ESPN and the O's Face of the Franchise

[esmd]

Pretty cool article on ESPN about the face of MLB franchises.  They look at which franchises currently have their best ever/face of the franchise playing, and which don't.  I figured the O's would be Cal or Brooks, with Palmer as a dark horse, and predictably, it was Cal.  I liked that they highlighted the difference in WAR between him and Brooks as to why Brooks was #2.  Link and our write-up is below.  I'm curious if anyone would dispute Cal and make an argument for another player, be it Brooks. Frank, Palmer, or even maybe Eddie Murray.  Tough to argue against Cal though, and it really is a shame that we won't see Manny give chase to Cal to see if he could be the next great HOF Oriole.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/22255717/how-many-mlb-teams-face-franchise-playing-right-now

Orioles' face: Cal Ripken Jr.

It's for players like Ripken that the concept of franchise face was born. Ripken and the Orioles will always go together like peas and carrots. His 92.5 WAR tops the Browns-Orioles leaderboard, 12.3 ahead of Brooks Robinson, who was a worthy franchise icon before Ripken came along. For you St. Louis Browns aficionados out there, George Sisler was the clear icon of the pre-Baltimore days, which produced exactly zero World Series titles.

Manny Machado, who everyone assumes is leaving the Orioles after this season, if he even gets that far, ranks 25th with 26.0 WAR. Even if he stayed, catching Ripken, or even Robinson, would be a tough ask.

 

[esmd]

LOL at the Marlins write-up:

Marlins' face: none

Nothing against him personally, but the guy known as "Mr. Marlin" is Jeff Conine, who had 16.7 WAR with the franchise. This is a faceless franchise because in every single instance the team has produced a star-level player, he's left via trade or free agency. (There's also the tragic case of Jose Fernandez.) Stanton is the team's all-time WAR leader, but we'll eventually remember him as a Yankee. Don't believe it? Well, which team do you associate Miguel Cabrera with? It's not the Marlins.

It begs the question - would you trade the Marlins success since 1993 (2 World Championships but no franchise pride) for the Orioles success since 1993 (Cal and 2131, 6 playoff trips, three ALCS appearances, but no Championships)?

[glenn__davis]

I think nationally, it is Cal.

To O's fans, it is Brooks.

Just my opinion, obviously both are great choices.  But Brooksie is a one in a million person along with being a one in a million player.  Not that Cal's not a good guy, he's just - different.

[MDtransplant757]

My pick would be Cal, but for the current core it would be AJ

[gmelson26]

26 minutes ago, glenn__davis said:

I think nationally, it is Cal.

To O's fans, it is Brooks.

Just my opinion, obviously both are great choices.  But Brooksie is a one in a million person along with being a one in a million player.  Not that Cal's not a good guy, he's just - different.

I get your point.  I wish I had gotten to see Brooks play, but for anyone younger than 45, it's Cal.  For someone older than 45?  It's probably Brooks, maybe Earl, maybe Cal, Palmer.

Personally, I have a picture and HoF jersey signed by Brooks, who I never saw play and nothing signed by Cal.  However, it's not really close to me, the face of the O's is Cal.  His run at 2131 is the defining moment of baseball for me.

[Ripken]

31 minutes ago, glenn__davis said:

I think nationally, it is Cal.

To O's fans, it is Brooks.

Just my opinion, obviously both are great choices.  But Brooksie is a one in a million person along with being a one in a million player.  Not that Cal's not a good guy, he's just - different.

I think it's an age thing.  Historically, it's both of those guys and probably AJ for people under 30.

[glenn__davis]

3 minutes ago, gmelson26 said:

I get your point.  I wish I had gotten to see Brooks play, but for anyone younger than 45, it's Cal.  For someone older than 45?  It's probably Brooks, maybe Earl, maybe Cal, Palmer.

Personally, I have a picture and HoF jersey signed by Brooks, who I never saw play and nothing signed by Cal.  However, it's not really close to me, the face of the O's is Cal.  His run at 2131 is the defining moment of baseball for me.

I never saw Brooks play either (I'm 36), but I've had the chance to meet him once or twice, and he's such a great guy.  I think I heard one of the radio guys describe him once, and they said something like, "Listen to all the stories you've heard about Brooks and how nice he is, and then get an expectation of how nice he'll be if you get to meet him.  He'll be even nicer than that."  One of those guys that make you feel like HE is honored to meet YOU. Those guys are rare.

