View Single Post
  #33  
Old 03-27-2014, 06:36 AM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 16,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
No surprise here to see you failing to either thoroughly read or bother to comprehend my post but if you did you'd note that I never made any mention of his defense because I agree he stinks in the field.

But the bottom line is that Dunn was still the most effective offensive player the Sox had all last season. This of course, speaks to how wretchedly terrible the Sox were as an offensive unit last season. You're free to go around pretending like it's not true, but it sadly is. Konerko was worse. Beckham was worse. Viciedo was worse. De Aza was worse. Alexei was worse. Flowers was worse. Keppinger was worse. The argument here isn't Adam Dunn vs. AL Average DH, the argument is Adam Dunn vs. the rest of the miserable stiffs in this organization, the Sox clearly had no other player last year of putting up even league average offensive production. I'm not suggesting they would have plummeted and made up the 12 games they had on Houston for worst record in the league, but take Dunn away from the team last year and they would have surely been worse. Numbers don't lie.

Dunn was a supremely ineffective offensive player in 2013. Anyone paying attention to the White Sox could see that. Fans who watched the team know that a statistics-based argument to the contrary is meaningless because they know what they saw. Using numbers to argue that he was not ineffective, or even less ineffective than other players on the White Sox actually does show that numbers sometimes do lie.

Or at least it shows you are using the wrong numbers.

Last edited by TDog; 03-27-2014 at 06:55 AM.
Reply With Quote