batmagadanleadoff wrote: How many ultimately mediocre players on every other team in the majors have similar accomplishments and don't have their numbers retired? Quite a fucking few I'm thinking. batmagadanleadoff wrote: I disagree with this many ways over. First of all, every ML'er is, at best, mediocre at the end of their careers. Even Willie Mays. Otherwise, they'd still be playing. Mike Piazza would still be backstopping for the Mets, catching Tom Seaver's 96 MPH fastballs. So to characterize Strawberry based on his end of career mediocrity, to imply that Straw was a mediocrity is wholly unfair to Straw and a distortion. But I'm not going to retire a number based on a few good years either. Do the Mets want to be the Yankees who will soon start having to use the Greek alphabet for their players because they've retired every single number for every single player who had a few good years for them? batmagadanleadoff wrote: Straw was a superstar and, I think, an underrated superstar, playing in an era when having to hit half your games in Shea Stadium was still murder on a batter's stats. I'll tell you something ... I secretly chafe a little bit every time I have to read that David Wright is the Mets best home grown hitter because I don't really believe it. Wright isn't the hitter that Straw was, and in fact, if you compare Wright's first eight years to Straw's first and only eight Mets seasons, (they were both 21 in their debut seasons, btw, making for a convenient comparison) Straw comes out on top overall, even though Wright had the best singular season. If Wright is the better Mets hitter than Straw, it's only because Wright outlasted Straw as a Met and took many more PA's, which enabled Wright to pass Straw in the career totals categories. For me its not about whether Straw was this or that or better than this guy or that guy. I like what the Red Sox do. I may be mistaken but I believe they have a system for retiring numbers. A player must be in the Hall of Fame and had to have played at least 10 years for them. THAT's a guy whose number should be retired. batmagadanleadoff wrote: Also, I don't think it'd be unprecedented if a player like Straw were to have his number retired. He's certainly more deserving of that honor, by like orders of magnitude, than say Gary Carter, who seems to have the most support among Mets fans for that kind of treatment. Lesser players than Straw have had their numbers retired. Not that that means anything, because we're now delving into a discussion in which rules and standards don't really apply and ownership can retire whatever numbers they feel like retiring. You're right, it wouldnt be unprecedented but again do the Mets want to be the Padres who retired Randy Jones and Steve Garvey? The freaking Dodgers haven't even retired Garvey's #6. I'd like a retired number in Queens to be a real honor. Right now I think it is. Casey Stengel, Gil Hodges, Tom Seaver and Piazza. 3 Hall of Famers and one guy who's value to the team is without question.