August 4, 200917 yr Actually the OBP is becoming more of an important stat than just batting average. The OBP includes everytime a player reaches base via walk, error, etc. That shows how often a player can make something happen to actually extend an inning, not just how many times he got a hit to extend an inning. Personally, I would love to have a guy in my lineup with a .400 OBP with those kind of run production numbers. He will make things happen.
August 4, 200917 yr Actually the OBP is becoming more of an important stat than just batting average. The OBP includes everytime a player reaches base via walk, error, etc. That shows how often a player can make something happen to actually extend an inning, not just how many times he got a hit to extend an inning. Personally, I would love to have a guy in my lineup with a .400 OBP with those kind of run production numbers. He will make things happen. If you're referring to Griffey, his OBP is .326. And keep in mind that Griffey is of diminished value when he does get on base due to his poor speed.
August 4, 200917 yr If you're referring to Griffey, his OBP is .326. And keep in mind that Griffey is of diminished value when he does get on base due to his poor speed. I was actually talking about Dunn. I should have specified.
August 4, 200917 yr ^ I'm not saying anything like that at all. Just a little shot at the Dunn bashers. Why? Do you really think he would have the same numbers if he was still here? Would this team be any better than what it is now if he was still here? This team would still be just as bad as before with him here. He probably wouldn't have as good of numbers either. The defense would be worse if he was still here. I mean in Washington he has a new hitting coach, who might have found something that actually made him learn to hit for average, which might not have happened here. He has a better offense around him, which lead for more opportunites to drive in runs. So its not surprising that his numbers are better this year. If you put him on this team this year, and his numbers are probably not as good as as they are now. The most important thing of all is that this team would still be probably just as bad if he was here. I mean there is no evidence to show otherwise, becuase they were this bad every year when he was here. So no reason to think otherwise this year. So why does this keep getting brought back up. Are we going to do this for every player that gets traded? The fact is the team sucked with Dunn, it now sucks without him, and it would have still sucked if he was still here. This team has far more problems then Dunn not being him. So whats the point at saying your taking a shot at people, when Dunn really means nothing at all one way or another for the success of this team? They would still be basically where they are today.
August 4, 200917 yr 2009 STATS BA HR RBI OBP SLG .280 27 78 .407 .563 Tied for 4th in the MLB in RBIs I am so glad the Reds got rid of the bum.
August 4, 200917 yr 2009 STATS BA HR RBI OBP SLG .280 27 78 .407 .563 Tied for 4th in the MLB in RBIs I am so glad the Reds got rid of the bum. Yeah and we know he would be doing just as good if he was still here right?, and would be helping the Reds win so much more like he did in the past right? I mean every team he has played on, has ended up being a winning team with him. Ok now yeah obviously it would be nice to have him over some of the people that we have now. However some of you all act like he is the type of player that really helps a team win. Yet facts show that he has really yet to help a team win. He joined a team in first place I believe in Arizona last year, and they ended up not making the playoffs. I am not totally against Dunn, but some of your all's love affair with him is amazing, and even with him gone you all still make sure you bring things up. The team sucked with him, and has sucked without him. So obviously he was not helping the team even when here. This team would still be just as bad basically even if he was here. So its not like us trading him hurt much at all, it could maybe help out in the long run. This team has many other problems, besides not having Dunn. If they fix those problems, they can be a winning team. They don't need Dunn to do that.
August 4, 200917 yr Author I love the argument that Dunn's teams don't win. How is that his fault again? Please explain this to me? Would you say the same if Pujols was with the Nats. That is beyond weak and the last little string you guys are hanging on to bash Dunn.
August 4, 200917 yr Yeah and we know he would be doing just as good if he was still here right?, and would be helping the Reds win so much more like he did in the past right? I mean every team he has played on, has ended up being a winning team with him. Ok now yeah obviously it would be nice to have him over some of the people that we have now. However some of you all act like he is the type of player that really helps a team win. Yet facts show that he has really yet to help a team win. He joined a team in first place I believe in Arizona last year, and they ended up not making the playoffs. I am not totally against Dunn, but some of your all's love affair with him is amazing, and even with him gone you all still make sure you bring things up. The team sucked with him, and has sucked without him. So obviously he was not helping the team even when here. This team would still be just as bad basically even if he was here. So its not like us trading him hurt much at all, it could maybe help out in the long run. This team has many other problems, besides not having Dunn. If they fix those problems, they can be a winning team. They don't need Dunn to do that. That's funny because when I first mentioned this season that the Reds missed Dunn, some on here was surprised because they had me pegged as a Dunn basher. I always felt he could do more than what he was but was open enough to understand that he produced close/over 200 runs a season for the Reds and no one else on the team or in the minors was doing that. Votto is the only exception.
