Dunn is awesome...No he's not...Yes he is!!!

17 Seconds · December 21, 2008

Dexter, why are you so annoying?

And I'm sorry, but I totally agree with scarey's simple point that I prefer a middle of the order bat to drive in runs, and not leave it up to the guy behind him. I realize the point of any AB is to not record an out, I really do. But there's also a difference between a .230/.330 hitter and a .280/.330 hitter. There just is.

That difference would presumably be in their SLG.

exactly. and dunn slugs well so the average really isn't that big of a deal

it doesn't look pretty though, so people will resfuse to believe that he's a productive hitter

what this team really needs is a guy who drives in runs with singles, not home runs

scarey · December 21, 2008

i jst like how scarey is ignoring amost everything everyone is saying but then cherrypicks one post out of 10 that he feels like he might actually be able to argue.

Quote something that I'm "ignoring" and I'll gladly address it. Please.

I;m not going to go through 11 pages and qutoe evrtyhing you've ignored. There are a ton of things that people have brought up that you haven't replied to. There will be like 10 posts in between yours and then you'll make one small post cherry picking a statement you want to reply too.

Name one thing. If I'm truly purposely ignoring it because it's not easy or I can't speak against it, then I shouldn't be able to answer it right?

Just pick one. You made a very good point, there's 11 pages of stuff here. Do you expect me to answer everybody here? This isn't even the best Cubs board I visit, so why would I spend that much time here?

17 Seconds · December 21, 2008

i jst like how scarey is ignoring amost everything everyone is saying but then cherrypicks one post out of 10 that he feels like he might actually be able to argue.

Quote something that I'm "ignoring" and I'll gladly address it. Please.

I;m not going to go through 11 pages and qutoe evrtyhing you've ignored. There are a ton of things that people have brought up that you haven't replied to. There will be like 10 posts in between yours and then you'll make one small post cherry picking a statement you want to reply too.

Name one thing. If I'm truly purposely ignoring it because it's not easy or I can't speak against it, then I shouldn't be able to answer it right?

Just pick one. You made a very good point, there's 11 pages of stuff here. Do you expect me to answer everybody here? This isn't even the best Cubs board I visit, so why would I spend that much time here?

What will naming one thing accomplish? Nothing. then you'll respond to it nd nothing will change. The fact is that the majority of the good points that have pretty much dismissed your case are ignored, then you claim that you can't answer everybody because you don't have time and this isn't the only board you visit. Whatever. If you're going to get involved in a thread and make claims, then you'd better stay involved and respond to people who are showing why those claims are false. Seriously, just take a look through out the thread. It's not hard to see what I'm talking about. You make a claim, he's argued by many (and well), and then you make a new post either talking about something knew or cherry picking one post you feel like you can respond to. It's weak.

Whatever though, I don't even really care anymore, it's pointless. It's been proven over and over again that Dunn is a productive player. Nobody is making him out to be great. He's good. The arugments about RISP and stuff like that need to stop though, because it's been psoted enough how weak those arguments are.

scarey · December 21, 2008

Disagree. In Dunn's case, I can only assume it's a matter of baseball smarts. The guy fails to score runners in scoring position and strikes out in that situation A LOT. If he were to try to make contact first, who knows? Maybe he hits a bloop that scores a guy from second more often. Maybe he gets a sac fly now and then. Maybe he fouls off pitches until he gets a good one to hit. His strikeouts have nothing to do with plate discipline and I know it.

I just wanted to jump in here and point out one thing. One thing Adam Dunn does really really well is hit homeruns. If I were his manager I would never ask him to cut down on his swing so he can bloop single. That is for people like Theriot, who had like 1 homerun all year last year. I mean someone pointed out earlier the situation that maybe Dunn could swing at a few more 3-0. 3-1 pitches that are borderline that he currently now takes for a walk. He said he swings at 12 and puts 10 into play, which would be really nice because maybe 1-4 more runs score, but he makes 2 more outs. He effectively raises his avg, but lowers his OBP and it makes him LOOK better because his RBI's are up and his avg is up, but it makes him a worse hitter. Also what is the trade off or asking him to shorten his swing? How many homeruns would he miss out on? I mean if Dusty had been successful making him do that sac bunt last year, he would have only had 39 homeruns and 3 less RBI's.

The point of this entire argument has to be that Dunn isn't the type of hitter you like, contrary to the fact that he is a highly productive hitter, and that you are a Dusty Baker type baseball fan and simply want to see guys do things the "right way" and don't care as much about wins and losses. Because the stats are basically proving you wrong over and over and over again, no matter how you keep spinning it.

