Cubs fans!

[Flipped Gazelle]

10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

I do, actually. Maddux's main accomplishments were with the Braves. 3 CY, WS champion...

Think about it. W/the Cubs, Maddux's avg. year was 13-11. Then he willingly left them for Atlanta.

 

[Balt]

Can't have WS participation as a requirement if you're the Chicago Cubs.

 

[waffleironhead]

yeah, he left the cubs for the braves and THEN won the cy young what 4 times? There was no reason to retire his number.

 

[Vette73]

He should go in the hall as a Brave though. Also the Braves retired his number as well.

He should have never left Atlanta. His ERA never went below 4.xx after he left Atlanta.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

I do, actually. Maddux's main accomplishments were with the Braves.

They are celebrating his career as a whole. He spent half his career with the cubs and that's where he got his start. He also won his first Cy Young award with the team.

His first few years with the cubs were really successful. He had a bad first year (6-14), but went on to win 18, 19, 19, 15, 15 and 20 before moving on to ATL. But overall, his career stats are amazing and he's probably a top 5 pitcher of all time.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

I do, actually. Maddux's main accomplishments were with the Braves.

They are celebrating his career as a whole. He spent half his career with the cubs and that's where he got his start. He also won his first Cy Young award with the team.

His first few years with the cubs were really successful. He had a bad first year (6-14), but went on to win 18, 19, 19, 15, 15 and 20 before moving on to ATL. But overall, his career stats are amazing and he's probably a top 5 pitcher of all time.

dere ya go.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

I do, actually. Maddux's main accomplishments were with the Braves. 3 CY, WS champion...

Think about it. W/the Cubs, Maddux's avg. year was 13-11. Then he willingly left them for Atlanta.

You are mixing in a few bad years with the good. He went

1988 18-8 (77-85 record)
1989 19-12
1990 15-15 (77-85 record)
1991 15-11 (77-83 record)
1992 20-11 (78-84 record)

That's 17-11 over 5 years. Not to mention he was 16-11 in another year..right about at the average. You also have to look at the fact that the cubs had a losing record for all but one year. He wasn't getting huge run support and playing for a winning team. There's more to just "wins and losses" than the numbers suggest. He was doing it for the lovable losers.

He won the Cy Young in 1992. He placed 3rd another year in the CY. He won Gold Gloves 4 of those years.

Think about that, then look at what he did with the Braves! He had another 11 GREAT years and did far better with them.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

I do, actually. Maddux's main accomplishments were with the Braves.

They are celebrating his career as a whole. He spent half his career with the cubs and that's where he got his start. He also won his first Cy Young award with the team.

His first few years with the cubs were really successful. He had a bad first year (6-14), but went on to win 18, 19, 19, 15, 15 and 20 before moving on to ATL. But overall, his career stats are amazing and he's probably a top 5 pitcher of all time.

I agree that he had an incredible career, but the amount of time w/Cubs was too short. When he came back to the Cubs, he went 16-11, 13-15, 9-11. Fewer than 1/2 of his career wins came with the Cubs. 7 good years equals retired #, especially with a cornerstone franchise like the Cubs?

It's kinda like the Phillies retiring Curt Schilling's #.

 

[ric1287]

the cubs need a reason to hang flags at Wrigley since they'll never win a ring

 

[ProfJohn]

FYI I am pretty sure that the HOF decided what hat a player wears when he retires.

This came out of Wade Boggs signing a contract with Tampa that included him going in the HOF as a Devil Ray, of course the HOF said no way.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
10 years, 133-112, no World Series.

Are Cubs standards really so low?

Edit: OK, I see it was Fergie Jenkins' # also. Still, he was just 167-132, no WS.

You're confused about why they'd retire Greg Maddox number? You don't know much about baseball, do you?

I do, actually. Maddux's main accomplishments were with the Braves.

They are celebrating his career as a whole. He spent half his career with the cubs and that's where he got his start. He also won his first Cy Young award with the team.

His first few years with the cubs were really successful. He had a bad first year (6-14), but went on to win 18, 19, 19, 15, 15 and 20 before moving on to ATL. But overall, his career stats are amazing and he's probably a top 5 pitcher of all time.

I agree that he had an incredible career, but the amount of time w/Cubs was too short. When he came back to the Cubs, he went 16-11, 13-15, 9-11. Fewer than 1/2 of his career wins came with the Cubs. 7 good years equals retired #, especially with a cornerstone franchise like the Cubs?

He spent 10 years with the cubs. 1/2 his career is longer than a lot of players whole careers! He was just so good that he was fortunate enough to play for over 20 years. That is rare.

Yes, 7 years out of a hall of fame top 5 all time pitcher's career deserves a reitred number. .

