Now that LoMo's gone, should Marlins re-retire No. 5?

Remember the stink when Logan Morrison received permission from Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria to wear No. 5, even though the number had been retired -- as part of the team's Inaugural Game festivities in 1993, no less -- in honor of the team's first president, Carl Barger?

Barger died before the Marlins played their first game. But the team retired No. 5 because it was the number worn by his favorite player, Joe DiMaggio. Then along came Morrison, who two years ago asked to wear No. 5 in honor of his late father, whose favorite player, George Brett, also wore that number. Never mind that retired numbers are supposed to be sacred. Loria gave it his blessing. Problem was, nobody from the Marlins notified the Barger family beforehand to ask their permission.

The Barger family still seems miffed by the slight, and justifiably so.

"We have our own memories of our father, and it was a disappointment when they unretired the number," said Barger's daughter, Betzi.

But wait. Morrison is gone now. The Marlins traded him to Seattle and, well, No. 5 is back in play.

What should the Marlins do? Should they re-retire the number in honor of Barger? Or should they make it available for the next player who wants to wear it?

"We wouldn't object if they did that," said Betzi Barger of re-retiring the number. "But we're not going to pursue it."

What do you think?

This much is certain: Morrison won't be taking someone's retired number in Seattle. Outside of No. 42, which has been retired universally by Major League Baseball in honor of Jackie Robinson, the Mariners and Colorado Rockies are the only two teams without a retired number.

Well, other than the Marlins, that is.