Skip to content

I wonder how many people realize Miguel Cabrera already has a World Series ring

Oct 22, 2012, 9:13 AM EDT

Miguel Cabrera Marlins

If you Google any sports figure for almost anything you’re bound to get a bunch of hits from Bleacher Report, as they have mastered the dark art of search engine optimization. This can sometimes be annoying, but it can sometimes be enlightening too. For example, I learned this morning that Miguel Cabrera needs to win a World Series ring in order to “send him to baseball immortality,” cement his legacy and write his name in “historical lore.”

One would think, wouldn’t one, that a story about the World Series and Miguel Cabrera’s legacy would at least mention the fact that he already has a World Series ring thanks to his tenure on the 2003 Florida Marlins.

Perhaps Cabrera wasn’t a major part of that World Series title (although he did hit a two-run homer off Roger Clemens in Game 4). But even if one were to make the argument that it didn’t mean much since he wasn’t the leader of that team or something, one would have to at least acknowledge that it occurred and explain why winning one with the Tigers would be different and more significant. This writer doesn’t seem to even be aware of it.

I don’t offer this in order to mess with Bleacher Report specifically. I offer it more as a comment on the people who engage in the even darker arts of judging players’ legacies.  We’ve seen an awful lot of that this postseason already with the A-Rod business, but it happens every year. People leave out that which doesn’t fit their preconceived ideas and preferred narratives. They emphasize things which do. If it means pretending that some history doesn’t exist, so be it.  And it’s not just Bleacher Report writers who do it.

I understand that desire to make stories with beginnings, middles and ends — and with richly-drawn characters, morals and the rest — out of sporting events. But, just, cut it out. Sports don’t work that way.

  1. proudlycanadian - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:20 AM

    2 home runs off Clemens who was possibly on Roids at the time! Good for him.

  2. kiwicricket - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM

    I think the same line of rational needs to be taken into account when someone wins a pile of WS rings. Doesn’t necessarily mean a great deal. Often just a good player who had the good fortune of playing for the right club at the right time.
    The majority of the time when talked about in the context of the HOF, its almost laughable. Some fantastic player will get demerit points because he didn’t win one, while Luis Sojo will be made out to be substantially more than what he was. A lucky bastard.

    • craggt - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:01 AM

      Exactly. If the Tigers win the WS this year Gerald Laird will have gotten rings in two consecutive years. Why aren’t more teams going after Gerald Laird?! He’s a WINNER!

      • historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:13 AM


      • Old Gator - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:26 AM

        You could also say that if the Tigers win, it will be Dave Dombrowski’s second ring with the Feesh.


      • historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:42 AM

        But this time it counts, Gator.

      • anotherwaytosay - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:46 AM

        I hear you about that, but I think you’re missing part of the point. It does improve a player’s legacy with a team to win a title there. It’s less important with baseball, especially a hitter, because there isn’t as much the player can do to really control the outcome, but you can’t say Curt Schilling’s legacy as a player isn’t enhanced by his two World Series rings or that Matt Cain’s 2010 playoff run didn’t cement him as a legit ace pitcher.

        Everyone likes to discount clutch, and they should to some extent, but nerves and pressure and a team game-planning against you more thoroughly can negatively impact performance. It makes no sense that someone would get better in such a situation, but it makes a lot of sense that someone could enhance his legacy by performing to his regular standards when it counts the most.

        The Laird comparison in that context is silly and undermines the whole point of why we even have a postseason. Don’t be so cynical to say it means nothing to perform in the playoffs. It just doesn’t mean anything if a player’s team never gave that player an opportunity to perform. That’s the thing to keep in mind.

      • kiwicricket - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:52 AM

        Another Laird family outing would be great!!

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:56 AM

        Don’t be so cynical to say it means nothing to perform in the playoffs

        Except, and correct me if i’m wrong but no way I’m clicking on a BR link, the only argument they are making is that Cabrera has to win a ring, not perform well in doing so? That’s where the problem is, especially when he has one already. If winning a ring is so important (queue Manning/Brady arguments or Kobe/LeBron), wouldn’t absence of a ring mean docking a player’s legacy (the converse)?

        That’s when we end up with ridiculous arguments like Jeter > Arod because it’s 5 rings to 1, and we can make the reductio ad absurdum that Luis Sojo > Ted Williams because it’s 5 rings to 0.

      • anotherwaytosay - Oct 22, 2012 at 12:14 PM


        That’s a straw-man argument. No one is saying that Laird or Sojo winning titles makes them better than those who haven’t. It’s obvious that the player has to directly contribute for it to matter with the legacy, and it’s clear that both Verlander and Cabrera *have* been contributing so far.

