The Mount Rushmore of the Boston Red Sox

David Ortiz, crushing it / US PRESSWIRE

We’re down to just two teams from the Junior Circuit–the Yankees and the Red Sox. These should both be pretty interesting.

The Red Sox playoff history is pretty well known. When they started off as the Boston Americans, they were strong out of the gate, finishing no lower than 3rd each of their first 4 years (1901-1904) and winning the World Series in 1903. After a run as a middling team from 1905 to 1911 (during which they changed their name to the Red Sox), they embarked on a great run from 1912 to 1918, where they appeared in and won 4 World Series.

After that, the team has had some major ups and downs. They had 6 straight last-place finishes from 1925 to 1930. They were quite respectable from the late 1930 through the 1950s, but made just one post-season appearance, losing the World Series in 1946. After being dismal for most of the 1960s, they made the World Series again in 1967, only to lose again. They were great throughout the 1970s but lost another Series in 1975.

Starting in 1986, the team has had a strong run continuing to present day. In the 26 completed season since then, they have finished lower than 3rd only 5 times. However, they also reeled off 7 more post-season exits until finally winning the World Series in 2004. They followed that up with another win in 2007, as well as 3 more playoff losses.

Anyway…let’s dig in.

Here are the top Red Sox batters in terms of career WAR:

Rk	Player	WAR/pos	From	To
1	Ted Williams	119.8	1939	1960
2	Carl Yastrzemski	90.1	1961	1983
3	Wade Boggs	70.3	1982	1992
4	Dwight Evans	62.3	1972	1990
5	Tris Speaker	53.1	1907	1915
6	Bobby Doerr	47.4	1937	1951
7	Jim Rice	44.3	1974	1989
8	Nomar Garciaparra	40.2	1996	2004
9	Carlton Fisk	37.2	1969	1980
10	Harry Hooper	36.4	1909	1920
11	Rico Petrocelli	35.7	1963	1976
12	David Ortiz	34.9	2003	2012
13	Jimmie Foxx	33.2	1936	1942
14	Reggie Smith	31.8	1966	1973
15	Manny Ramirez	31.0	2001	2008

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 7/18/2012.

Oh, boy. This is not going to be easy. David Ortiz, arguably one of the most important players the team’s ever had, is only 12th. We’ve got HOFers as low as 9th, 10th, and 13th. We’ve got 2 guys at the copy in Williams and Yaz who were lifelong Red Sox and are inner-circle HOFers. Where does this leave fantastic players like Boggs, Evans, and Speaker?

I really have no idea how decisions like this can be made. Forget it. Let’s look at pitchers.

Rk	Player	WAR	From	To
1	Roger Clemens	77.7	1984	1996
2	Cy Young	63.2	1901	1908
3	Pedro Martinez	51.9	1998	2004
4	Lefty Grove	42.5	1934	1941
5	Luis Tiant	34.1	1971	1978
6	Tim Wakefield	28.7	1995	2011
7	Smoky Joe Wood	28.3	1908	1915
8	Ellis Kinder	25.9	1948	1955
9	Dutch Leonard	25.7	1913	1918
10	Mel Parnell	25.5	1947	1956
11	Tex Hughson	23.1	1941	1949
12	Jon Lester	22.9	2006	2012
13	Josh Beckett	21.8	2006	2012
14	Ray Collins	21.7	1909	1915
15	Bob Stanley	21.6	1977	1989

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 7/18/2012.

Oh…Clemens, Cy Young, Pedro, and Lefty Grove? Is that all?

Seriously, I really don’t even know what to say. They have so many good players. And Curt Schilling isn’t even on here–all that guy did was win a game in every single playoff series the Red Sox played in 2004 and 2007.

When thinking of Red Sox managers, it’s hard not to think of Terry Francona. He took a team that hadn’t won a title in 86 years and delivered 2 in a 4-year span. The only other Red Sox manager to win two World Series was Bill Carrigan.

Anyway…good luck with this one, folks. For the first time, I’ve included all 15 guys from one of the lists–in this case, I put all 15 of the batters. The only ones I even considered leaving off were Harry Hooper and Reggie Smith, but thought better of it.

