Seriously? He gave up #21? Sigh.

Farnsworth didn't actually pitch very well, btw. He faced the weakest part of the Rays order. The first out came on a hanging slider (smack in the middle of the plate, popped up). The second was b/c Cano is a really good second baseman.

He still sucks.

Value Over Lump Of Clay. I like that a lot, E-Span, and it leads me to a better understanding of what Farnswacker is: he's the air pocket in the clay that causes kiln explosions.

If you were in my 7th grade shop class, you learned (and may have mischievously demonstrated) that air pockets in clay can make your handcrafted pot, or cup, or ashtray (heh. made one for my pop), etc. blow to pieces as it's baked in the kiln, causing collateral damage to every other project in the oven.

As far as I know, it's difficult to predict when, or at what temperature a clay air pocket will explode, which adds to the excitement.
Keep this in mind next time Clay Farnswacker gets the ball with the game in the balance.

I know I am in the minority on this, but I don't care at all about the Hawkins/#21 saga. I don't care that he chose to wear it and I don't care that many fans decided to boo him for doing so.

Hat's off to Hawk, I say. Surrendering #21 gives the haters, and meatheads one less thing to cackle about. Who needs their ugly noise?
Hopefully, Hawk's new number won't make him a target for the chuckleheads.

I also don't think a lot of fans have taken issue with #21 being used again. Instead, I think it's a case of who was using it. I have a feeling that if Joba or Hughes was wearing #21 no one would have had a problem.

Hawkins wasn't a popular signing anyway, and he isn't likely to be here beyond one year, so I can definitely see not wanting him to wear a number with such meaning to the fans.

5 I had the exact same thought. Joba as 21 = no problem. Also, Hawk pitching great as 21 = no problem.

Hawk as 21 pitching like Hawk? Uhhh...not priceless.

To be fair now, Hawkins should get a standing ovation the next time he appears. If he was booed simply for wearing #21, he should be cheered for giving the number up. From then on, he can be treated on the merits of his performance.

To touch on William's post: I don't really "care" about the whole #21 saga. either...at least not seriously. I will say, however, that having watched Yankees dynasties and non-dynasties since the 70s, I just don't "get" the fascination and veneration for Paul O'NeilL.

Don't get me wrong, he was a heckuva ball player, and in his prime he was potent and greatly undervalued (IMO)--I had many a long argument trying to demonstrate how even the declining O'Neill was a better overall RF than Ichiro!. I know he was the heart and soul, yada, yada...

But really, the reverence for the man by many Yanks' fans is a bit much. Whatever. Like I said, it doesn't really bother me all that much on the grand scheme of things. Rather, I think the whole affair is bit silly.

Emma, VOLC is brilliant. I think it's a damn useful concept.

"Do I make a joke about the apocalypse and Revelations?"
Me, I go for Yeats:
"Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned"

And, come to think of it, "the worst/Are full of passionate intensity" pretty well describes Farnsworth.

8 I feel the same way...but know a lot of fans who really love the guy. I guess I don't feel that way because I reserve that irrational reverence for Don Mattingly. Perhaps the generation of fans younger than I am feel that way about O'Neill?

Maybe we can blame this on the Yankees stuborness to print names on the back of their jerseys? Perhaps all those fans with O'Neill jerseys just didn't want them turned into Hawkins' jerseys?

10 Maybe--I was (and am) a huge Mattingly devotee. Mattingly was the best player on his team for several years (led the team in OPS five out of six years), and he was arguably the overall best player on the team for the period of career. He was a 'home grown' Yankee product, and he he had the extra tragic quality of just missing two dynasties. O'Neill was also a very good player (led the team in OPS 3 years in a row), but if you look at his tenure with the Yankees, Bernie Williams and then Derek Jeter were clearly better players overall. Admittedly, I am biased toward Mattingly, but IMO there is little comparison between two in terms of who warrants more veneration.

That said, I long ago made my peace with Mattingly's overall good-but-not-greatness. This in no way diminishes my own irrational sentiment toward his place in Yankee history. But if the team had never retired his number--if they were to reactivate it--it really would not bother me all that much. Then again, this probably says more about one of my other whipping boys: the Yankees' devaluation (IMO) of the honor of retired numbers.

12 I have also made by peace with Mattingly not making the Hall of Fame, but absolutely think he deserves to have #23 retired. If being wildly admired by your fanbase isn't reason enough for retiring a number, I don't know what is.

I also don't agree with the premise that the Yankees have devalued the honor. You can make a case against Reggie, Guidry and Maris, but I think all others stand up to scrutiny.

