As MLB’s regular season continues, here are three things we’ll be keeping an eye on around the baseball world throughout the weekend:
1. Jackie Robinson Day:
Tomorrow is Jackie Robinson Day, an event across the baseball world that commemorates the day the Hall of Famer and cultural icon first stepped onto the field for the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1947 and, in doing so, integrated Major League Baseball. This year, the day is also celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Jackie Robinson Foundation’s creation. As is tradition, all players, coaches, and managers across baseball will wear 42 in honor of Robinson. Additionally, a panel discussion will be available live on MLB.com at 9:30am CT tomorrow featuring commissioner Rob Manfred, six time All-Star CC Sabathia, Robinson’s granddaughter Sonya Pankey, and Devin Johnson, who serves as President of Lebron James’s SpringHill Company. More details on the events planned to celebrate Robinson and his legacy can be found here.
2. Rays Streak Continues Without Springs:
The Rays won their game against the Red Sox yesterday to tie the 1987 Brewers and 1982 Braves for the modern opening win streak record, with all three clubs having opened their respective seasons 13-0. The Rays will attempt to secure a record-breaking 14th victory against the Blue Jays this evening at 6:07pm CT. In the meantime, however, Rays left-hander Jeffrey Springs, who left yesterday’s game with ulnar neuritis, will be undergoing further evaluation. It’s an injury which has a wide range of possible recovery times, with more minor issues only requiring a short stay on the IL, while those that require surgery can have a recovery timeline of three months or longer.
3. Arcia Injury Opens The Door For Grissom:
With shortstop Orlando Arcia out due to a microfracture in his wrist, the Braves have lost their everyday shortstop who opened the season on a tear, slashing .333/.400/.511 in 13 games prior to the injury. In his place, the club is seemingly poised to call up youngster Vaughn Grissom, who was optioned to Triple-A alongside prospect Braden Shewmake after the pair lost out on the shortstop gig to Arcia. Grissom was called up midseason last year and largely impressed with a 121 wRC+ in 41 games as Atlanta’s primary second baseman while Ozzie Albies was injured. The biggest concern regarding Grissom appears to be his defense, which has drawn considerable criticism, leading the Braves to task infield coach Ron Washington with working on defense at short with Grissom over the offseason.
Ken Griffey Jr. had a great idea of everyone wearing 42 on this day.
I saw last season there was another of wearing 21 for Clemente on another day. Hope that is adopted too.
Celebrating the game’s history is never a bad thing.
@This one belongs to the Reds
If we’re going to celebrate baseball history, why not have a Babe Ruth Day, Willie Mays Day or Hank Aaron Day?
How about for an old-time umpire, a Hank O’Day Day?
A Lee & Carlos May Day? And a Jason Bay Day?
Personally I find the entire thing to be a joke. I hate the every player wearing same number days. Feel that numbers shouldn’t be retired for players who never played for the team as well. If you want to honor the player name a award after them grant their number to players who most represent their ideals
Jackie’s name is now associated with the Rookie of the Year awards. I thought Junior’s idea of wearing 42 was terrific, and those who joined in with him were magnificent.
I now wonder if the number 42-wearing thing is now compulsory, and therefore, has lost some of its luster.
While I can agree it’s not fun seeing players like Ozuna wearing the jersey, it’s a grander gesture than just one player it’s supposed to represent the league and player as a whole.
Too bad Roger Roid Rage Clemens also wore 21.
You could have every player wear 21 for Clemente, but why stop there? Do the same with all wearing 3 for Babe Ruth, 4 for Lou Gehrig, 5 for Joe DiMaggio and Johnny Bench, 6 for Stan Musial, 7 for Mickey Mantle, and 8 for Yogi Berra. Then there’s 14 for Pete Rose, 24 for Willie Mays and 44 for Henry Aaron. Why not 41 for Tom Seaver and 45 for Bob Gibson?
The issue becomes which players to honor as such and where does the line get drawn? It could quickly become stupid.
@Blue Baron
Well, I would say that Babe Ruth should be celebrated similar to what they do with Robinson, as he was mostly helped push baseball into the mainstream as a very popular sport in America. Sure, baseball was still popular before but I think he helped paved the way to make it more mainstream. Maybe not so much for some of the other greats as you and I have pointed out. However, I do like the Robinson day and probably a Clemente day too to encourage the development of such community responsibility.
