Dunn signs a two-year contract with the Nationals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

That's a very specific situation. I'm talking about overall production.


This guy is the best third basemen ever. His lifetime batting average is .267. He led the league in strikeouts 4 times and was in the top 3 9 times. This guy is the best player ever. 12 times, he finished 1st or 2nd in the league in strikeouts.

---

I'M JUST GOING TO ASSUME THAT LINK IS TO GEORGE BRETT OTHERWISE YOU AND I ARE THROUGH MISTER!!!!!

:p

Uh oh. *Prepares for the inevitable Griffey signing by the Mariners withing the next few weeks*

The second player I linked to I was actually very surprised about. I never realized that he struck out so much for his time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The second player I linked to I was actually very surprised about. I never realized that he struck out so much for his time.

---

Yea, those numbers are surprising for his era.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The second player I linked to I was actually very surprised about. I never realized that he struck out so much for his time.

---

Without looking, sounds like Schmidt and Ruth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

Without looking, sounds like Schmidt and Ruth.

---

Yep

Dunn is a great signing for the Nat's, obviously Teixiera would've been better, but beggars can't be choosers.

The Nationals ranked 11th in OBP and 16th in SLG% in the NL last season, at .323 and .373 respectively. Adam Dunn got on base at a .386 clip and slugged at .513. The Nationals also ranked 15th in homers with 117, while Dunn hit 40 out of the park on his own. And you can throw in the fact that his career OPS+ is 130.

How is that not an improvement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KowboyKoop

There are also hundreds of times a year that there is a runner on 2nd with two outs and a ground ball or fly ball to the OF will lead to nothing, while a HR and other typical Adam Dunn results will lead to more runs.

You can't look at one situation. It's about expected production over the course of the season. In terms of strictly offense, Adam Dunn is FAR better than the .325 OBP guy who doesn't strike out much that you are describing.

Now, defense and baserunning complicate things...but in terms of offense...you're mistaken on this one.

---

Well, I know I'm exaggerating (intentionally), but not sure about mistaken.

Look, I know the guy is decent. But what we don't know is how much of that 40 dingers a year is a result of the ballpark he played in. Let's say he's really more like a 30 dinger a year guy in DC.

OK, plus he walks a lot. That's cool too. Those two things alone means he's worth something.

But when the Nats already have a guy at first who has already hit more than 20 in a year when they played at cavernous RFK, and who actually has a higher lifetime OBP than Dunn, AND who is by far, far, far better a first baseman, then it complicates matters. Plus his proneness to injuries complicates matters.

But taking ALL of that into account, it is my opinion that $10 million for two years (I might've got on board for 1 year, it's next year I'm concerned with) is too much for what might not be much, IF ANY, of an upgrade, all things considered. If Johnson were to stay healthy, I'd take his production (at his cost) over Dunn's.

And again, if Dunn is all of this you guys are saying, I really want to know why he wasn't signed by now.

Tex was signed. CC was signed. Lowe was signed.

The two big ones left??? Manny and Dunn. Why? Because they both have negatives. Manny being Manny and Dunn's less than .250 average and nearly 200K's a year.

And there are some downplaying the significance of how often AB's occur that I described. Well, man on third, less than two outs aren't the only AB's where an out isn't needed. Man on second no outs, and putting the ball in play is just as important. Ever heard the term get em on, move em over, bring em in?? Yeah, traditionalist. I know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Well, I know I'm exaggerating (intentionally), but not sure about mistaken.

Look, I know the guy is decent. But what we don't know is how much of that 40 dingers a year is a result of the ballpark he played in. Let's say he's really more like a 30 dinger a year guy in DC.

OK, plus he walks a lot. That's cool too. Those two things alone means he's worth something.

But when the Nats already have a guy at first who has already hit more than 20 in a year when they played at cavernous RFK, and who actually has a higher lifetime OBP than Dunn, AND who is by far, far, far better a first baseman, then it complicates matters. Plus his proneness to injuries complicates matters.

But taking ALL of that into account, it is my opinion that $10 million for two years (I might've got on board for 1 year, it's next year I'm concerned with) is too much for what might not be much, IF ANY, of an upgrade, all things considered. If Johnson were to stay healthy, I'd take his production (at his cost) over Dunn's.

And again, if Dunn is all of this you guys are saying, I really want to know why he wasn't signed by now.

Tex was signed. CC was signed. Lowe was signed.

The two big ones left??? Manny and Dunn. Why? Because they both have negatives. Manny being Manny and Dunn's less than .250 average and nearly 200K's a year.

And there are some downplaying the significance of how often AB's occur that I described. Well, man on third, less than two outs aren't the only AB's where an out isn't needed. Man on second no outs, and putting the ball in play is just as important. Ever heard the term get em on, move em over, bring em in?? Yeah, traditionalist. I know.

