PDA

View Full Version : Dunn's second half; Over/Under 15 HR?


Nellie_Fox
07-12-2012, 12:21 AM
If he hits 15, that will be 40, which would be a major improvement over last year, but he's been struggling lately. So what say you?

Irishsoxfan
07-12-2012, 04:05 AM
Voted over. A player for whom the All Star break came at the right time. I think he will come back somewhat refreshed mentally and get back to normal again.

LITTLE NELL
07-12-2012, 05:09 AM
I'm hoping its over 15 but lately he is looking like the 2011 version.

PeteWard
07-12-2012, 05:16 AM
Voted over. A player for whom the All Star break came at the right time. I think he will come back somewhat refreshed mentally and get back to normal again.

Depends what normal is for Dunn. :(:

SI1020
07-12-2012, 08:23 AM
I'm hoping its over 15 but lately he is looking like the 2011 version. He's 9 for 67 since June 17. That's a .134 BA.

delben91
07-12-2012, 08:38 AM
Over, he'll have another "hot" streak in him that'll net 6 or 7 HRs over a couple week period which puts him well on his way to 15+.

doublem23
07-12-2012, 08:38 AM
Depends what normal is for Dunn. :(:

A ****load of home runs

asindc
07-12-2012, 10:13 AM
I think over. Within this season, he has shown the ability to go the other way, and this coaching staff seems to have a good handle on identifying where he can improve his approach. I suspect that he'll start going oppo quite a bit to open up the 2nd half and make pitchers re-adjust, and that's when he'll start turning on pitches again.

FoulTerritory
07-12-2012, 10:26 AM
I think over. Within this season, he has shown the ability to go the other way, and this coaching staff seems to have a good handle on identifying where he can improve his approach. I suspect that he'll start going oppo quite a bit to open up the 2nd half and make pitchers re-adjust, and that's when he'll start turning on pitches again.

I agree. While I've advocated dropping him to the 5 spot in the lineup, I do agree with you that the best hope for Dunn, as opposed to last year, is this coaching staff's seeming understanding of where his problems lie -- in his all-pull approach most especially. Robin has already made comments on this and is clearly aware of it.

Perhaps the x-factor in getting Dunn turned around is the new coaching staff. We shall cross our collective fingers.

bunkaroo
07-12-2012, 11:15 AM
I had to vote under 15. He may come back around, but I don't think it will be in time to hit more than 15.

I sure hope he can put the strikeout number out of his head since the press is already beating that drum pretty loudly.

DumpJerry
07-12-2012, 11:22 AM
Over. He'll get a standing O tomorrow in Kansas City for sacrificing his at-bat for Billy Butler and that will energize him.

Keep in mind he has appeared in all but one game this season (84 of 85 games). I'm sure the break since Sunday is helping him get some rest.

DeadMoney
07-12-2012, 12:15 PM
Over. He'll get a standing O tomorrow in Kansas City for sacrificing his at-bat for Billy Butler and that will energize him.

Keep in mind he has appeared in all but one game this season (84 of 85 games). I'm sure the break since Sunday is helping him get some rest.

And that 1 game off didn't come until last Thursday meaning he played in 82 of the first 82 games of the season (granted, some were pinch hit spots, but that's still a grind).

I think he'll go over 15. These 4 days off will help him greatly. As well as having grinding ABs come from Youk in front of him, which will lead to a greater liklihood that a pitcher makes a mistake or two over the amount of pitches Youk and he will see.

DumpJerry
07-12-2012, 12:19 PM
And that 1 game off didn't come until last Thursday meaning he played in 82 of the first 82 games of the season (granted, some were pinch hit spots, but that's still a grind).

I think he'll go over 15. These 4 days off will help him greatly. As well as having grinding ABs come from Youk in front of him, which will lead to a greater liklihood that a pitcher makes a mistake or two over the amount of pitches Youk and he will see.
The combo of Youk, Dunn, Konerko, AJ, and Rios gives pitchers little margin of error........:D:

JB98
07-12-2012, 01:04 PM
I think The Donkey has another hot streak or two in him. Over.

34rancher
07-12-2012, 01:20 PM
Depends in my opinion if pressure is on him. I'll say too much pressure and take the under.

