Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Kentucky Football: Tee Martin Reportedly Leaving for USC

Does Dunn's defense really matter?

It seems the big knock about trading for Dunn is that he is terrible defensively.  Assuming this is correct, does it even matter based on the Giants pitching staff?  Here are the GB/FB numbers of our starters, given in YTD/Career format:

Lincecum 1.44/1.33

Cain 0.67/0.79

Zito 0.83/0.90

Sanchez 0.93/0.97

Bumgarner 1.22/1.34

I also think it bares mentioning that none of these pitchers have a GB% over 50%.  

Now, I know just enough about stats to be dangerous but I am far from an expert.  But looking at those numbers, it seems that less GB opportunities = less opportunity for Dunn's defense to screw us.  This could very well be wrong, so if it is please explain why.  I'm not really making a statement of fact, just want to see if my logic is flawed.

This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.

Comment 81 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

All I know is that in a playoff game I would scared out of my mind everytime a ball was hit or thrown to him. This teams strength is it’s pitching and defense first and foremost. If he isn’t a defensive liability than it would be great because the Giants have been needing that fourth place hitter. All that would matter than would be the asking price.

by fabiani1233 on Jul 29, 2010 9:41 PM PDT reply actions  

GB% is better than GB/FB ratio

Because the latter (usually) leaves out line drives, which are (on average) the worst type of batted-ball to give up.

Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all

McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.

by baetown415 on Jul 29, 2010 10:00 PM PDT reply actions  

And I think I've warmed up a little to Dunn

I’ve gone from “No” to “hesitant”

Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all

McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.

by baetown415 on Jul 29, 2010 10:01 PM PDT reply actions  

Why? I think I did some pretty decent number crunching yesterday to show the expected gain from adding Dunn is 0 wins…

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

I hate to stop you in mid back-pat, but I found it pretty unconvincing.

I’m not super excited about Dunn, because I’m a defense whore and because I’m frightened at the price tag, but I’m pretty sure he’d be a net improvement.

Mark DeRosa is playing exactly the same amount of professional baseball as his adopted father, these days.

by oldjacket on Jul 30, 2010 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

And I’ve agreed that he’s a net improvement, the question is – how much? I’ve had a couple people say they disagree with me, but not a single person has actually presented a case that it’s a meaningful upgrade yet….

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

. . .the expected gain from adding Dunn is 0 wins…

so long as you don’t literally believe that, we’re on the same page.

Mark DeRosa is playing exactly the same amount of professional baseball as his adopted father, these days.

by oldjacket on Jul 30, 2010 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah I basically mean the expected added win value is below .5 for the remainder of this season, it’s just that wins are whole numbers…

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

It’s pretty hard to find a player that’s more than a win or two upgrade, unless the player you’re replacing is replacement level.That’s why all these Jonathan Sanchez tradesterbations make so little sense.

Mark DeRosa is playing exactly the same amount of professional baseball as his adopted father, these days.

by oldjacket on Jul 30, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yep, and that’s why I think we should stand pat (or get a quality reliever if we can find one for cheap). Since there don’t appear to be any real superstars on the market, and since our lineup is constructed so we essentially have 1-2+ WAR players everywhere, it just strikes me as extremely unlikely that we’ll find a good fit. If Matt Holliday were on the market like last year, that could potentially be a worthwhile move, but like I initially said – it’s gotta be a superstar.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

I should think . . .

. . . that well over 60% of the way into the season, an upgrade worth even one game (say, +10 runs) would be almost stupendously difficlut to get; it’s the equivalent of at least a +16 run upgrade over a full season, and those are not easy to find unless there’s a real black hole somewhere in the lineup. (And no, haters, that’s not Renteria or FSanchez.)

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

FSanchez isn’t a black hole in the lineup only if you don’t consider his defense.

Rooting for Jose Casilla to take his K- and GB-inducing skills to the majors and join his brother.

by dregarx on Jul 30, 2010 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Shit. That makes no sense.

FSanchez isn’t a black hole in the lineup only if you don’t consider his defense.

Rooting for Jose Casilla to take his K- and GB-inducing skills to the majors and join his brother.

by dregarx on Jul 30, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fuck. I did it again.

FSanchez isn’t a black hole in the lineup only if you do consider his defense.

