PDA

View Full Version : If Giants back out of Bonds deal, could Dunn be traded to SF?



Tom Servo
01-21-2007, 01:54 PM
In the midst of these cold, cold offseason days, I figured I'd give the old hot stove a nice kick.

With all of these articles about the Bonds deal not being official and the Giants having second thoughts I noticed a few of them note that the Giants attempted to trade for Manny or Dunn but couldn't get a deal done so they went back to Bonds. If they decide to back out of their deal with Bonds could the Giants be desperate enough and allow Wayne to pry away some of their young arms for Adam?

savafan
01-21-2007, 01:56 PM
I hear that Bonds is threatening to sue if the Giants back out of the deal, citing the fact that the positive amphetamines test can't be held against him because it was supposed to be confidential.

Dracodave
01-21-2007, 02:21 PM
Trading Dunn right now, takes away alot from our offense. Unless we start to rebuild, I dont see a point in doing that.

Falls City Beer
01-21-2007, 02:25 PM
I'd trade Dunn for Matt Cain, but the Giants wouldn't so there's really no point.

George Anderson
01-21-2007, 02:54 PM
Can you imagine Dunn playing left field at that ball park?? He is atrocious at GABP just imagine how many errors he would accumulate in SF.

Falls City Beer
01-21-2007, 02:55 PM
Can you imagine Dunn playing left field at that ball park?? He is atrocious at GABP just imagine how many errors he would accumulate in SF.

Bonds is every bit the butcher in left that Dunn is.

jmcclain19
01-21-2007, 03:08 PM
I thought I heard that usually, when sides agree to terms they fax MLB those terms to make it official, which in turn makes it binding for both sides. But Bonds didn't allow that because he wasn't happy with the language, meaning that the agreement isn't binding.

MLB.com had an article a few weeks ago that exactly ZERO of the Giants free agent signings over the winter have actually inked the deal yet, due to the Giants adding this new language into the contracts. But everyone is acting like it's done because the League has been sent a notice.

I'll do some digging to find out exactly where I read that.

jmcclain19
01-21-2007, 03:12 PM
I'll do some digging to find out exactly where I read that.

Quoting myself here, I found what I was looking for. The "Letters of Agreement" is what I was refering to.

From MLB.com on Jan. 8th

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070108&content_id=1775232&vkey=hotstove2006&fext=.jsp


Bonds, who reached an agreement in principle Dec. 7 to return to the Giants in 2007, is no closer to signing the one-year, $16 million deal today than he was a month ago. Part of the problem, mirroring all the other players, is a change in the standard guarantee language rewritten this offseason by San Francisco's department of baseball operations in each of the contracts, said Bobby Evans, an assistant general manager, who is handling the details of all these deals.

With the opening of Spring Training just a little more than five weeks away, Evans said the Giants have signed letters of agreement with eight of their nine free agents, even though the contracts have yet to be inked.

"The one that doesn't have all the boxes checked off is Barry," Evans said. 'We do not have a complete signed letter of agreement. At Barry's request, Barry wanted to have all the language finalized before anything was signed and announced. That's the difference. That's why we haven't announced Barry's signing nor put him on the 40-man roster."

Indeed, Bonds said recently that he's not signing the contract until "they've dotted all the I's and crossed all the T's."

Aside from Bonds, the Giants are bringing back Pedro Feliz, Ray Durham and Steve Kline from last year's squad. So far, they have added Barry Zito, Dave Roberts, Rich Aurilia, Ryan Klesko and Bengie Molina.
. . .

"What it comes down to is how some of those things are worded," Evans said. "Things like prohibited activities. We don't want our players participating in certain team sports. Things like that. The list is longer than it has been in the past. This is not legalese. This is spelled out in plain English. It's easy to understand. It's a lot less ambiguous."

. . .
"I don't see how the negotiations with Barry has anything to do with any of the others," Evans said. "I'm trying to be consistent, fair, administratively conscientious and get something that everybody is comfortable with."