Edit: but I am a little embarrassed that WSI has fallen in love with the home run. We are starting to sound like fans from the other side of town with Shamememe

soxnut1018
07-12-2012, 01:33 PM
Depends in my opinion if pressure is on him. I'll say too much pressure and take the under.

Edit: but I am a little embarrassed that WSI has fallen in love with the home run. We are starting to sound like fans from the other side of town with Shamememe

You're right. Good baseball fans hate home runs and prefer lineups of 9 grindy singles hitters.

LITTLE NELL
07-12-2012, 01:50 PM
You're right. Good baseball fans hate home runs and prefer lineups of 9 grindy singles hitters.

That worked pretty good from 1951 through 1967. If it wasn't for the Damn Yankees we might have had a few more Pennants flying around the ballpark.

FielderJones
07-12-2012, 01:52 PM
That worked pretty good from 1951 through 1967. If it wasn't for the Damn Yankees we might have had a few more Pennants flying around the ballpark.

The Damn Yankees had home run hitters. Somehow that worked better.

WhiteSox5187
07-12-2012, 01:53 PM
I voted under, I don't think he is going to fall off the face of the earth or anything but I think his hot streak won't be for very long and he'll hit about 13 homers and have pretty good numbers outside of his average.

asindc
07-12-2012, 01:57 PM
The Damn Yankees had home run hitters. Somehow that worked better.

So did a lot of the teams that consistently finished behind the Sox during those years.

Back on topic: I think the break will do Dunn well. As opposed to last year, this year he can look back at what has worked so far.

doublem23
07-12-2012, 02:03 PM
That worked pretty good from 1951 through 1967. If it wasn't for the Damn Yankees we might have had a few more Pennants flying around the ballpark.

I really hope you see the irony of this post.

doublem23
07-12-2012, 02:05 PM
As opposed to last year, this year he can look back at what has worked so far.

Not to mention he no longer has a pair of dip**** morons for his manager and hitting coach

russ99
07-12-2012, 02:53 PM
You're right. Good baseball fans hate home runs and prefer lineups of 9 grindy singles hitters.

Nope, a mix is preferable, and as for the home run hitters, I'd like to see them help in other ways, not just "one of three outcomes" sluggers we've seen on the south side lately...

Dunn is hitting much better on the road than at home, so I'd think he'll do better post all-star break with 13 road games vs. 3 home games the rest of July.

BigKlu59
07-12-2012, 06:54 PM
That worked pretty good from 1951 through 1967. If it wasn't for the Damn Yankees we might have had a few more Pennants flying around the ballpark.

The Damn Yankees had home run hitters. Somehow that worked better.


OVER... of course I'd like him to get one every 9-11 AB's, but I'll have to put in my order for flying pigs..


What worked better was dropping em in the seats down the left and right field line... That 40 extra feet and Higher wall can be a bitch...

BK59

LITTLE NELL
07-12-2012, 07:05 PM
I really hope you see the irony of this post.

What I'm trying to say is that during those 17 years we probably hit the fewest HRs in the AL but only the Yankees had more wins and not because they hit more HRs but because they had the money for a great farm system and brought up very good players year after year and were always able to make a trade with their Major League farm team in KC.

SI1020
07-12-2012, 08:41 PM
I have often bent space and time in my own mind and brought Frank Thomas up to the Sox in either 1950 or 60 instead of 1990. A prime Frank Thomas in the 50's means a pennant in 1955, and a fair to middling chance in 1953, 1957, and 1958. In the 60's it's even better. Those three consecutive second place finishes from 1963-65 now have a good chance to be pennant winners, and 1967 looks pretty good too. The Sox didn't need Mantle, Maris, Berra, Howard, Skowron, and the rest of the gang, they just needed one big time hitter. The pitching, speed and defense were there. As for Dunn, I hope his backslide comes to an end real quick after the break.

WhiteSox5187
07-12-2012, 10:27 PM
The Damn Yankees had home run hitters. Somehow that worked better.

I really hope you see the irony of this post.

What I'm trying to say is that during those 17 years we probably hit the fewest HRs in the AL but only the Yankees had more wins and not because they hit more HRs but because they had the money for a great farm system and brought up very good players year after year and were always able to make a trade with their Major League farm team in KC.

