PDA

View Full Version : How About a Thread About Adam Dunn?



Edskin
06-15-2007, 12:19 PM
You know, over the past few years, I've always felt the ONE issue that gets widely ignored at RZ is Adam Dunn's value to the organization. So, I thought I'd start a thread on it to see if any quality discussion could be generated :)

OK, I'll cease with the sarcastic tone....

Seriously, I am amazed at how the "Dunn argument" polarizes the fanbase. It's truly quite interesting.

I have waffled on this issue so many times, and I think I've finally come to a conclusion. First, a few points:

--Adam Dunn is "good." Of that, there is no doubt. The question is whether or not he's "pretty good, really good, great, or a cornerstone."

--I also have no doubt that some of the criticism tossed his way is just a residual effect of playing for a lousy team. When a team stinks, like the Reds have during Dunn's career, it becomes natural to point fingers-- sometimes, those fingers get pointed in the wrong direction.

--He has definitely been mis-used in terms of line-up placement throughout his career.

Now, that that is out of the way....

I have decided that I would be ACTIVELY trying to trade Adam Dunn, and here's why:

--I am NOT saying that Adam Dunn is not "clutch." But one thing I can't grasp is that how at this point in his career his AB's are still so unpredictable. There seems to be no difference in his approach, no consistency to his results. If the Reds are down 3-2 in the 9th and Dunn comes to bat with a runner on base, I am not thinking, "well, Dunn isn't clutch, so this game is over." What I AM thinking is that I have NO idea what he's going to do. He could hit one 600 feet or he could flail wildly at look miserable doing so.

IMO, in order for me to consider someone a "star" or a cornerstone, I have to at least get the feeling that the player is going to produce a high quality at bat/approach the majority of the time.

I know many people here don't view the strikeout as a big deal, but what bothers me is this.....

Dunn sets K records like they are going out of style. Right now, he has FIFTEEN more K's than the player in the NL with the second most K's. It bothers me that there is NO improvement in this area from Dunn. I understand-- he's a bopper and he gets on base-- and with that comes a higher K rate. OK, no problem. But a K rate THIS high with seemingly NO improvement from season to season? That bothers me.

His RBI numbers have improved this year, but in the past, I don't think his production has matched his "potential." Again, RBI's have become one of those "grey are" statistics, but they still have some merit to me. If you have runners on first and second with two outs in the 9th, sometimes drawing a walk is NOT the best thing-- assuming of course there were some hittable pitches in the AB.

I guess in the end, my biggest "problem" with Dunn is that I believe he has reached his ceiling. And I think his ceiling is one of a borderline all-star. His defense doesn't help him any. Borderline all-stars are good to have, no doubt. You can win a lot of games with rosters full of Adam Dunn type players.

But for the Reds, I think Dunn has run his course. I certainly would not give him away. But I would ABSOLUTELY be shopping him to any team that wanted to part with a good pitching prospect-- preferrably one on the cusp of the majors-- not a major project.

I would NOT be saying this if I felt Dunn was a star or was a potential star. As others have pointed out, his 3 RBI's in Sept. last year was far from star-worthy.

Adam Dunn is a good player. We should use that "goodness" to help bolster the farm.

Always Red
06-15-2007, 01:13 PM
Adam Dunn is a good player. We should use that "goodness" to help bolster the farm.

Good post, Ed. I think Dunn is the best player on this team, even with his considerable flaws.

IMO, a lot of the angst here and in Cincinnati in general towards Dunn all stems from expectations unmet. He came into the league absolutely on fire, and everyone thought he was the next coming of Bench, Perez, Foster, etc.

There are actually a much higher percentage of Dunn fans here at RZ, it seems, than in the city. I saw a poll on Lance's site last week- 80% of the fans voted they'd rather have Hopper in LF than Dunn. ...sigh....

Anyhow, when Dunn proved to be just very good, instead of all-world, a lot of folks in town turned on him. I think the constant losing, year after year, adds to that, to be honest. If this team were winning, Dunn would be considered a "key cog, with his 40 Hr's, 100 runs scored and 100 RBI", instead of a "strikeout machine who can't play LF." Just my 2 cents.

coachw513
06-15-2007, 02:06 PM
IMO, in order for me to consider someone a "star" or a cornerstone, I have to at least get the feeling that the player is going to produce a high quality at bat/approach the majority of the time.

I would NOT be saying this if I felt Dunn was a star or was a potential star.

Adam Dunn is a good player. We should use that "goodness" to help bolster the farm.

Good post...

Agree totally...

Said it earlier this week...a talented supporting actor in position to be paid big-time lead actor money...

This low-budget project cannot make such an investment...

Edskin
06-15-2007, 03:20 PM
coach-- that is an excellent way of putting it.

I totally disagree with the folks that put Dunn in the Rob Deer class.

I also totally disagree with the folks that put Dunn in the consistent all-star class.

RedsManRick
06-15-2007, 05:58 PM
Adam Dunn = Vin Diesel

He IS a leading man, you just have to put him in the right movie. If you cast him in a romantic comedy and expect tear jerking hilarity to ensue, the fault is yours. If you decide you don't want to produce that kind of movie, then fine, ship him elsewhere, but don't sell yourself short because he's Vince Vaughn.

He is not core of a team that wants to win by preventing and playing small ball. If that's the sort of team Krivsky wants to build, then by all means, get rid of Dunn. However, that doesn't change the fact that Adam Dunn creates more runs offensively than any other person on this team (excluding a healthy KGJ) by a wide margin -- it's not really close. He does deficiencies and if WK is hell-bent on creating a team around him that exacerbates his weaknesses, then fine. But just because he can't make Jennifer Aniston swoon believably doesn't mean he can't carry a film.

RedEye
06-16-2007, 07:45 PM
coach-- that is an excellent way of putting it.

I totally disagree with the folks that put Dunn in the Rob Deer class.

I also totally disagree with the folks that put Dunn in the consistent all-star class.

IMO, Dunn does go in the Deer class because of the "Three True Outcomes." I think Dunn will have a much longer career, mostly because he is more prolific at all three (Ks included, unfortunately).

You've probably already read this stuff, but just in case you haven't...

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3799

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/adam-dunn-three-true-outcomes/

RedEye
06-16-2007, 07:47 PM
Adam Dunn = Vin Diesel

He IS a leading man, you just have to put him in the right movie. If you cast him in a romantic comedy and expect tear jerking hilarity to ensue, the fault is yours. If you decide you don't want to produce that kind of movie, then fine, ship him elsewhere, but don't sell yourself short because he's Vince Vaughn.

He is not core of a team that wants to win by preventing and playing small ball. If that's the sort of team Krivsky wants to build, then by all means, get rid of Dunn. However, that doesn't change the fact that Adam Dunn creates more runs offensively than any other person on this team (excluding a healthy KGJ) by a wide margin -- it's not really close. He does deficiencies and if WK is hell-bent on creating a team around him that exacerbates his weaknesses, then fine. But just because he can't make Jennifer Aniston swoon believably doesn't mean he can't carry a film.

Absolutely LOVE this post. I would, however, like to point out that THE PACIFIER is a vastly underrated Diesel vehicle... not exactly a romantic comedy, but a comedy nevertheless. :thumbup:

pedro
06-16-2007, 07:54 PM
IMO, Dunn does go in the Deer class because of the "Three True Outcomes." I think Dunn will have a much longer career, mostly because he is more prolific at all three (Ks included, unfortunately).

You've probably already read this stuff, but just in case you haven't...

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3799

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/adam-dunn-three-true-outcomes/

Actually Deer struck out at a greater rate than Adam Dunn.

RedEye
06-16-2007, 07:59 PM
Actually Deer struck out at a greater rate than Adam Dunn.

Okay, well perhaps Adam's just got him beat in the record books as opposed to in the K rate.

RedEye
06-16-2007, 08:14 PM
Adam Dunn = Vin Diesel

He IS a leading man, you just have to put him in the right movie. If you cast him in a romantic comedy and expect tear jerking hilarity to ensue, the fault is yours.

If Adam Dunn = Vin Diesel, then...

Albert Pujols = Tom Hanks / Solid, A-lister capable of headlining a film by himself with no other talent to speak of. Consistent, versatile and almost never turns in a bad performance.

David Wright = Ryan Gosling / Talented newcomer with ability to be a leading man in time. With longevity, should be one of the greatest ever. Tantalizing talent.

Jose Reyes = Jamie Foxx / Another talented newcomer who keeps surprising us with his range. He does multiple things better than most of us do one thing. We find ourselves anxiously awaiting his next move.

Barry Bonds = Tom Cruise / He is, admittedly, crazy and a pretty unlikeable in person. However, he still headlines a blockbuster as well as anyone in the biz, and he's ultimately going to go down as one of the greats, whether we like it or not. Just check out his career for evidence of this. Almost no one has the track record in the box office that he does. Ever.

David Eckstein = Adam Sandler / This guy has a very, very limited game, but he makes the most of what he's got. He is the definition of "scrappy" and somehow that makes people want to root for him despite his admittedly limited talent. He's shown remarkable staying power just because he manages to be likeable and funny in places.

Jason Giambi = Robert Downey, Jr. / Ultimately one of the more talented and likeable actors of his generation, he just keeps succumbing to drugs over and over again. We like him because he's honest about his weakness, but the courts are not so sympathetic to his plight.

Any others you all can think of? :D

BCubb2003
06-16-2007, 08:17 PM
Here's a quiz:

Who has a higher batting average, Adam Dunn or Josh Hamilton?

Which Red has made the most outs this year? (It's not Dunn, or Hamilton, for that matter.)

RedEye
06-16-2007, 08:36 PM
Here's a quiz:

Who has a higher batting average, Adam Dunn or Josh Hamilton?

Which Red has made the most outs this year? (It's not Dunn, or Hamilton, for that matter.)

Dunn = .268
Hamilton = .258

I'll bet Brandon Phillips has made the most outs this year. But it might be Junior.

BCubb2003
06-16-2007, 08:56 PM
Dunn = .268
Hamilton = .258

I'll bet Brandon Phillips has made the most outs this year. But it might be Junior.

Brandon Phillips, then Alex Gonzalez.

mth123
06-16-2007, 09:48 PM
IMO, Dunn does go in the Deer class because of the "Three True Outcomes." I think Dunn will have a much longer career, mostly because he is more prolific at all three (Ks included, unfortunately).

You've probably already read this stuff, but just in case you haven't...

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3799

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/adam-dunn-three-true-outcomes/

Not really. Dunn gets lumped with the Deer and Kingman types all the time and it just isn't true. Deer only had 1 full season with an OBP > .340. Deer was more like 2 out of 3 true outcomes.

paintmered
06-16-2007, 10:00 PM
Not really. Dunn gets lumped with the Deer and Kingman types all the time and it just isn't true. Deer only had 1 full season with an OBP > .340. Deer was more like 2 out of 3 true outcomes.

