Re: Sox lineup, Major's Best???
posted at 2/16/2012 11:05 AM EST
In Response to Re: Sox lineup, Major's Best???
Last year, Dunn signed an atrocious four-year, $50 million contract. In his first year he had one of the worst seasons in baseball history. He posted a .159 batting average, and struck out a White Sox record, 177 times. His .159 batting average would have been the worst recorded in major league baseball since 1909 when Bill Bergen hit .139. However, Dunn fell six plate appearances shy of the required 506 plate appearances in order to qualify for the batting title, meaning he’d be left out of the record book. This is all to point out the fact that Dunn made $12.5 million last year, and he’ll again make $12.5 million this year. It’s insane to expect that Ortiz would willingly accept an offer of $12.65 million knowing the contract Dunn received and his lack of production. Considering the predicament the White Sox have placed themselves in, the Red Sox should feel fortunate.
Posted by FortMeade
You are looking at it incorrectly. Comparing Ortiz to Dunn is MAKING the Sox argument on Ortiz worth.
The 5 years prior to signing his contract, Dunn OPS;
The 5 years prior to Ortiz signing his contract, OPS;
Both players atrocious in the field. Both players atrocious on the base paths. Very, very similar offensive production.
Ortiz is 4 years OLDER
Sox can point out that Ortiz best years came in an era of potential steroid use (not that they would, but they could)
Seems to me, given the fall off the cliff numbers Dunn put up, and that Ortiz is 4 years older, the potential for Ortiz to fall off a cliff is very real. I would think Dunn, before this year, when he signed his contract, would have been an excellent player to comp for Ortiz if I was the Sox