What does NY have to do w/ anything?
If there is such a NY bias, then why isn't Munson & Mattingly in?
And does anyone think Bernie Williams, Paul O'Neill, ANdy Pettite, Mike Mussina are shoe-ins?

mussina should be in...

in what other cities would bernie and paul o'neill be even in the discussion??? i've never thought of them as legit cases.

pettite obviously no way (10 other ped guys would get in first before pettite).

It's got to be tough, thinking that way. I'm sure Beltre does not.

I don't think Mussina belongs or Mattingly/Munson. Dunn definitely not. McGriff was a far superior player, no? He had 6 top 10 MVP finishes compared to 0 for Dunn.

He had a very nice year in Boston, I didn't and don't understand why there wasn't more of an effort to keep him. He is only 35 and playing as well as ever, looking at his numbers he should be a pretty compelling case especially if he gets to 3000 hits.

Come on. Bernie Williams was a great centerfielder. Five seasons in which he drove in and scored 100 runs. Perennial all star switch hitter who played gold glove defense. Absolutely clutch when it mattered. Not a HOFer but you can't take anything away from him.

I think they were desperate to stop the bleeding from trading Cespedes - their offense has gone in the toilet for August. Dunn was probably their best option, and not a bad one - sometimes a player performs really well when initially in a new environment, and the playoff prospect might also get Dunn rev'd up.

Agree completely. I see little downside to the move for Oakland, even if Dunn performs with Dunn-like numbers. Power off the bench or in the DH slot gives the team strategic options and makes the opponent have to prepare differently. I liken it somewhat to when the Twins picked up Don Baylor the last 20 games of the 1987 season. He contributed a little bit and then had a great post-season, especially World Series, even though his time in the Bigs was basically done. I don't know that Dunn brings the same intangibles as Baylor, but he could get energized for his final run, especially once the playoffs roll around. I wish him well, mostly because I'll be rooting for Oakland.

I think so too, Scott.

BTW, since 2001 (his rookie year) only two other players have hit more home runs.

In regards to Adrian Beltre, and not to sidetrack this thread, but-- He is 25 hits away from 2,600, and 7 hr's away from 400.

Has anyone taken a look at the list of players with at least 2,500 hits and 400 hr's? He's definitely getting in. Pretty impressive list......

Brent, do you believe Dunn is a HoF'er? I do not believe he is, most all of us lean in that direction. How about you?

I do not believe he is a HOF'er.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Congrats to Dunn on his first Home Run as an Oakland A.

Most of the comments in this thread are laughable. I can't wait to re-visit it in a few years.

Dunn first AB a HR!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Adam Dunn?!?!?!?!?!?
 

2 big reasons why he will not make the Hall:

Lifetime BA is .237. The lowest non pitcher average in Hall is Ray Schalk at .253 so this alone would keep him out.

The other reason is his nickname of "Big Donkey". No hall of famer exists with that nickname nor will there ever be one! :D

Peace, Mik:)

Adam Dunn got traded? For the past week all the baseball fans in Chicago have been fixated on future HOFer Jorge Soler!

It bears repeating. The 133rd best left fielder of all time!!

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Batting - 4 (431), Average HOFer ≈ 27

Gray Ink Batting - 87 (270), Average HOFer ≈ 144

Hall of Fame Monitor Batting - 75 (257), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Batting - 33 (259), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS Left Field (133rd), 16.6 career WAR/17.4 7yr-peak WAR/17.0 JAWS
Average HOF LF (out of 19) = 65.1 career WAR/41.5 7yr-peak WAR/53.3 JAWS

Jeez, if Jeff Bagwell can't get in, and Frank Howard (a similar type, but much more consistent batter) couldn't get more then 2% of the vote when he was eligible...I don't see how Adam Dunn doesn't get knocked off the ballot his first year eligible, no matter how many HR's he ends up hitting.

He's basically Gorman Thomas c. 1978-85, spread out over a bit longer time period, though Thomas was probably a much more valuable fielder in his heyday then Dunn ever was.

Say what you will about his other stats, but when it comes to hitting home runs Dunn is in rarified air. The HOF rewards home run hitters. So I don't know what is so laughable about Dunn being voted in for his ability to hit home runs. Home runs are the only reason a lot of players are in the Hall. Killebrew, Reggie Jackson, Kiner: they're all in for their ability to hit home runs.

