In another thread, we have been debating the Hall of Fame merits of Bert Blyleven. Since that discussion has run out, let’s raise another.
Ozzie Smith was elected to the Hall of Fame this year. Alan Trammell may someday be. Should Smith have been elected? Should Trammell?
For the sake of starting the argument, I’ll work through a Keltner List for both players.
1. Was this player ever regarded, to some extent, as the best player in baseball?
I don’t think there was ever a time when either Smith or Trammell were commonly regarded as the best player in baseball. Trammell was probably the best player in baseball in the 1987 season but that’s not precisely what the question means.
2. Was this player ever the best player on his team?
I think it is reasonable to argue that both players were the best players on their teams in the mid-80s. The Cardinals had other guys who had huge seasons, like John Tudor and Jack Clark, but year to year Ozzie was the best. I’d say the same of Trammell; Kirk Gibson was pretty good too, but if I had to pick one I’d pick Trammell.
3. Was this player the best player in baseball, or in his league, at his position?
Ozzie Smith was clearly the best shortstop in the NL in the 1980s, until Barry Larkin got really good. Trammell has a harder case because he is a contemporary of Cal Ripken. Overall I would say Ripken was the better player, but that’s hardly a knock on Trammell.
4. Did this player have an impact on a number of pennant races or playoff series?
Both players had critical impacts on winning championships. Smith was a key player on Cardinal teams that just barely won their divisions in 1982 and 1985. Trammell was the best player in the league in 1987, when the Tigers just barely got by the Blue Jays. Both players also contributed to championship teams that won by larger margins.
5. Was this player good enough to play regularly after passing his prime?
Smith was a regular until he was 38, Trammell until 35, and both player a little after that.
6. Is this player the best player in baseball history who isn’t in the Hall of Fame, or the best at his position who isn’t in?
Ozzie Smith is in. If he WASN’T in, I would argue he would be the best shortstop ever who wasn’t in, although that remains to be proven by this thread. With Ozzie in, is Alan Trammell the best who isn’t? Not counting non-eligible players, he might be. But Dave Concepcion and Bert Campaneris were very good. I haven’t compared them to Trammell, but they might be just as good.
7. Are most comparable players in the Hall of Fame?
The only player who is really comparable to Ozzie Smith is Luis Aparicio, who like Smith played a long time, was just an OK hitter, ran the bases really well and won a lot of Gold Gloves. Aparicio is in the Hall of Fame. No other player is a really good match; some of the OK matches are Hall of Famers (Maranville, Nellie Fox) and some are not (Concepcion, Campaneris.)
Trammell’s closest comparisons, interestingly enough, are overwhelmingly present-day players, some of whom will probably go to the Hall of Fame (Roberto Alomar, Craig Biggio) and some of whom won’t (Tony Fernandez.) Of course, Alomar and Biggio are similar NOW; given more seasons to build their totals they won’t be when they retire. None of these players are exactly great matches for Trammell.
8. Do the player’s numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
Defining “HOF Standards” isn’t easy. By the Bill James toy methods, Ozzie has 35 on the HOF Standard score (50 is roughlt average) and 142 on the HOF monitor (100 makes it likely you’ll get elected.) Trammell is at 41 and 104.
I hate these methods because I see the Comparative Players bit as being a little more instructive. Based on that, I’d say both players at least reach the minimum levels the HoF would ask for from a shortstop.
9. Is there evidence this player might be better or worse than suggested by his statistics?
Of course, Ozzie Smith’s defense was just extraordinary. All shortstops tend to have their defensive value overrated; as a Blue Jays fan I’d heard for years that Alex Gonzalez’s horrible bat was okay because he was a great fielder. Funny how it’s not helping the Cubs. But in Ozzie’s case, it’s merited; he was an amazing shortstop, maybe the best who ever lived. All the hyperbole you’ve heard is true; the man was just awesome with the glove.
HOW amazing is debatable. Defensive numbers are not easy to work with, and an estimate of Ozzie’s defensive value could range from anywhere from 10 to 50 runs a year saved. There were seasons when Smith was making two hundred plays a year more than the average shortstop. Some of that is attributable to Cardinal pitching staffs, but there’s no doubt Smith was robbing opposing hitters of many, many hits. Even if you say he was only averaging 30-40 hits stolen per year, that’s a massive impact that obviously means his just-OK hitting does not tell the full story. Imagine if he was an average defensive shortstop but with another 35 hits a year and calculate his batting average. Smith was also a tremendous baserunner.
Trammell was a better hitter but not as amazing a shortstop. However, as a shortstop, and a pretty good one, he was obviously a better player than an outfielder with the same batting numbers would be.
10. Did the player ever win any MVP Awards, or have MVP-type seasons?
Neither player won. Coincidentally, both players finished second in 1987, and both absolutely SHOULD have won the Award, but were robbed by RBI champions (Bell over Trammell, Dawson over Smith) who were clearly inferior players on teams that got beat. Those were two of the worst MVP votes ever. Neither player came close any other year, although Trammell finished seventh one year.
11. How many All-Star games was this player in? Do most players in this many All-Star games go to the Hall of Fame?
Ozzie was in the All-Star game every year, 16 times in all. Obviously, most 16-time All-Stars are in the Hall of Fame.
Trammell went to six All-Star games, which is low for a Hall of Famer, but not unprecedentedly low. His direct contemporary, Robin Yount, went to only three. Obviously, Trammell was being voted out every year by Cal Ripken, which is a tough peer group, and got bumped out by Yount a few times. Six isn’t bad in his situation; he ws probably robbed twice by the every-team-represented rule, too.
12. If this player were the best player on a team, could that team win the pennant?
Since this did in fact happen, you’d have to say Yes for both.
13. Did this player have a impact on baseball that goes beyond his on-field accomplishment?
Not really.
14. Did this player uphold the basic pronciples of honestly and sportsmanship required by the Hall of Fame?
Both players are fine gentlemen as far as I know.
Next message, I’ll tackle the stats in detail. Meanwhile, whaddya think, guys? Ozzie, Trammell, or both? How do they compare to Ripken?