Rooting for Jose Casilla to take his K- and GB-inducing skills to the majors and join his brother.

by dregarx on Jul 30, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

There we go.

Rooting for Jose Casilla to take his K- and GB-inducing skills to the majors and join his brother.

by dregarx on Jul 30, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

OK. Now . . .

. . . that depends on whether you’re looking at what he’s doing right now or what it is reasonable to say he is. When he started his season off hotter than the Big Valley in the summer, everyone was “Ooh, Freddy!” Now he’s a black hole. Attention all hands: he is not “Ooh!” and he is not a black hole. He is a reasonably good batter for a major-league second baseman, probably mid-pack in a time when that position is stronger than usual.

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Few deadline deals are a meaningful upgrade, statistically speaking

It’s extremely difficult to be that valuable in 2-months when a good player is only 3 wins above replacement over the course of an entire season (and relievers are, what, 1 WAR?). Which is why I’ve always hated the deadline deal. If your team is a serious contender with an obvious hole, then you should really be looking to make a deal as early as possible; you can double the impact of a trade (or get the same impact from a much cheaper player) by getting a deal done at the beginning of June. It’s hardly impossible: 3 trades happened this June, 6 went down in June 2009.

VAE PVTO DEVS FIO

by Bhaakon on Jul 30, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree, though at least with something like a reliever, I see the usefulness in getting that piece for the playoffs, if you think you have a good chance of making it (as I believe good pitching with strikeout stuff is one of the most predictive areas for playoff success)….

Ultimately, a playoff team needs to be built in the offseason.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

One problem with Dunn is that he’d make it impossible to give Posey a half day off by moving him to first base. A Dunn-Torres-Huff outfield… Brutal. Might work with Timmeh pitching because of his exceptionally low FB%, but then again with Timmeh pitching, you can probably safely subtract one of our better bats for a full day of rest.

31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below .500

We are at war with Los Angeles. We have always been at war with Los Angeles.

Lowering the Quality of Internet Discourse Since 1985™

by S.F. Giangst on Jul 29, 2010 10:22 PM PDT reply actions  

A young rookie catcher shouldn’t play everyday anyways.

by fabiani1233 on Jul 29, 2010 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Word

The worst thing we could do is wear him out at this point. Just keep Whitey as the designated Sanchez catcher and we’re good.

by marcello on Jul 29, 2010 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sandoval.

He came up as a catcher, he was a good catcher, he could stand to lose some pounds and catching helps.

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Pretty sure that ship has sailed

I’m not happy about it, as I wanted him to be the occasional catcher with Posey as well, but at this point he hasn’t caught in 1.5+ years.

by marcello on Jul 30, 2010 6:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

As an emergency catcher he’s a major upgrade from Pedro Feliz.

31 May 2007, 21:38 EST - the last time Matteh's career W-L wasn't below .500

We are at war with Los Angeles. We have always been at war with Los Angeles.

Lowering the Quality of Internet Discourse Since 1985™

by S.F. Giangst on Jul 30, 2010 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes

I ain't havin' it

by NuschlerFace on Jul 29, 2010 10:30 PM PDT reply actions  

this

Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
"Out, out, Fred Lewis!" - JCTillam Gamerspeare

by jponry on Jul 29, 2010 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with your opinion.

by Into the Void on Jul 29, 2010 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Okay, maybe the question was wrong. It obviously matters. But, does it matter enough to negate the upgrade we get with his bat?

Not sure what to do about my screen name at this point...

by AngelWillSaveUs on Jul 29, 2010 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not completely

But enough to make the upgrade over what we have marginal over the last 2 months of the season.

by marcello on Jul 29, 2010 11:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Every move is going to be a marginal upgrade at this point. However, if Ishi/Burrell/Rowand lose at bats for the rest of the year, is a 1 win improvement out of the question?

Dunn in 414 plate appearances has a WAR of 2.8.
Ishi is 0.3. Rowand is 0.8, Burrell is 0.3, Nate is 0.9. That is in a combined 824 PAs (or close to it, added in my head)

If you go:
Torres
Sanchez
Posey
Dunn
Huff
Uribe
Sandoval
Burrell/Nate platoon

That’d be a pretty big improvement, IMO.

