PDA

View Full Version : Better shortstop Dave Concepcion or Ozzie Smith?



redlegs2370
08-12-2010, 08:43 PM
As I sit here and read all of the nonsense from the delusional Cardinal fans I go back to my childhood when I would debate with Cardinal fans who had the better shortstop: Dave Concepcion or Ozzie Smith. Well in my book it was Davey unless you wanted a gymnast to do flips on the field. Davey will never get the credit he deserves in baseball, except for Cincinnati fans.

Comparing both players stats I can't see where Smith is better and seeing that Smith is in the Hall of Fame Concepcion most certainly should. Both players played 19 seasons and Concepcion played in 9 post season series (4 WS) & Smith played in 8 post season series (3 WS)

Concepcion's stats (.267 BA) (101 HR) (950 RBI) (2,326 H) (.971 Field%)
Smiths stats (.262 BA) ( 28 HR) (793 RBI) (2,460 H) (.965 Field%)

Davey beats him in 4 of the 5 categories, plus post season Concepcion had (.297 BA) & Smith (.236) in roughly same amount of games.

I think without reservation Concepcion is better and most definitely deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

10xWSChamps
08-12-2010, 09:32 PM
This is a great site for intelligent baseball talk

Liar! ;)

Offensively they were similar players but on the bases and defensively Ozzie was head and shoulders above Dave

Fielding % isn't a very good statistic.

foxfire123
08-12-2010, 10:12 PM
Concepcion, hands down.

Griffey012
08-12-2010, 10:14 PM
I am too young to have watched Concepcion. But I know from watching Ozzie that he was quite the entertainer, where I am guessing Concepcion was more of just a baseball player. I know Ozzie was a whizz in the field, but unfortunately I have never seen Concepcion play. So I can't make a fair assessment.

redlegs2370
08-12-2010, 10:14 PM
Liar! ;)

Offensively they were similar players but on the bases and defensively Ozzie was head and shoulders above Dave

Fielding % isn't a very good statistic.

Davey invented the bounce on Astroturf. He pioneered how the game was played defensively from the shortstop position. How can you say fielding % isn't a very good statistic? Offensively similar? I will agree with you but Davey gets the nod because he was clutch in post season and he drove in more runs.

Razzle
08-12-2010, 10:17 PM
Davey invented the bounce on Astroturf. He pioneered how the game was played defensively from the shortstop position. How can you say fielding % isn't a very good statistic? Offensively similar? I will agree with you but Davey gets the nod because he was clutch in post season and he drove in more runs.

Fielding percentage is a pretty awful way to measure a defensive player. Who would you rather have a guy who makes every play with horrible range or a guy who gets to 20% more balls, but makes a few errors. The latter guy is going to help his team more often than not, but fielding percentage can't determine that. This is a pretty drastic example, but just used to exemplify the point.

redlegs2370
08-12-2010, 10:24 PM
Fielding percentage is a pretty awful way to measure a defensive player. Who would you rather have a guy who makes every play with horrible range or a guy who gets to 20% more balls, but makes a few errors. The latter guy is going to help his team more often than not, but fielding percentage can't determine that. This is a pretty drastic example, but just used to exemplify the point.

Are you saying Concepcion didn't have great range? I would say they were similar on range. Point blank Dave Concepcion was as good of defensive shortstop as Ozzie Smith and just an all around better baseball player. If you polled Bench, Rose, Morgan, Griffey, Perez, Oester, Driessen, etc they would 100% say they would rather have Concepcion at shortstop on their team than Ozzie Smith.

10xWSChamps
08-12-2010, 10:27 PM
Davey invented the bounce on Astroturf. He pioneered how the game was played defensively from the shortstop position. How can you say fielding % isn't a very good statistic? Offensively similar? I will agree with you but Davey gets the nod because he was clutch in post season and he drove in more runs.

As for fielding %, pretty much what Razzle said. Ozzie had tremendous range and got called for errors on balls no one would have got close to. You can't put their defense inside of a vacuum, the further a ball is hit away from where the shortstop is positioned at the more I want ozzie.

Besides, Ozzie actually has a higher fielding % ;) (.978) So even if you want to argue that F% is worthwhile, it still doesn't help your argument.