Yep, that's the biggest difference. Dunn has been consistently good at avoiding outs. It's just many of his outs are strikeouts, and those are more memorable than the obligatory pop-out or ground-out to second. And so he is reviled. This is not to say he is a player without faults. He is what he is and that is a major asset and contributor to this ballclub.

That said, Adam Dunn is the opposite of everything Cincinnati loves in a player. Right or wrong, this town is largely under the impression that if a player simply tries harder, he can become Pete Rose. Pete Rose was a damn good hitter because of his talent, not because he simply tried hard.

This town does not deserve Adam Dunn. Adam Dunn does not deserve this town. Maybe Adam would be better loved if he stayed at UT and played tight end instead.

dougdirt
06-16-2007, 10:01 PM
Dunn = .268
Hamilton = .258

I'll bet Brandon Phillips has made the most outs this year. But it might be Junior.

Griffey has an on base percentage far and away better than any regular on this team. No way he has made the most outs on this team.

dougdirt
06-16-2007, 10:04 PM
This town does not deserve Adam Dunn. Adam Dunn does not deserve this town.

No town is going to enjoy what Adam Dunn does as a whole unless he becomes a DH somewhere and there is one less noticable flaw in his game. Dunn brings things to the table with his power and his ability to take walks, but his flaws are very noticable with him consistantly hitting .250, striking out 180+ times in a season and playing absolutely horrible defense. No town is going to support a guy like that as a whole. I dont mind having Adam Dunn on my team, I understand what he is and what he is going to do year in and year out. I don't want him on the team next year because we will be vastly overpaying for him, but thats another arguement for another day.

SteelSD
06-16-2007, 10:34 PM
No town is going to enjoy what Adam Dunn does as a whole unless he becomes a DH somewhere and there is one less noticable flaw in his game. Dunn brings things to the table with his power and his ability to take walks, but his flaws are very noticable with him consistantly hitting .250, striking out 180+ times in a season and playing absolutely horrible defense. No town is going to support a guy like that as a whole. I dont mind having Adam Dunn on my team, I understand what he is and what he is going to do year in and year out. I don't want him on the team next year because we will be vastly overpaying for him, but thats another arguement for another day.

The guy creates 100+ Runs per season while being nearly as good, as good, or better defensively than guys like Manny Ramirez, Josh Willingham, Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Barry Bonds, Raul Ibanez, and Chris Duncan. Dunn isn't a good fielder by any stretch of the imagination, but I think we forget that's pretty much where MLB teams put guys like Dunn. If we care to look, we find that they're not at all rare.

Heck, he's one of only three NL players to be worth at least 100 Runs Created in each of the past three seasons. 2007 will be the fourth, barring injury. Very rarely have the Reds seen a position player as valuable as consistently. Joe Morgan, Frank Robinson, and Ted Kluszewski are the most recent examples. But not even George Foster did what Dunn is about to. If the Reds can't afford 13 Million bucks for their most consistently productive offensive player in decades, then they need to close up shop. And if fans can't get behind that kind of production, that's simply not an Adam Dunn issue.

mth123
06-16-2007, 10:52 PM
The guy creates 100+ Runs per season while being nearly as good, as good, or better defensively than guys like Manny Ramirez, Josh Willingham, Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Barry Bonds, Raul Ibanez, and Chris Duncan. Dunn isn't a good fielder by any stretch of the imagination, but I think we forget that's pretty much where MLB teams put guys like Dunn. If we care to look, we find that they're not at all rare.

Heck, he's one of only three NL players to be worth at least 100 Runs Created in each of the past three seasons. 2007 will be the fourth, barring injury. Very rarely have the Reds seen a position player as valuable as consistently. Joe Morgan, Frank Robinson, and Ted Kluszewski are the most recent examples. But not even George Foster did what Dunn is about to. If the Reds can't afford 13 Million bucks for their most consistently productive offensive player in decades, then they need to close up shop. And if fans can't get behind that kind of production, that's simply not an Adam Dunn issue.

Agreed completely. If somebody wants to trade Adam Dunn because the return will be so great that many of the franchise's problems will be solved, then go ahead. If somebody wants to trade Adam Dunn because they think he is the problem, then that's just wrong.

As for the money, we're talking about a $2.5 Million raise. That is less than the money being paid to Jason Larue in 2007. There is plenty of dead wood that can be moved to get some shopping money. No need to dump real production for that purpose.

dougdirt
06-16-2007, 10:57 PM
The guy creates 100+ Runs per season while being nearly as good, as good, or better defensively than guys like Manny Ramirez, Josh Willingham, Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Barry Bonds, Raul Ibanez, and Chris Duncan. Dunn isn't a good fielder by any stretch of the imagination, but I think we forget that's pretty much where MLB teams put guys like Dunn. If we care to look, we find that they're not at all rare.

Heck, he's one of only three NL players to be worth at least 100 Runs Created in each of the past three seasons. 2007 will be the fourth, barring injury. Very rarely have the Reds seen a position player as valuable as consistently. Joe Morgan, Frank Robinson, and Ted Kluszewski are the most recent examples. But not even George Foster did what Dunn is about to. If the Reds can't afford 13 Million bucks for their most consistently productive offensive player in decades, then they need to close up shop. And if fans can't get behind that kind of production, that's simply not an Adam Dunn issue.

Steel, first off, let me say welcome back. I have seen you around a little lately but havent actually said anything to you.
That said, I certainly see and understand all of the production Adam Dunn brings to the offensive side of the table. I also see him signing a contract for 14-15 million per season for 5 seasons once he signs a new contract and I don't think he is worth that in a small market like Cincinnati where they need to be very careful on how they spend their money. If Adam wants to give the Reds something around 60 million for 5 years, then sign me up. Anything more than that though, I think we need to look to move him ASAP and attempt to get back as much as we can and wish him the best of luck.

SteelSD
06-16-2007, 11:30 PM
Steel, first off, let me say welcome back. I have seen you around a little lately but havent actually said anything to you.
That said, I certainly see and understand all of the production Adam Dunn brings to the offensive side of the table. I also see him signing a contract for 14-15 million per season for 5 seasons once he signs a new contract and I don't think he is worth that in a small market like Cincinnati where they need to be very careful on how they spend their money. If Adam wants to give the Reds something around 60 million for 5 years, then sign me up. Anything more than that though, I think we need to look to move him ASAP and attempt to get back as much as we can and wish him the best of luck.

Good to see you too, Doug.

As always, I have no problem dealing Adam Dunn for the right return. If not, I don't see how the contract is an issue. Encarnacion, Phillips, and Hamilton are cheap. Milton's, Cormier, and most likely Conine are off the books after the season. Harang and Arroyo are signed to below-market deals as well. Votto is on the way pretty soon and should Bruce work out there's another cheap piece. If Krivsky can stop wasting talent in trades and money on non-projectible stop-gap vet signings, I see the Reds as a team that's set up to be able to afford Dunn even beyond 2008.

IMHO, the only possible way a Dunn trade makes sense (as mth noted) is if someone absolutely blows the Reds away with a franchise-changing offer. Otherwise, there's no reason he needs to be moved. Even with the raise he'll receive next season, I don't see any way the Reds couldn't receive an identical return after the "June 08" trade restriction is raised versus dealing him now. I look at the possibility of a Dunn trade and I just don't see the urgency- particularly as he's under the Reds control for 1.5+ seasons still at a very fair and affordable price.

Kc61
06-16-2007, 11:56 PM
As I understand it, after the "June '08" restriction ends, Dunn gets to make a list of (is it 10?) teams to which he would agree to a trade. This is a significant restriction that will impact the Reds' flexibility in trading him. Of course, a trade will still be possible, but with a limited number of suitors.

Frankly, I think Dunn is a goner and this year. I can't see the Reds paying him !3.5 for next year when the team is in such lousy shape. My view is that they will use the money on prospects and a few additional arms.

Had the Reds won more this year, then they might have kept him. But right now I'm sure they are looking years ahead and envision an outfield of Hamilton, Bruce and whomever.

Both Dunn and Griffey have hit well of late, which makes trades even more likely since contending teams may now be willing to offer more. I still think the Reds will keep Griff -- particularly as he approaches 600 homers. But I think Dunn is a goner. (Just a guess, the opposite could well happen, or nothing could happen.)

Dunn's value can and will be debated as much as the Sopranos ending. The only reasonable course to trading him, I think, is to sign him long term. If the team was close to a contender, I could see that happening, but I would be shocked if they signed him now.

RedEye
06-17-2007, 02:27 AM
Yep, that's the biggest difference. Dunn has been consistently good at avoiding outs. It's just many of his outs are strikeouts, and those are more memorable than the obligatory pop-out or ground-out to second. And so he is reviled. This is not to say he is a player without faults. He is what he is and that is a major asset and contributor to this ballclub.


That is what I was trying to say about Dunn. He is the "king" of the Three True Outcomes. He is by far a better OBP guy than either Kingman or Deer, and so he actually does end up being a viable offensive threat for any lineup. The other two TTO guys couldn't draw a walk as well, and so ended up being real feast or famine hitters. Dunn is often feast or famine, but he also has a few "snacks" now and again.

RedEye
06-17-2007, 02:29 AM
Griffey has an on base percentage far and away better than any regular on this team. No way he has made the most outs on this team.

My first guess was Phillips, which as it turns out is the correct answer. The only reason I guessed Junior is because he was the only guy I could think of who batted consistently at the top of the lineup (an obvious prerequisite for any consideration for the solution to BCubb's quiz). Last year his OBP was abysmal, so I kind of thought it had carried over. I was wrong.

WVRedsFan
06-17-2007, 03:05 AM
Good to see you too, Doug.

As always, I have no problem dealing Adam Dunn for the right return. If not, I don't see how the contract is an issue. Encarnacion, Phillips, and Hamilton are cheap. Milton's, Cormier, and most likely Conine are off the books after the season. Harang and Arroyo are signed to below-market deals as well. Votto is on the way pretty soon and should Bruce work out there's another cheap piece. If Krivsky can stop wasting talent in trades and money on non-projectible stop-gap vet signings, I see the Reds as a team that's set up to be able to afford Dunn even beyond 2008.

IMHO, the only possible way a Dunn trade makes sense (as mth noted) is if someone absolutely blows the Reds away with a franchise-changing offer. Otherwise, there's no reason he needs to be moved. Even with the raise he'll receive next season, I don't see any way the Reds couldn't receive an identical return after the "June 08" trade restriction is raised versus dealing him now. I look at the possibility of a Dunn trade and I just don't see the urgency- particularly as he's under the Reds control for 1.5+ seasons still at a very fair and affordable price.

Excellent reasoning. Why give him away to dump salary when his salary is not restrictive in any way for what he brings to the club? So you can put a couple more arms in the bullpen? The kids seems to be doing the job and we can't afford the drop in run production. Remember, we hae to win to put fannies in the seats. Maybe it's not as many wins as we want, but to wave the white flag now and wait for 2009 would be devastating to this franchise.

