Alan Trammel vs. Ozzie Smith

[Voltaire26]

some things about ozzie smith that never show up on a stat sheet


1) his range was insane, and he played on astroturf (which was equivalent to a concrete surface with a thin layer of carpet); extremely agile and would just rob hitters of basehits. Trying to use stats to define his defense does no justice


2) he was a first to third baserunner, if the ball got through the infield you could almost bet the Ozzie would be at third base


3) he was abnormally clutch, it seemed like anytime the Cards needed a crucial basehit or a stolen base, he would deliver


Alan Trammell was a good SS that did a lot of things well, but he's not as influential to a ball game like Ozzie Smith was. Smith was a game changer!

I am calling horse shit on this. Alan Trammel was a game changer.

1984 MVP World Series

1987 2nd MVP 28 HR (Ozzie's career total), 105 RBI's and .343 avg

Gold Glove SS, Excellent Base Runner. Negotiated his Contract by himself. Never a foul word, or showoff, always a gentleman. Play 19 year with his partner "Sweet" Lou Whitaker.

 

[broncosmitty]

Ozzie also played a ton more. You seem to be forgetting that. Trammell's biggest issue is his injury history. Trammell belongs in the Hall along with Whitaker. It's a travesty that Whitaker fell off the ballot after only one year. But don't blame that on Ozzie. Blame it on the overall ineptitude of the voters.

4th and 10th all-time in games played at short. But Tram did miss a lot of time at the end of his career. After Travis Fryman had taken oven at short and bumped #3 to third.

 

[StanMarsh51]

First, the walk off HR in the 85 NLCS might be one of the most clutch moments in MLB history. and it's cute how you only pointed out world series stats when he batted 500 in the 82 and 85 NLCS's...just sayin'

Second, of those stats that are highlighted...that distinguished nothing b/c whenever that Cards were in a playoff race and needed someone to get on base and get into scoring position, Ozzie would answer the call more times then not

Finally, I speak from growing up and watching him play; the impressions that he left on me and the fans. It does no justice to pull a stat sheet and use that alone to evaluate a player

If I were to bring up his 1982 and 1985 NLCS, I could just as very well bring up his 1987 NLCS where he hit .200 and his 1996 NLCS where he hit .000....how does that help your argument? By showing that he was clutch sometimes but other times stunk in those big series?

And yes, I'd rather rely more on the stats which record what actually happened, over what someone 'felt.' There are people who 'feel' that Nolan Ryan was a top 5 pitcher ever. There are people who 'feel' Derek Jeter was a solid defender. There are people who feel that Jack Morris was a great pitcher. And in this thread, you 'feel' that Ozzie was abnormally clutch. I'll rely on the stats more which record what actually happened, over a person's selective memory (a person's more likely to remember the good than the bad in case like this).

 

[broncosmitty]

I am calling horse shit on this. Alan Trammel was a game changer.

1984 MVP World Series

1987 2nd MVP 28 HR (Ozzie's career total), 105 RBI's and .343 avg

Gold Glove SS, Excellent Base Runner. Negotiated his Contract by himself. Never a foul word, or showoff, always a gentleman. Play 19 year with his partner "Sweet" Lou Whitaker.

Most double plays from a duo in the history of the game, played for one team, coach, manager,... Not sure why Ozzie and Larkin got in without any wait while Tram still sits on the ballot. But it's nowhere near as bad as Lou being off it.

 

[broncosmitty]

If I were to bring up his 1982 and 1985 NLCS, I could just as very well bring up his 1987 NLCS where he hit .200 and his 1996 NLCS where he hit .000....how does that help your argument? By showing that he was clutch sometimes but other times stunk in those big series?

And yes, I'd rather rely more on the stats which record what actually happened, over what someone 'felt.' There are people who 'feel' that Nolan Ryan was a top 5 pitcher ever. There are people who 'feel' Derek Jeter was a solid defender. There are people who feel that Jack Morris was a great pitcher. And in this thread, you 'feel' that Ozzie was abnormally clutch. I'll rely on the stats more which record what actually happened, over a person's selective memory (a person's more likely to remember the good than the bad in case like this).

