#21

[dano7594]

I have been thinking about this a very long time and when to post and ask this question. As we all know Roger Clemens left in1996. The #21 has not been issued since. Unless I have missed something over the years I feel its not even talked about. When Josh Beckett was traded here, he switched from 21 to 19, thats one off the top of my head that I can think of that did not get the number.

Will this number be retired, issued to someone at some point or never issued again?

 

[E5 Yaz]

The conventional wisdom was that they were waiting until he made it into the HoF but, of course, that might never happen. Not issuing it has sort of the same effect, although not as publicly.
Since then, of course, they've retired two numbers -- 6 and 34 -- without the HoF requirement being attained first, so it's possible they will go that route with Clemens as well. Or, for that matter, with 49.
The other aspect of 21 is that there has been a push every now and then for the number to be universally retired for Roberto Clemente. That wouldn't prevent the Red Sox from having it retired for both instances, just that it's a unique circumstance.
It's a safe bet that given the 20th anniversary of the 04 team and the tragic loss of Wake, there has been some internal discussions about retiring 49 ... and I'd expect that would be done, if they decide to do so, before they get to 21

 

[NJ_Sox_Fan]

They should 1000% retire Wake’s jersey number

 

[Scoots McBoots]

* with a knuckleballer exception.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I have been thinking about this a very long time and when to post and ask this question. As we all know Roger Clemens left in1996. The #21 has not been issued since. Unless I have missed something over the years I feel its not even talked about. When Josh Beckett was traded here, he switched from 21 to 19, thats one off the top of my head that I can think of that did not get the number.

Will this number be retired, issued to someone at some point or never issued again?

IIRC, Beckett was offered 21 but declined it, I assume out of respect for Clemens or not wanting to have to live up to the mantle or something. No idea why it hasn't been issued to anyone else though.

The old ownership seemed to hold the "retire as a Red Sox" in high regard thus no one wore #9 after Ted retired and no one wore #8 after Yaz retired. They didn't re-issue #14 (even though is HOF status was a question mark). But they happily handed out #24 and #26 and #27 repeatedly after Dewey and Boggs and Fisk left. #21 was a weird exception given that his Sox end was barely different than Boggs or Fisk or Dewey.

Current ownership seems to have continued on with unofficially setting aside numbers belonging to important players that retired with the organization (49, 33, 15) and ignoring such players that left before they were done (#24 twice-over). And also letting #21 fit into that weird limbo in between. The only number I can think of in the Henry era that has gotten the Clemens treatment is #45, which went up on the facade as soon as Pedro made the Hall. I suppose that's what they're waiting for with Clemens, too.

 

[HangingW/ScottCooper]

I believe that #21 was offered to Greg Swindell in 1998 but he declined or perhaps he asked and was denied.

 

[Steve Dillard]

Is 21 even popular in Boston? After leaving for more money in Toronto, he then cast his lot with the Yankees. The only time he returns is to “help” the Jimmy Fund but only by collecting funds indirectly for the Jimmy Fund through his Clemens foundation. When you look at their finances they scrape off money for overhead (Roger and his wife and cronies) and have been net neutral in making any actual charitable contributions. So it’s not like he’s doing it for actual charity for theJimmy Fund. I’d rather they never retire his number.

 

[GreenMonster49]

Is 21 even popular in Boston? After leaving for more money in Toronto, he then cast his lot with the Yankees. The only time he returns is to “help” the Jimmy Fund but only by collecting funds indirectly for the Jimmy Fund through his Clemens foundation. When you look at their finances they scrape off money for overhead (Roger and his wife and cronies) and have been net neutral in making any actual charitable contributions. So it’s not like he’s doing it for actual charity for theJimmy Fund. I’d rather they never retire his number.

I don't think that 21 is doing work for the Jimmy Fund through his foundation. The tax filings (see them here) don't have any mention of grants to the Jimmy Fund. And it looks like neither the trustees not the executive director take a salary. (Most of the expenditures are donations to the University of Texas.)

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

I would be strongly against retiring either Clemens or Wakefield's number, for different reasons. Clemens is a cheat and a carpet bagger, who happily betrayed Bosox fans by pitching so long and so well for rival teams after he let himself get fat with Boston. He never built the connection with the fan base that the other retired number players did.

