PDA

View Full Version : Why Is It That When Dunn Finally Comes Out of His Slump...



Pages : [1] 2

RedsFanInMD
06-14-2006, 11:53 AM
Everyone else (except for BP) falls into one? From the glass is half full standpoint, I do at least see it as a positive sign that Dunn has been swinging the bat well during this downstretch. If some of the other guys start coming around (especially with RISP), I see us coming out of this team slump.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 11:57 AM
Ross is in a slump?

11 for 28 last ten games .392 4HRs 8rbis

NJReds
06-14-2006, 11:58 AM
Redszone really does need a Dunn-only forum.

smith288
06-14-2006, 12:13 PM
Forum Jump
The Old Red Guard
Reds Live!
Down on the Farm
Fantasy Island
Dunn sucks/rules

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 12:17 PM
now smitty I got dinged up pretty bad for saying just that, yesterday!

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 12:23 PM
I can't figure out why Austin Kearns is not receiving any venom for his recent slide... is he that beloved???

griffeyfreak4
06-14-2006, 12:57 PM
Everyone else (except for BP) falls into one? From the glass is half full standpoint, I do at least see it as a positive sign that Dunn has been swinging the bat well during this downstretch. If some of the other guys start coming around (especially with RISP), I see us coming out of this team slump.
Last 10 games
Freel - 29 AB, 10 Hits, 2 BB, 7 Runs, .344 BA, .387 OBP
FeLo - 38 AB, 11 Hits, 7 BB, 7 Runs, .289 BA, .400 OBP
Phillips - 37 AB, 13 Hits, 4 BB, 6 Runs, .351 BA, .414 OBP
Griffey - 41 AB, 13 Hits, 7 BB, 8 Runs, .317 BA, .416 OBP
Dunn - 35 AB, 7 Hits, 9 BB, 8 Runs, .200 BA, .363 OBP
Aurilia - 39 AB, 8 Hits, 2 BB, 3 Runs, .205 BA, .243 OBP
Ears - 36 AB, 6 Hits, 2 BB, 3 Runs, .166 BA, .210 OBP
Hatte - 34 AB, 10 Hits, 4 BB, 6 Runs, .294 BA, .368 OBP
Ross - 28 AB, 11 Hits, 6 BB, 8 Runs, .392 BA, .500 OBP

This is hardly slumping. 1 Word - BULLPEN

dougdirt
06-14-2006, 01:01 PM
Dunn hitting .200 over his last 10 games is breaking out of a slump?

pedro
06-14-2006, 01:02 PM
Dunn hitting .200 over his last 10 games is breaking out of a slump?

most of those hits are in last 5 games.

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 01:03 PM
Dunn hitting .200 over his last 10 games is breaking out of a slump?
.363 OBP ain't bad though...

dougdirt
06-14-2006, 01:05 PM
Not at all, but even that is a little low for him, granted his OBP is usually quite high.

KoryMac5
06-14-2006, 01:05 PM
I do agree that the bullpen and defense have killed us but timely hitting we are not getting either. By looking at the above stats Aurillia, Dunn, and Kearns are all in slumps and they all bat pretty close together in the lineup which means to me if someone who is hot gets on base these guys aren't driving them in right now.

griffeyfreak4
06-14-2006, 01:06 PM
I can't figure out why Austin Kearns is not receiving any venom for his recent slide... is he that beloved???
Ears ain't ready for the bigs, Call up Denorfia!!!!! :evil:

reds44
06-14-2006, 01:08 PM
problem isn't the hitters, but where they are hitting.

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 01:08 PM
Ears ain't ready for the bigs, Call up Denorfia!!!!! :evil:
I thought about starting an "Austin Kearns' 1st 2 months=Fools' Gold" thread, but I didn't want to deal with the fall-out from the Banana Phone posts.

smith288
06-14-2006, 01:28 PM
now smitty I got dinged up pretty bad for saying just that, yesterday!
As you can tell by the name, the new forum would be an equal oppurtunity Dunn slam/praise forum.

RedsManRick
06-14-2006, 01:30 PM
Where have Aurilia and Hatteberg been hitting the past 10 days? Dunn needs to be hitting with men on base. Aurilia batting cleanup makes me sick. Get Dunn batting 3rd, Junior 4th, Kearns or Aurilia 5th.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 01:43 PM
why?



He has driven in 14 of a possible 91 runners in scoring position this year. He ranks 173rd out of a possible 240 ML players who come to bat with at least 45 runners on base this year. He hits solo HRs, He does not hit with RISP... With the bases empty, he's hitting .280, with RISP, he's hitting .147. He's had 5 hits in the past 3 games so that is good but he's still not driving in runs when the opportunity is there. It's easy to see, if he starts an inning, he's dangerous, if he comes up with men on, he's almost an automatic out.

Johnny Footstool
06-14-2006, 01:47 PM
How about we just have the moderators create a sticky thread called "Adam Dunn" that encompasses all arguments pro and con. If someone starts a new thread about Dunn, the mods check it to see if it's new ideas or rehashed stuff and either lock it or merge it with the main Dunn thread.

Pee Wee Herman's Ball of Tin Foil comes to mind...

westofyou
06-14-2006, 02:01 PM
if he comes up with men on, he's almost an automatic out..360 OB% in that situation says otherwise.

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 02:05 PM
How about we just have the moderators create a sticky thread called "Adam Dunn" that encompasses all arguments pro and con. If someone starts a new thread about Dunn, the mods check it to see if it's new ideas or rehashed stuff and either lock it or merge it with the main Dunn thread.

Pee Wee Herman's Ball of Tin Foil comes to mind...
Odd that you should say that. That is basically what the Sons of Sam Horn Red Sox fan site has evolved into.

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 02:08 PM
.363 OBP ain't bad though...
I wouldn't say drawing walks is a slump buster. Hitting would qualify as doing that.

MWM
06-14-2006, 02:15 PM
I wouldn't say drawing walks is a slump buster. Hitting would qualify as doing that.

Someone said he was an automatic out with guys on base. What woy posted was the exact measurement of the percentage of times he makes outs in that situation. I'd say that shows that he's not an easy out with guys on base.

westofyou
06-14-2006, 02:18 PM
I wouldn't say drawing walks is a slump buster. Hitting would qualify as doing that.
An out is an out, a base is base.

dougdirt
06-14-2006, 02:24 PM
An out is an out, a base is base.
An out is an out, but a walk is not a hit and they do not accomplish the same things.

griffeyfreak4
06-14-2006, 02:24 PM
^ agreed

westofyou
06-14-2006, 02:25 PM
An out is an out, but a walk is not a hit and they do not accomplish the same things.
I never said they did. The statement was he's an automatic out.

Which isn't true.

If you want to drive the bus into your own rabbit hole have at it.

dougdirt
06-14-2006, 02:31 PM
Gotcha, I skipped over a few posts, and I agree that Dunn is nowhere near an automatic out. Hes an out about 63% of the time.

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 02:33 PM
As soon as everyone comes to the conclusion that Dunn will drive in a huge % of his runs with HRs, will strike out a ton and walk a lot, the comments will cease. I once had high hopes for Adam to turn into a run-producing machine, but I have given up hope. He will knock in 100 runs, but the vase majority of them will come off of HRs. I will never expect him to become a great all around hitter who drives in runs in any given instance.

And when your OBP is mostly based on walks, it is not something to really brag about. If he hit .280 and had an OBP of .380, that is a lot more productive than hitting .220 with an OBP of .380.

dougdirt
06-14-2006, 02:35 PM
As soon as everyone comes to the conclusion that Dunn will drive in a huge % of his runs with HRs, will strike out a ton and walk a lot, the comments will cease. I once had high hopes for Adam to turn into a run-producing machine, but I have given up hope. He will knock in 100 runs, but the vase majority of them will come off of HRs. I will never expect him to become a great all around hitter who drives in runs in any given instance.

And when your OBP is mostly based on walks, it is not something to really brag about. If he hit .280 and had an OBP of .380, that is a lot more productive than hitting .220 with an OBP of .380.
Adam Dunn has 39 RBIs on the season. 29 are because of HR's on 21 HRs. So he has 10 RBI that did not come from hitting a home run.

OnBaseMachine
06-14-2006, 02:35 PM
As soon as everyone comes to the conclusion that Dunn will drive in a huge % of his runs with HRs, will strike out a ton and walk a lot, the comments will cease. I once had high hopes for Adam to turn into a run-producing machine, but I have given up hope. He will knock in 100 runs, but the vase majority of them will come off of HRs. I will never expect him to become a great all around hitter who drives in runs in any given instance.

And when your OBP is mostly based on walks, it is not something to really brag about. If he hit .280 and had an OBP of .380, that is a lot more productive than hitting .220 with an OBP of .380.

Home runs count as hits at last check.;)

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 02:36 PM
Dunn in "late innings of close games" (as defined by MLB.com) has an OBP of .433 but his slugging numbers go down to .435. 1 HR, 3 RBI.

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 02:38 PM
Adam Dunn has 39 RBIs on the season. 29 are because of HR's on 21 HRs. So he has 10 RBI that did not come from hitting a home run.
74% of his RBIs were from 21 ABs. That is my point. I think that is very skewed.

ochre
06-14-2006, 02:38 PM
and when your OBP is mostly based on walks your slumps don't hurt the team (outs) nearly as bad. Honestly we've discussed this ad nauseam. Please check the archives/search and if you have something different to contribute to that discussion, go for it.

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 02:38 PM
Home runs count as hits at last check.
Let me know where I refuted that.

westofyou
06-14-2006, 02:42 PM
If he hit .280 and had an OBP of .380, that is a lot more productive than hitting .220 with an OBP of .380.
Kind of a red herring there..

Only 2 players have ever hit less than .225 and had a .380 OB% in all of modern baseball history, it's an anomoly.


RUNS CREATED/GAME YEAR RC/G AVG OBA
1 Roy Cullenbine 1947 6.43 .224 .401
2 Gene Tenace 1978 5.93 .224 .392

In 1978 who was better?

Tenace or Willie Randolph (hitting only)



RUNS CREATED/GAME RC/G AVG OBA SLG
1 Willie Randolph 5.40 .279 .381 .357

in 1947 Cullenbine or Johnny Hopp?


RUNS CREATED/GAME RC/G AVG OBA SLG
1 Johnny Hopp 5.22 .288 .376 .358

OnBaseMachine
06-14-2006, 02:47 PM
Let me know where I refuted that.


He will knock in 100 runs, but the vase majority of them will come off of HRs.

You sounded disappointed with that.

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 02:56 PM
You sounded disappointed with that.
Not disappointed now. I thought, based on Dunn's history in the minors, he would turn into a hitter who would use his batting eye to help with his hitting (i.e., swing at good pitches, maybe hit .280 or better). Dunn is what he is...he is a batter who walks a lot and has great power. Nothing more. I am not saying that it is bad, but to reach the next level he would have to get more base hits, which would then drive in more runs (if they took place with men on) while getting himself on base, keeping the inning going, creating more opportunities, etc. I'm not bashing him and he is still young and has plenty of time to improve. I thought I saw glimpses early this season, when he was spraying the ball all over the field. But that stopped sometime in late April.

registerthis
06-14-2006, 02:59 PM
Home runs count as hits at last check.;)

No, they're just fly balls that can't be caught. ;)

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 02:59 PM
Kind of a red herring there..

Only 2 players have ever hit less than .225 and had a .380 OB% in all of modern baseball history, it's an anomoly.


RUNS CREATED/GAME YEAR RC/G AVG OBA
1 Roy Cullenbine 1947 6.43 .224 .401
2 Gene Tenace 1978 5.93 .224 .392

In 1978 who was better?

Tenace or Willie Randolph (hitting only)



RUNS CREATED/GAME RC/G AVG OBA SLG
1 Willie Randolph 5.40 .279 .381 .357

in 1947 Cullenbine or Johnny Hopp?


RUNS CREATED/GAME RC/G AVG OBA SLG
1 Johnny Hopp 5.22 .288 .376 .358
Very interesting and strange.

What I posted wasn't exactly clear. I was saying that HE would be more productive, which would also help his RBI levels.

ochre
06-14-2006, 03:06 PM
maybe dunn is productive enough.

maybe trying to eek that .040 out in his BA will lead to deteriorative results in some other aspects of his game.

Bat him second and enjoy him for what he is.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 03:34 PM
Well this should be obvious but I am going to say it. A hit will score a guy from second(unless it is Dunn) but a walk won't.

pedro
06-14-2006, 03:40 PM
Well this should be obvious but I am going to say it. A hit will score a guy from second(unless it is Dunn) but a walk won't.


and neither will an out and that's what you trade walks for, not hits.

MWM
06-14-2006, 03:45 PM
Well this should be obvious but I am going to say it. A hit will score a guy from second(unless it is Dunn) but a walk won't.

Not all hits score a guy from second. Actually, it's not that uncommon for hit to not score the run from second.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 03:46 PM
that is where we disagree, pedro. You can not give me any reason to believe it is better to try to walk than to just hit the ball up the third base line where they are giving you a hole.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 03:48 PM
I mean the whole idea of the bunt(been around a long time) is to trade an out for a runner to move to the next base, right. If a walk was better why would anyone ever try a bunt?

westofyou
06-14-2006, 03:51 PM
If a walk was better why would anyone ever try a bunt?
No one said a walk was better than a hit, a walk is better than an out a bunt is not an automatic event that creates a successful situation (see Twins game 9th inning last night) a walk is better than an out is the rub.

gonelong
06-14-2006, 03:53 PM
Well this should be obvious but I am going to say it. A hit will score a guy from second(unless it is Dunn) but a walk won't.

A goodly percentage of singles DON'T score a run from 2B.

That said ... I'd take my chances with a hit, don't get me wrong.

If you are drawing walks in that situation it should be obvious that the pitcher threw 4 balls that you correctly didn't chase.

GL

gonelong
06-14-2006, 03:56 PM
that is where we disagree, pedro. You can not give me any reason to believe it is better to try to walk than to just hit the ball up the third base line where they are giving you a hole.

Well, if it was that easy, he would probably just do it.

Why don't the rest of the guys just hit 45 Hrs over the fence? Nobody can catch them there.

GL

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 03:56 PM
I will give you that, but I would still rather see my 6'6" 275# 7.5million dollar 4 hole hitter hitting the ball at least when there are baserunners on second and third, even a ground ball out to the 2nd baseman can move the runners and that my friend is a productive out. I still think that is better than a walk/LOB situation which is what we are getting.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 03:58 PM
gonelong if everytime he batted with guys on second or third he hit a HR, you would never hear a negative comment, I guarantee it!

westofyou
06-14-2006, 03:59 PM
gonelong if everytime he batted with guys on second or third he hit a HR, you would never hear a negative comment, I guarantee it!
If I peed Nickles and shat dimes I'd never complain either!!!

pedro
06-14-2006, 04:02 PM
that is where we disagree, pedro. You can not give me any reason to believe it is better to try to walk than to just hit the ball up the third base line where they are giving you a hole.


Because he isn't trying for a walk, he's trying to not swing at balls. If he has a problem hitting strikes when he swings what makes you think he's going to be any better swinging at balls? It just makes no sense.

registerthis
06-14-2006, 04:02 PM
If I peed Nickles and shat dimes I'd never complain either!!!

If you were peeing nickles, i'd wager you'd be complaining a LOT, actually.

ochre
06-14-2006, 04:02 PM
I'd think that would hurt a bit. I think I'd complain.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:03 PM
I bet it would hurt like hell though!

ochre
06-14-2006, 04:03 PM
finally something we can all (mostly) agree on!!1

pedro
06-14-2006, 04:03 PM
I will give you that, but I would still rather see my 6'6" 275# 7.5million dollar 4 hole hitter hitting the ball at least when there are baserunners on second and third, even a ground ball out to the 2nd baseman can move the runners and that my friend is a productive out. I still think that is better than a walk/LOB situation which is what we are getting.

a productive out moving a guy from 2nd to 3rd is better than a walk? You really might want to stop now because that's just silly.

gonelong
06-14-2006, 04:04 PM
gonelong if everytime he batted with guys on second or third he hit a HR, you would never hear a negative comment, I guarantee it!

He is virtually never going to do that, because they will throw him 4 balls out of the strikezone and show him 1B.