Trade in later, but not now.

vaticanplum
06-17-2007, 01:11 PM
The guy creates 100+ Runs per season while being nearly as good, as good, or better defensively than guys like Manny Ramirez, Josh Willingham, Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Barry Bonds, Raul Ibanez, and Chris Duncan. Dunn isn't a good fielder by any stretch of the imagination, but I think we forget that's pretty much where MLB teams put guys like Dunn. If we care to look, we find that they're not at all rare.

Heck, he's one of only three NL players to be worth at least 100 Runs Created in each of the past three seasons. 2007 will be the fourth, barring injury. Very rarely have the Reds seen a position player as valuable as consistently. Joe Morgan, Frank Robinson, and Ted Kluszewski are the most recent examples. But not even George Foster did what Dunn is about to. If the Reds can't afford 13 Million bucks for their most consistently productive offensive player in decades, then they need to close up shop. And if fans can't get behind that kind of production, that's simply not an Adam Dunn issue.

:clap:

Matt700wlw
06-17-2007, 01:12 PM
:clap:

You just think he's cute ;)

vaticanplum
06-17-2007, 01:17 PM
You just think he's cute ;)

That is untrue.

Everyone knows we just dig the long ball.

Matt700wlw
06-17-2007, 01:21 PM
That is untrue.

Everyone knows we just dig the long ball.

Chicks do dig the long ball

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 01:31 PM
Good to see you too, Doug.

As always, I have no problem dealing Adam Dunn for the right return. If not, I don't see how the contract is an issue. Encarnacion, Phillips, and Hamilton are cheap. Milton's, Cormier, and most likely Conine are off the books after the season. Harang and Arroyo are signed to below-market deals as well. Votto is on the way pretty soon and should Bruce work out there's another cheap piece. If Krivsky can stop wasting talent in trades and money on non-projectible stop-gap vet signings, I see the Reds as a team that's set up to be able to afford Dunn even beyond 2008.

IMHO, the only possible way a Dunn trade makes sense (as mth noted) is if someone absolutely blows the Reds away with a franchise-changing offer. Otherwise, there's no reason he needs to be moved. Even with the raise he'll receive next season, I don't see any way the Reds couldn't receive an identical return after the "June 08" trade restriction is raised versus dealing him now. I look at the possibility of a Dunn trade and I just don't see the urgency- particularly as he's under the Reds control for 1.5+ seasons still at a very fair and affordable price.

I surely don't want to give Adam Dunn away, but at the same time I don't see him staying with the Reds past next season at the latest. As much as I hate to say it, the Reds aren't going anywhere this year. While there may not be an urgency to trade Adam Dunn for the Reds, I wonder if maybe someone will give up a little more to get him for that extra month and a half of this season than they will if they get him the last week of July. I guess I want to trade Dunn more because I don't think this team is going to resign him becuase of how he plays the game and how it goes against almost everything that they seem to say they want in a player. I think the sooner you can trade him, the more you can get back in return for him. From the rumors I am hearing at least, it sounds as if the Reds are at least asking for a lot hoping to get someone to bite.

KronoRed
06-17-2007, 01:54 PM
That is untrue.

Everyone knows we just dig the long ball.

So...why the love for Hatteberg? :D

pedro
06-17-2007, 01:56 PM
So...why the love for Hatteberg? :D

he's dreamy. ;)

(plus he likes wilco)

vaticanplum
06-17-2007, 01:59 PM
We also dig OBP. And grown men who run back to first base to hang out with Don Mattingly. (can't really hammer home this story enough, people.)

wheels
06-17-2007, 03:54 PM
Redsland had a good idea last night.

Trade him, then sign him as a FA in the offseason.

Dougdirt's head would explode.:laugh:

:explode::explode:

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 03:57 PM
Redsland had a good idea last night.

Trade him, then sign him as a FA in the offseason.

Dougdirt's head would explode.:laugh:

:explode::explode:

Nah, as long as it was a good signing. I just don't want to have the Reds paying him 14 million a season to play left field. If he wants to move to first base, then maybe it gets better.

RedLegSuperStar
06-17-2007, 04:36 PM
I Will say this Dunn has increased his value over this past week. Starting with the series opener of the Angels till todays current game Dunn is hitting:

.478 (11-23) 4 HRs 8 RBIs 6 Rs 7 Ks 2 BBs

Aronchis
06-17-2007, 04:43 PM
Typical Dunn hotstreak, to be followed by the typical Dunn slump;)

SteelSD
06-17-2007, 05:15 PM
Nah, as long as it was a good signing. I just don't want to have the Reds paying him 14 million a season to play left field. If he wants to move to first base, then maybe it gets better.

Well, let's change the question up then. Who would you pay 14M to play Left Field? Does such a player exist or is the 14M your personal "cap" on LF salary?

I'm curious because the market shows us that Dunn-level performance out there is certainly worth at least 14M.

jojo
06-17-2007, 05:52 PM
Well, let's change the question up then. Who would you pay 14M to play Left Field? Does such a player exist or is the 14M your personal "cap" on LF salary?

I'm curious because the market shows us that Dunn-level performance out there is certainly worth at least 14M.

Replacing Dunn's bat and glove means replacing roughly 90 RC. That's not an impossible task.

Here's the rub though....the free agent market for this off season looks pretty bleak in my mind (especially for position players). This notion of saving $13M for pitching and defense really only works if that $13M would buy you something valuable. Assuming Zambrano/Colon are out of the Reds price range, it looks like the Reds will be in bidding wars for arms like Tomko/Wolf/Silva or worse, they'll sink a ton of jack into their bullpen to satisfy Krivsky's closer fetish. I think basically its cross your fingers and hope enough teams foolishly chase the overvalued arms like Garcia/Hernandez/Jennings and the Reds can get a good value on some teams plan B. But it bears stating that we have no idea what the market might be... a fourth starter might actually eat up Dunn's option year salary if things get nuts-i.e. that $13M might not stretch very far.

I'm just not seeing the jettisoning of Dunn as an automatic improvement. There is something to be said for simply penciling in 90 RC overall in your lineup card and forgetting about it. While replacing Dunn in theory is very doable, it would require doing it in parts necesitating some creativity, foresight and intelligence that Krivsky hasn't demonstrated yet. I guess it depends upon who the Reds get back for him but I sure don't trust Krivsky in the free agent market with a wad of cash especially when the upcoming one seems filled with landmines IMHO.

Aronchis
06-17-2007, 06:13 PM
Replacing Dunn's bat and glove means replacing roughly 90 RC. That's not an impossible task.

Here's the rub though....the free agent market for this off season looks pretty bleak in my mind (especially for position players). This notion of saving $13M for pitching and defense really only works if that $13M would buy you something valuable. Assuming Zambrano/Colon are out of the Reds price range, it looks like the Reds will be in bidding wars for arms like Tomko/Wolf/Silva or worse, they'll sink a ton of jack into their bullpen to satisfy Krivsky's closer fetish. I think basically its cross your fingers and hope enough teams foolishly chase the overvalued arms like Garcia/Hernandez/Jennings and the Reds can get a good value on some teams plan B. But it bears stating that we have no idea what the market might be... a fourth starter might actually eat up Dunn's option year salary if things get nuts-i.e. that $13M might not stretch very far.

I'm just not seeing the jettisoning of Dunn as an automatic improvement. There is something to be said for simply penciling in 90 RC overall in your lineup card and forgetting about it. While replacing Dunn in theory is very doable, it would require doing it in parts necesitating some creativity, foresight and intelligence that Krivsky hasn't demonstrated yet. I guess it depends upon who the Reds get back for him but I sure don't trust Krivsky in the free agent market with a wad of cash especially when the upcoming one seems filled with landmines IMHO.

You don't want a wad of cash for the FA market, you are rebuilding. You put all the money back inside and give yourself a big market internal budget while you slash costs on the major league team.

Chip R
06-17-2007, 06:19 PM
There is no guarantee that you can sign a free agent that can come close, match or exceed Dunn's numbers. Or, in lieu of signing a bat, signing a free agent pitcher that puts up numbers worth $13-15M a year.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 08:29 PM
Well, let's change the question up then. Who would you pay 14M to play Left Field? Does such a player exist or is the 14M your personal "cap" on LF salary?

I'm curious because the market shows us that Dunn-level performance out there is certainly worth at least 14M.

The market shows us that Dunns offensive performance may be worth that much. His defense does however cost the Reds some of those runs he creates. Honestly, looking at this years every day left fielders there are only 4 guys playing very well. Bonds, Dunn and Matt Holliday.

Its not that I have a personal cap on any LF, but I think in our market its a lot of money to pay someone to be horribly below average on defense and not very well rounded. According to David Gassko's nice little article on Defense (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/d-fence/) the other day, Adam Dunn is worth -8 runs on defense already this season. Holliday is worth -4 and Bonds is worth -2 (I would be interested in seeing that one with more detail).

So considering that we are about 70 games into the season that projects Adam Dunn being worth -20.8 runs on defense this season. Is his offensive production -21 runs for his defense worth 14 million a season? I am not sure, but I do know that it probably isn't in Cincinnati.

So honestly, I don't think its a good idea to pay someone that much this season, regardless of what the market dictates. The market might not be correct. It did dictate 126 million dollars to Barry Zito, and there is no way on Earth I would consider paying him that much.

pedro
06-17-2007, 08:38 PM
I really wonder about the defensive runs against stats sometimes and if the Reds players are somehow getting lower ratings than they should because of pitchers getting hit so hard. It seems to me that if your pitching staff gives up an inordinate amount of very hard hit balls that when analyzing balls hit into a players "zone" it's going to give the impression that they should have gotten to balls that perhaps really weren't as catchable as they might appear when just looking at a hit chart.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 08:43 PM
I really wonder about the defensive runs against stats sometimes and if the Reds players are somehow getting lower ratings than they should because of pitchers getting hit so hard. It seems to me that if your pitching staff gives up an inordinate amount of very hard hit balls that when analyzing balls hit into a players "zone" it's going to give the impression that they should have gotten to balls that perhaps really weren't as catchable as they might appear when just looking at a hit chart.

I dont think so really. Who are the good defenders on our team? Ryan Freel, Brandon Phillips and Alex Gonzalez? They are all the players with positive defensive runs. Phillips is actually #2 at 2nd base.

jojo
06-17-2007, 08:47 PM
I really wonder about the defensive runs against stats sometimes and if the Reds players are somehow getting lower ratings than they should because of pitchers getting hit so hard. It seems to me that if your pitching staff gives up an inordinate amount of very hard hit balls that when analyzing balls hit into a players "zone" it's going to give the impression that they should have gotten to balls that perhaps really weren't as catchable as they might appear when just looking at a hit chart.