Retiring Wakefield's number would be only out of sentimentality. He was a great guy who was with the team for ever, one of the twenty five, died too soon obviously, but he's simply not a player of the caliber where we should expect to see a number retired. Baseball Reference has his Red Sox WAR at 32.7, which is 24th is Red Sox history. That puts him behind the likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio. And Wakefield compiled his total over 17 seasons, which is a lot more than any of those guys. Each of those players was better and more important in team history than Wakefield was. Are we going to retire all those numbers too? I'd guess Pedroia is the only one on that list with a shot (I figure they would have retired Tiant by now if that was going to happen).

Red Sox Hall of Fame, absolutely. Retired number, no way.

 

[voidfunkt]

* with a knuckleballer exception.

I like this.

No fucks to give about Clemens number.

 

[SoxFanInCali]

I would be strongly against retiring either Clemens or Wakefield's number, for different reasons. Clemens is a cheat and a carpet bagger, who happily betrayed Bosox fans by pitching so long and so well for rival teams after he let himself get fat with Boston. He never built the connection with the fan base that the other retired number players did.

Retiring Wakefield's number would be only out of sentimentality. He was a great guy who was with the team for ever, one of the twenty five, died too soon obviously, but he's simply not a player of the caliber where we should expect to see a number retired. Baseball Reference has his Red Sox WAR at 32.7, which is 24th is Red Sox history. That puts him behind the likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio. And Wakefield compiled his total over 17 seasons, which is a lot more than any of those guys. Each of those players was better and more important in team history than Wakefield was. Are we going to retire all those numbers too? I'd guess Pedroia is the only one on that list with a shot (I figure they would have retired Tiant by now if that was going to happen).

Red Sox Hall of Fame, absolutely. Retired number, no way.

I've always felt like getting into the Hall of Fame and having your number retired were 2 very different things with different criteria. Players such as Ted or Yaz or Papi fit in both. But I don't think every player that had stats worthy of the HoF needs his number on the facade, and there are players that meant so much to the team and community that may be short of HoF standard that deserve the number retired. Long before he died I said that 49 probably deserved to be retired while it wouldn't have bothered me at all if 14 or 26 were still in circulation.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Using WAR as the criteria for retiring a player's number is ridiculous. What a player (or player/coach/player/broadcaster in Pesky's case) means to a team's history shouldn't be based on a cherry-pick stat.

 

[The Talented Allen Ripley]

Wakefield is #1 in franchise history for innings pitched, #1 for games started, #2 in strikeouts, and #3 in wins. His number absolutely deserves to be retired, even without sentimentality being a factor.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

The Red Sox offered 21 to Papelbon heading into the 2006 season but he declined as he had decided to run with 58. That alone shows the Sox aren't seriously considering retiring Clemens' number.

 

[Tony Pena's Gas Cloud]

I would be strongly against retiring either Clemens or Wakefield's number, for different reasons. Clemens is a cheat and a carpet bagger, who happily betrayed Bosox fans by pitching so long and so well for rival teams after he let himself get fat with Boston. He never built the connection with the fan base that the other retired number players did.

Retiring Wakefield's number would be only out of sentimentality. He was a great guy who was with the team for ever, one of the twenty five, died too soon obviously, but he's simply not a player of the caliber where we should expect to see a number retired. Baseball Reference has his Red Sox WAR at 32.7, which is 24th is Red Sox history. That puts him behind the likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio. And Wakefield compiled his total over 17 seasons, which is a lot more than any of those guys. Each of those players was better and more important in team history than Wakefield was. Are we going to retire all those numbers too? I'd guess Pedroia is the only one on that list with a shot (I figure they would have retired Tiant by now if that was going to happen).

Red Sox Hall of Fame, absolutely. Retired number, no way.

But did he? That's a complete myth. Clemens '93 season was bad, but the team was also terrible. In '94 he led in ERA+ and h/9, finished second in pitcher WAR and k/9, third in WHIP, and lost the ERA title to a guy who qualified by one inning. In '95 he was injured for the first two months of the season, and his numbers were torpedoed by two consecutive starts where he allowed 16 ER in 4.1 innings. Remove those two games and he's 4th in ERA and in the Top 10 in just about every rate category. In '96 he led the AL in k/9 and strikeouts, and finished second in pitcher WAR and h/9. His record sucked because he made seven starts where he went 7+ innings, allowed two or fewer ER, and didn't get a win. So, yeah, Clemens was as good as ever from '94-'96.