. I feel like Jack Morris was a great pitcher. But Im only basing that off his CGs, opening day starts, All-Star game starts, WS alltime great performance(it was only one game though) and wins. All of which make him more important than any reliever, but clearly not important enough for enshrinement.

 

[bravesfan]

Trammell won 5 gold gloves and 3 silver sluggers. Was a 6 time all-star and was the MVP of the World Series his team won. He also finished in the top 20 in MVP voting 7 times, with a runner up finish in 1987. His offensive numbers are better than Ozzie Smith and his 236 career stolen bases tells you he wasn't a station to station base runner either.

Ozzie Smith was better defensively, but Trammell was no slouch with his glove. Offensively -- it isn't even close when you try and compare the two players.

If Trammell did a back flip on the way to his position -- He'd be in the HOF already.

Ozzie was a 15x allstar and 13x gold glover,

Like I said, "Trammell was good SS that did a lot of things well" he had like a 5 year stretch where he was awesome at the plate, but he did have plenty of mediocre years to boot and the last 8 years of his career he was on and off the DL and only have one healthy season. Trammell only finished with 185 HRs and 1000 RBI; and both players were somewhat close in BA, OBP, Hits, and Runs.

Hitting is that only real edge Trammell has over Smith I think if Trammell would of stayed healthy he would of been in the Hall by now. I still favor Smith more than Trammell

 

[DragonfromTO]

Ozzie was a 15x allstar and 13x gold glover,

Like I said, "Trammell was good SS that did a lot of things well" he had like a 5 year stretch where he was awesome at the plate, but he did have plenty of mediocre years to boot and the last 8 years of his career he was on and off the DL and only have one healthy season. Trammell only finished with 185 HRs and 1000 RBI; and both players were somewhat close in BA, OBP, Hits, and Runs.

Hitting is that only real edge Trammell has over Smith I think if Trammell would of stayed healthy he would of been in the Hall by now. I still favor Smith more than Trammell

If he'd played in the AL with Cal Ripken it seems unlikely that he would have been.

"Hitting is that only real edge Trammell has over Smith"

Yeah, I mean who cares about hitting? It's only the most important thing that position players do...

 

[bravesfan]

If I were to bring up his 1982 and 1985 NLCS, I could just as very well bring up his 1987 NLCS where he hit .200 and his 1996 NLCS where he hit .000....how does that help your argument? By showing that he was clutch sometimes but other times stunk in those big series?

And yes, I'd rather rely more on the stats which record what actually happened, over what someone 'felt.' There are people who 'feel' that Nolan Ryan was a top 5 pitcher ever. There are people who 'feel' Derek Jeter was a solid defender. There are people who feel that Jack Morris was a great pitcher. And in this thread, you 'feel' that Ozzie was abnormally clutch. I'll rely on the stats more which record what actually happened, over a person's selective memory (a person's more likely to remember the good than the bad in case like this).

for god's sake kid, he was 41 in 1996

 

[DragonfromTO]

for god's sake kid, he was 41 in 1996

But his regular season offensive numbers in 1996 were fine. So if we're just talking about his "clutchness", isn't that the point of comparison?

 

[bravesfan]

If he'd played in the AL with Cal Ripken it seems unlikely that he would have been.

"Hitting is that only real edge Trammell has over Smith"

Yeah, I mean who cares about hitting? It's only the most important thing that position players do...

Hitting is awesome and great, but when you're so fucking good at everything else that you are still being glorified even with average-at-best batting stats, speaks volume

 

[bravesfan]

But his regular season offensive numbers in 1996 were fine. So if we're just talking about his "clutchness", isn't that the point of comparison?

Trying to use what a player did in his 40s to define him as player is retarded

 

[StanMarsh51]

]Trying to use what a player did in his 40s to define him as player is retarded[/B]

That's why you look at everything in the aggregate, and in the aggregate, his postseason numbers aren't that good. And bringing up one or two memorable hits isn't going to change that.