Here are the players who have hit 40 home runs at least 5 years in a row:

Adam Dunn
Babe Ruth
Ralph Kiner
Duke Snider
Ken Griffey Jr.
Barry Bonds
Alex Rodriguez
Sammy Sosa


Three of those cheated to do it. One is the greatest player of all time. The others are HOFers.

And none of those guys put up their numbers while hitting .237 over the course of an entire career. As mentioned earlier, .237 would be 16 points lower than any other non-pitcher in the HoF.

IMO, it is time to lock the doors at Coorperstown if .237 hitters start getting inducted

Hey Packs, since we are doing lists then I have one for the board:

Eddie Joost — Career Batting Average: .239
Eddie Miller — Career Batting Average: .238
Aurelio Rodriguez — Career Batting Average: .237
Adam Dunn – Career Batting Average: .237
Dave Kingman — Career Batting Average: .236
Monte Cross — Career Batting Average: .234
Brandon Inge — Career Batting Average: .233

Jeopardy time: What are some of the WORST career MLB batting averages with min time?
Who on this list once had a batboy fill in for him on a bb card and rightly should have had the batboy actually hitting for him?
Which of these players is or deserves to be in the hall of fame?

1000 times to the plate and on average he goes back to the bench 763 times?!?!?!?!?!?!? UGH!!!!!!!

It does however give hope to struggling little leaguers, I'll give him that! :eek:

peace, Mik:)

I don't think he's a HOFer either but I think he deserves more respect. His power was special.

Saying Dunn and Kingman do nothing but hit home runs is like Buddy Ryan saying Cris Carter did nothing but catch touchdown passes.

Love live KONG!!!

Whoa! Never heard of OBP?
 

1000 times to the plate and on average he goes back to the bench 763 times?!?!?!?!?!?!? UGH!!!!!!!
_____________________________

You've been reading too many 1910 stats from the T205s. Do runs scored on walks not count toward the game score??

I don't see Dunn as a HOFer, but let's at least be fair- try 634 times in 1000.

His OBP is very respectable- higher than MANY HOFers. Granted most of those guys had other skills like fielding, but still, you sound like a know-nothing when you overstate your objections.

Addendum:

Just to follow up, Dunn’s OBP is even better than I thought relative to HOFers:

.366 better than:

Clemente
Yount
Winfield
Perez
Puckett
Murray
Ripken
Dawson (.323, for cryin’ out loud)
Brock
Bench
Stargell
Banks
Medwick (.324 BA but lower OBP)
Lloyd Waner
and Sam Crawford !!


Equal to Santo
3 points below Molitor!

And these are only the guys elected for their hitting- Need I go on?

Again, I don’t think Dunn should be in the HOF but the idea really isn’t that bizarre--

At one point, it looked like Johnny Damon was going to get 3,000 hits. He stumbled at the very end, playing only 64 games in 2012 while hitting .222. So, he ended with 2,769 hits. But if a few things had gone differently, if just a few of those outs had become hits, another team looking for a veteran presence on a young team might have given Damon a 1 or 2 year contract. Damon still had some power and speed. He didn't run as often, but he was successful on 46 of his last 53 stolen base attempts. He had 16 home runs in 2011. So, it wouldn't have been shocking if he'd gotten to 3,000 hits.

Would Johnny Damon have been a Hall of Famer with 3,000 hits? I say no. Not even close. Why?

Led the league in runs scored once, in triples once, in stolen bases once.
Never won an MVP, a Gold Glove, or a Silver Slugger. Never finished in the MVP top 10.
His numbers just don't impress. .284 career batting average, 235 home runs, 1,139 RBI are pretty average considering the era he played in. 1,668 runs scored and 408 stolen bases in 511 attempts, that's more impressive.
Career slash line: .352/.433/.785 is ok, nothing special.

Now, in his defense, I think his best years were in Kansas City, so he didn't get the exposure, or recognition, that his play might have warranted. However, that never held players like George Brett, or Bret Saberhagen, or Dan Quisenberry from making names for themselves. In 2000, Damon was 19th in the MVP vote when he hit .327 with a league leading 136 runs scored, 214 hits, 42 doubles, 10 triples, 16 home runs, 88 RBI, 46 stolen bases (lead the AL) and an .877 OPS. That's not an MVP season, really, but 19th in the voting? That's a top-ten-in-the-MVP-vote season to me.

