Adam Dunn on the Block?

[birdzgirl76]

2b- Roberts

RF- Markakis

SS- Tejada

DH- Dunn

LF- Wilson

1b- Gibbons

C- Hernandez

CF- Patterson

3b- Mora

Bedard

Cabrera

Benson

Loewen

Eaton

Trade Rodrigo Lopez & Hayden Penn for Adam Dunn.

Sign Adam Eaton 1/5

Sign a couple of reliable arms to add to the pen.

How does that sound?

Is that Preston or Craig in LF? I hope the latter...

Also, I think it's unlikely the Rangers don't re-sign Eaton considering what they gave up for him this past off-season, though I could be wrong.

[NoVaO]

Is Dunn an example of a batter who hit's for a high average and consistently produces runs?

Question: A pitcher has a lot of control on whether he strikes a hitter out, no? Yet he has little control on how hard a hitter hit's the ball? That doesn't seem to jive to me.

I agree with you. A few studies done have kinda concluded that pitchers have little control over batted balls, but I find it extremely hard to believe.

If pitchers have so little control on batted balls, then that assumes every pitcher has the same talent and the only thing that seperates them is walks and strikeouts, which is hardly the case.

It is true that a pitcher can control the number FBs and GBs they give up, but the feeling is that they can't control the amount of LD's. So if you see a pitcher with a 12% LD rate, you expect they are getting lucky and for the line drives to go up and then hit total to come up. And usually this is true.

If a pitcher has an unusually high BABIP, it is assumed they are getting unlucky and that is usually the case. The same goes for a pitcher who has an unusually low BABIP...it is assumed they are lucky. This is also usually true.

But usually you'll see a trend that the best pitchers in the game consistently hold hitters under the normal BABIP limit and if they don't, the BABIP given up usually never goes much over the average. Also, while the number of LD's vary, many of the best pitchers limit the number of line drives they give up. It also goes into the velocity of the ball that is hit. I am pretty sure they have a decent amount of control over how hard the ball is it. Weaker pitchers will probably tend to give up line drives that are hit harder, grounders that are hit harder, and fly balls that travel farther. Of course, the best pitchers usually have the good K rate.

Still, it is best if a pitcher has a high K rate because if not, there is much more variability in the BABIP and LD's on a year to year basis (see Kenny Rogers). And your stuff probably just isn't as good if you are not a high K pitcher.

[bernie132000]

I agree with you. A few studies done have kinda concluded that pitchers have little control over batted balls, but I find it extremely hard to believe.

If pitchers have so little control on batted balls, then that assumes every pitcher has the same talent and the only thing that seperates them is walks and strikeouts, which is hardly the case.

It is true that a pitcher can control the number FBs and GBs they give up, but the feeling is that they can't control the amount of LD's. So if you see a pitcher with a 12% LD rate, you expect they are getting lucky and for the line drives to go up and then hit total to come up. And usually this is true.

If a pitcher has an unusually high BABIP, it is assumed they are getting unlucky and that is usually the case. The same goes for a pitcher who has an unusually low BABIP...it is assumed they are lucky. This is also usually true.

But usually you'll see a trend that the best pitchers in the game consistently hold hitters under the normal BABIP limit and if they don't, the BABIP given up usually never goes much over the average. Also, while the number of LD's vary, many of the best pitchers limit the number of line drives they give up. It also goes into the velocity of the ball that is hit. I am pretty sure they have a decent amount of control over how hard the ball is it. Weaker pitchers will probably tend to give up line drives that are hit harder, grounders that are hit harder, and fly balls that travel farther. Of course, the best pitchers usually have the good K rate.

Still, it is best if a pitcher has a high K rate because if not, there is much more variability in the BABIP and LD's on a year to year basis (see Kenny Rogers). And your stuff probably just isn't as good if you are not a high K pitcher.

I keep meaning to ask Drungo this, but how does Sabermetrics explain Wang's season.

[SilentJames]

I keep meaning to ask Drungo this, but how does Sabermetrics explain Wang's season.

The sabermatrician's head explodes....thats how.

[El Gordo]

I keep meaning to ask Drungo this, but how does Sabermetrics explain Wang's season.

Is a statistical anomaly.

[Whatever0]

I keep meaning to ask Drungo this, but how does Sabermetrics explain Wang's season.

That's easy: pitchers have very strong control over three things: Ks, BBs, and GB% (which indirectly determines the HR rate). Wang was outstanding at two of those three things: his DIPS was a very respectable 4.04, 30th in all of baseball. Combine that with a little luck, and you have a very good season. If Wang doesn't start to strike out more batters, he's more likely to be a 4.00 ERA guy than a 3.5 one: but he's still an excellent young pitcher either way.

[NoVaO]

I keep meaning to ask Drungo this, but how does Sabermetrics explain Wang's season.

Yup, he is the exception to the rule. I mean his K rate is so low that you wouldn't even think he would be a sucessful MLB pitcher. Whatever explained it well...he is an extreme GB pitcher, but it goes a bit further in that he induces a lot of weak ground balls, and so far he has limited the number of line drives against him:

2005 - 14%

2006 - 16%

At least so far, he seems to have the ability to limit contact, but my feeling is that this is the best year he could possibly have. He'll still be a good pitcher, but I also see him having an ERA around 4.2 next year.

[Fan4Life]

Is a statistical anomaly.

