Re: Dunn wants to be a Cub?

[Guest]

You do all realize that Cincinnati is more homerun friendly than Wrigley, don't you? Why would Dunn be so much better in Chicago?

 

Interestingly on defense, for the year, Dunn RF -4 LF -4, Kosuke RF -3.

[Guest]

for the record, Soriano was +2 in LF and Bradley +2 in RF. If those numbers mean anything, I would reverse my thoughts on Dunn.

[rocket]

I would have to vote against Dunn especially if he wants a long-term deal. His defense will definitely hurt, especially in the playoffs, and he is not likely to age well. If the Cubs are going to get more left-handed, who loses their job?

 

i'm not sure the market is all that hot on dunn. is 3 years 36 million completely out of the question?

[rocket]

You do all realize that Cincinnati is more homerun friendly than Wrigley, don't you? Why would Dunn be so much better in Chicago?

 

Interestingly on defense, for the year, Dunn RF -4 LF -4, Kosuke RF -3.

 

i know he's had a ton more at-bats at cincy, but dunn has a 100 point higher slugging percentage at wrigley than he does at gabp.

[Guest]

You do all realize that Cincinnati is more homerun friendly than Wrigley, don't you? Why would Dunn be so much better in Chicago?

 

Interestingly on defense, for the year, Dunn RF -4 LF -4, Kosuke RF -3.

 

i know he's had a ton more at-bats at cincy, but dunn has a 100 point higher slugging percentage at wrigley than he does at gabp.

 

 

I'm pretty sure we both agree that means nothing. I am warming to Dunn so long as he is in Chicago 4 years or less. He'd fit nicely between Lee and Ramirez.

[rocket]

You do all realize that Cincinnati is more homerun friendly than Wrigley, don't you? Why would Dunn be so much better in Chicago?

 

Interestingly on defense, for the year, Dunn RF -4 LF -4, Kosuke RF -3.

 

i know he's had a ton more at-bats at cincy, but dunn has a 100 point higher slugging percentage at wrigley than he does at gabp.

 

 

I'm pretty sure we both agree that means nothing. I am warming to Dunn so long as he is in Chicago 4 years or less. He'd fit nicely between Lee and Ramirez.

 

it worked out wonderfully when we signed blauser because of it.

[RedFlash]

I would have to vote against Dunn especially if he wants a long-term deal. His defense will definitely hurt, especially in the playoffs, and he is not likely to age well. If the Cubs are going to get more left-handed, who loses their job?

 

i'm not sure the market is all that hot on dunn. is 3 years 36 million completely out of the question?

 

The question would be if Dunn is willing to take a similar deal to what Jose Guillen signed?

[Backtobanks]

The more I think about it the more I am liking Dunn over Bradley/Abreu, I think we have enough versatility that he could be pulled for defensive replacements late in games when we have a lead. Plus he is the youngest and the most likely to stay healthy and to have continued production over the course of a contract when compared to Bradley/Abreu. My opinion will likely change the first time he doesn't get to a flyball that a 80 year old woman with glaucoma, a hunchback, and a prosthetic leg could get to.

 

So that means your opinion will change by the third game of the season.

[MSG T]

You do all realize that Cincinnati is more homerun friendly than Wrigley, don't you? Why would Dunn be so much better in Chicago?

 

Interestingly on defense, for the year, Dunn RF -4 LF -4, Kosuke RF -3.

 

i know he's had a ton more at-bats at cincy, but dunn has a 100 point higher slugging percentage at wrigley than he does at gabp.

 

 

I'm pretty sure we both agree that means nothing. I am warming to Dunn so long as he is in Chicago 4 years or less. He'd fit nicely between Lee and Ramirez.

 

it worked out wonderfully when we signed blauser because of it.

 

I'm betting that, overall, the Cubs pitching that Dunn faced in Wrigley was better than the Cubs pitching that Blauser faced.

 

However, in principle, I agree.

