Adam Dunn redux
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
From: Zuke on 22 Sep 2009 23:05 On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, HTP wrote: > On Sep 22, 11:02 am, John Kasupski <kc2...(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> > wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:34:32 -0400, David Short >> >> <David.no.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.edu> wrote: >>> john smith wrote: >>>> I really wish people would stop getting ugly in here with all the >> Either way, it's undoubtedly become a PITA for the other folks in here, and >> since Dunn's not even a Red anymore, it's even pretty much off topic here. So as >> of now, I'm dropping it. We now return you to our regularly scheduled program >> about Cincinnati Reds baseball, already in progress. >> > > The Reds have the worst offense in the league. I think Adam Dunn is > still a legit topic here. But the reason we have the worst offense is positions other than Dunn's. 3rd base, shortstop and right field. Not to mention Centerfield which was bad last year. Between Nix and Gones you have about 35 homers, what hasn't been replaced are Dunn's walks which are nice but coming from your 5th hitter who is slow to boot, not that much of an offense killer. The killer this year is the non-offensive performances of the 3rd base, right field, center field and short stop. Add in the starting pitching which we felt we might have 4 15 game winners and we are going to be lucky to get one. What it comes down to is another scenario where we end up under .500. That's what cracks me up when the media and team starts talking in the hot stove league about how good we can be if this happens and if that happens. Well there are more ways for it to go bad than for it to go good and we keep finding them. But it's still fun to watch the team and see what goes on. I wish they played 365 days a year.
From: Bob Braun on 22 Sep 2009 23:48 "Zuke" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message news:alpine.OSX.2.00.0909222256190.74580(a)ucfsb.ucfilespace.uc.edu... > > But the reason we have the worst offense is positions other than Dunn's. > 3rd base, shortstop and right field. Not to mention Centerfield which > was bad last year. Between Nix and Gones you have about 35 homers, > what hasn't been replaced are Dunn's walks which are nice but coming > from your 5th hitter who is slow to boot, not that much of an > offense killer. The killer this year is the non-offensive performances > of the 3rd base, right field, center field and short stop. Add in > the starting pitching which we felt we might have 4 15 game winners > and we are going to be lucky to get one. Not other than Dunn's.........in addition to Dunn's. Again, one symptom of the overall problem.
From: Kevin McClave on 23 Sep 2009 08:33 On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 23:05:18 -0400, Zuke <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, HTP wrote: > >> On Sep 22, 11:02 am, John Kasupski <kc2...(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> >> wrote: >>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:34:32 -0400, David Short >>> >>> <David.no.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.edu> wrote: >>>> john smith wrote: >>>>> I really wish people would stop getting ugly in here with all the >>> Either way, it's undoubtedly become a PITA for the other folks in here, and >>> since Dunn's not even a Red anymore, it's even pretty much off topic here. So as >>> of now, I'm dropping it. We now return you to our regularly scheduled program >>> about Cincinnati Reds baseball, already in progress. >>> >> >> The Reds have the worst offense in the league. I think Adam Dunn is >> still a legit topic here. > >But the reason we have the worst offense is positions other than Dunn's. >3rd base, shortstop and right field. Not to mention Centerfield which >was bad last year. Between Nix and Gones you have about 35 homers, >what hasn't been replaced are Dunn's walks which are nice but coming >from your 5th hitter who is slow to boot, not that much of an >offense killer. You know what is the biggest offense killer? Outs. Outs are one of the few things during a baseball game that are in limited supply. That and players, I guess. Dunn makes fewer outs than a lot of other players. This is why dismissing, or minimizing his OBP ability when comparing him to guys like Kingman is so wrong-minded. The two best things a guy can do offensively to help his team win are get on base and hit for power...in that order. The two things Dunn does best on the positive side. >The killer this year is the non-offensive performances >of the 3rd base, right field, center field and short stop. Add in >the starting pitching which we felt we might have 4 15 game winners >and we are going to be lucky to get one. As has been pointed out by others, nobody has ever once suggested that this team would be getting ready for the playoffs if Dunn was still a Red and everything else being equal. This season they have had is hardly a shocker, though. Many (though not all) of us saw a non-contending team coming miles away, precisely because of the woeful offense. That was one of the things at least the majority of us agreed about. Even some of those folks who thought they would do better than us doomsayers figured it would be because the pitching and supposed improved D would *overcome* the inept O, not because they thought we'd actually see good offense. That doesn't diminish your point about the positions you named, but certainly losing Dunn's O and not even remotely replacing it is a big part of the problem offensively. So is not replacing Griffey's (league average RF OPS last season), Hairston's career half-year, etc. All the offensive shortcomings we discussed in the off-season that did in fact come home to roost. ********************************************************************* Kevin McClave "Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it." ~Robert F. Kennedy *********************************************************************