Oh, and this is what I was talking about earlier with the failed sac bunt/launching a 3 run homer.

With the Reds trailing by one run in the ninth inning Saturday, Adam Dunn's initial intention with runners on first and second and one out was to bunt his teammates into scoring position. After two unsuccessful sacrifice attempts, a frustrated Dunn chose to swing away. Dunn's backup plan sailed 449 feet into the right-field Sun Deck for a three-run walk-off home run...

Adam Dunn, batting seventh, with (I believe) 2 sac bunts in his career, asked to bunt in the bottom of the ninth with Paul Bako and the pitcher's spot behind him. (courtesy of FJM)

Ok, so I can get my point through thick skulls such as this, I'll try to make this as clear as possible. I've made my points over and over again, but let's sum it up by going for a simulated scenario.

Adam Dunn signs with the Cubs.

A base runner gets to third base with Dunn coming to the plate with two outs.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? HIT A FRIGGIN HOME RUN!!!!!

What would Scarey accept as alternatives?

1. Hit a triple (lol) or a double.

2. Hit a single.

.

3. Draw walk.

Dunn gets two strikes against him.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? MAKE CONTACT FIRST!!!!!

Now, if you disagree with that than that's just how the world works. People disagree. However, if you want to try to make me out to be some kind of Dusty Baker worshiping lunatic, please throw your slander elsewhere. I hated Baker's approach with his hitters. Piniella's approach is all about getting runs in. I'm not asking for sac bunts in the 1st inning or swinging for a single on the first pitch, but I think striking out with runners in scoring position is as bad as it gets much like Lou.

I don't care what nonsense you guys wanna make up about Dunn's swing angle, if a guy is striking out in 25% of his plate appearances with RISP, he can make strides towards trying to put the ball in play with two strikes.

Edited December 21, 2008 by scarey

wade · December 21, 2008

i jst like how scarey is ignoring amost everything everyone is saying but then cherrypicks one post out of 10 that he feels like he might actually be able to argue.

Quote something that I'm "ignoring" and I'll gladly address it. Please.

I;m not going to go through 11 pages and qutoe evrtyhing you've ignored. There are a ton of things that people have brought up that you haven't replied to. There will be like 10 posts in between yours and then you'll make one small post cherry picking a statement you want to reply too.

Name one thing. If I'm truly purposely ignoring it because it's not easy or I can't speak against it, then I shouldn't be able to answer it right?

Just pick one. You made a very good point, there's 11 pages of stuff here. Do you expect me to answer everybody here? This isn't even the best Cubs board I visit, so why would I spend that much time here?

Why come here at all?

17 Seconds · December 21, 2008

Disagree. In Dunn's case, I can only assume it's a matter of baseball smarts. The guy fails to score runners in scoring position and strikes out in that situation A LOT. If he were to try to make contact first, who knows? Maybe he hits a bloop that scores a guy from second more often. Maybe he gets a sac fly now and then. Maybe he fouls off pitches until he gets a good one to hit. His strikeouts have nothing to do with plate discipline and I know it.

I just wanted to jump in here and point out one thing. One thing Adam Dunn does really really well is hit homeruns. If I were his manager I would never ask him to cut down on his swing so he can bloop single. That is for people like Theriot, who had like 1 homerun all year last year. I mean someone pointed out earlier the situation that maybe Dunn could swing at a few more 3-0. 3-1 pitches that are borderline that he currently now takes for a walk. He said he swings at 12 and puts 10 into play, which would be really nice because maybe 1-4 more runs score, but he makes 2 more outs. He effectively raises his avg, but lowers his OBP and it makes him LOOK better because his RBI's are up and his avg is up, but it makes him a worse hitter. Also what is the trade off or asking him to shorten his swing? How many homeruns would he miss out on? I mean if Dusty had been successful making him do that sac bunt last year, he would have only had 39 homeruns and 3 less RBI's.

The point of this entire argument has to be that Dunn isn't the type of hitter you like, contrary to the fact that he is a highly productive hitter, and that you are a Dusty Baker type baseball fan and simply want to see guys do things the "right way" and don't care as much about wins and losses. Because the stats are basically proving you wrong over and over and over again, no matter how you keep spinning it.

Oh, and this is what I was talking about earlier with the failed sac bunt/launching a 3 run homer.

With the Reds trailing by one run in the ninth inning Saturday, Adam Dunn's initial intention with runners on first and second and one out was to bunt his teammates into scoring position. After two unsuccessful sacrifice attempts, a frustrated Dunn chose to swing away. Dunn's backup plan sailed 449 feet into the right-field Sun Deck for a three-run walk-off home run...

