Bobby Bonds and Andre Dawson: How does your Power/Speed Number Affect HOF-worthiness

Fuzzy Bear · 07-18-2002, 05:29 PM

The Top 20 Power/Speed numbers have all been compiled by players who have begun their careers from the mid-60s on, with the exception of Mays, Aaron, and Vada Pinson.

The top 20 Power/Speed totals:

Barry Bonds----------------522.22
Rickey Henderson---------480.18
Willie Mays------------------447.05
Bobby Bonds---------------386.01
Joe Morgan-----------------385.90
Andre Dawson-------------365.78
Hank Aaron-----------------364.22
Reggie Jackson------------324.56
Paul Molitor-----------------319.61
Eric Davis--------------------311.94

The power/speed number was a stat to measure value of a player who had the combination of power and speed manifested in HR and extra base power couples with baserunning and base-stealing ability.

Looking at the Top 10 Power/Speed group, Bobby Bonds and Andre Dawson are in the middle.

Are these guys HOF-worthy? It seems there is more support for Dawson than Bonds, in that Dawson hit many more career (438 to 332 in a longer career).
Bobby Bonds, however, was far more patient at the plate and had a higher OBP, a fact that was not recognized while he was active (people were always dwelling on his strikeouts). Bobby Bonds played RF because of Mays, and Ken Henderson, but he had CF ability. Dawson moved to RF as he aged, and his knees ground down.

If these guys are not HOF-worthy, I would like to ask what the value of the Power-Speed number as a statistic to assess a player's ability is. The Power-Speed number was formulated to calculate the effect a player who can rake and burn has on winning. So I ask you: can a Power/Speed number be such as to qualify a player for the HOF, or is it a meaningless stat? If Bobby and Hawk are as high as they are on the Power/Speed rankings, is that an indicator of quality? Are they HOFers? Is one of them a HOFer. More importantly, is the Power/Speed number something we should look at or forget about, in general?

Golden Bear · 07-18-2002, 05:32 PM

How is this number calculated?

Skip · 07-18-2002, 05:36 PM

Regardless of the computational details, I can say I wouldn't be mad about any of the guys on your list being put in the HOF with the exception of Eric Davis. I agree Bonds gets unfairly dismissed at times, but he's marginal too. If he's in - ok, if not - ok too.

If people like Torre will eventually get in on a combination of managerial and playing career, perhaps Bonds should get in on a contribution to genetics statute or something similar - tying his playing career together with Barry's.

Fuzzy Bear · 07-18-2002, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Golden Bear
How is this number calculated?

(HR x SB x 2) / (HR + SB)

This formula is designed so that if a player hits 30 HRs and steals 30 bases, his power/speed number will be 30.

Golden Bear · 07-18-2002, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skip
Regardless of the computational details, I can say I wouldn't be mad about any of the guys on your list being put in the HOF with the exception of Eric Davis. I agree Bonds gets unfairly dismissed at times, but he's marginal too. If he's in - ok, if not - ok too.

If people like Torre will eventually get in on a combination of managerial and playing career, perhaps Bonds should get in on a contribution to genetics statute or something similar - tying his playing career together with Barry's.

I agree 100%. Dawson should definitely be in, and I could take or leave Daddy Bonds. Eric Davis, unfortunately, was unable to reach his potential, and just didn't quite accomplish enough over the course fo his career.

pwdennis · 07-18-2002, 06:04 PM

To me Power/Speed is the most bogus statistic going. One SB is not worth one HR. THe ratio measures something of little value. True, most of the highly ranked players according to this measure are pretty good players but that is largely coincidence.

The measure might be a little more meaningful if a correction was done for caught stealings say Net Steals = Steals less 2x caught stealing so that the equation is

(HR x NS x 2) / (HR + NS)

Would you rather a 30-30 man or a 55-5 man ?
Would you take Andre Dawson in preference to Hammerin' Hank ?

Is a 30-30 man who gets caught stealing 20 times worth as much as a 30-30 man who gets caught stealing twice ? They will both have the same Power/Speed number according to the base formula

Skip · 07-18-2002, 06:08 PM

Good points all, PW. But ... for what reasons can you claim that all of the leaders just happen to be good players by "coincidence?" I think of this as a bogus stat, but the quality of the leaderboard makes me look again. And yes, a HR beats a SB by a mile (or at least 270 ft.).

JamesI · 07-18-2002, 06:34 PM

The statistic is meaningless to me, but Dawson had my support before. I'm not so sure about Bonds, but haven't looked at his record recently.

