PDA

View Full Version : Ken Rosenthal's take of direction of the Reds



klw
02-09-2006, 02:23 PM
Didn't see this elsewhere. He is suggesting the Reds blow it up.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5317510

Jim
02-09-2006, 02:43 PM
Ken makes a lot of sense. So does moving Dunn and/or Griffey to set the stage for the next batch of up-and-comers. I hope Krivsky pisses off a lot of Red's fans this year and proves his worth in 2 to 3 years.

missionhockey21
02-09-2006, 02:52 PM
Thing is in the batches of up and comers that you see each year, Dunn is like a needle in the haystack. If he can develop over the next few years like he is very capable of, whatever return we did get for him will look even more laughable. Such a risk is involved that unless we find a GM who secretly is Dunn's daddy and willing to totally change the depth of the franchise with quality young players or that ellusive ace we all seek, it's not worth considering. Based on all the rumors that I have seen that were "the best" of them all, had us getting a few above average prospects and one that you could maybe consider good. Not the kind of haul that will do anything for this team but shed Dunn's salary.

Give him the LTC and don't look back. It won't be a move to regret like so many of our other long term contracts that were done with career year types, past their primes or simply overrated. If we get our socks knocked off, then sure consider it but I simply dont think that will happen. Our team will be much better off with Dunn's production then getting a OK package of prospects who maybe one or two turn out to be effective MLB starters.

MartyFan
02-09-2006, 04:18 PM
Amen

Kc61
02-09-2006, 04:43 PM
I hope Krivsky remakes the team.

As DanO said, there are no shortcuts. You have to build with young talent. But DanO was unwilling to pull the trigger on deals.

Holding on to current stars may be satisfying to fans, but it is not the way to build. Reds should consider deals for top young talent. I think Rosenthal is correct in his view.

In particular, I think they have to explore trading Dunn and Griffey, who really are the team's only high priced talent. If you can get three top young players/prospects for Dunn, including pitchers, you do it. If you can get one very good young player for Griffey, you do it.

westofyou
02-09-2006, 04:46 PM
In Febuary there isn't much to write about, Ken is trying to fill his plate with the only scraps out there.

While a rebuild is gonna happen it's not going to be a shoot from the hip moment between now and ST that's for sure.

roby
02-09-2006, 04:53 PM
It blows my mind that some talk about acquiring young potential talent in exchange for Adam Dunn...when Dunn IS young and talented...and already proven as opposed to potentially good. I agree that if someone were to give you a mind-blowing deal you would have to consider it. But, you just don't trade young talent like Adam Dunn. He is what you BUILD AROUND!

flyer85
02-09-2006, 04:54 PM
If you can get three top young players/prospects for Dunn, including pitchers, you do it. If you can get one very good young player for Griffey, you do it.I think the trade value of either player is being seriously inflated by Reds fans. However, the caveat is that there is always a GM out there ready to make a really stupid trade. Although the frequency of those kind of deals seems to be going down.

KearnsyEars
02-09-2006, 05:20 PM
Thing is in the batches of up and comers that you see each year, Dunn is like a needle in the haystack. If he can develop over the next few years like he is very capable of, whatever return we did get for him will look even more laughable. Such a risk is involved that unless we find a GM who secretly is Dunn's daddy and willing to totally change the depth of the franchise with quality young players or that ellusive ace we all seek, it's not worth considering. Based on all the rumors that I have seen that were "the best" of them all, had us getting a few above average prospects and one that you could maybe consider good. Not the kind of haul that will do anything for this team but shed Dunn's salary.

Give him the LTC and don't look back. It won't be a move to regret like so many of our other long term contracts that were done with career year types, past their primes or simply overrated. If we get our socks knocked off, then sure consider it but I simply dont think that will happen. Our team will be much better off with Dunn's production then getting a OK package of prospects who maybe one or two turn out to be effective MLB starters.

great post man, i agree 100%

KearnsyEars
02-09-2006, 05:21 PM
also disagree with rosenthal due to the fact he says Wily Mo deserves a LTC.

Why the hell is that?

David Cubbedge
02-09-2006, 05:24 PM
I would have no problem dealing Griffey, LaRue, bullpen veterans, or our surplus of middle infielders such as Aurilia and Womack. But I keep our young guys as Rosenthal suggested and I keep Dunn despite his suggestion. A solid young core is needed to keep the team afloat as we seek out young players. Our core would include young players like Dunn, Kearns, Pena, Felo, EdE, Harang, Claussen, Bailey, Wood, Coffey, and Wagner. Since most of these guys are still somewhat raw and all of them have a lot of room to improve, we can say that a few will not pan out to where we want them to be. Thats an inexpensive risk. Once they are not what we want, we trade them to a team that feels they can fix them. Or if we have even half of them become very solid, we can trade one of Kearns or Pena for something of need as they will have a higher value. And we have possible replacements outfielders with Bruce, Szymanaski, Denorfia, and Stratton.

Keep that core and we have a team that people will still love to watch. Get young prospects that can help build our system for Griffey, LaRue, bullpen veterans, and the middle infielders. Trade away those young core guys that do not pan out and sign the ones that do long-term. Draft extremely well and we have a contender.

It all starts with signing Dunn (core player) to a LTC now. See what Felo, Kearns, and Harang do this year and look that direction for them if they can continue to strive. Then after the 2007 season, you look at Pena, EdE, and Wagner. On top of that we will have guys like Bailey, Bruce, Wood and prospects we get for any of the above mentioned trades to come in and place their mark on the team.

This is simply and inexpensive way to go without damaging the fanbase too much and keeping our young big time talent on to push as a contender.

Red Rover
02-09-2006, 05:27 PM
It blows my mind that some talk about acquiring young potential talent in exchange for Adam Dunn...when Dunn IS young and talented...and already proven as opposed to potentially good. I agree that if someone were to give you a mind-blowing deal you would have to consider it. But, you just don't trade young talent like Adam Dunn. He is what you BUILD AROUND!

I agree that Dunn is young and talented, but I don't considered him a young talent. A young talent should be new to the majors and fairly cheap. A young talent shouldn't cost 10 million a year. Sure Dunn is worth it, but a rebuilding small market team shouldn't start out signing LTC's to established, arbitration eligible players worth 10 million, should they?

kbrake
02-09-2006, 05:35 PM
A friend of mine and I were discussing this last week. I think that by the trade deadline we should move the following.
Womack
Aurilia
Mercker
Weathers
Wilson (if possible)
Milton (if possible)
Kearns or Pena
at least one of the catchers, maybe both
These guys might not fetch huge returns, but I dont see them serving any useful role on the 2007 Reds.

