FIRE JOE MORGAN

Another guy doesn't like Adam Dunn. His name is Paul Daugherty, and I'm going to write about his column. It will be a total waste of time for everyone involved, particularly the reader. This territory has been covered one million times. Please, I beg you, do not waste your time reading about another Adam Dunn article.

Instead, I recommend checking out the photos of the fake-or-not Bigfoot of Georgia, arranging wake-up calls for your friends from Hannah Montana, or getting super high and playing with this thing.

Last warning: you have read this article and the corresponding criticism may times before, in slightly different forms. Go away, now.

Dunn Too Much To Afford
Defense, demeanor, salary too costly

The Reds, who are exciting only when they're not playing, traded Adam Dunn to the Arizona Diamondbacks Monday for a 23-year-old Class-A starting pitcher named Dallas Buck who, in another life, died in old Western movies...As insignificant as Dunn was to winning here, 40 homers and 100 RBI don't appear magically every March.

Nobody was winning in Cincinnati. Maybe Dunn was "insignificant to winning" (?) because his team sucked, and Dusty Baker chews a toothpick that makes him dumber. I'll give Daugherty this: it takes some pretty serious ballzos (an Italian word meaning "balls") to point out Dunn's massive productive abilities, and casually dismiss the notion that he might have been helping his team win in the same sentence. I look forward to reading Mr. Daugherty's new book: "Thousands and Thousands of Delicious Slices of Mouth-Watering Pizza That I've Eaten: I Hate Pizza."

Stop reading this, and call your mother or listen to Wowee Zowee or play some table tennis or whatever gets you through the day.

After the club traded Ken Griffey Jr., the brass wanted to see if Dunn would emerge as a clubhouse presence. Apparently, after 11 days, the brass had seen enough.

Why should this apply only to Dunn? Don't get me wrong -- I get why they traded him, though I don't understand why they didn't do it earlier. But let me ask this: did anyone emerge as a clubhouse presence after Griffey was traded? Why should Dunn be singled out for failing to do so? If that's one of the criteria that the Reds value, then shouldn't anyone who didn't emerge as a clubhouse presence be given the same demerits, even if it doesn't end in a trade?

Maybe it's because he's a veteran, and he makes a bunch of money, and you ask a little more of guys like that. I could see that. I'm sure they'll hold Francisco Cordero -- a player with more experience, making just a bit less than Dunn this year -- to the same scrutiny.

This is so boring and such old news. EVERYONE GO SWIMMING I DON'T CARE IF YOU HAVE A POOL OR NOT.

Regardless, Dunn's tax bracket didn't match his production, at least not here. He'd have wanted too much money for what he provided. Dunn was who he was: a guy who could hit a baseball 400 feet more often than almost anyone else, but couldn't produce a two-out RBI single.

Obviously the first thing you do after reading something like this is check out Dunn's numbers this year. Find out how many RBI singles he has with RISP and two outs. In the back of your mind, you get greedy. You're hoping for something like 25 singles in 70 such at bats.

But I'll admit when I'm beat (sort of). You know how many singles Dunn has this year with two outs and runners in scoring position?

One.

Wa-unnnnnn.

Point: Daugher -- fucking no! Wait. Let's look at the rest of Dunn's line with 2 outs and RsISP:

In 37 AB's (pretty small sample, of course): .216 / .453 / .730 (!) (1.183 OPS)
6 HR, 20 RsBI, 15 R, 13 BB

Dude was pretty fucking good when it mattered, if you think that's when it mattered. Now, everyone, take a nap.

He was a big man whose bigness could give the impression he wasn't trying. Baseball wasn't his passion. It was his job. He played it that way.

I can't tell you how beautiful I find this paragraph. It starts almost on Dunn's side, and by the end, we're just straight up slamming him for -- God forbid -- playing baseball like it's his job. Which it is.

"Another day closer to retirement," Dunn said once a few years ago, around the batting cage before a game. That was Dunn. His teammates liked him, but he didn't lead. Laid back should be a character trait, not a career choice. Not when you're making $13 million.

Every attempt to discredit Adam Dunn makes me love the guy even more. He sounds like everyone's Dad.