Please choose 4:

0 0 votes

Article Rating

78 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

11 years ago

Started with Yaz and Williams. As Red Sox lifers, I think they have to be on there. Next, I decided to balance things out a bit with two pitchers. Added Cy Young next since I’m pretty sure he wasn’t on the Indians list and he really should be on some team’s Rushmore. I decided to skip Clemens, not because of anything steroid related but because I think there’s still a lot of hatred in Boston toward him based on how he left the team. Not sure Red Sox fans would want him up there. I then looked at Martinez and… Read more »

nightfly

11 years ago

Reply to Ed

That’s my four as well, and for many of the same reasons. When you get this many outstanding players, you have to then look for people who were also icons and Boston heroes. The four you took are in both categories. I’d actually cheat a little and make a hitters Rushmore and then a pitchers’ Rushmore. (I’m sure there are other commenters taking this approach as well, so I’m going to list mine before reading down.) The trouble with that is, once you get past the two locks on either mountain, the other two spots become much more debatable. Just… Read more »

Adam Darowski

11 years ago

This is impossible.

I’m thinking Williams/Yaz/Clemens/Pedro, but I’m going to have to think on this some more. Sheesh.

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to Adam Darowski

Adam, I originally agreed on both counts, that “this is impossible”, and the player selection. Then I got to thinking that I need to honor the great pre-1920 teams that won five WS, so I was going to take Clemens off, and replace him with… Young? Speaker? My first thought was, replace a pitcher w/a pitcher, so Cy Young. But then I thought more about Speaker. Speaker probably still is the best all-around player in Red Sox history, with great hitting, defense, and baserunning. He has more WAR over seven full years than HOFer Bobby Doerr over his entire 14-year… Read more »

11 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

If the Red Sox are impossible, what will that make the Yankees??? I don’t even want to think about that one!

Author

Andy

11 years ago

Reply to Ed

I actually think the Yankees will be much more straightforward—Ruth, Gehrig, Dimaggio, and then Mantle, Berra, Ford, or someone else in the 4th spot.

11 years ago

Reply to Andy

Maybe. But there’s also Jeter and Rivera. Plus numerous other options.

Adam Darowski

11 years ago

Reply to Andy

Am I crazy for thinking Mantle over DiMaggio? Guess it all depends how much WWII credit you give.

Mike L

11 years ago

Reply to Ed

I think I’m going to agree with Andy on this point. Yankees have large contingent of great players, but some separate themselves. Yankees are going to be Ruth, Gehrig, Dimaggio, and the dogfight for the 4th spot. As much as I admire both Jeter and Rivera, neither is at the level of Mantle. FYI, from 1950-1956, playing on a loaded team that won six WS, Berra had three MVP, two 2nds, a 3rd and a 4th.

Chad

11 years ago

Reply to Mike L

Am I alone in thinking that Mick is more of a lock than DiMaggio? I think Joe is the 4th, so its moot to me, but just feels that way.

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to Mike L

I’d rate the Yankees all-time greats as follows:

1) Ruth is clearly #1
2) Gehrig and Mantle battle it out for #2; I’ll take Mantle for a better peak.
3) The other one from #2
4) DiMaggio
5) Yogi
6) Jeter

Somehow it doesn’t seem right that there’s no one in the Top-5 from their great run of 1996 – present. Also, it’s somewhat subjective, so DiMaggio is probably going to be ahead of everyone except Ruth.

Christopher

11 years ago

Reply to Mike L

Oh, for goodness sakes. It is the Red Sox Rushmore and you guys are arguing about the Yankees! No wonder Boston hates NY so much!!

Jeff H

11 years ago

I don’t worry about finding balance between eras or hitters vs. pitchers. I err on the side of contribution over a player’s entire career. Some great players on the list that were only with the team for 5-10 years (Young, Grove, Martinez, Speaker). I went with four lifers or near lifers: Williams, Yaz, Evans and Boggs.

