Luis Gonzalez: should we retire his number?

And here’s why: How many players from those five expansion teams has had a single player (aside from us with Randy Johnson) who is retired, had as profound of a direct impact in the significant success of that team, had a prolonged tenure with the team, and then subsequently stayed involved with that team (or at least three of these qualifications)? I thought of one off of the top of my head – Edgar Martinez with the Mariners. If you ask me, he has to be retired after Ken Griffey Jr. (the quintessential Mariner has to be the first retired, just saying), and Griffey has to stop playing first for that to happen. If Carlos Delgado can’t find a job after he rehabs, then definitely him with the Blue Jays. But Clemens only had two years in Toronto. The Marlins won a World Series, but then subsequently dumped off all of their key players from that season to cut salary. There are no lasting bonds between player and community from that team. The Rays are an organization full of historic futility. And the Rockies have had nobody deserving that honor, and are going to have to wait for Todd Helton’s retirement before retiring any numbers. Using that comparison is pretty apples-to-oranges.

For the argument that Gonzalez’s career was inflated by one great season, sure. But consider that he had four years of OPS over .900 of his eight seasons in Arizona, one season that was four points away from .900, and only in his last season in Arizona did his OPS dip below .800, to .796. He’s far and away the best offensive player we’ve had, and considering the fact that we won a World Series with him on the roster, you have to give that some credit.

Then there’s the community aspect. It’s hard to find a guy as nice as Luis Gonzalez. And that’s one of the top-3 qualities that fans attach themselves to (along with, of course, performance/hustle, and for the ladies, attractiveness). It’s why we love Clay Zavada so much, despite him having just a bit over half of a season in the majors. It’s why Randy Johnson, the superior player, was never as adored as Gonzalez. It’s why the front office was able to trade Randy Johnson while he was still performing at an All-Star level and keep its head, but was crucified for trading Gonzalez well into his decline. It’s why we love him.

And then there’s The Moment. What can I say about it that hasn’t already been said? I don’t have many clearly-defined mental pictures of the Diamondbacks’ old days to look back upon, as I’ve only recently (two years / two and a half years ago or so) become a massive fan of the team or the sport. So I don’t have many distinct memories of the team pre-2007 (and not many since 2007, for that matter). But I have a clear mental imagine of Gonzalez in mid-air with his arms raised like an excited little-leaguer and a smile to match, scampering for first base. What makes that moment so captivating is that it was the perfect combination of great player, perfect situation, high pressure, and personality where every bit of emotion that Gonzalez emitted was perfect. It’s a cliche, but you could tell that he’d been dreaming of that moment since he was six, and it came to complete fruition. I’ll remember that moment when I’m 95 years old and forgetting my name from Alzheimer’s (ok, maybe not, but you get my point).

That’s why Luis Gonzalez should be the second Diamondback to have his number retired by the team.

Trying to argue that because other teams have retired worst player numbers then the Diamondbacks should as well is a very weak argument. His “leads” in offensive categories are tenuous at best. If all it takes is a young player 5 years to beat one of his categories, then that’s not saying much. There are also other ways to honor “locally loved” players that fall short of the Hall of Fame.

The fact of the matter is he didn’t play long enough or do enough with the Diamondbacks to warrant what to me should be the ultimate honor on a team level. Not having any retired numbers or only one isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I’d rather we wait to make sure every number retired is right then fill it up to appease everyone.

The Diamondbacks have not, nor in this day and age will never, have a player with huge impact stay with them for 10 years like with what the Red Sox have had in the past. In the day and age of big money contracts, free agency and willingness to go younger you just do not see people stay with the same team their entire careers and hit at least 10 years. Derek Jeter may just very well be the last that we’ll see have that happen to him, and even hey may go elsewhere after the Yankees finally cut ties just to prove he can (Weird thought for the day: Jeter in a Mets Uniform).

Either way, with only 12 years and a fair amount of success, the team should honor those that have had a monster impact on the team. Gonzo (Please let him be clean) and Johnson definitely fit that bill. Or if they want to wait…there’s always Gracie after he’s had a few more years in the booth and maybe eventually as a coach. We’ll see.

But yes on Gonzo…give it a couple years to see if his name comes up at all though. Much as we all pray he was clean.