GL

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:05 PM
pedro, he does hit strikes for HRs when no one is on base though, why is that, easier pitches to hit I bet. He takes a lot of strikes and a lot of very close balls. He should be more aggressive with RISP. Everyone knows that but we like to make excuses for his inability to get the job done with men on base.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:07 PM
why is it silly, is it not the same as a sac bunt?

Johnny Footstool
06-14-2006, 04:10 PM
pedro, he does hit strikes for HRs when no one is on base though, why is that, easier pitches to hit I bet. He takes a lot of strikes and a lot of very close balls. He should be more aggressive with RISP. Everyone knows that but we like to make excuses for his inability to get the job done with men on base.


For Dunn, more aggressive = more outs. That doesn't help anyone except on rare occasions.

Granted, watching him take a fastball down the pipe for a strike is frustrating. But I'd rather have him do that and work the count than hack at the first pitch and lift lazy fly balls to RF.

ochre
06-14-2006, 04:12 PM
there is no proof that changing his approach will net what you are looking for.

It might even net worse results.

ochre
06-14-2006, 04:14 PM
for the record, advancing a base < an out.

If the choice is advancing a base at the cost of an out, under nearly all circumstances, avoiding the out is the better choice. Late in key games (playoffs/WS) would be the only times that I'd consider that trade to be worth the cost.

pedro
06-14-2006, 04:15 PM
why is it silly, is it not the same as a sac bunt?

Because a sac bunt is only desirable in certain situations. Such as when the picther is up with a guy on base.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:15 PM
The world will never know!

Redsland
06-14-2006, 04:20 PM
why is it silly, is it not the same as a sac bunt?
There's no clock in baseball. You can keep hitting and keep scoring runs forever. Only one thing prevents this. Well, 27 things actually: The three outs you have in each of the nine innings. They are precious things to be horded. When you sac bunt, you give one away. When you walk, you don't.

KronoRed
06-14-2006, 04:22 PM
For Dunn, more aggressive = more outs. That doesn't help anyone except on rare occasions.

What more needs to be said?

This is how Dunn is, accept it and move on to the teams REAL problems.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:25 PM
0-24 with RISP?

ochre
06-14-2006, 04:37 PM
It's baseball. Probability indicates that any individual player will at one time, or another, go through streaks, whether those streaks be positive, or negative.

While each individual incident is probabilistically isolated, a streak such as the one you indicate there will generally be compensated for through a similar streak in which the positive outcomes occur. It is generally called reverting to norms.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:39 PM
I was commenting on the teams real problems statement. Thanks for the math lesson, though

KronoRed
06-14-2006, 04:53 PM
1-25 now ;)

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 04:55 PM
I love it!!!!!!!!!!

TeamBoone
06-14-2006, 05:20 PM
why?

He has driven in 14 of a possible 91 runners in scoring position this year. He ranks 173rd out of a possible 240 ML players who come to bat with at least 45 runners on base this year. He hits solo HRs, He does not hit with RISP... With the bases empty, he's hitting .280, with RISP, he's hitting .147. He's had 5 hits in the past 3 games so that is good but he's still not driving in runs when the opportunity is there. It's easy to see, if he starts an inning, he's dangerous, if he comes up with men on, he's almost an automatic out.

Did it ever occur to you that he's pitched differently with the bases empty? Not only that but he's had 134 ABs with the bases empty and 53 leading off an inning... 187 ABs total with the bases empty vs 91 with runners on... not necessarily in scoring position but on base.

Regardless, he still leads the team in RBI. How would you explain that?

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 05:25 PM
I am no longer discussing this matter! Dunn has put me in a state of no more griping!

M2
06-14-2006, 05:26 PM
I love it!!!!!!!!!!

So how did you dress your crow? Ketchup, mayo, perhaps a balsamic vinegar marinade?

wheels
06-14-2006, 05:27 PM
People think Dunn should drive in 150 instead of 100.

It's great to dream about, but 150 RBI is a rarity, especially in Redsland.

BigJohn
06-14-2006, 05:28 PM
It washes down plain with enough Coors light! I will gladly eat crow the rest of the season if the big Dunkey can do this more often! Believe me, no one is happier than I am right now!

TeamBoone
06-14-2006, 05:37 PM
Dunn in "late innings of close games" (as defined by MLB.com) has an OBP of .433 but his slugging numbers go down to .435. 1 HR, 3 RBI.

And how many of those "late innings of close games" did he contribute runs early? Without the early runs, there would be no "late innings of close games". I can actually think of a few in the last week.

RedsBaron
06-14-2006, 05:57 PM
Dunn is on pace to hit 56 HRs this season, with 103 RBI and 125 runs scored. Hey, I wish he was on pace to have 150 RBI and I wish his batting average was .300, but he is still the biggest offensive force in the Reds lineup.

westofyou
06-14-2006, 06:08 PM
People think Dunn should drive in 150 instead of 100.

It's great to dream about, but 150 RBI is a rarity, especially in Redsland.
Preach on brother man, especially since 130 has only been topped 5 times.

harangatang
06-14-2006, 06:20 PM
Preach on brother man, especially since 130 has only been topped 5 times.Hey I remember a post you made a while back about the percentages of RBI's that the best players made on their team. If I remember correctly it was something to the extent that even if a players RBI's go up that they only drive in 15% of the runs.

griffeyfreak4
06-14-2006, 06:22 PM
Maybe it's just me, but when Dunn comes up with a man on second do you expect a single? I never expect a single from Dunn, I expect him to work the count, get 2 strikes on him, and get on base. When Dunn comes up with a man on third, I still don't expect a single, I don't even expect a sac fly. I expect the same out of him every time with RISP.

Now when Dunn is batting with no one on, I expect some fireworks, but that's a different story. ;)

westofyou
06-14-2006, 08:30 PM
Hey I remember a post you made a while back about the percentages of RBI's that the best players made on their team. If I remember correctly it was something to the extent that even if a players RBI's go up that they only drive in 15% of the runs.
15% is good, IIRC Dunn lingers around 13-14% I think the best of all time was one of Gehrigs monster years when he had like 21%, Hack Wilson holds the RBI record with 191, that's 20% of his teams RBI's that year. FWIW Fosters 1977 was 19.8% of the Reds RBI's that season, so if Dunn drives in 130 runs and still represents 14% of the teams RBI's the Reds would probably score 928 runs, which would be the franchise record.

Handofdeath
06-14-2006, 08:55 PM
Dunn is on pace to hit 56 HRs this season, with 103 RBI and 125 runs scored. Hey, I wish he was on pace to have 150 RBI and I wish his batting average was .300, but he is still the biggest offensive force in the Reds lineup.
I looked it up and back in 1997 there was this centerfielder who played for Seattle, I forget his name. Anyway, he had that season EXACTLY 56 homers and scored 125 runs. That Seattle team was very close to what the Reds have offensively, maybe even less so. That centerfielder had 147 RBI's. Dunn has the worst HR/RBI ratio in the National League.

pedro
06-14-2006, 09:04 PM
I looked it up and back in 1997 there was this centerfielder who played for Seattle, I forget his name. Anyway, he had that season EXACTLY 56 homers and scored 125 runs. That Seattle team was very close to what the Reds have offensively, maybe even less so. That centerfielder had 147 RBI's. Dunn has the worst HR/RBI ratio in the National League.

That's your argument? That because Dunn isn't putting up numbers matching Griffey's 1997-1998 years that he somehow sucks? That's just silly.

pedro
06-14-2006, 09:07 PM
BTW- When Griffey did do that he was the same age as Dunn and just doing it for the first time.

Handofdeath
06-14-2006, 09:48 PM
That's your argument? That because Dunn isn't putting up numbers matching Griffey's 1997-1998 years that he somehow sucks? That's just silly.

Not once did I ever say that Dunn sucked. Dunn could be much better but he does not suck. People like yourself need to get a grip and accept the fact that some people don't worship at the altar of Adam Dunn. I respect your opinion and I expect the same in return. My point was and is that Dunn needs to be better. The Griffey from that era might be one of the 5 or 6 best players to ever play and you can't compare him to anyone today, even Pujols or A-Rod. But you didn't answer why the HR/RBI is so low. And you were wrong when you said that Griffey was doing it for the first time. Hitting 56 homers? Yes. But Dunn still hasn't done it has he? The Griffey of 1997 had to that point 3 40 homer seasons. He also had 4 100 RBI seassons. If you take into account the '94 strike he would have had 5 and probably would have hit over 50 homers. But that's not important here. What is important is that HR/RBI ratio. Tell me why is it so low? If Dunn is that much of an offensive powerhouse then why isn't it higher? Every single player in the NL with two or more homers is better. What possible argument can you or anyone make in his favor that cannot be said about other players? There is none.

westofyou
06-14-2006, 10:00 PM
What is important is that HR/RBI ratio. Tell me why is it so low? Because he hits more Solo HR's and currently has had a bad season with runners on?

But let's not act like it's something that never happens.



AGE YEAR AGE HR RBI
1 Hank Aaron 1973 39 40 96
T2 Barry Bonds 2003 38 45 90
T2 Darrell Evans 1985 38 40 94
4 Hank Aaron 1969 35 44 97
T5 Davey Johnson 1973 30 43 99
T5 Duke Snider 1957 30 40 92
T7 Mickey Mantle 1960 28 40 94
T7 Matt Williams 1994 28 43 96
9 Harmon Killebrew 1963 27 45 96
T10 Mickey Mantle 1958 26 42 97
T10 Rico Petrocelli 1969 26 40 97

Handofdeath
06-14-2006, 10:08 PM
Because he hits more Solo HR's and currently has had a bad season with runners on?

But let's not act like it's something that never happens.



AGE YEAR AGE HR RBI
1 Hank Aaron 1973 39 40 96
T2 Barry Bonds 2003 38 45 90
T2 Darrell Evans 1985 38 40 94
4 Hank Aaron 1969 35 44 97
T5 Davey Johnson 1973 30 43 99
T5 Duke Snider 1957 30 40 92
T7 Mickey Mantle 1960 28 40 94
T7 Matt Williams 1994 28 43 96
9 Harmon Killebrew 1963 27 45 96
T10 Mickey Mantle 1958 26 42 97
T10 Rico Petrocelli 1969 26 40 97


Very true but not to the extent that Dunn is doing it. Or not doing it. Even the worst players have a 2 to 1 ratio. Dunn can't even manage that.

westofyou
06-14-2006, 10:14 PM
Very true but not to the extent that Dunn is doing it. Or not doing it. Even the worst players have a 2 to 1 ratio. Dunn can't even manage that.
Of course you're measuring his up to June rate against a whole season so the jury is still out on how to really define ugly.

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 10:17 PM
Dunn career:

416 RBI/181 HR = 2.2983425 RBI/HR

MWM
06-14-2006, 10:18 PM
Who the hell cares abou HR/RBI? I sure don't. Have you looked at the OBP of people hitting ahead of him?

dabvu2498
06-14-2006, 10:22 PM
Who the hell cares abou HR/RBI? I sure don't. Have you looked at the OBP of people hitting ahead of him?
Chill, MWM, no need to curse...

Appearantly MWM does...

The only stat that really matters is W-L. And we haven't had a good one of those in a bit... so enjoy the cool early summer breezes while we do.

jimbo
06-14-2006, 10:33 PM
My point was and is that Dunn needs to be better.

You can make the point that everybody on the team "needs to be better." Maybe we should start a list of what every Reds player "needs to be better" at. That would be a pretty exhausting list.

It just seems to me that the people who have a problem with Dunn just cannot accept him for what he is and constantly criticize him for what he isn't, or hasn't done yet.

RFS62
06-14-2006, 10:37 PM
Because he isn't trying for a walk, he's trying to not swing at balls. If he has a problem hitting strikes when he swings what makes you think he's going to be any better swinging at balls? It just makes no sense.


This is the most important aspect of the ongoing Dunn discussions that seems to get lost in the vitriol.

Think about it. Does anyone want him to swing at balls?

I would love it if he could identify and pull the trigger on balls in his wheelhouse better than he does now. But no way do I want him to chase balls out of the zone. Nor do I want him to chase strikes outside of his wheelhouse.

In a perfect world, which I'm sure we'll never see, he fouls off tough strikes and never offers at pitches out of the zone.

Handofdeath
06-14-2006, 10:52 PM
Dunn career:

416 RBI/181 HR = 2.2983425 RBI/HR


Aurilia 3.96
Encarnacion 4.46
Freel 5.13
Hatteburg 5.03
Kearns 3.74
Larue 3.66
Lopez 4.12
Phillips 5.84

These are career numbers.

Handofdeath
06-14-2006, 10:58 PM
Who the hell cares abou HR/RBI? I sure don't. Have you looked at the OBP of people hitting ahead of him?
This season in the case of Freel, Encarnacion, Lopez, and Phillips, all over .353. Junior is at .333 I think.

TeamBoone
06-14-2006, 11:05 PM
Who the hell cares abou HR/RBI? I sure don't. Have you looked at the OBP of people hitting ahead of him?

Finally! Someone gets angry... long time coming.

It is all a bit ridiculous isn't it... most of it makes me sick to my stomach (literally).

Pick, pick, pick all the freaking time! Over every stinking thing, no matter how miniscule! And even RBI... which is totally dependent on the batters ahead of the hated one.

Even when he does something good he's maligned. Ugh!

Cyclone792
06-14-2006, 11:13 PM
Aurilia 3.96
Encarnacion 4.46
Freel 5.13
Hatteburg 5.03
Kearns 3.74
Larue 3.66
Lopez 4.12
Phillips 5.84

These are career numbers.

Hmmm ...



CAREER
RBI displayed only--not a sorting criteria
HOMERUNS displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME RATE PLAYER LEAGUE RBI HR
1 Ted Williams 259 12.91 4.98 1839 521
2 Babe Ruth 249 13.14 5.28 2210 714
3 Barry Bonds 218 10.70 4.91 1853 708
4 Mickey Mantle 205 9.35 4.57 1509 536
5 Rogers Hornsby 204 9.92 4.87 1584 301
6 Ty Cobb 201 9.25 4.60 1933 117
7 Joe Jackson 201 8.90 4.43 785 54
8 Lou Gehrig 199 11.21 5.62 1995 493
9 Todd Helton 194 10.19 5.25 916 271
10 Dan Brouthers 192 11.94 6.23 1296 106
11 Stan Musial 190 9.23 4.86 1951 475
12 Albert Pujols 186 9.58 5.15 621 201
13 Billy Hamilton 184 11.55 6.29 736 40
14 Jimmie Foxx 183 10.25 5.58 1921 534
15 Tris Speaker 183 8.59 4.69 1537 117
16 Frank Thomas 182 9.18 5.03 1465 448
17 Johnny Mize 182 8.98 4.93 1337 359
18 Honus Wagner 178 8.22 4.61 1732 101
19 Mel Ott 176 8.86 5.03 1860 511
20 Pete Browning 176 10.73 6.10 353 46
21 Hank Greenberg 175 9.65 5.50 1276 331
22 Manny Ramirez 173 8.96 5.18 1414 435
23 Mark McGwire 173 8.47 4.90 1414 583
24 Charlie Keller 172 8.52 4.95 760 189
25 Willie Mays 172 7.89 4.60 1903 660
26 Larry Walker 171 8.59 5.01 1311 383
27 Frank Robinson 171 7.56 4.43 1812 586
28 John McGraw 171 10.75 6.31 462 13
29 Benny Kauff 170 7.11 4.19 454 49
30 Elmer Flick 169 7.97 4.71 756 48
31 Joe DiMaggio 169 9.11 5.39 1537 361
32 Ed Delahanty 169 10.45 6.19 1464 101
33 Dick Allen 169 7.20 4.27 1119 351
34 Gavvy Cravath 168 6.85 4.08 719 119
35 Lance Berkman 168 8.74 5.22 617 180
36 Nap Lajoie 167 7.69 4.60 1599 82
37 Mike Donlin 166 8.08 4.86 543 51
38 Jim Thome 166 8.62 5.19 1193 430
39 Hank Aaron 165 7.49 4.53 2297 755
40 Ralph Kiner 165 8.33 5.05 1015 369
41 Edgar Martinez 164 8.22 5.01 1261 309
42 Lefty O'Doul 164 8.88 5.42 542 113
43 Jason Giambi 164 8.47 5.18 1031 313
44 Roger Connor 163 10.12 6.22 1322 138
45 Dave Orr 162 9.83 6.09 270 37
46 Frank Chance 161 7.36 4.58 596 20
47 Mike Schmidt 161 7.22 4.49 1595 548
48 Alex Rodriguez 161 8.30 5.17 1226 429
49 Brian Giles 160 8.44 5.26 858 246
50 Harry Heilmann 160 8.21 5.13 1539 183
So I took each of the top 50 players' RATE of production in RC/27 vs. the league average and compared it to RBI/HR rate.