Golden Bear · 07-18-2002, 06:42 PM

The statistic is interesting, but not very compelling. It doesn't tell you anything you can't pretty much figure out by looking at their HR and SB totals separately.

LeGrandOrange · 07-18-2002, 07:02 PM

The power/speed number does nothing for me. I think Bobby Bonds (peak value) and Andre Dawson (career value) should be in regardless of what the Bill James freak stats tell us.

Rinkster · 07-18-2002, 10:48 PM

Quote:

The power/speed number does nothing for me. I think Bobby Bonds (peak value) and Andre Dawson (career value) should be in regardless of what the Bill James freak stats tell us.

I will agree that the Bill James stats freaks will argue against Dawson, Rice, and perhaps Bobby Bonds as well, although Bonds is rarely mentioned outside of discussions about his son.

However, Bill James himself thinks that Bobby Bonds was a terrific player that was perhaps misused/miscast in his career. Perhaps, a better way to put it would be that the "baseball people" of Bonds' era still had trouble dealing with players that could both hit with power and steal bases.

There were always a couple of power/speed guys in the Major Leagues, power in this case the ability to hit doubles, homeruns and speed meaning actual stolen bases. Going way back there were players such as Ken Williams and Goose Goslin that could, and more importantly would, hit with power and steal bases. But for most of baseball history after the dead-ball era, power hitters were more or less stationary in terms of stealing bases.

In the 1950s, power hitters such as Jackie Jensen and Willie Mays, and Mickey Mantle to a lesser degree, began to use their speed as an offensive weapon in terms of stolen bases. Especially Mays.

During the 1950s Mays was considered an athletic freak, willing to do things that other seemingly great athletes in the game such as Hank Aaron, and Frank Robinson would not attempt to do. It was just not expected for power hitters to try and steal bases.

Robinson's career stolen base totals through 1958:

1956: 8
1957: 10
1958: 10

When Robinson's new teammate, Vada Pinson, became a full-time player in 1959, Robinson watched as the press touted Pinson as the next big thing in baseball, the next .400 hitter, soon to be the best power/speed player of all-time. Immediately, Pinson had baseball people from both sides of the issue unfairly judging him. Should he stress his speed only, or be a power speed player? Pinson chose the latter, much to the disappointment of know-it-all sportswriters and "old-school" baseball minds. But hey, other than 1959, when he batted second in the lineup, Pinson was the Reds' 3rd-hole hitter, so his choice was pretty much made for him.

However, Frank Robinson has admitted that watching Pinson combine power with base-stealing made him think of stealing an occasional base as a useful offensive weapon.
Robinson's stolen base total's 1959-64:

1959: 18
1960: 10
1961: 22
1962: 18
1963: 26
1964: 23

I have not heard any such admission by Hammerin' Hank, but the stats do show it is possible that Hank felt the same way as Robbie.

Aaron's stolen base totals pre-Pinson:

1954: 2
1955: 3
1956: 2
1957: 1
1958: 4
1959: 9

Aaron's stolen base totals after Pinson's first full year:

1960: 16
1961: 21
1962: 15
1963: 31
1964: 22
1965: 24
1966: 21
1967: 11
1968: 28

Not too many realize that if Aaron would have started stealing sooner he'd could have probably been the first 400HR-400 SB player. As it was, Aaron stole 240 bases for his career.

Mays by the way, ended up with 338 lifetime, Robinson had 204.

Now, in the grand scheme of things the power/speed total means what? I don't really know. I mean, the only reason Mickey Mantle is not on here is because nobody asked him to be. But it does measue achievement in some way, doesn't it? And in the grand scheme of things concerning the HOF, achievement has been the standard, not OPS or OPS+.

In the end, the same question thrust upon them by aging sportswriters doomed both Pinson and Bobby Bonds, and that questions was, "Make up your minds fellas, are you going to be a leadoff hitter or a power hitter."

Pinson was constantly beratted and personally insulted in newspaper columns by the brash Cincinnatti Reds' beat writer, Earl Lawson, for not bunting more. Hell, that is all you ever saw Lawson write about regarding Pinson. Lawson even called Pinson selfish for not bunting to try and win a batting title when the Reds were needing Pinson to provide power since Frank Robinson was suffering through a poor season! Wow, a writer demanding a player think for himself rather than the team. Don't see that often, do you? But the truth is that Pinson was the Reds' 3-hole hitter, and even in the 1960s, 3-hole hitters were not bunters.

Bonds faced the opposite issue. As a leadoff hitter, Bonds was very, very good. But, Bonds also swung for the fences and struck out alot. Baseball men of Bonds' day ignored Bonds' great success, and simply could not fathom a leadoff hitter that struck out like Bonds did, or had his power. As a result, Bonds was always being tinkered with, moving back and forth from the leadoff spot to the traditional power spots in the lineup.