What exactly do you mean when you say he invented the "bounce" on astroturf?

Dave had more pop in his bat and was an outstanding defensive SS, Ozzie was a SB machine and generational defensive SS.

I think Ozzie's popularity and celebrity was probably helped by playing on the Cardinals and the opposite would be true for Dave. But, it is what it is. Pujols missed a couple MVPs because Bonds roided so much.

Razzle
08-12-2010, 10:27 PM
Are you saying Concepcion didn't have great range? I would say they were similar on range. Point blank Dave Concepcion was as good of defensive shortstop as Ozzie Smith and just an all around better baseball player. If you polled Bench, Rose, Morgan, Griffey, Perez, Oester, Driessen, etc they would 100% say they would rather have Concepcion at shortstop on their team than Ozzie Smith.

That's not what I'm saying at all, just showing how fielding percentage can be seen as flawed. I don't really have a say in the matter as I am too young to have watched Concepcion play at all and I didn't really even get to see Smith in his prime. All I can go on is what I've been told and that wouldn't really say much since I've lived in St. Louis most of my life.

Defacto
08-12-2010, 10:34 PM
Ozzie wasn't the greatest offensive SS ever, he was one of the better defensive SS in baseball. Look at Ozzie's and Concepcion's WAR(Wins above Replacement), Ozzie's is 64.6 and Concepcion's is 33.6. I think Ozzie was the better SS of the two, but I think Concepcion deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

Griffey012
08-12-2010, 10:46 PM
Are you saying Concepcion didn't have great range? I would say they were similar on range. Point blank Dave Concepcion was as good of defensive shortstop as Ozzie Smith and just an all around better baseball player. If you polled Bench, Rose, Morgan, Griffey, Perez, Oester, Driessen, etc they would 100% say they would rather have Concepcion at shortstop on their team than Ozzie Smith.

He was just making a hypothetical example of why fielding percentage is flawed. He wasn't specifying players. It's a well known fallacy of fielding %

texasdave
08-12-2010, 10:52 PM
What exactly do you mean when you say he invented the "bounce" on astroturf?

It has been said that if you threw the ball with overspin it would pick up speed when it bounced off the Astroturf and get to the first baseman more quickly. This was the 70s so Astroturf and speed were more prominent. If you could get the ball to first base quicker it would be a huge advantage. That is what I remember. I don't know if that is true or not.

This is a quote from Joe Morgan.


The other innovation was Concepcion's one-hop throw to first base on AstroTurf. You know the one-hop throw you'll see shortstops make from deep in the hole? Davey started that. Sometimes he'd make the throw to Perez from short left field. Concepcion would practice those one-hop throws to learn the best place to bounce the ball.

Yadi for Mayor
08-12-2010, 11:01 PM
It's really not even close

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1012186&position=SS#fielding

Ozzie over 18 years is a 70 war player

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1002494&position=SS

Concepcion is a 45 war player.

In particular notice the difference between Runs above average UZR, Ozzie 239, Concepcion 50.

couch_manager
08-12-2010, 11:03 PM
I think Ozzie's popularity and celebrity was probably helped by playing on the Cardinals and the opposite would be true for Dave.

:bowrofl: Dave's lack of popularity was because he didn't play for the Cardinals?

Ozzie's popularity was mostly due to his backflips.

redlegs2370
08-12-2010, 11:04 PM
It has been said that if you threw the ball with overspin it would pick up speed when it bounced off the Astroturf and get to the first baseman more quickly. This was the 70s so Astroturf and speed were more prominent. If you could get the ball to first base quicker it would be a huge advantage. That is what I remember. I don't know if that is true or not.

This is a quote from Joe Morgan.

Thanks for the input Texas Dave. You put into words what I was thinking but couldn't quite get it out. Also great quote from Morgan. They both were great shortstops.

redlegs2370
08-12-2010, 11:08 PM
It's really not even close

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1012186&position=SS#fielding

Ozzie over 18 years is a 70 war player

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1002494&position=SS

Concepcion is a 45 war player.

In particular notice the difference between Runs above average UZR, Ozzie 239, Concepcion 50.
WAR is overrated. What about post season? When the money was on the line? Concepcion was nearly a .300 hitter and Smith in the low .200's. I'll take clutch performance anytime.

