I didn’t think it was possible to read something dumber and more nonsensical than Reilly’s “Let’s arbitrarily reward the MVPs” article within the next month, much less within two days and on the same site.

This is not dumber and more nonsensical than Reilly. Take that back.

Oakland Athletics:
Reggie Jackson, Mark McGwire, Rickey Henderson, Billy Beane

Giant stone carvings of heads are the new market inefficiency.

Also, Derek Jeter over Lou Gehrig... nice.

I don't get the lead-in. This seems to be an article in which a guy is just musing about something, not some moralistic faux-logical diatribe. Yes, it has the little shots at people, but it is not like Reilly's thing.

Also, Derek Jeter over Lou Gehrig... nice.

Yeah, I noticed that too. The Yankees really need 5. Ruth, Gehrig, Dimaggio, Berra, and Mantle.

A long roll call of options, including Cy Young, Tris Speaker,

Someone should tell the numbnuts at ESPN that Young and Speaker went in the HOF with Cleveland caps.

Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski, Pedro Martinez, David Ortiz

what about TEH FEAR?

I can't believe he got the Yankees wrong.

Jeter over Gehrig!?!? Gehrig is super-duper inner circle, best-starting 9 in history material.
As is Berra.

The Yankees have 4 guys you can argue are the best ever at their positions (Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle and Berra), and he leaves two of them off in favor of Jeter.

I can see DiMaggio over Berra. But either Gehrig or Berra need to be the 4th.

Edit:
The Yankees really need 5. Ruth, Gehrig, Dimaggio, Berra, and Mantle.

Concur!

I don't get the hate either. I mean, his choices may be wrong, but what a surprise. This is ultimately a pointless exercise, but I'll be damned if it ain't a pointless FUN exercise. One I think we've done before, but hey why not?

I should also point out that no one REALLY believes that the 4 presidents on the real Mt Rushmore were the best in our history

("What? No Woodrow Wilson?")

I'm a sucker for this kind of stuff. Anything that can be done in list format or something similar usually catches my attention. I get WAY too frustrated when stupid things are done with it (e.g. Jeter over Gehrig).

seem to remember it was done for NL a while back. cards was something like musial / hornsby / gibson / pujols or maybe schoendienst for hornsby ... anyway that's what i would say.

BLUE JAYS: Halladay, Stieb, Carter, Delgado
ORIOLES: Ripken, Palmer, Robinson, Robinson
RED SOX: Williams, Yaz, Pedro, Boggs
RAYS: Kazmir, Upton, Longoria, Crawford
YANKEES: Jeter, O'Neill, Leyritz, Brosius

no one REALLY believes that the 4 presidents on the real Mt Rushmore were the best in our history

i would say that was the consensus at the time. remember it was completed in the mid-30s. teddy had a big reputation for a long time.

I should also point out that no one REALLY believes that the 4 presidents on the real Mt Rushmore were the best in our history

Well, they started carving it in 1927. As of 1927, you could make a pretty solid argument for Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Roosevelt. Who's obviously missing? Jackson? Polk?

Claudell Washington, Stanley Jefferson, Teddy Higuera, Abraham Nunez, done.

Your right--Teddy Roosevelt is the Pie Traynor of presidents

I think I'd go Alomar or McGriff (although that does make two 1B) instead of Carter for the Jays

Claudell Washington, Stanley Jefferson, Teddy Higuera, Abraham Nunez, done.

I think Ted Lilly has an argument over Higuera.

Orioles (Cal, Jim Palmer and the Robinsons): Good enough, I can live with that. Maybe put in Earl instead of Frank.

Red Sox: Pedro and Papi shouldn't be in that. Replace them with Pesky (not for his playing so much as the fact he is the quintessential Red Sock) and Cy Young-era type guys and maybe it'd be good.

Yankees (Ruth, DiMaggio, Mantle and Jeter): NO NO NO NO. Gehrig > Jeter.

