Bonds vs Kiner (Pirates Only)

[AlecBoy006]

Since they played around the same time, Pirates wise, I can't imagine it being unreasonable to compare them, remember everybody, this is PIRATES only.

Let's start with homeruns

Kiner: 301
Bonds 176

Point for Kiner.

RBI
Kiner 801
Bond 556

Another point for Kiner.

MVP's
Bonds 2
Kiner 0
Point for Bonds


All Stars
Kiner 5
Bonds 2

Well, Kiner may have 6, but he spent most of 53 with the Cubs.

Can't use the silver slugger argument.

Someone will have to calculate me with Batting Average and OBP, and SLG with the Pirates. I am [B]not[B] a mathematician

Hits
Kiner 1097
Bonds 984

As far as the MVP argument

1) I believe Bonds had more talent around him than Kiner.
2) Mantle won more MVP's than Babe Ruth, but was he better than him? Ok, maybe that was a little out there, maybe not. I don't know. But offensively, I see an advantage for Kiner. Remember, this is PIRATES only, who was better?

[JamesWest]

Since they played around the same time, Pirates wise, I can't imagine it being unreasonable to compare them, remember ?

Kiner was done playing almost 10 years before Bonds was born.

[AlecBoy006]

What is that supposed to mean? Who was better while they played for the Pirates?

[538280]

Bonds and it's not a hard choice. Kiner may have been a little bit better as a hitter, but the difference wasn't huge, 155 to 146 OPS+. And Barry with the Pirates was just a sick all around player. He could steal 50 bases a year and play the best left field in the leauge all while hitting like that. He was kind of like a mega-version of his father, Bobby.

[rockin500]

Kiner was done playing almost 10 years before Bonds was born.
slight guess here in that he is assuming they spent comparable number of years with the pirates. ;)

[AlecBoy006]

Close only counts in horse shoes, Mr. Chris.


I could say Ryan won a few more games than Sutton. Sure, a few. But still Ryan has the edge. Same thing for Kinder about the OPS+.


It depends on what you look at though. If you want a better hitter, it's Kiner, but if you want a better baserunner/defender it's Bonds.

[JamesWest]

What is that supposed to mean? Who was better while they played for the Pirates?

You said that they played around the same time. Kiner played for the Pirates about 40 years before Bonds did.

[AlecBoy006]

I was talking about the time they spent. I'm not the best with interpreting words.

[johnnypapa]

I believe I would have to go along with you on this one AlecBoy006. Kiner produced 378 RCAA as a Pirate (maybe a little more because he had a few AB with the Pirates in 53). Bonds as a Pirate produced 291. They both had seven full seasons with the Pirates.

[AlecBoy006]

YES! I get agreement. Feels good. Of course as a player, Bonds has the clear advantage, but you can't say Kiner wasn't the better Pirate IMO.

[Edgartohof]

Well, this is really quite obvious.

If you want agreement, make a poll like: Ruth vs. Deer (unless of course you supported Deer).

Kiners years with the Pirates were his peak years, whereas Bonds didn't really peak until after his stint with them.

So for the question at hand, I do have to go with Kiner.

[AlecBoy006]

But they both played 7 seasons. And Bonds won 2 MVP's, but I think Kiner's peak was out of control.

[Minstrel]

Close only counts in horse shoes, Mr. Chris.


I could say Ryan won a few more games than Sutton. Sure, a few. But still Ryan has the edge. Same thing for Kinder about the OPS+.

It matters by how much, because if Kiner was a better hitter by only a small amount, Bonds can (and, in my opinion, does) catch him through stolen bases and defense.

[Edgartohof]

I think Kiner's peak was out of control.

From 1947-1951 He had a 162 Game average of 50 HR's!!!! Including a career high of 54 in 1949.

The guy was a monster with the bat. His big problem was that he couldn't consistently hit for a high average, never putting up back to back .280+ BA's. In fact, this is what he did year to year as far as BA goes:

1946 - .247
1947 - .313
1948 - .265
1949 - .310
1950 - .272
1951 - .309
1952 - .244
1953 - .279
1954 - .285
1955 - .243

Up...Down...Up....Down

[johnnypapa]

It matters by how much, because if Kiner was a better hitter by only a small amount, Bonds can (and, in my opinion, does) catch him through stolen bases and defense.



Runs Created factors in stolen bases in it's formula and Kiner still comes out ahead by about 100 runs created above average in those seven seasons. Kiner also played on a team with much less talent.

Bonds fielding does bring him closer though.

[johnnypapa]

Kiners years with the Pirates were his peak years, whereas Bonds didn't really peak until after his stint with them.



Pretty much Kiner's whole career were peak years.

[Minstrel]

Runs Created factors in stolen bases in it's formula and Kiner still comes out ahead by about 100 runs created above average in those seven seasons. Kiner also played on a team with much less talent.

Bonds fielding does bring him closer though.

Looking at WARP3, which includes batting, stolen bases and fielding, Bonds comes out well ahead. Going year by year for each of them, as Pirates:

Kiner.........Bonds
3.9............5.8
11.1..........8.5
9.5............8.5
10.8..........9.2
7.8............12.9
10.3..........12.1
6.7............13.8
1.4

So, despite Kiner playing one extra year as a Pirate, Bonds still ends up with more value, 70.8 wins above replacement compared to Kiner's 61.5 wins above replacement.

