Is starting to get scary.

You hate Dunn, that's so clear, there is no one that reads this board that isn't aware of your intense hatred for him.  Sure, there are those of us who find it curious that of all the truly terrible, horribly ineffective players there are in the game, that you have chosen done to levy all of your dislike on.

I haven't been on here near as long as some people here, but this is what I've learned so far from you.

1. YOU HATE DUNN (see above)
   
2. You will twist stats to prove whatever point it is you are trying to make (i.e. Dunn sucks).  
   
3. When twisting the stats isn't enough, you will take it further (i.e. Dunn was batting X this month, but if you take out all the atbats v. pitchers you feel suck then Dunn is better much less than X.)
   
4. Rob Deer and Dave Kingman scoffed at walking, in fact it's somehow much better for a team if a player like Dunn K's than walks, b/c walks are useless.  Deer and Kingman knew this and they refused to take walks, this somehow makes them preferable to you.
   
5. In this latest post, you prefer singles to homeruns b/c the guy who singles MIGHT score, which is somehow a lot better than w/ a homerun where the guy does score.  I guess after you've watched a lot of Reds games you see how they can constantly string together hits, so if Dunn could hit a single w/ a man on second as opposed to a homerun that would be better, b/c the guy behind him is bound to double.

I really don't care that you hate Dunn, there's been Reds players I don't like, for instance I couldn't stand Eddie Taubensee's terrible defense behind the plate and yet year after year they kept him around despite the fact that he couldn't throw out Cecil Fielder.  So, it's cool that you hate him, but I'd like to know why.  Did he screw your girlfriend?  Did he bully you in high school?  Do abnormally large people frighten you?  Does his resemblence to Goldmember bother you?

I'm not going to respond to anymore of your new posts, b/c this stuff has gotten so old and I'm tired of reading it.  Maybe if we could all agree not to respond to anymore of these posts they would eventually end.

Is anyone w/ me on the boycott?

I think the first problem with this scenario is that Player A doesn't exist, but player B might. Anyone who can hit 50HRs in a season is going to get some walks (even if only intentional, Rob Deer actually walked quite a bit). They will also get some doubles. They will not go 0-150 with RISP in the major leagues. Random chance gives better odds than that. (Think Arroyo's 2hrs). They might do poorly, but not that poorly.

Player B exists. Without looking at the numbers, I'd guess  a Wade Boggs type who mostly hit singles. What you need to add to this analysis is how often a runner who singles scores (with no outs it's 40% and gets lower when there are one or two outs) and how often they are stranded (60% then higher with 1 or 2 outs). These numbers are probably close for someone who walks with no out too.  A homerun is a run in the bank. A single is not.

You created an example where all the assumptions put player B in an ideal setting for his skill (will be on base to score  some runs after his rbis, sometimes he'll get two rbis from one hit, etc),  but player A is handicapped by not hitting doubles, or walking, or sacrifice flying or any of the things that generally go with being a fly ball hitter. He'll never be on to score runs from the next hit. That doesn't really exist.

Dunn has 92 runs scored, 40 of which he drove in himself. The other 52 were his teammates when he singled, doubled, walked or whatever he does when not hitting home runs or striking out. He has 90 rbis, 40 of which came from him scoring on his own homeruns. 23 solo shots, 17 with runners on. He has 57rbis with RISP. Some of those came  in the form of the 3 doubles, 35 walks and assorted singles.  It looks like a pretty good mix to me. Every run counts toward whether or not the team wins. It doesn't matter how they scored. What does matter is the odds of any particluar run scoring, and Adam Dunn is involved in run scoring a pretty high % of the time compared to other major leaguers.

OPS is a pretty good predictor of run scoring. The top ten players in OPS are in the top 25 in RBIs and Runs scored. I think that's a good correlation.

zeroboys, you were tapping into what was in fact the purpose of the post.

Sure there is a little criticism of the donkey implied/mixed in but that was secondary.

The players were meant to be EXTREME examples just to show the point. They were extreme and unrealistic in terms of likelihood of actually occuring but they are factually accurate. Not innacurate to imagine 50 hits with RISP producing 50 runs. And 50 solos would most definitely produce 50 runs.

