Minor League Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Mets Add Luis Ayala Bar-right-arrows

SUGGESTION TO JOHN

Tiny by rangersfan24 on

after a relatively lenthy, and still ongoing, debate about whether or not dunn is an overrated player. some seem to think his OPS and power make him a premium player, while others, including myself, feel that his ridiculously high strikeout total, along with poor AVG with runners in scoring postion(and AVG overall) are well below average. i saw where john already did a prospect retro on him bac in 2007, but id still like to hear his take on whether he's a liability to his team or not, along with whether or not he is a future hall of famer, lie some on this board have recently suggested. i know he most likely will not do it, but it doesnt hurt to ask. so please john, any way you can do it??

1 recs | Comment 95 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

I'm no John

but high strikeout totals effect nothing. An out is an out. If your projecting a player fine, but if your at the MLB level an out is an out. Sure it can be frustrating. Yadier Molina rarely strikes out, that doesn’t mean he’s better than Soto who strikes out about 5 times as much.

As far as with RISP, here are two career lines:
Totals: .247/.381/.521
RISP: .223/.412/.473

When factoring in OBP more like you should, he is actually very slightly more productive with RISP in his career.

Now what doesn’t make Dunn a “premium player” is his defense.

by bigboy1234 on Jul 13, 2008 2:01 PM EDT   0 recs

agreed kind of

The only thing strikeout totals effect is batting average so I can’t stand it when people count a low batting average and high strikeout total as two negatives against a player. With Dunn though, it all depends on whether or not the individual thinks that a three true outcomes player helps or hurts a team.

by was385 on Jul 13, 2008 2:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Disagree on both points...

An out is not just an out. If there is a runner on second and no outs, a strikeout is devastating. The stats are not talked about, but moving runners over is a very important part of baseball. So a ground ball to the right side of the infield or a deep fly ball is a much better out than a strike out.

As for factoring in OBP with runners in scoring position. Some of the same things apply. With a man on third and one out, a ground ball can be a much more productive PA than a walk. I would much rather have a guy putting the ball in play with RISP than taking the number of walks Dunn is.

by tt68 on Jul 13, 2008 2:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just so I understand, you would prefer Dunn to swing at more balls?

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 13, 2008 2:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just so I understand...

Dunn never takes a called strike?

by tt68 on Jul 13, 2008 2:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Ok, so if it’s a strike he should be swinging?

Start here, and report back in a few weeks.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 13, 2008 3:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I will try to help you understand the point of this thread...

We are not discussing if Dunn should change his approach. We are discussing if Dunn’s horrible strike out rates are a problem or not.

The point you are referring to is when the poster tried to imply that Dunn’s performance with RISP was justified by his high OBP. That OBP is high solely because of his walk rate. My point is that a walk (which is partially due to his inability to make contact) is not a good metric to look at with RISP. Yeah, he is good at getting a walk with RISP, but he is really bad at putting the ball in play with RISP. I don’t think the first can negate the second.

His swing and miss rate is the real problem. He makes up for it a little by having very good strike zone judgement, but that doesn’t excuse his average with RISP.

by tt68 on Jul 13, 2008 3:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

His high OBP is likely due to pitchers pitching around him when there are runners on. You know, because they’re afraid of what a good hitter he is.

I don’t see why you expect someone to have a higher average with runners in scoring position. I have yet to see proof that “hitting with runners in scoring position” is a skill.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 13, 2008 3:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Elaboration

I think I should elaborate on this. Mostly because that was an accidental post and I needed to fill out the body, anyway.

I believe that there is an absolute skill to hitting with RISP. Players like Paul LoDuca, Carter, and whomever else who’s names are escaping me are very capable of shortening their swings or expanding the strike zone. More to the point, BA, OBP, or SLG won’t always be an effective measure. OBI, otoh, can sometimes answer this. Whether we like it or not, players will try and advance/score runners. You expect a player to advance the runner by any means necessary, and that oftentimes manifests itself as a productive out. This is why people get down on Dunn for his high K rate. He’s a very productive bat, but his seeming inability to adjust to the game situation is maddening.

P.S. If it’s not already glaringly apparent, I believe that clutch exists.

by GuyinNY on Jul 13, 2008 4:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Exactly!

Couldn’t have said it better myself…. that’s why I quit trying a couple weeks ago. It’s not like we are going to convince someone to “see the light”, nor are they going to get us to believe that Dunn is borderline HOF material. It’s a useless argument now.

