
• Other than the number itself, Derrek Lee doesn’t look too strange. The Cubs were NNOB in 2005 and 2006.
• Jimmy Rollins was the only Phillie with a 42, but got the double-number treatment.
• David Ortiz had a successful night on two fronts: No. 42, and he got a hit! But like most of the 42ers, his helmet number didn’t match his jersey number. Note also, the Indians wore their blue alts at home. They started doing that again last season. And check out Garko’s nameplate. Who set up that radial arch, David Paterson?
• The Blue Jays’ jerseys actually look good without a name on the back. OK, not really good, but substantially better. They chose a busy font and color scheme, and losing a good portion of it cleans things up. Nice(ish). Also in Baltimore, the Orioles’ Adam Jones had his very own T-shirt giveaway night. The problem? He was wearing No. 42, not his usual No. 10. Thanks to Dan Sliwinski for the tip.
• While the Dodgers obviously all wore No. 42, Chaka Khan, sadly, did not. Plenty of good seats still available, by the way, if you’re out driving around and thinking about a ballgame. Interesting note: The Dodgers played the Pirates in one of three games that featured two full teams of 42s. The others were Angels/Rangers and Mets/Nationals.
Uni Watch News Ticker: Paul here. First and foremost, major thanks to Bryan for handling today’s main entry (a task he assumed on just a few hours’ notice), which allowed me to take care of some other urgent business last night. Much obliged, Bry. … Now then: As we’ve discussed a few times, Michigan will become an Adidas school this fall but is still technically a Nike school for now. But Seth Gladstein notes that several of the players in Saturday’s spring football scrimmage wore Adidas cleats with Nike socks. … A few days ago I mentioned the Expos’ retired numbers banner, which currently hangs in the Bell Centre. Here’s a really good photo of it (along with Andre Dawson and Gary Carter in Habs jerseys), courtesy of Costa Galanis. … The question of wearing a jacket while running the bases is addressed, somewhat inconclusively, in the last entry on this Q&A page (with thanks to Don Montgomery). … Mark Fightmaster reports that the Cincy Bearcats are wearing some awesome striped stirrups. … Obama of Dreams lives! That’s Ben Kozyak, posing with singer John Legend on Monday. … Here’s a Philly incident I hadn’t been aware of: Mike Schmidt once referred to the locals as “beyond help” and Veterans Stadium as a “mob scene, uncontrollable.” In his next game after those comments were published, Schmidt came out wearing a “disguise,” consisting of a wig and shades, which reportedly prompted a standing O from the boo-birds (nice find by Andrew Hoenig). … John Wright sent me this photo of Dave Brown. Is that a uni number below his left hand? If so, it clearly isn’t No. 22. I’ve never seen numbers on the Seahawks’ pants before. Can anyone shed any light on this? … Sigh. … At first glance, this story isn’t uni-related — until you get to the sixth graf. … Looks like we’ve got our first case of Cool Base-induced mismatched grays (great spot by Bryan). … Check this out: Dan Marino had a numbered towel and a hand-warmer pouch during his days at Pitt (with thanks to Doug Keklak). … Also from Doug: John Russell (current Pirates manager, former MLB catcher) had a “Jo. Russell” NOB back in his Texas Rangers days. … Awesome old sneaker ad here (with thanks to Matt Mitchell). … Attention NYC-area readers: Big literary event tomorrow evening, as Mets by the Numbers author/webmaster Jon Springer will be reading at Word Books, and he’ll be joined by Spike Vrusho, author of the newly published Benchclearing: Baseball’s Greatest Fights and Riots. Most of you know Springer by now (if not, get acquainted with his web site here and his book here); as for Vrusho, he’s the former editor of the brilliant 1990s baseball-centric zine Murtaugh, which featured, among other things, Tony Millionaire’s “Batty” comic (including the fondly remembered do-it-yourself installment) and such masterpieces of poetic verse as “Ode to Marge Schott” and “Dallas Green Is a Douche.” In other words, we’re talking two serious heavyweights of baseball literature here. First pitch is at 7:30pm.