 

I guess you'd have to compared how he did against Cubs pitching in GABP vs how he did in Wrigley vs Cubs pitching. *small sample size alert

[MSG T]

Found it, kind of.

 

In 109 games against the Cubs, covering 460 PA, .260/.398/.614/1.012 w/84 BB and 38 HR.

 

In Wrigley- 60 games 267 PA .286/.419/.664/1.083 w/49 BB and 23 BB. So against comparable pitching, he did hit better at Wrigley. Although he absolutely kills Cubs pitching everywhere.

 

However, how would he do against everyone else at Wrigley?

 

For the record, I love to see Dunn, Fuku/Johnson, Soriano L to R manning the OF.

[rawaction]

I like Dunn, but not for the Cubs. Again, on a defense with Soriano in LF and Kosuke in CF (I don't think Kosuke will be great in CF and I don't think Soriano goes to RF for his 3rd different OF position to start the season as a Cub), Dunn does not look like much of an option. In addition, when you consider the years and money you'd have to give him, there are better options.

 

Bradley has been more productive than Dunn the last 2 years and though he will hit the DL, his contract likely won't be as long or as expensive as Dunn's. Much better defender.

 

Hermida is much younger, shown he can be slightly less productive at his best, but entering his prime. Obviously much cheaper salary wise and better defensively, but would cost prospects.

 

Abreu, I rate similar to Dunn. Probably just as bad defensively. Less productive. Probably a similar contract, with maybe a year shorter in length.

[MSG T]

I like Dunn, but not for the Cubs. Again, on a defense with Soriano in LF and Kosuke in CF (I don't think Kosuke will be great in CF and I don't think Soriano goes to RF for his 3rd different OF position to start the season as a Cub), Dunn does not look like much of an option. In addition, when you consider the years and money you'd have to give him, there are better options.

 

Bradley has been more productive than Dunn the last 2 years and though he will hit the DL, his contract likely won't be as long or as expensive as Dunn's. Much better defender.

 

Hermida is much younger, shown he can be slightly less productive at his best, but entering his prime. Obviously much cheaper salary wise and better defensively, but would cost prospects.

 

Abreu, I rate similar to Dunn. Probably just as bad defensively. Less productive. Probably a similar contract, with maybe a year shorter in length.

 

 

Hermida would be my top choice, but I really don't think they'd be able to get him. Of the FA's, if Bradley would be more likely to stay healthy, he'd be my first choice, with Dunn being second. I just don't think Bradley is going to stay healthy. I'd bet he misses more games than Soriano did last season.

 

For me it comes down to 150 games of Dunn's D>Bradley on the DL for 60 games. It's still pretty close though.

[rawaction]

I like Dunn, but not for the Cubs. Again, on a defense with Soriano in LF and Kosuke in CF (I don't think Kosuke will be great in CF and I don't think Soriano goes to RF for his 3rd different OF position to start the season as a Cub), Dunn does not look like much of an option. In addition, when you consider the years and money you'd have to give him, there are better options.

 

Bradley has been more productive than Dunn the last 2 years and though he will hit the DL, his contract likely won't be as long or as expensive as Dunn's. Much better defender.

 

Hermida is much younger, shown he can be slightly less productive at his best, but entering his prime. Obviously much cheaper salary wise and better defensively, but would cost prospects.

 

Abreu, I rate similar to Dunn. Probably just as bad defensively. Less productive. Probably a similar contract, with maybe a year shorter in length.

 

 

Hermida would be my top choice, but I really don't think they'd be able to get him. Of the FA's, if Bradley would be more likely to stay healthy, he'd be my first choice, with Dunn being second. I just don't think Bradley is going to stay healthy. I'd bet he misses more games than Soriano did last season.

 

For me it comes down to 150 games of Dunn's D>Bradley on the DL for 60 games. It's still pretty close though.

 

I understand the health concerns, but Bradley greatly outproduced Dunn the last couple years. People talk about Bradley's numbers being skewed by the great hitters park in Texas, but he had solid road numbers. Even before that, he produced great numbers in San Diego after being traded in 2007 and had a good year in Oakland before that, two pitchers parks.

