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.

Adam Dunn reached the 40 HR mark five times, once in the AL where he finished behind Bautista, Hamilton, Encarnacion and Curtis Granderson - hardly juicers row.

On one of the four occasions in the NL, Dunn didn't finish in the top 10 in MLB, and couldn't even pass Carlos Beltran or Andruw Jones (among others) in his own league.

The three other times he fell short of Adrian Beltre, Ryan Howard and Albert Pujols, not Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa. Other seasons he chased the likes of Mark Reynolds, Derek Lee, Paul Konerko, Carlos Pena, Adrian Gonzalez and Prince Fielder. His failure to rise to the top of his own league much less all of MLB is not a story attributed others' PED use.

101+, no way is Dunn a HOFer, not even close...

No great leap on my part, I don't think.

You wrote that Dunn had some great years and hit a lot of homers yet his "overall performance" was not HOF-worthy. So the question is, what does the word "overall" mean. It either means (a) his overall career stats, in other words, the number of great years where he hit a lot of homers, or (b) his overall skillset (his game apart from homers and doubles and walks). Since I conceded in my original post that he had not had enough great seasons, it seemed that you had to be arguing that his overall skillset was not HOF-worthy, not that he hadn't had enough great years. In which case, you are saying that averaging 40 homers, 35 doubles, and 100 walks a year (Dunn during his prime) does not make you a Hall of Famer if the rest of your overall performance is unexceptional. Which is a perfectly legitimate point of view. Just not one that I share.

I agree that Adam Dunn is not a Hall of Fame caliber player, but to say it's "not even close" is a bit of a stretch in my opinion.

You may be correct. I didn't spend a lot of time analyzing the numbers.

Hypothetical Question
 

I've stated that if this is indeed Dunn's last year, then he doesn't make the HOF. But let's say this isn't Dunn's last year. Let's say he goes on to play 3 more years and averages 30 HRs a year and finishes his career with around 550 HRs. Is he a HOFer then?

Dunn not making the cut aside, I don't see how someone can say that if a player hits home runs well that doesn't warrant a HOF induction. Until the very recent past there was a number of home runs you could hit and make the HOF automatically.

Yikes - I'm a big Killebrew fan, and I cringe whenever I see him compared to players like Dunn, or even Thome. Even if you double Dunn's prime stats, he ain't no Killebrew.

Killebrew won an MVP, Dunn hasn't.
Killebrew was in the top 5 in MVP voting 6 times, Dunn never has been.
Killebrew was an 11-time AS, Dunn was twice.

Killebrew was a 6-time HR champ, Dunn never has been.
Killebrew was a 3-time RBI champ, Dunn never has been.
Killebrew was in the top 5 in RBI 9 times, Dunn never has been.

Killebrew was in the top 5 in SA 10 times, Dunn was once.
Killebrew's BA was 3 points below the league average, Dunn's is 30 below.
Killebrew's SA was 116 points above the league average, Dunn's is 66 above.
Killebrew's OPS was 160 points above the league average, Dunn's is 94 above.

Killebrew led the league in strikeouts just once to Dunn's 4 times
Killebrew was in the top 5 in SO only 5 times to Dunn's 11
Dunn has struck out an incredible 64% more frequently than Killebrew (despite Harmon's hit-or-miss reputation, his strikeout frequency was only 3 percentage points higher than the league average during his career)

My favorite stat for Harmon is one I've never seen published anywhere: In 10 different seasons he hit 25 or more home runs in an 82 games or fewer stretch, with 33 in 81 games in 1964, 30 in 82 games in both 1959 and 1969, and 29 in just 75 games in 1967.

Just curious, would you put Dunn in the Hall instead of someone like Dale Murphy? Home runs are not everything. This guy's career batting average can't be a lot higher than .220, and he strikes out at a ratio of more than anyone I have ever seen. Defensively, I've never heard much about him either. So, it's home runs and that's it?

Because, as mentioned above, there used to be a number (500) of homeruns that a player could hit and automatically make the HOF. I believe that still exists.

I don't believe that same number will be used to measure players that used PEDs. But for players that didn't use PEDs (and I truly belive Dunn has not), I believe that is still the magic number.

