Well, it wouldn't be a travesty to call Doc Mr. Blue Jay, perhaps premature, but not a travesty. There's one more for the pitching staff, and then Mr.Ripken can take his spot on the bench.  Just a suggestion. Obviously the vote in the poll on the left is skewed by a younger audience, but Doc isn't far behind T.Fernandez. and at the very least, he is clearly the #2 choice for the Jays despite great arguments being made for multiple other players (Carter, Alomar, Steib).

 

Hmmm,  all I can say is if Ernie Banks is “Mr. Cub”, then Stan Musial surely is Mr. Cardinal?  And PeeWee Reese is Mr. Dodgers, not Jackie.  Peewee was first in the hearts of Bums fans before Jackie came along, as well as after.  (Even Gil Hodges was more Mr. Dodgers than Jackie.)  Don't misunderstand:  I have as high a regard for Jackie and for Bob Gibson as anyone.   But I thought this was about which player in the franchise's history was the one that fans would first think of when it was mentioned, or who was seen as somehow 'representing' the franchise. 

I've been thinking about Ernie Banks, too; and I wonder if he's called “Mr. Cub” in large part because the media told us to call him that?  Yes, he had his two wonderful MVP seasons, and hit 500 home runs.  He also had a ready smile and was a favourite as much of the media as of the fans, because he gave ready access to both, and he worked actively in the Chicago 'community'.  But Joe Carter isn't Mr. Blue Jays, is he?  (I was a little surprised that nobody even mentioned Fergie Jenkins as Mr. Cub.  Six consecutive (?) twenty win seasons, a Cy Young, thousands of strikeouts, and a rubber arm.  In the late 60's and early 70's he's the first Cub most fans thought of, I'd wager.  And though Billy Williams was a much less public figure than Banks,  I'm not sure he was any less a favourite with people who followed the club.

I'd like to hear some of the arguments for Gibson and Jackie myself.  Not for their excellence—which no one disputes--but for their “Misterness”.

Tony Gwynn is undoubtedly Mr. Padres, but Trevor Hoffman would be a close second.  A bit of a cheat, but at least that way there'd be someone in the pen.

Jackie excited and challenged fans at the same time, like no other before him.  Did Dodger fans accept him completely as their own at the time?  Probably not.  Looking back, would those same fans who saw him back then say that he was more "Mr. Dodger" than Pee Wee Reese or Sandy Koufax or Don Drysdale?  I think so. 

Bob Gibson over Stan Musial as "Mr. Cardinal" is a different question, and frankly, a bit of a stretch.  It is hard for a truly great pitcher like Gibson or Koufax or Clemens or Marichal to define a team. 

Well, maybe you're right about Jackie, Mike.  These matters are never decidable anyway; but they're good conversation-generators.  Jackie was certainly exciting and challenging.  Reese was instrumental in 'easing' Jackie's entry (not that it was easy at all).  But Reese defused the potentially explosive situation with Dixie Walker, and stood up for Jackie several times in hostile cities.  Dodger fans knew that.  And as someone remarked earlier,  this question is definitely a generationally-conflicted one.  I'm happy with Jackie as Mr Dodger; but I do think that perception is coloured (yeah, lazy pun) by the passage of  five decades.

I also think of Larkin when I think of the Reds, but that's mostly because I'm a younger guy. If there's some level of agreement, we could bump Rose in favour of Larkin, and then use the roster spot on the Dodgers for Koufax over Robinson. I think it's a bit of a stretch though.