Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    Now this is not to say that Jose Iglesias will be as good as Ozzie Smith or that Xander Boegarts will have a career like Ernie Banks, but I use this as a point of reference to show what is possibly the high end of each player's potential.   If you had to pick one shortstop, who would you go with?  If I took baseball esthetics into account, I would choose Iggy/Ozzie, but if I wanted to see more wins, I would have to concede to the three run homers and base clearing doubles, and hopefully, the defense would be adequate as well.  If you're of an Oriole mind, you can substitute Mark Belanger for Ozzie, and Cal Ripkin for Ernie Banks.

    I realize this may not be as cut and dried a choice as it appears, as there may have other position options for Boegarts, but appearently, the future at third base looks promising as well with Cecchini emerging and/or Middlebrooks getting it together.  But for sake of discussion, if you have to choose one or the other, who would you go with?  

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

    Now this is not to say that Jose Iglesias will be as good as Ozzie Smith or that Xander Boegarts will have a career like Ernie Banks, but I use this as a point of reference to show what is possibly the high end of each player's potential.   If you had to pick one shortstop, who would you go with?  If I took baseball esthetics into account, I would choose Iggy/Ozzie, but if I wanted to see more wins, I would have to concede to the three run homers and base clearing doubles, and hopefully, the defense would be adequate as well.  If you're of an Oriole mind, you can substitute Mark Belanger for Ozzie, and Cal Ripkin for Ernie Banks.

    I realize this may not be as cut and dried a choice as it appears, as there may have other position options for Boegarts, but appearently, the future at third base looks promising as well with Cecchini emerging and/or Middlebrooks getting it together.  But for sake of discussion, if you have to choose one or the other, who would you go with?  

     

     



    That's easy Banks over Smith in their primes. Banks career ops was .830 Smith's was .666 fact of the matter is that Bank's played more games at 1B over the length of his career than he did @ SS.  So the comparison is not exactly apples to apples. That said, the difference in their production at the plate makes the choice easy. When you can get a player that profiles as the best hitter at their position one that is at worst league average fielder. I'll take the bat over the glove every time. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    I've seen others that I would prefer for comparison---I saw Ozzie and he was great--I just saw a little bit of Banks--like Bean mentioned mostly at 1 st.

    My favorite SS, and I'm a diehard Sox fan, is Jeter. I love the way he plays the game.

    Usually the great gloves have developed a following because in the day when games were preceded by fielding practice, it was a pleasure to see the SS and 2 B practice turning"2." Almost magical how the two players tried to get the ball away without it being in the glove-just a tap.

    Nice thread Sherrif R--thanks.

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?


    Th problem with this comparison is while their was only 1 Ozzie, Banks & Ripken in their prime were excellent fielders in their own right. A better comparison would be at 3B, where you could compare B. Robinson vs Killebrew; admittedly this is not the same, since SS is more important.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    I hear what your saying sheriff..I would take the average to above average D with the big stick over the gold glove no bat every time. Its understandable why the Sox went the direction they did.

    They werent trying to move Iggy, but when the need arose and they were faced with the same option, they chose Bogey's 900+ OPS and good defense over Iggys most likely 600+ OPS and GG defense.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    If I had both Ozzie and Banks on my team , Banks would play third. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    There is a theoretical consideration here.  I think it's possible that Ozzie Smith's value was greater playing for the Cardinals in that time period than it would be playing for the Red Sox now.  Different league, different venue, more run-scoring. 

    Pretty sure the Red Sox brain trust would choose Banks. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    As long as we sre ovrrsimplifying everything,  the Orioles lost in 1979 with Belanger but won in 1983 with Ripken...

     

    “Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me. Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.”

    -Shel Silverstein

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenwellforpresident. Show greenwellforpresident's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    For those who believe in WAR, Ozzie's career war is higher than Banks in the same number of seasons.

