The 40 Greatest Orioles of All-Time - No. 1 - Cal Ripken, Jr.
by SC on Mar 17, 2006 12:21 PM EST
in News
43 comments
1. Cal Ripken, Jr., SS/3B (1981-2001)
1982 American League Rookie of the Year
1983 American League MVP
1991 American League MVP
All-Star: 1983-2001
Gold Glove: 1991, 1992
Silver Slugger: 1983-1986, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1994
What on earth do you really say about Cal Ripken that has not already been said? He is the Iron Man. He is the absolute pride of the Baltimore Orioles, and you can argue that no player in the last 30 or 40 years has meant as much to baseball as Ripken has. He is not the greatest player of that time, not even close really. But make no mistake, Cal Ripken, Jr., was a great, great player, and he was the ultimate ambassador for the game of baseball. There aren't many players that are cheered in every park they go to. Ripken was one of them, particularly in the season where he broke Gehrig's streak.
But there's so much more to Cal than just the streak, although that will always be the No. 1 thing he is associated with. He is the best shortstop since at least Arky Vaughan, if not Honus Wagner. He was the greatest home run hitting shortstop of all time until Alex Rodriguez came along, and he was underrated defensively for much of his career. I again turn to Bill James, because this is one of my favorite writings about Ripken:
"One time about 1988 or 1989 Baseball America did a survey of players with the best tools. They listed the Royals shortstop, Kurt Stillwell, as having the Best Infield Arm in the American League. I'm a Royals fan; I thought, 'Wow, I never realized his arm was that good.' The Orioles came to town shortly after that, and I went to all three games, and focused on the shortstops' throws. It was preposterous to suggest that Stillwell threw as well as Ripken. Stillwell had a good arm, but Ripken played 5/10 feet deeper than Stillwell, and zinged the ball effortlessly to first base, every throw hitting the first baseman shoulder high. There was no comparison between them."
Ripken played 3,001 games in his career, 2,632 of them in a row. He hit .276/.340/447 with 431 homers, 1695 RBI, 603 doubles, 1129 walks, 1647 runs scored, 3184 hits. He won two MVP awards, in 1983 and 1991, won a couple Gold Gloves. He was an All-Star every year from 1983 through 2001, and though some years he didn't really deserve it, it speaks to the type of respect and love fans from all over the country had for Ripken.
Cal Ripken, Jr., was born and raised in Havre de Grace, Maryland, and was the ultimate hometown hero. He was actually drafted as a pitcher, but made it to the majors as a third baseman in 1982. He was moved to shortstop by Earl Weaver on July 1, and won the Rookie of the Year award after hitting .264/.317/.475 with 28 homers and 93 RBI. Cal Ripken played 160 games that year, and would not leave the Oriole lineup until September 20, 1998.
He was even better in his second season, hitting .318/.371/.517 with 27 homers, 47 doubles, 102 RBI, 211 hits, and 121 runs scored, helping lead the Orioles to the World Series championship and winning the AL MVP award. Ripken would hit 20 or more homers every year from 1984-1990. In 1991, he won his second MVP award, setting career highs with a .323 average, .566 slugging percentage, .374 OBP, 34 homers and 114 RBI.
Before that huge season, Ripken had a somewhat rough 1990 at the plate, but he had an amazing year defensively, making just three errors in 161 games at shortstop, a .996 fielding percentage as compared to the league average of .973. Ozzie Guillen won the Gold Glove that year, which probably wasn't quite as bad a decision as it seems to be if you just look at the fact that Guillen had 17 errors. Guillen did have better range than Ripken. But still, Ripken set an AL record for a shortstop with that fielding percentage, turned more double plays, went 95 games without an error. Guillen was good, but Ripken was unbelievably sure-handed that season.
Ripken would never get back to his 1991 season, although he was killing the ball in 1994 when the players went on strike, and he also tore it up in 1999, hitting .340, but over just 86 games.