Borris declined to comment on the depth of the problems he's having with the Giants about the language in Bonds' new contract. He did say he was relatively certain that the standard guarantee language submitted to him was the same as what the Giants gave to the other eight free agents.

Hubba
01-21-2007, 03:13 PM
I thought I heard that usually, when sides agree to terms they fax MLB those terms to make it official, which in turn makes it binding for both sides. But Bonds didn't allow that because he wasn't happy with the language, meaning that the agreement isn't binding.

MLB.com had an article a few weeks ago that exactly ZERO of the Giants free agent signings over the winter have actually inked the deal yet, due to the Giants adding this new language into the contracts. But everyone is acting like it's done because the League has been sent a notice.

I'll do some digging to find out exactly where I read that.
I read the same thing but don't remember where,Maybe it was rotoworld?

George Anderson
01-21-2007, 03:25 PM
Bonds is every bit the butcher in left that Dunn is.

Bonds is considered one of the best defensive LF's in baseball history. Eight Gold Gloves are pretty impressive.

reds44
01-21-2007, 03:29 PM
Bonds is considered one of the best defensive LF's in baseball history. Eight Gold Gloves are pretty impressive.
Yeah, he used to be great. He's probably worse then Dunn is now.

Highlifeman21
01-21-2007, 03:31 PM
Bonds is considered one of the best defensive LF's in baseball history. Eight Gold Gloves are pretty impressive.


He deserved some of those Gold Gloves in Pittsburgh.

Some.

Barry Bonds probably hasn't been a Gold Glove LF since 1993.

You can equate this to the fact Ken Griffey Jr probably hasn't been a Gold Glove CF since 1998-99.

jmcclain19
01-21-2007, 03:38 PM
Bonds is considered one of the best defensive LF's in baseball history. Eight Gold Gloves are pretty impressive.

Watching him out there now is painful to the eyes. Forget anything over his head or not right at him. He'll make the highlight reel catch from time to time - but for the most part he's a statue out there. It seems like he takes the right routes to the balls after they've blown over his head, but he hasn't been a gold glove LF for quite some time.

Some of it is lack of hustle, some of it is that he just has nothing left in his knees.

George Anderson
01-21-2007, 03:41 PM
He deserved some of those Gold Gloves in Pittsburgh.

Some.

Barry Bonds probably hasn't been a Gold Glove LF since 1993.

You can equate this to the fact Ken Griffey Jr probably hasn't been a Gold Glove CF since 1998-99.

Bonds no doubt is not the defensive player he was in his prime but if you match them up I have a very hard time believing Dunn is Bonds equal in the outfield. Throw out the fact that Bonds can still adequately judge fly balls while Dunn cant, but Bonds still has the superior throwing arm.

Also one of Dunns many defensive problems is judging fly balls. Dunn has trouble judging fly balls with mild wind conditions at GABP, imagine what it would be like seeing him judge flyballs with the more turbulent wind off the ocean at San Fran.

Highlifeman21
01-21-2007, 04:28 PM
Bonds no doubt is not the defensive player he was in his prime but if you match them up I have a very hard time believing Dunn is Bonds equal in the outfield. Throw out the fact that Bonds can still adequately judge fly balls while Dunn cant, but Bonds still has the superior throwing arm.

Also one of Dunns many defensive problems is judging fly balls. Dunn has trouble judging fly balls with mild wind conditions at GABP, imagine what it would be like seeing him judge flyballs with the more turbulent wind off the ocean at San Fran.


I would say Dunn is better than Bonds right now defensively, and neither one of them has a good arm.

Bonds can't get to anything. You think Griffey Jr is a statue now? Bonds gets to even less. Bonds can barely walk the bases, much less run in the OF.

Falls City Beer
01-21-2007, 05:42 PM
Bonds no doubt is not the defensive player he was in his prime but if you match them up I have a very hard time believing Dunn is Bonds equal in the outfield. Throw out the fact that Bonds can still adequately judge fly balls while Dunn cant, but Bonds still has the superior throwing arm.

