[undergroundwarrior]

Comparing Smith against the players of his generation would land Ozzie in the H.O.F. (first ballot). Today's shortstops are much better with the bat. A.Rod, Jeter, Nomar and even Omar. Tejada might move into this category.

[woofer]

The "OZ" is a shoe-in on two counts. Position player and broadcaster. (Ozzie works locally in St. Louis with the other HOF broadcaster, Jack Buck)

[dts32041]

If Ron Santos is not in why should OD be voted in?

[knowtherules]

Ozzie was indeed an exciting player to watch. It is also interesting that you cite Jeter and A-Rod as the only other shortstops that you would rather have.

Interesting because Ozzie had no bat. Not ever. The two shortstops you cite have a bat, but in my opinion, from a glove standpoint, could not hold a candle to Omar Visquel, let alone Oz.

Bottom line, a bat will get you to Cooperstown faster than a glove, alas, Oz only had the latter.

[TheExploited]

There is no way that Ozzie Smith should be first ballot Hall of Famer. I do not think that a middle infielder should get into the HOF because of great defense. They are supposed to play great defense. Bill Mazeroski is a similar situation. He played defense and hit a crucial home run. I think the HOF has been cheapened because players are let in because of hype. Is Ozzie Smith that much better than Mark Belanger? I do not think so. There are three shortstops in the pipeline (A-Rod, Nomar and Jeter) who will push Ozzie far down the list. Ron Santo should be the HOF before Ozzie Smith.

[No!]

Ozzie was the greatest I'd ever seen...

YES on first ballot!

And he could hit very well, thank you..

He was great on a hit and run and I remember his biggest homer and Jack Buck (my old next door neighbor, btw) saying..

Go CRAZY FOLKS

GO CRAZY!!!

Now who knows what I am talking about out there?

[John H K]

I consider debates over "First ballot" HOF vs. "Not first ballot" HOF impossibly stupid since voters vote individually and it officially means jack diddly squat.

And any voter who thinks someone is clearly a HOFer, but doesn't vote for him his first year of eligibility because he's not a "first ballot HOFer" is a mindless idiot who needs to have his voting privledges stripped from him.

[The G Man]

I vote yes on the HOF for Ozzie

On another topic, what are folks opinions for the football HOF for Kurt Warner and Terrell Davis. I say yes to each. They don't have longevity in their corner, but I liken their careers to Sandy Koufax's. Thoughts?

[markn]

[leadpenny]

....a first ballot Hall of Famer?

For a major league sport that is going through "contraction" and probably facing a player's strike and/or a lock-out by the owners, who cares? The greed of the owners and players is destroying a once-great sport for future generations. I'll just live with the memories of my dad taking his kids to old Tiger (Briggs) Stadium.

Don't mean to be so negative. There will always be baseball but there just needs to be some blood-letting at the top. Maybe when it is all sorted out in 20-25 years, dads will once again be able to afford to take their kids to see a major league game. Until then they can vote for whoever they want for Cooperstown. I'll vote by not opening my pocketbook.

I'll also understand if my post is completely ignored by you true baseball fans.

[CARDINALRULES]

YES.

[Wrigley]

Not on the first ballot.

[Jhensy]

Yes for Ozzie, he was arguably the best ever at the most important defensive position, why wait?

Also yes: Gary Carter, Ryne Sandberg (next year, I think).

Tough calls: Andre Dawson, Goose Gossage, Bruce Sutter, Jim Rice

Close, but no cigar: Ron Santo, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Joe Carter, Alan Trammell, Tony Oliva.

[Sabertooth]

Anyone know why Bill Freehan, an 11-time All-Star catcher and the last to catch a 30-game winner (Denny McLain) isn't in the Hall?

[GreatOne]

No offense, but a stupid question. Ozzie Smith is/was the greatest fielder of any player at any position of all time (yes, better than Bench, B. Robinson, Mazeroski, and DiMaggio/Mays/Speaker). No question he belongs in, and on the first ballot.

[The Thin Man]

I agree he deserves to be a first ballot HOFer for the reasons you stated. I would be shocked if he didn't get voted in right away.

[Tall_Texan]

Let's face it:

Smith would be a borderline HOFer were it not for the media hype. On offensive stats alone, (.262 career average, 28 HRs, 793 RBIs) he wouldn't get in at all. Both he and Dave Concepcion played 19 seasons and Concepcion had better numbers (.267, 101, 950) than Ozzie. Do you think Concepcion is a first-ballot HOFer?

As flashy with the glove as Smith was, Concepcion was the first to invent the astroturf hop-throw to first. And Concepcion has more World Series rings.

But one player made the highlight reel on Sportscenter every night and worked his way into broadcasting while the other didn't.

Folks will mention all the All-Star appearances, in spite of the fact that Ozzie was often voted onto the All-Star team when he was embarassingly past his prime because of his popularity, not for his skills.

In short, he'll make the Hall (since it's mostly a personality contest if a reasonable case can be made to get you in) but I don't think he'll be a first-ballot guy.

Now, do you want to explain why Concepcion doesn't deserve to be inducted? (BTW, I'm no Reds fan or Concepcion fan - I just think the Ozzie-vs-Davey argument best proves my point about how it's a hype thing, not a worthiness thing.)

[doctor noe]

Ozzie deserves to be in the Hall. What really jump-started Ozzie's career was being traded to the Cardinals. Playing on astroturf helped his already incredible fielding skills and it also helped lift his batting average out of the doldrums. Old-time SSs like Dave Concepcion and Bill Russell began their careers with weak bats and eventually became decent hitters in the last half of their careers...Smith was no different in that regard.

[Mean Spirited Conservative]

When determining whether a player deserves inclusion in the Hall Of Fame he must be measured against the peers of his particular era. Before Ripken, Garciaparra, Jeter, and A-Rod, Ozzie Smith was the greatest shortstop of his era.

Remember that Ozzie played most of his career on astroturf, during a time when turf was in roughly half of all major league ballparks. He perfected turf play. The game, defensively, of middle infielders evolved through him. And while he was no Ripken or Rodriguez at the plate he still had a tremendous influence on those players defensively.

There is also the matter of the pitching staffs Ozzie played behind. Every one of those pitchers was a better pitcher because Ozzie Smith was out there. That's a lot of pitchers. That's a lot of balls that didn't get through. That's a lot of doubleplays he started.

You see I have a theory about exceptional defenders in baseball, specifically middle infielders. The great ones are just as much a part of the pitching staff as they are a part of the regular lineup. It's very difficult to quantify it through statistics, but great defensive teams usually win whether they hit well or not. In his era Ozzie Smith helped keep runners off the bases and runs off the board better than any other player at any other position. He never got 200 hits in a season, but he may have prevented almost that many. And preventing them in the field is just as good as getting them at the plate.

[the_doc]

I would vote for him and Harriet.