 

[TomBrunansky23]

The Texas Con Man, forever and always.

These little drop-ins over the last few years to yuk it up on NESN or play in Steve Buckley's old time game change nothing. I still remember even if many younger folks don't.

 

[Ale Xander]

Wakefield is #1 in franchise history for innings pitched, #1 for games started, #2 in strikeouts, and #3 in wins. His number absolutely deserves to be retired, even without sentimentality being a factor.

Was coming in here basically to say this

plus there is also his work with the Red Sox Foundation if there’s anyone on the fence

 

[sezwho]

The Texas Con Man, forever and always.

These little drop-ins over the last few years to yuk it up on NESN or play in Steve Buckley's old time game change nothing. I still remember even if many younger folks don't.

I remember. Closer to home, please.

Wakefield is #1 in franchise history for innings pitched, #1 for games started, #2 in strikeouts, and #3 in wins. His number absolutely deserves to be retired, even without sentimentality being a factor.

That is a better case than I thought might be made, nice.

 

[ookami7m]

...

Retiring Wakefield's number would be only out of sentimentality. He was a great guy who was with the team for ever, one of the twenty five, died too soon obviously, but he's simply not a player of the caliber where we should expect to see a number retired. Baseball Reference has his Red Sox WAR at 32.7, which is 24th is Red Sox history. That puts him behind the likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio. And Wakefield compiled his total over 17 seasons, which is a lot more than any of those guys. Each of those players was better and more important in team history than Wakefield was. Are we going to retire all those numbers too? I'd guess Pedroia is the only one on that list with a shot (I figure they would have retired Tiant by now if that was going to happen).

Red Sox Hall of Fame, absolutely. Retired number, no way.

To be fair, by many accounts Johnny Pesky fits the same criteria - good but not great player (both only had 1 All Star season!) but huge involvement with the team on and off the field in historical contexts. Not a ton of complaints when 6 went up.

 

[The Gray Eagle]

Roger has more serious issues than whether he trained hard with the Red Sox or not, or whether/when he took steroids:
https://www.pitcherlist.com/bbwaa-is-erasing-mindy-mccready-from-the-roger-clemens-hall-of-fame-debate/

I would never support his number being retired or him being honored in any way.

 

[chrisfont9]

If they inducted Clemens into the Sox Hall of Fame, there would be polite applause. If they retired his number, I suspect there would be very loud booing happening throughout the ceremony.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

If they inducted Clemens into the Sox Hall of Fame, there would be polite applause. If they retired his number, I suspect there would be very loud booing happening throughout the ceremony.

Clemens is already in the Sox Hall of Fame. Inducted in 2014 in the same class as Nomar and Pedro.

 

[brs3]

I would be strongly against retiring either Clemens or Wakefield's number, for different reasons. Clemens is a cheat and a carpet bagger, who happily betrayed Bosox fans by pitching so long and so well for rival teams after he let himself get fat with Boston. He never built the connection with the fan base that the other retired number players did.

Retiring Wakefield's number would be only out of sentimentality. He was a great guy who was with the team for ever, one of the twenty five, died too soon obviously, but he's simply not a player of the caliber where we should expect to see a number retired. Baseball Reference has his Red Sox WAR at 32.7, which is 24th is Red Sox history. That puts him behind the likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio. And Wakefield compiled his total over 17 seasons, which is a lot more than any of those guys. Each of those players was better and more important in team history than Wakefield was. Are we going to retire all those numbers too? I'd guess Pedroia is the only one on that list with a shot (I figure they would have retired Tiant by now if that was going to happen).

Red Sox Hall of Fame, absolutely. Retired number, no way.