It's probably worth mentioning that those Yankee teams hit so many home runs because they played half their games in a stadium where it was 296 feet and 301 feet down the lines respectively as opposed 363 feet in Old Comiskey. Yankee Stadium was deeper in center but guys like Yogi Berra got a lot of cheapies down those lines. If you believe in building an offense around your ballpark it was very hard for the White Sox to build a team centered around power when they played at Old Comiskey.

Just looking at the numbers of some of those Yankee hitters in the late '50s and early '60s, they didn't do well at Old Comiskey. Joe Pepitone hit .159 and had one home run in Old Comiskey, Roger Maris hit 13 (of which 5 came in 1961 when he destroyed White Sox pitching), Elston Howard hit 13, Clete Boyer hit .217 with 3 home runs. A guy like Mickey Mantle would have hit anywhere but a lot of the other Yankee power hitters from that era wouldn't have hit well at all at Old Comiskey.

LITTLE NELL
07-13-2012, 06:14 AM
It's probably worth mentioning that those Yankee teams hit so many home runs because they played half their games in a stadium where it was 296 feet and 301 feet down the lines respectively as opposed 363 feet in Old Comiskey. Yankee Stadium was deeper in center but guys like Yogi Berra got a lot of cheapies down those lines. If you believe in building an offense around your ballpark it was very hard for the White Sox to build a team centered around power when they played at Old Comiskey.

Just looking at the numbers of some of those Yankee hitters in the late '50s and early '60s, they didn't do well at Old Comiskey. Joe Pepitone hit .159 and had one home run in Old Comiskey, Roger Maris hit 13 (of which 5 came in 1961 when he destroyed White Sox pitching), Elston Howard hit 13, Clete Boyer hit .217 with 3 home runs. A guy like Mickey Mantle would have hit anywhere but a lot of the other Yankee power hitters from that era wouldn't have hit well at all at Old Comiskey.

In the Go-Go era it was 352 down the lines.
In this chart roll your mouse over the years for dimensions, the 1949 dimensions remained that way until 1969 when they put up a chain link fence for 2 years.
http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/ComiskeyPark.html

TDog
07-13-2012, 05:44 PM
...
Just looking at the numbers of some of those Yankee hitters in the late '50s and early '60s, they didn't do well at Old Comiskey. Joe Pepitone hit .159 and had one home run in Old Comiskey, Roger Maris hit 13 (of which 5 came in 1961 when he destroyed White Sox pitching), Elston Howard hit 13, Clete Boyer hit .217 with 3 home runs. A guy like Mickey Mantle would have hit anywhere but a lot of the other Yankee power hitters from that era wouldn't have hit well at all at Old Comiskey.

Many hitters, including Ted Williams in his autobiography, said they believed Old Comiskey was the most difficult American League park to pick up the ball at night because it was so poorly lit. That didn't seem to change until the early 1970s. Not all the games were played at night, but there are stories about things the White Sox did even in the daytime to assure that Old Comiskey would be a pitcher's park.

Also, there are many who question the stated dimensions in the old ballpark. Not down the lines, necessarily, but Bill Melton, for example, insists the power alleys were deeper than the numbers on the wall.

LITTLE NELL
07-13-2012, 06:05 PM
Many hitters, including Ted Williams in his autobiography, said they believed Old Comiskey was the most difficult American League park to pick up the ball at night because it was so poorly lit. That didn't seem to change until the early 1970s. Not all the games were played at night, but there are stories about things the White Sox did even in the daytime to assure that Old Comiskey would be a pitcher's park.

Also, there are many who question the stated dimensions in the old ballpark. Not down the lines, necessarily, but Bill Melton, for example, insists the power alleys were deeper than the numbers on the wall.

For many years before JR and company moved homeplate 8 feet closer to the walls in 1982 the power alleys were posted on the walls at 375 but one of the players (I forget who) actually measured them and came up with 385.

NardiWasHere
07-13-2012, 07:15 PM
Home Runs are good.

The Sox won a World Series because they hit a ****load of home runs.

WSI is the only place where fans want their team to hit less HRs.

