Alan Trammel vs. Ozzie Smith

[DragonfromTO]

I agree... and because defense is the hardest thing in baseball to measure, i am sure it is not the most fair thing... My whole point is that we can not say allan trammel belongs in because he was better than Ozzie offensively, while ozzie did not make it because of his offensive numbers...

Thats like taking a pitcher who has won over 300 games, and saying another pitcher belongs in because he has a better ERA...

If your cry is that other great defenders should have made it, maybe you have a reason to complain(again measuring defense is too hard)...

I think the whole point of him bringing up Belanger was to make the point that Ozzie's offensive numbers ARE part of the reason he is a HoFer, given that Belanger's offensive numbers aren't as good and he didn't even get a sniff at the HoF (nor does he deserve one).

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think the whole point of him bringing up Belanger was to make the point that Ozzie's offensive numbers ARE part of the reason he is a HoFer, given that Belanger's offensive numbers aren't as good and he didn't even get a sniff at the HoF (nor does he deserve one).

Never said offense was not a part... The point is that if a player makes it because of his defense then he can not be compared to someone similar offensively... I have no clue if belanger deserves to make the HOF, never tried to answer, we are not talking about that though...

 

[Wazmankg]

Ozzie was the best defensive SS ever and it's the most important defensive position, save catcher possibly. He's in for the same reason Brooks Robinson is in. Trammell was no slouch defensively as has already been mentioned. But I've been a Tigers fan since the mid 70s and Tram was always a tough guy to figure offensively. He'd hit .320 one year and .250-something the next. I think he had about a half dozen years each where he was either > .300... sometimes well over, or under .260... very up & down. If he were more consistent offensively I think he'd be in. It's always surprised me how much love he gets in these HOF discussions from non-Detroit fans. I think sweet Lou has every bit as strong a case at 2nd and he got bounced after his first year of eligibility and you never hear much about him.

 

[Voltaire26]

Six shortstops of the 1980’s that were arguably better than Ozzie Smith: Cal Ripken, Robin Yount, Alan Trammel, Garry Templeton, Julio Franco and Barry Larkin. Yes I am saying, if you use the Ozzie Smith baseline as a Hall of Fame shortstop, the above listed should all be in the Hall of Fame (some are).

 

[StanMarsh51]

Six shortstops of the 1980’s that were arguably better than Ozzie Smith: Cal Ripken, Robin Yount, Alan Trammel, Garry Templeton, Julio Franco and Barry Larkin. Yes I am saying, if you use the Ozzie Smith baseline as a Hall of Fame shortstop, the above listed should all be in the Hall of Fame (some are).

Garry Templeton? You're really reaching with that one....



Templeton in the '80s hit .262 with an 82 OPS+ with 139 steals and a 17.2 WAR (per baseballreference WAR)

Smith in the '80s hit .261 with a 90 OPS+ with 364 steals and a 52.0 WAR

There's nothing arguable with that...Smith was clearly better.

Franco played 5 seasons at SS in the 1980s, and Larking played the equivalent of about 3 full seasons in the '80s, and each had a WAR under 15 for that decade in their limited time. Smith had a 52 WAR that decade so even if you projected their 1980s bRef WARs over a full decade, it wouldn't match Ozzie's 52).

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Would you be fighting so hard for trammel to be in the HOF if Ozzie was not in the HOF?? Your reasoning for someone to be in the HOF has to be more than because player A made it into the HOF...

If you can admit Ozzie was superior at Defense, then we can agree that the measurements of the 2 players has to be different...

They played at the exact same time. Both started in 1978, both retired in 1996. If you can't compare the two players, who can you compare them against?

 

[calsnowskier]

One of the first things I ask myself (not the only question) when trying to decide if a player is HOF worthy is, "Was he one of the best players at his position during his career". That means you really need to compare him to the same guys who played at the same time he did, and Ozzie CLEARLY is the prime guy you need to compare him to, along with Ripkin and Larkin (to a lesser extent).

Personally, I always viewed Trammell in that class (maybe a step below, but right there). Toss in the "pretty" aspects that he played his whole career with one team, has a WS ring, MVP, multiple ASGs, GGs and MVP votes in other years, and he is a clear borderline HOFer in my book. He had my vote every year since his eligibility, but has not had it the last couple years because the influx of the recent guys.

I hope he remains on the ballot long enough to make it, though. I really think he is worthy.

