Bonds vs. Williams

[drstrangelove]

the same Ted Williams who REFUSED to go to the 1946 pennant celebration party and then lied about going to see someone in the hospital when he realized what an ass he was
what a great teammate

Is this it? Is this the one that's going to trump Barry. Let's see:

"It's called talent. I just have it. I can't explain it. You either have it or you don't."

-Barry Lamar Bonds
September, 2001, ESPNMag

2001....as in.... in between 1998 and 2004.

"You either have it or you don't."

Wow. There is NOTHING on Williams that approaches this. What exactly do you call it when someone is using something secretly to make themselves look better than they are and pretends it's just natural talent? Hmmmmm......

Ted Williams did not come to my party and fibbed. I wish he could have been like Barry, who won't come either but will tell us how much "talent" he has.

the hyperbole of going to a dead man;s funeral 50 years after he was a jackass teammate

No. You see, hyperbole means exaggeration, as in they walked 1,300 miles over hot coals. Saying they drove was either a fact or a lie. It seems like hyperbole because well we know that it takes a lot of friendship to do that....

ted williams travels to west coast for baseball games = zero

Meaningless. Bonds had planes, Williams didn't. And it would have been strange for Williams to go to the west coast when no teams were there. Moreover, it has NOTHING to do with Williams having more WAR than Bonds. Everyone traveled the same during Williams' time as they did the same in Bonds' time. It doesn't give Williams an advantage or Bonds a disadvantage.

ted williams facing an integrated league and a competitive league = zero

It was zero % difference unless you want to post an adjustment and support. Simply saying "it was not integrated" may sound important, but without something else it flutters in the wind.

ted williams facing relief pitchers who were specialists = zero

More statements with zero % attached to it. More importantly, it has nothing to do with Bonds until you explain it. Having or not having specialists does not change the fact of how much WAR they had since everyone else in their league faced the same conditions.

ted williams playing full seasons after age 30 = almost zero

More pesky stats.

Crediting Williams for 223 games in 1952-53. His hands are still tied from before. We aren't going to hog tie him as well, right? He was a fighter pilot in Korea. Or do we want to punish him for fighting for his country?

Williams played 1108 games from age 31-41. We'll add 223 for his time in Korea. That's now 1331 games. But he has a 154 game schedule, not 162, so we'll have to adjust the 1331 to 1400.

Ages 30-41

Williams 1400 games
Bonds 1435 games

Now what shall we give Ted Williams from age 31 to 41, assuming he was consuming HGH and steroids like Bonds from ages 34-39? Oh ok...ok. The horse has changed colors. Seems like, with no REAL help from syringes, Mr T ballgame was the horse who kept playing through aches and pains and injuries while the primadonna was the slacker.

ted williams benefitting from a freaking bandbox that uniformly over inflates offense = MAXIMUM
see 1951 splits for example

Why cherry pick? Here are the facts for all the years in question.

Bonds H/A HR splits 1986-98 203-208
Williams H/A HR splits 1939-51 158-165

[drstrangelove]

Have you read "The Teammates"? Good book.

I haven't. I'm going to add a bunch to my Kindle and become a bookaholic. I'll happily add this one.

[pheasant]

I tried but I couldn't recalculate your numbers. I re-did them below.

1) Williams had 81.7 WAR between 1939-51. (I think you picked up his oWAR.) No biggie.
2) I've tried to recreate the numbers but to no avail. I'm particularly confused as to how Bonds in a 10 year stretch can have 82.1 WAR while playing in a 162 game schedule, can be calculated to 8.9 / WAR per year in a 162 game schedule, since that implies a calculated total of 89 WAR. Where did the extra 7 WAR come from?
3) can you explain why we are using Williams performance from ages 20-23, but dropping Bonds performance from ages 21-23?

In the meantime, these are the numbers that I think represent this:

Williams 81.7 WAR in 10 years adjusted to 85.9 for 162 game schedules, equates to 8.59 WAR per year
Bonds 96.9 WAR in 13 years (no adjustment needed), equates to 7.45 WAR per year.

Williams is 15% higher.

A) Of course, Bonds had the benefit of not playing at age 20 (when he was still not ready for the majors.) Had Bonds played at age 20, like age 21 (when he got 3.3 WAR), he would have averaged 7.16 WAR over 14 years, giving Williams a 20% edge.

B) And then, Williams missed 3 years at the peak of his career (43-45). Had he played in those 3 years at the same level as 1940-41-46-47, he would have added 30 WAR and 3 years bringing his total to 111.7 WAR (adjusted to 117.5) over 13 years and averaging 9.04 WAR a year, or 21.3% over Bonds.