#1 by Scott on 04.16.08 9:07 am |
Looks like it might be a “12″ on DB’s pants. Could it be yet another “12th Man” promotion?
#2 by Juan Grande on 04.16.08 9:09 am |
Another story I read about the guy you died at Shea said that the police think he was trying to slide down the bannister railing on a non-working escalator.
#3 by Scott on 04.16.08 9:11 am |
If that number is a “10″, it could also be some sort of 10th anniversary nod. That is assuming the picture was in 1986 (looks like it could be, given the Jets uniforms).
#4 by Robert on 04.16.08 9:12 am |
All of yesterday’s 42s reaffirms how much I dislike NNOB. The absence of a name makes the number look too small, and dammit, I like to be able to identify the players without a program.
#5 by Peter K on 04.16.08 9:13 am |
The Dave Brown Seattle Seahawk patch is their from their 10th anniversiery….
here’s a link for a (not much) better look
http://www.answers.c...
#6 by Yankee Hank on 04.16.08 9:13 am |
I am wondering, why are there some teams with only 1 rep wearing 42? I think that is a little slap in the face…persaonlly speaking Mark Kotsay was the only BRAVE to wear it…and he isnt Afro-American? Do the Braves not have any good sense?
#7 by Rhoda Morgenstern on 04.16.08 9:15 am |
Hawkins gives up No. 21 for No. 22
This would have been nice to see in the ticker…I know it is Yankees news…
http://newyork.yanke...
#8 by Jason Gomez on 04.16.08 9:17 am |
Are we sure that wasnt the blind govener that fell when he lost his way? Now about the 1st pitch….did some one tell him which way to throw or did he pitch to first base??
#9 by scott on 04.16.08 9:19 am |
So are the Yankees going to retire 21 in honor of Paul O’Neill?
#10 by Greg V. on 04.16.08 9:21 am |
Dusty Baker did venture out of the Wrigley dugout a few times. Did you see his 42? No, of course not. He was wearing a jacket the entire night. What’s the point of paying tribute to Jackie if you’re going to cover it up all night? Maybe it just makes Dusty feel better. Or maybe it’s for the cash from auctioning off the jersey.
#11 by LI Phil on 04.16.08 9:21 am |
i posted this late yesterday:
after seeing all the highlights on SC and other sports networks this am, i not only reiterate those thoughts
the NNOB’s LOOKED WONDERFUL
i know it’s beyond wishful thinking to have them return to all teams on a full-time basis, but it sure was great yesterday
…now having EVERY player wear 42…i could do without that next year, but one (or maybe 2) players chosen by their teams every year, well that’s great and i hope it remains
/good to see rachel @ shea last night
#12 by Robert on 04.16.08 9:22 am |
John Russell’s “JO RUSSELL” jersey was no doubt necessary because of the presence of pitcher Jeff Russell on the Rangers’ roster. So did Jeff’s jersey read “JE RUSSELL”?
#13 by Peter Wunsch on 04.16.08 9:23 am |
I was please that the NY Times article on the selling (out) of the Boston marathon did not include the name of the sponsor.
Now , if we get other stories to do the same when referring to sports arenas. What teams plays in M & T Stadium? Rogers Stadium? Wachovia Center? Plus Financial Field?
#14 by Rhoda Morgenstern on 04.16.08 9:25 am |
I certainly dont think so…it seems that this is a move out of FAN protest and nastiness…so it seems the front office hand nothing to with it. I think 51 should go on the wall before 21!
#15 by Shaftman on 04.16.08 9:25 am |
I’m mostly in agreement with you Phil.
If you wear pinstripes NNOB is definitely the way to go and if you don’t it should be done on a case by case basis. Royals, Jays, Giants…NNOB. (and others would be included but I don’t want to go through all 30 teams and their 5 [on average] different uniform combos).