For what it's worth, the play-by-play derived defensive metrics at least try to factor in velocity of BIP into their vector analysis. It's not just where ball X landed, it's how it got to that point too.

jojo
06-17-2007, 09:02 PM
I really wonder about the defensive runs against stats sometimes and if the Reds players are somehow getting lower ratings than they should because of pitchers getting hit so hard. It seems to me that if your pitching staff gives up an inordinate amount of very hard hit balls that when analyzing balls hit into a players "zone" it's going to give the impression that they should have gotten to balls that perhaps really weren't as catchable as they might appear when just looking at a hit chart.

I think if your look at Dewan's recently released numbers and UZR's latest ratings, it's obvious that the Reds defense has been woeful thus far. Nearly every position player is not only ranked poorly but they're near the bottom for their position. The exceptions are Phillips who is ranked highly and Gonzo who is ranked disappointingly middle of the pack.

The big caveat is that in season totals are really vulnerable to small sample size. It's possible for example for Gonzo (his head just hasn't seemed to be in Cincy IMHO) or for Hamilton (who has been ranked horribly) to finish with a much higher rating. That said, Dunn isn't likely to improve. His UZR rating has gotten worse every year since 2004. As Doug alluded earlier, both Dewan and UZR indicate that he's on pace to repeat his -20 defender status.

I know that some think the PBP systems overstate Dunn's defensive deficiencies. But the PBP systems weigh defense in a manner that seems much more intuitive to me than the clunker that is winshares defense. That argument aside, even if Dunn's defense is undervalued, the perception is widespread amongst the leagues FO's that Dunn is a lowest tier defender. That impacts his value even if left field is the place to hide defensive stiffs.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:07 PM
I dont think so really. Who are the good defenders on our team? Ryan Freel, Brandon Phillips and Alex Gonzalez? They are all the players with positive defensive runs. Phillips is actually #2 at 2nd base.

It's not that I think the Reds are really good defenders and that it's just the pitching staff. I do realize that the Reds aren't a good defensive team. I just wonder if those numbers could be somewhat negatively effected by having such an explosive pitching staff. I wouldn't think that this would have a huge impact, perhaps a couple of runs one way or the other. I think it's at least plausible.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:12 PM
I think if your look at Dewan's recently released numbers and UZR's latest ratings, it's obvious that the Reds defense has been woeful thus far. Nearly every position player is not only ranked poorly but they're near the bottom for their position. The exceptions are Phillips who is ranked highly and Gonzo who is ranked disappointingly middle of the pack.

The big caveat is that in season totals are really vulnerable to small sample size. It's possible for example for Gonzo (his head just hasn't seemed to be in Cincy IMHO) or for Hamilton (who has been ranked horribly) to finish with a much higher rating. That said, Dunn isn't likely to improve. His UZR rating has gotten worse every year since 2004. As Doug alluded earlier, both Dewan and UZR indicate that he's on pace to repeat his -20 defender status.

I know that some think the PBP systems overstate Dunn's defensive deficiencies. But the PBP systems weigh defense in a manner that seems much more intuitive to me than the clunker that is winshares defense. That argument aside, even if Dunn's defense is undervalued, the perception is widespread amongst the leagues FO's that Dunn is a lowest tier defender. That impacts his value even if left field is the place to hide defensive stiffs.

Having watched almost every game Hamilton has played and knowing that the other metrics (ZR, RF) have Hamilton at about middle of the pack I'm a bit skeptical of any system that rates Hamilton as a poor defender. Hamilton;s not a gold glover out there but I believe he's at least average.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 09:15 PM
Having watched almost every game Hamilton has played and knowing that the other metrics (ZR, RF) have Hamilton at about middle of the pack I'm a bit skeptical of any system that rates Hamilton as a poor defender. Hamilton;s not a gold glover out there but I believe he's at least average.

Its funny what your eyes will tell you sometimes.... especially what you can only see on tv where you can only see maybe half of the play from start to end.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:17 PM
Its funny what your eyes will tell you sometimes.... especially what you can only see on tv where you can only see maybe half of the play from start to end.

True. Regardless, ZR and RF rate Hamilton as about middle of the pack. I'd be curious as to how UZR rates Hamilton vs. Griffey in 2006.

jojo
06-17-2007, 09:18 PM
Its funny what your eyes will tell you sometimes.... especially what you can only see on tv where you can only see maybe half of the play from start to end.

Right and you have to keep in mind too that the PBP data place a player in the context of all of his peers so not only do you have to watch as much of player X as possible but you also have to do the same for the other 30 or so players getting significant innings at the position. This is a case where your eyes are a hopelessly small sample size IMHO.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 09:19 PM
True. Regardless, ZR and RF rate Hamilton as about middle of the pack. I'd be curious as to how UZR rates Hamilton vs. Griffey in 2006.
His +/- number is middle of the pack.

As for the other part it probably looks like average vs poor.

jojo
06-17-2007, 09:22 PM
True. Regardless, ZR and RF rate Hamilton as about middle of the pack. I'd be curious as to how UZR rates Hamilton vs. Griffey in 2006.

UZR didn't rate Hamilton in '06. In '07, both Jr and Hamilton are rated -6 at their positions. In '06, Jr was rated by UZR as a -34 CFer.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:26 PM
Another thing that may have a negative effect on the Reds defense is the inability of the pitching staff to locate their pitches thus making it more difficult to effectively position players defensively. Do any of these systems account for defensive positioning? I would think that would be very difficult.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:28 PM
UZR didn't rate Hamilton in '06. In '07, both Jr and Hamilton are rated -6 at their positions. In '06, Jr was rated by UZR as a -34 CFer.

I did mean Hamilton this year vs. Griffey last year. Thanks for the info.

Honestly I'm surprised Griffey isn't rated worse this year. His play in RF has been very poor IMO.

jojo
06-17-2007, 09:28 PM
Another thing that may have a negative effect on the Reds defense is the inability of the pitching staff to locate their pitches thus making it more difficult to effectively position players defensively. Do any of these systems account for defensive positioning? I would think that would be very difficult.

They try. I know that's not very edifying. :beerme:

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:30 PM
They try. I know that's not very edifying. :beerme:

The Reds don't seem to be as involved in defensive positioning as some teams, Atlanta for example.

jojo
06-17-2007, 09:36 PM
The Reds don't seem to be as involved in defensive positioning as some teams, Atlanta for example.

I only get to see Atlanta on tv and unfortunately alot of the nuances of defensive positioning seem get lost in the presentation. Heck, one could watch an FSN broadcast of the Reds and potentially not realize that the defense has overshifted against Dunn and Jr.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:40 PM
I only get to see Atlanta on tv and unfortunately alot of the nuances of defensive positioning seem get lost in the presentation. Heck, one could watch an FSN broadcast of the Reds and potentially not realize that the defense has overshifted against Dunn and Jr.

I used to go to a lot of Braves games when I lived in Atlanta.

And why do they all it the "overshift"? For some reason that just drives me crazy. It's redundant IMO.

flyer85
06-17-2007, 09:44 PM
should Dunn be traded? If they have no plans to sign him then they should be listening.

However anyone who isn't likely to be here in 2009 should be traded. That group includes Jr,hatteberg, conine, weathers, stanton, lohse, etc.

flyer85
06-17-2007, 09:48 PM
Is his offensive production -21 runs for his defense worth 14 million a season? I am not sure, but I do know that it probably isn't in Cincinnati.
The question is can the Reds spend 13M in the short term free agent market and get anywhere close to that in value? Certainly this year WK failed miserably.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 09:54 PM
The question is can the Reds spend 13M in the short term free agent market and get anywhere close to that in value? Certainly this year WK failed miserably.

You are now assuming that the Reds plan on spending 13 million to replace Dunns production. Getting an average hitter in LF and an above average defender over there closes the gap considerably and it probably won't cost you 13-14 million a year. Just because Wayne has failed at his job doesn't mean that we should overpay to keep Adam Dunn around.

pedro
06-17-2007, 09:57 PM
You are now assuming that the Reds plan on spending 13 million to replace Dunns production. Getting an average hitter in LF and an above average defender over there closes the gap considerably and it probably won't cost you 13-14 million a year. Just because Wayne has failed at his job doesn't mean that we should overpay to keep Adam Dunn around.

Here's a list of this coming off season free agent OF's. I think the Reds are going to have to trade for this LF you envision.

Bobby Abreu
Milton Bradley
Eric Byrnes
Jose Cruz, Jr.
Mike Cameron
Jermaine Dye
Darin Erstad
Cliff Floyd
Shawn Green
Jose Guillen
Torii Hunter
Kenny Lofton
Trot Nixon
Corey Patterson
Aaron Rowand
Shannon Stewart
Ichiro Suzuki
Brad Wilkerson
Rondell White

flyer85
06-17-2007, 09:58 PM
You are now assuming that the Reds plan on spending 13 million to replace Dunns production. Getting an average hitter in LF and an above average defender over there closes the gap considerably and it probably won't cost you 13-14 million a year. Just because Wayne has failed at his job doesn't mean that we should overpay to keep Adam Dunn around.PECOTA has Dunn pegged to have a MORP of $16M in 2008. The way the current GM threw around millions of bad players it is more than a fair question to consider how 25m+ dollars that would come off the books after 2007 will be spent. It would be hard pressed to spend that money and get any near that in value in a poor free agent market, especially in the short term one the Reds are forced to compete in.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 09:59 PM
They might have to trade for a guy like that, or maybe they already have him in Josh Hamilton if they plan on Ryan Freel playing CF past this season.

flyer85
06-17-2007, 10:00 PM
Here's a list of this coming off season free agent OF's. I think the Reds are going to have to trade for this LF you envision.
Nah, they got Hopper.

pedro
06-17-2007, 10:03 PM
They might have to trade for a guy like that, or maybe they already have him in Josh Hamilton if they plan on Ryan Freel playing CF past this season.

If Griffey stays on the team he has to move to LF IMO.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 10:04 PM
PECOTA has Dunn pegged to have a MORP of $16M in 2008. The way the current GM threw around millions of bad players it is more than a fair question to consider how 25m+ dollars that would come off the books after 2007 will be spent. It would be hard pressed to spend that money and get any near that in value in a poor free agent market, especially in the short term one the Reds are forced to compete in.

Again though, I could care less what PECOTA thinks Dunn should make. 22 teams or so have higher payrolls than the Reds. What they can ideally pay him and what we can are two completely different things.

flyer85
06-17-2007, 10:09 PM
Again though, I could care less what PECOTA thinks Dunn should make. 22 teams or so have higher payrolls than the Reds. What they can ideally pay him and what we can are two completely different things.Reds can easily afford a 3M increase to Dunn and are unlikely to find anywhere near 30M(Dunn, Milton, Lohse, Cormier, Conine, larue, etc) in value in the short term free agent market.