That’s why they make both chocolate and vanilla ice cream. Because I like vanilla and other people have crappy taste. LOL j/k (sorta)

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 13, 2008 5:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What retard said Dunn is borderline HOF? I like Dunn, but anyone who said that is downright stupid. I guess if he put up a year like last year for the next 10, but it’s pretty obvious his skills won’t age well.

Anyways, the point is that if clutch does exist, it’s still a skill that is dwarfed by actual talent. If you had a choice between Adam Dunn’s “anti-clutch” and Paul LoDuca’s “super-clutch” you should take Adam Dunn, because even after you adjust for their clutchiness quotients, Dunn is still the better hitter.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 13, 2008 5:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Not that stupid

He’s got a shot at 500 bombs, which would make him HOF material. That was my line of thinking, anyways.

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jul 13, 2008 5:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sorry for the personal attack, I assumed he was using hyperbole as I hadn’t seen that other thread. Anyways, I just don’t see Dunn’s career lasting long enough to get him there. His skill set just doesn’t age well and I would imagine his eventual decline to be more of a complete collapse.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 13, 2008 5:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's no problem

I was assuming the 500 homer threshold, and I know there’s a small chance he reaches it…

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jul 13, 2008 10:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

demondeaconbaseball said it

hence why hes now defending his remark

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 5:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Did you not see my reply to him?

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 13, 2008 6:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hrmm..

I agree with you to a certain extent. Obviously, Dunn is a better hitter than LoDuca or Carter. However, we’re discussing who’s better at advancing runners. This is basically a rehash of the essential argument surrounding Jim Rice’s HOF credibility. His supporters argue that Rice was among the very best of his era and had an incredible ability to advance runners. His detractors say that this simply wasn’t the case.

Of course Dunn is a better hitter than LoDuca, overall. That doesn’t change the fact that Dunn is less likely to advance any given runner with RISP. LoDuca is a lifetime 308/374/424 hitter with runners in scoring position, while Dunn is at 223/412/473. Granted, Dunn’s getting on more often and hitting the ball with more authority, but he’s getting far fewer hits and he’s making much less contact. Ergo, he’s advancing fewer runners. And, since facts can prove anything that’s even remotely true, Adam Dunn is a career 238 hitter with runners on 3rd while LoDuca is a lifetime 413 hitter in that situation. That’s ALOT of extra hits and, theoretically, RBI. 

There is a distinct trend in situations involving runners on base : LoDuca raises his ability to get hits while Dunn stagnates.  It's not so much that Dunn's getting worse, but that LoDuca's getting better.  And given the choice between Dunn's high-OPS, low contact approach and LoDuca's high contact approach, I'd probably take Paulie.

by GuyinNY on Jul 13, 2008 6:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Last Line

That last line should read :

There is a distinct trend in situations involving runners on base : LoDuca raises his ability to get hits while Dunn stagnates. It’s not so much that Dunn’s getting worse, but that LoDuca’s getting better. And given the choice between Dunn’s high-OPS, low contact approach and LoDuca’s high contact approach, I’d probably take Paulie.

Why does that happen?

by GuyinNY on Jul 13, 2008 6:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Not a good idea

Me, I know that a neither a lineup of 9 Adam Dunn’s or 9 Paul LoDuca’s is ideal, but if someone would prefer LoDuca they just prefer to score less i would think.

Hasn’t anybody just considered the idea that Adam Dunn id just better as a table setter than driving in runs? Whats wrong with that. If you guys just get your mind out of the 1950’s and except that todays game involves a lot of swinging and missing and just except Dunn for what he brings to the table. He’s a good player. He can hit 5th for me any day.

by casejud on Jul 13, 2008 8:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I actually think Dunn leading off would be great

He wouldn’t have to move as many runners over, and his OBP plays great in the leadoff role.

Plus, he may get a few better pitches to knock out if pitchers are afraid to put the leadoff man on base.

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jul 13, 2008 10:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Interesting that...

Looking at his numbers the last three years he has put up this line leading off a inning from 2005-2007

.230/ .313/ .450

That is actually kinda what I would think. That a LOT of his patience comes from his eye and pitchers being more careful when there is guys on-base.

