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.)
I completely disagree with your assessment. If you look at their respective lifetime stats, Smith had a higher fielding pct. (.978 vs. .971), and even though he played in 333 more games at shortstop, he had 579 more putouts, 1781 more assists, 30 less errors, and was involved in 300 more double plays. And yes, Smith's per game averages is superior to Concepcion in each of these categories.
Smith got to more balls, made more plays, and made the spectacular plays. No question of his credentials. Not so for Dave Concepcion. Even comparing offensive numbers, Smith is only bested in home runs and rbi's.
I'm not sure that "hype" is the correct word. But certain players add an element of personality and entertainment that transcend baseball skills, and that, rightly or wrongly, seem to contribute to their selection to the Hall of Fame.
One of my personal all-time favorite players, Kirby Pucket, made it in on the first try. His per-season numbers, yes, were fantastic, but his career was short. The fact that he was one of the most popular players in the country during his career, as well as the fact that he was a tremendous ambassador for the game, I'm sure didn't cost him any votes.
Ozzie has some of those same characteristics, in addition to his skills and his stats.
(I was a big-time Reds fan in the Concepcion days, and I'd love to see him there, so I understand your comparison; I just don't think I'd use as perjorative a term as "hype" for the extra that Ozzie has going for him.)