Informal Hall of Fame Opinion Poll

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by munsonman

i knew the ozzie smith apologists would jump on this

I'm a life long Red Sox fan. Never a big Cardinals of the 80's fan, but am dumbfounded that any knowledgeable fan could say Ozzie should not be in the HOF.

Originally Posted by munsonman

i knew the ozzie smith apologists would jump on this
he is only known for his defense-hence one dimensional

Does the fact that he is pretty much regarded as the greatest fielder at his position not mean anything to you? While I agree with the premise that I'd rather a one dimensional offensive player (i.e. Ted Williams). I just can't see how the greatest fielder (or at least one of the greatest) at the most important fielding position (outside of P/C) would not merit the HOF. Do you belive that one dimensional hitters, such as Ted Williams, should not be in the HOF? If so, I'll at least give you points for consistency.

Originally Posted by munsonman

he only garnered admirers through his ability to make those stupid back flips on This Week In Baseball in every 80's episode and the media lapdogs eating it up and shoving it down our throats.

You can't really believe that, can you?

To the original question, I'd remove Comiskey (Yawkey a close second) and add Blyleven.

[paul]

Whenever people say that Mazeroski should be one of the first to go, I always respond by saying that I guess Ozzie Smith should go too. Usually, that makes people think twice about kicking out Mazeroski. But now people want to kick Ozzie out too. So, I guess all I can say is that Brooks Robinson must be next.

[byrone]

Anybody who thinks Gary Carter doesn't belong in the HOF must have missed his decade in Montreal.

[munsonman]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

I'm a life long Red Sox fan. Never a big Cardinals of the 80's fan, but am dumbfounded that any knowledgeable fan could say Ozzie should not be in the HOF.


Does the fact that he is pretty much regarded as the greatest fielder at his position not mean anything to you? While I agree with the premise that I'd rather a one dimensional offensive player (i.e. Ted Williams). I just can't see how the greatest fielder (or at least one of the greatest) at the most important fielding position (outside of P/C) would not merit the HOF. Do you belive that one dimensional hitters, such as Ted Williams, should not be in the HOF? If so, I'll at least give you points for consistency.


You can't really believe that, can you?

To the original question, I'd remove Comiskey (Yawkey a close second) and add Blyleven.

i'll just post these anemic Ozzie Smith offensive stats and see if any body here will go out on a limb and say that this player's stats deserves HOF inclusion:
regular season
hits 2460
highest hit total in a year 182
career average .262
years over .300 batting average-1 (.303)
HR 28
RBI 793
never led league in ANY significant offensive category
post season
average .236
HR 1
RBI 10
AB's 144

While Smith did post a .978 fielding average for his career, i still do not see how feilding % can overcome his offensive "accomplishments". If i said in a post that these stats are first ballot HOF worthy I'd be laughed out of the building.

In answer to your question-yes i am saying that Smith being the "greatest" defender at his position should not overcome his pedestrian at best offensive stats for inclusion into the HOF. At least to me, offensive numbers mean much more to the overall perception of a player than any defensive accomplishments as well as his value to his team. More to the point, Smith's career fielding percentage of .978 isn't so far above Dave Concepcion's .971 career mark. Concepcion was a better hitter for average .267, power 101 HR, and RBI's 950. Trammell's career fielding % is .977 Larkin's is .975 and i will not even dignify a comparison of offensive #'s of these two players versus Smith. So maybe Smith's defensive accomplishments weren't so great after all. The percentages don't lie. Gold Glove Awards are a popularity contest (see Rapael Palmiero) Moreover, i do believe that the constant media fawning over "the wizard of oz" and his stupid gimmick i.e. the back flips did and still do skew fans perceptions as to Smith's greatness and worthiness for the HOF. How exactly is he better or more worthy than Trammell, Larkin, or even Concepcion when looking at the numbers? The question originally asked was who would you remove from the Hall and replace that player with and why. You may agree or disagree with my choice but please don't make it seem as if i am advocating the removal of Ruth for Kevin Maas.

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by munsonman

i'll just post these anemic Ozzie Smith offensive stats and see if any body here will go out on a limb and say that this player's stats deserves HOF inclusion:
regular season
hits 2460
highest hit total in a year 182
career average .262
years over .300 batting average-1 (.303)
HR 28
RBI 793
never led league in ANY significant offensive category
post season
average .236
HR 1
RBI 10
AB's 144

Agreed. He does not deserve HOF based on his hitting.

Originally Posted by munsonman

While Smith did post a .978 fielding average for his career, i still do not see how feilding % can overcome his offensive "accomplishments".

Defensive metrics lag behind offensive for comparison of players, but to judge a shortstop solely by fielding percentage, which totally ignores range, is not very useful.

Originally Posted by munsonman

In answer to your question-yes i am saying that Smith being the "greatest" defender at his position should not overcome his pedestrian at best offensive stats for inclusion into the HOF.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree. Although I agree with you that offensive numbers (Ruth, Williamss etc) bring more to the table. To say that the greatest defender at the most important fielding position, does not merit the HOF totally dumbfounds me.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by obcbobd

Defensive metrics lag behind offensive for comparison of players, but to judge a shortstop solely by fielding percentage, which totally ignores range, is not very useful.

Jeez, I was waiting for somebody to finally mention this. Cal Ripken has a .979 Fielding % at Shortstop. I've yet to find anybody who rates Ripken ahead of Ozzie defensively.