PDA

View Full Version : ORG Thread says Kemp (LA Dodgers) for Dunn



Hondo
06-11-2008, 12:43 PM
Now wait a minute here...

The guy Kemp is 23 and hit .342 last year with 10 HR in under 300AB's, but straight up for Adam Dunn???

Am I in the minority on this? I wouldn't do that deal straight up... If they wanted Dunn, 40-100-100-100

They would have to give me Billingsly, Kershaw, and Kemp

You all can call me nuts, crazy, or whatever... But I do not give a darn...

Dunn for Kemp straight up, rent a Dunn or not, that is ridiculous...

podgejeff_
06-11-2008, 12:44 PM
Do the trade, and then sign Dunn to a contract after he hits FA. He gets to go play somewhere else for a couple of months and then runs back to an outfield of him, Kemp, and Bruce.

I like that outfield a lot.

Fon Duc Tow
06-11-2008, 12:50 PM
I'd like to see what Kemp is making, salary-wise, and how long his contract is for.

Me personally, Ceteris Paribus, I would trade away a .250 40HR guy in a small park for a .325 20HR guy coming from a big park.

Phillips Head
06-11-2008, 12:52 PM
kemp would hit 30 in GAB, that would be an excellent deal for the reds...

we'd actually have our cleanup hitter we are complaining for...

redhawk61
06-11-2008, 01:06 PM
If I remember right, back when Walt was the GM for the Cards, he tried really really hard to land Kemp, but back them the Dodgers said no dice.

On a side note, my brother's, best friend's, uncle is Ned Collettie. Maybe I can meet him, take him out for some drinks and convince him how priceless Dunn is and getting him for Kemp would be a bargin

levydl
06-11-2008, 01:24 PM
Now wait a minute here...

The guy Kemp is 23 and hit .342 last year with 10 HR in under 300AB's, but straight up for Adam Dunn???

Am I in the minority on this? I wouldn't do that deal straight up... If they wanted Dunn, 40-100-100-100

They would have to give me Billingsly, Kershaw, and Kemp

You all can call me nuts, crazy, or whatever... But I do not give a darn...

Dunn for Kemp straight up, rent a Dunn or not, that is ridiculous...

From this and your post in the Encarnacion thread, you seem to have a warped sense of reality when it comes to trades and signings. Those 3 kids you mention are all 23 or younger and highly regarded. You would expect them in return for Adam Dunn for 1/2 the year? Why not ask for Sandy Koufax to boot?

If the Reds aren't going to sign Dunn long term, which I think is a mistake, I would take Kemp and his years of arbitration ahead of him straight up for 1/2 a year of Dunn in a heartbeat.

757690
06-11-2008, 01:26 PM
Now wait a minute here...

The guy Kemp is 23 and hit .342 last year with 10 HR in under 300AB's, but straight up for Adam Dunn???

Am I in the minority on this? I wouldn't do that deal straight up... If they wanted Dunn, 40-100-100-100

They would have to give me Billingsly, Kershaw, and Kemp

You all can call me nuts, crazy, or whatever... But I do not give a darn...

Dunn for Kemp straight up, rent a Dunn or not, that is ridiculous...

1) Kemp is a centerfielder, and a great one at that. He has a cannon for an arm and has excellent range. Dunn is a below average leftfielder.

2) Kemp is five years younger than Dunn, meaning that he will be getting better while Dunn will be losing his skills. He also will be much cheaper than Dunn.

3) Kemp is a righthanded power hitter for the middle of the lineup, something that the Reds desperately need, especially with Bruce and Votto and possible Alonso coming up.

4) Kemp will provide similar run production to Dunn in GAPB. He's too young to really know what his ceiling is, but he is putting up solid numbers playing a pitchers park. He could easily hit 30 HR and be a 100 RBI, 100 runs guy in GAPB. The last two years, he has averaged around a .860 OPS. Dunn's career is .900. Have them switch ballparks, and they will have very similar OPS.

Basically, even if Dunn is better player, Kemp fills the Reds needs better, and makes them a better team. I don't want a team of the best players, I want the best team. Kemp instead of Dunn makes the Reds a better team.

A good example is when the Red Sox traded Nomar, their best and most popular player in 2004. The players they got back were not as good as him, but they made the Red Sox a better team. I think that worked out well for them.

By the way, the Dodgers would not trade Billingsly or Kershaw straight up for Dunn, let alone both of them and Kemp for Dunn. For that suggestion, I will call you crazy. ;)

Homer Bailey
06-11-2008, 01:34 PM
This would open up so many options for the Reds. By opening up left field you now have options of what to do with Frazier/Votto/Alonso. The Dodgers won't do this trade, but yeah, it would be a good one.

redhawk61
06-11-2008, 01:39 PM
This would open up so many options for the Reds. By opening up left field you now have options of what to do with Frazier/Votto/Alonso. The Dodgers won't do this trade, but yeah, it would be a good one.

Yeah, when ready, Votto to LF, Alonso to 1b, Frazier to 3b, EE traded for prospects.

lineup of:

Kepp
Votto
Bruce
Kemp
Alonso
BP
Fraizer
some catcher

that lineup would rake

Hondo
06-11-2008, 01:42 PM
From this and your post in the Encarnacion thread, you seem to have a warped sense of reality when it comes to trades and signings. Those 3 kids you mention are all 23 or younger and highly regarded. You would expect them in return for Adam Dunn for 1/2 the year? Why not ask for Sandy Koufax to boot?

If the Reds aren't going to sign Dunn long term, which I think is a mistake, I would take Kemp and his years of arbitration ahead of him straight up for 1/2 a year of Dunn in a heartbeat.

Excuse you. I do not have a warped sense of Reality.

Do I think the Dodgers would trade those 3 for Adam Dunn? Probably not...

sammonator
06-11-2008, 01:50 PM
Excuse you. I do not have a warped sense of Reality.

Do I think the Dodgers would trade those 3 for Adam Dunn? Probably not...

The Dodgers wouldn't trade any one of those three for Adam Dunn. We would have to give them something else besides Dunn if we want Kemp. My proposal, Dunn and Bailey for Kemp.

redhawk61
06-11-2008, 01:58 PM
The Dodgers wouldn't trade any one of those three for Adam Dunn. We would have to give them something else besides Dunn if we want Kemp. My proposal, Dunn and Bailey for Kemp.

and my response, where do I sign

BLEEDS
06-11-2008, 02:04 PM
I don't think the Dodgers would trade Kemp straight-up for Dunn.

He would be a great cleanup hitter, unfortunately we'd still have DPBP batting 3rd. AND, the likelihood of DUHsty batting a CF-er in the 4 hole might take a minor miracle...

I would do the trade in a heartbeat. Seems like we aren't going to sign Dunn to an LTC - or we'd have done it months ago - so might as well get SOMETHING for him. Kemp would be a freakin steal of massive proportions.

We'd more than likely have to throw in something else of value - and get back some other fodder in from LA to make it look reasonable.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

sammonator
06-11-2008, 02:08 PM
and my response, where do I sign

agreed redhawk61. I don't think they would even do that.

BLEEDS
06-11-2008, 02:24 PM
Upon further review - Middle of the lineup hitter? Maybe y'all were reading "KENT", Jeff...

I'd LOVE this guy in CF - with Dunn in LF and Bruce in RF.

Maybe they'll take Alex Gonzalez for him, he's got some stick!! No? Yes? No? How about Votto - and we can put Yonserlini in there next year...

How about Brandon Phillips - and give the every day 2nd base job to Keppinger?
I'm REALLY getting sick of this guy against RH-ers being penciled in the cleanup spot.
Kemp would be just a tad less against Lefties, but he'd KILL BP against righties to the tune of ~50 points across the board in BA/OBP/SLG and almost a Buck in OPS...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Oxilon
06-11-2008, 02:37 PM
Excuse you. I do not have a warped sense of Reality.

Do I think the Dodgers would trade those 3 for Adam Dunn? Probably not...

Last time I checked, Aaron Boone netted a top pitching prospect in return for a deadline deal (granted he didn't exactly pan out, but never the less). You're severely undervaluing Dunn; guys who hit 40 HRs and produce 100+ BBs and RBIs don't grow on trees.

Dunn for Kemp is relatively a fair trade.

redsfanmia
06-11-2008, 02:44 PM
I would do that deal in a heartbeat but I am a Dunn hater.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 02:47 PM
Last time I checked, Aaron Boone netted a top pitching prospect in return for a deadline deal (granted he didn't exactly pan out, but never the less). You're severely undervaluing Dunn; guys who hit 40 HRs and produce 100+ BBs and RBIs don't grow on trees.

Dunn for Kemp is relatively a fair trade.

Man, I am not the one Undervaluing Dunn, is it everyone else on this board...

For Example... If Adam Dunn was available in Trade on another team...

And someone suggested we trade for him... Everyone here would say:

"You would have to trade Jay Bruce, Cueto, and another prosepct for Adam Dunn"

A lot of people here Do very much UNDERVALUE the Reds players... It is Pathedic...

I for one would be asking for Kemp, Billingsly, and Kershaw for Dunn... As the starting Point if I were Walt Jocketty... (someone is going to say NEd Colletti would hang up)

Adam Dunn is an Elite Player in the League... Maybe not a Pujols or anything, but Damn... Give the guy some Credit... If this team actually traded Adam Dunn staight up for Kemp, that would be a huge error. Adam Dunn is a guaranteed Hitter with 4+ years of MONSTER Production... You only have a small sample size to go off Kemp... So he may or may not be the 30 HR hitter everyone thinks he will be... But with a proven comodity as Adam Dunn, you know what you are getting...

44Magnum
06-11-2008, 02:49 PM
I would make the Dunn for Kemp trade before the Dodgers came to their senses.

No way the Dodgers are that dumb though. The Reds would (and should if given the opportunity)have to sweeten the pot.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 03:01 PM
I would make the Dunn for Kemp trade before the Dodgers came to their senses.

No way the Dodgers are that dumb though. The Reds would (and should if given the opportunity)have to sweeten the pot.

Yeah, we should just Trade Adam Dunn for an unproven hitter with potential...

44Magnum
06-11-2008, 03:05 PM
It beats 16 mil for a lame outfielder.

redsfanmia
06-11-2008, 03:05 PM
Yeah, we should just Trade Adam Dunn for an unproven hitter with potential...

A young CHEAP player with unlimited potentail for an Adam Dunn half-season rental is the kind of a deal that could make the Reds a contender next season and beyond.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 03:12 PM
A young CHEAP player with unlimited potentail for an Adam Dunn half-season rental is the kind of a deal that could make the Reds a contender next season and beyond.

The Dodgers would have to put another player like a PITCHER in there...

Like Billingsly and Kemp is a Fair value Trade for the Reds

levydl
06-11-2008, 03:40 PM
The Dodgers would only be getting Dunn's production (which I think is awesome, by the way - I'm a huge Dunn fan and constant defender) for half the year. We'd get Kemp for, what, the rest of this year plus another, and then 3 years of arbitration? You can't just look at it like they get Adam Dunn and we get Matt Kemp. It's they get Dunn for 3-4 months, we get Kemp for close to 5 years, with leverage to sign him long term.

I don't even think the Dodgers would throw in a second tier prospect, much less either or both of their best young arms.

757690
06-11-2008, 03:40 PM
The Dodgers would have to put another player like a PITCHER in there...

Like Billingsly and Kemp is a Fair value Trade for the Reds

You've got it backwards. Kemp by being younger, and being able to field an important defensive position, is more valuable than Dunn. Defense matters in the majors, a lot. The Reds would have to throw in an arm to make the deal fair.

And Kemp is not unproven, this is his third year in the majors, and he has put excellent offensive numbers while playing in a pitchers park. And he is most likely only going to get better.

And absolutely no way any sane person would ever consider trading Bruce for Dunn. Bruce is twice the player Dunn already, and is only going to get better. Clearly, you are guilty of overvaluing Dunn, in the most egregious way.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 03:58 PM
You've got it backwards. Kemp by being younger, and being able to field an important defensive position, is more valuable than Dunn. Defense matters in the majors, a lot. The Reds would have to throw in an arm to make the deal fair.

And Kemp is not unproven, this is his third year in the majors, and he has put excellent offensive numbers while playing in a pitchers park. And he is most likely only going to get better.

And absolutely no way any sane person would ever consider trading Bruce for Dunn. Bruce is twice the player Dunn already, and is only going to get better. Clearly, you are guilty of overvaluing Dunn, in the most egregious way.

NO, I am not. I said if Dunn was on another team and the Reds were interested. Everyone here including you would probably say Team X would Demand any Deal Starting with Bruce...

And thats the way it is...

You Undervalue the Reds players. And the notion of the Dodgers only getting 1/2 a Season... Oh well, Trades like that have been going on and on for, oh, the past 20 years or so... and they can get the 72 Hour deal to nebotiate a LTC... But wait... It is only, whatever... No way is Adam Dunn worth only Matt Kemp, oh and to the guys who said he is proven... He didn't even play 100 Games last year (98 to be exact) and the year beofe that is was 52 games... His season High for AB's is only 292 last year... So he is far from established...

Attention: I am not saying Kemp is a "bad player" or he is a joke, or anything like that... I think he has Great Potential... That being said... It is Potential... As for the next few years of him being Cheap... Yeah, thats the point, he may be a .280 hitter with 15 Homer Power, and that may be his production... Not bad Stats... But he may also be a .330-30-100-30 Guy... You don't know do you? I don't and you all certainly do not... So what you have here is a guy who has potential... The Dodgers are getting a bonafide Power Hitter with 4+ Years of a RESUME... Oh and they have the ability to negotiate a LTC with him... Just like The Mets did with Johan Santana, and all the other teams that have ever traded for a guy and asked for a 72 Hour window...