Kiner's offense was really variable, mixing MVP-caliber offensive seasons with good to very good offensive seasons. Bonds' offensive ability just kept rising from good to great. Also Kiner brought below average defense, while Bonds was stellar defensively as a Pirate.

[KCGHOST]

I really prefer Kiner in this one. He has a significant advantage as an offensive player despite playing his his games in Forbes Field. Bonds does have a strong defensive advantage and it might be enough to offset Kiner's offensive advantage in the minds of others.

[johnnypapa]

[QUOTE=Minstrel]Looking at WARP3QUOTE]



I'm familiar with BP's Warp3. I just wish I new how they formulate it. How they factor in fielding, etc. Anybody know?

[Minstrel]

I'm familiar with BP's Warp3. I just wish I new how they formulate it. How they factor in fielding, etc. Anybody know?

I believe Clay Davenport has described his fielding metrics in an edition of their yearly book, but I did find this rough description by Derek Zumsteg on BP's site:


Recent developments have taken a markedly different approach. Baseball Prospectus has for years published Clay Davenport's Fielding Translations, which begins by defining an overall value for the team and then dividing it up between fielders and hitters. In BP 2002 there's a long, detailed explanation of all this that I'm simply not going to do justice to. Fielding Translations assigns responsibility for hits 70% to fielders and 30% to pitchers; home runs, bases on balls, hit batters, and strikeouts are all assigned to the pitcher, and then these stats are crunched to produce Equivalent Averages for the fielders and pitchers. They are calculated as:

* Pitcher's EqA = (2H + 3HR + 1.5(BB + HBP)) / (3 * (IP + H + BB + HBP))
* Fielding EqA = (2H + 1.5(E)) / (3*IP + H)

Then you compare the ratio of the two in order to assign the runs the team allowed, do a little comparison work to league averages to figure out what they should have given up in the same number of innings, and you come up with the number of runs the team's defense saved or cost, overall. Then these runs have to be assigned, and that's done by figuring the plays made by a fielder above average for their position, using some really complicated formulas I want you to go buy the book to see. What it does do, though, is deal with many of the issues we see in Fielding Runs. For instance, by looking at the situation a play occurs in, players aren't credited or penalized for assists v. putouts that are team-dependent (for instance, a second baseman on a team with excellent pitching would get fewer double play opportunities than one on a terrible team, and systems that blindly weigh double plays will overrate the bad one).

[AlecBoy006]

16 votes so far.

Bonds 9
Kiner 7

Even if I 9 people disagree with me, and 7 agree (I didn't vote.) I'm under the assumption I created a good poll. :)

[Wee Willie]

You assume correctly.

[AlecBoy006]

Thanks Willie :)

[yanks0714]

16 votes so far.

Bonds 9
Kiner 7

Even if I 9 people disagree with me, and 7 agree (I didn't vote.) I'm under the assumption I created a good poll. :)

Good poll, Alec.

I voted for Bonds based on his considerable advantages in defense and speed although I think Kiner was ahead of his as a hitter.

But reading some of the posts in support of Kiner my opinion could be changed on this one.

[Murderers Row]

Bonds and it's not a hard choice. Kiner may have been a little bit better as a hitter, but the difference wasn't huge, 155 to 146 OPS+. And Barry with the Pirates was just a sick all around player. He could steal 50 bases a year and play the best left field in the leauge all while hitting like that. He was kind of like a mega-version of his father, Bobby.

He stole 50 bases once. 35 bases a year sounds more like it.

[AlecBoy006]

Thanks yanks.

As I mentioned earlier, there was no silver slugger award, but good god, if they handed them out in Kiner's rookie season, it deserves to be called the Kiner Award.

[Iron Jaw]

From 1947-1951 He had a 162 Game average of 50 HR's!!!! Including a career high of 54 in 1949.

The guy was a monster with the bat. His big problem was that he couldn't consistently hit for a high average, never putting up back to back .280+ BA's. In fact, this is what he did year to year as far as BA goes:

1946 - .247
1947 - .313
1948 - .265
1949 - .310
1950 - .272
1951 - .309
1952 - .244
1953 - .279
1954 - .285
1955 - .243

Up...Down...Up....Down

And don't forget, Kiner did it in Forbe's Field, which was not a good HR hitter's park by any means.

[Iron Jaw]

Too bad for Kiner that the Pirates of his time were absolutely awful as a team.

[AlecBoy006]

So What if they were?

[Iron Jaw]

So What if they were?

Players from last place teams rarely get the recognition that players from competitive teams do. For instance, despite some tremendous seasons, Kiner was never a league MVP. Had the Pirates been at the top, or at least competing for the pennant, Kiner could have very well won the award. Interestingly enough, despite Kiner's fine stats on the field he had heated salary disputes with Pirate GM Branch Rickey. Rickey told Kiner that the Pirates finished 8th (last) with him and could easily do the same without him. Being on a contender could have seriously elevated his salary. But in Kiner's day, a player was bonded to a team for life unless the team traded, waived or released him. Even if he retired and came back, the club still had the rights to him......such was life in baseball prior to the mid-70's.

Bonds played on some pretty good clubs in Pittsburgh - clubs that lost the playoffs but were good nevertheless. By the time Kiner played on a good team - it was the final season of his career in Cleveland. Ralph only played ten seasons and retired at the age of 32 citing regular back problems as the reason for the early out. The impact he made was good enough for the Hall of Fame though.

[AlecBoy006]

Kiner played for CHC and CLE