But, oh, Adam Troy Dunn. You made the cardinal sin of baseball. Instead of using your laid back-ness as a character trait, you used it as a career choice. Didn't you know? It's totally acceptable for laid back to be a career choice if you're making, like, the league average, which is roughly 62 times the national median household salary. But once you're making 13MM/yr? Dude. Character trait only. Big mistake.

Also, by the way, his teammates liked him. Daugherty just told us that. They liked the guy. His mistake, apparently, was that he didn't lead stop reading this and do something productive like balancing your checkbook if people still do that I don't really know.

It's doubtful Arizona will keep him after this season. Dunn will be the prototypical DH in '09, when his adventures in Left Field Land won't be duplicated.

On the off chance that any eccentric billionaires are reading this blog: I will pay one hundred U.S. dollars, and maybe more, for admission to a theme park called Left Field Land. May I make a suggestion, please? There should be a really good fried chicken restaurant in the food court called "The Fowl Pole." Also a giant waterslide into a pool shaped like Ted Williams' torso. And I hope this goes without saying: no women or minorities should be allowed inside Left Field Land.

To be dealt to Arizona, Dunn had to clear waivers. Any other club could have claimed him and the trade would not have been made. None did.

What's that? You think just because Paul Daugherty writes about baseball for a major newspaper, he should have a fundamental understanding of how waiver trades work?

You're so silly. I like you.

Only clubs with records worse than the Diamondbacks could have put in a claim on Dunn that would have made a difference. And most of those teams are out of contention, and have no reason to add Dunn's salary in a hopeless year. In fact, there were several reports that teams with better records than the Diamondbacks also put in claims for Dunn, hoping they might be able to snatch him up. So, more accurately: "Other clubs did claim him and the trade still happened."

Those enamored with numbers couldn't get enough of Adam Dunn. Stat freaks genuflected at the foot of Dunn's on-base percentage, while dismissing his detractors as ill-informed hacks.

Far be it from me to suggest that a columnist, who just demonstrated a basic misunderstanding of how waiver trades work, in the midst of writing an article with such a trite premise that I'm getting tired of making fun of it, might be an ill-informed hack.

Forty Homers! Hundred RBI! Hundred Runs! Look at that man ... Walk! The standard argument was, and is, "How do you replace numbers like those?" We're about to find out.

One thing you have to say about stat geeks: there are no stats that they love more than Runs and Runs Batted In. Excellent research, good sir.

And you know what? Great work all around, guys. I formally invite anyone still reading this to join me in a murder-suicide pact.

NOTE: After reading the article in its entirety, I noticed that a number of commenters pointed out Daugherty's mistake about how trades work after the July 31st deadline. No corrections have been made as of the time this blog went to press, which is not a real thing.

Thanks to reader Mark R. for the article tip.

EDIT: Great note by reader Benjamin, who points out that only NL teams with a worse record than the D-Backs could have blocked a trade to Arizona.

Labels: adam dunn, food metaphors, liberal use of "food metaphors" label, paul daugherty

in Cincinnati. On one side: the Dustyites. On the other side: common sense. Articles are being written every day celebrating the folksy wisdom of a man who thinks bases are only good when there's no one standing on them. This is exactly what happened in L.A. when Grady Little was hired -- "He's folksy! He's down-home! He has a drawl!" (one year later) "He kind of stinks!"

If you could fart into a kind of microprocessing funnel, and the funnel poured the fart into a computer, which converted the fart into words, this is what it would look like.

Dusty Baker can literally smell whether a guy has a couple hits in his bat. And if his bones ache while a starter is warming up, that means 6 2/3, 4H, 1R. Welcome to the age of divining rods and augurs, Cincinnati.

The best baseball managing is done by the seat of your pants, using good, old-fashioned, pre-sabermetric logic.

If I live in Cincinnati, I have just purchased a one-way ticket to Canada, draft-fleeing-style.

That's another reason to like Dusty Baker. (Beyond his knowledge of single-malt Scotches and Van Morrison lyrics, which is merely astounding and downright Renaissance.)

"It doesn't matter to me if a guy gets on base if he can't run. If he can't run he's just clogging up the bases. Also, in an unrelated matter, it's a marvelous night for a moondance." (does a shot of Lagavulin 21)

If Baker manages by a book, it's one inside his head, not one written by Bill James.