So if the Reds Trade Adam Dunn, and the Dodgers are able to sign him to a 6 year deal throgh the 72 hour window... You better darn sure expect a couple players in Return for that...

You guys who think The Dodgers are getting Ripped in a Deal when they get Adam Dunn and give up Matt Kemp, probably just need to become Dodgers fans.

Lockdwn11
06-11-2008, 04:16 PM
The Dodgers would have to put another player like a PITCHER in there...

Like Billingsly and Kemp is a Fair value Trade for the Reds

If you went to the Dodgers with those demands they would laugh at you and say no thanks.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 04:18 PM
If you went to the Dodgers with those demands they would laugh at you and say no thanks.

Then I would just keep my player.

Lockdwn11
06-11-2008, 04:26 PM
NO, I am not. I said if Dunn was on another team and the Reds were interested. Everyone here including you would probably say Team X would Demand any Deal Starting with Bruce...

And thats the way it is...

You Undervalue the Reds players. And the notion of the Dodgers only getting 1/2 a Season... Oh well, Trades like that have been going on and on for, oh, the past 20 years or so... and they can get the 72 Hour deal to nebotiate a LTC... But wait... It is only, whatever... No way is Adam Dunn worth only Matt Kemp, oh and to the guys who said he is proven... He didn't even play 100 Games last year (98 to be exact) and the year beofe that is was 52 games... His season High for AB's is only 292 last year... So he is far from established...

Attention: I am not saying Kemp is a "bad player" or he is a joke, or anything like that... I think he has Great Potential... That being said... It is Potential... As for the next few years of him being Cheap... Yeah, thats the point, he may be a .280 hitter with 15 Homer Power, and that may be his production... Not bad Stats... But he may also be a .330-30-100-30 Guy... You don't know do you? I don't and you all certainly do not... So what you have here is a guy who has potential... The Dodgers are getting a bonafide Power Hitter with 4+ Years of a RESUME... Oh and they have the ability to negotiate a LTC with him... Just like The Mets did with Johan Santana, and all the other teams that have ever traded for a guy and asked for a 72 Hour window...

So if the Reds Trade Adam Dunn, and the Dodgers are able to sign him to a 6 year deal throgh the 72 hour window... You better darn sure expect a couple players in Return for that...

You guys who think The Dodgers are getting Ripped in a Deal when they get Adam Dunn and give up Matt Kemp, probably just need to become Dodgers fans.

If we Undervalue Dunn and he should bring us all you say he should .Why did the Texans Demands start and end with Josh Hamilton? I mean if Dunn is as valuable as you say why wouldn't they demand Dunn? Now think about that and you will see who Overvalues Dunn and who is right. In my opinion of course

Lockdwn11
06-11-2008, 04:30 PM
I mean look at it like this you would want a #2 starter and a potenial all-star CFer for Adam Dunn. Who would do that ?

Hondo
06-11-2008, 04:39 PM
If we Undervalue Dunn and he should bring us all you say he should .Why did the Texans Demands start and end with Josh Hamilton? I mean if Dunn is as valuable as you say why wouldn't they demand Dunn? Now think about that and you will see who Overvalues Dunn and who is right. In my opinion of course

Only an Idiot would have accepted Edinson Volquez straight up for Dunn last offseason. Who would have known he would be 9-1 In his starts this year?

Hamilton was Worth Volquez, yeah... But look what Hamilton is doing... Those players both had Potential to be Stars... And they are going at it like that...

Your comparison is silly really...

The Rangers were not going to come up with Volquez and his 3-11 record and go...

"Ok Cincinnati, we want Adam Dunn and his 40 Homers for this unproven guy with a 3-11 record"

Hondo
06-11-2008, 04:41 PM
I mean look at it like this you would want a #2 starter and a potenial all-star CFer for Adam Dunn. Who would do that ?

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=28476

This is Adam Dunn's page over at ESPN...

Go take a gander at that before you say things like that.

Forgive me if I think Adam Dunn is an Awesome Talent and Worth Something.

redsfanmia
06-11-2008, 04:45 PM
Then I would just keep my player.

And finish last this season and beyond.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 04:49 PM
And finish last this season and beyond.

Dude you build winners with guys like Adam Dunn... I am not saying he is A-Rod but he is not the reason this team sucks right now... It has to do with using Re-Treads most of the year until now in the 5th Starters Hole, and using Corey Patterson as the lead off Hitter... Oh, and not having a right handed Hitter to balance the middle of the Lineup... (Don't come up with, there ya go in Kemp, he is not a proven Clean Up Hitter)

Adam Dunn is not the problem.

How are any of you Reds fans that think this way? No Offense? But I have been following Adam Dunn since he was Drafted and Love the guy.

Lockdwn11
06-11-2008, 04:51 PM
Ok let me just say, if you think Adam Dunn will bring us a #2 starter and a potenial all-star CFer in any trade your not living in the real world but I sure hope your right and I'm wrong.

redsfanmia
06-11-2008, 04:52 PM
Dude you build winners with guys like Adam Dunn... I am not saying he is A-Rod but he is not the reason this team sucks right now... It has to do with using Re-Treads most of the year until now in the 5th Starters Hole, and using Corey Patterson as the lead off Hitter... Oh, and not having a right handed Hitter to balance the middle of the Lineup... (Don't come up with, there ya go in Kemp, he is not a proven Clean Up Hitter)

Adam Dunn is not the problem.

How are any of you Reds fans that think this way? No Offense? But I have been following Adam Dunn since he was Drafted and Love the guy.

You dont build winners around poor defensive guys who are laid back and dont hit in the clutch.

Jack Burton
06-11-2008, 04:53 PM
Definitely would move Dunn for Kemp, but the Dodgers wouldn't.

redsfanmia
06-11-2008, 04:53 PM
Hondo I wish you were a GM for another team so we could dump Dunn on you for the kings ransom.

Lockdwn11
06-11-2008, 04:55 PM
So if I am realistic about the value of Adam Dunn I am not real reds fans?

_Sir_Charles_
06-11-2008, 04:55 PM
The Dodgers would have to put another player like a PITCHER in there...

Like Billingsly and Kemp is a Fair value Trade for the Reds

Hondo, I agree with you that many reds fans (here especially), undervalue Adam. But, that being said, I think you are OVER-valueing him. Look, I like Adam. I'd love it if he stayed with the Reds for his career. Unfortunately, he simply doesn't fit with this team currently. He's a mediocre-to-poor defender on a team that DESPERATELY needs quality defenders. He's a non-agressive power hitter who hits for little to no average. When what we need is a cleanup hitter who also makes consistant contact. Not a walk/strikeout machine. His power is tremendous, but in this ballpark...just "good" power is sufficient. He is a left handed hitter in a lineup overloaded with lefthanded hitters.

So the way I look at it is what is easier to do, trade 1 Adam Dunn, or make multiple changes to your roster to work around Adam Dunn? I'd say it's easier to move ONE player than multiple players. Now look at the numbers side of it. He's got half a year left on his current contract. Kemp is basically in the same situation as Votto is in terms of service time. Kemp's got a bunch of time left before he even reaches major contract time. If we re-sign Dunn, it'll be a hefty sum of money to be sure. We all know Adam likes playing in Cincy and he "may" be willing to give the Reds a home-town discount per say...but even IF that happens, it's gonna be a BIG contract to carry around. We've got SEVERAL young players who are going to be needing raises in the next few years and a large Dunn contract will hinder those signings.

So, we either re-sign Adam to a LTC and then make several other changes to make this lineup work cohesively...or we deal dunn this year and begin the change for next year (when we'll be really competeing anyway).

Lastly, I don't think LA would trade Kemp for Dunn straight up unless they got a guarentee of an extension from Adam. And I don't see Adam wanting to play for LA. He loves cincy and his home is in texas. If he agrees to go anywhere I think it'll be closer to home for him.

levydl
06-11-2008, 05:05 PM
Dude you build winners with guys like Adam Dunn... I am not saying he is A-Rod but he is not the reason this team sucks right now... It has to do with using Re-Treads most of the year until now in the 5th Starters Hole, and using Corey Patterson as the lead off Hitter... Oh, and not having a right handed Hitter to balance the middle of the Lineup... (Don't come up with, there ya go in Kemp, he is not a proven Clean Up Hitter)

Adam Dunn is not the problem.

How are any of you Reds fans that think this way? No Offense? But I have been following Adam Dunn since he was Drafted and Love the guy.

Is this all because both of you are from Texas?

I love Adam Dunn. He's my favorite player on the Reds. I defend him constantly to my friends who hate him. But if the Reds aren't going to sign him long term, then unloading Dunn for the rest of the year to get Kemp for 4.5 more years is a great trade I'd take in an instant.

BLEEDS
06-11-2008, 05:10 PM
Is this all because both of you are from Texas?

I love Adam Dunn. He's my favorite player on the Reds. I defend him constantly to my friends who hate him. But if the Reds aren't going to sign him long term, then unloading Dunn for the rest of the year to get Kemp for 4.5 more years is a great trade I'd take in an instant.

DING DING DING!!!! We have a winner Bob!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

_Sir_Charles_
06-11-2008, 05:32 PM
You're right of course BLEEDS (and levydl), but the real question is do you think the Reds SHOULD sign Dunn to a LTC or deal him?

bgwilly31
06-11-2008, 05:47 PM
kemp would hit 30 in GAB, that would be an excellent deal for the reds...

we'd actually have our cleanup hitter we are complaining for...

I agree.

I take that deal in a heart beat.

thorn
06-11-2008, 05:52 PM
Hell, I'd do that trade even if we did sign Dunn long term, save millions and get a better player at a premium position. Put Votto in LF and build around Votto, Bruce, Kemp, Phillips and a host of others.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 05:57 PM
So if I am realistic about the value of Adam Dunn I am not real reds fans?

You are not realistic...

Everyone on here said it was going to take Bruce, Cueto and others to get Bedard earlier... Well, it took a long haul from the Mariners to get him...

Oh, and I don't live in Texas anymore and am not from texas.

I don't care how many of you other posters think Dunn isn't worth a couple players... You are all wrong.

Stephenk29
06-11-2008, 06:05 PM
Matt Kemp is going to be a all-star for years to come, I think everything that can be said about him already has been. I would do that deal in a second. Even Bailey and Dunn for Kemp probably.

757690
06-11-2008, 06:06 PM
You are not realistic...

Everyone on here said it was going to take Bruce, Cueto and others to get Bedard earlier... Well, it took a long haul from the Mariners to get him...

Oh, and I don't live in Texas anymore and am not from texas.

I don't care how many of you other posters think Dunn isn't worth a couple players... You are all wrong.

While I can't agree with you, I admire your conviction Hondo. Way to be a majority of one! Never give up, no matter what anyone says. :thumbup:

Hondo
06-11-2008, 06:10 PM
Matt Kemp is going to be a all-star for years to come, I think everything that can be said about him already has been. I would do that deal in a second. Even Bailey and Dunn for Kemp probably.

Oh yeah, you are correct. The guy is deffinatly an All-Start this year huh?

Batting .299 (not bad) with 5 homers and 38 RBI

Projected to go .299-13-99-29 steals with 164 K

Those sure are All-Star Numbers for years and years to come...

Adam Dunn is over rated and you guys are all CORRECT. Most of the Reds players suck, and should not be expected to bring anything in return...

Stephenk29
06-11-2008, 06:24 PM
Adam Dunn had been an All-Star once in his entire career. Guess we're still undervaluing him. I don't think we're the only ones.

Kemp's 29 steals, 99 RBIs (which will be pretty close to Dunn), exponentially better defense , youth, and cheap salary is something in return. I think your forgetting the fact that his contract is up after this season. We have nearly zero leverage in a trade situation. No one is going to pay that much for a 4 month rental.

_Sir_Charles_
06-11-2008, 06:56 PM
Oh yeah, you are correct. The guy is deffinatly an All-Start this year huh?

Batting .299 (not bad) with 5 homers and 38 RBI

Projected to go .299-13-99-29 steals with 164 K

Those sure are All-Star Numbers for years and years to come...

Adam Dunn is over rated and you guys are all CORRECT. Most of the Reds players suck, and should not be expected to bring anything in return...

Hondo, don't get defensive now...you're making a nice argument, don't ditch it now. :O)

I think the big thing people are overlooking is the fact that they're comparing Dunn and Kemp as similar players. They're not. I also see many here suggesting that Kemp be our cleanup hitter. Personally, I see him as a lead-off hitter. Hits for a very good average and has excellent speed. He doesn't K much either. I'd prefer to see him walk at a bit higher clip, but all in all he's a pretty good solution to our current CF/Leadoff shortage. His defense will also improve the results from our pitching staff.

I agree with you that Kemp is not an all star. Will he become one? It's possible, he's certainly got the skills. But you've also got to admit that Dunn isn't an all star either. Sure, he'll hit a ton of HR's, but compared to other NL outfielders his batting average will simply never stack up with them. So that basically makes him a one-trick pony. Those types of players generally don't make it as all stars.

Hondo
06-11-2008, 07:00 PM
Hondo, don't get defensive now...you're making a nice argument, don't ditch it now. :O)

I think the big thing people are overlooking is the fact that they're comparing Dunn and Kemp as similar players. They're not. I also see many here suggesting that Kemp be our cleanup hitter. Personally, I see him as a lead-off hitter. Hits for a very good average and has excellent speed. He doesn't K much either. I'd prefer to see him walk at a bit higher clip, but all in all he's a pretty good solution to our current CF/Leadoff shortage. His defense will also improve the results from our pitching staff.

