Skip to content

The last players to wear 42 on each team

Apr 16, 2010, 9:11 AM EST

I wish I had seen this yesterday, but better late then never. A graphical representation of the last player to wear number 42 on each team.

Shocking: the Dodgers actually gave someone number 42 before they retired it themselves. A fellow by the name of Ray Lamb, who wore it in 1969. That would be a pretty good trick question for the Aflac folks.

  1. Megary - Apr 16, 2010 at 9:48 AM

    Any post that brings Scott Ruffcorn into the discussion is a worthy post indeed.

  2. Joe - Apr 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM

    Mo Vaughn holds the record for being the last guy to wear #42 for the most teams, at three. Technically not unbreakable, but unlikely.

  3. CG Hudson - Apr 16, 2010 at 11:36 AM

    This wearing of the 42 is all well and good but how about MLB getting creative next year (I know; no chance) and having each team wear the number of its first african american player (i.e., Indians wear Doby’s number, Reds wear Chuck Harmon’s, etc., etc.). We all might learn a bit more in the process.

  4. Harrison - Apr 16, 2010 at 11:56 AM

    Actually it is unbreakable in the MLB — Mariano Rivera is / will be the LAST MLBer to wear 42.
    #42 is retired by MLB and all teams; however, Mo is grandfathered in, once he retires, the number is retired permanently. It’ll only be seen on Jackie Robinson Day.

  5. Rays fan - Apr 16, 2010 at 12:13 PM

    Cool idea–now, how does one get someone in the commisioner’s office to actually consider it? What would be the solution for expansion teams, like the Marlins or the Rays?
    One year the Royals wore Kansas City Grays throwbacks–I thought that was pretty cool too.

  6. LarryLongBeach - Apr 16, 2010 at 12:14 PM

    CG, I usually reserve my talkback posts for righteous indignation or butting heads, but not this time. I FLAT OUT LOVE your suggestion. It would be a nice tribute and a strong history lesson, as you point out. It would show that MLB actually puts some thought into their plans and exhibits true respect/reverence, as opposed to the possible perception that they latch onto obvious ideas as a form of PR or marketing. (not begrudging JR Day, just saying it was as much a PR move as a way to honor Jackie.)
    The only obstacle may be that the handful of teams that were embarrassingly slow to act or reticent to allow players of color may not want to open an old wound or shine a light on exactly how long it took them to act
    Still, really great suggestion. My cap is tipped.

  7. IdahoMariner - Apr 16, 2010 at 12:31 PM

    that is a fantastic idea, CG. Seriously. Craig!! Send it to Bud!

  8. IdahoMariner - Apr 16, 2010 at 12:34 PM

    also? I love flipflop flyball. Always awesome.

  9. jwb - Apr 16, 2010 at 1:07 PM

    “What would be the solution for expansion teams, like the Marlins or the Rays?”
    The lowest numbered, the best, the one who stayed the longest, the one who was introduced first at the first home game. . . It’s a great idea and there are a number of acceptable solutions for this problem.
    Something I heard on a radio broadcast from a game yesterday: “#42 is warming up in the bullpen. I have no idea who he is.”
    “when unwanted”

  10. Rays fan - Apr 16, 2010 at 7:14 PM

    Oh, I agree–I also meant my second line (about the Negro Leagues throwbacks) as a possible solution. Another could be to have the expansion teams have some players each wear a number of an African-American player from their inaugural season, the number of players determining how many wear each number. Their are a number of ways to do this.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Cubs shore up rotation with Jon Lester
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. W. Myers (3931)
  2. M. Kemp (3601)
  3. M. Cabrera (3371)
  4. M. Morse (2522)
  5. J. Kang (2315)
  1. J. Lester (2262)
  2. C. Headley (2161)
  3. J. Upton (2093)
  4. M. Scherzer (1829)
  5. A. Rios (1800)