+- Sons of Ivy (https://sonsofivy.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Chicago Cubs (https://sonsofivy.com/forum/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Friendly Confines (https://sonsofivy.com/forum/forum-8.html)
+--- Thread: Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) (/thread-7263.html)
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Scarey - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34156:date=Apr 30 2009, 08:55 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 08:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34150:date=Apr 30 2009, 07:02 AM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Apr 30 2009, 07:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->40 of his rbi come via the solo home run in junk time. dunn will never ever help a contender win ballgames. it's not in his make up. walks, solo home runs, and strike outs, lots and lots of strike outs. thats all you'll ever get from dunn.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remove "walks" from the equation and it sounds a lot like Soriano.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, I believe the majority of Soriano's HRs so far this year have come with runners on (and they DEFINITELY have not come in junk time). Between that and his improved patience, I've been delighted by Soriano this year.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - veryzer - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34156:date=Apr 30 2009, 07:55 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 07:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34150:date=Apr 30 2009, 07:02 AM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Apr 30 2009, 07:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->40 of his rbi come via the solo home run in junk time. dunn will never ever help a contender win ballgames. it's not in his make up. walks, solo home runs, and strike outs, lots and lots of strike outs. thats all you'll ever get from dunn.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remove "walks" from the equation and it sounds a lot like Soriano.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
if he stays healthy, soriano will have a much better year than dunn. of that, i have no doubt whatsoever.
and let me add that though i never liked dunn, i absolutely hate him now. the amount of time we waste argiung about this douchebag on this site is amazing. a player of his averageness doesn't deserve to be dissected this much. he's not even on our team or in our division. why do we keep talking about him?
can we at the very least talk about pat burrell? they're the same guy for the most part, but at least it would be a different name.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Fly - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34150:date=Apr 30 2009, 08:02 AM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Apr 30 2009, 08:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><b>40 of his rbi come via the solo home run in junk time</b>. dunn will never ever help a contender win ballgames. it's not in his make up. walks, solo home runs, and strike outs, lots and lots of strike outs. thats all you'll ever get from dunn.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was gonna stay out of this, but geez. Is this the company line? I've had the same argument made to me over AIM in the past, and it's simply not true. People used to say the same thing about Sosa, and it was completely made up.
Over Dunn's career, he has 289 HRs and 687 RBI. 189 of those HRs and 431 of those RBI came when the game was within 2 runs. That hardly makes them meaningless, which I would say is the necessary conclusion one would have to make when they're hit "in junk time".
Look, I know Dunn's not a model player. He has his warts, just like Soriano, Lee, Ramirez, and most every player not named Pujols. And I know that Dunn has always been a sensitive issue around here, one that I've contributed to by stating that I'd rather have him, offensively, than certain other players on our team (and I still would). It's no sin to not want Dunn, of course, but I don't understand this constant perception of meaningless HRs.
I also don't understand the half-assing thing, but I know that GM said something about it and it's caused a reputation to grow. The truth is that none of us have any idea how much effort Dunn, or anyone, puts into the game. I will say this, though, that I have no problem having a guy who is going to hit 40 HRs and get on base over 40% of the time while playing 150 games and "half assing it". I don't care why he hits them, they all count the same.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Fella - 04-30-2009
I wouldn't mind Dunn, he obviously has a ton of power and is a solid offensive player. I just don't understand why the Dunn lovers can't grasp the reason people hate him is because he gets brought up over and over and over and over and over and over.
He is not one of the best players in baseball, not even close, he wasn't even considered for this team, and the guys who were considered are playing pretty well so why Dunn again? Replace Dunn with Ibanez and its a thread with maybe decent discussion instead of the same bullshit over again for literally the 50th time, thats not even an exaggeration I don't think.
It just gets really old.
As for the Soriano stuff, that's one of the main reasons I think Dunn is a bad fit. We already have a guy who hits a lot of HRs and also strikes out a lot, barely tries on defense and acts like a dumbass on the bases. We don't need two.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - rok - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34170:date=Apr 30 2009, 09:24 AM:name=Fella)-->QUOTE (Fella @ Apr 30 2009, 09:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I wouldn't mind Dunn, he obviously has a ton of power and is a solid offensive player. I just don't understand why the Dunn lovers can't grasp the reason people hate him is because he gets brought up over and over and over and over and over and over.
He is not one of the best players in baseball, not even close, he wasn't even considered for this team, and the guys who were considered are playing pretty well so why Dunn again? Replace Dunn with Ibanez and its a thread with maybe decent discussion instead of the same bullshit over again for literally the 50th time, thats not even an exaggeration I don't think.
It just gets really old.