Jeff H

11 years ago

Reply to Jeff H

I’m a Tiger fan though; I can understand Red Sox fans voting for guys that contributed to breaking the curse and winning a couple of WS.

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Reply to Jeff H

I don’t know the definition of “lifer”, but I am not sure how Red Sox fans would feel about the image of Wade Boggs on top of the NYC Police Horse riding around Yankee Stadium to celebrate the 1996 World Series etched into their Mount Rushmore. 🙂

Josh

11 years ago

As a Red Sox fan, it is my opinion that Manny Ramirez was far more important to the two most recent championships than Ortiz. If Duquette doesn’t sign him in 2000 (one move we should thank him for)…Schilling never agrees to come to Boston, Ortiz likely doesn’t become the hitter he became, and the foundation of a culture of winning is never built. That being said, this is still hard. Ted Williams is a no-brainer. Yaz is too. Then it gets tricky. I tend to give credit for being part of champions, so Pedro gets the next spot. Clemens would… Read more »

Author

Andy

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

It’s true that Babe Ruth has a claim to being on the ballot, but I just couldn’t imagine anyone voting for him for this, given how clearly identified he is with another franchise.

Josh

11 years ago

Reply to Andy

I happen to be someone who thinks the Sox should retire the No. 3 for Ruth, despite the fact that he never wore it in Boston, because he was the greatest player to have ever played for the team (but not necessarily the best Red Sox player ever, obviously) and I think retired numbers should recognize team history, and though he was not on the team long, he had a profound impact both during and after his tenure.

Voomo Zanzibar

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

It looks like with the Sox, Babe had roughly 20 WAR as a batter and 20 WAR as a pitcher. If I’m seeing that correctly that 40ish puts him in Nomar / Lefty Grove territory.

One note of similarity scores on the Babe:
At age 24 his comp (pitching)is Smokey Joe Wood
At age 26 his comp (batting) is Ted Williams

Voomo Zanzibar

11 years ago

Reply to Andy

@6
Andy, i think you underestimate how many smart-ass Yankee fans read your blog and would be delighted to vote for George Herman. And besides, it would not be a joke. He helped them to three titles, and in 1916 had arguably the greatest one-game pitching performance in WS history.

Chad

11 years ago

Williams, Yaz, Dewey, Cy

Junius worth

11 years ago

I have a soft spot for Johnny Pesky and Joe Cronin for some reason but don’t know if they belong.

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Reply to Junius worth

Not sure about Cronin, but I don’t see any problem with voting for the guy for which the “Pesky Pole” is named.

Speaking of Fenway Park, I think this is a scenario where the Ballpark could actually be up for nomination for a team’s Rushmore. Maybe even the Green Monster itself.

nightfly

11 years ago

Reply to Tmckelv

Interesting idea to put Fenway as one of the four. But in that case, I’d say that Pesky will have to settle for a pole, and no shame in it.

Forrest

11 years ago

This one’s HARD! No matter what I do, I’m leaving off somebody I don’t want to leave off. I ended up going with Pedro, Clemens, Teddy Ballgame, & Yaz. Anyone who leaves off Ted & Yaz, don’t know a thing about the Red Sox history. I was torn for the rest… but I chose Clemens ’cause he was basically the Red Sox during most of my youth. I thought Pedro deserved the last spot ’cause he really helped the team “end the curse”. I remember this old interview where he denied the curse’s existence with conviction. Yeah, an attitude like… Read more »

Evil Squirrel

11 years ago

How can any Mount Rushmore of the Boston Red Sox not include their only All Star selection from 1993 and 1994, Scott Cooper?

In the inexplicable absence of the Cooper Scooper from the ballot, I went Ted, Yaz, Clemens and Papi. Even with my recent player bias this was a toughie…

Phil

11 years ago

Williams and Yaz automatic, of course, then it gets tough–so many HOFers who split their careers. So I stuck with 10+ years as the minimum: Clemens next, and then, because of game 6, slight edge to Fisk over Rice.