Williams is 15% better IF you ignore BOTH Bonds not playing at 20 (while he was not ready) and Williams missing 3 peak years. The proverbial hand is being tied behind his back and Williams still has a healthy lead.

I averaged WAR per 162 games played, not scheduled. Williams does get docked a bit for that. However, I have a pretty steep adjustment for league quality. Also, I am more of a peak guy than a running total type of guy. I give about 70% of my weight for 10 year peak. That's why I'd put Albert Belle in the Hall, despite his short career. I rate Mickey Mantle higher than most due to his incredible 10 year run. He wasn't great the other years, probably due to his health and heavy drinking. As it sits, I have Bonds ranked 4th overall, Mantle 5th, and Williams 8th. Bonds' 180+ OPS+ from 1990-1998 while also swiping 35+ bags a year and 8 gold gloves is too much for Williams' hitting to overcome, especially when I doc Williams 10% for league quality. Mantle's 180 OPS+ over 10 years while playing centerfield decently while swiping bases at an 80% clip squeaks by Williams too. If I added more weight to longevity, counting numbers, and added lost years to the war, then Williams wins. I do have Williams as the 2nd best hitter ever, behind Babe Ruth.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

Ted Williams did not come to my party and fibbed

you are the one extolling Ted's virtuoso greatness as a teammate

facts and history differ with your opinion

he was moody, argumentative, fought with teammates over his refusal to give in the the shift, tempermental and it affected him so much he did not go to the celebration in the ONE year he won something

great teammate my ass

you also don;t seem to understand park illusions

Ted WIlliams out hit Joe DiMaggio .344 to .325 over their careers

take them out of their home parks and Dimmagio out hits Williams .333 to .328, Williams benefitted from Fenway to the tune of .361

Williams was a moody. tempermental, selfish, no base running, no fielding, no full season player who benefitted from a park illusion that inflated his stats and played in an era with no relief specialists and no integration

those are all FACTS

[drstrangelove]

I averaged WAR per 162 games played, not scheduled. Williams does get docked a bit for that. However, I have a pretty steep adjustment for league quality. Also, I am more of a peak guy than a running total type of guy. I give about 70% of my weight for 10 year peak. That's why I'd put Albert Belle in the Hall, despite his short career. I rate Mickey Mantle higher than most due to his incredible 10 year run. He wasn't great the other years, probably due to his health and heavy drinking. As it sits, I have Bonds ranked 4th overall, Mantle 5th, and Williams 8th. Bonds' 180+ OPS+ from 1990-1998 while also swiping 35+ bags a year and 8 gold gloves is too much for Williams' hitting to overcome, especially when I doc Williams 10% for league quality. Mantle's 180 OPS+ over 10 years while playing centerfield decently while swiping bases at an 80% clip squeaks by Williams too. If I added more weight to longevity, counting numbers, and added lost years to the war, then Williams wins. I do have Williams as the 2nd best hitter ever, behind Babe Ruth.

Ok, cool. So we did things differently. I was really focused on your math for WAR per year, not your conclusions or adjustments. thanks

[drstrangelove]

Ted Williams did not come to my party and fibbed

you are the one extolling Ted's virtuoso greatness as a teammate

facts and history differ with your opinion

he was moody, argumentative, fought with teammates over his refusal to give in the the shift, tempermental and it affected him so much he did not go to the celebration in the ONE year he won something

great teammate my ass

you also don;t seem to understand park illusions

Ted WIlliams out hit Joe DiMaggio .344 to .325 over their careers

take them out of their home parks and Dimmagio out hits Williams .333 to .328, Williams benefitted from Fenway to the tune of .361

Williams was a moody. tempermental, selfish, no base running, no fielding, no full season player who benefitted from a park illusion that inflated his stats and played in an era with no relief specialists and no integration

those are all FACTS

We're comparing Bond to Williams. Believe me, I can truly understand why one would prefer to compare Williams to DiMaggio, or Stan Musial, or Mother Teresa or Albert Einstein. Really. I can see why some folks won't mention the name Bonds in a post discussing Bonds vs Williams.

Compared to those Mother Teresa and Albert Einstein? Teddy loses every time. He'd be the first to admit.


But let's not make up a new thread here...let's deal with this one: BONDS VS WILLIAMS Not Williams vs DiMaggio or Williams vs Henderson or Williams vs Musial.

1)Bonds H/A HR splits 1986-98 203-208
Williams H/A HR splits 1939-51 158-165

It's not hard to see. Of course saying many many times what is not true may seem worthwhile. Williams had no advantage from Fenway.

2) WAR takes into account league, park, defense, and base running.