Also one of Dunns many defensive problems is judging fly balls. Dunn has trouble judging fly balls with mild wind conditions at GABP, imagine what it would be like seeing him judge flyballs with the more turbulent wind off the ocean at San Fran.

While it's still pretty windy in their new digs, it's nothing like Candlestick.

Chip R
01-21-2007, 05:53 PM
I think both sides will come to an agreement before ST because they need each other. SF needs players and Bonds is a draw, especially since he's chasing Aaron's record. And what's Bonds going to do, sit at home? Besides, it's not like the Giants would do anything if Bonds was 2 or 3 HRs away from the record and he tested positve for something. I know MLB might have something to say about it but if it were something that they couldn't do anything about, you think they would release him?

Petitt33
01-21-2007, 05:58 PM
Dunn is too young to play for the Giants. :D

vaticanplum
01-21-2007, 07:56 PM
I will be shocked if Bonds ends his career anywhere but San Francisco.

savafan
01-21-2007, 08:15 PM
I will be shocked if Bonds ends his career anywhere but San Francisco.

San Quentin?

TOBTTReds
01-21-2007, 09:53 PM
Yeah, he used to be great. He's probably worse then Dunn is now.

Is he really that bad of a fielder? I know he is slower than Edgar Martinez, but as far as his actual glove goes, he is much better. I wouldn't call him a butcher out there, just doesn't get to anything.

Falls City Beer
01-21-2007, 10:01 PM
Is he really that bad of a fielder? I know he is slower than Edgar Martinez, but as far as his actual glove goes, he is much better. I wouldn't call him a butcher out there, just doesn't get to anything.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, if you're not fast enough to get there to make the play, then what you do when you "get" there doesn't matter.

People defend guys like Aurilia and Golden Hands as good defenders, but the problem with both of those guys is that don't get a damn thing, so their "sure hands" are essentially wasted.

Bonds is brutal in the outfield (butcher, slow, bad, weak, pick your honorific). And unlike Dunn, Bonds does dog it.

George Foster
01-21-2007, 10:56 PM
San Quentin?

San Quentin took the place of Alcatraz, I think it's still in the same county as San Fran. So officially he would end his career there...:D

savafan
01-21-2007, 10:59 PM
San Quentin took the place of Alcatraz, I think it's still in the same county as San Fran. So officially he would end his career there...:D

Damn, I thought I was being clever. :laugh:

TOBTTReds
01-21-2007, 11:47 PM
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, if you're not fast enough to get there to make the play, then what you do when you "get" there doesn't matter.

People defend guys like Aurilia and Golden Hands as good defenders, but the problem with both of those guys is that don't get a damn thing, so their "sure hands" are essentially wasted.

Bonds is brutal in the outfield (butcher, slow, bad, weak, pick your honorific). And unlike Dunn, Bonds does dog it.

Completely disagree. Butcher and slow are two completely different things. Todd Walker was a butcher with no range, so was D'Angelo Jimenez. Juan Castro has no range, but not a butcher. If you give 100 grounders to Castro, and 100 to Todd Walker, the results will be very different despite similar poor range.

If I were to write on a scouting report that Juan Castro is a butcher, I'd be kicked out of a meeting immediately with an MLB team. If I said he had no range, it would be accepted.

Falls City Beer
01-21-2007, 11:57 PM
Completely disagree. Butcher and slow are two completely different things. Todd Walker was a butcher with no range, so was D'Angelo Jimenez. Juan Castro has no range, but not a butcher. If you give 100 grounders to Castro, and 100 to Todd Walker, the results will be very different despite similar poor range.

If I were to write on a scouting report that Juan Castro is a butcher, I'd be kicked out of a meeting immediately with an MLB team. If I said he had no range, it would be accepted.

Good hands is pretty much code for "not screwing up on balls hit right at 'em."