September 6, 1995, is a day that will live in baseball history forever. I'm sure every one of us watched that game. I just remember how special it really felt. Not because it was supposed to feel so, but because it truly did. Ripken's jog around the stadium to shake hands with the fans after the game became official -- it was really something.
The strike in 1994 and the 1995 lockout would have hurt baseball more if it weren't for Ripken, and later the Sosa/McGwire home run battle. Sure, we'd all still be here or have come back full force by now, but Ripken helped the healing process greatly. His streak was also a hot point with the labor issue, and the MLBPA gave Ripken their blessing to keep his streak going if MLB used scabs to play in 1995. It never happened, but it was another instance where Ripken showed who he really was. He had no intention of playing in replacement games, and Peter Angelos, in possibly my favorite thing he's ever done, refused to field a replacement Orioles team even if the rest of the league went ahead with the idea. It never came to any of that, thankfully.
Ripken was not without his prickly side, though, and how could he have been? Nobody could have been the competitor he was without some pride and some serious fire. When Davey Johnson moved Ripken to third base to give Manny Alexander a shot at short, Ripken was hardly thrilled by it. And he was right. But Cal did need to move to third by that point. It only lasted six games, because Alexander was terrible and Ripken was struggling at the plate.
In 1997, the switch stuck, as the Orioles acquired gloveman Mike Bordick. Ripken moved to third base amicably at that point, playing solid defense and remaining a solid hitter.
On September 20, 1998, Cal Ripken, Jr., took himself out of the lineup. Ryan Minor headed out to third base to start the game, which was confusing, shocking even. After the first out was made, the New York Yankees stood at the top of the visitors' dugout and gave Ripken a standing ovation.
On September 3, 1999, Ripken hit his 400th homer. On April 15, 2000, he got his 3,000th hit. On July 10, 2001, he played in his final All-Star game, starting at shortstop after voted shortstop starter Alex Rodriguez insists on trading positions with him, in one of A-Rod's cooler moves. Ripken also hits a homer off of Chan Ho Park (Park grooved it -- who cares?). On October 6, 2001, he played his final game.
You know, maybe there will be, I can't say for sure, but I wouldn't bet that we'll ever see another player like Cal Ripken. The consecutive games streak took forever for anyone to break at Gehrig's mark in the first place, and I'm pretty sure I'm not going to be alive if anyone ever breaks Cal's record. And obviously players that spend their entire career with one team are a dying breed. Derek Jeter will probably do it, I guess, and Bernie Williams will do it but he's at the end as it is.
Cal Ripken, Jr., is, simply put, one of a kind, and the greatest Baltimore Oriole of all-time.
0 recs |
43 comments
Email
Print
Comments
re:
by dtran2k3 on Mar 17, 2006 12:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Good pick
Personally I don't think it matters which you picked. Either order would have been perfectly right as a 1-2 combo.
by Mike Boehm on Mar 17, 2006 1:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
re:
by SC on Mar 17, 2006 2:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Great article, Scott.
I wouldn't have come back to baseball, or the Orioles, as quickly after the strike, but I'd followed Ripken for so long I had pay attention to every second of it.
Some the of the negative things that came out at the end of his career, the seperate limos, the seperate hotels, tarnished the legacy a little, and it seems like he was playing more for himself then for the good of the team...but I think he earned that.
Some cynics argue that Ripken is a genius self-promoter and hurt his career by not taking more days off, but I do think he has a genuine love of the game of baseball and really did play every day because he wanted to, not just for the PR. But it was great PR, too. I got to go to Orioles games at Fenway and Yankee stadium, and not only Ripken get loud ovations, there were tons of Orioles fans taking up seats in oppossing parks. It was a sight to see, and I'll never forget it.
I wonder what the future holds for Cal Ripken Jr. He seems to have a flair for running a baseball team, although I'm sure he is a huge part of the Ironbirds' success. Would he be a good coach? A manager? Part of an ownership group?
