Jan 11, 2010, 1:24 PM EST
1:24 P.M.: OK, I sort of laid off the Cubs on this earlier today because the story below seemed to be more a failure of reporting than of the Cubs decision on the matter (i.e. it seemed entirely possible that the Cubs had every intention of retiring Dawson’s number regardless of what cap he wore) but now ESPN is reporting that the Cubs really are going to wait and see what cap he wears before deciding if they’re going to retire his number.
Let me refine the point I made this morning, this time directed at the Cubs: someone please tell me why the Cubs would retire Greg Maddux’s number despite the fact that he’ll wear a Braves cap into Cooperstown while they now apparently won’t retire Dawson’s if he wears an Expos cap.
Maddux won one major postseason award in a Cubs uniform and pitched in a single playoff series for the Cubs. Andre Dawson won one major postseason award in a Cubs uniform and played in a single playoff series for the Cubs. Maddux had three more seasons with the Cubs than Dawson did, but of Maddux’s nine years in a Cubs’ uniform one was a late season callup, one full season was a far below average (ERA+ of 76 in 1987), and two were average, end of career years. All of Dawson’s six years were above average years.
I see no reason for the differential treatment here, and I would like someone with the Cubs or familiar with their thinking to explain it to me.
11:00 AM: Chicago Breaking Sports News reports that “[Andre] Dawson has been promised by the Cubs to have his No. 8 uniform number retired if he goes into the Hall of Fame as a Cub.” They go on to note that there’s “No word on whether the Cubs would follow through with retiring his number if Dawson is inducted as an Expo.” Query: Does the reporter here really need official word from the Cubs on that last point? They retired Greg Maddux’s number last year, and he’s almost
certain to go into the Hall as a Brave, so they’ll almost certainly do
it for Dawson.
But even if that’s not a given, the cap some committee of anonymous whoevers decides should appear on Dawson’s plaque can’t be the determining factor for the Cubs, can it? I mean, if they stand willing to retire his jersey anyway, they’re going to retire it regardless, right? I mean, what possible difference would it make to the Cubs? It’s not like they can’t still sell 40,000 “Andre Dawson: Hall of Famer” seat cushions or foam fingers or whatever on “Andre Dawson Day” anyway, and that’s what it’s really about, isn’t it?
If you haven’t guessed, I’m generally unimpressed with the practice of retiring numbers in the first instance.
- Yasiel Puig says the Cardinals are the Dodgers’ “principal rivals,” not the Giants 41
- Jayson Werth to serve five days in jail for reckless driving 47
- Keith Law’s top 100 prospects list is out 38
- Great Moments in Media Arrogance: Marshawn Lynch edition 173
- Nationals sign former Blue Jays closer Casey Janssen 11
- Ichiro Suzuki’s deal with the Marlins is worth $2 million 34
- Orioles acquire outfielder Travis Snider from Pirates 37
- Not so fast on the Bud Selig Hall of Fame talk 52
- Great Moments in Media Arrogance: Marshawn Lynch edition (173)
- Rob Manfred, new Major League Baseball commissioner, suggests ban on defensive shifts (118)
- Why “Deflategate” would never happen in baseball (96)
- The Yankees are going to try to get out of paying A-Rod his contract incentives (83)
- Rosenthal proposal: make relievers face more than one batter per appearance (72)