Jay Bruce Retires

[MJAlltheWay24]

Jay Bruce announces his retirement after 14 years in the MLB.

I will never forget Clinchmas in 2010.

[CincySportsFan]

4 hours ago, MJAlltheWay24 said:

Jay Bruce announces his retirement after 14 years in the MLB.

I will never forget Clinchmas in 2010.

Probably the #1 highlight from the 2010's decade.

Always seemed like just a good guy. 

[MJAlltheWay24]

15 minutes ago, CincySportsFan said:

Always seemed like just a good guy. 

I feel like he did a ton of philanthropy while he was playing for Cincy.

[MJAlltheWay24]

Will he make the Reds HOF?

[blue4sure]

My guess would be no

[CincySportsFan]

2 hours ago, MJAlltheWay24 said:

Will he make the Reds HOF?

If Dunn is in, so should Bruce. So my guess is yes.

[sportsfan41]

I would think he makes the Red's HOF.

[Voice of Reason]

3 hours ago, CincySportsFan said:

If Dunn is in, so should Bruce. So my guess is yes.

Dunn has clearly superior stats as Red. Dunn is top 10 in a number of stat categories and is a no doubt Reds Hall of Famer. 

While Bruce may not be at Dunn's level, I do think he is Reds Hall of Famer.

[CincySportsFan]

8 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

Dunn has clearly superior stats as Red. Dunn is top 10 in a number of stat categories and is a no doubt Reds Hall of Famer. 

While Bruce may not be at Dunn's level, I do think he is Reds Hall of Famer.

Well, your comment forced me to take a deep dive into the stats this morning (thanks a lot!)

Looking at just the games they played for Cincinnati, and adjusting for a 162 game season, here's what I came up with (if my math is correct).

Plate Appearances:    Dunn - 680 ,  Bruce - 665

At Bats:   Dunn - 555 ,  Bruce - 595

Runs:   Dunn - 101 ,  Bruce - 87

Hits:   Dunn - 137 ,  Bruce - 148

Doubles:  Dunn - 29 ,  Bruce - 32

Triples:  Dunn - 1 ,  Bruce - 4

Home Runs:   Dunn - 40 ,  Bruce - 31

RBI's:   Dunn - 96 ,  Bruce 95

Stolen Bases:   Dunn - 9 ,  Bruce - 8

Walks:   Dunn - 113 ,  Bruce - 60

Strikeouts:  Dunn - 180 ,  Bruce - 158

Batting Average:  Dunn - .247 ,  Bruce - .249

OBP:  Dunn - .380 ,  Bruce - .319

Slugging %:  Dunn - .520 ,  Bruce - .470

*****

All- Stars (as a Red):  Dunn - 1 ,  Bruce - 3

Silver Sluggers (as a Red):  Dunn - 0 ,  Bruce - 2

*****

Defensively:  (Didn't have the time to figure up each's fielding percentage)

Assists:  Dunn - 96 (50-OF, 46-1B) , Bruce - 85 (all as an OF)

Errors:  Dunn - 71 (59-OF, 12-1B) ,  Bruce - 46 (44-OF, 2-1B)

Double Plays (as an outfielder):  Dunn - 8 ,  Bruce - 17

*****

So, "clearly superior" stats for Dunn?  Ehhhh.  Yeah, he walked a ton more (which affects his OBP) and he averaged 9 more HR's per "year" (which affects his slugging %).  But, other than that?

 

 

[Voice of Reason]

15 minutes ago, CincySportsFan said:

Well, your comment forced me to take a deep dive into the stats this morning (thanks a lot!)

Looking at just the games they played for Cincinnati, and adjusting for a 162 game season, here's what I came up with (if my math is correct).

Plate Appearances:    Dunn - 680 ,  Bruce - 665

At Bats:   Dunn - 555 ,  Bruce - 595

Runs:   Dunn - 101 ,  Bruce - 87

Hits:   Dunn - 137 ,  Bruce - 148

Doubles:  Dunn - 29 ,  Bruce - 32

Triples:  Dunn - 1 ,  Bruce - 4

Home Runs:   Dunn - 40 ,  Bruce - 31

RBI's:   Dunn - 96 ,  Bruce 95

Stolen Bases:   Dunn - 9 ,  Bruce - 8

Walks:   Dunn - 113 ,  Bruce - 60

Strikeouts:  Dunn - 180 ,  Bruce - 158

Batting Average:  Dunn - .247 ,  Bruce - .249

OBP:  Dunn - .380 ,  Bruce - .319

Slugging %:  Dunn - .520 ,  Bruce - .470

*****

All- Stars (as a Red):  Dunn - 1 ,  Bruce - 3

Silver Sluggers (as a Red):  Dunn - 0 ,  Bruce - 2

*****

Defensively:  (Didn't have the time to figure up each's fielding percentage)

Assists:  Dunn - 96 (50-OF, 46-1B) , Bruce - 85 (all as an OF)

Errors:  Dunn - 71 (59-OF, 12-1B) ,  Bruce - 46 (44-OF, 2-1B)

Double Plays (as an outfielder):  Dunn - 8 ,  Bruce - 17

*****

So, "clearly superior" stats for Dunn?  Ehhhh.  Yeah, he walked a ton more (which affects his OBP) and he averaged 9 more HR's per "year" (which affects his slugging %).  But, other than that?