I believe that any player that hits 500 HRs and is not associated with PEDs should automatically make the HOF regardless of any other statistics. If you disagree, that is fine. That's just my opinion.

I will concede that Killebrew was a better player. Certainly over his career.

My point was about individual seasons in their prime. Take a look below at typical seasons in their prime and see if you can tell which are Dunn and which are Killebrew and you'll see what I meant.

106 runs, 20 doubles, 2 triples, 49 hrs, 140 rbi, 145 walks, 84 strikeouts, .427 on base pctg, .585 slugging average

107 runs, 34 doubles, 0 triples, 46 hrs, 102 rbi, 108 walks, 195 strikeouts, .388 on base pctg, .569 slugging avg

79 runs, 23 doubles, 0 triples, 40 hrs, 100 rbi, 122 walks, 164 strikeouts, .386 obp, .513 sa

85 runs, 21 doubles, 1 triple, 48 hrs, 126 rbi, 106 walks, 142 strikeouts, .366 obp, .545 sa

Rather than dealing with exactly what I said, you added "Unless you are saying". Now you are stating "You wrote that..." There is no need to put words in my mouth - I was saying exactly what I said - no straw man, no twists, just plain simple English. So we disagree - no big deal. The HOF if full of guys who shouldn't be there - add Adam Dunn. What the heck.

That's flawed logic. Just because players who hit a certain number of home runs made the HOF, doesn't mean they would have done so if their batting average had sucked.

David - I'm not trying to be contentious here. I think that Dunn's batting average could suck, but there could be other things he does, above and beyond what the other 500+ guys did, that could make up for it. For example, if he was a great-fielding second-baseman, or stole bases and scored a lot of runs. I think his OBP is worth considering, but I don't think that's enough.

Quoting what you wrote is not putting words in your mouth. Unless someone hacked your account ...



whatever

I totally agree Scott...By the way, what is Dunn's career batting avg? I did not look it up before this post. Again, my argument is what has this guy done (even mediocre), other than hitting home runs? He reminds me a lot of Dave Kingman....

Let me add a few comments:

1. the 1998 Yankees were the best team of my lifetime - and they had a total of 0 players with 30 HR's. They won with guys that had high batting average and high OBP. They were very hard to put down 1-2-3, which wore down pitchers and allowed them to be very good in the post-season. (editor's note: I am a big time Indians fan and quite to opposite of a Yankee lover).

2. Adam Dunn has 0 postseason AB's because his skills are fun to watch, but not winning baseball. We will see this October, but I expect that batting average to go down significantly.

3. The Hall of Fame should be that - the famous stars of the era, the truly great players. Compare stats across ages, but also within their era. Dunn does not look hall worthy in this era, IMO. Reggie Jackson was a force of nature for a decade, and a 5-time WS winner. Sure he wheezed across the finish line, but he exemplified super-star.

4. Gary Sheffield has 500 HR's? This blows my mind.

Well that's where we disagree, and that is certianly fine. I think 500 HR is enough to get anyone elected to the Hall, regardless of anything else (assuming they didn't use PEDs). What you're saying above is, that if Dunn had 500HR and some other skill set to accompany it, then he could be considered for the HOF. Other players have gotten into the HOF having been known for just one skill.

Speaking of great fielders, look at Ozzie Smith. He sure didn't get in on his offensive numbers. He was known as a great defensive player - look at all the Gold Gloves. What did he do offensively? Not jack! He's has 2460 hits, only 28 career home runs, 793 RBIs, a .262 lifetime batting average. Had he been just a mediocre third baseman defensively, he would not be in the HOF. In other words, he got in ONLY on his defensive skills. He was a one trick pony.

I realize we're talking about 2 different position players, but my point is this. Why does Smith get in with only one set of skills, but not Dunn?

Until now, almost every player with that many HR was also a good HITTER. Dunn is an extreme case of someone who is not.

How much higher was Smith's BA vs. Dunn? Just curious...Again, I have never seen a player strike out at the rate Dunn does...

Ozzie had a sheetload of stolen bases too.

And according to Baseball Reference's JAWS metric, Smith is 8th among shortstops and Dunn is 133rd (yep) among left fielders. Nuff ced.

I don't know - I wouldn't have voted for Smith either. But since we are talking about HR's and your claim that 500 is enough, what is the problem with comparing Dunn to other guys who have 500 and are in the HOF? Seems like a logical comparison that is being avoided.