Not sure what to do about my screen name at this point...

by AngelWillSaveUs on Jul 29, 2010 11:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Huff finishes strong, he may be in the running for MVP. No way he bats fifth.
Someone else said Posey should bat second. Only question is his speed.

by fabiani1233 on Jul 29, 2010 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Speed for a #2 hitter is waaaaay overrated. A #2 hitter isn’t going to steal many bases anyway; he’s on base in front of the team’s two best hitters! He just needs to get on base. The lineup AWSU showed would be made significantly better by moving Sanchez below Sandoval and moving everyone else up.

by taliesin on Jul 30, 2010 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sanchez

Ain’t that fast, plus when you consider that he’s barely hitting Pablo’s weight, that extra at-bat per game probably isn’t the best idea. If they had a better option to hit 4th I wouldn’t mind seeing Posey hit 2nd.

Giants best trade option: Bowker for Rowand

by Giant Torture on Jul 30, 2010 5:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

Discussed elsethread.

Right now, Huff is probably the best #2 choice: Torres, Huff, Burrell, Posey, then catch as catch can.

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 6:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's not the average alone

It’s the fact that he’s slugging less than Pablo’s average last year. Uribe hits .260, but he’s got power. Sanchez does walk occasionally, but that isn’t enough from a #2 hitter; he’s either got to walk a lot, hit for a better average, or hit for more power. The defense is nice, but he can defend like that from the 8-hole.

Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.

Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to do that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Jul 31, 2010 12:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

If Dunn comes cheaply, I have no problem with the (marginal) upgrade. The problem I have is giving up someone like Bumgarner (apparently their offer) for a marginal improvement for 2 months. That’s an automatic pass, as are any of our top prospects. You don’t trade those for Adam Dunn, you trade them for Cliff Lee, Sabathia, etc.

by marcello on Jul 30, 2010 7:12 AM PDT up reply actions  

Bumgarner for Dunn would make me mad.

I feel prickishly demanding!

I couldn't be prouder of my recent adoptee - Tim Lincecum's dealer. He provides the secret fuel behind both Cy Youngs. Also, he taught Timmy the change-up.

by giantsfansince1981 on Jul 30, 2010 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

yes, I would break things

Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl

by Viliphied on Jul 30, 2010 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

1 win is the most you can expect out of it. I personally think the chances are more likely the upgrade will be 0 wins. Why? Well, you can check out some of the math I did in the front page thread yesterday, but basically I expect the upgrade to be about .3-.5 WAR or so for this year.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

ironically

this is partially due to Sabean creating a roster with no gaping holes. In fact, if De Rosa stayed healthy there woudn’t even be a Dunn/Guillen/Cantu conversation.

On the other hand (still being held on by tendon strings), Torres might never have been given the starting job!

When this .sig was awaiting the Final Sabean Apocalypse, I never once in a million years suspected it would be a "good" Apocalypse. Bengie... Don't let the door hit you IN YOUR GIANT ASS on the way out!
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game totally stalled and basically dead at this point

by zenbitz on Jul 30, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes

Moreover, Dunn at first means Huff in the outfield, which is a significant downgrade defensively; either Huff would be in the outfield anyway, and Dunn replaces Ishikawa at first (much worse defense) or Huff would have been at first and now replaces Schierholtz be in the outfield (much worse defense).

So even though the Giants’ starters don’t throw all that many ground balls, adding Dunn has the potential to make the OF defense worse as well.

by taliesin on Jul 30, 2010 12:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

This is exactly my stance.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks to having entirely too much time to watch MLB Network, I don’t see why people are so scared of putting Dunn at 1st. HE ISN’T THAT BAD! People were absolutely sure that having Huff play defense would cost the Giants dearly, but has it? I think you would see the same thing with Dunn at 1st. Put the big oaf out there and let him play and be the force in the middle of the order that they need

by m34josh on Jul 30, 2010 12:10 AM PDT reply actions  

You’re underestimating the level of butchery that Dunn is capable of. Over his career, based in UZR he’s only about four runs worse than Huff in the OF but an incredible 11 runs worse at first. Yes, his UZR for this season doesn’t look that bad, but it’s an unreliably small sample. He’s really bad defensively. Accept it.