Although Willie Mays was the first "modern" power/speed player, it was Bonds and Pinson led the way for the numerous players of today in terms of what can be "accepted" for hitters in the leadoff position and power positions in the lineup. In a way, they were pioneers. Joe Morgan was another, although his influence came more during the mid-1970s.

So again, the power/speed number may not represent value in terms of what us young folks look at, but if you do well in the career power/speed number you have to have had a pretty good career.

JamesI · 07-18-2002, 11:41 PM

I heard a quote from Mantle after Canseco's 40-40 year, where he said that if the press made such a big deal out of it in the 50's he would have had 40-40 every season. Not sure if he really could have, but who's going to doubt Mick?

Skip · 07-18-2002, 11:50 PM

Nice post Rinkster. And it's nice to hear Bobby Bonds getting some appreciation. Whether or not he deserves HOF status, he's definitely among the better position players NOT to get there so far.

pwdennis · 07-18-2002, 11:54 PM

Reading Jim Brosnan's PENNANT RACE can help bring Pinson to life for you youngsters out there. He was a fine player

07-19-2002, 04:45 AM

I agree that all of the men on the list - with the exception of Eric Davis - could reasonably be considered Hall of Fame quality players. Davis was that for a time, but his career took a turn for the worse and, despite his praiseworthy comeback, never managed to cash in on his once yellow-brick road to Cooperstown.

Very interesting info about the revolutionary roles of Pinson and Bonds. As a younger man, I remember developing the impression that the press/fans thought poorly of Bonds Sr. in the same way that many people thought poorly of Dick Allen - a jerk, not a team player, etc. I don't recall what I read to give me that impression, but it lingers still in the back of my mind.

Thanks to maturation and the passage of time (and a development of analytical understanding), I think Bonds (and Pinson) are definately qualified for the Hall of Fame. The era in which they played has kept them out so far. They should eventually be inducted and their presense will in no way be a detriment to the institution.

Bonds and Pinson, in my opinion, are better candidates than Dawson.

07-18-2002, 05:29 PM	#1
Fuzzy Bear NetShrine's Evangelist Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Living by faith, and not by sight! Posts: 2,194	Bobby Bonds and Andre Dawson: How does your Power/Speed Number Affect HOF-worthiness The Top 20 Power/Speed numbers have all been compiled by players who have begun their careers from the mid-60s on, with the exception of Mays, Aaron, and Vada Pinson. The top 20 Power/Speed totals: Barry Bonds----------------522.22 Rickey Henderson---------480.18 Willie Mays------------------447.05 Bobby Bonds---------------386.01 Joe Morgan-----------------385.90 Andre Dawson-------------365.78 Hank Aaron-----------------364.22 Reggie Jackson------------324.56 Paul Molitor-----------------319.61 Eric Davis--------------------311.94 The power/speed number was a stat to measure value of a player who had the combination of power and speed manifested in HR and extra base power couples with baserunning and base-stealing ability. Looking at the Top 10 Power/Speed group, Bobby Bonds and Andre Dawson are in the middle. Are these guys HOF-worthy? It seems there is more support for Dawson than Bonds, in that Dawson hit many more career (438 to 332 in a longer career). Bobby Bonds, however, was far more patient at the plate and had a higher OBP, a fact that was not recognized while he was active (people were always dwelling on his strikeouts). Bobby Bonds played RF because of Mays, and Ken Henderson, but he had CF ability. Dawson moved to RF as he aged, and his knees ground down. If these guys are not HOF-worthy, I would like to ask what the value of the Power-Speed number as a statistic to assess a player's ability is. The Power-Speed number was formulated to calculate the effect a player who can rake and burn has on winning. So I ask you: can a Power/Speed number be such as to qualify a player for the HOF, or is it a meaningless stat? If Bobby and Hawk are as high as they are on the Power/Speed rankings, is that an indicator of quality? Are they HOFers? Is one of them a HOFer. More importantly, is the Power/Speed number something we should look at or forget about, in general?

07-18-2002, 05:36 PM	#3
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	Regardless of the computational details, I can say I wouldn't be mad about any of the guys on your list being put in the HOF with the exception of Eric Davis. I agree Bonds gets unfairly dismissed at times, but he's marginal too. If he's in - ok, if not - ok too. If people like Torre will eventually get in on a combination of managerial and playing career, perhaps Bonds should get in on a contribution to genetics statute or something similar - tying his playing career together with Barry's. Last edited by Skip : 07-18-2002 at 05:38 PM.