Adam Dunn, batting seventh, with (I believe) 2 sac bunts in his career, asked to bunt in the bottom of the ninth with Paul Bako and the pitcher's spot behind him. (courtesy of FJM)

Ok, so I can get my point through thick skulls such as this, I'll try to make this as clear as possible. I've made my points over and over again, but let's sum it up by going for a simulated scenario.

Adam Dunn signs with the Cubs.
A base runner gets to third base with Dunn coming to the plate with two outs.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? HIT A FRIGGIN HOME RUN!!!!!

What would Scarey accept as alternatives?
1. Hit a triple (lol) or a double.
2. Hit a single.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Draw walk.

Dunn gets two strikes against him.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? MAKE CONTACT FIRST!!!!!

Now, if you disagree with that than that's just how the world works. People disagree. However, if you want to try to make me out to be some kind of Dusty Baker worshiping lunatic, please throw your slander elsewhere. I hated Baker's approach with his hitters. Piniella's approach is all about getting runs in. I'm not asking for sac bunts in the 1st inning or swinging for a single on the first pitch, but I think striking out with runners in scoring position is as bad as it gets much like Lou.

I don't care what nonsense you guys wanna make up about Dunn's swing angle, if a guy is striking out in 25% of his plate appearances with RISP, he can make strides towards trying to put the ball in play with two strikes.

So to summarize, you don't want Dunn for these 2 reasons

1) Because he might not be good at getting a guy in from 3rd with less than 2 outs, which is a situational stat that makes a very marginal differencein runs over the course of an entire season

and

2) Because he doesn't shorten up with 2 strikes. Instea dhe swings away and stays as the same .900 OPS hitter who hits home runs at a good rate, instead of shortning up, flipping the bat at the ball in hopes of blooping a single, while usually just making weak contact to an infielder

Yeah, those are 2 very lofical reasons. I don't want him anymore either.

I just find it extremely comical that you entire argument revolves around BA with RISP and that you don't realize how miniscule that really is in the great scheme of producing runs

Sosa21MVP · December 21, 2008

i jst like how scarey is ignoring amost everything everyone is saying but then cherrypicks one post out of 10 that he feels like he might actually be able to argue.

Quote something that I'm "ignoring" and I'll gladly address it. Please.

I;m not going to go through 11 pages and qutoe evrtyhing you've ignored. There are a ton of things that people have brought up that you haven't replied to. There will be like 10 posts in between yours and then you'll make one small post cherry picking a statement you want to reply too.

Name one thing. If I'm truly purposely ignoring it because it's not easy or I can't speak against it, then I shouldn't be able to answer it right?

Just pick one. You made a very good point, there's 11 pages of stuff here. Do you expect me to answer everybody here? This isn't even the best Cubs board I visit, so why would I spend that much time here?

Why come here at all?

Apparently he feels he is better than us and is gracing us with his presence. :stickman:

slieb85 · December 21, 2008

Disagree. In Dunn's case, I can only assume it's a matter of baseball smarts. The guy fails to score runners in scoring position and strikes out in that situation A LOT. If he were to try to make contact first, who knows? Maybe he hits a bloop that scores a guy from second more often. Maybe he gets a sac fly now and then. Maybe he fouls off pitches until he gets a good one to hit. His strikeouts have nothing to do with plate discipline and I know it.

I just wanted to jump in here and point out one thing. One thing Adam Dunn does really really well is hit homeruns. If I were his manager I would never ask him to cut down on his swing so he can bloop single. That is for people like Theriot, who had like 1 homerun all year last year. I mean someone pointed out earlier the situation that maybe Dunn could swing at a few more 3-0. 3-1 pitches that are borderline that he currently now takes for a walk. He said he swings at 12 and puts 10 into play, which would be really nice because maybe 1-4 more runs score, but he makes 2 more outs. He effectively raises his avg, but lowers his OBP and it makes him LOOK better because his RBI's are up and his avg is up, but it makes him a worse hitter. Also what is the trade off or asking him to shorten his swing? How many homeruns would he miss out on? I mean if Dusty had been successful making him do that sac bunt last year, he would have only had 39 homeruns and 3 less RBI's.

The point of this entire argument has to be that Dunn isn't the type of hitter you like, contrary to the fact that he is a highly productive hitter, and that you are a Dusty Baker type baseball fan and simply want to see guys do things the "right way" and don't care as much about wins and losses. Because the stats are basically proving you wrong over and over and over again, no matter how you keep spinning it.

Oh, and this is what I was talking about earlier with the failed sac bunt/launching a 3 run homer.