#16 by Steve on 04.16.08 9:25 am |
New York Governor David Paterson, who’s legally blind, threw out the first pitch at Shea Stadium. Insert your own inappropriate joke here.
Was that really necessary Bryan? It’s almost like you’re hoping people make fun of his disability. Geeze……
Stay classy…….
#17 by LI Phil on 04.16.08 9:26 am |
first of all he’s LEGALLY blind, not completely blind, he is governor and he learned pitching technique on the dodgeball court
#18 by Jason Gomez on 04.16.08 9:28 am |
HA HA….sorry I didnt have my dictionary handy.
#19 by Adam on 04.16.08 9:30 am |
NNOB looking good or bad is very much a matter of opinion (personally, I hate it).
As for asking “why did some teams only have one person, don’t they care?” or whatever - that just seems stupid to me - obviously, some people/teams think the best honor is for the whole team to wear it, and others think it should be the player’s choice, and other’s think only one player should wear it. None of those options is wrong, and none of them mean that players/teams care any more/less.
One last side note: Jim Thome was supposed to wear #42, but was suspended for the game. So, while he’ll go down in history as wearing it, he actually didn’t.
#20 by Steve on 04.16.08 9:33 am |
Yeah, I read that too and I really want to say that I read it in an ESPN.com article which is weird since the one linked here doesn’t say that.
#21 by dgc on 04.16.08 9:36 am |
Maybe they thought fans would get confused. Maybe they thought a whole team of 42s was kind of silly. Anyway, here’s a story on Adam Jones getting notice he was tapped to wear 42. from the Baltimore Sun
#22 by Iggy on 04.16.08 9:37 am |
Am I the only wondering why, if on April 15th it’s okay for ENTIRE teams to wear the same number (42 in this case), it matters at all that players wear different numbers every other game of the year? I mean, why bother? From now on if a player wants a number that a teammate already has, why not just wear it anyway? It just goes to show you how little it really matters.
#23 by yukoncornelius on 04.16.08 9:38 am |
interesting story here, where the Ohio State coaching staff bumped a wide receiver from #4 to #82 as a punishment for poor behavior.
#24 by Eric S. on 04.16.08 9:38 am |
So you don’t want Kotsay to wear the number…..because of his race? Interesting.
#25 by Stormwater Runoff on 04.16.08 9:40 am |
Watching the A’s-White Sox game, for a while it seemed a bit weird to me that the only White Sox player wearing #42 was Jermaine Dye, but none of the white players. Then I think I saw Nick Swisher wearing #42. Any other “White” Sox wearing #42? -Runoff
#26 by ryan on 04.16.08 9:40 am |
This webpage shows a picture of Largent making a catch with the same patched pants - it’s in B&W, but you can see the ten clearly.
#27 by Shaftman on 04.16.08 9:45 am |
If you wonders why it matters you should have watched the Mets game last night. Every time there was a pinch hitter or someone warming up in the pen it was a crap shoot on whether Gary Cohen would know who it was (obviously I’m talking about the Nationals players).
He and Hernandez were joking for the last 4 innings about how they couldn’t figure out the other players. They even had trouble picking out Duaner Sanchez (who plays for the Mets) since it was his first game in a year and a half.
If you had the names on the jersey it wouldn’t have been that big of a deal, but there would still be times that you only see the front of a player.
That being said, for one game out of the year, I salute MLB and every team who participated in the remembrance of Jackie Robinson (whether they did a full team of 42’s or highlighted one player wearing it).
#28 by ScottyJ in WV on 04.16.08 9:45 am |
Ode to Marge Schott is great and disturbing.
#29 by Dustin Pomprowitz on 04.16.08 9:45 am |
The Brewers said that only one player was going to be allowed to wear 42, and it was a lottery-type pick between Rickie Weeks, Prince Fielder (who won) and Bill Hall. I think it’s a team-by-team basis, and it’s not just the players who can make the decision.
#30 by Kim on 04.16.08 9:46 am |
The Jackie Robinson tributes this year have kind of diluted the whole thing. It’s nearly up to Sean Taylor ridiculousness.