I agree with you that Kemp is not an all star. Will he become one? It's possible, he's certainly got the skills. But you've also got to admit that Dunn isn't an all star either. Sure, he'll hit a ton of HR's, but compared to other NL outfielders his batting average will simply never stack up with them. So that basically makes him a one-trick pony. Those types of players generally don't make it as all stars.


Finally a Reasonable argument... I agree that Dunn may not be an All-Star this year. But You are correct... We don't actually know what Kemp will be... The other point is that the Dodgers could get the 72 hour window to sign him to a LTC so it would not be a 3-4 month rental...

But anyway, thanks for your Post... I can deal with your Debate.

PTI (pti)
06-11-2008, 08:43 PM
I'd take Matt Kemp straight-up at this point, and so would most every GM in baseball. When you factor in that Dunn makes about 32x as much money, and is a free agent in about 3 months - it's a no-brainer.


This is *real* baseball, Hondo. Not rotisserie.

LexingtonLegend
06-11-2008, 09:11 PM
Baseball tonight this evening was saying the Dodgers would consider trading Brad Penny for a power bat as the trade deadline approaches. Anybody think they would consider Penny and Kemp for Dunn along with maybe 2 prospects? Possibly even Penny for Dunn even swap? I haven't heard anything about this, but it was an interesting thought when I heard it. I'm tired of that guy handing it to us every time he toes the rubber in cincy.

PTI (pti)
06-11-2008, 09:13 PM
Baseball tonight this evening was saying the Dodgers would consider trading Brad Penny for a power bat as the trade deadline approaches. Anybody think they would consider Penny and Kemp for Dunn along with maybe 2 prospects? Possibly even Penny for Dunn even swap? I haven't heard anything about this, but it was an interesting thought when I heard it. I'm tired of that guy handing it to us every time he toes the rubber in cincy.


:eek:


Dunn for Brad Penny, Matt Kemp, *and* two prospects??


Honestly, we should probably hold out for more. :rolleyes:

redsfanmia
06-11-2008, 09:18 PM
There is no way the Dodgers are going to trade Kemp for Dunn so its really moot to even discuss it. Tommy Lasorda does not run the team anymore.

LexingtonLegend
06-11-2008, 09:28 PM
:eek:


Dunn for Brad Penny, Matt Kemp, *and* two prospects??


Honestly, we should probably hold out for more. :rolleyes:

I didn't say Dunn for Penny, Kemp, and prospects.....

I said Penny and Kemp for Dunn and 2 additional REDS prospects

I(heart)Freel
06-12-2008, 07:40 AM
I didn't say Dunn for Penny, Kemp, and prospects.....

I said Penny and Kemp for Dunn and 2 additional REDS prospects

Throw in Homer. The Cali mindset and bigger park could do him wonders.

Orodle
06-12-2008, 08:59 AM
I'm a big Dunn fan but I would okay this deal, however I do not think the Dodgers would.

44Magnum
06-12-2008, 10:02 AM
Dunn for Kemp or Penny. The Reds just need to move Dunn! He's an anchor on an airplane.

bounty37h
06-12-2008, 10:15 AM
[QUOTE=Hondo;1663440]Man, I am not the one Undervaluing Dunn, is it everyone else on this board...

For Example... If Adam Dunn was available in Trade on another team...

And someone suggested we trade for him... Everyone here would say:

"You would have to trade Jay Bruce, Cueto, and another prosepct for Adam Dunn"

A lot of people here Do very much UNDERVALUE the Reds players... It is Pathedic...

Hondo, have you ever talked to any fans of other teams, and gauged their interest in Dunn? Fromt he ones I have spoke to, I would def say we overvalue him, as I have not talked to many people that want him on thier team-maybe they already feel good about their team and dont need him, btu they def dont express an interest, and will generally comment about his k's, and that he is not the key player a team should build around (its up for arguement of course on that). I am only stating this info from my own experiences/conversations, but for you to say people on this board are pathetic for not thinking what you think is "pathedic".

Hondo
06-12-2008, 10:20 AM
[QUOTE=Hondo;1663440]Man, I am not the one Undervaluing Dunn, is it everyone else on this board...

For Example... If Adam Dunn was available in Trade on another team...

And someone suggested we trade for him... Everyone here would say:

"You would have to trade Jay Bruce, Cueto, and another prosepct for Adam Dunn"

A lot of people here Do very much UNDERVALUE the Reds players... It is Pathedic...

Hondo, have you ever talked to any fans of other teams, and gauged their interest in Dunn? Fromt he ones I have spoke to, I would def say we overvalue him, as I have not talked to many people that want him on thier team-maybe they already feel good about their team and dont need him, btu they def dont express an interest, and will generally comment about his k's, and that he is not the key player a team should build around (its up for arguement of course on that). I am only stating this info from my own experiences/conversations, but for you to say people on this board are pathetic for not thinking what you think is "pathedic".

I didn't say everyone on the Board was "Pathedic"... I said people undervalueing the Reds players are/is "pathedic"...

I am not trying to get personal here, so I apologize if you took it the wrong way...

But I think it is oronius for this team to Trade a guy (Adam Dunn), who if he is a Free Agent at seasons end, will be the most coveted Power Producer on the Market... (Manny Ramierez and Vlad are there but they are 35/36, so Dunn at 29 will be highly sought after), For one player with a possibility to become a Good to Great Major Leaguer... If Dunn hits the Free Agent market, you'll see how many teams "Value" his services...

Handofdeath
06-12-2008, 11:00 AM
1) Kemp is a centerfielder, and a great one at that. He has a cannon for an arm and has excellent range. Dunn is a below average leftfielder.

2) Kemp is five years younger than Dunn, meaning that he will be getting better while Dunn will be losing his skills. He also will be much cheaper than Dunn.

3) Kemp is a righthanded power hitter for the middle of the lineup, something that the Reds desperately need, especially with Bruce and Votto and possible Alonso coming up.

4) Kemp will provide similar run production to Dunn in GAPB. He's too young to really know what his ceiling is, but he is putting up solid numbers playing a pitchers park. He could easily hit 30 HR and be a 100 RBI, 100 runs guy in GAPB. The last two years, he has averaged around a .860 OPS. Dunn's career is .900. Have them switch ballparks, and they will have very similar OPS.

Basically, even if Dunn is better player, Kemp fills the Reds needs better, and makes them a better team. I don't want a team of the best players, I want the best team. Kemp instead of Dunn makes the Reds a better team.

A good example is when the Red Sox traded Nomar, their best and most popular player in 2004. The players they got back were not as good as him, but they made the Red Sox a better team. I think that worked out well for them.

By the way, the Dodgers would not trade Billingsly or Kershaw straight up for Dunn, let alone both of them and Kemp for Dunn. For that suggestion, I will call you crazy. ;)

Excellent, excellent post.

levydl
06-12-2008, 11:04 AM
[QUOTE=bounty37h;1664177]

I didn't say everyone on the Board was "Pathedic"... I said people undervalueing the Reds players are/is "pathedic"...

I am not trying to get personal here, so I apologize if you took it the wrong way...

But I think it is oronius for this team to Trade a guy (Adam Dunn), who if he is a Free Agent at seasons end, will be the most coveted Power Producer on the Market... (Manny Ramierez and Vlad are there but they are 35/36, so Dunn at 29 will be highly sought after), For one player with a possibility to become a Good to Great Major Leaguer... If Dunn hits the Free Agent market, you'll see how many teams "Value" his services...

If Dunn hits the FA market a lot of teams will value his services BECAUSE THEY WILL BE ABLE TO SIGN HIM FOR MORE THAN 1/2 OF THE YEAR!!!!! It's not that difficult to understand. If you trade for him, you only get him for the rest of the year. That diminishes his value greatly. So, even if you think that Dunn is a great player who will command a 5 year $75 mil. contract in free agency (which I do), that's irrelevant to how much he's worth in a trade right now.

I'm not undervaluing Dunn. I'm realistically valuing him for 1/2 a year's service. Getting a really good and very promising outfield talent with a year and a half left on his rookie deal and 3 years of arbitration for Dunn's 1/2 year is a great return.

Hondo
06-12-2008, 11:07 AM
[QUOTE=Hondo;1664180]

If Dunn hits the FA market a lot of teams will value his services BECAUSE THEY WILL BE ABLE TO SIGN HIM FOR MORE THAN 1/2 OF THE YEAR!!!!! It's not that difficult to understand. If you trade for him, you only get him for the rest of the year. That diminishes his value greatly. So, even if you think that Dunn is a great player who will command a 5 year $75 mil. contract in free agency (which I do), that's irrelevant to how much he's worth in a trade right now.

I'm not undervaluing Dunn. I'm realistically valuing him for 1/2 a year's service. Getting a really good and very promising outfield talent with a year and a half left on his rookie deal and 3 years of arbitration for Dunn's 1/2 year is a great return.

Are you ignoring the fact that there is the ability to have the 72 hour Window agreement in any trade allowing Any team to negotiate a LTC with the Traded Player and if a deal can not be reached, the deal is Voided...

That is why that option is there...

"It's not that difficult to understand."

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 11:09 AM
It will be Pathedic if we don't resign Dunn, but it's looking more inevitable...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 11:11 AM
You're right of course BLEEDS (and levydl), but the real question is do you think the Reds SHOULD sign Dunn to a LTC or deal him?

Of course they SHOULD - but they SHOULD do a lot of things they don't do.

I wouldn't be so upset about if, but you don't sign a $46M closer for a last place team.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

_Sir_Charles_
06-12-2008, 11:34 AM
Of course they SHOULD - but they SHOULD do a lot of things they don't do.

I wouldn't be so upset about if, but you don't sign a $46M closer for a last place team.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

The problem I have with people's reaction to the Cordero signing was the interpretation that this means we're planning to win THIS year. His contract was a multiyear deal. Does anybody think we won't be competing in the next few years? I'm positive we'll be competitive starting next year. I think the Reds saw this as an opportunity to grab a solid closer from a team in our division. Not only bettering OUR team but worsening THEIRS. Who knows what closers will be available in the next year or two? They saw one they wanted now and grabbed him for the future. That's the way I see it.

Hondo
06-12-2008, 11:48 AM
The problem I have with people's reaction to the Cordero signing was the interpretation that this means we're planning to win THIS year. His contract was a multiyear deal. Does anybody think we won't be competing in the next few years? I'm positive we'll be competitive starting next year. I think the Reds saw this as an opportunity to grab a solid closer from a team in our division. Not only bettering OUR team but worsening THEIRS. Who knows what closers will be available in the next year or two? They saw one they wanted now and grabbed him for the future. That's the way I see it.

Fransisco Rodriguez is available this Offseason... I would gladly rather have him for 15 Million a year than Cordero... Of course I like Cordero too, so I am not saying signing Cordero was a bad move... Just pointing out that K-Rod is available at years end...

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 11:59 AM
The problem I have with people's reaction to the Cordero signing was the interpretation that this means we're planning to win THIS year. His contract was a multiyear deal. Does anybody think we won't be competing in the next few years? I'm positive we'll be competitive starting next year. I think the Reds saw this as an opportunity to grab a solid closer from a team in our division. Not only bettering OUR team but worsening THEIRS. Who knows what closers will be available in the next year or two? They saw one they wanted now and grabbed him for the future. That's the way I see it.

Agreed, however the rhetoric was there saying they wanted to win NOW, although every action after the Cordero signing said the exact opposite.

However I would think DUNN would be a part of that equation. Letting 2/3rds of your starting OF, and the two biggest Power guys on the team - and 3/3rds if you count the Hamilton Trade of last year - is not a good recipe for success.

Jay Bruce can more than take over the reigns from a soon to be 39 year old Griffey (who will be closer to 40 than 39 by next season), but Dunn is hitting his prime and you should be able to pencil him in for 40/100/100/100 - this all out of the FIFTH spot. Moving him down a slot should increase that, especially with a RH power bat and a developing Votto and EE behind him.

Trying to replace BOTH of those guys is not a good idea, and will likely leave us with 3 $10M+ pitchers on a last place team, again.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Cicero
06-12-2008, 12:01 PM
I would hate to see Dunn leave but this seems like a pretty good deal. A long term deal for Dunn would be very pricey. Especially with people like Steinbrenner in the mix. I think it would be a mistake to allow him to walk with no return.

levydl
06-12-2008, 12:04 PM
nevermind

Hondo
06-12-2008, 12:06 PM
Agreed, however the rhetoric was there saying they wanted to win NOW, although every action after the Cordero signing said the exact opposite.

However I would think DUNN would be a part of that equation. Letting 2/3rds of your starting OF, and the two biggest Power guys on the team - and 3/3rds if you count the Hamilton Trade of last year - is not a good recipe for success.

Jay Bruce can more than take over the reigns from a soon to be 39 year old Griffey (who will be closer to 40 than 39 by next season), but Dunn is hitting his prime and you should be able to pencil him in for 40/100/100/100 - this all out of the FIFTH spot. Moving him down a slot should increase that, especially with a RH power bat and a developing Votto and EE behind him.

Trying to replace BOTH of those guys is not a good idea, and will likely leave us with 3 $10M+ pitchers on a last place team, again.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS,

I AGREE with you 100%

I haven't been posting this thread or Replying in it because I want Dunn traded... I think he is part of the Solution... I just don't want the Reds trading him for 1 player... IMO, he is more valuable resigned to a LTC to the Reds than to be shipped off...

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 01:01 PM
BLEEDS,

I AGREE with you 100%

I haven't been posting this thread or Replying in it because I want Dunn traded... I think he is part of the Solution... I just don't want the Reds trading him for 1 player... IMO, he is more valuable resigned to a LTC to the Reds than to be shipped off...