2

Last year, "Mythbusters" did a show on baseball myths.

http://mythbustersresults.com/episode83

Perhaps they can do another set of baseball myths to determine if Farnsworth will explode when placed in a kiln.

(Oh, and for my money, VORP now stands 'Value over Rafael Palmeiro')

WeYankees: .262 .321 .419 .740
Opponents: .254 .320 .382 .701

I think we all know the Yankees will greatly improve their OPS. I think our pitching though, has done rather nicely. I believe as it warms up and players settle in, that both Phil and IPK will do better.

All things considered, I don't think any of us expect the Yankees to play much better then .500 ball in April.

I do believe Jason will have an .850 OPS or better...
I wonder if Jeter will ever have an extra basehit again...
JD actually hit a ball hard last night. I still think he's done (.750 OPS max)...
Imagine how good Cano would be with a lobotomy....

I still wonder if signing Barry for $5m + incentives would be smart. I don't think at this point he would make a lot of noise, but be greatful to play his last year at Yankee Stadium. It will be a tad crowded, but we may be able to trade JD (if we pay $8m of his salary, we would have traded JD for Bonds) and between JD, Mats and Giambi, we will have some time lost due to injuries).
It's a bit nutty I know, but having Bonds hit behind ARod would be sweet. He would be quite the DH/PH.

I would bring up Gardner, as I think with Ensberg on the roster, Shelly stays in AAA.

Has AG 'Pipped' Betemin?
Is having both Ensberg and Shelly redundant?

Sorry... I'm bored.

13 We'll have to agree to disagree. I see the retired number as an honor bestowed upon a player by the team--for any variety of reasons--but NOT an honor merited by wild popularity with the fans. There have been other examples of players who were greatly popular and admired by the fans, including some who stuck with the team for several years, but who were not "great" (good but not great) and surely do not deserve to have their numbers retired. I would include Roy White in that group, and there is no dishonor in that group.

As for who deserved to be retired, that is obviously subjective, and my standards would be much higher. Just going backwards chronologically;

Guidry: no
Mattingly: probably yes, but see my post above. Actually, if Guidry is a no, is Mattingly also a no?
Jackson: no
Martin: no. He didn't play his whole career with NY, wasn't that good of a player, and mainly got his number retired for being fired a lot and dying tragically.
Rizzuto: yes, though the arguments are similar to his HOF candidacy
Marris: no (retired number for one or two seasons and a single season record?)
Howard: probably yes. I don't know much about Howard, who is the third or fourth best C in team history, but the first African-American, so that counts for something.
Munson: yes. This is contentious and emotional. I do think that his number retiring had much to do with his tragic death, not just his playing career (which was also in the very good but not necessarily great category).

So really, what you see since 1979 are a rash of good-but-not great players and those whose numbers seem to have been retired more for the circumstances of their death than anything else. Now, there is nothing wrong with that per se (indeed, Gehrig's illness obviously influenced greatly the decision to retire his number). But the last eight or so retired numbers have set the bar pretty low.

Then again, maybe I'm just a stingy old bastard.

15 I'm bored too, as you can tell.

I won't comment on the Bonds gig, because it's not going to happen. Getting to some of your last questions: "I would bring up Gardner, as I think with Ensberg on the roster, Shelly stays in AAA. Has AG 'Pipped' Betemin? Is having both Ensberg and Shelly redundant?"

Much of this depends on Giambi. You predict "Jason will have an .850 OPS or better..." If he does, then he plays most of the year at 1B, which forces Matsui to DH, which leaves little room for Ensberg and Duncan and Betemit to get ABs.

But if Giambi is cooked or gets hurt, that will force ensberg/Betemit/Duncan into 1B platoon situation.

If AG pipps Betemit, then Ensberg (who can play 3B) will stay and Duncan will go. I like AG's glove and base running, but I really like Betemit's LH bat and roster flexibility. I also like Duncan's ability to play corner OF in a pinch. So in my ideal world, the team carries one fewer pitcher, or AG retreats to the minors.

On the other hand, if they keep Betemit (3B/SS/1B) and AG (SS/2B/PR), does that mean AG will pipp Ensberg?

I don't care if Hawkins wears #3. All of the things in the world to get upset about and it's the jersey number choice of a stranger showing the patented disrespect? Bah.

On the 21 ... I fear I dissent (again?) from william and others ... I agree entirely with Pete Abe on this. A probably small minority of booing jerks have been permitted to have their way here ... by a player preferring not to become an 'issue' for the team (and in so doing dropping a tribute to Clemente).

