Options
Ozzie v Omar
markj111
Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Bill James has published the first of a six part series on this issue at billjamesonline.com (subs. required, $3.00/month). Well worth it IMO.
Here is the intro:
Hey Bill, a couple of days ago you suggested Omar Vizquel might 'stumble into' the HoF. Can you help me, an Indians fan, understand how he differs from 1st year of eligibility HoF inductee Ozzie Smith? Thanks.
Asked by: Glkanter
Answered: February 27, 2011
To which I answered “Ozzie Smith had a reputation as a defensive wonder, and had extraordinarily good defensive statistics. Omar Vizquel had the same or almost the same defensive REPUTATION, but with very ordinary or even below-average defensive statistics. It's a very different problem.”
I’m not saying that was an inaccurate answer; to the best of my knowledge it is an accurate answer. It is, however, the kind of answer that raises more questions than it settles. Any of us can watch Omar at shortstop and think that he looks extraordinary; even when he was 37, 38, he still looked extraordinary. One can’t set that aside without a real understanding of why he doesn’t rate better.
My answer wasn’t wrong, I don’t think, but it also didn’t do much to build an understanding of the issue. The purpose of this article is to try to develop a little better understanding of the general issue.
Here is the intro:
Hey Bill, a couple of days ago you suggested Omar Vizquel might 'stumble into' the HoF. Can you help me, an Indians fan, understand how he differs from 1st year of eligibility HoF inductee Ozzie Smith? Thanks.
Asked by: Glkanter
Answered: February 27, 2011
To which I answered “Ozzie Smith had a reputation as a defensive wonder, and had extraordinarily good defensive statistics. Omar Vizquel had the same or almost the same defensive REPUTATION, but with very ordinary or even below-average defensive statistics. It's a very different problem.”
I’m not saying that was an inaccurate answer; to the best of my knowledge it is an accurate answer. It is, however, the kind of answer that raises more questions than it settles. Any of us can watch Omar at shortstop and think that he looks extraordinary; even when he was 37, 38, he still looked extraordinary. One can’t set that aside without a real understanding of why he doesn’t rate better.
My answer wasn’t wrong, I don’t think, but it also didn’t do much to build an understanding of the issue. The purpose of this article is to try to develop a little better understanding of the general issue.
0
Comments
<< <i>To say he was average or below average you would have to be on crack. The guy was fantastic at Shortstop. Someone can show me all the stats in the world and it wouldn't matter....he was fantastic. >>
I'll reserve judgment until I look at the numbers. IMO, they do matter.
The thing about Ozzie and Vizquel is the following career numbers.
OPS+
Ozzie 87
Omar 83
Small value extra for Ozzie
Ozzie 580 SB, 148 CS
Omar 400 SB, 163 CS
That is a pretty significant difference.
As total offensively, Ozzie was superior.
Defense is not perfectly measured via the numbers, but Ozzie is ahead of Omar, just a question of how much...either a good amount, or a great amount. Grand total puts Ozzie ahead of vizquel.
<< <i>Saberman, are you on crack? Omar leads Ozzie in MOST offensive categories (G, PA, AB, R, H, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, BA, OBP, SLG, OPS). Not to mention, Omar is still active. Omar also has a higher fielding percentage than... well, everyone! Maybe Omar should start doing back-flips. >>
What you say may well be true (I did not check, but I assume it's true), but Ozzie still had a higher OPS+. You take your fielding % guy, I'll take the one with the range.
Omar's range factor per nine innings (SS only) is 4.62. The league is 4.61. That does not scream HOF to me. Spin it anyway you wish, his range is that of a league average SS.
Through 2009, the career leaders in OPS+ (minimum 3,000 plate appearances, active players in bold) were:
1. Babe Ruth, 207
2. Ted Williams, 191
3. Barry Bonds, 182
4. Lou Gehrig, 179
5. Rogers Hornsby, 175
6. Mickey Mantle, 172
6. Albert Pujols, 172
8. Dan Brouthers, 170
8. Joe Jackson, 170
10. Ty Cobb, 167
11. Jimmie Foxx, 163
OPS+, Adjusted OPS, is a closely related statistic. OPS+ is OPS adjusted for the park and the league in which the player played, but not for fielding position. An OPS+ of 100 is defined to be the league average. An OPS+ of 150 or more is excellent and 125 very good, while an OPS+ of 75 or below is poor.
<< <i>Are you saying that offense does not matter? Wow! >>
I'm saying offense DOES matter, and that Omar leads Ozzie in all but three of them!
Omar - 48.4 Career WAR (Vizquel's WAR includes only 14.8 defensive wins)
Ozzie - 70.3 Career WAR
Omar - +137 Career TZ (Total Zone Fielding rating)
Ozzie - +239 Career TZ
Omar - 255 non-adjusted career Win Shares (300 is the low end of borderline HOFers)
Ozzie - 325 non-adjusted career Win Shares
all that said, Alan Trammell was better than both of them.