07-18-2002, 06:04 PM	#6
pwdennis NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Winter Springs, FL Posts: 2,503	To me Power/Speed is the most bogus statistic going. One SB is not worth one HR. THe ratio measures something of little value. True, most of the highly ranked players according to this measure are pretty good players but that is largely coincidence. The measure might be a little more meaningful if a correction was done for caught stealings say Net Steals = Steals less 2x caught stealing so that the equation is (HR x NS x 2) / (HR + NS) Would you rather a 30-30 man or a 55-5 man ? Would you take Andre Dawson in preference to Hammerin' Hank ? Is a 30-30 man who gets caught stealing 20 times worth as much as a 30-30 man who gets caught stealing twice ? They will both have the same Power/Speed number according to the base formula __________________ "I would submit that if the world survives for a million years, perhaps its finest hour may be that in the last half of the 20th century, when the power to blow up the world rested in the hands of a few men in two very unsophisticated and suspicious countries, we didn't do it, and one American, Richard Nixon, moved the cold war away from permanent confrontation toward victory. How could any wrong that he did compare with that?" - John Sears Last edited by pwdennis : 07-18-2002 at 06:06 PM.

07-18-2002, 11:54 PM	#14
pwdennis NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Winter Springs, FL Posts: 2,503	Reading Jim Brosnan's PENNANT RACE can help bring Pinson to life for you youngsters out there. He was a fine player __________________ "I would submit that if the world survives for a million years, perhaps its finest hour may be that in the last half of the 20th century, when the power to blow up the world rested in the hands of a few men in two very unsophisticated and suspicious countries, we didn't do it, and one American, Richard Nixon, moved the cold war away from permanent confrontation toward victory. How could any wrong that he did compare with that?" - John Sears

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

07-18-2002, 05:32 PM	#2
Golden Bear NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Upstate New York Posts: 1,100	How is this number calculated?

07-18-2002, 06:08 PM	#7
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	Good points all, PW. But ... for what reasons can you claim that all of the leaders just happen to be good players by "coincidence?" I think of this as a bogus stat, but the quality of the leaderboard makes me look again. And yes, a HR beats a SB by a mile (or at least 270 ft.).

07-18-2002, 06:34 PM	#8
JamesI Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Potsdam, N.Y. Posts: 3,723	The statistic is meaningless to me, but Dawson had my support before. I'm not so sure about Bonds, but haven't looked at his record recently.

07-18-2002, 06:42 PM	#9
Golden Bear NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Upstate New York Posts: 1,100	The statistic is interesting, but not very compelling. It doesn't tell you anything you can't pretty much figure out by looking at their HR and SB totals separately.

07-18-2002, 07:02 PM	#10
LeGrandOrange Membership Suspended 4/11/04 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 3,783	The power/speed number does nothing for me. I think Bobby Bonds (peak value) and Andre Dawson (career value) should be in regardless of what the Bill James freak stats tell us.

07-18-2002, 11:41 PM	#12
JamesI Netshrine Vacuum Cleaner Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Potsdam, N.Y. Posts: 3,723	I heard a quote from Mantle after Canseco's 40-40 year, where he said that if the press made such a big deal out of it in the 50's he would have had 40-40 every season. Not sure if he really could have, but who's going to doubt Mick?

07-18-2002, 11:50 PM	#13
Skip NetShrine Vagabond Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Louisville Posts: 7,866	Nice post Rinkster. And it's nice to hear Bobby Bonds getting some appreciation. Whether or not he deserves HOF status, he's definitely among the better position players NOT to get there so far.

07-19-2002, 04:45 AM	#15
BigKlu Posts: n/a	I agree that all of the men on the list - with the exception of Eric Davis - could reasonably be considered Hall of Fame quality players. Davis was that for a time, but his career took a turn for the worse and, despite his praiseworthy comeback, never managed to cash in on his once yellow-brick road to Cooperstown. Very interesting info about the revolutionary roles of Pinson and Bonds. As a younger man, I remember developing the impression that the press/fans thought poorly of Bonds Sr. in the same way that many people thought poorly of Dick Allen - a jerk, not a team player, etc. I don't recall what I read to give me that impression, but it lingers still in the back of my mind. Thanks to maturation and the passage of time (and a development of analytical understanding), I think Bonds (and Pinson) are definately qualified for the Hall of Fame. The era in which they played has kept them out so far. They should eventually be inducted and their presense will in no way be a detriment to the institution. Bonds and Pinson, in my opinion, are better candidates than Dawson.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)