Dbacks, Hernandez agree to extension

[love_that_reefer]

A strikeout isn't any less productive than a weak groundout in the wrong direction/with no runners on, an infield popout, a foul out that's not in deep territory, a long flyout with 2 outs or no runners on, and it's actually less unproductive than a GIDP.

Why do we only fixate on one unproductive out and forgive batters for the rest?

Nothing you said changes the fact that strikeouts are unproductive outs and hurt an offense.

[love_that_reefer]

Are you getting technical on me and pointing out that they don't/didn't excel at every faucet of the game? Because guys like that are rare.

I meant overall in a general term, as in they're overall productive even if they have some flaws.

You're going to tell me Adam Dunn getting on base at a career .373 clip (Hank Aaron, for comparison was .374), .503 SLG (Willie McCovey .515) hitting 40 HRs 5 years in a row and missing 100 RBIs (by 8) only once in that time span makes him unproductive overall because he strikes out a lot?

I'm not getting techincal at all. I mentioned defense in the original post you quoted but you conveniently overlooked it.

Willie McCovey and Hank Aaron are definitely better overall and much more productive.

[HollywoodLeo]

No but nothing you said changes the fact that strikeouts are unproductive outs and hurt an offense.

I never said they didn't hurt the offense.

I'm simply saying that Adam Dunn still gets on base at the same rate as Hank Aaron did and still helps his offense in the form of home runs, power, and slugging.

[love_that_reefer]

I never said they didn't hurt the offense.

I'm simply saying that Adam Dunn still gets on base at the same rate as Hank Aaron did and still helps his offense in the form of home runs, power, and slugging.

Sure he helps but not near as much as Hank Aaron because of strikeouts. Strikeouts hold him back and shouldn't be overlloked.

[HollywoodLeo]

Sure he helps but not near as much as Hank Aaron because of strikeouts. Strikeouts hold him back and shouldn't be overlloked.

I'm not overlooking strikeouts. I'm saying we shouldn't overlook pop outs, ground outs, shallow flyouts, lineouts, GIDPs, and the like.

[love_that_reefer]

I'm not overlooking strikeouts. I'm saying we shouldn't overlook pop outs, ground outs, shallow flyouts, lineouts, GIDPs, and the like.

[HollywoodLeo]

Excellent rebuttal. I see what you mean now.

[love_that_reefer]

Sorry if I found your comment to be hilarious and nothing to do with your original comment. I mean, what kind of rebuttal were you expecting for something like that?

[HollywoodLeo]

How did it have nothing to do with my argument that strike outs aren't any less produtive than pop outs, ground outs with nobody on base/2 outs, shallow flyouts, lineouts and are actually less unproductive than GIDPs?

[love_that_reefer]

Because it's a silly argument and no one is overlooking them! A runner can actually score on a GIDP so your assumption that a strikeout is less productive isn't entirely true. I don't know what point you are trying to make here because it has little to do with anything I have said about Mark Reynolds.

[HollywoodLeo]

It has EVERYTHING to do with what you have said about Mark Reynolds because your main argument against the notion of Mark Reynolds ever being worth a damn is that he struck out a lot despite the fact that he hit so many home runs and RBIs in 2009.

If you're going to say grounding into a double play is ok because it can, under the right circumstance, score a run (they don't award RBIs for that, by the way) then you can't, in the same thread, say a player isn't worth a damn despite constantly driving in runs just because he Ks a lot in between.

[HollywoodLeo]

Recovered from what? Being the strikeout king? Being one of the worst defensive 3B in the game? The Dbacks did well to shed themselves of strikeout artists like Reynolds which was a huge factor in them making the playoffs last year. That and a much improved bullpen.

Right. This discussion of the value of not striking out a lot has nothing to do with what you said about Reynolds.

[love_that_reefer]

It has EVERYTHING to do with what you have said about Mark Reynolds because your main argument against the notion of Mark Reynolds ever being worth a damn is that he struck out a lot despite the fact that he hit so many home runs and RBIs in 2009.

If you're going to say grounding into a double play is ok because it can, under the right circumstance, score a run (they don't award RBIs for that, by the way) then you can't, in the same thread, say a player isn't worth a damn despite constantly driving in runs just because he Ks a lot in between.

No, it doesn't!! My main argument was what did he recover from? He's a strikeout artist and a horrible defensive player. You only chose one part of my main argument! He is a Dave Kingman-type player and didn't imply anything different. Dbacks were better off without him.

Never said he wasn't worth a damn but keep pretending I did. I apologize for pointing out that GIDP can score runs and hurting your theory that they are less productive than strikeouts Your entire argument is off base.

[love_that_reefer]

Right. This discussion of the value of not striking out a lot has nothing to do with what you said about Reynolds.

Notice how you only chose one part of the argument and missed the rest?

[HollywoodLeo]

Never said he wasn't worth a damn but keep pretending I did. I apologize for pointing out that GIDP can score runs and hurting your theory that they are less productive than strikeouts Your entire argument is off base.

Right. Producing 2 outs in one at bat is always more productive than a strikeout because every once in awhile a runner from third base can score