Whatever role he plays in baseball's future, I hope it is as a part of the Baltimore Orioles.
by BrianS on Mar 17, 2006 1:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Dammit!
OK, before I get lynched, that was a feeble attempt at humor. Great write-up, SC, I think we all agree that Cal was the ultimate Oriole through and through.
by punkrawka on Mar 17, 2006 4:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Overrated
Cal Ripken Jr. began his career with the Orioles with a huge amount of promise and the added bonus of being a hometown (or at least area) kid. In many ways he fulfilled that promise, but I never felt he was as good as all the hype. He was an outstanding fielder with an incredible knack for positioning himself to make good plays. He was the prototype of the power hitting shortstop, which was subsequently taken to another level by his protege, Alex Rodriguez.
However the guy just did not produce enough offensively to deserve such a high rating in my opinion. Ripken only hit more than 30 HRs once, in his second MVP year 1991. He only broke 100 RBIs four times, in a 20 year career. In 12 of those twenty season his OPS was below .800.
Then there is "The Streak". I never understood all the attention it got. I always had the same reaction to The Streak as to the kid who had perfect attendance in High School; it's interesting, in a sort of weirdo kinda way, but who cares? That said, I didn't ever really have a problem with The Streak, but I definitely think that if it would help a player's offense to sit out for a day or two, then they should sit out. It's just common sense. I was glad that the O's, and Cal, were able to get all that attention the day he broke the record, but I always had wished it had been for a home run record, or a hitting streak, or something that helped the club more tangibly, not just showing up for work every day.
Up until the time and a few years after his second MVP title in 1991 I was a huge fan of Ripken's. But as time wore on I started to get really tired of all the publicity he received, while failing to put up the offensive numbers that would normally garner such praise. After the second MVP it seemed the hype surrounding the player took on a life of its own, existing independently of what he did, or failed to do, at the plate.
With all that said though, he meant a lot to Baltimore and the ballclub for many years. He obviously has a great deal of passion for the game and I'll be happy to see him in the Hall of Fame. I also would really like to see him involved somehow with buying the club from Angelos. I just wished that through many of Ripken's latter years the club had spent a little more time building better teams and a little less time congratulating themselves on their superstar.
by Jonnypops on Mar 17, 2006 6:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Overreacting
But you are just flat out wrong here.
- You are criticizing Ripken for not being "as good as all the hype". We're not measuring on hype. Hype has nothing to do with it. And unlike Alex Rodriguez (whose over-hyped nickname I won't use), Ripken never encouraged the hype. It came, sure, but only because he was a solid player. He was never a "look at me" kinda guy. Instead of focusing on "hype", look at what the guy did. As you said, he had an incredible knack for positioning himself for making plays. That wasn't a "luck" thing. That was, as I'm sure you know, Ripken devoting hours of study to opposing players' tendencies; it was the years of tutelage by his father which led to an unfailing sense of what was likely happen in any given game situation; it was the subtle shifts that he made just before the ball was delivered because he knew that the pitch that had been called was more/less likely to result in a pulled/pushed ball. In short, it was hard work on a mental level, something that most ballplayers don't have the patience or brainpower to do.
- However the guy just did not produce enough offensively to deserve such a high rating in my opinion. Ripken only hit more than 30 HRs once, in his second MVP year 1991. He only broke 100 RBIs four times, in a 20 year career. That's ridiculous. Ripken began and played much of his career in an era when 4-man pitching roations were common, and there were four fewer MLB teams than there are now. In short, the pitchers were better. 100 RBI seasons were simply nowhere near the norm in the 80s and 90s in the way they are in today's watered-down-pitching, steroid-juiced-batting environment. And I can remember how psyched we used to be in the early 80s when a player got over 20 HRs in a year. That was the benchmark then. You think 4 seasons of over 100 RBIs is easy? Apart from Eddie Murray (6) and Frank Robinson (6), please tell me who had more 100RBI seasons as an Oriole? Not Boog Powell. Not Ken Singleton either. Ripken averaged over 20 homers and 85 RBI per year in the bigs. For his era, that's plenty of firepower. For comparison's sake, it's the same number of RBIs (1700) as Reggie Jackson had over the same number of seasons (21).