102605
07-13-2012, 07:15 PM
On his way...

Marqhead
07-13-2012, 07:15 PM
Over :D:

Frater Perdurabo
07-13-2012, 07:17 PM
WSI is the only place where fans want their team to hit less HRs.

This is patently false hyperbolic garbage.

We Sox fans are glad the team this year can hit homers, doubles, triples, go first to third, and hit for high average with RISP.

Boondock Saint
07-13-2012, 07:18 PM
Home Runs are good.

The Sox won a World Series because they hit a ****load of home runs.

WSI is the only place where fans want their team to hit less HRs.

Not trying to dump on you here, but the problem has never been with the number of HR's the team hits, it's with the approach our hitters had been taking over the years, always swinging for a HR, when a single to start or continue a rally would do just as well.

NardiWasHere
07-13-2012, 07:27 PM
This is patently false hyperbolic garbage.


How should I interpret the following...

I am a little embarrassed that WSI has fallen in love with the home run. We are starting to sound like fans from the other side of town with Shamememe

You're right. Good baseball fans hate home runs and prefer lineups of 9 grindy singles hitters.

That worked pretty good from 1951 through 1967. If it wasn't for the Damn Yankees we might have had a few more Pennants flying around the ballpark.

Marqhead
07-13-2012, 07:29 PM
How should I interpret the following...

One of these things is not like the others.

Frater Perdurabo
07-13-2012, 07:30 PM
How should I interpret the following...



None of those posts said anything about wanting the Sox to hit fewer homers.

NardiWasHere
07-13-2012, 07:36 PM
None of those posts said anything about wanting the Sox to hit fewer homers.

Yes. You are right. 34rancher and Little Nell did not expressly state they wanted the Sox to hit fewer homers.

:dunno:

Little Nell appears to endorse the sarcastic idea that a team should have 9 scrappy guys and power is not necessary. I suppose 34rancher doesn't think fans should want their players to hit home runs (I'm unclear)....

Tell me what they meant.

DumpJerry
07-13-2012, 08:33 PM
Home Runs are good.

The Sox won a World Series because they hit a ****load of home runs.

WSI is the only place where fans want their team to hit less HRs.
The following men would like a word with you:
Mark Buehrle
Jon Garland
Jose Contreras
el Duque
Freddy Garcia
Cliff Pollite
Neal Cotts
Bobby Jenks
Don Cooper

Only six home runs were hit by the Sox during the World Series, none of them in Game IV.

NardiWasHere
07-13-2012, 08:40 PM
The following men would like a word with you:
Mark Buehrle
Jon Garland
Jose Contreras
el Duque
Freddy Garcia
Cliff Pollite
Neal Cotts
Bobby Jenks
Don Cooper

Only six home runs were hit by the Sox during the World Series, none of them in Game IV.

You know what I meant. They hit 200 during the regular season.

DumpJerry
07-13-2012, 08:47 PM
You know what I meant. They hit 200 during the regular season.
Once more, it was the pitching that brought home the bacon.

In the 2005 regular season, the White Sox were 13th in MLB in runs scored, just barely in the top half. They were 18th in team batting average

In the 2005 regular season, the White Sox were 4th in MLB in ERA and opposing team batting average.

It was the pitching that did it. The only non-pitcher whose batting average was over .300 was Joe Borchard (.417). He appeared in seven games for the Good Guys that year.

The other day I told my brother who is a Cub and Indians fan that pitching wins games, home run hitters sell tickets when he said the Tribe just needs a righty slugger to make a run.

NardiWasHere
07-13-2012, 08:52 PM
Once more, it was the pitching that brought home the bacon.

In the 2005 regular season, the White Sox were 13th in MLB in runs scored, just barely in the top half. They were 18th in team batting average

In the 2005 regular season, the White Sox were 4th in MLB in ERA and opposing team batting average.

It was the pitching that did it. The only non-pitcher whose batting average was over .300 was Joe Borchard (.417). He appeared in seven games for the Good Guys that year.

The other day I told my brother who is a Cub and Indians fan that pitching wins games, home run hitters sell tickets when he said the Tribe just needs a righty slugger to make a run.

Pitching wins. You are right. I'm not arguing that.

