The right time to walk away

gyb13 · 03-13-2002, 01:14 PM

In many of the threads here, we say things (usually to judge a player's career value) such as "his career wasn't long enough" or "he should've hung'em up sooner".

When should a player retire?

Should it be at first sign that he can no longer perform as he did at peak level? Or should it be at the moment in which he ceases to be a better than average player? Or better than a replacement player?
I have mixed feelings about this, but I feel a player who's still one of the top 750 players in the world, irrespective of his age, should be in the majors. On the plus side, a lot of kids get to see someone (who could've been great in the past) play during their lifetime (even if it is the tail end of their career). On the minus side, said player will be criticized for hanging on too long or for trying to accumulate more numbers.

Fritz Buelow · 03-13-2002, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gyb13
When should a player retire?

Only once someone is no longer willing to pay him to play.

gyb13 · 03-13-2002, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fritz Buelow
Only once someone is no longer willing to pay him to play.

So by that logic, when assessing a player's career (whether to add him to NetShrine or the HOF), you wouldn't use the tail-end of his career against him?

Skip · 03-13-2002, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fritz Buelow
Only once someone is no longer willing to pay him to play.

It's not that easy. For stars and regulars at least, it comes down more often to the player's evaluation of his own worth vs. the team's evaluation. Someone will nearly always pay; but will they pay "enough"?

This basically leaves it in the player's hands most of the time, as it should be. One may leave because he doesnt feel he can perform, or because he doesnt feel the compensation justifies the effort.

Fritz Buelow · 03-13-2002, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skip
One may leave because he doesnt feel he can perform, or because he doesnt feel the compensation justifies the effort.

Steve Carlton, who gets blasted a lot for hanging on, said it best - - at the end of his career, he was on a bus heading to the ballpark, and he pointed to people on the street, working, or heading to work, and he said to his teammate:

"See those people. No matter how you do it, try not to leave our world and enter theirs. We have it pretty good."

(I'm paraphrasing, but, that's what he meant.)

Quote:

Originally posted by gyb13
So by that logic, when assessing a player's career (whether to add him to NetShrine or the HOF), you wouldn't use the tail-end of his career against him?

I wouldn't (see someone like Tim Raines) - - Cooperstown may.

KCBOOMER · 03-13-2002, 03:44 PM

From a players point of view I would say for most players they should play until nobody will pay them enough to make them play. More HoFers are in for career numbers than be a dominating presence.

From a fan's point a player should quit when the fans think he is over the hill.

TGwynn19 · 03-13-2002, 03:56 PM

One of ideas that I oppose the most is "he hung on too long". I do not agree that 'playing too long' hurts your HOF chance or cheapens your career. If someone will pay Barry Bonds to play until he is 50 I am all for it, even if he hits .220 with 9 HR's. Barry Bonds one of the 15 best players ever and if he plays until he is 50 he will never drop below that level, IMHO.

Fritz Buelow · 03-13-2002, 04:05 PM

I think the issue is - - while a first impression may be a lasting impression, the last impression is the last impression.

Guys like Raines, people see the last 5 years and forget he was as good as Rickey in his prime.

JamesI · 03-13-2002, 04:12 PM

It depends on why the player is hanging on. If its for the love of the game, that is good even if the talent is dwindling. If they are holding on to reach a milestone, 3000 hits, 300 wins, etc. or to improve their chance at the Hall of Fame, then as a fan I believe they should hang it up.
JamesI

TGwynn19 · 03-13-2002, 04:21 PM

I really doubt the image anyone has of Willie Mays is the one floundering in the outfield in the 1973 WS. My lasting impression of Tony certainly will not be of a hobbled pinch hitter.

I also do not care why a player continues to play. If he wants 500 HR or whatever, who cares? If he can play and someone puts him on the roster, more power to him. So if Jose Canseco had the 'love of the game' no one would object to him playing this year??? But since it APPEARS that his only objective is to get to 500HR most everyone thinks that is wrong and cheapens the game. I applaud him for trying and wish him the best.

JamesI · 03-13-2002, 04:25 PM

Since Canseco has publically stated that he won't retire until he reached 500 home runs, that hurts my image of him. Of course it wasn't very good to begin.

I'd rather see players who are in their prime and doing what they do well. Some players can last longer than others. Canseco has not been a top player for a very long time.

Skip · 03-13-2002, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TGwynn19
I also do not care why a player continues to play. If he wants 500 HR or whatever, who cares? If he can play and someone puts him on the roster, more power to him.

Well said. Thats why I said earlier that it was generally (and should be) up to the player. If the player wants to keep playing for whatever salary is offered - who cares about the reason. If the team wants him - fine. If he loves the game - Great. If he wants a record - so what.

At some point everyone reaches their limits; to expect some sort of "Calling your last shot and walk off into the sunset with everyone yelling Shane" ending is over-the-top romanticism.

(Then again, in a non-baseball analogy, everyone remembers MJ's last shot vs. Utah as the perfect culmination of a career. Rather than the obvious push-off that got him the shot.)

TGwynn19 · 03-13-2002, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JamesI
Since Canseco has publically stated that he won't retire until he reached 500 home runs, that hurts my image of him. Of course it wasn't very good to begin.