He still would upgrade the team, but the upgrade would be small, especially when you consider there’s only a little better than a third of the season left. He could be a one-win upgrade if he really mashed after the deal.

by taliesin on Jul 30, 2010 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Dunn IS that bad. There’s a case to be made he’s the worst defensive player that plays defense full time in baseball, and has been over the last few years.

having Huff play defense would cost the Giants dearly, but has it?

Um, well, our OF UZR/150 last year was 13.9, and our 1B UZR last year was 11.8 (trust this number less because it’s one position vs 3). This year our OF UZR is 13.1 (yay for Torres 26.9!) and our 1B UZR is -1.4 I could probably come up with better evidence if I wanted to, but the point is yes, it has cost us a substantial amount. 28.3 batted runs above average more than makes up for it, just don’t confuse “his overall value is good because of how ridiculously well he’s hitting” with “his defense doesn’t cost us”.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed, there are better defensive options at 1B and LF, but Huff hasn’t been the defensive liability that many thought he would be. He’s not to blame for the negative team UZR at 1B:

Huff: 1.9
Sandoval: -0.6
Ishikawa: -0.9
Posey: -1.3

I’m well aware this is only based on four months of data, so SSS certainly applies here.

by RoyaleWithCheese on Jul 30, 2010 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

So if we are going by this year alone, does that mean Adam Dunn’s -1.2 mean he is somewhere between TI and Buster? Seems like that tradeoff would be well worth the middle of the order hitter the Giants have lacked for a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long time

by m34josh on Jul 31, 2010 1:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

If we are going by this year alone

Dunn would be well ahead of both of them. His UZR/150 (-1.2) is much better than Ishi’s (-11.5) or Buster’s (-9.8).

Good thing we don’t have to do that. That would be a horrible way to make decisions.

by RoyaleWithCheese on Jul 31, 2010 2:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

for the millionth time, when it comes to UZR, we’re not going by this year alone.

Mark DeRosa is playing exactly the same amount of professional baseball as his adopted father, these days.

by oldjacket on Jul 31, 2010 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yep, instead we are assuming he is an awful 1st basemen based on 200 games sporadically spread out over 10 seasons

by m34josh on Jul 31, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, but that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t help this team.

Hensley "Bam Bam" Meulens!
Better than you! Mejor que tú! Beter dan jij! 良い場合も! Mehor than abo!
"The trouble with baseball is that it is not played the year round." - Gaylord Perry

by GrahamCrakalaka on Jul 30, 2010 1:02 AM PDT reply actions  

Dh

All this speaks to the advantage Al teams have by being able to carry a guy like Dunn on the roster while NL teams have to slot a 4th OF / PH specialist type in as a DH in world series games.

by Change Up on Jul 30, 2010 8:55 AM PDT reply actions  

But that's only because . . .

. . . most NL teams don’t know how to manage a roster. (Mind, most AL teams don’t either—having a man whose nominal position is “DH” is folly.)

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

But looking at those numbers, it seems that less GB opportunities = less opportunity for Dunn’s defense to screw us

Your logic’s right on. Our staff doesn’t get many GB’s. It’s also worth mentioning we’re leading the league in K/9, which means even less opportunities. So yes, defense probably should be discounted to some degree, but that doesn’t mean you should conclude defense doesn’t matter. It still matters a lot.

I’ll just reiterate my thoughts:

Even if we talk about removing someone like Ishikawa straight up – I’m comfortable saying Ishikawa is probably somewhere like +20 runs better than Dunn defensively. He’s also pretty average offensively, meaning Dunn is AT BEST +30 runs better than Ishi offensively (he’s on pace for 30 this year, and I still think I have a strong case he should hit worse for the remainder of this year than he has, PLUS he should hit worse in AT&T, and his previous two years averaged about +30). So you’re talking about +1 win over the full course of the season. The other players you also mentioned are all and probably fairly similar to Ishikawa in overall value (~2 WAR players).

With 37% of the season left, you’re talking about a case that most likely will result in 0 additional wins (expected improvement – anywhere from 0 to .37 wins).
At this point in his career, Dunn is maybe a +25 hitter offensively. Let’s regress his D a little and call him a -10 defensive player. I’m gonna call Schierholtz a +15 defender and a -5 hitter. On the surface, that appears to bring us +5 runs. Aubrey Huff moving from 1B to a corner OF spot, coincidentally, costs us 5 runs (using positional adjustments for this). It’s a wash. Even adjusting Schierholtz down to a -10 hitter, we’re talking about 5 runs over a whole season, or what, 2 runs at the most over the last 2 months?