Rays (Crawford, McGriff, Kazmir, Maddon): What, no Greg Vaughn!?! (I kid, I kid)

Blue Jays (Carlos Delgado, Dave Stieb, Roy Halladay, Pat Gillick): Needs more Tom Cheek.

White Sox (Frank Thomas, Luke Appling, Nellie Fox and Shoeless Joe): Good enough.

Indians (Bob Feller, Tris Speaker, Jim Thome, Nap Lajoie): Fine.

Tigers (Cobb, Greenberg, Kaline, Harwell): Perfect.

Royals (George Brett, Hal McRae, Frank White, Dan Quisenberry): Mike Sweeney is the only guy who I can truly say has even the slightest ability to say he was snubbed. Bo Jackson wasn't there long enough.

Twins (Puckett, Killebrew, Carew, Hrbek): Can Walter Johnson get a honorable mention here?

Angels (Nolan Ryan, Tim Salmon, Garret Anderson, Vlad): The Rally Monkey was snubbed.

A's (Reggie, McGwire, Rickey! and Billy Beane): I'm sorry, but when they didn't even change the nickname you should be allowed to use the KC and the Philly A's as well. Ergo, this list is crap.

Mariners (Edgar, Griffey, ICHIRO!, Dave Niehaus): No complaints.

Rangers (Ryan, Pudge, Palmeiro and Juan Gonzalez): Not much to work with with the Rangers, I guess.

They also have NL at this link.

Well, they started carving it in 1927. As of 1927, you could make a pretty solid argument for Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Roosevelt. Who's obviously missing? Jackson? Polk?

Jefferson is actually the big miss. His greatness is all pre-Presidency. His Presidency was actually a huge failure.

If you're going for founding fathers, Jefferson doesn't have anything over Adams, or Madison.

INDIANS: Cy, Speaker, Feller, Manny (?)
ROYALS: Brett, White, Quiz, Saberhagen
TIGERS: Cobb, Gehringer, Greenberg, Kaline
WHITE SOX: Thomas, Fox, Aparicio, Fisk (Veeck, honorary)
TWINS: Killebrew, Puckett, Carew, Blyleven

I should also point out that no one REALLY believes that the 4 presidents on the real Mt Rushmore were the best in our history

Good point. If we are going to do this exercise properly, it should be three great players, and then one guy from the current team.

INDIANS: Cy, Speaker, Feller, Manny (?)

I'm sick and tired of people like Esoteric and Albert Belle leaving Albert Belle off the Indians' Mt. Rushmore.

Clicked over to the NL side to check out the Pirates. Figured Clemente, Stargell and Wagner were no brainers. Was interested in the fourth. Picking Bob Prince was interesting.

Sorry if there was another thread already for the NL.

ATHLETICS: Rickey, Reggie, Eckersley, Connie Mack
MARINERS: Griffey, Ichiro, Edgar, Buhner (someday maybe Felix)
RANGERS: Ryan, maybe Howard, plus a bunch of steroid cheats (JuanGone, A-Rod, Palmeiro, etc.)
ANGELS: Vlad, Ryan (on two Rushmores!), Anderson (!), Autry

ATHLETICS: Rickey, Reggie, Eckersley, Connie Mack

XX or Grove over Eck, definitely.

Good point. If we are going to do this exercise properly, it should be three great players, and then one guy from the current team.

wait a minute--does this mean you wanna put Barack Hussein on the real Mt Rushmore?

Royals (George Brett, Hal McRae, Frank White, Dan Quisenberry): Mike Sweeney is the only guy who I can truly say has even the slightest ability to say he was snubbed. Bo Jackson wasn't there long enough.

I think Amos Otis was one of the top four Royals of All-Time, but I doubt many other Royals fans feel the same way. I'd take Quiz off, great as he was.

