PDA

View Full Version : Rosenthal: Nationals and Reds disussing Dunn



Tom Servo
07-23-2007, 01:15 AM
It's no secret that Nationals general manager Jim Bowden covets Reds left fielder Adam Dunn and no surprise that the Nats are pursuing Dunn, according to major-league sources.

Whether the Nationals can obtain Dunn is another question.
One, they will face competition from other clubs in the trade market as the non-waiver deadline draws closer.

Two, they might not be willing to meet the Reds' price, assuming the Reds even like their prospects.

And three, they would be risking a mere rental of Dunn, who will become a free agent at the end of the season if he is traded.

While a trade does not appear close, the Reds have scouted the Nationals' most talented minor-league club, Class A Potomac.

Bowden, who was the Reds' GM when the team drafted Dunn in 1998, probably thinks that if he can get Dunn to D.C., he can talk him into signing long-term.

Dunn, 28, would be the centerpiece of the Nationals' rebuilding program as they move into their new ballpark next season and heaven knows that the Nats, last in the majors with 59 home runs, need the power.

Then again, after spending his entire career playing for losing teams in Cincinnati, Dunn might prefer to join an established contender.

In the worst-case scenario, if Bowden failed to sign Dunn long-term, the Nats would receive two high draft picks when he departed as a free agent.

It is not clear which other contenders are interested in Dunn. The Twins and Angels are among those looking for offense, and the Yankees and Red Sox always monitor the availability of big-name talent. The Padres, who have had past interest in Dunn, are more focused on improving their bench and adding depth to their rotation.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7050210

Unassisted
07-23-2007, 01:20 AM
I'll bet that Wayne makes any player offered from Washington in a trade take not just 1 but 2 physicals before accepting the trade. Due diligence squared. ;)

dougdirt
07-23-2007, 01:26 AM
All talks better include Chris Marrero for starters.

Eric_Davis
07-23-2007, 02:07 AM
Here's the National League players from the Elias' Sports Bureau's group of "A" and "B" players after the 2006 season. The rankings always come from service over the last two years, so in this case, 2005-2006. The new rankings come out at the end of the year and it will cover the 2006-2007 seasons to determine Free-Agent Compensation eligibility. The rankings are used to determine whether players are Type "A," "B" or "C" free agents. Their classification determines which draft picks a former team receives as compensation if the player signs with another team. The top 30% in each group get an "A" ranking, the next 20% a "B" ranking and the group between 50% and 60% a "C" ranking.

1 Albert Pujols 100.000 A
2 Jason Bay 96.000 A
3 Matt Holliday 95.111 A
4 Lance Berkman 89.565 A
5 Moises Alou 86.444 A
6 Pat Burrell 85.778 A
7 J.D. Drew 85.111 A
8 Todd Helton 84.348 A
9 Brian Giles 83.333 A
10 Derrek Lee 82.609 A
11 Andruw Jones 80.667 A
12 Geoff Jenkins 80.556 A
13 Carlos Beltran 80.444 A
14 Alfonso Soriano 80.222 A
15 Ryan Howard 80.000 A
16 Carlos Delgado 79.130 A
17 Adam Dunn 78.889 A
18 Ken Griffey Jr. 78.000 A
19 Nick Johnson 77.391 A
20 Luis Gonzalez 75.778 A
21 Brad Hawpe 75.556 A
22 Shawn Green 73.556 A
23 Randy Winn 73.222 A
24t Brady Clark 72.000 A
24t Jim Edmonds 72.000 A
26t Mike Cameron 71.333 A
26t Cliff Floyd 71.333 A
28 Aubrey Huff 70.889 A
29 Juan Encarnacion 70.667 A
30 Barry Bonds 70.000 A
31 Jacque Jones 67.111 A
32 Matt Murton 66.889 A
33 David Dellucci 66.333 A
34 Dave Roberts 66.000 A
35 Austin Kearns 65.444 A
36 Kenny Lofton 64.444 B
37 Josh Willingham 63.111 B
38 Ryan Church 62.000 B
39 Ryan Freel 61.333 B
40 Aaron Rowand 61.111 B
41 Jeff Conine 60.889 B
42 Preston Wilson 60.778 B
43 Nomar Garciaparra 60.000 B
44 Jeff Francoeur 58.889 B
45t Kevin Mench 58.444 B
45t Xavier Nady 58.444 B
47 Juan Pierre 58.111 B
48 Jose Guillen 57.556 B
49 Andre Ethier 55.889 B
50 Shea Hillenbrand 54.783 B
51 Ryan Klesko 53.778 B
52 Chris Duncan 53.444 B
53 Marlon Anderson 53.222 B
54 Adam LaRoche 53.043 B
55 Willy Taveras 52.222 B
56 Luke Scott 52.111 B
57t Jeromy Burnitz 51.111 B
57t Matt Diaz 51.111 B
The rest are C players or below.


Here's a reminder on how Compensation works:

Free Agent Compensation
A club may receive draft-pick compensation if it loses a free agent if:

the player signs with another club before December 2, or
the club offered arbitration to the free agent but failed to re-sign him.
Compensation is based on the free agent’s place in the Elias Sports Bureau’s ranking of all major league players by position based on their performance during the last two seasons. Players are ranked by league in one of five positional groups: 1) 1B/DH/OF, 2) 2B/SS/3B, 3) catchers, 4) starting pitchers or 5) relief pitchers. The statistical criteria, which vary by position, are not public.

Type A players:
Those who rank in the top 30 percent at their position. (The Type A pool shrinks to the top 20 percent after the 2007 season.)
Compensation for a Type A player is the signing club’s first-round draft pick and a supplemental pick between the first and second rounds.
Type B players:
Those who rank between 31 and 50 percent. (The Type B pool shrinks to between 21 and 40 percent after the 2007 season.)
Compensation for a Type B player is a supplemental pick between the first and second rounds.
Exceptions

If the signing club’s first-round draft pick falls in the upper half of the first round, that choice is protected and the signing club loses its second-round selection instead.
If a club signs multiple free agents within the same category, its earlier pick goes to the team that lost the higher-rated player.



I don't know what it is for type C players, if it's anything, but Elias Sports Bureau had rankings for them.

Eric_Davis
07-23-2007, 02:13 AM
I figured someone would be curious, so here's the American League FirstBasemen/Outfielders/DH category for Free-Agent Compensation status from the Elias Sports Bureau after the 2006 season (2005-2006 numbers having been used):

1 Vladimir Guerrero 95.278 A
2 Manny Ramirez 93.750 A
3t Travis Hafner 93.333 A
3t David Ortiz 93.333 A
5t Paul Konerko 93.077 A
5t Mark Teixeira 93.077 A
7 Bobby Abreu 89.444 A
8 Raul Ibanez 85.000 A
9 Lyle Overbay 84.615 A
10t Jermaine Dye 84.444 A
10t Grady Sizemore 84.444 A
12 Johnny Damon 82.083 A
13 Gary Sheffield 81.944 A
14 Hideki Matsui 81.667 A
15 Carlos Lee 80.833 A
16 Vernon Wells 79.444 A
17 Magglio Ordonez 78.611 A
18 Richie Sexson 76.923 A
19 Jason Giambi 76.154 A
20 Ichiro Suzuki 75.694 A
21 Gary Matthews Jr. 75.556 A
22 Justin Morneau 75.385 A
23 Carl Crawford 74.861 A
24 Emil Brown 73.611 A
25 Sean Casey 72.308 A
26 Jim Thome 71.667 A
27 Torii Hunter 70.833 A
28 David DeJesus 69.444 A
29 Nick Swisher 69.167 A
30 Juan Rivera 67.500 A
31 Michael Cuddyer 65.278 A
32 Kevin Millar 65.000 A
33 Frank Catalanotto 63.611 A
34t Milton Bradley 63.333 B
34t Coco Crisp 63.333 B
34t Frank Thomas 63.333 B
37t Reed Johnson 62.500 B
37t Trot Nixon 62.500 B
39t Garret Anderson 60.833 B
39t Chone Figgins 60.833 B
41t Craig Monroe 60.000 B
41t Mike Sweeney 60.000 B
43 Casey Blake 59.722 B
44 Jay Gibbons 59.444 B
45 Alex Rios 58.611 B
46 Ben Broussard 57.692 B
47 Mark Kotsay 53.333 B
48t Eric Hinske 53.077 B
48t Kevin Youkilis 53.077 B
50 Jay Payton 52.083 B
51 Mark DeRosa 51.944 B
52 Greg Norton 51.667 B
53 Rocco Baldelli 50.833 B
54 Jason Michaels 50.556 B
55 Brad Wilkerson 48.611 B
56 Jonny Gomes 48.333 B
57 Reggie Sanders 48.056 B

Eric_Davis
07-23-2007, 02:17 AM
If someone is interested in Adam Dunn for the next several years, it would be cheaper for them to get him now from us because then they'd just be resigning their own player instead of having to pay someone else a high draft pick for next year if they sign him after he was with another team. If they fail to sign him, then they still get two extra picks themselves. So, Dunn has a lot of trade value right now for that reason alone.

WVRed
07-23-2007, 06:18 AM
Stay away Wayne.

Stay very far away.

RedFanAlways1966
07-23-2007, 08:01 AM
Dunn, 28, would be the centerpiece of the Nationals' rebuilding program as they move into their new ballpark next season — and heaven knows that the Nats, last in the majors with 59 home runs, need the power.


Hmmmm, that is strange. About one year ago I read here at RZ that the Nats got a lot of power in a trade they made with some team that plays by the Ohio River. A lot of power.... what happened? :devil:

puca
07-23-2007, 08:22 AM
Hmmmm, that is strange. About one year ago I read here at RZ that the Nats got a lot of power in a trade they made with some team that plays by the Ohio River. A lot of power.... what happened? :devil:

And the Reds got bullpen help.....a lot of bullpen help.

Both teams swung and missed.

oneupper
07-23-2007, 08:23 AM
Hopefully, Wayne uses the Nat's "interest" to up the ante in the bidding process for Dunn.

redsfan4445
07-23-2007, 08:28 AM
maybe this time.. he makes sure Chad Cordero is included in the trade and makes Bowden take back magic man!!! still im leary of bowden.. he screwed us once, he will again

redsfan4445
07-23-2007, 08:33 AM
or make sure we get Zimmerman in the deal and Cordero.. then we can trade Edwin for pitching as well.

Red Leader
07-23-2007, 08:39 AM
I doubt the Nats are parting with Zimmerman. I don't think they'd include Zimmerman if we included Encarnacion.

I could see Cordero being involved however, and that scares me, because the Nats have been asking for a king's ransom for Cordero.

I'd like to see Cordero and Marrero involved in the deal, but I think that's highly unlikely.

OldXOhio
07-23-2007, 08:40 AM
Years ago, it was reported that a few GMs wrote Jim Bowden's name off their list of contacts after experiencing the short side of a deal with the Reds. If memory serves, Steve Phillips was one of them. Interesting that WK would be entertaining anything from JB after last year's Magic mess.

creek14
07-23-2007, 08:44 AM
Maybe we could get Chris Booker, D'Angelo Jimenez, Felipe Lopez, Dmitri Young and Austin Kearns.

Team Clark
07-23-2007, 08:56 AM
Years ago, it was reported that a few GMs wrote Jim Bowden's name off their list of contacts after experiencing the short side of a deal with the Reds. If memory serves, Steve Phillips was one of them. Interesting that WK would be entertaining anything from JB after last year's Magic mess.

I think it is smart on Wayne's part to talk to everybody. In effect creating a lot of "interest" in Adam Dunn. Not that there wasn't already. Keep it in the media and the pressure on other GM's may rise.

OldXOhio
07-23-2007, 08:58 AM
No doubt TC - I guess I was trying to allude to the difference b/w listening to someone's pitch and actually considering acting upon it.

flyer85
07-23-2007, 08:59 AM
Washington has the worst minor league system in baseball.

But who knows, maybe Dunn for Rauch.

GAC
07-23-2007, 09:07 AM
Years ago, it was reported that a few GMs wrote Jim Bowden's name off their list of contacts after experiencing the short side of a deal with the Reds. If memory serves, Steve Phillips was one of them. Interesting that WK would be entertaining anything from JB after last year's Magic mess.

There was a good article that came out several years ago on Bowden (interview). I think it was right after the Griffey deal, and I remember reading it. He said that if "blood" has to be spilled, then it's gonna be the other guy, and that he is unapologetic about his approach, and could care less if he pees other GMs off. Typical Bowden. Mostly mouth IMO.

Didn't his GF spill some of his blood a couple years back on a street corner in D.C. (or was it Miami)? ;)

Chip R
07-23-2007, 09:34 AM
Maybe we could get Chris Booker, D'Angelo Jimenez, Felipe Lopez, Dmitri Young and Austin Kearns.

:laugh:

jesusfan
07-23-2007, 09:52 AM
Dunn and Edwin for Cordero, Zimmerman, Rauch, and prospect..... DO IT!

jojo
07-23-2007, 09:54 AM
If someone is interested in Adam Dunn for the next several years, it would be cheaper for them to get him now from us because then they'd just be resigning their own player instead of having to pay someone else a high draft pick for next year if they sign him after he was with another team. If they fail to sign him, then they still get two extra picks themselves. So, Dunn has a lot of trade value right now for that reason alone.

That doesn't give Dunn a lot of trade value. That basically means a team looking to rent him would basically be willing to part with what they think his two month value plus two comp picks would be worth.