 

 

Thanks for all the hard work. Before I posted my comment, I took the easy path and used baseballreference.com. 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/leaders_bat.shtml

Dunn Reds career top tens:

HR - #5 (Bruce #8)

AB per HR - #1 (Bruce #9)

OBP - #7

Slugging - #2 (Frank #1, Joey #3)

OPS - #3

Walks - #7

Those numbers are why I said Dunn clearly superior. Adam Dunn is arguably the most underrated Reds player ever.

 

[nkypete]

Dunn was a freak of nature.  I wished that they had home run exit velocity back in his day.

[CincySportsFan]

14 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

Thanks for all the hard work. Before I posted my comment, I took the easy path and used baseballreference.com. 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/leaders_bat.shtml

Dunn Reds career top tens:

HR - #5 (Bruce #8)

AB per HR - #1 (Bruce #9)

OBP - #7

Slugging - #2 (Frank #1, Joey #3)

OPS - #3

Walks - #7

Those numbers are why I said Dunn clearly superior. Adam Dunn is arguably the most underrated Reds player ever.

 

Again, walks and homers.  Said it before, and I'll say it again, I concede both.  But, every category you listed up there, is impacted heavily on just those two items.

But, despite averaging 9 more HR's per year, Dunn only managed one extra RBI per year?  Likewise, when you look at runs scored (minus the HR's), Dunn averaged 61 runs a year, just 5 more than Bruce's 56...despite getting on base with an extra 53 walks per year?!?  And before you say it, I know...RBI's and runs scored depend sooooo much more on the rest of your team.  If there's nobody on, how can you drive them in?  And likewise, if you get on, but nobody can drive you in, how can that be your fault?  But, what if I told you Dunn's Reds averaged 743 runs per year while he was there, compared to Bruce's 691.

So, you take Dunn's averages of RBI's (96) and add Runs Scored (101), then subtract Home Runs (40)((since you've technically counted them twice, with the other two categories)) and you get a get a total of 157 runs he was responsible for, one way or another.  Do the same for Bruce...95 RBI's + 87 Runs Scored - 31 HR's = 151.  So, Dunn was responsible for 157 of the 743 team runs each year, or 21.13%  Bruce's comes out to 151 of 691...which equals 21.85%.  Their dang near identical...despite Dunn's massive advantage in walks and a good bump in HR's, and his teams' ability to score more runs per year.

I'm really not looking to cause an argument.  You can say Dunn is better than Bruce, and that's fine.  In certain ways he was.  I just feel that Bruce's overall contributions to his teams were just as important as Dunn's were to his.  And if Dunn is in the Reds HOF, then I believe Bruce should be too.  That's all.

[Voice of Reason]

2 hours ago, CincySportsFan said:

Again, walks and homers.  Said it before, and I'll say it again, I concede both.  But, every category you listed up there, is impacted heavily on just those two items.

But, despite averaging 9 more HR's per year, Dunn only managed one extra RBI per year?  Likewise, when you look at runs scored (minus the HR's), Dunn averaged 61 runs a year, just 5 more than Bruce's 56...despite getting on base with an extra 53 walks per year?!?  And before you say it, I know...RBI's and runs scored depend sooooo much more on the rest of your team.  If there's nobody on, how can you drive them in?  And likewise, if you get on, but nobody can drive you in, how can that be your fault?  But, what if I told you Dunn's Reds averaged 743 runs per year while he was there, compared to Bruce's 691.

So, you take Dunn's averages of RBI's (96) and add Runs Scored (101), then subtract Home Runs (40)((since you've technically counted them twice, with the other two categories)) and you get a get a total of 157 runs he was responsible for, one way or another.  Do the same for Bruce...95 RBI's + 87 Runs Scored - 31 HR's = 151.  So, Dunn was responsible for 157 of the 743 team runs each year, or 21.13%  Bruce's comes out to 151 of 691...which equals 21.85%.  Their dang near identical...despite Dunn's massive advantage in walks and a good bump in HR's, and his teams' ability to score more runs per year.

I'm really not looking to cause an argument.  You can say Dunn is better than Bruce, and that's fine.  In certain ways he was.  I just feel that Bruce's overall contributions to his teams were just as important as Dunn's were to his.  And if Dunn is in the Reds HOF, then I believe Bruce should be too.  That's all.

 You slough off the walks and home runs like they aren't that significant. But arguably the key measurement of a hitter is OPS,  On base percentage plus slugging percentage. Walks and home runs are huge factors in that stat. OPS is how hitters are measured in baseball. Adam Dunn is number 3 all time in Reds OPS, and Jay Bruce is number 43.

I agree that both Bruce and Dunn belong in the Reds Hall of Fame. Dunn is clearly superior.

[CincySportsFan]

28 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

 You slough off the walks and home runs like they aren't that significant. But arguably the key measurement of a hitter is OPS,  On base percentage plus slugging percentage. Walks and home runs are huge factors in that stat. OPS is how hitters are measured in baseball. Adam Dunn is number 3 all time in Reds OPS, and Jay Bruce is number 43.

I agree that both Bruce and Dunn belong in the Reds Hall of Fame. Dunn is clearly superior.

Honest question...do you believe that Adam Dunn is the 3rd best hitter the Reds history?

[Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, CincySportsFan said:

Honest question...do you believe that Adam Dunn is the 3rd best hitter the Reds history?

No. I would rank Dunn around #10. Bruce would probably be around #20.

 I do place very high value on OPS,  and more than most other people on the on base percentage part of that even more than the slugging. That is why I rank Dunn so high. Dunn's OBP is higher than Pete Rose.