Without looking at the article (aside from the blurb) or what anyone has said:

A's: Eddie Collins, Reggie Jackson, Lefty Grove, Jimmie Foxx
BoX: Ted Williams, Yaz, Joe Cronin, Wade Boggs
CWS: Frank Thomas, Ted Lyons, Luke Appling, Ed Walsh
CLE: Bob Feller, Tris Speaker, Albert Belle, Lou Boudreau
DET: Ty Cobb, Sam Crawford, Al Kaline, Alan Trammell
NYY: Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle
StB/Balt: Brooks Robinson, Jim Palmer, Urban Shocker, George Sisler, Cal Ripken
Wash/MIN: Harmon Killebrew, Walter Johnson, Rod Carew, Kirby Puckett

Edited to change my honorary Brown.

I'm biased, but I think Pedro should be on there for the Sox. His arrival marked the ascendance of Red Sox fandom into its current state of over-the-top craziness.

If not Pedro, then Ortiz or Manny. But someone from the second-most successful era in Red Sox history is a given, I think.

Williams and Yaz, obviously. Then the fourth one is harder, for me. The Sox have had a lot of all-time greats who played a considerable amount of time elsewhere. If that's an issue, maybe go with lifer Johnny Pesky. If it's not, maybe Cy Young?

PS. I never liked Boggs. Plus he played for the Yankees.

WHITE SOX: Thomas, Fox, Aparicio, Fisk (Veeck, honorary)

Appling was way better than Aparicio.

You can argue that Ted Lyons or Eddie Collins belongs on over Fox or Fisk.

I'd rather have Finley than Beane for Oakland. He moved the team to the city and won 3 WS after all.

Finley, Rickey, Fingers, Dave Stewart. It's not the best 4, but it's representative, controversial and in Fingers' case, the 'stache looks good in stone. Maybe flip Eck for Stew if you want.

XX or Grove over Eck, definitely.

You're right, I'm high. I revise to Rickey, Reggie, Grove, and Mack. XX is so close but his split between Philly and Boston SLIGHTLY favors the Sox over Lefty's. Grove may have made more All-Star teams with the Red Sox, but he was better with the Athletics, including his insane 1931 season.

Appling was way better than Aparicio.

He most certainly was, but living as I do here on the South Side, you wouldn't believe how much the crusty old-timers still adore Aparicio. I'm affected by that. The idea of a "Mount Rushmore" is something of a popularity contest, after all.

(tongue in cheek) The great mistake with the Stimulus bill was that they missed the opportunity to do a massive "make-work" project that would employ hundreds and bring good amounts of tourism dollar: Mount Rushmore II. Honor the great presidents past the point that RUshmore was constructed.

The question is, who'd be on it. The only guy I think EVERYONE can agree on is FDR. Who else? Going by a recent CSPAN poll of presidential historians, the 4 on a second Mt. Rushmore would be FDR, Harry Truman, JFK and Ike. But, sadly, there is no way in hell that in this day and age that a 3-1 Democrat advantage on Rushmore could occur (besides, Truman's awesomeness isn't something you can describe to a kid, which is essential in 1st grade history class). So Truman would be replaced with Reagan.

You gotta have someone who played on the '04 and '07 Red Sox teams.

Picking Bob Prince was interesting.

Arky Vaughn gets no respect. He's pretty clearly the second greatest shortstop in history. (Third if you count A-Rod as a shortstop)

The only guy I think EVERYONE can agree on is FDR.

I wouldn't agree with that. But then again, I'm not really a fan of any of the post-World War I presidents.

You gotta have someone who played on the '04 and '07 Red Sox teams.

Agreed. I actually like Schoenfield's Red Sox list. If you want to take off one of the two modern guys for a Cronin or Boggs, I guess I see the case, but Pedro was TRANSCENDANT during his peak Boston years (moreso than Boggs ever was) and it seems like Ortiz has as many great Red Sox moments under his belt as every other member of the team ever combined.

You HAVE to have Pedro in there, though.

I wouldn't agree with that. But then again, I'm not really a fan of any of the post-World War I presidents.

Okay, FDR is the only guy almost everyone can agree on.

NATIONAL LEAGUE FAST-FORWARD SELECTAH!