I think it is wrong to treat this as trivial or boring. 'Power to the people' is fine, within limits, but that kind of sense of entitlement is disturbing. Me, I'll blame O'Neill until I hear if he actually stood up, spoke up, intervened. He might not have been able to stop it cold, but he sure should have tried.

Sliced, we can say hats off to Hawkins, and I agree with you, but he should NOT have had to do it.

16 I think playing ability clearly factors into it, but I'd much rather retire the number of a very good player who was beloved than a great player who was disliked (if such a player exists). I just don't see how you can divorce the person from the player in bestowing the "honor" of having a number retired. In my opinion, if Mattingly doesn't deserve the "honor", then the distinction is irrelevant any way.

I don't think Roy White comes even close to being beloved, at least not on the level of Don Mattingly. Guidry also doesn't reach that level, so I don't their cases are tied together. Furthermore, I think Mattingly was a better player than Guidry, so that's a distinction. Having said that, I think Guidry does deserve his honor.

I agree that Jackson, Martin and Maris probably don't deserve to have their numbers retired. I don't think Howard is debatable, however. Not only was he a very good player, but he was the first black Yankee and first black AL coach. He spent a huge chunk of time in the Yankke organization and by all accounts was a man of great integrity. It seems like "honor" and Ellie go hand-in-hand.

19 Why is Hawkins entitled to honor Clemente, but fans can't honor by O'Neill by expressing their displeasure with Hawkins wearing the number? Also, if Clemente is so important to Hawkins, why hadn't he worn the number before?

Also, why should O'Neill be to blame? He did speak on the matter and said he was a little disappointed that the number was given out. You are holding his honesty against him? I respect him for saying how he truly felt instead of giving the kind of contrived answer for which athletes are so often criticized.

Hawkins is being paid millions of dollars to pitch for the Yankees. He doesn't have an inherent right to any number he chooses. Would I have booed Hawkins? No, but I don't think doing so makes on a jerk

16 I can't see how anyone could suggest Gehrig's death was any kind of significant factor in retiring his number. Yes, to it playing a role in his being grieved/loved, but jeez, look at the career!

I think we may be at risk of overvaluing good players on bad teams if we turn it into a fan-lovefest. Or even, come to think of it, good but not great players on memorable teams.

Me, I remain really upset that someone wanting to honour Clemente (who damn well deserves it) should be booed by we-have-the-power fans and WE don't note and condemn it. Jeter and Jorge may be 'right' in saying 'it ain't worth the trouble' from a pragmatic standpoint, but aren't there other standpoints here?

19 Also...keep in mind that numbers were created for the fans, not for players. The reason players wear numbers is so they can be indentified by those watching games...not so they can offer tributes to their heroes. Fans have every right to be emotionally attached to a number as do players, especially when the players do not have a long-term commitment to the team.

22 It was a factor though. The concept of retiring numbers wasn't prevalent back then. Had Gehrig not been forced into retirement by his illness, his number would not have been retired at that point. Even the Babe didn't have #3 retired until months before his death.

Again, the "honor Clemente" theme rings hollow when you consider Hawkins had not worn #21 before. If he realty wanted to honor Clemente, he had plenty of opportunities beforehand. In fact, if #32 was not retired for Ellie, he wouldn't have asked for #21 any way.

Hawkins had to change his number. He made a selection based on Clemente. Is that so odd or hard to grasp? Players don't change numbers unless forced.

And the answer to your question ... let me ask this, ever, anywhere, any sport seen something like this? I haven't. Has a team ever 'empowered' some fans to make a player take a number off, forbid anyone from ever again wearing it? Think anyone will ever put on 21 again after this?

O'Neill? Sorry, I disagree. It is always possible to say, 'Guys, you aren't honoring me, you are embarrassing me. I'm not at that level.' I didn't know he said he was disappointed. That makes it worse. He threw gasoline on it, invited it. I've lost some respect for him if you are right, based on what you just said.

Your view is, if a decent ballplayer (foolishly) thinks his jersey should be retired forever he can and should campaign with his fan base. (Why stop at expressing 'disappointment'?) Hell, blog it! Release the hounds!

It is one thing to praise someone for being honest, and I do know what you mean, it is another to support what amounts to delusional, self-aggrandising behavior that appears to have become destructive. If O'Neill says he's disappointed what does it MEAN? Means he thinks no one should ever again wear it, and he's allowing that thought to get out there.

25 If Yankee fans don't want Hawkins wearing #21, I have no problem with their voicing displeasure. You are imposing your view of O'Neill on others, including O'Neill himself. If some fans think O'Neill deserves for his number to be retired, I may disagree, but I wouldn't call them jerks for it. To suggest otherwise is very arrogant.