I agree with that, however I can understand both sides. WITHOUT an LTC, some will look at it as "1/2 a year of DUNN" versus "X, Y or Z"... of course any trade should include a 72 hour window to sign Dunn to an LTC, so some could/should look at it as trading for "5 years of Dunn". But really, it should be irrelevant.

What the Reds SHOULD be doing is considering "Trading Dunn for X, Y, or Z" or "Not Trading Dunn for anything, and hoping to get 2 2009 draft picks - which don't look like much value - in return". Would I rather have Kemp + X, Y, and/or Z? Sure. Would I rather have Kemp only versus 2 1st round picks in 2009? Probably. Would I rather have Dunn for 5 years at $75M. DEFINITELY.

Personally, if I could trade Dunn and Bailey for Kemp and some pitching prospects, I would be killing 3.75 birds with one stone at this point...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Ohioballplayer
06-12-2008, 01:13 PM
Guys I hate to burst your bubble but we have to get Dunner out of left field via trade or 1st base, he has no arm, and mediocre range at best.

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 01:23 PM
Guys I hate to burst your bubble but we have to get Dunner out of left field via trade or 1st base, he has no arm, and mediocre range at best.


:sleep:

:deadhorse

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Cicero
06-12-2008, 01:41 PM
Guys I hate to burst your bubble but we have to get Dunner out of left field via trade or 1st base, he has no arm, and mediocre range at best.


What radio station told you this? Dunn is an average fielder. He makes me nervous when there is a had hit ball in his direction, but he is far from the black hole in left field people like to make him out to be.

Stud4life717
06-12-2008, 03:10 PM
Just signed up... First Post... Be easy...

Adam Dunn is essentially a "1" tool player... His biggest asset: Plus Power. He does not hit for average, does not field well, does not throw well, and does not run well.

For a team like the Reds to invest 1/5th of its entire payroll (15m a year on a 75m payroll) on a ONE tool player is to me, beyond belief. It severely hampers their ability to sign their younger, more talented, and diversly tooled players.

Now, On a team with a 150m+ payroll, He makes much more sense because the team can not only afford him, but due to having much more payroll flexibility can sign and surround him with players that can make up for his negatives.

Due to having a small payroll, the Reds need to build young and from within, and shipping Dunn off for younger, cheaper, and more diverse players (contact, speed, glove, pitching, etc) makes much more sense than hampering payroll.

levydl
06-12-2008, 03:16 PM
Just signed up... First Post... Be easy...

Adam Dunn is essentially a "1" tool player... His biggest asset: Plus Power. He does not hit for average, does not field well, does not throw well, and does not run well.

For a team like the Reds to invest 1/5th of its entire payroll (15m a year on a 75m payroll) on a ONE tool player is to me, beyond belief. It severely hampers their ability to sign their younger, more talented, and diversly tooled players.

Now, On a team with a 150m+ payroll, He makes much more sense because the team can not only afford him, but due to having much more payroll flexibility can sign and surround him with players that can make up for his negatives.

Due to having a small payroll, the Reds need to build young and from within, and shipping Dunn off for younger, cheaper, and more diverse players (contact, speed, glove, pitching, etc) makes much more sense than hampering payroll.

High OBP, high OPS, 100 runs, 100 rbis, 100 BBs, 40 HRs. That's one tool?

Stud4life717
06-12-2008, 03:26 PM
Plus Power may very well result in similar numbers like the ones posted...

But Scouts' five tools for measuring a player are: Power, Speed, Contact, Fielding, Arm.

Adam Dunn is highly skilled in ONE of those. Albert Pujols is very highly skilled in 3.(Power, Contact, Fielding)

Simply put, Adam Dunn is not anywhere near worth 1/5th of the Reds Payroll.

redsfanmia
06-12-2008, 03:41 PM
Just signed up... First Post... Be easy...

Adam Dunn is essentially a "1" tool player... His biggest asset: Plus Power. He does not hit for average, does not field well, does not throw well, and does not run well.

For a team like the Reds to invest 1/5th of its entire payroll (15m a year on a 75m payroll) on a ONE tool player is to me, beyond belief. It severely hampers their ability to sign their younger, more talented, and diversly tooled players.

Now, On a team with a 150m+ payroll, He makes much more sense because the team can not only afford him, but due to having much more payroll flexibility can sign and surround him with players that can make up for his negatives.

Due to having a small payroll, the Reds need to build young and from within, and shipping Dunn off for younger, cheaper, and more diverse players (contact, speed, glove, pitching, etc) makes much more sense than hampering payroll.

Welcome and I agree 110%

Handofdeath
06-12-2008, 03:48 PM
Just signed up... First Post... Be easy...

Adam Dunn is essentially a "1" tool player... His biggest asset: Plus Power. He does not hit for average, does not field well, does not throw well, and does not run well.

For a team like the Reds to invest 1/5th of its entire payroll (15m a year on a 75m payroll) on a ONE tool player is to me, beyond belief. It severely hampers their ability to sign their younger, more talented, and diversly tooled players.

Now, On a team with a 150m+ payroll, He makes much more sense because the team can not only afford him, but due to having much more payroll flexibility can sign and surround him with players that can make up for his negatives.

Due to having a small payroll, the Reds need to build young and from within, and shipping Dunn off for younger, cheaper, and more diverse players (contact, speed, glove, pitching, etc) makes much more sense than hampering payroll.

Damn good 1st post. You absolutely hit the nail on the head mentioning payroll. And I agree that despite "High OBP, high OPS, 100 runs, 100 rbis, 100 BBs, 40 HRs" he is a one tool player. Hitting for power constitutes a tool, the ability to take a walk does not. And it is also imperative that this fact gets mentioned, Adam Dunn's lifetime batting average is .248 and it's .234 this season. Mention the 40/100/100 numbers all you want , but Adam Dunn has shown a complete inability to put the bat on the ball on a regular basis. With his lack of skills in the other areas of his game, for the long term the Reds absolutely should try to get Matt Kemp to replace him.

_Sir_Charles_
06-12-2008, 04:17 PM
Fransisco Rodriguez is available this Offseason... I would gladly rather have him for 15 Million a year than Cordero... Of course I like Cordero too, so I am not saying signing Cordero was a bad move... Just pointing out that K-Rod is available at years end...

Yes, that's true. But like I said, going for Cordero had the added benefit of HURTING one of our division rivals. That's nothing to sneeze at. The Brewers were supposed to be right in the thick of things with the Cubbies this year, that hole at the back of their pen is a MAJOR reason why they're struggling. The biggest reason IMO.

_Sir_Charles_
06-12-2008, 04:29 PM
High OBP, high OPS, 100 runs, 100 rbis, 100 BBs, 40 HRs. That's one tool?

Considering how he's used...yep. I'm not saying he's not an asset. He is. I'm saying that he does NOT fit with the roster we currently have. We don't have other powerhitting guys who hit for average to hit around him. His walks are most often wasted. He comes up with men on base quite a bit. If he knocks them in with a dinger, great. But his other most common hitting results don't help us in that situation. A walk or a strikeout. The most frustrating part about Adam is his lack of agression at the plate. He's got a great eye, I think everyone agrees with that. He wouldn't rack up as many BB's as he does if he didn't have great plate discipline and a good eye. It's his failure to make contact. Not just putting the ball in play, but just making freaking contact. If he could do that on a consistant basis he'd be a MUCH more valuable asset.

As it stands now, if we sign Dunner to a LTC, we'd have to make other changes to the roster to make it work. Multiple changes. The other option is to move him for another OF who can fill the void we have in our team. Defense and hitting for consistant average. I know a lot of people here are sabermetric-fanatics, but the good ole' fashioned batting average tends to get overlooked here. On base percentage is all fine and good. But HITS are what knock in runs and keep rally's going, not walks and K's. So if we keep him, we simply HAVE to find more bats to fit around him and better defense to play around him. And the LTC would have to be somewhat reasonable. A huge contract for a 1-tool player will decimate this franchise for a decade.

Blue
06-12-2008, 04:33 PM
Damn good 1st post. You absolutely hit the nail on the head mentioning payroll. And I agree that despite "High OBP, high OPS, 100 runs, 100 rbis, 100 BBs, 40 HRs" he is a one tool player. Hitting for power constitutes a tool, the ability to take a walk does not. And it is also imperative that this fact gets mentioned, Adam Dunn's lifetime batting average is .248 and it's .234 this season. Mention the 40/100/100 numbers all you want , but Adam Dunn has shown a complete inability to put the bat on the ball on a regular basis. With his lack of skills in the other areas of his game, for the long term the Reds absolutely should try to get Matt Kemp to replace him.

You can have your singles hitters. I'll take the run producers.

Also, the ability to take a walk is not considered a "tool" because it has little to do with physical talents. It is a skill, and a very valuable one at that. Fewer walks equals more outs.

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 04:51 PM
Plus Power may very well result in similar numbers like the ones posted...

But Scouts' five tools for measuring a player are: Power, Speed, Contact, Fielding, Arm.

Adam Dunn is highly skilled in ONE of those. Albert Pujols is very highly skilled in 3.(Power, Contact, Fielding)

Simply put, Adam Dunn is not anywhere near worth 1/5th of the Reds Payroll.

So Albert Pujols is a perennial GG 1st Baseman??!?! Sure he's a 2 tool player, but he's nowhere near a 3 or 4/5 tool players.

And besides, it's a SCOUTING tool, not a measure of anything of great importance at the ML level. For example, Corey Patterson was considered a 4 tool player - Power, Contact, Fielding, Arm.
Does that make him better than Dunn? NOT EVEN CLOSE.

At the ML level all you care about is PRODUCTION - and for that you look at OPS, HR's, RBI's, R's, and yes BB. Guys without great Defensive prowess - read: Fielding and Arm - get plopped in LF and 1B respectively. Nobody really values SPEED anymore unless you're talking about CF-ers and/or lead-off guys. You won't find any of those in LF or 1B.

And again with the Payroll BS? It's a lame excuse, that isn't based one iota in reality. Using that logic, we could NEVER get any of the top 20 players in baseball because we can't afford them, period. SO, you get a Catch-22 with every guy ever to wear a Reds Uniform who ever gets to any level of production above "Average". Complete and Utter nonsense. But, eventually everyone who ever argues against Dunn has to go there, because their other arguments get refuted.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Hondo
06-12-2008, 04:51 PM
Damn good 1st post. You absolutely hit the nail on the head mentioning payroll. And I agree that despite "High OBP, high OPS, 100 runs, 100 rbis, 100 BBs, 40 HRs" he is a one tool player. Hitting for power constitutes a tool, the ability to take a walk does not. And it is also imperative that this fact gets mentioned, Adam Dunn's lifetime batting average is .248 and it's .234 this season. Mention the 40/100/100 numbers all you want , but Adam Dunn has shown a complete inability to put the bat on the ball on a regular basis. With his lack of skills in the other areas of his game, for the long term the Reds absolutely should try to get Matt Kemp to replace him.

Oh wow, and what do you do to replace this vagabond player named Adam Dunn?

Look, the guy gets on base... His OB% is always around or above .400

So for you stat guys that stay up all night looking up WORP and Doubles per Inning with 1 or more outs... Dunn should be a Moneyball player for you...

Hey listen... Dunn is a good player... Why don't you guys want to get rid of the Pattersons, Bako, Valentin, Ross, Hariston, Phillips, Edwins, Alex Gonzalez of this team, and replace them before we go getting rid of Adam Dunn...

Not too mention the other guys like Stanton and Hattteberg who have already been let go...

BLEEDS
06-12-2008, 05:01 PM
Considering how he's used...yep. I'm not saying he's not an asset. He is. I'm saying that he does NOT fit with the roster we currently have. We don't have other powerhitting guys who hit for average to hit around him. His walks are most often wasted. He comes up with men on base quite a bit. If he knocks them in with a dinger, great. But his other most common hitting results don't help us in that situation. A walk or a strikeout.

Another fallacy - the rest of the Team SUCKS, so we should undervalue Dunn. Yeah, it's his fault that "his walks are wasted". GREAT ARGUMENT!!!
OPS is valued on every other Team in the Majors - but not the Reds!!! Perhaps the answer is - don't hurt yourself now - GET BETTER PLAYERS TO SUPPORT HIM!!! Nah, let's get Norris HOpper, then they'll pitch to him - hope his SINGLES don't get "wasted".... :thumbdown



The most frustrating part about Adam is his lack of agression at the plate. He's got a great eye, I think everyone agrees with that. He wouldn't rack up as many BB's as he does if he didn't have great plate discipline and a good eye. It's his failure to make contact. Not just putting the ball in play, but just making freaking contact. If he could do that on a consistant basis he'd be a MUCH more valuable asset.

Oh, like Brandon Phillips. He's aggressive, and puts the ball in play A LOT - usually a slow roller to SS for the patented Double-Play. He leads the team easily, and among the LEAGUE LEADERS in Double-Plays. Surely that is better than walks or strikeouts. Another HUGE fallacy.

NEXT!!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Hondo
06-12-2008, 05:14 PM
I like this BLEEDS guy...

BLEEDS, you are correct, the ney-sayers always go back to old faithful... 1/5 of the Payroll...

And yeah, lets put Hopper in Left Field and Rock ON! Not...

If this team lets Dunn go, it will be that much further from being a contender...

