• 2013 Yankees, Who’s Wearing What

    Posted by on February 13th, 2013 · Comments (16)

    I took a guess at Juan Rivera’s number below.  But, the rest are pretty good, I think.  Did I miss anyone or a number?

    # Player
    2 Derek Jeter
    11 Brett Gardner
    13 Alex Rodriguez
    14 Curtis Granderson
    17 Jayson Nix
    18 Hiroki Kuroda
    19 Chris Stewart
    22 Matt Diaz
    24 Robinson Cano
    25 Mark Teixeira
    26 Eduardo Nunez
    27 Dan Johnson
    28 Joe Girardi
    29 Francisco Cervelli
    30 David Robertson
    31 Ichiro Suzuki
    33 Travis Hafner
    34 David Aardsma
    35 David Phelps
    36 Kevin Youkilis
    38 Cody Eppley
    39 Clay Rapada
    42 Mariano Rivera
    43 Michael Pineda
    45 Bobby Wilson
    46 Andy Pettitte
    47 Ivan Nova
    48 Boone Logan
    50 Mick Kelleher
    52 CC Sabathia
    53 Juan Rivera
    54 Kevin Long
    56 Tony Pena
    57 Mike Harkey
    58 Larry Rothschild
    59 Rob Thomson
    61 Adam Warren
    62 Joba Chamberlain
    65 Phil Hughes

    Comments on 2013 Yankees, Who’s Wearing What

    1. February 13th, 2013 | 12:58 pm

      No one wanted #12?

    2. February 13th, 2013 | 2:42 pm

      And, obviously, the Yankees are sitting on numbers 6, 20, 21 and 51 for some reason :-)

    3. MJ Recanati
      February 13th, 2013 | 4:17 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      [T]he Yankees are sitting on numbers 6, 20, 21 and 51 for some reason.

      At a certain point they’re just going to have to shit or get off the pot, as the saying goes. Either retire #6, #21 and #51 or put them back in circulation. It’s been long enough since Torre, O’Neill, and Williams all moved on that this is just sort of silly.

      Perhaps the policy should be that for all numbers that will not be retired, they are taken out of circulation for five years and then reintroduced. That would be a way to honor guys like Bernie and Paulie who probably don’t deserve the ultimate honor of a number retirement ceremony. Alternatively, they could get plaques in Monument Park without having their numbers retired. A third thought could be that their number is semi-retired in that the names and numbers are displayed in Monument Park without taking the jersey out of circulation.

      Obviously Torre will have his number retired. I imagine Posada may get the ultimate honor if he makes the HOF (which is more likely than Williams/O’Neill but still a dubious proposition if the entire PED era is being held out).

    4. February 13th, 2013 | 4:35 pm

      If Mussina makes the hall, would/should the Yankees retire his number? And, if they do, will they have to yank it off someone’s back?

    5. MJ Recanati
      February 13th, 2013 | 4:52 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      If Mussina makes the hall, would/should the Yankees retire his number? And, if they do, will they have to yank it off someone’s back?

      It’ll depend on whether the Hall enshrines him as a member of the Yankees or the Orioles. There’s certainly precedent not to retire a jersey (Joe Gordon/Tony Lazzeri) although they made it into the Hall of Fame via the Veterans Committee and hadn’t been players for five decades…

      Somehow I doubt #35 gets hung up, even if Moose enters Cooperstown wearing pinstripes.

    6. February 13th, 2013 | 11:04 pm

      The Yankees already have too many numbers retired. 1. (Martin, loved him but no way), 9. (Maris, this to me is an absolute joke), 44. (Jackson, played for the Yanks 5 years and had three good years only one of those years was he in the top 5 MVP vote). Who doesn’t love Paul and Bernie but I would not retire their numbers. Jorge, I wouldn’t, but we have time. I don’t think a manager’s number should be retired, but if someone insists on doing it, there is a case for Torre.

    7. #15
      February 14th, 2013 | 2:24 am

      From a marketing standpoint, perhaps you hold off on “selling” these events until a time when you need to create some buzz (and ticket sales) while things aren’t going so well on the field.