Given the Reds themselves could get two comp picks for him, that means the Reds take might be expected to be about what a team figures two months of Dunn would be worth.

Really Dunn's trade value only increases if the Reds can find a trading partner that wants him longer term and they are able to work out an extension as part of the deal. What the Reds get back would really depend upon how badly the other team wanted Dunn and how much they had to give Dunn in the extension (which probably isn't going to be discounted versus the FA market because the point would be to keep him form entering it). So even in this scenario, really the Reds are trading Dunn for two months and the right to negotiate without other teams butting in. That isn't quite the same thing as trading 4-5 control years of Dunn and IMHO doesn't dramatically increase what such a team would be willing to give the Reds in trade.

I'm fairly pessimistic that the Reds can get a ton of value for Dunn and if I had to bet the house, i'd say they pick up his option.

jojo
07-23-2007, 09:56 AM
Dunn and Edwin for Cordero, Zimmerman, Rauch, and prospect..... DO IT!

I'm thinking a guy whose heart is in Texas would be miserable living in the DC area. Getting Dunn to sign there long term would shock me...

Johnny Footstool
07-23-2007, 10:11 AM
Nick Johnson, Jon Rauch, and their best pitching prospect.

Joseph
07-23-2007, 10:16 AM
I'm thinking a guy whose heart is in Texas would be miserable living in the DC area. Getting Dunn to sign there long term would shock me...

I would have said the same thing about Austin Kearns, though trade Texas for Kentucky.

Team Clark
07-23-2007, 10:31 AM
Didn't his GF spill some of his blood a couple years back on a street corner in D.C. (or was it Miami)? ;)

Good times! :beerme: (Miami)

HotCorner
07-23-2007, 10:51 AM
This is a great move by WK! Have Adam Dunn's #1 fan get in on the bidding will only help drive up his price ... hopefully.

I read that if Washington is to trade Cordero then Rauch would become the closer so I don't see both being dealt.

wheels
07-23-2007, 10:51 AM
Nick Johnson, Jon Rauch, and their best pitching prospect.

Where does that leave Votto? LF?

Johnny Footstool
07-23-2007, 11:12 AM
Where does that leave Votto? LF?

Yep. Or traded for a pitcher -- I imagine he would bring an excellent return.

If you're giving up Dunn, you need a bat like Nick Johnson's to fill the void.

westofyou
07-23-2007, 11:20 AM
If you're giving up Dunn, you need a bat like Nick Johnson's to fill the void.
Hopefully it won't be Nicks body coming with said bat.

flyer85
07-23-2007, 11:22 AM
Hopefully it won't be Nicks body coming with said bat.as long as the get the wheelchair it should be OK. :evil:

redsfan4445
07-23-2007, 11:29 AM
Dunn and Edwin for Cordero, Zimmerman, Rauch, and prospect..... DO IT!

well i can see this deal, minus Rauch as he would take over for Cordero,.. and include Marrero their pitching prospect.... Nick Johnson is always hurt.. i think the reds do better giving 1st base to Votto!

KoryMac5
07-23-2007, 11:31 AM
I just can't see Wayne dealing with Bowden in the near future. Making a trade with Bowden is like making a trade with your ex-wife. :devil:

Johnny Footstool
07-23-2007, 11:31 AM
Hopefully it won't be Nicks body coming with said bat.

Meh. I'd rather have 450 ABs of Nick Johnson than 600 ABs of, say, Jacque Jones.

BRM
07-23-2007, 11:32 AM
Meh. 450 ABs of Nick Johnson is better than 600 ABs of, say, Jacque Jones.

I take it Johnny's no fan of Jacque Jones. That's alright. Cubs fans don't appreciate his game either.

fearofpopvol1
07-23-2007, 11:41 AM
I'm thinking a guy whose heart is in Texas would be miserable living in the DC area. Getting Dunn to sign there long term would shock me...

You'd think so, but I think the fact that he could/would be reunited with Kearns, his good friend, would be some incentive to stay. If you may remember correctly, Dunn was pretty bummed after Kearns was dealt.

Johnny Footstool
07-23-2007, 11:48 AM
I take it Johnny's no fan of Jacque Jones. That's alright. Cubs fans don't appreciate his game either.

I really dislike Jones' game. Lots of K's with no BBs, speed that's more rumor than fact. Decent OF glove, but he's past his prime.

BRM
07-23-2007, 11:48 AM
I really dislike Jones' game. Lots of K's with no BBs, speed that's more rumor than fact. Decent OF glove, but he's past his prime.

For the record, I was just messing with you JF. I have zero desire to see Jacque Jones in Cincinnati either.

flyer85
07-23-2007, 11:50 AM
I have zero desire to see Jacque Jones in Cincinnati either.I don't mind him in Cincy ...




as long as it is in a Cubs uniform.

westofyou
07-23-2007, 12:00 PM
Meh. I'd rather have 450 ABs of Nick Johnson than 600 ABs of, say, Jacque Jones.

Yeah, that's not exactly what I'd want either, nor do I want any player that breaks down like Nick... period.

REDREAD
07-23-2007, 12:11 PM
It's smart of Wayne to have dialog with Bowden about Dunn.

I'm getting the impression that the offers for Dunn aren't nearly what Wayne has hoped for.

We also don't know whether Wayne has been told by ownership that the option will not be picked up, or if Dunn has been ordered to be traded.

My guess is that no matter what we get back for Dunn, most of this board will be disappointed.

I actually think it's good though that Wayne isn't letting personal feelings get in the way of trying to make the team better. Naturally, I want all the Nats players X-Rayed, MRIed, carbon 14 dated, etc before the trade is made.

The Nats are probably going to have a lot of free money to spend to improve next year. When Bowden really wants a player bad, and has money to spend, he's been known to ante up more. Wayne might actually do best with Washington.

edabbs44
07-23-2007, 12:28 PM
It would be classic if a trade inclued Nick Johnson and when he got to the stadium, Wayne asks him "What are you doing on crutches?"

Joseph
07-23-2007, 01:53 PM
My guess is that no matter what we get back for Dunn, most of this board will be disappointed.

Half will be mad he was traded. The other half will be mad we didn't get enough in return.

wheels
07-23-2007, 02:09 PM
Instead of bemoaning the board reaction, let's look behind why the reaction would be as such.

What it tells me is that Dunn is more valuable to the Reds than in a trade.

So yeah, if that's really the case, I'd be upset about a Dunn trade. Say what you want about me, and gimme the big 'ol eye roll. I'm a big boy, I can take it.

KronoRed
07-23-2007, 02:11 PM
Maybe we could get Chris Booker, D'Angelo Jimenez, Felipe Lopez, Dmitri Young and Austin Kearns.

Sounds good..for 2003 :evil:

flyer85
07-23-2007, 02:48 PM
Cordero is the wrong kind of pitcher for the Reds to acquire.

1) He is no longer cheap as he closes in on free agency.
2) Is an extreme flyball pitcher that has been HR prone over the last 2 years. Think that will play well in GABP?
3) BB rate way up and Ks way down this year.

Focus on relievers that have a DOM(KK/B) well over 2 and a HR rate of well under 1.

fearofpopvol1
07-23-2007, 03:08 PM
I'd rather see the Reds get Rauch than Cordero.

BRM
07-23-2007, 03:19 PM
John Fay weighs in.



Moving to Dunn to the Nats would show the Wayne Krivsky isn't gun shy after the eight-player trade with Washington last year. But I'd be surprised that the two clubs would get together with the Gary Majewski grievance still pending.

If the Reds do move Dunn, I think fans will be shocked by how little they get for him because of his contract.

flyer85
07-23-2007, 03:21 PM
If the Reds do move Dunn, I think fans will be shocked by how little they get for him because of his contract.Which really means there is no reason to trade him at this point.

Matt700wlw
07-23-2007, 04:13 PM
Which really means there is no reason to trade him at this point.

They may be better off picking up the option, and trading him in the offseason...you may be able to get more.

That's a risky move (financially) because if they still can't move him, they're stuck paying for him, which I don't think they want to do.

However, if they can't move him, they don't pick up the option, and he walks after the season for nothing, they look stupid.

They're in a tough spot.

PuffyPig
07-23-2007, 04:16 PM
They may be better off picking up the option, and trading him in the offseason...you may be able to get more.

That's a risky move (financially) because if they still can't move him, they're stuck paying for him, which I don't think they want to do.

However, if they can't move him, they don't pick up the option, and he walks after the season for nothing, they look stupid.

They're in a tough spot.


If the option is picked up, they can't trade him until June 15 (I think). And even then there's a limited list of teams.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 04:18 PM
I'd just try to extend him. Let the imbeciles around baseball not get one of the most underrated bats in the sport. I'd be thrilled to have the big guy for five more years. If for no other reason than to subject all the ham-and-egger fans to his strikeouts. :devil:

flyer85
07-23-2007, 04:21 PM
If the option is picked up, they can't trade him until June 15 (I think). And even then there's a limited list of teams.Basically a limited no-trade clause is just a way to give a player some veto ability. Generally it is used to force the acquiring team to give the player an extension.

flyer85
07-23-2007, 04:22 PM
I really have no idea what they may or may not be doing with Dunn.

The only thing I am confident about is that WK will make a shambles of the moves that are coming.

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 04:25 PM
If the option is picked up, they can't trade him until June 15 (I think). And even then there's a limited list of teams.
Correct. A full no trade clause is in effect untill June 15th (2008). Afterwards, Dunn can choose up to nineteen teams that he can't be traded to without his consent.

Unless Krivsky is just bowled over with a deal, he may be better off excercising Dunn's option and tell him to go ahead and start working on his list of teams. It may be difficult to move Dunn that far away from the trade deadline, but if nothing pans out, there is always the two comp picks in the2009 draft waiting.

Matt700wlw
07-23-2007, 04:26 PM
If the option is picked up, they can't trade him until June 15 (I think). And even then there's a limited list of teams.

Yet another complication...

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 04:29 PM
Yet another complication...
Dunn also receives a 500K assignment bonus if traded.

BRM
07-23-2007, 04:30 PM
I'd just try to extend him. Let the imbeciles around baseball not get one of the most underrated bats in the sport. I'd be thrilled to have the big guy for five more years. If for no other reason than to subject all the ham-and-egger fans to his strikeouts. :devil:

It would certainly keep RedsZone buzzing with "discussion" about his production for another year.

pedro
07-23-2007, 04:30 PM
The Reds could also choose to not exercise the option and offer Dunn arbitration instead. If Dunn chose not to accept arb the Reds would get the draft picks and if he does accept arb, they'd be free to trade him at any time. That may be a better option if no one is really offering much up in a trade right now.

Personally, I'd prefer the Reds try and sign him to an extension similar to the one recently given to Travis Hafner.

Red Leader
07-23-2007, 04:31 PM
and a settlement check for his Laz-e-boy.

Matt700wlw
07-23-2007, 04:36 PM
Dunn also receives a 500K assignment bonus if traded.

He's got a good agent

KronoRed
07-23-2007, 04:44 PM
Great baseball players usually do :)

KronoRed
07-23-2007, 04:45 PM
Which really means there is no reason to trade him at this point.

Yep, this feeling I get from some fans and media that the Reds MUST deal Dunn is baffling, if the trade doesn't make the team better then don't do it.

Kc61
07-23-2007, 04:47 PM
He's got a good agent

If the Reds were contending, the Dunn deal would be ok. They could pick up the option for next year and be happy to spend the $13.5 million to help them win a pennant.

As things now stand, Dunn's deal is win/win for Dunn. He either is a free agent or he gets the $13.5 option exercised, with trade protection next year and free agency when 2008 ends. The Reds are faced with a $13.5 million decision for a team that is unlikely to be a contender during that option year.

I don't think the arbitration gambit will happen (assuming it's even possible under the contract). Too much money involved. Reds aren't going to risk having an arbitrator set Dunn's salary next year. Could be even more than $13.5.

Personally, I think Dunn is playing his last week with the Reds. The only sensible decision, other than trading him, is to re-negotiate and sign him long term. I think the trade will happen.

Johnny Footstool
07-23-2007, 04:48 PM
and a settlement check for his Laz-e-boy.

That needs to come out of Dave Miley's pocket.

That, and a fee for the Danny Graves jersey he stole from Dunn and gave his wife for her charity auction.

Matt700wlw
07-23-2007, 04:49 PM
If the Reds were contending, the Dunn deal would be ok. They could pick up the option for next year and be happy to spend the $13.5 million to help them win a pennant.

As things now stand, Dunn's deal is win/win for Dunn. He either is a free agent or he gets the $13.5 option exercised, with trade protection next year and free agency when 2008 ends. The Reds are faced with a $13.5 million decision for a team that is unlikely to be a contender during that option year.

I don't think the arbitration gambit will happen (assuming it's even possible under the contract). Too much money involved. Reds aren't going to risk having an arbitrator set Dunn's salary next year. Could be even more than $13.5.

Personally, I think Dunn is playing his last week with the Reds. The only sensible decision, other than trading him, is to re-negotiate and sign him long term. I think the trade will happen.


I think he'll be traded too, but I'm just looking at the whole picture and the scenarios on what happens if he doesn't get traded.

It's not as simple as it is for other players.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 04:49 PM
It would certainly keep RedsZone buzzing with "discussion" about his production for another year.