Hartvig

11 years ago

Before I vote I have to go back and figure out if I voted for Foxx & Grove for the A’s and Speaker for the Indians- if I didn’t, then this absurdly difficult task will have become simply impossible. And we haven’t even begun to talk about characters like Bill “Spaceman” Lee or Dick “Dr. Strangeglove” Stuart or one of the most human of all owners, Tom Yawkey or one of the most despised, Harry Frazee.

At this moment my gut is telling me Young-Williams-Yaz-Clemens. We’ll see how/if that holds up.

Josh

11 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

If you don’t mind, could you please clarify your “most human of all owners” comment about Yawkey, considering his intolerance of black players and legacy as the owner of the last team in MLB to integrate? Yes, he bought a floundering team and rebuilt the ballpark, but he was not the messiah that some make him out to be (and I believed until I learned more).

Hartvig

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

As far as I’m aware most of the credit for Boston’s late arrival to integration lies with Joe Cronin plus Lou Boudreau and particularly Pinky Higgins. Yawkey of course hired them so was in that sense responsible but I’ve never seen any information that he was more of a racist than your typical white American was at that time. If you can point me to information that shows otherwise then your point stands.

Josh

11 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

“More racist than your typical white American” isn’t really an excuse. He still fostered a racist atmosphere for quite sometime. Did he arguably save the franchise after the sale of Ruth and the fire at Fenway? Yes. But to call him “the most human of all owners” seems to be a stretch.

Author

Andy

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

Seriously. Next somebody is going to say that a particular rapist did it gently.

Dan McCloskey

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

Well, if he was like everyone else then calling him “the most human,” is kind of right-on, isn’t it? 😉 It’s not like he said “most humane.”

nightfly

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

I take “most human” as a somewhat florid way to say that Yawkey was both virtuous and flawed; neither a saint nor a demon. One hears stories of his being very kindly and generous. His family’s southern holdings in South Carolina eventually were willed to the state as a national park, and he was a staunch supporter of the Jimmy Fund. Finally he was well-known and well-loved in Boston for sparing no expense to build a winning ball club – but of course, not if it meant employing black players. Most of what I know about the topic comes from… Read more »

Hartvig

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

First of all you left out the “one of the” part of the quote which is a little different context. Second other than the fact that they were the last to integrate- which was something that someone was going to be- and that he had one kind of well known and a couple of possible racists working for him I have still seen no evidence that any of this was done at his behest. It’s one thing to go along with the prevailing attitudes of your times, it’s another entirely to be one of the people manning the barricades. Maybe… Read more »

Nash Bruce

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

“b) it would have been pretty damned hypocritical of me to stand on the shoulders of giants and claim that I am better than them because I can see farther.”

Wow, Hartvig, forgive me for not knowing, but is that a line of yours? If so, or if not, damn, that is good stuff…..

Nash Bruce

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

oh yeah, Yaz, Williams, Young, Pedro.

11 years ago

Reply to Josh

@ Nash, not to detract from some great writing by hartvig, but its an old metaphor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants

Baseballs Deep

11 years ago

Many have said the same thing already – longevity counts.

My votes went to Ted, Yaz, Dewey and Clemens.

I picked Dewey over Boggs for two reasons – one, Boggs bawled like a baby in the dugout visible to all cameras after the 1986 World Series, and two, he hopped on the back of a horse to celebrate the 1996 World Series as a YANKEE.

For similar reasons, I considered Wakefield instead of Clemens, but it has to be Clemens

Chad

11 years ago

Reply to Baseballs Deep

Shouldn’t Boggs get some credit for drinking 64 beers?

Dan McCloskey

11 years ago

I went with Williams and Yaz (of course), then after that it came down to choosing two of four guys: Clemens, Young, Pedro and Boggs. It’s hard to argue against Clemens as the greatest pitcher in Sox history, so he’s the third. Then, I gave Pedro the edge over Young because of his contribution to the 2004 team and his peak brilliance. Boggs probably has the highest team WAR total (70) of any player I didn’t vote for throughout this process, but he was damn close too, obviously.