- I always had wished it had been for a home run record, or a hitting streak, or something that helped the club more tangibly, not just showing up for work every day. Well, that's where you and I really disagree. The hype around The Streak was overwrought, sure; but players and managers alike have said repeatedly how much they respect Ripken for doing what he did, so consistently, day-in and day-out for such a long period of time. Again, given the number of guys who dog it late in the season when the team is out of the running, who pull themselves from the lineup because there's a little twinge in their back (hello, Sheffield?), who show up hung over and not ready to play even if they don't ask to be taken out...yet there's Ripken saying "put me in Coach," every day for six years! His managers loved the fact that there was one part of the lineup card that they simply didn't have to worry about. You think that doesn't contribute to a team? Look at Don Mattingly. Look at Kirby Puckett. Those are the guys you love to manage. Not the whiny guys who piss and moan about where they are in the order and whether they're getting enough days off. And please tell me how a home run record (juiced, no less) helped St. Louis or San Francisco or the Cubbies in the years that Bonds and McGwire and Sosa were setting them? It didn't get any of those teams a Series, which Ripken did help his team do. A home-run record is the ultimate "me" thing in baseball. RIpken's showing up every day was the ultimate "us" thing. And turning a double play damned near every time there's an opportunity is far more important than hitting balls over fences.
/rant. :)
by zknower on Mar 17, 2006 7:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re:
by Awesome Mike Awesome on Mar 17, 2006 8:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont know if someone said this already but
by Larry Bigbie3 on Mar 17, 2006 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Two more things
by Larry Bigbie3 on Mar 17, 2006 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh...
I don't get this whole consistent argument. Here are Cal's OPS+ numbers from 1982 - 2000, and it's not incredibly consistent.
115, 144, 145, 124, 122, 105, 128, 105, 114, 162, 91, 98, 107, 89, 103, 93, 89, 139, 95.
by Jonnypops on Mar 17, 2006 11:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I quit smoking...
by Jonnypops on Mar 17, 2006 10:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hate, hate, hate
by Stanicek on Mar 18, 2006 2:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re:
by Awesome Mike Awesome on Mar 18, 2006 7:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not my point.
Probably. But none of his managers chose to take him out. And he did not choose to take himself out. And I admire that through the innumerable aches and pains he had over the years, he did not choose to take himself out.
You've got some real team-first blinders on.
Ahh, Mike, always willing to toss in an insult and say how stupid or biased someone else is.
And as much as I hate A-Rod, I can't think of any time he tried to draw attention to himself to the detriment of his team.
Excellent point. He let his agent do it though. The demand for an on-payroll publicist, and for building-sized likenesses of him to be put up in his destination town, the binder describing him as the greatest player who ever played. That was some serious hype. But you're absolutely right. Alex Rodriguez didn't personally do that stuff.
Ripken was a great player, but you're ascribing an absurd level of moral superiority to him that has little to do with any observable reality.
Whoa! I didn't say he was morally superior. Actually, I didn't really bring up his morals. I said "No off-the-field shenanigans, a complete asset to his community: Ripken was an all around classic ballpayer, class act and distinguished gentleman of the game. He was humble and gracious and a fierce competitor all at the same time." And I believe all of those things are true. His public persona throughout his career reflected that statement. Jeez, the most controversial thing ever mentioned about him is whether he should have sat down or not.
That doesn't address whether he got into some fight or took a separate bus, things which are mentioned below, and which may have happened; I suppose you can be picky and say this alleged brawl counts as something ammoral, but the details of it are shadowy at best. My point is, Ripken never made news for doing stuff off the field, and I don't think that's because of some conspiracy to make him an angel; I think it's because he wasn't involved in silly crap off the field at any kind of level that was newsworthy. People can pick on him all they want about riding a different bus or whatever, and those are legitimate gripes; but that's really niitpicking if that's the worst knock on a ballplayer who played for two decades.
