Okay, we've done the Hernandezes, so let's start at the top. Who is the greatest Smith in baseball history?
| Hilton |  4 (4.26%) |
| Lee | 10 (10.64%) |
| Lonnie | 2 (2.13%) |
| Ozzie | 68 (72.34%) |
| Reggie | 8 (8.51%) |
| Other (specify) | 2 (2.13%) |
94 votes | 4 featured comments
You'll note the wording has changed from the Hernandez poll, from "in MLB history" to "in baseball history." Didn't seem right to leave Hilton, a HOF pitcher, off the list.
And for some context -- here is the January 2005 Hall of Names "All-Smith" roster.
Reg-gie! Reg-gie! Reggie!
What, wrong Reggie?
OK. But the right Smith. As great as Ozzie was (I think the fact that Andre Dawson won the 1987 MVP and not Smith is a bigger scandal than Trammell over Bell), I think the 25 or so extra homers Reggie would hit makes up for the 40 or 50 singles Ozzie would save...
I also don't think Ozzie ever had his whole game together. Which sounds odd, I realize. In his early 20s, on the grass in San Diego - he played shortstop better than anyone has ever played it. He needed to, because he couldn't hit a lick in those days. And so when he was at his best as a fielder, he was an utter zero as a hitter.
Ozzie eventually became a very effective offensive player indeed - but he was in his 30s by then, and no longer the greatest fielder in the history of the game. He was still really, really, good, of course. But Ozzie wasn't particularly well-suited to playing on fast artificial turf. Pretty well everything about his defensive game was transcendant and operated at a Level Not Seen Before - except his arm, which was maybe average at best. (I may in fact be giving his arm too much credit.) Arm strength is much more of an issue on turf, of course.
What, wrong Reggie?
OK. But the right Smith. As great as Ozzie was (I think the fact that Andre Dawson won the 1987 MVP and not Smith is a bigger scandal than Trammell over Bell), I think the 25 or so extra homers Reggie would hit makes up for the 40 or 50 singles Ozzie would save...
I also don't think Ozzie ever had his whole game together. Which sounds odd, I realize. In his early 20s, on the grass in San Diego - he played shortstop better than anyone has ever played it. He needed to, because he couldn't hit a lick in those days. And so when he was at his best as a fielder, he was an utter zero as a hitter.
Ozzie eventually became a very effective offensive player indeed - but he was in his 30s by then, and no longer the greatest fielder in the history of the game. He was still really, really, good, of course. But Ozzie wasn't particularly well-suited to playing on fast artificial turf. Pretty well everything about his defensive game was transcendant and operated at a Level Not Seen Before - except his arm, which was maybe average at best. (I may in fact be giving his arm too much credit.) Arm strength is much more of an issue on turf, of course.
I love Reggie Smith. I think that he's a borderline Hall of Famer.
But, Ozzie was a great player from 1982 to 1988 and really the key to the Cardinals' 3 appearances in the World Series. If you're comparing the two of them, you have to look either at replacement level shortstop and replacement level right-fielders, or account for the fact that an average right-fielder is a lot easier to find than an average shortstop. Oh, that might cut a little close to the bone this season...
Ozzie was a no-doubt Hall of Famer in my book, one of the top 5-10 shortstops ever to play the game.
But, Ozzie was a great player from 1982 to 1988 and really the key to the Cardinals' 3 appearances in the World Series. If you're comparing the two of them, you have to look either at replacement level shortstop and replacement level right-fielders, or account for the fact that an average right-fielder is a lot easier to find than an average shortstop. Oh, that might cut a little close to the bone this season...
Ozzie was a no-doubt Hall of Famer in my book, one of the top 5-10 shortstops ever to play the game.