PDA

View Full Version : Extending Adam Dunn



texasdave
09-19-2007, 12:24 PM
This should be the first priority for WK in the off-season. This is the single biggest factor which will affect the direction of this franchise which needs to be addressed this winter. These options are, obviously, based upon my understanding of the arbitration rules. Firstly, let's consider the options available if AD has decided he does not want to extend his contract with the Reds.

Option 1 - Don't pick up the 2008 option year and don't offer Adam Dunn arbitration. This will not happen. It is an option. Just not a realistic one. The Reds are not letting AD go without getting either players or draft picks in return. Let's move on.

Option 2 - Don't pick up the 2008 option year, but do offer Adam Dunn arbitration.
2A)Dunn accepts arbitration. Unlikely, but certainly not impossible. However, if AD has decided he doesn't want to be in Cincinnati after 2008, he would probably just as soon move on after 2007. He has had an offensive renaissance, and his value is pretty high right now. Why risk an offensive decline in 2008? That would make him a year older and probably less valuable in the minds of other teams.
2B)Dunn declines arbitration. His value is up after 2007, and AD would likely strike while the iron was hot. Cincinnati would be left with draft choices as compensation. Not the best option, but this seems better than having AD walk after the 2008 season. Your comp draft choices would be one year further along in their development.

Options 3 and 4)These two are essentially the same. Exercise the 2008 option and then shop AD over the winter. Or work out an extension and with Dunn's blessing move him to another team. If WK finds a deal he likes he can attempt to buy out Adam's no-trade clause. If a full year's worth of AD can fetch more than a half year's worth, ti would stand to reason that several years of AD should bring back substantially more.

If Adam Dunn is amenable to signing an extension there only remains one hurdle. That would be to find a length of contract and a number of years that both sides could live with. I believe Carlos Lee and Alfonso Soriano are comparable contract situations. (In truth I believe that Adam Dunn is both a better player and younger than those two and should probably receive a little more). If that is the case then I don't believe contract offers of 3 or 4 or 5 years at 15M is going to get the job done - unless Adam Dunn gives the Reds a generous hometown discount. Both Lee and Soriano have inked deals for more years and more dollars per year. Starting in 2010, Lee and Soriano are both going to receive annual salaries of at least 18M. I feel this is more in line with what Adam will receive. Even if AD is willing to extend there is no guarantee that will happen. If it does great. If it doesn't then jump over to the list of options given under the assumption that AD does not want to extend.

No matter how this situation plays out, whether he stays long-term or whether he is moved over the winter, how this situation is resolved will have a tremendous effect on the Reds' future for years to come.

GoReds33
09-19-2007, 12:56 PM
I wish they would pick up the option. That is unless we can get Carlos Silva with that money. Him and the draft picks would make up for the loss of Dunn.

RedDevil
09-19-2007, 03:08 PM
I wish they would pick up the option. That is unless we can get Carlos Silva with that money. Him and the draft picks would make up for the loss of Dunn.

lol No it won't

DannyB
09-19-2007, 03:59 PM
Option 2 & 2A
Its not worth the risk Dunn could very well accept arbitration.He could get over $20 mil

jnwohio
09-19-2007, 07:03 PM
The way Dunn has performed since the trade deadline pretty much has limited the Reds alternatives. They can't get the draft picks unless they offer arb; and, now Dunn, as noted above, is in a position to break the bank in arb then still go for free agency after 2008. So what choice do they have but to exercise the option?

After they exercise the option, then they have to decide what to do next. Dunn has to provide them with a list of 10 teams he would accept a trade to, so they will have alternatives. Do they try to move him over the off season. Do they go for a long term deal first and try to trade later if thet can't get a LTC?

texasdave
09-19-2007, 11:09 PM
Lifted from ORG:


If the Reds have no intention of re-signing him, then it doesn't make sense to pick up the otion unless they're going to trade him. This team isn't exactly WS caliber, and unless there's a complete overhaul of the pitching staff this offseason they won't be next year, either. You might as well get something of value for Dunn if you're certain he won't be on the team come 2009.


It makes perfect sense. They would have a left fielder for '08. They'd be paying him roughly what he's worth. If he walks after '08, the Reds get two draft picks which history suggests are pretty valuable. There is also always the chance the Reds could trade him.

