What if Dave Kingman had 500 HRs. HOFER?

[Fuzzy Bear]

And Johnny Damon if he had 3,000 hits.

Some perspective needs to be gained here.

There has been comparisons of Kingman to Killebrew and Damon. Let's put this in perspective. Harmon Killebrew led the AL in HRs 6 times, had a 60.4 career WAR. Johnny Damon had a 56.3 career WAR. Dave Kingman, he of the 442 career lifetime HRs, had a 17.3 career WAR. Even Jose Canseco has 42.4 WAR.

What does that fact say to you?

Bill James discussed this once. His point about Kingman was that he could do only one thing in baseball, and that was hit HRs. In this respect, his real comps are Gorman Thomas and Rob Deer. Even in these cases, Rob Deer was an acceptable corner outfielder and Gorman Thomas was a decent Center Fielder. Kingman was a defensive liability wherever he was placed. Had he been a career First Baseman he MAY have had better WAR, but he also struck out a lot, was not patient at the plate, and was not good at the skill of putting the bat on the ball. He had the gift of hitting HRs, but that was his only skill. 28.06% of his hits were HRs. That's a high percentage, and it's reflective of a guy who's strong, but who didn't make contact much. Kingman's defense was, of course a massive negative. Let's get real here. Kingman's HR total caused people to think he was better than he was, and they thought "If only there was an opening at 1B!". Even as a regular 1B, Kingman wouldn't have gone longer than he did, and wouldn't have made the HOF.

[redban]

Had he reached 500 HR, then yes. He would have made the HOF. The writers would have protected the 500 HR milestone.

[milladrive]

I loved Kingman as a kid and have an entire album of his baseball cards and autographs. Homerun hitters are a lot of fun to watch.

Heh, indeed, Kingman was my childhood hero as well. I was 11 when he came to the Mets in 1975, and that high elbow was a staple of my boyhood batting stance (as awful a stance as that really is to teach kids). And watching the races with Schmidt those years is key in my memory banks.

At the time, I believed losing Kingman on June 15, 1977, was right up there with the loss of Seaver! Lol

I felt cheated when he did well with the Cubs, and was ecstatic when the Mets got him back.

Of course, I now have long realized, it's no coincidence the Mets became a winner when he left the second time.

[White Knight]

in the end Kong was still Adam Dunn with a stache.

Dunn knew how to take a walk though, Kingman didn't.

[pedrosrotatorcuff]

Without reading through the thread (and this point has probably been made several times over): no, and the .236 BA was no doubt what made his case DOA. If Andruw Jones will have to work to get in at .254 in an era where it is de-emphasized and offense is far from his primary skill, Kong would have absolutely had no shot 25-30 years ago.

Screen Shot 2022-03-19 at 3.58.18 PM.png
No Hall of Famers here among Kingman's most similars–not even close, and while if he got to 500 this list would be very different, in the end Kong was still Adam Dunn with a stache.

[scottmitchell74]

Kingman had 6,677 at bats, and he hit a home run every 15.11 of them. That ties him for 10th all time among retired players who put in more than 10 seasons. To reach that level a batter has to have just super elite hitting skills.

Could he have approached his at bats in a different way, and put together a more conventionally acceptable record, with fewer HR but also fewer K and a higher OB%? Did he just decide to go for home runs and to heck with anything else? And, was that the right decision?

This is a really good point. With the possible exception of Cobb and maybe Ichiro, just about every player in history wants to hit more HRs if they can. I don't think Sky King gets enough credit for literally...not figuratively...literally being one of the best HR hitters in human history.

Baseball is both unique and harsh in its view of specialists. Most other sports celebrates specialists. Some sports (football) are a collection of specialists.

Kingman was a specialist at the single hardest thing to do in sports and he did it well.

[Mongoose]

Kingman was potentially really good. Put him in a better lineup in his prime, and his average would have been about 20 points higher, and he would have driven in 100 per year. Through about 1980 he was considered comparable to Schmidt as an offensive player. He just kind of became increasingly one dimensional.

Kingman and the press were also mutually adversarial. He could have hit 600HR, and probably still would have been outside looking in.

What's up with all these zombie threads suddenly being reanimated, and roaming around?

[Bamay22]

No he wouldn’t be.

[White Knight]

It's a huge frustration to me to this day that Kingman wasn't allowed to put the voters to the test.

And Johnny Damon if he had 3,000 hits.

[Cougar]

You are probably right, I guess. However, I grew up with fast running/great defense teams that didn't rely on home runs to score (other than a George Hendrick or a Jack Clark in the order)! As a kid, I always preferred the stolen base guys to the home run hitters. Ironically, though, at the same time I really liked Kingman, Gorman Thomas, Tony Armas, Steve Balboni and Ron Kittle! They couldn't steal a base if the catcher left the field for a pitch or two, and didn't contribute much more offensively than the home run. Thomas was a pretty fast runner when he was young, though.

So was Armas; in fact he was a very good outfielder. I think Kong was pretty athletic when he started out too.

[scottmitchell74]

It's a huge frustration to me to this day that Kingman wasn't allowed to put the voters to the test.

[willshad]

Kingman had 6,677 at bats, and he hit a home run every 15.11 of them. That ties him for 10th all time among retired players who put in more than 10 seasons. To reach that level a batter has to have just super elite hitting skills.

Could he have approached his at bats in a different way, and put together a more conventionally acceptable record, with fewer HR but also fewer K and a higher OB%? Did he just decide to go for home runs and to heck with anything else? And, was that the right decision?

Kingman was ahead of his time. if he was playing now he would fit right in and probably be a huge star.

[westsidegrounds]

Kingman had 6,677 at bats, and he hit a home run every 15.11 of them. That ties him for 10th all time among retired players who put in more than 10 seasons. To reach that level a batter has to have just super elite hitting skills.

Could he have approached his at bats in a different way, and put together a more conventionally acceptable record, with fewer HR but also fewer K and a higher OB%? Did he just decide to go for home runs and to heck with anything else? And, was that the right decision?

[JR Hart]

This is a BLAST!!

[Dude Paskert]

I was reading a blurb, and a story about Dave Kingman was mentioned. I was wondering if anyone knew more about it...

When Dave Kingman was with the Cubs, perhaps 1980 (maybe late 1970's), he was playing left field one day. He made an errant throw from the outfield, it went into the dugout, down the entrance to the clubhouse and ended up bouncing into a toilet. :ooo: It might have been against Houston or LA, and I think it was on the road.

I'd love more details if you know any.

"Crappy throw, Dave."

This story is in the book "Playing The Field", FWIW.