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Since the word “Go!” the Boston Americans/Red Sox have absolutely been crushing it. They one the WS in 1903 (which actually caused John McGraw to not let his team participate in the 1904 WS), and a third of the first 15 post season series that included the AL. They haven’t looked back. There was one prolonged down period (like every team) during the post-Babe Ruth/pre-Ted Williams years. But otherwise they have always been solid. Red Sox eras: 1) Early 20th century – Babe Ruth, Cy Young, Tris Speaker, Smoky Joe Wood, Dutch Leonard, Larry Gardener, Jimmy Collins, Freddie Parent, Ray… Read more »

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Reply to Tmckelv

“I want to include a 19th century rep (Young)”

That would be extra difficult since the Boston Americans/Red Sox did not play in the 19th century. I meant early 20th century.

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to Tmckelv

1) You mean “deadball era” instead of “19th century”, right? The Boston Red Sox never existed in the 19th century.

2) If you’re going to include pitchers the likes of Burgmuir, Drago, Nipper, Lamp and even a guy that doesn’t really exist (Sam Malone), HOW oh HOW can you leave out from Era #3 (1961-1970) “The Monster”, Dick Radatz?

Otherwise, a very good summation of the most significant players in the history of the Boston Red Sox.

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

I intended to add Radatz, it was a mistake, you are correct it is not complete without him. Thanks.

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Five MOUNT RUSHMORES for the Red Sox – No one asked for it, here it is anyway (see my #18): 1) Pre-1920 (1901-19) – -Tris Speaker -Cy Young -Smokey Joe Wood -Jimmy Collins (over Hooper, because he was a player and manager) 2) Between the Wars (1920-1941) – -Joe Cronin -Lefty Grove -Jimmy Foxx -Bobby Doerr (could also go under #3) 3) Pre-divisional play (1942-68) – -Ted Williams -Yaz (could go under #4, but his signature year was 1967) -Johnny Pesky (more of a “Lifetime Achievement” emeritus award, though he was outstanding with the RS) -Mel Parnell 4) Pre-wild card… Read more »

11 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

Does this mean that you voted 5 separate times???

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to Ed

See #18 (under #2) – no, I voted just once (Speaker/ Williams/ Yaz/ Pedro).

In #26 above, I am just expressing my frustration with the extreme over-abundance of good choices,and am listing more RS players who deserve recognition.

Phil

11 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

Or, looked at another way, the Yankees will be the easiest of all in choosing only one.

Richard Chester

11 years ago

Reply to Phil

Hey guys,I am an avid Yankee fan but I think that all discussions about them should be reserved for their own Mt. Rushmore blog. After all we took Babe Ruth from the Sox, let’s at least let them have their own blog.

Mike L

11 years ago

Reply to Richard Chester

I agree with Richard-I should have waited. Let the Sox fans have their moment in the sun.

11 years ago

Reply to Mike L

Yeah, I think I jumped the gun by mentioning the Yankees back in #20. But Richard is 100% correct. More Red Sox talk please!!!

Dan McCloskey

11 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

No Babe Ruth on your deadball era Mt. Rushmore?

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to Dan McCloskey

Ruth’s Red Sox career was short, at just over five years; Foxx at 6+ years is about the shortest career length I’ll accept. Plus, I am leaving Ruth for the Yankees.

11 years ago

Reply to Dan McCloskey

Ruth did come in 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd in WAR in the AL his last 4 yrs with the Sox, enough to get him a placement for sure.

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to PP

I suppose according to pure dominance Ruth would rank over Wood and Collins, but I wanted to acknowledge:

-Jimmy Collins’ 6+ years as player-manager and premier defensive third baseman, helping to establish Boston as an outstanding AL franchise.
-Joe Woods’ amazing 1912 season

MikeD

11 years ago

Easy. Williams, Yaz, Clemens and Boggs.