Like three-year-olds getting inoculated for measles--they don't realize it's good for them in the long run. But boy, they sure do cry.

BRM
07-23-2007, 04:51 PM
Like three-year-olds getting inoculated for measles--they don't realize it's good for them in the long run. But boy, they sure do cry.

That's an interesting comp. I like it.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 04:53 PM
If the Reds were contending, the Dunn deal would be ok. They could pick up the option for next year and be happy to spend the $13.5 million to help them win a pennant.

As things now stand, Dunn's deal is win/win for Dunn. He either is a free agent or he gets the $13.5 option exercised, with trade protection next year and free agency when 2008 ends. The Reds are faced with a $13.5 million decision for a team that is unlikely to be a contender during that option year.

I don't think the arbitration gambit will happen (assuming it's even possible under the contract). Too much money involved. Reds aren't going to risk having an arbitrator set Dunn's salary next year. Could be even more than $13.5.

Personally, I think Dunn is playing his last week with the Reds. The only sensible decision, other than trading him, is to re-negotiate and sign him long term. I think the trade will happen.

But if people are offering peanuts for him, the decision becomes a slam-dunk in favor of extending him.

I cringe at the thought of this offense without Dunn. Even if Bruce comes up next season and goes all Pujols or something. With Griffey giving the Reds an uncharacteristic and unsustainable shot in the arm, the Reds simply MUST have a power source in their lineup. And, really, for the money, there are few hitters I'd want more than Dunn.

Red Leader
07-23-2007, 04:55 PM
Maybe the reason the Reds don't want to pay Dunn's option next year or extend him in future years is because they realize (hopefully) that in order for him to be worth that contract, they'll have to upgrade the rest of the offense, thus more money will have to be spent...

Kc61
07-23-2007, 05:02 PM
But if people are offering peanuts for him, the decision becomes a slam-dunk in favor of extending him.

I cringe at the thought of this offense without Dunn. Even if Bruce comes up next season and goes all Pujols or something. With Griffey giving the Reds an uncharacteristic and unsustainable shot in the arm, the Reds simply MUST have a power source in their lineup. And, really, for the money, there are few hitters I'd want more than Dunn.

They'll use the $10 million saved (by trading Dunn for kids) and use it to add another $10 million piece. Maybe we won't like who they get, but the Reds won't see it as a trade for peanuts. They'll see it as allowing a move in free agency or another trade.

When trying to avoid paying a big salary, sports teams look at the return as secondary. The main point is -- we don't want to pay $X to X player. Let's get someone else to take him, and give us cheap players back. We'll use the money more wisely on others.

As for Dunn's value as a player, I think they would be happy to keep him one more year if the team was contending. But they aren't, so one year doesn't really get you much, particularly with his no-trade protections. My gut is that they don't want to give him $75 million for 5 years. So I think he'll be traded. Just one opinion.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 05:04 PM
They'll use the $10 million saved (by trading Dunn for kids) and use it to add another $10 million piece. Maybe we won't like who they get, but the Reds won't see it as a trade for peanuts. They'll see it as allowing a move in free agency or another trade.

When trying to avoid paying a big salary, sports teams look at the return as secondary. The main point is -- we don't want to pay $X to X player. Let's get someone else to take him, and give us cheap players back. We'll use the money more wisely on others.

As for Dunn's value as a player, I think they would be happy to keep him one more year if the team was contending. But they aren't, so one year doesn't really get you much, particularly with his no-trade protections. My gut is that they don't want to give him $75 million for 5 years. So I think he'll be traded. Just one opinion.

The Royals and Pirates think this way. Let your good players walk for nothing.

pedro
07-23-2007, 05:08 PM
The Royals and Pirates think this way. Let your good players walk for nothing.

The A's do it too (see Tejada, Miguel)

westofyou
07-23-2007, 05:11 PM
The A's do it too (see Tejada, Miguel)

Giambi, Damon, Zito.....

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 05:12 PM
But if people are offering peanuts for him, the decision becomes a slam-dunk in favor of extending him.
Maybe not the slam dunk we think. Dunn's option can increase to 16M with performance escalators in his contract. I don't know what they are and couldn't find anything about them after a google search. Perhaps he's already met them or close to meeting them. Certainly that extra 3M (if Dunn receives it) in salary is going to play a part in any decision to excercise the option.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 05:14 PM
The A's do it too (see Tejada, Miguel)

Right. But they 1. already had a contending team in place 2. Tejada was older than Dunn (do you think if the Reds had only signed Junior through age 34, anyone would have given a damn had they allowed him to walk away at that point?).

Sure very good teams have let good players walk away. But context is important here. The Reds might as well close up shop and stop playing for 5 years if they let Dunn walk away for nothing.

They've got very little margin for error here.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 05:15 PM
Giambi, Damon, Zito.....

Didn't they get draft picks for several of these guys, though? By trading Dunn for throwaway prospects, they are getting even LESS than draft picks.

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:17 PM
Neither MLB4U or Cot's lists what the incentives are for Dunn's 2008 option. MLB4U does have this roundup of Dunn trade rumors though.



Reds are willing to deal him, but for a very high price. The Twins would have interest if the Reds paid most of his remaining salary. The Padres are willing to move Scott Linebrink and another arm for Dunn, but Reds sought even more than that package. The Dodgers are interested but lack a lineup spot for him. The Angels and Mariners also contacted the Reds, but were baffled by the asking price: a starting pitcher, a middle infielder and top prospect. Braves, Tigers, Astros and White Sox are also scouting him. Nationals are also interested.
Last Updated: 11:29 AM - Jul 23, 07 Source: Ken Rosenthal

pedro
07-23-2007, 05:17 PM
Right. But they 1. already had a contending team in place 2. Tejada was older than Dunn (do you think if the Reds had only signed Junior through age 34, anyone would have given a damn had they allowed him to walk away at that point?).

Sure very good teams have let good players walk away. But context is important here. The Reds might as well close up shop and stop playing for 5 years if they let Dunn walk away for nothing.

They've got very little margin for error here.

Tejada was 27 at the time the A's let him walk.

I'd prefer that the Reds resign Dunn but if they decide to move on I think I'd rather have the draft picks than a substandard trade return.

Aronchis
07-23-2007, 05:19 PM
Tejada was 27 at the time the A's let him walk.

I'd prefer that the Reds resign Dunn but if they decide to move on I think I'd rather have the draft picks than a substandard trade return.

I agree. The Reds may just liquidate Dunn one way or another.

Red Leader
07-23-2007, 05:21 PM
So, it sounds to me like Wayne is holding out for something ridiculous, which is fine. I just hope he doesn't wake up on July 31st and say "well, none of those teams were willing to go that extra step, so I'll just go ahead and deal him for what they want to give me."

Although Linebrink + pitching prospect (depending on prospect) isn't as terrible a deal as I would have thought they were being offered.

I wonder why the demand of a middle infielder? A major league middle infielder at that? Maybe the Reds do want to trade Alex Gonzalez this offseason? I doubt it's because they're looking to move Brandon Phillips.

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:21 PM
I'd prefer that the Reds resign Dunn but if they decide to move on I think I'd rather have the draft picks than a substandard trade return.

Can the team decline the option and offer arbitration instead? Is that allowed?

pedro
07-23-2007, 05:22 PM
Can the team decline the option and offer arbitration instead? Is that allowed?

Yes.

Red Leader
07-23-2007, 05:23 PM
Can the team decline the option and offer arbitration instead? Is that allowed?

I think Dunn is a free agent at the end of the 2007 season. So, I believe if they decline the option, he is no longer under their control, and thus a free agent. Not sure on arbitration rules for free agents.

Aronchis
07-23-2007, 05:23 PM
So, it sounds to me like Wayne is holding out for something ridiculous, which is fine. I just hope he doesn't wake up on July 31st and say "well, none of those teams were willing to go that extra step, so I'll just go ahead and deal him for what they want to give me."

Although Linebrink + pitching prospect (depending on prospect) isn't as terrible a deal as I would have thought they were being offered.

I wonder why the demand of a middle infielder? A major league middle infielder at that? Maybe the Reds do want to trade Alex Gonzalez this offseason? I doubt it's because they're looking to move Brandon Phillips.

I doubt the Reds want Linebrink for Dunn. They want to liquidate his position completely. Of course being Adam Dunn, they want a very high ceiling prospect in return. Whether a team blinks is the unknown factor. If they don't, we get picks.

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:24 PM
Yes.


I think Dunn is a free agent at the end of the 2007 season. So, I believe if they decline the option, he is no longer under their control, and thus a free agent. Meaning the Reds cannot offer arbitration.

Well, which one of you is correct? :)

If it is allowed, it would be an interesting gamble to take.

Falls City Beer
07-23-2007, 05:24 PM
It'd be great if they let Dunn walk away and try to piece together offense by signing two over-the-hill stiffs $5 million apiece. That would be Classic Wayne.

pedro
07-23-2007, 05:25 PM
I think Dunn is a free agent at the end of the 2007 season. So, I believe if they decline the option, he is no longer under their control, and thus a free agent. Meaning the Reds cannot offer arbitration.

From what I understand teams can always offer arbitration and in fact must if they want to get compensation picks.

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:25 PM
It'd be great if they let Dunn walk away and try to piece together offense by signing two over-the-hill stiffs $5 million a piece. That would be Classic Wayne.

Jacque Jones is on his way!

IslandRed
07-23-2007, 05:28 PM
The Reds not only are allowed to offer arbitration to their outgoing free agents, they MUST in order to get draft-pick compensation.

I think there's little chance of Dunn accepting arbitration, anyway, since it means coming back to this zoo (and without trade protection) instead of taking the security of a multi-year deal somewhere else. But with the famous exception of Greg Maddux aside, teams generally know if the player has any intention of accepting an arbitration offer and proceed accordingly.

Red Leader
07-23-2007, 05:29 PM
Well, which one of you is correct? :)

If it is allowed, it would be an interesting gamble to take.

Come to think about it, I think pedro is correct.

A player has 3 arbitration years and then is a free agent. If a players turns F.A., as Dunn will after 2007, the team he played for can still offer him arbitration, but the player at that time then has the right to decline arbitration and become a free agent, or accept arbitration, have a hearing and stay with his previous team. I think that's how it works.

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:30 PM
It'd be great if they let Dunn walk away and try to piece together offense by signing two over-the-hill stiffs $5 million apiece. That would be Classic Wayne.

I just did a quick scan of free agent outfielders for 2008. How does a LF platoon of Luis Gonzalez and Rondell White strike you? They should work for Dunn's money, huh?

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:31 PM
Come to think about it, I think pedro is correct.

A player has 3 arbitration years and then is a free agent. If a players turns F.A., as Dunn will after 2007, the team he played for can still offer him arbitration, but the player at that time then has the right to decline arbitration and become a free agent, or accept arbitration, have a hearing and stay with his previous team. I think that's how it works.

Makes sense. I just didn't know if the option muddied the waters for the process. It sounds like it doesn't.

jojo
07-23-2007, 05:41 PM
They may be better off picking up the option, and trading him in the offseason...you may be able to get more.

That's a risky move (financially) because if they still can't move him, they're stuck paying for him, which I don't think they want to do.

However, if they can't move him, they don't pick up the option, and he walks after the season for nothing, they look stupid.

They're in a tough spot.

Really it's not risky in the sense that it's pretty likely that the Reds would simply have to pay him what his production is worth in '08 (based upon his projected performance).

It's only risky if the Reds have zero intention of retaining him. But truthfully, I'm not sure where they could spend that $13M in a less risky fashion...

jojo
07-23-2007, 05:43 PM
If the option is picked up, they can't trade him until June 15 (I think). And even then there's a limited list of teams.

Dunn can waive it though....

jojo
07-23-2007, 05:50 PM
If the Reds were contending, the Dunn deal would be ok. They could pick up the option for next year and be happy to spend the $13.5 million to help them win a pennant.

As things now stand, Dunn's deal is win/win for Dunn. He either is a free agent or he gets the $13.5 option exercised, with trade protection next year and free agency when 2008 ends. The Reds are faced with a $13.5 million decision for a team that is unlikely to be a contender during that option year.

I don't think the arbitration gambit will happen (assuming it's even possible under the contract). Too much money involved. Reds aren't going to risk having an arbitrator set Dunn's salary next year. Could be even more than $13.5.

Personally, I think Dunn is playing his last week with the Reds. The only sensible decision, other than trading him, is to re-negotiate and sign him long term. I think the trade will happen.


The likelihood that Dunn would accept arbitration is probably less than 10%. Accepting arb would be a huge risk for for what would be a relatively minor raise compared to the security and magnitude of a contract he could get on the free agent market.

jojo
07-23-2007, 05:53 PM
Right. But they 1. already had a contending team in place 2. Tejada was older than Dunn (do you think if the Reds had only signed Junior through age 34, anyone would have given a damn had they allowed him to walk away at that point?).

Sure very good teams have let good players walk away. But context is important here. The Reds might as well close up shop and stop playing for 5 years if they let Dunn walk away for nothing.

They've got very little margin for error here.

Well the biggest part of the Oakland equation is, they thought they had someone to replace Tejada.

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 05:53 PM
Dunn can waive it though....
It's a team option, not a mutual one.

BRM
07-23-2007, 05:54 PM
It's a team option, not a mutual one.

I believe he was referring to the no trade clause.

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 05:56 PM
I believe he was referring to the no trade clause.
Ooops. My bad.