With the Reds trailing by one run in the ninth inning Saturday, Adam Dunn's initial intention with runners on first and second and one out was to bunt his teammates into scoring position. After two unsuccessful sacrifice attempts, a frustrated Dunn chose to swing away. Dunn's backup plan sailed 449 feet into the right-field Sun Deck for a three-run walk-off home run...

Adam Dunn, batting seventh, with (I believe) 2 sac bunts in his career, asked to bunt in the bottom of the ninth with Paul Bako and the pitcher's spot behind him. (courtesy of FJM)

Ok, so I can get my point through thick skulls such as this, I'll try to make this as clear as possible. I've made my points over and over again, but let's sum it up by going for a simulated scenario.

Adam Dunn signs with the Cubs.
A base runner gets to third base with Dunn coming to the plate with two outs.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? HIT A FRIGGIN HOME RUN!!!!!

What would Scarey accept as alternatives?
1. Hit a triple (lol) or a double.
2. Hit a single.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Draw walk.

Dunn gets two strikes against him.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? MAKE CONTACT FIRST!!!!!

Now, if you disagree with that than that's just how the world works. People disagree. However, if you want to try to make me out to be some kind of Dusty Baker worshiping lunatic, please throw your slander elsewhere. I hated Baker's approach with his hitters. Piniella's approach is all about getting runs in. I'm not asking for sac bunts in the 1st inning or swinging for a single on the first pitch, but I think striking out with runners in scoring position is as bad as it gets much like Lou.

I don't care what nonsense you guys wanna make up about Dunn's swing angle, if a guy is striking out in 25% of his plate appearances with RISP, he can make strides towards trying to put the ball in play with two strikes.

Ok so real quick, as this discussion has worn thin with how much you've made yourself look foolish.

1. Please refrain from the personal attacks. I don't even come to this board that often and I know that Tim and other mods don't like that.

2. OPS with RISP last year for Adam Dunn: .929

3. OPS with runner on 3rd less than 2 outs: .800

4. OPS with runner on 3rd, 2 outs: 1.095

So let the guy hits 40 hr's and OPS's .899 last year as a whole, and your stuck on the fact that he doesn't hit for avg with runners on 3rd with less than 2 outs? I mean an .800 OPS isn't great by any means, but he's still pretty productive in that situation. And more than productive the rest of the time.

If your like Lou (like you claim and not like Dusty), then you should realize the best way to drive in runs is not make outs. Outs are precious, and dropping down sac bunts and trying to hit for contact as opposed to talking a walk are not good strategies. Just don't make an out and you've had a productive at bat. ESPECIALLY IF YOUR THE NUMBER 3-4 HITTER HITTING BETWEEN DERREK LEE AND ARAMIS RAMIREZ! THAT IS A PRODUCTIVE AT BAT. PERIOD.

I'll be on pins and needles waiting for you to tell us how making an out (which obviously you would do more often if you put pitches that are out of the strike zone into play) is more productive than letting the ball go by and taking a walk, extending the inning, and letting someone else try to not make outs.

Mephistopheles · December 22, 2008

When it's Game Seven of the World Series. Bottom of the ninth, runner on third, one out and we're down by one run. The pitchers spot is next, thanks to the patented Lou ill-advised double switch.

And Adam Dunn strikes out on a curveball in the dirt, leaving our hopes up to Reed Johnson. Will you still attend the Church of Dunn

Cut N Shoot

UK1679666180 · December 22, 2008

I don't care what nonsense you guys wanna make up about Dunn's swing angle.

If you think Dunn's bat angle is nonsense, you really don't know much about hitting nor much about how it impacts the ability to make contact. There's nothing made up there, with his overly patient approach which gets him into too many two strike counts and his bat angle (uppercut swing), that shortening his swing isn't going to do much since his bat isn't in the hitting zone much to begin with.

So instead of focusing the main problem Dunn, you want to focus on him shortening his swing with two strikes, what about the frequency he ends up in two strike counts? That's easier to improve than his K ratio with two strikes.

As I said before, which appears to be something you can't grasp, show me where I was a jerk towards you that merits a pompous response?

Fwiw, it doesn't appear you can debate in a civil tense, so I wish you would stick to that other board that you prefer (this doesn't ignore those who have responded to you in an equally arrogant manner, who I wish didn't post here either).

USSoccer · December 22, 2008

Once again...BA w/ RISP is a useless and non predictive stat, and to use it as a basis to critique a player is horrid logic.

Secondly, the 2008 Cubs were a 97 win team in large part due to a newfound patience at the plate, which put our hitters in a position to feast on bad middle relief more often than not. So adding a guy who will simply attrit a pitchers' arm that much more while providing a high end slugging % would be a good move, not a bad one.

bcl412 · December 22, 2008

Adam Dunn's not clutch and he smells like cottage cheese.