I thought it was a great stunt last year to call attention to a legend and a landmark moment in history. But if it’s universally retired, then it should not be worn on any kind of regular basis.
#31 by Joey Guns on 04.16.08 9:46 am |
The first pitch in tonight’s Yankees-Red Sox game will be thrown by astronaut Dr. Garrett Reisman. There’s one problem. He’s in space.
Dr. Reisman is on the International Space Station until June. The pitch will be shown on the Jumbotron in Yankee Stadium. Let’s see how long Chad Moeller waits for the pitch to cross the plate. Hopefully J.D. Drew will swing from the dugout to make the moment complete.
http://www.nydailyne...
#32 by Mike Engle on 04.16.08 9:48 am |
Whether it should be retired or not, I am so pleased to see LaTroy Hawkins finally surrender 21. It would be one thing if an established superstar (like Sammy Sosa in his prime) wore 21 after Paulie, but LaTroy Hawkins? Who? Come on, don’t soil a legacy like that.
#33 by Adam on 04.16.08 9:52 am |
A link to everybody wearing 42 was above. For the White Sox, it was Dye, Swisher, Thome (who was suspended), Jeff Cox (3B coach), Harold Baines (1B coach) and Ozzie Guillen (Manager)
It seems a bit weird to me that people have a problem with a white person honoring Jackie Robinson. Isn’t the whole point of Jackie Robinson that color no longer mattered in who could play baseball? Why can’t a white person admire that?
#34 by Kek on 04.16.08 9:52 am |
That’s nonsense. I’m against stadium naming rights as much as the next guy and would much rather the stadia and arenas have more traditional names however, it is a fact of life in this, the 21st century. Companies that shell out the money to get their name on a stadium or arena have a right to have it referred to as such properly in the media.
The Boston Marathon is different because it’s an event. In Nascar circles, the Pepsi 400 is still referred to as the Firecracker 400 but for the most part, the races are referred to by their corporate names.
Same with some of the bowl games. The Rose Bowl is “presented by” a corporate sponsor, but most media describe still as the Rose Bowl. However, the bowl games with the corporate sponsorship in the title are described as such.
As for the venue issue, what would the standard be if you were not going to use the corporate moniker? Would you simply call it “Insert Team Name Here” Stadium/Park/Field/Arena? Would you revert to n prior name (Civic Arena, The Spectrum, Comiskey Park, etc)? Like it or not, the corporate naming rights help with consistency.
I think in Denver there was a group of writers that refused to Invesco by it’s name and instead still referred to as Mile High or the New Mile High.
#35 by Kek on 04.16.08 9:54 am |
Not to speak for anyone else, but I don’t think there is anyone with a problem of a white guy sporting the #42, it’s more a disappointment in black players that opted NOT to.
Just proves my theory that this does very little to promote what Jackie Robinson really did. It’s a hollow effort by MLB at best.
#36 by Chad on 04.16.08 9:54 am |
looks like the pope is breaking out some retro uniforms
#37 by James P. on 04.16.08 9:55 am |
The Astros’ Jason Bourn wore 42 last night.
#38 by Mark on 04.16.08 9:57 am |
Nice to see the Dodger fans arriving late as usual
#39 by James P. on 04.16.08 9:57 am |
Oh, and Jose Valverde was wearing an Astros WS05 long-sleeve shirt in the bullpen last night. It’s probably what caused him to blow the save…that and the home plate ump totally missing the tag on what was the winning run.
#40 by Mike Engle on 04.16.08 9:58 am |
For what it’s worth, I always thought the 42 tribute would be at its coolest if each starting second baseman wore Jackie’s number at Jackie’s position.
However, David Ortiz looked good in his 42. Reminds me of Mo Vaughn.
#41 by Cosmo on 04.16.08 9:59 am |
That’s a great point. It’s not like in basketball where the refs refer to the player by their number, or football where the officials use numbers to help them determine eligible receivers. Players could all wear the same number, or have numbers like 20,000 or 1/8 (see Gaedel, Eddie) and it wouldn’t matter one bit. Teams like the Yankees may need to go this route once they’ve retired all the regular numbers.