If you want to change the conversation to comparing Dunn to Ozzie Smith, that's fine, but his skills don't in any way compare to Dunn's. Whether or not Smith is HOF-worthy is another discussion.

Not trying to avoid additional debate, but my internet is SO SHITTY (thank you Comcast) that I'm turning off the computer for the day.

Have fun, guys. Or have fungis.

The BA doesn't matter because I wasn't comparing their careers against each other. I was merely pointing out that both Dunn and Smith were each only know for just one thing.

I think that the steroid era has minimized or cheapened the home run, especially with players like Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, etc. Had Dunn accomplished another important milestone instead of 500 HR (which I know he's not there yet), say like 3000 hits, I really don't think we would even be having this discussion and most everyone would agree that he was a future HOFer based on 3000 hits.

I agree David, but he's a shitty hitter. He's probably 6'7", 285 lbs., if he just makes contact he's going to hit home runs. How many K's has this guy had in his career? I would venture to say it's in the top 10 of all time...

David, for Dunn to achieve the worthy goal of 3000 hits, he would have to be a good hitter. Not shitty, not average, but either a long-lasting really good hitter, or a normal length career great hitter. Pick some other stat that merits hof consideration, but Dunn and 3000 hits is like saying what if Ozzie Smith got 300 home runs. It just isn't in the realm of possibility.

(You cannot imagine how long it took to type this on my galaxi mini, yet I still did so in a manner giving the appearance of having an iq greater than that of tree bark)

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

Above is referring to grammar, punctuation and spelling. David and Packs are otherwise tying my brain in a knot.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

Kevin, "making contact" is no easy feat - especially when the pitcher knows the consequences. Dunn gets as many walks as he does for a rwason.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

Ozzie Smith is a no-doubt HOF'er in my book.

Also, if you look at just about every peripheral stat of Ozzie, who I believe is tremendously under-rated offensively, Ozzie did all the little things that Dunn was never capable of.

Comparing Ozzie to Dunn is a study of how valuable it is to actually put the ball in in play and not strikeout. He did all the little things managers love from players who don't have a lot of pop. He hit sacrifice flys, at a much higher rate then big ol' Adam Dunn, he Sacrificed tons of runners over, he Walked at a much higher rate then he struck out, He stole a ton of bases pretty efficiently.

....oh, and the glove.

If you are going to say a guy only did one thing good, it's a pretty good push if he's also in the argument for "the best ever" in that category. Adam Dunn is not in that argument, not "all-time" and not in his era.

Regardless of whatever arbitrary numbers he might have hit in a certain timespan.

One other thing, I think that a guy's HOF stock rises if you were "iconic" in some way. Ozzie Smith and Reggie Jackson certainly fall into this category. Good, intermittently awesome players, with a GREAT set of intangible things that make them "more" than the average player. I think the HOF should have tons of room for guys like that...just IMHO.

And another HR for Dunn. Just saying.

What the Dunn!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Solo homer. They still lost. Sorry man! :D

Adam's been "Dunn" for some time now. With or without 500 HR, he would not have been a HOF'er. See Fred McGriff!

Best to all,

Larry

That shot yesterday was a moon shot, and off Felix. I don't think I've ever watched Dunn swing up to that point - he doesn't get cheated.

Root sports showed a Dunn interview after the game, where he talked about hitting against Felix. Not sure if it was filmed before or after, but I really liked the guy - very, very personable. I hope this resurrects his career and he makes the HOF.

Yes, Dunn is doing what he usually does; laughing, being a class clown, swinging for the fences and hitting home runs. And the team he plays for is also doing the same thing - losing.

With Dunn on the team and hitting home runs, the A's are 1 and 2. Dunn said he is having fun and might reconsider retiring.

Yeah right.

Just wait until the A's have lost five in a row, Dunn has gone 0 for 20 with 12 strike outs, no rbi's and has not come through with runners in scoring position in a close game. When the fans start booing him, like fans from EVERY team he has played on has done, then this talk about not retiring will end.

As to him being a nice guy. Go to the chatboards of EVERY team that he has ever played for and see what they say about him. Usually a few things come through loud and clear.

