If you missed it Tuesday evening, there was some Red Sox number drama that played out on Twitter. You can read more here, but the short recap is that the Red Sox’ official roster listed pitcher Martin Perez as No. 33, Catherine Varitek (wife of longtime No. 33 Jason Varitek) got upset and fired off a profane tweet, Perez announced he never actually asked for 33 and was going to stick with the 54 he wore last season, and everyone lived happily ever after.
As I saw this all play out, I couldn’t help but wonder… Did I miss something? Is there a reason the No. 33 is now off-limits to all current and future Red Sox players?
This isn’t meant to be facetious. We all understand the important role Varitek played in Boston for 15 years, seven of which he was team captain. He helped the Red Sox win two World Series, caught more games than any catcher in franchise history, caught more no-hitters than any catcher in MLB history, made three All-Star Games, won a Gold Glove and a Silver Slugger, fought A-Rod, etc.
But his number hasn’t been retired by the team. The Red Sox haven’t announced any plans to retire it. Yet the mere suggestion that someone might wear it seemed like an unforgivable offense.
While it might seem like a given that 33 will be retired at some point, there is also an argument for not doing so, depending on how selective you want the organization to be.
Until 20 years ago, the Red Sox were extremely selective, with three very strict criteria: You had to have played at least 10 years with the team, you had to have been elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame, and you had to have finished your career with the team.
But starting with Carlton Fisk (who did not finish his career in Boston) in 2000, the Red Sox have been more flexible. Johnny Pesky’s No. 6 was retired for his lifetime contributions to the organization despite not meeting any of the previous criteria.
Wade Boggs, previously passed over because he finished his career elsewhere, now made the cut. Pedro Martinez was a no-brainer despite only playing seven seasons with the Red Sox. David Ortiz’s No. 34 went up five years before he was even eligible for the Baseball Hall of Fame.
Historically, that next group of players who were great Red Sox, but not Baseball Hall of Famers, have been honored in the Red Sox Hall of Fame, not by having their number retired.
Dwight Evans, second in franchise history in games played and fifth in WAR (66.5 to Varitek’s 24.2 by the way), still hasn’t had his number retired. In fact, another No. 24 (Manny Ramirez) was allowed to play a whole career arguably worth its own number retirement while wearing it. And then David Price wore it after that.
Roger Clemens’ 21 isn’t hanging in right field yet either, nor is Luis Tiant’s 23. Dustin Pedroia’s No. 15 certainly warrants consideration now that he’s officially retired.
Go compare the career numbers for Varitek and Rico Petrocelli. They’re quite similar, but I don’t remember ever hearing that 6 should be retired for Petrocelli as well as Pesky.
If being a key part of multiple World Series teams elevates Varitek to number retirement level, then what about Jon Lester or -- if you dare even go near this third rail -- Curt Schilling? Tim Wakefield had longevity and multiple World Series and, believe it or not, a higher career WAR than Varitek.
Varitek has been retired for nine years now. If retiring his 33 was a slam-dunk no-brainer a la Ortiz, there’s been some time for it to happen.
Varitek is still a part of the organization as a game-planning coordinator and will presumably continue to wear 33 when he's in uniform, so perhaps that's a factor, but generally coaches (or coordinators) don't take priority over active players when it comes to numbers.
Martin Perez won’t be wearing it and by all accounts didn’t even ask for it. No one has worn it since Tek retired and maybe no one ever will, especially after this mini-drama. But I can’t for the life of me figure out why a number should be off-limits if it hasn’t actually been retired.