_Sir_Charles_
06-12-2008, 05:43 PM
Another fallacy - the rest of the Team SUCKS, so we should undervalue Dunn. Yeah, it's his fault that "his walks are wasted". GREAT ARGUMENT!!!
OPS is valued on every other Team in the Majors - but not the Reds!!! Perhaps the answer is - don't hurt yourself now - GET BETTER PLAYERS TO SUPPORT HIM!!! Nah, let's get Norris HOpper, then they'll pitch to him - hope his SINGLES don't get "wasted".... :thumbdown

Did I say that? No. I'm saying that if we do keep Dunn (and I'd be fine with that) that we'd have to make multiple changes to make the roster work around him. As it is now, his walks ARE wasted. And no, that's not Dunn's fault. I'm not suggesting it is, a good portion of that blame falls on Dusty and his failure to recognize the OBP of Dunner and hitting him higher in the order. The question isn't whether Adam's a good player or not or how we "value" him, but whether we should sign him or not. Despite what many here say, that decision is anything but a "no-brainer". His contract is going to be huge no matter who it's with. And you can try to spin this any way you want to, but he IS a one-trick pony. He's just damned good at that one trick. ;)



Oh, like Brandon Phillips. He's aggressive, and puts the ball in play A LOT - usually a slow roller to SS for the patented Double-Play. He leads the team easily, and among the LEAGUE LEADERS in Double-Plays. Surely that is better than walks or strikeouts. Another HUGE fallacy.

NEXT!!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

As for Brandon, he's a very valuable player on this team. However, he IS being used improperly. That's fairly obvious. Even if Brandon couldn't hit a lick, he's a valuable player for his defense alone. But he's got better than average power, he'll hit for a considerably better average than Dunn ever will, and he runs the bases VERY well. His propensity for the DP is a major thorn in our side, but batting him in the proper place would minimize that. Hitting him cleanup is simply stupid when facing a righty. Not to mention that he should be moved around more than any other player (up or down in order) in terms of who he's facing (righty or lefty). Moving Brandon higher up in the order or much lower in the order would suit his skills better. But putting the ball in play is never a bad thing. Do that consistantly and you'll find success more than enough. Sometimes hitting into DP's is just bad luck. Against righty's though, it's usually just a bad approach for him.

However, for both Brandon and Adam...I place a large portion of thier flaws at the feet of thier hitting coach. Changing your approach at the plate in certain situations is one of the easiest things to do. Swinging at the first pitch against a young struggling pitcher who's having trouble finding the strike zone? Both of these guys do that on a consistant basis unfortunately. That's something that a good hitting coach would be drilling into their heads daily.

Regardless, I like both players and would be perfectly fine if both stayed long term. But depending upon who goes and who stays...that dictates what we have to do to build things around them.

redsfanmia
06-12-2008, 06:19 PM
So Albert Pujols is a perennial GG 1st Baseman??!?! Sure he's a 2 tool player, but he's nowhere near a 3 or 4/5 tool players.

And besides, it's a SCOUTING tool, not a measure of anything of great importance at the ML level. For example, Corey Patterson was considered a 4 tool player - Power, Contact, Fielding, Arm.
Does that make him better than Dunn? NOT EVEN CLOSE.

At the ML level all you care about is PRODUCTION - and for that you look at OPS, HR's, RBI's, R's, and yes BB. Guys without great Defensive prowess - read: Fielding and Arm - get plopped in LF and 1B respectively. Nobody really values SPEED anymore unless you're talking about CF-ers and/or lead-off guys. You won't find any of those in LF or 1B.

And again with the Payroll BS? It's a lame excuse, that isn't based one iota in reality. Using that logic, we could NEVER get any of the top 20 players in baseball because we can't afford them, period. SO, you get a Catch-22 with every guy ever to wear a Reds Uniform who ever gets to any level of production above "Average". Complete and Utter nonsense. But, eventually everyone who ever argues against Dunn has to go there, because their other arguments get refuted.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Adam Dunn is no Albert Pujols not even close. The Reds can afford to spend 15+ million on a franchise player but not on a player like Dunn. If the Reds spend 1/5 of their payroll on one guy he has to be a dominant player not a guy who disappears for weeks at a time.

OUReds
06-12-2008, 07:05 PM
Adam Dunn is no Albert Pujols not even close.

Albert is a better player no doubt, but he also signed his contract 5 years ago, is still making more then 15 Mil a year, and has shown a disturbing propensity for injuries recently.

Dunn is an elite offensive player, and he's going to get paid like an elite offensive corner defender.

Right now the Reds are 8 out of 16 NL teams in runs scored, despite playing in one of the best offensive ballparks. Without Dunn, or a suitable replacement that doesn't seem to be available through FA or in house, this team is simply not a contender the next few years.

redsfanmia
06-12-2008, 07:27 PM
Dunn is an elite offensive player, and he's going to get paid like an elite offensive corner defender.

Hopefully not by the Reds, let some other team overpay for an overrated Dunn.

_Sir_Charles_
06-12-2008, 07:43 PM
Dunn is an elite offensive player, and he's going to get paid like an elite offensive corner defender.

Adam Dunn is an elite HOME RUN hitter. NOT an elite offensive player.

An elite offensive player has numbers like this....

Utley 21 HRs...but also a .310 ba, 58 rbis
Berkman 19 HRs...but also a .374 ba and 56 rbis
Braun 17 HRs...but also a .292 ba and 49 rbis
Puljols 16 HRs...but also a .347 ba and 42 rbis

Dunn 16 HRs and 41 rbis is on pace with many hitters in the nl...but a .234 ba pales in comparison. An elite offensive player contributes solidly to all 3 triple crown catagories.

I'll never understand why so many sabermetric fanatics totally choose to overlook batting average. I just don't get it. Just because a stat is old school doesn't mean it's a pointless stat. Hitting for a high average is MUCH better than getting a bunch of walks. Not all of those hits are going to be singles. But even those singles will score runners already on base.

OUReds
06-12-2008, 10:59 PM
I'll never understand why so many sabermetric fanatics totally choose to overlook batting average. I just don't get it.

The answers are out there should you care to devote a modicum of effort to find them. This will get you started.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45245

It's unfair to say that sabermetricians don't value batting average, they just value stats that better correspond to actual run production more.

Lockdwn11
06-12-2008, 11:40 PM
See I think some of you are under the impression that Dunn is an elite Player. He is not he is a good player but far from elite. He will give you Hrs and walk and that is great but thats about it. I mean look at the leader boards and tell me where you will fined Adam Dunn in the top 10 other then walks and Hrs you won't not RBI's not OPS hell not even OBP. I am all for the reds re-signing Dunn if it's for 2-3 year 12-13 mill but we all know it will cost more then that in years and dollars and he just isn't worth 5-6 years 14-16+ mill. Sorry

Hondo
06-12-2008, 11:50 PM
See I think some of you are under the impression that Dunn is an elite Player. He is not he is a good player but far from elite. He will give you Hrs and walk and that is great but thats about it. I mean look at the leader boards and tell me where you will fined Adam Dunn in the top 10 other then walks and Hrs you won't not RBI's not OPS hell not even OBP. I am all for the reds re-signing Dunn if it's for 2-3 year 12-13 mill but we all know it will cost more then that in years and dollars and he just isn't worth 5-6 years 14-16+ mill. Sorry

Yeah that 1 Million - 3 Million Differance per year Salary is really going to hurt the Reds... I know you are going to respond with the length of years but even at 6 year length, he is only 35, and probably still smoking 40 HR and going 100-100-100... But I think Dunn would sign for 5 anyway...

Lockdwn11
06-12-2008, 11:53 PM
Yeah that 1 Million - 3 Million Differance per year Salary is really going to hurt the Reds... I know you are going to respond with the length of years but even at 6 year length, he is only 35, and probably still smoking 40 HR and going 100-100-100... But I think Dunn would sign for 5 anyway...

I disagree

Stud4life717
06-13-2008, 06:46 AM
So Albert Pujols is a perennial GG 1st Baseman??!?! Sure he's a 2 tool player, but he's nowhere near a 3 or 4/5 tool players.

And besides, it's a SCOUTING tool, not a measure of anything of great importance at the ML level. For example, Corey Patterson was considered a 4 tool player - Power, Contact, Fielding, Arm.
Does that make him better than Dunn? NOT EVEN CLOSE.

At the ML level all you care about is PRODUCTION - and for that you look at OPS, HR's, RBI's, R's, and yes BB. Guys without great Defensive prowess - read: Fielding and Arm - get plopped in LF and 1B respectively. Nobody really values SPEED anymore unless you're talking about CF-ers and/or lead-off guys. You won't find any of those in LF or 1B.

And again with the Payroll BS? It's a lame excuse, that isn't based one iota in reality. Using that logic, we could NEVER get any of the top 20 players in baseball because we can't afford them, period. SO, you get a Catch-22 with every guy ever to wear a Reds Uniform who ever gets to any level of production above "Average". Complete and Utter nonsense. But, eventually everyone who ever argues against Dunn has to go there, because their other arguments get refuted.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Pujols is a very good defensive player at his position: 1B. Adam Dunn is not. Pujols was even above average at 3B before the Cards acquired Rolen.

Patterson simply did not live up to his high ceiling expectations. His only real asset now is speed. He is above average at best in CF.

Once again, Dunn's only asset is Plus Power. High OPS, R's, RBI's are a result of him hitting for power in the middle of the order. But then again, that is the only thing he does well.

As for payroll, No way is it logical to lock up 1/5th of your payroll for a guy who only does one thing well: Hit for power. And if you think Adam Dunn is a top-20 guy in baseball with that .240 career BA, I would definitely like to try what you are smoking.

Pujols and Dunn simply don't belong in the same sentence. Not only does Pujols hit for power, he makes contact, fields well, and more times than not, has even HIGHER middle of the order production numbers (OPS, SLG, RBI's, etc) than Dunn. And this is not even mentioning the intangibles he brings to the team. He is a leader in that clubhouse, is a good influence around other players, shows a winning attitude, and has shown a willing to improve his game from day 1. Pujols is a guy worth 1/5 of the Reds payroll. Adam Dunn is simply not close.

The Reds have not had a winning season since Dunn has been with the club. Time to move in a different direction.

Big Hurt
06-13-2008, 08:05 AM
Adam Dunn is an elite HOME RUN hitter. NOT an elite offensive player.

An elite offensive player has numbers like this....

Utley 21 HRs...but also a .310 ba, 58 rbis
Berkman 19 HRs...but also a .374 ba and 56 rbis
Braun 17 HRs...but also a .292 ba and 49 rbis
Puljols 16 HRs...but also a .347 ba and 42 rbis

Dunn 16 HRs and 41 rbis is on pace with many hitters in the nl...but a .234 ba pales in comparison. An elite offensive player contributes solidly to all 3 triple crown catagories.

I'll never understand why so many sabermetric fanatics totally choose to overlook batting average. I just don't get it. Just because a stat is old school doesn't mean it's a pointless stat. Hitting for a high average is MUCH better than getting a bunch of walks. Not all of those hits are going to be singles. But even those singles will score runners already on base.


Pujols is a very good defensive player at his position: 1B. Adam Dunn is not. Pujols was even above average at 3B before the Cards acquired Rolen.

Patterson simply did not live up to his high ceiling expectations. His only real asset now is speed. He is above average at best in CF.

Once again, Dunn's only asset is Plus Power. High OPS, R's, RBI's are a result of him hitting for power in the middle of the order. But then again, that is the only thing he does well.

As for payroll, No way is it logical to lock up 1/5th of your payroll for a guy who only does one thing well: Hit for power. And if you think Adam Dunn is a top-20 guy in baseball with that .240 career BA, I would definitely like to try what you are smoking.

Pujols and Dunn simply don't belong in the same sentence. Not only does Pujols hit for power, he makes contact, fields well, and more times than not, has even HIGHER middle of the order production numbers (OPS, SLG, RBI's, etc) than Dunn. And this is not even mentioning the intangibles he brings to the team. He is a leader in that clubhouse, is a good influence around other players, shows a winning attitude, and has shown a willing to improve his game from day 1. Pujols is a guy worth 1/5 of the Reds payroll. Adam Dunn is simply not close.

The Reds have not had a winning season since Dunn has been with the club. Time to move in a different direction.

This says it all, IMO.

I(heart)Freel
06-13-2008, 08:07 AM
I like this BLEEDS guy...

BLEEDS, you are correct, the ney-sayers always go back to old faithful... 1/5 of the Payroll...

And yeah, lets put Hopper in Left Field and Rock ON! Not...

If this team lets Dunn go, it will be that much further from being a contender...



Old faithful... otherwise known as historical fact.

Until the Rockies magical late season run last year, no modern team has contended with one player accounting for 1/5 of its payroll.

It's all charted out in "The Book on The Book," if you don't believe me. Which at least two of you won't.

Stick to your guns. Its admirable. But understand that what youre saying - that the Reds can compete by spending 1/5 of its payroll on one player - goes against a lot of history.

There simply has to be a reason for that.

Newman4
06-13-2008, 10:30 AM
To answer the initial question: Yes, I would trade Kemp for Dunn straight up. Not that I don't think Dunn is a valuable offensive player, but this club needs more horses in the rotation before it can discuss 15-20 million per year for a luxury such as Adam Dunn.

levydl
06-13-2008, 12:03 PM
On base percentage is all fine and good. But HITS are what knock in runs and keep rally's going, not walks and K's.

Getting on base and not making outs are what creates runs. It's statistical fact.

OUReds
06-13-2008, 12:04 PM
See I think some of you are under the impression that Dunn is an elite Player. He is not he is a good player but far from elite. He will give you Hrs and walk and that is great but thats about it. I mean look at the leader boards and tell me where you will fined Adam Dunn in the top 10 other then walks and Hrs you won't not RBI's not OPS hell not even OBP. I am all for the reds re-signing Dunn if it's for 2-3 year 12-13 mill but we all know it will cost more then that in years and dollars and he just isn't worth 5-6 years 14-16+ mill. Sorry

I suppose that depends on your definition of elite. Last year he was tenth in the league in OPS, 15th in OBP and 10th in SLG. Even if you don't think he is "elite" in comparison to the rest of the league, he is certainly the best offensive player the Reds have.

