Worst HOfer Ever!

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

I vote for Ozzie Smith.

I don't understand how anyone could possibly say Ozzie Smith is the worst HOF.

I guess having the #1 Defensive WAR doesn't count for anything?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...f_career.shtml

...or being voted to 15 All Star Games in a 19 year career?

...or having won the most Gold Gloves (13) among short stops?

...2nd overall in Assits with 8375 (19 year career = yearly avg 441), second to Rabbit Maranville 8967 (23 year career = yearly avg 390). First in assists for SS

...1st Total Zone Runs as SS (239)



Also with Jeter retiring this year I am constantly hearing that he is a first year HOF.

Jeter WAR: 71.6 (88 overall) | JAWS: 56.9 (12 overall)
O. Smith WAR: 76.5 (69 overall) | JAWS: 59.4 (8 overall)


Offensively only O. Smith doesn't stack up to the competition (though he does rank 5th in SB among SS) but he is the BEST defensive SS in the history of the game. If you can't be the best in your defensive position in the game and still be in the HOF then that would be a shame.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

I don't understand how anyone could possibly say Ozzie Smith is the worst HOF.

I agree, Andy. Dave's a friend, but on this, we don't agree.

The Wizard of Oz wasn't an offensive force by any means. He had no power, though he did have a few good offensive seasons, even winning a Silver Slugger in 1987 when he hit .303 with 102 runs, 182 hits, 40 doubles and 43 stolen bases. He had a handful of other seasons where he was decent with the stick, hitting in the .280s and 290s. But it was his defense which made him a star, and one of my favorite players to watch when he played. Though the prevailing line of thinking might be that offense wins games more than defense, you can pitch around a hitter when they come up. A great defensive shortstop like Ozzie Smith is out there every day, sucking up everything that comes within 10 feet of them. Ozzie Smith was a black hole where doubles went to die. And he did just fine negating my Brewer bats that hit 216 home runs in the 1982 World Series.

I liken the Wizard of Oz to another Cardinal who was a late bloomer with the stick, Yadier Molina. Look at what Yadi did in his first seven seasons in the Majors, and then look what he's done the last three:



Yadi is the best catcher in baseball. Period. Sorry, Giants fans. I like Buster Posey a lot. But Yadi now offers comparable offense, and superior defense. If I were a manager, I'd run against Buster. There's not a chance in hell I'd run with Yadi Molina behind the plate.

Will Molina make the Hall of Fame one day? He's going to be 32 this July, so he's still in his prime right now, and could have at least three or four more seasons behind the plate. He's had back to back top 4 MVP finishes, and has been awarded six straight Gold Gloves. Look for him to finish with 10 Gold Gloves, 2,000 + hits, and a couple World Series championships under his belt. If he gets another one or two of those, which I think he will, he's going to get an awful lot of credit for handling that pitching staff. Things like that factor into the minds of voters. So does throwing out 45% of would be base runners for your career. So, if Yadi does not continue hitting the way he has these last three seasons, and keeps playing great defense, he's basically Ozzie Smith behind the plate.

I don't think Smith got the credit he deserved when he played. And I certainly don't think he's the worst Hall of Famer. Not by a long shot.

[brewing]

Bill, I find it interesting that Dwight Evans has an OPS .029 lower than Rice in the years selected as Rice's peak. Evans the far superior fielder and the guy no one mentions as a HoF candidate.

I think it's fair to consider numbers to an era, but it's not right to pick a range of years and say this guy had the most xxx. It's the same weak argument they make for Jack Morris. Most wins in the decade. Big deal! Of course they forget to mention he pitched on the winningest team of the decade.

I don't have the time right now, but a stronger case can be made for Whitaker, Trammell, and Richie Allen than Jim Rice.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by brewing

Bill, I find it interesting that Dwight Evans has an OPS .029 lower than Rice in the years selected as Rice's peak. Evans the far superior fielder and the guy no one mentions as a HoF candidate.

I think it's fair to consider numbers to an era, but it's not right to pick a range of years and say this guy had the most xxx. It's the same weak argument they make for Jack Morris. Most wins in the decade. Big deal! Of course they forget to mention he pitched on the winningest team of the decade.

I don't have the time right now, but a stronger case can be made for Whitaker, Trammell, and Richie Allen than Jim Rice.

I saw Evans' name listed there while compiling, and wasn't surprised at all. He's another guy I feel deserves a second look. Man, the Red Sox had some great outfielders in the 60s and 70s, didn't they? Yaz, Reggie Smith, Rice, Dwight Evans, Freddy Lynn, Tony Conigliaro.

As far as your comment regarding numbers within an era, I understand where you're coming from, Brent, but here it's a little different. Wins are a team accomplishment. You can have a 4.00 ERA and still win 20 games if your offense comes through with a lot of run support, just like you can have a sub 3.00 ERA, and win nine games if your offense stinks (think Nolan Ryan in 1987. He went 8-16 though he led the NL in ERA, strikeouts, H/9 IP, K:BB ratio, K/9 IP). Batting average, home runs, and total bases, are really individual metrics. RBIs are, of course, not, as other guys have to be on base for you to to drive them in. But when you look at a wide range of statistics, Rice is either at the top, or very near the top, for a twenty year span. And while the supporting numbers I put out there for Rice are hardly definitive (I would really need to get into a year by year breakdown, because no matter where one draws the lines when sampling a large amount of data, players with different starts, peaks, and ends are not going to match up perfectly for comparative purposes), they are a good start. And his 162 game average for his career is pretty darned good. How many players in that era could say they averaged .300 with 30 HR and 110 + RBI every single year?

Jim Rice is by no means the greatest slugger to ever play the game. I wouldn't put him in my top ten, and likely not in my top twenty. But he'd be up there. The man had some downright massive seasons, but the other ones were really good, too. Even when you examine a season like 1984, where he had a .791 OPS, he still drove in 122 runs. He's what I call sneaky good. Led his league in hits once, triples once, home runs three times, RBI twice, slugging twice, OPS once, and total bases four times.

He certainly wasn't the fielder Evans was, that's for sure.

When you have some time, make your argument for Whitaker, Trammell and Allen. I'd love to see your thoughts.

[the 'stache]

Hmm, not sure why there was a double post. My apologies, gang.

[djson1]

There are a lot of "all-star" type players who were good, but not HOF-worthy, like Ron Santo.

[33rd Street]

I'd have to agree on Santo, I don't think he's the worst selection but how Santo's in an Hodges is out is beyond me. I personally don't think either belongs but I always thought Hodges had a better case than Santo. I'd say Santo was just a sentimental favorite but Hodges kind of is to.

[33rd Street]

This is why I love boards like this, nothing better than baseball talk with other educated fans, weather you agree or not! Just another reason why baseball is an always will be the national pastime to me. Love football to but does anyone really care who goes into Canton?

[djson1]

Originally Posted by 33rd Steet

I'd have to agree on Santo, I don't think he's the worst selection but how Santo's in an Hodges is out is beyond me. I personally don't think either belongs but I always thought Hodges had a better case than Santo. I'd say Santo was just a sentimental favorite but Hodges kind of is to.

Agreed...some players get voted in by the Veterans committee because they were great personalities and representatives of the game, like Santo. Hodges should be in, but maybe just didn't have enough friends (which surprises me as I believe he was described as a liked player). Another one that comes to mind is Rick Ferrell....a great nice guy..but I just don't see it in his numbers as HOF-worthy.

On the flip side of all this, there are also many great players that took so long to get voted in, like Duke Snider, Hack Wilson, and Joe Sewell (or not in yet as in Hodges case).