Maybe I’m overestimating our guys a little bit, maybe we should adjust for the fewer number of fielding opportunities….whatever we do, I’m having a hard time coming up with a number that shows Dunn as adding anything more than +1.4,1.5 WAR over the course of a full season to our alternative, and we’re 5 games away from having 1/3 of the season left….so best case scenario is we get an expected added win value of .5, .6 WAR – where we should think it’s more likely we get 1 win rather than 0, but not a certainty. I also think it’s not unreasonable to think the expected added win value is less than that, to where the most likely case is we don’t add a single win…..

Overall, I’d take Dunn, I think he adds something positive, if they wanted something like Bowker who we clearly hate and want no part of, sure, why not, but I don’t see how he justifies any sort of real prospect in return.

Now, if anyone has their own numbers, I’d like to see them. Also, similar to Change Up’s comment – Dunn provides more value to an AL team, so it just really doesn’t make sense for us to acquire him. In a rationally functioning market, assuming there’s some AL team out there with a need, that AL team should get more value by acquiring Dunn that us and thus be willing to give up more. By that logic, we HAVE to overpay to get him.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 8:58 AM PDT reply actions  

There's a more important point than number of ground balls...

… and that’s the penalty for failure/reward for success.

When we say a fielder costs us 10 runs, what we mean is that every time he fails to make a play he gives the opposition addition resources to score runs (in the form of an extra baserunner and an extra out), and that an average offence would utilise those resouces to score an average of 10 runes against averag pitching/defence.

Except: the Giants do not have average pitching. They have exceptional pitching – our ERA is consistant at around 3.5 for the last season and a half, compared to the league average of 4.5. So, basically, given the same resources, our opponents only score 78% as many runs as the league average. So, roughly, an missed play by Dunn would only cost us 78% of what it would cost a league average team (it’s actually lower than that, because fewer baserunners also means that a higher percentage of plays are in bases empty/runner on 1st situations, where errors are less costly than with runners in scoring position) – essentially because the pitcher will bail him out a lot. Likewise, an extra play being made is only worth 78% (or less) of the benefit.

On top of that, the number ofs GBs does have a smaller, but still significant, effect.

Combining (a) the pitchers’ ability to bail him out, (b) the lower number of GBs, and © the lower proportion of high leverage (i.e. multiple runners etc) spots, somwhere in the region of 35% – 40% of his defensive failings should be hidden.

His batting, however, suffers no such penalty now that our offence is somewhere around league average.

On top of the number of runs added points, there’s the conversion to wins – WAR is also calculated on league averages – that 9 or 10 runs is worth a win (Fangraphs seems to be working on 9.7 this season). But with great pitching, you play in a lower run environment, so it becomes maybe 8.5 runs to a win.

Basically, I’m totally up for this. I think this is probably worth about 1.5 wins until the end of the season, and makes us a genuine post season threat too.

by sarf_london_niner on Jul 30, 2010 9:13 AM PDT reply actions  

1.5 wins? That means you basically expect Dunn to be a 4.5 win improvement over the course of a full season. I’d really like to see where that number comes from.

Also, I’d argue Dunn’s batting suffers a significant penalty. When you’re a LHH pull hitter who only provides value by walking and hitting HR’s, and your home park reduces HR’s to RF by ~20-30%…..

Also, our pitching is good, but ERA isn’t the right measure since we’re consistently a good fielding team. FIP has us at the 9th best pitching staff in the league, at 3.9 rather than 3.5, so we’re really talking about something more like ~85% of league average….

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Actually, thinking about it, runs scored really is what’s relevant, so ERA might be appropriate after all (or better yet, a measure of runs/baserunners in general)….