Correlation = -0.116688307

Yea, I think we can safely say that using RBI/HR rate to determine a hitter's productively is about as inaccurate as it gets.

MWM
06-14-2006, 11:17 PM
Here's the top 20 HR hitters of all time and their respective ratios:


HR RBI Ratio
Mark McGwire 583 1414 2.43
Barry Bonds 703 1843 2.62
Sammy Sosa 574 1530 2.67
Jimmie Fox 534 1452 2.72
Harmon Killebrew573 1584 2.76
Mickey Mantle 536 1509 2.82
Eddie Mathews 512 1453 2.84
Griffey 501 1444 2.88
Willie Mays 660 1903 2.88
Mike Schmidt 548 1595 2.91
Willie McCovey 521 1555 2.98
Reggie Jackson 563 1702 3.02
Hank Aaron 755 2297 3.04
Frank Robinson 586 1812 3.09
Babe Ruth 714 2210 3.10
Rafael Palmeiro 572 1775 3.10
Ernie Banks 512 1636 3.20
Ted Williams 521 1839 3.53
Mel Ott 511 1860 3.64
Eddie Murray 504 1917 3.80

Reds4Life
06-14-2006, 11:21 PM
Another Dunn debate.........................I'm shocked. SHOCKED.

MWM
06-14-2006, 11:33 PM
And here is a list of players with more than 10,000 career PA and less than 100 HRs and their respective ratios.


HR RBI Ratio
Ozzie Smith 28 793 28.32
Nellie Fox 35 790 22.57
Luke Appling 45 1116 24.80
Luis Aparicio 83 791 9.53
Rod Carew 92 1015 11.03


That's right, Ozzie Smith has a ratio of 28.3 while Babe Ruth's is only 3.09 and Willie Mays' (two best players of all time, IMO) is only 2.88.

Honestly, this is the stuff that makes people say things like "you can invent stats that will say anything." No one with even a cursory understand of statistical analysis would ever attempt to use this ratio to imply anything. It tells us absolutely nothing meaninful and no conclusions can be drawn from it.

Cyclone792
06-14-2006, 11:42 PM
Honestly, this is the stuff that makes people say things like "you can invent stats that will say anything." No one with even a cursory understand of statistical analysis would ever attempt to use this ratio to imply anything. It tells us absolutely nothing meaninful and no conclusions can be drawn from it.

Precisely, MWM.

I even took it a step further, and decided to break down the top 100 players in rate of RC/27 vs. the league average from 1950-2005. I wondered if the inclusion of 19th century players and Dead Ball players in the earlier list gave me a bad sample.

Let's see ...


CAREER
1950-2005
RBI displayed only--not a sorting criteria
HOMERUNS displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME RATE PLAYER LEAGUE RBI HR RBI/HR Rate
1 Ted Williams 250 12.08 4.82 801 256 3.13
2 Barry Bonds 218 10.7 4.91 1853 708 2.62
3 Mickey Mantle 205 9.35 4.57 1509 536 2.82
4 Todd Helton 194 10.19 5.25 916 271 3.38
5 Albert Pujols 186 9.58 5.15 621 201 3.09
6 Frank Thomas 182 9.18 5.03 1465 448 3.27
7 Stan Musial 176 8.66 4.91 1245 329 3.78
8 Manny Ramirez 173 8.96 5.18 1414 435 3.25
9 Mark McGwire 173 8.47 4.9 1414 583 2.43
10 Willie Mays 172 7.89 4.6 1903 660 2.88
11 Larry Walker 171 8.59 5.01 1311 383 3.42
12 Frank Robinson 171 7.56 4.43 1812 586 3.09
13 Dick Allen 169 7.2 4.27 1119 351 3.19
14 Lance Berkman 168 8.74 5.22 617 180 3.43
15 Jim Thome 166 8.62 5.19 1193 430 2.77
16 Hank Aaron 165 7.49 4.53 2297 755 3.04
17 Edgar Martinez 164 8.22 5.01 1261 309 4.08
18 Jason Giambi 164 8.47 5.18 1031 313 3.29
19 Mike Schmidt 161 7.22 4.49 1595 548 2.91
20 Alex Rodriguez 161 8.3 5.17 1226 429 2.86
21 Brian Giles 160 8.44 5.26 858 246 3.49
22 Jeff Bagwell 160 8.11 5.07 1529 449 3.41
23 Ralph Kiner 159 8.05 5.07 557 201 2.77
24 Willie McCovey 157 6.97 4.44 1555 521 2.98
25 Carlos Delgado 157 8.15 5.2 1173 369 3.18
26 Willie Stargell 157 6.86 4.38 1540 475 3.24
27 Gary Sheffield 156 7.81 5 1476 449 3.29
28 Duke Snider 156 7.65 4.9 1215 379 3.21
29 Bobby Abreu 155 8.15 5.25 776 190 4.08
30 Vladimir Guerrero 155 8.07 5.21 936 305 3.07
31 Ken Griffey Jr. 155 7.73 5 1536 536 2.87
32 Chipper Jones 154 8.03 5.21 1111 331 3.36
33 Jackie Robinson 154 7.74 5.03 477 97 4.92
34 Norm Cash 154 6.64 4.32 1103 377 2.93
35 Harmon Killebrew 153 6.68 4.35 1584 573 2.76
36 Kal Daniels 153 6.85 4.48 360 104 3.46
37 Joe Morgan 153 6.79 4.45 1133 268 4.23
38 Eddie Mathews 152 7.15 4.7 1453 512 2.84
39 Wade Boggs 151 7.12 4.72 1014 118 8.59
40 Larry Doby 149 7.28 4.87 817 215 3.80
41 Reggie Smith 149 6.39 4.3 1092 314 3.48
42 Will Clark 149 7.18 4.84 1205 284 4.24
43 George Brett 148 6.58 4.44 1595 317 5.03
44 Billy Williams 147 6.42 4.37 1475 426 3.46
45 Jim Edmonds 147 7.69 5.24 998 331 3.02
46 J.D. Drew 147 7.74 5.28 409 142 2.88
47 Rod Carew 147 6.26 4.27 1015 92 11.03
48 Ken Phelps 146 6.67 4.55 313 123 2.54
49 Al Kaline 146 6.51 4.45 1583 399 3.97
50 Carl Yastrzemski 146 6.29 4.31 1844 452 4.08
51 Rickey Henderson 146 6.93 4.75 1115 297 3.75
52 Pedro Guerrero 145 6.47 4.45 898 215 4.18
53 Mike Piazza 145 7.49 5.17 1223 397 3.08
54 Kevin Mitchell 144 6.66 4.63 760 234 3.25
55 Albert Belle 143 7.27 5.07 1239 381 3.25
56 Tim Raines 143 6.66 4.65 980 170 5.76
57 John Kruk 143 6.59 4.6 592 100 5.92
58 Nomar Garciaparra 143 7.41 5.18 740 191 3.87
59 Tony Oliva 142 5.98 4.2 947 220 4.30
60 Reggie Jackson 142 6.14 4.33 1702 563 3.02
61 Adam Dunn 142 7.27 5.14 374 158 2.37
62 Jack Clark 141 6.36 4.5 1180 340 3.47
63 Mo Vaughn 141 7.27 5.15 1064 328 3.24
64 Rafael Palmeiro 141 6.95 4.92 1835 569 3.22
65 Al Rosen 141 6.96 4.94 712 192 3.71
66 Bernie Carbo 141 6.13 4.36 358 96 3.73
67 Fred McGriff 141 6.86 4.88 1550 493 3.14
68 Darryl Strawberry 141 6.45 4.59 1000 335 2.99
69 Tony Gwynn 140 6.63 4.72 1138 135 8.43
70 Fred Lynn 140 6.23 4.46 1111 306 3.63
71 Jim Gentile 140 6.42 4.59 549 179 3.07
72 Tim Salmon 140 7.22 5.17 989 290 3.41
73 Gene Tenace 139 6.05 4.34 674 201 3.35
74 Boog Powell 139 5.86 4.21 1187 339 3.50
75 Ferris Fain 139 6.92 4.97 333 31 10.74
76 David Ortiz 139 7.09 5.09 626 177 3.54
77 Dwight Evans 139 6.15 4.42 1384 385 3.59
78 David Justice 139 6.89 4.97 1017 305 3.33
79 Alvin Davis 139 6.26 4.52 683 160 4.27
80 Keith Hernandez 138 6.22 4.5 1071 162 6.61
81 Frank Howard 138 5.9 4.27 1119 382 2.93
82 Greg Luzinski 138 6.16 4.46 1128 307 3.67
83 Dick Dietz 137 6.03 4.39 301 66 4.56
84 Danny Tartabull 137 6.5 4.74 925 262 3.53
85 Kent Hrbek 137 6.24 4.56 1086 293 3.71
86 Rico Carty 136 5.97 4.37 890 204 4.36
87 Joe Cunningham 136 6.47 4.75 436 64 6.81
88 Lenny Dykstra 136 6.28 4.63 404 81 4.99
89 Rocky Colavito 136 6.09 4.49 1159 374 3.10
90 Ken Singleton 135 5.97 4.41 1065 246 4.33
91 Ellis Burks 135 6.6 4.87 1206 352 3.43
92 Erubiel Durazo 135 7 5.17 330 94 3.51
93 Bobby Bonds 135 5.96 4.4 1024 332 3.08
94 Scott Rolen 135 7.08 5.23 859 231 3.72
95 Minnie Minoso 135 6.41 4.74 1022 185 5.52
96 Oscar Gamble 135 5.92 4.38 666 200 3.33
97 John Olerud 135 6.8 5.04 1230 255 4.82
98 Ted Kluszewski 135 6.72 4.98 901 259 3.48
99 Eric Davis 135 6.41 4.76 934 282 3.31
100 Roberto Clemente 134 6.06 4.51 1305 240 5.44
Correlation = -0.262446106

Nope, definitely not going anywhere here. Looks to me that RBI/HR rate has one heck of a lousy correlation to actual run production. Why people would consider using to analyze the productive value of any hitter baffles me.

edabbs44
06-14-2006, 11:47 PM
Finally! Someone gets angry... long time coming.

It is all a bit ridiculous isn't it... most of it makes me sick to my stomach (literally).

Pick, pick, pick all the freaking time! Over every stinking thing, no matter how miniscule! And even RBI... which is totally dependent on the batters ahead of the hated one.

Ugh!
Um.....Dunn is hitting .148 with RISP (8-54) with 6 HRs and 21 RBI.

With runners on he is hitting .180 (16-89) with 7 HRs and 24 RBI.

With bases empty, he is hitting .280 (37-132) with 15 HRs and 15 RBI.

Now I know there is going to be tons of backlash, b/c the board is divided these days with pro vs con Dunn. And that's fine. But he has had plenty of opportunities to drive in more runs than he has to this point.

The way I see the constant bickering goes a little something like this:

"New school" RZ members complain about Dunn.

"Old school" RZ members complain about the new guys complaining about Dunn and throw all kinds of Dunn stats at the New School. Most of the stats have something to do with OBP and his great walk ratio.

New school retaliates with Dunn's average and failure with runners on base.

Old school complains about the rehashing of Dunn arguments and doesn't budge, no matter what new school says. New school is always wrong.

Rinse, repeat.

Solution: No idea. But I think this is all a matter of opinion. OBP has become the hot stat as of the last few years. Some value it more than BA, some value it less. Walks aren't going to drive in runs, but they will help keep innings alive and possibly create runs, depending on what the following batters do. For me, I would rather have someone getting a hit than walking, if all things are equal. A single causes runners to move up almost every time and a walk moves runner up only if they are forced. A single could drive in a run with runners in different positions (3rd, 2nd and 3rd, 2nd, 1st and 3rd, 1st and 2nd). A walk will only drive in someone with the bases loaded.

So, IMO, hits will help create runs (both directly and indirectly) more than walks. If someone wants to tell me about some crazy statistic about how walks on Thursday create more runs on Sunday, then great. But for my money, I would rather have someone's OBP made up more of average then walks.

And for those who complain about the number of Dunn threads, think about it this way. A good number of the Dunn threads are generated by newer posters. These guys (and gals) don't know what has been beaten to death on the board over the past years. So you don't have to complain and talk about "Here we go again" and then blast the poster. Just don't respond. Most of the time you can tell what the thread is saying by the title. Don't even open it. And if you want to post, read what the thread is stating. If someone is talking about Dunn's .148 average with RISP, I'm pretty sure they don't care about his walk rate and OBP. No matter what your OBP is, going 8-54 with RISP is pretty pathetic.

Disclaimer: I realize he hit a 3 run bomb with RISP today, so my stats are one game off. But it doesn't make much of a difference.

paintmered
06-14-2006, 11:57 PM
Um.....Dunn is hitting .148 with RISP (8-54) with 6 HRs and 21 RBI.

With runners on he is hitting .180 (16-89) with 7 HRs and 24 RBI.

With bases empty, he is hitting .280 (37-132) with 15 HRs and 15 RBI.

Now I know there is going to be tons of backlash, b/c the board is divided these days with pro vs con Dunn. And that's fine. But he has had plenty of opportunities to drive in more runs than he has to this point.

The way I see the constant bickering goes a little something like this:

"New school" RZ members complain about Dunn.

"Old school" RZ members complain about the new guys complaining about Dunn and throw all kinds of Dunn stats at the New School. Most of the stats have something to do with OBP and his great walk ratio.

New school retaliates with Dunn's average and failure with runners on base.

Old school complains about the rehashing of Dunn arguments and doesn't budge, no matter what new school says. New school is always wrong.

Rinse, repeat.

Solution: No idea. But I think this is all a matter of opinion. OBP has become the hot stat as of the last few years. Some value it more than BA, some value it less. Walks aren't going to drive in runs, but they will help keep innings alive and possibly create runs, depending on what the following batters do. For me, I would rather have someone getting a hit than walking, if all things are equal. A single causes runners to move up almost every time and a walk moves runner up only if they are forced. A single could drive in a run with runners in different positions (3rd, 2nd and 3rd, 2nd, 1st and 3rd, 1st and 2nd). A walk will only drive in someone with the bases loaded.

So, IMO, hits will help create runs (both directly and indirectly) more than walks. If someone wants to tell me about some crazy statistic about how walks on Thursday create more runs on Sunday, then great. But for my money, I would rather have someone's OBP made up more of average then walks.

And for those who complain about the number of Dunn threads, think about it this way. A good number of the Dunn threads are generated by newer posters. These guys (and gals) don't know what has been beaten to death on the board over the past years. So you don't have to complain and talk about "Here we go again" and then blast the poster. Just don't respond. Most of the time you can tell what the thread is saying by the title. Don't even open it. And if you want to post, read what the thread is stating. If someone is talking about Dunn's .148 average with RISP, I'm pretty sure they don't care about his walk rate and OBP. No matter what your OBP is, going 8-54 with RISP is pretty pathetic.

Disclaimer: I realize he hit a 3 run bomb with RISP today, so my stats are one game off. But it doesn't make much of a difference.


Okay, here's the big issue that is being overlooked. The choice is not hits vs. walks. The choice is walks vs. outs. You get to choose walks or outs - one or the other. Those are the options for pitches out of the zone. There is no "I'd like a hit" option available.

I'd like him to turn some of those walks into hits too. Man, that would be Ted Williamsesque. But it simply does not work that way for ballplayers not named Valdamir. To think that it does is a monumental fallacy if there ever was.

Now what Dunn does with pitches in the strikezone is an entirely different argument.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:02 AM
Okay, here's the big issue that is being overlooked. The choice is not hits vs. walks. The choice is walks vs. outs. You get to choose walks or outs - one or the other. Those are the options for pitches out of the zone. There is no "I'd like a hit" option available.

I'd like him to turn some of those walks into hits too. Man, that would be Ted Williamsesque. But it simply does not work that way for ballplayers not named Valdamir. To think that it does is a monumental fallacy if there ever was.
I hear you Paint, but I think walks vs hits is one of the many arguments out there. If someone says his avg is awful in a given situation and then a rebuttal is posted saying look how good his OBP or OPS is, then it does turn into hits vs walks b/c a lot of the value of Dunn's OPS and OBP is made up of walks.