#42 by Adam on 04.16.08 10:01 am |
Of course it’s a hollow effort. Wearing a different number for one day doesn’t change anything. Of course, I’m also of the opinion that pretty much any sort of memorial effort (patches, ceremonies, etc) is a hollow effort.
#43 by Adam on 04.16.08 10:05 am |
There are 100 regular numbers. I don’t see them running out any time soon. And even if they did, I’d think three digit numbers would be better than duplicating numbers. For one day, maybe people can deal, but there would be lots of confusion if numbers were duplicated on a regular basis.
#44 by dilbert719 on 04.16.08 10:08 am |
Michael Bourn, James. But it’s good to hear that he was getting in the spirit of things.
Anyways, count me in as supporting the theory that the Seahawk leg number was a 10th anniversary patch.
#45 by Rhoda Morgenstern on 04.16.08 10:09 am |
And people accused me of politics yesterday. NO, i was mearly saying ONE man, who happens to be white on the Braves, a southern team, was the ONLY one to wear the number…what, no one else could find it in there size? IT is a little bit of a slap in the face…DIDNT pitching coach Roger McDowell wear that number with the Mets? WHY NOT LAST NIGHT???????????????????????
#46 by Anthony Verna on 04.16.08 10:11 am |
Or 7/8 like Leela.
http://upload.wikime...
#47 by dm00n [Doug] on 04.16.08 10:11 am |
Personally I think they should let 42 stay retired. Wasn’t the point that nobody in the league would wear it again? Also, I’d rather they celebrated this on major anniversaries of it rather than every year. It isn’t one of my major pet peeves (long pants, catcher goalie masks, etc), but I think it sort of ruins the seriousness or solemness of what they are trying to do.
#48 by Kim on 04.16.08 10:13 am |
I didn’t consider last year ‘hollow’, the tributes and hoopla allowed me to have a great and meaningful conversation with my (then) 8 year old daughter about why Jackie Robinson was important and what he did and why it extended beyond baseball.
But doing similar events and stunts make it hollow.
Maybe if they formed some sort of Jackie Robinson society and those limited players wore 42 in honor of JR on the one day. Maybe that would be nice and acceptable, but the total randomness of who wears 42, and how many can wear 42 really turns it into a circus. And that’s not what Jackie Robinson should be to MLB or society.
#49 by Kris Fulton on 04.16.08 10:13 am |
Gilbert Arenas’ quest to wear all 20 different colorways of his GilIIZero shoes has come to an end, under threat of suspension (not just a fine) from Stu Jackson.
#50 by Luke Mohamed on 04.16.08 10:17 am |
Agreed. Everyone likes saying that MLB and players are missing the point by everyone wearing 42. I think those questioning the point are missing the point. (If that makes sense). After last year, I’m more aware of Jackie Robinson than I ever was, and the same goes for a lot of people. Yes it is a bit over the top, but so was the idea of a black man in baseball. No, Babe Ruth is not on par with Jackie Robinson, you could say they both did the same for baseball, but Jackie was an inspiration to an entire race (and no the fat, hot dog eating race does not count).
#51 by dilbert719 on 04.16.08 10:18 am |
It feels like they’re getting there, though. Counting the roster and coaches, that’s 33 numbers. Once Rivera retires, 42’s off the table, and adding that to the team’s retired numbers, that’ll be 16 more. That leaves 51 unused, unretired numbers, assuming they’re willing to assign 0. If they give out 00 as a separate number, that’s 52. They’ll likely be safe for quite a while, but given enough time and a liberal retirement policy, they’ll be out of them eventually.
It’d be interesting, though, once they get down to that last 33 numbers. They’d have to basically lock in the number to the roster spot, and every time someone gets replaced, that number would have to be given to the new player. I think the more likely situation, before they go to three digits, is to simply stop retiring numbers, and after that they might apply for lettering the coaching staff: M for manager, 1B for the 1B coach, BN for bench coach, etc.