BRM
02-09-2006, 05:37 PM
A friend of mine and I were discussing this last week. I think that by the trade deadline we should move the following.
Womack
Aurilia
Mercker
Weathers
Wilson (if possible)
Milton (if possible)
Kearns or Pena
at least one of the catchers, maybe both
These guys might not fetch huge returns, but I dont see them serving any useful role on the 2007 Reds.

Half of those names aren't serving any useful role on the 2006 Reds.

registerthis
02-09-2006, 05:40 PM
also disagree with rosenthal due to the fact he says Wily Mo deserves a LTC.

Why the hell is that?

Give Wily Mo a LTC but not Dunn?

OooooK... :rolleyes:

Falls City Beer
02-09-2006, 05:41 PM
If Rosenthal's thoughts looked like a woman, they'd resemble Bea Arthur.

registerthis
02-09-2006, 05:45 PM
I agree that Dunn is young and talented, but I don't considered him a young talent. A young talent should be new to the majors and fairly cheap. A young talent shouldn't cost 10 million a year. Sure Dunn is worth it, but a rebuilding small market team shouldn't start out signing LTC's to established, arbitration eligible players worth 10 million, should they?

I guess it depends on the kind of team you want the Reds to be. If it's the kind that is constantly in a rebuilding mode, the kind that jettisons all talent when it becomes pricey and has little to no continuity on the team, then sure. Personally, the idea of the Reds being a team that is not able to sign the good players they develop to LTCs is not very gratifying--in fact, it's unbelieveably frustrating. It's the way teams like the Pirates and Royals operate, and those are two teams you don't want to be mentioned alongside of.

If the Reds make the determination that Dunn is not worthy of a LTC, then I would argue that there isn't a player out there whom the Reds would deem worthy of a LTC.

Wheelhouse
02-09-2006, 05:47 PM
I've said it before--you CANNOT trade a player who has a ceiling of hitting 60hrs in a season. A batter who can do that not only is someone you can build an offense around, a batter like that changes the other team's game plan (see Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Pujols). This is the only way you beat teams who can outspend you: to have one or two hitters who force the hand of the other manager to say "We're not going to let this guy beat us." Make them play your game. Players who cause that kind of reaction come around once a decade, and Dunn (and Wily Mo for that matter) have the ability to be one of them. Austin Kearns on the other hand has a 35-40 hr ceiling, and has not at a season where he's had 400 ABs. This is where I differ with Rosenthal. A LTC for Dunn is a key move for the Reds future.

kbrake
02-09-2006, 05:49 PM
Half of those names aren't serving any useful role on the 2006 Reds.


Well the hope is that by July 31st they have been up decent enough numbers that some team will give us some kind of a prospect for them..........You never know maybe DanO will have another job in baseball by then and we could just get TWO prospects for Womack.

CincyRedsFan30
02-09-2006, 05:52 PM
If the Reds make the determination that Dunn is not worthy of a LTC, then I would argue that there isn't a player out there whom the Reds would deem worthy of a LTC.

Exactly.

Dunn was one of the top hitters in the league last year. The team needs to lock up players who are young and good, regardless of how much money they are asking for.

You will never get anywhere if the few players that you DO develop who are young and good (and could stick around for a long time if you give them fair offers) get dumped as soon as they start showing why you invested your time in them in the first place. Build from what you have and go from there. Cleaning the entire slate just makes the work even harder than it would be, because we would not only be stuck with a pitching staff that was historically bad last year, but also an offense that was no longer young and good.

Suggesting a team just "start over" seems like the idea of someone looking for the easy way out of a situation. It could well lead to starting over another time and another time after that, and so on. Spinning your wheels in the mud will leave nothing but dirt on your car.

BRM
02-09-2006, 05:52 PM
Well the hope is that by July 31st they have been up decent enough numbers that some team will give us some kind of a prospect for them..........You never know maybe DanO will have another job in baseball by then and we could just get TWO prospects for Womack.

My hope is that Womack plays himself off the roster long before then. Otherwise, he's stealing at-bats from better, younger players.

reds44
02-09-2006, 05:58 PM
also disagree with rosenthal due to the fact he says Wily Mo deserves a LTC.

Why the hell is that?
I liked the article, but I agree with that.

The Reds have 3 guys that deserve a LTC.

Dunn
Lopez
Harang

My guess is the Reds sign Harang, sign either Dunn or Lopez and trade the other.

reds44
02-09-2006, 05:59 PM
My hope is that Womack plays himself off the roster long before then. Otherwise, he's stealing at-bats from better, younger players.
I don't know if Womack or RA will be on the roster come OD. Those are Dan'O guys.

Aronchis
02-09-2006, 06:04 PM
This may be Bergolla's shot, he can flat pick it at 2nd base and Krivsky may not take offensive "weakness" as important if you can pick it.

klw
02-09-2006, 06:09 PM
My interpretation of his Pena LTC suggestion is that you are more likely to get Pena to sign cheaply at this point. If you could get him locked at 4 years for $12 to 15 million total that would be something to consider. It would protect against big arbitration increases if his production is solid. For Dunn, however, the LTC yearlies would't be much lower than that.

Kc61
02-09-2006, 06:09 PM
I liked the article, but I agree with that.

The Reds have 3 guys that deserve a LTC.

Dunn
Lopez
Harang

My guess is the Reds sign Harang, sign either Dunn or Lopez and trade the other.

Dunn's LTC will cost $40 to 50 million, or more. It makes little sense for the Reds to commit so much money to one position player (assuming he would even accept such a deal). The concept is to lock up cheaper players (WMP, Kearns, Harang, Lopez) long term and only spend big on top of the rotation pitchers, when they are available.

True, this is painful to say, but that's how middle market teams succeed.

BRM
02-09-2006, 06:10 PM
I don't know if Womack or RA will be on the roster come OD. Those are Dan'O guys.

That wouldn't bother me at all. Although RA doesn't bother me much if he's used properly, in a backup role. Womack being anywhere in the Reds organization is a crime.

registerthis
02-09-2006, 06:10 PM
I liked the article, but I agree with that.

The Reds have 3 guys that deserve a LTC.

Dunn
Lopez
Harang

My guess is the Reds sign Harang, sign either Dunn or Lopez and trade the other.

Lopez hasn't convinced me yet. I remember a lot of people wanted to give Reese a LTC after 1999, based off of the numbers he put up then.

Lopez had a great year, no doubt. But, to date, it's been his ONLY great year. I'd like him to prove some consistency first before we sink $20-$30 million in him.

registerthis
02-09-2006, 06:15 PM
Dunn's LTC will cost $40 to 50 million, or more. It makes little sense for the Reds to commit so much money to one position player (assuming he would even accept such a deal). The concept is to lock up cheaper players (WMP, Kearns, Harang, Lopez) long term and only spend big on top of the rotation pitchers, when they are available.

True, this is painful to say, but that's how middle market teams succeed.