The question is not whether Dunn is worth $13M(even if PECOTA thinks he is). The question is can the Reds spend that money elsewhere in the short term free agent market and get value anywhere close to dollar for dollar on what they spend?

jojo
06-17-2007, 10:51 PM
Again though, I could care less what PECOTA thinks Dunn should make. 22 teams or so have higher payrolls than the Reds. What they can ideally pay him and what we can are two completely different things.

IMHO, anything BP does that includes it's view of defense is tainted and should be viewed skeptically but Flyer point is a good one.

Conservatively, wins seem to be worth $4M right now. So if Dunn is a 4 win player, he should be roughly worth $16M.

IMHO, Dunn has to be at least be a 50 VORP bat to be arguably a 4 win player (thats with erroring in Dunn's favor and assuming the UZR rating underrates Dunn's defense by 10 runs-I think he really has to be atleast a 55 VORP bat). Dunn has been a 50 VORP bat once in his career ('04).

I personally think it's not that risky to assume Dunn would be a 3 win player in '08 especially after his start this year is suggesting last fall was just one of those things. While Dunn probably wont be a value at $13M, he probably roughly would be at least earning his keep. While smart, well run teams could find cheaper ways to get those three wins, paying a player what he's worth is not a sin. If a team in the market the size of Cincy's (stretching from dayton/columbus to Louisville) can't afford to pay it's players what they are worth, then we at redszone, need to really adjust our expectations.

During the course of arguing that the return for Dunn is likely to be less than most would hope, I've begun to entertain the notion that keeping Dunn in '08 may be a wise decision. $13M to Dunn allows other priorities to be addressed (left field is checked off the list) while buying Bruce another year to get rushed up in '09.

Anyway, thats how I'm thinking about this issue currently-if you expect Dunn to have an OBP greater than .350 and a SLG somewhere north of .540,then $13M aint such a terrible thing assuming no market correction is eminent. I can at least see where someone would argue that its less risky to bet on Dunn being a three win guy than for the other ways the Reds might spend the $13M to equal three wins.

dougdirt
06-17-2007, 11:44 PM
jojo, I can go for paying him 13.5 next season, but its that next time that he signs the dotted line that I don't want to pay him for because I see him getting 14-16 million a season for 4 or 5 seasons when he does that, and he just isn't worth that much.

SteelSD
06-18-2007, 12:40 AM
The market shows us that Dunns offensive performance may be worth that much. His defense does however cost the Reds some of those runs he creates. Honestly, looking at this years every day left fielders there are only 4 guys playing very well. Bonds, Dunn and Matt Holliday.

Its not that I have a personal cap on any LF, but I think in our market its a lot of money to pay someone to be horribly below average on defense and not very well rounded.

According to David Gassko's nice little article on Defense (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/d-fence/) the other day, Adam Dunn is worth -8 runs on defense already this season. Holliday is worth -4 and Bonds is worth -2 (I would be interested in seeing that one with more detail).

I'm not sure what "not very well rounded" means. He's a 6"6" 275-pound masher who does an excellent job of avoiding Outs, acquires a ton of Bases, and can even swipe a bag when needed.

And it's interesting that you categorized Dunn as "horribly below average" in one paragraph while citing Gassko's article in the next. Here's what Gassko says about Manny Ramirez in that article:

Gassko: Mannyís rating (-14) actually isnít all that bad, because these ratings do not include a park adjustment. If they did, Manny would be closer to -7 or 8 runs. That certainly isnít good, but itís not awful, either.

Gassko then goes on to note a "dearth" of quality defensive LF. That's entirely my point. Dunn's defense isn't good, but it's not the absolute mess one might think when one considers the alternatives.

I'd also have to question a defensive rating system that, after 70-odd games, includes +20 ratings for a 1B (Pujols) and a +24 rating for a 3B (David Wright) after knowing that only about 33% of non-HR baserunners result in Runs Scored. That kind of rating assumes that an average 1B or 3B would have allowed nearly 1 more baserunner per game. That's excessive, particularly considering the number of chances a 3B gets over the course of a season. In fact, the very idea that Wright holds a near 35-Run gap on a Edwin Encarnacion at this point in the season smells like complete fiction.


Again though, I could care less what PECOTA thinks Dunn should make. 22 teams or so have higher payrolls than the Reds. What they can ideally pay him and what we can are two completely different things.

If Krivsky can stop overpaying filler vets for what they've done rather than what they project to do, what exactly concerns you? You don't care about PECOTA value projections but you've given in whole-heartedly to BP's evaluation of defensive value?

The Reds have Harang and Arroyo signed to reasonable contracts through 2010 with 2011 options. If Bailey, who you've supported all the way, is the real deal he projects to produce sometime around the 2009 or 2010 date. Joey Votto could be a productive near-MLB minimum salary option at that point. Brandon Phillips and Edwin Encarnacion should be more expensive at that point, but nowhere near back-breaking. If Josh Hamilton learns and produces a career year in a couple seasons that's a pretty cheap core while the Reds should be raising their payroll.


jojo, I can go for paying him 13.5 next season, but its that next time that he signs the dotted line that I don't want to pay him for because I see him getting 14-16 million a season for 4 or 5 seasons when he does that, and he just isn't worth that much.

He's absolutely worth 14-16M per season over the next four years. At that price, in his prime, he's a bargain versus a Carlos Lee or Alfonso Soriano. The alternative is to look for a Brian Giles type return for Dunn and I'd be fine with that. But frankly, you seem to have a 13.5M ceiling on Dunn's value. He's certainly worth more than that and he's worth more than that to any franchise. The difference between being able to afford Dunn and not being able to afford Dunn is basically 25% the price of Mike Stanton.

dougdirt
06-18-2007, 01:05 AM
I'm not sure what "not very well rounded" means. He's a 6"6" 275-pound masher who does an excellent job of avoiding Outs, acquires a ton of Bases, and can even swipe a bag when needed.
Well he can't play an ounce of defense. What he does at the plate is quite limited, and while he does lot of good things at the plate which you hit on, he does lots of poor things at the plate as well. And up to this point he has been very healthy, but I can't say I trust someone of his size to be healthy for a ton longer if he continues to play the outfield. He is just too large of a human being.



And it's interesting that you categorized Dunn as "horribly below average" in one paragraph while citing Gassko's article in the next. Here's what Gassko says about Manny Ramirez in that article:

Gassko: Mannyís rating (-14) actually isnít all that bad, because these ratings do not include a park adjustment. If they did, Manny would be closer to -7 or 8 runs. That certainly isnít good, but itís not awful, either.

Yeah, its not awful, its 4th worst out of 131 guys listed in LF.... its atrocious.



Gassko then goes on to note a "dearth" of quality defensive LF. That's entirely my point. Dunn's defense isn't good, but it's not the absolute mess one might think when one considers the alternatives.

Gassko talks about the dearth of quality left fielders by saying that bad fielders should be hidden in RF, but then lists the best fielders at the position as guys that should be hidden in RF. I dont think its an absolute mess to think of the alternatives, defensively especially for Adam Dunn. 4 players of the 132 listed have a worse run problem in LF than Adam Dunn. So basically everyone in the league is better than him defensively, 4 players not withstanding.



If Krivsky can stop overpaying filler vets for what they've done rather than what they project to do, what exactly concerns you? You don't care about PECOTA value projections but you've given in whole-heartedly to BP's evaluation of defensive value?
Well, firstly its a THT article and not a BP article. I also havent given in to its evaluation of defensive value. Nearly all systems project Adam Dunn to be -20+ runs below the average left fielder. I just simply used this one because I read it the other day and knew exactly where to find it. As far as Krivsky spending money on crappy players, we will agree to that. What concerns me is overpaying for Adam Dunn simply because we may not be able to replace his offense in 1 offseason.



The Reds have Harang and Arroyo signed to reasonable contracts through 2010 with 2011 options. If Bailey, who you've supported all the way, is the real deal he projects to produce sometime around the 2009 or 2010 date. Joey Votto could be a productive near-MLB minimum salary option at that point. Brandon Phillips and Edwin Encarnacion should be more expensive at that point, but nowhere near back-breaking. If Josh Hamilton learns and produces a career year in a couple seasons that's a pretty cheap core while the Reds should be raising their payroll.

Yes, it is a pretty cheap core of players. That still doesn't justify overpaying someone.



He's absolutely worth 14-16M per season over the next four years. At that price, in his prime, he's a bargain versus a Carlos Lee or Alfonso Soriano. The alternative is to look for a Brian Giles type return for Dunn and I'd be fine with that. But frankly, you seem to have a 13.5M ceiling on Dunn's value. He's certainly worth more than that and he's worth more than that to any franchise. The difference between being able to afford Dunn and not being able to afford Dunn is basically 25% the price of Mike Stanton.

He may be a bargain versus Lee or Soriano (both of whom play for teams with payrolls 20 and 30 million dollars higher than ours), but they are both extremely overpaid players and just because they are overpaid does not mean that if someone else is paid less than them that they are not also going to be overpayed. I think we will have to agree to disagree that Dunn is worth that much money to the Reds. I see his defense taking away quite a bit of the runs his bat is worth, whereas you don't seem to agree with me that it is taking away as much as I think. Thats fine.

SteelSD
06-18-2007, 01:39 AM
Well he can't play an ounce of defense. What he does at the plate is quite limited, and while he does lot of good things at the plate which you hit on, he does lots of poor things at the plate as well. And up to this point he has been very healthy, but I can't say I trust someone of his size to be healthy for a ton longer if he continues to play the outfield. He is just too large of a human being.

The guy has played 158 games or more for four of the past five seasons. Not sure what you mean by "...he does lots of poor things at the plate..." but if you avoid outs and acquire bases at his rate, you're not doing much, if anything, wrong.


Yeah, its not awful, its 4th worst out of 131 guys listed in LF.... its atrocious.

You'll need to argue that point with Gassko- who doesn't consider the worst (Ramirez) to be "awful", much less "atrocious".


Gassko talks about the dearth of quality left fielders by saying that bad fielders should be hidden in RF, but then lists the best fielders at the position as guys that should be hidden in RF. I dont think its an absolute mess to think of the alternatives, defensively especially for Adam Dunn. 4 players of the 132 listed have a worse run problem in LF than Adam Dunn. So basically everyone in the league is better than him defensively, 4 players not withstanding.

And Gassko notes that Ramirez, who's much worse than Dunn in LF, isn't "awful". IMHO, you're dramatically overvaluing defense for a position that isn't historically a defensive position. The gap between good and bad simply isn't as great as you're letting on and it's nowhere near the fatal flaw you're making it out to be.


Well, firstly its a THT article and not a BP article. I also havent given in to its evaluation of defensive value. Nearly all systems project Adam Dunn to be -20+ runs below the average left fielder. I just simply used this one because I read it the other day and knew exactly where to find it. As far as Krivsky spending money on crappy players, we will agree to that. What concerns me is overpaying for Adam Dunn simply because we may not be able to replace his offense in 1 offseason.