I would agree that if an extension isn't forthcoming for any reason (either the club doesn't want one or AD doesn't want one), it makes no sense. Sure the Reds would have their LFer. Maybe even at below-market value. But with this pitching staff would it really matter? Probably not. As it was pointed out, two first round comp draft picks are very valuable. So why not get those two picks into the farm system ASAP? Instead of spending 13M on a LFer that won't be here after next year, in a season with not much likelihood of a playoff berth; why not take a chunk of that 13M and plow it into the farm system. The Reds would be in a position of taking full advantage of a talented player that might be falling due to monetary considerations. Let the Reds steal a gem for once instead of rolling with the signability picks. It's just a thought.

AmarilloRed
09-20-2007, 01:26 AM
Adam Dunn would have to refuse arbitration for us to get the draft picks, and it is possible he would accept arbitration. The Reds would end up paying more than if they just picked up the option. Yo would have to be fairly sure Adam would decline arbitration before you would take the risk of declining the option and going for the draft picks.

ChatterRed
09-20-2007, 07:47 AM
The reason the Reds WILL PICK UP HIS OPTION is to buy time and see what Jay Bruce can do. It will also buy them time to see if they can trade Griffey.

Personally, I'm starting to lean toward trading Josh Hamilton. His stock is high, but he appears to be one of these guys who will be perenially hurt (yes, I'm basing it on one season, but I have a gut feeling about him in the future).

Maybe we try and trade Griffey, Freel and Hamilton for pitching (??? if we can). Then sign Dunn longterm. Sign a center fielder in free agency and then bring up Bruce to fill the other spot. That leaves Hopper & Coats as backups.

texasdave
09-20-2007, 08:38 AM
Adam Dunn would have to refuse arbitration for us to get the draft picks, and it is possible he would accept arbitration. The Reds would end up paying more than if they just picked up the option. Yo would have to be fairly sure Adam would decline arbitration before you would take the risk of declining the option and going for the draft picks.

If, for whatever reasons, it gets to the point that the club has offered Adam Dunn arbitration, there is almost no chance that he accepts. He would be one of the top players who are eligible for free agency. Although it may have happened, It is not in the best interests for a top-free agent to negate team's bidding over his services to accept arbitration. There are at least three valid reasons for this.

1)The player is not guaranteed an arbitration windfall. The arbiter picks between the two submitted bid. He does not set the salary at what he thinks is a fair amount. Players win some; management wins some.

2)By accepting a one-year arbitration contract, the player assumes the risk of a career-ending or career-altering injury. Adam Dunn has been durable to this point in his career, but there are no guarantees that will continue.

3)By accepting a one-year arbitration contract, the player assumes the risk of performing poorly. In most cases I think another good performance does not help as much as performing poorly may hurt any potential future contracts. In other words, if AD has another year similar to 2007, most teams would feel that is expected, so his value wouldn't rise significantly. If he performs at his 2006 level it may lead to questions in the minds of potential bidders. Just my opinion, but I feel a bad year hurts more than a good year helps AD.

On top of these 3 reasons why would AD choose to play for a team in 2008 if he isn't going to be there in 2009, Especially if that team isn't likely to be contending for anything?

Adam Dunn might accept arbitration. IMO, there is only a small chance of that happening.

hebroncougar
09-20-2007, 08:46 AM
It would be absolutley foolish and stupid for the Reds to do everything in their power to ensure Adam Dunn is a Red for 2008 and beyond.

RedsMightWin
09-20-2007, 09:02 AM
It would be absolutley foolish and stupid for the Reds to do everything in their power to ensure Adam Dunn is a Red for 2008 and beyond.

Do you mean that like its written or do you mean it to say they would be stupid and foolish NOT to do everything.

SMcGavin
09-20-2007, 09:14 AM
Not picking up the option would be the dumbest thing I've seen from Reds management in as long as I can remember. Even dumber than the Milton signing, at least there was a chance when that happened that it would work out. If the Reds decline his option I will be taking a break from Reds baseball for a while.

That being said, WK is not an idiot, he will pick it up. I'd like to see Dunn extended as I think his Ks make people undervalue him, so his market value may be a little lower than his actual worth. However, if we get a good return I won't complain about a trade. The FO's decision on Dunn is crucial, as it really will shape the direction of this team for the next few seasons.