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 05:58 PM
Ok then, but would the MLBPA allow Dunn to waive to the no trade clause?

jojo
07-23-2007, 06:00 PM
Come to think about it, I think pedro is correct.

A player has 3 arbitration years and then is a free agent. If a players turns F.A., as Dunn will after 2007, the team he played for can still offer him arbitration, but the player at that time then has the right to decline arbitration and become a free agent, or accept arbitration, have a hearing and stay with his previous team. I think that's how it works.

Declining a player's option does not relinquish the team's rights to his service per se. They can still offer him arbitration. If he refuses, then he is a free agent and the team can be compensated with draft picks depending upon the status of the player.

jojo
07-23-2007, 06:01 PM
It's a team option, not a mutual one.


:beerme:

flyer85
07-23-2007, 06:02 PM
Ok then, but would the MLBPA allow Dunn to waive to the no trade clause?players do it all the time, it's what got Cormier an extra contract year out of the Reds. It is used as a negotiating chip.

Chip R
07-23-2007, 06:14 PM
I don't see the sense of not picking up Dunn's option and then offering him arbitration - if you know he's going to accept. For one thing, his salary could be much higher than the $13M he would get if the option is picked up. And, although the Reds would be able to trade him to anyone at any point before the non-waiver deadline, how many teams are going to want him anyway? Teams don't want him now obstensibly because he would be a free agent after the end of this season but next year would be the same scenario. Plus his salary could be higher than the $13M he'd make if the Reds picked up the option so that would be another stumbling block if they did that. Not picking up his option and offering arbitration just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me unless they know he doesn't want to come back.

jojo
07-23-2007, 06:20 PM
I don't see the sense of not picking up Dunn's option and then offering him arbitration - if you know he's going to accept. For one thing, his salary could be much higher than the $13M he would get if the option is picked up. And, although the Reds would be able to trade him to anyone at any point before the non-waiver deadline, how many teams are going to want him anyway? Teams don't want him now obstensibly because he would be a free agent after the end of this season but next year would be the same scenario. Plus his salary could be higher than the $13M he'd make if the Reds picked up the option so that would be another stumbling block if they did that. Not picking up his option and offering arbitration just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me unless they know he doesn't want to come back.

It would be a shocking decision if he accepted the Reds arbitration offer.

Reds Nd2
07-23-2007, 06:28 PM
players do it all the time, it's what got Cormier an extra contract year out of the Reds. It is used as a negotiating chip.
Cormier waived his 10 and 5 rights, not a complete no trade clause in his contract though. Maybe I'm just splitting hairs, but it seems the player's association might have a problem with a player trying to get of a portion of his contract.

Kc61
07-23-2007, 06:32 PM
It would be a shocking decision if he accepted the Reds arbitration offer.

Correct, if Dunn were offered good long-term deals by other teams, he would decline arbitration. I'm assuming he would be offered those deals, but if not Dunn would accept arbitration with the Reds.

The only "gain" in it for the Reds if they offer arb is draft choices. So, they can offer Dunn arb, take the risk (even if small) that he accepts, and either get draft choices or, if he accepts arb (small chance) get Dunn at some astronomical arbitration salary.

I don't see the Reds taking the gamble, even if small, that they arbitrate with Dunn. Why should they take this risk? For draft choices? Just don't see it happening.

REDREAD
07-23-2007, 06:41 PM
Instead of bemoaning the board reaction, let's look behind why the reaction would be as such.

What it tells me is that Dunn is more valuable to the Reds than in a trade.

So yeah, if that's really the case, I'd be upset about a Dunn trade. Say what you want about me, and gimme the big 'ol eye roll. I'm a big boy, I can take it.

Actually, you make a good point. If the Reds are willing to big up Dunn's option, they have 1.5 years of Dunn.. but if they trade him, they are only trading 1/2 year of Dunn.

It makes sense.

If you flip things around. Let's suppose last year we were a little closer to being a legit contender. Let's suppose we were chasing Soriano and Carlos Lee. I imagine most of the board wouldn't want to give up much to rent one of those guys for the stretch run. Likewise, SD, Angels, Dodgers, etc probably don't want to give up prime prospects for a half season of Dunn either.

REDREAD
07-23-2007, 06:44 PM
and a settlement check for his Laz-e-boy.

Maybe Cast can buy back the Graves Jersey they stole from him as well. :laugh:

oregonred
07-23-2007, 06:53 PM
THis headline sure got my attention. Would like to have those calls bugged for general entertainment value alone.

REDREAD
07-23-2007, 07:03 PM
Ok then, but would the MLBPA allow Dunn to waive to the no trade clause?


Sure, it happens all the time. Recent examples are Cormier and Sheffield. They both waived no trade clauses, but they negotiated more years to do it.

Patrick Bateman
07-23-2007, 07:26 PM
How about a Dunn and EE for Zimmerman deal?

Mario-Rijo
07-23-2007, 07:35 PM
How about a Dunn and EE for Zimmerman deal?

I honestly would almost do that deal, I would also get a whole lot of flack for it here. Zimmerman IMO will end up being the best defensive and perhaps the best overall 3B of this new generation. David Wright is an offensive force and plays good defense but Zimm is a guy who I just would take the chance that if you gave him the proper instruction with regards to hitting he would take to it and improve by leaps and bounds. He is the Harang of 3rd baggers, intense, competitive and a hard worker. That said he ain't an awful hitter but he definitely could and likely will improve.

Of course I would definitely attempt to gain another player or 2 from the deal. However I don't think Jimbo trades Zimmerman for anyone (at least not anyone on this team).

PuffyPig
07-23-2007, 07:36 PM
How about a Dunn and EE for Zimmerman deal?

I bet you would like an Austin Kearns jersey with the Nationals?

What'll you give me for it?

PuffyPig
07-23-2007, 07:38 PM
I honestly would almost do that deal, I would also get a whole lot of flack for it here. Zimmerman IMO will end up being the best defensive and perhaps the best overall 3B of this new generation. David Wright is an offensive force and plays good defense but Zimm is a guy who I just would take the chance that if you gave him the proper instruction with regards to hitting he would take to it and improve by leaps and bounds. He is the Harang of 3rd baggers, intense, competitive and a hard worker. That said he ain't an awful hitter but he definitely could and likely will improve.

Of course I would definitely attempt to gain another player or 2 from the deal. However I don't think Jimbo trades Zimmerman for anyone (at least not anyone on this team).

Getting Zimmerman for Dunn and EE would be a steal for us, considering Dunn's pending FA.

Patrick Bateman
07-23-2007, 07:48 PM
Getting Zimmerman for Dunn and EE would be a steal for us, considering Dunn's pending FA.

I'd definitely agree.

My original thought was Dunn, EE, and something else good, but I can't figure out who that would be. I'm thinking adding Cueto to the mix would make it a deal worth considering for both sides.

jojo
07-23-2007, 07:53 PM
Correct, if Dunn were offered good long-term deals by other teams, he would decline arbitration. I'm assuming he would be offered those deals, but if not Dunn would accept arbitration with the Reds.

The only "gain" in it for the Reds if they offer arb is draft choices. So, they can offer Dunn arb, take the risk (even if small) that he accepts, and either get draft choices or, if he accepts arb (small chance) get Dunn at some astronomical arbitration salary.

I don't see the Reds taking the gamble, even if small, that they arbitrate with Dunn. Why should they take this risk? For draft choices? Just don't see it happening.

If the Reds declined Dunn's option and then offered him arb, Dunn would have to decline the Reds offer and file for free agency before other teams could make their offers.

But Dunn's agent certainly should have a sense of Dunn's market and it's pretty unlikely that Dunn would accept arbitration given a likelihood that someone would tender him a long term deal. Accepting arb and getting maybe $15M instead of the original $13M just isn't worth the risk of injury or of have a poor walk year etc which could cost him many millions more on his next contract.

Why would the Reds risk Dunn taking the arb offer? Those to supplemental draft picks are actually pretty valuable and if you don't offer arb to Dunn, he walks for nothing. Worst case scenario, the reds simply end up paying Dunn roughly what his production is worth (assuming no injury or slumpy type year).

jojo
07-23-2007, 07:58 PM
BTW, despite a guy like Cutler wanting to dump Dunn so that $13M can be spent on pitching, pitching, pitching, pitching.....that $13M really isn't going to buy a whole lot of pitching considering the upcoming crop of free agents.

Besides, I can think of no worse use of free agent money than spending buckets of it on your bullpen.

IslandRed
07-23-2007, 07:59 PM
I don't see the Reds taking the gamble, even if small, that they arbitrate with Dunn. Why should they take this risk? For draft choices? Just don't see it happening.

Two early draft picks are huge for a team that's trying to rebuild its farm system.

In any event, the decision tree really doesn't lead where you're saying, because you're describing the worst-case scenario -- he walks and we get nothing. If the Reds are not intending to pick up his option *and* they're not willing to take the (low) risk of arbitration, then he'll be traded this month for whatever's on the table.

pedro
07-23-2007, 08:01 PM
Two early draft picks are huge for a team that's trying to rebuild its farm system.

In any event, the decision tree really doesn't lead where you're saying, because you're describing the worst-case scenario -- he walks and we get nothing. If the Reds are not intending to pick up his option *and* they're not willing to take the (low) risk of arbitration, then he'll be traded this month for whatever's on the table.

I agree completely.

KronoRed
07-23-2007, 09:57 PM
Jacque Jones is on his way!

What good player is he bringing with him? :evil:

Patrick Bateman
07-24-2007, 12:41 AM
I bet you would like an Austin Kearns jersey with the Nationals?

What'll you give me for it?

Where would you get that crazy idea?

fearofpopvol1
07-24-2007, 01:39 AM
I think I would do the Linebrink + pitching prospect for Dunn, assuming it was an above average one. At least you get a proven pitcher and someone who is automatic out of the pen (which is something the Reds DESPERATELY need).

Jpup
07-24-2007, 01:50 AM
Adam Dunn should be a Red for, at least, the next 5 years. I can't see any reason for the Reds to play cheap and not lock him up. This talk of trading him for Scott Linebrink or anybody like that is crazy talk.:help:

Eric_Davis
07-24-2007, 05:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric_Davis
If someone is interested in Adam Dunn for the next several years, it would be cheaper for them to get him now from us because then they'd just be resigning their own player instead of having to pay someone else a high draft pick for next year if they sign him after he was with another team. If they fail to sign him, then they still get two extra picks themselves. So, Dunn has a lot of trade value right now for that reason alone.



That doesn't give Dunn a lot of trade value. That basically means a team looking to rent him would basically be willing to part with what they think his two month value plus two comp picks would be worth.
.

Jojo, you missed the whole topic of what I said. His high value right now is to those teams interested in having Dunn on their team for the next several years. You're talking about something else, which if fine, but it's not what I was talking about.

Eric_Davis
07-24-2007, 05:55 AM
To solve some of the confusion, here are the rules for Arbitration and Free Agency:

Arbitration

A player and club who cannot agree on a contract may agree to salary arbitration, provided the player has enough Major League service time. CBA, Article VI F.

Eligibility

The following players are eligible for arbitration:

Players with at least 3 but less than 6 years of Major League service time.

The top 17 percent of players with at least 2 but less than 3 years of Major League service. (See Super 2). To qualify as a Super 2, a player must have accumulated at least 86 days of service in the previous year. (A year of service is 172 days. The historical cutoff point for Super 2 status is 2 years, 128 days of service, though the requirement has been as high as 2 years, 140 days.)

Players who have filed for free agency and both received and accepted offers of arbitration from their former club.

Offer requirements

A club must offer contracts to players under its control by December 12.

If a player has filed for free agency, his former club must offer him arbitration by December 1. If the player accepts by December 7, he becomes club property again, returns to the roster, and the two sides may continue to negotiate or go to an arbitration hearing. If the player declines, the sides may continue to negotiate. (A club offering arbitration to a player who has filed for free agency retains the right to draft-pick compensation if he signs elsewhere. The club forfeits compensation if it does not offer arbitration. See Free Agent Compensation.)

The club's salary offer to a player under its control (pre-free agency players) may not be less than 80% of the player's salary and performance bonuses the previous year or less than 70% of his salary and performance bonuses from 2 years earlier. (Exception: If a player won an arbitration award the previous year increasing his salary 50% or more, the 80% requirement does not apply.) The 80% rule does not apply to free agents who are offered arbitration.

Procedure

In January, the player and the club each submit a salary figure for arbitration. The parties may continue to negotiate until the case goes before a three-person panel of professional arbitrators between Feb. 1-20.

At the hearing, each party has one hour to argue its case and 30 minutes for rebuttal. The player is required to attend and generally represented by an agent. A club executive or attorney usually represents the club.

Criteria the panel may consider include the player’s contribution to the club in terms of performance and leadership, the club’s record and attendance, “special accomplishments,” the salaries of comparable players in his service-time class and, for players with less than 5 years of service, the class one year ahead of him. The parties may not refer to team finances, previous offers made during negotiations, comments from the press or salaries in other sports or occupations.

The panel, without opinion, awards the player a one-year, non-guaranteed contract at one salary or the other. If the player is cut before the 16th day before the season begins (March 14, 2007), he is entitled only to 30 days’ termination pay. If the player is cut during spring training but after the 16th day before the season begins (between March 15 and March 31, 2007), he is entitled only to 45 days’ termination pay.