11 years ago

I went with Williams, Yaz, Clemens (hated to do it but 3 CYs, a 2nd place finish (probably should have had the 1 in ’90 too), a 3rd, an MVP, another 3rd place MVP finish (in ’90)), and a personal favorite, Dewey (19 yrs with the Sox, and a near HOFer, if not one in my opinion). I’m a Sox fan…

no statistician but

11 years ago

Before we get to the Yankees, I’m going to raise an issue that bothers me a little. We can call it the Cy Young issue, or the “what have you done for me lately” issue, or the “lack of historical perspective” issue, but what it amounts to is that far too many voters in these polls, it seems to me, vote on the basis of what they’ve seen or known in their lifetimes and nothing else except when an elephant like Ted Williams is present in the room, that is, one so huge that even they can’t ignore him. If… Read more »

no statistician but

11 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

Forgot to include this for #54:

Irony and sarcasm alert. Be warned.

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

I don’t think it’s because people here are forgetting Cy Young (after all, he’s gotten 43 votes so far). Let me try to explain: Ted Williams and Yaz are the two obvious picks, then a lot of people are trying to first pick a pitcher, then someone from a different era than Yaz and Ted. Young, Clemens, and Pedro are the three leading candidates for “greatest Red Sox pitcher ever”. However (despite what you may think), Cy Young is not clearly the best pitcher by a wide margin. All three were quite dominant, but also pitched at least half their… Read more »

no statistician but

11 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

I think you miss my point, and it’s only about the poor support for Young as an instance. Throughout these ballots for the older teams there has been a plethora of posts by enthusiasts for more recent players, players “I saw,” favorite players. Fine. Grover Cleveland, the guy Pete Alexander was named after, was a huge favorite among presidential aficionados at the time Mt. Rushmore was conceived. Since Cal Coolidge, president at the time, insisted on Washington, one Democrat, and two Republicans for the carving, a popular vote might have immortalized Cleveland’s pudgy countenance in place of Jefferson’s handsome features.… Read more »

Hartvig

11 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

snb- I get your point and I’m largely in agreement. I do think that while there needs be be some consideration for discounting performance prior to or because of historical markers- 60’6″, the live-ball era, minor leagues, breaking the color barrier, expansion, steroids- I also think that we need to be careful not to over compensate also. Just as there is little argument the Honus Wagner belonging on the Mount Rushmore of the Pittsburgh Pirates I think there should be little argument that Cy Young also belongs on someones Mount Rushmore as well. But unlike some of the players that… Read more »

Lawrence Azrin

11 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

I get your point, if your point is that older (say, pre-WWII) players often don’t get their due from many fans who consider themselves knowledgeable concerning MLB history. I do not get your point, if your point is that Cy Young is an obvious choice for the Red Sox Mt Rushmore. I also see a certain logical inconsistency – if you are encouraging people not to diminish the value of older players, why is Young so much a better choice than Speaker, who started with the Red Sox only eight years (as a regular) after Young? They have roughly the… Read more »

11 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

as an aside, I’ve been to Cy Young’s home (boyhood home, I think, can’t tell if it’s still open), driving through Ohio 15 or so years ago I saw a sign for it, bought a little blue booklet about his life too, was quite fun, unexpected, I still pick Clemens over him though

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Not being a Red Sox fan, I think I underestimated how much people liked Pedro (in terms of a Red Sox Mount Rushmore). I am surprised he has so many votes. It is NOT a comment about how he shouldn’t get any votes, I just found it interesting how far off I was.

Even if I vote for someone who ends up with a low total (like Francona this time), I can typically guess who would be the guy(s) that would get the most votes from other people. Not this time with Pedro.

nightfly

11 years ago

Reply to Tmckelv

With Pedro, it was three things. First, he was lights-out every single time. His peak is one of the most ridiculous things ever. It was a must-see game when he was pitching. Second, he loved the Sox. He gave them his best and probably shortened his career by doing so. Third, he did all that in the aftermath of the fanbase’s acrimonious falling-out with Roger Clemens – the golden arm traded after being out-of-shape and disinterested, possibly over-the-hill, and his responding by having a ridiculous second career that seemed calculated to completely piss off all of Boston, not least of… Read more »