August 4, 200917 yr I love the argument that Dunn's teams don't win. How is that his fault again? Please explain this to me? Would you say the same if Pujols was with the Nats. That is beyond weak and the last little string you guys are hanging on to bash Dunn. Give a healthy Volquez, an offense that scores runs for Harang especially and the others, too and the Reds would be where they could possibly do something with Dunner and at least ONE MORE BAT.
August 4, 200917 yr Would this team be any better than what it is now if he was still here? The most important thing of all is that this team would still be probably just as bad if he was here. I mean there is no evidence to show otherwise, becuase they were this bad every year when he was here. So no reason to think otherwise this year. The Reds would be a little better with Dunn, because he would fill one of the biggest holes in their offense. One player doesn't make a team good by himself, and one player doesn't make a team bad by himself. That's a lesson that needs to be learned, especially the way a lot of Reds fans seemed to lay the team's failures at Dunn's feet the last few years. Especially since the pitching has been better than it has in recent years, who's to say the Reds couldn't have made a legitimate run at .500 with Dunn?
August 4, 200917 yr Yeah and we know he would be doing just as good if he was still here right?, and would be helping the Reds win so much more like he did in the past right? I mean every team he has played on, has ended up being a winning team with him. Ok now yeah obviously it would be nice to have him over some of the people that we have now. However some of you all act like he is the type of player that really helps a team win. Yet facts show that he has really yet to help a team win. He joined a team in first place I believe in Arizona last year, and they ended up not making the playoffs. I am not totally against Dunn, but some of your all's love affair with him is amazing, and even with him gone you all still make sure you bring things up. The team sucked with him, and has sucked without him. So obviously he was not helping the team even when here. This team would still be just as bad basically even if he was here. So its not like us trading him hurt much at all, it could maybe help out in the long run. This team has many other problems, besides not having Dunn. If they fix those problems, they can be a winning team. They don't need Dunn to do that. If they had Dunn and a SS along w/ picking up Rolen at the deadline w/ healthy pitching they would be better than not having Dunn. It is so dumb to say they sucked w/ him and they still suck w/o him so who cares. You are proving that it wasn't his fault. It's like saying Dillon was a bad player for the Bengals b/c they never won. It's just a dumb argument IMO.
August 4, 200917 yr BA matters a great deal for all players.... BA is one factor in determining how well a player helps his team do the one thing that is necessary to winning: score runs. However, a .300 hitter with no power and an undiscerning eye will do less to help a team score runs than the .250 hitter with good power and a high OBP%. People using Dunn's average as the reason for not wanting him simply do not know baseball.
August 4, 200917 yr Dunner.... 2009 STATS BA HR RBI OBP SLG .280 27 78 .407 .563 Tied for 4th in the MLB in RBIs Griff 2009 STATS BA HR RBI OBP SLG .220 11 33 .326 .396 We haven't updated these guys in a while. What Dunn has done in the lineup is pretty amazing IMO. Amazing how much he wasn't appreciated here. You guys seem to forget that Dunn was due to make $14m this year if the Reds kept him. Is what he has done worth $14m? The Nats signed him for $30m over 3 years and $8m this year.
August 4, 200917 yr You guys seem to forget that Dunn was due to make $14m this year if the Reds kept him. Is what he has done worth $14m? The Nats signed him for $30m over 3 years and $8m this year.No, Dunn was a free agent after last season, which is why the Reds traded him in the first place. Dunn signed a two-year deal for $20 million.
August 5, 200917 yr Reds had an option to pick up Dunn but it would have cost between 13-14 million. He is having a good year playing for a bad team. No pressure to produce. I like Dunn and would like to have seen the Reds keep him but in the long run he probably welcomed the trade out of Cincy.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.