Hall Of Fame Or Very Good?

Let us start with 16.2, because as I have said many times, in baseball numbers don’t lie. It falls well short of 75. Then there is another guy 91.74, now that’s a number. At the end of the day baseball is about all about the numbers right? So why I am so appalled by 16.2 as it is compared to 91.74? Well at the end of the day it’s all about whether that 16.2 is 58.8 too low or not.

Does the King deserve a crown? Dave Concepcion, or El Rey as he was called by any in the Queen City hung up his spikes on September 15, 1988. Nobody expected Concepcion to waltz into the hall of fame. But there was another short stop, one with a constant smile, a glint in his eye, he of the back flip that walked into the Hall. I know what you are thinking, Ozzie Smith was the best defensive short stop of all time The Wizard was, but how good was Concepcion?

I know all about the "he didn’t score 1000 runs argument", I know all the "he batted .267 debates", but seriously. He was the best of a decade, and didn’t even get our serious consideration.

My thoughts are not that he may not just be good, but great. Let’s start with 5 gold gloves and part of one of the greatest middle infield combinations of all time. A fielding percentage of .971, a James Bond (.007) less than Smith’s life time total. That coupled with their similar chance per game numbers 4.9 for El Rey vs. 5.1 for the Wiz and I would certainly argue that at short stop Concepcion’s range or lack their of is not in question.

So then where is it that Ozzie was so much better? I mean would agree that The Wizard of Oz didn’t get in on the strength of his bat, but certainly was named on 91% of the ballots because of his glove.

His life time offensive numbers stack up favorably at the plate as well, Short stops weren’t known for their ability to produce offensively until the post-Cal Ripken experiment. So having similar career batting averages of .267 and .262 doesn’t separate them, nor does Smith having 140 more career hits, as it took him an extra 600 at bats to get there. Some would argue his 580 stolen bases, but then what of his 28 round trippers? DC swiped 321 bags, well knocking 101 balls out of the yard.

So what am I saying with all of this, I mean am I really arguing what it looks like I am arguing? Well here we are, they both almost the exactly same number of games, 2511 for Smith, to 2499 for Concepcion. The Wizards claim to fame, the thing that carried him to 91.74 percent of all BBWAA ballots that year was his range, and steady hand. Well I am looking at a guy that even while playing some games (321, or two seasons worth) at positions that didn’t lend themselves to the number of chances still managed to post numbers that trail Smith by .5 chances a game, and if we compare them simply at the short stop position for the 17 years of Concepcion’s career we will see on a .2 chances per game gap. With similar batting stats in an era where short stops hitting ability was for the most part akin to pitchers. (And I’m not talking about Micah Owings.) Why can’t we measure the best short stop of the 70’s against The Wizard? And if that’s true, how he is 75.54 percent, or an entire Hall of Famer short? I am sure Dave would have settled for the 58.8% necessary anyway.