And again, it's really nothing against Cal.  Cal's great and certainly was the star of my youth.  

[interloper]

I think the more interesting topic is who is the face of the franchise after Jones and Manny leave? I think the answer has to be Chris Davis simply by default, tenure, length of contract, and the fact that most general/casual baseball fans recognize him as an Oriole other than, say, a Ranger. 

[gmelson26]

20 minutes ago, Ripken said:

I think it's an age thing.  Historically, it's both of those guys and probably AJ for people under 30.

Yeah I was going to say, anyone younger than 20 at this point and it's probably AJ or Manny.

[TonySoprano]

1 hour ago, Ripken said:

I think it's an age thing.  Historically, it's both of those guys and probably AJ for people under 30.

Absolutely, it's generational.  Brooks retired in 1977, long before cable sports.  Unless you lived in the area, or caught them once or twice during the regular season on the NBC "Game of the Week,"  more and more people alive today never saw him in his playing days.  I watched all of Ripken's career, 162 games a season of it for two decades, so he's the face of the franchise for more of us.  It's hard to believe Cal's been out of the game for 16 seasons, so he too will fade, but not for a while.  

The ESPN article used WAR to measure greatness, and for the Orioles that was Cal Ripken, who leads the franchise in many statistical categories including games played.  I don't care what numbers Anthony Rizzo posts, you'll never find a greater Cub on and off the field than the late Ernie Banks, and Brooks is the same for Baltimore, a legendary gentleman.

If there's any consolation needed O's fans, the face of the Yankees has been dead for almost 70 years, and nothing Judge will ever do in his career can change that.

[Redskins Rick]

1 hour ago, TonySoprano said:

Absolutely, it's generational.  Brooks retired in 1977, long before cable sports.  Unless you lived in the area, or caught them once or twice during the regular season on the NBC "Game of the Week,"  more and more people alive today never saw him in his playing days.  I watched all of Ripken's career, 162 games a season of it for two decades, so he's the face of the franchise for more of us.  It's hard to believe Cal's been out of the game for 16 seasons, so he too will fade, but not for a while.  

The ESPN article used WAR to measure greatness, and for the Orioles that was Cal Ripken, who leads the franchise in many statistical categories including games played.  I don't care what numbers Anthony Rizzo posts, you'll never find a greater Cub on and off the field than the late Ernie Banks, and Brooks is the same for Baltimore, a legendary gentleman.

If there's any consolation needed O's fans, the face of the Yankees has been dead for almost 70 years, and nothing Judge will ever do in his career can change that.

To us fans, Cal was the "Oriole Way", of course, his father was a huge part of installing that philosophy into the organization as a coach.

No disrespect for Brooks, but to me, personally, Cal is the Oriole King Legend.

 

[Moose Milligan]

2 hours ago, interloper said:

I think the more interesting topic is who is the face of the franchise after Jones and Manny leave? I think the answer has to be Chris Davis simply by default, tenure, length of contract, and the fact that most general/casual baseball fans recognize him as an Oriole other than, say, a Ranger. 

Ugh, kill me now.  

[interloper]

28 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Ugh, kill me now.  

Right?

[foxfield]

3 hours ago, gmelson26 said:

I get your point.  I wish I had gotten to see Brooks play, but for anyone younger than 45, it's Cal.  For someone older than 45?  It's probably Brooks, maybe Earl, maybe Cal, Palmer.

Personally, I have a picture and HoF jersey signed by Brooks, who I never saw play and nothing signed by Cal.  However, it's not really close to me, the face of the O's is Cal.  His run at 2131 is the defining moment of baseball for me.

I'll trade you a picture of Cal Ripken Signed in my presence for the HoF jersey signed by Brooks???  

[Frobby]

4 hours ago, glenn__davis said:

I think nationally, it is Cal.

To O's fans, it is Brooks.

Just my opinion, obviously both are great choices.  But Brooksie is a one in a million person along with being a one in a million player.  Not that Cal's not a good guy, he's just - different.

Brooks is more a man of the people.    Cal manages his image, Brooks never thought that way.    But I’m proud that both were lifelong Orioles.