For your own purposes, why not, but I think the general utility of such concordances would be limited.
a. Because
Strack numbers are not widely cited by dealers and collectors. So very few of them would feel the need to use your concordance.
b. Because once you have the description of a coin, and its
Cohen number, which both
RIC and
Strack cite, it is fairly easy to find a coin in
Strack for which you have an
RIC number, and
vice versa.
c. Seaby's
Roman Silver Coins, whose primary numeration follows
Cohen, cites for each coin the equivalent
catalogue numbers in
BMC,
RIC, and
Strack. So that
work can be used as a concordance
RIC -
Strack or
Strack -
RIC for all of Hadrian's silver coins, though not of course for
his bronze coins or
aurei.
d. Because a new edition of
RIC for
Hadrian is due to appear within the next couple of years. After that, no one will be using or trying to find the old
RIC numbers. Whether the new
RIC will itself cite
Strack, I do not know, though I think it should!