1) Dunn seems to be a nice guy.
2) The fans are glad he is no longer playing for their team.

David

David, what's your problem? Go for a jog or something. :)

edited to add smiley, as there was no anger intended in my post

Do you think a good personality adds to a players HOF chance? I do, but that's just my opinion and I don't have anything to back that up. I mentioned Ozzie Smith earlier in this thread and he had a great personality - very likable - unlike a lot of players today.

I could realistically see Dunn playing 3 more years, averaging 30 HRs a year. That puts him at +/- 550 HRs and I think he would get some serious consideration at that point given his personality and the lack of PEDs. Will it happen? Who knows, but I'd like to think so.

Certainly personality is also a big factor. Look at Albert Belle and Kirby Puckett.

[QUOTE=Runscott;1318331]That shot yesterday was a moon shot, and off Felix. I don't think I've ever watched Dunn swing up to that point - he doesn't get cheated.

Interesting you mention this Scott. I've watched quite a bit of Dunn the last 3+ years and he doesn't change his approach no matter what the situation or batting count is. Always a big swing vs. attempting to put the ball in play with two strikes. Blows my mind that he never realized that with his strength good things are likely to happen if he just puts the ball in play. Perhaps he has tried and isn't able to make the adjustment. He also rarely goes the opposite way anymore despite aggressive shifts against him. FWIW - I don't see him in the Hall - what he's done the last few years took that off the table.

Uh, no.

If people who haven't seen Dunn play for a long period of time can come on this board and slobber all over his big, overweight butt then I can come on here and tell the other side of the story.

The story about fans having to put up with his horrible defense, his station to station baserunning ability, his failure to hit the ball to the opposite field, his failure to drive in runs in key situations, his 30% strike out rate, his failure to get into shape and stay in shape, his failure to work on his game over the Winter, his going into the tank EVERY September.

For those espousing Dunn for the Hall Of Fame, I would like to know how many have actually watched him over an entire season? I would like to know how many have seen him be totally inept at the plate for an entire month, then get hot for two weeks and then be inept for another entire month.

I spent my money going to Reds games when he played for Cincinnati and all I saw was an overweight oaf who lumbered around in the outfield and who struck out on called third strikes with runners on or in scoring position. He struck out on those pitches because they were over the outer third of the plate and he was too stubborn to stop swinging for the fences, trying to pull the ball for a home run.

So for every Dunn butt kisser, I want to know how many times YOU have actually seen him play? I will tell you, the more you do, the worse he gets and the more it will bother you that he is paid millions of dollars to be the fraternity class clown.

David

LOL, cant disagree with any of that! As a long suffering White Sox fan these last 3+ years have been miserable watching him. I've never seen anyone get fooled so often by off-speed pitches.

Nice post, David. It illustrates that there really is some value in having a good personality.

He's only played 3 games with the A's (and was only a PH in one of those games). As Scott pointed out earlier in the thread, maybe he just needed a change of scenery. Since joining the team, he's gone 4 for 8 with 2 HRs and 4 RBIs - that's 1/3 of their runs in those 3 games and, again, he only had 1 AB in one of those games. A's losing and it's Dunn's fault? Really?


I realize we're only 3 games into the month, but isn't 4 for 8 with 2 HRs and 4 RBIs is a pretty good start to September, or am I missing something?


Ummm, being from Houston, I followed him his entire career.

As an Astros fan, you are.......Dunn :eek:

But he's not winning games single-handedly. If he was any good, he'd also be encouraging his pitchers to do a better job.

"Hey Lester - I'm gonna hit one HR, but I need you to not give up two, as I can't get anyone else on our side to hit one."

Typical response from Dunn fans - it's the pitchers fault. He is only one guy on the team. Yada. Yada. Yada.

Adam Dunn is a beer league softball player playing home run derby. That is it. I said that in 2007 and it is still true today.

Four years ago, Dunn signed a 4 year, $60 million dollar contract with the White Sox. In 2011, his first year with the team, at age 31, in 415 at bats, Dunn had the following stats: 11 home runs, 36 runs scored, 42 rbi, 75 walks, 177 strike outs, .159 batting average, .292 OBP, .277 slugging percentage, .569 OPS and a NEGATIVE 3.1 WAR.

