I understand your argument ,I just do not agree with it. I do not think a defensive player should be awarded hall of fame. There are some great defensive outfielders that do not belong for the same logic.
My Hall of Fame requirements are different than yours.
I have seen statistics manipulated in sports many times. I remember when Notre Dame came up with all purpose yards to push a possible Heisman for what was primarily a punt returner. I was amazed people bought it.
These cooked up defensive stats for Ozzie dont work for me. I need more and he does not reach.
What, strong punt and kickoff returns don’t help football teams? Start every possession on the 40 and you’re going to have a hell of a lot better result than starting on the 20.
And a world class defensive shortstop matters more than a world class defensive outfielder because they handle by far the most plays in a baseball game.
My Hall of Fame logic would be to reward players who helped win the most games. Like Ozzy.
And almost one out per game over the average SS is a huge difference.
“Cooked up”? Any more “cooked up” than “41 RBI s per season. he had 28 career homers. 262 life time batting ave.”?
By todays standards he could not hold a shortstop job. Arod ,Yount ,Jetr,Tejada, would you bench them for Ozzie. NO WAY. He was an offensive liability.
Today’s standard? Every player you mentioned, aside from Tejada, had careers that overlapped Ozzie’s. In fact, Yount retired 3 years before Ozzie Smith.
Disregarding that, what would I do if I had ARod and Ozzie Smith on the same team? I would move A Rod to third base and enjoy the show Ozzie puts on out on the field.
The Boston Red Sox just won the World Series with a shortstop that batted .237 for the season.
Why you even responded to that, i have no idea.
gonzomax, have you noticed who actually started at short for the Cardinals the last few years? You think he could hold down a job, but Ozzie Smith couldn’t?
If Vizquel, a worse hitter and fielder, can start today, so can Ozzie.
Actually, Vizquel is a better hitter in terms of average (.274) than Ozzie was. Ozzie still has the advantage in defense though.
Also, gonzomax’s argument against the inclusion of Ozzie Smith in the HOF might be stronger if Ozzie continued to hit in the .220-.230 range throughout his career. His batting average improved considerably after his first few seasons.
Vizquel’s numbers are superficially better, but because he played in a different offensive context (yes, his career overlaps Ozzie’s, but obviously the bulk of it was in the high-offense era.)
Omar’s career OBP is .340, whereas the average player in the leagues he’s played in is at .339; Ozzie, by comparison, was at .337 in a .328 context. Omar’s batting average IS slighty better, but Ozzie drew more walks. Same thing with slugging; if you compare them in context, Ozzie’s slugging is 62 points below average, Omar’s is 77 points below average. Omar also isn’t nearly the baserunner Ozzie was; Ozzie stole 200 more bases and was actually caught stealing fewer times. Taken as a whole, Omar created 4.3 runs per game to Ozzie’s 4.1, but in a context where a LOT more runs were scored. Overall, Ozzie was actually a slightly better offensive player than Omar.
This should not be taken as a shot against Omar Vizquel, who has been a very fine player indeed, but he’s not as good as Ozzie Smith with the glove OR the bat.
He wont be offered as a hall of fame candidate which is the subject we are discussing. You play the best you have at that position ,no matter how flawed that player may be.Then you trade or bring a minor leaguer up replace him.
Ozzie’s backflips also brought in fans and probably raised player morale. Take that, Steroid Shortstop Sluggers!
The topic was your pronouncement that he couldn’t play in the majors today because of his offense. I’d say that he would probably still be better than most shortstops, if well behind the top few.
Ozzie appeared in 3 World Series which put him in the big picture. Announcers need something to talk about
Craig Nettles was a very good 3rd baseman. He had a spectacular World Series. He then became the best in the game. He was not. He was very good though. If Ozzie did not get in the series he would have been a footnote.
I wonder how many other guys played in fifteen All-Star games and just ended up as “footnotes.” I also wonder how many 13-time Gold Glove winners were “footnotes.” Heck, I’m curious as to how many people just played over 2500 games and were mere “footnotes.”
I would guess none.
Since I’ve provided a huge amount of evidence and argument supporting Ozzie’s greatness, none of which has been refuted, I guess I can’t say much more.
BTW, it’s “Graig,” not Craig, Nettles. And isn’t it interesting that Nettles also played in many World Series (five, in fact) and played as long as Ozzie did, but DIDN’T make the Hall of Fame. You know why? He wasn’t as good.
You brought no evidence. It is opinion. Mine is different than yours.
Gold Glove is a bullshit award. Citing that is a waste.
Nettles did not have the hitting credentials, just like Ozzie. Yet he hit 390 hrs. Smith 28. Fielders do not belong in the hall. My opinion,I would take Ozzie out and put Nettles in to bat for him during a game.
I’m seeing a ton of evidence in the last few dozen posts. Is your position that batting average and home runs are the only stats that count?
You are correct in saying Nettles’ hitting (i.e., his low batting average) is what’s keeping him out of the HOF. However, I’m not sure Nettles is the best example to cite since there are some distinctions that have to be made between him and Ozzie. For one thing, Nettles was a third basemen and their comparitive offensive/defensive skills are evaluated differently than shortstops. In my view, it seems a third baseman’s offensive stats are graded tougher than a shortstop’s. Nettles was also a power hitter (hence the 390 home runs) and Ozzie definitely was not. Finally, would your statement that “(f)ielders do not belong in the hall” apply in Brooks Robinson? His lifetime .267 batting average ranks near the lower end of HOF members.
I fear for the answer we might get. 