Overall, who was more valuable?
2007-11-10 04:05:19 · 16 answers · asked by PearApple 7 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Osborne Earl Smith saved more runs scored than Dale Murphy drove in! End of discussion. Ozzie literally did backflips over the compitition throughout the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s.
And, yes, we're still going crazy over his first left-handed home run ever in Game 5 of the NLCS against the Dodgers in 1985!
2007-11-10 11:57:58 · answer #1 · answered by pricehillsaint 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Ozzie smith easily. He was a gold glove fielder who had speed, hit for average and was the emotional leader. He had a good on base percentage and had the best range of any shortstop in both leagues. He took walks and could steal bases. Dale Murphy hit for power and wasn't a great fielder nor did he have speed. He struck out a lot more than Ozzie on average and was merely a power hitter and rbi producer. Ozzie had more overall VALUE to hit team.
2007-11-10 13:45:49 · answer #2 · answered by gemeneye25@prodigy.net 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ozzie Smith for several reasons, the most important being that his prime lasted for far longer. Murphy pretty much was done as an effective player by the time he was 32.
Second, Smith's teams were playing for more games of importance than Murphy's. That's not Murphy's fault, but it should be considered.
Third, Murphy was actually an over-rated fielder who was pretty much sub-standard while Ozzie Smith is the best of modern times (Baseball Prospectus).
Smith was not that good a hitter, but he was good for a shortstop. Replacing him would have been far harder than getting something like equal value for Dale Murphy.
2007-11-10 14:51:56 · answer #3 · answered by Bucky 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Good question. One borderline HOF'er (Dale) vs Ozzie. Both were very vital to the success of their clubs but I will go with Ozzie on this one and not simply because he made the hall. The HOF is meaningless with your question.
Dale was no slouch, a two time MVP. He made the sacrifice of changing positions early in his career. Definitely a "team" player like we rarely see. Dale finished with a mediocre lifetime BA for an offensive player (no slouch in center either) and that likely kept him out of the hall. Ozzie, the ultimate defensive threat if you can be one in baseball, got the gold though with a WS win. Let's face it the World Series delineates the most valuable when we look back. How valuable is a player if the team never gets to the top?
We give it to the Wizzard in a very close one here. Two great, "clean" players. Good question.
2007-11-10 17:01:16 · answer #4 · answered by Celestine C 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think "in their prime" both players were very valuable to there teams. Of course Ozzie will get more votes because he was a shortstop...good speed, glove, bat, and attitude! But Murph was the same way..good glove, bat, speed (younger day), and attitude...Both were great in the club house and team leaders! Ozzie NLCS Mvp in '85...Murphy '82, 83 league Mvp...Ozzie 13 gold gloves...Murphy 5 gold gloves...Murphy also had 4 straight years of 162 games played(is that a leader or what!) Anyway...i think both would be a good pick!! :)
2007-11-10 12:27:50 · answer #5 · answered by kbenson55 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Oz helped at a Hall of Fame level for a lot of WINNING teams. So I would go with him. Murphy was one of the best all around outfielders for several years in the early 80's but the Braves were pretty bad back then. They were both great, but Oz was one of a kind.
2007-11-10 19:46:38 · answer #6 · answered by Eho 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I was building a team, I'd probably take Ozzie, but might take Murf instead depending on how my roster was constructed, as well as the tendencies of my pitching staff and my home ballpark.
Hard to go wrong with either one. But Ozzie is harder to replace. And while he had no power to bother speaking of, he really was quite good at getting on base, and that is a valuable skill.
2007-11-10 13:07:29 · answer #7 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ozzie no doubt. Ozzie brought this 'we can do anything' mentality. Ozzie had the power to spark his team with an extraordinary catch or play. Without the wizard the cards would have gotten nowhere.
2007-11-10 12:09:47 · answer #8 · answered by moneyball1011 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ozzie, because the Braves sucked during Murphy's prime - they sucked with him and they sucked without him. I was a big Braves fan as a kid in the 80s - it was tough.
2007-11-10 15:11:32 · answer #9 · answered by voluntarheel 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Best way to answer that question is to ask which player was on more playoff teams and actually won it all? Ozzie Smith is your man.
2007-11-10 18:39:16 · answer #10 · answered by The Reverend 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