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 12:03 AM
the pitch he hit for the hr today was out of the zone!

westofyou
06-15-2006, 12:11 AM
OBP has become the hot stat as of the last few years.So hot Branch Rickey wrote an article about it in LOOK Magazine in 1950.

OldRightHander
06-15-2006, 12:11 AM
He said something during today's post game interview that was quite telling and I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned it yet. Steve asked him about the poor hitting with RISP and he said that the problem is that he has been expanding his strike zone too much in those situations and pressing too much. He said that his hitting with RISP will get better if he can approach those PAs the same way he does when there is nobody on base. Basically, if he does what so many say he should do, his hitting actually suffers in those situations.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:15 AM
So hot Branch Rickey wrote an article about it in LOOK Magazine in 1950.
That makes absolutely no sense. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but writing an article about something over 50 years ago doesn't have to be the reason why it is the stat du jour. Moneyball has a lot more to do with the OBP craze than Branch Rickey's article.

ochre
06-15-2006, 12:23 AM
the fact that it correlates closest to actual run production of all the individual, non-composite stats should be immaterial to any discussion about it's usefulness, relevance, or contemporary popularity.

paintmered
06-15-2006, 12:24 AM
I hear you Paint, but I think walks vs hits is one of the many arguments out there. If someone says his avg is awful in a given situation and then a rebuttal is posted saying look how good his OBP or OPS is, then it does turn into hits vs walks b/c a lot of the value of Dunn's OPS and OBP is made up of walks.

Dunn's OBP is heavily walk driven? Absolutely. We agree with that.

But why is that? The most simple answer is, he sees a TON of balls and has the eye to lay off of them (generally).

Let's look at the situations for this year:


By Situation AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS
1B Only 35 3 8 3 0 1 3 7 0 14 1 0 .229 .357 .400 .757
Scoring Posn, 2 out 24 10 4 1 0 2 8 5 0 6 0 0 .167 .310 .458 .768
Men On, 2 out 42 11 6 2 0 2 8 9 0 14 0 0 .143 .294 .333 .627
Man on 3rd, <2 out 11 11 0 0 0 0 4 4 1 6 0 0 .000 .278 .000 .278
Lead Off Inning 46 0 12 5 0 4 4 8 0 11 0 0 .261 .370 .630 1.000
On Second 21 7 4 0 0 4 8 8 0 8 0 0 .190 .414 .762 1.176
On Third 4 2 1 0 0 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 .250 .400 1.000 1.400
First and Second 11 7 2 0 0 1 4 4 0 3 0 0 .182 .400 .455 .855
First and Third 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 .000 .111 .000 .111
Second and Third 4 3 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 3 0 0 .000 .556 .000 .556
Bases Loaded 6 10 1 1 0 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 .167 .125 .333 .458
None On/Out 51 5 14 6 0 5 5 10 0 12 0 0 .275 .393 .686 1.079
None On, 1/2 out 81 10 23 2 0 10 10 20 0 24 0 0 .284 .426 .679 1.105
Close and Late 29 5 7 3 0 0 2 8 0 10 0 0 .241 .405 .345 .750
None On 132 15 37 8 0 15 15 30 0 36 0 0 .280 .414 .682 1.096
Runners On 89 35 16 4 0 7 24 25 1 35 1 0 .180 .359 .461 .820
Scoring Position 54 32 8 1 0 6 21 18 1 21 0 0 .148 .360 .500 .860

Let's specifically compare bases empty vs. runners in scoring position.

Bases Empty: Dunn has had 162 plate appearances (ABs + BB + HBP) with the bases empty. He has walked 30 times. So Adam Dunn walks 18.5% of all plate appearances with the bases empty. He's also batting .280 in this situation and striking out 22.2% of the time.

Runners in Scoring Position: Dunn has had 78 plate-appearances in this situation. He has 18 walks which equates to 23.1%. He is also striking out 28.7% of the time and his BA is much lower.

So when we take into account that in rbi situations that...

1) Walk percentage increases
2) Strikeouts increase
3) Batting average decreases

It all reinforces the notion that Adam Dunn sees less to hit (i.e. more balls) in the money-making rbi situations. And so yes, it really is a question of walks vs. outs.

westofyou
06-15-2006, 12:26 AM
That makes absolutely no sense. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but writing an article about something over 50 years ago doesn't have to be the reason why it is the stat du jour. Moneyball has a lot more to do with the OBP craze than Branch Rickey's article.
Maybe in your world, but Branch Rickeys approach (and that includes valuing OB%) has a hell of a lot more to do with it in Baseball than Moneyball.

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 12:32 AM
OK, I know there is porn and other neat stuff I should be looking at on the internet but...

Dunn has had 36 abs where the count was 3-2 before he walked or struck out, he hit 6 times and had 3 hrs.

So at least 72 hittable strikes were not hit. I say he is getting pitches to hit and my post proves it. That is just when he goes 3-2 not counting all the very close to being strikes he takes.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:33 AM
Let's specifically compare bases empty vs. runners in scoring position.

Bases Empty: Dunn has had 162 plate appearances (ABs + BB + HBP) with the bases empty. He has walked 30 times. So Adam Dunn walks 18.5% of all plate appearances with the bases empty. He's also batting .280 in this situation and striking out 22.2% of the time.

Runners in Scoring Position: Dunn has had 78 plate-appearances in this situation. He has 18 walks which equates to 23.1%. He is also striking out 28.7% of the time and his BA is much lower.

So when we take into account that in rbi situations that...

1) Walk percentage increases
2) Strikeouts increase
3) Batting average decreases

It all reinforces the notion that Adam Dunn sees less to hit (i.e. more balls) in the money-making rbi situations.
I agree that pitchers are probably more careful with him when runners on. It just makes sense. But I think his approach has to be different in those situations as well. He is hitting 100 points lower in rbi situations. He strikes out more. He walks more. But if he isn't seeing as many pitches to hit in these situations to make a substantial difference like 100 points in batting average, his walk ratio should rise more than 5%. Maybe it's the pressure of his lack of run produciton in these situations. Maybe it's just poor pitch selection. But I don't think anyone can argue that he has a lot of room to improve in those situations. If he isn't getting the pitches, then don't swing. If they aren't going to pitch to you, fine. But he has had a lot of ABs in these situations and the "not pitching to him" reasoning will get very old if those numbers don't start to move.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 12:36 AM
I hear you Paint, but I think walks vs hits is one of the many arguments out there. If someone says his avg is awful in a given situation and then a rebuttal is posted saying look how good his OBP or OPS is, then it does turn into hits vs walks b/c a lot of the value of Dunn's OPS and OBP is made up of walks.

That's a strawman argument. I've never seen anybody turn this into a walks vs. hits debate. Anybody using OPS or OBP instead of BA recognizes the difference in reliability of the stats; they're not turning it into any walks vs. hits debate.

OPS, OBP, SLG, runs created and just about every other stat someone has pulled out over BA correlate to run scoring significantly better than BA. That's why people use those stats instead of BA. It's been proven over and over and over again. All those stats correlate better to run scoring than batting average, and it's not even close.

Here's a sample of 10 seasons from 1996-2005 showing the correlation of those stats to actual runs scored ...