GIDP
08-12-2010, 11:17 PM
Ozzie. I didnt see Davey at all and barely remember Ozzie.

Larkin > Both combined though.

bshall2105
08-12-2010, 11:18 PM
I'm surprised some people aren't arguing for Paul Janish being better than both.

Yadi for Mayor
08-12-2010, 11:24 PM
WAR is overrated. What about post season? When the money was on the line? Concepcion was nearly a .300 hitter and Smith in the low .200's. I'll take clutch performance anytime.

I personally don't believe in players being "clutch". There are some players who choke in pressure situations and there are many money who just have skewed numbers because of a small sample size.

However if you want to believe in things like players being clutch and overvaluing small sample sizes, Ozzie Smith's famous "go crazy folks" homerun in the 1985 NLCS was pretty clutch.

757690
08-12-2010, 11:33 PM
I watched both play and even though as a Reds fan, I love Concepcion, I have to say that overall, Ozzie was a better shortstop. Davey was a bit better offensively, not just because he was clutch, but Ozzie was a much better fielder.

If UZR was around back then, Ozzie would have easily been a +35-50 fielder some years. I am not exaggerating. He was that good. He made plays I have yet to see any other SS make, and he did it on a regular basis.

Davey was always underrated defensively, since he was thought of as an offensive minded SS, and easily was one of the best of his ERA. But he was great, while Ozzie was other worldly. Think the Pujols of defense.

10xWSChamps
08-12-2010, 11:54 PM
:bowrofl: Dave's lack of popularity was because he didn't play for the Cardinals?

Ozzie's popularity was mostly due to his backflips.

I'm not trying to brag or anything, I'm just saying the Cardinals were a more popular team and got more national media exposure.. that was even more important back then then it is these days with the internet, ESPN and the MLB network where you can see more then just the select national coverage.

mckbearcat48
08-12-2010, 11:56 PM
Larkin was the man....I really enjoyed watching him play.

Griffey012
08-12-2010, 11:58 PM
I'm surprised some people aren't arguing for Paul Janish being better than both.

Hilarious! :beerme:

Hey Meat
08-13-2010, 12:09 AM
Didn't Dave win 2 World Series?

Hey Meat
08-13-2010, 12:11 AM
Ozzie. I didnt see Davey at all and barely remember Ozzie.

Larkin > Both combined though.

I agree. Larkin was great. Not sure if he was better than both the Wiz and Davey.

GIDP
08-13-2010, 12:18 AM
I agree. Larkin was great. Not sure if he was better than both the Wiz and Davey.

obviously not combined but i was making a point

Dawg
08-13-2010, 12:59 AM
Larkin had a better arm than Ozzie, but I think Ozzie had better range.
Larkin was also much better with the bat.

mikemo14
08-13-2010, 01:14 AM
I would take Davey anyday over Ozzie. Davey was overshadowed by Hall of Famers but was a crucial part of that 70-80s teams. He was not nearly as flashy as Ozzie but his range was incredible and he seldom needed to dive for a ball. His ability to leap and grab line drives was incredible as well. Hard to believe he is not a hal of famer.

couch_manager
08-13-2010, 01:16 AM
I'm not trying to brag or anything, I'm just saying the Cardinals were a more popular team and got more national media exposure.. that was even more important back then then it is these days with the internet, ESPN and the MLB network where you can see more then just the select national coverage.

Have you heard of the Big Red Machine, the team that Davey played on? They got plenty of media attention during the '70's. Is there an equivalent Cardinals team that generated that much buzz when Ozzie played? Sorry, I'm sure you'd like to rewrite history, but the Cardinals weren't the team of the '80's.

10xWSChamps
08-13-2010, 01:20 AM
This probably won't be a popular opinion, but I think you have to include Derek Jeter in the discussion for best ever. Easily the best bat and he's an above average defensive SS, although not even close to being even top 10 defensively. But he's still been one of the better gloves in the league.

If we're talking about clutch, Jeter has that too. The guy is also a very likable Yankee, and that may be the greatest achievement of his whole career ;)

10xWSChamps
08-13-2010, 01:22 AM
Have you heard of the Big Red Machine, the team that Davey played on? They got plenty of media attention during the '70's. Is there an equivalent Cardinals team that generated that much buzz when Ozzie played? Sorry, I'm sure you'd like to rewrite history, but the Cardinals weren't the team of the '80's.