To adress some other points here...

Saying he "only" gives you power (SLG) and walks (OBP) is just another way of saying that he only gives you great offense, because getting on base and aquiring as many bases as possible (SLG) is exactly how you score runs.

Nobody is comparing Dunn and Pujols here, because Pujols is clearly the better player. Bleeds only brought him up to illustrate that using scouting metrics is not a good way to evaluate a player's overall worth.

Saying Pujols is an above average defender at 1st base is really damning with faint praise. LF and 1st base are where you stick bats. Dunn is not so bad a defender nor Pujols so good at their respective (offensive oriented) positions that any difference means much in the grand scheme of things.


The Reds have not had a winning season since Dunn has been with the club. Time to move in a different direction.

This implies Dunn has been part of the problem over the last 6 years or so. Don't make me pull out the pitching stats over that period.

Finally, I would trade Dunn for Kemp straight up as well. I'd even throw in a sweetener or take on Pierre's contract to do it. I just want the Reds to win. If there is a plan to replace Dunn's production in the lineup, then fine, off he goes. Unfortunately, despite the prevailing wisdom here, players that OPS between .900 and .940 don't just grow on trees.

levydl
06-13-2008, 12:04 PM
Did I say that? No. I'm saying that if we do keep Dunn (and I'd be fine with that) that we'd have to make multiple changes to make the roster work around him. As it is now, his walks ARE wasted. And no, that's not Dunn's fault. I'm not suggesting it is, a good portion of that blame falls on Dusty and his failure to recognize the OBP of Dunner and hitting him higher in the order. The question isn't whether Adam's a good player or not or how we "value" him, but whether we should sign him or not. Despite what many here say, that decision is anything but a "no-brainer". His contract is going to be huge no matter who it's with. And you can try to spin this any way you want to, but he IS a one-trick pony. He's just damned good at that one trick. ;)




As for Brandon, he's a very valuable player on this team. However, he IS being used improperly. That's fairly obvious. Even if Brandon couldn't hit a lick, he's a valuable player for his defense alone. But he's got better than average power, he'll hit for a considerably better average than Dunn ever will, and he runs the bases VERY well. His propensity for the DP is a major thorn in our side, but batting him in the proper place would minimize that. Hitting him cleanup is simply stupid when facing a righty. Not to mention that he should be moved around more than any other player (up or down in order) in terms of who he's facing (righty or lefty). Moving Brandon higher up in the order or much lower in the order would suit his skills better. But putting the ball in play is never a bad thing. Do that consistantly and you'll find success more than enough. Sometimes hitting into DP's is just bad luck. Against righty's though, it's usually just a bad approach for him.

However, for both Brandon and Adam...I place a large portion of thier flaws at the feet of thier hitting coach. Changing your approach at the plate in certain situations is one of the easiest things to do. Swinging at the first pitch against a young struggling pitcher who's having trouble finding the strike zone? Both of these guys do that on a consistant basis unfortunately. That's something that a good hitting coach would be drilling into their heads daily.

Regardless, I like both players and would be perfectly fine if both stayed long term. But depending upon who goes and who stays...that dictates what we have to do to build things around them.

Dunn drove in a higher percentage of men on base when he was at bat than BP did last year. You can look it up. Or you can look at their respective batting averages and fallaciously deduce what you want from them.

Hondo
06-13-2008, 12:15 PM
Look, with the understanding that no Team has won the big one with 1/5 of its payroll tied to one player... Trading Dunn or not resigning Dunn doesn't make any sense...

The Draft picks aren't going to do anything to improve the club... If they do, all the young cheap players are going to be in the same Spot as Dunn is now, and you might be saying the same thing... Keep Dunn while a lot of Young Talent is so cheap right now...

And if this team wants to be a contender, they might have to sink 15-20 Million in another players besides Dunn, (who I think Dunn will sign for around 14 Mill/year) to be in the Mix... For a Title...

So, your logic, History not withstanding, is Illogical... Dunn isn't the problem, and you will be doing the same thing over and over and over again... You'll never have the right mix of Vetran stars and Young Talent together to win???

And this team has Cordero for 46 Million over 4 years, Getting rid of Dunn, Griffey, and Stanton, Patterson... Helk, you might still have a player eating 1/5 of the Payroll if you go with that path, like you are suggesting...

We can just keep spinning the Wheels here I guess, based on your Logic...

levydl
06-13-2008, 12:16 PM
Adam Dunn is an elite HOME RUN hitter. NOT an elite offensive player.

An elite offensive player has numbers like this....

Utley 21 HRs...but also a .310 ba, 58 rbis
Berkman 19 HRs...but also a .374 ba and 56 rbis
Braun 17 HRs...but also a .292 ba and 49 rbis
Puljols 16 HRs...but also a .347 ba and 42 rbis

Dunn 16 HRs and 41 rbis is on pace with many hitters in the nl...but a .234 ba pales in comparison. An elite offensive player contributes solidly to all 3 triple crown catagories.

I'll never understand why so many sabermetric fanatics totally choose to overlook batting average. I just don't get it. Just because a stat is old school doesn't mean it's a pointless stat. Hitting for a high average is MUCH better than getting a bunch of walks. Not all of those hits are going to be singles. But even those singles will score runners already on base.

Just because a stat is old school does not make it a meaningful stat. BA does not strongly correlate with runs created. It just flat out doesn't. It's not that I don't want it to, so I will discredit it, it statistically does not. It mathematically does not. Do you even know why it's a stat? Because the guy who invented the box score back in the day was an Englishman and a cricket fan and thought walks shouldn't count. No matter that you get on base same as a hit, he thought it was somehow not as good or noble as a hit. It wasn't created because someone figured out it somehow in itself is an important measure of creating runs. It was created out of a cricket fan's bias. But continue to hold onto it as if it is, in itself, something very important to winning baseball, despite the fact that it has been proven otherwise.

Similarly, RBIs are so dependent on other people getting on base that it only gives you half the picture of an individual's offensive capabilities.

Utley, Berkman, and Pujols are all elite offensive players, but it's because of the stats you missed, not the ones you cite, which are really a byproduct of the meaningful statistics.

levydl
06-13-2008, 12:18 PM
Pujols is a very good defensive player at his position: 1B. Adam Dunn is not. Pujols was even above average at 3B before the Cards acquired Rolen.

Patterson simply did not live up to his high ceiling expectations. His only real asset now is speed. He is above average at best in CF.

Once again, Dunn's only asset is Plus Power. High OPS, R's, RBI's are a result of him hitting for power in the middle of the order. But then again, that is the only thing he does well.

As for payroll, No way is it logical to lock up 1/5th of your payroll for a guy who only does one thing well: Hit for power. And if you think Adam Dunn is a top-20 guy in baseball with that .240 career BA, I would definitely like to try what you are smoking.

Pujols and Dunn simply don't belong in the same sentence. Not only does Pujols hit for power, he makes contact, fields well, and more times than not, has even HIGHER middle of the order production numbers (OPS, SLG, RBI's, etc) than Dunn. And this is not even mentioning the intangibles he brings to the team. He is a leader in that clubhouse, is a good influence around other players, shows a winning attitude, and has shown a willing to improve his game from day 1. Pujols is a guy worth 1/5 of the Reds payroll. Adam Dunn is simply not close.

The Reds have not had a winning season since Dunn has been with the club. Time to move in a different direction.

The Reds haven't had a winning season with Harang either. Does he suck too?

And Pujols is on roids or HgH or the new HgH no one knows about yet. If Dunn cheated like that he'd be a god too. He'd also be bald at "23" like Pujols, have 40 inch thighs, and pull his giant calf muscle running out of the box.

757690
06-13-2008, 12:20 PM
Getting on base and not making outs are what creates runs. It's statistical fact.

Yes they do create runs, but so does getting hits with RISP. The question is which do you want your highest played player hitting in the middle of the lineup to be better at?

Read what is written about Dunn, most agree he is very productive, but question his role on the team. With the current roster makeup, is it wise to give 1/5 of the teams payroll to one guy? Personally, until Bruce came along, I thought no. But from what I've seen of Bruce, I am on the fence, since he makes it less important that Dunn carry the team.

Still, without a doubt, the team is much better with Kemp for the next four years than Dunn.

OUReds
06-13-2008, 12:28 PM
Yes they do create runs, but so does getting hits with RISP. The question is which do you want your highest played player hitting in the middle of the lineup to be better at?

I'd like my highest paid player hitting in the middle of the lineup to create runs. Period. I don't care how he does it or if Marty approves of how he does it.

levydl
06-13-2008, 01:07 PM
Yes they do create runs, but so does getting hits with RISP. The question is which do you want your highest played player hitting in the middle of the lineup to be better at?

Read what is written about Dunn, most agree he is very productive, but question his role on the team. With the current roster makeup, is it wise to give 1/5 of the teams payroll to one guy? Personally, until Bruce came along, I thought no. But from what I've seen of Bruce, I am on the fence, since he makes it less important that Dunn carry the team.

Still, without a doubt, the team is much better with Kemp for the next four years than Dunn.

This 1/5 of the team's payroll is a complete cop out and I can't believe Reds fans continue to trot it out there. The Reds made close to $20 million in profit last year. $20 million they took home (The Yankees actually lost money last year. Granted, the value of their franchise continues to increase at a much higher rate than the Reds, but they spent more than they made last year. And Steinbrenner's paying for his own $1 billion stadium). When our team is mired in close to a decade of losing, and after the taxpayers ponied up to pay for a new stadium for them to play in, people still say we can only spend $75 or $80 mil on payroll. God forbid Castellini and the Western Southern boys merely break even while our team sucks for the, what, 8th year in a row now. The team will be worth significantly more than they bought it for whenever they want to sell it, so they can get their money back that way, on top of their thriving fruit business and insurance business and trust funds. When they win, then they can take the money home instead of putting it back into the team.

And why do we have owners that can't afford to win? If you want to buy a baseball team, you should have to have so much money that it's a toy. If you don't, go buy mutual funds. Don't let these mulit-millionaires fool you into thinking we can't compete.

redsfanmia
06-13-2008, 02:28 PM
Question When the Reds needed Dunn to step up 2 seasons ago during August and September what did he do?

I(heart)Freel
06-13-2008, 06:22 PM
Look, with the understanding that no Team has won the big one with 1/5 of its payroll tied to one player... Trading Dunn or not resigning Dunn doesn't make any sense...

The Draft picks aren't going to do anything to improve the club... If they do, all the young cheap players are going to be in the same Spot as Dunn is now, and you might be saying the same thing... Keep Dunn while a lot of Young Talent is so cheap right now...

And if this team wants to be a contender, they might have to sink 15-20 Million in another players besides Dunn, (who I think Dunn will sign for around 14 Mill/year) to be in the Mix... For a Title...

So, your logic, History not withstanding, is Illogical... Dunn isn't the problem, and you will be doing the same thing over and over and over again... You'll never have the right mix of Vetran stars and Young Talent together to win???

And this team has Cordero for 46 Million over 4 years, Getting rid of Dunn, Griffey, and Stanton, Patterson... Helk, you might still have a player eating 1/5 of the Payroll if you go with that path, like you are suggesting...

We can just keep spinning the Wheels here I guess, based on your Logic...

I think the thought is, get good young well-rounded cheap talent in a trade. Then when they do get expensive, you spin them off for more of the same, filling holes that your minor league system hasn't filled.

That's the general idea, at least.

schmidty622
06-13-2008, 07:56 PM
This might have been asked already but why in the hell would the Dodgers want anything to do with that trade?

redsfanmia
06-13-2008, 08:20 PM
This might have been asked already but why in the hell would the Dodgers want anything to do with that trade?

Because Dunn is an elite offensive player.:rolleyes:

levydl
06-13-2008, 09:17 PM
Because Dunn is an elite offensive player.:rolleyes:

Dunn is an elite offensive player, but the Dodgers still wouldn't do it.

BLEEDS
06-14-2008, 12:55 AM
Would people be singing a different tune, if Dunn replaced 1/4th of his walks with weak singles? Then his BA would be .290-ish, and everything else would be the same.

THEN would everyone say he was being "WASTED"?!?!?!

It's really STUPID to consider that a walk - i.e. getting on base without making an out - is THAT much different than a weak single that doesn't move anybody on the bases.

Basically that's what you get with Norris Hopper - a bunch of worthless base hits and NO POWER or SLG stats, which is why he is practically offensively worthless. NOT Corey Patterson or Paul Janish worthless, but not that much better.

Brandon Phillips gets on base about 40-50+ times less than Adam Dunn per year, and creates WAY less TOTAL BASES, but since his AVERAGE is more, some people mistakenly think he is more PRODUCTIVE.

THAT'S why "old school" stats don't show you the whole picture.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redhawk61
06-14-2008, 03:25 AM
Would people be singing a different tune, if Dunn replaced 1/4th of his walks with weak singles? Then his BA would be .290-ish, and everything else would be the same.

THEN would everyone say he was being "WASTED"?!?!?!

It's really STUPID to consider that a walk - i.e. getting on base without making an out - is THAT much different than a weak single that doesn't move anybody on the bases.

Basically that's what you get with Norris Hopper - a bunch of worthless base hits and NO POWER or SLG stats, which is why he is practically offensively worthless. NOT Corey Patterson or Paul Janish worthless, but not that much better.

Brandon Phillips gets on base about 40-50+ times less than Adam Dunn per year, and creates WAY less TOTAL BASES, but since his AVERAGE is more, some people mistakenly think he is more PRODUCTIVE.

THAT'S why "old school" stats don't show you the whole picture.