Also:
9 consecutive seasons over 100 runs scored.
522 career doubles, 109 triples, 235 home runs.

But, again, he could have ended up with 3,000 hits.

I think before this era, which was definitely geared towards offense, 3,000 hits and 500 home runs were just more impressive. Fewer teams meant that the overall talent level in the game was greater. Now you have players in the Major Leagues that wouldn't have made it to the Majors in the 60s or 70s.
You also have to remember that back in the day, seasons were only 154 games long. Now they're 162. That's not a big deal on a small scale, but if you play 15 to 20 years, that extra 8 games a season adds up. Play 20 years, and you've basically added a whole extra years worth of numbers to your career total. Play 15 years, and you've added an extra 120 games. That's an extra 130-150 hits for a good player, making that 3,000 hit threshold more attainable by those good, not great players who manage to stay in the game, and healthy, for a long period of time.

When you start to add all these things together-longer seasons, slightly watered down talent across the league, improvements to conditioning and strength training, a change to the mound height, etc...all these things make it a little easier for a player to get close to 3,000 hits. Then you start getting players who really shouldn't be considered for Cooperstown putting up numbers that twenty years ago would have warranted serious consideration.

Not to hijack the thread, but there was much more at work with regard to that Buddy Ryan quote. That was Ryan's way of cutting Carter without publicly humiliating the guy by saying he was being released due to his addiction problem. Carter has long credited Buddy Ryan cutting him for helping save his life; not his career, his life. Carter also publicly thanked Ryan during his HoF induction speech.

http://www.csnphilly.com/football-ph...yan-hof-speech

While those numbers are accurate, you want to make sure to consider the eras these different players competed in. Dunn has played in an era that heavily favored offense.

I just ran two quick reports on Baseball Reference. Between 2000 and 2014, there have been nine players to accumulate 3,000 or more at bats, and have a .400 or better on base percentage, and another, Miguel Cabrera, at .396.

Between 1960 and 1980, same 3,000 at bat threshold, there were only two players to have a .400 or better on base percentage, Mickey Mantle at .415, and Mike Hargrove at .403.

The point to this? Players in this era have a naturally higher on base percentage than players back in the era you just listed. Adam Dunn's skills as a hitter are downplayed too much, in my opinion. I don't care what era a player is in. Hitting as many home runs as he has takes skill. It might not be as impressive as before, but even with the prevalence of PEDS in the game now, you're still not seeing a flood of people hitting 500 home runs. And people need to keep that in mind. Yes, players might realize an increase in their seasonal home run totals for a time, but to get 500 means you were a consistently great power hitter for a long time. If a man averages 30 home runs a season, which is quite an achievement, they'd have to average 30 home runs for 17 seasons.

Here are those two reports I referenced:

1960 to 1980
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/7751/j4U5hD.png

2000 to 2014
http://imageshack.com/a/img540/9985/y9sYe2.png

This isn't, of course, a perfect test, but it shows at least that in this era, there is a higher overall OBP across the board.

Hits a bomb in first Oakland ab. He could sniff the hall if he hits 500.

Bill, I agree
 

with you about the relative imptce of OBP-- players between 1960 and 1995 were disadvantaged in that regard. And I wouldn't advocate kicking any of those guys out of the HOF.

However, my initial point was to undermine another poster's obsession with Dunn's low batting average. BA has to be the most overvalued stat in BB history.

In the final analysis, no single stat (OBP, BA, SLG, HR total) is enough to evaluate a player's overall career. I happen to think SLG and OBP are the most crucial ones, but even then Dunn doesn't make my HOF despite his undeniable skills in those areas. There is something to be said for all-around skill a la Molitor, Yount, Bench, Winfield, etc etc.

Here is a simple fact; starting in 2003, Dunn did nothing but try and pull fastballs located over the inner third of the plate and between the upper thigh and the belt for home runs. That is it.

Go and look it up. Compare his hits charts from 2001 and 2002 to 2003 and on.

Now, tell me, how many OTHER major league hitters could hit as many (or more) home runs as Dunn if their ONLY goal in the at bat was to get an inside fastball to pull? Fred McGriff had 494 home runs and a .284 batting average. How many more home runs do you think he could have hit if he had a .240 batting average because of swinging from his heels on inside fastballs?