BigbadB · December 22, 2008

Once again...BA w/ RISP is a useless and non predictive stat, and to use it as a basis to critique a player is horrid logic.

Secondly, the 2008 Cubs were a 97 win team in large part due to a newfound patience at the plate, which put our hitters in a position to feast on bad middle relief more often than not. So adding a guy who will simply attrit a pitchers' arm that much more while providing a high end slugging % would be a good move, not a bad one.

Yep. Dusty's aggressive approach meant less guys on base. Lou has emphasized a much better plate approach, and it is no coincidence that the Cubs have gone from being the worst team in the league at scoring runs to one of the best. While the batting average is not really that much different than when Dusty was here, the incredible improvement in drawing walks is the most accountable thing to the run scoring improvement.

I'm not a huge Adam Dunn fan, but I'd be happy to have him on this team. His OBP and power combination makes him valuable.

The only thing that would result in Adam Dunn shortening his swing is 300 foot fly outs rather than 400 foot home runs.

I think the key to having Dunn in the line up would be to keep Lee in front of him, since his ground ball tendencies could result in an even worse GIDP ratio than he already has. You want an XBH guy or two hitting behind Dunn like Ramirez, Soto and DeRosa. Base runners create big innings. Big innings create wins.

Blue W · December 22, 2008

It seems pretty obvious to me: you only get 27 outs but you have a potentially unlimmited number of bases and runs you can get. You shouldn't change the swing that you are comfortable with, the swing that got you to the major leagues, on the off chance you might bloop one over the second baseman's head. You are MORE likely to get an out that way than 1) by sticking with the swing that made you better at hitting a round ball with a round bat than 99.9 percent of the world 2) taking a walk when you don't get a good pitch to hit.

Being a middle of the order type hitter is not a suicide pact. It's not all or nothing, though that's what Scarey and others are advocating. Dunn realizess this and takes the same approach to all his at bats. This has translated into a marginal BA and a great OPS. As was said before - it's not pretty but it gets the job done.

Dunn isn't my first choice. But we could do a lot worse. A lot worse.

NewUserName · December 22, 2008

this may have already been brought up but I was looking at similar players through age 28 to Adam Dunn and found that several of these guys were very controversial on how good they actually were.

1. Darryl Strawberry (920)

2. Jose Canseco (906)

3. Harmon Killebrew (902) *

4. Rocky Colavito (895)

5. Reggie Jackson (889) *

6. Troy Glaus (867)

7. Tom Brunansky (865)

8. Barry Bonds (861)

9. Roger Maris (859)

10. Boog Powell (859)

I am not a big fan of similarity scores for predicting a career. In this case I find it interesting because several of these players were widely criticized for being one-dimensional.

RynoRules · December 23, 2008

this may have already been brought up but I was looking at similar players through age 28 to Adam Dunn and found that several of these guys were very controversial on how good they actually were.

1. Darryl Strawberry (920)
2. Jose Canseco (906)
3. Harmon Killebrew (902) *
4. Rocky Colavito (895)
5. Reggie Jackson (889) *
6. Troy Glaus (867)
7. Tom Brunansky (865)
8. Barry Bonds (861)
9. Roger Maris (859)
10. Boog Powell (859)

I am not a big fan of similarity scores for predicting a career. In this case I find it interesting because several of these players were widely criticized for being one-dimensional.

That's some pretty good company. I think Reggie is a very good comparison skillset wise, BTW.

samhainn77 · December 23, 2008

Disagree. In Dunn's case, I can only assume it's a matter of baseball smarts. The guy fails to score runners in scoring position and strikes out in that situation A LOT. If he were to try to make contact first, who knows? Maybe he hits a bloop that scores a guy from second more often. Maybe he gets a sac fly now and then. Maybe he fouls off pitches until he gets a good one to hit. His strikeouts have nothing to do with plate discipline and I know it.

I just wanted to jump in here and point out one thing. One thing Adam Dunn does really really well is hit homeruns. If I were his manager I would never ask him to cut down on his swing so he can bloop single. That is for people like Theriot, who had like 1 homerun all year last year. I mean someone pointed out earlier the situation that maybe Dunn could swing at a few more 3-0. 3-1 pitches that are borderline that he currently now takes for a walk. He said he swings at 12 and puts 10 into play, which would be really nice because maybe 1-4 more runs score, but he makes 2 more outs. He effectively raises his avg, but lowers his OBP and it makes him LOOK better because his RBI's are up and his avg is up, but it makes him a worse hitter. Also what is the trade off or asking him to shorten his swing? How many homeruns would he miss out on? I mean if Dusty had been successful making him do that sac bunt last year, he would have only had 39 homeruns and 3 less RBI's.