Free Agency

Eligibility

A player with at least 6 years of Major League service time and no contract for the next season is eligible to file for free agency and negotiate with any club.

Filing period

A player has 15 days from the first day after the World Series ends to file for free agency.

His former club retains exclusive negotiating rights until 15-day filing period expires, and the former club may re-sign the player at any time, during or after the filing period. During the filing period, a player who has filed for free agency may engage in general discussions with other clubs but may not discuss contract details or sign with them.

Procedure

A club receives compensation if it loses a free agent before December 2. See Free Agent Compensation.

By December 1, each club must decide whether to offer salary arbitration to their former players who have filed for free agency. A club not offering arbitration may continue to negotiate with the player but does not receive compensation if he signs with another club.

By December 7, player must accept or reject the arbitration offer. If the player accepts the offer, he returns to his club’s 40-man roster. The player and club may continue to negotiate before the February arbitration hearing. See Arbitration. If the player rejects the offer, he may continue to negotiate with any of the 30 clubs.

A free agent who signs a major-league contract may not be traded without his written consent before June 15 of the following season.

Limits on free agent signings

If 0-14 players qualify as Type A and B free agents, no team may sign more than 1 Type A or B player.

If 15-38 players qualify as Type A and B free agents, no team may sign more than 2.

If 39-62 players qualify as Type A and B free agents, no team may sign more than 3, with the limits increasing accordingly for higher totals.

A club may sign an unlimited number of free agents who do not qualify as Type A or B free agents.

A club may sign as many type A and B free agents as it has lost, regardless of the limits above.

redsrule2500
07-24-2007, 08:14 AM
I want to see him in the AL before the NL...

jojo
07-24-2007, 08:38 AM
Adam Dunn should be a Red for, at least, the next 5 years. I can't see any reason for the Reds to play cheap and not lock him up. This talk of trading him for Scott Linebrink or anybody like that is crazy talk.:help:

Here's one reason. His projected performance suggests it's pretty risky to assume he'll be worth the money beyond year two of such a contract.

jojo
07-24-2007, 08:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric_Davis
If someone is interested in Adam Dunn for the next several years, it would be cheaper for them to get him now from us because then they'd just be resigning their own player instead of having to pay someone else a high draft pick for next year if they sign him after he was with another team. If they fail to sign him, then they still get two extra picks themselves. So, Dunn has a lot of trade value right now for that reason alone.

Jojo, you missed the whole topic of what I said. His high value right now is to those teams interested in having Dunn on their team for the next several years. You're talking about something else, which if fine, but it's not what I was talking about.

It wouldn't necesarily be cheaper to get Dunn now. It all depends upon who a team would have to give up in talent up front in order to get the right to resign Dunn... Thats the point I was trying to address. It's those two comp picks that really determine Dunn's value. It's unlikely that the Reds will get much more than the value of those two comp picks back for Dunn from a team wanting to rent him. If that's the case, the Reds really are better off with the comp picks themselves IMHO. A team wanting to sign Dunn long term really only gets the advantage of exclusive negotiating rights for a relatively short window (assuming a deal isn't worked out as part of the trade and assuming Dunn is even interested in negotiating during the season). That certainly isn't worth a ton of extra talent. Maybe signing him as part of the deal has a little more value but it's unlikely that it's an additional top prospect type of value.

If the Reds simply give Dunn away, then you're probably right.

Red Leader
07-24-2007, 08:51 AM
Offer requirements

A club must offer contracts to players under its control by December 12.

If a player has filed for free agency, his former club must offer him arbitration by December 1. If the player accepts by December 7, he becomes club property again, returns to the roster, and the two sides may continue to negotiate or go to an arbitration hearing. If the player declines, the sides may continue to negotiate. (A club offering arbitration to a player who has filed for free agency retains the right to draft-pick compensation if he signs elsewhere. The club forfeits compensation if it does not offer arbitration. See Free Agent Compensation.)

The club's salary offer to a player under its control (pre-free agency players) may not be less than 80% of the player's salary and performance bonuses the previous year or less than 70% of his salary and performance bonuses from 2 years earlier. (Exception: If a player won an arbitration award the previous year increasing his salary 50% or more, the 80% requirement does not apply.) The 80% rule does not apply to free agents who are offered arbitration.


That last sentence makes it sound like a team can offer a pending free agent any amount they want. So the Reds could decline the option, offer Dunn arbitration and offer him a contract for $100K, have him (obviously) refuse it and get draft picks out of it? That seems to be a loophole to me. They are making it easier for the team to get free agent compensation when one of the their players reaches free agency, if true. Why would a team not offer a free agent to be player arbitration of at least $100K if this is true?

jojo
07-24-2007, 08:58 AM
That last sentence makes it sound like a team can offer a pending free agent any amount they want. So the Reds could decline the option, offer Dunn arbitration and offer him a contract for $100K, have him (obviously) refuse it and get draft picks out of it? That seems to be a loophole to me. They are making it easier for the team to get free agent compensation when one of the their players reaches free agency, if true. Why would a team not offer a free agent to be player arbitration of at least $100K if this is true?

Here's the kicker with arb though..... the team and the player submit ONE figure each. The arbitrator than determines the player's worth and awards the sum that is closest to that value. The arbitrator can't split the difference down the middle etc.

If the Reds offered $100k and Dunn's value is roughly $14M (like I think it probably will be this off season) then Dunn's agent could theoretically easily win if he submitted something as crazy as $27M.

Teams and agents play it pretty close to the vest for obvious reasons.

Red Leader
07-24-2007, 09:00 AM
Here's the kicker with arb though..... the team and the player submit ONE figure each. The arbitrator than determines the player's worth and awards the sum that is closest to that value. The arbitrator can't split the difference down the middle etc.

If the Reds offered $100k and Dunn's value is roughly $14M (like I think it probably will be this off season) then Dunn's agent could theoretically easily win if he submitted something as crazy as $27M.

Teams and agents play it pretty close to the margins for obvious reasons.

Aha. Forgot that part. Thanks, jojo. Makes sense. Wouldn't that scenario be hilarious. Reds payroll jumps to $90M as Dunn is awarded $29M in arbitration... :laugh:

buckeyenut
07-24-2007, 10:31 AM
I don't want to trade Dunn. Haven't ever, as I love Adam. But this is something I could live with.

Dunn and EE for Zimmerman and Rauch.

Then what I do is the following. I am basing this off of this list.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-freeagents071507.doc&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Sign Kosuke Fukudome, RF as a FA to a 4 yr 36M contract. This should save me at least 4m over having Dunn in the OF, should improve my D, and will give me a #2 hitter who should be able to get on base like dunn. I will lose some power obviously, but I can live with that. This is a bigger deal than yahoo expects, so I should be able to make that work.

Sign Carlos Zambrano, SP as a FA to a 5 year 125M contract. Given his age, that will allow him to be a FA still in his prime so he can get one more monstrous contract, which would not really work if we sign him longer. And at 25M a year, it should be enough above market value to get him to sign it quickly.

I offer this up under the assumption that the Reds have about 40M to spend this offseason, which is the number I have heard bandied about. The majority of our team is still young enough to be unimpactful in arb or already signed to contracts, so I don't think there will be a lot of issues in regards to big raises other than Dunn, who we would have dealt.

This would still leave us with a good offense, Bruce to replace Jr, one of the best rotations in all of baseball (Zambrano, Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Belisle or other), and the only major hole being in the pen, which we would have upgraded a little via Rauch. So, the last piece would really be figuring out a closer so that Weathers, Rauch, Burton, Coutlangus and Coffey could make up the remainder of the pen.

bucksfan2
07-24-2007, 11:00 AM
Bowden would hang up the phone if someone mentioned Zimmerman and didn't mention either Bruce or Bailey or both in a trade. I dont even know if Harang nets you Zimmerman.

registerthis
07-24-2007, 11:08 AM
Bowden would hang up the phone if someone mentioned Zimmerman and didn't mention either Bruce or Bailey or both in a trade. I dont even know if Harang nets you Zimmerman.

Bailey for Zimmerman?

Sign me up.

M2
07-24-2007, 11:13 AM
Bailey for Zimmerman?

Sign me up.

Me too.

Red Leader
07-24-2007, 11:16 AM
Me too.

Me three, and then trade Edwin and Stubbs to Minnesota for Garza and we'd be looking real good.

fearofpopvol1
07-24-2007, 11:21 AM
Why is everyone so high on Zimmerman?

Does he really project to be the next Mike Schmidt? It looks like he has some pop and his other stats are decent and I know he's only 22, but maybe I'm missing something here.

KronoRed
07-24-2007, 11:23 AM
Knowing how Bowden operates he won't be willing to part with much offense, and they don;t have the pitching to get Dunn

M2
07-24-2007, 11:58 AM
Why is everyone so high on Zimmerman?

Does he really project to be the next Mike Schmidt? It looks like he has some pop and his other stats are decent and I know he's only 22, but maybe I'm missing something here.

He's cut more from the Brooks Robinson mold. He's a bit BA-driven, but in the GAB you're probably looking at 35 doubles and 25 HR to go with all-world defense.

Patrick Bateman
07-24-2007, 12:05 PM
I think Zimmerman is a lot like Scott Rolen. It would be nice to get a guy like that for a change. If the cost is only Bailey, you have to pull the trigger on that one.

Eric_Davis
07-24-2007, 05:55 PM
I'll bet that Wayne makes any player offered from Washington in a trade take not just 1 but 2 physicals before accepting the trade. Due diligence squared. ;)

No doubt.

bucksfan2
07-25-2007, 10:15 AM
Bailey for Zimmerman?

Sign me up.

Its interesting how a guy has 5 starts and people are already to write him off.

M2
07-25-2007, 10:17 AM
Its interesting how a guy has 5 starts and people are already to write him off.

There's a rather sizable difference between writing a guy off and trading him for a dynamite young 3B.

RichRed
07-25-2007, 10:19 AM
Its interesting how a guy has 5 starts and people are already to write him off.

I think it's more like people would rather have a 23-year old who's already a legit major league third baseman than a pitching prospect who is far from a sure thing as a major league pitcher.

Count me among them.

Falls City Beer
07-25-2007, 11:31 AM
I'm ready to write him off. And Zimmerman looks great. Sounds like a winner.

Tommyjohn25
07-25-2007, 11:39 AM
I'm ready to write him off.

FCB, I normally don't agree with your pessimism when it comes to Reds players/prospects, but I can normally justify it to a point to where I don't reply and I stayed quiet. I'm going to have to call shenannigans on this one though, that is just silly.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 11:41 AM
I like how on the SunDeck everyone is making fun of us here on the ORG who would do this trade.

Bailey is apparently a sure fire ace.

I don't think many in the SD are getting the point. It's not that many here think Bailey is trash as I see him as one of the best prospects in baseball. His stint in the majors really did nothing to change that. I knew he wasn't ready, so I'm not all that discouraged at the results. It was just poor management IMO.

I think if Zimmerman was playing half his games in GABP rather than RFK, he becomes a close to .900 OPS type. He's not a monster OBP type, but he's alright there and has legit power. Combine that with phenomenal defense, and you have one of the best 3rd basemen in baseball. Bailey still needs to progress, as his future is not a certainty.

I would like to note that if Bailey for Zimmerman went through, then I would also have to trade EE for sme pitching or else the Reds would be badly handling their assets, but as a straight up deal, Zimmerman for Bailey is a slam dunk in my mind.

flyer85
07-25-2007, 11:50 AM
It's not that many here think Bailey is trash as I see him as one of the best prospects in baseball. His stint in the majors really did nothing to change that. I knew he wasn't ready, so I'm not all that discouraged at the results. What discouraged me was watching him lose command when he tried to throw in 93 and above range. I was really disappointed by the curve. It was decidedly not a plus pitch. I cringed whenever he threw it because it just rolled up there. What I saw was a kid whose future looked more like a closer than a #1 starter.

M2
07-25-2007, 11:58 AM
I don't think many in the SD are getting the point.

Well, that would be a first.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 12:01 PM
What discouraged me was watching him lose command when he tried to throw in 93 and above range. I was really disappointed by the curve. It was decidedly not a plus pitch. I cringed whenever he threw it because it just rolled up there. What I saw was a kid whose future looked more like a closer than a #1 starter.

Really?

I thought it was a really nice looking pitch. It had a tone of movement on it, and it was very sharp movement. It looked as good as advertised IMO, and if refined can be a plus pitch.

Of course he never did really control it which makes it harmless as of now, but it is a good enough 2nd pitch IMO. The defining pitch between big time starter and closer is the development of his change-up. That pitch too showed some potential when it was used. At had nice deception to it. If that pitch comes along he will stick as a starter, as I have confidence in the other pitches.

My main concern right now is his control of his pitches. Overall right now, he doesn't know where a whole lot is going. Over the next few years he needs to make major strides in this area in order to be an ace pitcher. If his control stagnates, then he may be more Daniel Cabrera than anyone else.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 12:03 PM
Well, that would be a first.

No kidding. As of right now, only 1 person over there has even bothered to see the opposing viewpoint to the argument. Without that, it's pretty difficult to make an informed opinion on a trade proposal discussion.

But as you said, this is the norm, not a rariety.

M2
07-25-2007, 12:04 PM
My main concern right now is his control of his pitches. Overall right now, he doesn't know where a whole lot is going. Over the next few years he needs to make major strides in this area in order to be an ace pitcher. If his control stagnates, then he may be more Daniel Cabrera than anyone else.

