PDA

View Full Version : Adam Dunn is not having even a mediocre year....



Pages : [1] 2 3

dougdirt
07-15-2008, 03:26 PM
Or so says John Fay.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008807130431

The Reds are going to go into the All-Star break in a sort of baseball limbo.

Within reach of .500. Not really in contention. Not really out of contention. Playing better, but not really hot.

Fifty fans would have 50 different reasons why the Reds aren't in better shape. Among the popular complaints:

Dusty Baker stuck with Corey Patterson too long. The fifth spot in the rotation has been a black hole. Ken Griffey Jr. shouldn't be hitting in the third spot. The Reds don't hit in the clutch. Edwin Encarnacion continues to throw the ball away on a regular basis.

There's some validity to all of the above.

But the real reason the Reds are where they are?

Four of their highest-paid, most experienced players are having bad years. Among Griffey, Adam Dunn, Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, none is having even a mediocre year.

"That's a fair assessment," Baker said. "You pay attention to them because they're big guys. They're the highest-salary guys."

Dunn makes $13 million, Griffey $12.5 million, Harang $6.75 million and Arroyo $4.575 million - nearly half the Reds' $74.1 million total payroll.

If all four were close to their average big-league numbers, the Reds probably would be right in the thick of the National League Central race.

If two of the four were having decent years, the Reds probably would be .500 or better.

Baker and his coaches have spent a lot of time trying to get them there.

"You try to find out why," Baker said. "You try to get a guy back to that point of excellence that everyone is used to, especially them. Nobody's more disappointed than they are."

But none of the four is even close to the numbers on the backs of their baseball cards. Consider (all stats are going into Saturday's game):

Griffey is hitting .235 with 12 home runs and 43 RBI. He hasn't hit left-handers (.198) and he hasn't hit with runners in scoring position (.224).

Griffey is 38 years old, so no one expects the 1997 Griffey. But the Reds would take the 2007 Griffey. He was hitting .286 with 23 home runs and 59 RBI at the break last year.

Dunn is hitting .225 with 24 home runs and 54 RBI. His on-base percentage (.381) is the best on the team, and he's tied for the NL lead in walks.

But, like Griffey, he has struggled against left-handers (.179) and with RISP (.213).

Dunn probably never is going to hit .300 or even .280, but he hit .264 last year.

Harang is 3-11 with a 4.76 ERA. His sore forearm and workload might have something to do with his numbers.

But even before the infamous relief appearance in San Diego, Harang could not seem to get on the kind of roll he had in the past.

Arroyo is 7-7 with a 5.97 ERA. He admitted last week that he's very lucky to be at .500 given his ERA.

Of the big four, he's shown the most positive signs of turning it around. He's 3-0 over his last three starts.

Baker is banking the second half on the hope that the big four will be themselves again.

"We've got a lot of season left," he said. "Hopefully, they can have a monster 2˝ months."

Three of the four are in their prime years: Arroyo's 31, Harang's 30 and Dunn's 28.

Again, Griffey is 38. His father, Ken Sr., hit .286 with 14 home runs and 64 RBI at 37. He hit .255 with four home runs and 23 RBI the next year.

But Baker thinks all four can return to reasonable facsimiles of their former selves.

"Yeah, they can," Baker said. "I know some people don't think so, but I think so."

If they don't, the Reds' second half will be a lot like their first half.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-15-2008, 03:28 PM
Fay is an idiot.

So is Dusty Baker if he thinks Dunn is having a mediocre year.

Arroyo has been struggling a little, but not nearly as bad as his ERA indicates (he's been BABIP) unlucky. His K numbers are way up, in fact.

Harang has struggled a bit (like Arroyo with ERA), but his struggles are not nearly as bad as his W/L record indicates, especially considering he's been overused the past few years and he's now feeling the effects as he's BEEN INJURED and is actually MISSING STARTS, because of it!

I wouldn't expect Fay or Baker to look a little deeper. It's both of their jobs to do so, but Fay's too used to typing gibberish to spoonfeed the the casual fan and Baker is, well, Baker.

RedsManRick
07-15-2008, 03:35 PM
I swear.... His inability to write paragraphs makes me want to claw my eyes out. Good to know we're still blaming our most productive player for our problems. Sure, he leads the Reds in HR, RBI, OBP, and SLG and is 2nd in Runs. But he's the reason the Reds are below .500. If only he could hit .260 again.

Somebody needs to tell Fay that .228/.380/.538 is very close to .247/.381/.521. I wish Dunn haters would just come out and say it: "I believe that batting average is the best indicator of offensive performance. Adam Dunn cannot hit for average and therefore is not a productive offensive player." Maybe someday Fay will enter the 1990's... let alone this century.

Cyclone792
07-15-2008, 03:40 PM
Fay himself is having a bad year as a beat writer.

missionhockey21
07-15-2008, 03:40 PM
Damn that Adam Dunn.

(Based on NL Rankings:
11th in OPS
16th in OBP
14th in SLG%
12th in RC/27)

*BaseClogger*
07-15-2008, 03:40 PM
http://www.firejoemorgan.com/


Finally tonight -- you guessed it. More Adam Dunn bashing! This time reader Derek wants us to join in on the misery of reading John Fay's reporting on the Reds.

Four of their highest-paid, most experienced players are having bad years. Among Griffey, Adam Dunn, Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, none is having even a mediocre year.

Forget the other guys -- I don't even care. We all love Adam Dunn here at FJM and we're not afraid to admit it. He gives us the kind of Three True Outcomes boner that's getting harder and harder to find in this post-steroids "emphasis on fundamentals" bull**** era that is so much less exciting and awesome than the days when everyone did a ton of drugs and hit the ball 4,000 feet and you didn't even have to worry about explaining to people about why it's stupid to bunt because it was never even an issue because for crissakes even your catcher could hit 30 home runs a year because he was doing things to his body that were making him better at baseball but of course god forbid people who play baseball should be allowed to do things that make them better at baseball --

Sorry. You're the ones who are supposed to getting drunk. I'm the 'mauf man. Apologies.

Adam Dunn is having a better than mediocre year. You all know this. He is doing the two things that are most important for hitters very well: getting on base (380 OBP) and hitting the ball hard (538 SLG). Unfortunately, John Fey has found someone to agree with him in his assessment that Dunn's year is -- again, remember this -- not just not great, but not even mediocre.

"That's a fair assessment," Baker said. "You pay attention to them because they're big guys. They're the highest-salary guys."

Good job, Dusty.

Our hearts continue to go out to the fine people of Cincinnati, who will have no choice but to drown their sorrows in Graeter's Ice Cream and Skyline Chili until DB steps down.

If all four were close to their average big-league numbers, the Reds probably would be right in the thick of the National League Central race.

Adam Dunn, career averages:
247 / 381 / 521

Adam Dunn, 2008:
228 / 380 / 528

BuckeyeRedleg
07-15-2008, 03:49 PM
If two of the four were having decent years, the Reds probably would be .500 or better.

Uhh, as I said, Dunn might appear to be having an average year for his standards, but he's really been better. On pace for 44 HR (better than average), 918 OPS (Better than average) 100 RBI (about average for him, and consider the fact that nobody is on base in front of him), and career low in K's. He's been better in LF. Oh, but that .228 BA. That must be it. LOL.

And Arroyo is having a mediocre year when you look at all his numbers. He's not Cy Young. He's a #3-4 starter. It's not his fault that the Reds paid him like he was a #2.

Harang: Tired arm.

Griffey is 38, nearing 39. Expecting him to carry the team is foolish, but this is a manager that continues to hit him 3rd, [Orbit chewing gum girl]no matter what [Orbit chewing gum girl].

By the way, the Reds are playing 3-4 games of their Pythag, so they are lucky to be where they are, even with Dunn having a good year and Arroyo having a medicore year.



Dunn is hitting .225 with 24 home runs and 54 RBI. His on-base percentage (.381) is the best on the team, and he's tied for the NL lead in walks.

But, like Griffey, he has struggled against left-handers (.179) and with RISP (.213).

Dunn probably never is going to hit .300 or even .280, but he hit .264 last year.

Way to cherry pick stats. LOL.


Harang is 3-11 with a 4.76 ERA. His sore forearm and workload might have something to do with his numbers.

You think?


Arroyo is 7-7 with a 5.97 ERA. He admitted last week that he's very lucky to be at .500 given his ERA.

And his ERA is unlucky, but you wouldn't know that. And Arroyo should feel he's lucky to be 7-7, considering he's on a bad team.

Reds Fanatic
07-15-2008, 04:03 PM
Including Dunn in that article is ridiculous. He is on pace for another 40 HR 100 RBI year with a good OBP. I wish more of our players were having such a "mediocre" year.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-15-2008, 04:04 PM
Also they think that those four are causing the Reds to be out of contention. Did they also expect Volquez to be Cy Young?

Without him, this team is 10 under, not even considering what Dunn, Arroyo, and Harang have done.

RedsManRick
07-15-2008, 04:05 PM
The real problem is that Dunn is being rolled in here with Junior, Harang, and Arroyo. Junior and Arroyo have been replacement level and Harang has clearly struggled a lot. Dunn meanwhile is on pace for one of the best years of his career. It's a completely short-sided analysis blinded by a single insignificant number.

I wish Fay would stick to his job as a reporter of news that other people make and leave the analysis to people who know what they're talking about. It's one thing to use quotes as the bulk of your story, the thing which you are reporting. It's quite another to suggest a analytical thesis and then cherry pick quotes to support it. His utter misuse of the stats only seal the deal.

RichRed
07-15-2008, 04:05 PM
Dunn is hitting .225 with 24 home runs and 54 RBI. His on-base percentage (.381) is the best on the team, and he's tied for the NL lead in walks.

But, like Griffey, he has struggled against left-handers (.179) and with RISP (.213).

Translation: Sure Dunn is doing well in actual run-producing categories but look at how bad he is in stats that don't mean squat!

Seriously though, Dunn IS underperforming against lefties this year - to the tune of a .685 OPS vs. his career .830 OPS against lefties - but by all means his batting average in those 116 PAs should outweigh the good points.

Fay and Dusty are birds of a feather - dodo birds. And yes, the good people of Cincinnati most definitely deserve better.

nate
07-15-2008, 04:11 PM
Wow...

Just...

Wow...

PuffyPig
07-15-2008, 04:19 PM
Dunn has an higher OPS than Josh Hamilton.

Just sayin'.....

Jpup
07-15-2008, 04:26 PM
Does anyone ever e-mail Fay? If so, does he ever respond? The Dunn bashing is way over the top and this about takes the cake.

princeton
07-15-2008, 04:39 PM
I hear that he's untradeable.

how good of a year could he be having?

RichRed
07-15-2008, 04:41 PM
Does anyone ever e-mail Fay? If so, does he ever respond? The Dunn bashing is way over the top and this about takes the cake.

I don't know but someone should send him the firejoemorgan link, for all the good it would do.

Reds1
07-15-2008, 04:44 PM
I don't have the numbers, but I bet the past 3-4 weeks of Dunn has been crazy good. He's been hitting a lot out and with guys on base. Just crazy this article. This is the best Dunn has been. If he had exactly the same numbers and a .300 ave I guess that makes it better.

Sea Ray
07-15-2008, 04:51 PM
Dunn has an higher OPS than Josh Hamilton.

Just sayin'.....

If that's the case then it just goes to show if you look far enough you can find stats to support anything. I don't think you'll get too many baseball people to say Dunn's having a better year than Josh.

redsmetz
07-15-2008, 04:54 PM
I agree with your assessment of Fay and including Dunn in his comments as "not even mediocre" jumped out and flashed lights all over the night sky. Same for Arroyo frankly; now at .500. It's not stellar, but it's not below mediocre.

As for Dusty's comment, I have to reserve judgement because I have no idea what question Fay actually posed to Dusty. As someone correctly noted, he's having a below mediocre year as a writer, I wouldn't put it past him to have asked one question and inserted the quote into this. He's that awful.

RedsManRick
07-15-2008, 05:01 PM
If that's the case then it just goes to show if you look far enough you can find stats to support anything. I don't think you'll get too many baseball people to say Dunn's having a better year than Josh.

It just goes to show you how incredibly influential the stats we choose to look at are to our perception of how well a guy performs.

Though I will say, because Hamilton's slugging has been over 87 more at bats than Dunn's, he's doing a lot more to advance runners on a per/PA basis. Dunn's walks are very valuable, but they do cost him from a runner advancement standpoint compared to base hits.

Patrick Bateman
07-15-2008, 05:02 PM
If that's the case then it just goes to show if you look far enough you can find stats to support anything. I don't think you'll get too many baseball people to say Dunn's having a better year than Josh.

No, it goes to show that Hamilton's insane year is two parts:

1. Playing very well

2. Getting lots of opportunities from his teammates


On a per at bat basis, Dunn and Hamilton have been roughly equivalent hitters. Hamilton has gotten more opportunities to drive guys in, and granted, he is making good use of those chances, however, this is not likely a repeatable skill.

Over the long haul, provided with the same rate stats, Dunn and Hamilton getting the same team dependent opportunities would have very similar offensive numbers. It really ins't that far fetched. Both are great hitters, but neither is currently in the Pujols/Berkman level of greatness.

dougdirt
07-15-2008, 05:05 PM
Hamilton, park adjusted, has had a better year than Dunn in the OPS range. His OPS+ is 144 to Dunns 137. Thats a fairly substantial difference.

red-in-la
07-15-2008, 05:13 PM
I am NO Fay fan, far from it, but maybe he is writing what Dunn himself told him.....just sayin'.

If you asked Adam Dunn what kind of first half he had, what would Adam Dunn say?

To one other point, if nobody is on in front of Dunn, is it still OK to be hitting like .200 with RISP? Just sayin'. I doubt if Dunn is happy with that stat.

And I believe a part of Fay's "logic" was that Dunn is being paid to be a star......and Dunn is expecting (I assume) to be paid like a super-star in 2009......maybe not.

nate
07-15-2008, 05:28 PM
To one other point, if nobody is on in front of Dunn, is it still OK to be hitting like .200 with RISP? Just sayin'. I doubt if Dunn is happy with that stat..

I don't understand. How do you hit with RISP if no one is on base?

Team Clark
07-15-2008, 05:36 PM
Harang has struggled a bit (like Arroyo with ERA), but his struggles are not nearly as bad as his W/L record indicates, especially considering he's been overused the past few years and he's now feeling the effects as he's BEEN INJURED and is actually MISSING STARTS, because of it!

I am genuinely curious as to why you think Harang has been overused the past years?

westofyou
07-15-2008, 05:43 PM
I don't understand. How do you hit with RISP if no one is on base?

With a big bat?

http://www.guyville.com/baseball_main-tm.jpg

KronoRed
07-15-2008, 05:43 PM
Fay himself is having a bad year as a beat writer.

Year? decade maybe.

red-in-la
07-15-2008, 05:45 PM
I don't understand. How do you hit with RISP if no one is on base?

That was MY point nate. I mean, what is the point of saying that nobody is on base in front of the guy when talking about whther he is having a good year (driving in runs)?

I think Adam get a bad wrap just because he isn't Albert Pujols. I want him to be Pujols in the worst way, but he isn't.

What disappoints some of us, IMHO, is that Dunn came up with a decent BA and was an opposite field hitter. At least that seemed to be the first glance of him at the ML level.

He seems strong enough to hit the ball over the fence with one hand, yet he has looonnggg stretches where he pulls off the pitch and seems to be trying to simply make SportsCenter.

I agree that Dunn has been better lately, and he has also, in that stretch hit a few balls to left field. He frustrates me because I think if he would just use his tremendous talent, he could be much closer to Pujols than to Dave Kingman.

That said, maybe we cannot expect Dunn to have a career year when the Reds need one. I agree with Fay's point, in that a career 2nd half could carry the Reds, maybe into the WC race, maybe not. Shoot, if Baker could see the light, 6 weeks too late, that Patterson is not a player, maybe he could improve the Reds enough to contend just by finally batting JR 6th or 7th instead of 3rd and the Dunn issue could be less glaring.

princeton
07-15-2008, 05:46 PM
look, over his career Adam's RBIs with men in scoring position add up to less than 30 percent of his number of plate appearances

for Carlos Lee, that percentage is about 40 percent. For Josh Hamilton, it's 46.5 percent. if men are on, Josh is the guy that you least like to face right now.

and Adam's the one guy that you REALLY want to face with men on base.

unless bases are loaded of course. he might just walk one in.

BTW, Adam's done better at this for the present season: 37 percent. Job, Adam.

Sea Ray
07-15-2008, 06:04 PM
On a per at bat basis, Dunn and Hamilton have been roughly equivalent hitters.


That's pretty far fetched. I don't think you'll find many "baseball people" (those being paid by the game) that'd agree with you. Maybe you're smarter than those that're making their living out of this game but I'll go out on a limb and say that in 2008 on a per AB basis Josh Hamilton is having the superior year

Patrick Bateman
07-15-2008, 06:11 PM
I'd give the slight edge to Hamilton, but it's a lot closer than you'd think.

OldXOhio
07-15-2008, 06:18 PM
Does anyone ever e-mail Fay? If so, does he ever respond? The Dunn bashing is way over the top and this about takes the cake.

If anyone happens to, will you please include this previous post (along with a hot cup of shut the hell up for Mr. Fay):


If all four were close to their average big-league numbers, the Reds probably would be right in the thick of the National League Central race.

Adam Dunn, career averages:
247 / 381 / 521

Adam Dunn, 2008:
228 / 380 / 528

KronoRed
07-15-2008, 06:23 PM
The only thing Fay will see in that is batting average, the most "holy!" stat.

jojo
07-15-2008, 06:24 PM
Fay himself is having a bad year as a beat writer.

Ya, not even a mediocre one....

jojo
07-15-2008, 06:27 PM
I don't understand. How do you hit with RISP if no one is on base?

:cool:

CrackerJack
07-15-2008, 06:30 PM
Ok the torches and mob are out for him including Dunn, we get it, he was wrong to include him.

I think they're probably right about Jr. and Harang though - regardless of the reasons. Arroyo? Hard to say.

Raisor
07-15-2008, 06:30 PM
That's pretty far fetched. I don't think you'll find many "baseball people" (those being paid by the game) that'd agree with you. Maybe you're smarter than those that're making their living out of this game but I'll go out on a limb and say that in 2008 on a per AB basis Josh Hamilton is having the superior year



The Runs Created formula has Josh creating about 2 runs per 100 PA's more then Dunn this year.

Other Dunn/Hamilton notes.

Hamilton has 425 TPA
Dunn has 369 TPA (-56)

Hamilton has come to the plate 220 times with runners on.
Dunn has 142 PA's (-78)

Hamilton has had 303 runners on base in his PA's
Dunn has had 214 (-89)

Comparing Hamilton's RBI to Dunn's is comparing Apples to Oranges.

jesusfan
07-15-2008, 06:59 PM
Dunn isn't mediocre, he's better than that... I understand the stat comparison with Josh Hamilton, but Hamilton is on another level, Dunn isn't even close... Dunn has 2 tools Power and OBP... Hamilton has every single tool there is....

Saying that... I don't feel there is a free agent for 09 that will produce close to what Dunn does unless we sign Milton Bradley, but that is a risk...

Will M
07-15-2008, 07:06 PM
Dunn isn't mediocre, he's better than that... I understand the stat comparison with Josh Hamilton, but Hamilton is on another level, Dunn isn't even close... Dunn has 2 tools Power and OBP... Hamilton has every single tool there is....

Saying that... I don't feel there is a free agent for 09 that will produce close to what Dunn does unless we sign Milton Bradley, but that is a risk...

If Dunn goes i want the Reds to sign Pat Burrell or Marc Teixeira

jesusfan
07-15-2008, 07:11 PM
If Dunn goes i want the Reds to sign Pat Burrell or Marc Teixeira

I would love to have Tex, but you know he is going to get big big dollars, considering he is really the one impact bat in free agency... Pat Burrell is a right handed Dunn, with a bit less power and a bit better avg.... Myself... I say keep Dunn and go after C.C.... Let JR walk... I also wouldn't mind signing I-Rod to a 2 year deal...

Raisor
07-15-2008, 07:14 PM
I would love to have Tex, but you know he is going to get big big dollars, considering he is really the one impact bat in free agency... Pat Burrell is a right handed Dunn, with a bit less power and a bit better avg....

Burrell 15 RC per 100 PA
Tex 17 RC per 100 PA
Dunn 17 RC per 100 PA

Dunn will probably be the most affordable of the three.

jesusfan
07-15-2008, 07:15 PM
I think the only way the Reds sign C.C is if someone takes Arroyo's contract off our hands in the next few weeks.... This rotation would be sick... Volquez, Sabathia, Harang, Cueto, Bailey/Thompson

Rojo
07-15-2008, 07:19 PM
Replacing hits with walks means you trade your own RBI's for RBI opportunities for your teammates. Of course, you have to be batted accordingly and......pick the right team.

