Like Jackie Robinson's #, should the NBA retire Michael Jordan's number 23 leaguewide?

frankhardy

What are your thoughts on this. I really believe that the league should retire #23 all over the league. Maybe when he gets to the Hall of Fame. He didn't have the culteral impact that Jackie Robinson had, but he did transform the league.

He was IMHO, the greatest ever.

yawie99

Jackie Robinson is one of my heroes, but I wasn't all that crazy about the leaguewide retirement of 42. The notion of the NBA doing the same for Jordan's 23 borders on the absurd.

I think the NHL did it for Gretzky's 99. He's probably my all-time favorite athlete, but that number retirement was pretty silly since a player would have to have a massive set of cajones to request a number that is not only that distinct but that is also inextricably linked to The Great One. (Sorry, George Mikan fans.)

Gator5220

Chicago could retire it (have they?) for his contribution to the team. But in the larger picture he was a great player for the league, but if yo retire his number league-wide, you might as well retire Kareem's, Wilt's, etc.

That's a mighty slippery slope to start retiring players numbers league-wide for performance accomplishments.

WinPitcher

Why?

Steve

stevek

Of course not.

Axtell

No.

What Robinson did, in breaking the color line, ok I understand the league wide retirement of the number.

But Jordan? He was a great player...but if you retire his, you better do the same for Wilt's and others.

DeltaSigChi4

No.

E

DeltaSigChi4

<< <i>
What Robinson did, in breaking the color line, >>



Symbolically he did. He wasn't the first "colored" player though. So he really didn't break the barrier.

E

pandrews

<< <i>
Symbolically he did. He wasn't the first "colored" player though. So he really didn't break the barrier.

E >>



correct..

fsjeter

<<
Symbolically he did. He wasn't the first "colored" player though. So he really didn't break the barrier.

E >>



correct..

Incorrect. You are right in that there was no color barrier in the late 19th Century. At least, not until Cap Anson decided he no longer wanted to play with or against any team with a black baseball player (even refusing to play the Toledo Blue Stockings with Moses Fleetwood Walker (the first African American in the Major Leagues) and pulling his team from the field). Other players in the league joined him and thus the "barrier" was set. Yes, there were hispanic and cuban players in the league (who had dark complexions) and they played exhibition games against the Negro League teams (in the early 20th century) but the owners had a "gentleman's agreement" if you will, to bar players of african american decent. That is, until, Branch Rickey signed Jackie Robinson thereby breaking the "color line" in professional baseball. His accomplishments in baseball as well as his contributions to the civil rights movement late in his career and after his retirement is what prompted his number being retired by the league.

That said, the only other number that I believe should be considered for league wide retirement in any sport would be Babe's #3. Jordan's number should be retired by the Bulls alone. I agree that he is the greatest basketball player ever but it could also be argued that the Bird/Magic rivalry had as much, if not more, to do with the transformation of the league than Michael Jordan. Just my $0.02!

Scott

pandrews

<< <i>Incorrect. You are right in that there was no color barrier in the late 19th Century. At least, not until Cap Anson decided he no longer wanted to play with or against any team with a black baseball player (even pulling his team from the field in one instance). Other players in the league joined him and thus the "barrier" was set. Yes, there were hispanic and cuban players in the league (who had dark complexions) and they played exhibition games against the Negro League teams (in the early 20th century) but the owners had a "gentleman's agreement" if you will, to bar players of african american decent. That is, until, Branch Rickey signed Jackie Robinson thereby breaking the "color line" in professional baseball. His accomplishments in baseball as well as his contributions to the civil rights movement late in his career and after his retirement is what prompted his number being retired by the league.

That said, the only other number that I believe should be considered for league wide retirement in any sport would be Babe's #3. Jordan's number should be retired by the Bulls alone. I agree that he is the greatest basketball player ever but it could also be argued that the Bird/Magic rivalry had as much, if not more, to do with the transformation of the league than Michael Jordan. Just my $0.02!

