Home Sports Talk

Bobby Witt jr. as good as Ozzie Smith defensively?

DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

Personally the last two years I think so.
But no matter how well anyone plays the SS position these days I think they won’t get a fair comparison to Ozzie because of one main reason. A modern SS well never get as many chances or putouts or double plays now because of the huge increase in strikeouts. Players can’t put the ball in play anymore like in Ozzie’s day. So fans will just look at all Ozzie’s chances and think it’s all because of his range being so superior.
IMO witt has as good a range and a better arm than Ozzie and depending on if he can keep it up could end up being better.
And yes I know I’m basing this on the last two years but that’s over 300 games.
Bobby last year, gold glove.
This year, 25 oaa to lead all of baseball and should go platinum let alone gold.

Comments

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 2,190 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Definitely have to look at Ozzie Smith's assists totals those years and count them as a combination of skill and just simply getting a lot of balls hit his way. His replacements on those teams in those years(during season and the season before/after he was there) also had very high assist rates.

    Witt is currently measured on a more accurate scale than Ozzie was and Witt was the leading SS this year in runs saved. His tools are also tremendous. So currently Witt is the combination of elite tools and elite results, which is pretty impressive.

  • ElMagoStrikeZoneElMagoStrikeZone Posts: 1,221 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Ozzie's reputation and value are largely attached to his skill as a defender. It's tough to argue any SS over him in that sense. He was a decent hitter, but of course nothing like the overall power and run producing numbers achieved by Witt Jr. so far. Examine again when Bobby's career has reached its apex, because it's not even close to that yet.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 12,008 ✭✭✭✭✭

    even if Ozzie was a bit better on defense, (and it is very difficult to tell) I would rather have Witt at this point because he is such a better hitter.

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 4,495 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Witt is definitely the better player. Ozzie couldnt hit his way out of a paper bag but had some big time defensive highlights like his diving play with the Padres. Other than that though if Witt keeps it up hes way better and I think Ozzie is overrated to be honest.

    Fire AJ Preller

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 32,469 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Witt is one of the players I follow, Jackson Holliday as well

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 4,495 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @perkdog said:
    Witt is one of the players I follow, Jackson Holliday as well

    Little brother is likely better too for the Hollidays. More power anyways

    Fire AJ Preller

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    As a part of his Win Shares method, Bill James calculates Expected Assists by shortstops. This takes into account how many strikeouts the pitchers got, and how many innings were pitched by LHP/RHP. From 1990 on, Ozzie comes in just a little above average (+42 over 7 years). But before 1990, very different; Ozzie was +462 over 12 years, or close to +40 per season. He peaked in 1982 at +82, or an "extra" assist every other game.

    Whether or not Smith was the greatest SS in history is unknowable, but he was spectacularly good. Witt is very good but, at least so far, he's not Ozzie.

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @dallasactuary said:
    As a part of his Win Shares method, Bill James calculates Expected Assists by shortstops. This takes into account how many strikeouts the pitchers got, and how many innings were pitched by LHP/RHP. From 1990 on, Ozzie comes in just a little above average (+42 over 7 years). But before 1990, very different; Ozzie was +462 over 12 years, or close to +40 per season. He peaked in 1982 at +82, or an "extra" assist every other game.

    Whether or not Smith was the greatest SS in history is unknowable, but he was spectacularly good. Witt is very good but, at least so far, he's not Ozzie.

    Good post…..
    also there’s going to be no acknowledgment that Clemente did indeed improve at least 20% in his thirties compared to his twenties is there?
    Just curious because you challenged us to name at least one player who did improve that much who didn’t use steroids.
    I completed the assignment by naming Clemente so are you consulting with Bill James before you announce that you were incorrect?

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Darin said:
    Just curious because you challenged us to name at least one player who did improve that much who didn’t use steroids.
    I completed the assignment by naming Clemente so are you consulting with Bill James before you announce that you were incorrect?

    Sorry about that, but here's my full credit acknowledgment that you were correct and I was wrong. If I did once know Clemente did that, I forgot it. The delay was me wondering if anyone else fit what I will now call the "Clemente exception", players who were so godawful for several years at the start of their careers that significant improvement after 30 was possible. I haven't found any others, so you may have found the only one, but I can't check everybody. And I don't know why the Pirates stuck with Clemente after his 1957 season which would have gotten most players sent back to the minors. I guess they saw something because, obviously, it did work out very well for them in the long run.

