Um,, No.

I honestly don't care one way or another. It's one of those things that would create craziness for a sec, and then a few years later everyone would have fully adjusted and not even think of Paige went they talk about the award--same way as Young now...

It's cool that he has some details of Paige's three-inning promotional stint with the KC A's in 1965. I've always wondered about that. Pretty impressive for a "59"-year-old to shut down Major Leaguers, and the quote here says he was still throwing in the upper 80s.

The Johnson award. And no, not Randy.

The Cy Young is one of the few* annual awards in sports, which most fans know what it means when they just hear the name of the person it honors. When someone is given the Hank Aaron (A) or the Bill Russell (B) or the Davey O'Brien (C) or the Vezina (D) or the Art Ross (E), only the hardcore fans of those sports know what the eponym is for.

*Some of the few which most general fans know? The Heisman Trophy, the Stanley Cup and the Ryder Cup. However, most of us don't know diddly about John Heisman or Frederick Stanley or Samuel Ryder.

A. The best hitter in each league.
B. NBA Finals MVP.
C. The best college quarterback.
D. Top NHL goalie.
E. NHL points leader in regular season.

I do think Paige is the greatest pitcher ever, but I still wouldn't support this. It's kind of like kicking Lloyd Waner out of the Hall of Fame. As logical as the notions might be -- Lloyd doesn't deserve to be in the HOF, Cy isn't really the best pitcher of all time -- I just don't see these things as things that, once they're done, can be undone.

(Unless Cy Young killed some people we never knew about. Then maybe you could justify it. Woulda been interesting to see what would have happened if O.J. were convicted on the murder charge. Anyway.)

Do I think we should do more to honor the greats of the Negro Leagues? Certainly. But this has "political correctness" written all over it, and would be nearly as absurd as those "Jackie Robinson nights" where everyone wears No. 42.

The Cy Young is one of the few* annual awards in sports, which most fans know what it means when they just hear the name of the person it honors. When someone is given the ... Bill Russell (B) ... only the hardcore fans of those sports know what the eponym is for.

...

B. NBA Finals MVP.

I actually had no idea that the NBA Finals MVP award was named for anybody, just like the Jackie Robinson Award in baseball. Pretty much everybody knows it as the Rookie of the Year award. I wonder why the "Pitcher of the Year" award is always referred to by the player's name but the Rookie of the Year award almost never is.

But this has "political correctness" written all over it, and would be nearly as absurd as those "Jackie Robinson nights" where everyone wears No. 42.

Or making every team retire Jackie Robinson's number.

I wonder why the "Pitcher of the Year" award is always referred to by the player's name but the Rookie of the Year award almost never is.

Well, the award had been around for almost 50 years before it was named for Jackie. That's a long time for the ROY name to become established, and the new name never took, I suppose. Kinda like the Avenue of the Americas...

Or making every team retire Jackie Robinson's number.

I feel differently about that one. Everyone wearing 42 is both silly and somewhat confusing -- the numbers are there to help identify players, and as a Gameday stringer who has to visually verify substitutions with my binoculars, it's really hard to tell who the guy is if I can't see his number. I don't know what all these guys look like, especially if they're making their MLB debut.

Retiring 42 throughout baseball is a genuine gesture of how important Jackie was to all of MLB, not just the Dodgers. Nobody gets to wear it after Rivera retires, it doesn't lead to confusing, it honors the man's contribution without making a joke of the game. There's nothing wrong with it.

Do I think we should do more to honor the greats of the Negro Leagues? Certainly. But this has "political correctness" written all over it, and would be nearly as absurd as those "Jackie Robinson nights" where everyone wears No. 42.

agree (at least about the first part, I lean mostly pro-42 uniform but I understand the other side of the argument) I mean Satchel Paiges name should be known by pretty much anyone who can name great ballplayers and remember Stan Musial name. I'm having a discussion on another board about best catcher of all time and I have to qualify whether to include Josh Gibson or not and some of the relatively informed posters over there didn't know who he was.

data needs to come out, MLE's need to be created, stories need to be told etc. but doing something like this would just be stupid. (or bowing down to the political correctness behemoth)

Once a thing is named in a person's honour the name should never, ever, ever, be changed. This idea is not only a bad one it signifies a crime against the past. The tyranny of the present over the past is the single worst thing about our culture and is representative of a spirit of decadence and decline.

Once a thing is named in a person's honour the name should never, ever, ever, be changed.

