Originally Posted by TaylorStSox
This is just anecdotal drivel. I challenge you to find 1 stat that says Beckham is a more valuable player than Dunn.
I find Beckham more frustrating than Dunn. If you're going to be a really bad hitter, you better do the little things ie. moving runners over, be a good base runner. Beckham does neither of these. He's a plus 2nd baseman. That's great. Plus second baseman are called failed short stops.
I'm not a big fan of Dunn, but there's absolutely no way he brings less value than a guy who probably shouldn't even be an every day player. At the end of the day, 41 home runs and 105 walks don't lie.
Beckham had a higher batting average with runners in scoring position. He had a higher batting average than Dunn with two outs and runners in scoring position. Late in close games Beckham had a higher batting average than Dunn. It wasn't a good batting average, unless you compare it to Dunn's, whose batting averages in the above situations weren't even close.. Dunn was more vulnerable to late-inning relievers than Beckham was, although that might be weighted against Dunn in that teams were more likely to bring in specialists whose job was to get him out while teams generally did not change pitchers to focus on Beckham.
At the end of the day, Dunn was a black hole offensively. As a third-place hitter, he hurt the White Sox over the course of 2012. If you are relying on his stats to tell you otherwise, you are misinterpreting them. If hitting home runs is pretty much all you do offensively, 41 over six months, doesn't guarantee you are helping your team. No one has ever had a lower batting average while leading the league in walks. In my lifetime, I have never seen a championship team that played most of the year with a No. 3 hitter hitting .204.
And Adam Dunn led the league in unproductive outs.