Will M
07-15-2008, 07:21 PM
Burrell 15 RC per 100 PA
Tex 17 RC per 100 PA
Dunn 17 RC per 100 PA

Dunn will probably be the most affordable of the three.

Yes but that doesn't mean he won't go elsewhere. If Dunn declares free agency the Reds need to try to re-sign him but they would be wise to open discussions with Tex and Burrell because thay almost HAVE to have one of these guys in 2009. The offense is weak this year and Dunn is our best offensive player. we need to keep him/replace his production then ADD to that.

The other two do have advantages over Dunn. Tex is very good defensively at 1B and Burrell's D is better than Dunn. Burrell bats RH and Tex is a switch hitter.

Spring~Fields
07-15-2008, 07:34 PM
http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008807130431


Dusty Baker stuck with Corey Patterson too long.
Ken Griffey Jr. shouldn't be hitting in the third spot

But the real reason the Reds are where they are?

Baker and his coaches have spent a lot of time trying to get them there.

"You try to find out why," Baker said. "You try to get a guy back to that point of excellence

But none of the four is even close to the numbers on the backs of their baseball cards.

Consider (all stats are going into Saturday's game):

"That's a fair assessment," Baker said. ;)

"Nobody's more disappointed than they are."







NAME GP AB R H BB BA OBP SLG OPS
Andy Phillips 20 28 2 4 2 .143 .200 .214 .414
Paul Janish 31 64 3 12 6 .188 .278 .203 .481
Norris Hopper 26 50 3 10 5 .200 .286 .200 .486
S. Hatteberg 34 52 3 9 7 .173 .262 .231 .493
C. Patterson 75 199 28 38 8 .191 .225 .337 .562
J. Valentin 49 70 4 16 5 .229 .276 .314 .591
Paul Bako 66 203 25 44 23 .217 .296 .355 .651
Ryan Freel 48 131 17 39 8 .298 .340 .359 .699
J. Keppinger 58 214 21 63 19 .294 .353 .388 .741
K. Griffey Jr. 90 315 43 74 55 .235 .348 .400 .748
Jay Bruce 44 163 26 44 15 .270 .335 .429 .765

Opponents 96 3321 468 892 329 .269 .337 .444 .782

Adam Dunn 91 290 48 66 69 .228 .380 .538 .918

J. Cabrera 7 18 1 7 2 .389 .450 .444 .894
J. Hairston Jr. 56 188 34 66 14 .351 .398 .495 .893
E. Encarnacion 86 297 47 77 33 .259 .341 .481 .823
Joey Votto 91 308 39 86 33 .279 .350 .464 .814
David Ross 39 103 11 27 21 .262 .389 .417 .806
B. Phillips 93 372 53 104 24 .280 .323 .476 .798

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&cat=OPS&order=false&season=2008&split=0&seasonType=2&type=reg

mbgrayson
07-15-2008, 07:39 PM
I didn't send Fay an e-mail, but I posted the following on the comment section under the article:


John,

Your analysis of Dunn is just plain wrong. This year for Dunn is actually better than his career averages.
2008: .229/.382/.542 for an OPS of .924
Career: .247/.381/.521 for an OPS of .902

Dunn now has 26 HRs, and is second in MLB in homers, behind only Ryan Howard. He is 14th in the NL in RBIs, and would be higher in that department if he was batting right behind some high OBP producers. Dusty's terrible lineup construction really hurts.

I am sick of criticism based on Dunn's average and strikeouts. He gets on base, scores a ton of runs, and has monster power.

On base percentage is far more important than average. There is a much higher correlation between OBP and runs produced than there is with average. Reds fans (and you, Mr. Fay) need to catch up with using OBP instead of average when evaluating hitters. Adam Dunn is 16th in the NL in OBP, and and 14th in slugging %. Any modern analysis of him should be that he is having a great year.
7/13/2008 10:52:40 AM

The problem with this crap from Fay is that it fuels the anti-Dunn flames in Cincinnati. That fuels the anti-Dunn news media(Marty, are you reading this?), and the anti-Dunn feelings around baseball. It hurts his value, makes the big donkey feel bad, and generally does nothing useful.

Raisor
07-15-2008, 07:39 PM
Yes but that doesn't mean he won't go elsewhere..

Oh I agree, which is why they need to work on an extension while they can do so alone.

Between Dunn, Tex, and Pat the Bat, Dunn's going to be the least expensive AND the Reds have sole negotiating rights for months still.

CTA513
07-15-2008, 08:05 PM
Burrell 15 RC per 100 PA
Tex 17 RC per 100 PA
Dunn 17 RC per 100 PA

Dunn will probably be the most affordable of the three.

I don't know what Teixeira will be asking for, but hes a guy I would like to see the Reds go after.
He would be a big upgrade defensively at first base.

GAC
07-15-2008, 08:24 PM
Fay is an idiot.

So is Dusty Baker if he thinks Dunn is having a mediocre year.

I could really care what Fay has to say.

But when the manager, the guy who constructs the lineup/runs the team, holds such a perception of a guy like Dunn, that, IMHO, is the reason he "miscasts" Dunn in this lineup, then I simply shake my head in disbelief.

Spring~Fields
07-15-2008, 08:25 PM
2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #1
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
NAME
C. Patterson 30 126 .190 .231 .341 .573
J. Hairston Jr. 30 122 .393 .449 .533 .981
Ryan Freel 21 83 .301 .363 .361 .724
Jay Bruce 10 40 .200 .250 .450 .700
Norris Hopper 6 24 .125 .192 .125 .317


2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #2
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
NAME
J. Keppinger 32 130 .269 .317 .385 .701
Jay Bruce 15 64 .344 .432 .516 .948
Paul Janish 13 42 .167 .239 .167 .406
J. Hairston Jr. 10 41 .293 .326 .512 .838
Adam Dunn 6 23 .261 .393 .565 .958
C. Patterson 7 22 .182 .217 .182 .399
Ryan Freel 5 22 .364 .348 .409 .757
K. Griffey Jr. 4 17 .176 .176 .176 .353
J. Cabrera 5 15 .467 .529 .533 1.063


2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #3
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
Name
K. Griffey Jr. 77 283 .244 .358 .406 .764


2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #4
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
Name
B. Phillips 80 321 .293 .340 .508 .848


2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #5
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
Name
Adam Dunn 61 194 .247 .410 .562 .971

jojo
07-15-2008, 08:30 PM
2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #1
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
NAME
C. Patterson 30 126 .190 .231 .341 .573
J. Hairston Jr. 30 122 .393 .449 .533 .981
Ryan Freel 21 83 .301 .363 .361 .724
Jay Bruce 10 40 .200 .250 .450 .700
Norris Hopper 6 24 .125 .192 .125 .317

Code:
2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #2
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
NAME
J. Keppinger 32 130 .269 .317 .385 .701
Jay Bruce 15 64 .344 .432 .516 .948
Paul Janish 13 42 .167 .239 .167 .406
J. Hairston Jr. 10 41 .293 .326 .512 .838
Adam Dunn 6 23 .261 .393 .565 .958
C. Patterson 7 22 .182 .217 .182 .399
Ryan Freel 5 22 .364 .348 .409 .757
K. Griffey Jr. 4 17 .176 .176 .176 .353
J. Cabrera 5 15 .467 .529 .533 1.063

Code:
2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #3
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
Name
K. Griffey Jr. 77 283 .244 .358 .406 .764

Code:
2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #4
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
Name
B. Phillips 80 321 .293 .340 .508 .848

Code:
2008 Cincinnati Reds splits batting position #5
GP AB BA OBP SLG OPS
Name
Adam Dunn 61 194 .247 .410 .562 .971



I'm not sure what point you're making.

dougdirt
07-15-2008, 08:33 PM
The fact that the Reds have used 9 hitters in the #2 spot and 5 in the #1 spot is downright disturbing.

Spring~Fields
07-15-2008, 08:51 PM
The fact that the Reds have used 9 hitters in the #2 spot and 5 in the #1 spot is downright disturbing.


But the real reason the Reds are where they are?

Four of their highest-paid, most experienced players are having bad years. Among Griffey, Adam Dunn, Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, none is having even a mediocre year.

"That's a fair assessment," Baker said. "You pay attention to them because they're big guys. They're the highest-salary guys."

Dunn makes $13 million, Griffey $12.5 million, Harang $6.75 million and Arroyo $4.575 million - nearly half the Reds' $74.1 million total payroll.

If all four were close to their average big-league numbers, the Reds probably would be right in the thick of the National League Central race.

I disagree with Fay


#1
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&cat=avg&order=false&season=2008&split=109&seasonType=2&type=reg

#2
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=110&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

#3
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=111&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

#4
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=112&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

#5
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=113&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

#6
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=114&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

#7
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=115&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

#8
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&season=2008&seasonType=2&split=116&cat=avg&order=false&type=reg

Spring~Fields
07-15-2008, 09:20 PM
I could really care what Fay has to say.

But when the manager, the guy who constructs the lineup runs the team, holds such a perception of a guy like Dunn, that, IMHO, is the reason he "miscasts" Dunn in this lineup, then I simply shake my head in disbelief.

I don't think that stops with Dunn, and Dunn alone.

LoganBuck
07-15-2008, 09:47 PM
You guys should have heard Jeff Brantley on SportsTalk tonight. He thought they should start platooning Junior AND DUNN! Called them out for "not producing". Said that Dunn was having a terrible year.

Further madness from Jeff was that he thought that the Reds should let Cueto and Volquez (by extension Bailey) throw as many innings as the could this year to "build arm strength" and that he wanted to see them "throw at least 7 innings each time out".

He also continued his high praise of Jeff Keppinger and Jerry Hairston. Hairston deserves it, but I would not lump Keppinger in with Hairston.

My head nearly exploded.

Raisor
07-15-2008, 10:00 PM
Guess it's time to run Dunn out of town.

LoganBuck
07-15-2008, 10:12 PM
Guess it's time to run Dunn out of town.

I don't get it. Why all the hate? Jeff even pointed out that Dunn doesn't hit "game changing" homeruns.

Raisor
07-15-2008, 10:23 PM
I don't get it. Why all the hate? .

He's not scrappy.

edabbs44
07-15-2008, 10:32 PM
Replacing hits with walks means you trade your own RBI's for RBI opportunities for your teammates. Of course, you have to be batted accordingly and......pick the right team.

Forget "batted accordingly". Dunn, in this lineup, is the one needed to be knocking in the other guys. The lineup isn't deep enough to take advantage of Dunn's OBP. Go get an OBP guy to fill in for Dunn next year (Brian Giles?) at a cheaper rate and them spend the savings on a guy to knock him in. Or get Ray Durham with his .385 OBP, put him at 2nd, move Phillips to SS, then spend some coin on an RBI guy. Or even get Furcal at put him at the top of the order.

The way the team is currently structured, Dunn's worth is being wasted. Deal him, get some young talent in return and reinvest the savings. It's a shame that we are watching so much money and player value being flushed away on these mediocre seasons.

ochre
07-15-2008, 10:38 PM
look, over his career Adam's RBIs with men in scoring position add up to less than 30 percent of his number of plate appearances

for Carlos Lee, that percentage is about 40 percent. For Josh Hamilton, it's 46.5 percent. if men are on, Josh is the guy that you least like to face right now.

and Adam's the one guy that you REALLY want to face with men on base.

unless bases are loaded of course. he might just walk one in.

BTW, Adam's done better at this for the present season: 37 percent. Job, Adam.
How do they all shake out per AB?

Degenerate39
07-15-2008, 10:45 PM
I don't get it. Why all the hate? Jeff even pointed out that Dunn doesn't hit "game changing" homeruns.

I just looked up a few of Dunn's game changing homers. These aren't all of them because I don't feel like looking up that much info.

May 5th vs Chicago - Reds win by 2 and Dunn has a 2 run homer

May 14th vs Florida - Reds win by 1 and Dunn has a solo homer.

May 16th vs Cleveland - Reds win by 1 and Dunn has a 2 run homer

May 17th vs Cleveland - Reds win by Reds win by 2 and Dunn has a 3 run homer. Also a walk off shot BTW

May 18th vs Cleveland - Reds win by 2 and Dunn has a solo shot

May 19th vs Dodgers - Reds lose by 1 and Dunn has a 2 run homer

May 23rd vs Padres - Reds win by 1 and Dunn has a solo homer

May 27th vs Pirates - Reds win by 3 and Dunn has a 3 run homer

July 6th vs Nats - Reds win by 1 and Dunn has a 3 run homer

July 12th vs Brewers - Reds win by 6 and Dunn has 2 homers with 4 rbi's.

Again this is just a sample. I'd say at least half of his home runs aren't 'meaningless' if not more.

jojo
07-15-2008, 10:47 PM
you are witnessing the PR machine.......... i'd say the decisions have been made...

Raisor
07-15-2008, 10:51 PM
you are witnessing the PR machine.......... i'd say the decisions have been made...

yep. I don't think it's coincidence that Fay and Cowboy do this on the same day.

LoganBuck
07-15-2008, 10:54 PM
you are witnessing the PR machine.......... i'd say the decisions have been made...

It sickens me.

SMcGavin
07-15-2008, 10:55 PM
you are witnessing the PR machine.......... i'd say the decisions have been made...

I think you're right. What a shame.

KronoRed
07-15-2008, 11:45 PM
It sickens me.

Run em out of town..classy.

Wheelhouse
07-16-2008, 01:05 AM
Run em out of town..classy.

A little bit of conspiracy theory here, me thinks...

Kc61
07-16-2008, 02:17 AM
Obviously Dunn isn't having a bad year, he's hit for huge power, his OBP is good, his defense is improved, as always he's playing hard. His OPS is excellent, it's a statistic that favors Dunn with his high walk total and great power.

A balanced view of Dunn would point out that he's hitting below .230 and his OPS against lefties is sub-.700. Dunn has 66 hits which ties him for 89th-92nd in the league. Dunn continues to be home run/walk guy and so far hasn't continued last year's .260 plus BA performance.

Dunn's BA is important because if he got more hits he would likely knock in more runs. He has never had very high RBI numbers. This is only partially because of Dunn's own hitting tendencies. It is also because Dunn doesn't seem to get the opportunities to knock in runs that some of the other top sluggers in baseball do; Dunn's not surrounded by many high OBP hitters.

Commentators shouldn't overlook Dunn's great strengths. At times this year he has seemed like Greg Vaughn in 1999, with a string of key homers.

But this is not the perfect player, or even the perfect hitter, as fans should recognize.

harangatang
07-16-2008, 02:47 AM
It is also because Dunn doesn't seem to get the opportunities to knock in runs that some of the other top sluggers in baseball do; Dunn's not surrounded by many high OBP hitters.
Take this into consideration:

Josh Hamilton RBI total in 2008: 95
Adam Dunn RBI total in 2008: 59

Texas Rangers OPS+ in 2008: 118
Cincinnati Reds OPS+ in 2008: 95

Screwball
07-16-2008, 03:37 AM
It's truly amazing how someone can cover baseball for a living and still not understand how it works. The sad part is, after reading a couple previous thoughtful comments to similar nonsensical writings done by Fay, I've come to the conclusion that it's willful ignorance on Fay's part, and nothing else.

It's a shame that this city is going to have to endure the void of a career .900 OPS to appreciate just how valuable it is. You hate the offense now? Just wait until Dunn is gone.

Ron Madden
07-16-2008, 03:55 AM
It's truly amazing how someone can cover baseball for a living and still not understand how it works.

That's Baseball in a nutshell.

Team Owners keep hiring GM's who keep hiring Managers..............




;)

Guacarock
07-16-2008, 04:00 AM
you are witnessing the PR machine.......... i'd say the decisions have been made...

You expect Fay to dish out offal and tripe, but when the team mouthpieces spout the same rancid baloney, you can't help but smell the stink in the kitchen.

princeton
07-16-2008, 09:18 AM
How do they all shake out per AB?

Dunn: 40 percent

Lee: 47.5 percent

Hamilton: 56 percent

who do you want to face?

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 09:35 AM
Dunn: 40 percent

Lee: 47.5 percent

Hamilton: 56 percent

who do you want to face?

Facing the order of
Dunn
Lee
Hamilton


with 2 out and runners on, I walk Dunn to get to Lee. I don't want to give Dunn anything to hit or embarrassing us with a walk off homerun and Hamilton is riding a career high season, making Lee my choice to pitch to.

Timeout Ump !
And I am bringing in my right handed finesse pitcher to face him. I had to check the stats ;)

princeton
07-16-2008, 09:40 AM
Facing the order of
Dunn
Lee
Hamilton

with 2 out and runners on, I walk Dunn to get to Lee. I don't want to give Dunn anything to hit or embarrassing us with a walk off homerun and Hamilton is riding a career high season, making Lee my choice to pitch to.

Dusty?

pahster
07-16-2008, 09:40 AM
Dunn: 40 percent

Lee: 47.5 percent

Hamilton: 56 percent

who do you want to face?

Lee because he makes the most outs.

princeton
07-16-2008, 09:48 AM
Lee because he makes the most outs.

sorry, but again that's not the answer that we're looking for.

does anyone know the correct answer?

Raisor
07-16-2008, 09:52 AM
Since the beginning of 2005

Hamilton 18 RC per 100 PA RISP
Dunn 16 RC per 100 PA RISP
Lee 16 RC per 100 PA RISP

princeton
07-16-2008, 09:58 AM
Since the beginning of 2005

Hamilton 18 RC per 100 PA RISP
Dunn 16 RC per 100 PA RISP
Lee 16 RC per 100 PA RISP

runs created is such a great stat. It identifies runs that were never actually created.

sadly, I live on earth, where I count actual runs. ;)

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 10:02 AM
Dusty?

The answer or choice would not matter in the case where Hamilton is involved, Hamilton is having a “miraculous” season. Hamilton is using an enhancer, he claims that God is making all this possible for him and it appears to be true. Hey, what do I know, I know some higher power has allowed Dunn to “walk” through his life in baseball, so maybe he is swinging the bat for Hamilton, I am pitching to Lee. :evil:

princeton
07-16-2008, 10:18 AM
I am pitching to Lee. :evil:

my congressman in the '70's was famous for this statement during Watergate proceedings: "Don't bother me with facts. Nixon's my man"

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 10:20 AM
my congressman in the '70's was famous for this statement during Watergate proceedings: "Don't bother me with facts. Nixon's my man"

:)

princeton
07-16-2008, 10:50 AM
Since the beginning of 2005

Hamilton 18 RC per 100 PA RISP
Dunn 16 RC per 100 PA RISP
Lee 16 RC per 100 PA RISP

let's put it this way-- per those 100 appearances, Lee has plated 10 more actual runners than Dunn, and Hamilton has plated 17 more. I suspect that Lee in particular plates fewer runs but in a much higher percentage of his appearances, whereas Dunn probably plates a high number of runs in a much smaller percentage of his actual appearances -- but I don't have those stats. if so, Lee would provide much more dependable offense.

that's fine hitting and it's why pitchers don't like to face Lee and Hamilton but don't mind facing Dunn at all, and it's probably why Dunn's never been tradeable. and it's too bad-- you'd like to keep Dunn, but it's tough to keep an asset that just can never be moved.

again, though, Dunn has improved in this area. I don't know if that's actual improvement, or just a small sample size, but I actually think that he's having his best year within the confines of a bad offense. If they can't trade him, then I expect that he'll be signed to stay here. will the announcers make that too difficult?

REDREAD
07-16-2008, 11:25 AM
It just goes to show you how incredibly influential the stats we choose to look at are to our perception of how well a guy performs.

Though I will say, because Hamilton's slugging has been over 87 more at bats than Dunn's, he's doing a lot more to advance runners on a per/PA basis. Dunn's walks are very valuable, but they do cost him from a runner advancement standpoint compared to base hits.

Dunn gets a huge boost in OBP from taking walks (largely from being pitched around). Not saying walks are bad, but his OBP is so heavily weighted by BB that it's not really valid to do a direct comparison of OPS.

While Dunn doesn't suck this year by any means, it's probably fair to say that we expected more out of him.

REDREAD
07-16-2008, 11:34 AM
Burrell 15 RC per 100 PA
Tex 17 RC per 100 PA
Dunn 17 RC per 100 PA

Dunn will probably be the most affordable of the three.


But isn't runs created just a formula that you plug hits, walks, slugging, and steals into.

It's not a whole lot different than OPS.. same inputs.

Dunn gets a boost in Runs created because he gets walked a ton.
The problem is, that in reality most of the walks Dunn gets are because the pitcher wants to walk him in that situation. I posted the stats on another thread. With runners on base, his OBP is huge but his BA is low.

Again, when one watches the game, you see it all the time.. With runners on and men on base (not loaded), the pitchers simply nibble and try to get Dunn to take the 3rd strike. They really don't care if they walk him, as the next guy is a weaker power threat.

So in summary, Dunn is getting credit for runs created for his pile of BB, when most of those walks are basically intentional walks given to him for strategic purposes.

It would be really interesting to put Dunn on a team that had a strong lineup top to bottom.. I'm guessing his walk rate would go down considerably. His batting average and power numbers might go up (or stay the same). Then again, the pitchers might not change their approach, since the nibble approach has a pretty decent percentage of resulting in a K.

ochre
07-16-2008, 11:37 AM
Ok princeton. You can have your "who would you rather pitch to". Here's mine:

.295 .335 .514 .849

.251 .327 .471 .798

.323 .446 .630 1.076

Who would you rather pitch to?

REDREAD
07-16-2008, 11:38 AM
yep. I don't think it's coincidence that Fay and Cowboy do this on the same day.

Interesting. Hadn't thought of that. Looks like they are greasing the skids to say goodbye to Jr and Dunn, I guess.

Wouldn't be new for the Reds. I remember how it seemed after anyone was traded, there would always be stories popping up about what a bad seed that player was.. Everyone (fans/media) loved Josh, until he was traded, then he became a clubhouse disruption, timebomb, etc..

princeton
07-16-2008, 11:42 AM
Ok princeton. You can have your "who would you rather pitch to". Here's mine:

.295 .335 .514 .849

.251 .327 .471 .798

.323 .446 .630 1.076

Who would you rather pitch to?


if I could have pitched to isolated numbers instead of to actual bats, I'd have had me a major league career :thumbup:

westofyou
07-16-2008, 11:46 AM
Wouldn't be new for the Reds. I remember how it seemed after anyone was traded, there would always be stories popping up about what a bad seed that player was.

That's not a Reds only thing, it happens in every sport and with every team... lost in all the Josh love in Texas was the recent mention that some cancers were jettisoned after July last year and well the team is more lovey dovey now and spending less time looking at their numbers.

Well I guess the guy in question was Texiria, who Bobby Cox didn't shy away from so I guess he isn't exactly Satan.

ochre
07-16-2008, 11:48 AM
if I could have pitched to isolated numbers instead of to actual bats, I'd have had me a major league career :thumbup:
ahh. So stats are cool when they work toward your argument? Just checking... :)

princeton
07-16-2008, 11:56 AM
ahh. So stats are cool when they work toward your argument? Just checking... :)

actually, you were the one that asked for stats, in expectation that they supported your preconceived notion. When supplied stats refuted your idea, you rejected the stats.

for me, I like to pitch to Dunn with a close game on the line and runners in scoring position, and the numbers support that. He's the big guy who rarely gets hits, and we've all faced that guy.

but that guy can, occasionally, hurt you with one swing. It's rare, but it does happen. More power to him.

SteelSD
07-16-2008, 11:59 AM
It would be really interesting to put Dunn on a team that had a strong lineup top to bottom..

2005

missionhockey21
07-16-2008, 12:58 PM
Dunn gets a boost in Runs created because he gets walked a ton.
The problem is, that in reality most of the walks Dunn gets are because the pitcher wants to walk him in that situation. I posted the stats on another thread. With runners on base, his OBP is huge but his BA is low.

Again, when one watches the game, you see it all the time.. With runners on and men on base (not loaded), the pitchers simply nibble and try to get Dunn to take the 3rd strike. They really don't care if they walk him, as the next guy is a weaker power threat.

So in summary, Dunn is getting credit for runs created for his pile of BB, when most of those walks are basically intentional walks given to him for strategic purposes.

It would be really interesting to put Dunn on a team that had a strong lineup top to bottom.. I'm guessing his walk rate would go down considerably. His batting average and power numbers might go up (or stay the same). Then again, the pitchers might not change their approach, since the nibble approach has a pretty decent percentage of resulting in a K.
A.) That belittles Dunn's talent. It's obvious that this is a guy who has a good knowledge of the strikezone and a keen eye for what is a ball. His PPA rates second in the MLB at 4.40 (career-high) and his BB/SO ratio is at .70, the best it's been since 2002. I am not arguing the fact that he does get pitchers who would rather walk him and face the next guy, but don't you think that is true of many guys? Barry Bonds took walks like that all the time, but I don't think many would question his knowledge of the strikezone.

B.) Pitchers could pitch around Dunn because they are having a hard time focusing as they picture Dunn completely green and see a resemblance to the Jolly Green Giant.... but should we take that value away from Dunn? He is still reaching 1st base, does it really matter what "kind" of walk it is? Albert Pujols walks a lot, is that just pure skill or are pitchers avoiding him too? Any good hitter will have pitchers who will go to ball four rather than let him touch base four times.

C.) Walks are a result of a pitcher's failure. A failure to deliver strikes to the strikezone. You are acting as if though pitchers are bouncing the balls to the plate and no sane human would ever swing at them. Whether they are avoiding him or not, Dunn is certainly avoiding their pitches often and that positively affects his value.

How would you explain Adam Dunn's .425 OBP in the minors? Obviously Dunn's swing has had more tweaks and changes from a various collection of coaches, but the one thing that has remained constant is his ability to get on-base. What I find amusing is that you see these pitcher-Dunn showoffs as purely an avoidance of Dunn, which it is in part. But you don't see Dunn battling off balls, try to get the count high and looking for pitches early, protecting with two strikes and looking for that ball four to get on base? Because I know I do.

Again, I agree with the concept, but this is not an Adam Dunn exclusive event nor something that takes away value from him or any player. At the end of the day, I just want to see Reds get on-base, the reasons why I really don't give a hoot about.

westofyou
07-16-2008, 01:20 PM
That belittles Dunn's talent.

That's Redszone's alternate motto.

If you play the site backwards you can hear it.

Kc61
07-16-2008, 01:35 PM
That's Redszone's alternate motto.

If you play the site backwards you can hear it.

In a way, it would be fun to see Dunn become a free agent this off-season with no ties to any club and an unrestricted chance to make his best deal.

Would be interesting to see how the market values him. Certainly there's no agreement on this board as to Dunn's value and there hasn't been for years. Wonder how the GMs would react given the chance to get Dunn.

ochre
07-16-2008, 01:42 PM
actually, you were the one that asked for stats, in expectation that they supported your preconceived notion. When supplied stats refuted your idea, you rejected the stats.

for me, I like to pitch to Dunn with a close game on the line and runners in scoring position, and the numbers support that. He's the big guy who rarely gets hits, and we've all faced that guy.

but that guy can, occasionally, hurt you with one swing. It's rare, but it does happen. More power to him.
Actually, you used PA, presumably to discount walks. I was just curious about the impact the walks had on the percentages. I assumed you had the numbers near by as you had introduced the statistical comparison previously.

I wouldn't really say it refuted my "idea". It's your contrived statistic; I just wanted to see if there was an underlying reason you chose PA.

westofyou
07-16-2008, 01:47 PM
In a way, it would be fun to see Dunn become a free agent this off-season with no ties to any club and an unrestricted chance to make his best deal.

Would be interesting to see how the market values him. Certainly there's no agreement on this board as to Dunn's value and there hasn't been for years. Wonder how the GMs would react given the chance to get Dunn.

Yep... I'm getting Frank Howard feelings. The Dodgers and their fans were back and forth on Hondo all through his years there, he left and went to Washington and is probably after Walter Johnson the most famous Senator of all time.

Rojo
07-16-2008, 01:54 PM
Forget "batted accordingly". Dunn, in this lineup, is the one needed to be knocking in the other guys. The lineup isn't deep enough to take advantage of Dunn's OBP.

That's my point. A lot of Dunn's value is in setting the table for other hitters. That's great but the more money it costs you, the less valuable it becomes. Really you need to pair a Dunn with a Hamilton-type hitter who throws in more hits with the homers and walks. Without that hitter, its wasted money.

Thing is, Bruce may be that kind of hitter -- which is why it's tempting to keep Dunn -- but I think he's two years away.

As you mentioned, you could replace Dunn's OB but you also have to replace the power. But it doesn't have to come from the same player. There are intiquing outfielders coming up thanks to the dear departed. And platooning would be an excellent option.

Rojo
07-16-2008, 01:57 PM
Would be interesting to see how the market values him. Certainly there's no agreement on this board as to Dunn's value and there hasn't been for years. Wonder how the GMs would react given the chance to get Dunn.

This will sound counter-intuitive but his value might be higher to another club than to the Reds. I think he'd be terrific paired with Vlad in LA, for instance.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 02:11 PM
As you mentioned, you could replace Dunn's OB but you also have to replace the power. But it doesn't have to come from the same player. There are intiquing outfielders coming up thanks to the dear departed. And platooning would be an excellent option.

Yeah, but my point is that hitting Dunn towards the top of the lineup takes away from the value of his power.

Team Clark
07-16-2008, 02:12 PM
ahh. So stats are cool when they work toward your argument? Just checking... :)

Not choosing a side here.... However, that is THE MOTTO of a fair amount of people I run into on this board. Most of them are very intelligent people, who like me really love this game. Funny thing is "actual" stats are rarely used. Always a concoted version with adjustments, and more adjustments, and yet more adjustments, and oh let me take these numbers out too until the numbers don't mean anything except they support someone's point of view. Kind of like a political poll. :D

Just an observation of mine not a knock against you, princeton or your posts. Just going along with your theory for a minute.

Kc61
07-16-2008, 02:24 PM
This will sound counter-intuitive but his value might be higher to another club than to the Reds. I think he'd be terrific paired with Vlad in LA, for instance.


Yes, but the question is how GMs will perceive Dunn's value.

It is unlikely that Dunn's future performance will be calculable by wins and losses. One outfielder doesn't usually dictate team winning percentage. So, without any huge team record impact, there will always be argument as to Dunn's value -- depending upon how an individual views the various available performance measures.

In the absence of any real objective barometer of Dunn's success on the field, the market test becomes quite interesting. In the eyes of the so-called experts running these ballclubs, how does this market value his skills?

It will be fascinating to see how this off-season turns out for Dunn if he isn't signed before free agency.

Rojo
07-16-2008, 02:30 PM
It will be fascinating to see how this off-season turns out for Dunn if he isn't signed before free agency.

I suspect it might be down because even the teams who could use him will undervalue him.

princeton
07-16-2008, 02:30 PM
Not choosing a side here.... However, that is THE MOTTO of a fair amount of people I run into on this board. Most of them are very intelligent people, who like me really love this game. Funny thing is "actual" stats are rarely used. Always a concoted version with adjustments, and more adjustments, and yet more adjustments, and oh let me take these numbers out too until the numbers don't mean anything except they support someone's point of view.

right, that's why I looked for all plate appearances. I removed nothing, not even walks. did a hitter deliver runners or not?

(it'd be nice if I figured out how many runners were available to deliver, but I was too lazy)

it's a complementary stat to pitchers' inherited runners, but has more meaning. A pitcher could do very well at preventing such runners from scoring, but if he happened to be a guy that had to face the toughest batters then his stat could actually look worse than a pitcher who tended to be brought in to face weaker hitters.

since in the case of delivering runners, it's always the same batter at the plate, it's a more meaningful stat.

the stat is also closer to what GMs, managers and scouts are paying attention to, as opposed to runs created-- (no scout is thinking, hmm, I need to find the derivative of that bases empty double before I factor in whether a runner should have been on base...)

Rojo
07-16-2008, 02:31 PM
Yeah, but my point is that hitting Dunn towards the top of the lineup takes away from the value of his power.

Yeah, but do you want him setting the table for Paul Bako and Corey Patterson?

ochre
07-16-2008, 02:41 PM
right, that's why I looked for all plate appearances. I removed nothing, not even walks. did a hitter deliver runners or not?

(it'd be nice if I figured out how many runners were available to deliver, but I was too lazy)

it's a complementary stat to pitchers' inherited runners, but has more meaning. A pitcher could do very well at preventing such runners from scoring, but if he happened to be a guy that had to face the toughest batters then his stat could actually look worse than a pitcher who tended to be brought in to face weaker hitters.

since in the case of delivering runners, it's always the same batter at the plate, it's a more meaningful stat.

the stat is also closer to what GMs, managers and scouts are paying attention to, as opposed to runs created-- (no scout is thinking, hmm, I need to find the derivative of that bases empty double before I factor in whether a runner should have been on base...)
It's always the same batter at the plate, but all opportunities are not the same. That's why I asked you which tree lines you would prefer to face. They are the hitters that have most frequently, this season (not exact as I don't have time to do detailed game-by-game lineup analysis), hit after the three batters you analyzed. So, who is more likely to see better pitches hitting in front of the three hitting lines I provided?

Additionally, the "nice to know" part you mention up there is likely one of the 2-3 most important components of the statistic you are proposing. Call me crazy, but when people start throwing around un-vetted statistics around as meaningful, I like to try to figure out what their actual merit is. After all, some of those highly esteemed "GMs, managers, and scouts" work pretty hard trying to find more ABs for the Corey Pattersons of the world.

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 02:42 PM
Not choosing a side here.... However, that is THE MOTTO of a fair amount of people I run into on this board. Most of them are very intelligent people, who like me really love this game. Funny thing is "actual" stats are rarely used. Always a concoted version with adjustments, and more adjustments, and yet more adjustments, and oh let me take these numbers out too until the numbers don't mean anything except they support someone's point of view. Kind of like a political poll. :D

Just an observation of mine not a knock against you, princeton or your posts. Just going along with your theory for a minute.

TC,
I think that is what the origin of this thread was.

Fay, to peddle a story, selected a few stats just to spin doctor his story.

Fay then coincidentally leaves out the other bunch of players who produce less than a Dunn or a Griffey.

Then Fay spin doctors it that those two aren't doing their job well enough, implying that they are the major reason, if not directly stating that they are the reason that the Reds are not in a better position than they are.


But the real reason the Reds are where they are?

Four of their highest-paid, most experienced players are having bad years. Among Griffey, Adam Dunn, Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, none is having even a mediocre year.

If two of the four were having decent years, the Reds probably would be .500 or better.


Somewhere in this jungle of a thread I posted actual stats or links to illustrate that there are many other’s who have not produced well enough. Fay conveniently glosses over the part where the manager may not be utilizing a Griffey or Dunn to get a maximum return on what they are producing.

To me that is what Fay is working here below with his magic ink to do what you are saying above.


Griffey is hitting .235 with 12 home runs and 43 RBI. He hasn't hit left-handers (.198) and he hasn't hit with runners in scoring position (.224).

Griffey is 38 years old, so no one expects the 1997 Griffey. But the Reds would take the 2007 Griffey. He was hitting .286 with 23 home runs and 59 RBI at the break last year.

Dunn is hitting .225 with 24 home runs and 54 RBI. His on-base percentage (.381) is the best on the team, and he's tied for the NL lead in walks.

But, like Griffey, he has struggled against left-handers (.179) and with RISP (.213).

Dunn probably never is going to hit .300 or even .280, but he hit .264 last year.

To me the whole story is in this link below, if we are talking offense. Except that the story leaves out that the manager chose and decided to use many of the weaker links often in key batting positions that receive more AB and PA than the other batting positions.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/batting?team=cin&cat=OPS&order=false&season=2008&split=0&seasonType=2&type=reg

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 02:49 PM
Not choosing a side here.... However, that is THE MOTTO of a fair amount of people I run into on this board. Most of them are very intelligent people, who like me really love this game. Funny thing is "actual" stats are rarely used. Always a concoted version with adjustments, and more adjustments, and yet more adjustments, and oh let me take these numbers out too until the numbers don't mean anything except they support someone's point of view. Kind of like a political poll. :D

Just an observation of mine not a knock against you, princeton or your posts. Just going along with your theory for a minute.

People usually use facts to support THEIR argument TC. There is little Objective Truth in baseball. I am no statistician for sure, but aren't there statistics, and yet another thing called staticial analysis?

The issue is when some people try to behave as though they are smarter or know more about the game because they have a subscription to Baseball Prospectus.

The truth is that none of us here know more than the people playing the game or reporting about it. None of us know more than your average GM or even Scout. We have our role in the ballet and that is the FAN. We are supposed to argue and discuss and have discord over the game......that is our job.

We get carried away with ourselves here on this board almost all the time......and we often treat the topics on this board as if they were rocket science.

Baseball is BIG BUSINESS for sure......but being a FAN is being a part of the GAME. If you want to use stats to put across your point of view, go for it. If you just want to say IMHO, go for it. But don't start thinking that you are more intelligent than the next board member because you think, in your humble opinion, that you understand the game better than he does.

It is a GAME.

I personally find statistics less than interesting or even useful because the game is played by human beings in an almost unlimited environment of permutations. But that doesn't mean that others cannot form arguments that THEY find powerful based upon them.

Anyway, I have my opinion of Adam Dunn.....OK, so what. It is just my opinion. Various threads composed in the last few days, again, in my HUMBLE opinion, show the fruitlessness of stats in that not only are there new ones at every turn, but there seems to be little consensus HERE as to what they even mean.

Adam Dunn's worth has been on parade for any FAN to see for years now. He has been on the trade list for some time now, known to all who want to hear it that offers will be entertained......and more will be before July 31. We will see what he is worth tio those who lay they livelihood on the line......their's is the only opinion that matter anyway.

Team Clark
07-16-2008, 03:01 PM
People usually use facts to support THEIR argument TC. There is little Objective Truth in baseball. I am no statistician for sure, but aren't there statistics, and yet another thing called staticial analysis?

The issue is when some people try to behave as though they are smarter or know more about the game because they have a subscription to Baseball Prospectus.

The truth is that none of us here know more than the people playing the game or reporting about it. None of us know more than your average GM or even Scout. We have our role in the ballet and that is the FAN. We are supposed to argue and discuss and have discord over the game......that is our job.

We get carried away with ourselves here on this board almost all the time......and we often treat the topics on this board as if they were rocket science.

Baseball is BIG BUSINESS for sure......but being a FAN is being a part of the GAME. If you want to use stats to put across your point of view, go for it. If you just want to say IMHO, go for it. But don't start thinking that you are more intelligent than the next board member because you think, in your humble opinion, that you understand the game better than he does.

It is a GAME.

I personally find statistics less than interesting or even useful because the game is played by human beings in an almost unlimited environment of permutations. But that doesn't mean that others cannot form arguments that THEY find powerful based upon them.

Anyway, I have my opinion of Adam Dunn.....OK, so what. It is just my opinion. Various threads composed in the last few days, again, in my HUMBLE opinion, show the fruitlessness of stats in that not only are there new ones at every turn, but there seems to be little consensus HERE as to what they even mean.

Adam Dunn's worth has been on parade for any FAN to see for years now. He has been on the trade list for some time now, known to all who want to hear it that offers will be entertained......and more will be before July 31. We will see what he is worth tio those who lay they livelihood on the line......their's is the only opinion that matter anyway.

Excellent post! Thank you. :thumbup:

Team Clark
07-16-2008, 03:04 PM
TC,
I think that is what the origin of this thread was.

Fay, to peddle a story, selected a few stats just to spin doctor his story.



I agree. I can hardly read any of his "material". Certainly not anything worthy of news or a column. Having spent some time with him years ago I always said that I felt "embarassed" for him. Nothing has changed.

princeton
07-16-2008, 03:09 PM
It's always the same batter at the plate, but all opportunities are not the same. That's why I asked you which tree lines you would prefer to face. They are the hitters that have most frequently, this season (not exact as I don't have time to do detailed game-by-game lineup analysis), hit after the three batters you analyzed. So, who is more likely to see better pitches hitting in front of the three hitting lines I provided?.

the idea of protection was refuted a long time ago by Bill James himself, if I'm not mistaken. For some odd reason, protection doesn't really occur or if it does, it's minimal.

as for percentage of times at bat with one runner or two runners in scoring position, it generally is the same for two batters. But I ran those numbers to please you. For Dunn, 16.4% of the time there were two runners in SP; for Lee, it was 16.2%. So Dunn actually had more runners.

Dunn's just not so good at delivering.

but I never have an agenda. And if anything, I think this stat shows that Dunn could be improving. That's a good thing. (maybe there is a cow in Texas after all, eh Dusty?)

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 03:11 PM
Yeah, but do you want him setting the table for Paul Bako and Corey Patterson?

No...OBP is somewhat cheap in relation to SLG. So I'd rather get that OBP at a discount and fill a gaping hole (SS/CF) at the same time, then spend the Dunn money on an RBI type bat to knock that guy in.

Spending big money on Dunn so that he can set the table for anyone else on the team is just poor management.

missionhockey21
07-16-2008, 03:14 PM
Not choosing a side here.... However, that is THE MOTTO of a fair amount of people I run into on this board. Most of them are very intelligent people, who like me really love this game. Funny thing is "actual" stats are rarely used. Always a concoted version with adjustments, and more adjustments, and yet more adjustments, and oh let me take these numbers out too until the numbers don't mean anything except they support someone's point of view. Kind of like a political poll. :D

Just an observation of mine not a knock against you, princeton or your posts. Just going along with your theory for a minute.
But isn't that the case with everyone, both with people who use stats and those who do not? Adam Dunn is not Albert Pujols but he isn't Juan Castro either. For any player where a definitive view of total greatness or awfulness is not clearly established, whether you use stats or not, you pick and choose to support your perceptions and show how strong your argument is.

That's just human nature though.

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 03:15 PM
I agree. I can hardly read any of his "material". Certainly not anything worthy of news or a column. Having spent some time with him years ago I always said that I felt "embarassed" for him. Nothing has changed.

I agree, I think that if we voted on who is most likely to get arrested for yelling fire at a movie theatre the fans or Fay, Fay would win, because he likes doing a version of yelling fire to sell it.

Fay brought up ERA, a bad choice in my estimation if one is looking to sell his story, because many pitchers have some ERA looking worse than Harang, Fay leaves those stats out.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/pitching?team=cin&cat=ERA&order=true&season=2008&split=0&seasonType=2&type=reg

Rojo
07-16-2008, 03:22 PM
No...OBP is somewhat cheap in relation to SLG. So I'd rather get that OBP at a discount and fill a gaping hole (SS/CF) at the same time, then spend the Dunn money on an RBI type bat to knock that guy in.

Spending big money on Dunn so that he can set the table for anyone else on the team is just poor management.

We don't disagree. On this team, the two-hole makes the most sense, but, really, Dunn needs to complement a better team, not form the core of a middling one and we're approaching "core" money.

TeamBoone
07-16-2008, 03:33 PM
I am so sick of hearing/reading this nonsense. Dunn and Phillips are tied in RBI, even though their BAs are pretty far apart. That alone should say something, not even considering the other stuff.

And a pitcher's win/loss record is about as reliable as Dunn's BA in showing one how well (or not) they perform. There are soooo many other variables... the opposing pitcher, run support (or lack thereof), defense, etc., etc., etc. Yet, how often do we hear someone spew the lack of one's pitching prowess based on the win/loss record.

I thought managers were supposed to be somewhat intelligent about this stuff; it is baseball after all and they should know what the stats indicate... all the stats, not just their favorite indicators (for what they are worth). And if they don't know, they should find out. One of an employee's obligations is to stay up-to-date on the inovations of their careers; why should an MLB manager be any different? Just think what a doctor would be like if he never read the medical journals on new medications and/or procedures.

I don't expect quite as much from beat reporters, but I do expect them to know what they're writing about or shut their mouths and not mislead the thousands who read their drivel and take it as gospel.

Rojo
07-16-2008, 03:35 PM
I do expect them to know what they're writing about or shut their mouths and not mislead the thousands who read their drivel and take it as gospel.

And baseball's the least of it.

jojo
07-16-2008, 03:41 PM
Not choosing a side here.... However, that is THE MOTTO of a fair amount of people I run into on this board. Most of them are very intelligent people, who like me really love this game. Funny thing is "actual" stats are rarely used. Always a concoted version with adjustments, and more adjustments, and yet more adjustments, and oh let me take these numbers out too until the numbers don't mean anything except they support someone's point of view. Kind of like a political poll. :D

Just an observation of mine not a knock against you, princeton or your posts. Just going along with your theory for a minute.

I think this is pretty unfair as a blanket characterization of statistical arguments.

Sabermetrics really is just a collection of tools used to test assumptions about what we think we know about baseball and to dig for a deeper understanding.

Disingenuous sabermetric arguments are easily discounted as their flaws are pointed out and the ORG is like shark-infested waters for stat-based arguments that are bleeding.

Sea Ray
07-16-2008, 03:42 PM
The issue is when some people try to behave as though they are smarter or know more about the game because they have a subscription to Baseball Prospectus.


Baseball is BIG BUSINESS for sure......but being a FAN is being a part of the GAME. If you want to use stats to put across your point of view, go for it. If you just want to say IMHO, go for it. But don't start thinking that you are more intelligent than the next board member because you think, in your humble opinion, that you understand the game better than he does.

It is a GAME.




You make a great point. Some around here are irritating not for their statistical analysis but for their condescending attitude toward others. The first page of this thread includes a post calling Fay an idiot and then goes on to say this:



I wouldn't expect Fay or Baker to look a little deeper. It's both of their jobs to do so, but Fay's too used to typing gibberish to spoonfeed the the casual fan and Baker is, well, Baker.


That implies that the said poster thinks he's smarter than Dusty, Fay and all the "casual fans" out there. I've also seen good baseball people like Marty and Thom Brennaman, Jeff Brantley, Dave Miley, and Pete MacKanin get drilled endlessly for not being more intelligent about baseball.

Just in the past day or so I had the following lobbed at me:


you don't have even a cursory understanding of statistical evaluation


And if you don't feel like going through all of that and would prefer to simply stick to what you know, then you don't really have room to call the other people liars for disagreeing with you

(I would venture to say my education and success in a scientific field would dwarf those who are lobbing these comments but I won't go there)

I could find countless other examples but I'm on board with what you said big time, Red-in-la.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-16-2008, 03:46 PM
What cracks me up is that's it's okay for Baker to take one stat (BA) for his basis that Dunn is having a mediocre year, but when some of us site every other offensive stat that shows Dunn's doing well, we're accused of making up silly stats or just showing the stats that make him look good.

LOL. Seriously. LOL.

I guess BA should be the only thing that matters. Norris Hopper for president. Whippiee.

Rojo
07-16-2008, 03:48 PM
Nobody has a problem refuting defensive stats if it contradicts their eyes. Why should it be any different for hitting or pitching? If a lot of people think a hitter is missing something, maybe he is. Stat-savvy and intuitive shouldn't be mutually exclusive.

Sea Ray
07-16-2008, 03:54 PM
I don't have the numbers, but I bet the past 3-4 weeks of Dunn has been crazy good. He's been hitting a lot out and with guys on base. Just crazy this article. This is the best Dunn has been. If he had exactly the same numbers and a .300 ave I guess that makes it better.

Actually in the last 28 days Dunn has hit .218 and has a very unimpressive tOPS+ of 94

Kc61
07-16-2008, 03:56 PM
but I never have an agenda. And if anything, I think this stat shows that Dunn could be improving. That's a good thing. (maybe there is a cow in Texas after all, eh Dusty?)

In terms of improvement, I thought Dunn's 2007 showed marked improvement. This year, assuming he were to play the same number of games, the numbers indicate that Dunn would increase his homers, BBs, and RBIs over last year. But Dunn's runs scored, hits, and doubles would be reduced.

His BA is 36 points lower than last year; his OBP is slightly down and his SLG is down a bit. I think the main difference on the minus side is that Dunn only has 12 doubles so far in 2008, a pretty small number for 290 official at bats.

Dunn's RBI total (based upon 152 games played, which was the 2007 number) would be 115 this year. Either Dunn is hitting with more men on base, or his hitting is more timely, but that's the kind of RBI production you want from Dunn.

At the risk of upsetting the "BA is meaningless" group, I still say that if this guy could just hit .250 to .260 every year, the overall impact on his numbers would get him recognized as a truly elite power hitter. He can still get there this year, as he did last year.

ochre
07-16-2008, 03:58 PM
the idea of protection was refuted a long time ago by Bill James himself, if I'm not mistaken. For some odd reason, protection doesn't really occur or if it does, it's minimal.

as for percentage of times at bat with one runner or two runners in scoring position, it generally is the same for two batters. But I ran those numbers to please you. For Dunn, 16.4% of the time there were two runners in SP; for Lee, it was 16.2%. So Dunn actually had more runners.

Dunn's just not so good at delivering.

but I never have an agenda. And if anything, I think this stat shows that Dunn could be improving. That's a good thing. (maybe there is a cow in Texas after all, eh Dusty?)
I was under the impression that James refuted protection across the population of ~all at bats, not in crunch situations such as with RISP. I guess all those random bases-empty intentional/semi-intentional walks balance things out :).

See, here we go with math fallacies again. So Dunn's percentage ~= Lee's percentage = equal count of runners? Not sure I grok that bro, unless they had the same number of RISP. I also tend to value the act of not making an out just slightly below the act of delivering the run, but way far ahead of just making an out. If I can borrow some of your math, Dunn's roughly 3-4% better at that according to your numbers... :)

Sometimes a cow is a cow.

jojo
07-16-2008, 04:02 PM
Nobody has a problem refuting defensive stats if it contradicts their eyes. Why should it be any different for hitting or pitching? If a lot of people think a hitter is missing something, maybe he is. Stat-savvy and intuitive shouldn't be mutually exclusive.

Stats should always augment/be augmented by the eyes IMHO.....

That said, I understand that not everyone enjoys stats and too much analysis can get in the way of the pleasure they derive from watching a game.

Anyway, while the thread has turned to venting a bit-ill say this- I find those who both eschew stats and justify their preference by suggesting those using stats "don't reconcile metrics with the eyes" to be hypocritical...

ochre
07-16-2008, 04:04 PM
Nobody has a problem refuting defensive stats if it contradicts their eyes. Why should it be any different for hitting or pitching? If a lot of people think a hitter is missing something, maybe he is. Stat-savvy and intuitive shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
Offensive stats are vetted by their correlation to aggregate runs scored. There are some issues with them, one of which being that OBP can be tricky to value in a random team context, such as the Reds this year. Dunn's OBP is possibly not as valuable, contextually, in the 6th or 7th slot on the Reds as it might be higher in the lineup, or on another team. But that is, flaws and all, what advanced metrics attempt to do, isolate the player from these team factors.

*BaseClogger*
07-16-2008, 04:07 PM
Dunn: 40 percent

Lee: 47.5 percent

Hamilton: 56 percent

who do you want to face?

What about the times when Dunn walks and the next guy drives the runners in? Other hitters (such as Lee) might have made an out and ended the inning...

Rojo
07-16-2008, 04:23 PM
Stats should always augment/be augmented by the eyes IMHO.....

That said, I understand that not everyone enjoys stats and too much analysis can get in the way of the pleasure they derive from watching a game.

Anyway, while the thread has turned to venting a bit-ill say this- I find those who both eschew stats and justify their preference by suggesting those using stats "don't reconcile metrics with the eyes" to be hypocritical...

I'm not "eschewing" stats nor does it lessen my pleasure of the game.

Bill James criticized the notion that, based on assists, Bill Buckner was a better fielder than Steve Garvey. He noted that Buckner was immobile and liked to toss the ball to the pitcher covering whereas Garvey had a weak arm and liked to take it himself. You can't get that from stats.

Sure that's a simple case, but the numbers can lead you down a garden path as sure as your eyes can.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 04:24 PM
But isn't runs created just a formula that you plug hits, walks, slugging, and steals into.



So in summary, Dunn is getting credit for runs created for his pile of BB, when most of those walks are basically intentional walks given to him for strategic purposes.

.

Well, those "intentional" walks still lead to runs.

The proof is in the pudding, isn't it?

Reds actual runs scored this year: 4.33/game
Reds runs created this year: 4.54/game
95% accurate.
Find me something else that's more accurate, and easy to find/use, and I'll use it.

Rojo
07-16-2008, 04:29 PM
Offensive stats are vetted by their correlation to aggregate runs scored. There are some issues with them, one of which being that OBP can be tricky to value in a random team context, such as the Reds this year. Dunn's OBP is possibly not as valuable, contextually, in the 6th or 7th slot on the Reds as it might be higher in the lineup, or on another team. But that is, flaws and all, what advanced metrics attempt to do, isolate the player from these team factors.

Isolate the player, then factor in the team he plays for. The former without the latter is fantasy baseball.

ochre
07-16-2008, 04:35 PM
Isolate the player, then factor in the team he plays for. The former without the latter is fantasy baseball.
Thus the years of consternation from Reds fans vis. Reds management and roster/lineup construction :)

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 05:02 PM
What cracks me up is that's it's okay for Baker to take one stat (BA) for his basis that Dunn is having a mediocre year, but when some of us site every other offensive stat that shows Dunn's doing well, we're accused of making up silly stats or just showing the stats that make him look good.

LOL. Seriously. LOL.

I guess BA should be the only thing that matters. Norris Hopper for president. Whippiee.

I found that portion of this thread (the newbie stats) very educational. Because I am one who would say that Dunn is having a very poor year.......but clearly, he isn't that far off having a good one.

It seems to me though, that he had a very poor first 30% of the year. He has hit a lot of HR's in the last month (I think) and some of them have actually been more than solo shots.

Dunn is not Albert and that is why I think he will, and should, walk. He will want Albert money, and some fool organization will probably give it to him......and I agree that it might well end up being the Angels.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 05:16 PM
I found that portion of this thread (the newbie stats) very educational. Because I am one who would say that Dunn is having a very poor year.......but clearly, he isn't that far off having a good one.

It seems to me though, that he had a very poor first 30% of the year. .

The average major league LFer for 2008: 341 OBP, 435 SLG

Adam Dunn
Apr 396/415 811
May 429/691 1.120
Jun 342/425 767
Jul 333/784 1.117

Compared to his peers, the only month Dunn was below average was June.

osuceltic
07-16-2008, 05:17 PM
At the risk of being bludgeoned with more stats, here are a few points I haven't seen but may have missed:

--- All OBPs are not created equal. That .380 OBP really does some damage when it's attached to a good baserunner with the ability to steal or take an extra base. When it's attached to a poor, station-to-station baserunner, it's not as valuable.

--- We all agree Dunn is a three-outcome batter, correct? If you stick him at the top of the lineup, he's going to be on base for other players a solid number of times (but you have to subtract his HRs), but usually he's going to be on first base (via walk). He's a guy who requires three singles to score from first. A traditional table-setter can often score with just one (taking the extra base and scoring on a sac fly).

--- I've always believed if you're going to spend 20 percent of your payroll on one asset, he'd better be someone who makes things easier on players around him. A lot of Dunn defenders bemoan his lack of protection, but he's the guy we're counting on providing protection to others. And if that's "not his skill-set" then he's not a guy to whom we want to hand $90 million. There are times I've seen guys pitch around Phillips and others to get to Dunn. Again, when that's happening, it's a sign you should re-think that $90 million contract offer.

--- There are guys you really can't overpay -- true aces like Pedro in his prime, premier hitters like Bonds and Pujols, and even great middle-infield talents and leaders like Larkin and Jeter. Teams get in trouble when they hand out big money and long-term deals to guys who aren't at that level. We see it time and time again. Almost as soon as the ink dries, the team is regretting it and trying to dump the player on NY or Boston. If the Reds sign Dunn to a big deal, I'd be stunned if they weren't doing exactly this by the middle of next season.

--- Finally, a point on style of play. There are a lot of ways to build a winning baseball team, some of them more aesthetically pleasing than others. A team of stationary sluggers whose greatest value is their ability to draw a walk, with no aptitude for running the bases or playing their positions defensively isn't aesthetically pleasing. And in a business where selling tickets and TV ratings matter, that's something to consider. How much do you really enjoy watching Dunn play? Other than those 40 HRs, of course. There's a lot of baseball outside those 40 ABs. Do you buy a ticket to watch him walk? (Cue the predictable: "I don't buy a ticket to watch him make outs" response.

It's obvious where I come down on the Dunn debate. I think he boasts a pretty hollow OBP because of his base-running limitations, he has proven he isn't a middle-of-the-order hitter (as even his supporters concede), the home runs are nice, but not enough to overcome the other flaws in his game -- including truly terrible defense (I can't believe some of the comments in this thread about his improving defense -- he has been terrible this season).

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 05:18 PM
Well, those "intentional" walks still lead to runs.

The proof is in the pudding, isn't it?

Reds actual runs scored this year: 4.33/game
Reds runs created this year: 4.54/game
95% accurate.
Find me something else that's more accurate, and easy to find/use, and I'll use it.

RBI is pretty close.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 05:23 PM
RBI is pretty close.

...and team dependent.

westofyou
07-16-2008, 05:23 PM
RBI is pretty close.

Too faulty, here's an example


CINCINNATI REDS
SEASON
1965
RUNS CREATED/GAME displayed only--not a sorting criteria
RCAA displayed only--not a sorting criteria
RUNS displayed only--not a sorting criteria
REACHED BASE displayed only--not a sorting criteria
OUTS displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RBI RBI RC/G RCAA R RB OUTS
1 Deron Johnson 130 6.03 25 92 231 466
2 Frank Robinson 113 7.35 45 109 260 437

westofyou
07-16-2008, 05:24 PM
CINCINNATI REDS
SEASON
2002-2007
REACHED BASE vs. the league average displayed only--not a sorting criteria

REACHED BASE YEAR RB RB
1 Adam Dunn 2002 270 63
2 Adam Dunn 2004 264 54
3 Adam Dunn 2005 260 56
4 Adam Dunn 2006 249 29
5 Adam Dunn 2007 244 44
6 Sean Casey 2004 241 40
T7 D'Angelo Jimenez 2004 236 20
T7 Todd Walker 2002 236 15
T9 Brandon Phillips 2007 232 -18
T9 Ken Griffey Jr. 2007 232 30

nate
07-16-2008, 05:47 PM
Well, here's one:

11.15

That's AB/HR for Dunn. It's the best in the league. Next best is Ryan Howard with 13.

Is it safe to say if Dunn hit 3rd and thus had 50 - 60 more ABs at this point, he'd have well over 30 HR so far?

Is that still sub-mediocre?

EDIT: In the AL, Marcus Thames AB/HR is 10.88 with 17 HR in 185 AB.

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 05:54 PM
Well, here's one:

11.15

That's AB/HR for Dunn. It's the best in the league. Next best is Ryan Howard with 13.

Is it safe to say if Dunn hit 3rd and thus had 50 - 60 more ABs at this point, he'd have well over 30 HR so far?

Is that still sub-mediocre?

This to me, is the trap of the stats. How many of those HR's are solo shots? Dunn is paid to drive in runs, not necessarily hit HR's. I agree that you could make the argument of hitting him higher in the order, if for no other reason but to try to get more men on base for him......but then you come back to that awful BA and all those strike outs.

Besides, somebody else always hits 3rd......:eek:

Maybe Dunn just needs more protection......maybe hitting Dunn 3rd, Phillips 4th and Votto 5th would be just what the doctor ordered. Seems to me, that if Dunn walks a lot, the ohter team pitches very carefully to him. Maybe he would get more pitches he could drive if the middle of the order were behind him.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 06:05 PM
This to me, is the trap of the stats. How many of those HR's are solo shots? Dunn is paid to drive in runs, not necessarily hit HR's. .

Adam Dunn is paid to do the same thing every other major league hitter is paid to do: help his team score more runs then the other team.

The best way to score more runs then the other team is to a) make less outs (OBP) b) collect more bases (SLG).

For someone that says they don't like to get involved in statistical arguments, you certainly get into a lot of them.

Kc61
07-16-2008, 06:05 PM
It's obvious where I come down on the Dunn debate. I think he boasts a pretty hollow OBP because of his base-running limitations, he has proven he isn't a middle-of-the-order hitter (as even his supporters concede), the home runs are nice, but not enough to overcome the other flaws in his game -- including truly terrible defense (I can't believe some of the comments in this thread about his improving defense -- he has been terrible this season).

Your post was thoughtful, just wanted to comment that I do think Dunn is playing better left field than previous years. He is making the routine play and he seems to be running hard out there, occasionally covering some ground to make a play. He's not a plus left fielder, but I do believe he is playing better defensively. Not stats based, just what I'm seeing watching the games.

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 06:16 PM
Adam Dunn is paid to do the same thing every other major league hitter is paid to do: help his team score more runs then the other team.

The best way to score more runs then the other team is to a) make less outs (OBP) b) collect more bases (SLG).

For someone that says they don't like to get involved in statistical arguments, you certainly get into a lot of them.

Raisor, I didn't mean to wander into a statistical argument here.....maybe you guys are corrupting me or something.

I don't see how saying Dunn is paid to drive in runs is making a statistical argument. There are two types of hitters on a team in my experience, those who get on.....their job seems to be to SCORE runs. The other type is those who drive runs in. Their job is to collect RBI's. I am not proclaiming an OPS or VORP or OBI here, just that Dunn, to me, is paid to drive in runs.

The other comment I have made about Dunn's hitting is that I do not think he is a situational hitter. He seems to me, from the length of his swing and how he turns his hips out early, upper cuts, and pulls his front shoulder out, that he wants to hit long fly balls. Before I was called silly for seemingly declaring what Dunn was thinking. Well, I did not then or do not now declare what Dunn thinks, just that I know a little bit about the swing of a guy Dunn's size.

So, it seems to me that Dunn is trying to do what IMHO he is paid to do, just that I think he could be a better team player if, with two strikes, he shortened his swing and took the ball the other way so that he might drive in a run or two with a single, double or sac fly. He was applauded earlier this season on two or three ocassions when he did just that......I would just like to see him do it a bit more often.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 06:29 PM
Solo Homeruns>

Since RIL brought up solo homers, though I'd do some research:

In 2008, of his 26 homers, 61% (16) have been solo shots.

OK, so how "bad" is that?

Let's look at the rest of the top 7 NL HR leaders

Howard 15 of 28 solo 53%
Dunn 16 of 26 61%
Utley 14 of 25, 56%

Braun 17 of 23, 73%
Burrell 14 of 23, 60%
Ramirez 15 of 23, 65%
Uggla 16 of 23, 69%

107 of 171, 62%

RedsManRick
07-16-2008, 06:34 PM
At the risk of being bludgeoned with more stats, here are a few points I haven't seen but may have missed:

--- All OBPs are not created equal. That .380 OBP really does some damage when it's attached to a good baserunner with the ability to steal or take an extra base. When it's attached to a poor, station-to-station baserunner, it's not as valuable.

--- We all agree Dunn is a three-outcome batter, correct? If you stick him at the top of the lineup, he's going to be on base for other players a solid number of times (but you have to subtract his HRs), but usually he's going to be on first base (via walk). He's a guy who requires three singles to score from first. A traditional table-setter can often score with just one (taking the extra base and scoring on a sac fly).

I agree with your basic assertion. Not all base runners are equally valuable. However, without context, we really have no idea of how much value a base runner loses by being slow, and certainly not Dunn in particular. It's easy for us to place an inappropriate amount of weight on things -- judging weight (or comparative value) is simply not something people do very well, in baseball or anywhere else. Take strikeouts for example, which are indeed worse than most other outs, but where the difference is extremely tiny to the point of near irrelevance.

My gut says that I think you're overstating how slow/poor a base-runner Dunn is and perhaps aren't' considering the full picture of base running value (such as not running in to outs). I'm not willing to say that I know any more than you do exactly how much of an effect base running has on his overall value. But the real point is that without some way to measure it, all we can do is guess. Some "statistic", could speak to this. It would not necessarily be a definite answer, but it certainly would be a more objective approach - a common language we can all use and agree on. One where we can know what exactly we're measuring, what we can't measure, and where it might be biased. Dan Fox has done a ton of work on this in his series on BP. I've emailed him to see if I can get data on Dunn.

Dunn's walks might be worth 50% as much as a Phillips' walk, for example, or they could be worth 95% as much. It would be nice to have a sense of that so that we could weight the issue appropriately in our assessment of his value. Otherwise it's just some vague critique and it's difficult to put it the proper perspective, whether that means ignoring the issue because it's relatively insignificant or having it as a crucial issue undercutting Dunn's value.

Absent an objective measure, people tend to assume that things agree with their preconceived notions. It's confirmation bias, and we're all guilty of it.



--- I've always believed if you're going to spend 20 percent of your payroll on one asset, he'd better be someone who makes things easier on players around him. A lot of Dunn defenders bemoan his lack of protection, but he's the guy we're counting on providing protection to others. And if that's "not his skill-set" then he's not a guy to whom we want to hand $90 million. There are times I've seen guys pitch around Phillips and others to get to Dunn. Again, when that's happening, it's a sign you should re-think that $90 million contract offer.

I don't quite understand the basis of your premise. Sure, that would be nice, but is it reasonable? Does Albert Pujols make life easier for Rick Ankiel? Did Bonds make life easier for Jeff Kent? Does ARod make life easier for Derek Jeter (or visa versa)? How much? In a world of real numbers, how much extra do we pay for that effect? If Dunn doesn't have that impact, should we only pay him 15% of our payroll? How do we know that he does or doesn't?

Further, is it really reasonable from our position in the stands/couch to assume that we can watch an at bat and accurately conclude that a hitter was pitched a certain way because of the guy behind him? Again, this seems like the sort of thing that is fertile ground for confirmation bias. We look for something to happen and, bam, suddenly we see it.

And this has been studied in some depth by multiple people. Players simply don't hit better or worse based on who is up next. I know we hear it all the time, it makes intuitive sense, and we see at bats where it looks like it's happening -- but that doesn't make it true. Outside of our speculation and assumptions, there's no evidence to suggest it happens with enough regularity and to make a difference in how a guy performs. The weighting issue comes back in to play here. Even if it does happen, does it really have that big of an effect?

As for your example, if Brandon Phillips is being walked so that Adam Dunn can hit, I'd say that's a positive, not a negative. Having guys on base for your best slugger is a good thing. If BP is getting walked, he doesn't need to swing the bat.



--- There are guys you really can't overpay -- true aces like Pedro in his prime, premier hitters like Bonds and Pujols, and even great middle-infield talents and leaders like Larkin and Jeter. Teams get in trouble when they hand out big money and long-term deals to guys who aren't at that level. We see it time and time again. Almost as soon as the ink dries, the team is regretting it and trying to dump the player on NY or Boston. If the Reds sign Dunn to a big deal, I'd be stunned if they weren't doing exactly this by the middle of next season.

I don't disagree with your premise (in fact I'm against extending Dunn as well), but can you define "level"? I'm also not not exactly clear on what would change from this fall to next summer that would make us have buyer remorse. Dunn isn't old, isn't injury prone, and has been one of the most consistent offensive producers in baseball. This isn't a Barry Zito situation where he was fading quickly and everybody seemed to know it but Brian Sabean nor a Jason Giambi where some of Dunn's performance was artificial. Of course, the specific years and dollars make all the difference here. 3/40 would be a lot different than 6/100.



--- Finally, a point on style of play. There are a lot of ways to build a winning baseball team, some of them more aesthetically pleasing than others. A team of stationary sluggers whose greatest value is their ability to draw a walk, with no aptitude for running the bases or playing their positions defensively isn't aesthetically pleasing. And in a business where selling tickets and TV ratings matter, that's something to consider. How much do you really enjoy watching Dunn play? Other than those 40 HRs, of course. There's a lot of baseball outside those 40 ABs. Do you buy a ticket to watch him walk? (Cue the predictable: "I don't buy a ticket to watch him make outs" response.

It's obvious where I come down on the Dunn debate. I think he boasts a pretty hollow OBP because of his base-running limitations, he has proven he isn't a middle-of-the-order hitter (as even his supporters concede), the home runs are nice, but not enough to overcome the other flaws in his game -- including truly terrible defense (I can't believe some of the comments in this thread about his improving defense -- he has been terrible this season).

I can't argue with an aesthetic preference. I do think we shouldn't assume that there's a consensus on what's exciting and what's not. However, I personally would rather watching a boring winner than an exciting loser. Do you disagree? Let's put a winning team there and then worry about how they look doing it.

As for team composition, one stationary slugger does not a team make. We could have Dunn and still not be a station-to-station team.

And lastly, no, I don't derive pleasure from Brandon Phillips rolling over on yet another low and outside changeup for a double play.


Fundamentally, the tension in this thread and elsewhere is between those who like to make their assessments based on primarily subjective, qualitative measures and those who like to make them on objective measures. That's not to suggest that objective measures are perfect. They can certainly be misused, misinterpreted, poorly conceived, and cannot be applied to every area that matters. But don't eschew music just because Ashley Simpson is a horrible use of it. Find better musicians. There is nothing inherently misleading about stats. Dismissing them merely because they can be misused is pretty lazy, in my opinion. Suggesting that most people who frequently use stats, particularly complex and/or unfamiliar ones, are just stroking their own egos or magicians trying to make themselves look smart is ignorant at best.

Subjective analysis can be useful and is more appropriate than quantitative for some topics. It's not an either/or world. I simply don't understand the "well stats can't measure X" or "somebody else used stat Y in a stupid way" arguments against the use of quantitative analysis in general.

Bottom line, I personally prefer to come to decisions through a process that can be shared, analyzed, critiqued, corrected, etc. I like to show my work and give everybody the opportunity to show me where I screwed up. Likewise, I want evidence for every claim made -- or at least the homework showing that evidence cannot be found. If somebody thinks we should get rid of Dunn because he strikes out too much, I'd like them to explain how his striking outs hurts us.

Sorry for the rant following my responses to your points, osuceltic. This isn't meant as a personal attack on you in any way. It's just continually frustrating to see the use of metrics painted as a dismissive, elitist pursuit when it's meant to be precisely the opposite; A way to get outside of any one person's limited personal experience and the natural biases we all carry and to come to common understandings based on transparent process.

jojo
07-16-2008, 06:38 PM
Dunn is paid to drive in runs

How do you know he's not?

Raisor
07-16-2008, 06:38 PM
So, it seems to me that Dunn is trying to do what IMHO he is paid to do, just that I think he could be a better team player if, with two strikes, he shortened his swing and took the ball the other way so that he might drive in a run or two with a single, double or sac fly. He was applauded earlier this season on two or three ocassions when he did just that......I would just like to see him do it a bit more often.


Let me ask you something. Earlier you said that you are one of the people that think that, yes, Dunn is having a bad year.

Compared to what?

princeton
07-16-2008, 06:46 PM
So Dunn's percentage ~= Lee's percentage = equal count of runners?

right, that's what it means. same percentage with one or with two in scoring position equals same number of opportunities, normalized by plate appearances

as for protection, nobody works around Dunn with men on second or third. He hits about .200. He's who you WANT to face. if anyone gets worked around, it's the RBI guys like Lee and Hamilton.

as for walks, they're OK. but plating runs is the goal. I do worry about the youth of America-- they take their eye off the ball so easily.

but I hereby concede to your superior obstinacy. most will tell you: if princeton loses a stubborn contest, that says a LOT :thumbup:

Peace.

princeton
07-16-2008, 06:50 PM
In terms of improvement, I thought Dunn's 2007 showed marked improvement. This year, assuming he were to play the same number of games, the numbers indicate that Dunn would increase his homers, BBs, and RBIs over last year. But Dunn's runs scored, hits, and doubles would be reduced.

you may very well be right. I think that he's been a bit unlucky, and that the team around him is messing up his chances to score. But I'm basing improvement on just a few more RBI opps that he cashed, just as you're basing runs on just a few that are missing.

who knows who's right? we'll see next year and beyond. unfortunately, Reds have to make a decision soon.

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 07:00 PM
Let me ask you something. Earlier you said that you are one of the people that think that, yes, Dunn is having a bad year.

Compared to what?

There would a lot of ways to look at that.

Compared to other RBI guys getting paid 13 illion a year?....maybe?

To me, as I said also before, just that I think he could do better......he has been doing better in the last couple of weeks for sure. I mean, .161 BA in June......12 RBI's? In July he already has 6 HR's and 11 RBI's with a .270 BA.....that's in just 37 AB's.

Now, super small smaple size for sure, but just think if Baker would wake up and bump him up and JR way down, and Dunn could keep up his pace in the last 37 AB's for the rest of the year?

That is it for me and stats. Just as an opinion, I just know that this year, except for the last two weeks, I cringe when I see Dunn come to the plate with the game on the line.

nate
07-16-2008, 07:02 PM
This to me, is the trap of the stats. How many of those HR's are solo shots?

7 with RISP, 10 with "men on", 16 solo shots.

How does Dunn have anything to do with who is on base when he comes to bat?


Dunn is paid to drive in runs, not necessarily hit HR's.

He does drive in runs. He's driven in 59 which is first on the Reds. It may be your expectation that he drives in more runs but you need guys to actually be on base when you're at bat to do that.

Overall: .228/.380/.538
When he comes to bat with RISP: .224/.364/.526
Men on: .213/.373/.509
Empty: .236/.385/.555

I think pitchers are pitching around him in general.


I agree that you could make the argument of hitting him higher in the order, if for no other reason but to try to get more men on base for him......but then you come back to that awful BA and all those strike outs.

But every 11 ABs, he'll hit a home run. Isn't that the best case scenario of any AB?

Isn't the worst result of an AB making an out or multiple outs?

I mean, Brandon Phillips seems to be a pretty good hitter but it's more likely that his AB will end in an out then Adam Dunn's.

Outs are precious!


Besides, somebody else always hits 3rd......:eek:

eek indeed.


Maybe Dunn just needs more protection......maybe hitting Dunn 3rd, Phillips 4th and Votto 5th would be just what the doctor ordered.

I'd bat him second.


Seems to me, that if Dunn walks a lot, the ohter team pitches very carefully to him.

The second part of your sentence explains the first part.


Maybe he would get more pitches he could drive if the middle of the order were behind him.

Maybe!

nate
07-16-2008, 07:08 PM
The other comment I have made about Dunn's hitting is that I do not think he is a situational hitter.

Who do you think is a situational hitter?

SteelSD
07-16-2008, 07:14 PM
The issue is when some people try to behave as though they are smarter or know more about the game because they have a subscription to Baseball Prospectus.

The truth is that none of us here know more than the people playing the game or reporting about it.

Appeals to authority, while convenient, are generally misguided. As with any industry, there are smart people, mediocre people, and just plain dumb people working in and writing about baseball. We see evidence of that every single day.


Dunn is not Albert and that is why I think he will, and should, walk. He will want Albert money, and some fool organization will probably give it to him......and I agree that it might well end up being the Angels.

And here's where you double-back on your own logic, as often happens when the only real motivation is to suppress other folks' ability to challenge traditional notions. If you truly believed that "none of us know more", then there's no possible way you could frame a team signing Dunn to a high-dollar contract as being a "fool organization". After all, the folks signing Dunn would be working in baseball. And you don't. In fact, using your own rationale, you shouldn't have any opinion that doesn't hold Adam Dunn in high esteem because folks who work in baseball have already paid him a great deal of money to play the game.

Can't have it both ways.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 08:39 PM
...and team dependent.

You were just asking for something else that correlated to runs actually being scored. RBI works well. So does runs scored.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 08:39 PM
Too faulty, here's an example


CINCINNATI REDS
SEASON
1965
RUNS CREATED/GAME displayed only--not a sorting criteria
RCAA displayed only--not a sorting criteria
RUNS displayed only--not a sorting criteria
REACHED BASE displayed only--not a sorting criteria
OUTS displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RBI RBI RC/G RCAA R RB OUTS
1 Deron Johnson 130 6.03 25 92 231 466
2 Frank Robinson 113 7.35 45 109 260 437

Agreed, just pointing out stats that correlate well with total runs scored. Which was the request.

But I don't think it is a coincidence that the better hitters in the league generally end up with more RBI than the lesser hitters.

SMcGavin
07-16-2008, 08:40 PM
I don't see how saying Dunn is paid to drive in runs is making a statistical argument. There are two types of hitters on a team in my experience, those who get on.....their job seems to be to SCORE runs. The other type is those who drive runs in. Their job is to collect RBI's. I am not proclaiming an OPS or VORP or OBI here, just that Dunn, to me, is paid to drive in runs.


This seems to be a basic premise of your argument. Like Raisor said, it's incorrect.


Adam Dunn is paid to do the same thing every other major league hitter is paid to do: help his team score more runs then the other team.

I can't stress the importance of this statement enough. There are lots of ways to get production - it seems like some people want their big salary players to be high AVG / high RBI guys, their high OBP guys to be speedy leadoff hitters, etc. Everything has to fit into its place. Not only does it not always work like that, but it often costs more to acquire these "traditional" type players because even the dumb organizations know those players are good. Guys with "weird" skillsets like Dunn get undervalued in relation to "traditional" players who actually have the same level of production.

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 08:50 PM
OK Steel, you are right, you and other here know more about running a baseball team than those who are paid in some cases hundreds of times what you and I make at our jobs. So, doubling back on our own logic here, who is dumber?

It seems to me that you are trying to guide the argument in a single particular way.....for one, by putting words in my mouth. There is such a thing as a rhetorical statement you know. Of course, in any walk of life you can find someone less intelligent that yourself in what they are doing, but are you saying that is the norm?

I don't like John Fay as a Reds sportswriter, but are you seriously saying that he knows less of what is going on with Adam Dunn day-to-day than you do? Do you really think he knows less about the Reds and their players and the game of baseball than you do?

If that is what you are saying, well, then I just have to disagree with you. I would be happy to agree that you may be smarter, in general. I would be willing to say that you ware a really smart baseball FAN......as you have shown over the years, but as has been said here over and over again, we just don't get the access to the players that Fay does. It is my guess again, that Fay has probably listened to Dunn say he isn't happy with his year to this point. Again, just a guess, since I have heard Welch say that exact thing during recent broadcasts.

I really wish we were talking about somebody other than John Fay, as I have had issues with his writing before......and I am not endorsing what he is saying here, I was mostly referring to Dunn's season in and of itself, not so much what Fay wrote.

As to what I might be trying to suppress, I don't get where I tried to suppress anything. I have been arguing that we all have our own way of looking at the sport. It is the very point that many on this board enter into attack mode with their BP in one hand and the keyboard in the other.

I do not have to want to understand or become involved with the stathead approach to be smart or to be an insightful baseball fan. That is the attack of the stathead clones line of thinking. Anyway, just not going there yet again. Anybody, IMHO, who signs Adam Dunn to a LTC worth even what he is making now per year, will regret it.

These people can be foolish with there money and still know more than any of us here. I am simply expressing my own opinion about it.

GAC
07-16-2008, 08:53 PM
This to me, is the trap of the stats. How many of those HR's are solo shots?

How is that Dunn's fault because the guy's in front of him aren't getting on base? Fault a manager who places very little emphasis on OB%, and gives the most ABs to "athletes" with speed. ;)


Dunn is paid to drive in runs

First off.... he does.

Currently, Adam Dunn is leading this team in Hrs (26), RBIs (59), OB% (.380), SLG% (.538), OPS (.918)

His career numbers are .381 OB%, .521 SLG%, .901 OPS

So he is either meeting those career expectations, and in some instances slightly exceeding them this year.

Yet what do people like to emphasize what he leads[/g] the team in? Any of the above? No. His strikeouts.

Secondly.... just because he is not driving in 130-140 runs/season like some of the other elite "RBI guys" is not Dunn's fault if the others are presented with greater opportunities, meaning, having players ahead of them who consistently get on base at greater rate.

For example.... would Dunn have more RBIs if he was in Josh Hamilton's "shoes" at Texas, batting 3rd, and having OB guys like Kinsler (.397) and Young (.350) batting ahead of him?

And that brings me to another viewpoint that I have always felt about Adam. Too many try to put him "in a box" by saying what you do... "He's paid to be an RBI guy".... as if that should be his primary role.

And I disagree.


I agree that you could make the argument of hitting him higher in the order, if for no other reason but to try to get more men on base for him......[b]but then you come back to that awful BA and all those strike outs.

And then there's that "awful" .380 OB%. Yes the guy has power, and will hit 40+ Hrs/season. But another HUGE advantage with Adam, that is just as much an intrical part of his game that seems to be overlooked (especially by Baker) is his OB%. ;)

And I don't understand why Dunn gets so much grief about the Ks when the greatest sluggers through the history of the game K'd a lot. Yet with Dunn it's a problem.

The guy is going to consistently give you 100 RBIs and 100 runs scored/season.

Bat him 2nd in the lineup.

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 09:07 PM
Or so says John Fay.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008807130431

But the real reason the Reds are where they are?

Four of their highest-paid, most experienced players are having bad years. Among Griffey, Adam Dunn, Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo, none is having even a mediocre year.

"That's a fair assessment," Baker said. "You pay attention to them because they're big guys. They're the highest-salary guys."



It seems a bit deceptive to me, and it’s just not fair to mention Griffey and Dunn without mentioning the others that have had several at bats.

Hairston and Votto by the stats look like they are the only batters that can hit both, right and left handed pitching.



Sorted by players with a minimum 188 AB and over

Patterson BA OBP SLG OPS Bako BA OBP SLG OPS
vs. Left .143 .189 .143 .332 vs. Left .226 .262 .468 .730
vs. Right .201 .233 .378 .611 vs. Right .213 .311 .305 .616
April .225 .292 .488 .780 April .310 .388 .507 .895
May .180 .180 .197 .377 May .186 .262 .305 .567
June .156 .156 .311 .467 June .151 .224 .283 .507
July .222 .300 .222 .522 July .150 .261 .150 .411


Griffey BA OBP SLG OPS Dunn BA OBP SLG OPS
vs. Left .204 .320 .330 .650 vs. Left .174 .371 .314 .685
vs. Right .250 .361 .434 .795 vs. Right .250 .385 .632 1.017
April .255 .339 .429 .768 April .232 .396 .415 .811
May .250 .336 .360 .696 May .284 .429 .691 1.120
June .205 .370 .425 .795 June .161 .342 .425 .767
July .220 .360 .415 .775 July .270 .333 .784 1.117

Phillips BA OBP SLG OPS Encarn BA OBP SLG OPS
vs. Left .365 .408 .704 1.112 vs. Left .314 .427 .500 .927
vs. Right .241 .284 .374 .658 vs. Right .237 .303 .474 .777
April .283 .330 .500 .830 April .293 .369 .576 .945
May .292 .342 .557 .899 May .172 .228 .247 .475
June .262 .304 .374 .678 June .294 .422 .603 1.025
July .286 .308 .449 .757 July .343 .368 .629 .997

Votto BA OBP SLG OPS Kepping BA OBP SLG OPS
vs. Left .288 .370 .490 .860 vs. Left .379 .453 .515 .968
vs. Right .275 .339 .451 .790 vs. Right .257 .306 .331 .637
April .308 .341 .538 .879 April .312 .361 .431 .792
May .281 .385 .528 .913 May .400 .447 .543 .990
June .257 .315 .386 .701 June .296 .406 .370 .776
July .275 .370 .375 .745 July .179 .238 .179 .417

Hairston BA OBP SLG OPS
vs. Left .391 .461 .563 1.024
vs. Right .331 .362 .460 .822
April .348 .375 .435 .810
May .343 .397 .514 .911
June .302 .339 .472 .811
July .429 .479 .524 1.003

Season splits links:
Griffey
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=2148
Dunn
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=4808
Phillips
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=5031
Encarncion
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=5904
Votto
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=28670
Keppinger
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=6076
Patterson
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=4239
Bako
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=3829
Hairston
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=3966

To compare three year links:
Dunn
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=4808&type=batting3
Griffey
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=2148&type=batting3
Phillips
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=5031&type=batting3
Encarncion
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=5904&type=batting3
Votto
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=28670&type=batting3
Keppinger
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=6076&type=batting3
Patterson
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=4239&type=batting3
Bako
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=3829&type=batting3
Hairston
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=3966&type=batting3

Jpup
07-16-2008, 09:12 PM
Do you really think he knows less about the Reds and their players and the game of baseball than you do?

I'll answer for him. Yes he does and so does about 95% of the ORG.

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 09:17 PM
I'll answer for him. Yes he does and so does about 95% of the ORG.

Well, I hope his Editor (if they have them anymore) doesn't agree with you.

Jpup
07-16-2008, 09:18 PM
Well, I hope his Editor (if they have them anymore) doesn't agree with you.

obviously, he doesn't have a copy editor.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 09:23 PM
How is that Dunn's fault because the guy's in front of him aren't getting on base? Fault a manager who places very little emphasis on OB%, and gives the most ABs to "athletes" with speed. ;)

If Dunn was knocking 'em dead with RISP, I think this argument would hold water.


Secondly.... just because he is not driving in 130-140 runs/season like some of the other elite "RBI guys" is not Dunn's fault if the others are presented with greater opportunities, meaning, having players ahead of them who consistently get on base at greater rate.

For example.... would Dunn have more RBIs if he was in Josh Hamilton's "shoes" at Texas, batting 3rd, and having OB guys like Kinsler (.397) and Young (.350) batting ahead of him?

And that brings me to another viewpoint that I have always felt about Adam. Too many try to put him "in a box" by saying what you do... "He's paid to be an RBI guy".... as if that should be his primary role.

Hamilton has 138 PAs this year with RISP. He has 95 RBI. Dunn, in his monster year of 2004, had 192 PAs with RISP. He had 102 RBI. That equates to 7 more RBI in 54 more PAs. The reason why Dunn doesn't have upper echelon RBI numbers is because he doesn't get enough hits in those RISP situations. Nothing else. He gets his chances. He just doesn't drive them in.


And I don't understand why Dunn gets so much grief about the Ks when the greatest sluggers through the history of the game K'd a lot. Yet with Dunn it's a problem.

Some of the greatest sluggers also didn't routinely hit south of .250. Some did, but a large amount didn't.


The guy is going to consistently give you 100 RBIs and 100 runs scored/season.

Bat him 2nd in the lineup.

He won't give you 100 RBI if you hit him 2nd in the lineup. He struggles to get 100 RBI with better hitters hitting in front of him in more of an RBI spot.

Go get me a cheaper, high OBP SS or CF to hit 2nd. $13-15MM per year for a guy like Dunn hitting 2nd is a total waste.

Jpup
07-16-2008, 09:26 PM
I'm not sure Dunn has ever had a better hitter in front of him.

red-in-la
07-16-2008, 09:29 PM
How is that Dunn's fault because the guy's in front of him aren't getting on base? Fault a manager who places very little emphasis on OB%, and gives the most ABs to "athletes" with speed. ;)



First off.... he does.

Currently, Adam Dunn is leading this team in Hrs (26), RBIs (59), OB% (.380), SLG% (.538), OPS (.918)

His career numbers are .381 OB%, .521 SLG%, .901 OPS

So he is either meeting those career expectations, and in some instances slightly exceeding them this year.

Yet what do people like to emphasize what he leads[/g] the team in? Any of the above? No. His strikeouts.

Secondly.... just because he is not driving in 130-140 runs/season like some of the other elite "RBI guys" is not Dunn's fault if the others are presented with greater opportunities, meaning, having players ahead of them who consistently get on base at greater rate.

For example.... would Dunn have more RBIs if he was in Josh Hamilton's "shoes" at Texas, batting 3rd, and having OB guys like Kinsler (.397) and Young (.350) batting ahead of him?

And that brings me to another viewpoint that I have always felt about Adam. Too many try to put him "in a box" by saying what you do... "He's paid to be an RBI guy".... as if that should be his primary role.

And I disagree.



And then there's that "awful" .380 OB%. Yes the guy has power, and will hit 40+ Hrs/season. But another HUGE advantage with Adam, [b]that is just as much an intrical part of his game that seems to be overlooked (especially by Baker) is his OB%. ;)

And I don't understand why Dunn gets so much grief about the Ks when the greatest sluggers through the history of the game K'd a lot. Yet with Dunn it's a problem.

The guy is going to consistently give you 100 RBIs and 100 runs scored/season.

Bat him 2nd in the lineup.

So make a lot of sense GAC, as usual.......but saying Dunn K's a lot (like other sluggers) is like saying that Budwiser is just another beer. :beerme:

I am sorry, but when I watch, time and again, Dunn come up to bat with a guy at 3rd and one out and watch him barely take the bat off his shoulder before he walks back to the dugout with the guy still at 3rd (because he K'ed), and I know that he is the highest paid player on the team, and that he isn't paid to play defense, throw, run or win the batting title, I just get disappointed.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 09:29 PM
I'm not sure Dunn has ever had a better hitter in front of him.

The way he produces, it really wouldn't make sense to put high OBP producers ("better hitters") in front of him. He is the high OBP guy who should be in front of the guys who will drive him in. But I'm not sure that this team can afford him if the market dictates the kind of $$$ being talked about.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 09:36 PM
Hamilton has 138 PAs this year with RISP. He has 95 RBI. Dunn, in his monster year of 2004, had 192 PAs with RISP. He had 102 RBI. That equates to 7 more RBI in 54 more PAs. The reason why Dunn doesn't have upper echelon RBI numbers is because he doesn't get enough hits in those RISP situations. Nothing else. He gets his chances. He just doesn't drive them in.

.





Runners on

Dunn 04- 336 PA's w/Runners on. 460 runners on base. 1.37 runners per PA
Hamilton 08-220 PA's w/Runners on. 330 runners on base. 1.50 runners per PA.

Assuming Hamilton winds up with 336 PA's w/runners on, he'd have 504 runners in front of him.

I wonder if that has anything to do with it?

edit: I was looking at runners on, not risp...give me a minute, and I'll fix it.

OldRightHander
07-16-2008, 09:51 PM
edit: I was looking at runners on, not risp...give me a minute, and I'll fix it.

Shouldn't those two really be one and the same?

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 09:53 PM
Runners on

Dunn 04- 336 PA's w/Runners on. 460 runners on base. 1.37 runners per PA
Hamilton 08-220 PA's w/Runners on. 330 runners on base. 1.50 runners per PA.

Assuming Hamilton winds up with 336 PA's w/runners on, he'd have 504 runners in front of him.

I wonder if that has anything to do with it?

edit: I was looking at runners on, not risp...give me a minute, and I'll fix it.


Dunn: In 2004 had 202 runners in scoring position.
Hamilton: So far has had 150.

I think, quick and dirty calc in my head.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 10:00 PM
I think this is one way some might distort the facts in one direction. Hamilton is driving in runs because of two reasons: he is getting a lot of chances and he is getting a lot of hits. True that he is getting his fair share of chances. No one is disputing that. But he is also getting hits in those situations, which do produce runs.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 10:05 PM
Dunn: In 2004 had 202 runners in scoring position.
Hamilton: So far has had 150.

I think, quick and dirty calc in my head.

well, whatever it was, Hamilton is on pace to have about 45 more runners on base then Dunn did in 2004. In reality it'll be a lot more since he's on pace to have about 50 more PA's w/runners on then Dunn did in 04.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 10:08 PM
well, whatever it was, Hamilton is on pace to have about 45 more runners on base then Dunn did in 2004. In reality it'll be a lot more since he's on pace to have about 50 more PA's w/runners on then Dunn did in 04.

Agreed that he is having more opportunities than most hitters. But he is also cashing in those opportunities at a nice clip.

Ltlabner
07-16-2008, 10:14 PM
I agree that you could make the argument of hitting him higher in the order, if for no other reason but to try to get more men on base for him......but then you come back to that awful BA and all those strike outs.

So if Dunn did everything he is doing now (Same OBP, same SLG, leading the team in nearly every offensive category) but instead of striking out grounded weakly to 2nd base?

Stupid, stupid K's.

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 10:35 PM
I don’t think that Fay gave Harang fair treatment either

2008 Harang Season & Game Log
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/gamelog?statsId=6936&year=2008



IP H ER HR BB SO K/9 P/GS WHIP ERA
123.0 138 65 20 34 108 7.90 105.5 1.40 4.76


Sorted by Runs and Earned Runs
DATE OPP RES IP H R ER HR BB SO GB FB PIT ERA*
May 25 SD L 12-9 4.0 2 0 0 0 1 9 2 1 63 3.32
Apr 10 MIL W 4-1 8.0 5 1 1 0 0 3 13 7 99 2.14
Apr 20 MIL W 4-3 8.0 4 1 1 1 0 8 9 8 114 2.83
May 17 CLE W 4-2 7.0 8 1 1 0 1 5 10 10 101 3.12
Jun 13 BOS W 3-1 7.0 4 1 1 0 0 7 7 7 118 4.10
Apr 5 PHI W 4-3 7.0 6 2 2 0 3 6 3 10 108 2.77
Mar 31 ARI L 4-2 6.0 3 3 2 2 2 6 8 7 9 9 3.00
Apr 25 SF L 3-1 7.1 8 3 2 0 1 8 8 9 114 2.76
Apr 30 STL L 5-2 6.0 7 3 3 0 3 4 6 7 103 2.98
May 6 CHC L 3-0 7.0 7 3 3 0 2 6 8 9 114 3.09
Jun 3 PHI L 3-2 6.0 9 3 3 1 1 4 5 9 113 3.86
Jun 30 PIT W 4-3 7.0 7 3 3 1 1 8 9 9 104 4.48
May 12 FLA W 8-7 7.0 7 4 4 3 2 4 5 14 108 3.32
Totals 13 Games 87.1 77 28 26 8 17 76 1358 3.35

Harang very good games
13 Games Runs 28/13 = av’g 2.2 ER 26/13 = av’g 2.0

Team
* 11 Games total - run support - 30 runs scored av’g 2.7
* 2 Games total - run support - 17 runs scored av’g 8.5
* 6 Wins total - run support - 23 runs scored av’g 3.8
* 1 Win total - run support - 8 runs scored av’g 8.0
* 5 Losses total - run support - 7 runs scored av’g 1.4
* 1 Loss total - run support - 12 runs scored av’g 12.0

Sorted by Runs and Earned Runs
DATE OPP RES IP H R ER HR BB SO GB FB PIT ERA*
Apr 15 CHC L 9-5 6.0 8 5 5 2 2 6 3 9 110 3.33
May 22 SD L 8-2 5.1 10 5 5 2 2 7 6 8 103 3.50
Jun 19 LAD L 7-4 5.0 10 5 5 1 3 2 8 9 107 4.33
Jun 25 TOR W 6-5 5.2 7 5 5 2 3 3 4 12 118 4.51
May 29 PIT L 7-2 4.0 10 6 6 1 0 2 3 9 73 3.81
Jul 8 CHC L 7-3 4.1 5 6 6 2 7 6 2 6 108 4.76
Jun 8 FLA L 9-2 5.1 11 8 7 2 0 4 7 8 91 4.31

Harang in his rough outings
7 Games

Raisor
07-16-2008, 10:40 PM
But he is also getting hits in those situations, which do produce runs.

Just did some more research.

2008

Adam Dunn has plated 15.4% of the runners on base in front of him this year.

The average of the top ten RBI men in the NL is 17.9%.

Assuming 450 runners on for a year that gives us:

Dunn: 69.3 RBI
NL top 10: 80.5 RBI

or in other words, about 1 RBI every 16 games.

edabbs44
07-16-2008, 10:46 PM
Just did some more research.

2008

Adam Dunn has plated 15.4% of the runners on base in front of him this year.

The average of the top ten RBI men in the NL is 17.9%.

Assuming 450 runners on for a year that gives us:

Dunn: 69.3 RBI
NL top 10: 80.5 RBI

or in other words, about 1 RBI every 16 games.

I see this game played often when it comes to situations like this. Kind of like how:

Adam Dunn's 2008 OBP: .380
MLB 2008 OBP: .330

Over 650 PAs, Dunn gets on base 33 times more than the average hitter. That equates to a little more than once a week. Woo hoo.

Fun stuff.

LoganBuck
07-16-2008, 10:51 PM
I just read another thread about Adam Dunn and came back convinced that one side will never see how dumb they are, and the other side will never prove how smart they are, or vice versa.

Spring~Fields
07-16-2008, 11:00 PM
I just read another thread about Adam Dunn and came back convinced that one side will never see how dumb they are, and the other side will never prove how smart they are, or vice versa.

How's come the rest get a pass, and Dunn gets interrogated on every swing.

I am not saying you LoganBuck, specifically. Seems like a lot of us let the other’s skate.

If those other guys put up a significant percentage of what Dunn does, the Reds would be in good shape right? I think, I am not doing the homework on that one.

REDREAD
07-16-2008, 11:02 PM
I'm not sure Dunn has ever had a better hitter in front of him.

Perhaps he meant to say that Dunn often has some of the better hitters on the Reds in front of him. Dunn seems to have hit 5th or 6th most of the year.
Jr has been in second in OBP for the team this year.. usually batting 3rd. Phillips usually bats 4th. If Dunn does bat 6th, Votto or EdE hits in front of him ..

In other words, Dunn arguably has his best teammates hitting in front of him.
Dusty is setting Dunn up to get a lot of RBI opportunities, maybe not the optimal amount, but quite a bit.

Problem is, that with the better hitters in front of Dunn, the pitchers will either walk or K Dunn with runners on base, because Dunn is more than happy to take every close pitch, so the pitchers exploit that in RBI situations.

Sure, that means Dunn should probably hit #2, he's miscast as a big RBI guy, he's more of a table setter with power.. but do you want to pay 18 million/year for that.. Remember, one of the reasons OBP was initially valued so much was because it was cheap relative to other offensive skills (and still is, sometimes).

REDREAD
07-16-2008, 11:08 PM
So if Dunn did everything he is doing now (Same OBP, same SLG, leading the team in nearly every offensive category) but instead of striking out grounded weakly to 2nd base?

Stupid, stupid K's.

In isolation, strikeouts are the same as most other outs.

But look at the long pattern.

With men on base (as long as it's not bases loaded), all the pitcher has to do is nibble with Dunn.. He'll either get a walk or K the majority of the time. Neither causes a run to score. Then the pitcher is rewarded with a weaker hitter up next.

I think that's what Red-in-La and some others are saying. Hamilton is a better RBI guy so far this season than Dunn ever was. Hamilton goes up there trying to drive the guy in. It seems at times, Dunn goes up there trying to get a walk, letting the burden pass on to the next guy. Not exactly a guy I want to pay 18 million/year for 6 years to.. Especially since he insists on playing LF and he's not good at it.. I was fine with every contract given to Dunn up to this point. The last one was not a steal, but it was a fair value and a reasonable risk.. I'm not in favor of a 6 year, 108 million deal, which is probably the minimum it's going to take.

Raisor
07-16-2008, 11:11 PM
In other words, Dunn arguably has his best teammates hitting in front of him.
Dusty is setting Dunn up to get a lot of RBI opportunities, maybe not the optimal amount, but quite a bit.

.

Runners on Base

Junior 225
Phillips 282
Dunn 214

If Dunn had those 282 runners at his current % of plating guys, he'd have 70 RBI and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

ochre
07-16-2008, 11:24 PM
I think this is one way some might distort the facts in one direction. Hamilton is driving in runs because of two reasons: he is getting a lot of chances and he is getting a lot of hits. True that he is getting his fair share of chances. No one is disputing that. But he is also getting hits in those situations, which do produce runs.
In spite of Bill James, I contend that when the dude behind you is
.316 .440 .610

you're going to see a pitch or two to drive per at bat.

SteelSD
07-16-2008, 11:25 PM
OK Steel, you are right, you and other here know more about running a baseball team than those who are paid in some cases hundreds of times what you and I make at our jobs. So, doubling back on our own logic here, who is dumber?

Oh, don't even start with that stuff. You're the one pointing at "baseball people", without context or clarification, as our guiding light. But it seems that's only holds true if what they're saying or doing supports your contention. Your "fool organization" comment makes that very clear.

We're not supposed to question the "baseball people" because "we" allegedly don't know as much as they do. But should they do or project to do something you don't like, the word "fool" pops off your keyboard pretty darn quickly. Seems that "we" excludes "you", and that ain't a rational way of going about things.


It seems to me that you are trying to guide the argument in a single particular way.....for one, by putting words in my mouth. There is such a thing as a rhetorical statement you know. Of course, in any walk of life you can find someone less intelligent that yourself in what they are doing, but are you saying that is the norm?

Right now there is someone living on your street who knows more about a profession they aren't in currently than someone who's doing a poor job in that profession. In fact, I'll bet you can think of something you don't do professionally that you're better at than someone who does it professionally.

Every single day a capable someone from outside an industry goes into that industry. And every single day someone who once fit that profile gets promoted to a position ahead of someone else who's been in the industry longer.


I don't like John Fay as a Reds sportswriter, but are you seriously saying that he knows less of what is going on with Adam Dunn day-to-day than you do? Do you really think he knows less about the Reds and their players and the game of baseball than you do?

John Fay knows less about understanding player performance than at least 75% of the ORG. And that's a conservative estimate.


If that is what you are saying, well, then I just have to disagree with you. I would be happy to agree that you may be smarter, in general. I would be willing to say that you ware a really smart baseball FAN......as you have shown over the years, but as has been said here over and over again, we just don't get the access to the players that Fay does. It is my guess again, that Fay has probably listened to Dunn say he isn't happy with his year to this point. Again, just a guess, since I have heard Welch say that exact thing during recent broadcasts.

If Fay actually did hear Adam Dunn say such a thing, and if Fay cared about the truth of the matter, he wouldn't have grouped Dunn in with players who actually aren't performing very well.


I really wish we were talking about somebody other than John Fay, as I have had issues with his writing before......and I am not endorsing what he is saying here, I was mostly referring to Dunn's season in and of itself, not so much what Fay wrote.

Well, there's nothing actually wrong with Adam Dunn's season. There is, however, something entirely wrong with John Fay.


As to what I might be trying to suppress, I don't get where I tried to suppress anything. I have been arguing that we all have our own way of looking at the sport. It is the very point that many on this board enter into attack mode with their BP in one hand and the keyboard in the other.

I do not have to want to understand or become involved with the stathead approach to be smart or to be an insightful baseball fan. That is the attack of the stathead clones line of thinking. Anyway, just not going there yet again. Anybody, IMHO, who signs Adam Dunn to a LTC worth even what he is making now per year, will regret it.

I've heard that prior to settling on just "Attack of the Clones", "Attack of the Stathead Clones" was actually considered as a potential title for Star Wars: Episode II.

And it's good to know that you're "not going there" after you just went there.

But seriously, you're right. You don't have to be a mathematical whiz to be a smart, insightful baseball fan. That being said, this thread is rife with folks who obviously have little to no interest in understanding advanced metrics. Yet a lack of motivation doesn't excuse away having to produce a counter-argument that all too often begins with something akin to "The problem I have with stats is..."

Not speaking to you in particular, rila, but if you willingly bring a knife to a gunfight and then get popped before you can get the switchblade out of your pocket, the idea that you're not interested in guns doesn't really cover for the fact that you knowingly engaged in a battle for which you were unprepared.


These people can be foolish with there money and still know more than any of us here. I am simply expressing my own opinion about it.

But they're "baseball people". If they know so much more than any of us, how could they be wasteful with their cash? In fact, how could you be watching yet another losing season of Reds' baseball?

Team Clark
07-16-2008, 11:30 PM
right, that's why I looked for all plate appearances. I removed nothing, not even walks. did a hitter deliver runners or not?

(it'd be nice if I figured out how many runners were available to deliver, but I was too lazy)

it's a complementary stat to pitchers' inherited runners, but has more meaning. A pitcher could do very well at preventing such runners from scoring, but if he happened to be a guy that had to face the toughest batters then his stat could actually look worse than a pitcher who tended to be brought in to face weaker hitters.

since in the case of delivering runners, it's always the same batter at the plate, it's a more meaningful stat.

the stat is also closer to what GMs, managers and scouts are paying attention to, as opposed to runs created-- (no scout is thinking, hmm, I need to find the derivative of that bases empty double before I factor in whether a runner should have been on base...)

Like I tried to explain I was not taking a side at all. I for one like your posts and follow your methods very well. I can not say that for a lot of other posters. Not sure how many ways I can express to you that in no way was I trying to degrade your post. I even mentioned you by name. It just seems to me that I see an overwhelming number of posters who do try to sway other's opinions with stats that simply do not add up.

Team Clark
07-16-2008, 11:33 PM
But isn't that the case with everyone, both with people who use stats and those who do not? Adam Dunn is not Albert Pujols but he isn't Juan Castro either. For any player where a definitive view of total greatness or awfulness is not clearly established, whether you use stats or not, you pick and choose to support your perceptions and show how strong your argument is.

That's just human nature though.

Excellent point and no argument from me.


I agree, I think that if we voted on who is most likely to get arrested for yelling fire at a movie theatre the fans or Fay, Fay would win, because he likes doing a version of yelling fire to sell it.

Fay brought up ERA, a bad choice in my estimation if one is looking to sell his story, because many pitchers have some ERA looking worse than Harang, Fay leaves those stats out.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/pitching?team=cin&cat=ERA&order=true&season=2008&split=0&seasonType=2&type=reg

:thumbup:

Team Clark
07-16-2008, 11:36 PM
I think this is pretty unfair as a blanket characterization of statistical arguments.

Sabermetrics really is just a collection of tools used to test assumptions about what we think we know about baseball and to dig for a deeper understanding.

Disingenuous sabermetric arguments are easily discounted as their flaws are pointed out and the ORG is like shark-infested waters for stat-based arguments that are bleeding.

I am not characterizing statistical arguments at all. I am criticizing some of the people who really try to misuse the statistics and literally take way from the value of the tools. There are a small group of posters on here that do one heck of a bang up job with stats. Really opened my eyes in the last few years. There are others who butcher them to death and try to force feed them to us. I am pretty tired of that. Just my opinion.

Stormy
07-16-2008, 11:41 PM
I think this is one way some might distort the facts in one direction. Hamilton is driving in runs because of two reasons: he is getting a lot of chances and he is getting a lot of hits. True that he is getting his fair share of chances. No one is disputing that. But he is also getting hits in those situations, which do produce runs.

Dunn with Runners On (.213BA, 373OBP, 884OPS), and Hamilton with Runners On (.320BA, 359OBP, 947OPS). Dunn has 43 RBI in those situations, Hamilton has 85 RBI in those situations: Despite Hamilton having far more actual baserunners, and Dunn having a higher OBP in those circumstances, there seems to be added value of getting Hits as opposed to Walks in those Runners On opportunities. Drawing walks are far superior to expanding your zone and getting yourself out, but I'd prefer to see our best player convert more of those situations, as opposed to leaving it to EdE.

Fay's contentions are absurd, and Dunn is still by far the most productive offensive weapon on this team, but he's not overly adept of putting the ball in play in a productive manner with men on (which is where so many elite producers do the majority of their damage).

Raisor
07-16-2008, 11:50 PM
Dunn has had 224 Plate Appearances with Runners On (.213BA, 373OBP, 884OPS), .

Dunn's had 142 PA's with Runners on, not 224.


Hamilton has had 41% more baserunners then Dunn and 55% more PAs w/runners on then Dunn.

He also has 61% more HR then Dunn.

So yeah, Dunn's a little behind where Hamilton would be with the same chances and everything, but is the difference the 110 points of batting average or is it the 60 points of OPS?

Runs created:
Hamilton 18.5 per 100 PA w/Runners On
Dunn 15.1 per 100 PA w/Runners On

Stormy
07-17-2008, 12:03 AM
Dunn's had 142 PA's with Runners on, not 224.

What manner of moron am I? I should have realized that number, was incredibly high. Disregard my previous remarks, regarding conversion rates. I edited my remarks to make some semblance of sense.

Thanks, Phil.

Raisor
07-17-2008, 12:14 AM
What manner of moron am I? I should have realized that number, was incredibly high. Disregard my previous remarks, regarding conversion rates. I edited my remarks to make some semblance of sense.

Thanks, Phil.

I still have buckets of love for you man.

red-in-la
07-17-2008, 12:14 AM
So if Dunn did everything he is doing now (Same OBP, same SLG, leading the team in nearly every offensive category) but instead of striking out grounded weakly to 2nd base?

Stupid, stupid K's.

Yeah, it would be crazy to turn that weak ground ball to 2nd base into advancing a runner to 3rd with less than two outs......I agree, who cares if he strikes out or not. :confused:

Are we really trying to make the case that driving in runs, getting hits with runners in scoring position is just an accident? Are we saying that Dunn has no real involvement in hitting to drive in a run or two? :confused:

An RBI isn't just a statistical anomoly.....

westofyou
07-17-2008, 12:23 AM
I think this is one way some might distort the facts in one direction. Hamilton is driving in runs because of two reasons: he is getting a lot of chances and he is getting a lot of hits. True that he is getting his fair share of chances. No one is disputing that. But he is also getting hits in those situations, which do produce runs.

Ian Kinsler is having the same season has Hamilton except he's the one scoring the runs not driving hem in.


NAME GP AB R H 2B 3B HR TB RBI BB SO SB CS BA OBP
Ian Kinsler 93 398 84 134 34 4 14 218 58 37 55 23 1 .337 .397 .548 .945
Josh Hamilton 93 377 60 117 22 3 21 208 95 37 65 7 0 .310 .367 .552 .919

In fact an argument that Bradley AND Kinsler are having better seasons could be made.

Raisor
07-17-2008, 12:24 AM
Yeah, it would be crazy to turn that weak ground ball to 2nd base into advancing a runner to 3rd with less than two outs......I agree, who cares if he strikes out or not. :confused:



I'm not sure, but you MIGHT want to change your situation a bit.

Dunn, career runner on 3rd, less then two outs

249 Plate Apperances
263/402/526/927 128 RBI

SteelSD
07-17-2008, 12:25 AM
The way he produces, it really wouldn't make sense to put high OBP producers ("better hitters") in front of him. He is the high OBP guy who should be in front of the guys who will drive him in. But I'm not sure that this team can afford him if the market dictates the kind of $$$ being talked about.

The Reds don't have a "better hitter" to put in front of Dunn. That's part of the problem, of course. They don't have a better hitter to place in front of him and they don't have a better hitter to place behind him. This season, Dunn has seen the lion's share of AB in the 5 slot. The combined OBP of the slots immediately preceeding that slot is around .328 this season.

Dunn isn't a "table setter". He's a Run producer. Even as an RBI producer, the guy has matched his 2007 career high of one RBI every 4.92 AB even though he's seen bad OBP performances directly ahead of him. Your average NL team has produced one RBI every 8.04 AB this season.

So exactly how does Dunn suck in this area?

BTW, how does Adam Dunn have more RBI from the beginning the 2007 season through now versus Albert Pujols even though Pujols has a .335 BA versus .251 BA advantage and 39 more AB over that time frame?

Raisor
07-17-2008, 12:39 AM
BTW, how does Adam Dunn have more RBI from the beginning the 2007 season through now versus Albert Pujols even though Pujols has a .335 BA versus .251 BA advantage and 39 more AB over that time frame?

Now isn't that interesting?

2007-08

Pujols 153 RBI, 671 runners on base, 497 PA's w/Runners on
Dunn 165 (+8%) RBI, 641 (-5%) runners on base, 443 (-12%) PA's w/Runners on


Runs Created in that time span:
Dunn 72.6 in 443 PA's w/Runners on 16.4 per 100 PA's
Pujols 81.1 in 497 PA's w/Runners on 16.3 per 100 PA's

Maybe it isn't the Batting average after all?

red-in-la
07-17-2008, 12:45 AM
I'm not sure, but you MIGHT want to change your situation a bit.

Dunn, career runner on 3rd, less then two outs

249 Plate Apperances
263/402/526/927 128 RBI

Raisor, I was trying to be too cute......I meant that a weak ground ball to 2nd base, if it follows a double by whoever, means the runner moves to 3rd with one out......whereas a strike out in that situation does not move the runner up.

I am not really after Dunn for his strike outs, because I do agree that 40 HR's a year doesn't just fall off the turnip truck. So you take the good with the bad.

Rojo
07-17-2008, 01:29 AM
BTW, how does Adam Dunn have more RBI from the beginning the 2007 season through now versus Albert Pujols even though Pujols has a .335 BA versus .251 BA advantage and 39 more AB over that time frame?

Because Dunn has 16 more homers. Pujols also averages 126 RBI/season to Dunn's 100. Certainly there are team variables there, but the fact that Pujols collects 60 more hits annually can't be irrelevant.

Nobody's trying to argue the walks and homers away, just trying to figure out who Dunn is and how much that's worth.

Raisor
07-17-2008, 02:30 AM
Because Dunn has 16 more homers.

Which is the point.

In the time period we're talking about, Pujols has 36 more basehits then Dunn with Runners on base, yet he has 12 less RBI.

If what others have said is true, that it just takes more hits, that shouldn't be possible. Especially considering Pujols having more PA's and Runners on Base.

Ron Madden
07-17-2008, 04:15 AM
Which is the point.

In the time period we're talking about, Pujols has 36 more basehits then Dunn with Runners on base, yet he has only 12 more RBI.

If what others have said is true, that it just takes more hits, that shouldn't be possible. Especially considering Pujols having more PA's and Runners on Base.


Just proves the fact that things are not always as simple as they seem to be.

Ltlabner
07-17-2008, 07:03 AM
Yeah, it would be crazy to turn that weak ground ball to 2nd base into advancing a runner to 3rd with less than two outs......I agree, who cares if he strikes out or not. :confused:

Except you've picked out the one scenario that supports your case that strike-outs are evil, stop the earth from spinning and cause puppies to die. There are a host of other scenarios where the weak ground out doesn't advance a runner (even assuming one is on) and results in the same result as the dreaded K.

And before you claim that K's and low BA's don't bother you, remind yourself that you are the one who posted that despite the 100runs, despite the 40+ homers per year, despite the high OBP that you always have to get back to the dreadfull BA and all those K's.


Are we really trying to make the case that driving in runs, getting hits with runners in scoring position is just an accident? Are we saying that Dunn has no real involvement in hitting to drive in a run or two? :confused:

Not saying he has no real involvement, but you gloss over the minor detail that the pitcher and plain ole randomness also plays a part in whether Dunn is hitting to drive in a run or two. It's not as if Dunner is the only variable in the equation.


An RBI isn't just a statistical anomoly.....

Nope it's just one measurement in a sea of measurements. Apparently you give it (and, of corse, the Global Warming causing strike-out) far more weight than other measurements despite reams of evidence that they aren't as effective of measuring tools as some others.

Feel free to continue to use the digital wrist-watch while the rest of the world is using a computer, but don't get your nose bent out of shape when your conclusions are questioned.

nate
07-17-2008, 07:32 AM
Yeah, it would be crazy to turn that weak ground ball to 2nd base into advancing a runner to 3rd with less than two outs......I agree, who cares if he strikes out or not. :confused:

Or GIDP with 1 out.


Are we really trying to make the case that driving in runs, getting hits with runners in scoring position is just an accident? Are we saying that Dunn has no real involvement in hitting to drive in a run or two? :confused:

No. We're saying that RBI are a team stat like "wins" for a pitcher. A pitcher can't get a "win" unless his team scores more runs than the other team.


An RBI isn't just a statistical anomoly.....

Nor is it what you're portraying it as: a measure of individual player performance. It's a measure of team performance. That is, other than hitting a home run, you can't get an RBI without someone else being on base in front of you.

Spring~Fields
07-17-2008, 07:53 AM
you can't get an RBI without someone else being on base in front of you.

If I have learned anything, I have learned that, and I have to give credit to the stats guys on here that have worked tirelessly to try and to teach some of us.

Now if Fay and Dusty would just learn that too, OBP/SLG

edabbs44
07-17-2008, 08:08 AM
Which is the point.

In the time period we're talking about, Pujols has 36 more basehits then Dunn with Runners on base, yet he has 12 less RBI.

If what others have said is true, that it just takes more hits, that shouldn't be possible. Especially considering Pujols having more PA's and Runners on Base.

A single with a man on first isn't going to score many runs, so "hits" with "men on base" compared with RBI might be a little misleading.

In the main run scoring spots of RISP, Pujols had 11 less PAs than Dunn in 2007, 17 less ABs and 12 more RBI. Mostly because he had 7 more hits in those situations.

Also, I'm not saying that runs scored when people aren't in RISP don't count the same. Because they do. I am saying, however, that these numbers were cherry picked out of a small sample size.

Check out Pujols' 2006 year:

2006 Pujols: 301 PAs with runners on, 81 hits, 115 RBI.
2007 Dunn: 301 PAs with runners on, 62 hits, 87 RBI.

Tell me what causes that massive disparity.

Spring~Fields
07-17-2008, 08:40 AM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/STL/2006_bo.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2007_bo.shtml

edabbs44
07-17-2008, 08:47 AM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/STL/2006_bo.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2007_bo.shtml

Not sure if this is in response to my post (I believe it is), but did you realize that they had the same exact number of PAs with runners on base?

GAC
07-17-2008, 08:51 AM
We should be examining (and complaining) far more about Jr's very poor offensive production in the #3 slot then Adam Dunn.

edabbs44
07-17-2008, 09:02 AM
We should be examining (and complaining) far more about Jr's very poor offensive production in the #3 slot then Adam Dunn.

There's nothing to debate. Everyone is on the same side there. Hence no reason to argue. :)

Jpup
07-17-2008, 09:04 AM
The Reds don't have a "better hitter" to put in front of Dunn. That's part of the problem, of course. They don't have a better hitter to place in front of him and they don't have a better hitter to place behind him. This season, Dunn has seen the lion's share of AB in the 5 slot. The combined OBP of the slots immediately preceeding that slot is around .328 this season.

Dunn isn't a "table setter". He's a Run producer. Even as an RBI producer, the guy has matched his 2007 career high of one RBI every 4.92 AB even though he's seen bad OBP performances directly ahead of him. Your average NL team has produced one RBI every 8.04 AB this season.

So exactly how does Dunn suck in this area?

BTW, how does Adam Dunn have more RBI from the beginning the 2007 season through now versus Albert Pujols even though Pujols has a .335 BA versus .251 BA advantage and 39 more AB over that time frame?

yeah, that's what I meant too. You just explained it much better. :)

jojo
07-17-2008, 09:19 AM
I'd like to chime in with something..... I haven't lobbied for Dunn in the 2 hole because he isn't a "run producer" (as has been argued earlier in this thread where it was suggested that even Dunn supporters acknowledge that he isn't a run producer though I'd not really a "Dunn supporter" in the sense I think the author was meaning).... I've argued for it because he's more valuable to an offense than a typical #4 hitter is.... (i.e. the Reds should leverage him better by constructing their lineup to both maximize his PAs and by maximizing the number of guys on base in from of him).....

Spring~Fields
07-17-2008, 09:19 AM
Not sure if this is in response to my post (I believe it is), but did you realize that they had the same exact number of PAs with runners on base?

That is interesting, I like information like that.

I could only reason that Pujols is one of the great hitters.

I don't know if there is any such thing as protection in reality, but I would think that a pitcher has to look at things a little differently with men on base, Pujols up with Rolens and Edmonds or whoever to follow. Larussa's and Jocketty's lineup's in the past are somewhat made like Anderson's use to be with the Reds in the 70's (that productive powerful middle 3,4,5,6)

I think that we both know that the Reds batters won't put much fear of god into any pitcher. That's one reason I am always whining about stacking the OBP guys vs left or right, hoping our team can snag a few breaks here and there. We both know that the Reds are under manned if we are talking "champion" level.

edabbs44
07-17-2008, 09:27 AM
That is interesting, I like information like that.

I could only reason that Pujols is one of the great hitters.

I don't know if there is any such thing as protection in reality, but I would think that a pitcher has to look at things a little differently with men on base, Pujols up with Rolens and Edmonds or whoever to follow. Larussa's and Jocketty's lineup's in the past are somewhat made like Anderson's use to be with the Reds in the 70's (that productive powerful middle 3,4,5,6)

I think that we both know that the Reds batters won't put much fear of god into any pitcher. That's one reason I am always whining about stacking the OBP guys vs left or right, hoping our team can snag a few breaks here and there. We both know that the Reds are under manned if we are talking "champion" level.

I agree...there aren't many who can compete with Pujols in most hitting situations. That wasn't really my point, as most will lose in any head to head batting battles with Albert. It was more about the different views taken on certain stats.

bucksfan2
07-17-2008, 09:31 AM
Oh, don't even start with that stuff. You're the one pointing at "baseball people", without context or clarification, as our guiding light. But it seems that's only holds true if what they're saying or doing supports your contention. Your "fool organization" comment makes that very clear.

We're not supposed to question the "baseball people" because "we" allegedly don't know as much as they do. But should they do or project to do something you don't like, the word "fool" pops off your keyboard pretty darn quickly. Seems that "we" excludes "you", and that ain't a rational way of going about things.

Right now there is someone living on your street who knows more about a profession they aren't in currently than someone who's doing a poor job in that profession. In fact, I'll bet you can think of something you don't do professionally that you're better at than someone who does it professionally.

Every single day a capable someone from outside an industry goes into that industry. And every single day someone who once fit that profile gets promoted to a position ahead of someone else who's been in the industry longer.

John Fay knows less about understanding player performance than at least 75% of the ORG. And that's a conservative estimate.

If Fay actually did hear Adam Dunn say such a thing, and if Fay cared about the truth of the matter, he wouldn't have grouped Dunn in with players who actually aren't performing very well.

Well, there's nothing actually wrong with Adam Dunn's season. There is, however, something entirely wrong with John Fay.

I've heard that prior to settling on just "Attack of the Clones", "Attack of the Stathead Clones" was actually considered as a potential title for Star Wars: Episode II.

And it's good to know that you're "not going there" after you just went there.

But seriously, you're right. You don't have to be a mathematical whiz to be a smart, insightful baseball fan. That being said, this thread is rife with folks who obviously have little to no interest in understanding advanced metrics. Yet a lack of motivation doesn't excuse away having to produce a counter-argument that all too often begins with something akin to "The problem I have with stats is..."

Not speaking to you in particular, rila, but if you willingly bring a knife to a gunfight and then get popped before you can get the switchblade out of your pocket, the idea that you're not interested in guns doesn't really cover for the fact that you knowingly engaged in a battle for which you were unprepared.

But they're "baseball people". If they know so much more than any of us, how could they be wasteful with their cash? In fact, how could you be watching yet another losing season of Reds' baseball?

Steel that is a pretty arrogant stance to take. Sure you can think you can do a better job than Fay but have you ever tried? Its awful easy to say I can do it better when you have never been thrust into that situation. There is a big difference between being a follower or outsider than being thrust into a management position.

As baseball fans we only have access to what happens on the field. We really know little of what goes on outside of the field. There was an even a couple of weeks ago when Dusty pulled Dunn from the game early and got ripped for it. It turned out that Dunn's kid had been taken to the ER and Dusty did it so Dunn could get there. Too often when we make judgements based upon superficial evidence we are wrong.

Fay isn't the best writer but that doesn't mean he is an idiot. That doesn't mean that an everyday joe can step in and do a better job. His job is to cover the reds on a daily basis. His job is to also write articles that apply to the general population on about a 7th grade reading level. He also has to keep a working relationship with the entire Reds organization. If he writes something way over the top of something that the reds ownership doesn't agree with he may be looking for a new job. I would much rather have C Trent covering the Reds on a daily basis than Fay but all in all Fay is ok.

RedsManRick
07-17-2008, 09:36 AM
Bucks, there's a difference between simplicity and correctness. There's no 7th grade reading level which makes Dunn's season bad.

Fay isn't particularly gifted with a turn of phrase and he gets the facts wrong, often. I don't know how well Steel writes, but I know he bases his analysis in reality. Fay would benefit from doing the same.

westofyou
07-17-2008, 09:54 AM
Steel that is a pretty arrogant stance to take.
Is it also arrogant to consistently say that stats don't matter and then use RBI's and RISP to beat Dunn up?

I only ask because I see that coming down the pike time and time again.

If stats don't matter why do so many worry about RISP and RBI's all the while they slam others for using advanced metrics?

bucksfan2
07-17-2008, 10:12 AM
Is it also arrogant to consistently say that stats don't matter and then use RBI's and RISP to beat Dunn up?

I only ask because I see that coming down the pike time and time again.

If stats don't matter why do so many worry about RISP and RBI's all the while they slam others for using advanced metrics?