As a lifetime Yankees fan, I don’t think Ruth really needs any more celebrating than he’s already gotten. Actually, they kind of slapped him in the face by re-naming the World Series MVP after Willie Mays. It had previously been the Babe Ruth award. I love Willie, but lots of guys were better in the World Series, and it seemed to me to be PC run amok.
Christy Mathewson should probably be in the convo if we are looking at what sounds like a formula of
All Time Greats + Significant Social Value Contributing to the Advancement of Baseball.
@HistoryBelongstotheVictorsInArms
True.
I heard during a Reds broadcast yesterday that Clemens named all his kids with “K’, presumably because of strikeouts (or his affinity for a certain organization….I keed, I keed): Kory, Koby, Kody, Kacy.
His wife is a saint.
His wife is a co-conspirator.
The players in question are being honored for their humanity, not their statistics. In baseball, the number is your identity. So, it’s fitting.
It’s funny that people who complain about the Hall of Fame apparently want the character clause to apply at the LOWEST possible level.
Then they also complain when the character clause is applied at the HIGHEST possible level, in terms of wearing a number.
The bottom line is that you decide whether to moan or celebrate. Your choice. Always.
@whyhayzee
I said nothing about stats. At least with the Ruth case, he contributed a lot to growing the game and expanding the fanbase. I’m not suggesting we celebrate stats but many of these players helped contribute to the growth of the game in the 20s through 50s to make it what it is today. Having celebration days for just character is noble and I’m agreed with it, but I think we’re doing a disservice to the game itself by not also recognizing contributions to baseball from some of the early stars that made MLB what it is today.
Which brings it back to my argument about where to draw the line. Lou Gehrig, Henry Aaron, and Cal Ripken Jr deserve as much as anyone to be honored for character. And in the understandable desire to honor Robinson, what about Larry Doby?
If you extend the number-wearing practice to all who arguably deserve the honor, it would be overdone and pointless.
@Blue Baron
But, shouldn’t we be celebrating Branch Rickey Day instead? He was the one that scouted and signed him to the Dodgers team? If not for that, it could have been another player down the line instead of Robinson.
As well as being the guy who plucked Clemente in the Rule 5 draft from the Dodgers to the Pirates.
Apparently if we do something for one or two guys, we have to include more? Whatever.
Again, where do you draw the line?
There’s no line. There’s no series of boxes to be checked. There’s no number of hours to serve, no amount of money to raise. That’s the problem with this world. Everything has to be a competition and quantified for judgement. Whosoever operates under those parameters shall be doomed to accept fools who have met the criteria. It just doesn’t work out well.
To be a fully qualified actuary, I had to pass ten exams, requiring 300-400 hours of study, with a pass rate below 40%. Pretty good selection criteria for a challenging profession. And yet, not all that make it are excellent actuaries. But it does keep out the less committed people.
Being a great baseball player and a great humanitarian is way beyond me, so I tend to have great admiration for that small group. Maybe you are right, there could be more.
Rays rushed sending Bradley down. Now he’s down for 10 days and can’t be called back up. Ray miss by Tampa
The exception to that is if he is replacing someone that is injured, so if replacing Springs, couldn’t he called back up? I believe that couldn’t happen until Springs is placed on the IL.
Correct, a player can be called up if injury.
I’d look for Patino or Chirinos to be the next brought up, but Taj looked good. Might need two guys anyway.
But they’re 12-0, so it doesn’t really matter.
@Blue Baron
13-0 as of this morning.
FYI: Wrong Jackie Robinson link. It should be: baseball-reference.com/players/r/robinja02.shtml
@Mr MacPhisto
Good call.
Branch Rickey should be the one celebrated.
Branch Rickey was forward thinking but he was a business man and not a civil rights activis. Jackie did the heavy lifting, took the death threats and the horrible treatment. It’s absolutely insane to suggest that anyone besides Jackie should be at the forefront of this celebration.
They were both all-time greats as men and forward-thinkers. I agree that Rickey shouldn’t be ‘the one’ celebrated. Jackie took the beanballs, spikings and epitaphs… and he was a helluva player besides. It’s not a contest to me. The two were a terrific team and dragged the country forward. .