But we are talking offense. That offense scored a ton of its runs via the home run. Its revisionist history to say otherwise.

Also, even though I agree that pitching is more important, you still need to score runs. Home run hitters do more than sell tickets, they produce runs.

34rancher
07-13-2012, 10:13 PM
Yes. You are right. 34rancher and Little Nell did not expressly state they wanted the Sox to hit fewer homers.

:dunno:

Little Nell appears to endorse the sarcastic idea that a team should have 9 scrappy guys and power is not necessary. I suppose 34rancher doesn't think fans should want their players to hit home runs (I'm unclear)....

Tell me what they meant.

I'll agree with all of you that home runs are important. They contribute runs, they get in other teams heads, they do a lot of awesome things. It canbe argued that they can be the most memorable, incredible endings in any game in any sport. I'm not disputing that they are important. They are are also really fun ways to end a rally too sometimes. Power is necessary, but not required to be the only way to be successful.
What I'm saying is that I want a guy to hit them through a natural level swing, with a contact hitter. I also don't want the desire for a home run to sway a guy to take PEDs or cheat either. I love the kind of hitters like JD and Maggs were. Rios is a prime example of the kind of hitter I like. Power with contact and speed. I don't want guys going up there thinking its softball season. Look at tonight, we hit home runs,they hit contact in a row. I'm not saying small Ozzie ball all the time, I'm saying a balance is what I want between power and contact. Much like the 2005 team you mentioned. Power was consistent but not the only thing we were trying to do.

NardiWasHere
07-13-2012, 10:29 PM
I'll agree with all of you that home runs are important. They contribute runs, they get in other teams heads, they do a lot of awesome things. It canbe argued that they can be the most memorable, incredible endings in any game in any sport. I'm not disputing that they are important. They are are also really fun ways to end a rally too sometimes. Power is necessary, but not required to be the only way to be successful.
What I'm saying is that I want a guy to hit them through a natural level swing, with a contact hitter. I also don't want the desire for a home run to sway a guy to take PEDs or cheat either. I love the kind of hitters like JD and Maggs were. Rios is a prime example of the kind of hitter I like. Power with contact and speed. I don't want guys going up there thinking its softball season. Look at tonight, we hit home runs,they hit contact in a row. I'm not saying small Ozzie ball all the time, I'm saying a balance is what I want between power and contact. Much like the 2005 team you mentioned. Power was consistent but the only thing we were trying to do.

I'm not a stat nerd but if a guy has an obp of .380 and hits 40 HRs, I don't care if he is fast or "has a natural level swing."

Also, I'm pretty sure Magglio Ordonez used PEDs.

WhiteSox5187
07-14-2012, 03:38 AM
Once more, it was the pitching that brought home the bacon.

In the 2005 regular season, the White Sox were 13th in MLB in runs scored, just barely in the top half. They were 18th in team batting average

In the 2005 regular season, the White Sox were 4th in MLB in ERA and opposing team batting average.

It was the pitching that did it. The only non-pitcher whose batting average was over .300 was Joe Borchard (.417). He appeared in seven games for the Good Guys that year.

The other day I told my brother who is a Cub and Indians fan that pitching wins games, home run hitters sell tickets when he said the Tribe just needs a righty slugger to make a run.

It was the pitching and the offense's balance. They could beat you 1-0 by Pods getting a single, stealing second, Iguchi moving him over to third on a ground out to the right side and Everett bringing him in on a sac fly. Or by 11-0 with Konerko, Dye, Everett and AJ going deep with runners on base. It was the pitching and defense that led the way but the offense had a variety of ways to beat an opponent too.

FoulTerritory
07-14-2012, 09:56 AM
It was the pitching and the offense's balance. They could beat you 1-0 by Pods getting a single, stealing second, Iguchi moving him over to third on a ground out to the right side and Everett bringing him in on a sac fly. Or by 11-0 with Konerko, Dye, Everett and AJ going deep with runners on base. It was the pitching and defense that led the way but the offense had a variety of ways to beat an opponent too.

Exactly. They hit a lot of homers, but they also lead the league in effective sacrifices, stole bases, and pitched well. They could beat you in various ways, similar to the 1996-2000 yankees teams.