And health. The kid's got to stay healthy. FWIW, I imagine he'll finish strong in AAA after the breather he's getting at the moment. I'd end his season there on a strong note, but the Reds may give him a September callup.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 12:06 PM
And health.

When talking about any pitching prospect, I think that goes without saying.

nate
07-25-2007, 01:11 PM
I like how on the SunDeck everyone is making fun of us here on the ORG who would do this trade.

Bailey is apparently a sure fire ace.

I don't think many in the SD are getting the point. It's not that many here think Bailey is trash as I see him as one of the best prospects in baseball. His stint in the majors really did nothing to change that. I knew he wasn't ready, so I'm not all that discouraged at the results. It was just poor management IMO.

I think if Zimmerman was playing half his games in GABP rather than RFK, he becomes a close to .900 OPS type. He's not a monster OBP type, but he's alright there and has legit power. Combine that with phenomenal defense, and you have one of the best 3rd basemen in baseball. Bailey still needs to progress, as his future is not a certainty.

I would like to note that if Bailey for Zimmerman went through, then I would also have to trade EE for sme pitching or else the Reds would be badly handling their assets, but as a straight up deal, Zimmerman for Bailey is a slam dunk in my mind.

I think you make a really good point, Zimmerman could be awesome for us a 3rd for a long time.

The only problem is, we need pitching, pitching, pitching. Zimmerman can't help us there.

Now, here's one for you, would you trade Dunn for Zimmerman?

Would JimBo?

pedro
07-25-2007, 01:13 PM
I think you make a really good point, Zimmerman could be awesome for us a 3rd for a long time.

The only problem is, we need pitching, pitching, pitching. Zimmerman can't help us there.

Now, here's one for you, would you trade Dunn for Zimmerman?

Would JimBo?


I'd trade Dunn for Zimmerman. Don;t think the nats would do it though.

deltachi8
07-25-2007, 01:27 PM
Now, here's one for you, would you trade Dunn for Zimmerman?

Would JimBo?

Hmmmmm...that would be tempting.

Danny Serafini
07-25-2007, 01:49 PM
Dealing Bailey for Zimmerman is a terrible idea. This team is in desperate need of pitching. They have the top pitching prospect in the minors. Trading him for a good, not great 3B does not help this team. I understand there's some risk with Bailey, but I'm not going to throw him out based on a couple of bad starts, that's a huge overreaction. If this was a team stocked with pitchers and short on bats it would be one thing, but Bailey has much more value to this team than any 3B short of Mike Schmidt. That's not a deal I would touch.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 01:53 PM
Now, here's one for you, would you trade Dunn for Zimmerman?

Would JimBo?

Because of the contracts involved, Zimmerman has far more trade value than Dunn. For the overall package, Zimmerman may be the more valuable player without even considering contracts. Knowing that Dunn is already making big bucks, while Zimmerman has a few cheap years left, his trade value far outweighs Dunn's.

IMO, you would likely have to combine Dunn with EE, and probably somebody like Cueto to tempt Bowden into trading Zimmerman. They too are building from the ground up, and trading young, cheap players like Zimmerman is generally not the way to go. I think a trade like that would be worth considering if the Nats felt Dunn was worth the money long term.

nate
07-25-2007, 02:04 PM
Because of the contracts involved, Zimmerman has far more trade value than Dunn. For the overall package, Zimmerman may be the more valuable player without even considering contracts. Knowing that Dunn is already making big bucks, while Zimmerman has a few cheap years left, his trade value far outweighs Dunn's.

IMO, you would likely have to combine Dunn with EE, and probably somebody like Cueto to tempt Bowden into trading Zimmerman. They too are building from the ground up, and trading young, cheap players like Zimmerman is generally not the way to go. I think a trade like that would be worth considering if the Nats felt Dunn was worth the money long term.

Right, I was thinking exactly that. We'd have to give up at least EE, maybe a minor leaguer as well. Its an interesting proposition...I guess it would guarantee NoHo and Farney outfield spots for the remainder of the year.

Next year, hopefully, Jay Bruce would get a shot in ST, thus aligning the planets and taking us back to a brand of Reds baseball we haven't seen since The Waltons were in primetime.

jojo
07-25-2007, 02:09 PM
Right, I was thinking exactly that. We'd have to give up at least EE, maybe a minor leaguer as well. Its an interesting proposition...I guess it would guarantee NoHo and Farney outfield spots for the remainder of the year.

Next year, hopefully, Jay Bruce would get a shot in ST, thus aligning the planets and taking us back to a brand of Reds baseball we haven't seen since The Waltons were in primetime.

I'm pretty sure Bowden would only be interested in Dunn because he was trying to buy draft picks.

Two supplemental picks, EE, and Cueto probably don't equal the tangible production of Zimmerman over his control years.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 02:10 PM
Dealing Bailey for Zimmerman is a terrible idea. This team is in desperate need of pitching. They have the top pitching prospect in the minors. Trading him for a good, not great 3B does not help this team. I understand there's some risk with Bailey, but I'm not going to throw him out based on a couple of bad starts, that's a huge overreaction. If this was a team stocked with pitchers and short on bats it would be one thing, but Bailey has much more value to this team than any 3B short of Mike Schmidt. That's not a deal I would touch.

I think you are grossly undervaluing Zimmerman. I find it absolutely crazy that Bailey could be worth a young guaranteed Mike Schmidt calibre player. Those types don't exist, and if they do, they don't get traded for anybody, especially a pitcher with zero major league success. He has played in one of the most difficult parks to hit in and still put up solid numbers. Of course, his splits have actually shown a better ability to hit at home, but he might just be the type that excels in front of the home crowd.

The fact that he has been able to hit well in a park like RFK, menas to me that he will do even better in other parks, especially GABP. There are very few 3rd basemens who are currently better than him, and when factoring in contracts and defense, there is only 2-3 3rd basemen I'd rather have then him.

It would be awesome if Bailey develops fully and the Reds do need pitching, but IMO, if you can get basically a guaranteed stud 3rd basemen for him then you do it. The odds of Bailey becoming the legit ace that would equate to more value than Zimmerman are unlikely.

Anyways, I don't think the starting pitching is that bad. I like Harang and Arroyo as the top 2, and despite recent struggles, I like Belisle as a 4th-5th guy in the rotation. IMO, the Reds are only 1 good starter away from a solid rotation. If Bailey is that guy then great, but I don't feel they are in such a bind to find starters as years past. So I wouldn't let holding on to pitching get in the way of getting the best value in a trade.

On the other side, I don't think the Reds offense is all that great right now. I'm hopeful that Votto will help next season, but with Dunn possibly exiting, EE struggling, Hamilton still with limited experience, and Griffey always an injury risk, the Reds may have some trouble plating runs over the next few seasons even when playing in a run friendly enviroment. I wouldn't mistake the current offense for a loaded gun.

I can certainly understand the notion of wanting the Reds to hold on to Bailey with the sheer lack of quality pitchers developed over the last decade, but Zimmerman's value is a lot higher than many here are suggesting. Bailey clearly has immense upside, but he still has a long way to go to be a major league quality starter, and the odds suggest he never becomes an ace. It's quite likely that Bailey does not amount to being as good a pitcher as Zimmerman is a 3rd basemen. That's pretty lofty expectations for any pitching prospect.

M2
07-25-2007, 02:21 PM
Dealing Bailey for Zimmerman is a terrible idea. This team is in desperate need of pitching.

Yep, and can you tell me exactly when Bailey will be providing that?


They have the top pitching prospect in the minors.

Yep, Homer's at the peak of the hype curve all right.


Trading him for a good, not great 3B does not help this team.

I think Zimmerman will be a pretty damn good 3B. Maybe not David Wright, but I expect him to have a fine next decade. Anyone who can have a good decade will help this team.


I understand there's some risk with Bailey, but I'm not going to throw him out based on a couple of bad starts, that's a huge overreaction.

When you find one person who's saying they'd trade Bailey for Zimmerman based on Homer's last few starts, you let me know.


If this was a team stocked with pitchers and short on bats it would be one thing, but Bailey has much more value to this team than any 3B short of Mike Schmidt. That's not a deal I would touch.

Bailey's value to the team is theoretical. Don't get me wrong. It's a wonderful theory, but neither you nor I nor anyone on the planet really knows if it's ever going to become a reality. What we do know at the moment is that it's not all the close to happening. He'd have to take some fairly mammoth strides to be a good major league pitcher next season.

Yes, the Reds pitching stinks. So does the defense (28th in DER) and the offense (21st in EQA). This team isn't stocked with anything.

I understand the conservative, by-the-book approach to team building says you hoard your prospects and keep your fingers crossed that it all works out, but I've never had much use for that book. My view is you seize opportunities in an effort to leapfrog the teams content to wait in line.

Danny Serafini
07-25-2007, 02:43 PM
It would be awesome if Bailey develops fully and the Reds do need pitching, but IMO, if you can get basically a guaranteed stud 3rd basemen for him then you do it. The odds of Bailey becoming the legit ace that would equate to more value than Zimmerman are unlikely.

I guess that's where our difference of opinion lies. Just like Bailey isn't a guaranteed ace, Zimmerman isn't a guaranteed stud. I put more value in a P than a 3B to start with, so as long as Bailey turns into a pretty good pitcher Zimmerman would have to develop into a true star to have more value in my eyes. It's all just speculation on both our parts, but I think Bailey's got a better chance of winning that value battle than Zimmerman does.


Anyways, I don't think the starting pitching is that bad. I like Harang and Arroyo as the top 2, and despite recent struggles, I like Belisle as a 4th-5th guy in the rotation. IMO, the Reds are only 1 good starter away from a solid rotation. If Bailey is that guy then great, but I don't feel they are in such a bind to find starters as years past. So I wouldn't let holding on to pitching get in the way of getting the best value in a trade.

I wish I was that optimistic about the rotation. I'm fine with the top two, but it's shaky after that. You never know if Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Lohse will show up, and it's not going to matter soon anyway since he won't be around next year. Belisle is a guy I think has value in the pen, but right now he's showing what I was afraid of, that he can't hold up over the course of a season as a starter. His back just isn't going to take that wear and tear. This team is really three starters short of a solid rotation, which makes Bailey's value to the Reds that much higher.


On the other side, I don't think the Reds offense is all that great right now. I'm hopeful that Votto will help next season, but with Dunn possibly exiting, EE struggling, Hamilton still with limited experience, and Griffey always an injury risk, the Reds may have some trouble plating runs over the next few seasons even when playing in a run friendly enviroment. I wouldn't mistake the current offense for a loaded gun.

I've got no real argument, but it is easier to find bats than arms. So to me I don't like the idea of trading the organization's best young arm for a bat. I just don't think the value is there with Zimmerman.

NJReds
07-25-2007, 02:43 PM
I look at Zimmerman's stats, but I don't see Mike Schmidt.

Someone tell me what is it about him that screams out "future star." His home/road splits are identical and his OPS is in the .700s. If he was playing for the Reds, I guarantee he wouldn't be 'Mr. Popularity' on this board. And to echo a familiar board criticism...he doesn't walk a whole lot either.

jojo
07-25-2007, 02:54 PM
I look at Zimmerman's stats, but I don't see Mike Schmidt.

Someone tell me what is it about him that screams out "future star." His home/road splits are identical and his OPS is in the .700s. If he was playing for the Reds, I guarantee he wouldn't be 'Mr. Popularity' on this board. And to echo a familiar board criticism...he doesn't walk a whole lot either.

But you're looking at a tough first half of a season's worth of production.

Here's what Pecota sees:

2008: age: 23; VORP: 47.8;
2009: age: 24; VORP: 52.8;
2010: age: 25; VORP: 51.5;
2011: age: 26; VORP: 52.8;

So during his cheap control years, his bat is projected to average 5 wins above replacement. This while playing excellent defense.

All told, he's projected to probably be a 25 win player over the next four years considering his glove and bat. if wins are going for roughly $4M, that means if he hit the projections, he's be roughly worth $100M while the Nats will probably pay him less than a fifth of that.

Supplemental picks are valuable, but it would take more than 2 supplemental picks, EE and Cueto to equal what most in the industry feel Zimmerman is and will be especially given his cheap price.

Danny Serafini
07-25-2007, 02:57 PM
Yep, and can you tell me exactly when Bailey will be providing that?

Of course not, just like you can't tell me exactly what Zimmerman is going to provide. We're both having to project futures here.


I think Zimmerman will be a pretty damn good 3B. Maybe not David Wright, but I expect him to have a fine next decade. Anyone who can have a good decade will help this team.

But not as much as as a pretty damn good P who I expect to have a fine next decade. And it's my belief that Bailey will be of more help to this team than Zimmerman. Especially with a team that needs a pitcher more than a bat.


When you find one person who's saying they'd trade Bailey for Zimmerman based on Homer's last few starts, you let me know.

Let me ask you this, would anyone have seriously considered this trade a month ago? The Bailey bandwagon has been emptying, those few starts have left a bad taste in some mouths. I'd say the thought of this deal wouldn't have been nearly as well received before Bailey's callup.


Bailey's value to the team is theoretical. Don't get me wrong. It's a wonderful theory, but neither you nor I nor anyone on the planet really knows if it's ever going to become a reality. What we do know at the moment is that it's not all the close to happening. He'd have to take some fairly mammoth strides to be a good major league pitcher next season.