My point was: I feel that the fact that he said "I'm in" every day for most of his career...that was a selfless act. I don't think he did it for glory or attention or even to set a record (until maybe the last year or so). I think he did it because he thought he could help his team win.
by zknower on Mar 19, 2006 12:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re:
A home-run record is the ultimate "me" thing in baseball. RIpken's showing up every day was the ultimate "us" thing.
Home runs unquestionably help a team win. Playing every day to the detriment of your ability does not necessarily do so. And yet you're assuming Ripken played every day to help his team win golly gee, while Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa hit tons of home runs and put major runs on the board because they're just selfish.
by Awesome Mike Awesome on Mar 19, 2006 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
while I agree
by Larry Bigbie3 on Mar 19, 2006 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And by agreeing with the somewhat
by Larry Bigbie3 on Mar 19, 2006 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Context.
For example: Ken Griffey, Jr. hits a lot of home runs. But if he can only play 50% of your games, is that more or less help to a team than an outfielder who hits fewer home runs, but plays great defense, gets on base a lot, and is available for every game? Maybe not.
My point is (was) that Cal brought enough to the offense department to be considered a pretty good player offensively; but that his dependability was more valuable.
As for "playing every day to the detriment of your ability"...that's conjecture. Maybe Cal hits better with a few more days off a year, maybe he doesn't (because, of course, he got several days off anyway from days with no game and/or rainouts; I'd guess about one a week on average). Maybe the extra day off messes with his hitting timing. Maybe taking a day off makes him less sharp in the field than playing every day does. Can you say for sure? No, not really. You can think it might have made him better, but there's no real way of knowing.
Oh, and as for some home-run hitters being selfish? No, I don't think all those guys were trying to hurt their teams. But I would venture that Sammy might have gotten on base a little more often if he weren't striking out so much trying to hit the ball out of the park (and I mean in the late 90s, not just last year).
by zknower on Mar 19, 2006 10:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re:
by Awesome Mike Awesome on Mar 19, 2006 10:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re:
Runs, absolutely. Victories, not always.
And my point is that Ripken would be equally dependable playing 158 games a year and saving his legs here and there. His streak was largely cosmetic and meaningless when it came to winning (ie., 162 games a year vs. 158)
Yeah, I'll concede you've got a point there. I'd be hard-pressed to show how his presence for those 4 extra games would translate to victories; although I guess it would partially depend on who was playing short those days, and whether they made any untimely errors.
by zknower on Mar 21, 2006 12:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Time to bunker down!
- I am not accusing Ripken of creating all the hype surrounding himself. Obviously machinations like that are generally larger than one man; involving agents, PR guys, the press, the ballclub, major corporate sponsorship deals, and public approval. Ripken did nothing to discourage the hype either, and the hype was good, so who in their right mind would. I have looked at what the guy did and tried to give him credit where it is due. And I feel he does belong in the Hall of Fame. But I do feel he gets more credit than his performance on the field warranted.
- What I am speaking to is Ripken's ranking on this list, and I certainly think he belongs in the top 5, but not #1. You yourself have given me two Orioles with more 100+ RBI seasons than Ripken in Murray and Frank Robinson. I can see the argument in Frank Robinson not really being with us long enough. However Murray's HR totals, average, OPS with the Orioles were all superior to Ripken's. He's also my personal favorite and I would have ranked him higher than Ripken. I've posted previously of my admiration of Jim Palmer, as a pitcher, and for how much he contributed to the championships of the club and I would have placed him higher as well, probably at #1. As I had mentioned before, my approach to ranking these players would be to assess how much they contributed to the ultimate goal of this team winning penants and World Series titles. That's just me...but if I start letting my personal favorites into it I have a strange amalgam of Murray, Olson, Todd Frohwirth from that crazy-ass submarine pitch he threw, Mora, and Randy Milligan in my top 5. And that's just too weird.