I'd rather see players who are in their prime and doing what they do well. Some players can last longer than others. Canseco has not been a top player for a very long time.

Obviously all of us would like see the superstars in their prime, but that is only 5-8 years out of a 15+ year career.

So this standard is only for superstars?? Paul Bako has always been bad. So he should retire?

JamesI · 03-13-2002, 04:49 PM

It difficult to see a player who at one time was one of the best ever, and they are limited to a fraction of themselves. I can't blame Canseco from playing if someone is willing to send him out there, but he is not anywhere near the level he was at in the late 80's and early 90's. I prefer to remember players at their best, and think someone should retire when they are not the best. If a player tries to hang on too long, eventually no one will sign them and they'll be forced to retire. I'd rather see a player walk away then be forced to leave.
JamesI

Skip · 03-13-2002, 05:04 PM

It's their life, their dream, their profession, their source of income, and their choice.

03-13-2002, 01:14 PM	#1
gyb13 NS Omnipresent Brasilian Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Crazy George's playground Posts: 10,903	The right time to walk away In many of the threads here, we say things (usually to judge a player's career value) such as "his career wasn't long enough" or "he should've hung'em up sooner". When should a player retire? Should it be at first sign that he can no longer perform as he did at peak level? Or should it be at the moment in which he ceases to be a better than average player? Or better than a replacement player? I have mixed feelings about this, but I feel a player who's still one of the top 750 players in the world, irrespective of his age, should be in the majors. On the plus side, a lot of kids get to see someone (who could've been great in the past) play during their lifetime (even if it is the tail end of their career). On the minus side, said player will be criticized for hanging on too long or for trying to accumulate more numbers. __________________ Gustavo NDF Moderator Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

03-13-2002, 03:44 PM	#6
KCBOOMER NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Home of the T-Bones Posts: 11,116	From a players point of view I would say for most players they should play until nobody will pay them enough to make them play. More HoFers are in for career numbers than be a dominating presence. From a fan's point a player should quit when the fans think he is over the hill. __________________ KCBOOMER *Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball*

03-13-2002, 04:05 PM	#8
Fritz Buelow NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 1,020	I think the issue is - - while a first impression may be a lasting impression, the last impression is the last impression. Guys like Raines, people see the last 5 years and forget he was as good as Rickey in his prime. __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator PLEASE READ: Community Standards . : ~ : PLEASE SHOP: Our Stuff! : ~ : HOW CAN YOU: Help? : ~ : BE NICE: To Your Fav Baseball Person.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Offseason stat package--SO	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	01-06-2003 10:40 AM
Offseason stat package--Runs created/game	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	12-09-2002 10:54 AM
Offseason stat package--OPS	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	12-02-2002 10:18 AM
Offseason stat package--SLG	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	11-30-2002 10:16 AM
Offseason stat package--SO	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	6	01-28-2002 11:25 AM

03-13-2002, 03:56 PM	#7
TGwynn19 Guest Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Naples, FL Posts: 2,087	One of ideas that I oppose the most is "he hung on too long". I do not agree that 'playing too long' hurts your HOF chance or cheapens your career. If someone will pay Barry Bonds to play until he is 50 I am all for it, even if he hits .220 with 9 HR's. Barry Bonds one of the 15 best players ever and if he plays until he is 50 he will never drop below that level, IMHO.

03-13-2002, 04:12 PM	#9
JamesI Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Potsdam, N.Y. Posts: 3,723	It depends on why the player is hanging on. If its for the love of the game, that is good even if the talent is dwindling. If they are holding on to reach a milestone, 3000 hits, 300 wins, etc. or to improve their chance at the Hall of Fame, then as a fan I believe they should hang it up. JamesI

03-13-2002, 04:21 PM	#10
TGwynn19 Guest Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Naples, FL Posts: 2,087	I really doubt the image anyone has of Willie Mays is the one floundering in the outfield in the 1973 WS. My lasting impression of Tony certainly will not be of a hobbled pinch hitter. I also do not care why a player continues to play. If he wants 500 HR or whatever, who cares? If he can play and someone puts him on the roster, more power to him. So if Jose Canseco had the 'love of the game' no one would object to him playing this year??? But since it APPEARS that his only objective is to get to 500HR most everyone thinks that is wrong and cheapens the game. I applaud him for trying and wish him the best.

03-13-2002, 04:25 PM	#11
JamesI Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Potsdam, N.Y. Posts: 3,723	Since Canseco has publically stated that he won't retire until he reached 500 home runs, that hurts my image of him. Of course it wasn't very good to begin. I'd rather see players who are in their prime and doing what they do well. Some players can last longer than others. Canseco has not been a top player for a very long time.

03-13-2002, 04:49 PM	#14
JamesI Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Potsdam, N.Y. Posts: 3,723	It difficult to see a player who at one time was one of the best ever, and they are limited to a fraction of themselves. I can't blame Canseco from playing if someone is willing to send him out there, but he is not anywhere near the level he was at in the late 80's and early 90's. I prefer to remember players at their best, and think someone should retire when they are not the best. If a player tries to hang on too long, eventually no one will sign them and they'll be forced to retire. I'd rather see a player walk away then be forced to leave. JamesI

03-13-2002, 05:04 PM	#15
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	It's their life, their dream, their profession, their source of income, and their choice.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)