 

[Cleaves2000]

Trammell was better than ozzie.......he was clutch on some great tiger teams.....look at the other SS in the AL he had to go against for AS games.....ripken and fernandez to name 2......so the AS appearances mean nothing.....trammell belongs in......i think morris deserves it more than lou just because of the big games he had pitched in......plus he was good for 8-9 innings alot....pitched big games for the tigs, jays, and twins.....was the anchor of those teams.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Trammell was better than ozzie.......he was clutch on some great tiger teams.....look at the other SS in the AL he had to go against for AS games.....ripken and fernandez to name 2......so the AS appearances mean nothing.....trammell belongs in......i think morris deserves it more than lou just because of the big games he had pitched in......plus he was good for 8-9 innings alot....pitched big games for the tigs, jays, and twins.....was the anchor of those teams.

He was dreadful for the Jays in the postseason of the first World Series win (0-1, 6.57 ERA vs Oakland and 0-2, 8.44 ERA vs Atlanta) and was left off of the playoff roster entirely during the second championship.

 

[navamind]

He was dreadful for the Jays in the postseason of the first World Series win (0-1, 6.57 ERA vs Oakland and 0-2, 8.44 ERA vs Atlanta) and was left off of the playoff roster entirely during the second championship.

7-12, 6.19 ERA in 1993. How dare they leave him off!

 

[da55bums]

It's ridiculous that Trammel and Whitaker both aren't in....it would also be ridiculous to put Morris in the HOF.

Trammel and Whit...hands down should be in..

Nailed it but not ridiculous for Morris, not likely but could, one of best pitchers of the decade and he was pitching against the beginning of steroid use , they were proven in football already, no doubt it was the start up years for official "illegal" PEDs, not the kinds Mickey and the Duke used.

Ozzie was a 1st ballot because of his personality with the media, back flips for the fans and just overall likability....was as good as his defense.

 

[Voltaire26]

Trammel and Whit...hands down should be in..

Nailed it but not ridiculous for Morris, not likely but could, one of best pitchers of the decade and he was pitching against the beginning of steroid use , they were proven in football already, no doubt it was the start up years for official "illegal" PEDs, not the kinds Mickey and the Duke used.

Ozzie was a 1st ballot because of his personality with the media, back flips for the fans and just overall likability....was as good as his defense.

I know ... Still pissed over it. I need a life.

 

[jdwills126]

Trammel and Whit...hands down should be in..

Nailed it but not ridiculous for Morris, not likely but could, one of best pitchers of the decade and he was pitching against the beginning of steroid use , they were proven in football already, no doubt it was the start up years for official "illegal" PEDs, not the kinds Mickey and the Duke used.

Ozzie was a 1st ballot because of his personality with the media, back flips for the fans and just overall likability....was as good as his defense.

Ozzie played in St Louis and their is some crazy love for that city and baseball. Not just amongst fans but writers as well.

Trammel played SS in the AL when it was Ripken and everyone else. He should have been the AL MVP over George Bell. But their is a decidedly bias against Trammel and Lou. The problem is if the writers don't like you, you are just screwed. I am willing to bet the veteran's committee will put Trammel in for sure and I bet Lou and Morris may get in then as well.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

I can't believe Trammel isn't in already. Some guys just have to wait their turn I guess.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Ozzie played in St Louis and their is some crazy love for that city and baseball. Not just amongst fans but writers as well.

Trammel played SS in the AL when it was Ripken and everyone else. He should have been the AL MVP over George Bell. But their is a decidedly bias against Trammel and Lou. The problem is if the writers don't like you, you are just screwed. I am willing to bet the veteran's committee will put Trammel in for sure and I bet Lou and Morris may get in then as well.

In all fairness, I think a large part of Trammel's MVP snub is the ongoing fascination with power numbers among a good portion of voters..

I mean, when Ripken won his 2nd MVP in 1991, Cecil Fielder received 9 first place votes (laughable) and wasn't far behind at all in the total voting from Ripken. When Ripken won his 1st MVP, Eddie Murray received 10 first place votes.

So in other words, there are always voters who will vote for the guy with the big power numbers. In some years it's to a greater degree than other (particularly since the voters rotate every few years), but I don't think it's some hatred or conspiracy against Trammel. It's probably more ignorance among the voters.

 

[broncosmitty]

I can't believe Trammel isn't in already. Some guys just have to wait their turn I guess.

It's pretty ridiculous.