 

And losing Bradley to the DL doesn't hurt the Cubs that much, because then you can play Derosa in RF and Fontenot at 2B, which would be a minimal loss offensively.

[CP_414]

There seems to be much more concern about defense on this board this offseason than I can ever remember. I'm not there yet. I would love to have Dunn on the Cubs at a "reasonable" contract. His offensive production exceeds any of the other options (unless Bradley somehow becomes Ripkenesque and matches his Texas numbers). Dunn's defense is really bad, but if it wasn't he would get $20 million a year, so you take the bad with the good.

 

I don't really understand how each defensive metric works or how accurate they are so I am definitly open minded about this but I believe Soto, Lee, Ramirez, and Fukudome are strong defenders. Theriot and DeRosa are ok, and Soriano and Dunn would be very poor. I would imagine that would put us around middle of the pack in terms of fielding, but #1 in the NL in runs scored, and we should be top 3 or 4 in pitching. As was mentioned earlier, we also do have a lot of options for defensive replacments if the situation calls for it.

 

I'll take him.

[17 Seconds]

There seems to be much more concern about defense on this board this offseason than I can ever remember.

 

yeah for some reason defense is suddenly the new hotness on here

[Outshined_One]

There seems to be much more concern about defense on this board this offseason than I can ever remember.

 

yeah for some reason defense is suddenly the new hotness on here

 

We need something else to argue about since we've pretty much beaten all of the offensive stats to death.

[Tracer Bullet]

I like Dunn, but not for the Cubs. Again, on a defense with Soriano in LF and Kosuke in CF (I don't think Kosuke will be great in CF and I don't think Soriano goes to RF for his 3rd different OF position to start the season as a Cub), Dunn does not look like much of an option. In addition, when you consider the years and money you'd have to give him, there are better options.

 

Bradley has been more productive than Dunn the last 2 years and though he will hit the DL, his contract likely won't be as long or as expensive as Dunn's. Much better defender.

 

Hermida is much younger, shown he can be slightly less productive at his best, but entering his prime. Obviously much cheaper salary wise and better defensively, but would cost prospects.

 

Abreu, I rate similar to Dunn. Probably just as bad defensively. Less productive. Probably a similar contract, with maybe a year shorter in length.

 

 

Hermida would be my top choice, but I really don't think they'd be able to get him. Of the FA's, if Bradley would be more likely to stay healthy, he'd be my first choice, with Dunn being second. I just don't think Bradley is going to stay healthy. I'd bet he misses more games than Soriano did last season.

 

For me it comes down to 150 games of Dunn's D>Bradley on the DL for 60 games. It's still pretty close though.

 

I understand the health concerns, but Bradley greatly outproduced Dunn the last couple years. People talk about Bradley's numbers being skewed by the great hitters park in Texas, but he had solid road numbers. Even before that, he produced great numbers in San Diego after being traded in 2007 and had a good year in Oakland before that, two pitchers parks.

 

And losing Bradley to the DL doesn't hurt the Cubs that much, because then you can play Derosa in RF and Fontenot at 2B, which would be a minimal loss offensively.

 

I might be missing something, but are you saying that the offensive drop-off from Bradley to Fontenot would be minimal?

[shnsajax]

There seems to be much more concern about defense on this board this offseason than I can ever remember. I'm not there yet. I would love to have Dunn on the Cubs at a "reasonable" contract. His offensive production exceeds any of the other options (unless Bradley somehow becomes Ripkenesque and matches his Texas numbers). Dunn's defense is really bad, but if it wasn't he would get $20 million a year, so you take the bad with the good.