Again, as a former Reds fan, I had the displeasure of watching Dunn play from 2001 until he was traded in 2008. His on base percentage isn't impressive and that is because there were hundreds (if not thousands) of times where a pitcher would throw balls towards or over the outer third of the plate and Dunn would NEVER swing at those pitches. Even with two strikes and a runner on third base. He would just look at the pitch go by with his bat on his shoulder.

If it were a called third strike, Dunn would get that dumb look on his face, turn around and walk slowly back to the dugout.

David

Dunn excelled at two things which all power hitters do in their careers. Home runs and strike outs. As for hitting for average or playing defense? You can't discuss some things that didn't happen.

Good post, Tim.

Within the last year or so, I've started delving into player statistics again. I can't begin to tell you how many hours I spent on statistical analysis when I was growing up. I'd get my baseball cards, and start drawing out spreadsheets long before there were home computers to do it. I was doing Excel spreadsheets before Office existed. :p There are a bunch of new ones that I'm having to learn with the advent of sabermetrics. But I still find the old school stats are quite useful, and of those, OPS + is my favorite. It takes into consideration how often a player gets on, either by a hit, walk or getting hit by a pitch. It also mixes in their power. And then it adjusts for the ballparks that particular players has been playing in. I like OPS + because to have a high score, you have to excel as both a power hitter and as somebody who gets on base. And I would want my lineup filled with as many high OPS + guys as possible. Those are the complete offensive forces. I want hitters that can drive in runs with their power, or get on base if a pitcher isn't giving them anything to hit. It's not as broad based as something like WAR, but whenever I want to compare players within an era, or across eras, it's usually my starting point.

I still love batting average. It's fallen out of favor with a lot of statisticians, but I think that's a mistake. If a hitter's job is to get on base, yes, OBP is the ultimate measure of how effective a player is doing their given job. But I want to see the batting average component. To me, it's a pure metric. Before one starts tossing in things like BABIP, AVG calculates how well a player sees the field, sees and adjusts to the ball, and is able to deliver the ball where there's no fielder. And I want hitters with high averages because that tells me that they are effective with the bat. A player can draw walks for a variety of reasons. Power hitters might get more walks, if they are patient, because a pitcher doesn't want to get burned. So, that pitcher might throw around the outside of the strike zone. They may also get pitched around with runners on base. But in those instances where a pitcher goes after the hitter, I want somebody like a Clemente, or a Gwynn, or a Gehrig-guys that hit for pure average. Ted Williams drew a lot of walks. I mean walks made up for 138 points of his OBP. But the man could flat out hit, as shown by his career .344 average.

Perfectly said Bill. I too like to look at batting averages. A walk is not as good as a hit in all situations. Come late innings or playoff time, give me a guy that can swing it over a guy who's strictly a high OBP guy.

Hi Tim
 

I agree with this, and your preferred stats reveal that even David Justice had a higher OBP and higher SLG than Dunn while playing for a similar period of time.

I am a firm believer that a HOFer must be elite or nearly so during his time in the game. Dunn has played 14 years and only received MVP votes three times. Worse, even in those three seasons he did not finish in the top 20 and received less than 3% of the vote, finishing tied or behind such legends as Marcus Giles, David Eckstein and Johnny Estrada. If you can't make any greater mark than that among your own contemporaries (even using Justice as an example again shows he received votes 5 times and finished 3rd and 5th, and Kong also received votes 5 times), why should I begin to consider you as worthy of a Hall for All-Time greats?

Absolutely, Ian. And thank you!

If a high OBP guy comes up with the bases loaded in a playoff game, I'd rather he go for the hit than try to draw a walk. A hit could score multiple runs, or even clear the bases.

Not a Hall-of-Famer but he was actually a very productive player from 2004-2010, despite the strikeouts. During that time, he hit 231 doubles and walked 750 times, so he did more than just hit home runs (of which he hit 242 during that seven-year stretch). For that period, you had a guy who averaged 33 doubles, 35 home runs, 107 walks, and an OBP of .371 per year, which is typically somebody you want on your team. Keep that up for a few more years and you've got a bona fide Hall-of-Famer, regardless of the low batting average and poor fielding.

He aged quickly, though, and his production really fell off when he moved to the AL and into the designated hitter spot (which may have had something to do with it- some studies have found that players hit worse as DHs than as everyday fielders, but Dunn was not a good fielder so there would be a trade-off).

Sabermetricians tend to find him a fascinating player because more than almost any other player, his at-bats resulted in one the "three true outcomes," a home run, a walk, or a strikeout. See http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/201...omes-milestone

A lot of people found him boring to watch for the same reason.