 

[navamind]

Trying to use what a player did in his 40s to define him as player is retarded

As opposed to using one or two moments to declare him "clutch" instead of his entire postseason resume?

 

[DragonfromTO]

Trying to use what a player did in his 40s to define him as player is retarded

If you're trying to establish a player's "clutchness" through his postseason performance then it seems that the comparison should be between the player's regular season performance and his postseason performance in the same season. Ozzie Smith's regular season 1996 performance was slightly above average for him. If you're saying that his postseason performance is the proof of his clutchness, then it should have been even better.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Trammell only finished with 185 HRs and 1000 RBI; and both players were somewhat close in BA, OBP, Hits, and Runs.

Somewhat close? Ozzie Smith played in 300 more games than Trammell, yet only has 95 more hits. Trammell's Career BA is .285. Smith's is .262. Same with runs scored -- Trammell wasn't a leadoff hitter like Smith and you talk about Smith's baserunning, yet Smith only scored 25 more runs than Trammell, even though he played almost 2 full seasons more worth of games.

OBP advantage Trammell. BA advantage Trammell by a lot. Slug % advantage Trammell by a lot. OPS advantage Trammell by a landslide (101 points higher for Trammell)

And as I said -- Defensively Smith was better because of his range, but Trammell was well above average and finished with a fielding % of .977, which is .001 worse than Smith.

The fact Smith was a 1st ballot HOFer and Trammell is not in the HOF is a joke.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I think this is unfair comparisons... Ozzie smith did not make the HOF because of his offense... he made it because of his defense... So comparing other similar players offensively is totally irrelevant... Dont claim defense is half the game if you dont allow it to be a big reason a player can make it to the HOF... Allan trammel, he might have been better offensively than Smith, but he was no HOF offensively either...

 

[Voltaire26]

I think this is unfair comparisons... Ozzie smith did not make the HOF because of his offense... he made it because of his defense... So comparing other similar players offensively is totally irrelevant... Dont claim defense is half the game if you dont allow it to be a big reason a player can make it to the HOF... Allan trammel, he might have been better offensively than Smith, but he was no HOF offensively either...

Where are Mark Belanger's votes? What about Ray Oyler (great fielder hit .135 for the Tigers in 1968)? Ozzie Smith was a media darling and may not have been a top 10 shortstop of his era. I can understand if people say Trammel doesn't belong (I disagree), but to vote someone in on the basis of a backflip and a good interview is demeaning. Especially with a larger percentage than Joe DiMaggio.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Where are Mark Belanger's votes? What about Ray Oyler (great fielder hit .135 for the Tigers in 1968)? Ozzie Smith was a media darling and may not have been a top 10 shortstop of his era. I can understand if people say Trammel doesn't belong (I disagree), but to vote someone in on the basis of a backflip and a good interview is demeaning. Especially with a larger percentage than Joe DiMaggio.

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)...

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

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...

It isn't about arguing offense over defense or vice versa. Trammell is far superior offensively, while still winning gold gloves at SS. Obviously Ozzie was better defensively because of his range, but Trammell and Smith finished with basically identical fielding % (.978 to .977). It isn't as if Trammell was a statue at SS -- the guy stole 236 bases, so he had speed.

It makes zero sense that one guy is a 1st ballot HOFer, while the other guy doesn't even get voted in. Trammell wasn't a media favorite and didn't do back flips on the way to his position. If he did -- he would be in the HOF already.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

It isn't about arguing offense over defense or vice versa. Trammell is far superior offensively, while still winning gold gloves at SS. Obviously Ozzie was better defensively because of his range, but Trammell and Smith finished with basically identical fielding % (.978 to .977). It isn't as if Trammell was a statue at SS -- the guy stole 236 bases, so he had speed.

It makes zero sense that one guy is a 1st ballot HOFer, while the other guy doesn't even get voted in. Trammell wasn't a media favorite and didn't do back flips on the way to his position. If he did -- he would be in the HOF already.

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...