OOTS August 26th

[TransMonk]

Philly scores 3 in each of the first two frames vs. SD and leads 6-0.

Atlanta just underway at St. Louis.

[Frayed Knot]

Philly up by several touchdowns against SD

Cards on the board in the 5th, now 3-0

Tigers holding on the a 5-4 lead in the 8th vs Yanx.

[Valadius]

Jeff Bagwell's number 5 was retired by the Astros today.

This brings our co-expansionees up to eight retired numbers against our three.

[Frayed Knot]

Tiggers Win!

Cards 4 - Braves 1; 6th inning

[Valadius]

On an interesting note, Curtis Granderson led off the bottom of the first with an inside-the-park home run.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Valadius wrote: Jeff Bagwell's number 5 was retired by the Astros today. This brings our co-expansionees up to eight retired numbers against our three.

I prefer to think of us having 97 available numbers against their 92.

[stevejrogers]

Valadius wrote: Jeff Bagwell's number 5 was retired by the Astros today. This brings our co-expansionees up to eight retired numbers against our three.

Bagwell, Jimmy Wynn, Jose Cruz, Mike Scott, Larry Dierker (I'll assume its for his managing years combined with his pitching), Jim Umbricht and Don Wilson as RIP entries. And of course Hall of Famer Nolan Ryan.

I hope you aren't arguing that we should be retiring more uniforms, because the Mets seem to have the right approach.

Lets see, 37 as kind of a "Thank you for getting us started on the right foot, and please enjoy your role in our front office."

14 as a RIP to the man who guided the Mets to their first ever championship.

And of course some guy who happens to be the only "true" Met (You could make an arguement for Carter though) in Cooperstown has 41 retired in his honor.

A team HOF seems like a better way of honoring players of distinction the way a Bagwell, Cruz, Wynn and Scott had been for the Astros.

FWIW, we did have this discussion a couple of months ago

[Valadius]

I am arguing for it, though not to the degree the Astros have.

I'd retire #8 for Carter immediately. Then comes the conundrum of how to approach #31 and #45.

We'll end up retiring #31 once Piazza hangs up his cleats. But what about John Franco's contributions while wearing that number? And of course, once Piazza came over here, Franco switched to #45, a number I wish we'd retire for Tug McGraw. But Franco might possibly merit retiring a number too - and how would you go about it? Can you honor two players with one number? Or three players with two numbers? And what about Pedro Martinez, who currently wears #45?

So I would retire more numbers, but for more significant contributions to this ballclub.

[stevejrogers]

="Valadius"]I am arguing for it, though not to the degree the Astros have. I'd retire #8 for Carter immediately. Then comes the conundrum of how to approach #31 and #45. We'll end up retiring #31 once Piazza hangs up his cleats. But what about John Franco's contributions while wearing that number? And of course, once Piazza came over here, Franco switched to #45, a number I wish we'd retire for Tug McGraw. But Franco might possibly merit retiring a number too - and how would you go about it? Can you honor two players with one number? Or three players with two numbers? And what about Pedro Martinez, who currently wears #45? So I would retire more numbers, but for more significant contributions to this ballclub.

For what? Being essentially the Ed Kranepool of the bullpen? We aren't retiring Eddie K's # 7. He (along with Tug) are in the Mets Hall, and maybe if certain feelings die down Franco maybe in so honored as well.

What has Pedro done to merit the Mets honoring him? Made an impact his first year sure, but essentially his Met career has been on the same level of Mike Vail (save for him being a future HOFer who was one of the main factors in changing the culture of the clubhouse as opposed to a hotshot rookie).

[Valadius]

Regarding Pedro, that's not what I mean. What I merely was saying was that we currently have a guy wearing #45, so retiring it would be more than a little bit weird right now.

[stevejrogers]

Valadius wrote: Regarding Pedro, that's not what I mean. What I merely was saying was that we currently have a guy wearing #45, so retiring it would be more than a little bit weird right now.

If the Mets were ever serious about honoring Franco/McGraw in such a manner, they would have kept it out of circulation, even if Pedro is a legend. They kept Seaver's 41 out of circulation, despite both of his leavings being very messy.

Probably worse than Franco's who just has innuendos of being a power broker with the team. Nothing has ever been alleged more than just the ramblings of message board posters, talk radio callers, and newspaper columnists who never really were on the inside of the Met clubhouse to know what really went on.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Valadius wrote: I'd retire #8 for Carter immediately.

Jeez, you wouldn't even have some sort of ceremony?

[Frayed Knot]

Valadius wrote: On an interesting note, Curtis Granderson led off the bottom of the first with an inside-the-park home run.

And that was just 2 days after having a two triple game.
Granderson's a fun, exciting player in the Reyes mold - although that home park of his does help him out in the triple/I-t-P HR department. Still, 21 3Bs with 33 games still to go isn't easy no matter where you play.



* Braves lost.



* BoSox cumulative score for their 4-game sweep of the ChiSox = 46-7

[Valadius]

Edgy DC wrote: ="Valadius"]I'd retire #8 for Carter immediately. Jeez, you wouldn't even have some sort of ceremony?

LOL.

[Elster88]

Edgy DC wrote: ="Valadius"]Jeff Bagwell's number 5 was retired by the Astros today. This brings our co-expansionees up to eight retired numbers against our three. I prefer to think of us having 97 available numbers against their 92.

I guess the hundreth is zero. How do you spell hundredth?