reno cool
Fuck You Mocha Joe
- Since
- Jan 29, 2010
- Messages
- 20,500
- Score
- 1,280
- Tokens
- 0
sounds like you are making a point, why not?
Noticed something interesting when comparing Bonds and WIlliams by era.
League BA during careers
Williams: .277
Bonds: .263
Leagues OBP
Williams: .356
Bonds: .333
Leagues SLUG
Williams: .409
Bonds: .410
Almost identical slugging percentages for their leagues, with much lower OBP for Bonds'.
Not really making a point, just a discrepancy I thought was interesting.
League OBP was above .360 six times in Williams' career. Highest it ever was in Bonds' was .344.
When you compare them to the leagues they played in, the seemingly gigantic gap in William's OBP lead is much slimmer.
Williams' OBP was 1.35x higher than the league for his career.
Bonds' was 1.33x higher than the league for his career.
As for power:
Williams' ISO was 2.19x higher than the league average.
Bonds' ISO was 2.10x higher than the league average.
And then there's OPS+, which has Williams at 190 and Bonds at 182.
Really close between the two of them, across the board. Biggest gap is due to BA. But Bonds almost dominated his era as an offensive player to as great an extent as Williams.
Williams was almost certainly the best hitter of all time. But I'm not sure the gap is so huge between him and Bonds that I'm willing to overlook defense and baserunner, where Bonds is the clear winner.
Noticed something interesting when comparing Bonds and WIlliams by era.
League BA during careers
Williams: .277
Bonds: .263
Leagues OBP
Williams: .356
Bonds: .333
Leagues SLUG
Williams: .409
Bonds: .410
Almost identical slugging percentages for their leagues, with much lower OBP for Bonds'.
Not really making a point, just a discrepancy I thought was interesting.
League OBP was above .360 six times in Williams' career. Highest it ever was in Bonds' was .344.
When you compare them to the leagues they played in, the seemingly gigantic gap in William's OBP lead is much slimmer.
Williams' OBP was 1.35x higher than the league for his career.
Bonds' was 1.33x higher than the league for his career.
As for power:
Williams' ISO was 2.19x higher than the league average.
Bonds' ISO was 2.10x higher than the league average.
And then there's OPS+, which has Williams at 190 and Bonds at 182.
Really close between the two of them, across the board. Biggest gap is due to BA. But Bonds almost dominated his era as an offensive player to as great an extent as Williams.
Williams was almost certainly the best hitter of all time. But I'm not sure the gap is so huge between him and Bonds that I'm willing to overlook defense and baserunner, where Bonds is the clear winner.
And a lot of Bonds OPS came from intentional walks.
Williams had to earn his way onto base.
Facts are funny.
versus 86.
how many Intentional Bases on Balls did Williams get in 1947?
Oh My!!!
Babe Ruth NEVER got intentionally walked???? no wonder these guys raked... until 1955 no pitcher was ever smart enough to issue an intentional pass?
but that's not the funniest part.
taking his calculator and ball and goin home boys!!!!
our loss, I guess
but what WAS funny is not that they didn't track a statistic until 1955 that you cited as 688 vs 86 as FACT!
But that if you remove all of Bond's intentional Walks that year, his OPS would have still been better then Ted William's best
or do we think he would tap back to the pitcher on all 120 of those free passes?
do I need to do the math for you at a slugging % of .812 for 120 ab's (of which he'd get walked about 25 times anyways) leaving 95 official ab's to slug .812 in for 77 more total bases. and so on and so forth....punch the numbers, punch the numbers, carry the 1, hit = on the calculator
Bond's OPS Comes in around 1.300 in 2004.
Still better then Ted's best year, batting against only white devils
taking his calculator and ball and goin home boys!!!!
our loss, I guess
but what WAS funny is not that they didn't track a statistic until 1955 that you cited as 688 vs 86 as FACT!
But that if you remove all of Bond's intentional Walks that year, his OPS would have still been better then Ted William's best
or do we think he would tap back to the pitcher on all 120 of those free passes?
do I need to do the math for you at a slugging % of .812 for 120 ab's (of which he'd get walked about 25 times anyways) leaving 95 official ab's to slug .812 in for 77 more total bases. and so on and so forth....punch the numbers, punch the numbers, carry the 1, hit = on the calculator
Bond's OPS Comes in around 1.300 in 2004.
Still better then Ted's best year, batting against only white devils
What? You want me to regress OPS for these guys too?
HINT: It's going to look almost identical. In fact, it will probably be a lot more pronounced.
Williams had a ridiculous OPS anyway. Bonds wasn't as good as Williams even with the help of steroids.