PDA

View Full Version : Think This Deal Would Fly For Both Sides?



Krusty
09-26-2007, 03:08 PM
Would probably take some negotiations by the Dodgers to get Dunn to agree to a contract extension but out in LA, they say Kemp could be available this offseason:

Dunn for Broxton and Kemp.
Reds get bullpen help and a young outfielder that might be able to play CF.

Opinions?

Patrick Bateman
09-26-2007, 03:09 PM
Hasn't this trade offer been discussed like a trillion times?

chicoruiz
09-26-2007, 03:12 PM
Giving up Dunn and not getting a rotation starter back would make me drink Drano...

PuffyPig
09-26-2007, 03:13 PM
Hasn't this trade offer been discussed like a trillion times?


Yes, but until everyone says that it can happen, it will be asked again and again.

KronoRed
09-26-2007, 03:15 PM
Dunn for a closer?

What a disaster that would be.

pedro
09-26-2007, 03:15 PM
why do the reds want another outfielder?

what leads you to believe that Kemp is a better option in CF than Bruce or Hamilton?

Blitz Dorsey
09-26-2007, 03:30 PM
Giving up Dunn and not getting a rotation starter back would make me drink Drano...

Liquid Plumber here. But I hear ya.

lollipopcurve
09-26-2007, 03:50 PM
I really doubt LA gives up a few years of controlling Broxton, an excellent closer-in-the-making, for a half-year of Dunn at 8-9MM (he can't be traded till 6/15). Not to mention Kemp.

2-3 years ago we were talking about Dunn for Billingsley and Broxton. That bird flew and its flock with it.

camisadelgolf
09-26-2007, 04:13 PM
If I were the Reds, I'd do it in a heart beat, but I don't think there's anyway the Dodgers would do that trade.

Benihana
09-26-2007, 05:02 PM
Dunn for Billingsley. Straight up, end of discussion.

I doubt the Dodgers ever give up Chad, but he's a local guy, and that's who I'd want for Adam Dunn.

No need for Broxton- he doesn't give the Reds anything that Jared Burton can't offer.

Patrick Bateman
09-26-2007, 05:22 PM
Dunn for Billingsley. Straight up, end of discussion.

I doubt the Dodgers ever give up Chad, but he's a local guy, and that's who I'd want for Adam Dunn.

No need for Broxton- he doesn't give the Reds anything that Jared Burton can't offer.

There's no rule saying that you can't have multiple good relievers, especially considering that Broxton has proven a lot more than Burton has.

I'm not in favour of this trade, but you're kidding yourself if you think Broxton would add little to the team.

TOBTTReds
09-26-2007, 05:26 PM
No need for Broxton- he doesn't give the Reds anything that Jared Burton can't offer.

ridunculous

Highlifeman21
09-27-2007, 04:27 PM
Dunn for Billingsley. Straight up, end of discussion.

I doubt the Dodgers ever give up Chad, but he's a local guy, and that's who I'd want for Adam Dunn.

No need for Broxton- he doesn't give the Reds anything that Jared Burton can't offer.

Oh boy, improving the rotation while forcing the Reds to play Ryan Freel and or Norris Hopper everyday in the OF.

I'd rather stay with the status quo pitching and hope we can develop Cueto and light a fire under Bailey, rather than deplete the offense by trading Dunn.

flyer85
09-27-2007, 04:39 PM
not gonna happen. The odds are better that Dunns option will not be picked than him approving a trade in the off-season.

pedro
09-27-2007, 04:42 PM
not gonna happen. The odds are better that Dunns option will not be picked than him approving a trade in the off-season.

I don't know about that. If he knows the Reds were going to trade you at the break to god knows who, why wouldn't he just go ahead and approve a trade now and be in the same place all year? Assuming it's someplace he wouldn't mind playing.

flyer85
09-27-2007, 04:43 PM
I don't know about that. If he knows the Reds were going to trade you at the break to god knows who, why wouldn't he just go ahead and approve a trade now and be in the same place all year? Assuming it's someplace he wouldn't mind playing.Dunn still has a limited no-trade which if he uses it wisely can create a situation where they can't trade him without his approval. If the Reds pick up his option only to try and trade I would think Dunn would make it as difficult as possible. I am one who thinks the Reds declining the option is a very real possibility.

pedro
09-27-2007, 06:03 PM
Dunn still has a limited no-trade which if he uses it wisely can create a situation where they can't trade him without his approval. If the Reds pick up his option only to try and trade I would think Dunn would make it as difficult as possible. I am one who thinks the Reds declining the option is a very real possibility.

Not a chance in hell that they don't pick up the option IMO.

If I was Dunn I would want to use the no trade clause to steer a trade to a team of my liking, if the Reds were intent on trading him.

Ltlabner
09-27-2007, 06:21 PM
I am one who thinks the Reds declining the option is a very real possibility.

Why would Wayne make his first deal as Reds GM to sign Dunn to a contract, only to turn around 2 or 3 years later and claim the guy doesn't have any value to the team?

Epecially when it's an option on a contract he negotiated?

TOBTTReds
09-27-2007, 07:24 PM
Why would Wayne make his first deal as Reds GM to sign Dunn to a contract, only to turn around 2 or 3 years later and claim the guy doesn't have any value to the team?

Epecially when it's an option on a contract he negotiated?

I'll add: This last year was Dunn's best. So if he thought Dunn was worth the option 2 years ago, he DEFINITELY thinks he is worth it now.

PuffyPig
09-27-2007, 07:29 PM
Dunn still has a limited no-trade which if he uses it wisely can create a situation where they can't trade him without his approval. If the Reds pick up his option only to try and trade I would think Dunn would make it as difficult as possible. I am one who thinks the Reds declining the option is a very real possibility.

I continue to think that the option being picked up is a certainty. Dunn is likely a bargain at $13M. They would want to pick it up even if he can't be traded because (1) he's a good player and worth the contract:and(2) if we can't trade him (or don't even try because we are competing), we can always offer him arbitration and get a couple of good drafts picks for him later on.

corkedbat
09-27-2007, 11:25 PM
I think that chances are very good that one of the starting OFers may be dealt for pitching by ST. I think this is especially likely if the front office thinks that Bruce is ready to start the season in the bigs (no way can I see Bruce as the one dealt). I think that this could be even more likely if they can add a fairly solid RH 4th OF bat with some pop in Free Agency or a secondary deal.

I don't see Dunn as being the one to go, because I don't think he's dealable until the trade deadline at the earliest and even then probably wouldn't bring a worthwhile return.

I guess there's a chance that they might not pick up AD's option <shudder> which would probably mean no OF is dealt, but I find ths highly doubtful. I think a 2 or 3yr. extension w/an option to be more likely.

As much as I love KGJ, he would probably be the ideal OF to swap if the right player (pitcher) were dangled. Unless an AL team wants him as an OF/DH, I don't believe anyone will offer enough to make it happen. My guess is that his solid season at the plate and (relatively) injury-free season will lead ownership to have Junior play out his contract and hit #600 as a Red.

Josh Hamilton, is a great story, has fantastic tools, has had an outstanding rookie year and is controlable for several more seasons. This would seem to make him only slightly more likely to be dealt than Bruce. Those same attributes however, might bring some team, eager for young LH OF production, to offer the right someone to upgrade the pitching staff.

Josh's slight weakness against LH pitchers, durability questions, past and the number of future OF prospects in the Reds pipeline might make this a little more palatable. Again, acquiring a RH OF with some power would make this much more doable.

I only trade Josh though if it is for a major league (ready) arm in return that can clearly improve the pitching staff.