While I kinda like the IDEA of him as a leadoff man because it is outside the box, as they say I envision him being really devastating as a player with a high average guy who you CAN”T avoid pitching to batting behind ( A Vladamir type player. I know there ARE no ther players like Vladimir but you know what I meen) him. This would allow him to keep his same approach but force pitchers to pitch to him more. Getting MORE guys on-base in front of him wouldn’t hurt either.

Regardless of his flaws Dunn should always be a part of a good offense. He’ still a plus out there with the bat in his hand.

by casejud on Jul 14, 2008 2:24 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Soriano

Dunn reminds me of Soriano, in that he’s very hard to place in an order. Intuitively, I agree with you that he belongs as a place setter, due to his strong OBP skills. However, this would be largely wasting his power. Granted, the extra PA’s could help Dunn to hit more homers, but he’d generally have fewer batters in front of him at the top of an NL order.

Let’s say Dunn bats 2nd.* He’s likely to only have 1-2 baserunners at most in front of him, and he’ll almost never get a chance with the bases loaded. Over the course of the season, this will amount to a considerably lower number of RBI opportunities. However, if Dunn bats 5th, he’s not very good at advancing runners who are already on. His OBP would also be a bit on the wasted side, as I’d prefer to have a bat like his in front of some serious contact/power types. Solution? Adam Dunn to the Yankees to replace Jason Giambi for next season.

*If Dunn were to bat 2nd, OH the baseclogging! :)

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 12:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

LoDuca

Over 162 games, I’d prefer Adam Dunn. What I’m arguing is that I’d prefer LoDuca with a runner on 3rd. I’d also prefer LoDuca in a clutch situation, as LoDuca is more likely to advance the players who are on in front of him. Granted, he won’t advance them as many bases as Dunn would, provided Dunn puts his bat on the ball. But, I’ll take quantity over quality in this case.

On a tangent, this touches right at the heart of the Rake & Take v. Smallball debate. In mid or high run scoring environments, of course it makes sense to wait for the three run homer. However, in lower run scoring environments or in high leverage situations, I’d be more apt to go for a player with better contact skills because it’s more important to get the run I know to be within reach than the three runs which may never come.

P.S. I happen to think this is the reason why the A’s made the playoffs, but never went very far. Ramon Hernandez’s bunt excluded, obviously.

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 12:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

P.S. I happen to think this is the reason why the A’s made the playoffs, but never went very far. Ramon Hernandez’s bunt excluded, obviously.

This has to be a joke right? If it’s what I’m thinking of, he was bunting for a hit. There were two outs. This was even mentioned in Moneyball as the point where all the ignorant analysts pointed to this one event as a change in the A’s philosophy so they could finally win, completely ignoring the fact that they weren’t sacrifice bunting.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 14, 2008 1:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Ok, thank god. You almost destroyed my mind, well done.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 14, 2008 1:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I try. :P

I actually do believe this is true for the 02-07 Yankees, as well. The main reason they made the World Series in 2003 being their great pitching that season.

The Red Sox get it done with a good, healthy mix.

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

makes sense

there certainly are situations where id prefer LoDuca, yes. There arent that many of them though.

i dont think a player like Dunn would even EXIST in a low-run environment though. His style is completely a product of our modern babseball times, parks, baseballs, the steroid era …though not him using personally

by casejud on Jul 14, 2008 1:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Big Papi

I’d imagine that had Dunn played in another era, he’d have wound up like David Ortiz in Minnesota. Whoever had him would have tried desperately to change him. Now, granted, this might actually have worked and we’d get an Adam Dunn with the same power and better contact skills. However, I think it’s more likely Dunn would just have been labeled a hacker and likely wouldn’t have gotten too much time in the everyday lineup. Until he hit some homers, that is.

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 2:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

40 homers plays anytime

Dunn is not much different then Harmon Killebrew or Dave Kingdom, both who had lengthy careers, one of which landed in the HOF.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Jul 14, 2008 4:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

Well said

by wolviex18 on Jul 14, 2008 2:37 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Clutch

The clutch question is interesting to me. On the one hand, I certainly believe that certain people handle high-pressure situations especially well, some handle them poorly, and some handle them about the same as they handle anything else. I’ve seen that in my own work environments, so I think they exist in pro sports as well. Therefore, when you match a hitter who handles pressure well against a pitcher who struggles under pressure, you shift the odds in the batter’s favor, even if the batter is less talented than the pitcher (I can’t figure out how to word that to make sense; how do you compare hitting talent to pitching talent? But I think you all know what I mean). However, I do not believe that anyone has a mystical, magical ability to exceed their personal limitations and perform fantastic feats in clutch situations. For example, I seem to recall Marco Scutaro hitting a game-winning homer off K-Rod once. Among A’s fans, Scutaro has a reputation for being clutch. But if Scutaro compiled a sizable number of at-bats against K-Rod, who do you really think would win the majority of the time?