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • bgrbgr Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You know Clemente’s story right?

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thank you Dallas!

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    You know Clemente’s story right?

    Bgr- what part of his story, early in his career?

  • bgrbgr Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 26, 2025 7:08AM

    @Darin said:

    @bgr said:
    You know Clemente’s story right?

    Bgr- what part of his story, early in his career?

    Yes. It’s no surprise Clemente was an unpolished hitter early in his career and yeah. Pittsburgh might have seen something. They selected him as a rule 5 pick from the dodgers after all.

    I’m not trying to equate beltre to Clemente other than to say their struggles offensively, while different, were things they each had to work through. And I don’t know whether Beltre took PEDs or not so I’m not assuming anything I can’t.

    Thank you for returning to smack him with the clue bat. It seems like he was able to explain it away as the Pirates sticking with him through adversity.

  • galaxy27galaxy27 Posts: 9,029 ✭✭✭✭✭

    have you guys ever looked up Phil Niekro's stats

    the year he turned 30 he had only won 31 games................and ended up with 318

    i know knuckleballers used to pitch until they were 127, but still that's rather remarkable

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 4,495 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I miss a good knuckelballer with their personal catchers with the giant softball glove

    Fire AJ Preller

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The left side of the Royals infield wears the gold! Mikael at third and Bobby at short. 🏆
    Most are familiar with Ripken’s fast start to his career winning rookie of year his first full season and MVP his second full season. Well Bobby has now played 4 full seasons and compares favorably with Cal’s first 4 full seasons.

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Cal Ripken OPS+ age 20-30 was 126.
    Age 31 to end of his career it was 99.
    So I’m thinking in the end Bobby’s not going to have much trouble having a better career than ole Cal.
    He’s taken on Cal’s spectacular first four seasons and held his own, all he has to do is not gradually revert to mediocrity like Ripken did.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 2,190 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Darin said:
    Cal Ripken OPS+ age 20-30 was 126.
    Age 31 to end of his career it was 99.
    So I’m thinking in the end Bobby’s not going to have much trouble having a better career than ole Cal.
    He’s taken on Cal’s spectacular first four seasons and held his own, all he has to do is not gradually revert to mediocrity like Ripken did.

    On the right pace....but damn it is hard to keep it going.

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Darin said:
    Cal Ripken OPS+ age 20-30 was 126.
    Age 31 to end of his career it was 99.
    So I’m thinking in the end Bobby’s not going to have much trouble having a better career than ole Cal.
    He’s taken on Cal’s spectacular first four seasons and held his own, all he has to do is not gradually revert to mediocrity like Ripken did.

    On the right pace....but damn it is hard to keep it going.

    When the season was over Bobby was talking about how his OBP dropped from .387 to .351 and that he wasn’t happy with that. He said next year he needs to get on base more and steal more bases and score more runs.
    I like how motivated he is to improve his game. He’s got a good head on his shoulders and is just what his Midwest fan base loves, humble and hard working.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 12,008 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Witt is a fantastic player. The Royals scored huge when they got him. I think the only thing that could keep him from topping Cal is if the second half of his career turns into Mike Trouts second half.

    noone ever would have guessed what has happened with Trout

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • countdouglascountdouglas Posts: 2,890 ✭✭✭✭✭

    No one???

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 12,008 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @countdouglas said:
    No one???

    alright, perhaps one!

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • countdouglascountdouglas Posts: 2,890 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Ozzie never won a Platinum Glove. 😉
    .

  • bgrbgr Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I saw that Tatis won Plat in NL and I don't know what to think about that one. I didn't look at the defensive metrics in the AL, but where did Witt sit?

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    I saw that Tatis won Plat in NL and I don't know what to think about that one. I didn't look at the defensive metrics in the AL, but where did Witt sit?

    I thought Pete crow arm. should have won in the NL. I believe his stats were better than Tatis and he’s a center fielder.
    It’s my understanding that catcher, shortstop and centerfield are the 3 most important defensive positions so those positions should have the inside track on platinum. So I think pca got robbed.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Bailey had a great season defensively for Giants. But I would have been fine with PCA - that’s who I was expecting. I guess they were dinged for offense.

  • DarinDarin Posts: 7,369 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I thought Bobby’s platinum was well deserved.
    Of course Ozzie probably would have won 13. 😁

Sign In or Register to comment.