The point of this entire argument has to be that Dunn isn't the type of hitter you like, contrary to the fact that he is a highly productive hitter, and that you are a Dusty Baker type baseball fan and simply want to see guys do things the "right way" and don't care as much about wins and losses. Because the stats are basically proving you wrong over and over and over again, no matter how you keep spinning it.

Oh, and this is what I was talking about earlier with the failed sac bunt/launching a 3 run homer.

With the Reds trailing by one run in the ninth inning Saturday, Adam Dunn's initial intention with runners on first and second and one out was to bunt his teammates into scoring position. After two unsuccessful sacrifice attempts, a frustrated Dunn chose to swing away. Dunn's backup plan sailed 449 feet into the right-field Sun Deck for a three-run walk-off home run...

Adam Dunn, batting seventh, with (I believe) 2 sac bunts in his career, asked to bunt in the bottom of the ninth with Paul Bako and the pitcher's spot behind him. (courtesy of FJM)

Ok, so I can get my point through thick skulls such as this, I'll try to make this as clear as possible. I've made my points over and over again, but let's sum it up by going for a simulated scenario.

Adam Dunn signs with the Cubs.
A base runner gets to third base with Dunn coming to the plate with two outs.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? HIT A FRIGGIN HOME RUN!!!!!

What would Scarey accept as alternatives?
1. Hit a triple (lol) or a double.
2. Hit a single.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Draw walk.

Dunn gets two strikes against him.

What does Scarey want Dunn to do? MAKE CONTACT FIRST!!!!!

Now, if you disagree with that than that's just how the world works. People disagree. However, if you want to try to make me out to be some kind of Dusty Baker worshiping lunatic, please throw your slander elsewhere. I hated Baker's approach with his hitters. Piniella's approach is all about getting runs in. I'm not asking for sac bunts in the 1st inning or swinging for a single on the first pitch, but I think striking out with runners in scoring position is as bad as it gets much like Lou.

I don't care what nonsense you guys wanna make up about Dunn's swing angle, if a guy is striking out in 25% of his plate appearances with RISP, he can make strides towards trying to put the ball in play with two strikes.

Besides the points that a few others made...I don't think it the point has been addressed that "MAKING CONTACT FIRST" is not always ideal, especially if it comes at the cost of forcing an extremely disciplined hitter to change his approach and flail weakly at any and every pitch. In your arbitrary, cherry picked scenario you are trading a chance for a HR, Double, Walk, Single for a slightly higher chance (this point is debatable, but I'll concede it for the sake of the bigger argument) at a single (bloop, seeing eye, or otherwise) or error. If you're willing to make that trade - fine.

But what if my arbitrary, cherry picked scenario of bases loaded, 1 out, 2-2 count comes up. Now how ideal is it to "MAKE CONTACT FIRST"? We saw about 1 million rallies killed last year from DLee "contacting" into a DP. Outs by contact are not always better than a strikeout, especially if you are playing the risk vs reward game.

Transmogrified Tiger · December 23, 2008

I guess this is the place for this. Emphasis mine.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/shysterball/article/marty-brennaman-is-a-disgrace/

Caller: People here don’t realize that Pat Burrell and Adam Dunn don’t get paid $12 million to hit .300. They get paid to hit home runs; that’s it.
Marty: No, they get paid to drive in runs, is what they get paid to do.
Caller: And hit home runs.
Marty: No, unh-uh. Home runs are incidental. It’s run production that they are going to get paid for. Adam Dunn hits 40 home runs and barely reaches a hundred RBI’s.
Caller: But, if you’re going to talk about potential run production, look at his on-base.
Marty: (angrily) I don’t care about—I don’t care about his on-base! I get so blasted tired hearing some people talk to me about Adam Dunn’s on-base percentage. Adam Dunn ain’t paid to walk. Adam Dunn’s paid to hit home runs and drive in runs for God’s sake, and they can take off, uh, they can take off the walks, and you’re out of here! (hangs up)
. . .
Marty: We are heading toward a break. Don’t call and talk to me about Adam Dunn’s on-base percentage--
Thom: You sure?
Marty: --because it pushes my hot button.
Thom: I would have never known.
Marty: I’m tired of hearing about how many times he walks. He was paid to hit home runs, paid to drive in runs. He homers; he doesn’t drive in runs.
Thom: You know, you’re too old to get worked up like this.

samhainn77 · December 23, 2008

I guess this is the place for this. Emphasis mine.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/shysterball/article/marty-brennaman-is-a-disgrace/