A middle of the order hitter getting paid $15 million dollars a year to produce that. How is THAT the pitchers fault? Yes, Dunn is only one guy on the team but when you are one of the highest paid players on the team and you produce like that, don't you think the OTHER players on the team try to do more than they are capable of to try and offset what doesn't ISN'T producing?

Dunn is getting paid $15 million dollars this year to be a platoon DH. Think about THAT?

David

Dunn was born and raised just outside of Houston. I always laughed at Dunn when the Reds played the Astros.

Dunn wouldn't hustle one bit when he played other teams but when he was playing the Astros, especially in Houston, he would do things he NEVER did anytime else. Dunn would steal bases, run hard for balls in the outfield and try to hit the ball to the opposite field. Dunn didn't mind getting booed EXCEPT when it was the Astros. He played hard in front of the home town fans.

I always thought it would be good for Dunn to play for Houston. Then, I thought about it and saw how wrong I was.

If he played for the Astros, it would mean he would have to hustle, play hard and stay in shape the whole year, things that Dunn could never do for long stretches of time. So it became obvious why he never played for them.

David

I can think of many other obvious reasons why players don't end up on an Astros roster.

Dunn accounted for the only run in the game for the A's, yet it is his fault they lost :confused:

Given your other comments, you must be one handsome, athletic, intelligent dude.

Runscott,

As a fan of the Reds when Dunn was on the team I can tell you have the same arguments as Dunn fans back then.

Look at the stats and the Reds had a BAD pitching staff. Look at the stats and Dunn hit 40 home runs and had 100 rbi's. Dunn good, pitching staff bad.

The problem with that is that people did NOT look at Dunn's defensive stats or his base running ability. Furthermore, they didn't look at his game log and see when he hit his home runs.

Dunn was a HORRIBLE defensive player. If you never saw him play and don't believe me then go and read what Jon DeWan of the Fielding Bible had to say about Dunn's defense.

Because he was overweight and out of shape, he had no range. Because of THAT, he played deeper than normal. This meant a pitcher could make a good pitch and the ball would STILL fall in for a hit because Dunn could NOT get to it. This also meant that even playing deeper, Dunn could not cut off balls down the lines or in the gap and keep them from being extra base hits. This isn't even mentioning the errors he committed on balls that he DID get to or his weak and inaccurate throwing arm.

Add all of those things to the Reds playing in a hitter friendly ball park and you get pitchers throwing more pitches than they should have, giving up more hits and extra base hits than they should have and then giving up more runs than they should have.

As far as his offense goes, yes, he hit home runs but even then, it was no sure thing his team would win when he did so.

Again, when your middle of the order hitter is one of the highest paid players on the team and they are NOT producing on offense, are horrible on defense and do not scare the pitcher, catcher or defense when they are on base then they are a NEGATIVE as far as winning a baseball game goes.

Look at Dunn's game log and you will see that he can go three weeks to a month where he produces very little on offense. He will then have about a two week period when he gets hot. When you add his two, two week hot periods together they usually add up to about HALF of his full year production as far as home runs and rbis go.

So, Dunn is super productive for those two periods. The problem is, if the other hitters on the team or the pitchers are NOT good during that period then Dunn's hot streaks are wasted. That ALSO means that with Dunn being UNPRODUCTIVE the other 120 to 130 games during the year, it is hard for a team to be a winner.

Dunn has hit two home runs for the A's in three games since he has been there but the team is 1 and 2. What do YOU think is going to happen when Dunn goes into one of his 0 for 20 streaks with a bunch of strike outs and no rbi's?

Dunn is happy and talking about NOT retiring now. When he goes into one of his patented, long streaks of unproductiveness and the fans are booing him, watch how that talk ceases. Also watch how the fans will get sick of him smiling in the dugout when the A's are losing. Watch how they will get sick of him standing at the plate, watching a called third strike cross the dish when there is a runner on third base.

Watch, just like with the Reds, Diamondbacks, Nationals and White Sox, how the fans will say he is a nice guy but they can't wait for him to be off of their team or, once he is off of their team, how he is a nice guy but they are glad he is gone.

David

David, I'm one of the guys who said he isn't HOF-worthy. I was just surprised at the personal shots you took at the guy. Personality and likability are good traits to have, even if you aren't a HOF-calibre baseball player. If Dunn was Albert Bell-like, this thread wouldn't even exist.

