Which number should the Reds retire next?
Whither Brandon Phillips?
I did it again.
Last week, the New York Metropolitans announced that they plan to retire the uniform numbers of a couple of franchise legends, Dwight Gooden and Darryl Strawberry. The same day, local radio personality Lance McAlister asked a fairly benign question over on twitter/x: “Which Reds player should become the next to have his number retired?”
I thought the answer was self-evident, so I did what I usually do on twitter: I responded with what I thought was a sarcastic answer. I said the Reds should retire #4 in honor of Brandon Phillips.
I should have been prepared for the reaction, but if there’s one thing you need to know about me, it’s that I’ll never learn. Every time I think I’m being clever or funny on twitter, I discover that most of the people who reply will respond in earnest, thinking that I’m being serious. And to be fair, that’s my fault. I should know better. But sometimes I simply must craft these beautiful tweets just for myself and the dozen followers who recognize that I’m just being dumb for laughs.
So yeah, a lot of people agreed that BP’s uniform number should be retired. Again, this shouldn’t have surprised me. A few days prior, the Hall of Fame announced this year’s vote totals, and Phillips actually received a single vote. When I asked who had voted for him, a number of people responded with some version of: “I don’t know, but he’s my new favorite baseball writer!” Because they still love BP, you see. His popularity has certainly endured.
After a day of people agreeing with my sarcastic twitter take, I had to address the elephant in the room:
I hesitate to admit it, since legions of his loyal fans chimed in to agree…but I was not being serious about this. BP was an excellent player. Clearly a Reds HOFer, maybe the 2nd-best 2B ever to play for the Reds. But it’s silly to suggest his number should be retired IMO.
Again, I thought it was pretty obvious. You just can’t retire the uniform number of every pretty good player in franchise history. Only the all-time greats should get that honor, right? Well, maybe, maybe not. After thinking about it, I wondered: why not BP?
After all, there are no established criteria for a professional sports franchise to retire a number. It’s mostly just vibes. “There's no set rule on that,” according to Rick Walls, the executive director of the Reds Hall of Fame since 2007. “Certainly the benchmark is being in the Baseball Hall of Fame. But you take each case and consider the merits of the particular person and go from there.”
The Reds have retired ten uniform numbers, not including Jackie Robinson’s #42, which is retired by every club.
#1: Fred Hutchinson
#5: Johnny Bench
#8: Joe Morgan
#867-5309: Jenny
#10: Sparky Anderson
#11: Barry Larkin
#13: Dave Concepcion
#14: Pete Rose
#18: Ted Kluszewski
#20: Frank Robinson
#24: Tony Perez
Let’s examine those names. If the “benchmark” is the Hall of Fame, we immediately notice that only six of those ten names are actually in the HOF. There are extenuating circumstances with Rose, obviously, but Big Klu, Davey Concepcion, and Hutch* aren’t getting elected to the big boy HOF any time soon. (Although I keep thinking that I want to write about Davey’s Hall of Fame case one of these days. It’s stronger than you think.)
*Another name I need to write about soon. Hutchinson’s number retirement is well-deserved, for many reasons.
On the flip side, there are plenty of baseball HOFers who played for the Reds — 26, by my count — but haven’t yet had their number retired by the club. Of that number, Ernie Lombardi, Bid McPhee, Eppa Rixey, and Edd Roush all played more games for the Reds than any other team. McPhee and Roush will never have their numbers retired, because they didn’t have numbers on their uniforms when they played. Rixey only wore a uniform number in the final two seasons of his 13-year career with Cincinnati, and that number — 18 — has been retired for Kluszewski. One could argue that it should have been jointly retired for Rixey/Klu.
Lombardi presents a more interesting case: Hall of Fame, five All-Star selections, National League MVP in 1938. One of the club’s all-time greats. But ultimately, I agree with the franchise’s decision not to retire Lombardi’s number, mostly because he didn’t really have a number — he wore six different ones! Which do you retire: 2, 4, 7, 17, 27, or 35?
Back to the original question: which number should the Reds retire next? There’s only one sure-fire candidate, of course: Joey Votto. When he finally retires, the Reds should immediately announce that #19 will never be worn by a Red again.* Seventeen years in Cincinnati, arguably the best hitter in franchise history, an MVP. This is a no-brainer.
