Well I did initially think the argument was 8 genetically engineered copies of Adam Dunn. I think it's pretty convenient for the proponents of this argument to only include his offensive skill set as the basis of the argument. Last I checked there is defense in baseball still and Adam Dunn freaking sucks in that aspect. Take the whole skill set or not at all, which is why the point is insane. I'll take the current Cubs team with 5.4 runs per game, and not a single 'Adam Dunn' in the lineup, and I'm pretty confident they'd beat a team with 8 Dunns quite handily. man you're such a bad poster the question is "is adam dunn a good hitter" the answer is "yes, if you had an entire lineup that hit like adam dunn, that offense would be incredible. better than four adam dunn's and four ryan theriots or 4 ichiros or whatever" how badly you're missing the subject is just mindblowing. Actually, I joined the discussion when posters were calling Dunn "a great hitter". My contention is that Dunn is a great slugger, but not a great hitter and that modern stats are skewed overwhelmingly toward sluggers rather than hitters. Your argument is quite silly. What should we go by to judge how great a hitter is?