outrageous claim of the day.
would you trade pedro martinez, circa 1999, for ken griffey jr., circa 1997?
hamilton/volquez '08.
hamilton/volquez '08.
posted by mike at 7:51 AM
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Previous Posts
- outrageous claims about the NBA playoffs.
- quote of the day.
- non-sports post: music commentary.
- comments about the ncaa tournament...
- tournament preview, top 10 seeds.
- non-sports post- BOOK TALK!!!!!
- handicapping the n.b.a.
- thoughts on the santana trade.
- guest column 2: courtesy John Lorenz. Australian O...
- welcome, guest nfl columnist.
11 Comments:
you're a regular blogger! almost as often as the cnn political ticker :)
-rach
isn't there any way the reds could have convinced the rangers to take dunn instead of hamilton? The rangers seem pretty inept... they would have dunn it...
But seriously, note to GM's everywhere - when trading off excess outfield talent... try not to make it your best outfielder.
Adam Dunn is still pretty sweet: according to espn.com, he's on pace for his fifth straight forty homer season.
Here's a thought: would Volquez have been the best pitcher the Rangers ever brought up in their organization?
Dunn's 40 HR's cost abou $12 mil (?) a year now. But, hey, at least they come along with 85 whole RBI's in a season.
I suppose he does still get on base a lot. But whose driving him in once he gets on? The Reds have offensive issues. Maybe that isn't Dunn's fault, but there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the makeup of the lineup. You'd want to play Smallball with half the lineup and Moneyball with the other half. You put the two halves together, and you just get outs. The only player who seems like he could have success with both Smallball and the long ball is Brandon Phillips. Josh Hamilton may probably could have done this as well.
And he strikes out a lot. There is such a thing as a productive out. The sad thing is if you go back and look at his minor league stats, he could hit .300. Let's say instead of hitting .235 (Greg Vaughn quality...), striking out 190 times and hitting 50 HR's, he hit .285 (something I think he's capable of), "only" struck out 140 times, but only hit 35-40 HR's would it be worth it??? They say it depends on slugging and on base. So were talking about a potential decline in slugging (or are we... replace 50 strike outs 25-30 extra hits?) and a potential increase in on base.
I guess I'm hard on Dunn. He's one of the premier power hitters in the league. I guess I'm just uncomfortable with the idea of some striking out 200 times and being an all star (that goes for you too, Ryan Howard). I just don't see him as being all that clutch. He's good for two to three 0 for ? stretches with ?? strikeouts every season. I've never looked into his average with runners in scoring position, but I'm sure it would probably prove me wrong. Whatever.
hey, let me defend dunn once more: he has had 100+ rbi in 3 of his last 4 seasons. if you're going to go after reds for not being productive, look at corey patterson first. because he sucks.
alternatively, you could go after my favorite player to hate, ryan freel, who has, in his 1,881 AB's (or 2,092 plate appearances) a whopping 117 RBI's, with 137 extra-base hits. but hey, he's a gamer, if an extremely unproductive one. the reds threw 2.3 million at him last year for his 16 rbi and 19 XBH, but at least he can field, and they can hit him 8th. put him with patterson at leadoff? (yelp!) and the random crappy catcher of the year, and that's why the reds suck. it's not dunn. it's the worst 1-7-8-9 in baseball, or alternatively, the worst 1-8-9 in baseball. but jay bruce will save the reds like a phoenix.
and when jay bruce comes to save the day, you can go back to hating adam dunn. but until that time, please use your hatred on the players that are destroying your lineup.
hey, look at the bright side: he's not richie sexson!
Ryan Freel has a career on base percentage of .360... which is respectable.
Given a chance to play a full season (he played 143 games and 132 games two of his seasons... after that 103 is his highest total) he would score between 70 and 80 runs a season.
Considering he is a leadoff hitter, RBI's are a terrible, awful, irrelevant measure of his worth... especially in the national league, where he's batting after the pitcher. Way to compare apples and oranges.
I realize Dunn is a valuable commodity and misplaced on the Reds. But my main argument isn't that Dunn is a bad player. He costs them $13 million - which could be used to upgrade elsewhere. Then again, small market team, yada yada yada.
Someone find me the following stats with Dunn:
Avg. with runners on base
Strikeouts with runners on base
RISP Avg.
RISP Stikeouts
I don't know if this stat means anything but I've always been interested in RBI to homerun ratio. Dunn gets 100 RBI's... good for him. But is that good for him? I know RBI's is a biased stat because it is dependent on whether there is a runner on base or not which is beyond the control of the hitter. But based on his power, and his spot in the lineup, he has to have opportunity. For being a "premier" slugger, he has only been in the top 10 in RBI's in his league once. I want a sabermetric answer to this. It will probably prove me wrong, but a certain point, doesn't 200 strikeouts nullify an OPS around .1000?
And here's my ridiculous claim. Is Adam Dunn all that different from post-Roid era Giambi? He's got more RBI's, but how many RBI's are left out there with A-Rod in your lineup? (Throwing out 04 and 07, when Giambi was a shell of a person and only played a half a season.)
the best thing about having jay bruce is the need to no longer play ryan freel.
that 7,8 combination for the reds just went 5-6 with 6 RBIs and 4 runs scored tonight.
As Tracy Mcgrady would say; it's Adam Dunn's fault that a couple of people in the stands ordered Heinekens and got Budweiser.
Some things I want to add:
-Ryan Freel is nothing more than a solid utility player.
-Adam Dunn has averaged 100 RBI's and 103 runs a season the last 4 years. Apparently someone is driving him in once he draws a walk.
-I think Adam Dunn's pay is pretty fair considering his production and the market.
-1,7, and 8 are a major part of the problem.
-Pitching is still problem #1. Both middle relief and starters. Better pitching would cover most of the problems that this offense has in terms of makeup and generating timely offense. Volquez being 7-2 and having a sick ERA and Cueto pitching one great game does not fix the problems that this staff has like a lot of Reds fans seem to think.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home