Is this thread going to turn into a daily report on Adam Dunn's most recent game? He could bat 1.000 for the rest of the year and it wouldn't change my opinion -- great power, an unusually poor hitter for someone with that much power, walked a lot so it's not quite as bad as it looks from BA alone, weak in other aspects of the game, not even close to HOF caliber.

+1...I agree Peter, the idea of Dunn as a HOFer is almost laughable IMO...

If he DOES bat 1.000 the rest of the year, suffice it to say, I will try to be open-minded.

No.

I respect that you are an Adam Dunn fan. I think he's been a great power hitter, and I also think he's been more than just a power hitter with the walks he's taken. And I think if he reaches 500 home runs without taking any PEDs in an era when many did, he is to be commended.

But I still don't think he's a Hall of Famer. If he manages to hit 500 home runs, he did it by being one of the top home run hitters in the Majors for quite some time. But he was never the best home run hitter. He never led the American league in runs, home runs, RBI, average, slugging average, OBP, or OPS. Not once. In 14 seasons, he never led his league in any of the premier hitting metrics.

He's never won an MVP. But not only has he not won an MVP, he's never finished in the top 5 of any MVP vote. He's never finished in the top 10, or the top 15, or even the top 20 of any MVP vote. His best finish in an MVP race was 21st in 2010. That means every single one of the fourteen years he played, the Baseball Writers thought there were at least 20 other players in the American League...not even in all of baseball, but just in the American League, that were better than Adam Dunn.

Adam Dunn has never won a Silver Slugger. That means he was never even the best power hitter at his position in the American League. There was always somebody better.

There just isn't anything remarkable about Dunn's career. He gets points for longevity, and consistency.

I am a baseball fanatic. I watch 100 games at least every year. I watch the races. I read the newspaper. I subscribe to Baseball America, and MLB.tv, and watch the MLB channel religiously. At no time in the near decade and a half since Adam Dunn has been a Major Leaguer did I consider him a superstar, or Hall of Fame worthy. Again, he walks more than people probably were aware of. But besides the walks, Dunn is a home run hitter with a nearly 35% career strikeout rate. There isn't anything more to him.

You know how many 30 home run seasons there have been between 2001 and 2014?

371

Hitting 30 home runs is good. It is nothing special, however.

What about 40 home run seasons?

There have been 83 40 home run seasons between 2001 and 2014. Ok, that's, of course, tougher to do. Dunn appears on this list six times. Dunn's best season is good for 33rd on the list of best individual home run seasons since 2001. There have been 13 seasons of 50 or more home runs.

But typically, people that hit a lot of home runs and make the Hall of Fame did other things well. Mays and Aaron, Ruth, Frank Robinson, Mike Schmidt, Jimmie Foxx, Willie McCovey, Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, Eddie Matthews, Ken Griffey Jr, Barry Bonds. The other guys were great hitters. Some were elite fielders. Most of them were the best players in baseball at least once or twice in their career.

Dunn never finished in the top 20 of any MVP vote!

Adam Dunn should, and will be remembered as a great power hitter. But he wasn't, at least in my educated opinion, an elite baseball player. He could hit the ball out of the park. When he wasn't hitting a home run, he really wasn't contributing to his team much in an other way.

I just don't see him in Cooperstown.

Edit: by the way, JAWS (Jaffe War Score System) has Adam Dunn listed as the 133rd best left fielder of all-time.

Bill,

Thank you for taking the time to answer my question while others overlooked it. Although it was a hypothetical question (but a realistic possibility), I thought it was a valid question.

You may be right, 550 HRs may not be enough to get him into Cooperstown, who knows? But regardless of all his other stats (low BA, all the SO, etc), there has to be a point where they have to let him in just because of the number of home runs overshadows all the other stats. For example if he ends up playing another 5 years (puts him at 39 years old - again a realistic possibility) averaging 30 HRs a year, he would end up in the ballpark of 600 HRs. I don't think you can keep him out at that point, I don't care if his BA drops to .200 and he SO on every 4/5 ABs. 600 HR is HOF worthy no matter what (again not considering PED issues) in my opinion.