So to sum up, “clutch” exists, IMO, as far as handling pressure, but it does not exist as a magical way to make players better. And in most cases, more talented players will produce better results than less talented players, regardless of their “clutchiness.”

by ozzman99 on Jul 14, 2008 4:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd think

that the amount of times you’d actually make a productive out would be almost nullified by the extra times that someone like Dunn would ground into double plays if he put the ball in play more.

by was385 on Jul 13, 2008 3:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

-1

With runners in scoring position, the relative value of a walk shoots way down.

by rwperu34 on Jul 13, 2008 3:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Dunn

While his Ks are very frustrating, they do not change the fact that he is an offensive force. Where he hurts the team is by clogging the bases and plaing LF like he’s drunk. Most SABR types tend to overrate Dunn, but he’s still an overall positive for his team.

by rwperu34 on Jul 13, 2008 3:30 PM EDT   0 recs

Clogging

LOL

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. George Carlin

by GregJP on Jul 13, 2008 3:31 PM EDT to parent up   1 recs

EqA

Dunn LEADS his team in EqA, so I highly doubt he’s a “liability” to the team despite his bad defense and high K rate.

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. George Carlin

by GregJP on Jul 13, 2008 3:31 PM EDT   0 recs

this was not meant to be a discussion between posters

ive heard both sides of the story.like to see what john has to say, someone whose opinion simply carries more weight than ours

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 5:57 PM EDT   0 recs

*bites tongue*

A healthy thread on the merits of whether or not players make adjustments/clutchiness isn’t the worst thing in the world. I’m sure John sees this thread, and I doubt he minds that we’re discussing clutch (if for the 5034890th time). He may mind the minor flaming, or he might just not care about it at this point…

Is it odd that we’re discussing him in such a far away and authoritative sense?

by GuyinNY on Jul 13, 2008 6:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's like he is God...

I guess that would mean that players that are left out of the book are sent to Hell and players he gives a Grade C to are in purgatory since they can go either way.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 13, 2008 6:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hm?

I thought souls in purgatory were eventually (after some amount of suffering) admitted to heaven on a permanent basis.

[/tangent into Catholic theology]

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 13, 2008 10:38 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Span

Clearly, Denard Span has had people praying for him to ascend to a higher plane of existence (the majors.)

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 12:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

far away sense?

the topic on this thread specifically directed a question TO HIM. please explained how that is “far away.” and i never said he was god, or that he is right about everything, but he is, whether you want to admit it or not, much more knowledgeable about evaluating players and their value than you, i, or anybody else on this board. if you new more than he did, youd be the one selling books, not him

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 7:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

and while you obviously dont care much

about the conversation about clutch, and for some reason seem to think he does not care, i would be much more interested in reading an article about that than i would an article about michael burgess or denard span. if he wants to do it, great. if he doesn’t, no problem. but i have every right in the world to ask, especially when other people get on here all the time and ask him to do these prospect retros, mostly because they own them in fantasy leagues and want to read articles about their stud or their amazing additions they made way back when before they were stars. you are out of line criticizing me just for asking john to write a meaningful article. next time you have an objection to something as harmless as that, you truly do need to bite your fuckin tongue and stay off people’s cases. somehow, i doubt john needs you to get on here and speak for him. its his site, he can do whatever he wants

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 7:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think you're overreacting...

GuyinNY is agreeing with you. I don’t know how you read his last post, but he is saying that even though you asked for John’s opinion, he doesn’t think John would mind an intelligent conversation/argument about the idea of clutch and how it pertains to Dunn and other players.

And his comment about John was more about how we were talking about John like he wasn’t in the room. Like when two people talk about a third like the third one wasn’t present even though they are. He was not downplaying John’s knowledge or anything of the sort, just that John was being talked about like he wasn’t here.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 13, 2008 7:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

if thats what he was saying

then i apologize, because i obviously read it wrong, and i was out of line responding in the manner that i did

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 7:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

My sentiments exactly.