        A World Series title does not make anyone better than everyone who doesn’t have one, and it’s incredibly short-sighted to assume that’s what it has to mean if you think it means anything. It simply enhances a player’s credentials for being a deserved legend in the city’s sports history and in a small-but-not-pointless way for Hall of Fame votes. The latter (getting votes) is true even if you don’t think it actually matters, and that’s all the author was saying even though he stated the obvious in confirming both players look like HoF locks already.

        It was a bad oversight on the writer’s part, but you guys are trying so hard to be pompous baseball aficionados that it’s kind of pathetic when you take it so far to set up straw men on the side of people who think titles matter. They do. A player who legitimately contributes to a title deserves credit for that. If you’ve ever played a sport in your life, you’d understand that.

        Again, they aren’t the be-all, end-all of what identifies a single player in a team sport as a great one, especially with sports that feature many players like baseball and football, but they matter. And no one is saying that having one makes you automatically better than someone who doesn’t, etc. Argue this one rationally if you want to follow up.

      • Alex K - Oct 22, 2012 at 1:04 PM

        anotherway- The problem is that crazy Jeter > A-Rod because of 5-1 argument is actually made! I’ve seen it in just the last couple weeks.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 22, 2012 at 1:29 PM

        And no one is saying that having one makes you automatically better than someone who doesn’t, etc. Argue this one rationally if you want to follow up.

        Except I’m not arguing that winning a WS makes one a better player, and no where in my comment did I make that argument. What I said is that often writers and fans often use championships as justifications for who is better than another. And if you haven’t seen anyone make the Kobe > LeBron because of rings, or Brady > Manning b/c of rings, then I envy you from avoiding almost every aspect of sports writing in the past 10 years.

        As for people who actually make the argument, here’s a few examples:

        1 –
        2 –

        3 –

        Hmm apparently googling this website + my name + luis sojo leads to every time I’ve made that argument. <3 the internet

      • anotherwaytosay - Oct 24, 2012 at 1:09 AM

        I understand what you mean, and I’ve heard all that, but Kobe vs. LeBron is a clearly different argument than “guy who happens to be on championship team” vs. superstar without a ring.

        Anyway, it’s clearly not the be-all, end-all decider of who is a better player (just helps to nicely bolster a player’s resume), but we weren’t even talking about comparisons between players here. We were talking about what winning the WS this year would mean for the legacies of Cabrera and Verlander.

        Plain and simple, championships enhance the way a player is remembered. By no means are titles necessary to be remembered as a great or to get in the Hall of Fame, but the point of the above post here was talking about already-great players cementing legacies in the city they play in and in baseball as a whole.

        If Cabrera retires with seven WS rings or something, that’s definitely going to make him a bigger deal and thought of as more of a franchise-changing player even if he were to put up exactly the same numbers during the regular season without much postseason success. He’d go from a Carl Yastrzemski
        name in history to a Mantle/Ruthian level.

        Again, even if his regular-season stats were just as awesome with only one title to his name, his legacy would be more enhanced by being the man on several title winners.

        That’s an extreme example to show a point, but I just want to make sure we’re on the same page that we’re just talking about how you can’t deny it helps a player’s legacy/reputation level to win big games. Even Marco Scuatro looks a lot more appealing as a middle-infield acquisition now than he did a year ago. It absolutely does *not* make him seem or look better than Ian Kinsler, of course, but it gives you that extra confidence in and respect for the player for performing in big games.

        While some people may have said in other places that Jeter’s been better than A-Rod and point to the titles as proof, that’s irrelevant here because that’s not what was at issue. That original article was just a fluffy thing about how it would cement the players’ legacies in Detroit and bolster their HoF cases to win the WS this year. How it might affect the way they are remembered in 30 years.

        I just wanted to chime in and say you guys are getting carried away with the knee-jerk desire to be cynical about this kind of thing and have gotten to a point where you act like playoff performance means nothing at all. That’s going way too far.

        If you’re gonna come back and Luis Sojo me again, you’re a lost cause. ; )

      • anotherwaytosay - Oct 24, 2012 at 1:11 AM

        Haha it should be pretty obvious I copied and pasted Yaz’s last name to make sure I spelled it right. Dammit.

  3. historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:45 AM

    I’ve found myself reminding people of Miggy’s WS win several times this season. It’s as if in some minds it doesn’t count if it’s the Marlins.