Just forget I said it. Honestly it wasn't meant to be a chest-thumping thing... sorry

couch_manager
08-13-2010, 01:22 AM
This probably won't be a popular opinion, but I think you have to include Derek Jeter in the discussion for best ever.

Without question, when his career is over, he'll probably be considered the best all-around shortstop ever to play the game. But...he's had a great supporting cast his entire career.


Just forget I said it. Honestly it wasn't meant to be a chest-thumping thing... sorry

Well, that's what I've come to expect from Cardinals fans. If that was not your intent, sorry. :beerme:

Defacto
08-13-2010, 01:29 AM
Have you heard of the Big Red Machine, the team that Davey played on? They got plenty of media attention during the '70's. Is there an equivalent Cardinals team that generated that much buzz when Ozzie played? Sorry, I'm sure you'd like to rewrite history, but the Cardinals weren't the team of the '80's.


The A's also had attention in the 70's.;) Anyways, the Cardinals were the team of the 80's for most of the decade. Then, in 1988, the A's went on a similar tear as the Cardinals did, except their threepeat went into 1990.

couch_manager
08-13-2010, 01:37 AM
The A's also had attention in the 70's.;) Anyways, the Cardinals were the team of the 80's for most of the decade. Then, in 1988, the A's went on a similar tear as the Cardinals did, except their threepeat went into 1990.

The Cardinals went on a tear? They lost 2 of the 3 World Series they were in. If you really want to compare the Cardinals to the A's, they were a disappointment, much like the Buffalo Bills in football.

The team of the '80's were the Dodgers, not the Cardinals.

Krawhitham
08-13-2010, 01:38 AM
For defense Davy, hands down, by a mile, if the man could back flip he'd be in the HOF

Defacto
08-13-2010, 01:39 AM
The Cardinals went on a tear? They lost 2 of the 3 World Series they were in. If you really want to compare the Cardinals to the A's, they were a disappointment, much like the Buffalo Bills in football.

The team of the '80's were the Dodgers, not the Cardinals.

I can except that. I was just saying the Cardinals were like the A's due to the fact they won three pennants and only won one WS once.

ian_madden
08-13-2010, 02:31 AM
1. The Big Red Machine is considered by many, not just Reds fans as the greatest team ever.

2. Ozzie Might have been the Wizard, but Barry Larkin is GOD!

DocRed
08-13-2010, 09:58 AM
Hard to compare offensive worth vs defensive worth, even with today's sabremetrics. That being said Concepcion was certainly no slouch defensively, he was a 5 time GG'er. Overall though Ozzie was better, but the difference was not a large as some here would lead you to believe, Ozzie had some extremely bad offensive years early in his career. It was only until he turned 30 that he somehow began to hit the ball with any kind of consistency. Ozzie's BA was somewhere in the .230's before he hit 30.

scott91575
08-13-2010, 10:20 AM
I personally don't believe in players being "clutch". There are some players who choke in pressure situations and there are many money who just have skewed numbers because of a small sample size.

However if you want to believe in things like players being clutch and overvaluing small sample sizes, Ozzie Smith's famous "go crazy folks" homerun in the 1985 NLCS was pretty clutch.

So you downplay it due to sample size, and then go to a 1 time example. Good logic.

scott91575
08-13-2010, 10:22 AM
I think Ozzie's popularity and celebrity was probably helped by playing on the Cardinals

The Big Red Machine was more popular than your Cardinals ever were or ever will be.

scott91575
08-13-2010, 10:28 AM
I'm not trying to brag or anything, I'm just saying the Cardinals were a more popular team and got more national media exposure.. that was even more important back then then it is these days with the internet, ESPN and the MLB network where you can see more then just the select national coverage.

Seriously, the more I read the more I wonder where you are coming from. What was different in the 80's vs. the 70's? Nintendo?

The Big Red Machine of the 70's had as much if not more exposure nationally than the Cardinals in the 80's.

If you want to make any kind of comparison you could say the Cardinals did not have the star power of a Bench, Rose, or Morgan and therefore did not overshadow Ozzie like the stars of the Reds overshadowed Concepcion.