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 12:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

dunn

I like Dunn and I think people pick on him too much. He’s one dimensional as a hitter, but it’s a strong dimension. The strikeouts can be annoying but do not, in my opinion, ruin his value. He’s basically a left-handed version of Harmon Killebrew, not as good once you account for the difference in leagues and context, but a similar skill set: power, walks, strikeouts. I wish the Twins had him to add more power to the lineup. You can’t rely on him to be your BEST hitter due to his limitations, but properly deployed he is of great value.

I think some people pick on his on-field stuff because they don’t like him OFF the field, but that’s a seperate issue.

by John Sickels on Jul 13, 2008 6:56 PM EDT   0 recs

i can agree with this

nobody argues his power. what prompted me to start this was because of another thread i started wonderign where mie moustakas was. i made the comment id hate for him to turn into adam dunn, and some retorted with the statement that dunn is going to be a hall of famer- a comment i found to be laughable. i tried saying i would not want dunn because he is more of an all or nothing type player, something i would not want on my team over the course of a 162 game season. thats my personal preference tho. i will always take that i have confidence in putting the ball in play safely, over a guy that youre praying for a walk so he doesnt kill a rally. although 40 hr power is impressive, it is still an extremeley low percentage play

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 7:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Just to clarify...

I don’t think Adam Dunn’s bound for the HOF unless he hits 500, which would make him a lock considering the voting body. I still stand by the fact that he’s a pretty good player, albeit a little overrated (that defense is horrible, LF or not).

The argument was still fun though. :D

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jul 13, 2008 10:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Good points

The best one I think is that he gets more flack when his team is struggling and they want him to be something he isnt. people want him to cut the K’s, hit .275, play better defense and keep the walks and the batting eye. Shoot, everybody in the league would like to do something similar to that with thier skills but because Dunn has such a unique profile as a hitter people find it hard to except. I say, get over it! Take the player for what he does as a whole and if you are building a team…i think like a GM… just put players with diverse skilla around him and dont sweat it.

As far as his personality, I think that he is a fun loving, kind of laid back player much in the mold of many players who have been loved in the game. the are only loved when they WIN though. If the Reds win or whatever team he goes to, his flaws will fade to the background.

basically the entire Dunn conversation is kinda dumn IMO. He is a pretty consistent and quality ballplayer if you ask me. He also has probably no chance to make the Hall of Fame.

by casejud on Jul 13, 2008 8:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Mostly agree....

One thing I take issue with:

You can’t rely on him to be your BEST hitter due to his limitations

Dunn was the best hitter on the 2005 Reds, who were #1 in the NL in both Runs Scored and OPS+. He most certainly can be the best hitter on a good offense, as long as you’re not hitting Corey Patterson leadoff and the rotting husk of Ken Griffey, Jr. third.

"Karma - there it was. The meaning of life, straight from Carson Daly's lips to my morphine-laced ears." -Earl Hickey

by BLee2525 on Jul 13, 2008 9:26 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Dunn with RISP

There’s nothing wrong with Dunn’s approach with Runners in Scoring Position. His low splits in those situations are the result of an obvious managerial failure that could easily be fixed.

Dunn has one huge limitation in his offensive game; he can’t hit borderline pitches. He’s a zone hitter, and needs to see a lot of pitches in order to get one he can drive. When pitchers are forced to challenge him, he’s extremely dangerous. When they’re able to throw a bunch of borderline crap, not worrying about walking him, and hope they get a call, he’s essentially neutralized. The Reds do him no favors by batting him 5th. Dunn has actually seen the lowest percentage of pitches in the strike zone of any hitter in baseball this year.

With RISP and 1st base occupied, Dunn has a career line of .258/.388/.529, and hits a HR every 13.7 AB’s. All better than his career averages. When first base is occupied, pitchers are forced to challenge him, and Dunn is fine.

With RISP and 1st base open, Dunn has a career line of .204/.449/.454, and hits a HR every 15.07 AB’s. Obviously, when 1st base is open, pitchers are staying away from him. His walk rate doubles in those situations, and his inability to hit borderline pitches kills his BA.

Dunn’s the same hitter in every situation, only the pitcher’s approach changes. When Dunn is hitting 5th, at the end of the Reds’ run-producers, the “unintentional-intentional” walk becomes an even more attractive option for the opposing pitcher. If the Reds would simply bat Dunn 2nd or 3rd with a credible threat behind him, his RISP splits would look essentially the same as his overall numbers.