---

He was not signed because most GM's are idoits or had the position solved, as Housto said already.... :/

Quote:

---

And again, if Dunn is all of this you guys are saying, I really want to know why he wasn't signed by now.

---

Says more about the teams than Dunn. There are like 10 AL teams that would immediately improve their DH spot by signing Dunn, and no team did.

Quote:

---

Tex was signed. CC was signed. Lowe was signed.

---

All better players than Dunn.

Quote:

---

The two big ones left??? Manny and Dunn. Why? Because they both have negatives. Manny being Manny and Dunn's less than .250 average and nearly 200K's a year.

---

Nobody's denying Dunn's flaws. I'd argue that his only real flaw is his defense, though.

If the Nationals had a hitter like Dunn in '05 when they challenged for the division, there's a good chance they could have won the division. Their biggest Achilles heel in recent years has been their offense, power production in particular, and Dunn is an immediate and profound remedy to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Well, I know I'm exaggerating (intentionally), but not sure about mistaken.

Look, I know the guy is decent. But what we don't know is how much of that 40 dingers a year is a result of the ballpark he played in. Let's say he's really more like a 30 dinger a year guy in DC.

OK, plus he walks a lot. That's cool too. Those two things alone means he's worth something.

But when the Nats already have a guy at first who has already hit more than 20 in a year when they played at cavernous RFK, and who actually has a higher lifetime OBP than Dunn, AND who is by far, far, far better a first baseman, then it complicates matters. Plus his proneness to injuries complicates matters.

But taking ALL of that into account, it is my opinion that $10 million for two years (I might've got on board for 1 year, it's next year I'm concerned with) is too much for what might not be much, IF ANY, of an upgrade, all things considered. If Johnson were to stay healthy, I'd take his production (at his cost) over Dunn's.

And again, if Dunn is all of this you guys are saying, I really want to know why he wasn't signed by now.

Tex was signed. CC was signed. Lowe was signed.

The two big ones left??? Manny and Dunn. Why? Because they both have negatives. Manny being Manny and Dunn's less than .250 average and nearly 200K's a year.

And there are some downplaying the significance of how often AB's occur that I described. Well, man on third, less than two outs aren't the only AB's where an out isn't needed. Man on second no outs, and putting the ball in play is just as important. Ever heard the term get em on, move em over, bring em in?? Yeah, traditionalist. I know.

---

If Nick Johnson were a durable player, you can definitely argue that Dunn isn't a great signing. That's fine..but that's not really what I'm talking about. I'm talking about Adam Dunn vs. the .325 OBP guy who rarely strikes out that you brought up. Adam Dunn is significantly better than that guy offensively. Adam Dunn is a small upgrade offensively over Nick Johnson if Johnson can stay healthy and thus, wouldn't be worth the contract...if Johnson was durable, but he's not.

This is a good signing for the Nats. They really should trade Johnson for something decent in return...there will be a team willing to give up a nice arm perhaps for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Says more about the teams than Dunn. There are like 10 AL teams that would immediately improve their DH spot by signing Dunn, and no team did.

---

Why??? Are ALL 10 of those teams stupid, is that you're contention? If it's cost, well, yeah, that's one of my complaints if you read my comments. So why not then?? Are a majority of AL teams being run by idiots too?

As far as Bowden is concerned. Take a look at the Nats record over the 4 years he's been there. Four years into a gig is normally time enough to see whether something is working out or not, his trend continues to be DOWN. Fewer wins almost every year than the year before.

Sounds like he should apply to be CEO of the automakers to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Why??? Are ALL 10 of those teams stupid, is that you're contention? If it's cost, well, yeah, that's one of my complaints if you read my comments. So why not then?? Are a majority of AL teams being run by idiots too?

---

Pretty much, or they found someone else.....

Quote:

---

As far as Bowden is concerned. Take a look at the Nats record over the 4 years he's been there. Four years into a gig is normally time enough to see whether something is working out or not, his trend continues to be DOWN. Fewer wins almost every year than the year before.

---

Bowden has basically given the Nationals real tools to survive. He refitted them, and while painful, in the long run they should look good. If Peter Angelos dies...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

Why??? Are ALL 10 of those teams stupid, is that you're contention? If it's cost, well, yeah, that's one of my complaints if you read my comments. So why not then?? Are a majority of AL teams being run by idiots too?

---

I have no idea why an AL team didn't sign Dunn. It certainly has nothing to do with Dunn being a bad player, though.

Quote:

---

As far as Bowden is concerned. Take a look at the Nats record over the 4 years he's been there. Four years into a gig is normally time enough to see whether something is working out or not, his trend continues to be DOWN. Fewer wins almost every year than the year before.

Sounds like he should apply to be CEO of the automakers to me.

---

I'm not defending Bowden's overall body of work. I just think you aren't giving Dunn a fair shake.