Seriously, how can you compare exposure of the Reds of the 70's vs. the Cardinals of the 80's? The Reds of the 70's are compared to the greatest teams of all time. The Cardinals of the 80's? Also rans.

Caveman Techie
08-13-2010, 11:59 AM
Sorry, but Ozzie had the better glove for a longer time than Davey did. Not saying that Davey didn't have some seasons where he would have rivaled Ozzie defensively, just Ozzie had more seasons of better defense.

Also, Larkin was better than both. The whole package defense and offense. He was the one who changed what SS were supposed to be on a team.

Reds
08-13-2010, 12:07 PM
I'm too young to offer an type of real analysis. Ozzie Smith's rookie card is worth more, tho. :D

Orodle
08-13-2010, 12:48 PM
The Wizard.....

However, I would say Larkin was a lot more valuable player.

PhatHead
08-13-2010, 01:13 PM
Both have comparable offensive numbers.

It's bottom of the 9th. 2 outs, runner on third. A sharp ground ball hit deep in the hole between SS and 3rd. Who do you want fielding it?

CySeymour
08-13-2010, 01:36 PM
Both have comparable offensive numbers.

It's bottom of the 9th. 2 outs, runner on third. A sharp ground ball hit deep in the hole between SS and 3rd. Who do you want fielding it?

How about Ozzie getting to the ball, but Davey throwning it :)

Krawhitham
08-13-2010, 01:37 PM
The Big Red Machine was more popular than your Cardinals ever were or ever will be.

Ozzie did not start till after the big red machine was dead, so their was no direct competition between Ozzie and The Big Red Machine. The reds in the 80's were by far the worse team in baseball. It is not like today where sports center is on 24/7 you got like 5 minutes on the local nightly news and if you got any coverage that was not a local sport team it was Ozzie doing that damn back flip. Local news had about 5 seconds to devote to non local sports and a flip took about 5 seconds


You also had This week in Baseball which did not cover the Reds in the 80's because they had 30 minutes a week and well the Reds SUCKED in the 80's. And every week I remember seeing Ozzie doing back flips on TWIB

With the The Big Red Machine Davey was never a talking point, as good as he was: Rose, Bench, Morgan, Foster, & Perez were better in the eyes of people because they could hit. Only time Davey hit was in the clutch. So Davey was 6th or 7th on the pecking list while Ozzie was 1st on the pecking list for the Cards. Only thing the Cards had besides Ozzie was Vince Coleman

Boston Red
08-13-2010, 01:44 PM
the Reds SUCKED in the 80's.

That's not really true. Just the portion of the '80s that included Concepcion. The mid to late '80s Reds were pretty good.

Magdal
08-13-2010, 02:26 PM
All this talk about Dave, Ozzie, Larkin and Jeter and not 1 single mention of the greatest SS that ever lived? The Babe Ruth of SS's....Honus Wagner. Greatest hitting SS of all time and the best leather and throw man of his era, playing with that little glove they used. Go look him up guys and get back to me.

arkimadee
08-13-2010, 02:26 PM
barry larkin

10xWSChamps
08-13-2010, 03:23 PM
All this talk about Dave, Ozzie, Larkin and Jeter and not 1 single mention of the greatest SS that ever lived? The Babe Ruth of SS's....Honus Wagner. Greatest hitting SS of all time and the best leather and throw man of his era, playing with that little glove they used. Go look him up guys and get back to me.

Yeah I kind of already knew about Honus, although admittedly it was only because of hearing about his baseball card that's worth like a million dollars. I went and looked up his stats after I heard about one selling at an auction like 6-7 years ago.

I think it's hard to compare a player from that era with players today, or even players 50 years ago.

Personally, I only really compare players today with players from the mid 1940s and on when baseball got segregated. Scouting also started to increase exponentially from that point on.

If we don't split up the eras old time players will dominate the stats too much. And if we're looking at ranking teams then it gets even more drastic. The BRM is one of the greatest teams in baseball history but they don't hold a candle to the late 1920's Yankees.

texasdave
08-13-2010, 03:57 PM
the Reds SUCKED in the 80's.