    • pw38 - Oct 22, 2012 at 1:46 PM

      Well, he wasn’t quite the leader back then that he is now. It’s one thing to be a rookie and be lucky enough to be on the winning team. It’s another to be the star of the team (well with Verlander) and do it. It will help with his legacy, like it or not. People love Dan Marino but he ultimately never won the big game. Same with Jim Kelly. Elway went from probably being one of the best quarterbacks to never win a SB to being a 2 time winner. His legacy was set but he’s not in the same company as Marino or Jim Kelly anymore, he’s in the same company with Montana, Bradshaw, etc.. It’s a subtle difference but at the same time a big one. The fact that people in the know didn’t even remember he’s already won a WS says something. Look at Pudge Rodriguez for another example. One of the top 2 or 3 catchers of all time but it took him 11 or 12 years to finally win a championship. It’s helped with his legacy. He’s a “Winner” now. Might not be fair but it’s what it is.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 1:52 PM

        You know, I might’ve followed that better if you didn’t put golf or some shit in it.

  4. number42is1 - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:46 AM

    If anyone on this team deserves a ring it’s Verlander

    • historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:55 AM

      Gonna go out on a limb here and say there a number of guys on the team that deserve it. Of course, I love V’s work but he didn’t get here all by himself. I’m just glad we got rid of some of the dead weight that didn’t deserve it.

      • stlouis1baseball - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:52 AM

        Brandon Inge? What about Brandon Inge? Does he “deserve” it?
        Sort of rethorical in my opinion. From where I sit…Brandon Inge is one who deserves it.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:07 AM

        OMG, Woodpecker — that was exactly who I was thinking of when I said “dead weight.”

      • stlouis1baseball - Oct 22, 2012 at 2:27 PM

        Hahaha! My guess…in 2006 when Inge was sucking things up at 3rd like a vacuum and subsequently throwing lasers to 1st he was very deserving. Only when he the injury bug starting nagging him and his plate performance dipped horrendously does he no longer become “deserving.”

      • historiophiliac - Oct 22, 2012 at 2:55 PM

        You mean the year we went to the WS and he made two errors on one play?? Uh, no, not even then.

        But, yeah, it didn’t get better after he pulled his groin muscle hitting .180.

    • megl3155 - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:49 AM

      No one DESERVES it–they have to EARN it. JV gets nowhere without defense and run support. MIggy gets nowhere if the pitcher doesn’t handle his business. They as a team get nowhere if Inge and/or Mr. Strikeout–Granderson–is in the lineup. Gerald Laird does his job behind the plate, even if you guys think he’s a joke. Inge got what he earned–an ALC ring from Mr. Ilitch in 2006.

      • stlouis1baseball - Oct 22, 2012 at 2:32 PM

        Easy Megl. I appreciate where you are coming from. I was really just giving Philiac a hard time.

  5. ericellers - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:51 AM

    proudlycanadian | Oct 22, 2012, 9:20 AM EDT
    2 home runs off Clemens who was possibly on Roids at the time! Good for him.
    You’re probably right, however I’m sure Cabrera was juiced and may still be in fact?

    • polegojim - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:41 AM

      Seriously dude? No, not juiced, and doesn’t even look like it.

      Fact is, he just remembers how to play the game AFTER the postseason… unlike A-Rod, who wants to go home to mamma after September.

      • megl3155 - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:51 AM

        Miggy isn’t juiced–he’s sober. The best thing he did for himself and his team was to quit drinking.

      • megl3155 - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:52 AM

        You mean his potential baby mama.

      • hammyofdoom - Oct 22, 2012 at 12:31 PM

        Ok while I have nothing to say about whether or not miggy is on any illegal substances or not, the whole “he doesnt even look like it” argument can never be used ever again since Brian goddamned Roberts was on one drug or another

      • polegojim - Oct 22, 2012 at 5:05 PM

        Not the way Miggy’s been accused of tho, and Roberts appearance is why I believe him.

        See Jose Conseco and Mark McQuire… before and AFTER baseball playing days. Miggy’s not even close.

        “In 2003, when I took one shot of steroids, I immediately realized that this was not what I stood for or anything that I wanted to continue doing. I never used steroids, human growth hormone or any other performance-enhancing drugs prior to or since that single incident. I can honestly say before God, myself, my family and all of my fans that steroids or any performance-enhancing drugs have never had any effect on what I have worked so hard to accomplish in the game of baseball. I am very sorry and I deeply regret ever making that terrible decision. My only hope and prayer is that the Orioles, my family, friends and fans that have supported me so faithfully will forgive me.”

  6. temporarilyexiled - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:52 AM

    Giants fans remember. Before Clemens was the Marlins’ infamous playoff series with the Cubs. And before that, the Marlins knocked the Giants out of the playoffs (again…as in 1997).

    I remember this really talented kid playing third base for the Marlins…Miguel Cabrera. Hope the Giants get another chance to play against him. I hear that’d be a popular series in Venezuela.

    Pretty ironic that the Tigers lost 119 games in 2003.