I probably wouldn't say it this strongly, but I agree. Changing the name of the Cy Young award would be an insult to Cy Young, whether intended as one or not.

Once a thing is named in a person's honour the name should never, ever, ever, be changed. This idea is not only a bad one it signifies a crime against the past. The tyranny of the present over the past is the single worst thing about our culture and is representative of a spirit of decadence and decline.

I always thought extreme, hysterical over-the-top proclamations were the single worst thing about our culture.

I’m all for tradition, but baseball has more important people to remember than a man who began his career in the horse-and-buggy age.

The unintended irony in this statement is priceless.

I probably wouldn't say it this strongly, but I agree. Changing the name of the Cy Young award would be an insult to Cy Young, whether intended as one or not.

Agree on both counts.

Moreover, I really don't like the tone of this, from TFA:

baseball has more important people to remember than a man who began his career in the horse-and-buggy age. He’s had his name on the award for the game’s best pitcher for over half a century, plenty long to honor his place in the game. See ya, Cy.

The very fact that Young "began his career in the horse-and-buggy age" is something that should motivate us to work hard to preserve his memory. Indeed, I strongly believe that despite the fact that his name is on the award, he's generally overlooked and underappreciated today.

An excerpt from an article I wrote several years ago:

For a figure of such immense stature in baseball history, it's amazing how few biographical resources on Cy Young exist -- an illustration, perhaps, of just how much Young's quiet, calm, rather bland personality allowed his feats to stand in unmatched disproportion to his personal fame. Despite the highly prestigious award named in his honor, it's likely that many fans, asked to name the greatest players in baseball history, would list a dozen more prominent names before remembering Cy Young. And it's a near certainty that practically no fans today know anything at all about Young's life and character, while just about all are quick to offer an anecdote about Ruth, Cobb, or Williams, or even about such Young contemporaries as Honus Wagner, Christy Mathewson, or Cap Anson.

.

Unless Cy Young killed some people we never knew about

Do we know where Cy was when Ed Delahanty fell off that train?

Changing the name of the Cy Young award would be an insult to Cy Young, whether intended as one or not.

I don't particularly care either way, but it always amuses me to hear of how something is an "insult" to a dead person.

I don't particularly care either way, but it always amuses me to hear of how something is an "insult" to a dead person.

Or conversely, an "honor" for a dead person.

This guy's dopey column angries up my blood.

Retiring 42 throughout baseball is a genuine gesture of how important Jackie was to all of MLB, not just the Dodgers. Nobody gets to wear it after Rivera retires, it doesn't lead to confusing, it honors the man's contribution without making a joke of the game. There's nothing wrong with it.

Ultimately I don't see it as a big deal, but I find it rather empty and trite. We're baseball, we really care, so here's a league-wide retired number.

I admit I'm a little tired of the Jackie Robinson deification. Not that he wasn't a great man and a great ballplayer but I feel like the issue of civil rights and sport has become too tied up in Jackie and Muhammad Ali and it risks belittling the accomplishments of everyone else (also known as the Larry Doby Theory) and I get a feeling that MLB celebrates Jackie Robinson because it looks good. Where is the love for Willard Brown or Hank Thompson or Pumpsie Green? It would actually be a far cooler idea to ask each of the original sixteen franchises to retire the number of the player who integrated their team.

It's also opened Pandora's Box as the NHL has retired Gretzky's number, Hispanic groups are advocating Roberto Clemente's retired number and people suggested the NFL retire Pat Tillman's number.

Lastly, something else that bothers me is now that Robinson's number is retired no current player can wear the number, which means no current player can actually wear the number in tribute to Jackie. Mo Vaughn is the most prominent example I can think of but undoubtedly there were more players who have done it. There should be a special dispensation for players to wear the number in tribute of Robinson.

Admittedly everybody wearing Robinson's number is ten times dumber than retiring it across the game.

#21--nice.

Mo Vaughn is the most prominent example I can think of but undoubtedly there were more players who have done it.

Butch Huskey, I believe.

I feel like he might have a better case if Cy Young were more like Ty Cobb or Cap Anson and everyone knew he was an outrageous d-bag or racist, but since all I really know about Cy Young is he threw really hard and had an absurdly durable arm, it's hard to get on board.

Even if Paige was a better pitcher, Young did it first, right? I mean, if Barack Obama turns out to be the best president ever or something, will anyone clamor for President's Day to be moved to Obama's birthday?