NL EAST

EXPOS/NATIONALS: Raines, Dawson, Carter, Staub

METS: Seaver, Keith Hernandez, Wright (premature, perhaps?), and one of the many Metsfans here can tell me whether I should choose Strawberry or Gooden.

PHILLIES: Schmidt, Roberts, Carlton, Bunning

BRAVES: Aaron, Spahn, Maddux, Matthews (this one is so hard...Chipper? Smoltz? Niekro? Murphy?)

MARLINS: ???? Hanley, Livan (?), Sheffield (?), Dontrelle (?)

Feller, Nap, and Tris are no-brainers for the Indians, but Thome just isn't #4. Yes, he's the team's all-time home run leader, but Earl Averill, Lou Boudreau, Larry Doby, and Mel Harder all make more sense to me in a historical context.

Actually, I'd choose Herb Score. Short playing career, but nobody is more synonymous with the Cleveland Indians of the latter half of the 20th century than Herb Score.

If you've gotta have someone from the '90s teams, Thome is the guy, but I don't like the idea of picking someone just because of when they played.

the 4 on a second Mt. Rushmore would be FDR, Harry Truman, JFK and Ike.

Four consecutive presidents were the best? Really? And what is great about Truman? Yeah, he dropped the bomb, but he wrote the Truman Doctrine, a philosophy that lead to needless and unjustified involvement in Korea and later Vietnam. And Ike? He of the McCarthism and Korea War involvement? Put up Reagan and Clinton.

Announcer Mt Rushmore: Scully, Caray, Miller and Scooter the talking baseball.

What about Randy Johnson for the Mariners? I think I'd go with him over Buhner or Dave Niehaus. So, Griffey, Ichiro, Edgar, RJ.

Also, for the Indians, I'll say Feller, Lajoie, Doby, Belle. Aside from Feller, though, that's a tough one - Speaker, Manny and Thome are are all logical choices, too.

Gehrig over Jeter is a no-brainer. Yankees: Ruth, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle. Berra really should be there, too, but if you're limiting this to four, those seem like obvious choices. The Yankees really have a five, or even six (with Berra and Jeter) man Mt. Rushmore.

Didn't look at the NL, but the Mets: Seaver, Straw, Piazza, Tug McGraw. Wright or Reyes will be on there soon - hell, you could put them on now, and I won't argue the point. A lot of people would probably put Doc ahead of McGraw, but I feel like having both Doc and Darryl is kinda repetitive, seeing as they basically represent the same thing and often mentioned in the same breath. Maybe you could do a two-headed hydra called DocDarryl, with a vial of cocaine stuck up its nose. Anyway, I'll just go with McGraw, mostly on account of the whole "You Gotta Believe!" thing, even though there's a number of Mets who were more valuable players.

NL CENTRAL

PIRATES: Clemente, Wagner, Stargell, Vaughan

REDS: Bench, Morgan, Larkin, Rose

CUBS: Banks, Williams, Santo, Sandberg

CARDINALS: Musial, Hornsby, Gibson, Ozzie

BREWERS: Yount, Molitor, Fingers, Uecker

ASTROS: Biggio, Bagwell, Wynn, Cruz

Actually, now that I think of it for Oakland, I'd go Finley, Fingers, Rickey and Bill King. That's even better.

He of the McCarthism and Korea War involvement?

I also blame Ike for not using the time machine hidden in the Washington Monument to go back and not get involved in Korea.

Oakland: Fingers (gotta get the stash), RICKEY!, Reggie, Connie Mack

Team Steroids: Canseco, Clemens, Bonds, A-Roid!

it seems like Ortiz has as many great Red Sox moments under his belt as every other member of the team ever combined.

That's at least partly a function of how widespread sports coverage is now and the increased opportunity to perform in the playoffs.

The last month of Yaz's 1967 is well known. Here are some other highlights...

