Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted

the 2004 rule the sox had where any players who play one game for for the sox could get a ws ring. sould they keep the rule

 

The rule would mean something like said the didn't traded Tony Graffanino by opening day but did later on and the sox won the 2006 ws than players like Tony Graffanino get a ws ring too

Posted
Yeah we should.

 

I also remember Brian Daubach getting a ring or hearing something about that :lol:

I believe he did and it was sent to him. If I recall correctly, he was playing for the Mets and we didn't play them last year.

Posted

A lot of teams do this. It isnt necessarily a Red Sox, 86 year thing. A lot of the front office execs, players, coaches, and even in some cases broadcasters (I know Rex Hudler and his partner got rings in 2002, and i'm sure its happened on other occasions). I know that the Yankees dont limit the rings to players who were on the team when the World Series was one. I know in 1996 Ruben Sierra got a ring although he was traded half way through the '96 season. Those are just a few specifics, there have obviously been plenty more instances.

 

So really the only thing done because of the 86 years thing is that they gave rings to a bunch of the old players.

 

I am of the belief that all teams should give rings to all players who were on their active roster at some point in the year. The way I see it, if they were a part of that tteam, then they deserve it. If the team wants to limit the financial share, fine, but rings are a different story IMO.

Posted
A lot of teams do this. It isnt necessarily a Red Sox, 86 year thing. A lot of the front office execs, players, coaches, and even in some cases broadcasters (I know Rex Hudler and his partner got rings in 2002, and i'm sure its happened on other occasions). I know that the Yankees dont limit the rings to players who were on the team when the World Series was one. I know in 1996 Ruben Sierra got a ring although he was traded half way through the '96 season. Those are just a few specifics, there have obviously been plenty more instances.

 

So really the only thing done because of the 86 years thing is that they gave rings to a bunch of the old players.

 

I am of the belief that all teams should give rings to all players who were on their active roster at some point in the year. The way I see it, if they were a part of that tteam, then they deserve it. If the team wants to limit the financial share, fine, but rings are a different story IMO.

I'd bet KC would be the exception.. KC .. what am I thinking... never happen.

Posted
I don't think guys who weren't involved with the team at all should get rings. The ring is for the World Series Champions, and those who helped put it together.
Posted

if Graff hits a walk-off homer on opening day, gets traded the next day, and the sox win the AL east by 1 game and go onto win the world series, then damn right he should get a ring

 

but then if a guy plays 5 games for the sox and is designated for assignment, how do you tell him he doesnt get a ring?

 

regardless of everything else, anyone who had even the smallest effect on the clubhouse during a given year, had an effect on how the team did that team

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...