RealGM

Who's having the worse season and who has the most potential to pick it up later on in the season?

Theyre both studs and have potential to pick it up. These guys are too good to slide for a whole year. I wouldn't sleep on either of them

Berkman is a far better player.

They've had horrible years up until now in my eyes. I have them in a league where I have no idea what to do with them...

I think Berkman has the most potential to get out of his slump... but blah.

kobeSTOPkobeDONT wrote:Berkman is a far better player.

Dye is a better fielder with one of the best arms in the game. Berkman can play 4 positions. At the plate, I always liked Dye when healthy, but Berkman really hasn't had injury concerns

Berkman has a lot better chance to turn around his hitting than Dye.

34Celtic wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Dye is a better fielder with one of the best arms in the game. Berkman can play 4 positions. At the plate, I always liked Dye when healthy, but Berkman really hasn't had injury concerns

Actually, Berkman has had trouble staying healthy as well. I'm taking him because he is a far better hitter when healthy and far more consistent (.970 career OPS compared to Dye's .820). Dye had a huge year last year but it was kind of a fluke (only 1 other season in his career comes anywhere near that; 2000). He is still usually a pretty good hitter, but Berkman is a great hitter.

It really isn't close, Berkman >>>>>> Dye.

I'd have to agree and go with Berkman having the better chance to turn it around.

Injuries play a big role in this debate, so for this year it will be Berkman. If both are healthy, I would go with Dye because he is superior in the field and about even as a hitter.

Dye

Honestly, how can anyone argue that Dye is even remotely close to Berkman as a hitter (and player overall since the gap in hitting is so massive)? Dye is a pretty good hitter but far from a special or great hitter. He has a career .820 OPS, a .700 OPS this year and prior to last year he hadn't posted an OPS above .850 since he played half a season in Oakland.

Berkman on the other hand has a career .971 OPS, hasn't had an OPS under .927 in his entire career (it is at .842 this year, but he has been on fire and it'll get above .900) and is just a machine.

It isn't close. Dye is closer to Julio Lugo as a hitter than he is to Lance Berkman.

Yeah Jermaine Dye fans....I just went there.

i completely agree and cant really see how its even close between the 2.

kobeSTOPkobeDONT wrote:Yeah Jermaine Dye fans....I just went there.

Now you're bordering on insane. Look at Dye's numbers when healthy and he's a legit stud. Lugo is throwup.

34Celtic wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Now you're bordering on insane. Look at Dye's numbers when healthy and he's a legit stud. Lugo is throwup.

I just went through his numbers and they clearly showed he isn't close to Berkman and that you are tossing the word "stud" out there far too easily. He has a career OPS is .820 and he hasn't been all that great aside from last year's huge season. A season in which he is making look more and more like a fluke each game.

I was never claiming that Dye and Lugo are close as hitters, but that comparison is about as valid as Dye/Berkman (i.e. not close). It was half joking, half serious.


Berkman>>>>>Dye>>>>Lugo.

Even thou I was a big fan of Jermaine while he was in Oakland,I have to go with Lance,plus Lance can play all 3 OF spots plus 1B,so I'd rather have him than Jermaine.