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'd still go with FIP

because that better measures the pitcher’s ability to “bail out” a bad fielding play

Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl

by Viliphied on Jul 30, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, but good fielding can also contribute to “bailing out” a bad fielding play. In this context we’re talking about run prevention as opposed to just strictly pitching or just strictly fielding. My initial thought was the same as yours but thinking about it I realized we don’t care about isolating pitching here.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Right – it’s a question of whether the baserunner (and any hitters than follow him) scores, which is a function of the team’s pitching & defence working in unison. Really doesn’t matter if the pitcher does it, if the catcher picks him off, if the CF catches the ball over the wall, or whatever.

by sarf_london_niner on Jul 30, 2010 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

but then again

any run that scores because of an error won’t be counted in ERA. Maybe some combination of FIP and team UZR. (which would be really cool to see some sort of xERA combining those things)

Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl

by Viliphied on Jul 30, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

He’s nowhere near as bad as you are making out:
Link

1.5 was probably too high, but I do think it would be over 1.

Two points about replacements:

(1) Although he’ll be taking the day-to-day spots off Burrell and Ishikawa, those players will take spot starter/PH ABs off the likes of Velez, Rohlinger and Whiteside. So it’s not correct to just compare Dunn to Burrell/Ishikawa (who I would expect to regress to their respective means in any case).

(2) Comparing Dunn’s defence to Schierholtz isn’t fair, because Schierholtz isn’t going to play every inning in any case. Arguably, Huff in LF/Dunn at 1B is an upgrade over Huff at 1B/Burrell in LF (at the very least it’s close).

by sarf_london_niner on Jul 30, 2010 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

I’m still not seeing where you get over 1. That’s still saying we’re getting a 3+ WAR upgrade from Dunn over the course of the season since we have just over 1/3 of the season left. I’m not seeing any way to make the numbers support that, but if someone really thinks they can make the case….make it! And of course I regressed players towards their means in my calcs.

As for Schierholtz, I used him because I assumed he’s our best option at the COF spot. With Burrell, you’re getting maybe a +10 hitting -5 fielding player, with Huff’s D getting an additional 5 runs for being at 1B instead of OF. Dunn gives you maybe +30 hitting -10 fielding…..

Any way I work the numbers, I can’t come up with Dunn being more than a 1 WAR, and even being a little more conservative, more like 1.5 WAR better than any of the players he would potential replace (over a season). Considering he replaces them all to some degree, it’ll be somewhere in the middle. With a third of a season left, that’s just much of an upgrade. I’m not arguing that Dunn doesn’t provide anything, just that it’s not all that big and isn’t worth trading talent for.

(I like using hittracker, by the way, since it just breaks out HR’s, which are what we’re concerned with)

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Burrell is an atrocious left fielder. His last 3 seasons there, his UZR/150 was -12, -21 and -9, and he’s aged another 2 years since then – in fact he averages -6 over his entire career, including when he was young. I’m not having that he’s a -5 fielding player now. He’s certainly more than 5 runs worse than Huff at LF, and Huff is no more than 5 runs better than Dunn at 1B.

As discussed earlier, being a “-10” fielder (and I’m still not sold that he is – having abysmal LF range doesn’t necessarily make you the worst 1B in the majors) doesn’t cost you 10 runs if your overall pitching and defence is really good.

As I said, Dunn takes ABs away from Burrell, Schierholtz, Whiteside, Velez, Rohlinger and Rowand etc. We aren’t talking about trading away Burrell – he’ll still get significant spot time, so “Dunn instead of Burrell” isn’t the comparison. You have to take into account that Dunn would be replacing genuinely replacement level players for a lot of his ABs. And I don’t think AT&T will hurt him as much as you do. So I’d expect him to produce 30-35 more runs, compared to the players who would actually receive reduced playing time as a result, over an entire season. I think the defensive difference would be maybe -5 on your scale (since removing Burrell is a good thing), which would cost only 3 or 4 runs with our pitching.

Wins are cheaper in lower run environments, say 8.5 runs per win rather than 9.5. So Dunn produces a net 28-32ish runs a season, which is more than 3 wins for SF (even if it’s not 3 WAR).

by sarf_london_niner on Jul 30, 2010 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

All this presupposes some adroit managing, of course. I envision most lineups down the stretch featuring Dunn at first, Burrell in left, and Huff in right, with Ishikawa and Rowand regularly entering in the sixth or seventh inning, and plenty of late-game pinch-hitting opportunities for Madison Bumgarner.

by Evan on Jul 30, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I thought I might be giving Pat too much credit for D, I think you’re probably right – I just took his career UZR and regressed it a bit.