SEASON
1996-2005
RUNS CREATED displayed only--not a sorting criteria
OPS displayed only--not a sorting criteria
OBA displayed only--not a sorting criteria
SLG displayed only--not a sorting criteria
AVERAGE displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS YEAR R RC OPS OBA SLG AVG
1 Indians 1999 1009 1024 .840 .373 .466 .289
2 Mariners 1996 993 1042 .850 .366 .484 .287
3 White Sox 2000 978 956 .826 .356 .470 .286
4 Rockies 2000 968 979 .816 .362 .455 .294
5 Yankees 1998 965 960 .825 .364 .460 .288
T6 Rockies 1996 961 968 .827 .355 .472 .287
T6 Red Sox 2003 961 1032 .851 .360 .491 .289
8 Indians 1996 952 1021 .844 .369 .475 .293
9 Indians 2000 950 1011 .837 .367 .470 .288
T10 Orioles 1996 949 961 .822 .350 .472 .274
T10 Red Sox 2004 949 992 .832 .360 .472 .282
12 A's 2000 947 936 .817 .360 .458 .270
13 Rangers 1999 945 973 .840 .361 .479 .293
14 Rangers 1998 940 933 .819 .357 .462 .289
15 Astros 2000 938 992 .837 .361 .477 .278
T16 Rangers 1996 928 966 .827 .358 .469 .284
T16 Red Sox 1996 928 958 .816 .359 .457 .283
18 Mariners 2001 927 946 .805 .360 .445 .288
T19 Giants 2000 925 982 .834 .362 .472 .278
T19 Mariners 1997 925 963 .839 .355 .485 .280
T21 Rockies 2001 923 1008 .837 .354 .483 .292
T21 Rockies 1997 923 975 .835 .357 .478 .288
23 Red Sox 2005 910 930 .811 .357 .454 .281
24 Diamondbacks 1999 908 942 .805 .347 .459 .277
T25 Mariners 2000 907 916 .803 .361 .442 .269
T25 Braves 2003 907 967 .824 .349 .475 .284
27 Rockies 1999 906 953 .819 .348 .472 .288
28 Yankees 1999 900 940 .819 .366 .453 .282
29 White Sox 1996 898 928 .807 .360 .447 .281
T30 Yankees 2004 897 900 .811 .353 .458 .268
T30 Yankees 2002 897 913 .809 .354 .455 .275
T30 Indians 2001 897 915 .807 .350 .458 .278
T33 Blue Jays 2003 894 896 .803 .349 .455 .279
T33 Brewers 1996 894 909 .794 .353 .441 .279
35 A's 1999 893 901 .801 .355 .446 .259
36 Yankees 1997 891 918 .798 .362 .436 .287
37 Rangers 2001 890 937 .815 .344 .471 .275
38 Cardinals 2000 887 932 .812 .356 .455 .270
39 Yankees 2005 886 932 .805 .355 .450 .276
40 A's 2001 884 876 .784 .345 .439 .264
41 Blue Jays 1999 883 921 .810 .352 .457 .280
42 Royals 2000 879 870 .773 .348 .425 .288
T43 Yankees 2003 877 911 .810 .356 .453 .271
T43 Twins 1996 877 871 .782 .357 .425 .288
T45 Red Sox 1998 876 894 .810 .348 .463 .280
T45 Cardinals 2003 876 936 .804 .350 .454 .279
47 Astros 1998 874 923 .792 .356 .436 .280
48 Giants 1999 872 888 .790 .356 .434 .271
T49 Yankees 1996 871 887 .796 .360 .436 .288
T49 Yankees 2000 871 903 .804 .354 .450 .277
51 Indians 1997 868 927 .825 .358 .467 .286
T52 Rangers 2005 865 883 .798 .329 .468 .267
T52 Reds 1999 865 900 .792 .341 .451 .272
T52 White Sox 2004 865 840 .790 .333 .457 .268
55 Angels 2000 864 945 .825 .352 .472 .280
T56 Blue Jays 2000 861 920 .810 .341 .469 .275
T56 White Sox 1998 861 861 .782 .339 .444 .271
T58 A's 1996 860 892 .796 .344 .452 .265
T58 Rangers 2004 860 859 .786 .329 .457 .266
T60 Red Sox 2002 859 875 .789 .345 .444 .277
T60 Mariners 1999 859 894 .798 .343 .455 .269
T60 Mariners 1998 859 926 .812 .345 .468 .276
63 Indians 2004 858 882 .795 .351 .444 .276
T64 Royals 1999 856 855 .781 .348 .433 .282
T64 White Sox 2002 856 844 .787 .338 .449 .268
66 Cardinals 2004 855 918 .804 .344 .460 .278
T67 Mets 1999 853 912 .797 .363 .434 .279
T67 Rockies 2003 853 860 .790 .344 .445 .267
T69 Red Sox 1997 851 922 .815 .352 .463 .291
T69 Angels 2002 851 851 .773 .341 .433 .282
T71 Giants 2004 850 912 .795 .357 .438 .270
T71 Orioles 1999 850 904 .800 .353 .447 .279
T71 Indians 1998 850 895 .795 .347 .448 .272
74 Rangers 2000 848 873 .798 .352 .446 .283
75 Astros 2001 847 893 .798 .347 .451 .271
76 Giants 1998 845 872 .774 .353 .421 .274
77 Rangers 2002 843 871 .794 .338 .455 .269
78 Orioles 2004 842 874 .776 .345 .432 .281
79 Phillies 1999 841 887 .782 .351 .431 .275
T80 Phillies 2004 840 898 .788 .345 .443 .267
T80 Red Sox 1999 840 893 .796 .350 .446 .277
T80 Braves 1999 840 864 .777 .341 .436 .266
T83 Royals 2003 836 811 .763 .336 .427 .274
T83 Angels 2004 836 846 .770 .341 .429 .282
85 Rockies 2004 833 890 .800 .345 .455 .275
86 Cubs 1998 831 839 .771 .337 .433 .264
87 Angels 1997 829 826 .762 .346 .416 .272
88 Tigers 2004 827 849 .786 .337 .449 .272
T89 Rangers 2003 826 863 .784 .330 .454 .266
T89 Braves 1998 826 870 .795 .342 .453 .272
T89 Rockies 1998 826 903 .808 .347 .461 .291
92 Reds 2000 825 885 .790 .343 .447 .274
T93 Tigers 2000 823 842 .781 .343 .438 .275
T93 Astros 1999 823 866 .775 .355 .420 .267
95 Reds 2005 820 876 .785 .339 .446 .261
96 Diamondbacks 2002 819 831 .769 .346 .423 .267
97 Diamondbacks 2001 818 877 .783 .341 .442 .267
98 Orioles 1998 817 865 .793 .347 .447 .273
99 Blue Jays 1998 816 864 .788 .340 .448 .266
100 Brewers 1999 815 878 .779 .353 .426 .273
T101 Cardinals 2001 814 849 .780 .339 .441 .270
T101 Mariners 2002 814 835 .769 .350 .419 .275
103 Blue Jays 2002 813 796 .757 .327 .430 .261
104 Orioles 1997 812 834 .770 .341 .429 .268
T105 Braves 2000 810 846 .775 .346 .429 .271
T105 Cardinals 1998 810 900 .781 .341 .441 .258
107 Cardinals 1999 809 852 .764 .338 .426 .262
T108 Mets 2000 807 851 .776 .346 .430 .263
T108 Phillies 2005 807 866 .772 .348 .423 .270
T108 Rangers 1997 807 828 .771 .334 .438 .274
T111 Cardinals 2005 805 820 .762 .339 .423 .270
T111 Astros 2003 805 831 .767 .336 .431 .263
T113 Yankees 2001 804 825 .769 .334 .435 .267
T113 A's 1998 804 763 .735 .338 .397 .257
T115 Braves 2004 803 858 .777 .343 .434 .270
T115 Astros 2004 803 848 .778 .342 .436 .267
117 Twins 2003 801 828 .772 .341 .431 .277
118 A's 2002 800 819 .771 .339 .432 .261
119 Giants 2001 799 932 .802 .342 .460 .266
T120 Dodgers 2000 798 843 .771 .341 .431 .257
T120 White Sox 2001 798 823 .785 .334 .451 .268
T122 Padres 1997 795 815 .749 .342 .407 .271
T122 Mariners 2003 795 801 .754 .344 .410 .271
124 Orioles 2000 794 821 .776 .341 .435 .272
T125 Pirates 2000 793 836 .762 .339 .424 .267
T125 Dodgers 1999 793 830 .760 .339 .420 .266
T125 A's 2004 793 854 .776 .343 .433 .270
T128 Diamondbacks 2000 792 816 .763 .333 .429 .265
T128 Red Sox 2000 792 837 .764 .341 .423 .267
T130 White Sox 2003 791 812 .777 .331 .446 .263
T130 Braves 1997 791 817 .769 .343 .426 .270
T130 Phillies 2003 791 830 .762 .343 .419 .261
133 Indians 2005 790 849 .787 .334 .453 .271
T134 Padres 2001 789 777 .735 .336 .399 .252
T134 Cubs 2004 789 855 .786 .328 .458 .268
T136 Cardinals 2002 787 809 .763 .338 .425 .268
T136 Angels 1998 787 796 .751 .335 .415 .272
T138 Giants 1997 784 808 .751 .337 .414 .258
T138 Tigers 1997 784 772 .747 .332 .415 .258
T140 Tigers 1996 783 753 .743 .323 .420 .256
T140 Giants 2002 783 879 .786 .344 .442 .267
142 Twins 2004 780 803 .763 .332 .431 .266
T143 Rockies 2002 778 797 .760 .337 .423 .274
T143 White Sox 1997 778 799 .758 .341 .417 .273
T143 Reds 1996 778 803 .753 .331 .422 .256
T146 White Sox 1999 777 811 .766 .337 .429 .277
T146 Mets 1997 777 755 .737 .332 .405 .262
T146 Astros 1997 777 825 .747 .344 .403 .259
T146 Cubs 2001 777 815 .766 .336 .430 .261
150 Pirates 1996 776 779 .736 .329 .407 .266
T151 Blue Jays 2005 775 750 .738 .331 .407 .265
T151 Pirates 1999 775 808 .753 .334 .419 .259
153 Braves 1996 773 811 .765 .333 .432 .270
T154 Devil Rays 1999 772 784 .754 .343 .411 .274
T154 Twins 1997 772 776 .741 .333 .409 .270
T154 Red Sox 2001 772 817 .773 .334 .439 .266
T154 A's 2005 772 749 .737 .330 .407 .262
T154 Cubs 1996 772 730 .721 .320 .401 .251
T159 Twins 2001 771 807 .770 .337 .433 .272
T159 Padres 1996 771 793 .740 .338 .402 .265
161 Braves 2005 769 802 .768 .333 .435 .265
T162 Padres 2004 768 814 .756 .342 .414 .273
T162 Twins 2002 768 793 .769 .332 .437 .272
T162 A's 2003 768 763 .743 .327 .417 .254
165 Blue Jays 2001 767 806 .755 .325 .430 .263
166 Blue Jays 1996 766 786 .752 .331 .420 .259
167 Cubs 2000 764 806 .746 .335 .411 .256
168 A's 1997 763 813 .762 .339 .423 .260
169 Angels 1996 762 816 .770 .339 .431 .276
T170 Dodgers 2004 761 801 .755 .332 .423 .262
T170 Angels 2005 761 746 .734 .325 .409 .270
172 Cardinals 1996 759 749 .736 .330 .407 .267
173 Dodgers 2001 758 781 .748 .323 .425 .255
174 Giants 2003 755 812 .763 .338 .425 .264
T175 Astros 1996 753 770 .733 .336 .397 .262
T175 Pirates 2003 753 819 .758 .338 .420 .267
T177 Padres 2000 752 764 .732 .330 .402 .254
T177 Giants 1996 752 756 .719 .331 .388 .253
179 Marlins 2003 751 787 .754 .333 .421 .266
T180 Devil Rays 2005 750 770 .754 .329 .425 .274
T180 Reds 2004 750 793 .749 .331 .418 .250
T180 Reds 1998 750 771 .739 .337 .402 .262
T183 Astros 2002 749 800 .755 .338 .417 .262
T183 Padres 1998 749 771 .739 .330 .409 .253
185 Twins 2000 748 771 .744 .337 .407 .270
T186 Tigers 1999 747 778 .768 .326 .443 .261
T186 Royals 1997 747 770 .740 .333 .407 .264
T186 Cubs 1999 747 780 .749 .329 .420 .257
T189 Royals 1996 746 746 .731 .332 .398 .267
T189 Phillies 2001 746 782 .743 .329 .414 .260
T189 Mets 1996 746 768 .737 .324 .412 .270
192 Orioles 2003 743 741 .729 .323 .405 .268
T193 Marlins 2001 742 782 .749 .326 .423 .264
T193 Dodgers 1997 742 790 .748 .330 .418 .268
T195 White Sox 2005 741 752 .747 .322 .425 .262
T195 Expos 1996 741 749 .733 .327 .406 .262
T197 Brewers 2000 740 749 .729 .325 .403 .246
T197 Marlins 1997 740 773 .741 .346 .395 .259
T197 Rockies 2005 740 772 .744 .333 .411 .267
T197 Brewers 2001 740 753 .745 .319 .426 .251
201 Indians 2002 739 727 .733 .321 .412 .249
202 Expos 2000 738 792 .758 .326 .432 .266
203 Royals 2002 737 736 .721 .323 .398 .256
204 Angels 2003 736 750 .743 .330 .413 .268
T205 Expos 2002 735 786 .752 .334 .418 .261
T205 Reds 2001 735 764 .744 .324 .419 .262
207 Twins 1998 734 715 .717 .328 .389 .266
208 Devil Rays 2000 733 727 .728 .329 .399 .257
209 Marlins 2000 731 786 .740 .331 .409 .262
T210 Braves 2001 729 745 .736 .324 .412 .260
T210 Orioles 2005 729 774 .761 .327 .434 .269
T210 Royals 2001 729 741 .727 .318 .409 .266
213 Brewers 2005 726 775 .754 .331 .423 .259
214 Pirates 1997 725 768 .733 .329 .404 .262
T215 Tigers 2001 724 729 .730 .320 .409 .260
T215 Cubs 2003 724 739 .739 .323 .416 .259
217 Tigers 2005 723 756 .750 .321 .428 .272
T218 Mets 2005 722 764 .738 .322 .416 .258
T218 Tigers 1998 722 763 .738 .323 .415 .264
220 Royals 2004 720 703 .720 .322 .397 .259
221 Blue Jays 2004 719 729 .732 .328 .403 .260
T222 Expos 1999 718 763 .751 .323 .427 .265
T222 Marlins 2004 718 743 .736 .329 .406 .264
T224 Diamondbacks 2003 717 785 .746 .330 .417 .263
T224 Marlins 2005 717 778 .748 .339 .409 .272
226 Devil Rays 2003 715 743 .724 .320 .404 .265
T227 Royals 1998 714 740 .724 .324 .399 .263
T227 Devil Rays 2004 714 734 .725 .320 .405 .258
T227 Brewers 2003 714 784 .748 .329 .419 .256
T230 Dodgers 2002 713 728 .729 .320 .409 .264
T230 Phillies 1998 713 751 .721 .326 .395 .264
T232 Angels 1999 711 700 .716 .322 .395 .256
T232 Expos 2003 711 731 .727 .326 .401 .258
T234 Phillies 2002 710 816 .761 .339 .422 .259
T234 Padres 1999 710 729 .725 .332 .393 .252
236 Reds 2002 709 758 .738 .330 .408 .253
T237 Braves 2002 708 762 .741 .331 .409 .260
T237 Phillies 2000 708 764 .729 .329 .400 .251
239 Brewers 1998 707 726 .726 .330 .396 .260
T240 Mets 1998 706 745 .724 .330 .394 .259
T240 Cubs 2002 706 755 .734 .321 .413 .246
T242 Cubs 2005 703 798 .764 .324 .440 .270
T242 Dodgers 1996 703 705 .701 .316 .384 .252
244 Royals 2005 701 691 .716 .320 .396 .263
T245 Mariners 2005 699 694 .709 .317 .391 .256
T245 Marlins 2002 699 771 .740 .337 .403 .261
T245 Indians 2003 699 701 .717 .316 .401 .254
248 Mariners 2004 698 757 .727 .331 .396 .270
249 Diamondbacks 2005 696 797 .754 .332 .421 .256
250 Reds 2003 694 724 .713 .318 .395 .245
251 Astros 2005 693 735 .730 .322 .408 .256
T252 Marlins 1999 691 724 .719 .325 .395 .263
T252 Angels 2001 691 745 .732 .327 .405 .261
T252 Expos 1997 691 746 .741 .316 .425 .258
255 Mets 2002 690 701 .717 .322 .395 .256
256 Cardinals 1997 689 733 .720 .324 .396 .255
T257 Twins 2005 688 694 .714 .323 .391 .259
T257 Marlins 1996 688 742 .722 .329 .393 .257
T259 Cubs 1997 687 704 .717 .321 .396 .263
T259 Orioles 2001 687 674 .699 .319 .380 .248
261 Twins 1999 686 688 .712 .328 .384 .264
262 Dodgers 2005 685 713 .721 .326 .395 .253
T263 Mets 2004 684 723 .726 .317 .409 .249
T263 Padres 2005 684 742 .724 .333 .391 .257
265 Brewers 1997 681 709 .723 .325 .398 .260
T266 Pirates 2004 680 715 .722 .321 .401 .260
T266 Pirates 2005 680 735 .723 .322 .400 .259
268 Padres 2003 678 721 .721 .333 .388 .261
269 Devil Rays 2002 673 688 .704 .314 .390 .253
270 Devil Rays 2001 672 681 .707 .320 .388 .258
271 Expos 2001 670 682 .715 .319 .396 .253
272 Dodgers 1998 669 684 .698 .310 .387 .252
273 Phillies 1997 668 695 .707 .322 .385 .255
T274 Marlins 1998 667 672 .690 .317 .373 .248
T274 Orioles 2002 667 679 .712 .309 .403 .246
276 Diamondbacks 1998 665 681 .707 .314 .393 .246
277 Padres 2002 662 697 .702 .321 .381 .253
278 Pirates 2001 657 683 .706 .313 .393 .247
279 Blue Jays 1997 654 674 .699 .310 .389 .244
280 Reds 1997 651 719 .710 .321 .389 .253
T281 Phillies 1996 650 716 .712 .325 .387 .256
T281 Pirates 1998 650 673 .686 .311 .374 .254
283 Giants 2005 649 688 .714 .319 .396 .261
284 Expos 1998 644 677 .704 .310 .394 .249
T285 Mets 2003 642 644 .688 .314 .374 .247
T285 Mets 2001 642 695 .710 .323 .387 .249
287 Pirates 2002 641 685 .700 .319 .381 .244
288 Nationals 2005 639 682 .708 .322 .386 .252
289 Expos 2004 635 694 .705 .313 .392 .249
290 Brewers 2004 634 708 .708 .321 .387 .248
291 Brewers 2002 627 682 .711 .320 .390 .253
292 Devil Rays 1998 620 683 .706 .321 .385 .261
293 Diamondbacks 2004 615 674 .703 .310 .393 .253
294 Tigers 2003 591 619 .675 .300 .375 .240
295 Tigers 2002 575 606 .679 .300 .379 .248
296 Dodgers 2003 574 618 .671 .303 .368 .243

Correlation to actual run scoring is as follows ...

Runs Created = 0.955013527
OPS = 0.945836495
OBP = 0.905001688
SLG = 0.890128653
BA = 0.827190939

I see one outlier on the very bottom there, and it just so happens to be batting average. Runs Created, OTOH, correlated over 95.5 percent, and OPS was a hair behind at 94.6 percent.

Avoid outs and acquire bases. That's how you produce runs. I don't care how you avoid outs or how you acquire bases, that's what I want a hitter to do. Whether it's home runs, doubles, singles, walks or some combination, it doesn't matter. Just avoid outs and acquire bases as best you can, and you'll be the best hitter that you can be.

And as we can see, Runs Created and OPS are far better indicators of avoiding outs and acquiring bases than is batting average.

paintmered
06-15-2006, 12:38 AM
OK, I know there is porn and other neat stuff I should be looking at on the internet but...

Dunn has had 36 abs where the count was 3-2 before he walked or struck out, he hit 6 times and had 3 hrs.

So at least 72 hittable strikes were not hit. I say he is getting pitches to hit and my post proves it. That is just when he goes 3-2 not counting all the very close to being strikes he takes.


Would you believe me if I were to tell you that not all strikes are hittable? Would you believe me if I told you it was Ted Williams that stated that.

One of the greatest hitters of all time knew that there were pitches in the strike zone that he could not hit well. So while your post does provide some food for thought, it doesn't really "prove" anything.

ochre
06-15-2006, 12:39 AM
...Anybody using OPS or OBP instead of BA recognizes the difference in accuracy of the stats...
change "accuracy" to "reliability" Cyc.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:39 AM
Maybe in your world, but Branch Rickeys approach (and that includes valuing OB%) has a hell of a lot more to do with it in Baseball than Moneyball.
From a quick Google search, when I entered OBP and Beane it talks about how the game today values OBP.

When I do the same thing for Branch Rickey, it talks about how he invented the statistic.

I'm not saying Rickey never valued it and I'm not saying that Beane invented it. I'm saying it is b/c of Beane why the stat is more highly valued now than in the past.

ochre
06-15-2006, 12:41 AM
From a quick Google search, when I entered OBP and Beane it talks about how the game today values OBP.

When I do the same thing for Branch Rickey, it talks about how he invented the statistic.

I'm not saying Rickey never valued it and I'm not saying that Beane invented it. I'm saying it is b/c of Beane why the stat is more highly valued now than in the past.
Branch Rickey died before google was begat.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 12:41 AM
change "accuracy" to "reliability" Cyc.

Darn, the biggest flaw in my post was the slight misuse of a word! :p:

Consider it dunn, ochre ;)

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 12:42 AM
I know it doesn't prove anything, that was tongue in cheek(doesn't work well on the internet) but I do know that many homeruns are on pitches that aren't strikes. Letter high fast balls go a long way when Dunn turns on them.

ochre
06-15-2006, 12:42 AM
and I'm going to coin a new category of appeal to authority:

argumentum ad googlum: Using google search results to fallaciously validate a point.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:44 AM
That's a strawman argument. I've never seen anybody turn this into a walks vs. hits debate. Anybody using OPS or OBP instead of BA recognizes the difference in reliability of the stats; they're not turning it into any walks vs. hits debate.

Here's one

Quote:
Originally Posted by ***
Dunn hitting .200 over his last 10 games is breaking out of a slump?

.363 OBP ain't bad though...


Here's another

Not at all, but even that is a little low for him, granted his OBP is usually quite high.


And another

Quote:
Originally Posted by ***
I wouldn't say drawing walks is a slump buster. Hitting would qualify as doing that.

An out is an out, a base is base.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:49 AM
and I'm going to coin a new category of appeal to authority:

argumentum ad googlum: Using google search results to fallaciously validate a point.
Huh? In rebuttal of my "Beane made OBP a hot statistic today" argument I was told that Branch Rickey is the reason, even though OBP has come more to the forefront in the past 5-10 years than ever before. I used Google just to see if I was dead wrong, and it showed that many authors and baseball execs talk about Beane revolutionizing the way players are looked at today.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 12:49 AM
Here's one

Quote:
Originally Posted by ***
Dunn hitting .200 over his last 10 games is breaking out of a slump?

.363 OBP ain't bad though...


Here's another

Not at all, but even that is a little low for him, granted his OBP is usually quite high.


And another

Quote:
Originally Posted by ***
I wouldn't say drawing walks is a slump buster. Hitting would qualify as doing that.

An out is an out, a base is base.

And you know what? A .363 OBP isn't bad. I don't care how you achieve it, but if you're getting on base 36.3 percent of the time, then you're avoiding an out 63.7 percent of the time, and you're avoiding outs well above the average hitter in all of baseball.

OBP high = very good.

Outs are bad, bases are good. Avoid outs, acquire bases. Certain statistics correlate to run scoring much, much better than batting average. It's a proven fact, and it's a simple concept. Feel free to peruse that list of 296 teams in 10 years if you don't believe it.

SteelSD
06-15-2006, 12:52 AM
Solution: No idea. But I think this is all a matter of opinion.

Nope. It's a matter of what is and what isnt'.

Correlations- 2005: MLB team Run Scoring per Game with RISP:

BA w/RISP: 0.630
OBP w/RISP: 0.675
SLG w/RISP: 0.703
OPS w/RISP: 0.807

Correlations- 2005: MLB team Run Scoring per Game Overall with RISP Behavior:

BA w/RISP: 0.425
OBP w/RISP: 0.500
SLG w/RISP: 0.790
OPS w/RISP: 0.800

Correlations- 2005: MLB team Run Scoring per Game Overall:

BA: 0.701
OBP: 0.783
SLG: 0.789
OPS: 0.879

No surprises there. BA is consistently the lowest correlated driver to Run scoring behavior in every single category. Sometimes better numbers are discovered. When that happens we can either use them or cling to worse numbers while claiming that it's a "matter of opinion" when it's really nothing more than a matter of not wanting to see what's better versus what's worse. No one woke up one day and decided they'd start some "fad". What happened is that they discovered the relevance of something that had ALWAYS been more relevant than what was being used. That's evolution.