  7. stex52 - Oct 22, 2012 at 9:56 AM

    If you watched any of that series, I don’t see how you could have missed the kid. It didn’t take much to see he had bucketloads of talent and a chance to go far. I’m surprised as many people as you say don’t remember.

    • pw38 - Oct 22, 2012 at 1:52 PM

      I’d say because he wasn’t already a big name and probably also because I believe the Marlins had that fire sale after they won it all, didn’t they? I could be wrong. Maybe that was the 1997 team.

  8. indaburg - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:00 AM

    That was a particularly bad Bleacher Report link, besides its factual incorrection. So you need a ring to become immortal? I wonder how Ted Williams feels about that? As for the link’s other premise, that the ring will cement Verlander’s and Cabrera’s case for the HOF, I call bullshit. Their achievements as individuals is what makes them HOF bound.

    • stex52 - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:23 AM

      Good points all. I didn’t address that. Just if I remembered Cabrera. They are neither one in a position to be talking HOF just yet.

      • indaburg - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:29 AM

        I should have added: …assuming their careers maintain their current trajectories.

  9. 1908wasnextyear - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:29 AM

    Long-time “lurker,” (from way back in Craig’s “Hardball Times” days) first time commenting…

    No Cubs fan has forgotten that Cabrera has a ring…I can still see his bat flashing through Kerry Wood’s low inside fastball and smashing it into the bleachers in game 7 of NLCS.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:59 AM

      Wish I could give you another thumbs up for the name, well done.

  10. js20011041 - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:31 AM

    The internet years are like dog years. In today’s age, nine years ago is ancient history.

    • gammagammahey - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:15 AM

      And the college freshman who wrote that Bleacher Report article probably wasn’t allowed to stay up late and watch the World Series in 2003.

  11. stlouis1baseball - Oct 22, 2012 at 10:49 AM

    Miquel Cabrera was a stud with the Marlins and he’s a stud now.
    Dude’s been the real deal since he entering the league.
    If people forget this I would be hard pressed to believe they were full fledged MLB fans.

    • megl3155 - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:41 AM

      And that’s why every Tigers fan was absolutely geeked when he came to Detroit. Miggy is no joke, and never has been.

  12. schmedley69 - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:11 AM

    If a World Series happens in Florida, and no one is there to remember it, did it really happen?

    • nolanwiffle - Oct 22, 2012 at 1:40 PM

      It did, but it never should have. Florida should be home to Spring Training…..and that’s all.

    • gogigantos - Oct 22, 2012 at 2:02 PM

      There are many who remember their runs to the Championship, they ran over my favorite team while I was watching. They are remembered, and, yes yes yes it did happen,, (&*%&*^%(&*&(^&(*%&((&*%% dammit
      Remembered in Florida is another thing.

    • kalinedrive - Oct 22, 2012 at 3:47 PM

      I suppose that was meant to be funny, but I was at 1 NLDS game, 2 NLCS games, and 1 WS game that year, and there were huge crowds at all of them. They played in a football stadium, remember, and opened up 60,000 seats for the postseason.

      • schmedley69 - Oct 22, 2012 at 5:30 PM

        The problem with the Florida teams is that you guys only seem to show up at playoff time, which isn’t healthy for a franchise. Face it, baseball in FLA is on life support.

  13. darthicarus - Oct 22, 2012 at 11:52 AM

    Shocked, the article no longer exists. Bummer as I wanted to read it.

  14. pantherfan550 - Oct 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM

    I am so glad I saw this article because it shows what a joke bleacher report is. At first I thought it was cool, but I stopped going to their website completely. Crap like that ends up on their site all the time, there is no vetting, no actual editing, they just think get as much crap out there as possible and it will be awesome. 90% of the stuff on their site is written by people with no journalism background, just fans who think they know it all. There are misspelled words all the time and the sentence structure seems like it is written by a two year old most of the time.

  15. suicidesqueeze91361 - Oct 22, 2012 at 3:34 PM

    Ring or no ring in 2003…..or at ANY time……here’s the 2012 scoop…..

    Back-to-back batting titles;

    Triple Crown (first in 45 YEARS!);

    Impending MVP of the AL:

    No doubt a HUGE impact player if winning a possible World Series happens now.

    What else do you need to know?

    Miggy’s got one more step to take before he’s looking down on the baseball world from the TOP STEP. He just had a year for the AGES that we were lucky enough to witness, and he may just top it off with the finishing touch of a very special RING. One he commanded for his team.

Leave Comment

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

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (2607)
  2. G. Stanton (2445)
  3. D. Span (2415)
  4. Y. Puig (2367)
  5. J. Fernandez (2302)
  1. B. Crawford (2252)
  2. G. Springer (2201)
  3. M. Teixeira (2128)
  4. J. Hamilton (2065)
  5. H. Pence (1928)