Every player's value is theoretical. We don't know for sure that Zimmerman is going to be a stud either, or any other young player for that matter until it happens. And Bailey may have to make some mammoth strides to be a good Major League pitcher next year. If all we're worried about is 2008 then there's a good chance Zimmerman will have the better year. But I'm willing to bet Bailey's career winds up being better than Zimmerman's, and that's what I'm concerned with. If it takes until 2009 then so be it, because the years afterwards will be worth it. It's not like 2008 is the Reds window to win it all, the opposite is true. I'll deal with the growing pains next year to get the expected returns. And yes it is theoretical, but I'm willing to go with that theory.


My view is you seize opportunities in an effort to leapfrog the teams content to wait in line.

I agree with the thought, but I don't see this as an opportunity to leapfrog. Getting rid of your best young player at a much needed position is an opportunity to fall back.

pedro
07-25-2007, 03:17 PM
I think the odds that Zimmerman out produces Bailey are pretty good at this point.

NJReds
07-25-2007, 03:17 PM
But you're looking at a tough first half of a season's worth of production.

Well, actually I looked at 2006 and 2007. I'm not saying he's a bad player or a bust. But I don't see superstar stats.



Here's what Pecota sees:

2008: age: 23; VORP: 47.8;
2009: age: 24; VORP: 52.8;
2010: age: 25; VORP: 51.5;
2011: age: 26; VORP: 52.8;

What did Pecota say about Austin Kearns when he was 23?


Don't get me wrong, I like Zimmerman as a player. But I really would just throw EE out there for the rest of this year and let Bailey continue to develop before considering a deal like this.

bucksfan2
07-25-2007, 03:22 PM
Here's what Pecota sees:

2008: age: 23; VORP: 47.8;
2009: age: 24; VORP: 52.8;
2010: age: 25; VORP: 51.5;
2011: age: 26; VORP: 52.8;


So you are using projections to project 4 years into the future, that doesn't hold much water with me. Too many variables are going to happen in that time period for those stats to really mean anything.

NJReds
07-25-2007, 03:24 PM
Randy Johnson had control problems when he broke into the majors at age 24. I'm not ready to declare Homer a bust at age 21. I think he was up here too soon. He should stay in AAA for the rest of the year.

Falls City Beer
07-25-2007, 03:35 PM
Randy Johnson had control problems when he broke into the majors at age 24. I'm not ready to declare Homer a bust at age 21. I think he was up here too soon. He should stay in AAA for the rest of the year.

Johnson also threw 97 MPH with regularity.

I used to think Bailey did, till I learned he's lucky to top 95 once or twice a game.

If you throw as hard as Johnson does, you can be excused for a little wildness. Bailey, meanwhile, can't find the plate, and when does, it gets mashed.

Even with a kid who's not ready for whatever reason, I want to see him do SOMETHING right to give me faith that improvements can and most likely will be made; Bailey showed me absolutely nothing.

NJReds
07-25-2007, 03:45 PM
Johnson also threw 97 MPH with regularity.

I used to think Bailey did, till I learned he's lucky to top 95 once or twice a game.

If you throw as hard as Johnson does, you can be excused for a little wildness. Bailey, meanwhile, can't find the plate, and when does, it gets mashed.

Even with a kid who's not ready for whatever reason, I want to see him do SOMETHING right to give me faith that improvements can and most likely will be made; Bailey showed me absolutely nothing.

ExposZone was probably calling for him to be traded for Gregg Jeffries...;)

flyer85
07-25-2007, 03:54 PM
Johnson also threw 97 MPH with regularity.
... and had an extremely nasty slider. There is no comparison to be made.

flyer85
07-25-2007, 03:55 PM
I honestly can't see Bowden trading Zimmerman. He is too valuable of the asset to the franchise.

M2
07-25-2007, 03:56 PM
Of course not, just like you can't tell me exactly what Zimmerman is going to provide. We're both having to project futures here.

In the GAB, Zimmerman should give you a .340+ OB, 35+ doubles, 25+ HR, GG-caliber defense. He'll deliver immediately too. Back to my question though, when's Homer going to start being a good pitcher?


But not as much as as a pretty damn good P who I expect to have a fine next decade. And it's my belief that Bailey will be of more help to this team than Zimmerman. Especially with a team that needs a pitcher more than a bat.

Do you expect him to be that or do you want him to be that? I want him to be that, but I don't get invested in this quasi-religious zeal over the kid. Pitching prospects are hot properties these days, not because they're so wonderful (because they're no more likely to succeed than they ever were), but because that's where the market's at. So if I were sitting there with a hot commodity, I'd I'd curious to see what he's worth on the market.


Let me ask you this, would anyone have seriously considered this trade a month ago? The Bailey bandwagon has been emptying, those few starts have left a bad taste in some mouths. I'd say the thought of this deal wouldn't have been nearly as well received before Bailey's callup.

I've never been sold on Bailey. I've never been not sold on Bailey either. He's got talent, but he's also got far more obstacles than Reds fans want to admit. He's not ready for a major league innings load (doesn't seem likely to top his 138.2 IP effort from last season given his current injury). He's got control with all of his pitches. His change and curve are wildly inconsistent. Now, that's not unusual stuff for a 21-year-old pitcher. Then again it wouldn't be unusual for his to suffer a major injury or significant setbacks either. It's also a fairly common thing in the game of baseball for wunderkind prospects to struggle with the teams that drafted them only to thrive another stop or two down the line. So, mixed up in the whole "Can Homer become a quality major league pitcher?" question, is the question of "And will he be able to do it for the Reds?"


Every player's value is theoretical. We don't know for sure that Zimmerman is going to be a stud either, or any other young player for that matter until it happens. And Bailey may have to make some mammoth strides to be a good Major League pitcher next year. If all we're worried about is 2008 then there's a good chance Zimmerman will have the better year. But I'm willing to bet Bailey's career winds up being better than Zimmerman's, and that's what I'm concerned with. If it takes until 2009 then so be it, because the years afterwards will be worth it. It's not like 2008 is the Reds window to win it all, the opposite is true. I'll deal with the growing pains next year to get the expected returns. And yes it is theoretical, but I'm willing to go with that theory.

Guys who've performed well in the majors are a lot less theoretical than kids who are a couple of years away from being able to perform well in the majors. We're not talking about equivalent amounts of theoretical here.


I agree with the thought, but I don't see this as an opportunity to leapfrog. Getting rid of your best young player at a much needed position is an opportunity to fall back.

Take a look at the top 10 pitchers in the NL for ERA -

Chris Young
Brad Penny
Jake Peavy
John Smoltz
Oliver Perez
John Maine
Tom Gorzelanny
Tim Hudson
Sergio Mitre
Brandon Webb

There isn't a single first round draft pick in the bunch. Most of these guys (six to be exact) didn't strike gold with the team that orginally drafted/signed them. Of the group, only Penny was ever a top 10 prospect. In fact, he's the only guy on that list who ever ranked better than #40 on a BA top 100 list.

The lesson is we think we can pick these horses before the race starts and time and again we discover that we can't. Homer Bailey could be awesome. He could be a flop. He could be a million shades in between too. His current prospect status means nothing when it comes to him being able to pitch in the majors. Supposedly before the season he was a better prospect than Tim Lincecum, Andrew Miller and Yovani Gallardo. I feel fairly confident in saying there's 30 teams in MLB that would rather have one of those three than Bailey at this moment.

That could change in a year's time. Some stars diminish while others burst into view. The best starting pitcher the Reds have had in a long time is Aaron Harang, who never stood out in the prospect ranks. If someone had told you in the early part of this decade to trade Ty Howington and seek pitchers elsewhere, you'd have probably insisted that was crazy talk. However, it would have been the wise thing to do. There were better pitchers elsewhere and Howington didn't live up to his hype. All I'm saying is the Reds ought to at least consider going that route with Bailey.

FWIW, JimBo would demand Encarnacion if he was trading Zimmerman and I'm not sure there's anything else that he could/would give to deliver enough return value if Edwin were added into the mix.

Aronchis
07-25-2007, 03:59 PM
Randy Johnson? How about Johnson at 21? You are talking about a more older mature RJ. I bet you never knew much about the 21 year old version.

This thread has fallen apart at the seams.

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 04:02 PM
I guess that's where our difference of opinion lies. Just like Bailey isn't a guaranteed ace, Zimmerman isn't a guaranteed stud. I put more value in a P than a 3B to start with, so as long as Bailey turns into a pretty good pitcher Zimmerman would have to develop into a true star to have more value in my eyes. It's all just speculation on both our parts, but I think Bailey's got a better chance of winning that value battle than Zimmerman does.


Considering ballpark effects and fielding, there are very few 3rd basemens who IMO are currently better than Zimmerman. You have the elite 5 in A-Rod, Miggy, Wright, Ramirez, and Jones. Plus you have Ryan Braun. That's 6 guys you have to take over Zimmerman at this point.

But after that, I see Zimmerman as the leader. His hitting would be majorly helped by moving out of RFK (even though his splits don't show much of a difference in production, there is no way that a guy who's game is based around power would be hurt by moving into a smaller park).

Considering he's on the verge of turning only 23, there is still a lot f projection left. Even if he stalls a bit, Zimmerman is still one of the league's better 3rd basemen, but he also does have the neccessary skill level to perhaps move up towards the elite (albeit he won't be a Cabrera type of hitter obviously).

There's not a whole lot of downside here as it's touhg to imagine Zimmerman really struggling to have success when he's done pretty darned well so far. Plus he's one of (if not the best) defensive 3rd basemen in the game.



This team is really three starters short of a solid rotation, which makes Bailey's value to the Reds that much higher.

I don't know about that. I think GABP and the horrid team defense has prevented Belisle from being a reliable starter. He's got good command and decent enough stuff. His perpherals indicate that he's been good enough this season. He fits in pretty well as a 4th starter IMO. Not many teams have 5 solid starters, so I'd really argue that the team is really 1 good starter away from being a competitve rotation. Not that this group is fantastic, but it's in no worse shape than the line-up IMO.

Danny, I see your points. I would love Bailey to be that missing starter and the ace that makes this a great rotation. But I'm naturally going to be wary of any starting pitching prospect. There's always going to be the chance that Bailey just stagnates and never even turns into a major league calibre starter. Plus the chances of him really becoming an ace level pitcher are not great.

I'm not a Bailey hater or anything, but with Zimmerman, I don't see any reaistic chance that he flames out into oblivion. He's already pretty solid, plus he offers a nice package of upside. You can't really go wrong either way. Bailey is a bigger gamble, and offers the bigger reward, but the chance of the huge reward coming through are slim.

I respect that you don't want to trade Bailey. I'd only trade him if the right deal comes along. I obviously value Zimmerman higher than you do which is understandable, but at what point do you consider moving Bailey? I believe that you would agree that the 2nd coming of Mike Schmidt isn't readily available for a pitcher with zero major league success (despite the potential), so would it have to be a Miguel Cabrera type coming back straight up to force your hand?

flyer85
07-25-2007, 04:03 PM
Randy Johnson had the raw stuff that comes along once every 10 years. It did take a long time to develop a repeatable delivery. Bailey is ahead of Randy at age 21 but with not nearly as much "stuff".

This is likley moot because I doubt that
1) WK has any intention of trading Bailey
2) JB has any intention of trading Zimmerman

M2
07-25-2007, 04:04 PM
... and had an extremely nasty slider. There is no comparison to be made.

... and Johnson got traded away by the team that drafted him when it got impatient with his long developmental curve. In fact, the Mariners were near the end of their rope with Johnson until he had it all click in 1993 at age 29.

flyer85
07-25-2007, 04:05 PM
In fact, the Mariners were near the end of their rope with Johnson until he had it all click in 1993 at age 29.it seems to take tall pitchers quite a bit longer to work out the mechanics of their delivery(if they do at all).

Patrick Bateman
07-25-2007, 04:09 PM
FWIW, JimBo would demand Encarnacion if he was trading Zimmerman and I'm not sure there's anything else that he could/would give to deliver enough return value if Edwin were added into the mix.

I'd agree with this. When I heard that Jimbo wanted Dunn, I immediately thought that the only player I was the least bit interested in was Zimmerman. There's not one other player that excites me in the rest of their team.

That's why I'd prefer to work a Dunn trade around Zimmerman withut Bailey. Perhaps if Bowden is prepared to sign Dunn longterm that a Dunn-EE-Cueto dela would be enough, but I would be willing to give up more if neccessary.

I don't think many would have a problem finding room for both Bailey and Zimmerman on the same team.

NJReds
07-25-2007, 05:06 PM
Randy Johnson? How about Johnson at 21? You are talking about a more older mature RJ. I bet you never knew much about the 21 year old version.

This thread has fallen apart at the seams.

The stats on Johnson don't start at 23 I believe (@ www.thebaseballcube.com). My point was that he was wild, and then learned control.

I don't think that Bailey=Johnson. That's crazy. Johnson's a Hall of Fame pitcher.

My point is, I don't know yet what Bailey is, but I think there's a chance that he proves to be more valuable to a franchise than a 3rd baseman. And I think that Zimmerman's value is being slightly overstated here based on what I've seen from him in his very young career.

The thread isn't coming apart at the seams. Just because there's back and forth discussion doesn't mean that the thread's falling apart. There's a lot of good info here. I respect the opinions of all those that would pull the trigger on a Bailey-Zimmerman deal. While I'd think long and hard about it, I wouldn't pull the trigger on such a deal.