That which correlates more highly with scoring Runs is preferable to that which does not. You see a .148 BA and think it stinks because you overvalue the relevance of that particular number. I see a .360 OBP and a .500 SLG and know that those numbers trump the relevance of a .148 BA, particularly when the .360 and .500 are combined. That's just what baseball tells us.

paintmered
06-15-2006, 12:54 AM
I agree that pitchers are probably more careful with him when runners on. It just makes sense. But I think his approach has to be different in those situations as well. He is hitting 100 points lower in rbi situations. He strikes out more. He walks more. But if he isn't seeing as many pitches to hit in these situations to make a substantial difference like 100 points in batting average, his walk ratio should rise more than 5%. Maybe it's the pressure of his lack of run produciton in these situations. Maybe it's just poor pitch selection. But I don't think anyone can argue that he has a lot of room to improve in those situations. If he isn't getting the pitches, then don't swing. If they aren't going to pitch to you, fine. But he has had a lot of ABs in these situations and the "not pitching to him" reasoning will get very old if those numbers don't start to move.

I was hoping you would post this because it leads into my next point very well. Let's take a look at the same situations during the 2003-2005 seasons (per ESPN once again)


By Situation AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS
1B Only 285 35 77 12 1 22 46 63 7 90 10 3 .270 .414 .551 .965
Bases Loaded 40 52 8 3 0 4 33 7 0 20 0 0 .200 .300 .575 .875
Close and Late 228 44 55 11 0 19 44 50 5 87 3 0 .241 .385 .539 .924
First and Second 110 42 29 8 0 8 43 20 6 37 1 0 .264 .404 .555 .959
First and Third 46 23 9 1 0 4 21 16 1 15 4 1 .196 .400 .478 .878
Lead Off Inning 377 0 100 22 2 30 30 35 3 110 0 0 .265 .333 .573 .906
Man on 3rd, <2 out 72 62 16 5 0 7 54 24 2 28 1 1 .222 .404 .583 .987
Men On, 2 out 278 85 60 14 0 12 62 94 2 105 11 2 .216 .417 .396 .813
None On 842 64 208 47 2 64 64 106 10 277 0 0 .247 .338 .536 .874
None On, 1/2 out 445 32 105 25 0 32 32 68 5 160 0 0 .236 .344 .508 .852
None On/Out 397 32 103 22 2 32 32 38 5 117 0 0 .259 .332 .567 .899
On Second 116 31 25 8 0 6 25 58 1 37 3 0 .216 .480 .440 .920
On Third 33 15 6 2 0 3 14 14 0 5 0 0 .182 .426 .515 .941
Runners On 650 218 159 34 1 49 196 190 17 212 18 5 .245 .424 .526 .950
Scoring Position 365 183 82 22 0 27 150 127 10 122 8 2 .225 .431 .507 .938
Scoring Posn, 2 out 166 78 36 11 0 9 55 69 1 57 7 1 .217 .449 .446 .895
Second and Third 20 20 5 0 0 2 14 12 2 8 0 1 .250 .543 .550 1.093


Once again, let's compare bases empty vs. RISP.

Bases empty: 1466 PA, 174 BB = 11.9%
BA = .243
SO = 29.6%

RISP: 502 PA, 127 BB = 25.3%
BA = .225
SO = 24.3%

So when we take a larger sample, there isn't a 5% jump in walk percentage, but instead we see over a 13% jump!

So what does this all boil down to? Adam Dunn sees less to hit with RISP than bases empty. This is the case now as it was then. So what's the difference between this year and the last three? It looks like he's pressing, really.

lucky bugle boy
06-15-2006, 12:55 AM
He said something during today's post game interview that was quite telling and I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned it yet. Steve asked him about the poor hitting with RISP and he said that the problem is that he has been expanding his strike zone too much in those situations and pressing too much. He said that his hitting with RISP will get better if he can approach those PAs the same way he does when there is nobody on base. Basically, if he does what so many say he should do, his hitting actually suffers in those situations.
I think this is very interesting as well. I know alot of people like to minimize the RISP stats, but this shows that at least for Dunn, his thought process is different in these situations. I agree he needs to try to approach these situations the same as any other (if possible?). Dunn is awesome, wouldn't have a fantasy team without him, but I think the poor RISP stats might deserve some of the attention that they get.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:56 AM
I was hoping you would post this because it leads into my next point very well. Let's take a look at the same situations during the 2003-2005 seasons (per ESPN once again)


Once again, let's compare bases empty vs. RISP.

Bases empty: 1466 PA, 174 BB = 11.9%
BA = .243
SO = 29.6%

RISP: 502 PA, 127 BB = 25.3%
BA = .225
SO = 24.3%

So when we take a larger sample, there isn't a 5% jump in walk percentage, but instead we see over a 13% jump!

So what does this all boil down to? Adam Dunn sees less to hit with RISP than bases empty. This is the case now as it was then. So what's the difference between this year and the last three? It looks like he's pressing, really.
And thank you for posting that. The only arguments being posted here is that Dunn isn't producing in run scoring opportunities. And as long as you agree, then there is no reason to argue.

paintmered
06-15-2006, 12:59 AM
And thank you for posting that. The only arguments being posted here is that Dunn isn't producing in run scoring opportunities. And as long as you agree, then there is no reason to argue.

It depends on what your definition of producing is. For me, it is avoiding outs and accumulating bases. For you, it means driving in runs.

As it has been shown time and time again, the former definition has more to do with scoring runs than the latter. Scoring more runs = more wins as shown by the pythagoreum theorum (which I need to update btw).

Krusty
06-15-2006, 12:59 AM
What? Another Dunn thread that hasn't been closed yet?

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 12:59 AM
Nope. It's a matter of what is and what isnt'.

Correlations- 2005: MLB team Run Scoring per Game with RISP:

BA w/RISP: 0.630
OBP w/RISP: 0.675
SLG w/RISP: 0.703
OPS w/RISP: 0.807

Correlations- 2005: MLB team Run Scoring per Game Overall with RISP Behavior:

BA w/RISP: 0.425
OBP w/RISP: 0.500
SLG w/RISP: 0.790
OPS w/RISP: 0.800

Correlations- 2005: MLB team Run Scoring per Game Overall:

BA: 0.701
OBP: 0.783
SLG: 0.789
OPS: 0.879

No surprises there. BA is consistently the lowest correlated driver to Run scoring behavior in every single category. Sometimes better numbers are discovered. When that happens we can either use them or cling to worse numbers while claiming that it's a "matter of opinion" when it's really nothing more than a matter of not wanting to see what's better versus what's worse. No one woke up one day and decided they'd start some "fad". What happened is that they discovered the relevance of something that had ALWAYS been more relevant than what was being used. That's evolution.

That which correlates more highly with scoring Runs is preferable to that which does not. You see a .148 BA and think it stinks because you overvalue the relevance of that particular number. I see a .360 OBP and a .500 SLG and know that those numbers trump the relevance of a .148 BA, particularly when the .360 and .500 are combined. That's just what baseball tells us.
I see a .148 average with RISP and wish it were higher. That's it. I love that he walks a lot. I love that he hits HRs. I'm a big Dunn fan. But I would rather have him knocking in the runs than walking and hoping the next guy comes through. That's been my only argument. Good night.

ochre
06-15-2006, 01:01 AM
What? Another Dunn thread that hasn't been closed yet?
It's been pretty civil so far. Not much hyperbole.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 01:01 AM
It depends on what your definition of producing is. For me, it is avoiding outs and accumulating bases. For you, it means driving in runs.

As it has been shown time and time again, the former meaning has more to do with scoring runs than the latter.
If Dunn has Manny, Papi or Pujols hitting behind him then the walks mean more to me. If he has Hatteberg and LaWho? hitting behind him, I'd rather have him hit the ball than walk. Good night.

SteelSD
06-15-2006, 01:02 AM
And thank you for posting that. The only arguments being posted here is that Dunn isn't producing in run scoring opportunities. And as long as you agree, then there is no reason to argue.

Adam Dunn is producing in RISP situations.

Coming into today's game:

.360 OBP/.500 SLG (both higher now)

You do that, and you're producing because OBP, SLG, and particularly OPS are more highly correlated with RISP and Overall Run scoring than anything else. You are arguing an untenable position.

ochre
06-15-2006, 01:02 AM
If Dunn has Manny, Papi or Pujols hitting behind him then the walks mean more to me. If he has Hatteberg and LaWho? hitting behind him, I'd rather have him hit the ball than walk. Good night.
so the issue is more: where he bats in the order?

I've been saying bat him second and forget about it for 2-3 years now, so you'll get no argument from me there.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 01:05 AM
If Dunn has Manny, Papi or Pujols hitting behind him then the walks mean more to me. If he has Hatteberg and LaWho? hitting behind him, I'd rather have him hit the ball than walk. Good night.

So you're arguing for Dunn to hit the ball ... even if he has to expand the strike zone to do so?

Well, this is what we get for the average hitter when they expand the strike zone ...

http://www.fangraphs.com/custom%20graphs/MLB%20All.png

It's never a good thing to dip into that three percent range for actually getting hits, and that's what happens when hitters expand the strike zone and chase bad pitches.

I don't want any hitter expanding their strike zone. Not with those results.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 07:14 AM
Adam Dunn is producing in RISP situations.

Coming into today's game:

.360 OBP/.500 SLG (both higher now)

You do that, and you're producing because OBP, SLG, and particularly OPS are more highly correlated with RISP and Overall Run scoring than anything else. You are arguing an untenable position.
OK. If you actually think that Dunn is "producing" with RISP then you are correct. This is a useless argument.

With all the love for walks on this board, you'd have to wonder who is responsible for actually swinging the bat and knocking in the runs.

Because in the cases we are citing here, Dunn doesn't need a walk. The runners are there. OBP has worked. Now let's drive in a few runs. If a .148 average with RISP is acceptable, then God bless you all. I've said it before...if we are happier when a player doesn't swing the bat, the Reds are overpaid. This guy would be much cheaper.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/boxscore/eddiegaedel.jpg

And I couldn't find a picture of Rudy Stein, but he would work as well.

I'm done with this thread. Good luck Reds.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 07:15 AM
So you're arguing for Dunn to hit the ball ... even if he has to expand the strike zone to do so?

Well, this is what we get for the average hitter when they expand the strike zone ...

http://www.fangraphs.com/custom%20graphs/MLB%20All.png

It's never a good thing to dip into that three percent range for actually getting hits, and that's what happens when hitters expand the strike zone and chase bad pitches.

I don't want any hitter expanding their strike zone. Not with those results.
Well either Dunn is expanding the zone with RISP or he is just unlucky, I guess.

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 08:29 AM
edabbs44, you have got to be the smartest person in New Jersey!

puca
06-15-2006, 08:49 AM
Well either Dunn is expanding the zone with RISP or he is just unlucky, I guess.

Considering his manager has basically told him to, and his local hall of fame broadcaster has gotten 90% of the fans to parrot that stance, there is a pretty good chance that he has.

SteelSD
06-15-2006, 09:20 AM
OK. If you actually think that Dunn is "producing" with RISP then you are correct. This is a useless argument.

With all the love for walks on this board, you'd have to wonder who is responsible for actually swinging the bat and knocking in the runs.

Because in the cases we are citing here, Dunn doesn't need a walk. The runners are there. OBP has worked. Now let's drive in a few runs. If a .148 average with RISP is acceptable, then God bless you all. I've said it before...if we are happier when a player doesn't swing the bat, the Reds are overpaid. This guy would be much cheaper.

Let's recap:

OBP, SLG, and OPS are more highly correlated with the Reds scoring Runs than is BA.

Dunn's "trouble" area is least highly correlated with scoring Runs overall and situationally.

We've established time and time again that OBP and SLG are the most important drivers for Run scoring behavior for a team overall and situationally. Dunn's RISP SLG? .554. OBP? .364. That's a .918 OPS and it trumps BA across the board.

The data has been layed out for you in no uncertain terms. And yet you dismiss it as being a "fad", or because of some board "walk love" fallacy, or respond with "But his Batting Average..." when shown information that Batting Average least equates to the Reds producing Runs as a result of Dunn's PA versus OBP and SLG regardless of the situation. Why do you do that?

Dunn is succeeding in areas that are most highly correlated with the Reds scoring Runs overall and situationally and yet respond as if folks are crazy for liking the good numbers over the bad. And yet, what you're really saying is that you'd prefer the player have more RBI than the team more Runs while at the same time mis-identifying what behavior actually correlates with a player producing more RBI (SLG- not BA) w/RISP. Rather than harping on Dunn's RISP BA, you should be grumping about SLG w/RISP. But then, Dunn's .554 RISP SLG is fine so there's not much to grump about.

Please...for your own sake...put the Batting Average down and walk away slowly. I beg you. We're only trying to help.

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 10:08 AM
Except for the fact that it sure seems that he fails when it really matters and succeeds when it doesn't and although many here feel this is just mass hysteria, there are too many rational people with this same observation. Thus the clutch vs choke controversy will continue unless the big Dunkey can continue to shut up his critics with performances like yesterday as to which I will eat my crow with the other observers and enjoy every bite!

westofyou
06-15-2006, 10:17 AM
I'm done with this thread. Good luck Reds.Don't worry this thread is just a fad, I'm writing a book about it right now, it should be bigger in a year or two.

RFS62
06-15-2006, 10:34 AM
Don't worry this thread is just a fad, I'm writing a book about it right now, it should be bigger in a year or two.



You should. Just collect the best of the posts over the past two years and call it "The Donkey Dialogues"

It practically writes itself.

westofyou
06-15-2006, 10:37 AM
You should. Just collect the best of the posts over the past two years and call it "The Donkey Dialogues"

It practically writes itself.
My wife calls him Ham Hands (says his hands are as big as hams) I say it's because sometimes he fields like he has glaze on his glove.

RFS62
06-15-2006, 10:43 AM
My wife calls him Ham Hands (says his hands are as big as hams) I say it's because sometimes he fields like he has glaze on his glove.


"Dr. Strangeglove"

or

"how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb"

Roy Tucker
06-15-2006, 10:46 AM
"Dr. Strangeglove"

or

"how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb"
Or "how I learned to stop worrying and love the walk".

registerthis
06-15-2006, 10:50 AM
Dunn is succeeding in areas that are most highly correlated with the Reds scoring Runs overall and situationally and yet respond as if folks are crazy for liking the good numbers over the bad.

I'm going to hand write this on posterboard and bring it with me to the next Reds game I attend. Maybe that will get FSN's attention?

Ltlabner
06-15-2006, 11:03 AM
Except for the fact that it sure seems that he fails when it really matters and succeeds when it doesn't....

As I have posted several times before, this is a prime example of the anti-Dunn crowds biggest issue with him. "it she seems that he fails...". Once again, a perception issue, not a fact based issue. It's easy to see a homer, or see his batting average. It's harder to conceptualize the idea that getting on base is more productive in the long-run.

He's definatley had some struggles this year, no doubt about that, but I firmly believe the anti-dunn crowd's main argument against him is that they think he should do more of the flashy stuff they expect, and can't see him doing the productive things he is actually doing.

KittyDuran
06-15-2006, 11:16 AM
What? Another Dunn thread that hasn't been closed yet?Here, Here...:thumbdown

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 11:17 AM
Flashy stuff like, get a hit when there is a guy on third?

Johnny Footstool
06-15-2006, 11:18 AM
He said something during today's post game interview that was quite telling and I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned it yet. Steve asked him about the poor hitting with RISP and he said that the problem is that he has been expanding his strike zone too much in those situations and pressing too much. He said that his hitting with RISP will get better if he can approach those PAs the same way he does when there is nobody on base. Basically, if he does what so many say he should do, his hitting actually suffers in those situations.

Someone PLEASE sticky this post, or turn it into a plaque, or carve in in marble, or build a giant laser and etch in into the surface of the moon.

Anyone who says "Dunn needs to expand the zone and try to drive runners in" needs to have this post tattooed on his/her forehead. Backwards, so they can read it in a mirror.

TRF
06-15-2006, 11:54 AM
Ok, who is having the better year? Adam Dunn or Alfonso Soriano?

Now this is a really good comparison, because I keep hearing about how Soriano is having a MONSTER year and at the same time I hear how Dunn is doing poorly.

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 11:55 AM
Start your own thread TRF!

GAC
06-15-2006, 11:56 AM
Redszone really does need a Dunn-only forum.

One forum with 44 moderators! :lol:

TRF
06-15-2006, 11:58 AM
Excuse me? I thought this was the Dunn bashing thread du jour. There have been a ton of arguements for and against. This is just another comparison.