In the example I illustrated can you dispute that Player B would in fact be contributing more to run scoring than the 50 HR 1.250 OPS Player A? Player B directly produces 50 runs just like Player A but by virtue of being left on first base 50 times no doubt he would come around to score at least some portion of those times.
- - - - - - -

I don't dispute OBP, SLG, OPS being representative MUCH of the time. And certainly for a "team" or "league" or "year" no doubt the accuracy only gets better.

My point was to show a scenario where OPS certainly could significantly OVERSTATE production. Again that scenario would be this:

A BB-Driven OBP + a SLG heavy on solo homers and weak on RISP hitting

Certainly when judging the relative strength of an OBP, if you have 2 players with the same OBP, the one which is LESS BB-driven would be a relatively STRONGER OBP. And as in Player A/Player B example solo homeruns and weak RISP hitting weaken the relative strength of SLG.

Dunn's LIFETIME BA with RISP coming into this year was ~.215. That is HORRIBLE for anyone but particularly horrible for a middle of the order "rbi guy".

OBP has its place no doubt. But a BB DOES NOT drive in a run. With a man on second and first base open (Runner in scoring position) sure a BB is better than an out but it IS NOT A HIT and DOES NOT drive in a run.

BA with RISP is what is important NOT OBP.  And I don't care much about SLG with RISP either. For my tastes I care about a HIT... I'll take the double but that's just gravy, the HIT is what is important.

...the underlying assumption of your attack on OPS as a reliable means of measuring and predicting run production, however, is that both its components are of equal importance.  But they're not.  OBP is the more important of the two, shown by the fact that Player B in your example above only has value because somebody else is already on base.

Player A produces a run by himself.  Player B needs the efforts of at least one other player in order to produce the same amount.  Player A, is therefore, more efficient at run production than Player B.  You do want players on your team that are efficient at producing runs, don't you?

You're ascribing a perfection to OPS that it doesn't claim to have and rendering your critique moot by not including the more--much more, actually--important factor, OBP.  Quite frankly, the fact that you intentionally left it out reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

Look Dunn has his flaws, of course.  But to attempt to imagine and justify a universe where he's less valuable than a Rafael Belliard-type of hitter runs counter to every single pitch of baseball you've ever seen or played and you know it.

Oh, and did you just write that a homerun can be a rally killer???  Please tell me I imagined that, so I can stop banging my head on my desk.

BTW, I'm new here.  Love the discussion threads, guys.        

Referring to OBP above, I mean walks.  I should have stated that more clearly.

and yes, to do weighting of OBP and SLG in OPS would make it more complicated and less practical for quick and easy reference however.....

You can't dispute the following can you?

-an OBP driven by walks is MOST DEFINITELY weaker than the same OBP with a greater pct. of HITS

-a relatively low BA with RISP is MOST DEFINITELY weaker than a player with relatively high BA with RISP

-an SLG greatly driven by homeruns (60% of which are SOLOS) is MOST DEFINITELY weaker than the same SLG with same number of homeruns but 45-50% SOLO homeruns.

you take the bias to SLG in OPS formula, the inequity of treating a BB-driven OBP the same as a less BB-driven OBP...etc..etc.. all these things together can greatly distort/overstate the end product OPS/run production level for a player type like Adam Dunn.

Hal McCoy, the hall-of-fame baseball writer for the Dayton Daily News, in his Q/A column in today's newspaper writes:

Q: One thing the Reds won't get in September is help from Adam Dunn. His numbers historically drop dramatically in September: his homers, his RBIs, his batting average, and this year is no different, one home run and one RBI in his last 14 games (through Thursday). Dunn's done. -- Ken, Dayton

A: This week was Bash Adam Dunn Week. Yes, he is struggling mightily these days, a .231 average with runners in scoring position, and only 13 of his 39 homers have come with runners in scoring position. But he isn't the Lone Ranger. Like Raymond, Everybody Loves Ryan, but did you know Freel's batting average with runners in scoring position is .178 (13-for-73)? Ken Griffey Jr. is at .211. Royce Clayton is .152. Jason LaRue is .132. Only Edwin Encarnacion (.337), Scott Hatteberg (.303) and, get this one, Juan Castro (.333) can hold his head high.

Michael, you've actually managed to put your own little voice inside your head asleep, because this sounds so much like your other posts.

Time to use the random comment generator to spice things up a bit.