1967 World Series: .400 AVG, .500 OBP, .840 (in low-offense era)
last two weeks of 1972 season: .255 AVG, .339 OBP, .569 SLG
1975 ALCS: .455 AVG, .500 OBP, .818 SLG
last two weeks of 1978 season: .250 AVG, .379 OBP, .521 SLG
And he homered in the 1978 playoff game.

These memories may not stand out as much as Ortiz's heroics in part because they happened longer ago (we forget), in part because baseball didn't do as much "OMG Teh Clutch!!!111!!!", in part because the raw numbers aren't as impressive (thanks to their occurring in lower offensive eras), and in part because, ultimately, the Red Sox didn't win in those seasons. That's a lot of the reason why Ortiz appears to be more of a human highlight reel, why Yaz's and Dwight Evans's heroics recede in our memory.

Jefferson is actually the big miss. His greatness is all pre-Presidency. His Presidency was actually a huge failure.

Oh, I don't know. The Louisiana Purchase was pretty sweet, right? The embargo was silly, but not legacy-killing silly.

The four on Rushmore are all universally liked, three for their qualities and one for half-quality, half-personality (that'd be TR, folks). And he rolled back the Alien & Sedition Acts, so that's cool. It's a pretty good selection.

As for modern day...FDR is in; liberals love the New Deal and conservatives like his foresight on the war; Truman might get more support from conservatives than liberals right now; JFK is...well, JFK has Camelot and the whole assassination thing (though so does Garfield, so that probably shouldn't be a prime criterion), so he'd probably make it on personality but accomplishment seems difficult; Ike is warmly regarded as a grandfatherly patron through the quiet 50s...Reagan's got great numbers with conservatives, good numbers with independents, and still draws okay with Democrats (conservative wing, obviously).

I guess if Democrats had to pick two it'd be FDR & JFK and Republicans would take Reagan & Ike.

The real travesty is James K. missing the original cut. What more do you want from the man?!

NL WEST

GIANTS: Mays, Ott, Marichal, Bonds (*sigh*)
DIAMONDBACKS: RJ (I put him here instead of the Mariners, but it's a close one), Schilling, Luis Gonzalez (I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it's true), Finley (?)
DODGERS: Robinson, Snider, Koufax, Sutton
PADRES: Gwynn, Winfield, Garvey, Randy Jones (too early for Peavy)
ROCKIES: Helton, Walker, Bichette (?), Holliday (?)

Whoops. I went back and dropped my edit in the wrong place. The Alien and Sedition Act comment should follow the TJ comment.

Jefferson is actually the big miss. His greatness is all pre-Presidency. His Presidency was actually a huge failure.

Ummm... what? Granted, he completely disregarded his own principles (radicals usually do) - but the Louisiana Purchase is probably somewhere in the top 5 of most important events in American history. You can argue that the US would have inevitably inherited or otherwise taken the territory, but TJ pulled the trigger requiring no bloodshed at an amazing price.

CUBS: Banks, Williams, Santo, Sandberg

I'd replace Sandberg or Santo with Hartnett...

Let's keep politics out of this thread.

SERIOUSLY. KEEP IT THE F*CK OUT.

Oh, I don't know. The Louisiana Purchase was pretty sweet, right? The embargo was silly, but not legacy-killing silly.

The four on Rushmore are all universally liked, three for their qualities and one for half-quality, half-personality (that'd be TR, folks). And he rolled back the Alien & Sedition Acts, so that's cool. It's a pretty good selection.

Good point, though I wonder why you refer to TR as only "half-quality." You could make a pretty reasonable case that he was the fourth-best president, after Lincoln, Washington and FDR.

I can't help but wonder if Thomas Jefferson has joined the likes of Nirvana and batting average in the halls of the so-overrated-they're-underrated. Yeah, he did some dumb stuff, and I definitely come down on the Hamilton side of the Hamilton/Jefferson debate, but he was hardly a huge failure or anything.

MARLINS: ???? Hanley, Livan (?), Sheffield (?), Dontrelle (?)

Good sir. SIR! I say good sir! to you, sir! GOOD SIR!