And thank you, but until a mod says otherwise, I think I'll post wherever I want.

vaticanplum
06-15-2006, 11:58 AM
edabbs44, you have got to be the smartest person in New Jersey!

Don't knock the Jerz. Jersey rules x-core.

That strike zone expanding chart is awfully pretty. I'm going to hang it in my dining room and stare at it at every meal.

GAC
06-15-2006, 11:59 AM
why?



He has driven in 14 of a possible 91 runners in scoring position this year. He ranks 173rd out of a possible 240 ML players who come to bat with at least 45 runners on base this year. He hits solo HRs, He does not hit with RISP... With the bases empty, he's hitting .280, with RISP, he's hitting .147.

That'll be just about enough of that on here Big John! :lol:

GAC
06-15-2006, 12:03 PM
Not all hits score a guy from second. Actually, it's not that uncommon for hit to not score the run from second.

That's true. But I've never seen a walk score a guy from second. ;)

registerthis
06-15-2006, 12:04 PM
That's true. But I've never seen a walk score a guy from second. ;)

Tony Womack could do it. :)

BigJohn
06-15-2006, 12:04 PM
TRF, I was just kidding buddy! Unwad your panties! :D

TRF
06-15-2006, 12:20 PM
TRF, I was just kidding buddy! Unwad your panties! :D

Sarcasm is a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. Hard to tell from your post. No biggie.

But still the comparison is valid. You can't turn on BBTN without hearing how great a year Soriano is having. Even though the only edge he has is in singles and SB's. Dunn trumps him in walks, and in every other category their numbers are nearly identical.

So why id Soriano having a monster year, and Dunn is flailing at the plate?

BRM
06-15-2006, 12:23 PM
So why id Soriano having a monster year, and Dunn is flailing at the plate?

My guess is batting average. Soriano is hitting .294 versus Dunn's .239.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 12:25 PM
Soriano plays on the East Coast, Dunn plays in a small-market Midwestern city where huge crowds don't show up even when their team is winning. (Thus, surely they don't watch BBTN either.)

Soriano will also end up playing for a contender before the year is over, so they're doing preemptive trade work.

TRF
06-15-2006, 12:30 PM
Soriano plays on the East Coast, Dunn plays in a small-market Midwestern city where huge crowds don't show up even when their team is winning. (Thus, surely they don't watch BBTN either.)

Soriano will also end up playing for a contender before the year is over, so they're doing preemptive trade work.

Dunn is playing for a contender now.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 12:37 PM
Dunn is playing for a contender now.
One that no one (seems) to care about.

GAC
06-15-2006, 12:54 PM
Because he isn't trying for a walk, he's trying to not swing at balls.

And he's not doing a very good job in that category.

Bust him low and away (slider)... and the guy is like a big mouth bass who hasn't eaten in months, sees the hook, yet still can't lay off. :lol:


If he has a problem hitting strikes when he swings what makes you think he's going to be any better swinging at balls? It just makes no sense.

I don't think anyone is advocating for Adam to be up there hacking, swinging at balls, trying to get a hit.

If a pitcher is gonna accomodate you with a walk, then don't disappoint him.

But I am also one who does not downplay or rank as totally insignificant batting average in various situations....

Adan Dunn so far this year with runners in scoring position....

Scoring Positon, 2 out - .167 BA .310 OB% .458 SLG % .768 OPS
Men On, 2 out - .143 BA .294 OB% .333 SL% .637 OPS
Man on 3rd, 2 out - .000 BA .278 OB% .000 SLG% .278 OPS
On Second - .190 BA .414 OB% .762 SLG% 1.176 OPS
On Third - .250 BA .400 OB% 1.000 SLG% 1.4 OPS
First and Second - .182 BA .400 OB% .455 SLG% .855 OPS
First and Third - .000 BA .111 OB% .000 SLG% .111 OPS
Second and Third - .000 BA .556 OB% .000 SLG% .556 OPS
Bases Loaded - .167 BA .125 OB% .333 SLG% .468 OPS

Overall, that is a ..... .122 BA .320 OB% .371 SLG% .691 OPS

That is not Dunn bashing. That is simply pointing out his lack with RISP.

I stil maintain - put Dunn in the #2 spot and leave him alone. He is an OB machine, and will still get his HRs.

But he is not impressing me in RBI situations at all this year.

GAC
06-15-2006, 12:58 PM
Tony Womack could do it. :)

Only if he stole 1B first! :lol:

Roy Tucker
06-15-2006, 01:11 PM
Chris Denorfia can score on a walk all by himself.

He is around the bases completely and crossing home before the catcher catches ball 4.

It's amazing.

pedro
06-15-2006, 01:31 PM
And he's not doing a very good job in that category.

Bust him low and away (slider)... and the guy is like a big mouth bass who hasn't eaten in months, sees the hook, yet still can't lay off. :lol:



I don't think anyone is advocating for Adam to be up there hacking, swinging at balls, trying to get a hit.

If a pitcher is gonna accomodate you with a walk, then don't disappoint him.

But I am also one who does not downplay or rank as totally insignificant batting average in various situations....

Adan Dunn so far this year with runners in scoring position....

Scoring Positon, 2 out - .167 BA .310 OB% .458 SLG % .768 OPS
Men On, 2 out - .143 BA .294 OB% .333 SL% .637 OPS
Man on 3rd, 2 out - .000 BA .278 OB% .000 SLG% .278 OPS
On Second - .190 BA .414 OB% .762 SLG% 1.176 OPS
On Third - .250 BA .400 OB% 1.000 SLG% 1.4 OPS
First and Second - .182 BA .400 OB% .455 SLG% .855 OPS
First and Third - .000 BA .111 OB% .000 SLG% .111 OPS
Second and Third - .000 BA .556 OB% .000 SLG% .556 OPS
Bases Loaded - .167 BA .125 OB% .333 SLG% .468 OPS

Overall, that is a ..... .122 BA .320 OB% .371 SLG% .691 OPS

That is not Dunn bashing. That is simply pointing out his lack with RISP.

I stil maintain - put Dunn in the #2 spot and leave him alone. He is an OB machine, and will still get his HRs.

But he is not impressing me in RBI situations at all this year.


It's true. He has struggled THIS year in situations with RISP. But over his career he has not and all I can attribute this years failures to is the same thing that I understand Adam did in yesterday's post game show... he's been listening to bad advice about expanding his zone with RISP.

griffeyfreak4
06-15-2006, 01:37 PM
So you're arguing for Dunn to hit the ball ... even if he has to expand the strike zone to do so?

Well, this is what we get for the average hitter when they expand the strike zone ...

http://www.fangraphs.com/custom%20graphs/MLB%20All.png

It's never a good thing to dip into that three percent range for actually getting hits, and that's what happens when hitters expand the strike zone and chase bad pitches.

I don't want any hitter expanding their strike zone. Not with those results.
That chart is for an average hitter. Think how it would look for Dunn. There would be purple ALL OVER THE PLACE. People just have to face it. DUNN IS NOT A GOOD HITTER He's not. He's good at hitting HR, and taking walks. He is not a good hitter, so stop getting mad when he doesn't hit the ball. Like I said before, when Dunn comes up, do you expect a single with a man on 2nd or 3rd? NO! Do you expect a sac fly with a runner on third? You shouldn't. Dunn is going to continue to hit HR, strikeout, and draw walks. It is his game, and it's how he plays. Quit complaining about his BA because he's not a good hitter, and bad hitter's have low batting averages. It's how the game works!

vaticanplum
06-15-2006, 01:41 PM
That chart is for an average hitter. Think how it would look for Dunn. There would be purple ALL OVER THE PLACE. People just have to face it. DUNN IS NOT A GOOD HITTER He's not. He's good at hitting HR, and taking walks. He is not a good hitter, so stop getting mad when he doesn't hit the ball. Like I said before, when Dunn comes up, do you expect a single with a man on 2nd or 3rd? NO! Do you expect a sac fly with a runner on third? You shouldn't. Dunn is going to continue to hit HR, strikeout, and draw walks. It is his game, and it's how he plays. Quit complaining about his BA because he's not a good hitter, and bad hitter's have low batting averages. It's how the game works!

Hitting home runs and taking walks are part of being a good hitter.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 01:43 PM
Hitting home runs and taking walks are part of being a good hitter.
That depends on your definition of "good hitter." Plenty of good hitters who don't/didn't walk much an/or hit many home runs.

BRM
06-15-2006, 01:43 PM
Apparently bad hitters also have high slugging percentages.

griffeyfreak4
06-15-2006, 01:43 PM
Hitting home runs and taking walks are part of being a good hitter.
So is getting a lot of hits and a high BA.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 01:45 PM
Hitting home runs and taking walks are part of being a good hitter.
I'm back. Taking walks is part of being a good batter, not hitter.

vaticanplum
06-15-2006, 01:46 PM
That depends on your definition of "good hitter." Plenty of good hitters who don't/didn't walk much an/or hit many home runs.

I didn't say they were mutually exclusive. The post I was quoting stated, outright, that only hitters with high batting averages are good ones.

griffeyfreak4
06-15-2006, 01:50 PM
I didn't say they were mutually exclusive. The post I was quoting stated, outright, that only hitters with high batting averages are good ones.
No, I said Dunn is not a good hitter because he doesn't get a lot of hits and bad hitters have low batting averages. A bad hitter is not going to have a high batting average. A good hitter can have somewhat of a mediokre BA, but is he really that good of a hitter if he has a low BA. After all, BA is your % of hits.

TeamBoone
06-15-2006, 01:52 PM
After all, BA is your % of hits.

What one does with those hits is what really counts.

pedro
06-15-2006, 01:52 PM
No, I said Dunn is not a good hitter because he doesn't get a lot of hits and bad hitters have low batting averages. A bad hitter is not going to have a high batting average. A good hitter can have somewhat of a mediokre BA, but is he really that good of a hitter if he has a low BA. After all, BA is your % of hits.


Doesn't the quality of the hits countfor anything?


a double is better than a single
a triple is better than a double
a hr is better than a triple

Handofdeath
06-15-2006, 02:01 PM
Doesn't the quality of the hits countfor anything?


a double is better than a single
a triple is better than a double
a hr is better than a triple


And a strikeout is not better than anything.

ochre
06-15-2006, 02:02 PM
no, but it's dead equal to an out.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 02:02 PM
What one does with those hits is what really counts.
Agreed 100%.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 02:03 PM
no, but it's dead equal to an out.
Not really. Man on 2nd, no outs and a 4-3 ground out most times will move the runner to 3rd. That is better than a K.

ochre
06-15-2006, 02:03 PM
anybody have anything new to add? This is starting to spiral down into another meaningless back and forth. There was some good discussion going, but now it has dropped down to the epithets level.

ochre
06-15-2006, 02:04 PM
Not really. Man on 2nd, no outs and a 4-3 ground out most times will move the runner to 3rd. That is better than a K.
marginally. Still haven't scored the run.

RFS62
06-15-2006, 02:04 PM
I'm back. Taking walks is part of being a good batter, not hitter.


You're kind of making this stuff up as you go, aren't you?

griffeyfreak4
06-15-2006, 02:06 PM
You're kind of making this stuff up as you go, aren't you?
??? That doesn't make any sense..............?:confused:

pedro
06-15-2006, 02:06 PM
And a strikeout is not better than anything.

It's better than a double play.

KittyDuran
06-15-2006, 02:07 PM
anybody have anything new to add? This is starting to spiral down into another meaningless back and forth. There was some good discussion going, but now it has dropped down to the epithets level.
Yeah...like 3 pages ago... close it, please! :p:

pedro
06-15-2006, 02:09 PM
Personally I dont see any reason to close this thread.

Puffy
06-15-2006, 02:11 PM
Personally I dont see any reason to close this thread.

Me neither.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 02:11 PM
Personally I dont see any reason to close this thread.
Agreed... I don't see epithets... unless bad hitter is one now.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 02:12 PM
Strikeouts vs. outs, here's the quick primer ...

----------------------------

Suppose that strikeouts are as bad as everyone says they are. Then in theory they should have an effect on run production, no? A high strikeout team should score fewer runs than a low strikeout team if K's are so bad. Well, let's look at the relationship between runs scored and strikeouts in the American League from 1997-2001 (I picked the AL since it gets rid of pitchers batting, the timespan because I already had that data set):

http://www.thediamondangle.com/archive/mar02/kcor.jpg

The data bounce all around, showing no clear trend. The correlation coefficient, r, is equal to 0.016, about as close as you can get to being completely uncorrelated. To put this into perspective, square r. A back of the envelope calculation shows that the variation in team runs scored is related at a 0.03% level by strikeouts. Not 3%, 0.03% In other words, no effect at all.

http://www.thediamondangle.com/marasco/opan/kfile.html

KittyDuran
06-15-2006, 02:13 PM
Personally I dont see any reason to close this thread.I do... no one is going to budge an inch (or at least not admit it on the thread)... :rolleyes: Same tired crap...

Handofdeath
06-15-2006, 02:14 PM
Sarcasm is a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. Hard to tell from your post. No biggie.

But still the comparison is valid. You can't turn on BBTN without hearing how great a year Soriano is having. Even though the only edge he has is in singles and SB's. Dunn trumps him in walks, and in every other category their numbers are nearly identical.

So why id Soriano having a monster year, and Dunn is flailing at the plate?

Maybe it's because Soriano has 27 more total bases. And he is flailing.

griffeyfreak4
06-15-2006, 02:14 PM
I do... no one is going to budge an inch (or at least not admit it on the thread)... :rolleyes: Same tired crap...
So......we just close every thread because we have a lot of stubburn people (myself included) here?

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 02:15 PM
I do... no one is going to budge an inch (or at least not admit it on the thread)... :rolleyes: Same tired crap...
And tomorrow there'll be another.

Easy solution: don't read it!

Puffy
06-15-2006, 02:15 PM
I do... no one is going to budge an inch (or at least not admit it on the thread)... :rolleyes: Same tired crap...

With all due respect - you don't have to read this thread if you don't want to. If others wanna discuss it who are you to tell them its not OK, if they are being civil, which everyone is.

Eric_Davis
06-15-2006, 02:21 PM
How old is Adam Dunn?

Oh, yeah.... HE'S 24 FRICKIN' YEARS OLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give the guy a break.

He has the exact same stats as Daryl Strawberry at age 24 and Reggie Jackson at age 23....one a Hall-of-Famer and the other had a pretty good career.

He has better stats at this point of his career than Rocky Colavito, Jose Canseco, Harmon Killebrew, Tony Conigliaro, Boog Powell, Juan Gonzalez, Troy Glaus, and Tom Brunansky.

registerthis
06-15-2006, 02:23 PM
Maybe it's because Soriano has 27 more total bases. And he is flailing.

He's also right up there with Dunn in HRs despite playing in a park that swallows up HRs and spits them back at you.

pedro
06-15-2006, 02:24 PM
How old is Adam Dunn?

Oh, yeah.... HE'S 24 FRICKIN' YEARS OLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Give the guy a break.

He has the exact same stats as Daryl Strawberry at age 24 and Reggie Jackson at age 23....one a Hall-of-Famer and the other had a pretty good career.

actually he's 26.

westofyou
06-15-2006, 02:24 PM
He's also right up there with Dunn in HRs despite playing in a park that swallows up HRs and spits them back at you.
Especially RH's it destroys RH hitters power.

registerthis
06-15-2006, 02:24 PM
How old is Adam Dunn?

Oh, yeah.... HE'S 24 FRICKIN' YEARS OLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

he's actually 26.

registerthis
06-15-2006, 02:25 PM
Especially RH's it destroys RH hitters power.

Yep, you can ask Vinny Castilla about that.

westofyou
06-15-2006, 02:25 PM
actually he's 26.
3 and half in dog years.

Eric_Davis
06-15-2006, 02:26 PM
Oh, yeah,....and the REDS have only paid him $5,695,000 in his four years prior to this year. That's pretty good bang for the dollar.

KittyDuran
06-15-2006, 02:26 PM
With all due respect - you don't have to read this thread if you don't want to. If others wanna discuss it who are you to tell them its not OK, if they are being civil, which everyone is.Hey, O asked... I just responded...:p:

Eric_Davis
06-15-2006, 02:27 PM
3 and half in dog years.

doh!

He still should get a break.

At least he pulled this off:

Two straight seasons of 40 HR, 100 RBI, 100 R, all before his 26th birthday.