 

I don't really understand how each defensive metric works or how accurate they are so I am definitly open minded about this but I believe Soto, Lee, Ramirez, and Fukudome are strong defenders. Theriot and DeRosa are ok, and Soriano and Dunn would be very poor. I would imagine that would put us around middle of the pack in terms of fielding, but #1 in the NL in runs scored, and we should be top 3 or 4 in pitching. As was mentioned earlier, we also do have a lot of options for defensive replacments if the situation calls for it.

 

I'll take him.

 

Dunn playing good defense would not add $8million to his yearly demands. He's a great slugger and poor hitter, he would never command $20million a year.

[JonnyRed]

I don't profess to be the stats junkie that some on this board are, but it seems like we are placing much more emphasis on a player's defense than on his offensive contribution.

 

The unscientific way I look at it says that Dunn would hit a HR every 4 days for the Cubs, while likely driving in 100+ runs. He also would have an error every 10-15 games---which may or may not lead to a run. Factor in a more limited range in the field, and I still don't think that you come close to having his lack of D outweigh the offense he can provide to the Cubs. Not to mention the protection in the lineup he can provide to guys like D-Lee and Ram.

 

It sounds like we are his first choice and as long as we can get him signed to a reasonable deal (3 years, $36-40M) I'm all for it....get it done Jim!

[CP_414]

There seems to be much more concern about defense on this board this offseason than I can ever remember. I'm not there yet. I would love to have Dunn on the Cubs at a "reasonable" contract. His offensive production exceeds any of the other options (unless Bradley somehow becomes Ripkenesque and matches his Texas numbers). Dunn's defense is really bad, but if it wasn't he would get $20 million a year, so you take the bad with the good.

 

I don't really understand how each defensive metric works or how accurate they are so I am definitly open minded about this but I believe Soto, Lee, Ramirez, and Fukudome are strong defenders. Theriot and DeRosa are ok, and Soriano and Dunn would be very poor. I would imagine that would put us around middle of the pack in terms of fielding, but #1 in the NL in runs scored, and we should be top 3 or 4 in pitching. As was mentioned earlier, we also do have a lot of options for defensive replacments if the situation calls for it.

 

I'll take him.

 

Dunn playing good defense would not add $8million to his yearly demands. He's a great slugger and poor hitter, he would never command $20million a year.

 

I think he will get more than $12M. I would also debate your comment that he's a poor hitter, but the last thing this board needs is another debate about that, so it is what it is.

[Mephistopheles]

whats funny about dunns defense is that he actually isn't an immovable object. He's got fairly decent athleticism, more so than a lot of better corner defensive outfielders than him. what he doesn't do well is read the ball of the bat and have a quick first step.

[Derwood]

Hermida is interesting, but would you rather give up cash or prospects? With Dunn, all you're giving up is money, whereas Hermida will probably be held for king's ransom

[Guest]

Dang...been too long since I worked with this stuff...

 

I'm trying to match up my calculations to the defensive efficiency ratings on BP. The calculation should be:

 

1 - (hits/(AB - HR - K))

 

Right?

 

Where I'm trying to go with this is the following: I don't buy that one player's defense makes a 40 run difference when I'm not sure the entire team defense has much more difference than that between the best teams and the worst teams. So I'm starting with defensive efficiency to estimate how many runs separate best from worst in order to validate/invalidate my gut feel.

 

From there...well...I'll figure that out when I see how much difference there is between best team and worst team. I know that there could be one of the worst fielders in history on a team with seven (eight) other outstanding defenders that comes out well above average as a team. So the allocation process would be tricky if trying to use a top-down process. It may overly reward bad defenders on good fielding teams and vice versa.

 

Just worth a couple hours of research, methinks.

[Guest]

nm. the calc is right there on the page.

[Guest]

Alright - so the most efficient defense in baseball last year was TB, converting 71% of all balls in play into outs (as an aside - Hendry is right that defense played a part in last year's success, as the Cubs were second best in baseball). Texas was the worst in the game at a 67% conversion rate. The difference on the number of hits on balls in play comes out to nearly two extra hits per game (just over 300 total).

 

Now I just have to figure out how to convert that into runs...