I grew up hating Ozzie Smith and Alan Trammell because to me Cal Ripken was the ONLY shortstop.
While I do agree that Ozzie, Omar, and Alan were all great shortstops, I'm not convinced that any of them are HOF worthy (even though Ozzie is obviously already in).
THe OPS+ shows they are close, but Ozzie a little ahead. The other more accurate measurements show Ozzie even a little more ahead.
In addition to the OPS+, shown was their stolen base/caught stealing contribution...making Ozzie's slim lead a little larger as an offensive player.
Sure, defensive numbers are not as accurate...but when somebody has that big a lead, it is tough to argue that one is on equal footing as him.
Fielding percentage is NOT a good measurement of a player's defensive contributions. Currently, with the video analysis of every play in MLB, the fielding measurements are better than ever. I don't believe Omar is always at the top of those...despite having a high fielding percentage....and every single play is looked at.
If Ozzie is superior offensively,
and most likely much more superior defensively, then I don't see where anyone can claim them on equal footing.
In regard to the backflip comment on Ozzie...the same can be said for Vizquel's 'flashy' play with the knee slide back hand, or a 'jump' throw. Those may look out of this world, but they are not necessarily better than a guy making a standard back hand drop step fire(it may not 'look' as flashy, but gets the same 'out', but not the same 'eye credit'). You are giving Vizquel more credit for those plays, compared to players who make as many or more of those plays(but happen to do it in a less flashy way).
<< <i>Jeff,
THe OPS+ shows they are close, but Ozzie a little ahead. The other more accurate measurements show Ozzie even a little more ahead.
In addition to the OPS+, shown was their stolen base/caught stealing contribution...making Ozzie's slim lead a little larger as an offensive player.
Sure, defensive numbers are not as accurate...but when somebody has that big a lead, it is tough to argue that one is on equal footing as him.
Fielding percentage is NOT a good measurement of a player's defensive contributions. Currently, with the video analysis of every play in MLB, the fielding measurements are better than ever. I don't believe Omar is always at the top of those...despite having a high fielding percentage....and every single play is looked at.
If Ozzie is superior offensively,
and most likely much more superior defensively, then I don't see where anyone can claim them on equal footing.
In regard to the backflip comment on Ozzie...the same can be said for Vizquel's 'flashy' play with the knee slide back hand, or a 'jump' throw. Those may look out of this world, but they are not necessarily better than a guy making a standard back hand drop step fire(it may not 'look' as flashy, but gets the same 'out', but not the same 'eye credit'). You are giving Vizquel more credit for those plays, compared to players who make as many or more of those plays(but happen to do it in a less flashy way). >>
Where I come from, it isn't called an all-flash jump throw. It's called "Jetering".
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Jeff,
THe OPS+ shows they are close, but Ozzie a little ahead. The other more accurate measurements show Ozzie even a little more ahead.
In addition to the OPS+, shown was their stolen base/caught stealing contribution...making Ozzie's slim lead a little larger as an offensive player.
Sure, defensive numbers are not as accurate...but when somebody has that big a lead, it is tough to argue that one is on equal footing as him.
Fielding percentage is NOT a good measurement of a player's defensive contributions. Currently, with the video analysis of every play in MLB, the fielding measurements are better than ever. I don't believe Omar is always at the top of those...despite having a high fielding percentage....and every single play is looked at.
If Ozzie is superior offensively,
and most likely much more superior defensively, then I don't see where anyone can claim them on equal footing.
In regard to the backflip comment on Ozzie...the same can be said for Vizquel's 'flashy' play with the knee slide back hand, or a 'jump' throw. Those may look out of this world, but they are not necessarily better than a guy making a standard back hand drop step fire(it may not 'look' as flashy, but gets the same 'out', but not the same 'eye credit'). You are giving Vizquel more credit for those plays, compared to players who make as many or more of those plays(but happen to do it in a less flashy way). >>
I think you're just messing with me now...
So you listed three offensive categories (well, two REAL offensive categories) that Ozzie is better than Omar. I listed ALL OF THE REST that Omar is better. Yet you still say Ozzie was better? You know, I've already spent WAY too much time in this thread, so if you don't mind, please allow me to escape now.
GO BARRY LARKIN!
All those things you listed are accounted for in the OPS+, but are given the proper weight. They are also adjusted for the era the guy plays in. Vizquel played in the live ball expansion era where runs were/are plentiful...and yes, it helped him.
oddly enough no members of the people "talking" about MLB HOFers are employed by MLB front offices. Statisticians are.