RFS62
06-15-2006, 02:32 PM
3 and half in dog years.



Yeah, but what's that in donkey years?

registerthis
06-15-2006, 02:35 PM
This whole discussion about Dunn reminds me of a satirical conversation I had with a friend of mine once, regarding the Buckeye football team. We were joking about how there are some die-hard fans who never seem pleased with anything the football team does, always looking for perceived shortcomings in their game, even in convincing victories. That led to this exchange, about a mythological OSU trouncing of the U of M:

Me: Wow, did you see the Michigan game? The Buckeyes killed them...Smith threw for 550 yards and 6 TDs, and ran for 200 yards and 3 more TDs. The defense pitched a shutout and only gave up 30 yards in the entire game! And we made every extra point attempt, blocked three field goals, and ran a punt and a kickoff back for a TD. it doesn't get any better than that!

Friend (playing die-hard fan): Sure, that's OK I guess, but I saw a number of plays where the offensive line didn't move the defensive line as much as they should have. It's really unacceptable at this point in the season to watch our line playing like that. They'll never amount to anything if the O line can't consistently move the defense off the ball!

That's how the Dunn complaints come across to me.

pedro
06-15-2006, 02:35 PM
I hear good pitchers make chorizo out of big donkey.

just sayin' ;)

Handofdeath
06-15-2006, 02:41 PM
It's better than a double play.

Dunn hit the ball with someone on base? Ok now you're just yanking my chain.:evil:

TRF
06-15-2006, 02:47 PM
Maybe it's because Soriano has 27 more total bases. And he is flailing.

in 14 more plate appearances. Plus He's swiped 15 bags. But since he's been caught 7 time, I don't consider that too much of a plus.

Gee, I wonder if having more PA's might have something to do with aquiring more bases?

And while Dunn has been scuffling a bit, I think it's due more to some bad advice, and a bit of a change he himself is trying: taking the ball the other way. I'm seeing a lot of hard hit balls to left centerfield. Some go out, some don't, but I think he's starting to use the whole field more.

BTW A K is better than a GIDP.

BRM
06-15-2006, 02:47 PM
Dunn hit the ball with someone on base? Ok now you're just yanking my chain.:evil:

54 times this year. Hard to believe isn't it? ;)

ochre
06-15-2006, 02:48 PM
Dunn's BABIP w/ RISP: .242
Dunn's BABIP overall: .353

membengal
06-15-2006, 02:55 PM
Dunn hit the ball with someone on base? Ok now you're just yanking my chain.:evil:

This is precisely the kind of stuff that gets old on this board.

edabbs44
06-15-2006, 02:56 PM
You're kind of making this stuff up as you go, aren't you?
Yeah, not quite sure if I catch your drift here. If you have a good eye and utilize that quality to draw walks, you have good at bats. If you utilize that quality to swing at mostly hittable pitches, therefore giving yourself a better chance to get a hit, then you are utilizing that quality to be a better hitter. Dunn doesn't use that quality in the way where you put yourself in a better position to get more hits. And if he does, then that's really sad.

GAC
06-15-2006, 03:11 PM
It's true. He has struggled THIS year in situations with RISP.

And I think that is only what most are saying.... about this year.


But over his career he has not and all I can attribute this years failures to is the same thing that I understand Adam did in yesterday's post game show... he's been listening to bad advice about expanding his zone with RISP.

That's possible. But Chambliss has been given alot of credit with helping our hitters show more patience, getting walks, and placing us in the top 10 in OB%.

So I doubt he is giving Dunn detrimental/bad advice.

ochre
06-15-2006, 03:14 PM
54 AB = small sample size.
With his low BABIP in that situation, it stands to reason that he will level out somewhere near his normal BA, or so, given enough opportunities.

pedro
06-15-2006, 03:15 PM
And I think that is only what most are saying.... about this year.



That's possible. But Chambliss has been given alot of credit with helping our hitters show more patience, getting walks, and placing us in the top 10 in OB%.

So I doubt he is giving Dunn detrimental/bad advice.


Yes GAC, but people are trying to use a relatively small sample size from this year to justify a fallacious argument that has been 5 years in the making.

And I don't necessarily think it's Chambliss.

registerthis
06-15-2006, 03:21 PM
I really do think Dunn is being mis-used in the order. Soriano, whose name has been brought up in this thread, is having a very successful year batting leadoff for the Nats. I think Dunn's OBP skills make him an excellent candidate for the #2 slot. Batting him ahead of guys like Junior, Kearns, E_E and Phillips could be a boon for this offense. WHy Dunn is having such difficulties with RISP this year--well, who knows, could be many things. But so long as his OBP isn't suffering, bat him higher and let the other guys knock him in. Perhaps with less pressure to be the "RBI guy" Dunn will relax at the plate and get his numbers up anyway. It's worth trying, anyway.

GAC
06-15-2006, 03:26 PM
Yes GAC, but people are trying to use a relatively small sample size from this year to justify a fallacious argument that has been 5 years in the making.

I understand that pedro. But those people just have a "bone" to pick with Dunn and don't like the guy regardless of what he does. Their obsession with his K's, the Kingman analogy, etc.

I'm not part of that clique. ;)

My evaluation of Dunn is not about his previous years or overall performance; but what he has done so far in '06.

I'm disappointed, but not throwing my hands in the air in despair. There is still plenty of games left in this season.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 03:42 PM
Adam Dunn so far this year with runners in scoring position....

Scoring Positon, 2 out - .167 BA .310 OB% .458 SLG % .768 OPS
Men On, 2 out - .143 BA .294 OB% .333 SL% .637 OPS
Man on 3rd, 2 out - .000 BA .278 OB% .000 SLG% .278 OPS
On Second - .190 BA .414 OB% .762 SLG% 1.176 OPS
On Third - .250 BA .400 OB% 1.000 SLG% 1.4 OPS
First and Second - .182 BA .400 OB% .455 SLG% .855 OPS
First and Third - .000 BA .111 OB% .000 SLG% .111 OPS
Second and Third - .000 BA .556 OB% .000 SLG% .556 OPS
Bases Loaded - .167 BA .125 OB% .333 SLG% .468 OPS

Overall, that is a ..... .122 BA .320 OB% .371 SLG% .691 OPS

That is not Dunn bashing. That is simply pointing out his lack with RISP.


GAC, I have no idea where you're getting those overall figures and a .691 OPS. Currently, Dunn has a .918 OPS w/RISP, and his OBP is .364 with his SLG at .554 w/RISP. I'm guessing you either counted two sets of data twice, didn't count a set or both.

There's a world of difference between a .691 OPS and a .918 OPS :)

BTW, ochre, what formula are you using for BABIP?

I've been using the Hardball Times formula (H-HR)/(AB-K-HR), and this is what I get for Dunn's BABIPs:

BABIP RISP: .071 (2 for 28)
BABIP Overall: .238 (31 for 130)

Dunn's BABIP for RISP is telling me two things, 1) he's been horribly unlucky, and 2) he's been listening to some horrible advice if people are telling him to swing at pitches out of the strike zone with runners in scoring position. The combination of those two is what has to be going on to go 2 for 28 on balls in play.

ochre
06-15-2006, 03:44 PM
GAC, I have no idea where you're getting those overall figures and a .691 OPS. Currently, Dunn has a .918 OPS w/RISP, and his OBP is .364 with his SLG at .554 w/RISP. I'm guessing you either counted two sets of data twice, didn't count a set or both.

There's a world of difference between a .691 OPS and a .918 OPS :)

BTW, ochre, what formula are you using for BABIP?

I've been using the Hardball Times formula (H-HR)/(AB-K-HR), and this is what I get for Dunn's BABIPs:

BABIP RISP: .071 (2 for 28)
BABIP Overall: .238 (31 for 130)

Dunn's BABIP for RISP is telling me two things, 1) he's been horribly unlucky, and 2) he's been listening to some horrible advice if people are telling him to swing at pitches out of the strike zone with runners in scoring position. The combination of those two is what has to be going on to go 2 for 28 on balls in play.
My bad. I forgot to take out the homers. Your's is better, but I wasn't normalizing for balls put out of play :)

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 03:49 PM
Dunn's BABIP for RISP is telling me two things, 1) he's been horribly unlucky, and 2) he's been listening to some horrible advice if people are telling him to swing at pitches out of the strike zone with runners in scoring position. The combination of those two is what has to be going on to go 2 for 28 on balls in play.
This is the kind of logic I don't particularly care for. The man took responsibility for it himself after the game on the radio, and yet we come on here and make excuses for him.

ochre
06-15-2006, 03:53 PM
mentioning that there seems to be statistical evidence to back up what he was saying is making excuses?

Johnny Footstool
06-15-2006, 03:55 PM
no, but it's dead equal to an out.

Actually, a strikeout is more beneficial than other outs made on the first or second pitch of an AB. And most strikeouts involve more than three pitches, which is an added benefit.

"Productive" outs that advance the runner and Sac Flies that score a runner are better than strikeouts, but are rare and represent a very small percentage of outs. And the benefit gained from advancing a runner in those situations (except Sac Flies) doesn't increase a team's chances of scoring by a large amount.

You're better off using your normal approach and risking the strikeout in exchange for the chance of making quality contact.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 03:57 PM
This is the kind of logic I don't particularly care for. The man took responsibility for it himself after the game on the radio, and yet we come on here and make excuses for him.

I'm not making any excuses at all. I'm simply looking at his ball-in-play events and what actually happened with them. Here are the facts with his ball-in-play events:

Dunn's 2004 BABIP: .321
Dunn's 2005 BABIP: .281
Dunn's 2006 BABIP: .238

Dunn's 2004 line drive %: 19.3 percent
Dunn's 2005 line drive %: 17.5 percent
Dunn's 2006 line drive %: 20.0 percent

Dunn's 2004 ground ball %: 32.4 percent
Dunns' 2005 ground ball %: 35.3 percent
Dunn's 2006 ground ball %: 31.0 percent

Dunn's 2004 fly ball %: 48.3 percent
Dunn's 2005 fly ball %: 47.2 percent
Dunn's 2006 fly ball %: 49.0 percent

With the shift he faces, it's important for him to get his ground ball percentage down. He's done that. Line drive percentage going up is always good, and he's done that. Fly ball percentage for a power hitter like Dunn is always good too, and he's done that.

Now, we can either choose to sit here and determine the importance of all the above figures and what they all mean, or we can continue to make fallacious arguments and fail to understand what is going on.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 03:58 PM
mentioning that there seems to be statistical evidence to back up what he was saying is making excuses?
Maybe it was actually his fault that the statistics are as they are. Not his "advisors" or fates?

gonelong
06-15-2006, 04:00 PM
This is the kind of logic I don't particularly care for. The man took responsibility for it himself after the game on the radio, and yet we come on here and make excuses for him.

I don't particularly care for the logic that would dismiss it.

Over time BABIP rates pretty much come to a familiar level, what's wrong with trying to determine if Dunn is more likely, less likely, or just as likely to turn his rate of contact into hits?

I am not sure why it becomes a matter of blame or excuses. Its not. It simply is.

GL

ochre
06-15-2006, 04:04 PM
Maybe it was actually his fault that the statistics are as they are. Not his "advisors" or fates?
Maybe his stock portfolio is taking a dive? Perhaps his motorcycle fell over and now the paint on the tank is chipped?

I don't know. What I do know about is that he has been "hit unlucky" in a small sample size study. I also know that managers and other coaches have monkeyed with his approach in the past (as has been reported in various forms).

so, as can be seen here, there are different levels of speculation. Things that have been reported and keep coming out in interviews probably tend toward the "fact" side.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 04:07 PM
I also know that managers and other coaches have monkeyed with his approach in the past (as has been reported in various forms).
My resulting question would be this: Why would they do this if he is the "offensive machine" that certain statistics show him to be?

gonelong
06-15-2006, 04:08 PM
I think what most of us are trying to pull from studying the numbers is:

1) What is this guy worth today?
2) What is this guy likely to be worth in <insert time frame>

Worth can be measured by contract, prospects, MLB players, hits, runs, HRs, ERA, Wins, Loses, etc.

GL

gonelong
06-15-2006, 04:11 PM
My resulting question would be this: Why would they do this if he is the "offensive machine" that certain statistics show him to be?

They either don't know about the metrics, don't understand the metrics, or don't believe in the metrics to some degree.

I don't doubt that one or all of the above is true.

However, teams are paying much more attention to these and other metrics as the years roll by.

GL

ochre
06-15-2006, 04:13 PM
My resulting question would be this: Why would they do this if he is the "offensive machine" that certain statistics show him to be?
I think it was woy that has said they are "stuck in the 80s". They also tend to be former catchers that think they know the way the game is supposed to be played. I am, of course, speaking of the streak of quality managers the Reds have had. I've blocked the name of the crappy hitting coach that tried to turn Dunn into a more 'complete' hitter by teaching him to exclusively pull the ball.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 04:16 PM
I think it was woy that has said they are "stuck in the 80s". They also tend to be former catchers that think they know the way the game is supposed to be played. I am, of course, speaking of the streak of quality managers the Reds have had. I've blocked the name of the crappy hitting coach that tried to turn Dunn into a more 'complete' hitter by teaching him to exclusively pull the ball.
Understood...
Follow-up: Based on most metrics, it would appear that Chambliss is doing a rather excellent job with the Reds offense as a whole this season. So could we infer then that the blame train would pass him by?

Johnny Footstool
06-15-2006, 04:16 PM
I've blocked the name of the crappy hitting coach that tried to turn Dunn into a more 'complete' hitter by teaching him to exclusively pull the ball.

Lefebvre? Feblevreer? Levfbrelslvver?

GOREDSGO32
06-15-2006, 04:27 PM
Rob "Dunn" Deer.

Cyclone792
06-15-2006, 04:27 PM
Understood...
Follow-up: Based on most metrics, it would appear that Chambliss is doing a rather excellent job with the Reds offense as a whole this season. So could we infer then that the blame train would pass him by?

Chambliss is probably the only guy in the entire organization that I would urge Dunn to listen to. He was the hitting coach for the Yankees when they just ran over people offensively back in the late 90s.

Go back and look at the offensive numbers the Yankees put up during that time period. Try to get past the fact that the Yankees payroll was large - we all know it was - but instead concentrate on how their offense scored runs. What you'll find is they put loads of runs on the scoreboard utilizing plate discipline, taking pitches, running up opposing pitchers' pitch counts, urging swinging at balls only in the strike zone, taking walks and getting men on base.

Plate discipline, taking pitches, swinging at balls in the strike zone and avoiding balls out of the strike zone, taking walks and getting men on base. That's a phenomenal offense right there, and that's what Adam Dunn excels at. That's why many of us want Dunn and all our hitters to be more disciplined, take pitches, run up pitch counts, take walks and get on base.

Chambliss was the man running that show in New York, and if our hitters listen to him and nobody else, he can help turn our offense into a similar machine as the late 90s Yankees.

I trust Chris Chambliss, but I sure as heck do not trust Jerry Narron.

TRF
06-15-2006, 04:30 PM
BTW, Adam Dunn over his last 7 games:



SPLIT G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB BA OBP SLG OPS
Last 7 7 23 7 7 0 0 5 7 0 .304 .448 .957 1.405


That is not struggling. at all.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 04:32 PM
I trust Chris Chambliss, but I sure as heck do not trust Jerry Narron.
So these videos:
http://www.narronprohitting.com/
are not worth buying?

pedro
06-15-2006, 04:36 PM
So these videos:
http://www.narronprohitting.com/
are not worth buying?

Now that's funny.

Narron's career was ops .588.

westofyou
06-15-2006, 04:39 PM
Now that's funny.

Narron's career was .588.
If Jerry didn't catch chances are he would have started managing a lot earlier like Weaver, LaRussa and Bristol. But being bench ballast on a Martin team and a Mauch team cannonizes him in my book. If he ever wanted to talk about it I'd listen.

dabvu2498
06-15-2006, 04:42 PM
Actually it's his brother that does most of the videos. I just think it's kind of amusing.

TRF
06-15-2006, 04:48 PM
Hmm. It appears Dunn hasn't "flailed" in the month of June.



AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS
39 12 10 2 0 5 7 13 0 12 0 0 .256 .442 .692 1.134


14 days. Small sample? dunno. but he's been hitting the snot out of the ball.

KronoRed
06-15-2006, 05:09 PM
Bat avg is only .256 and that's the only stat that matters ;)