#52 by Shaftman on 04.16.08 10:19 am |
I’m going to attempt to respond to the Roger McDowell comment.
Yes; he wore 42 with the Mets.
No; he didn’t wear it last night.
Now you are questioning his character because he didn’t go with the mass opinion of the rest of baseball in wearing 42 for one game. If nothing else, this is exactly what Jackie Robinson would not have wanted. His legacy is the fact that you can go against mass opinions (Racism, at the time) and still be in the right.
For the teams that chose to wear 42 yesterday; you did a great job.
For the players who chose to wear 42 yesterday; you did a great job.
For the players that chose to wear their regular numbers; you did a great job.
The fact that we are even discussing this the day after if testament to the fact that the memorial works. WE ARE REMEMBERING THE LEGACY OF JACKIE ROBINSON. That is what this day and tribute were designed to do.
Now back to your regularly scheduled uni-parade.
#53 by possum on 04.16.08 10:19 am |
If they want to let the whole Dodgers team wear #42, that would be one thing. But having 2 teams play each other and every player wear it is ridiculous. Maybe they should have all the second basemen in the league wear it, that’d be a neat tribute and wouldn’t be so over the top.
#54 by stu on 04.16.08 10:21 am |
Minor League Promo Jersey for Mike Vick
#55 by Kek on 04.16.08 10:26 am |
Love the single strip of eye-black… and love Futurama!!!
#56 by Pat on 04.16.08 10:28 am |
Get over it. Does anybody else think this is insulting? I thought the Mike Vick dog chew toy was a funny idea but openly mocking a guy that is in jail (and has been for a few months) just seems a little dumb. Minor league teams usually come up with cool ideas… this one I find insulting to everyone involved.
The fact that they are having a jersey auction to give to a worthwhile cause is great. But aren’t we beating a dead horse with this Mike Vick shit by now?
#57 by James P. on 04.16.08 10:28 am |
D’oh! Coffee hasn’t kicked in yet…plus the morons on the other side of my wall are talking about Matt Damon…
On the topic of wearing 42, I think MLB should allow teams to issue the number. With the number of African-Americans in MLB being so low, maybe the prospect of wearing #42 might draw more into the game. Plus it will keep entire teams from wearing the number…which should be limited to only the Dodgers and the Mets…and if the Dodgers wear the number as a whole, they should ALL be made to wear Jackie Robinson-esq uniforms from his 1947 debut. Maybe even have the Mets wear the same type uniform but only in Mets Blue and Orange…
Now something completely different: Watched Paul’s Ebbett’s clip on Page 2. I was happy to see him holding a Tampa Smokers jersey. I’m in the process of saving up to but one of those as my “smoking jersey” and I’ve wanted to see what it actually looks like…not just a picture.
#58 by Steve on 04.16.08 10:29 am |
Jimmy Rollins was the only Phillie with a 42, but got the double-number treatment.
Doesn’t he always have a double number? (#11)
#59 by John on 04.16.08 10:32 am |
Hey Chaka, how frikkin’ cold was it in LA last night? Must have gotten all the way down to 60.
#60 by Kek on 04.16.08 10:33 am |
Very smart post. Like I’ve said before, every park has his number and name beside their respective retired numbers of that club. Wasn’t that the tribute for all of baseball? With the grounds crews as artistic as they are these days, do tributes in the field of play itself.
I guess my point is where do you draw the line. For instance, Roberto Clemente is damn near sainthood here in the burgh. His number is retired and with good reason (and I’m not a big fan of teams that go hogwild on retiring numbers, I say less is more, I take Pitt’s approach with football and basketball over say, a Celtics or Yankees).
I wouldn’t want to see a day were the number was unretired and all the Pirates wore it because that would diminish the honor of the retired number in the first place. (Was it the Colts that unretired numbers when they moved to Indy, citing those players played in Baltimore?)