In 1980 the Reds won 89 games. In 1981 they had the best record in baseball but got shafted. Their overall record from 80-89 was 781-783, due largely to a 61-101 record in 1982.

gmt
08-13-2010, 04:12 PM
I've been around long enough to see both play. Both were good, Ozzie was better in the field and dazzling time and time again. Concepcion was the better hitter and very steady at short. What Ozzie had over Concepcion was the media factor. Concepcion had to deal with teammates who far overshadowed his performance. Ozzie was a key to the defense and speed teams of the Cardinals, so he stuck out in a smaller crowd. You can't just look at the numbers and say one was better than the other. People would go to games expecting Ozzie to entertain them and he rarely disappointed. I don't think the same could be said of Concepcion.

Magdal
08-13-2010, 04:22 PM
Yeah I kind of already knew about Honus, although admittedly it was only because of hearing about his baseball card that's worth like a million dollars. I went and looked up his stats after I heard about one selling at an auction like 6-7 years ago.

I think it's hard to compare a player from that era with players today, or even players 50 years ago.

Personally, I only really compare players today with players from the mid 1940s and on when baseball got segregated. Scouting also started to increase exponentially from that point on.

If we don't split up the eras old time players will dominate the stats too much. And if we're looking at ranking teams then it gets even more drastic. The BRM is one of the greatest teams in baseball history but they don't hold a candle to the late 1920's Yankees.When it comes to players of different era's it's best to compare how they ranked in THEIR era. No SS has dominated any era as Wagner did his. There was no one to compare him with.

Not so Dave and Ozzie. (or Jeter!)

redlegs2370
08-13-2010, 05:25 PM
Ozzie Smith's famous "go crazy folks" homerun in the 1985 NLCS was pretty clutch.

Famous quotes, sorry that yours don't compare with the excitement the Reds have had with Marty say "And this one belongs to the Reds" What kind of announcer would say "go crazy folks." Buck and little Buck weren't very good and unfortunately living close to Illinois I had to listen to them from time to time. They were nowhere in the same league as the father son combo of Marty and Thom!

Magdal
08-13-2010, 05:34 PM
Famous quotes, sorry that yours don't compare with the excitement the Reds have had with Marty say "And this one belongs to the Reds" What kind of announcer would say "go crazy folks." Buck and little Buck weren't very good and unfortunately living close to Illinois I had to listen to them from time to time. They were nowhere in the same league as the father son combo of Marty and Thom!I did not understand Buck's "dry witt" when I was a child, or appreciate it when I got older. But I do admire his intelligence. I was moved by the old man's 9/11 poem and saddened by his soon after death.

redlegs2370
08-13-2010, 09:01 PM
I did not understand Buck's "dry witt" when I was a child, or appreciate it when I got older. But I do admire his intelligence. I was moved by the old man's 9/11 poem and saddened by his soon after death.

I'll never forget when Eric Davis hit the home run in 1990 and you hear Buck in the back ground say uh oh. He didn't want Reds to win. His poem was well written though.

bagz
08-13-2010, 09:33 PM
Hard to compare offensive worth vs defensive worth, even with today's sabremetrics. That being said Concepcion was certainly no slouch defensively, he was a 5 time GG'er. Overall though Ozzie was better, but the difference was not a large as some here would lead you to believe, Ozzie had some extremely bad offensive years early in his career. It was only until he turned 30 that he somehow began to hit the ball with any kind of consistency. Ozzie's BA was somewhere in the .230's before he hit 30.

Well said Doc. Concepcion was better offensively no question about it. Defensively I might give a slight edge to Smith because I think he could cover a little bit more ground. Arm strength to first was very similiar.

scott91575
08-13-2010, 10:25 PM
Ozzie did not start till after the big red machine was dead, so their was no direct competition between Ozzie and The Big Red Machine. The reds in the 80's were by far the worse team in baseball. It is not like today where sports center is on 24/7 you got like 5 minutes on the local nightly news and if you got any coverage that was not a local sport team it was Ozzie doing that damn back flip. Local news had about 5 seconds to devote to non local sports and a flip took about 5 seconds


You also had This week in Baseball which did not cover the Reds in the 80's because they had 30 minutes a week and well the Reds SUCKED in the 80's. And every week I remember seeing Ozzie doing back flips on TWIB