If you have no range it really doesn't matter either way. It's like putting a pretty hood ornament on a 72 Pinto. Nice to have, but not essential.

Either way, we're splitting hairs: Bonds sucks as a fielder; he's slow, gets bad jumps, dogs it when he's got to bear down and chase a ball to the track, weenie arm. But he's not a butcher. Better?

savafan
01-22-2007, 12:01 AM
But he's not a butcher. Better?

I agree. My uncle is a butcher, and it's pretty much a fine art. Bonds is more like a hacker.

TOBTTReds
01-22-2007, 12:30 AM
Bonds sucks as a fielder; he's slow, gets bad jumps, dogs it when he's got to bear down and chase a ball to the track, weenie arm. But he's not a butcher. Better?

I'll agree with that.

Jpup
01-22-2007, 01:30 AM
In the midst of these cold, cold offseason days, I figured I'd give the old hot stove a nice kick.

With all of these articles about the Bonds deal not being official and the Giants having second thoughts I noticed a few of them note that the Giants attempted to trade for Manny or Dunn but couldn't get a deal done so they went back to Bonds. If they decide to back out of their deal with Bonds could the Giants be desperate enough and allow Wayne to pry away some of their young arms for Adam?

link please. I haven't read anything mentioning Dunn and the Giants.

Wheelhouse
01-22-2007, 04:09 AM
Bonds is every bit the butcher in left that Dunn is.

Adam Dunn=2006: 156 games, 12 errors (led Major Leagues)

Barry Bonds= 2006: 116 games, 3 errors

Back to the drawing board...

Tom Servo
01-22-2007, 08:09 AM
link please. I haven't read anything mentioning Dunn and the Giants.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/sports/baseball/17chass.html?_r=1&em&ex=1169182800&en=caa8dd23f7601970&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin

Jpup
01-22-2007, 08:35 AM
Adam Dunn=2006: 156 games, 12 errors (led Major Leagues)

Barry Bonds= 2006: 116 games, 3 errors

Back to the drawing board...

you can't make an error if you don't get to the ball.

Falls City Beer
01-22-2007, 10:39 AM
Adam Dunn=2006: 156 games, 12 errors (led Major Leagues)

Barry Bonds= 2006: 116 games, 3 errors

Back to the drawing board...


Dude. Put down the slide rule and watch the games!

TRF
01-22-2007, 11:06 AM
Adam Dunn=2006: 156 games, 12 errors (led Major Leagues)

Barry Bonds= 2006: 116 games, 3 errors

Back to the drawing board...

Barry Bonds 197 TC
Adam Dunn 298 TC

Bonds 875 Innings
Dunn 1321 Innings

Sometimes it's ok to tell the whole story too. I'd say they are closer than you think.

Wheelhouse
01-22-2007, 03:38 PM
Barry Bonds 197 TC
Adam Dunn 298 TC

Bonds 875 Innings
Dunn 1321 Innings

Sometimes it's ok to tell the whole story too. I'd say they are closer than you think.

Double Bonds innings, double his errors. That's still Bonds 6, Dunn 12 (with Bonds having 430 innings more than Dunn.) And Dunn is HIDEOUS at getting to balls, and gets the worst jumps and takes the worst routes on balls in the game. Bonds is bad, but still has the instincts to do a serviceable job. You guys need to wake up to what a liability Dunn is in the field. "Tell the whole story"? What on earth are you talking about? Stop fooling yourself with illusions Dunn is a decent fielder. He is the very worst. Accept it.

TRF
01-22-2007, 11:00 PM
Oh, I accept it. I think he's horrible. I just think Bonds is too. But you only listed games played not innings. thats a pretty big misrepresentation of the facts.

Topcat
01-22-2007, 11:09 PM
I'd trade Dunn for Matt Cain, but the Giants wouldn't so there's really no point.

He would no better than a 15-10 starter here. Do not get me wrong I truly appreciate his talents but if that deal goes down then the Red's have to go out and acquire some Bat's immediately.