Caller: People here don’t realize that Pat Burrell and Adam Dunn don’t get paid $12 million to hit .300. They get paid to hit home runs; that’s it.
Marty: No, they get paid to drive in runs, is what they get paid to do.
Caller: And hit home runs.
Marty: No, unh-uh. Home runs are incidental. It’s run production that they are going to get paid for. Adam Dunn hits 40 home runs and barely reaches a hundred RBI’s.
Caller: But, if you’re going to talk about potential run production, look at his on-base.
Marty: (angrily) I don’t care about—I don’t care about his on-base! I get so blasted tired hearing some people talk to me about Adam Dunn’s on-base percentage. Adam Dunn ain’t paid to walk. Adam Dunn’s paid to hit home runs and drive in runs for God’s sake, and they can take off, uh, they can take off the walks, and you’re out of here! (hangs up)
. . .
Marty: We are heading toward a break. Don’t call and talk to me about Adam Dunn’s on-base percentage--
Thom: You sure?
Marty: --because it pushes my hot button.
Thom: I would have never known.
Marty: I’m tired of hearing about how many times he walks. He was paid to hit home runs, paid to drive in runs. He homers; he doesn’t drive in runs.
Thom: You know, you’re too old to get worked up like this.

Oh my Lord...I had never seen this before. I didn't think I could dislike Marty more than I already do.

scarey · December 23, 2008

I want to make clear that I'm not cherry picking arguments, I just want to put an emphasis on this.

1. Please refrain from the personal attacks. I don't even come to this board that often and I know that Tim and other mods don't like that.

I have made it a point, as I do with all forums I visit, to not make any personal attacks. Feel free to check. I have told people their arguments are hyperbole, nonsense, etc. I have not made a single personal attack and quite frankly I'm getting tired of the misconceptions and presumptions people are making.

Other than that, I want to make sure I summarize my feelings on this topic because it seems like people are still really confused about my feelings.

-I am not totally against getting Dunn, I would rather have players that in my opinion are better.

-I value OBP very much. I am a big believer. However, I do think there's times where the most obvious stats don't tell the whole story. I understand that people think my RISP ideas are very situational, but for a middle of the order hitter, it's a situation that happens A LOT and I personally feel it's very relevant.

-I have never claimed to be right about anything. If what I've said makes people believe that's what I'm saying, I apologize because I don't feel like I am in anyway an authority on baseball. I've only ever wanted to make my point heard.

-I am not saying this stuff to ruffle feathers. I only wanted to talk baseball. I visit a few different forums and like to get other people's POV as well as stake my argument. I find it enjoyable. I don't do anything like this to anger anyone and I may be mistaken, but I get the feeling that people here think I'm trying to be a smart ass.

So, I'm sorry that I upset people here. I'm going to make this my last post because I have not found defending my stance to be enjoyable here and I'm fairly certain that most people here don't want me here. As I've said, there are other boards that I enjoy more than this one and it's not a big deal if I stick to them instead. It's not that you guys have different baseball ideas than I do, but I just don't think I fit in.

So, if Dunn happens to end up being a Cub, I'll cheer as hard or harder then you guys for him. Let's just hope for good production from any player the Cubs pick up as well as a successful season and post season in 2009.

DonnieD · December 24, 2008

scarey,

I don't think there are many people that "don't want you here", and it is definitely not most. Understand that the reason statistical or baseball philosophy arguments get somewhat heated is that people (yourself included) want others to see things as they see them.

I myself was much more of a baseball traditionalist about 5 or 6 years ago. I got most of my information and developed (or borrowed) most of my ideas from baseball announcers and ESPN. Only when I found this site and began reading and contemplating some of the contrary ideas and opinions of many of the members here did I really begin to do some of my own analysis. I consider myself an extremely open-minded person, so even though these ideas all but shattered my long held baseball ideals, I researched and examined many viewpoints and ended up much more in the SABR camp than not.

As far as this particular discussion goes, my take on it is that you look too far into the RISP thing. Many have pointed out the sample size issue, but I think what it really comes down to is that with almost no exceptions a hitter’s line in “clutch” situations is going to be completely in line with their overall statistics. I briefly looked at 3 year splits for overall numbers and RISP numbers for a few MLB players and even among the players traditionally considered “clutch” like David Ortiz, their RISP numbers fall right in line with their actual numbers. A players RISP rate stats are typically going to fall somewhere between their best and worst years. For example with David Ortiz here is what you find:

Period AVG OBP SLG OPS

3 year .297 .413 .596 1.009

3 yr RISP .326 .454 .620 1.074

Best year .332 .445 .621 1.066

I suspect the difference in OBP is more than accounted for by his intentional walks with RISP. With nearly every player I looked at (Adam Dunn included), their RISP numbers fall between the best and worst years of their 3 year splits even though their RISP sample sizes are smaller than one season.