Because he is the remainder of an unbalanced equation.. He... is the ONE.

[bryanman8]

Cincinnati can't wait to get rid of Dunn. This guy is the reincarnation of Dave "Kong" Kingman.

Completely and utterly wrong. Would people stop saying this please whenever you have a power hitter that strikes out too?

OPS comparison by age:

22: Dunn- .854 in 676 PA's, Kingman- .885 in only 128 PA's (Dunn also OPSed .949 in 286 PA's at 21)

23: Dunn- .819, Kingman- .765

24: Dunn- .957, Kingman- .779

25: Dunn- .927, Kingman- .742

26: Dunn- .855, Kingman- .778

Kingman finished with a .780 OPS after his prime and whole career. Dunn has an .893 OPS for his career pre-prime.

He is also the perfect example of the fact that you can't rely totally on OPS as the complete measure of a baseball player.

Who's suggesting you rely totally on OPS? That's a good measure of offense, although you also have to consider peripheral numbers to make sure the 'naked' stats aren't deceiving you and baserunning on the offensive side, as well as defense entirely. No stat-guy would say OPS tells you everything you need to know about the whole player.

* He is not only a bad defensive LF, he is horrendous. Only Manny Ramirez is worse. If he stays in Cincinnati, they'll probably put him at 1B. In reality, his only position is DH.

Ok. So what? Last I checked we need a 1B/DH. This is a guy who will be 27 next year and has the potential to OPS 1.000 for the rest of his career. I'll take him at 1B/DH if need be, but I don't believe his defense is that deadly in LF.

* He strikes out at an eyepopping rate - .343 in 2006.

And strikeouts don't matter.

* His BABIP is an anemic .278 - 11th from the bottom of the NL among regulars at any position.

If anything, this shows that he will get much better next year, just like Nick Swisher last year. He got unlucky on a lot of balls he put in play. He should have a much higher BABIP next year and thus have much better overall numbers.

* BA/RISP is .222 - only two players in the NL are worse than him.

Clutch also really doesn't exist, and if this is just from last year only, it's waaaay to small of a sample size.

* His offensive stats peaked three years ago and are steadily dropping.

Hardly. He had one off year this year which appears to really just be unlucky. In this park, he'd kill the ball with his homer/walk game.

[skipshot26]

I have to believe that if the O's could trade for Dunn, sign Soriano and trade for a young 1B the offense is playoff caliber.

Brob - 2B

Markakis - RF

Dunn - DH

Tejada - SS

Soriano - LF

Mora - 3B

Hernandez - C

young 1B (see previous threads for the best one)

Patterson - CF

The next issue to consider is obviously pitching.

[DrungoHazewood]

I keep meaning to ask Drungo this, but how does Sabermetrics explain Wang's season.

He's a unique, extreme ground ball pitcher, as several others have mentioned. Meaning he's very much at the whims of his infield defense. If he doesn't increase his K rate I'd bet he is quite inconsistent year to year.

But he's so far out of the edge of the data it's hard to tell what's going to happen. Cy Young caliber pitchers with K Rates of 3.0 per nine are about as common as albino flying anteaters.

[Whatever0]

I'll take him at 1B/DH if need be, but I don't believe his defense is that deadly in LF.

Well, the defensive metrics disagree with you here. BP rates him 4 runs below replacement as a LF: that's just horrific. BP's defensive statistics aren't always very accurate, but it's pretty obivous Dunn is a butcher in LF. He's obviously an excellent option at 1B or DH, but playing him in LF mkaes him far less valuable.

[Flosman]

Well, the defensive metrics disagree with you here. BP rates him 4 runs below replacement as a LF: that's just horrific. BP's defensive statistics aren't always very accurate, but it's pretty obivous Dunn is a butcher in LF. He's obviously an excellent option at 1B or DH, but playing him in LF mkaes him far less valuable.

He is bad in the field. the kind of fielder that the best thing you can say about his fielding is that he can hit.

[goodburger34]

He is bad in the field. the kind of fielder that the best thing you can say about his fielding is that he can hit.

He can't hit that's the problem. Dunn is a meathead with a good eye, but when he makes contact with the ball it goes. Still I would still love to have him on the orioles.

[Mackus]

I saw Itallion Stallion bring up the point that anyone batting in the 4th spot should bat in at least 100 runs over a full season, in a discussion about Magglio Ordonez. That got me to thinking about Dunn. Isn't the following an indictment of Dunn as a middle of the order hitter.

From 2003-2005 Dunn had 98 RBI in 621 AB's which is well over one full season for someone who walks as much as he does. Last year he had 24 RBI in 169 AB's in the 4th spot. That doesn't project to anything close to 100 RBI.

RBI and runs scored, as you know, are much more dependant on a guy's teamates than his own production.

Dunn will get fewer RBI than other middle of the order hitters because of his low batting average and high walk rate. Most RBI are on hits, and Dunn just doesn't get a whole lot of them. That doesn't mean that his presence doesn't lead to more runs for the team, he certainly does, but its not him driving them in. The bottom line is the key to scoring a lot of runs isn't getting lots of hits or homeruns, but avoiding as many outs as possible. His OBP will show you that he's great at doing that. The fact that he also hits 35-40 HR a year is just icing on the cake.

I'm thinking the if we landed Dunn, that we should bat Tejada behind him. Dunn will get on base a whole lot, and then Tejada can get him over or in with all of the hits that he provides.