Yes, it is a pretty cheap core of players. That still doesn't justify overpaying someone.

Dunn at 14-15M isn't anything resembling overpaying considering his consistent top-tier production. There simply aren't any number of Left Fielders who can compete with Dunn's overall run production in the Show and there's no way his presence will in any way hinder the Reds from fielding a better team going forward should Krivskly be smart.


He may be a bargain versus Lee or Soriano (both of whom play for teams with payrolls 20 and 30 million dollars higher than ours), but they are both extremely overpaid players and just because they are overpaid does not mean that if someone else is paid less than them that they are not also going to be overpayed. I think we will have to agree to disagree that Dunn is worth that much money to the Reds. I see his defense taking away quite a bit of the runs his bat is worth, whereas you don't seem to agree with me that it is taking away as much as I think. Thats fine.

Dunn is worth every penny of his salary to the Reds and every other MLB team.

Cyclone792
06-18-2007, 01:42 AM
I'd also have to question a defensive rating system that, after 70-odd games, includes +20 ratings for a 1B (Pujols) and a +24 rating for a 3B (David Wright) after knowing that only about 33% of non-HR baserunners result in Runs Scored. That kind of rating assumes that an average 1B or 3B would have allowed nearly 1 more baserunner per game. That's excessive, particularly considering the number of chances a 3B gets over the course of a season. In fact, the very idea that Wright holds a near 35-Run gap on a Edwin Encarnacion at this point in the season smells like complete fiction.

Not to get this thread completely off-topic, but this is precisely my problem with some of these defensive systems that attempt to place run values with each player. Almost every single time, the extremes (and most players near the middle) are far too extreme. And they aren't even close to being accurate either.

If David Wright's defense at third base is really worth 34 more runs than Edwin Encarnacion's defense at third base, then that's saying that Wright has saved the approximate equivalent of 40 doubles worth of plays that Encarnacion hasn't saved (or the approximate equivalent of 65 singles worth of plays). The notion of even suggesting such an extreme is beyond silly.

These types of defensive systems may have pretty accurate rankings in terms of identifying which players are better than others defensively, but the specific run values of each player is ridiculous, especially on the extremes. There just simply isn't enough defensive plays or even runs altogether to go around in a season to account for the absurd differences in extremes with their run values.

KronoRed
06-18-2007, 03:51 AM
They might have to trade for a guy like that, or maybe they already have him in Josh Hamilton if they plan on Ryan Freel playing CF past this season.

Haven't we got enough evidence at this point that Ryan Freel is not an everyday player?

dougdirt
06-18-2007, 08:06 AM
Haven't we got enough evidence at this point that Ryan Freel is not an everyday player?

I do. You do. The Reds probably don't.

bucksfan2
06-18-2007, 10:35 AM
Here's a list of this coming off season free agent OF's. I think the Reds are going to have to trade for this LF you envision.

Bobby Abreu
Milton Bradley
Eric Byrnes
Jose Cruz, Jr.
Mike Cameron
Jermaine Dye
Darin Erstad
Cliff Floyd
Shawn Green
Jose Guillen
Torii Hunter
Kenny Lofton
Trot Nixon
Corey Patterson
Aaron Rowand
Shannon Stewart
Ichiro Suzuki
Brad Wilkerson
Rondell White

There are several guys on this list that I would love to see the reds get but all will get paid well and many of the potential FA are old. Unless you trade for a prospect in the outfield I dont think you can get better value than Dunn at $13 million a season. Of the guys on the list Abreau, Dye, Hunter, and Suzuki will all recieve a good pay day this offseason. Erstad, Flyod, Green, Guillen, Lofton, Nixon, Steward, Cruz, Bradley, Erstad, and White are all to old for me to have an impact on the devlopment of hte reds. This basically leaves you with Byrnes, Cameron, Patterson, Rowand, and Wilkerson. These guys will probably make around $10 Mil per season and are they worth it?

M2
06-18-2007, 10:55 AM
Adam Dunn is currently tied for 8th in the NL in runs scored, tied for 9th in RBIs, he's 2nd in HR, 9th in OPS and 2nd in pitches per plate appearance.

Now, I think that should be his basement these days, what his stats look like after a slump (lower top 10 in your main run production categories) and I'd like to see his OB about 30 points higher (dude needs to walk more). Yet if that's where he winds up at the end of the season in the rankings, then he's worth $13M and then some. He's one of the more dangerous offensive players in baseball. There's a lot of arguing with the premise when it comes to Dunn. The man gets the big stuff very right.

M2
06-18-2007, 10:57 AM
Not to get this thread completely off-topic, but this is precisely my problem with some of these defensive systems that attempt to place run values with each player. Almost every single time, the extremes (and most players near the middle) are far too extreme. And they aren't even close to being accurate either.

If David Wright's defense at third base is really worth 34 more runs than Edwin Encarnacion's defense at third base, then that's saying that Wright has saved the approximate equivalent of 40 doubles worth of plays that Encarnacion hasn't saved (or the approximate equivalent of 65 singles worth of plays). The notion of even suggesting such an extreme is beyond silly.

These types of defensive systems may have pretty accurate rankings in terms of identifying which players are better than others defensively, but the specific run values of each player is ridiculous, especially on the extremes. There just simply isn't enough defensive plays or even runs altogether to go around in a season to account for the absurd differences in extremes with their run values.

Excellent post. Defensive metrics still have a long way to go.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-18-2007, 11:21 AM
Adam Dunn is currently tied for 8th in the NL in runs scored, tied for 9th in RBIs, he's 2nd in HR, 9th in OPS and 2nd in pitches per plate appearance.

Now, I think that should be his basement these days, what his stats look like after a slump (lower top 10 in your main run production categories) and I'd like to see his OB about 30 points higher (dude needs to walk more). Yet if that's where he winds up at the end of the season in the rankings, then he's worth $13M and then some. He's one of the more dangerous offensive players in baseball. There's a lot of arguing with the premise when it comes to Dunn. The man gets the big stuff very right.

Exactly. The plus .900 OPS Dunn is worth every bit of $13M.

The struggling mid .800 OPS Dunn is not worth the dough. Which Dunn do we have? His 2-3 day breakouts usually seem to be followed by a two week slump. We'll see.

You know, he could very well be putting together a career season in the midst of all this trade discussion. I think this is the year he goes for 50 HR and keeps the OPS over .900. Will it be while wearing a Reds uni is the 13 million dollar question.

lollipopcurve
06-18-2007, 12:23 PM
Exactly. The plus .900 OPS Dunn is worth every bit of $13M.

Yep. People should not be comforted by Griffey's surge -- his durability remains a huge question mark. If Griffey goes down and Dunn is traded for unproven talent, this team could fall off a precipice and not climb out for a while.

Shipping Dunn is a huge risk -- bigger than the Kearns/Lopez deal. If Krivsky pulls the trigger and the return washes out, we could be looking at the closest thing to Kansas City since Royals Nate Archibald and Slammin' Sam Lacey went west.

flyer85
06-18-2007, 12:24 PM
Adam Dunn is currently tied for 8th in the NL in runs scored, tied for 9th in RBIs, he's 2nd in HR, 9th in OPS and 2nd in pitches per plate appearance. yeah, but he leads the league in Ks. And we know that negates everything else. :D

flyer85
06-18-2007, 12:25 PM
Yep. People should not be comforted by Griffey's surge -- his durability remains a huge question mark. If Griffey goes down and Dunn is traded for unproven talent, this team could fall off a precipice and not climb out for a while.

Shipping Dunn is a huge risk -- bigger than the Kearns/Lopez deal. If Krivsky pulls the trigger and the return washes out, we could be looking at the closest thing to Kansas City since Royals Nate Archibald and Slammin' Sam Lacey went west.... and yet most are unconcerned. There is no replacement for Dunn's offense and Jr is having a moment in the sun in the twilight of a career. The Reds have not yet neared the bottom of this slide.

KronoRed
06-18-2007, 01:19 PM
yeah, but he leads the league in Ks. And we know that negates everything else. :D

K's are worse then douple plays ;)

Edskin
06-18-2007, 01:22 PM
Shipping Dunn is a huge risk -- bigger than the Kearns/Lopez deal. If Krivsky pulls the trigger and the return washes out, we could be looking at the closest thing to Kansas City since Royals Nate Archibald and Slammin' Sam Lacey went west.


Totally agree. And this coming from someone who WANTS to trade Dunn.

Yep, if we ship him out and don't get a quality return, then not only are we a bad team, but we're a bad team that just traded it's best player and best assett for nothing.

It's a scary thought.

But it's not as if I'm comforted by 74 win seasons either. We're 27-43 right now with Dunn. W/O him maybe we'd be 22-48? I don't think I'd feel any worse. I'm willing to take the chance that he lands us some pitching help.


The Reds have not yet neared the bottom of this slide.

I also agree with that.

Which is why deep down I kind of think that none of this really matters. Keep Dunn, trade Dunn. Whatever.

The Reds are already a really bad organization. No post-season appearances since 1995 and truly only one "good" season since then (1999) which proved to be a fluke.

We could very well be looking at a decades-long debacle.

I would not surprised ONE bit if our post-season drought stretched at least another 10 years. I believe it is really THAT big of a mess.

jojo
06-18-2007, 02:48 PM
And it's interesting that you categorized Dunn as "horribly below average" in one paragraph while citing Gassko's article in the next. Here's what Gassko says about Manny Ramirez in that article:

Gassko: Manny’s rating (-14) actually isn’t all that bad, because these ratings do not include a park adjustment. If they did, Manny would be closer to -7 or 8 runs. That certainly isn’t good, but it’s not awful, either.

Gassko then goes on to note a "dearth" of quality defensive LF. That's entirely my point. Dunn's defense isn't good, but it's not the absolute mess one might think when one considers the alternatives.

One thing that has to be remembered is that Gassko is commenting on a data set that has one huge caveat-small sample size. Gassko isn't directly commenting upon Manny's overall defensive ability but rather how Manny has done during the first third or so of the 2007 season. We have several seasons worth of data to help place the numbers from Gassko's article into context. Manny and Adam clearly fall into the lowest tier of left field defenders when looking at the distributions for PBP-based metrics over several years.


I'd also have to question a defensive rating system that, after 70-odd games, includes +20 ratings for a 1B (Pujols) and a +24 rating for a 3B (David Wright) after knowing that only about 33% of non-HR baserunners result in Runs Scored. That kind of rating assumes that an average 1B or 3B would have allowed nearly 1 more baserunner per game. That's excessive, particularly considering the number of chances a 3B gets over the course of a season. In fact, the very idea that Wright holds a near 35-Run gap on a Edwin Encarnacion at this point in the season smells like complete fiction.

