Alan Trammell was a better shortstop than Ozzie Smith was.
Okay, pick yourself up off the floor and shake your head a couple of times. All better? Good.
To answer the question most of you are now probably asking, no, I'm not insane (depending upon who you ask). It is my studied opinion that Alan Trammell was a more productive player than Ozzie Smith was.
Now, everyone agrees that Ozzie will be a first-ballot Hall of Famer this year. And he should. After all, he's the finest defensive shortstop in the history of the game and he played arguably the most important defensive position. Throw in his character, his outstanding baserunning ability and offensive skills that matured throughout his career and I don't think you'll find anyone who would bar the door to Cooperstown for him.
But Alan Trammell was better.
Look, we all know where this is going. Did Smith's defensive superiority outweigh Trammell's offensive superiority, or vice versa? To me it's clear that Trammell gets the overall edge.
Here's the case for Ozzie, in form of his defensive statistics, Trammell's, and the average post-WWII Hall of Fame shortstop. Just so you don't have to look them up, that group consists of Lou Boudreau, Phil Rizzuto, Ernie Banks, Luis Aparicio and Robin Yount:
Post-WWII
Smith Trammell HOF SS Avg
G 2511 2139 1731
PO 4249 3391 3269
PO/G 1.69 1.59 1.89
A 8375 6172 5261
A/G 3.34 2.89 3.04
E 281 227 281
DP 1590 1307 1144
FP .978 .977 .968
LgFP .966 .967 .960
% over Lg 1.24% 1.03% 0.83%
Rng Fac 5.03 4.47 4.93
Lg RF 4.10 4.09 4.51
% over Lg 22.68% 9.29% 9.31%
Clearly Trammell's defensive abilities fit in well with the Hall of Famers. His fielding percentage compared to his league was better and his range compared to his league is nearly identical to the Hall of Famers. And his ability was recognized at the time by awarding him four Gold Gloves. No slouch with the glove at all.
That said, Smith dwarfs him. Just look at how much better Smith was compared to his league. He reached an incredible number of balls and despite the enormous number of increased opportunities to screw up, he still posted a fielding percentage well above the league average. Smith's gap in range factor over his league was more than double Trammell's, an excellent shortstop in his own right. His gap in fielding percentage over his league was 20% better than Trammell's. He won an incredible 13 Gold Gloves at the key defensive position on the field. There's no contest - Ozzie Smith was the finest defensive shortstop ever.
So how can Trammell compare to this, you might ask? Well, let me show you.
These are the offensive numbers of Smith, Trammell and the same group of Hall of Famers:
Smith Trammell Post-WWII
G 2573 2293 2243
AB 9396 8288 8427
R 1257 1231 1225
H 2460 2365 2323
2B 402 412 390
3B 69 55 86
HR 28 185 180
RBI 793 1003 1012
AVG .262 .285 .276
OBP .337 .352 .343
SLG .328 .415 .406
Wow. While Smith's numbers (exclusive of some of the counting stats from longevity) pale in comparison, I don't think the numbers could get any closer between Trammell and the Hall of Famers. Essentially this means that Alan Trammell, from an offensive perspective, is a near perfect example of the post-WWII Hall of Fame shortstop. And keep in mind that two of the players making up this average are Ernie Banks and Robin Yount, each of whom padded their total numbers with more than a thousand games at a different position. If we exclude them from the average (leaving just Luis Aparicio, Phil Rizzuto and Lou Boudreau) and make the same comparison, Trammell looks even better:
Post-WWII
Trammell (no Banks or Yount)
G 2293 2018
AB 8288 7533
R 1231 1103
H 2365 2054
2B 412 337
3B 55 75
HR 185 79
RBI 1003 757
AVG .285 .273
OBP .352 .348
SLG .415 .369
Think for a moment about what this means. We can glorify Cal Ripken and the latest crop of big-hitting shortstops, and rightfully so, but among players who are currently eligible for the Hall of Fame, the shortstop with the best offensive abilities of at least the last 50 years is Alan Trammell.
And in case you're wondering, no, I'm not hiding anything by excluding pre-war shortstops from this comparison. Most of the median numbers for the Hall of Famers drop even with all of the Arky Vaughans and Honus Wagners included, largely because they're off-set by the Bobby Wallaces and Dave Bancrofts. Take a look:
Median
All HOF Post-WWII
G 2124 2243
AB 7647 8427
R 1233 1225
H 2226 2323
2B 385 390
3B 96 86
HR 68 180
RBI 926 1012
AVG .285 .276
OBP .355 .343
SLG .405 .406
I think perhaps the most revealing statistic of all in this comparison is this - ten Hall of Fame shortstops posted a better OPS than Trammell and seven posted a better fielding percentage compared to their league, but just three - Boudreau, Honus Wagner, and Hughie Jennings - managed to do both. Meanwhile, the same seven Hall of Famers beat out Smith in fielding percentage versus their league while a whopping 15 of 19 beat him in OPS. Five managed to do both - Boudreau, Wagner and Jennings again, along with George Davis and Bobby Wallace. To me, that sure does seem to indicate that Trammell has better all-around Hall qualifications than Smith does.
In case a capper is needed on this argument, we can turn to a pair of the other qualifications that voters typically look at - MVP Voting and post-season performance. Both men finished second in their league's MVP voting in 1987, but Trammell also managed two other top-ten finishes, in 1984 and 1988. Smith never cracked the top-ten again.
In post-season play, Smith certainly had more opportunities. He played in 42 post-season games compared to just 13 for Trammell. But he still won just one World Series, the same as Trammell. Smith was very good in four NL Championship Series, posting an OPS of .827 and winning the NLCS MVP in 1985. But Trammell was just as good. In his two ALCSs, Trammell posted a .813 OPS, so that's pretty much a wash. The tiebreaker is World Series play, in which Smith posted an atrocious OPS of just .435, while Trammell posted a whopping 1.300 and won the Series MVP in 1984.
Sorry, Ozzie fans. I think the Wizard deserves a plaque on the first ballot this year. On my imaginary ballot, he's safely nestled in Slot #3. But it's clear to me that Alan Trammell deserves the spot above him.
Now watch. Come January 8th, when the voting results are announced, we'll see that the BBWAA will screw this up entirely. Ozzie will get more votes than anyone else on the ballot, while Trammell will be lucky to get about 30% and might never be elected.
Mark my words.
» Paul White will be posting the rest of his personal Hall of Fame ballot in the upcoming weeks. You can read more of Paul's work at www.lostinleftfield.com.
Also by Paul White
» My 2002 Hall of Fame Ballot: Slot #1, Gary Carter
» Happy Birthday Bob Elliott
» 3,000 Hits That Don't Belong in Cooperstown
» Frankie Frisch's Sad Legacy: The Cheapening of The Hall of Fame
» Babe's MVP Snubs
» The Schalk-Schang Redemption: Two Men Who Prove That The Hall of Fame Veterans Committee Was a Sham
» Being Tony Muser
» More submissions
Copyright © 2001 by Paul White. Posted November 30, 2001.
BALLPLAYERS | TEAMS | CHRONOLOGY | TODAY | BOOKS | NEWSLETTER | ERRATA | FAQ