Unfortunately, the book inside Dusty's head is "Lightning" by Dean R. Koontz. This will not help him.

The other day, the Reds manager decided he wanted Joey Votto and Adam Dunn to swing their bats more. "I don't like called third strikes," Baker said.

Can we get an Amen?

That's the thing about saberguys. We love called third strikes. I know it's controversial and counterintuitive, but we think batters should take more called third strikes. Statistics clearly show that offenses are best when the hitters take called 3rd strikes at least 16 times per game. That's why sabermetricians generally put on the permanent take sign for the first seven innings. Here's an equation to prove why this is good:

See? Called third strikes are awesome.

It always amuses when fans defend heart-of-the-order hitters by pointing to their on-base percentage. Wow, look at all those walks.

Yes. And then look at the corresponding runs that those walks create. And then look at the wins created by those runs! We are watching successful baseball! This is fun!

Five of the top six teams in walks last year were playoff teams.

Unless they're intentional walks, or the big boppers are being pitched around, walks aren't what you want from players hitting third through sixth. You want them up there smart-hacking.

You want these guys to brain-swing. You want them to think-swipe. You don't want your 3-6-hole hitters to engage in torque ignorance. You want them to cognitive-swivel.

As Baker said: "(Votto) needs to swing more. I'd like to see him more aggressive."

Joey Votto has hit .289/.385/.476 in the minors. He's ranked as one of the top infield prospects in baseball by nearly anyone who ranks top prospects. Here's Dusty's idea: let's change his plate approach.

By-the-book managing is for men who aren't confident in their ability to read players and situations. It's for managers who don't know their players' personalities. It's what you do so you can say later, after it backfires: "Don't blame me. I went by the book."

What you are calling "by the book managing" is often completely thoughtless, ignorance-steeped tradition. 2-1 count with a guy on first? Hit and run. Leadoff guy gets on? Bunt him over. That's by-the-book managing, and it's dumb. What people like Bill James, and Rob Neyer, and BP, and Billy Beane advocate is: research, analysis, thought, science. But fuck that. Let's read some tea leaves.

The best thing about Baker is that from all accounts, it's important to him to know his players individually: what jazzes them, what scares them, the situations that best suit their talents and temperaments. Contrary to the notions of the seamheads and stat freaks, players are not numbers.

Don't use jazz as a verb, please. Also: stat freaks and seam heads hate baseball. They are fucking ASIMO robots who make managerial moves through NASA press releases. Eric Wedge makes his moves from home, via on-line chats. Terry Francona has never met anyone on his 25-man roster. Joe Maddon is a 2.4 gigahertz Linksys router. Manny Acta is actually M.A.N. eACTA, the black-ops code-name for the Mechanized Algorithmic Numerical (internet-ready) Actionable Computation Techno-Automaton. When his "contract" runs out with the Nats he is going to be launched into space. We are weaponizing space. Deal with it, China.

"Managing" means exactly what it says: the ability to manage people. How Baker runs a game strategically is far less important than what he is able to pull from his employees, 162 times a summer.

"How he runs a game strategically" and "what the results are of his moves?" are somehow mutually exclusive things.

Anyone with a laptop can locate the Web site baseball- reference.com and sound like an expert. Anyone with a library card can pick up one of James' mind-numbing baseball "abstracts," in which the author makes the game sound like a first cousin to biomechanical engineering.

Which is why it boggles the mind that some people don't. Especially the ones paid millions of dollars to operate one of 30 several-hundred-million-dollar franchises. And for the record, I'm not trying to sound like an expert. I'm trying to sound like a dude with a computer who can look shit up and point out that Adam Dunn is doing just fine, thank you, and if you start making him swing at pitches he doesn't like, you're going to screw up your team.

It ain't that scientific.

It's not purely scientific. But it goddamn is kind of scientific.

The NFL does the same thing, in a different fashion. To convince you that pro football is actually a 17-week MENSA convention, The League whips out its 800-page playbooks and offers up oh-so-serious coaches who work 20 hours a day and act as if their jobs involve brain surgery and a red telephone.

QB: What play are we running, coach?

