@ cooper: Ah, mid-career - yes, absolutely a grant looks good! Many (most?) of the ads I've seen at assoc/full explicitly state a preference for "evidence of external funding" or similar. It definitely won't hurt, and if it's portable, so much the better. To the pubs, in my opinion (which of course counts zero in faculty searches outside my own department :), higher quality work trumps lower quality + higher quantity.
@ anon above, the part you can control is to present yourself as well as you can with what you have. Dev folks know that dev work takes much longer than some areas, and if the search committee is mixed area, a dev (or clinical) person should be able to explain this to the rest of the committee. I also can definitely sympathize re: the mound of data. For the first few years I was worried about getting data, and now we can't write fast enough!
I'm planning to be on the market in the next year or two, and I accept that my publication and funding stats will be "better" than some, and not as "good" as others. I'll give it my best shot - life is short, and there's really never a perfect time. Good luck to both of you!