The Marlins must include Jeff Conine. For the love of Sad King Billy (the Marlin) he is called "Mr. Marlin!"

It'd be Jeff Conine, Mike Lowell, Miguel Cabrera, and Dontrelle Willis for pure "face of the franchise-ness". Hanley would supplant Cabrera or Willis in a few years.

ROCKIES: Helton, Walker, Bichette (?), Holliday (?)

Coors Field has to be on there somewhere

The idea of a "Mount Rushmore" is something of a popularity contest, after all.

Which is why, for your Cardinals entry, I'd 86 Hornsby (peerless as he was) and put in Pujols or Ken Boyer.

Dayn -

Yeah, I just figured it was too early for Pujols. But he was at the top of my mind.

Four consecutive presidents were the best? Really? And what is great about Truman? Yeah, he dropped the bomb, but he wrote the Truman Doctrine, a philosophy that lead to needless and unjustified involvement in Korea and later Vietnam. And Ike? He of the McCarthism and Korea War involvement?

To be fair, Eisenhower despised McCarthy, and he inherited the Korean War.

The most questionable one to me is Kennedy. What did he do, besides die?

The most questionable one to me is Kennedy. What did he do, besides die?

he porked Marilyn--that's gotta count for sumpin

Ike is warmly regarded as a grandfatherly patron through the quiet 50s

Additionally, I would say Ike had pretty decent foresight.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

Original teams only. Tie breakers go to the most beloved in their day:

AL:

O's: Brooks, Cal, Earl, Frank

Sox: Ted, Yaz, Pedro, Looie

Yanks: Babe, Lou, Joe, Mick

White Sox: Thomas, Minoso, Appling, Veeck

Indians: Feller, Boudreau, Veeck, Thome

Tigers: Cobb, Greenberg, Kaline, Harwell

Nats / Twins: Johnson, Killebrew, Puckett, Hrbek

A's: Mack, Grove, Rickey, Collins

NL:

Dodgers: Robinson, Campanella, Reese, Koufax

Giants: Matty, Ott, Mays, Bonds

Cards: Rickey, Musial, Gibson, Pujols

Phils: Alexander, Roberts, Ashburn, Schmidt

Cubs: Banks, Santo, Sandberg, Unknown Bleacher Bum

Reds: Rose, Morgan, Bench, Kluszewski

Braves: Aaron, Mathews, Spahn, Maddox

Pirates: Wagner, Vaughan, Clemente, Maz

Expansion teams are all too diluted, and their players move around too much to be identified with just one team. Come back in 50 years.

Good point, though I wonder why you refer to TR as only "half-quality." You could make a pretty reasonable case that he was the fourth-best president, after Lincoln, Washington and FDR.

What I'm saying is that T.R. gets on Rushmore half because of his accomplishments as president and half because of how colorful a character he was. If T.R. does everything T.R. did but with the vivaciousness of a Coolidge, he doesn't make it.

Or maybe he does, but it's certainly more difficult.

Coolidge. There's a man who should be on a mountain somewhere. But Coolidge would never approve of such a public expenditure, nor such grandiose exaltation of a public servant.

I don't get the lead-in. This seems to be an article in which a guy is just musing about something, not some moralistic faux-logical diatribe. Yes, it has the little shots at people, but it is not like Reilly's thing.

I didn't say it was worse, per se, but it's dumber and much more nonsensical. Really, Shoeless Joe Jackson? Ortiz over Manny, much less Boggs? If Shoeless Joe, how the #### not Clemens? It has no internal logic, it has no point, and it's just...wrong. Somehow he is objectively wrong on a subjective matter. Reilly was bitter and silly, but you didn't see him arguing that 2 of Bonds' MVPs should have gone to Craig Counsell and Quinton McCracken.

This is laying aside the point that Schoenfield thieved from a Primate blatantly and then derisively dismissed the reaction here. David, I don't know if you still come around, but if you do, you're still a dillweed. (I'm trying to build a comeback for that term.)

Additionally, I would say Ike had pretty decent foresight.