The Reds aren't operating like a middle-market team, they are operating like a small-market one.

Under normal circumstances, I would agree that so much money should not be tied up in one position player. But Dunn is anything but "normal". He has his prime years ahead of him, where he has the opportunity to mash 50 HRs and drive in 130, year after year. I don't see why you'd be willing to invest $40-$50 million in a front-line starter, and not the same amount for one of the elite power hitters in the game.

BRM
02-09-2006, 06:18 PM
Dunn's LTC will cost $40 to 50 million, or more. It makes little sense for the Reds to commit so much money to one position player (assuming he would even accept such a deal). The concept is to lock up cheaper players (WMP, Kearns, Harang, Lopez) long term and only spend big on top of the rotation pitchers, when they are available.

True, this is painful to say, but that's how middle market teams succeed.


Eric Chavez and his 6 year, $66M dollar contract says hi.

reds44
02-09-2006, 06:22 PM
The Reds aren't operating like a middle-market team, they are operating like a small-market one.

Under normal circumstances, I would agree that so much money should not be tied up in one position player. But Dunn is anything but "normal". He has his prime years ahead of him, where he has the opportunity to mash 50 HRs and drive in 130, year after year. I don't see why you'd be willing to invest $40-$50 million in a front-line starter, and not the same amount for one of the elite power hitters in the game.

I need alitte better BA and better clutch hitting before I had the truck to Dunn. He has the potential to be a great player, but I need more then homers to give him the keys to the franchise. Dunn wont get a long term contract till Jr. is traded. That may mean he never gets one with the Reds.

Red Leader
02-09-2006, 06:24 PM
Where's Raisor?

westofyou
02-09-2006, 06:31 PM
.248/.468/.574/1.042 in 129 at bats with runners in scoring position.

BRM
02-09-2006, 06:39 PM
.248/.468/.574/1.042 in 129 at bats with runners in scoring position.

OBP and SLG are irrelevant when talking about RISP. BA is all that matters. :evil:

CincyRedsFan30
02-09-2006, 06:44 PM
I need alitte better BA and better clutch hitting before I had the truck to Dunn. He has the potential to be a great player, but I need more then homers to give him the keys to the franchise. Dunn wont get a long term contract till Jr. is traded. That may mean he never gets one with the Reds.

Batting average counts every hit the same, even though they aren't all the same. As for the clutch hitting; Dunn has done a good job in the clutch. He has gotten on base to keep innings alive and has had a high SLG percentage, meaning he is getting a lot of extra base hits in those situations.

A better metric to use would be something like OPS(On Base Percentage plus Slugging Percentage) or Isolated Power(Total Bases - Hits (divided by) At Bats).

registerthis
02-09-2006, 06:51 PM
I need alitte better BA and better clutch hitting before I had the truck to Dunn. He has the potential to be a great player, but I need more then homers to give him the keys to the franchise. Dunn wont get a long term contract till Jr. is traded. That may mean he never gets one with the Reds.

Any statistic that counts a bunt single the same as a home run doesn't have mean squat when discussing Dunn. I'll take 40 HRs, 100+ RBI and a .930 OPS any day of the week, thank you. His .247 BA is a meaningless statistic.

And I don't know how you define "clutch", but WOYs numbers show that it's hard to do much better than Dunn did with RISP.

Again, if that's not worthy of a LTC, then nothing is.

KronoRed
02-09-2006, 07:06 PM
Change Dunn's 40 walks with the bases empty to 40 singles and you have a .298 hitter.

Just sayin.

M2
02-09-2006, 07:10 PM
The time for Krivsky to get ruthless will be between Memorial Day and July 31st.

That's where DanO really blew it in his first year (well, if you don't count letting an entire offseason pass with Cory Lidle being your biggest move). If Kearns, Pena and Jr. and raking then he can't afford to fall in love with them. He's got to turn some, or all, into pitching. You could add Dunn in there too I guess (you almost have to if he refuses to talk LTC), but Dunn's the guy that allows you to risk on the offensive side with the still reasonable expectation that you can survive it.

TeamBoone
02-09-2006, 07:49 PM
Adam Dunn is young. There is absolutely no reason not to include him in the rebuilding plan rather than dump him for prospects. That's just flat out foolish.

TeamBoone
02-09-2006, 07:51 PM
If you can get three top young players/prospects for Dunn, including pitchers, you do it. If you can get one very good young player for Griffey, you do it.

Dunn is worth so much more than this. I would expect this for LaRue!

TeamBoone
02-09-2006, 07:53 PM
I agree that Dunn is young and talented, but I don't considered him a young talent. A young talent should be new to the majors and fairly cheap. A young talent shouldn't cost 10 million a year. Sure Dunn is worth it, but a rebuilding small market team shouldn't start out signing LTC's to established, arbitration eligible players worth 10 million, should they?

Just because Adam flew through the minors and made the big club young doesn't mean he is not a young talent, nor does his salary. Many "young talents" don't even make it to the bigs until they are his age.

Willy
02-09-2006, 08:54 PM
The fact of the matter is the Reds have no talent in their farm system, and there are only so many ways to get this Organization on track to play consistant winning baseball.
Krivsky will have a system,and I believe if given a chance his system will work. The problem with his plan is i will take 5-6 years before we start seeing the results.

So the Reds have a few options in the meantime.

1. Spend money on free agents to keep the Big Club afloat until the systemstarts pumping out players.

2. Trade every player that has any value for prospects to try to build your farm system quicker.

Castellini has a decision to make. Does he want to spend some money now to keep fans interest for the next 5 years, or do you take a PR hit and allow your GM to dismantle the current team, in the hope he can see is system work before his contact is up.

Yes, Dunn maybe one of those once in a lifetime players, but in order for the Reds to turn into a solid organization they may have to send Dunn packing.

If I had the choice between keeping a once and a lifetime player, or building a winner in the next 2-3 years, I would have to choose building a winner.

I just don't think the Reds can have their cake and eat it too.

Willy
02-09-2006, 09:00 PM
Lopez hasn't convinced me yet. I remember a lot of people wanted to give Reese a LTC after 1999, based off of the numbers he put up then.

Lopez had a great year, no doubt. But, to date, it's been his ONLY great year. I'd like him to prove some consistency first before we sink $20-$30 million in him.

The only way LTC work, is if you have front office people who know 95% of the time what players to give long term contracts to and do it early.

The Reds have missed the boat with Dunn and a LTC. The Reds aren't going to save any money by giving a LTC now, the cat is already out of the bag.

You need to be able to make that call way before they start making big money in arbitration.

If the Reds KNOW Lopez is going to be a great player, then you sig him to a LTC. You don't wait 3 years and he proves it, you never get a good deal in those cases.