- The Streak thing is just a difference of opinion. I just never got what was such a big deal about it. And as it got closer and came to pass I was really surprised at how much attention it received in the press.
by Jonnypops on Mar 17, 2006 8:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Woops...
by Jonnypops on Mar 17, 2006 8:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re:
He played every single day with the intention of being the best he could be. I agree he would have been better served to take a day off now and again. He didn't, and it's a hell of a thing to play 2,632 games in a row, mostly at a demanding position.
As I had mentioned before, my approach to ranking these players would be to assess how much they contributed to the ultimate goal of this team winning penants and World Series titles.
Do you think if Ripken had been the shortstop of those teams and not Belanger they'd have won less? One player can't do it all, nor can two, as Ripken and Murray proved. I'm not so much arguing, but Jim Palmer was on better teams, bottom line. That is not Ripken's fault.
by SC on Mar 18, 2006 3:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brooks v. Ripken
Brooks was there when the team was a bunch of no-names and anchored the championship teams. Ripken was good, but he was no Brooks.
It's probably a generational choice but the glory years and the Oriole-way occured when Brooks was the face of the Orioles.
by john on Mar 18, 2006 8:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
And as far as that goes...
by elktonfan on Mar 18, 2006 9:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is...
I never heard that story about his wife though. When was that? What was the deal with that?
by Jonnypops on Mar 18, 2006 10:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rumors are...
by elktonfan on Mar 18, 2006 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that damned kevin costner
by SC on Mar 18, 2006 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
by Jonnypops on Mar 18, 2006 12:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good one Jonny...
But somehow, even a perfectly worded query from our resident arbiter of all things Bosox would probably never see the printed pages of the Sun.
Cal is the king of Md...just for an instance..and I'm not picking on him it's just facts here.
A few years back, after he had retired and decided to build the aptly named Ripken Stadium for his Ironbirds, he solicited for a new on-off ramp from exit 85 off of I-95 in Maryland, just north of Aberdeen. The state, already strapped for cash because of budget shenanigans, approved the absolute most beautiful on-off ramp in the state to help out their favorite son.
Now he's putting up a gorgeous hotel off the left field side of the park, building replica little league fields of Wrigley and Fenway, adding a golf course, and on and on.
The cash that rolls thru that complex every spring and summer is huge.
He is driving millions into the local economy, and hiring lots of local kids to help out.
But, pack a sub or a hoagie or even a bag of peanuts to bring into this low A ball park, and you'll be asked to either leave it at the gate, return it to your car, or consume it right there before you enter.
Bottom line - Cal is makling himself and those around him alot of money, and certainly is entertaining lots of people with his baseball complex, but when it comes to giving something back to the fans, like a $4.00 sub being able to be brough into the game instead of spending $5.00 for one of thier horrible burgers, forget it.
by elktonfan on Mar 18, 2006 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
by Larry Bigbie3 on Mar 18, 2006 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This really lowers my opinion of Ripken
by rebop on Mar 23, 2006 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
my god
by SC on Mar 18, 2006 10:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is this new to you?
by Jonnypops on Mar 18, 2006 10:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not new, no
by SC on Mar 18, 2006 11:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Believe me, as a lifelong O's fan..
I think it's a matter of your perspective thru time.
I grew up with Brooks as my third baseman, and saw Cal play thousands of games. Both were tremendous ball players, had remarkably injury free careers, and both were lifetime O's hall of famers.
I lve them both, but I think as a team mate, leader, and just all around good guy Brooks ranks with me a little higher. It's a generational thing, I guess.
I used to listen to my grandpop tell me that Pie Traynor was the best third sacker of all time, and I argued with him all of the time.