That is why posters here are disregarding your RISP argument or attributing it to luck. You needn’t drill down into someone’s “clutch” stats, you can look at their actual numbers and tell with a high level of assurance what type of hitter they are going to be.

The biggest problem I have (and I assume others do too) with your argument is that you claim to value OBP “very much”, but in your analysis you are disregarding OBP and instead are stressing the inferior AVG. In addition, you seem to be in agreement that Dunn is a productive player because of his high OPS, but your argument seems to be that Dunn is a bad hitter with RISP despite his (still high) OPS, because of his low AVG in those situations. However his 3 year splits show that he hits .234 with RISP, right in line with his .244 overall average, and the same as his AVG in his worst year of the last 3.

shnsajax · December 24, 2008

scarey,

I don't think there are many people that "don't want you here", and it is definitely not most. Understand that the reason statistical or baseball philosophy arguments get somewhat heated is that people (yourself included) want others to see things as they see them.

I myself was much more of a baseball traditionalist about 5 or 6 years ago. I got most of my information and developed (or borrowed) most of my ideas from baseball announcers and ESPN. Only when I found this site and began reading and contemplating some of the contrary ideas and opinions of many of the members here did I really begin to do some of my own analysis. I consider myself an extremely open-minded person, so even though these ideas all but shattered my long held baseball ideals, I researched and examined many viewpoints and ended up much more in the SABR camp than not.

As far as this particular discussion goes, my take on it is that you look too far into the RISP thing. Many have pointed out the sample size issue, but I think what it really comes down to is that with almost no exceptions a hitter’s line in “clutch” situations is going to be completely in line with their overall statistics. I briefly looked at 3 year splits for overall numbers and RISP numbers for a few MLB players and even among the players traditionally considered “clutch” like David Ortiz, their RISP numbers fall right in line with their actual numbers. A players RISP rate stats are typically going to fall somewhere between their best and worst years. For example with David Ortiz here is what you find:

Period AVG OBP SLG OPS
3 year .297 .413 .596 1.009
3 yr RISP .326 .454 .620 1.074
Best year .332 .445 .621 1.066

I suspect the difference in OBP is more than accounted for by his intentional walks with RISP. With nearly every player I looked at (Adam Dunn included), their RISP numbers fall between the best and worst years of their 3 year splits even though their RISP sample sizes are smaller than one season.

That is why posters here are disregarding your RISP argument or attributing it to luck. You needn’t drill down into someone’s “clutch” stats, you can look at their actual numbers and tell with a high level of assurance what type of hitter they are going to be.

The biggest problem I have (and I assume others do too) with your argument is that you claim to value OBP “very much”, but in your analysis you are disregarding OBP and instead are stressing the inferior AVG. In addition, you seem to be in agreement that Dunn is a productive player because of his high OPS, but your argument seems to be that Dunn is a bad hitter with RISP despite his (still high) OPS, because of his low AVG in those situations. However his 3 year splits show that he hits .234 with RISP, right in line with his .244 overall average, and the same as his AVG in his worst year of the last 3.

I think people look too much at OPS without looking at how a player got to that number. Why not just look at OBP and Slug% as two different variables? The individual numbers that create OPS are just as important when determining what kind of role a player should serve.

I've said this before but I think Dunn can be an asset and a detriment to this team depending on how he is used.

Keeper · January 3, 2009

I'd take Dunn over Bradley any day of the week. Besides being a major head case, last season seemed fluky to me. Plus, Bradley almost always gets hurt. With Dunn, you know what you're getting. Yes, he strikes out a lot. And yes, he'll never win a gold glove. But you're guaranteed 40 HRs, 100 RBIs, and a high OBP.

'Course, they should have gone after Ibanez. Too late now, though.

laurens · January 3, 2009

I'd take Dunn over Bradley any day of the week. Besides being a major head case, last season seemed fluky to me. Plus, Bradley almost always gets hurt. With Dunn, you know what you're getting. Yes, he strikes out a lot. And yes, he'll never win a gold glove. But you're guaranteed 40 HRs, 100 RBIs, and a high OBP.

'Course, they should have gone after Ibanez. Too late now, though.

Isn't Dunn better than Ibanez? And a few centuries younger?

Edited January 3, 2009 by laurens

vance_the_cubs_fan · January 3, 2009

:banghead:

Dunn is awesome...No he's not...Yes he is!!!

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs