Dunn to the Dbacks

[CubinNY]

For the record, I really don't care about out in play vs. strikeouts, it is too marginal of a difference to get upset about.

 

My beef with Dunn is that he is reducing the chances of putting himself in a position to produce by working the count until it becomes a disadvantage for him. While strikeouts are often the ultimate outcome, it's his frequent ability to get behind in the count with two strikes that limits him on pitches that can be driven. If it's 1-1 and he takes a called strike, it's less likely that he'll get a better pitch to hit on 1-2. Sometimes tip your cap b/c there was nothing he could've done, sometimes you think he should've been more aggressive.

 

I've stated many times that Dunn should be utilized as a run scorer and not a run producer. He is not a good hitter in any split. One of my biggest problems with him is the amount of RBI's he has not via the HR.

 

I do think he has a lot of value if used correctly, and that he is a detriment if used incorrectly. My biggest fear would be him hitting #3 or 4.

RBI is a function of guys on base.

[UK1679666180]

For the record, I really don't care about out in play vs. strikeouts, it is too marginal of a difference to get upset about.

 

My beef with Dunn is that he is reducing the chances of putting himself in a position to produce by working the count until it becomes a disadvantage for him. While strikeouts are often the ultimate outcome, it's his frequent ability to get behind in the count with two strikes that limits him on pitches that can be driven. If it's 1-1 and he takes a called strike, it's less likely that he'll get a better pitch to hit on 1-2. Sometimes tip your cap b/c there was nothing he could've done, sometimes you think he should've been more aggressive.

He also consistently works starters deeper into the count and contributes to them departing earlier, which helps the whole team.

 

As far as the comment of 100 strikeouts over average costing half a win, he strikes out about 50 times more than the average player every 600 at bats...so can we call it a game every four seasons?

 

His impact of working pitchers deep into counts isn't likely as damaging to the pitcher if he was more productive in the AB, therefore creating more runs and extending the pitchers' usage by not creating an out.

Except, you know, that a a significant amount of those at bats are productive and end up in walks or hits...he does have a 500 OBP at a full count.

 

Not really a significant amount of those Abs are productive, if they were, he'd be a much better hitter overall.

 

With two strikes, his OPS is .578.

 

About 30% of his 2 strike ABs are 3-2 counts, in those other 70% he has been bad, even for a hitter of lesser quality than him.

 

He'd be a better hitter if he was more aggressive early in the count, IMO. Either that or he needs to become a better 2 strike hitter since 55% of his PAs are in two strike counts.

[Derwood]

wouldn't every hitter be better if they struck out less? why is this observation particular to Dunn?

[UK1679666180]

wouldn't every hitter be better if they struck out less? why is this observation particular to Dunn?

 

It's not the strikeouts, it's the amounts of ABs that he tries to him from with two strikes and behind in the count.

[Jehrico]

For the record, I really don't care about out in play vs. strikeouts, it is too marginal of a difference to get upset about.

 

My beef with Dunn is that he is reducing the chances of putting himself in a position to produce by working the count until it becomes a disadvantage for him. While strikeouts are often the ultimate outcome, it's his frequent ability to get behind in the count with two strikes that limits him on pitches that can be driven. If it's 1-1 and he takes a called strike, it's less likely that he'll get a better pitch to hit on 1-2. Sometimes tip your cap b/c there was nothing he could've done, sometimes you think he should've been more aggressive.

 

I've stated many times that Dunn should be utilized as a run scorer and not a run producer. He is not a good hitter in any split. One of my biggest problems with him is the amount of RBI's he has not via the HR.

 

I do think he has a lot of value if used correctly, and that he is a detriment if used incorrectly. My biggest fear would be him hitting #3 or 4.

Depends on the lineup. If you have a weak bottom of the order, then maybe he's a good #2 hitter. If you have a solid bottom of the order with guys like DeRo, Soto and Theriot hitting 6-7-8, then I'd fine with him as a #4 or 5 hitter in front of him. All in all though, I don't think it's that big of a deal where he hits.

[Jehrico]

 

Not really a significant amount of those Abs are productive, if they were, he'd be a much better hitter overall.

 

With two strikes, his OPS is .578.

 

About 30% of his 2 strike ABs are 3-2 counts, in those other 70% he has been bad, even for a hitter of lesser quality than him.

 

He'd be a better hitter if he was more aggressive early in the count, IMO. Either that or he needs to become a better 2 strike hitter since 55% of his PAs are in two strike counts.

 

There's some serious flaws in your thought process here. You seem to be concerned with him because he always gets to two strikes which adversely affects his abilities, and you support that by noting his OPS with two strikes is .578. Yet, his overall career OPS is an even .900. If that's the case, then he must not be getting to two strikes so often that it is preventing him from having overall good numbers. Dunn is like everything in life, you take the good with the bad. He's exceptional when he's ahead in the count, and like most other players, including good ones, he's not as good when he's down in the count. What counts is how he does overall, unless you're looking at him as a platoon player. Dunn isn't a platoon player, so all your main concern is how he does overall, which he manages to do very good despite his Ks.

[UK1679666180]

There's nothing flawed with my thought process, it's spot on.

 

55% of his PAs end with him with two strikes.

 

His overall .899 OPS shows how good of a hitter he is with less than two strikes as well as early in the count.

 

I'm not saying is a bad hitter in his current state, if anyone puts those words in my mouth, they're an idiot. I'm saying it's about turning a good hitter into a better hitter. There is room in Dunn's game to make him a better hitter.

 

I think he would be more productive overall sacrificing some of that patience by swinging aggressive on pitches that can be driven. Too often, he'll let the best pitch in the AB be a called strike early in the AB.

[treebird]

DERREK LEE

260/543 (48%) of his plate appearances go to 2 strikes

in those plate appearances, he is hitting 212/300/290

 

ADAM DUNN

250/479 (52%) of his plate appearances go to 2 strikes

in those plate appearances, he is hitting 136/276/306

 

they look pretty similar to me, except that lee is much more likely to single with two strikes, and dunn is more likely to walk. that's pretty much the case all the time, though.

[UK1679666180]

DERREK LEE

260/543 (48%) of his plate appearances go to 2 strikes

in those plate appearances, he is hitting 212/300/290

 

ADAM DUNN

250/479 (52%) of his plate appearances go to 2 strikes

in those plate appearances, he is hitting 136/276/306

 

they look pretty similar to me, except that lee is much more likely to single with two strikes, and dunn is more likely to walk. that's pretty much the case all the time, though.

 

Over their careers, if Dunn had maintained Lee's 2 strike/PA ratio, it would've results in 180 or so less PAs that weren't in two strike counts or about 30 per year.

 

Lee is also a patient hitter as well that works the count, I don't think Lee has the talent of Dunn, though.

[UK1679666180]

I will say that Howard is an even larger example of this than Dunn.

[Jehrico]

There's nothing flawed with my thought process, it's spot on.

Alright, then maybe I'm missing the boat here. What the heck is this thread about now? The whole argument seems to be on whether his high K rate has a significant impact on his value, and you appeared to be arguing that it does. If that's the case, then no, it's not on. If that's not your point, then what are you arguing? I don't think anyone is arguing against the fact that if Dunn could make contact as consistantly as Manny he'd be an elite hitter. That's a no brainer.

[brinoch]

I think you guys are talking across each other's point. Ping makes a very interesting and valid point which I think is thought-provoking. I agree that K's are no better or worse, all things considered, than any other kind of out.

 

While Dunn is an excellent on-base machine and hits for an awful lot of power, Ping is noting that Dunn also works himself into bad counts and is a very average hitter (as compared to the league average) with two strikes. His combined 0-2, 1-2, 2-2, and 3-2 numbers for his career are .150/.273/.305/.578. Compare that to the MLB average with two strikes for 2008: .198/.273/.308/.580.

 

His patience is an asset, of course, but it also seems to hurt him quite a bit as well. If he's taking hittable strikes just to get deep in the count, that's pretty clearly not to his -- or his team's -- advantage. Now, it may be that Dunn is doing as well as he can with his skill set. I don't know. But it's very interesting nonetheless.

[SouthSideRyan]

But the fact that Dunn is hitting much better than the league in the early counts would say that he is picking the pitches that he knows he can beat the hell out of.

[Tracer Bullet]

But the fact that Dunn is hitting much better than the league in the early counts would say that he is picking the pitches that he knows he can beat the hell out of.

 

I think that's exactly right. Other than maybe the first pitch - and maybe not even then - I doubt Dunn goes up there thinking "I'm going to take a few in my wheelhouse, just to give this guy a chance." He picks the pitches he thinks he can drive and swings out of his shoes. If it's not in that zone, he takes it. I don't know how often he strikes out looking after getting 2 strikes (compared to league average), but I'd guess he expands his zone a little with 2 strikes.

 

If Dunn is taking pitches with the sole purpose of getting deep into the counts, that's kind of stupid. And I don't think he's that stupid.

[UK1679666180]

But the fact that Dunn is hitting much better than the league in the early counts would say that he is picking the pitches that he knows he can beat the hell out of.

 

Plus, he's stronger than any other hitter in either League. It's not as if he's fouling or missing those pitches to get into all those 2 strike counts. He's too passive early in the count, especially for someone who doesn't expand his zone. From watching Dunn over his career, he's too passive up there early in the count.

[dew1679666265]

But the fact that Dunn is hitting much better than the league in the early counts would say that he is picking the pitches that he knows he can beat the hell out of.

 

Plus, he's stronger than any other hitter in either League. It's not as if he's fouling or missing those pitches to get into all those 2 strike counts. He's too passive early in the count, especially for someone who doesn't expand his zone. From watching Dunn over his career, he's too passive up there early in the count.

 

Is there a way to tell how often he swings and misses? That may be part (though admittedly it may be small) of his going so deep into counts.

 

I know when he swings he swings really hard - so maybe he's jumping on pitches early, but missing them.

[nilodnayr]

For the record, I really don't care about out in play vs. strikeouts, it is too marginal of a difference to get upset about.

 

My beef with Dunn is that he is reducing the chances of putting himself in a position to produce by working the count until it becomes a disadvantage for him. While strikeouts are often the ultimate outcome, it's his frequent ability to get behind in the count with two strikes that limits him on pitches that can be driven. If it's 1-1 and he takes a called strike, it's less likely that he'll get a better pitch to hit on 1-2. Sometimes tip your cap b/c there was nothing he could've done, sometimes you think he should've been more aggressive.

He also consistently works starters deeper into the count and contributes to them departing earlier, which helps the whole team.

 

As far as the comment of 100 strikeouts over average costing half a win, he strikes out about 50 times more than the average player every 600 at bats...so can we call it a game every four seasons?

 

His impact of working pitchers deep into counts isn't likely as damaging to the pitcher if he was more productive in the AB, therefore creating more runs and extending the pitchers' usage by not creating an out.

Except, you know, that a a significant amount of those at bats are productive and end up in walks or hits...he does have a 500 OBP at a full count.

 

Not really a significant amount of those Abs are productive, if they were, he'd be a much better hitter overall.

 

With two strikes, his OPS is .578.

 

About 30% of his 2 strike ABs are 3-2 counts, in those other 70% he has been bad, even for a hitter of lesser quality than him.

 

He'd be a better hitter if he was more aggressive early in the count, IMO. Either that or he needs to become a better 2 strike hitter since 55% of his PAs are in two strike counts.

 

Well that really has nothing to do with a conversation about going deep in a count, now does it? So, yeah, a significant amount of those at bats deep in a count are productive. But you are talking about something different.

[UK1679666180]

 

Well that really has nothing to do with a conversation about going deep in a count, now does it? So, yeah, a significant amount of those at bats deep in a count are productive. But you are talking about something different.

 

 

 

If you read what I wrote (which I have stated numerous times), I have said that Dunn is often too passive early in the count taking pitches that are hittable pitches (often the best pitches of the AB) in doing so, he is often behind in the count and has never hit well with two strikes. I have said that I believe Dunn would be better off being more aggressive earlier in the count (not expanding his zone ala Patterson).

 

So far, the only counter-argument has been that he is good at working counts deep and that takes away from it as well as that he's already a good hitter so don't change it.

 

I've already explained that I think he would be more productive if he did what I suggested and he's more likely to improve as a hitter than regress if he became more aggressive.

 

Is that something different? Hell, I don't know your angle nor do I give a crap to try and figure it out. Agree or disagree, I sure ain't seen anything to pursuade me otherwise.

[Jehrico]

 

Well that really has nothing to do with a conversation about going deep in a count, now does it? So, yeah, a significant amount of those at bats deep in a count are productive. But you are talking about something different.

 

 

 

If you read what I wrote (which I have stated numerous times), I have said that Dunn is often too passive early in the count taking pitches that are hittable pitches (often the best pitches of the AB) in doing so, he is often behind in the count and has never hit well with two strikes. I have said that I believe Dunn would be better off being more aggressive earlier in the count (not expanding his zone ala Patterson).

 

So far, the only counter-argument has been that he is good at working counts deep and that takes away from it as well as that he's already a good hitter so don't change it.

 

I've already explained that I think he would be more productive if he did what I suggested and he's more likely to improve as a hitter than regress if he became more aggressive.

 

Is that something different? Hell, I don't know your angle nor do I give a crap to try and figure it out. Agree or disagree, I sure ain't seen anything to pursuade me otherwise.

My biggest problem with your suggestion is that pursuading Dunn to be more aggressive sounds a little bit too much like something Dusty tried to get him to do.

[CubinNY]

There's no guarantee that if Dunn takes a whack at a pitch early in the count he's a) going to make contact or b) it's going to not result in a putout. I'm sure there are times where Dunn would have hit a HR or a base hit had he made contact earlier in the count but it stands to reason that the times he would have made an out would vastly outnumber the times he wouldn't have. In other words, If he makes contact on pitches earlier in the count his BA in those situations would surely go down. The reason it is so high is likely because he's getting pitches he can mash.

 

What I'd like to see is some analysis of his swings in those counts (swings = times he makes contact + times he does not). If he's not swinging early I think your point has some merit, but if his swing % is not significantly less....

 

My opinion is that Dunn knows his limitations, like any great hitter. He's a low contact masher with a very good eye for pitches that he can drive.

[UK1679666180]

My biggest problem with your suggestion is that pursuading Dunn to be more aggressive sounds a little bit too much like something Dusty tried to get him to do.

 

So you're disagreeing with it b/c it sounds like something Dusty would say? There's nothing valid with your statement.

[UK1679666180]

There's no guarantee that if Dunn takes a whack at a pitch early in the count he's a) going to make contact or b) it's going to not result in a putout. I'm sure there are times where Dunn would have hit a HR or a base hit had he made contact earlier in the count but it stands to reason that the times he would have made an out would vastly outnumber the times he wouldn't have. In other words, If he makes contact on pitches earlier in the count his BA in those situations would surely go down. The reason it is so high is likely because he's getting pitches he can mash.

 

What I'd like to see is some analysis of his swings in those counts (swings = times he makes contact + times he does not). If he's not swinging early I think your point has some merit, but if his swing % is not significantly less....

 

My opinion is that Dunn knows his limitations, like any great hitter. He's a low contact masher with a very good eye for pitches that he can drive.

 

Of course there's no guarantee he'll get a hit and he is likely to hit less than he currently is earlier in the count, with that said, he is more likely to be more productive being more aggressive while still swinging at pitches in the zone than he is letting it go for a strike (unless it's a pitcher's pitch) and then trying to hit from behind.

[Backtobanks]

There's no guarantee that if Dunn takes a whack at a pitch early in the count he's a) going to make contact or b) it's going to not result in a putout. I'm sure there are times where Dunn would have hit a HR or a base hit had he made contact earlier in the count but it stands to reason that the times he would have made an out would vastly outnumber the times he wouldn't have. In other words, If he makes contact on pitches earlier in the count his BA in those situations would surely go down. The reason it is so high is likely because he's getting pitches he can mash.

 

What I'd like to see is some analysis of his swings in those counts (swings = times he makes contact + times he does not). If he's not swinging early I think your point has some merit, but if his swing % is not significantly less....

 

My opinion is that Dunn knows his limitations, like any great hitter. He's a low contact masher with a very good eye for pitches that he can drive.

 

I know that I'm in the minority on all of this admiration about Dunn, but I would never call Dunn a "great hitter". A "great hitter" would be able to make contact with the ball more often than Dunn does.

[JimSorgi]

There's no guarantee that if Dunn takes a whack at a pitch early in the count he's a) going to make contact or b) it's going to not result in a putout. I'm sure there are times where Dunn would have hit a HR or a base hit had he made contact earlier in the count but it stands to reason that the times he would have made an out would vastly outnumber the times he wouldn't have. In other words, If he makes contact on pitches earlier in the count his BA in those situations would surely go down. The reason it is so high is likely because he's getting pitches he can mash.

 

What I'd like to see is some analysis of his swings in those counts (swings = times he makes contact + times he does not). If he's not swinging early I think your point has some merit, but if his swing % is not significantly less....

 

My opinion is that Dunn knows his limitations, like any great hitter. He's a low contact masher with a very good eye for pitches that he can drive.

 

I know that I'm in the minority on all of this admiration about Dunn, but I would never call Dunn a "great hitter". A "great hitter" would be able to make contact with the ball more often than Dunn does.

He has a .904 OPS and a .305 EQA. I would say that's a great hitter.

[Jehrico]

My biggest problem with your suggestion is that pursuading Dunn to be more aggressive sounds a little bit too much like something Dusty tried to get him to do.

 

So you're disagreeing with it b/c it sounds like something Dusty would say? There's nothing valid with your statement.

There's nothing valid with your humor detector either on that one.