The Reds needed to sign Dunn 3 years ago.

redsfanmia
02-09-2006, 09:03 PM
I know that Reds fans dont want to hear it but a total rebuild would be in the best interest of the team.

kbrake
02-09-2006, 09:03 PM
I think the Reds can have their cake and eat it too, if by that you mean winning with Adam Dunn on this team. Dunn is not the only player that will fetch a good return. You dont have to do all this wheeling and dealing right now. This team is going nowhere in 2006, so why not let a few of these guys try to play up their value a little bit. Then come the end of July you could turn a lot of these guys into valuable prospects and still hang on to Adam Dunn.

TeamBoone
02-09-2006, 09:04 PM
Perhaps you're right and they do need to send him packing... but, I don't care how barren the minors are, you don't restock it with prospects for Adam Dunn. A trade involving a player of his caliber should demand nothing less than an ace... well, maybe a #2, but no lower.

Personally, I don't think he should be traded at all, but I know a whole lot of people disagree. But please, don't trade him for prospects.

JinAZ
02-09-2006, 09:18 PM
Perhaps you're right and they do need to send him packing... but, I don't care how barren the minors are, you don't restock it with prospects for Adam Dunn. A trade involving a player of his caliber should demand nothing less than an ace... well, maybe a #2, but no lower.

Personally, I don't think he should be traded at all, but I know a whole lot of people disagree. But please, don't trade him for prospects.

I think the ideal trade for Dunn would return a #2 starter, 1 high-minors starter of Germano's quality of higher, and 1 lower-minors starter of B-B+ quality. I agree, it shouldn't be done for less. Maybe a year from now when he's getting ready to move to Houston anyway, but we can at least have him and his productivity for another year...hopefully he'll put up even bigger numbers (now that his hand is healed) and keep driving up his trade value. -JinAZ

Raisor
02-09-2006, 09:46 PM
Where's Raisor?


Word.

I let my clones handle this.

Rack me.

:cool:

westofyou
02-09-2006, 09:51 PM
I let my clones handle this.

But of course the concept was first written by F.C. Lane back during the Deadball Era, it went like this.


"Would you value any monetary system that valued a penny the same as it valued a nickle, dime or even a quarter? I would think not, then why would lean so much on batting average as the measure of a players worth on offense?"

Raisor
02-09-2006, 10:00 PM
But of course the concept was first written by F.C. Lane back during the Deadball Era, it went like this.


I never said I didn't outright steal my material.

You should have seen "my" last college term paper.
:devil:

NewEraReds
02-09-2006, 10:05 PM
Ken makes a lot of sense. So does moving Dunn and/or Griffey to set the stage for the next batch of up-and-comers. I hope Krivsky pisses off a lot of Red's fans this year and proves his worth in 2 to 3 years.
im with you. ive caught flack before for saying we should move dunn. but i still feel it makes us a better TEAM

vaticanplum
02-09-2006, 10:31 PM
Ken makes a lot of sense. So does moving Dunn and/or Griffey to set the stage for the next batch of up-and-comers.

Dunn is way different from Griffey. Griffey will, at best, equal his work this year over maybe one or two more seasons. Dunn is only going to get better, and as of now he still costs them a lot less. By that definition, Dunn is unquestionably "young talent".

There is a lot of common sense on this thread that I want to commend. The Reds should have locked up Dunn a long time ago. That is their mistake and they need to fix it by signing him now (if they haven't insulted him enough for him to turn away) -- not make their own mistake doubly worse by losing him too.

With Dan O gone, I am no longer kept up nights worrying that Dunn will be traded for a bag of baseballs and a cell phone plan, but the Reds are not going to get in return what he is worth to them now. If they bring Dunn to the table, it's clear that they're giving up their best player and they're desperate and I simply don't think he's worth giving up for a #3 or 4 starter and a couple of shaky prospects. The Reds have some weaknesses that need to be fixed, now, but this is exactly what a good GM is supposed to do: get creative and figure out how to fix them while not giving up their crown jewel. Dunn is the best the Reds have, but he's not all that's good. the Reds have a lot of options that could be viable to other teams.

The Reds should be marveling every day at their own inexplicable smarts for drafting him and their luck that he has turned out as well as he has and is still developing to boot. For me, the Dunn situation is pretty uncomplicated. I see Dunn as a green M&M. I don't care if someone offers me 15 brown ones, I'm not giving up my green one, even if we're playing brown M&M poker, because it's the best one simply by virtue of being green. Somebody else is going to realize this, gather all the green ones and win the universe, and I am going to cry like a baby. This is why I would be a terrible GM, but I think the Reds' conclusion should be the same even if they're relying on, you know, details. The common sense is the same.

NewEraReds
02-09-2006, 10:38 PM
I would have no problem dealing Griffey, LaRue, bullpen veterans, or our surplus of middle infielders such as Aurilia and Womack. But I keep our young guys as Rosenthal suggested and I keep Dunn despite his suggestion. A solid young core is needed to keep the team afloat as we seek out young players. Our core would include young players like Dunn, Kearns, Pena, Felo, EdE, Harang, Claussen, Bailey, Wood, Coffey, and Wagner. Since most of these guys are still somewhat raw and all of them have a lot of room to improve, we can say that a few will not pan out to where we want them to be. Thats an inexpensive risk. Once they are not what we want, we trade them to a team that feels they can fix them. Or if we have even half of them become very solid, we can trade one of Kearns or Pena for something of need as they will have a higher value. And we have possible replacements outfielders with Bruce, Szymanaski, Denorfia, and Stratton.

Keep that core and we have a team that people will still love to watch. Get young prospects that can help build our system for Griffey, LaRue, bullpen veterans, and the middle infielders. Trade away those young core guys that do not pan out and sign the ones that do long-term. Draft extremely well and we have a contender.

It all starts with signing Dunn (core player) to a LTC now. See what Felo, Kearns, and Harang do this year and look that direction for them if they can continue to strive. Then after the 2007 season, you look at Pena, EdE, and Wagner. On top of that we will have guys like Bailey, Bruce, Wood and prospects we get for any of the above mentioned trades to come in and place their mark on the team.

This is simply and inexpensive way to go without damaging the fanbase too much and keeping our young big time talent on to push as a contender.
i agree you keep your core. but i dont think you can build a team in our market with a player making what dunn will be making. i dont think we can afford any player at what he will make(and still have a solid TEAM) but if we were, it would have to be a no. 1 pitcher or all around ss/cf(what jr should have been)

jnwohio
02-10-2006, 12:28 AM
We don't know what Krivsky sold Castellini on during the interview process. Only time will reveal that to us. However, dumping Dunn would seem to run counter to Castellini's inferences that he wanted to be immediately competitive while building his future championship caliber team.

(I recall the one supposed insider leak about when DanO's fate may heve been sealed was that at the first meeting (clear back in late Novemeber/ early December when he'd been named as propspective owner) Castellini had with the FO baseball staff. Supposedly Mr. C asked what was the plan. DanO launched into one of his verbose explanantions of the 5 year plan. Mr. C cut him off and said yeah, OK on the long term future but what are you going to do in the next couple of months to be more competetitve in 2006? Of course DanO had no plan for that.)

NewEraReds
02-10-2006, 12:35 AM
We don't know what Krivsky sold Castellini on during the interview process. Only time will reveal that to us. However, dumping Dunn would seem to run counter to Castellini's inferences that he wanted to be immediately competitive while building his future championship caliber team.

(I recall the one supposed insider leak about when DanO's fate may heve been sealed was that at the first meeting (clear back in late Novemeber/ early December when he'd been named as propspective owner) Castellini had with the FO baseball staff. Supposedly Mr. C asked what was the plan. DanO launched into one of his verbose explanantions of the 5 year plan. Mr. C cut him off and said yeah, OK on the long term future but what are you going to do in the next couple of months to be more competetitve in 2006? Of course DanO had no plan for that.)
not really. if you can get guys who will be able to help you win in 2 years(not this year, but the next, then it doesnt) you have to do what is BEST for your team in the LONG RUN. not just for this year. imo, thats moving dunn for the best deal possible.

Nugget
02-10-2006, 12:47 AM
You could trade Dunn for a couple of guys who have just made the big leagues (not proven) but have obviously got what it takes to make it. For instance, a Scott Kazmir when he got traded to the devil rays, the guy from KC at 1B and probably another pitcher. That gives you both talent that can be used now and in the future as they have six years to go til free agency. The deal with Dunn is that if he doesn't take a "hometown" discount on his package (ie. Hunter) then the REDS would be better off trading in the long term. Moving Junior (and it pains me to say this) would be good too as it allows some payroll flexibility but I don't think the REDS have the ability to move him for value. Especially, if he has another comeback season like last year (because if Dunn produces you would have at least got some kind of talent in return). That being said the payroll flex that Junior affords is not as great as it seems because there is so much money deferred that the REDS will be paying him until 2030.

registerthis
02-10-2006, 10:41 AM
If the Reds KNOW Lopez is going to be a great player, then you sig him to a LTC. You don't wait 3 years and he proves it, you never get a good deal in those cases.

The Reds needed to sign Dunn 3 years ago.

Who said anything about waiting 3 years? I simply said that one good season does not show me that Lopez will CERTAINLY be good for the next 5 years or so and is thus worthy of a LTC. There were more than a handful on this board who, prior to last season, wanted the Reds to dump Lopez because the thought was that he would never amount to anything. Last season he proved he can play, this season he needs to prove that he can do it consistently. Another year like 2005, and I don't have any problems offering him a LTC. What I don't want is for the Reds to jump the gun, sign him to a 4 year deal now, then have him go all Cristian Guzman or Pokey Reese on them.

registerthis
02-10-2006, 10:52 AM
not really. if you can get guys who will be able to help you win in 2 years(not this year, but the next, then it doesnt) you have to do what is BEST for your team in the LONG RUN. not just for this year. imo, thats moving dunn for the best deal possible.

What makes you thyink that any players the Reds woul dget for Dunn would help them more in the long term than Dunn could?

That's the thinking I don't get from the people who want to see Dunn dealt. He's young (26), and is a prodigious HR hitter who gets on base and stays healthy. Barring an unforseen injury, Dunn should be one of the most consistent and accomplished power hitters in all of baseball for the next decade. He is a force in the lineup who changes the way opposing teams pitch, and affects the outcome of games with regularity (28 win shares in 2005, 1st on the Reds, 5th for NL outfielders).

If Dunn is signed to a LTC, he WILL help the Reds in the long term, and that isn't even a debateable point. There's no question of prospects developing into serviceable players, or reaching their potential--with Dunn, we have a known commodity who is one of the elite players in the league, and young enough to be a part of the Reds plans for the forseeable future. I don't envision a way that the Reds are a better team--now, or 3 years from now--if they trade him.

CySeymour
02-10-2006, 11:48 AM
I am not saying I am for trading Dunn, but one thing to keep in mind is that players who are of his size don't have a great history once hitting 30. Yeah, I know, that is still 4 years away. However, what can this team realistically hope to accomplish in that time? If there is no realistic hope to compete for a league championship in that period, then Dunn should be dealt for a high return package.

fourrunhomer
02-10-2006, 12:04 PM
From what I have read about the new owners and GM, the plan is to build for the future AND win this year. Winning this year will not happen if they trade Dunn for anything less than an established ace. To help with the future,said ace must also be young. You do not trade someone like Dunn for maybes. I seem to remember The Reds trading another outfielder (yes I realize Dunn is probably at 1st now barring a trade) that they thought would not be the right person to build the club around. I think his name was something like Robinson or something like that. I wasn't even born at the time but I still cringe when I think what might have been. Does any one else remember this one?
That said, the only way I trade Dunn is for the afforementioned young established ace. This probably only if I can't get a commitment from him for the future. I also think there is a better shot of this around the trade deadline to a contending team deep on pitching needing a bat to finish the stretch run. But hey, I still have my fingers crossed that the Reds are still in the hunt at that time and that some of the pitching somehow steps up this year. I think the Reds have three guys that can do that and Wilson is a longshot. I am not sure about Williams.
I think the Reds best bet is to Trade Pena or Kearns, a catcher (even though I like all these guys), and maybe throw in Freel for at best a number 3 guy in the rotation and prospects. Also, I would do my best to deal Milton for whatever we could get. I wouldn't mind giving him another chance but his contract hurts. If by chance we are still in the race at the deadline,I still probably deal one or two of the 40 something relievers for whatever we need. If we are out of it I would trade all the vet relievers( Merker, Weathers, Hammond, and White) to teams that need that extra bullpen help for the push run to get whatever prospects I can get.
My point is that based on what has been said by ownership and management, the Reds are not willing to just throw away this season. i think they see potential. I also think I read that Cast said the 60-65 mil range was a starting point for this year but he would be willing to increase that if the team got off to a good start. I believe that we may not be stuck watching b movies any more. We may not be moving up to blockbusters any time soon. But we may at least get the afternoon matinee.

buckeyenut
02-10-2006, 12:15 PM
What makes you thyink that any players the Reds woul dget for Dunn would help them more in the long term than Dunn could?

That's the thinking I don't get from the people who want to see Dunn dealt. He's young (26), and is a prodigious HR hitter who gets on base and stays healthy. Barring an unforseen injury, Dunn should be one of the most consistent and accomplished power hitters in all of baseball for the next decade. He is a force in the lineup who changes the way opposing teams pitch, and affects the outcome of games with regularity (28 win shares in 2005, 1st on the Reds, 5th for NL outfielders).