Coach: (furious) What "play" are we "running?" This ain't science, you jackass! You, Johnson. Just run down the field, and kind of squiggle around. Henderson? I want you to just groove. Bergleson -- let your soul take over. I want you to feel it. Smithson? Put this welding helmet on and close your eyes. Run wherever you feel like you should run. And Thompson? When the ball is snapped, I want a long primal scream. Don't worry about "blocking" or "patterns" or "execution." This game is about emotion, people.

Assistant Coach: Have you noticed that everyone on this team is named "something-son?"

Coach: You're fired. I don't pay you to think. Now. Soul-Ball Gut Check 34 on 3.

Possibly, it's less complex. Block. Tackle. Win.

If you try to win a modern-day NFL game solely by telling your players to "Block and tackle" you will lose 100-0.

Baseball's cerebral side involves numbers. While I believe in baseball-card wisdom - you are who the back of your card says you are - it's just a little piece of the whole. When some of us (OK, me mostly) advocated dealing, say, Votto and Homer Bailey for Oakland pitcher Joe Blanton, the Statboys came out flame-throwing numbers:

Homer Bailey: 21, awesome in the minors. Walks too many guys but gave up 6.55 H/9IP at AAA. Votto: potential stud at 1st for years. Blanton: pretty good 27 year-old pitcher, maybe hitting his stride. Also arb-eligible for the next 3 years, and will get very expensive. Chances that Bailey outpitches him in 2009 for 1/20 the price? Decent. This would be a trade you make at the deadline if you are one starter away from the World Series, not if you're Cincy and you have to basically start from the ground-up. Also, if you want to trade Bailey and Votto, you can do a whole lot better than Joe Blanton, I think.

Blanton's a creation of his spacious home ballpark! Look at his ERA, home and away! Blanton's a flyball pitcher! Check out his ratio of groundballs to flies!

This is fucking fantastic. These are his examples of ridiculous, opaque, arcane stat-geek numbers. Home/Away ERA. GB/FB ratio. If you think that's complicated, you are a simpleton of the highest order.

If you shot back that Blanton has won 42 times in the last three years - and that he went 7-5 at home last year and 7-5 on the road - if you suggested that no number matters but Games Won, you were dismissed as an illiterate.

Not an illiterate. I believe you can read. But maybe an ignoramus? Yes, let's go with ignoramus.

(Actually, maybe Blanton won as many on the road as at home, even with a much higher road ERA, because Oakland's hitters worked under the same conditions as their pitcher. Allow more runs, score more runs. And factually, flyball man Blanton gave up only 16 home runs in 230 innings last year. But never mind.)

First of all, if he actually is worse on the road, it would be a dumb idea to make him pitch 16 times a year in Cincinnati, where the RF fence is 115 feet from the plate. However, Blanton did have a very good year in 2007. He may be entering his prime. His HR rate and BB both dipped last year. Good work using numbers to show that.

Numbers are fun to look at but dangerous to dwell on.

But...didn't...you...just...

Baker understands this. If Dunn walks 30 fewer times this year, he'll drive in 15 more runs. His on-base percentage will dip. Oh, no.

If Dunn walks 30 fewer times, he'll drive in 15 more runs. This is thanks to the scientifically proven formula: RBI = (this is nonsense) (I made it all up).

If Votto takes fewer first-pitch strikes, his run production will improve.

You're right. He should hit more 1st-pitch home runs. Why doesn't anyone besides Dusty Baker and Paul Daugherty think home runs are better than walks?

And so on. Here's a stat: Wins as manager: Dusty Baker, 1,162; Bill James, 0.

This...this is the dumbest thing I have ever read.

Here's a stat: U.S. Presidents: All Americans Besides Paul Daugherty: 43. Paul Daugherty: 0. Suck on that, Paul Daugherty! You've never won the Presidency. What a jerk!

At bats are complicated things. The best result of an AB is a home run. The worst is an out that advances no runners. (Or a triple play, I guess, but you get the idea.) In between are several thousand other possibilities. A walk is a successful AB no matter how you slice it. Patient hitters are good hitters, by and large, who help their teams a great deal more than impatient hitters, and the more a guy is patient, the more he will swing at a good pitch instead of any pitch, which increases the chances he will succeed.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to run a level-5 diagnostic on the M.A.N. eACTA. His verillion modulator is on the fritz.

Labels: bill james, dusty baker, paul daugherty, sabermetrics, statistics