As I’m sure you know, traditional zone ratings are pretty flawed for many reasons including modern defensive shifting which reeks havoc upon zone rating. Gassko cited data from Dewan’s modified zone rating (THT purchased from BIS) that deals with the shifting issue by treating balls within a zone (BIZ) and ones outside a zone (BOZ) separately rather than original way where putouts tallied outside of the normal zone where included both in the numerator and denominator (i.e. PO/(BIZ+BOZ)). For those who care, double plays are only counted once in the modified zone rating (duh!). BYW, this isn’t Dewan’s plus/minus system in case there is confusion.

Anyway to the point-sample size can be an issue with in-season glimpses of Dewan’s modified zone rating because of the way Gassko estimates the denominator for BOZ (basically the larger the sample size, the less that random variation influences the estimate). Since first and third bases have the greatest number of BOZ, this issue can lead to the extreme numbers for Pujols and Wright that are bothering you. However, as the season progresses, this issue will largely take care of itself as greater data allows variation to be better controlled. Suffice it to say though that there is little question that Wright has been a far superior defensive third baseman thus far in '07 than EE even if the magnitude of the difference is skewed a bit by sample size issues during the early going.

While a limitation, it's not one that invalidates the results across the defensive spectrum let alone for the corner infield positions IMHO.


You don't care about PECOTA value projections but you've given in whole-heartedly to BP's evaluation of defensive value?

BP's defensive metrics are flawed and shouldn't be taken seriously. Unfortunately they've permeated a good deal of the metrics BP publishes. I'm a huge fan of VORP though which isn't influenced by the way BP tries to measure defense.


He's absolutely worth 14-16M per season over the next four years.

I have trouble excepting this statement without a big caveat. Since Pecota allows long range forecasts, here is what it suggests the value of Dunn's bat will be over the next four years:

'08 VORP: 42.1;
'09 VORP: 39.9;
'10 VORP: 31.3;
'11 VORP: 27.2;
total projected VORP: 141;

Assuming that $4M/win is the going rate, at $14M-$16M/year ($56-64M total over the four years), Dunn has to be a 14 to 16 win player over that period to give a club his money's worth. Pecota suggests that Dunn's bat should be worth $14M/year averaged over that period. However, VORP does not address defense. Conservatively Dunn is a -10 to -15 defender so if Dunn plays the field over those four years, he's something closer to a 80 to 100 run player overall over replacement rather than a 141 run bat. Basically if Dunn remains in left field he's more likely to only be worth $8M to $10M per year averaged over '08 to '11.

Dunn may be a $14M/yr player as a DH. However, since he'll basically get paid like he can catch no matter where he goes, a long term deal for Dunn as an NLer is a much riskier proposition especially if he commands $16M per. I don't have much problem with the Reds picking up Dunn's '08 option, but I have trouble seeing him as a 4 win player if he stays in the national league or really even if he primarily DH's.

RedsManRick
06-18-2007, 03:58 PM
That's all well and good Jojo, but at the end of the day, you need to get a certain amount of production from the guys you put on the field, regardless of what they are paid. I agree, the .875 OPS version of Dunn isn't worth more than $12M or so per year. However, how do we recoup 141 VORP if we trade him. Will the players he returns do that? Will the players we add in FA?

My worry is that we trade away productive players because we're very concerned about overpaying for that productivity. In the meantime, we spend 1/4 of the payroll on replacement level talent and don't think twice. We worry so much about getting "good value" that we sometimes forget the winner isn't who pays the least per win, but just who wins the most games.

Unfortunately, guys don't get paid in FA based on their PECOTA weighted mean projections. BP actually does a salary/worth forecast called MORP (Marginal Value Above Replacement Player) and it projects Dunn at $63.075M from 2008-2011. That sounds about right to me, if not a little low. Multiple teams offered Carlos Lee 6/100+ and Dunn is both younger and more productive. Lee isn't exactly Torii Hunter out there either. Given this, I think the Reds would be smart to deal Dunn. However, I just hope we get impact in return, because replacing that production is going to be harder than you think.

M2
06-18-2007, 04:03 PM
Multiple teams offered Carlos Lee 6/100+ and Dunn is both younger and more productive.

And a better defender.

jojo
06-18-2007, 04:05 PM
And a better defender.

Not really.

Cyclone792
06-18-2007, 04:29 PM
The Reds don't seem to be as involved in defensive positioning as some teams, Atlanta for example.

The Reds don't seem to do much defensive shifting at all in the outfield, at least in the games I've attended when I've sat in the outfield or down one of the lines. Unless it's the pitcher at the plate or a serious power threat, the most I'll ever see any of the outfielders move is a couple steps in one direction, if even that. There's a small patch of grass in left field that's worn down and Dunn pretty much stands on it for 75 percent of hitters.

I wouldn't know how successful the Reds are with defensive positioning relative to other teams, but if the Reds really are a poor team when it comes to defensive positioning, then to me that's an advance scouting problem and a coaching problem, not a player problem.

Also, I'm guessing anybody who has ever sat in the left field terrace box seats at any point from around 6pm-8pm on any given non-overcast day probably has a greater appreciation for Dunn's defensive efforts than those who've never sat there during those evening times (Saturday night game times were 6:10pm last year).

pedro
06-18-2007, 04:32 PM
I wouldn't know how successful the Reds are with defensive positioning relative to other teams, but if the Reds really are a poor team when it comes to defensive positioning, then to me that's an advance scouting problem and a coaching problem, not a player problem.

Totally agree. IIRC, one of the things Pat Corrales is responsible for in Atlanta is defensive positioning and I know that he used to work with Leo Mazzone to make sure that the defensive positioning was in line with how they planned to pitch certain batters.

jojo
06-18-2007, 04:46 PM
That's all well and good Jojo, but at the end of the day, you need to get a certain amount of production from the guys you put on the field, regardless of what they are paid. I agree, the .875 OPS version of Dunn isn't worth more than $12M or so per year. However, how do we recoup 141 VORP if we trade him. Will the players he returns do that? Will the players we add in FA?

While Dunn is projected to have a VORP of 141, really he probably has more like a 80 to 100 run effect on the overall RS/RA for that period. There are alot of ways to get to an 8 to 10 win contribution over 4 years. At this point, we're all guessing about what the Reds would get for Dunn. Certainly the reds could replace Dunn's value through a combination of talent back and talent bought by the money they save. That said, while it's doable, I'm not arguing it's a lock that Krivsky does it.


My worry is that we trade away productive players because we're very concerned about overpaying for that productivity. In the meantime, we spend 1/4 of the payroll on replacement level talent and don't think twice. We worry so much about getting "good value" that we sometimes forget the winner isn't who pays the least per win, but just who wins the most games.

I think we' pretty much agree on payroll issues. In a previous post (http://www.redszone.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1387400) I've suggested the Reds should probably pick up Dunn's option in '08 and that the Reds should be expected to pay players what they are worth when its warranted. Really the post you've quoted is addressing what Dunn is likely to be worth over the next four years. My earlier chicken scratch suggests that the Reds could end up overpaying Dunn for his production by $8M/yr in the worst case scenario presented (i.e. he was paid $16M/yr and turned out to only be an 8 win player over that period). While the fans should demand that the Reds pay a guy what he's worth when it's warranted (rather than let him go), the Reds simply can not afford to dramatically overpay for performance and expect to compete. Really my previous post was trying to consider the risk associated with the "Dunn decision".


Unfortunately, guys don't get paid in FA based on their PECOTA weighted mean projections. BP actually does a salary/worth forecast called MORP (Marginal Value Above Replacement Player) and it projects Dunn at $63.075M from 2008-2011. That sounds about right to me, if not a little low. Multiple teams offered Carlos Lee 6/100+ and Dunn is both younger and more productive. Lee isn't exactly Torii Hunter out there either. Given this, I think the Reds would be smart to deal Dunn. However, I just hope we get impact in return, because replacing that production is going to be harder than you think.

Not to hammer the subject but BP has a seriously flawed approach to defense and it effects all player valuation metrics that incorporates defensive value.

Also, this really is the underlying point. Just because several teams are willing to make dumb payroll decisions doesn't mean the Reds should follow their leads. In fact dumb contracts like Lee's represent chances for the Reds to gain a competitive advantage provided the Reds are smarter.

I'm fascinated by the Reds Dunn dilemma and will be anxious to see how it gets resolved.

pedro
06-18-2007, 04:52 PM
Not to hammer the subject but BP has a seriously flawed approach to defense and it effects all player valuation metrics that incorporates defensive value.

.

Honestly I can't see how their approach could be anymore flawed that UZR which you seem to accept without reservations. As was stated by others earlier in this thread UZR appears to greatly overstate the value or lack of value of players at either end of the spectrum. My personal opinion is that as the numbers are correlated by paid observers at the games that they must be letting their own preconceived notions about who is good and who is not color their judgments of what should and shouldn't have been caught. There is just no way that any first baseman is worth +20 runs a little more than 1/3 of the way through the season. It's clearly impossible IMO.

RedsManRick
06-18-2007, 04:56 PM
The point which I did not make well Jojo is that I'd prefer to pay $16M for $8M worth of production than $8M for $2M worth of production. It's a fairly tangential point, but an important one. If the Reds don't turn the cash savings and the players acquired in to equal or greater production, then it's a loss, period.

I'm concerned that the 13M+ won't be spent productively and the players we receive in return will not be significant upgrades over in house options we already have. I don't want to be stuck paying Adam Dunn $18M in 2012, but I also know that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. This is a team in desperate need of impact level talent and we're about to trade away our most impactful player.

jojo
06-18-2007, 05:02 PM
The point which I did not make well Jojo is that I'd prefer to pay $16M for $8M worth of production than $8M for $2M worth of production. It's a fairly tangential point, but an important one. If the Reds don't turn the cash savings and the players acquired in to equal or greater production, then it's a loss, period.

Paying $16M for $8M worth of production is fine IMHO, if that $8M of production puts you over the top. Otherwise I think in both cases it hurts if it becomes a habit. More often than not it's just a drag on your ability to compete.

Your overall point though is well taken.

jojo
06-18-2007, 05:19 PM
Honestly I can't see how their approach could be anymore flawed that UZR which you seem to accept without reservations.

Davenport basically mixes a bunch of stuff in a pot and then releases some numbers. He doesn't bother to let anyone know what his actual methodology is while he continually announces that he's changed it. Not only isn't his methodology testable, his results are very often, for lack of a better word, screwy.


As was stated by others earlier in this thread UZR appears to greatly overstate the value or lack of value of players at either end of the spectrum.

Actually the earlier discussion was about Dewan's modified zone ratings (completely different beast than UZR). Also, basically the specific issue you're referring to really is specific for a small sample size and primarily at the corner infield positions. All in-season defensive metrics have similar issues with sample size. It's a nice peek into what the season might end up being but it's not nearly as definitive as what the system will have to say at the end of the season. Nobody is really suggesting that people should read too deeply into the early numbers published by Gassko.


