.
…Isn’t just because they know it’s stuffed up The Tubez for easy and instant access.
In addition, I think its got a lot to do with the fact that everything is searchable within most digitally archived documents.
Which means you never have to actually read through something in its entirety to both find the thing you’re looking for and to make sure you don’t miss something that might shed a little more light on that thing further on down the piece.
I thought of this as I finished all one and three-quarter pieces worth reading in yesterday’s Globe* in their entirety and finally began ruminating on something that really matters, which was a list of all of baseball’s retired numbers that that was tagged on a big hunk o’ fluff attached to yet another R. Alomar ressurrection bit of deck chair shuffling.**
And, not surprisingly the way things used to work, numbers below 10 had, by far the most retirees, in aggregate.
I was surprised, however, that the number ’20’ was tied with ‘5’ (Brooks!) for the most.
Although 20 is a bit of cheater because it includes Big Frank (not Brooks!) twice. First when he played with Brooks in Baltimore and later with the Reds.
Which of, course, got me looking through the list for other single number double retirees….#29 Rod Carew (Twins/Angels)…#34 Nolan Ryan (Astros/Rangers, but not Miracle Mets when pre-Advil wild man, ha!) and Rollie Fingers (Brewers/A’s)….#44 Hammerin’ Hank (Braves/Brewers).
But here’s the thing.
Because I read through the entire thing, I noticed something else.
Which is that one player has had two different numbers retired by two different teams.
And no, (the real) Pudge,*** who palindromed 2 and 7 with the Red&White Sox doesn’t count, although in true crustian pudge fashion it is pretty damned cool.
Think about it for a second.
And stay away from the goldarned Google….
How about a few brain searchable hints to get the old memory mojo workin’…
Like…. Straw (not berry)?….Car dealerships (and fires)?….Joe Rudi?….Hit-on-the-big-fat-beefy-hip by Dodgers’ kid fireballer…Whiffs and homers and tirades for and with both of his most famous mercurial managers, both now deceased….
Yup.
You got it now.
Reggie Jackson.
Old fashioned #9, with the very new fangled early ’70’s A’s.
And new fangled, riding the tail-end of Hank’s #44 with the faux traditional late ’70’s Yankees.
_______
*All of D.Saunders, half of T.Southey and 1/4 of S.Quinn
**Make no mistake, I think that Robbie was an excellent 2nd baseman…But I remember him as a free agent vagabond who was no Omar Vizquel when it came to making a real difference for a team beyond range and consistent numbers…And don’t forget, despite all the adulation from the Center of the Universe’s scribes, he was only their for five wild, Skydome Hotel outfield window years…
***Thanks to my editor, I almost, but not quite got to interview the real/no tweet Pudge in the Oakland Alameda County Coliseum bullpen…
I remember seeing Roberto’s older brother Sandy Jr play for the Padres Triple A affiliate a whole bunch of times in the late 80’s and being blown away from his command of all aspects of the game both behind and at the plate…Have to wonder what his very good MLB career could have become if he hadn’t been hobbled by injuries by a large chunk of its first decade….Please note – I, could be a little fuzzy on that one because I resisted the urge and did NOT look it up….And if I did, I’d go downstairs and dig out the door stop, the BBEncyclopedia, for all kinds of reasons like, say, I might want to look up want to look to directly compare Sandy Sr.’s numbers with his kids’ on the directly facing page….Hey!….I think I’ll go do that right now…
Later, in the lab (well, actually earlier this morning), I mentioned this non-searchable excercise to one of the sharp young deep sequence blasters, for whom everything is searchable….He just rolled his eyes at me and said….”Names”….”What?”, I replied….”All you had to do was re-align using names, alphabetically, rather than numbers and you would have seen that in about two seconds”….Sheesh.
Update: Thought about it a bit more…Tomorrow I’ll ask to explain how he’d search the fact that there is nothing comparable to #7 for stark contrast…Will then wait to see if the smartass can figure that one out in Boolean scriptease…Ha!
.