Williams 81.7 WAR in 10 years adjusted to 85.9 for 162 game schedules, equates to 8.59 WAR per year
Bonds 96.9 WAR in 13 years (no adjustment needed), equates to 7.45 WAR per year.

Williams is 15% higher. Under the most favorable means of measuring (Bonds not playing at 20 and Williams missing 3 peak years).

Williams is better.

3) Moody, argumentative and temperamental? Same applies to Bonds in spades. Which of his teammates will drive 1300 miles to his deathbed in 40 years?


4) "It's called talent. I just have it. I can't explain it. You either have it or you don't." -Barry Lamar Bonds September, 2001, ESPNMag Vol 4, no 19.

In 2005, MLB started testing players for talent.

5) Let's do a poll: Who will win? Who is the most likely person to use steroids: Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Joe DiMaggio or Barry Lamar Bonds? I wonder if this will work for the Sesame Street game.



Back to square one. One only has to justify a 20% adjustment in league quality. If it's a FACT, then show the math. Easy preazy.

[GiambiJuice]

you also don;t seem to understand park illusions

Ted WIlliams out hit Joe DiMaggio .344 to .325 over their careers

take them out of their home parks and Dimmagio out hits Williams .333 to .328, Williams benefitted from Fenway to the tune of .361

That's weak, Roy. Everyone knows OBP and SLG are more important than batting average and correlate better with run scoring.

OBP/SLG ON THE ROAD
Dimaggio .405/.610
Williams .467/.615

Yet you cite a (gasp!) FIVE point advantage in batting average for Dimaggio as proof that he was a better hitter on the road than Williams. 5 points in batting average overrides 62 points in OBP and 67 points in OPS??? You're a riot.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

That's weak, Roy. Everyone knows OBP and SLG are more important than batting average and correlate better with run scoring.

OBP/SLG ON THE ROAD
Dimaggio .405/.610
Williams .467/.615

Yet you cite a (gasp!) FIVE point advantage in batting average for Dimaggio as proof that he was a better hitter on the road than Williams. 5 points in batting average overrides 62 points in OBP and 67 points in OPS??? You're a riot.

There was also a knock on Williams for taking the close pitches in situations where a base hit with runners on might have better served his team. Of course we will never know, that was Ted's hitting philosphy and it worked for him but as you can see, hitting alone batting average and slugging close and Joe was a RH hitter. Your talking 5 points slugging difference. Seven of the top ten career batting averages are LH handed.
Only one RH batter in the last 80 years hit .325 or better, Dimaggio, Pujols a possibilty. Medwick .324, Foxx.323.
I don't think Joe was the hitter Ted was, how many were but the lefty righty batter plays a part.

Williams OBA and overall hitting is too much for Barry to overcome.

[bluesky5]

There was also a knock on Williams for taking the close pitches in situations where a base hit with runners on might have better served his team. Of course we will never know, that was Ted's hitting philosphy and it worked for him but as you can see, hitting alone batting average and slugging close and Joe was a RH hitter. Seven of the top ten career batting averages are LH handed.
Only one RH batter in the last 80 years hit .325 or better, Dimaggio, Pujols a possibilty. Medwick .324, Foxx.323.

I read his hitting book, can't remember the name, over the winter my freshman year of high school and adopted that philosophy. Worked great. Improved my hitting a lot. From tolerable to slightly above average. Saved me a lot of angst.

Thanks Ted.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I read his hitting book, can't remember the name, over the winter my freshman year of high school and adopted that philosophy. Worked great. Improved my hitting a lot. From tolerable to slightly above average. Saved me a lot of angst.

Thanks Ted.

Nio doubt Ted new the science of hitting like not many did.
I believe he got his start by speaking to Hornsby who told him........ get a good pitch to hit, worked for Roger, worked for Ted.

[Los Bravos]

If someone could just dig up a Williams quote praising Bob Gibson...

[SHOELESSJOE3]

If someone could just dig up a Williams quote praising Bob Gibson...

Did they ever face off, maybe an All Star Game, or was Ted gone before Bob came around.

[pheasant]

There was also a knock on Williams for taking the close pitches in situations where a base hit with runners on might have better served his team. Of course we will never know, that was Ted's hitting philosphy and it worked for him but as you can see, hitting alone batting average and slugging close and Joe was a RH hitter. Your talking 5 points slugging difference. Seven of the top ten career batting averages are LH handed.
Only one RH batter in the last 80 years hit .325 or better, Dimaggio, Pujols a possibilty. Medwick .324, Foxx.323.
I don't think Joe was the hitter Ted was, how many were but the lefty righty batter plays a part.

Williams OBA and overall hitting is too much for Barry to overcome.

In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.

[GiambiJuice]

In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.