My personal opinion is that as the numbers are correlated by paid observers at the games that they must be letting their own preconceived notions about who is good and who is not color their judgments of what should and shouldn't have been caught. There is just no way that any first baseman is worth +20 runs a little more than 1/3 of the way through the season. It's clearly impossible IMO.

Dewan's modified zone rating shouldn't be interpretted as Pujols was worth +20 runs. It's suggesting that Pujols made 20 more plays than the average firstbaseman did given a set range of responsibility. The value wasn't converted to runs (i.e. no probabilities were associated with the BIP data) and the reasons for why Pujols' and Wright's totals were excessive have already been discussed. Basically with such a small smple size, you shouldn't trust such an excessive total given what we know about the methodology. Thats not a fatal flaw. It's a limitation that colors interpretation. All metrics have 'em.....

M2
06-18-2007, 05:25 PM
Not really.

Really.

Side note on BIZ and BOZ. In 2006 there was steep downward adjustment on the number of balls that were deemed in zone for corner OFs. Roughly 40% of what was deemed "in zone" in previous years was moved to the "out of zone" column. Dunn suddenly ranked a lot higher on the LF modified ZR list (http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2006&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit) as a result. My guess is "in zone" will be in flux for a number of years as will how to weight BIZ with BOZ and come up with a meaningful representation of what it actually means in scoreboard terms. Ultimately it needs to be a system that accrues over the course of the year, not one that normalizes once the numbers get large enough.

It should be noted that LF defense in MLB is particularly awful these days. Off the top of my head, you've got the following guys butchering the position:

Adam Dunn
Carlos Lee
Chris Duncan
Alfonso Soriano
Moises Alou (when he's healthy)
Pat Burrell
Josh Willingham
Luis Gonzalez
Matt Holliday
Barry Bonds
Manny Ramirez
Hideki Matsui
Jay Gibbons (though his awful hitting has mercifully put his butt on the bench)
David Dellucci
Shannon Stewart
Raul Ibanez

That's most of the regular LFs in baseball. Quite frankly, the average is so low that I find it almost impossible to believe anyone can pop all that far off the back of that group.

jojo
06-18-2007, 07:38 PM
Really.

Side note on BIZ and BOZ. In 2006 there was steep downward adjustment on the number of balls that were deemed in zone for corner OFs. Roughly 40% of what was deemed "in zone" in previous years was moved to the "out of zone" column. Dunn suddenly ranked a lot higher on the LF modified ZR list (http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2006&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit) as a result. My guess is "in zone" will be in flux for a number of years as will how to weight BIZ with BOZ and come up with a meaningful representation of what it actually means in scoreboard terms. Ultimately it needs to be a system that accrues over the course of the year, not one that normalizes once the numbers get large enough.

It should be noted that LF defense in MLB is particularly awful these days. Off the top of my head, you've got the following guys butchering the position:

Adam Dunn
Carlos Lee
Chris Duncan
Alfonso Soriano
Moises Alou (when he's healthy)
Pat Burrell
Josh Willingham
Luis Gonzalez
Matt Holliday
Barry Bonds
Manny Ramirez
Hideki Matsui
Jay Gibbons (though his awful hitting has mercifully put his butt on the bench)
David Dellucci
Shannon Stewart
Raul Ibanez

That's most of the regular LFs in baseball. Quite frankly, the average is so low that I find it almost impossible to believe anyone can pop all that far off the back of that group.

Lets look at some of the gold standard defensive metrics to actually put numbers to perceptions. Often these systems can give slightly different takes on a player so it's probably most informative to view all of them. Here's UZR, Dewan's +/-, and PMR (to runs) for both players so that by an educated comparison, a general consensus can hopefully emerge.

Here's UZR data comparing Dunn and Lee since 2003:

2003: Dunn:-10; Lee: +7;
2004: Dunn: -6; Lee: +5;
2005: Dunn: -6; Lee:-19;
2006: Dunn:-20; Lee: -19;
2007: Dunn: -6; Lee: -2;

Total: Dunn: -48; Lee: -28;

Here's PMR to Runs:
2004: Dunn: -9; Lee: +12;
2005: Dunn: -8; Lee: +3;
2006: Dunn: -7 (ZR-R= -12); Lee: -13 (ZR-R= -3);

Total: Dunn: -24; Lee: +2;

From the Fielding Bible for 2003 thru 2006, Lee was rated as +18 while Dunn was rated as -38 in Dewan's +/- system. His +/- data isn't publically available for '07 but Dewan's modified zone ratings have been released by THT. For roughly the first third of '07, Lee is rated as 0 (neutral) and Dunn is rated as -8.

So a survey of PBP metrics do not support the assertion that Dunn is a better defender than Lee. At best you can suggest that Lee is aging into a Dun-like defender and are equally bad. Although PBP data suggests Dunn is in the lowest defensive tier while Lee may not have dropped that far yet.

UZR and Dewan's +/- system are considered the gold standards by defensive gurus so I consider them the most compelling personally.

Finally, it's also worth noting that while the current crop of LFers may be defensive butchers relative to CFers etc, their skill distribution still has an average to which each can be compared. So the best defender in left field might be a bad one but he still can be significantly better than the lowest tier defender among his peers and the difference can be meaningful.

M2
06-18-2007, 08:54 PM
I don't really care what Lee rated in 2003. He's falling apart out in the field in recent years. It comes with being out of shape, getting older and never having been a very good defender to begin with.

The 2005 and 2006 UZR numbers back that up. Dunn's at least in decent shape these days, which should give him an advantage over el caballo de piedra over the course of the season.

jojo
06-18-2007, 11:59 PM
I don't really care what Lee rated in 2003. He's falling apart out in the field in recent years. It comes with being out of shape, getting older and never having been a very good defender to begin with.

The 2005 and 2006 UZR numbers back that up. Dunn's at least in decent shape these days, which should give him an advantage over el caballo de piedra over the course of the season.

Yet Dunn's numbers which also suggest deterioration can not be ignored.

SteelSD
06-19-2007, 01:06 AM
Since first and third bases have the greatest number of BOZ, this issue can lead to the extreme numbers for Pujols and Wright that are bothering you. However, as the season progresses, this issue will largely take care of itself as greater data allows variation to be better controlled.

Here's the problem- we're assuming that it'll normalize over a larger sample. But we don't know that it does. Secondly, if Gassko can't tell us "That's how much the player has been worth defensively!" over 70-odd games, why am I to believe it'll be accurate over 162?

Instead, Gassko says this about Wright:

Gassko: While I donít believe that David Wright has actually saved 24 runs in the field, he certainly improved the one part of his game that was still a weakness.

Gassko is asking us to look at his work as being representative of defensive Run value, but then tells us that he doesn't believe that a guy has actually been worth that many Runs. As others have noted, Gassko's metric might be somewhat representative of good and bad in the abstract (like Zone Rating), but when it comes right down to it, even Gassko doesn't support the result over a large chunk of the season.

I understand sample size volatility when evaluating who a player is. After all, a player with 70-odd games of top-tier hitting isn't necessarily a top-tier hitter. But, if nothing else, we understand and can assign value to what that player has done over the sample. However, it appears what Gassko's telling us is that we don't actually know how much a player has been worth defensively to this point.

I also understand what you're saying as to BOZ randomness at both 1B and 3B, but if that were a primary driver behind escalated Run value, at least Gassko could actually say that a guy like Wright has been worth +24 Runs to this point. But he can't. To me, that's a huge problem and my brain is going to extend that to positions beyond just 1B and 3B.

As an aside, I sure do appreciate the research you've put into this, jojo. Very impressive if I may say so.


Dunn may be a $14M/yr player as a DH. However, since he'll basically get paid like he can catch no matter where he goes, a long term deal for Dunn as an NLer is a much riskier proposition especially if he commands $16M per. I don't have much problem with the Reds picking up Dunn's '08 option, but I have trouble seeing him as a 4 win player if he stays in the national league or really even if he primarily DH's.

Then you sign him to a backloaded deal for a year or two longer than you think he'll be a 4-win player and then deal him when you think he'll fall off a cliff. Might you overpay for a season? Maybe. But at his age, it's also likely you get a peak season in the middle of such a deal; which may escalate his trade value.

One thing folks don't realize is how good Dunn is offensively over time for his position. Over the past three years only four Left Fielders have produced 100+ RC in each season. The list includes:

Manny Ramirez (365.8 RC)
Adam Dunn (347.6 RC)
Carlos Lee (327.6 RC)
Carl Crawford (310.3 RC)

If you whittle that down to 105+ RC each season, two LF are left standing- Manny Ramirez and Adam Dunn.

Of the four players listed, Dunn is better defensively right now than all but one of them (Crawford). Now, if Krivsky went out and produced a Brian Giles-like swap for Dunn involving a Jason Bay type plus an Olvier Perez type arm, I'd get behind that deal. But anything less is just subtraction by subtraction.

At 16M per season versus 13.5M I simply don't see Dunn as the risk you do; particularly since a 4-year contract extension might result in a career year right about when the Reds project to really compete given the current cast of talent and prospects. It's 2.5M. When you sink 2.5M into a non-projectible player, that's bad. But when you overpay by 2.5M for projectible performance, that's another thing entirely as such players are worth geometrically more than the average volatile alternative because there's no volume of the former and plenty of the latter.

Dunn been one of the most productive players at his position for years and simply isn't the defensive black hole we think versus other players at his position. He's not average, but your average defensive LF comes nowhere near Dunn offensively. Players in between are either traded for (Jason Bay) or produced internally (Matt Holliday regardless of his atrocious Home/Road splits).

At this point, you discuss a long-term contract extension with Dunn (4 years max) or you play things out for 2008 or you trade him knowing that his 10 team list will still incite a bidding war as the majority of that list will include probable contenders. But you'd better get a lot more projectible MLB-ready talent than he's worth or you've just blundered into a 2015 contender window.

Kc61
06-20-2007, 10:54 AM
Another thing to put into the equation here -- actually three things -- Josh Hamilton, Joey Votto, Jay Bruce. Left handed hitters. Outfield and first base.

The Dunn/Griffey positions seem to be covered going forward with left handed bats. All excellent prospects. Of course, no guarantees, but you can hardly have three better young lefty bats for outfield/first base.

You would think that the Reds, in evaluating Dunn, might conclude that his value is better realized by exchanging for players at other positions or who hit right handed.

Chip R
06-20-2007, 11:12 AM
You would think that the Reds, in evaluating Dunn, might conclude that his value is better realized by exchanging for players at other positions or who hit right handed.


Possibly. But just being a RH hitter doesn't necessarily replace Dunn's bat. No matter how you feel about Dunn, you have to accept that he brings ~40 HRS ~100 RBIs and ~100 runs scored while playing in over 150 games every year. That is what you need to replace if you get rid of him.