From: John Kasupski on 23 Sep 2009 10:36 On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:48:20 -0700 (PDT), HTP <tmbowman25(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >bench Taveras, put Dickerson/Bruce in center, with Bruce/Gomes in rf. >Now put Ted in left. That makes a huge difference to the offense. All >theoretical of course, but its silly to say that swapping out Willie >Tavares for Ted Williams makes almost no difference in an offense. Agreed...but in my opinion, still not enough of a difference to significantly change where the Reds will finish in the division standings. Whether Bruce is in RF or CF, he still hit .210 with a .284 OBP. And the Reds still also had gaping offensive holes at shortstop and third base. One guy isn't going to transform this team from fifth place to the playoffs...not even Teddy Ballgame. >Youre use of the word "passed" implies that they considered signing >him to fill a need, or were at least in a financial position to do so, >and chose not to. This is false. Its not a possibility that Dunn could >have signed with every one of the 30 teams. Go team-by-team and look >at each teams LF or DH situation in last December. First eliminate the >teams that cant or wont spend 10-15 million per year for him or >anyone. Next, eliminate the teams that are fairly set at LF and/or DH. >Now consider that there are a few other comparable outfielders on the >market who were also looking for jobs. Youre left with a handful of >teams. Well...I think every team looks at all the players who are available and makes some sort of decision. The decision might indeed be "we can't afford him" or it might be "he's not worth what he's asking" (and there's a difference), or as you pointed out, it may be "we have a better player already here" or it may be "we have a need at that position but we'd rather have player x than player y." The thing is, we don't know about those decisions that are made during a team's internal discussions. Ultimately, a team made a decision whose results are known to us - he got signed to a two-year contract by the worst team in baseball. >> You can also maintain that the Reds didn't do enough to improve the offense >> after Dunn was traded - and you'll certainly get no argument from me on that >> point - but bringing back Dunn this past winter wasn't going to solve the >> problem when there were gaping holes at four other positions. They needed to do >> a lot more than that...and they still do, for that matter. > >i dont recall anyone claiming Dunn was a cure-all. Well, I would hope nobody's that naive. As much as I've ragged on the value of Dunn, he's still 40 homers and a hundred ribbies, and the guy with the majority of PT in left has turned out to be Nix, who has 13 HR and 37 RBI. So that's definitely been part of the problem, but far from being the only problem. JK
From: HTP on 23 Sep 2009 12:07
On Sep 23, 7:36 am, John Kasupski <kc2...(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:48:20 -0700 (PDT), HTP <tmbowma...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >bench Taveras, put Dickerson/Bruce in center, with Bruce/Gomes in rf. > >Now put Ted in left. That makes a huge difference to the offense. All > >theoretical of course, but its silly to say that swapping out Willie > >Tavares for Ted Williams makes almost no difference in an offense. > > Agreed...but in my opinion, still not enough of a difference to significantly > change where the Reds will finish in the division standings. Whether Bruce is in > RF or CF, he still hit .210 with a .284 OBP. And the Reds still also had gaping > offensive holes at shortstop and third base. One guy isn't going to transform > this team from fifth place to the playoffs...not even Teddy Ballgame. The solution for Bruce is simple - platoon him. Even hitting almost exclusively against RHP, he would still be on pace for 30+ HR. If he did hit only .215, with Ted getting on base ahead of him, thats alot of 3-run homeruns. Those are gamebreakers. All theoretical of course. > > >Youre use of the word "passed" implies that they considered signing > >him to fill a need, or were at least in a financial position to do so, > >and chose not to. This is false. Its not a possibility that Dunn could > >have signed with every one of the 30 teams. Go team-by-team and look > >at each teams LF or DH situation in last December. First eliminate the > >teams that cant or wont spend 10-15 million per year for him or > >anyone. Next, eliminate the teams that are fairly set at LF and/or DH. > >Now consider that there are a few other comparable outfielders on the > >market who were also looking for jobs. Youre left with a handful of > >teams. > > Well...I think every team looks at all the players who are available and makes > some sort of decision. The decision might indeed be "we can't afford him" or it > might be "he's not worth what he's asking" (and there's a difference), or as you > pointed out, it may be "we have a better player already here" or it may be "we > have a need at that position but we'd rather have player x than player y." The > thing is, we don't know about those decisions that are made during a team's > internal discussions. Ultimately, a team made a decision whose results are known > to us - he got signed to a two-year contract by the worst team in baseball. It was a bad year to be a free agent. I wonder if the 2-year deal was his idea, and that he didnt want to spend a long time in Washington. Probably. |