    More importantly to me is the chance that either guy reaches that potential.  In my opinion, the chance that Jose is one of the best fielders in the majors for years to come is far better than the chance that Xander is an offensive superstar.  Offense can change a lot from minors to majors, defense not so much.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to notin's comment:

    As long as we sre ovrrsimplifying everything,  the Orioles lost in 1979 with Belanger but won in 1983 with Ripken...



    Well played.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    The Sox dynasty in the John Henry era is based on good hitting beats good fielding every day, all day long.  They won the 2007 WS with Lugo at SS and the 2004 WS with a hodgepodge of Reese, Garciaparra, and Cabrera and immediately that offseason signed Renteria, a reportedly good hitting SS.  Lowrie would still be SS if the Sox had been sure he would stay healthy.  Alex Gonzalez, a very good fielding SS, lasted one season,2006, which was the only season, 2003-2009, the Sox didn't get to the playoffs. 

    I think Iglesias is the best fielding SS the Sox ever had--I could be wrong--but I also think he doesn't fit the Sox mold of good hit first, good field second.  Ellsbury and Pedroia have both won gold gloves, but they have lasted primarily because of their offense. 

    I am not happy with this trade because I liked Iglesias a lot, but I do understand how their system works.  For Cherington, this was a no brainer given the issues with the rotation, Drew already in the SS slot (and now producing more gamewinning hits), and Bogaerts waiting at Pawtucket. 

    I forgot to mention Saltalamacchia, who the Sox picked up for a song because his defense as a catcher was very suspect--there was some doubt he could even throw to second base, let along get guys out.  But every year he keeps getting more innings primarily because he can hit.  His defense has improved, but he still has issues throwing runners out. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    There is still the assumption that Iglesias is all glove, no stick.  At the time of the trade, he was batting .330, highest on the team. Some will point out that his hitting was declining over the last 13 games. We don't normally do that with other players. The fact is that this glove man was still hitting .330. No one ever expected him to maintain a .400 average.Now , if he continues to hit well over the next few months and years , please don't come back and say " Who could ever have predicted that? ". 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    There is still the assumption that Iglesias is all glove, no stick.  At the time of the trade, he was batting .330, highest on the team. Some will point out that his hitting was declining over the last 13 games. We don't normally do that with other players. The fact is that this glove man was still hitting .330. No one ever expected him to maintain a .400 average.Now , if he continues to hit well over the next few months and years , please don't come back and say " Who could ever have predicted that? ". 

    Stabbed by Foulke.



    The rapid decline in average was widely predicted because his high average had resulted from an extraordinarily high percentage of balls in play, especially ground balls, ending up as hits.

    It wouldn't be a huge surprise if he ends up as a .250 or .260 hitter, but one who doesn't draw many walks or hit for power. 

    If he turns out to be able to maintain an OPS of .725 or higher, then yes, I'll admit that I was totally wrong about his hitting.  I'm on record.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    There is still the assumption that Iglesias is all glove, no stick.  At the time of the trade, he was batting .330, highest on the team. Some will point out that his hitting was declining over the last 13 games. We don't normally do that with other players. The fact is that this glove man was still hitting .330. No one ever expected him to maintain a .400 average.Now , if he continues to hit well over the next few months and years , please don't come back and say " Who could ever have predicted that? ". 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     



    The rapid decline in average was widely predicted because his high average had resulted from an extraordinarily high percentage of balls in play, especially ground balls, ending up as hits.

     

    It wouldn't be a huge surprise if he ends up as a .250 or .260 hitter, but one who doesn't draw many walks or hit for power. 

    If he turns out to be able to maintain an OPS of .725 or higher, then yes, I'll admit that I was totally wrong about his hitting.  I'm on record.



    If he continues to be able to put the ball in play, he will hit for a decent average. If he strikes out a lot , he will not. Batting ninth, you will not get many walks. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to nhsteven's comment:


    Th problem with this comparison is while their was only 1 Ozzie, Banks & Ripken in their prime were excellent fielders in their own right. A better comparison would be at 3B, where you could compare B. Robinson vs Killebrew; admittedly this is not the same, since SS is more important.



