PDA

View Full Version : Could we have traded Dunn for Volquez?...



Hal#23Fan
04-22-2008, 12:40 PM
:rolleyes:I am not sure about how Dunn's current contract would come into play, but this would have been a far better move for the Reds. I believe the Rangers would have gone for it as well.

IMHO, i would take a Josh Hamilton over an Adam Dunn any day of the week.

Dunn struggles in more areas than he excels in. Hamilton is a 5 tool guy.....enough said.
:rolleyes:

Homer Bailey
04-22-2008, 12:42 PM
Although most will not agree with you, I actually will.

texasdave
04-22-2008, 12:44 PM
:rolleyes:I am not sure about how Dunn's current contract would come into play, but this would have been a far better move for the Reds. I believe the Rangers would have gone for it as well.

IMHO, i would take a Josh Hamilton over an Adam Dunn any day of the week.

Dunn struggles in more areas than he excels in. Hamilton is a 5 tool guy.....enough said.
:rolleyes:

If a Dunn for Volquez/Herrera trade would have gone down you would not be reading this post right now. The thermo-nuclear (over)reaction to that trade would have nuked Redszone right off the web for weeks. Hell, maybe months or even years. Perhaps rightfully so.

dsmith421
04-22-2008, 01:02 PM
The Rangers would not have traded their best pitching prospect (plus an interesting low-minors arm) for one year of Adam Dunn. MLB-ready starters with minimal service time are incredibly valuable, and sometimes you have to give value to get value.

Hal#23Fan
04-22-2008, 01:02 PM
I know there is some serious man love for Dunn on here, but i have never seen the results on the field. Yeah, Dunn gives you 40 HR's and 90+ RBIs, but plays lazy defense, has a terrible arm, strikes out on average around 150 times per year, and has a .248 career BA.

Sorry.....i just don't see it.

Here's to the minority:beerme:

Hal#23Fan
04-22-2008, 01:05 PM
The Rangers would not have traded their best pitching prospect (plus an interesting low-minors arm) for one year of Adam Dunn. MLB-ready starters with minimal service time are incredibly valuable, and sometimes you have to give value to get value.

I wonder if the Reds at least sent out some feelers?

Natty Redlocks
04-22-2008, 01:09 PM
:rolleyes:I am not sure about how Dunn's current contract would come into play, but this would have been a far better move for the Reds. I believe the Rangers would have gone for it as well.

IMHO, i would take a Josh Hamilton over an Adam Dunn any day of the week.

Dunn struggles in more areas than he excels in. Hamilton is a 5 tool guy.....enough said.
:rolleyes:

Actually, Hamilton has six tools if you count the crack pipe as a tool.

I know, I know, but seriously, he was (and still is) a major risk to relapse and has always been injury-prone. This is one of the few instances where the front office did the right thing and sold high (get it? Hamilton? High?).

After Dunn's failure to run over the tiniest catcher in baseball Sunday, though, I finally don't give a crap if they don't extend him.

AmarilloRed
04-22-2008, 01:11 PM
The Rangers really wanted Josh Hamilton, and rightfully so. He was a very talented outfield prospect, was going to be cheap for a long time, and had already proved himself with 1 year of MLB experience. Dunn, on the other hand, was in his option year, and was going to be very expensive in free agency. I doubt anyone but Hamilton(possibly Bruce) was ever in trade talks.

HalMorrisRules
04-22-2008, 01:12 PM
The Rangers would not have traded their best pitching prospect (plus an interesting low-minors arm) for one year of Adam Dunn. MLB-ready starters with minimal service time are incredibly valuable, and sometimes you have to give value to get value.

His salary would have been the biggest hindrance IMO.

Hal#23Fan
04-22-2008, 01:17 PM
The Rangers really wanted Josh Hamilton, and rightfully so. He was a very talented outfield prospect, was going to be cheap for a long time, and had already proved himself with 1 year of MLB experience. Dunn, on the other hand, was in his option year, and was going to be very expensive in free agency. I doubt anyone but Hamilton(possibly Bruce) was ever in trade talks.

Sounds about right....i keep forgetting Dunn was in his option year last year.

Who could we get for Dunn at this point?? Move Dunn ASAP and insert Bruce into his spot.