What you are saying is anyone who has a different opinion to yours has a mental health disorder.
And is racist, and pathetic, and…
@woodhead1986
Strange, I can’t reply to you directly so I have to reply to DCartrow in order to reply to you.
Sure, he took them, however, without the support to bring Robinson to the team, we could be celebrating someone else and wearing a different jersey number. So, yes, I agree that we can celebrate Robinson but maybe the day should be a combination of both Rickey and Robinson.
Everyone saying we should have all players wear Ruth and others numbers are wrong. Jackie put his life on the line to make baseball whole. Clemente died giving aid to others. They were about coming together for others. I’d be okay with Lou Gehrig getting a jersey day, but the others don’t measure up off the field like these gentlemen did. Bigger off, than on.
@superunclea
I don’t think anyone is trying to get rid of Robinson Day but pointing out that there are individuals who helped make baseball what it is today. Would Robinson have been playing in the MLB in the 50s if it had not been as popular at the time for athletes? Maybe they would still be playing the deadball era baseball without the pop of Ruth coming on the scene. Maybe we’d be celebrating someone other than Ruth or baseball wouldn’t be as popular or financially successful of a sport as it is today.
Enough with the numbers already.
Jackie has a day. Roberto has an annual award named for him.
I think those two guys are covered. Enough with the numbers already.
I am always disappointed when I read the comments on this site but the fact that there are people miserable and terrible enough to be negative and racist about Jackie Robinson day is just flooring me. So pathetic.
I read all the comments on Jackie Robinson here, and didn’t see a single one that was racist. What comments are you reading, woodhead?
I don’t think it takes a lot of deep digging to see the racism at play but the “branch rickey should be the one celebrated” is pretty obvious.
Not as obvious as the appropriate cognomen attached to your post.
@woodhead1986
Tell me, how does Robinson get to the MLB without him?
It’s not racist. As I said, Branch Rickey doesn’t need to ‘be the one”, but it’s a matter of people’s opinion. Not a matter of race.
York is correct. Without Rickey there is no Jackie. It’s like without Lee Harvey Oswald, there’s no JFK on the U.S. half dollar.
It’s not always nice and neat and sometimes even repugnant to the clear and wood headed , but it’s inconveniently so.
Live with it.
wood headed.
Heh heh heh…
HEH HEH HEH!
heh heh heh…
You claiming that Rickey was just a business man and not a civil rights activist is pretty ignorant. Rickey was an architect of baseball teams. He was also a civil rights activist. The two are not mutually exclusive.
I don’t think anyone has said anything “racist” in this discussion. Its an open dialog with people merely suggesting that if you can do it for one or two players why stop there. Asking the question “where does it end?” Is viable as lots of players have given back to their country and society. How many players served in WWII yet no celebrations in their honor in the game.
It’s only the liberal meaning of “racist” because people are questioning why not more rather than just doting on the one
Yeah, I’m sure it’s purely a coincidence that they’re questioning the legitimacy of retiring 42 and 21 for men of color. Definitely just a crazy liberal notion. Why not a white history month too, amirite?
The only one bringing up ‘color’ is you, wooddick.
Wow,you showed me!
You showed everybody, big guy.
*Jordan shrugging gif*
Or maybe people simply don’t like numbers being universally retired? I don’t care if it’s 42, 21, 3,6….it’s just dumb. I also don’t like when everyone wears the same number because it becomes more difficult to tell the players apart. You seem to be the only one focused on race. Here’s a little food for thought: when everything is racist, nothing is.
Here’s a little food for thought: when everything is racist, nothing is.
I can taste the puke of that “food” in my mouth.
I don’t even know how to respond to that because it has no meaning
Griffey Junior also pitched a fit because he couldn’t wear #24 as a Red, it being retired for Big Dog Tony Perez.
I’m a big time history buff. As it happens, today is the day that the Great Emancipator, Abe Lincoln was shot. He lingered, never regained consciousness, and finally passed on April 15, 1865. Some coincidence, eh?
When Branch Rickey interviewed Jackie Robinson in Brooklyn, a picture of our 16th President hung on the wall behind his desk.
Make sure that Tim Anderson is there for Jackie Robinson Day.