If Dunn is signed to a LTC, he WILL help the Reds in the long term, and that isn't even a debateable point. There's no question of prospects developing into serviceable players, or reaching their potential--with Dunn, we have a known commodity who is one of the elite players in the league, and young enough to be a part of the Reds plans for the forseeable future. I don't envision a way that the Reds are a better team--now, or 3 years from now--if they trade him.

I think that is the rub with any Dunn deal. Are they going to help you more short and longterm than Dunn does?

There are only 5-10 teams with the kind of talent that I can maybe say yes to that question. Out of those 5-10, you can eliminate at least half due to them being in a similar situation to CIN regarding $$ or needs. So the question is, can you get enough talent from the teams left to offset the risk of unproven talent and the certainty of Dunn's value? I honestly think only ANA and LA really fit the criteria completely and LA is iffy and ANA is, as mentioned, looking for a different profile guy.

registerthis
02-10-2006, 12:26 PM
I am not saying I am for trading Dunn, but one thing to keep in mind is that players who are of his size don't have a great history once hitting 30. Yeah, I know, that is still 4 years away. However, what can this team realistically hope to accomplish in that time? If there is no realistic hope to compete for a league championship in that period, then Dunn should be dealt for a high return package.

If the Reds are going to be languishing in 5th place 4 years from now with no chance of competing for a pennant, then they have far larger problems to deal with than simply trading Dunn. The foundation for a competitive team is already in place, Krivsky's job is to find ways to fill the gaps (most noticeably in the rotation) that will allow the Reds to compete. Getting rid of your most productive offensive player--one who, like I previously mentioned, can be expected to remain productive for the forseeable future--for unproven talent will irreversibly set this franchise back years.

I would argue that the quickest way to ensure that the Reds aren't competitive 4 years from now is to trade Dunn for prospects.

Willy
02-10-2006, 02:16 PM
Who said anything about waiting 3 years? I simply said that one good season does not show me that Lopez will CERTAINLY be good for the next 5 years or so and is thus worthy of a LTC. There were more than a handful on this board who, prior to last season, wanted the Reds to dump Lopez because the thought was that he would never amount to anything. Last season he proved he can play, this season he needs to prove that he can do it consistently. Another year like 2005, and I don't have any problems offering him a LTC. What I don't want is for the Reds to jump the gun, sign him to a 4 year deal now, then have him go all Cristian Guzman or Pokey Reese on them.

A great front office will know what players are worthly of a LTC, before they have 2 All Star years. That is what these guys are suppose to do. Lopez may be a bad example because trhe jury is still out. But even I knew Dunn was something special a few years back. That is when you offer a LTC, that is when you save the big money. If you wait until you prove it a couple of years, you missed the boat.

kbrake
02-10-2006, 02:33 PM
A great front office will know what players are worthly of a LTC, before they have 2 All Star years. That is what these guys are suppose to do. Lopez may be a bad example because trhe jury is still out. But even I knew Dunn was something special a few years back. That is when you offer a LTC, that is when you save the big money. If you wait until you prove it a couple of years, you missed the boat.


I think most people have wanted Dunn signed to a LTC for a few years now. The fact that O'Brien was an idiot is just something we have to deal with. As far as Lopez, depending on just how much money we are talking I would not mind seeing the Reds try and sign him long term. While I fear that he could turn into a Pokey or Guzman, I fear much much more that another All-Star year and Boras will make sure he is priced out of Cincinnati.

Krusty
02-10-2006, 02:38 PM
Here is the problem....you can't tie all your money into two players (Griffey, Dunn). Even the Minnesota Twins were able to spread the money around to lock several of their veterans to two, three year deals.

Now with Junior have a 10-5 rights and his history of injuries, the chances of trading him are slim unless you eat at least half of his contract. That would leave Dunn. If you sign Dunn to a longterm deal, then you have all your money tied to two players. You trade Dunn for three talent prospects, you accelerate the rebuilding process while gaining payroll flexibility.

I wonder if Krivsky offered Dunn to the Dodgers for a packaged of young talent headed by RHP pitching gem Chad Billingsley if the Dodgers would bite?

RedsManRick
02-10-2006, 03:12 PM
The issue at hand is not is Dunn valuable at 12-14MM per year over the next 5 years. I think there's pretty much a consensus that he is worth that much money generally speaking. The real question is how do we maximize the value presented by Dunn given the circumstances.

1.) Sign him to a long term market value deal such as described above
2.) Trade Dunn for a package of talents that POTENTIALLY could provide more talent than Dunn alone. Also gain the financial flexibility to add talent through FA or other trades.
3.) Wait and address the situation later, be it this summer, or next offseason as he enters his final year of Reds control.

Re #1: I personally don't believe Dunn wants to sign here long term. If he does sign with the Reds, it will cost us essentially market value. Given the Konerko contract, we're looking at something like 70MM over 5 years. While I think Dunn is worth that much, I don't think it's a wise distribution of the Reds payroll, particularly given the shallow state of talent in the organization as a whole. It's too many of our eggs in 1 basket. It's not a Dunn thing, it's percentage of payroll thing. Thus to me, Dunn is only an attractive option long term if we get a discount putting him in the 10-12MM range maximum. I'm not sure why he would do this, particularly as it doesn't really even make him much money in the next 2 years that he wouldn't be getting already through arbitration.

Re #2: If the Angels picked up the phone and said "we'll give you Wood or Kendrick, Sanata, and Kotchman for Dunn and Hudson/Hancock", I wouldn't hang up the phone until I knew papers were on their way. But barring a deal such as that, there's no reason to force a Dunn trade right now. I do NOT think it's likely the Angels would offer this.

Re #3: There will be a number of good windows over the next 18 months to trade him or get that advantageous long term deal. An unexpected playoff run could boost forward our payroll escalation calender and make Dunn more keen on staying here. But you need to put those feelers out now -- let teams start looking, imagining, salivating. If they know Dunn is an option, it opens doors. You don't want to decide you need to deal in July of '07 and lose all your leverage.

The fact is that there simply isn't enough talent in the organization to win right now. There are just 3 ways to get more talent, draft, trade, and sign. We're working the draft route, obviously. But development of draftees takes time and everybody is pulling from the same pool -- our development has been piss poor, so even gross improvement doesn't give us a competetive advantage. That leaves us with trades and FA. FA requires either astute signings of players who contribute more than the market prices them at (see Moneyball) or the ability to afford market prices on the talent needed. We can't afford the market price of the talent we need to add, and I have seen very little evidence of understanding regarding talent undervalued by the marketplace.