Scott >>



no, i was correct.. Moses "Fleet" Walker was the first African American to play in the big leagues..

i agree that Jackie Robinson broke color barriers, but he was not the first black ballplayer..

nice edit, BTW..

fsjeter

<<but he was not the first black ballplayer.>>

That, I understood. I was referring to the "symbolic" reference and the fact that he didn't break the "color barrier" so to speak.

Scott

pandrews

<< <i>That, I understod. I was referring to the "symbolic" reference and the fact that he didn't break the "color barrier" so to speak.

Scott >>



thats why you went back and edited in Fleet Walkers name, after i made my post..

Axtell

Yes pandrews you are all knowing so we shall all bow to your infinite knowledge!

grow up already, sheesh.

pandrews

<< <i>Yes pandrews you are all knowing so we shall all bow to your infinite knowledge! >>



correct.. you in particular should..

DirtyHarry

What for? MJ was a great player but not anything other than that.

DirtyDog48

Retire Masonori Murakami's number 10 as the first player to break the Asian barrier in the major leagues......that makes as much sense as retiring MJ's #23.

JrMacdaddy

silly.

Eddie Jordan wasn't even that good.

jordan

DeltaSigChi4

<< <i>Yes pandrews you are all knowing so we shall all bow to your infinite knowledge!

grow up already, sheesh. >>



pandrews > Axtell

E

DeltaSigChi4

Oh, and Delta's work is done here.

Delta stands by his original reply.

That is all.

E

Ilovebaseballcards

<< <i>Oh, and Delta's work is done here. >>

great!

if your work is now done, why dont you go back to Iraq

(and jump on a landmine)

pandrews

<< <i>great!

if your work is now done, why dont you go back to Iraq

(and jump on a landmine) >>



who the hell are you?

perkdog

Hey "ILOVEBASEBALLCARDS" you are a total piece of sh it for making refferance to going back to Iraq and that landmine stuff, do you realize how many men we have lost to those landmines? Not to mention other losses of good men and woman? I realize this is a "basically whatever goes" forum here but you are out of line and need to go fist fu ck your mouth.

greencrow

Happy birthday Mike!

bunt

<< <i>Hey "ILOVEBASEBALLCARDS" you are a total piece of sh it for making refferance to going back to Iraq and that landmine stuff, do you realize how many men we have lost to those landmines? Not to mention other losses of good men and woman? I realize this is a "basically whatever goes" forum here but you are out of line and need to go fist fu ck your mouth. >>




Whoa ??? The above is 8 years old ! And never got removed ? Whoa - you could say things like that above when the Pats were filming practices and won their cheatin bowls back then here ? How could that member be allowed to stay here ? I am going to try now to Fist %^%^^ My M......in disbelief

MGLICKER

<< <i>Whoa ??? The above is 8 years old ! And never got removed ? >>



Sports moderator was a part time and I believe non paid position. Impossible to read every post, and unless called to his attention, much of the turbulence could pass by unnoticed. Wonder what other gems Greencrow will uncover!

bunt

hey licker - did it die ? you know - the other one ?

MGLICKER

?? Not sure of your question. PM me if you like.

fiveniner

NO WAY!!!!!Jackie was a hero and faced abuse of every kind in order to let his race play mlb.

Estil

<< <i>Chicago could retire it (have they?) for his contribution to the team. But in the larger picture he was a great player for the league, but if yo retire his number league-wide, you might as well retire Kareem's, Wilt's, etc.

That's a mighty slippery slope to start retiring players numbers league-wide for performance accomplishments. >>



They did in fact retire it right after his first retirement in 1993. But after a few games of him wearing #45 upon his return, he suddenly went back to #23 (and was fined for it). All that time they kept the number in the rafters.

pocketpiececommems

No. Would you retire the # of the first player from each ethnic group. What was Jim Thorpes #?

JoeBanzai

No!

RoarIn84

I would say if anyone's number should be retired (besides Robinson's), it should be Clemente's..... You could say he paved the way for Latinos to play professional sports. Since he was a top player in the sport, faced MUCH adversity (he was also half African), was a selfless humanitarian and in his wake, almost 30% of baseball is Latino, his number should be retired before anyone else's that I can think of......