MLB did a really neat thing, original thing with the league-wide retirement. They should have left it at that.
As a former catcher, and one that preferred the Bob Boone/Carton Fisk half-helmet to boot, I too, HATE the hockey masks. I don’t care if they’re lighter. It’s looks stupid, like the five-year-old at a sporting goods store putting on equipment from five different sports.
#61 by LI Phil on 04.16.08 10:34 am |
well said j
well said
#62 by Jason on 04.16.08 10:40 am |
1) The Braves have no African American starters, and
2) Mark Kotsay plays center field, Jackie Robinson’s position.
#63 by Paul Lukas on 04.16.08 10:45 am |
Dr. Reisman happens to be the brother-in-law of a longtime friend of mine. She’ll be at the game tonight and has tentatively agreed to write something about the experience.
#64 by Joey Guns on 04.16.08 10:45 am |
Gary Carter was just on WFAN radio in NYC, and he said how he’s annoyed that the Expos retired his #8, but the Nationals still issued #8 to Aaron Boone this year……..
#65 by Bryan Redemske on 04.16.08 10:49 am |
Umm … Jackie Robinson played first and second base. Not at the same time, though.
#66 by dilbert719 on 04.16.08 10:51 am |
Assuming Baseball Reference is correct, usually a safe assumption, CF was, at absolute best, Jackie Robinson’s 4th position. He played 748 at 2B, 256 at 3B, 197 at 1B, 160 at an unspecified OF position, 2 in LF, and 1 at SS.
#67 by Chris is Nashville on 04.16.08 10:55 am |
Yeah, so Jackie Robinson played 2B but let’s not let facts get in the way of a good argument.
#68 by Kim on 04.16.08 10:56 am |
Very timely of Carter to chime in 4 years later that the Nationals abandoned all of their Expos heritage in Montreal. (Fortunately the Canadiens went dumpster diving behind Olympic stadium and saved Youppee! and the retired numbers)
#69 by Chris is Nashville on 04.16.08 10:58 am |
Hey Bryan, where did you get those pictures you used today? They were great.
#70 by DJK on 04.16.08 10:59 am |
Has anyone ever bought a grey replica MLB jersey? I am looking to get a new Brewers jersey, and I like the grey’s the best of their unis, but in pictures the grey of the replicas looks like a completely different shade of grey than the authentic jerseys. I was just wondering if anyone had ever compared them (from any team), and if the greys are infact different shades of grey?
thanks to anyone that has any info.
#71 by Yankee Hank on 04.16.08 11:01 am |
I wonder with the current rate of exchange of the LOON vs the dollar if his #8 isnt more like a 6 or 6.3 by now…
#72 by Kris Fulton on 04.16.08 11:08 am |
Check your facts - with the current state of the US economy the Canadian dollar and US dollar have been even for some time now, with some periods when the Canadian dollar was higher.
#73 by Thorold Blair on 04.16.08 11:09 am |
Check a newspaper.. it’d be about 7.9! Not to mention that the CDN $ has been trading at par or higher than the USD for much of the last two or three months.
#74 by Mike Engle on 04.16.08 11:11 am |
You’re misunderstanding. The Phillies have sleeve numbers. So you see his sleeve 42, and thus presume he had 42 on the back as well. How different is this from teams with regular old front numbers? Not very, but nevertheless, the detail was observed.
#75 by Buccigross Fan Club on 04.16.08 11:16 am |
Do you like 50’s and 60’s motorsport? Do you need some luggage? Lucky for you, Caracalla Bagaglio has a product line that satisfies both of your desires.
#76 by alex on 04.16.08 11:17 am |
New Philly jersey. What a beaut. *cough, cough*
#77 by joe on 04.16.08 11:18 am |
The problem with your theory is that JR was not the 1st black guy in baseball, he was the 1st in modern baseball.
#78 by Kim on 04.16.08 11:20 am |
This is what mash-ups can lead to.
