Just watching Jorge's retirement speech on MLB Network. What a emotional speech. The Yankees better retire his # soon. I'm a diehard Yankees fan, but in all honesty in my eyes he is a Hall Of Famer. He ranks in the top 10 in every offensive category there is by a catcher, and did everything right in his career and life you could ask for from a ballplayer. Just want to say thanks to him for providing me with some of my best sports moments and memories in my life.
I hate the Yankees with a passion that rivals the Hatfields distaste for the McCoys...but Ive seen a lot of games (my whole family roots for the Yanks
) and Ive seen a lot of Jorge over the years. I respect the guy. I kind of even, dare I say....like him? Everything you say is true, hes a franchise player, had great stats, played clean and was Mr Congeniality off the field.
They should def retire his number.
(01-24-2012, 12:42 PM)Merovius Wrote: [ -> ]I hate the Yankees with a passion that rivals the Hatfields distaste for the McCoys...but Ive seen a lot of games and Ive seen a lot of Jorge over the years. I respect the guy. I kind of even, dare I say....like him? Everything you say is true, hes a franchise player, had great stats, played clean and was Mr Congeniality off the field.
They should def retire his number.
Lol, thats like me and David Wright. Hard to hate the good 1's.
I agree they should retire his number, and i hate the yankees too. But hes not a hall of famer
(01-24-2012, 02:56 PM)john1580 Wrote: [ -> ]I agree they should retire his number, and i hate the yankees too. But hes not a hall of famer
It's hard to argue against his numbers, especially for catchers that played after 1950. That eliminates catchers like Cochrane, Hartnett, Dickey, Schalk, Lombardi, Bresnahan, and Ferrell, who are all HOF'ers. There are so few catchers in there, and to hear assorted people around MLB say he was 1 of the best catchers ever, make me agree. Also to hear Peter Gammons say he a HOF'er, makes up my mind for sure
I have top agree. Great Yankee player. One of the key contributors for their 5 World Series rings. Very good stats at the position. But compared to Berra, Bench, Campanella & Fisk, he's a notch or 2 below. Who knows. Maybe in 20 years he gets a Veterans Committee vote.
(01-24-2012, 04:32 PM)murrylove Wrote: [ -> ]It's hard to argue against his numbers, especially for catchers that played after 1950. That eliminates catchers like Cochrane, Hartnett, Dickey, Schalk, Lombardi, Bresnahan, and Ferrell, who are all HOF'ers. There are so few catchers in there, and to hear assorted people around MLB say he was 1 of the best catchers ever, make me agree. Also to hear Peter Gammons say he a HOF'er, makes up my mind for sure
People refer to him as one of the best hitting catchers ,not the best catchers. And even that is a stretch. He was a pretty bad catcher. His % of runners thrown out was garbage and he led the league in past balls alot if im not mistaken. Alot of pitchers on the yanks ddnt like throwing to him either.
taht being said i do think he was a very good player, not a hof though. Just my opinion though, and im not too smart
As a Yankee fan, I really enjoyed watching Jorge play all these years; all though this year was painful. While his career seemed good to me, I never thought much of him as a Hall of Famer until I read the articles on ESPN in how he stacks up against the current catchers in the HOF. When you compare him to them, he is a Hall of Famer. When you compare him to all players in his era, he doesn't look like a Hall of Famer. I guess it will come down to which comparison the writers make in 5 years.
(01-25-2012, 06:52 AM)fulltritty Wrote: [ -> ]As a Yankee fan, I really enjoyed watching Jorge play all these years; all though this year was painful. While his career seemed good to me, I never thought much of him as a Hall of Famer until I read the articles on ESPN in how he stacks up against the current catchers in the HOF. When you compare him to them, he is a Hall of Famer. When you compare him to all players in his era, he doesn't look like a Hall of Famer. I guess it will come down to which comparison the writers make in 5 years.
My own belief is that a little bit of both should be considered, more so against the players of his era. It's easy to pick and choose from history to make someone look good/bad in a discussion about the HOF. Each era has their own unique differences that set them apart from others making it a guessing game as to how they would have done in different eras as opposed to having factual information in front of you showing how they played in their respective era.
Things get too sticky when it comes to comparing player A to player B and whether or not they should be in the HOF. If we want to use that method of judgment, then there really shouldn't be more than 3 players (arbitrary number) in the HOF since so many players don't match up to the likes of Ruth, Johnson, Williams, and Mathewson. (Arbitrary players listed)
On another note, does the Baseball HOF even have a definition of what a "hall of famer" is? Not that it would matter since the writers could manipulate that to argue their votes.
Jorge Posada-A very good player who I hated seeing come up to the plate when they played the Red Sox, but not a HOFer.
Yes Posada helped with bringing championships to New York. But he should not be inducted to the HOF and the Yankees should not retire his number. Are the Yankees obligated to retire every number of a player that has played with them over 10 years?