Smokey Joe Williams was a better pitcher, imo, than Paige was (will be interesting when they go head-to-head in the overall Hall of Merit pitching rankings later this summer).

Yet hardly anyone knows that is even plausible, while most baseball fans have heard of Satchel Paige.

So by this logic, shouldn't we make it the "Smokey Joe Award"? - which sounds kind of cool, too.

My dopey Award names that I've been giving out since the mid-60's...

AL - The Ty Cobb Award
NL - The Rajah Award

Combined - The Splinter Award

AL - The Lefty Grove Award
NL - The Warren Spahn Award (changed to The Tom Seaver Award for a few years due to Gaylord Gaynor the neighborhood bully)

Combined - The Rocket Award (originally The Walter Johnson Award...but since these are MY dopey awards...)

Let’s rename the award after a man who won more games than Young, struck out more batters than Nolan Ryan, pitched in at least twice as many games as anyone else

Is this true? I don't think I'd ever read about his playing record. How many games did he play a year?

I admit I'm a little tired of the Jackie Robinson deification. Not that he wasn't a great man and a great ballplayer but I feel like the issue of civil rights and sport has become too tied up in Jackie and Muhammad Ali and it risks belittling the accomplishments of everyone else (also known as the Larry Doby Theory) and I get a feeling that MLB celebrates Jackie Robinson because it looks good.

I'm inclined to agree, as mentioned in the Aaron/Ali/Cosby thread.

If I may be indulged to quote another article excerpt:

Too often, examination of the integration of baseball properly hails the courage of the pioneer Jackie Robinson, but then assumes something of a self-congratulatory tone, more than implying that everyone lived happily ever after. A similar dynamic often occurs in the discussion of larger racial issues as well, substituting Justice Thurgood Marshall or Rosa Parks or Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King for Robinson, and again closing on the presumption that bigotry was in our midst, that racial injustice was a national scandal, until a larger-than-life hero (Robinson/Marshall/Parks/King) came along and saved the day.

The truth is vastly more complicated, of course, and vastly less sanguine.

Is this true? I don't think I'd ever read about his playing record. How many games did he play a year?

Chris Cobb's MLEs, from Paige's HOM thread, are 4666 ip, 302-250, 4.00 DERA, 113 DERA+, 336 win shares.

In other words, one hell of a major-league career. He was an easy first-ballot HOMer.

But to think of Paige as superhuman, as many do, is not realistic. He was mythical even in his own day, but he has since come to serve as the emblem of a half-considered idea that Negro League greats were greatly superior to their white contemporaries. Since it's impossible to count all his barnstorming wins and strikeouts, they take on a Paul-Bunyan quality in the retelling.

If he'd been born white in 1867, Paige might have won 400 games – one can't rule that out. Would he have won 500? All we know is that tons of guys have pitched in the major leagues, at both 50' and 60'6", and aside from Young and Walter Johnson nobody has won even 400 games.

But to think of Paige as superhuman, as many do, is not realistic. He was mythical even in his own day, but he has since come to serve as the emblem of a half-considered idea that Negro League greats were greatly superior to their white contemporaries. Since it's impossible to count all his barnstorming wins and strikeouts, they take on a Paul-Bunyan quality in the retelling.

This. (ooh I'm so hip)

There's a line between genuinely and appropriately celebrating and honoring a great historical figure, and deifying him, and much of the Paige foo-rah has tended to go way over that line. Paige's very clever self-promotional skill did much to contribute to it, of course.

Cy Young, career record of 511-316.

To have that many wins and losses is remarkable. Does anyone else come close to Cy Young's loss record?

Nolan Ryan was a mere 24 behind.

Retiring 42 throughout baseball is a genuine gesture of how important Jackie was to all of MLB, not just the Dodgers. Nobody gets to wear it after Rivera retires, it doesn't lead to confusing, it honors the man's contribution without making a joke of the game. There's nothing wrong with it.

A much better idea would have been for each team to assign # 42 to the player who best exemplifies Jackie Robinson's spirit, and never retire it.

If he'd been born white in 1867, Paige might have won 400 games – one can't rule that out. Would he have won 500? All we know is that tons of guys have pitched in the major leagues, at both 50' and 60'6", and aside from Young and Walter Johnson nobody has won even 400 games.