"Karma - there it was. The meaning of life, straight from Carson Daly's lips to my morphine-laced ears." -Earl Hickey

by BLee2525 on Jul 13, 2008 10:00 PM EDT   0 recs

Or leadoff...

I still think he’s a credible leadoff guy.

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jul 13, 2008 10:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

based on his OBP

dunn would be a top leadoff hitter. but in reality, that move would get dusty baker fired, and then committed to the local loony bin. dunn is slower than molasses on the bases, and has sub par on base running skills. plus itd pretty much waste his hr potential

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 10:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

on second thought

i hope dusty does do it. i hate dusty. he has absolutely no clue how to manage young pitchers. but thats for a different thread

by rangersfan24 on Jul 13, 2008 10:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

eh

Getting a homer in your first AB of a few games would be pretty good…

At least we agree on Dusty. :D

by demondeaconsbaseball on Jul 14, 2008 12:26 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The numbers...

completely back up what BLee2525 is aying though. Just looking at numbers it makes sense…Dunn has high OBP…but look at what Lee said and he is right on. Dunn the last three years has an OBP of .313 when he leads off an inning.

He should bat third behind 2 guys who REALLY get on base and behind a guy who makes a LOT of powerful contact.

by casejud on Jul 14, 2008 1:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Dunn/RISP

How can Dunn’s approach be fine with RISP if he’s unable to hit borderline pitches? I’m sorry to sound like a codger (I assure you that I’m not), but it’s Dunn’s damn job as a run producer to expand the zone, make some contact, and drive in those runners. A sac fly or a grounder to the right side with 1 out and a runner on third might not help his OPS, but it damn sure helps his team score runs. You admit that this is a limitation on Dunn’s game. It’s not hard to say “Adam Dunn’s a very good slugger, but a crappy RBI guy”. I agree that Dunn is very dangerous when a strike is thrown to him, but so are most sluggers. The issue is that because Dunn can’t “expand the zone”, he’ll never be as great a slugger as somebody like Pujols, Sheff, Vlad, or Papi. 

To bat Dunn 2nd would be something of a waste of his power.  I do think he's desperately in need of a major bat behind him.  He likely needs to bat 3rd in an AL lineup to be maximized, where his OBP and SLG would both be on full display and pitchers would be forced to throw him fastballs.

Sorry if I’ve seemed harsh. It’s just that Dunn isn’t as great as his OPS advertises him to be, and the whole package taken together (crappy defense, lousy baserunning, poor RBI guy, and questionable locker room presence) really amounts to much less than you might think.

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 1:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

...

It happened again.

“To bat Dunn 2nd would be something of a waste of his power. I do think he’s desperately in need of a major bat behind him. He likely needs to bat 3rd in an AL lineup to be maximized, where his OBP and SLG would both be on full display and pitchers would be forced to throw him fastballs.”

And please add : “Then we’d likely be much more tolerant of his issues with his approach. Except with two out. :)”

by GuyinNY on Jul 14, 2008 1:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Dunn Vs. Howard

There isn’t too much of a difference between what Dunn does, and what Howard does. Howard just benefits because he has Rollins and Utley in front of him while Dunn is forced to be constantly moved around the lineup. I would love to see what Dunn could do batting cleanup in Philly for a season.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Jul 13, 2008 10:36 PM EDT   0 recs

No, there's another difference

Howard is black. Dunn is white. Dunn fits the traditional stereotype of the unathletic, fat white slugger who likes walking and doesn’t care about striking out. Howard doesn’t.

Anytime a player fits a traditional whipping boy stereotype (and this is regardless of race—you could say the same to explain the general dislike of Lastings Milledge [undisciplined black gangsta] or Pedro Feliz [“brain dead Caribbean hitter”]), he’s going to be disliked more than if he was a similar player who didn’t fit into people’s easy racial/visual classification schemes.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 13, 2008 10:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

hehe good ol Larry Krueger

at least it got Damon Bruce hired, one of the best new wave sports radio guys in the biz.

Accidentally not thedude925 anymore. I do hate this new name.

by wildthang on Jul 14, 2008 2:48 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

True

Pat Burrell is kind of like Howard, but kinda Howard-Lite, and gets demonized here in Philly regularly despite being a top 10 productive LF since he was put into the majors. Except this year, when it’s oddly been the reverse.

by Alon on Jul 16, 2008 5:57 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs