Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GoReds
Pretty much what I figured I would get. Thanks for that.
Dunn had a good month, but didn't stand out notably from the rest of the Reds hitters. He lead the Reds in TB, SLG and HRs, but only in HRs was the difference over the next guy signficant.
|
I'm not sure you'd understand how much better Adam Dunn was versus the rest of the Reds hitters, but when a guy ranks 6th in the NL in Equivalent Runs it's a pretty darn big deal. When he puts up a .326 EQA over 111 PA while the only other starting position player (Phillips) on the team to post an EQA over .300 has only 68 PA, that's a pretty darn big deal as well.
That being said, it's immaterial. Most productive player is most productive player. That doesn't denigrate what Arroyo did in April. It's just a fact.
Quote:
|
Arroyo, on the other hand, led or was second in almost every category for a starting pitcher this last month. He wasn't just better than the other guys, he was significantly better.
|
That says everything about the other pitchers on the team (sans Coffey- who was great) and virtually nothing about Bronson Arroyo.
Quote:
|
Dunn was the best hitter, for sure. I just don't see the need to shout it at every opportunity at the expense of a player who was so much better than the rest at his position for the previous month.
|
At the "expense of a player"? Go back and read my original post. Dunn was the most productive player on the team in April. Bronson Arroyo was first on my list of Honorable Mentions. I'd considered Arroyo until I noticed that his ERA was entirely out of line with his DIPS (a product of an awful HR rate, BTW).
Production doesn't play favorites. Either you added more value to your team than everyone else or you didn't. As soon as that more productive guy ends up being someone other than Dunn, you'll see me saying so. Until then, you won't.
And as for "so much better"...
Arroyo ranks 20th in the NL in DIPS at 3.89. The guy right behind him in 21st place at 4.00 DIPS is named Aaron Harang. One guy was lucky in April. One guy wasn't. You seem to think that being lucky means the former produced at a significantly higher rate than did the latter. I don't.