Dunn to the White Sox (p. 12)

[17 Seconds]

i really want dunn, but man it's going to suck to have to put up with kaplan-esque meatheads whine about his skill set constantly.

[OleMissCub]

Apparently people do

 

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/rank?versionId=2&listId=533#topOfList

 

While placing Griffey ahead of Bonds is inexcusable, that's one thing...but really Tony Gwynn?

 

Is Mark Grace really one of the 20 best position players of the 90s??

 

.310/.385/.449/.835, 122 OPS+, 1754 hits and 364 doubles with 4 gold gloves is a pretty fair decade. He's obviously at the bottom of a top 20 of the decade, but I can't imagine that it would be a travesty or anything that he is there.

[17 Seconds]

Love Grace, but I'm not sure a .449 slugging percentage from a 1B (especially in Wrigley) is good enough to be a top 20 player for that decade.

[SouthSideRyan]

There are 8 1B listed there, and without looking into it I have Grace as the 8th best. There shouldn't be 8 of one position in a best of a decade list

[dew1679666265]

Anybody who needs advanced stats to tell the difference between Mike Cameron and David Eckstein hasn't watched very much baseball.

 

I'm talking about difference in value, though looking at the stats that was a poor example. I also didn't know you included OPS in "traditional" stats. Generally "traditional" stats include batting average, SB, R, H, 2B, 3B, RISP, etc.

 

My main preference for advanced stats (I look at OPS, WAR, OBP, SLG, BB% and K%) is they tell you a lot more in far fewer stats – they're also much more accurate in showing value. Instead of having to look at 4-5 stats to find how well a player slugs, using advanced stats I just have to look at SLG and OPS. It's a much more convenient method for me. I'm awful at figuring them out, though.

[OleMissCub]

Love Grace, but I'm not sure a .449 slugging percentage from a 1B (especially in Wrigley) is good enough to be a top 20 player for that decade.

 

but he wasn't a power hitting first baseman, so why penalize him for that? He was in that mold of first baggers like Will Clark and Olerud. Granted they both had a bit more power than Gracie, but they aren't Thome/Big Mac types. Would it have been nicer if he had more power? Hell ya. He still had a damn strong decade though.

[17 Seconds]

Love Grace, but I'm not sure a .449 slugging percentage from a 1B (especially in Wrigley) is good enough to be a top 20 player for that decade.

 

but he wasn't a power hitting first baseman, so why penalize him for that? He was in that mold of first baggers like Will Clark and Olerud. Granted they both had a bit more power than Gracie, but they aren't Thome/Big Mac types. Would it have been nicer if he had more power? Hell ya. He still had a damn strong decade though.

 

this makes no sense to me.

 

i don't understand saying "he wasn't a power hitting first baseman", like that means it's okay that he didn't hit for power. it's like saying "michael barrett isn't a defensive catcher" after someone complains about his defense.

 

mark grace not being a power hitter is a strike against him, at least when comparing him to others. it doesn't make his other stats better. power might not have been part of his game, but it's a huge part of THE game..... especially if you play first base.

[Backtobanks]

Love Grace, but I'm not sure a .449 slugging percentage from a 1B (especially in Wrigley) is good enough to be a top 20 player for that decade.

 

but he wasn't a power hitting first baseman, so why penalize him for that? He was in that mold of first baggers like Will Clark and Olerud. Granted they both had a bit more power than Gracie, but they aren't Thome/Big Mac types. Would it have been nicer if he had more power? Hell ya. He still had a damn strong decade though.

 

Also, you need to look at the role a player fills on the team. A 1B without power might be okay if the team is getting power from "non-power" positions (2B, SS, CF, C). The same argument can be made for Tony Gwynn.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Also, you need to look at the role a player fills on the team. A 1B without power might be okay if the team is getting power from "non-power" positions (2B, SS, CF, C). The same argument can be made for Tony Gwynn.

 

That's a stupid argument. If I'm getting power from a non-power position, I can get it from a power position too and have extra power.

[jersey cubs fan]

Love Grace, but I'm not sure a .449 slugging percentage from a 1B (especially in Wrigley) is good enough to be a top 20 player for that decade.

 

but he wasn't a power hitting first baseman, so why penalize him for that? He was in that mold of first baggers like Will Clark and Olerud. Granted they both had a bit more power than Gracie, but they aren't Thome/Big Mac types. Would it have been nicer if he had more power? Hell ya. He still had a damn strong decade though.

 

Power hitting 1B and non power hitting 1B are not two different positions. 1B is the position, and the best ones hit for power. The fact that Grace didn't doesn't excuse him. He's "penalized" because the fact that he didn't hit for power is a negative.

[SouthSideRyan]

Koyie Hill isn't a good baseball player so why penalize him for that? You have to look at the role he plays on a team, and since the Cubs already have some good baseball players, a player that is bad is ok. The same argument could be made for Aaron Miles.

[OleMissCub]

Fine, it was a silly thing to say. You can penalize anyone for anything.

 

Point is, Grace had a very strong decade. He's certainly on the ass end of a list like that at #20 or so, but I think he belongs in that range.

[Backtobanks]

Apparently people do

 

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/rank?versionId=2&listId=533#topOfList

 

While placing Griffey ahead of Bonds is inexcusable, that's one thing...but really Tony Gwynn?

 

Is Mark Grace really one of the 20 best position players of the 90s??

 

.310/.385/.449/.835, 122 OPS+, 1754 hits and 364 doubles with 4 gold gloves is a pretty fair decade. He's obviously at the bottom of a top 20 of the decade, but I can't imagine that it would be a travesty or anything that he is there.