You have to take into account that Dunn would be replacing genuinely replacement level players for a lot of his ABs.

I’m not seeing it. Dunn starting means one of our current starters isn’t starting – when Dunn starts, it means Burrell, Nate, Rowand or Ishikawa don’t. Those aren’t replacement level players. Yes, I see your point that it adds a better player to our bench to pinch hit, but I don’t see how that turns into “a lot” of Dunn’s PA’s. The majority of Dunn’s PA’s come at the expense of a current starter.

As for Dunn’s offense, it seems 30-35 is a very generous estimation to me. He’s on pace for 33 offensive runs above average this season, but he actually hasn’t been as good this season as he has in the past. His current wOBA is built on a very, very high BABIP relative to his career norm (and none of his peripherals suggest a change in his approach). He’s walking a lot less – to the point where we can conclude he’s no longer as good as he used to be (walks and HR’s are how he accumulates all his value). AT&T will affect him to some degree – we might only be talking about 2-3 HR’s here, but overall, it seems to me we should expect something closer to +25 out of him offensively going forward….

Even if we only lose 3-4 more runs from adding his defense, we’re still looking at an absolute max of 1 extra win from adding Dunn for a third of a season, and I still think I have an argument it’s less than that. Even just looking at aggregate WAR’s – Dunn is what, a 3.5 WAR player at best? Ishikawa, Burrell, Schierholtz, Rowand – whichever one of them we’re talking about who gets bumped out of the starting lineup on a given day, I’m comfortable saying they’re all at least ~1.5 WAR players, and I think those are generous assumptions….

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not seeing it. Dunn starting means one of our current starters isn’t starting – when Dunn starts, it means Burrell, Nate, Rowand or Ishikawa don’t.

Look at our stats for the season, and Imagine if Dunn had been here. He’d have had about 425 PAs, like Huff and Sandoval. That’s basically what Ish, Burrell and Schierholtz have between them, so you could say that’s where Dunn gets his PAs from.

But Velez, Rohlinger, Bowker and Downs have about 250 PAs between them, of replacement level hitting. Ish/Burrell/Schierholtz wouldn’t get 0 PAs if Dunn was here – they’d get at least those from the AAAA guys (who would have stayed in Fresno), plus some pinch hitting spots off the likes of Whiteside, plus we can perhaps keep Uribe/Sanchez fresher. So actually, Dunn takes 250+ PAs from replacement level hitters and less than 175 from decent hitters.

Basically, non-starters get more PAs than possibly you may think, and the result of adding a new guy at the top of the ladder isn’t to knock the old guys off, but rather to move eveyrbody else down a rung.

by sarf_london_niner on Jul 31, 2010 5:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

Can 1B fielding really be "hidden"?

For any other infielder, the logic is plausible, but a first baseman is involved on the back end of most infield plays. If he has a “bad glove”, that means more than just that he doesn’t always field batted balls optimally: he will make some overt errors receiving throws, and—probably more significant—will fail to dig out tough throws that a better glove rescues, but for which misses are not classed “errors”.

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Indeed.

Also, IIRC, the UZR that much of this Dunn argument rests upon omits 1B receiving from its defensive calculation (although, IIRC once more, MGL claims that receiving only seems to be worth a handful of runs per season).

VAE PVTO DEVS FIO

by Bhaakon on Jul 30, 2010 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

Considering . . .

. . . that all these defensive metrics seem castles erected on quicksand, I wonder that so many people place so much weight on them, and calculate with them out to several decimal places. At best, they are rough indicators.

Professional baseball analyst since 1980.

by owlcroft on Jul 30, 2010 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t really understand the objection. Sarf’s not arguing that we can hide a poor glove at first base, he’s arguing that because of the way this team is constructed, we can hide a poor glove anywhere (or at least anywhere in the infield) and pay less of a price for it than most teams would.

by Evan on Jul 30, 2010 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Two issues with the "Dunn's D is gonna ruin us!"