*If the Reds assign #19 to another player this year, we riot.
As for Brandon Phillips, though I initially rejected it outright, you can make the case for him. When trying to make that case — gotta play devil’s advocate occasionally, you know — my first thought was to compare him with Dave Concepcion. Davey wasn’t a Hall of Famer and wasn’t a particularly great hitter (.679 career OPS), but his number is retired while eight players have already worn BP’s #4 since he departed Cincinnati.
The more I thought about it, however, it’s not a great comparison. First of all, Davey played his entire 19-year career in Cincinnati. That means something. He also made nine All-Star teams (compared to BP’s three), won five Gold Gloves (BP won four), and was a two-time winner of the Silver Slugger for shortstops (BP won one for 2Bs). And while Phillips was somewhat better at the plate, you may be surprised to learn that he was a below-average hitter for his career, despite the fact that Reds managers installed BP in the cleanup spot more often than any other spot in the lineup.
And then it just comes back to the vibes.* The Reds didn’t retire Concepcion’s number for almost two decades after he retired, but they didn’t give it out to any other player because Davey was such an institution in Cincinnati. Meanwhile, the Reds had no problem handing out Phillips’ #4 to such luminaries as Brandon Dixon, Cliff Pennington, Matt Reynolds, and Harrison Bader.
*This isn’t my strongest argument, I concede.
A better comparison for Phillips might be with Ted Kluszewski, the weakest player to have had his uniform retired by the Reds. Like Phillips, Klu played 11 seasons in Cincinnati, posting 29.9 WAR; Phillips’ total was 28.4. Both were four-time All-Stars. Klu was a great hitter, Phillips was a great defender. Klu had huge forearms, Phillips had that great smile and played with a rare enthusiasm. Both were fan favorites.
During the span between Klu’s departure in 1957 and his number retirement in 1998, eight different players wore #18, including Steve Bilko, Walt Drop, Cliff Cook, Miguel de la Hoz, and Tim Costo. And when you throw Rixey into the mix, Klu wasn’t even the best Cincinnati Reds to wear that number. If you’re going to retire #18, you have to at least consider retiring Phillips’s #4, right?
First, the Reds should consider retiring a couple of other numbers. Vada Pinson’s #28 was one that was mentioned more than once in response to my initial, ill-considered tweet. Pinson played 11 years for the Reds (like Klu and BP), but posted 47.7 WAR over that span, eighth-best among Reds hitters all-time. Only Votto and McPhee are higher on that list without having their number retired (yet). He was a four-time All-Star, a Gold Glove winner who hit .297/.341/.469.
What other numbers are possibilities? I guess you* could make the case for George Foster’s #15, given the MVP award he won to go along with all those massive home runs and epic sideburns. I do think the Reds should consider retiring #44 for Eric Davis. And Adam Dunn. And Cody Reed. And Elly De La Cruz.
*You can make the case. I’d prefer not to.
In the end, it depends on where you want to draw the line as a fan. I draw the line at Votto, though I could be talked into Vada Pinson and Eric Davis…and maybe even Brandon Phillips, despite my initial dismissal. It’s not as crazy an idea as I originally thought. But still, pretty crazy, right? Right?
The Reds can’t retire every number, but perhaps they should consider retiring more. After all, they’ve now retired the same total as the Mets, but the Reds have been around twice as long as that lame franchise. Plus, every time you retire a number, you get to have a big ceremony on the field and you know how the Castellinis love big ceremonies on the field. It’s a win-win!
What’s Chad Watching?
I’m working on my Top 25 list of movies for 2023 which will drop just before the Oscars ceremony, as usual. (Here’s the 2022 list.) Three movies I watched recently will certainly figure somewhere on that list, with at least a couple potentially in the top ten. Two — Anatomy of a Fall and American Fiction — were nominated for Best Picture this year, and both were excellent. Society of the Snow was nominated in the international category, and it was also very good (and on Netflix currently if you want to see it).
The other two were Sherlock Holmes pictures featuring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. You know, if you’re interested in that sort of thing.