EDIT: You mention Curt - I mention Nolan Ryan. He played only 8 season with the Astros, but they retired his number. It's a way for the club to respect a hall of famer - they retire his number.

 

[x-alki]

How's this for great numbers?

Fergie Jenkins 1971:
24-13, Games started-39, Complete Games-30 , ERA-2.77, SO-263 BB-37, Innings Pitched-325

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: ekrub
How's this for great numbers?

Fergie Jenkins:
24-13, Games started-39, Complete Games-30 , ERA-2.77, SO-263 BB-37, Innings Pitched-325

Apparently, you cannot retire a players number unless they are like Ernie Banks and play 20 years with the same team and put up hall of fame numbers.

Show no respect to the baseball greats!

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
He spent 10 years with the cubs. 1/2 his career is longer than a lot of players whole careers! He was just so good that he was fortunate enough to play for over 20 years. That is rare.

Yes, 7 years out of a hall of fame top 5 all time pitcher's career deserves a reitred number. .

Top 5 pitcher, hmmm... maybe.

Cy Young
Christy Matthewson
Walter Johnson
Tom Seaver
Bob Gibson
Steve Carlton
Sandy Koufax
Grover Cleveland Alexander
Randy Johnson
Warren Spahn

Just off the top of my head... all as good or better than Maddux.

Again, no disrespect intended for Maddux, but he is remembered by most as a Brave. I just think the Cubs would have a more stringent requirement for retired #'s.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: ekrub
How's this for great numbers?

Fergie Jenkins:
24-13, Games started-39, Complete Games-30 , ERA-2.77, SO-263 BB-37, Innings Pitched-325

Apparently, you cannot retire a players number unless they are like Ernie Banks and play 20 years with the same team and put up hall of fame numbers.

Show no respect to the baseball greats!

Edit: seriously, I agree with that statement.

I just wonder what happens when teams run out of numbers?

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: ekrub
How's this for great numbers?

Fergie Jenkins:
24-13, Games started-39, Complete Games-30 , ERA-2.77, SO-263 BB-37, Innings Pitched-325

Apparently, you cannot retire a players number unless they are like Ernie Banks and play 20 years with the same team and put up hall of fame numbers.

Show no respect to the baseball greats!

Edit: seriously, I agree with that statement.

I just wonder what happens when teams run out of numbers?

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/ch...ry/retired_numbers.jsp

Lets see...there are 99 numbers to choose from. The cubs have 6 retired numbers. They don't have anyone on their roster right now that looks like a hall of fame player...and the fact they've been around for 100 years.

I'm going to venture to say that the cubbies won't be running out of numbers anytime soon.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: ekrub
How's this for great numbers?

Fergie Jenkins:
24-13, Games started-39, Complete Games-30 , ERA-2.77, SO-263 BB-37, Innings Pitched-325

Apparently, you cannot retire a players number unless they are like Ernie Banks and play 20 years with the same team and put up hall of fame numbers.

Show no respect to the baseball greats!

Edit: seriously, I agree with that statement.

I just wonder what happens when teams run out of numbers?

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/ch...ry/retired_numbers.jsp

Lets see...there are 99 numbers to choose from. The cubs have 6 retired numbers. They don't have anyone on their roster right now that looks like a hall of fame player...and the fact they've been around for 100 years.

I'm going to venture to say that the cubbies won't be running out of numbers anytime soon.

I guess they're safe - for now! :laugh:

But seriously, all those guys (except for Jackie Robinson) are "Mr. Cub" types.

My Mets have only retired one player's number - #41, Tom Seaver.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: ekrub
How's this for great numbers?

Fergie Jenkins:
24-13, Games started-39, Complete Games-30 , ERA-2.77, SO-263 BB-37, Innings Pitched-325

Apparently, you cannot retire a players number unless they are like Ernie Banks and play 20 years with the same team and put up hall of fame numbers.

Show no respect to the baseball greats!

Edit: seriously, I agree with that statement.

I just wonder what happens when teams run out of numbers?

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/ch...ry/retired_numbers.jsp

Lets see...there are 99 numbers to choose from. The cubs have 6 retired numbers. They don't have anyone on their roster right now that looks like a hall of fame player...and the fact they've been around for 100 years.

I'm going to venture to say that the cubbies won't be running out of numbers anytime soon.

I guess they're safe - for now! :laugh:

But seriously, all those guys (except for Jackie Robinson) are "Mr. Cub" types.

My Mets have only retired one player's number - #41, Tom Seaver.

Edit: Nevermind, they have 2 coaches who've been retired. Only 1 player.
http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/ny...ry/retired_numbers.jsp

I don't think the Mets have any other players who deserve it. Until "lines of coke done off a hookers ass" becomes a stat, Strawberry and Gooden will probably not have their #'s retired.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

nvmd.