I have never said stats don't matter. Stats are a useful part of baseball, both the simple stats as well as the more complex stats. However I get told all the time that BA, RISP, RBI, etc. aren't useful because there are more complex better stats. Matter of opinion?

We are pretty much all reds fans here. We all enjoy watching the reds and talking about the reds. IMO RZ and especially ORG is a very statistical heavy forum. I have no problem with that. I sit on the other side of the fence because I don't like sabermetrics and Bill James all that much. Am I wrong? I hope not. Is the other side wrong? No. I enjoy debating with the stat guys because it gives me a different perspective. However I don't like being told that this doesn't matter or that this is a better stat because in all reality its not. There is not a such thing as a perfect stat. There isn't and probably never will be a perfect way to measure a game of failure played by humans. 5 years from now Bill James will probably come up with something that he will say puts OPS to shame. What will we do then?

Spring~Fields
07-17-2008, 10:15 AM
There's nothing to debate. Everyone is on the same side there. Hence no reason to argue. :)


GAC,
We should be examining (and complaining) far more about Jr's very poor offensive production in the #3 slot


I don’t know how they measure lost time, and lost opportunity, or how often we see a problem that is obvious and wonder, why doesn’t someone fix that. Really I don’t care how they do either, I don’t need the engineers to come down and do a time motion study, or the companies actuary and his cost accountants to come in afterward to get me to see that Griffey is lost time and opportunity. To me Griffey in the three position seems to be one of those problems, and has been for some seasons now with the best retort usually being, “Griffey isn’t going to move out of the number three position so forget that” is there any of us that doesn’t have to wonder about that if it is a true retort?

How do we complain/argue about a Dunn who can at least get on base, while the Reds upper, middle and field level management play oblivious to what they have in the three position?

How are we to accept comments on the positive side from ownership to middle management and field level with such an obvious in the number three position acting as a barrier to their constructive and positive spins on the issues of winning or losing?

The powers that be cannot tell this individual you will be hitting such and such? Because we feel that it will benefit the team? Speaking of reality, how hard can it be to write the name Griffey lower on the lineup card? Are human politics or personality characteristics to prevail in such cases?

Is someone in a way or manner holding another party hostage here? Since when has that been allowed?

westofyou
07-17-2008, 10:25 AM
I have never said stats don't matter. Stats are a useful part of baseball, both the simple stats as well as the more complex stats. However I get told all the time that BA, RISP, RBI, etc. aren't useful because there are more complex better stats. Matter of opinion?


I wasn't speaking directly about you .. and stats are baseball, they are the recording of the events in a baseball game, so useful is one way to term it, that is if we believe recording history is useful .



I don't like sabermetrics and Bill James all that much.

If you love baseball and have never read any Bill James essays (not the stats stuff) then you are really missing out on some great stuff, because Bill James is a wonderful writer who is capable of writing a tome about the game without inserting a table or a number.


5 years from now Bill James will probably come up with something that he will say puts OPS to shame. What will we do then?

Ops is the measure of slugging and the times a guy gets on base added up.

Why that is so evil has eluded me to this day, that said James doesn't dabble in metrics for the public anymore.. he's paid by the World Champs to do that for them.

RedsManRick
07-17-2008, 10:36 AM
I have never said stats don't matter. Stats are a useful part of baseball, both the simple stats as well as the more complex stats. However I get told all the time that BA, RISP, RBI, etc. aren't useful because there are more complex better stats. Matter of opinion?

We are pretty much all reds fans here. We all enjoy watching the reds and talking about the reds. IMO RZ and especially ORG is a very statistical heavy forum. I have no problem with that. I sit on the other side of the fence because I don't like sabermetrics and Bill James all that much. Am I wrong? I hope not. Is the other side wrong? No. I enjoy debating with the stat guys because it gives me a different perspective. However I don't like being told that this doesn't matter or that this is a better stat because in all reality its not. There is not a such thing as a perfect stat. There isn't and probably never will be a perfect way to measure a game of failure played by humans. 5 years from now Bill James will probably come up with something that he will say puts OPS to shame. What will we do then?

The argument of statistical relativism is just plain wrong. Certain stats ARE better than other ones when you're are trying to measure something in specific. Batting average, to use the obvious example, does not measure how many runs a guy produces as well as about 578 other measures. RISP metrics tell us less about a guy's RBI potential then other stats do. RBI don't tell us which guys create the most runs.

Now, I can understand if the less statistically inclined crowd don't want to use the more complex stats. The traditional stats do you take pretty far and if the traditional stats tell you what you feel you need to know, that's absolute fine. But they ARE worse. A '92 Saturn is a worse car than a '09 BMW. It doesn't make it a pointless car. But it's going to be less comfortable, break down more often, etc. You many not want or need a BMW, but that doesn't make all cars equal.

Obviously the current advanced metrics aren't perfect and nobody would assert otherwise; That's a blatant strawman. Furthermore, statheads would agree with you 100% that we'll never have the game purely down to a science. Stats will continue to be refined and redeveloped to be even better at measuring and predicting performance. When those stats are developed, we'll start using them instead. But that's no excuse for not using the best ones we have today. Did you stop watching your TV 5 years ago because you knew 42" LCDs were coming? Would you argue that your 12" black and white is just as good a TV as your 42" 1080p HD LCD?

You may have an opinion regarding what statistics you are most comfortable using and you are absolutely entitled to that. But certain stats are better at measuring performance. That's not a matter of opinion. To revisit Steel's analogy, a knife is a fine weapon. But if you're in a duel and the goal is to kill the other duy, the gun is more effective. In fact, the gun is so much more effective that it makes the knife virtually useless.

Stats like batting average are useful in so far as they are better than nothing. But when we have such easy access to stats which measure the game so much more precisely, arguing that all stats are equally good/bad is pretty ignorant.

jojo
07-17-2008, 10:38 AM
If you love baseball and have never read any Bill James essays (not the stats stuff) then you are really missing out on some great stuff, because Bill James is a wonderful writer who is capable of writing a tome about the game without inserting a table or a number.

Concerning stats, James has produced his share of clunkers (with winshares being the biggest) but his contribution to sabermetrics has been extraordinary.

That said, I think you put your finger on James exactly-even ignoring the stats stuff, Bill James is one of the best baseball writers ever. To ignore his body of work because he's associated with the "saber" movement is really a huge mistake for a passionate baseball fan to make. It's kind of like cutting your feet off so that you won't have to worry about getting your shoes muddy.... :cool:

REDREAD
07-17-2008, 11:09 AM
Which is the point.

In the time period we're talking about, Pujols has 36 more basehits then Dunn with Runners on base, yet he has 12 less RBI.

If what others have said is true, that it just takes more hits, that shouldn't be possible. Especially considering Pujols having more PA's and Runners on Base.

Well, this leads to another discussion.. Which is more valuable..
These are hypothetical numbers, not Dunn or Pulojos.

Is the guy that drives in 100 RBI with 4O HR and 30 singles
Or is it the guy drives in 100 RBI with 20 HR and 70 singles.
Let's assume outs in all other plate appearances.


The guy that is more tilted towards HR will give you more big innings. Is it better over the course of the season to have those 100 runs scored in big innings or spread out more? I don't know the answer, but I was wondering if anyone gave it any thought.

(

Raisor
07-17-2008, 11:50 AM
Well, this leads to another discussion.. Which is more valuable..
These are hypothetical numbers, not Dunn or Pulojos.

Is the guy that drives in 100 RBI with 4O HR and 30 singles
Or is it the guy drives in 100 RBI with 20 HR and 70 singles.
Let's assume outs in all other plate appearances.


The guy that is more tilted towards HR will give you more big innings. Is it better over the course of the season to have those 100 runs scored in big innings or spread out more? I don't know the answer, but I was wondering if anyone gave it any thought.

(

Blow outs either way tend to even themselves out. It's why the pythagorean thm works so well.

RichRed
07-17-2008, 01:19 PM
Even on the strikeout front, Dunn is having at least "a mediocre year." In the 5 seasons that Dunn has had at least 500 ABs, he has averaged 178.4 strikeouts per season. This year, he is on pace for 171 Ks. Not a huge difference and he could still surpass his career average but still...

Also, his BABIP so far is a ridiculously low .242 (it was .278 in '06 and .309 in '07). It could be due to his relatively low LD percentage of 16% versus the 23% he had in '06 or '08. I'm not sure what to attribute that to (could be random) but I'm betting we're going to see a pretty strong second half from Dunn, not that I expect Fay to be able to recognize it if/when it happens.

Rojo
07-17-2008, 01:41 PM
Well, this leads to another discussion.. Which is more valuable..
These are hypothetical numbers, not Dunn or Pulojos.

Is the guy that drives in 100 RBI with 4O HR and 30 singles
Or is it the guy drives in 100 RBI with 20 HR and 70 singles.
Let's assume outs in all other plate appearances.


The guy that is more tilted towards HR will give you more big innings. Is it better over the course of the season to have those 100 runs scored in big innings or spread out more? I don't know the answer, but I was wondering if anyone gave it any thought.(

Before, I answer that question, I'd want to know if your first premise is true. Most homers are solo shots and player B is stirring the pot in 20 more innings.

princeton
07-17-2008, 03:03 PM
Even on the strikeout front, Dunn is having at least "a mediocre year.".

nothing about 170 K's qualifies as mediocre.

the man goes for those Ks in a big way.

SMcGavin
07-17-2008, 03:23 PM
RE: The wisdom of "baseball people"

If by some stroke of luck I was named GM of a major league baseball team, I would be offering significant sums of money to bring some of the people from this message board into my organization. I've been reading this message board for four or five years, and I've been reading mainstream baseball articles for probably twelve years, and there's no question which one has taught me more about baseball. That's not to say I wouldn't hire some more traditional baseball people as well. But if you don't think some of the people here know more about baseball than the average guy working in a MLB front office, IMO you're crazy.

princeton
07-17-2008, 03:32 PM
Albert Pujols may qualify as the Barry Bond apparent. If anyone does get nailed by having nobody batting behind him, it's that guy: 44 IBBs in last two years to Adam Dunn's 12.

Interestingly, if you remove IBBs from the equation, Pujols has had only 259 men on second and third to knock in, to Adam's 324.

He's got 98 RBIs in those situations (38 percent success) to Adam's 95 (29 percent success). Maybe a high BA isn't such a bad thing?

(that's why you watch out for those counting stats, or so I've heard ;))

Rojo
07-17-2008, 03:40 PM
If anyone does get nailed by having nobody batting behind him, it's that guy: 44 IBBs in last two years to Adam Dunn's 12.

Pitchers give Albert nearly four times the number of free passes? They must not visit this board.

princeton
07-17-2008, 03:43 PM
Pitchers give Albert nearly four times the number of free passes? They must not visit this board.

Albert needs to require that opposing managers read the Bill James article about how protection is overrated

honestly, I suspect that it is, but Bonds and Pujols did come along after that article was written.

westofyou
07-17-2008, 03:45 PM
Albert needs to require that opposing managers read the Bill James article about how protection is overrated

honestly, I suspect that it is, but Bonds and Pujols did come along after that article was written.

Albert doesn't even make the top 25 in the history of the game.

Yet.


NTENTIONAL WALKS vs. the league average displayed only--not a sorting criteria

INTENTIONAL WALKS YEAR IBB IBB
1 Barry Bonds 2004 120 117
2 Barry Bonds 2002 68 64
3 Barry Bonds 2003 61 58
4 Willie McCovey 1969 45 39
T5 Barry Bonds 1993 43 38
T5 Barry Bonds 2007 43 40
7 Willie McCovey 1970 40 34
8 Barry Bonds 2006 38 34
T9 Ryan Howard 2006 37 31
T9 Sammy Sosa 2001 37 32
T11 Barry Bonds 2001 35 31
T11 Ryan Howard 2007 35 30
13 Barry Bonds 1997 34 30
T14 John Olerud 1993 33 29
T14 Ted Williams 1957 33 30
T16 Barry Bonds 1992 32 27
T16 Kevin Mitchell 1989 32 25
T16 Vladimir Guerrero 2002 32 25
19 George Brett 1985 31 27
20 Barry Bonds 1996 30 25
T21 Adolfo Phillips 1967 29 22
T21 Dale Murphy 1987 29 22
T21 Frank Howard 1970 29 23
T21 Barry Bonds 1998 29 25
T21 Frank Thomas 1995 29 26

princeton
07-17-2008, 03:52 PM
hmm-- face Albert Pujols, not John Olerud.

westofyou
07-17-2008, 03:55 PM
hmm-- face Albert Pujols, not John Olerud.

Adolfo Philips?

Not Santo, Not Williams, Not Banks....

princeton
07-17-2008, 03:58 PM
Pujols is on pace for 46 IBBs this season, BTW. Willie McCovey is nervous.

*BaseClogger*
07-17-2008, 04:00 PM
RE: The wisdom of "baseball people"

If by some stroke of luck I was named GM of a major league baseball team, I would be offering significant sums of money to bring some of the people from this message board into my organization. I've been reading this message board for four or five years, and I've been reading mainstream baseball articles for probably twelve years, and there's no question which one has taught me more about baseball. That's not to say I wouldn't hire some more traditional baseball people as well. But if you don't think some of the people here know more about baseball than the average guy working in a MLB front office, IMO you're crazy.

I wanted to post this a second time in case anyone missed it... :thumbup:

Ltlabner
07-17-2008, 04:45 PM
# NAME PA EqA OBP SLG VORP RAR RAP
1. Brandon Phillips 403 .280 .323 .476 20.5 22.1 8.6
2. Ken Griffey Jr. 374 .267 .348 .400 3.4 14.0 -2.3
3. Adam Dunn 368 .313 .380 .538 24.0 33.5 18.8
4. Joey Votto 343 .280 .350 .464 13.1 18.5 1.3
5. Edwin Encarnacion 337 .284 .341 .481 13.5 19.7 5.5
6. Jeff Keppinger 238 .265 .353 .388 9.3 8.4 2.8
7. Paul Bako 228 .226 .296 .355 -3.8 -0.8 -5.8
8. Jerry Hairston 213 .315 .398 .495 24.2 20.2 14.0
9. Corey Patterson 212 .197 .225 .337 -10.6 -6.9 -16.0
10. Jay Bruce 182 .265 .335 .429 3.7 6.7 -0.6
11. Ryan Freel 143 .250 .340 .359 1.8 3.0 -2.6
12. David Ross 131 .287 .389 .417 6.2 7.9 4.8

Long before I get to Adam Dunn being a "problem" I see minor things like...

1) CPat geting 212 PA's of significantly less than replacement level leadoff hitting goodness.

2) Bako, Freel and Bruce geting 553 PA's of right around or below replacement level performance at the plate

3) Another parcel of PAs given out to Hopper, Hatteberg, Janish, Phillips, Colbert and Javy that didn't do much (if anything) to advance the team.

4) Jr. (God love him) scoring better than replacement level runs at the plate but far less than other average Right Fielders and right about replacement level value (not to mention suspect defense to boot).

And that's before you really get into the defensive situation and the pitching staff.

But oh brother...all those K's.

ochre
07-17-2008, 04:45 PM
I suspect protection is legitimate in the micro, not so much in the macro. RISP late in the game with 1st base open and Pujols coming up is a fairly sample, but I imagine most managers want to face the next guy.

ochre
07-17-2008, 04:49 PM
Adolfo Philips?

Not Santo, Not Williams, Not Banks....
Not to mention Olerud was:
.363 .473 .599 1.072

that season.

***with mostly Tony Fernandez, Ed Spraque, and Darrin Jackson batting in the slot behind him at that...

Highlifeman21
07-17-2008, 04:50 PM
Pujols is on pace for 46 IBBs this season, BTW. Willie McCovey is nervous.

I take it you don't recognize Barry Bonds 3 seasons that were better than McCovey's 45?

Rojo
07-17-2008, 05:29 PM
Long before I get to Adam Dunn being a "problem" I see minor things like...

Yeah, well its too bad that a decision on Adam has to be reached quickly.

GAC
07-17-2008, 07:25 PM
I've argued for it because he's more valuable to an offense than a typical #4 hitter is.... (i.e. the Reds should leverage him better by constructing their lineup to both maximize his PAs and by maximizing the number of guys on base in from of him).....

Bingo jojo. :thumbup:

GAC
07-18-2008, 03:38 PM
Steel that is a pretty arrogant stance to take. Sure you can think you can do a better job than Fay but have you ever tried? Its awful easy to say I can do it better when you have never been thrust into that situation.

Respectfully, maybe I'm missing something here; but being a journalist, or "beat writer" for the Reds, makes Fay more qualified or a "baseball person"?

How? Just because he has access to the clubhouse?

GAC
07-18-2008, 03:42 PM
I also like what CaiGuy said on the Dunn vs Howard thread.


Also, many blame Dunn's strikeouts for his "inability" to drive in runs, yet the only man who strikes out more than him leads the league in RBIs.

Spring~Fields
07-18-2008, 04:05 PM
# NAME PA EqA OBP SLG VORP RAR RAP
1. Brandon Phillips 403 .280 .323 .476 20.5 22.1 8.6
2. Ken Griffey Jr. 374 .267 .348 .400 3.4 14.0 -2.3
3. Adam Dunn 368 .313 .380 .538 24.0 33.5 18.8
4. Joey Votto 343 .280 .350 .464 13.1 18.5 1.3
5. Edwin Encarnacion 337 .284 .341 .481 13.5 19.7 5.5
6. Jeff Keppinger 238 .265 .353 .388 9.3 8.4 2.8
7. Paul Bako 228 .226 .296 .355 -3.8 -0.8 -5.8
8. Jerry Hairston 213 .315 .398 .495 24.2 20.2 14.0
9. Corey Patterson 212 .197 .225 .337 -10.6 -6.9 -16.0
10. Jay Bruce 182 .265 .335 .429 3.7 6.7 -0.6
11. Ryan Freel 143 .250 .340 .359 1.8 3.0 -2.6
12. David Ross 131 .287 .389 .417 6.2 7.9 4.8

Long before I get to Adam Dunn being a "problem" I see minor things like...

1) CPat geting 212 PA's of significantly less than replacement level leadoff hitting goodness.

2) Bako, Freel and Bruce geting 553 PA's of right around or below replacement level performance at the plate

3) Another parcel of PAs given out to Hopper, Hatteberg, Janish, Phillips, Colbert and Javy that didn't do much (if anything) to advance the team.

4) Jr. (God love him) scoring better than replacement level runs at the plate but far less than other average Right Fielders and right about replacement level value (not to mention suspect defense to boot).

And that's before you really get into the defensive situation and the pitching staff.

But oh brother...all those K's.

What you say, seems fair and reasonable showing a long line that would take one awhile to go through before they ever came to an Adam Dunn as the cause and effect of issues with the Reds. If the others were accurately critqued to the degree that a Dunn is, would there ever be time to mention Dunn in the same breath with those players?

nate
07-18-2008, 04:37 PM
I just noticed this at the top of Dunn's BR gamelog (http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/gl.cgi?n1=dunnad01&t=b&year=2008) page:


RBI Opportunities
Adam Dunn -- PA: 368 RBI: 59
Actual Runners on Base: 214 (91-77-46),
ML Avg. Player with PA: 368 RBI: 41
Avg. Runners on Base: 230 (114-77-39)

red-in-la
07-18-2008, 04:49 PM
Youy cannot compare Dunn to AVERAGE players. He isn't paid like an average player, he isn't counted on like an average player. Also, are pitchers in this average player's stat's?

Raisor
07-18-2008, 04:53 PM
Youy cannot compare Dunn to AVERAGE players. He isn't paid like an average player, he isn't counted on like an average player. Also, are pitchers in this average player's stat's?

Who do you want to compare him to?

Rojo
07-18-2008, 05:00 PM
Who do you want to compare him to?

That's the trick isn't it? Dunn's contentious because he's a unique ballplayer.

registerthis
07-18-2008, 05:03 PM
Youy cannot compare Dunn to AVERAGE players. He isn't paid like an average player, he isn't counted on like an average player.

OK, he's leading the team in HRs, RBI, OBP, OPS, walks, and is second in runs scored.

He's second in the league in HRs, leads the league in walks, and is top 20 in OPS, OBP, SLG and RBI.

All this despite playing on one of the most putrid offenses in the league.

Nothing "average" about that.

westofyou
07-18-2008, 05:15 PM
Who do you want to compare him to?

Frank Howard (http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/howarfr01.shtml) or Dave Nicholson (http://www.baseball-reference.com/n/nichoda01.shtml).

red-in-la
07-18-2008, 05:15 PM
Who do you want to compare him to?

I guess I compare him to other RBI guys who are making 13 million a year.....and plan to compare him to RBI guys who will make more (via FA).

red-in-la
07-18-2008, 05:22 PM
Frank Howard (http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/howarfr01.shtml) or Dave Nicholson (http://www.baseball-reference.com/n/nichoda01.shtml).

To me, Adam is the antitheses of Frank Howard. I am not sure if the stats bare this out....