PEACE

-BLEEDS
If he was batting .290 his BA with RISP would more than likely be higher, thus more RBI's, wouldn't it? It kinda plays into what Dusty says about BB's clogging the bases. If there is no one on, than yeah a walk is just as good as a single ie the leadoff hitter(somehow Dusty doesn't use his own ideas with CP), but if there are RISP a walk doesn't do anything more than "clog up the bases", which is not something you want from your most paid offensive player, you want him to be the one driving in those runs with a hit

OUReds
06-14-2008, 05:27 AM
If he was batting .290 his BA with RISP would more than likely be higher, thus more RBI's, wouldn't it? It kinda plays into what Dusty says about BB's clogging the bases. If there is no one on, than yeah a walk is just as good as a single ie the leadoff hitter(somehow Dusty doesn't use his own ideas with CP), but if there are RISP a walk doesn't do anything more than "clog up the bases", which is not something you want from your most paid offensive player, you want him to be the one driving in those runs with a hit

As mentioned in any of the Dunn threads, we want our highest paid offensive player to create runs, by avoiding outs and accumulating as many bases as possible. This is something Dunn does better then anyone on the team, and better then 80-90% of MLB players currently playing.

I would love it if he would do it by batting .350. Not because it really matters how he does it (assuming the same RC/27 of course), but because then perhaps we would only have a "Dunn Sucks!" thread every couple of weeks instead of every day.

Lockdwn11
06-14-2008, 08:32 AM
"Brandon Phillips gets on base about 40-50+ times less than Adam Dunn per year, and creates WAY less TOTAL BASES, but since his AVERAGE is more, some people mistakenly think he is more PRODUCTIVE"

Total Bases:
Phillips
2007 - 315
2008 - 129

Dunn
2007- 289
2008-106

In 07 Dunn reached base by hit or walk 239 time Brandon Phillips 219 that only 20 less times not the 40-50+ you speak of . Sofar this year it's 104 to 89. On top of that Phillips gives you GOLD GLOVE defense so if anyone is undervalued on this board it's Brandon Phillips because he doesn't walk alot people mistakenly think he is LESS PRODUCTIVE then he really is.

I(heart)Freel
06-14-2008, 10:00 AM
"Brandon Phillips gets on base about 40-50+ times less than Adam Dunn per year, and creates WAY less TOTAL BASES, but since his AVERAGE is more, some people mistakenly think he is more PRODUCTIVE"

Total Bases:
Phillips
2007 - 315
2008 - 129

Dunn
2007- 289
2008-106

In 07 Dunn reached base by hit or walk 239 time Brandon Phillips 219 that only 20 less times not the 40-50 you speak of . Sofar this year it's 104 to 89. On top of that Phillips gives you GOLD GLOVE defense so if anyone is undervalued on this board it's Brandon Phillips because he doesn't walk alot people mistakenly think he is LESS PRODUCTIVE then he really is.

Don't forget the second half of his 30/30 accomplishment: steals.

Well-rounded ball player.

Lockdwn11
06-16-2008, 05:34 PM
Good point I(heart)freel

redsfanmia
06-16-2008, 06:25 PM
Don't forget the second half of his 30/30 accomplishment: steals.

Well-rounded ball player.

And Phillips is a plus defender.

_Sir_Charles_
06-16-2008, 06:32 PM
Would people be singing a different tune, if Dunn replaced 1/4th of his walks with weak singles? Then his BA would be .290-ish, and everything else would be the same.

THEN would everyone say he was being "WASTED"?!?!?!

It's really STUPID to consider that a walk - i.e. getting on base without making an out - is THAT much different than a weak single that doesn't move anybody on the bases.

Basically that's what you get with Norris Hopper - a bunch of worthless base hits and NO POWER or SLG stats, which is why he is practically offensively worthless. NOT Corey Patterson or Paul Janish worthless, but not that much better.

Brandon Phillips gets on base about 40-50+ times less than Adam Dunn per year, and creates WAY less TOTAL BASES, but since his AVERAGE is more, some people mistakenly think he is more PRODUCTIVE.

THAT'S why "old school" stats don't show you the whole picture.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I don't discount the positives of walking and not making outs. But I refuse to believe that people here would prefer a walk to a hit. I simply flat out refuse to believe that Reds fans are that blindingly dumb. Yes, SOME singles don't move runners around. However, the large majority of hits (ANY hits, not JUST singles) WILL move runners around and will score a good portion of them. Walks DON'T. I'm not saying that what Dunn does isn't valuable. It is. But if he were even just SLIGHTLY more aggressive at the plate, he'd be more productive. Working the count is fantastic and I'd love to see more of our players do it regularly. But the point to working the count is to force the pitcher to give you a pitch you can hit OR force him into a walk. Dunn doesn't do this. He forces a pitcher into a walk, or he bails them out with a strikeout. I don't want him to get aggressive to the point where he swings at bad pitches, but he will regularly go down looking instead of at least swinging. That's a passive approach.

But back to the hit versus a walk issue. I'd love to see you sabermetric fanatics put together some numbers of how productive a walk is compared to a single. Both get a man on base, both continue an inning. But what's the percentage of singles that DON'T move a runner more than one base. Or what about when it's a single and a runner is already in scoring position. You really want your walk then?

I'm not trying to say that Batting Average is a more or less useful tool than OBP or SLG or whatever. I'm just saying that BA gets overlooked by sabermetric fans and that it IS still a useful tool...just in a different way. Walks are great, hits are MUCH, MUCH better. Whether they come from Norris Hopper or Adam Dunn. I'll take the hit.

757690
06-16-2008, 06:52 PM
I don't discount the positives of walking and not making outs. But I refuse to believe that people here would prefer a walk to a hit. I simply flat out refuse to believe that Reds fans are that blindingly dumb. Yes, SOME singles don't move runners around. However, the large majority of hits (ANY hits, not JUST singles) WILL move runners around and will score a good portion of them. Walks DON'T. I'm not saying that what Dunn does isn't valuable. It is. But if he were even just SLIGHTLY more aggressive at the plate, he'd be more productive. Working the count is fantastic and I'd love to see more of our players do it regularly. But the point to working the count is to force the pitcher to give you a pitch you can hit OR force him into a walk. Dunn doesn't do this. He forces a pitcher into a walk, or he bails them out with a strikeout. I don't want him to get aggressive to the point where he swings at bad pitches, but he will regularly go down looking instead of at least swinging. That's a passive approach.

But back to the hit versus a walk issue. I'd love to see you sabermetric fanatics put together some numbers of how productive a walk is compared to a single. Both get a man on base, both continue an inning. But what's the percentage of singles that DON'T move a runner more than one base. Or what about when it's a single and a runner is already in scoring position. You really want your walk then?

I'm not trying to say that Batting Average is a more or less useful tool than OBP or SLG or whatever. I'm just saying that BA gets overlooked by sabermetric fans and that it IS still a useful tool...just in a different way. Walks are great, hits are MUCH, MUCH better. Whether they come from Norris Hopper or Adam Dunn. I'll take the hit.

Excellent question.

Based on historical stats, most Saber guys conclude that a walk has been worth about 2/3 of a hit in terms of runs produced. That is a broad generalization, and is not context specific. This is why OBP needs to be understood in terms of how it is reached. Two players with the same OPB can produce very different run estimates. The one with more hits will produce more runs.

This site gives some explanation.

http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2004/10/brief-history-of-run-estimation_27.html

I am still waiting for an analysis of the difference between a hit and walk with men on base and with RISP in terms of run production. I think Saber guys are afraid of the results they might find.

OUReds
06-16-2008, 07:11 PM
I don't discount the positives of walking and not making outs. But I refuse to believe that people here would prefer a walk to a hit....

But back to the hit versus a walk issue. I'd love to see you sabermetric fanatics put together some numbers of how productive a walk is compared to a single. Both get a man on base, both continue an inning. But what's the percentage of singles that DON'T move a runner more than one base. Or what about when it's a single and a runner is already in scoring position. You really want your walk then?

Hits are better then walks, nobody should contest that point.

However, the value difference between a hit and a walk absolutely pales in comparison to the difference between a walk and making an out. The single most important thing you can do at the plate to score runs is avoid making an out. You only get 27 of them.

People in general are not overvaluing walks compared to hits, they are undervaluing walks compared to outs.

As far as the relative value of a walk to a hit, all that work has been done should you care to research it, and it is incorperated into saber stats like runs created. 757690 has got you started.


I am still waiting for an analysis of the difference between a hit and walk with men on base and with RISP in terms of run production. I think Saber guys are afraid of the results they might find.

Why should they be afraid? For every guy trying to make walks and Adam Dunn look good, there is a guy who doesn't give a damn who Adam Dunn is or how he scores runs. I doubt there is a conspiracy to make walks look better then they are. You're paranoid :p:

_Sir_Charles_
06-16-2008, 07:20 PM
I agree, 757690. I just find it frustrating that everyone (saber-ites...for lack of a better term) touts Dunn as an elite offensive player because of his excellent OBP. But what would you rather have, a high OBP guy where his OBP is mostly walk-driven...or batting average-driven? Me, I'll take the batting average driven OBP any day of the week. So, say what you want about Norris Hopper (not you...others), but don't compare him to the Paul Janish's and Corey Patterson's of the world. Yes, he's got similar power to Janish (or lack thereof) but he DOES generate OBP via a high batting average, he's got plus-speed and he's one hell of a bunter which makes him a valuable 4th outfielder due to his pinchhitting/sac bunt usefulness.

So, what exactly makes Dunn an elite hitter? I guess that would be my next question. Because he easily generates 80% of his stats during 20% of the season during his hot stretches. But the rest of the season, he's a black hole in the lineup. Is it his OBP? Is it his 40 hr / 100 rbi / 100 runs / 100 bb / 100 k's? Because I don't view him as an elite hitter in the NL. His lack of consistancy alone should disqualify him from elite status. And say what you want about batting average guys, but it's batting average that shows you how consistant a hitter is at the plate IMO.

_Sir_Charles_
06-16-2008, 07:29 PM
Hits are better then walks, nobody should contest that point.

However, the value difference between a hit and a walk absolutely pales in comparison to the difference between a walk and making an out. The single most important thing you can do at the plate to score runs is avoid making an out. You only get 27 of them.

People in general are not overvaluing walks compared to hits, they are undervaluing walks compared to outs.

As far as the relative value of a walk to a hit, all that work has been done should you care to research it, and it is incorperated into saber stats like runs created. 757690 has got you started.

But again, are we looking at outs in the same way? Dunn's outs tend to be strikeout based. If they were deep flyouts, I'd be fine with them. As those will have a moderate chance to move runners up or even score them via the sac. fly. But his consistant failure to put bat on ball is his biggest fault as a hitter. His lack of aggression at the plate makes him fall well out of the elite catagory. Putting the ball into play consistantly while maintaining a patient approach is what we want to see. Not just watching them sail past him.

Last time I mentioned wanting Dunn to just put the ball in play, people started spouting back to me stuff about Brandon Phillips and his hitting into double plays as "just putting the ball in play". I'd take Phillip's approach over Dunn's any day of the week (if he would just be a bit more patient and not swing at the first pitch so often). He's aggressive and tries to make something happen. Put some pressure on the defense instead of leaving the decision up to the Umpire's strike-zone.

Yes, hits are better than walks and walks are better than outs. But if you're already working the count...stay aggressive and put the ball in play. Maybe I'm alone in hating seeing Dunn strike out looking after taking a pitcher to a 10-12 pitch at bat. I'd certainly hope I'm not.

OUReds
06-16-2008, 07:36 PM
I agree, 757690. I just find it frustrating that everyone (saber-ites...for lack of a better term) touts Dunn as an elite offensive player because of his excellent OBP. But what would you rather have, a high OBP guy where his OBP is mostly walk-driven...or batting average-driven? Me, I'll take the batting average driven OBP any day of the week. So, say what you want about Norris Hopper (not you...others), but don't compare him to the Paul Janish's and Corey Patterson's of the world. Yes, he's got similar power to Janish (or lack thereof) but he DOES generate OBP via a high batting average, he's got plus-speed and he's one hell of a bunter which makes him a valuable 4th outfielder due to his pinchhitting/sac bunt usefulness.

So, what exactly makes Dunn an elite hitter? I guess that would be my next question. Because he easily generates 80% of his stats during 20% of the season during his hot stretches. But the rest of the season, he's a black hole in the lineup. Is it his OBP? Is it his 40 hr / 100 rbi / 100 runs / 100 bb / 100 k's? Because I don't view him as an elite hitter in the NL. His lack of consistancy alone should disqualify him from elite status. And say what you want about batting average guys, but it's batting average that shows you how consistant a hitter is at the plate IMO.

Because hitters with plate diecipline are, ironicly, more consistent. When Dunn is slumping he still provides value because he is still getting on base and avoiding walks (as opposed to being a "black hole"). Patience doesn't slump.

When someone with a BA driven OBP slumps, he's just making outs period. What's more, for various reasons you are free to research under the heading BABIP, history shows us that, in general, a high OBP% driven by BA is not sustainable long term. In essence, it's not batting average, but plate discipline that shows how consistent a hitter is at the plate.

As has been answered many, many times in every Dunn thread, Dunn is an elite hitter because he gets on base (avoids outs) and collects lots of bases over a course of the season (hits for power).

OUReds
06-16-2008, 07:44 PM
But again, are we looking at outs in the same way? Dunn's outs tend to be strikeout based. If they were deep flyouts, I'd be fine with them. As those will have a moderate chance to move runners up or even score them via the sac. fly. But his consistant failure to put bat on ball is his biggest fault as a hitter. His lack of aggression at the plate makes him fall well out of the elite catagory. Putting the ball into play consistantly while maintaining a patient approach is what we want to see. Not just watching them sail past him.