#79 by Wollen1 on 04.16.08 11:26 am |
Mark Fightmaster…if he’s got a relative named Chuck or Mick that would officially qualify as the one guy you don’t want to f__k with just on name alone.
#80 by zonker on 04.16.08 11:26 am |
#81 by Carl G on 04.16.08 11:28 am |
I apologize if this has come up before, but when going through the Jersey-Joe site I noticed them selling some obama shirts
http://www.jersey-jo...
Any idea why they can do so but the other individuals could not? I assume Jersey Joe only sells only licensed materials, so is this a case of a vendor having the right to use the cubs and white sox logos and putting any name or number on the back (like a customized jersey) and using obama and 08 or was their some specific permission from Obama or mlb needed?
Just curious
#82 by lwiedy on 04.16.08 11:33 am |
Agreed, but since 51 shouldn’t go, that takes care of 21. As discussed here recently, 2, 6 & 42 (again) will be retired and that’s it.
Bryan was right bring up the possibility that the JR tributes are perhaps being overdone by now. Now, very carefully, to compare why it is being done to a player like Ruth is completely missing the significance of the original event.
This is not about JR the player, but JR the man and the integration of arguably the most significant social entity of the first half of the 20th Century. THAT is what the celebration is (or should be) and the 42 is the most functional “baseball way” to call attention to it.
#83 by Carl G on 04.16.08 11:42 am |
I am a Mets fan, so maybe I do not get it, but was Paul O’Neill such a great player that his jersey should be retired? We are not talking about Mantle or Dimaggio here.
If you go to Baseball-Reference.com, the players whose stats O’Neills are most similar to are:
Bobby Bonilla (923)
Del Ennis (922)
Fred Lynn (915)
Garret Anderson (909)
Reggie Smith (904)
Bernie Williams (904)
Shawn Green (900)
Ruben Sierra (892)
Moises Alou (891)
George Hendrick (891)
Not exactly a whos who of players who should have their jersey’s retired.
#84 by Ian K on 04.16.08 11:44 am |
I am so sick of this joke. Dodger fans show to the game - almost 40,000 for a Tuesday night game against the Pirates. I went to the Rangers/Angels game Monday and was part of a crowd of 14,000. Sure Dodger Stadium isn’t packed for BP but every game I’ve been to there is well attended.
#85 by RaoulDuke on 04.16.08 11:44 am |
The arena my beloved Blues play in has been renamed twice for corporate entities, I refuse to call it anything but “the Kiel” until i get my check.
#86 by Adam on 04.16.08 11:45 am |
The problem was never putting the word “Obama” on a t-shirt, the problem was altering MLB logos without permission. Assuming MLB gets their normal licensing money, there’s no reason there would be any problem with a normal MLB t-shirt or jersey with “Obama” on the back.
#87 by Carl G on 04.16.08 11:46 am |
On a similar note (understanding that not everyone likes Nascar), the announcers always talks about the cars being filled up with “Sunoco gasoline” rather than just saying fuel or gas. it is slightly amusing when the announcer says something like “the number 24 just did not have enough Sunoco gas to finish the race” rather than just saying gas.
#88 by Cork on 04.16.08 11:49 am |
I am not sure exactly how a program would have helped last night with the teams in which every player wore #42. in fact while watching the Yankees Rays game there were a couple of moments of confusion trying to figure out which Rays pitcher was warming up and apparently at the Mets-Nats game some Mets fans booed Johnny Estrada when they thought it was former Met Paul LoDuca
#89 by Philly Bill on 04.16.08 11:52 am |
Hear, all ye good people, hear what this brilliant and eloquent speaker has to say!
As a middle reliever, LaTroy Hawkins is roughly as distinguished as O’Neill was as a right fielder.
The deification of Paulie is just another case of irrational Yankee fan behavior. (You can have A-Rod; I’ll take Scotty Brosius — Now there’s a gamer!) And now, get ready for many more examples of such on this comment thread.
#90 by lwiedy on 04.16.08 11:52 am |