I legit guffawed at this. Every single number retired is largely about sentimentality. However, Tim Wakefield is a multi-generational individual, much like Johnny Pesky was. All the love in the world to likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio, but at the end of the day, they're all generationally beloved. I can't tell you any of Tiant's or Petrocelli's stats. He was before my time. However, I'm not opposed to retiring numbers. I know those guys, just not well. A 15 year old diehard fan probably appreciates Tim Wakefield more than they appreciate Dustin Pedroia, because they were barely 10 the last time Pedroia was relevant and seen regularly. I assumed we'd have this Retire 49 discussion in 35 years, but I always assumed this conversation would occur.

I don't care if Clemens's number is retired, but I'd lean towards no. He doesn't elicit warm and fuzzies like Wakefield and Papi do. Warm and fuzzies matter in terms of looking up at retired numbers. Who wants to look up and shake their fists at a number? Shaking your fist at 49 would be missing the entire point of being a fan of the Red Sox.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I legit guffawed at this. Every single number retired is largely about sentimentality. However, Tim Wakefield is a multi-generational individual, much like Johnny Pesky was. All the love in the world to likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio, but at the end of the day, they're all generationally beloved. I can't tell you any of Tiant's or Petrocelli's stats. He was before my time. However, I'm not opposed to retiring numbers. I know those guys, just not well. A 15 year old diehard fan probably appreciates Tim Wakefield more than they appreciate Dustin Pedroia, because they were barely 10 the last time Pedroia was relevant and seen regularly. I assumed we'd have this Retire 49 discussion in 35 years, but I always assumed this conversation would occur.

Let me first say that I agree with you that Wakefield's number should be retired the day they have the 20th Anniversary celebration of the 2004 team next year (and I have a feeling that it will be done if not that day, then sometime next year). But what if the Sox don't retire it? Does the "Retire Wakefield's Number" request become this generation's version of "Retire Tony C's number"? Because I certainly hope not. I wasn't around for Tony C, but I understand that he had a very special significance for Sox fans of a certain age, especially Sox fans in New England.

At the beginning of the calls for his number retirement I was agnostic to it. But it became such a thing--especially by Herald writer/EEI host Steve Buckley--that after a few years of the constant call for 25 to go on the facade I had gone to the other side and just didn't want it to happen. And mostly because I was sick of people building up Tony C. by tearing down current Sox players who wore 25 or who constantly made the same Boomer refrain that "we wouldn't understand, we weren't there." Which is true, but you know, it's more than just untapped potential.

In any event, I just hope that Tim Wakefield isn't some sort of weird new battlefield for cross generational Sox fans to war on and big time each other on. Tim Wakefield wouldn't want that (and neither would Tony C. incidentally, I don't think anyone wants this bullshit) and I just hope that it doesn't become a thing.

 

[8slim]

I don’t like retiring numbers as a concept. I have no problem honoring players, and if a team wants to represent that by hanging their number off a rafter or on a facade, that’s cool.

Personally I like the idea of keeping all numbers active and making traditions out of them. It’d be cool to see Casas wearing #14, or whatever.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

I legit guffawed at this. Every single number retired is largely about sentimentality. However, Tim Wakefield is a multi-generational individual, much like Johnny Pesky was. All the love in the world to likes of Pedroia, Nomar, Tiant, Betts, Petrocelli, DiMaggio, but at the end of the day, they're all generationally beloved. I can't tell you any of Tiant's or Petrocelli's stats. He was before my time. However, I'm not opposed to retiring numbers. I know those guys, just not well. A 15 year old diehard fan probably appreciates Tim Wakefield more than they appreciate Dustin Pedroia, because they were barely 10 the last time Pedroia was relevant and seen regularly. I assumed we'd have this Retire 49 discussion in 35 years, but I always assumed this conversation would occur.

I can tell you that Luis Tiant and maybe even Rico Petrocelli meant more to Sox fans in the late 60's/early 70's than Tim Wakefield meant to Sox fans in the 1990s and 2000s, and I say that as a Tim Wakefield fan. If Wakefield's number were retired, people 20-30 years from now would look at his numbers and say, "why did they retire his number?" just as you ask "why would they retire Tiant's or Petrocelli's?" They're not going to look at numbers from Williams or Yaz or Ortiz that way.

Using WAR as the criteria for retiring a player's number is ridiculous. What a player (or player/coach/player/broadcaster in Pesky's case) means to a team's history shouldn't be based on a cherry-pick stat.