As for the Soriano stuff, that's one of the main reasons I think Dunn is a bad fit. We already have a guy who hits a lot of HRs and also strikes out a lot, barely tries on defense and acts like a dumbass on the bases. We don't need two.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's sums it up about perfectly for me.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Runnys - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34171:date=Apr 30 2009, 09:36 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Apr 30 2009, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34170:date=Apr 30 2009, 09:24 AM:name=Fella)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fella @ Apr 30 2009, 09:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I wouldn't mind Dunn, he obviously has a ton of power and is a solid offensive player. I just don't understand why the Dunn lovers can't grasp the reason people hate him is because he gets brought up over and over and over and over and over and over.
He is not one of the best players in baseball, not even close, he wasn't even considered for this team, and the guys who were considered are playing pretty well so why Dunn again? Replace Dunn with Ibanez and its a thread with maybe decent discussion instead of the same bullshit over again for literally the 50th time, thats not even an exaggeration I don't think.
It just gets really old.
As for the Soriano stuff, that's one of the main reasons I think Dunn is a bad fit. We already have a guy who hits a lot of HRs and also strikes out a lot, barely tries on defense and acts like a dumbass on the bases. We don't need two.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's sums it up about perfectly for me.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Me too. I don't hate Dunn and I would have had no problem having him on this team. But I am sick of this same pointless argument coming up all the time....it has no fucking bearing on anything that is going on, why constantly bring it up?
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Butcher - 04-30-2009
Nobody was talking about anything. I started this thread and now we have seven pages of discussion.
Excuse the shit out of me for trying to liven it up in here.
If everyone hates the Dunn discussions so much, feel free to start another thread, or ignore the Dunn thread. It isn't complicated.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Runnys - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34176:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Nobody was talking about anything. I started this thread and now we have seven pages of discussion.
Excuse the shit out of me for trying to liven it up in here.
If everyone hates the Dunn discussions so much, feel free to start another thread, or ignore the Dunn thread. It isn't complicated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But it isn't 7 pages of discussion....it is 7 pages of the same bullshit we have had 10 other times in the past 6 months, in reality, it is probably about 100 pages of pointless discussion.
Sorry, I just think dealing in hypotheticals is a waste of time because things are the way they are, they aren't going to change.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Butcher - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34177:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM:name=Runnys)-->QUOTE (Runnys @ Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34176:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Nobody was talking about anything. I started this thread and now we have seven pages of discussion.
Excuse the shit out of me for trying to liven it up in here.
If everyone hates the Dunn discussions so much, feel free to start another thread, or ignore the Dunn thread. It isn't complicated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But it isn't 7 pages of discussion....it is 7 pages of the same bullshit we have had 10 other times in the past 6 months, in reality, it is probably about 100 pages of pointless discussion.
Sorry, I just think dealing in hypotheticals is a waste of time because things are the way they are, they aren't going to change.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I enjoy the conversation and I enjoy dealing in the "what-ifs." It's relevant to me because there were several left-handed outfielders available in the offseason (Bradley, Dunn, Abreu, and Ibanez). Why can't we talk about the offseason decisions Hendry made? Why was Dunn not even considered and Bradley was the top of the list? Why didn't Hendry pursue Ibanez or Abreu? Are these not relevant questions?
Seriously. It isn't hard to *not* click on this thread if you aren't interested in it.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Coach - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34169:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:17 AM:name=FlyAtTheThigh)-->QUOTE (FlyAtTheThigh @ Apr 30 2009, 10:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I also don't understand the half-assing thing, but I know that GM said something about it and it's caused a reputation to grow. The truth is that none of us have any idea how much effort Dunn, or anyone, puts into the game.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's true, as I have heard it second-hand straight from him.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Fella - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34179:date=Apr 30 2009, 09:13 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 09:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34177:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM:name=Runnys)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runnys @ Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34176:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Nobody was talking about anything. I started this thread and now we have seven pages of discussion.
Excuse the shit out of me for trying to liven it up in here.
If everyone hates the Dunn discussions so much, feel free to start another thread, or ignore the Dunn thread. It isn't complicated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But it isn't 7 pages of discussion....it is 7 pages of the same bullshit we have had 10 other times in the past 6 months, in reality, it is probably about 100 pages of pointless discussion.
Sorry, I just think dealing in hypotheticals is a waste of time because things are the way they are, they aren't going to change.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I enjoy the conversation and I enjoy dealing in the "what-ifs." It's relevant to me because there were several left-handed outfielders available in the offseason (Bradley, Dunn, Abreu, and Ibanez). Why can't we talk about the offseason decisions Hendry made? Why was Dunn not even considered and Bradley was the top of the list? Why didn't Hendry pursue Ibanez or Abreu? Are these not relevant questions?
Seriously. It isn't hard to *not* click on this thread if you aren't interested in it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its not about not being interested, that wasn't my point. My point is you Dunn lovers get up in arms because of all the statements of hate about him and you cant seem to understand its because you bring his name up and every single drop of a hat. Its like the Wilkerson stuff back on ITI.
It just feels like political discussion, neither side is convincing anyone of anything, both sides make their statements, take shots at the others position and it goes around and around over and over. I enjoy talking about what-ifs as much as anyone, I love baseball discussion, I've done the Dunn discussions like a thousand times already. Like I said if it would have said Ibanez instead of Dunn it would have made for actual discussion instead of the same bullshit.