Mario-Rijo
07-25-2007, 06:34 PM
I wouldn't deal Homer for Zimmerman. I wouldn't deal Dunn, EE and Cueto for Zimm. I would almost deal Dunn and EE for Zimmerman (maybe I would), I would have to really consider everything other than just financial and talent angles. But I really like Zimmerman, but I think Bowden would come off of Zimmerman for something less than Bailey.

Of course I would also be just fine sticking with Dunn and EE. EE has a chance to be as good as Zimmerman both offensively and defensively (ok probably as good or better offensively, but not quite the range or instincts defensively). However I sometimes question his motivation (EE's) he seems a bit withdrawn. Probably from getting jerked around & made an example of so much.

But I would have to get something more than just Zimmerman for those 2. Perhaps Dunn, EE and Dumatrait for Zimmerman and Marrero, I may even be tempted to part with a Carlos fisher or the like but Cueto I would only toss in if need be for that package.

Wait a minute I forgot about Jimbo being the "5 star" GM, how about this one. Dunn, Dumatrait and Dickerson for Zimmerman and a minor league arm? Then Jimbo has his CF he has been dying to get his hands on and Dunner. Then send EE to AAA for the rest of this season to work on playing LF?

2009:

C - David Ross?
1B - Joey Votto
2B - Brandon Phillips
SS - Pedro Lopez?
3B - Ryan Zimmerman
LF - EEE
CF - Hammy
RF - "The Boss" (Jay Bruce)

pahster
07-25-2007, 06:48 PM
Then send EE to AAA for the rest of this season to work on playing LF?


Why not just let him do it in the majors? It's not like the Reds are making a playoff run right now. If this trade happened, I'd much rather see EE in left than Hopper.

Mario-Rijo
07-25-2007, 06:54 PM
Why not just let him do it in the majors? It's not like the Reds are making a playoff run right now. If this trade happened, I'd much rather see EE in left than Hopper.

If we could make that deal, I'm in for him playing out the season in LF. Of course like someone already stated Bowden would likely demand EE. And if that's the case then he would have to come off Marrero.

jojo
07-25-2007, 08:42 PM
Well, actually I looked at 2006 and 2007. I'm not saying he's a bad player or a bust. But I don't see superstar stats.




What did Pecota say about Austin Kearns when he was 23?


Don't get me wrong, I like Zimmerman as a player. But I really would just throw EE out there for the rest of this year and let Bailey continue to develop before considering a deal like this.

Concerning Zimmerman, at age 21 he was already approximately a 3 win bat in the majors

Here's as far back as I got with Kearns' projections:
2004: age: 24; VORP: 21.7;
2005: age: 25; VORP: 29.2;
2006: age: 26; VORP: 22.4;
2007: age: 27; VORP: 25.6;

Clearly Kearns was not thought to be in the same class that Zimmerman is thought to be in....

NJReds
07-25-2007, 08:53 PM
Concerning Zimmerman, at age 21 he was already approximately a 3 win bat in the majors

Here's as far back as I got with Kearns' projections:
2004: age: 24; VORP: 21.7;
2005: age: 25; VORP: 29.2;
2006: age: 26; VORP: 22.4;
2007: age: 27; VORP: 25.6;

Clearly Kearns was not thought to be in the same class that Zimmerman is thought to be in....

Thanks for that. Perhaps you're right. I still have a tough time pulling the trigger on a deal like that.

RedLegSuperStar
07-25-2007, 09:08 PM
With Mark Teixeira talks heating up.. this is what the Braves are offering as long as the Rangers toss in a reliever:


The Braves still appear to be in front. The names going to Texas would include Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Elvis Andrus, and one of Matt Harrison or Kyle Davies. A very nice package, but to get three solid prospects the Rangers would have to pair Teixeira with a reliever. The Braves have their eye on Eric Gagne, C.J. Wilson, and Ron Mahay, with the latter most likely. It's unclear whether Gagne can be traded to the Braves without his consent.

Dodgers countered with:


The Dodgers counter with James Loney, Andre Ethier, and a pitcher not named Clayton Kershaw.

Now granted Teixiera is a better hitter then Dunn.. he doesn't quite have the power Dunn has. Another thing is Dunn has been healthy.. and will play about 140-150+ games.

If the dodgers offer Ethier, Meloan, and Orenduff would that be enough for Dunn?

pedro
07-25-2007, 09:15 PM
With Mark Teixeira talks heating up.. this is what the Braves are offering as long as the Rangers toss in a reliever:



Dodgers countered with:



Now granted Teixiera is a better hitter then Dunn.. he doesn't quite have the power Dunn has. Another thing is Dunn has been healthy.. and will play about 140-150+ games.

If the dodgers offer Ethier, Meloan, and Orenduff would that be enough for Dunn?

If the Braves get Texeira and Gagne they're going to be pretty tough.

Danny Serafini
07-26-2007, 09:30 AM
I respect that you don't want to trade Bailey. I'd only trade him if the right deal comes along. I obviously value Zimmerman higher than you do which is understandable, but at what point do you consider moving Bailey? I believe that you would agree that the 2nd coming of Mike Schmidt isn't readily available for a pitcher with zero major league success (despite the potential), so would it have to be a Miguel Cabrera type coming back straight up to force your hand?

I don't think there is a one-for-one deal that really works. Realistically I know a team isn't going to deal a Cabrera type for Bailey. With players that are so highly valued I don't think either side would accept only one player in return since each side values what they have so much. And while I believe Bailey will be the real deal, at the moment he is still more of a lottery ticket than a 100% sure thing, so he wouldn't bring back Cabrera. If I take a guy like Zimmerman (who I've probably undersold a bit, I do think he'll be pretty good, just not a star) there has to be another arm coming along with him. Maybe a good prospect in AA does it, I don't know. A guy in AAA who's close to the Majors but doesn't project high isn't going to cut it. But some other pitcher has to come along with Zimmerman, and it has to be a quality arm, not a throw in. Otherwise I take my chances with Bailey, because I do believe he'll develop into a top pitcher.

NJReds
07-26-2007, 09:59 AM
I was listening to ESPN radio on the way in, and Kurkjian (sp?) said that Boras is thinking in the $25-$30M/year range for Texiera's next contract. It seems as though the Braves now are not a match, and the Dodgers value Loney's bat (and price) moving forward.

Frankly, these numbers are starting to make Dunn look like a bargain at $15M per.

Patrick Bateman
07-26-2007, 10:53 AM
I don't think there is a one-for-one deal that really works. Realistically I know a team isn't going to deal a Cabrera type for Bailey. With players that are so highly valued I don't think either side would accept only one player in return since each side values what they have so much. And while I believe Bailey will be the real deal, at the moment he is still more of a lottery ticket than a 100% sure thing, so he wouldn't bring back Cabrera. If I take a guy like Zimmerman (who I've probably undersold a bit, I do think he'll be pretty good, just not a star) there has to be another arm coming along with him. Maybe a good prospect in AA does it, I don't know. A guy in AAA who's close to the Majors but doesn't project high isn't going to cut it. But some other pitcher has to come along with Zimmerman, and it has to be a quality arm, not a throw in. Otherwise I take my chances with Bailey, because I do believe he'll develop into a top pitcher.

Fair enough.

I certainly have zero problems holding onto Bailey anyways. I mean if you trade every Bailey that comes through, it's going to be pretty hard to ever come up with an ace pitcher. You would really have to rely on Aaron Harang types coming out of nowhere to develop that well. So from that point of view holding onto the Bailey's of the world may be the best thing to do because of the rare chances a team had of trying develop a guy like him into an acae. Homer has defeated the odds to this point anyways.

But he is still a pitching prospect with at least another year or two of developing that needs to be done before he can be counted on as a major league quality starter, and a lot can happen in that period.

Patrick Bateman
07-26-2007, 10:56 AM
I was listening to ESPN radio on the way in, and Kurkjian (sp?) said that Boras is thinking in the $25-$30M/year range for Texiera's next contract. It seems as though the Braves now are not a match, and the Dodgers value Loney's bat (and price) moving forward.

Frankly, these numbers are starting to make Dunn look like a bargain at $15M per.

Overall, they are basically the same hitter. Nearly identical career OBP/SLG/OPS and neither has been reaching new highs lately. If Dunn really does come 10M cheaper than Teixara, then he's the bargain of the century. There just isn't mcuh of a difference between the two.

registerthis
07-26-2007, 11:46 AM
Dealing Bailey for Zimmerman is a terrible idea. This team is in desperate need of pitching. They have the top pitching prospect in the minors.

One does not necessarily follow the other. yes, the Reds need pitching. But I'm not sold that Bailey is going to be the one to provide it. I would, however, love to see Zimmerman in a Reds uniform for the next 5 years or so.

bucksfan2
07-26-2007, 01:42 PM
One does not necessarily follow the other. yes, the Reds need pitching. But I'm not sold that Bailey is going to be the one to provide it. I would, however, love to see Zimmerman in a Reds uniform for the next 5 years or so.

Bailey has had 2 bad outings as a 21 year old. For gods sake this guy was gold earlier in the season. He is the top rated pitching prospect in the minors. Why have so many people jumped off the bandwagon? For those who didn't realize that Bailey was going to struggle early what did you expect. The Nats aren't going to trade Zimmerman and the reds aren't going to trade Bailey.

registerthis
07-26-2007, 02:10 PM
Bailey has had 2 bad outings as a 21 year old. For gods sake this guy was gold earlier in the season.

It's not "two bad outings" that have people questionning his abilities. I would think, at least, that a few minutes perusing this thread or others would make that abudantly clear. His "stuff" wasn't outstanding in the minors--he simply was experiencing the good fortune of facing inexperienced hitters. In the majors, we've caught a glimpse of exactly how far away he is from being the "stud" we've long been led to believe he was. Considering that the control problems he experienced in the majors closely mimic what he has been doing in the minors for the past two seasons, it doesn't instill me with an abundance of confidence in his future abilities.

Yes, he is young, and yes, he still has a lot of potential. But it is by no means a certainty that he'll achieve the legendary status that many have sought to anoint him with--or that he'll even be an above-average major league starter. He's got a LONG ways to go before he can even think about those things. In the meantime, if there is proven major league talent to be had that would clearly improve the team--as the acquisition of a Zimmerman most certainly would--in exchange for someone like Bailey, you make that kind of exchange in a heartbeat. Young pitching talent is far too unpredictable--and flames out far too often--for the Reds to put all of their pitching eggs in Homer Bailey's basket.

Red Leader
07-26-2007, 04:07 PM
It's not "two bad outings" that have people questionning his abilities. I would think, at least, that a few minutes perusing this thread or others would make that abudantly clear. His "stuff" wasn't outstanding in the minors--he simply was experiencing the good fortune of facing inexperienced hitters. In the majors, we've caught a glimpse of exactly how far away he is from being the "stud" we've long been led to believe he was. Considering that the control problems he experienced in the majors closely mimic what he has been doing in the minors for the past two seasons, it doesn't instill me with an abundance of confidence in his future abilities.

Yes, he is young, and yes, he still has a lot of potential. But it is by no means a certainty that he'll achieve the legendary status that many have sought to anoint him with--or that he'll even be an above-average major league starter. He's got a LONG ways to go before he can even think about those things. In the meantime, if there is proven major league talent to be had that would clearly improve the team--as the acquisition of a Zimmerman most certainly would--in exchange for someone like Bailey, you make that kind of exchange in a heartbeat. Young pitching talent is far too unpredictable--and flames out far too often--for the Reds to put all of their pitching eggs in Homer Bailey's basket.

Exactly. If Bailey was dominating the minors with his fastball and a plus-plus secondary pitch (change), along with a third pitch (curve) that ranked as a plus pitch, that's something different. Bailey is getting by with his fastball alone. His change and curve are improving, but he's still in the "development" phase with both pitches. That's not something anybody should expect him to learn at the major league level (which is why the callup earlier this year was stupid). I still have faith he can develop those two pitches and be an above average starting pitcher, but if he can't, like one other person said (flyer, I think) he's going to look like a future closer candidate.

jojo
07-26-2007, 06:41 PM
It's not "two bad outings" that have people questionning his abilities. I would think, at least, that a few minutes perusing this thread or others would make that abudantly clear. His "stuff" wasn't outstanding in the minors--he simply was experiencing the good fortune of facing inexperienced hitters. In the majors, we've caught a glimpse of exactly how far away he is from being the "stud" we've long been led to believe he was. Considering that the control problems he experienced in the majors closely mimic what he has been doing in the minors for the past two seasons, it doesn't instill me with an abundance of confidence in his future abilities.

Yes, he is young, and yes, he still has a lot of potential. But it is by no means a certainty that he'll achieve the legendary status that many have sought to anoint him with--or that he'll even be an above-average major league starter. He's got a LONG ways to go before he can even think about those things. In the meantime, if there is proven major league talent to be had that would clearly improve the team--as the acquisition of a Zimmerman most certainly would--in exchange for someone like Bailey, you make that kind of exchange in a heartbeat. Young pitching talent is far too unpredictable--and flames out far too often--for the Reds to put all of their pitching eggs in Homer Bailey's basket.


I think Homer has pretty exciting stuff-basically he's got two plus pitches in his fastball and curve. IMHO, the issue with him isn't his stuff but rather the lack of major league command of his stuff. That might seem like splitting hairs but really it's two separate issues altogether.