Which leaves us with trades. As you all know, you have to give talent to get talent. There are very few trades when you KNOW you're getting greater value in return, though these do happen, usually as deadline deals for mediocre talent that a playoff team thinks will put them over the top. The other way is to trade somebody at the peak of their value for a king's ransom (or trade your bust for somebody else's) and get lucky when nearly the full value of the ransom is recognized. Call this the AJ Pierzynski approach. (AJ for Nathan, Lirano, and Bosner)

The only way to build a talent poor franchise QUICKLY is through amazing drafts (Oakland) or through the AJ Pierzynksi approach. Standard draft gains and Joe Randa/Todd Jones deals help, but slowly. AJ Pierzynksi deals (or more similarly to us, Bartolo Colon deals) allow you to instantly get a influx of talent which places you in a very strong position. Of course, the problem is that it's risky. If you get the wrong pieces, or just they don't pan out, then you bottom out completely (see the Royals).

Given Castinelli's stated objectives and principals, a trade of Dunn or Junior seems to be the best way to right the ship. In Feb 1998, the Twins traded their best position player, 29 year old Chuck Knoblauch, to the Yankees for Brian Buchanan, Cristian Guzman, Eric Milton, Danny Mota, and cash. This was the beginning of their ascent to becoming a competetive force in the AL Central.

Krusty
02-10-2006, 03:22 PM
The issue at hand is not is Dunn valuable at 12-14MM per year over the next 5 years. I think there's pretty much a consensus that he is worth that much money generally speaking. The real question is how do we maximize the value presented by Dunn given the circumstances.

1.) Sign him to a long term market value deal such as described above (I think we can all agree the Reds are not going to get a significant discount in a long term deal situation)
2.) Trade Dunn for a package of talents that POTENTIALLY could provide more talent than Dunn alone. Also gain the financial flexibility to add talent through FA or other trades.
3.) Wait and address the situation later, be it this summer, or next offseason as he enters his final year of Reds control.

Re #1: I personally don't believe Dunn wants to sign here long term. If he does sign with the Reds, it will cost us essentially market value. Given the Konerko contract, we're looking at something like 70MM over 5 years. While I think Dunn is worth that much, I don't think it's a wise distribution of the Reds payroll, particularly given the shallow state of talent in the organization as a whole. It's too many of our eggs in 1 basket. It's not a Dunn thing, it's percentage of payroll thing. Thus to me, Dunn is only an attractive option long term if we get a discount putting him in the 10-12MM range maximum. I'm not sure why he would do this, particularly as it doesn't really even make him much money in the next 2 years that he wouldn't be getting already through arbitration.

Re #2: If the Angels picked up the phone and said "we'll give you Wood or Kendrick, Sanata, and Kotchman for Dunn and Hudson/Hancock", I wouldn't hang up the phone until I knew papers were on their way. But barring a deal such as that, there's no reason to force a Dunn trade right now.

Re #3: There will be a number of good windows over the next 18 months to trade him or get that advantageous long term deal. You need to put those feelers out now though -- let teams start looking, imagining, salivating. If they know Dunn is an option, it opens doors. You don't want to decide you need to deal in July of '07 and lose all your leverage.

The fact is that there simply isn't enough talent in the organization to win right now. There are just 3 ways to get more talent, draft, trade, and sign. We're working the draft route, obviously. But development of draftees takes time and everybody is pulling from the same pool -- our development has been piss poor, so even gross improvement doesn't give us a competetive advantage. That leaves us with trades and FA. FA requires either astute signings of players who contribute more than the market prices them at (see Moneyball) or the ability to afford market prices on the talent needed. We can't afford the market price of the talent we need to add, and I have seen very little evidence of understanding regarding talent undervalued by the marketplace.

Which leaves us with trades. As you all know, you have to give talent to get talent. There are very few trades when you KNOW you're getting greater value in return, though these do happen, usually as deadline deals for mediocre talent that a playoff team thinks will put them over the top. The other way is to trade somebody at the peak of their value for a king's ransom and get lucky when nearly the full value of the ransom is recognized. Call this the AJ Pierzynski approach.

The only way to build a franchise QUICKLY is through amazing drafts (Oakland) or through the AJ Pierzynksi approach. Standard drafts gains and Joe Randa deals help, but very slowly. AJ Pierzynksi deals (aka Bartolo Colon deals) allow you to instantly get a confluence of talent which places you in a very strong position. Of course, the problem is that it's risky. If you get the wrong pieces, or they don't pan out, then you bottom out completely (see the Royals).

Given Castinelli's stated objectives and principals, a trade of Dunn or Junior seems to be the best way to right the ship. In Feb 1998, the Twins traded their best position player, 29 year old Chuck Knoblauch, to the Yankees for Brian Buchanan, Cristian Guzman, Eric Milton, Danny Mota, and cash. This was the beginning of their ascent to becoming a competetive force in the AL Central.

Good post. As I mentioned keeping Dunn and locking him to a five year, 50+ million dollar deal has all the payroll tied up along with Junior's contract. And I don't see Junior going anywhere anytime soon.

Dunn is the most attractive player that could accelerate the rebuilding process. He could bring in three young players that would play an important role in the rebuilding process. Teams like the Astros, Dodgers and Angels (all deep in quality and pitching prospects) would inquire about trading for Dunn.

Trading Dunn would be painful. But like I said before it is about time the Reds get this rebuilding process right.

KronoRed
02-10-2006, 03:37 PM
Good post. As I mentioned keeping Dunn and locking him to a five year, 50+ million dollar deal has all the payroll tied up along with Junior's contract. And I don't see Junior going anywhere anytime soon.

He's out of here after 2008, and right now we can afford both, back load the deal for Dunn so he goes up as JR goes off the payroll.

registerthis
02-10-2006, 04:39 PM
Also, we have no idea where the reds payroll will stand in 2-3 years time. It's entirely possible that Castellini will raise payroll to $70-$80 mil, thus allowing for the signings of guys like Dunn to long-term deals.

registerthis
02-10-2006, 04:43 PM
A great front office will know what players are worthly of a LTC, before they have 2 All Star years. That is what these guys are suppose to do. Lopez may be a bad example because trhe jury is still out. But even I knew Dunn was something special a few years back. That is when you offer a LTC, that is when you save the big money. If you wait until you prove it a couple of years, you missed the boat.

The Reds have a horrible history of offering big contracts to players who either don't deserve them or never play up to the amount they're being paid--just look at the recent past: Griffey, Casey, Graves, Milton, etc. And money that gets tied up into guys like that DOESN'T go to the players who truly DO deserve LT deals, such as Dunn.

Even if it costs them a little more, I'd prefer to give Lopez another season to prove himself of being consistently able to produce like he did in '05 before locking him up long term. Pokey Reese looked pretty good after the '99 season, luckily the Reds didn't bite.

vaticanplum
02-10-2006, 05:04 PM
Here is the problem....you can't tie all your money into two players (Griffey, Dunn).

