1) Nobody is looking at Dunn's SB totals and suggesting that he's a speed demon or that his stolen bases make a significant contribution (clearly they are worth a lot less than 40 HR...) To me, though, that many SB with such a high % success suggests he must be a pretty good baserunner, and have at least reasonably decent speed. Compare him to McGwire, who had 12 SB in his entire career, plus 8 CS (60% success rate), and as we know was slow as dirt and not a good baserunner. I think there is a distinct difference between the two players in that regard, and that if their power numbers ended up the same, Dunn would be a clearly more valuable player in the long haul.

2) Seven years is a lot. It's true that McGwire started off strong, averaging 36 HR in his first 6 yeas (let's ignore his cup of coffee in 1986 for this discussion.) But that included one dreadful year, 1991, where he slumped to a .201 average and had just 22 HR and 75 RBI in a full season. It also included two other seasons where he batted in the .230s and had an OBP in the .330s. (It's true that Dunn had one bad season in 2003 as well, although not nearly as bad as McGwire's '91.) Now if you add in the 7th season, 1993, McGwire got hurt and his totals suffer. As we know, McGwire did miss a lot of games in the second half of his career, and his body deteriorated quickly after age 35. My point in all this is that Dunn has been a LITTLE BIT better and a LITTLE BIT more resilient than McGwire so far, and to my mind gives him the potential to finish in a higher bracket than McGwire. Dunn's got a long way to go yet, though.

I'm not knockin' Dunn - I like him too - but it's funny to see the love for him here, given the all the recent negative comments about McGwire (minus the SBs, he was Dunn through the first seven years of his career).