Sorry for being a dick about it, but its gotten so old that every time I see Dunn get brought up on this site now, it makes me want to go bash my head into a wall.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - veryzer - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34171:date=Apr 30 2009, 09:36 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Apr 30 2009, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34170:date=Apr 30 2009, 09:24 AM:name=Fella)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fella @ Apr 30 2009, 09:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I wouldn't mind Dunn, he obviously has a ton of power and is a solid offensive player. I just don't understand why the Dunn lovers can't grasp the reason people hate him is because he gets brought up over and over and over and over and over and over.
He is not one of the best players in baseball, not even close, he wasn't even considered for this team, and the guys who were considered are playing pretty well so why Dunn again? Replace Dunn with Ibanez and its a thread with maybe decent discussion instead of the same bullshit over again for literally the 50th time, thats not even an exaggeration I don't think.
It just gets really old.
As for the Soriano stuff, that's one of the main reasons I think Dunn is a bad fit. We already have a guy who hits a lot of HRs and also strikes out a lot, barely tries on defense and acts like a dumbass on the bases. We don't need two.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's sums it up about perfectly for me.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
me too. to waste this much time and effort on a player who probably isn't even in the top 50 position players in baseball is perplexing to me. again, let's at least talk about pat burrell or some other one dimensional player who's dunn but with a different face.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - kbwsb - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34179:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:13 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34177:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM:name=Runnys)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runnys @ Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34176:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Nobody was talking about anything. I started this thread and now we have seven pages of discussion.
Excuse the shit out of me for trying to liven it up in here.
If everyone hates the Dunn discussions so much, feel free to start another thread, or ignore the Dunn thread. It isn't complicated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But it isn't 7 pages of discussion....it is 7 pages of the same bullshit we have had 10 other times in the past 6 months, in reality, it is probably about 100 pages of pointless discussion.
Sorry, I just think dealing in hypotheticals is a waste of time because things are the way they are, they aren't going to change.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I enjoy the conversation and I enjoy dealing in the "what-ifs."<b> It's relevant to me because there were several left-handed outfielders available in the offseason (Bradley, Dunn, Abreu, and Ibanez).</b> Why can't we talk about the offseason decisions Hendry made? Why was Dunn not even considered and Bradley was the top of the list? Why didn't Hendry pursue Ibanez or Abreu? Are these not relevant questions?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thank you Butch, for nailing your response. We have EVERY right to question Hendry for making the moves he makes, especially when some of them are completely inexplicable.
At least signing Bradley made some vague sense, if you're a "cross-your-fingers-and-believe in miracles" type dreamer who thought maybe, <i>just</i> maybe, Bradley could stay healthy for more than half of the games. Cause when healthy, he's a hell of a ballplayer.
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - rok - 04-30-2009
I'm all for being skeptical of Hendry's moves and all for being critical of anything Cubs related, but it just strikes me that this type of discussion isn't going anywhere and is a dead end. Most of us didn't have Bradley as our #1 offseason target, so it is almost like preaching to the choir, only the player's name that keeps coming up time after time in these discussions would have also been a bad fit because he can't play RF. Besides, we don't control what Hendry will do, so what's the point of rehashing this topic?
Dunn vs. Bradley (so far) - Baron - 04-30-2009
<!--quoteo(post=34230:date=Apr 30 2009, 12:59 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Apr 30 2009, 12:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34179:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:13 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34177:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM:name=Runnys)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runnys @ Apr 30 2009, 10:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=34176:date=Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2009, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Nobody was talking about anything. I started this thread and now we have seven pages of discussion.
Excuse the shit out of me for trying to liven it up in here.
If everyone hates the Dunn discussions so much, feel free to start another thread, or ignore the Dunn thread. It isn't complicated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But it isn't 7 pages of discussion....it is 7 pages of the same bullshit we have had 10 other times in the past 6 months, in reality, it is probably about 100 pages of pointless discussion.
Sorry, I just think dealing in hypotheticals is a waste of time because things are the way they are, they aren't going to change.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I enjoy the conversation and I enjoy dealing in the "what-ifs."<b> It's relevant to me because there were several left-handed outfielders available in the offseason (Bradley, Dunn, Abreu, and Ibanez).</b> Why can't we talk about the offseason decisions Hendry made? Why was Dunn not even considered and Bradley was the top of the list? Why didn't Hendry pursue Ibanez or Abreu? Are these not relevant questions?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thank you Butch, for nailing your response. We have EVERY right to question Hendry for making the moves he makes, especially when some of them are completely inexplicable.
At least signing Bradley made some vague sense, if you're a "cross-your-fingers-and-believe in miracles" type dreamer who thought maybe, <i>just</i> maybe, Bradley could stay healthy for more than half of the games. Cause when healthy, he's a hell of a ballplayer.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You enjoy hyperbole.