Author Topic: Sox Should Have Signed Adam Dunn  (Read 3859 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Sox Should Have Signed Adam Dunn
« on: May 11, 2009, 02:26:46 AM »

Offline johnnyrondo

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4038
  • Tommy Points: 1245
There were rumors this Winter of the Sox's interest in signing Dunn. The Nationals got him for a reasonable short 2 yr contract. Here's Dunn's stats this yr: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4808  Here's Papi's: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3748 

Since Youkilis has been hurt and Drew gets hurt frequently, Dunn would have been a nice addition. When Lowell went down last yr in the playoffs, I felt the noodle bat of Kotsay hurt us as a corner infielder and was a reason we didn't get past TB. Anyways, just pointing out how good Dunn has been. Hope Papi turns it around at least. I still have hope.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2009, 11:11:22 AM by Redz »

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2009, 08:02:29 AM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
Would Dunn have agreed to the same contract to be a bench player, though?  Our outfield / DH position were full.  As a free agent looking to reestablish value, I don't think he could risk having his plate appearances limited.

Also, as good as Dunn has been offensively, he's atrocious in the field.  Again, that doesn't sound as important with Papi struggling, but the Sox had to assume that their DH position was filled.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2009, 08:46:01 AM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7674
  • Tommy Points: 446
I don't think Dunn would have wanted to be a backup, but at this point he's looking like a major upgrade at the dh.  Lets hope Ortiz comes around.  By the way, I wonder what kind of numbers Dunn would put up in a stacked lineup like Boston's.

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2009, 08:55:59 AM »

Offline mattyweb

  • Xavier Tillman
  • Posts: 27
  • Tommy Points: 1
Dunn signed a 2 year contract, right? Well Papi's is up after next season...

Maybe he'll be the Sox next DH after all.

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2009, 09:08:44 AM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48121
  • Tommy Points: 8800
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
It's easy to look back and second guess not having someone to back up a woeful Ortiz but there aren't that many AL teams that have a primary back up specifically for their DH position. And that's what Dunn would have been because, as mentioned, he is a dreadful fielder.

Fact is there isn't a person who knows anything about baseball that would have predicted the horrible start that Ortiz is having. Not a person. Could people have expected a slow start or a falling off? Sure! But no homers and a .224 BA with no power whatsoever. NO. No one could have foreseen that.

At this point Tito is forced to do with Papi what he did with Pedroia in Pedroia's rookie season. That is have patience and wait it out and hope he has a comeback and turn around like Pedroia did that season.

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2009, 09:45:28 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32523
  • Tommy Points: 1722
  • What a Pub Should Be
There would've been no place to put him and he's too high priced to simply be a bench player.  Sox had their outfield and DH set coming into the season so where would've you put him?

He's also an exceptionally one dimensional talent.  Yes, he hits plenty of HRs but he strikes out a ton.  Yes, he's hitting over .300 right now but I'm willing to bet that by the end of the season, he'll be back towards his career number there.    Also, there's no way that Adam Dunn could effectively play the vast right field of Fenway Park.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2009, 10:52:02 AM »

Offline Rondo2287

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13009
  • Tommy Points: 816
First of all the title should be, "Sox should have signed Adam Dunn," and also no they should not have.  He is having a great season yes, but he is not worth the kind of money we would have to shell out for him given the fact that nobody in their right minds would have thought Ortiz wouldn't have a homer yet.  I truly believe Papi will come around and if he doesn't we should just move him down in the order and let him hit doubles. 
CB Draft LA Lakers: Lamarcus Aldridge, Carmelo Anthony,Jrue Holiday, Wes Matthews  6.11, 7.16, 8.14, 8.15, 9.16, 11.5, 11.16

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2009, 04:57:45 PM »

Offline johnnyrondo

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4038
  • Tommy Points: 1245
There would've been no place to put him and he's too high priced to simply be a bench player.  Sox had their outfield and DH set coming into the season so where would've you put him?

He's also an exceptionally one dimensional talent.  Yes, he hits plenty of HRs but he strikes out a ton.  Yes, he's hitting over .300 right now but I'm willing to bet that by the end of the season, he'll be back towards his career number there.    Also, there's no way that Adam Dunn could effectively play the vast right field of Fenway Park.


I don't know about his average at the end of the season, but obp is more important and he tends to do well in that category. Also, strikeouts are overrated.

In regards to Papi's struggles, people are saying NO ONE could have predicted this, but from what I read, the Sox front office was concerned about him this winter and his slowed bat speed, which would probably explain their reported interest in Dunn.

I do agree that a player of Dunn's caliber, probably wanted a guaranteed starting spot, so to sign him we would have had to pay more than Washington and convince him that he's have plenty AB's backing up numerous positions. He could back up Papi at DH, Drew in right, Bay in left, probably backup up Ellsbury with Drew shifting to Center, and if he was capable of playing first he could back up Youks or Lowell (with youks shifting to third). So he could of had plenty of AB's and you could also bill up the fact that Fenway is more of a hitter's park than Washington's.

IMO I think the reason the Sox passed is because Dunn has been against playing first in the past and the Sox went with their heart and hoped for a Papi rebound, despite the reports of slowed bat speed. They definitely didn't pass based on batting average or strikeouts. Those aren't the kind of stats they focus on. They know Dunn is a very good hitter and they might be regretting not pursuing him harder since he's tearing the cover off the ball (in Washington even), Papi looks like a shell of his former self and based on injuries.

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2009, 10:58:33 AM »

Offline MBz

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2203
  • Tommy Points: 30

I don't know about his average at the end of the season, but obp is more important and he tends to do well in that category. Also, strikeouts are overrated.


How are strike outs over-rated?  They are a worthless at bat.  You have no versatility with a guy who strikes out so much, can't play hit and run, we have enough guys in the line up who strike out too much, we didn't need one more.
do it

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #9 on: May 26, 2009, 11:09:09 AM »

Offline LB3533

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4088
  • Tommy Points: 315
Sox should not have signed JD Drew at 15 million per.

Re: Sox should of signed Adam Dunn
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2009, 12:07:14 PM »

Offline Brendan

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2990
  • Tommy Points: 72

I don't know about his average at the end of the season, but obp is more important and he tends to do well in that category. Also, strikeouts are overrated.


How are strike outs over-rated?  They are a worthless at bat.  You have no versatility with a guy who strikes out so much, can't play hit and run, we have enough guys in the line up who strike out too much, we didn't need one more.
It's pretty well established (statistically) that if a guy has good offensive numbers (think OBP and SLG) - then its not a big deal if he strikes out or grounds out or flies out. That's a bit of a simplification, but when going off the first order rate stats it works. Alternatively we can look at his VORP (Value Over RePlacement) - or some other advanced stat - and see how much the strikeouts impact his worth.

Given that they had three starting OF, a fourth guy in Baldelli, and starting 1b and DH, I think it would have been hard to get Dunn to play here. It would have made sense for the Sox given their knowledge of Ortiz and Drew, but as a sales pitch "don't worry we don't expect Big Papi and JD to play that much" probably doesn't work well.