Just because we are a new franchise does not mean we have to set the bar low to let in a fan favorite. We should demand the highest standards for that honor. There are other ways to honor a former fan favorite.
and to always bring up the ‘cuteness’ factor or the “he’s a community guy” arguemnt is nothing more than an irrelevant appeal. I am paying good money to be entertained by these athletes and for the most part i have been. I am not paying for sainthood, I am paying for the best athlete possible on the field of play. If player X does not fit that bill, then sorry, no # retired for you.

the faster, the better.

I tend to lean towards “Hall of Fame inductees only” school of thought.

yes because I think “impact on club history” should be the marker. His double totals combined with the 2001 World Series make him a DBack who has had a gigantic impact.

Randy Johnson wouldn’t even qualify on the Red Sox policy (8 seasons), so it strikes me that they probably have it ordered wrong.

I think the ordering of honors goes something like this (from greatest to least):

HoF
Retired Number
Bobblehead 10-20 years after retirement
Team award named after you

The only reason Boston could afford to have such a strict policy is because they have a lot of history. The Cardinals have the policy about right. Schoendienst got his number retired BEFORE the Veterans’ Committee admitted him.

Luis was the first, and most iconic, star in the field for a young team. Along with Johnson he made the franchise. He led the team in its early years. And the numbers are hard to argue with.
An older franchise (Giants, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) should be stricter in retiring numbers. But a newer franchise has a looser set of criteria; team history does matter.
The D’Backs should retire both RJ and Gonzo’s numbers together, to celebrate the first success for the franchise. History has to start somewhere.

once Randy is in, then retire Louis’ number. He did a lot for this team, and deserves it. He has been my favorite player for a damn long time, not just on, but off the field he’s a good guy. In fact, they should retire RJ’s and Gonzo’s numbers at the same time, well stated pygalgia.

How many players stay with a team for 10 years or longer in this current environment? Sorry that the game has changed and that standard is simply unrealistic imho. How likely are we to see players like Biggio, Jeter, Rivera, and Pujols stay entirely with one team throughout their careers, put them in play 10 years later, I would guess that at least two of them may have had to move on unless the player CHOSE to stay with a team for less money. How many guys like that are there in the majors these days?

So it comes down to this, when you think of Luis Gonzalez, do you think Detroit Tiger, Houston Astro or Arizona Diamondback? How many other players does this franchise have like that who embody the image of the franchise itself? Was he a very good player, yes, is he a HOF player, no. You have to base the judgement on his importance to the franchise and whether that player left a legacy that was noetworthy. I believe that Gonzalez has done that, I’d have no issues with his jersey being retired after Randy’s.

it is what is his value to this franchise?

When I tell you about our ugly purple and green uniforms who in your mind is wearing that uniform? I’d guess a majority of you are picturing Gonzo.

Gonzalez has done more for such a young franchise than anyone else has for other expansion franchises. The reason there hasn’t been a retired number for other young franchises is because of a lack of that “special something” in a player. The DBacks were lucky enough to have that in Luis. He was a performance leader, a mentor and the face of a young franchise in desperate need of an identity. He gave the DBacks their identity.

None of the previously named franchises had such a guy. When I say Florida Marlins you think? What about Tampa Bay Rays (or even better Devil Rays)? Blue Jays? There aren’t answers for those, because they overall lack an identity. Now when I say Mariners you think? Griffey Jr. Rockies? Todd Helton. Diamondbacks? Luis Gonzalez AND Randy Johnson. We have been lucky enough to have two guys to identify this team with. So all in good time I think they should both be retired together. Perhaps in 2011, to celebrate the 10 year anniversary of our first and hopefully not last, World Series Championship.

1) it can be undone (with permission—except for Jackie Robinson) or even without permission (if a team wanted to punish a steroids guy like that they could).

2) There is already a hall of fame.

It’s a much more informal honor, I just can’t see everybody getting worked up over it.

but have an eye on “luis gonzalez night” at chase later this season, giving me the sinking feeling it’s a moot point, probably a requested condition of his employment in the front office.

i think the steroid questions are enough to bring unhealthy attention to the team around the time of a ceremony, causing a distraction.