tag

11 years ago

Someone jumped the gun on me by considering Fenway for a spot on the Rushmore. I had already concluded that Wrigley Field would be on the Cubs Rushmore. But I like the idea of The Monster for Fenway and the enire park for Wrigley. Baseball sells nostalgia like Apples sells i-whatevers and is excellent at it. If you think of other old-time sports like horse racing and boxing, they are unable to compete with baseball in the 21st century for various reasons, but a major one is that they are unable to sell nostalgia as intelligently and efficiently. A lot… Read more »

topper009

11 years ago

The more I think about these the less I care about the stats or WAR. It should be a hall of fame with the emphasis on actual fame for the franchise, and I like to spread it out over all the different eras. Whereas I think the real HOF should be about the stats. I also am leaning more and more to guys who spent their entire careers or at least all of their productive years with the team. The early RoSox won 4 WS is 7 series, much better than the current team that bought 2 in 4 years.… Read more »

tag

11 years ago

Reply to topper009

Topper, not to get all pedantic on you but you used a semi-colon poorly; a colon would have been more appropriate there :-).

I liked the rest of your points, especially about Papi (if not the rest of your punctuation: why the question mark after the statement about Francona?) 🙂 :-). At least you didn’t use any exclamation marks! 🙂 🙂 🙂

no statistician but

11 years ago

Reply to topper009

topperOO9:

Perhaps unintentionally you suggest that Cy Young was never in the WS. In fact, he was in the first real one ever played (to me, the 19th Century post-season series don’t qualify. Only revisionist history considers them). In the 1903 best of 9, he had a 2-1 record and a 1.85 ERA. Bill Dinneen’s 3-1 record outshone him, but together they put the powerful Pirates of Wagner, Clarke, and Leach to bed in eight games.

topper009

11 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

I meant more of the dynasty version of the team from 1912-1918. 1903 was a good start but pretty isolated.

Tmckelv

11 years ago

Reply to topper009

I am not saying that anyone else must vote for Francona, but the Sox had a lot of great rosters between 1919 and 2003, but none of those teams won a WS.

You spend the first few sentences of your post explaining how stats are not as important as overall “Fame” for these Mount Rushmores. I think that can extend to the managers also. I didn’t choose Francona because of his tactical moves, it was the fact that he is the only Red Sox WS winning manager for the last 80+ years. He is pretty famous for that.

Paul E

11 years ago

Speaker, Williams, Yaz, Fisk/Rice/? or if that doesn’t work for you, how about: DiMaggio, Zarilla, Malzone, Conigliaro (just kidding)

Steven

11 years ago

Ted Williams, Yaz, Cy Young, and Dick Williams. Dick Williams really turned the franchise around after several years of mediocrity. The Sox were probably headed for multi-purpose stadium Hell until the rest of the world discovered Fenway in 1967.

e pluribus munu

11 years ago

It’s helpful that we’ve reached the Red Sox Rushmore late in the game, since the totals on the Athletics and Indians voting makes it clear that Grove, Speaker, and Foxx all have an HHS mountain home already. Williams (not Dick) and Yaz seem clear to everyone. I personally think Cy Young is not a difficult choice – he won nearly 200 games (192-112) in the team’s first eight seasons, with an ERA+ of 147. Then there’s the Clemens: his record is eerily similar to Young’s (192-111/ERA+ 144) – they could be twins. Of course, Clemens took 13 years to get… Read more »

Rico Petrocelli

11 years ago

Late to party.

Voted THEN read all your resoning.

Williams / Yaz and then…no clear answer

There are different tracts based on gracimg the uniform or nostalgia
Don Draper says that “nostalgia” means “pain from an old wound,”

Gracing: Williams / Yaz / Pedro / Manny…. HM = Foxx, Speaker

nostalgia: Williams / Yaz / Tiant / Petrocelli… HM = Dewey, Wakefield

Final Williams / Yaz / Manny / Petrocelli

Brent

11 years ago

Williams and Yaz, Clemens and Young. I did make it easier on myself because I had Grove in Philly and Speaker in Cleveland. I could probably be talked into Pedro over either pitcher I chose.