With the The Big Red Machine Davey was never a talking point, as good as he was: Rose, Bench, Morgan, Foster, & Perez were better in the eyes of people because they could hit. Only time Davey hit was in the clutch. So Davey was 6th or 7th on the pecking list while Ozzie was 1st on the pecking list for the Cards. Only thing the Cards had besides Ozzie was Vince Coleman

In the 80's the Reds were in no way the worst team in baseball (they had a winning record 6 out of 10 years, including the best record in the NL in 81). They had the same number of winning seasons as the Cards. Second, WTF do the Reds of the 80's have to do with the Reds of the 70's which you quoted? I was comparing the popularity of the Cards in the 80's vs. the Reds in the 70's, when both players were in their prime.

TWIB? You mean a 1/2 hour show on Saturday around noon is the thing that propelled the Cardinals popularity vs. the Reds of the 70's?

Your only legit point is the one I mentioned. Yet I was refuting the point made that the Cards popularity in the 80's was bigger than the Reds of the 70's, which is laughable. No one in their right mind brings up the Cards in the 80's when people discuss the greatest teams of all time, yet you can bet the Big Red Machine will be in the discussion.

Buy a clue before spouting off the Reds were the worst team in baseball in the 80's, especially since it was nothing to do with my points and is completely wrong.

Kingspoint
08-13-2010, 10:49 PM
Liar! ;)

Offensively they were similar players but on the bases and defensively Ozzie was head and shoulders above Dave

Fielding % isn't a very good statistic.

Ozzie Smith sucked big-time Offensively the first half of his career. Concepcion was always good.

big boy
08-13-2010, 11:35 PM
As a shortstop, Ozzie's fielding % was .978 while Concepcion's was .971.

Ozzie's range factor was higher, also.

Kingspoint
08-14-2010, 02:50 AM
Concepcion was a better "clutch-hitter", also...usually among the league-leaders in hitting w/ RISP.

Kingspoint
08-14-2010, 02:51 AM
Concepcion was a better "clutch-hitter", also...usually among the league-leaders in hitting w/ RISP.

Kingspoint
08-14-2010, 02:51 AM
Concepcion was a better "clutch-hitter", also...usually among the league-leaders in hitting w/ RISP.

scott91575
08-14-2010, 03:36 AM
Concepcion was a better "clutch-hitter", also...usually among the league-leaders in hitting w/ RISP.

So nice you have to say it 3 times.

BTW...his numbers do not prove that out. Same average and .002 higher slugging w/RISP vs. his overall hitting. His OBP is .015 higher, but that is just walking with runners in scoring position. With an OPS below .700 I would not put him in the clutch hitting hall of fame.

Concepcion was a better clutch hitter, but he was a better hitter in general. Both of them have near identical RISP numbers to their overall numbers.

nornob
11-03-2012, 06:24 AM
Are you saying Concepcion didn't have great range? I would say they were similar on range. Point blank Dave Concepcion was as good of defensive shortstop as Ozzie Smith and just an all around better baseball player. If you polled Bench, Rose, Morgan, Griffey, Perez, Oester, Driessen, etc they would 100% say they would rather have Concepcion at shortstop on their team than Ozzie Smith.

I heard Joe Morgan say on a telecast, "Davey Concepcion was the best shortstop I'd ever seen until I saw Ozzie Smith." The Wizard of Oz was a better shortstop than Conception. And, yes, Davey belongs in the Hall.
All brilliant shortstops belong there.
Oz was even better than Omar Vizquel, and that's hard for me to say as a native Clevelander and lifelong Indians fan. Oz had a better arm than Omar.

smixsell
11-05-2012, 02:19 PM
I am too young to have watched Concepcion. But I know from watching Ozzie that he was quite the entertainer, where I am guessing Concepcion was more of just a baseball player. I know Ozzie was a whizz in the field, but unfortunately I have never seen Concepcion play. So I can't make a fair assessment.

Concepcion was a phenomenal SS and an even better all around baseball player. Tremendous range, sick throwing arm, clutch hitter. I'd rate them as rough equals defensively. Overall a Concepcion was a better player than Ozzie IMO, but by only a small margin as Ozzie was also great.