Dunn can fill Griffey's place on the payroll in a few years. That's why you sign him now and backload the contract.

edit: Ok, going to finish reading through threads before I post from now on.

wolfboy
02-10-2006, 05:20 PM
The Reds have a horrible history of offering big contracts to players who either don't deserve them or never play up to the amount they're being paid--just look at the recent past: Griffey, Casey, Graves, Milton, etc. And money that gets tied up into guys like that DOESN'T go to the players who truly DO deserve LT deals, such as Dunn.

Even if it costs them a little more, I'd prefer to give Lopez another season to prove himself of being consistently able to produce like he did in '05 before locking him up long term. Pokey Reese looked pretty good after the '99 season, luckily the Reds didn't bite.


I don't think it's fair to include Griffey in that group. I don't think there was an indicaiton that Griffey would fall apart the way he did after signing that contract. At least Griffey had put up numbers in the past that justified the money he was signed for. He was also likely to do so in the future. Casey, Milton, and Graves never gave any indication that they were worth the contracts they signed.

registerthis
02-10-2006, 06:14 PM
I don't think it's fair to include Griffey in that group. I don't think there was an indicaiton that Griffey would fall apart the way he did after signing that contract. At least Griffey had put up numbers in the past that justified the money he was signed for. He was also likely to do so in the future. Casey, Milton, and Graves never gave any indication that they were worth the contracts they signed.


The Reds have a horrible history of offering big contracts to players who either don't deserve them or never play up to the amount they're being paid

I think Griffey fits in very well with that.

MikeS21
02-10-2006, 06:20 PM
I hope that I am dead wrong, but here's my take:

I believe some of us are jumping to a conclusion, thinking that money is the only thing preventing Dunn from signing a LTC. I'm of the opinion that Adam Dunn would not sign if they offered him five years at $100 million. Why? Because after the 2007 season, he can sign as a FA with the Astros (for a hometown discount) and play for the hometown crowd.

IMO, the hold-up right now is over length of contract. The Reds probably want to tie Dunn up 4-6 years, but Dunn has no plans on being here past 2007. So Dunn wants a one year deal. he might be willing for two year deal, but nothing more. The Reds are trying to draw out negotiations until the last minute - wanting a long term deal. They will eventually, cave in and sign Dunn to a one year deal at Dunn's price moments before the arbitration hearing.

Dunn knows that as long as he does not commit himself past 2007, he is a free agent to go where he pleases. And he is aware that unless he signs a LTC, not too many teams are willing to part with top prospects for a guy who won't commit long-term - which hurts his trade value. (Would you trade your top three or four prospects for a guy who you can't control for more than two years?) And the Reds are less likely to move him for inferior prospects. I think he is mentally counting the days before he can play for the hometown team.

It only makes sense that Castellini has stepped in these last 2-3 weeks, trying to get a deal done, so I imagine Dunn has seem some better-than-market figures thrown at him for a long-term deal. So why hasn't he signed? Because he does not want to commit past 2007.

It's very difficult to build your team around a guy who is planning on playing elsewhere in two years.

As I said, I hope I am wrong.

RedsManRick
02-10-2006, 06:25 PM
I hope that I am dead wrong, but here's my take:

I believe some of us are jumping to a conclusion, thinking that money is the only thing preventing Dunn from signing a LTC. I'm of the opinion that Adam Dunn would not sign if they offered him five years at $100 million. Why? Because after the 2007 season, he can sign as a FA with the Astros (for a hometown discount) and play for the hometown crowd.

IMO, the hold-up right now is over length of contract. The Reds probably want to tie Dunn up 4-6 years, but Dunn has no plans on being here past 2007. So Dunn wants a one year deal. he might be willing for two year deal, but nothing more. The Reds are trying to draw out negotiations until the last minute - wanting a long term deal. They will eventually, cave in and sign Dunn to a one year deal at Dunn's price moments before the arbitration hearing.

Dunn knows that as long as he does not commit himself past 2007, he is a free agent to go where he pleases. And he is aware that unless he signs a LTC, not too many teams are willing to part with top prospects for a guy who won't commit long-term - which hurts his trade value. (Would you trade your top three or four prospects for a guy who you can't control for more than two years?) And the Reds are less likely to move him for inferior prospects. I think he is mentally counting the days before he can play for the hometown team.

It only makes sense that Castellini has stepped in these last 2-3 weeks, trying to get a deal done, so I imagine Dunn has seem some better-than-market figures thrown at him for a long-term deal. So why hasn't he signed? Because he does not want to commit past 2007.

It's very difficult to build your team around a guy who is planning on playing elsewhere in two years.

As I said, I hope I am wrong.

My thoughts exactly Mike. Though do keep in mind the value the Brewers got for Richie Sexson. Dunn is basically Sexson but 3 years ahead of schedule and even more willing to take a walk.

December 1, 2003: Traded by the Milwaukee Brewers with a player to be named later and Shane Nance to the Arizona Diamondbacks for Junior Spivey, Craig Counsell, Lyle Overbay, Chad Moeller, Chris Capuano, and Jorge de la Rosa. The Milwaukee Brewers sent Noochie Varner (minors) (December 15, 2003) to the Arizona Diamondbacks to complete the trade.

Now most people thought the D-Backs overpaid, but the point is that there are deals to be made. I'll be the first to tell you that every trade situation is unique and just because Sexson was dealt doesn't mean there's a suitor for Dunn. But still...

David Cubbedge
02-10-2006, 06:38 PM
I can't say that Mike and Redsman are wrong here. I think it is entirely poossible that Dunn is not willing to stay in Cincinnati. Although I would love to have the team built around him, we may have to face facts soon. And these expressions from Mike and redsman may be just that, fact.

I revert to my earlier post and say that if dunn is not signed long term, we have to look for that next guy to be the franchise player. We still have that "core" even without Dunn. This means that we have to see Harang, Felo, or Kearns step it up for the 2006 season. Or else we have to look at Pena, Claussen, or EdE later down the road.

If we could trade Dunn to Houston for a Brewers type overkill, we would be in far better shape with our minor league system. Or we could trade for that ace as Jeff Piecoro expressed on 1360 this morning. He even whispered Oswalt as one he could see as a possible fit for a Dunn trade. Purely speculation though. Either way, we have a core to see Dunn go, and we could get something great if he does happen to leave.

So if he wants to leave in 2007, so be it, use the money elsewhere.

Willy
02-10-2006, 08:26 PM
RedsManRick you are a poet!!!

Well said!!


I don't think you can base the Reds ability to judge which guys to sign to ltc's on past history.

New guy making those calls, and he has been around an organization who had very good sucess doing it.