Yes. And this fact makes Young's 511 wins all that much more staggering a feat. His career totals (749 complete games and 7,355 innings along with the 511 wins) are so monumental that practically speaking they're incomprehensible, or at least not fully and properly comprehended.

Of course they're artifacts of the particular conditions of his era; in no other age of baseball history was it feasible for a pitcher to record such totals. But the fact that no other era could have yielded such numbers doesn’t make it inevitable that his era would, and Young's career numbers tower over those of his greatest contemporaries. It’s difficult to imagine any alternative baseball history scenario under which any pitcher could possibly win more than 511 games. One of the most confident statements one can ever make is this: no one else will ever, ever, win as many games as Cy Young.

One of the most confident statements one can ever make is this: no one else will ever, ever, win as many games as Cy Young

at least not until they start letting cyborgs into the league.

Once a thing is named in a person's honour the name should never, ever, ever, be changed.

I agree, but this is as good a place as any to mention that I have an old Thomas Guide that shows the Nixon Freeway.

from bb-ref

Rank Player (age) Losses Throws
1. Cy Young+ 316 R
2. Pud Galvin+ 310 R
3. Nolan Ryan+ 292 R
4. Walter Johnson+ 279 R
5. Phil Niekro+ 274 R
6. Gaylord Perry+ 265 R
7. Don Sutton+ 256 R
8. Jack Powell 254 R
9. Eppa Rixey+ 251 L
10. Bert Blyleven 250 R

only Powell and Blyleven are NOT in the Hall of Fame.
Only Powell is not in the Hall of Merit.

Only Jamie Moyer (191) among active pitchers has more than 165 career losses, and only 11 have as many as 115 losses.
Sissies!

Another strange thing about this is that even if we accept that we should remove an honor from Cy Young because he played a really, really long time ago, it's not like Paige is all that much more relevant to the game today either. We're talking about a guy, after all, who started his career more than 80 years ago, only 15 years removed from when Young played.

I know they will never honor Barry Bonds with an award in his name, but I think it would be great to have an annual Barry Bonds trophy for the player in the majors who has that season's highest OBP. Bonds has the two best seasons in history in that category, .6094 (2004) and .5817 (2002). Bonds has the 3 best seasons for total walks, too. However, nobody should get an award for most total walks in a season, unless he led the majors in OBP.

Bonds also has the single-highest slugging average in a single season, .8634 (2001), but that award could just as well be named for Babe Ruth, who has the 2nd and 3rd best years in that stat and did so on whiskey, not roids.

Once he retires, I think it would be cool to have an annual Ichiro Suzuki Award for the player in the majors who collected the most hits in that season.

Rickey Henderson, of course, should be the eponym for the season stolen base leader.

would the Dave Kingman award be given to the three true outcome champion?


I imagine we could come up with a list of 50 awards to give out named after players without doing truly silly ones. (if truly silly 100-200 would be easy)

"Ryder Cup"

Most people know what this is? Really?

I think it's either a golf award or a tennis one (one of those country club sports), but if you asked me how you earn it, I wouldn't have a clue.

Edit: Or maybe it's sailing? ####. I have no idea.

would the Dave Kingman award be given to the three true outcome champion?

No way. Kingman couldn't draw a walk with a pencil.

would the Dave Kingman award be given to the three true outcome champion?'

That sounds like the Rob Deer Award to me.

I wouldn't mind maning each Gold Glove at its position. (If we're lucky, this would end the tradition of giving 3 cf Gold Gloves per league.)

c: The Bench or The Rodriguez
1b: The Hernandez
2b: The Mazeroski or The White
3b: The Robinson
ss: The Smith
lf: Hm. The Crawford, maybe
cf: The Speaker or The Ashburn
rf: No one leaps to mind here, either. The Henrich?

p: The Maddux or The Kaat

I think it's either a golf award or a tennis one (one of those country club sports), but if you asked me how you earn it, I wouldn't have a clue.

I thought it was equestrian.

Shoplifting.

rf: No one leaps to mind here, either. The Henrich?

Clemente

3b: The Robinson

Silly, they'd all be called that.

I wouldn't mind maning each Gold Glove at its position.

Normally when I act like a #### and make fun of someone else's typo, I know immediately what the person meant to write. But in this case, I was actually befuddled for a minute until I realized you intended naming. It's unusual to flip the first and third letters in a word. My typos usually involve consecutive strokes when I rwite things rwong.

Heh, I read it as "manning" and for whatever reason my brain decided that made perfect sense.