I get what you're saying about no MVP, SS, GG, etc. But there are other players in the HOF that never one any of those titles either. Look at Nolan Ryan. He never won a CY, won only 20 or more games twice in his 27 years, an ERA title only once and lost more games than he won 7 years. Yeah, he won 324 games in his career, but when you consider he played for 27 years, that's only 12 wins a year. He never had any of the accolades that you're (and others) saying Dunn never had. Don't get me wrong, I love Ryan and think he is great. We're from the same home town and I even played ball with his oldest son. But all I'm saying is that all of these titles you're (and others) saying Dunn has never won, well the same can be said for many HOFers.

Regards,

David

The last two posts are, in my opinion, the clearest (and most civilized) articulations of the two sides of the Adam Dunn HOF issue that I've read so far. We ought to just erase all the other posts--including my many longwinded and argumentative comments--and close the thread, agreeing that there are differences of opinion over Adam Dunn's value and what truly makes someone HOF-worthy. :)

No problem, David. :)

Regarding Nolan Ryan, I don't put a lot of weight in his win-loss record. He played for so many bad teams. I'd be willing to bet he was on more losing teams than winning ones. Maybe I'll look at that later tonight. But some of the best pitchers today, like Felix Hernandez and Clayton Kershaw, only have a few 20 win seasons between them, and that's not because of anything they've done. A great pitcher can win fewer games than a good pitcher if that good pitcher has a great defense, and a really potent offense behind them. In 1987, Nolan Ryan led the National League with a 2.87 ERA, in strikeouts, in Fip, in strikeouts per 9 innings pitched, in K:BB ratio, and ERA +. But he was 8-16. Those numbers don't reconcile in my brain. :p

Ryan has more strikeouts, and more no hitters than anybody in history, and really, there's nobody close to either figure. He has an 839 strikeout lead, and the guy he leads is retired. And the nearest active strikeout pitcher is more than 3,300 strikeouts behind Ryan. And while Dunn didn't lead in any major category, Ryan led his league in strikeouts 11 times, and ERA twice. He holds the single season strikeout record, too, with 383. And he never won a Cy Young, but he finished in the top 5 in Cy Young voting six times.

Also, his 6.6 hits per 9 innings pitched is the best ever. And he did that while pitching 5,386 innings.

I don't know what Adam Dunn would have to do to get in. I don't think there's anything he can do. Even if he hit 600 home runs, I don't think he gets in. He's playing in an era where home runs are plentiful. His one claim to fame is home runs, but he's never been the best at it. Every year, there was at least one guy better than him. He finished second in the league in home runs three times. Third once. Fourth twice. Fifth twice. So again, he was pretty good, but never the best. If he were a big time run producer, that might be a little easier to overlook. But he's not even that great an RBI guy. He's hit 462 homers, and driven in 1,162 runs. He's driven in 700 other base runners besides himself.

If you look at the first two 500 home run guys he'll meet if he gets to 500, here's how they'll match up RBI-wise.

Adam Dunn 462 home runs, 1,162* RBI
Eddie Murray 504 home runs, 1,917 RBI
Gary Sheffield 509 home runs, 1,676 RBI

Say Dunn plays one more year, hits 38 home runs, and drives in 100 RBI. He's at 1,262. He's 414 RBI behind Sheffield, and 655 behind Murray.

Dunn's best RBI seasons are as follows:
106 RBI 2007
105 RBI 2009
103 RBI 2010
102 RBI 2004
101 RBI 2005
100 RBI 2008

Why are his RBI totals so low? Adam Dunn is a career .225 hitter with runners in scoring position. He is a .229 career hitter in high leverage situations. He is a career .237 hitter in medium leverage situations, and a .242 career hitter in low leverage situations. You want your power hitters to perform well in high leverage situations.

I'm more in the Bill James camp on Nolan Ryan -- he ranks him the 24th best pitcher of all time, considerably lower than most of the public -- but even so there is no meaningful analogy between Ryan and Dunn.

I didn't mean for it to be an anology between Ryan and Dunn. My comments meant to show that you don't have to have all the titles that everyone keeps referring to (Silver Slugger, MVP, Golded Glove, Cy Young or whatever) to be a HOFer. There are plenty of guys in the HOF w/o any of those awards. Ryan was just one example.