Hopefully you are wrong, even by today's watered-down standards.

I'm amazed at what the Hall of Fame would apparently consist of if some of our members were allowed to fill it up. Who's next? Steve Balboni?

How does Steve Balboni compare to Adam Dunn? All people are saying is that Dunn wasn't just some throw away player. He had special power and was a very productive player during his prime.

lol.

They are exactly alike in every respect - size, stats, shoe size, even hat size. I think they even had the same 1st-grade teacher.

Huh? Balboni is 3 inches shorter, 60 lbs lighter, and even their stats are far apart. I realize you were exaggerating, Scott, but as the previous poster pointed out, Dunn wasn't the person that everybody is making him out to be.

David, I wasn't exaggerating - I was being ludicrous.

My earlier (prior to my ludicrous one) post did not say that Balboni and Dunn are the same. Please re-read it. I realize that you guys are sensitive about Dunn, but my opinion is that he is not HOF material. That's all I'm saying. Sure he is desirable on a major league team. Sure he has had some great years. Sure he hits with power. But personally, I don't think his overall performance is HOF-worthy. I think that letting him in would be further watering down the HOF. That's all I was saying.

Back when Lefty Grove was voted in, I could have said "What's next, Phil Niekro?". Obviously that would not have been stating that Niekro and Grove are exactly alike, or even that they compare - only that Niekro is clearly a step or more below Grove.

I like the guy, but I don't know that I'm particularly sensitive about Dunn.

What I said was that he is NOT Hall of Fame material, but that if he had had a few more great years (like he did from 2004-2010) his overall performance would have been higher, and then he would have been HOF material. Which sounds a lot like what you just wrote.

Unless you are saying that someone who hits 40 homers, 35 doubles, and walks 100 times a year can NEVER be HOF material--no matter how many times he does it--so long as he's slow and strikes out a lot. Which may be a legitimate point of view, although it might mean we'd have to kick out people like Ralph Kiner and Harmon Killebrew. (Killebrew, by the way, has stats that are somewhat comparable to Dunn in his prime, but Killebrew maintained the high level of play for longer.)

But again, I specifically said that Dunn is not HOF material. Just that he could have been.

I would add Reggie Jackson to that list too. Reggie only made it to 500 homers by playing 4 more seasons after hitting .194 for the Angels in 1983. He is as much of a compiler as anyone but was voted in first ballot and by 93 percent of voters.

I don't think Dunn is a HOFer either but I like him and think his abilities should be more respected than they are. He was only 4 homers away (two straight seasons of 38) from hitting 40 homers seven years in a row. Only Babe Ruth has ever done that in the history of the game.

Although I agree with your response generally, the comparison to Killebrew is weak. Not only did he play in a pitching-rich era, he dominated and was considered among the elite. He won an MVP, finished second in the voting once--to a triple crown winner--finished third twice, fourth twice and received MVP votes five other seasons. Dunn never dominated nor approached dominating his league even once, and as mentioned, seldom received any MVP votes. By way of comparison, Killer received 15 MVP votes in 1965, a year when he was hurt and only played in 113 games. Dunn has received 15 MVP votes in 14 years. So not only did Killer put up big numbers longer, he did so at a much higher level than Dunn and at a time when pitching was better overall.

EDITED TO ADD: Also, Dunn never even led his league in HRs, while Killebrew led the MAJORS in HR three times, tied for first one year and finished 1 behind Mays in another.

I have no idea how you made that leap of logic from what I posted.

Also, I think it's great that Dunn was almost able to do one thing that Babe Ruth did, and I also am gleaning from this thread, that everyone is in agreement that Dunn can hit a lot of HR's. If HR's were the only aspect of baseball that counted, then Dunn would be a HOF'er for sure.

Ruth lifetime batting average: .342
Dunn lifetime batting average: .237

August 31, 2014: Traded by the Chicago White Sox with cash to the Oakland Athletics (source: Baseball Reference)

Because the White Sox paid the A's to take him?

(I know they got a minor leaguer)

True, but Killebrew wasn't competing with PED users and Dunn was.

Dunn may have never led the league in HRs, but I would bet my left testicle that he never used PEDs either.

:)So far, the tally:

Not a HOFer: 100+??
a HOFer if he hits 500HR: 1

A brave man stands alone.