Exactly.

And yet despite all these disadvantages, Ted was STILL a better hitter on the road than Dimaggio was.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Nio doubt Ted new the science of hitting like not many did.
I believe he got his start by speaking to Hornsby who told him........ get a good pitch to hit, worked for Roger, worked for Ted.

Didn't work so much for Mike Epstein. Maybe Bonds was on to something.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.

Should we factor that in with all hitters now, look at the pitching on the teams they played for and those that they hit against.
Did Musial face tougher pitching than Ted, only an example, where does it end.
Yes the Yankees did have the better pitching.
But if thats part of the game your using the pitching faced factor, and it is legit it does matter then I'm going to bring back the fact that Joe, like all RH hitters had the more unfavorable match up with RH pitchers, many more than there were LH pitchers.

1939-1951, only two RH batters batted .300. Dimaggio .322 and Appling .310.
1939-1951 LH .300 or better---.347-.347-.310-.308-.304-.303-.302-.300.
That is a hugh gap.
We know the lefthanded batters were not just born better, we do know why they dominate the hitters list, go back as far as you like.
Despite the fact that that many more RH batters in those years, a bigger pool of hitters, yet there were so many more LH .300 batters.
You could just say, tough luck Joe, your a righty or we could consider it.
I never said Joe was the hitter Ted was but when you factor in batting right against many more RH pitchers, the gap is not as wide as some think it is.
On the parks, does anyone had Joe on the road minus Fenway and Ted on the road minus Yankee Stadium

[TonyK]

Ted Williams, the .406 hitter in 1941, or Barry Bonds from whatever year you drum up before his PED's career began? I'll take '41 Ted on my fantasy team any day of the week.

Three of his teammates were his close friends for life. How many of us can say the same thing about our co-workers?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Ted Williams, the .406 hitter in 1941, or Barry Bonds from whatever year you drum up before his PED's career began? I'll take '41 Ted on my fantasy team any day of the week.

Three of his teammates were his close friends for life. How many of us can say the same thing about our co-workers?

I think there were a few incidents in Ted's life in Ted's life not positive.
Overall, not a bad guy, his own man and some didn't like that side of him but he stuck with it.
Teammates seem to speak well of him.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

One of my favorite Ted stories.
Called out on strikes, throws bat into air, bat strikes woman, she bleeds from the head. Not life threatening but scary, taken to hospital.
You can see Ted leaning on rail. Walks bck to the bench crying.
The woman, Gladys Heffernan.............housekeeper for Bosox General Manager Joe Cronin.
The woman is forgiving, not upset at all, she understands.
Later Ted buys her a very expensive watch.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Here is a follow up to that earlier post, had a problem uploading photos.

[TonyK]

One of my favorite Ted stories.
Called out on strikes, throws bat into air, bat strikes woman, she bleeds from the head. Not life threatening but scary, taken to hospital.
You can see Ted leaning on rail. Walks bck to the bench crying.
The woman, Gladys Heffernan.............housekeeper for Bosox General Manager Joe Cronin.
The woman is forgiving, not upset at all, she understands.
Later Ted buys her a very expensive watch.

He wore his emotions on his sleeve for sure. The 1958 photo reminded me of how tanned he would be from his endless fishing trips.

[TonyK]

Didn't work so much for Mike Epstein. Maybe Bonds was on to something.

...or on something?

[9RoyHobbsRF]

thank god he matured as he got older - 1958 would have been 19 years since he broke into the majors

Here is a follow up to that earlier post, had a problem uploading photos.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

In addition, the road stats don't even tell the story. Williams is at a disadvantage when using just road stats for a couple of different reasons.

Dimaggio now has the advantage of hitting in 11 games at Boston to Williams' 0. Secondly, Williams has the disadvantage of hitting in 11 games at Yankee Stadium while Dimaggio hits in 0. Also, the Yankees pitchers were considerably tougher to hit than Boston's pitchers. Unfortunately for Williams, he had to face those tough Yankee pitchers 22 times a year. Despite Boston being a better scoring park, the Yankees staff gave up fewer runs ever year during Williams' and Dimaggio's time(1939-1951). The difference was an average of .69 runs per game over those 10 years(excludes war years, of course). That is a huge discrepancy in runs given up by Yankee pitchers vs Red Sox pitchers.

The old Yankee Stadium was constructed to be a haven for LH hitters, especially LH pull hitters

it was not a disadvantage, it was a huge advantage if you were a LH pull hitter

Williams was as big a LH pull hitter as there was in history

your premise is dead wrong, and therefore your conclusion is not well founded

[Joltin' Joe]

Later Ted buys her a very expensive watch.

Yep a gold Rolex.