First, I think it should be known that Dunn would likely play most (if not all) of his starts at 1B, not in RF. His defense at first is not good, however, he doesn’t seem to be God-awful there this season. Last I saw, Fangraphs had him as -0.1 at 1B. (I could be wrong, though)

Second, can we please stop the “Yeah, but Dunn at first would put Huff in LF” argument. Huff has spent most of his time in LF this later portion of the season. It certainly looks like he’ll be out there with or without Dunn. So kill that noise.

by SixFourThree on Jul 30, 2010 9:35 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

Fangraphs has him at -1.2 UZR/150 this year. That’s not the way to use UZR, though, sample size is too small. The way to use it is to look at his career UZR number at the position and regress it to the appropriate degree based on how many innings he’s played it. Also, if you want, it may make sense to include UZR from other positions in that calculation, as long as you standardize it using positional adjustments.

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I realize that this year’s numbers are the subject of SSS.

However, I don’t like the argument that his RF UZR should be included with his 1B UZR. His lack of speed kills him in RF, but at 1B, range is not a “high” priority.

Again, I agree he is full of clank…. I just think the idea that he would cost us tons-o-runs at 1B is a bit overblown.

by SixFourThree on Jul 30, 2010 10:22 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

I think there’s good reason not to include RF UZR with his 1B UZR as the positions are completely different and require different skills. In some situations, like 2B/SS, or any of the 3 OF positions, it makes sense, though. That said, you’d be surprised how much range still matters at 1B….

Also, even looking just at his 1B defensive numbers, and regressing them quite a bit, he still profiles as a bad defender that will cost us runs, especially compared to the lineups we could field right now, like one that includes Schierholtz in the OF and Huff at 1B or Huff in the OF and Ishikawa at 1B…..

by Missing Barry on Jul 30, 2010 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

Tons-o-runs?

I guess that depends on what you mean by that. I think the evidence is pretty strong that he’s a -10 run defender at 1B over a full season. That’s about 5 runs worse than Huff or 15 runs worse than Ishikawa. So depending on who you think he’s taking innings from over there, he’d cost something like 1 to 5 runs for the rest of the season. It doesn’t sound like much, but when you consider that his bat would add only 10 or so runs the rest of the way, the amount defense removes really does look like a significant portion of the pie.

by taliesin on Jul 30, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

Chris Haft doesn't think so

He was on KNBR a few days ago and said, “Just forget about the defense”. I thought “Well, let’s get Brian Bocock back and just forget about the offense; we’ll need a shortstop next year!”

You can’t just ignore an entire part of a player’s game. Nothing works like that; ignoring things that matter are how smart people do stupid things and how stupid people get killed. Any valuation of Dunn as a potential acquisition has to be carefully considered as a boost offensively and a drain defensively, not only because we have to consider his total impact on the team, but because we have to consider how much we’d give up for him. If you ignore Dunn’s defense, then he is worth a top prospect; he’s consistently a great hitter who gets on base and hits for power. But he isn’t worth a top prospect, because his defense does suck, and you have to recognize that.

Ain't no Posey like a Buster Posey cause a Buster Posey don't stop...hitting.

Giants baseball: We're stupid enough to do that (TM)

by quincy0191 on Jul 30, 2010 11:56 AM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about San Francisco Giants.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Sp-giants21_ph_t_0501991449_part6_small
The McCovey Chronicles Fantasy League, For Money.
Calvin_and_hobbes_small
2012 Adoption Draft: Who's In?
Calvin_and_hobbes_small
2012 Adoption Draft: Rules Discussion
Honus_wagner4_small
Hector & Gregor's Excellent Adventure (In the VWL)
Calvin_and_hobbes_small
Community Prospect List: The Results

Recent FanPosts

T_36396_small
2012 MLB Draft Snapshot - Power Hitters
T_36396_small
2012 MLB Draft Snapshot – College Left Handed Pitchers
Img_0100_small
Cormac McCarthy novel The Road
T_36396_small
2012 MLB Draft Snapshot – HS Left handed pitchers
Small
Angel Villalona reported to have a work visa
T_36396_small
2012 MLB Draft Snapshot – The Catchers
Hidey-fern_small
Hiking on the 18th?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Manager

174246766_ea2fd78204_small Grant Brisbee

Moderators

Minime_small Natto

Fawlty_small WalrusMan

Goofus_small Goofus

Howtheyscoredcat_small howtheyscored

Det_7193_small jponry

Authors

09_small JT Jordan

Small steve S