    8. February 14th, 2013 | 7:05 am

      @ Joseph Maloney:
      Agreed on 1, 9 and 44.

    9. #15
      February 14th, 2013 | 11:33 am

      I think 1 marginally earned, in composite, as a player and manager. He did bleed yankee blue. Self destructive to be sure, and it hurt the team at times.

      9 probably got it for the 61 HR season, but I can also tell you firsthand, a number of guys that played with him, Gibbs, Downing, Stafford, Johnny B., and Tresh all loved the guy. They all felt he was a great teammate and a very underrated outfielder.

      44… Neeeehh. I do appreciate he helped us win, but he was a rented tool that dogged it too often and pissed on his teammates. Never liked him. Never will.

      51… Probably. He gets a nudge because he played his whole career as a Yankee.

      Same with 20.

      21? I certainly liked him as much as these other two. Not as many years as 20 and 51, but 9 years is a bunch. Helped get us 4 rings. I’d vote yes.

    10. February 14th, 2013 | 7:27 pm
    11. Ricketson
      February 14th, 2013 | 9:35 pm

      Steve L. wrote:

      If Mussina makes the hall, would/should the Yankees retire his number? And, if they do, will they have to yank it off someone’s back?

      A team should not be allowed to officially retire the number of a player – any player, that has played less than half of his career, or less than a certain amount of years, for that team. Period. It should not matter how popular he was, or how impressive his accomplishments in that timeframe were. Mussina was a great pitcher, but he played only ten years in Baltimore, and less than half of his career in New York. A player such as Mussina in this case should not be eligible to have his number retired for either team, Hall of Fame induction or otherwise. To retire the number of a Mussina in either Baltimore or New York is to diminish the honor itself as bestowed on other players as and has been done in the past such as with #44 in The Bronx.

    12. MJ Recanati
      February 15th, 2013 | 9:11 am

      @ Ricketson:
      Why should there be rules that govern how a team chooses to honor a player? It should be up to the team’s discretion to decide how to best honor its alumni.

    13. February 15th, 2013 | 1:37 pm
    14. Ricketson
      February 15th, 2013 | 8:58 pm

      @ MJ Recanati:
      I simply would be favor of a rule forbidding the asinine practice of a team retiring the number of a player such as Reggie Jackson who played less than 25% of his career for that team (The Yankees). Jackson is one of my favorite ballplayers since childhood, and the Yankees are my favorite team, but the team’s retirement of his number is absurd – he played twice as many years with Oak., and still less than half of his career with that franchise – but the Yankees retire his number?
      Of course such a rule will never be enacted/implemented – I am speaking hypothetically. In your opinion, it should be up to a team’s discretion; in my opinion, if such a proposal was presented, I would support it. Once again in the case of an Oak. player, Fingers: his number has been retired by two teams? One of which is Oak., with whom he played only 52% of his career, and the second Mil., with whom he played only 23% and the final 4 years (3 of which were exceptional) of his career?
      I wouldn’t mind M.L.B. stepping in and telling Mil., “[N]o… your official retirement of Fingers’ number is ridiculous. If you want to unofficially retire his number by not assigning it in the future, that’s fine. But you can’t give Fingers’ the same honor MLB has given Jackie Robinson, for example, simply because you would like your franchise to have a/one more retired number, an association with that player for some reason, etc.”

    15. Corey
      February 16th, 2013 | 12:34 am

      Ricketson wrote:

      but the Yankees retire his number?

      That’s why he wears pinstripes in the Hall, though. It was a trade off.

    16. Ricketson
      February 16th, 2013 | 6:50 pm

      @ Corey:
      That’s my point – that kind of stuff shouldn’t be allowed. I love Jackson, and part of me was pleased that he wore “pinstripes in the Hall,” but its wrong, and was not a matter of discretion in this case. There should be some legitimacy in the retirement of a number – Fingers has only 3 exceptional years in Milwaukee, and 4 altogether, and his number is retired? Jackson has only 4 years worth speaking of in N.Y. and his number is retired?

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.