Will he and should he are two different things. He hits lots of homers, and takes lots of walks, so he's always had a good OPS, despite not being a good batting average guy. There's several factors going against him however..... 1.) Despite being a premier power hitter, he's never won a homerun or RBI title. 2.) He's never been considered anything close to an elite player, or among the 'league's best'. He's never put up a 150 OPS+. 3.) He's a -24! defensive WAR for his career. I don't think anyone can argue that he's an absolute butcher in the field. 4.) He hasn't hit his decline years yet. He's an .878 OPS guy right now, and that's before his decline phase. It's very safe to say that when he retires, his career OPS may be somewhat lower than .878, and his career OPS+ will be somewhat lower than 127. (If I had to guess, I'd say somewhere around 120) Because of his Homeruns and Walks skillset, he may hang around a while, even as the rest of his skills completely erode. So, will he? I think there's about a 15-25% chance that he will be, based on what we know about how the sports-writers vote. He will likely have a .235-ish batting average when he retires. We may all well know that batting average is not a good measuring stick of offensive value, but sports writers WILL hold it against him. Also, as previously mentioned, the fact that he's just never been considered a 'premier' talent will be held against him as well (IMO). He is a one-time all star. Should he? I don't think so. Fred McGriff was a career .886 OPS guy. McGriff fell just short of 500 homers, but was better than Dunn in just about every other way (assuming Dunn makes it to 500, which I'm assuming he will). So I think, rationally...........no, and no.