 

I totally agree. If you're talking about just hitting and not power hitting because he played 1B, then he belongs in the discussion. Same with players like Gwynn and Ichiro.

[Guest]

Apparently people do

 

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/rank?versionId=2&listId=533#topOfList

 

While placing Griffey ahead of Bonds is inexcusable, that's one thing...but really Tony Gwynn?

 

Is Mark Grace really one of the 20 best position players of the 90s??

 

.310/.385/.449/.835, 122 OPS+, 1754 hits and 364 doubles with 4 gold gloves is a pretty fair decade. He's obviously at the bottom of a top 20 of the decade, but I can't imagine that it would be a travesty or anything that he is there.

 

I totally agree. If you're talking about just hitting and not power hitting because he played 1B, then he belongs in the discussion. Same with players like Gwynn and Ichiro.

Ichiro wasn't a very good MLB player in the 90's. :)

 

Just to add my two cents on Grace - the fact that he was so poor compared to his peers at 1B is a huge knock against him. As someone else pointed out, there's a lot of 1B on that list and Grace was the worst of them all. 1B was loaded with talent in that decade, but the fact that provided relatively poor production for his position on the field has to be a strong consideration for the rankings.

[Thurman Merman]

Fine, it was a silly thing to say. You can penalize anyone for anything.

 

Point is, Grace had a very strong decade. He's certainly on the ass end of a list like that at #20 or so, but I think he belongs in that range.

 

Can anyone find WAR sorted by decade for players? That would probably give us a quick answer here.

[OleMissCub]

according to fangraphs, Grace had a total WAR in the 90's of 37.6

 

some others on the list

 

Alomar: 46.4

Joey: 42.9

Pudge: 38.4 (didn't play in 90)

Thome: 30.7 (not counting 92,91,90)

Juan Gonz: 30.1

Bernie: 35.4 (didn't play in 1990)

Gwynn: 34.1

Olerud: 44.2

Biggio: 53.2

Larkin: 51.8

McGriff: 38.8

Piazza: 45.2 (not counting 90,91,92)

Edgar: 54.0

Bagwell: 58.3

Raffy: 53.4

Big Mac: 51.2

Bonds: 82.8

Junior: 70.2

Big Hurt: 57.0

[SouthSideRyan]

Matt Williams was the first name that popped into my head, glad to see WAR backs me up, giving him 41.1 for the 90s.

[fromthestretch]

according to fangraphs, Grace had a total WAR in the 90's of 37.6

 

some others on the list

 

Alomar: 46.4

Joey: 42.9

Pudge: 38.4 (didn't play in 90)

Thome: 30.7 (not counting 92,91,90)

Juan Gonz: 30.1

Bernie: 35.4 (didn't play in 1990)

Gwynn: 34.1

Olerud: 44.2

Biggio: 53.2

Larkin: 51.8

McGriff: 38.8

Piazza: 45.2 (not counting 90,91,92)

Edgar: 54.0

Bagwell: 58.3

Raffy: 53.4

Big Mac: 51.2

Bonds: 82.8

Junior: 70.2

Big Hurt: 57.0

 

I used B-R, so my WAR numbers are a bit different, but...

 

Bonds 85.2

Griffey 65.9

Bagwell 59.6

Thomas 54.3

Biggio 51.7

Larkin 51.7

Martinez 49.4

Palmeiro 48.1

McGwire 47.0

Lofton 45.9

Ventura 45.4

Piazza 43.2

Alomar 43.0

Walker 42.6

Knoblauch 41.3

Henderson 40.4

Olerud 39.8

Williams 39.2

Belle 36.9

Grace 36.8

I-Rod 35.8

 

I've italicized the ones left off the ESPN list. Even Lankford, Phillips, and Jay Bell topped a 35 in WAR.

[SouthSideRyan]

Oh yeah, what the [expletive] was RICKEY not doing on this list?

[Guest]

Contract Crowdsourcing: Adam Dunn

 

The Fangraphs community pegs Dunn at 3/36.

[Exile on Waveland]

Contract Crowdsourcing: Adam Dunn

 

The Fangraphs community pegs Dunn at 3/36.

 

Where do I sign?

[AlwaysaCub]

Contract Crowdsourcing: Adam Dunn

 

The Fangraphs community pegs Dunn at 3/36.

 

Where do I sign?

 

Right after the clause stating that "Player may reject a trade to any other organization in MLB"

[Cubs Fan Dan]

Contract Crowdsourcing: Adam Dunn

 

The Fangraphs community pegs Dunn at 3/36.

 

Where do I sign?

 

Right after the clause stating that "Player may reject a trade to any other organization in MLB"

 

That seems too low even with a no trade clause, give him 6 years 90 mil

[Guest]

Contract Crowdsourcing: Adam Dunn

 

The Fangraphs community pegs Dunn at 3/36.

 

Where do I sign?

 

Right after the clause stating that "Player may reject a trade to any other organization in MLB"

 

That seems too low even with a no trade clause, give him 6 years 90 mil

Brilliant comedy.

 

Completely unfounded in anything but the soriano contract, but brilliant nonetheless.

[Wheelimus]

Contract Crowdsourcing: Adam Dunn

 

The Fangraphs community pegs Dunn at 3/36.

 

Where do I sign?

 

Right after the clause stating that "Player may reject a trade to any other organization in MLB"

 

If it's 3/36 I just might sign anyway. If things get so bad that you're thinking of trading him it probably isn't because of a crash...it's probably because WE have crashed. Again. And at that point he's probably nodding along to a trade to a contender.