Sorry to offend with my use of WAR - its not a be-all-and-end-all stat but merely a shorthand way of measuring a player's career, and like other stats, it has its shortcomings. I would agree with you that using it to argue the merits of Tim Wakefield at 32.7 versus, say, Reggie Smith at 34.2 is not particularly useful. But I don't understand why you think its cherry-picked. I could go through All Star appearances or MVP voting or all sorts of other things and make the same case for the relative merits of players like Tiant and Nomar versus Wakefield.

A lot of the players I listed compiled a significantly higher WAR in a significantly shorter period of time. Petrocelli is 20% higher in a career that was 30% shorter, for example. Are whatever flaws you see in WAR so large that they invalidate a difference like that?

 

[brs3]

Let me first say that I agree with you that Wakefield's number should be retired the day they have the 20th Anniversary celebration of the 2004 team next year (and I have a feeling that it will be done if not that day, then sometime next year). But what if the Sox don't retire it? Does the "Retire Wakefield's Number" request become this generation's version of "Retire Tony C's number"? Because I certainly hope not. I wasn't around for Tony C, but I understand that he had a very special significance for Sox fans of a certain age, especially Sox fans in New England.

At the beginning of the calls for his number retirement I was agnostic to it. But it became such a thing--especially by Herald writer/EEI host Steve Buckley--that after a few years of the constant call for 25 to go on the facade I had gone to the other side and just didn't want it to happen. And mostly because I was sick of people building up Tony C. by tearing down current Sox players who wore 25 or who constantly made the same Boomer refrain that "we wouldn't understand, we weren't there." Which is true, but you know, it's more than just untapped potential.

In any event, I just hope that Tim Wakefield isn't some sort of weird new battlefield for cross generational Sox fans to war on and big time each other on. Tim Wakefield wouldn't want that (and neither would Tony C. incidentally, I don't think anyone wants this bullshit) and I just hope that it doesn't become a thing.

Totally agree. I wouldn't stake a flag on the hill of retiring 49. I would love it, but it's not the parade I have any interest in needlessly joining. If his number isn't retired in 2024, I suspect it won't be, and they'd be better off reissuing it to eliminate the question. Much like Wade Boggs & 26 before it was retired.

I can tell you that Luis Tiant and maybe even Rico Petrocelli meant more to Sox fans in the late 60's/early 70's than Tim Wakefield meant to Sox fans in the 1990s and 2000s, and I say that as a Tim Wakefield fan. If Wakefield's number were retired, people 20-30 years from now would look at his numbers and say, "why did they retire his number?" just as you ask "why would they retire Tiant's or Petrocelli's?" They're not going to look at numbers from Williams or Yaz or Ortiz that way.

I wouldn't object to Tiant or Petrocelli's number being retired. Just like Johnny Pesky, Wakefield's number being retired would go beyond his contributions strictly as a player, though they certainly meet my own person criteria, which is largely made of deep diving into statistic analysis of, this feels right to me.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Petrocelli’s number has been retired, so that would be difficult to do now.

 

[pedro1918]

Every time someone mentions retiring the numbers of players like Petrocelli, Tiant and even Wake, all of whom are Red Sox Hall of Famers and players I love, I come back to the idea that there should only be three numbers on the facade: 8, 9 and 34.

Well, 42 as well. But that is different.

 

[donutogre]

Every time someone mentions retiring the numbers of players like Petrocelli, Tiant and even Wake, all of whom are Red Sox Hall of Famers and players I love, I come back to the idea that there should only be three numbers on the facade: 8, 9 and 34.

Well, 42 as well. But that is different.

Wow, you're quite a hard-liner! Not even 45?, despite your handle?

 

[pedro1918]

Pedro is my all-time favorite baseball player. The best pitcher I have ever seen. He didn’t play here long enough. He’s an Expo, a Met, a Dodger, a Phillie and a Red Sox. A Red Sox and Expo more than the others, but still.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

Every time someone mentions retiring the numbers of players like Petrocelli, Tiant and even Wake, all of whom are Red Sox Hall of Famers and players I love, I come back to the idea that there should only be three numbers on the facade: 8, 9 and 34.

Well, 42 as well. But that is different.

This is pretty much where I am, although like #Donutogre, I'd include 45 as well.