Last time I mentioned wanting Dunn to just put the ball in play, people started spouting back to me stuff about Brandon Phillips and his hitting into double plays as "just putting the ball in play". I'd take Phillip's approach over Dunn's any day of the week (if he would just be a bit more patient and not swing at the first pitch so often). He's aggressive and tries to make something happen. Put some pressure on the defense instead of leaving the decision up to the Umpire's strike-zone.

Yes, hits are better than walks and walks are better than outs. But if you're already working the count...stay aggressive and put the ball in play. Maybe I'm alone in hating seeing Dunn strike out looking after taking a pitcher to a 10-12 pitch at bat. I'd certainly hope I'm not.

Yes, strikeouts adversely affect run production, and are factored into saber equations. They just don't affect production as much as people THINK they do.

Edit: As far as Dunn vs Phillips, I guess I don't understand why it has to be a competition? Different hitters have different approaches at the plate, the game would be far less enjoyable if everyone hit the same way. Objectively, Dunn is a much better offensive player (7.8 RC/27 vs 5.0 RC/27), but Brandon playes a premium defensive position and plays is absolutely beautifully.

_Sir_Charles_
06-16-2008, 08:03 PM
Because hitters with plate diecipline are, ironicly, more consistent. When Dunn is slumping he still provides value because he is still getting on base and avoiding walks (as opposed to being a "black hole"). Patience doesn't slump.

When someone with a BA driven OBP slumps, he's just making outs period. What's more, for various reasons you are free to research under the heading BABIP, history shows us that, in general, a high OBP% driven by BA is not sustainable long term. In essence, it's not batting average, but plate discipline that shows how consistent a hitter is at the plate.

As has been answered many, many times in every Dunn thread, Dunn is an elite hitter because he gets on base (avoids outs) and collects lots of bases over a course of the season (hits for power).

Theoretically, that's great. But that's not what Dunn does. When Dunn slumps, he does NOT get walks still. He's striking out MORE. A larger portion of Dunn's walks come when he's NOT slumping and pitchers are pitching around him (and the occasional intentional pass). And when that starts happening, they come in bunches. Multiple times in a short number of games. But when he goes into his prolonged slumps, he's simply not getting on base at all. Care to recall how many times you've seen Dunn have a 4 strikeout game? Or 10 k's in a 3 game period? Dunn is an all or nothing hitter. But the problem is that he generates his production in a short period of time...and over the course of the season that means it impacts FEWER games. His total numbers are great, but they affect fewer wins.

And players who hit for high averages are also usually patient hitters as well. When they slump...they are also having quality at bats and getting the occasional walk too.

And lastly, walks don't generate runs. They generate the opportunity for your fellow teammates to generate runs. An elite hitter doesn't just say "well, the next guy will knock us around". An elite hitter stays aggressive at the plate and puts pressure on the defense. Hit the ball hard into play often enough and you'll get more than your fair share of hits...and a good portion of those will NOT just be singles. Dunn's power is wasted if he's not putting the bat on the ball.

OUReds
06-16-2008, 08:30 PM
Theoretically, that's great. But that's not what Dunn does. When Dunn slumps, he does NOT get walks still. He's striking out MORE. A larger portion of Dunn's walks come when he's NOT slumping and pitchers are pitching around him (and the occasional intentional pass). And when that starts happening, they come in bunches. Multiple times in a short number of games. But when he goes into his prolonged slumps, he's simply not getting on base at all. Care to recall how many times you've seen Dunn have a 4 strikeout game? Or 10 k's in a 3 game period? Dunn is an all or nothing hitter. But the problem is that he generates his production in a short period of time...and over the course of the season that means it impacts FEWER games. His total numbers are great, but they affect fewer wins.

And players who hit for high averages are also usually patient hitters as well. When they slump...they are also having quality at bats and getting the occasional walk too.

And lastly, walks don't generate runs. They generate the opportunity for your fellow teammates to generate runs. An elite hitter doesn't just say "well, the next guy will knock us around". An elite hitter stays aggressive at the plate and puts pressure on the defense. Hit the ball hard into play often enough and you'll get more than your fair share of hits...and a good portion of those will NOT just be singles. Dunn's power is wasted if he's not putting the bat on the ball.

Since 2004, 28 full months of baseball, Dunn has been under a .350 OBP only 5 of those months. Three of those 5 months he posted OPB of over .340. Dunn is the model of consistency when it comes to getting on base.

As far as saying "walks don't generate runs", that's semantics. Walks help create runs. If Dunn walks and Votto homers two batters later, didn't Dunn's walk "generate" one of those runs? Does Votto get all the credit for both runs? Doesn't Dunn get credit for, ya know, knocking in 100 runs a year himself.

I know Dunn doesn't create runs the way you want him to, but why does it matter HOW he does it? Isn't that he does it enough?

BLEEDS
06-17-2008, 12:18 AM
"Brandon Phillips gets on base about 40-50+ times less than Adam Dunn per year, and creates WAY less TOTAL BASES, but since his AVERAGE is more, some people mistakenly think he is more PRODUCTIVE"

Total Bases:
Phillips
2007 - 315
2008 - 129

Dunn
2007- 289
2008-106

In 07 Dunn reached base by hit or walk 239 time Brandon Phillips 219 that only 20 less times not the 40-50+ you speak of . Sofar this year it's 104 to 89. On top of that Phillips gives you GOLD GLOVE defense so if anyone is undervalued on this board it's Brandon Phillips because he doesn't walk alot people mistakenly think he is LESS PRODUCTIVE then he really is.

Using BP's CAREER YEAR is nice, but I was talking on average. How about 2006:

2006:
Dunn: 131 hits + 112 BB = 246
BP: 148 hits + 35 BB = 183
That difference is 63

what's 63 + 20 totaled, divided by 2? 41.5. That's called "on average". Of course BP needed 650 AB's compared to Dunn's 522 to get within 20 in 2007, but whatever....


And yes, the "Official" baseball statistic for "Total Bases" does not include walks. I was not referencing only hits-produced bases, but walks as well.
Those numbers?::

2007:
Dunn: 390
BP: 348
That difference is 42

2006:
Dunn: 387
BP: 264
That difference is WAY too much to calculate with piddies, so I can understand you not including it - it's 123.

Of course I was mentioning "~" which means approximate, and of course this is in terms of "average", which is for the following past two years:

2007:
hits+walks: 41.5 per year
Total Bases+walks: 84 per year.

Also, of course, you have to consider games played and AB's vary - especially between guys who bat higher in the lineup - being BP for some ridiculous reason.

Might be most simple to look at their OBP and SLG if you want to compare apples to apples.

Dunn's OBP is about .380 compared to BP's .320 (which is being generous in only including his last 3 years) - which is about 60 points difference. Using ONLY 550 as a comparison - you get 33. So excuse me, he only gets OB about 33 more times than BP - all things being equal.

Total Bases? Slugging is about a 55 points difference as well (only over the last 3 years, which is giving BP WAAAAy too much credit, again), so good for about 30 additional bases

Walks - on average Dunn gets about 94 pts more per AB in walks, so about 52 more walks per 550 AB's, giving you TOTAL PRODUCTION of about 82 TB's + Walks.

When you consider that BP's Batting average is a whopping 26 pts higher than Dunn's over the last 3 years, that's about an average of 14 hits more per 550 AB's. That's LESS than 1 per every 10 games

NOW, when you consider that Dunn gets on base more often - meaning gets OUT less - at a pace more than DOUBLE that at 60, that means that BP gets out 33 more times per year than Dunn - or MORE than once more often every 5 games - or TWO times every 10 games. And, more than likely, one of those outs is a Double Play. Then tell me who is more PRODUCTIVE.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Lockdwn11
06-17-2008, 07:16 AM
Using BP's CAREER YEAR is nice, but I was talking on average. How about 2006:

2006:
Dunn: 131 hits + 112 BB = 246
BP: 148 hits + 35 BB = 183
That difference is 63

what's 63 + 20 totaled, divided by 2? 41.5. That's called "on average". Of course BP needed 650 AB's compared to Dunn's 522 to get within 20 in 2007, but whatever....


And yes, the "Official" baseball statistic for "Total Bases" does not include walks. I was not referencing only hits-produced bases, but walks as well.
Those numbers?::

2007:
Dunn: 390
BP: 348
That difference is 42

2006:
Dunn: 387
BP: 264
That difference is WAY too much to calculate with piddies, so I can understand you not including it - it's 123.

Of course I was mentioning "~" which means approximate, and of course this is in terms of "average", which is for the following past two years:

2007:
hits+walks: 41.5 per year
Total Bases+walks: 84 per year.

Also, of course, you have to consider games played and AB's vary - especially between guys who bat higher in the lineup - being BP for some ridiculous reason.

Might be most simple to look at their OBP and SLG if you want to compare apples to apples.

Dunn's OBP is about .380 compared to BP's .320 (which is being generous in only including his last 3 years) - which is about 60 points difference. Using ONLY 550 as a comparison - you get 33. So excuse me, he only gets OB about 33 more times than BP - all things being equal.

Total Bases? Slugging is about a 55 points difference as well (only over the last 3 years, which is giving BP WAAAAy too much credit, again), so good for about 30 additional bases

Walks - on average Dunn gets about 94 pts more per AB in walks, so about 52 more walks per 550 AB's, giving you TOTAL PRODUCTION of about 82 TB's + Walks.

When you consider that BP's Batting average is a whopping 26 pts higher than Dunn's over the last 3 years, that's about an average of 14 hits more per 550 AB's. That's LESS than 1 per every 10 games

NOW, when you consider that Dunn gets on base more often - meaning gets OUT less - at a pace more than DOUBLE that at 60, that means that BP gets out 33 more times per year than Dunn - or MORE than once more often every 5 games - or TWO times every 10 games. And, more than likely, one of those outs is a Double Play. Then tell me who is more PRODUCTIVE.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I went back two year because I feel that it was the best way to go because BOTH player are in thier prime 06 was Brandon first full year in the Majors so I didn't feel that was fair but have at it.

BLEEDS
06-17-2008, 10:39 AM
I went back two year because I feel that it was the best way to go because BOTH player are in thier prime 06 was Brandon first full year in the Majors so I didn't feel that was fair but have at it.

NAH, just use ONE year, which happens to be his best year, and call it statistically significant.

I mean, 149 games and 536 at-bats for a 25 year-old who's been in MLB for 5 years shouldn't be considered now should it? How about we just compare Brandon's 2007 stats to Dunn's 2008 June?!?

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Hondo
06-17-2008, 12:55 PM
Using BP's CAREER YEAR is nice, but I was talking on average. How about 2006:

2006:
Dunn: 131 hits + 112 BB = 246
BP: 148 hits + 35 BB = 183
That difference is 63

what's 63 + 20 totaled, divided by 2? 41.5. That's called "on average". Of course BP needed 650 AB's compared to Dunn's 522 to get within 20 in 2007, but whatever....


And yes, the "Official" baseball statistic for "Total Bases" does not include walks. I was not referencing only hits-produced bases, but walks as well.
Those numbers?::

2007:
Dunn: 390
BP: 348
That difference is 42

2006:
Dunn: 387
BP: 264
That difference is WAY too much to calculate with piddies, so I can understand you not including it - it's 123.

Of course I was mentioning "~" which means approximate, and of course this is in terms of "average", which is for the following past two years:

2007:
hits+walks: 41.5 per year
Total Bases+walks: 84 per year.

Also, of course, you have to consider games played and AB's vary - especially between guys who bat higher in the lineup - being BP for some ridiculous reason.

Might be most simple to look at their OBP and SLG if you want to compare apples to apples.

Dunn's OBP is about .380 compared to BP's .320 (which is being generous in only including his last 3 years) - which is about 60 points difference. Using ONLY 550 as a comparison - you get 33. So excuse me, he only gets OB about 33 more times than BP - all things being equal.

Total Bases? Slugging is about a 55 points difference as well (only over the last 3 years, which is giving BP WAAAAy too much credit, again), so good for about 30 additional bases

Walks - on average Dunn gets about 94 pts more per AB in walks, so about 52 more walks per 550 AB's, giving you TOTAL PRODUCTION of about 82 TB's + Walks.

When you consider that BP's Batting average is a whopping 26 pts higher than Dunn's over the last 3 years, that's about an average of 14 hits more per 550 AB's. That's LESS than 1 per every 10 games

NOW, when you consider that Dunn gets on base more often - meaning gets OUT less - at a pace more than DOUBLE that at 60, that means that BP gets out 33 more times per year than Dunn - or MORE than once more often every 5 games - or TWO times every 10 games. And, more than likely, one of those outs is a Double Play. Then tell me who is more PRODUCTIVE.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Yeah, what he said...

But to add something... What is worse? A strike out or a Double Play?

But another thing... Brandon Phillips is a great Player. Adam Dunn is a great player... This team needs both, plus some more pieces...

BLEEDS
06-17-2008, 01:00 PM
Yeah, what he said...

But to add something... What is worse? A strike out or a Double Play?

But another thing... Brandon Phillips is a great Player. Adam Dunn is a great player... This team needs both, plus some more pieces...

Agreed. Funny thing though is that people love BP because of his BA, but ignore his other HUGE offensive flaws, while pounding Dunn, who is CLEARLY the most productive player on the roster, and it's not even close.

Just pointing out the disparity.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Lockdwn11
06-17-2008, 04:17 PM
Agreed. Funny thing though is that people love BP because of his BA, but ignore his other HUGE offensive flaws, while pounding Dunn, who is CLEARLY the most productive player on the roster, and it's not even close.

Just pointing out the disparity.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Another funny thing is people on this board ignore Dunn and his HUGE flaws but will bring up BP every chance they get. They are both good players and both very productive they just go about it in different ways