MGLICKER

No numbers should be retired, period. No one player has ever been larger than the game that he played.

98% would have never participated in pro sports had the specific game not been created.

soundgard

Whos cares?

bunt

mglicker had his secondary 85fan id set up far before being booted as expected from the 85flavorflav id - this was in order for him to remain and still talk to himself - while coming up with a new angle while twerking by himself in front of the bathroom mirror and simultaneously posting on the message board.

yeah man - you're seeing it's 'new' id already

larryallen73

No. Silly question.

telephoto1

98% would have never participated in pro sports had the specific game not been created.

Ummmm.... huh? So 2% of pro basketball players would still be pro basketball players if basketball hadn't been created? LOL

Estil

Sorry to once again bring this topic up but another problem is that unlike with Gretzky, Jordan (contrary to popular myth) is not the undisputed greatest player ever. I think a very strong case could be made for Wilt Chamberlain (held nearly every record you could think of at the time, including his famous 100 game; no longer all-time leader in points but was the first to reach 25,000 points and I think is still holds a ton of records today...plus he was such a dominant player it was like he was truly several leagues above everyone else). A good case could be made for Kareem Abdul-Jabbar as well...all time leading scorer, has SIX MVP awards (all time record) and he along with Magic Johnson led the Showtime Lakers of the 80s to five championships.

PS: Don't bring up LeBron James or any other active players...it isn't exactly fair to open this kind of debate for any player until their career is all done.

JoeBanzai

+1 Wilt the "Stilt".

MGLICKER

<< <i>Sorry to once again bring this topic up but another problem is that unlike with Gretzky, Jordan (contrary to popular myth) is not the undisputed greatest player ever >>



Gordie Howe played both side of the puck. Gretzky was great, but hardly undisputed.

Estil

Gretzky does in fact hold all those ****load of records and as great as Gordie Howe was he did not have nearly as big as impact as Wayne did. Where as Wilt Chamberlain was in the same position Gretzky was...he too held nearly every record one could think of. Plus there were times early in Wilt's career (look it up) that he was so frustrated with being quintuple teamed all the time (I'm not exaggerating) that he didn't think the game was any fun anymore and was close to walking away completely. I think people have forgotten just how much better he was compared to all the other players at the time and as Wilt once said himself he (unlike Jordan) caused rule changes to be made so players like Wilt couldn't dominate so much (the three second rule and the widening of the paint area are a couple of big fat for instances), whereas with Jordan, the NBA if anything made things easier for Jordan to do his stuff to make the NBA in general more popular/marketable.

I'm sorry if I'm not making as good sense I'm just trying to make the point to answer the OP's question about why the whole league retirement thing might not necessarily work for the NBA like it did for MLB or NHL.

PS: While we're on the subject of Jackie...if MLB want to make as big a fuss over him as they have been (retiring his number league wide for the 50th anniversary of his making history made total sense but they should be careful about not going overboard like the pink ribbons have) then why in sam hell do they nor the sports media not make one itty bitty little peep about the Jackie Robinson Award? You mean they should make one you might ask? NO, THERE ALREADY IS ONE. Jackie was the first ever winner in in 1947 and later on (late 80s) the Rookie of the Year award was named for him (he was the first one after all). I mean the Pitcher of the Year award is always called simply the "Cy Young" so why doesn't MLB and/or the media at least call the ROY the Jackie Robinson Rookie of the Year award (at least for when the announcement/presentation is made). As great and as deserving as that whole retiring #42 in all of MLB was...having one of the "big three" individual honors named after you is no chicken feed either you know?

MGLICKER

<< <i>Gretzky does in fact hold all those ****load of records and as great as Gordie Howe was he did not have nearly as big as impact as Wayne did. >>



You made my point. I did not say that Gordie was better than Wayne, just that the issue was worthy of dispute.

Estil

I will say for the record the Gordie Howe hat trick (goal+assist+fight) is very clever. Do you have to win the fight for it to count? I know it doesn't work this way in real hockey but in the classic NES video game called Blades of Steel you can get into fights...and only the loser of the fight is sent to the 'box.