    I'd take killabrew....middle of the order impact bat proven run producer...

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:

    For those who believe in WAR, Ozzie's career war is higher than Banks in the same number of seasons.

    More importantly to me is the chance that either guy reaches that potential.  In my opinion, the chance that Jose is one of the best fielders in the majors for years to come is far better than the chance that Xander is an offensive superstar.  Offense can change a lot from minors to majors, defense not so much.



    Most sabre metric statheads contend that defensive war metrics are flawed and often over-inflate a players actual wins above replacement...

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    Let's not forget Ozzie was no slouch at the plate.  In his prime he was a .280 .350 obp guy who would give you 30 doubles and 30 SB

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:

     

    For those who believe in WAR, Ozzie's career war is higher than Banks in the same number of seasons.

    More importantly to me is the chance that either guy reaches that potential.  In my opinion, the chance that Jose is one of the best fielders in the majors for years to come is far better than the chance that Xander is an offensive superstar.  Offense can change a lot from minors to majors, defense not so much.

     



    Most sabre metric statheads contend that defensive war metrics are flawed and often over-inflate a players actual wins above replacement...

     



    The saber metric stat heads are the ones who invented WAR and swear by it. It is the more traditional fans who are dubious of its value. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

     

    Now this is not to say that Jose Iglesias will be as good as Ozzie Smith or that Xander Boegarts will have a career like Ernie Banks, but I use this as a point of reference to show what is possibly the high end of each player's potential.   If you had to pick one shortstop, who would you go with?  If I took baseball esthetics into account, I would choose Iggy/Ozzie, but if I wanted to see more wins, I would have to concede to the three run homers and base clearing doubles, and hopefully, the defense would be adequate as well.  If you're of an Oriole mind, you can substitute Mark Belanger for Ozzie, and Cal Ripkin for Ernie Banks.

    I realize this may not be as cut and dried a choice as it appears, as there may have other position options for Boegarts, but appearently, the future at third base looks promising as well with Cecchini emerging and/or Middlebrooks getting it together.  But for sake of discussion, if you have to choose one or the other, who would you go with?  

     

     

     



    That's easy Banks over Smith in their primes. Banks career ops was .830 Smith's was .666 fact of the matter is that Bank's played more games at 1B over the length of his career than he did @ SS.  So the comparison is not exactly apples to apples. That said, the difference in their production at the plate makes the choice easy. When you can get a player that profiles as the best hitter at their position one that is at worst league average fielder. I'll take the bat over the glove every time. 

     



    Banks played the better part of his first nine major league seasons at short when he was most productive as a hitter.  He had five 40+ home run seasons as a shortstop, which included a 47 home run season in 1958, and 45 in 1959.  He never reached 40 as a first baseman and went from being around a .300 hitter as a shortstop, to around a .250 hitter as a first baseman.  

    I'm not implying that the switch of positions had anything to do it, as he had knee injuries, necessitating a switch to a less mobile position.  If Boegarts emerges as a hitting force, it's likely he gets moved to another positon when Father Time calls, another whipper-snapper emerges, and/or a vacancy occurs at first, third, or DH.  In the meantime, it's easier to find corner infielders with pop (although maybe not at the current moment), but shortstops with hitting prowess and pop are a rare breed outside of the steroid era. Hopefully, he can field the position decently as well.  

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Look at it this way: Ozzie Smith or Ernie Banks?

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:

    For those who believe in WAR, Ozzie's career war is higher than Banks in the same number of seasons.

    More importantly to me is the chance that either guy reaches that potential.  In my opinion, the chance that Jose is one of the best fielders in the majors for years to come is far better than the chance that Xander is an offensive superstar.  Offense can change a lot from minors to majors, defense not so much.



    Banks's lower WAR numbers are a result of weaker offensive numbers in the second half of his career when he played first and had knee injuries.  Compare their WAR numbers as shortstops, and I'm sure Banks blows Ozzie away.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share