My view is that people should be free to honestly express their feelings: O'Neill to say he was disappointed; fans to boo; and Hawkins to wear or not wear the number.

22 You're kidding yourself if you don't think his impending death a great deal to do with his number being retired? he was the player in any sport in North America to have his number retired--not Ruth, whose career speaks for itself and who had already retired by Lou Gehrig day. There is no way the precise circumstances of the end of Gehrig's playing days did not strongly factor into the decision to retire his number.

That all being said, your objection actually supports my main point: the quality of the careers of retired number wearers has declined since the "big guys" (Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, etc.) were so honored.

26 "My view is that people should be free to honestly express their feelings..."

Ah, you're starting to wobble here! People should--and indeed ARE--free to express their feelings honestly, just like I may tell my wife she looks a little fat in her new dress. That does not make it right or appropriate to do so in all contexts.

Yankees fans exercised their rights and booed Hawkins; I still think that they were wrong to do so; and (as I first posted) on the grand scheme I don't care all that much.

I'm a big Paul O'Neill fan. I don't get the #21 absurdity. I'm not sure 21 should be retired (I've seen good arguments against). I have no problem with Hawkins wearing it. I think people "honoring" Paulie by booing Hawkins are misguided. I do wish Paulie had stepped up and disowned such "honoring."

I don't see how booing Hawkins is in any way honoring Paul O'Neill. As for O'Neill expressing his disappointment, I suppose one can respect his honesty. On the other hand, I lose respect for him because he really does feel that way. I think it's petty and rather arrogant.

28 Of course, context governs free speech. You shouldn't go out of your way to hurt peoples feelings, yell fire in a crowded theater and use profane words in public, etc.. I am sorry, but I don't think booing a baseball player because you don't want him to wear a number transcends those bounds. Hawkins is not being deprived of anything significant, especially when you consider he hadn't worn #21 before anyway. He is still making millions and getting the chance to pitch in the majors. I don't think he can be called a victim here. This isn't telling him he looks fat in his new dress.

i am still pissed at paul o'neill for wearing dan pasqua's number. he was my fave.

i must admit i am happy that no one at the stadium will think i am wearing a hawkins jersey for the rest of the year.

30 Wanting to be honored by an organization you spent 9 years with is petty and arrogant? I think that's genuine and human. It tells me he loved being a Yankee and was touched by the idea that they and the fans held in greet esteem. I not only don't have a problem with that, I am glad he feels that way. It sure beats the ballplayer who is just passing through picking up checks, without a care for the organization or its history.

33 Disappointment that someone else is wearing his number? Petty, because that's what happens with numbers. Disappointment that his number isn't retired? Arrogant to expect that it should be.

33 Oh, and saying that while another player is being booed for having the gall to wear #21 - rather than sticking up for the player - greatly magnifies the pettiness and arrogance. As I said, I've lost a lot of respect for O'Neill in the process.

20 Fair enough.

Slightly changing the subject, something your wrote interests me:

"Furthermore, I think Mattingly was a better player than Guidry, so that's a distinction. Having said that, I think Guidry does deserve his honor."

I wonder, was Mattingly a better player than Guidry. My heart and instinct say yes, but the more I think about it, the less I am sure. It's of course tough to compare pitchers and position players. I had always thought that Guidry compared favorably to other borderline HOF pitchers (whatever that is worth), and as time goes on I do not see the arguments in favor of him weakening significantly. But as time goes on I feel the case for Mattingly in the HOF gets weaker and weaker.

What d'yall think? Who was the better player?

31 "...You shouldn't go out of your way to hurt peoples feelings...but I don't think booing a baseball player because you don't want him to wear a number transcends those bounds...I don't think he can be called a victim here."

I think that he is a "victim" insofar as there is any victim in this little saga, but I do agree with you that the damages he suffered were miniscule and his victimhood rather insignificant.

That said, booing Hawkins was clearly meant to hurt his feelings intentionally, or perhaps more accurately, to shame him publicly. And it worked, he was shamed enough to acquiesce. My argument is that the reason to boo him (because you don't like the number he chose) is petty and insignificant, the booing/shame tactic a disproportionate (though legal, of course) response to a player's actions. Boo the guy for blowing a save, but for wearing the wrong number? Hmmmm.

37 I don't think booing Hawkins was meant to hurt his feelings. It was meant to say, "hey, switch to a new number!"

I also don't think Hawkins was "shamed". Instead, he realized t