That he did:

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

Coolidge. There's a man who should be on a mountain somewhere. But Coolidge would never approve of such a public expenditure, nor such grandiose exaltation of a public servant.

This is about the fifth or so tribute to Coolidge I have seen here in the past month.

Damn liberal circle jerks.

David, I don't know if you still come around, but if you do, you're still a dillweed. (I'm trying to build a comeback for that term.)

Ahh.

Tie breakers go to the most beloved in their day:


.....Indians: Feller, Boudreau, Veeck, Thome

then my boy Rocky has to be on there

Tie breakers go to the most beloved in their day:

.....Indians: Feller, Boudreau, Veeck, Thome

then my boy Rocky has to be on there

Yeah, you're right. But damn, it's tough to know which one to scratch. I think I'll just squeeze all five in there and say who's gonna stop me?

Marlins: Huizenga, Loria, Samson, Bartman

Padres: Gwynn, Hoffman, RJones, San Diego Famous Chicken

then my boy Rocky has to be on there

Yeah, you're right. But damn, it's tough to know which one to scratch. I think I'll just squeeze all five in there and say who's gonna stop me?

I like your style--think outside of the mountain

I think the Dodgers should just be a giant stone Garvey-head. Perhaps with the words "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY" carved underneath.

Yeah, you're right. But damn, it's tough to know which one to scratch. I think I'll just squeeze all five in there and say who's gonna stop me

I think Colavito has to move Thome. If Thome had been a career Indian, then you move Veeck, but Thome went FA.

Here's a question: Who would go on an MLB Mt. Rushmore?

Babe Ruth
Jackie Robinson
Alexander Cartwright?
Landis?
Branch Rickey?

PILOTS: Michener, Hegan, Harper, Bouton.

PILOTS: Michener, Hegan, Harper, Bouton

Two authors and two ballplayers. Good call. My take:

PILOTS: Bouton, Schultz, Oyler, Selig

Ahh.

?

Here's a question: Who would go an MLB Mt. Rushmore?

Ruth and Robinson, I think, are inarguable. I might go with ...

Ruth, Robinson, William Hulbert, Marvin Miller

Yeah, I think I might go with Miller as well.

PILOTS: Bouton, Schultz, Oyler, Selig

Budweiser

Think of all the new merchandise teams could stell.

Paging MS Word spellchecker. Spellchecker to the white courtesy phone, please.

The MLB Rushmore is Ruth, Jackie Robinson, Marvin Miller and Roberto Clemente. If we are going solely by players it is Ruth, Robinson, Flood and Clemente.

For those of us not as into the labor wars, I'll go with Ruth, Robinson, Mays, and Bonds. If not Bonds, then Cy Young or Sandy Koufax or some such.

Teddy was put on Mt Rushmore partly cause the guy in charge luvved him and wanted him up there. The "determining the 4 faces" is really a pretty good story.

But actually, I think the four up there are the right ones. I've got FDR at #5.

If not Bonds, then Cy Young or Sandy Koufax or some such.

How did it happen that Walter Johnson went from being near-universally acknowledged as the top SP in history to being an afterthought in little more than a generation?

I mean, I'm not saying he is/was the greatest of all time - when you combine both peak and career - but he ought to be in the discussion. I wasn't a kid that long ago, but in the 70s and 80s, he was just the other side of Cobb/Ruth/Wagner as a no-brainer on the all-time best team discussions. 3509 used to mean something, dammit.

He's even got an all-time great nickname!

Walt?

I hate this site.

WWWJT


A ####### fastball, you #####.

According to CSPAN's recent poll of American historians it's:

Lincoln, Washington, FDR, Teddy

Truman comes in #5, Jefferson finishes #7.

So, when people are talking about removing one from the real Rushmore and adding a 4th, it's the removal of Jefferson not Teddy.

Bull Moose forever!!!

He's even got an all-time great nickname!

Barney?