I guess he could have been right, but I never saw Pie play, so....
by elktonfan on Mar 18, 2006 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re:
Believing that the streak was overrated and whether the man should have played 158 or 162 games per year misses a bigger point, and I believe it gets to the heart of what bothers people about Cal Ripken. I don't know when Cal Ripken realized he could break Gherig's record, but once the goal was in sight, the constant media drum beat began. Cal Ripken's quest became larger than himself, and baseball, not just Baltimore put him on a pedestal. Baseball desperately needed a hero after the 1994 strike, and the decent man from Baltimore on a quest for a significant milestone fit the bill. Cal Ripken was a throwback to the old Orioles, and his work ethic and attitude exuded that basic devotion to the fundamentals and respect for the game. It was easy to mold him into a hero because he was a fine example of how baseball could be. It could not have been easy to be the face of major league baseball, but Ripken carried himself well. Over time, he succumbed to some of the trappings of fame, and demonstrated some arrogance with the well publicized distancing himself from the team. That rubbed people the wrong way. At the same time, he continued to be the face of the Orioles and carried a dismal organization through tough times. That was not an easy task. The payback, in this increasingly corporate world of baseball, was lucrative deals from major league baseball, corporations, and politicians. Not that this never occurred in the past, but it seems Ripken's deals were much greater than anything available to Baltimore sports celebrities of the past. Cal Ripken became a celebrity in ways no other Baltimore athlete ever had. Baltimore's two other sports heroes, Robinson and Unitas, never enjoyed these perks. They remained rather humble athletes who struggled transitioning from a sport that did not make them fabulously wealthy into the corporate world. This resonates much better with the average person.
Cal Ripken came from a solid Aberdeen family. His instincts were the same as Robinson's and Unitas'. He was however, sucked into a much greater whirlwind of celebrity. It seems to me that overall, he remained rather grounded. He also was a hell of an Oriole and a proud face of the organization.
by drj on Mar 20, 2006 10:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I hear you.
But while I can't fault Ripken for wanting to make a buck, at the same time that kind of massive publicity can get VERY annoying to the fan that simply wanted to watch someone play baseball. All of a suddent it's not just the humble shortstop of the Baltimore Orioles anymore, it's RipkenCorp (trying to come off as the humble shortstop of the Baltimore Orioles) hocking you a wide variety of consumer products. The argument may be made that that's simply "where we're at" at this point in time. Very true...but I and many others do not like where we're at.
by Jonnypops on Mar 20, 2006 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...
I can also understand why it rubbed some of his teammates the wrong way, especially guys like Alomar who felt that all that (positive) attention should have been going to them.
But I never put much stock in those complaints--the fact is that the kind of success that Ripken experienced tends to breed envy, and no one, no matter how good a guy they is going to be liked by everyone. But the vast majority of Ripken's teammates over the years will tell you he was a good teammate.
by rebop on Mar 23, 2006 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cal Ripken
The streak will never be broken period.Cal
will be a first ballot hall of famer.without
a doubt he was a gentleman & loved the game he played & has given back more to baseball then
any player i can think of.
The thing I liked about Ripken the most he
never let the Media & fans define him.What
you saw was what you got.Cal was a steady
performer that earned the right to play
everyday.His managers made that decision
not him.
To be constantly denigrated as a player &
a human being is a monumental mistake by
those who choose to do so.
Cal handled his career with a thoughtful
attitude & gave considerable credit to those
that helped him along the way.Cal never ever
like todays players took cheap shots at his
teammates or his teams owner & indeed could
have a few times for legitimate causes.
Truthfully he wasn,t the orioles alltime best
player BUT nobody was better at showing the
fans & his teammates,managers & coaches the
effort he put forth day in & day out.
After Brooks retirement he has certainly
been the face of the Orioles.Certainly Cal,s
Streak help bring baseball back from the strike
& helped make recover some of its glory.
by hagersbush on Mar 20, 2006 12:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
GAMETHREAD SPONSOR
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