Eugene, IIRC from a "The American Presidency" course I took just two years ago, Truman ranks way higher with the historians than he does with the common folk. And I think vicey-versey (though not to the degree) for Jefferson.

He's even got an all-time great nickname!


shame Walter Johnson never met Lionel James

According to CSPAN's recent poll of American historians it's:

Lincoln, Washington, FDR, Teddy

Truman comes in #5, Jefferson finishes #7.

Number 6 was Kennedy -- a truly bizarre choice, if you ask me. I am a supporter, but he is being ranked more on potential than accomplishments.

Since they started work in 1927, FDR, Truman and JFK would not have been choices. So by that standard, they got it right!

METS: Seaver, Keith Hernandez, Wright (premature, perhaps?), and one of the many Metsfans here can tell me whether I should choose Strawberry or Gooden.

Piazza's #2 after only Seaver.

The idea of a "Mount Rushmore" is something of a popularity contest, after all.

Which is why, for your Cardinals entry, I'd 86 Hornsby (peerless as he was) and put in Pujols or Ken Boyer.

agree. i'd drop hornsby too, put in pujols and try to squeeze in red schoendienst. i forgot about ozzie earlier, he makes it a tough call. well, who says it has to be 4?

in about 5 or 6 yrs if we do this exercise agin, somebody will want TLR.

What? No one is for putting Shoeless Joe on?

Truman is a terrible choice. He was temperamentally unfit to be president, plus he gave us the Viet Nam paradigm: stupid wars of attrition with nations who have nothing to lose and are willing to sacrifice their citizenry to the last man, while you fight with one arm tied behind your back and urge your citizens on with promises that pawns in geopolitical gamesmanship go to their eternal Valhalla. Piss on Truman. He was LBJ’s daddy in foreign affairs, and at least LBJ was successful on a grand scale domestically. Truman was a boob there, too. His popularity is due to the mentality of many who like presidents who pretend that they have a “pair of ‘em.” Uh oh, look for a resurgency in the popularity of the ######## who just so gracelessly exited stage left.

Glad to see so many consider Eisenhower as underrated. It's hard to judge presidents who keep things from happening. Ike kept his head in a time when all too many were losing theirs. Which was his great attribute in war, too, besides being a master preparer (administrator/organizer).A brilliant man in many ways, but who is underrated because he didn't have oratorical flourish (his speeches are just brilliant policy statements). He not only despised McCarthyism, he administered the coup de grace to Tailgunner Joe. He pretty much bluff the Chinese into negotiating a lasting truce by showing iron hand within a velvet glove. (He sub rosa hinted at adopting some of Douglas MacArthur’s proposals for pursuing the conflict—this had to scare the #### out of them.)

Jefferson is a great president for the reasons given, but also for what his election represented. A neverending rolling thunder dynamism. Moreover, like Lincoln (and Jackson, too, probably) he understood that separation of powers meant that there is a point when the institutions of government could be at irreconcilable loggerheads--and this was good. We have a tendency to think that somehow the government should workd. Not necessarily. Immediately, and ever since, there are attempts to resolve the contradictions of the doctrine by having one branch supervene over the others. John Marshall was savvy enough to find for Jefferson and Madison in Marbury. Otherwise, methinks (and methinks Marshall thought) if he had not, Jefferson would have told him to roll the sacred constitutional parchment and attempt to do the rolling donut thing.

Jefferson is actually the big miss. His greatness is all pre-Presidency. His Presidency was actually a huge failure.

Jefferson wrote the epitaph on his tombstone and didn't even mention he'd been the 3rd President of the US.

This whole Mt. Rushmore thing is fun. How about... Simpsons characters who aren't members of the Simpson family? I nominate Comic Book Guy/Mr. Burns/Disco Stu/Mrs. Krabapple

This whole Mt. Rushmore thing is fun. How about... Simpsons characters who aren't members of the Simpson family? I nominate Comic Book Guy/Mr. Burns/Disco Stu/Mrs. Krabapple

Lenny, Barney, George H. W. Bush, and Mr. Burns.