OesterPoster
04-22-2008, 01:28 PM
Sounds about right....i keep forgetting Dunn was in his option year last year.

Who could we get for Dunn at this point?? Move Dunn ASAP and insert Bruce into his spot.

He has a no-trade clause prior to June 15th. After that date, he has a list of 19 teams where he can be traded.

AmarilloRed
04-22-2008, 01:30 PM
He has a no-trade clause prior to June 15th. After that date, he has a list of 19 teams where he can be traded.

I have heard it is 10 teams, all chosen by Adam.

757690
04-22-2008, 01:37 PM
Sounds about right....i keep forgetting Dunn was in his option year last year.

Who could we get for Dunn at this point?? Move Dunn ASAP and insert Bruce into his spot.

I think the Reds would have loved to trade Dunn instead of Hamilton, but when they picked up his option, a clause in contract stipulated that Dunn could not be traded until June of 08. They were stuck for him.

I agree, I would rather see Bruce replace Dunn than Griffey or even Patterson. As for who could the Reds get for him? Basically they would take anything more than what they think they can get with a first round draft pick and a supplemental pick. So at least one top 10 prospects, and one top 20. It will all depend on who needs a big hitter at the trade deadline. Let's hope it's the Devil Rays, their system is stacked.

757690
04-22-2008, 01:40 PM
He has a no-trade clause prior to June 15th. After that date, he has a list of 19 teams where he can be traded.

That is just a negotiating tactic. If the Reds want to trade Dunn right now, they can. It's just that whoever takes will have to give him a long term extension, before the trade is finalized. That is why players want no trade clauses, as leverage so they can be bought out of them.

Fil3232
04-22-2008, 01:45 PM
After Dunn's failure to run over the tiniest catcher in baseball Sunday, though, I finally don't give a crap if they don't extend him.


Really? That's the tipping point for you?

durl
04-22-2008, 01:55 PM
I'm not locked into either trading or keeping Dunn but if the Reds to retain him, there are some things to think about. His BA may not be extremely high but you can be a VERY good player (even a HOFer) without a very high BA.

Lifetime BA:
Harmon Killebrew - .256 (never hit .300 in his career)
Reggie Jackson - .262
Mike Schmidt - .267 (.961 FP)
Ernie Banks - .274
Mark McGwire - .263

Defense? Killebrew didn't make the HOF with his defense. His FP at 3B was .940. .976 in the OF. Adam Dunn's lifetime FP (so far) is better than Mike Schmidt's lifetime FP of .961. Among OFs over the past 3 years, Dunn doesn't have a great FP but it's comparable to Francoeur, Burrell, and V. Guerrero.

It can be frustrating to watch Dunn K a lot but the guy delivers very good offensive numbers. That's what he's paid to do.

Va Red Fan
04-22-2008, 02:13 PM
Wow, Dunn only hits 40 HR's a year and drives in around 100 runs while walking a ton and playing average outfield. That is so very easy to replace. Lets look on the waiver wire and see who we could pick up to do that. OK, that's kind of thin right now, what about sitting on the bench of another team. No, not many 40/100 guys sitting on a bench. What about on the field for another team. Gosh, not many teams have a dependable 40/100 guy on the team at all. I'm shocked.

Dunn is a talent, but he is given very little credit.

757690
04-22-2008, 02:15 PM
I'm not locked into either trading or keeping Dunn but if the Reds to retain him, there are some things to think about. His BA may not be extremely high but you can be a VERY good player (even a HOFer) without a very high BA.

Lifetime BA:
Harmon Killebrew - .256 (never hit .300 in his career)
Reggie Jackson - .262
Mike Schmidt - .267 (.961 FP)
Ernie Banks - .274
Mark McGwire - .263

Defense? Killebrew didn't make the HOF with his defense. His FP at 3B was .940. .976 in the OF. Adam Dunn's lifetime FP (so far) is better than Mike Schmidt's lifetime FP of .961. Among OFs over the past 3 years, Dunn doesn't have a great FP but it's comparable to Francoeur, Burrell, and V. Guerrero.

It can be frustrating to watch Dunn K a lot but the guy delivers very good offensive numbers. That's what he's paid to do.

Offensive #'s from that era should not be used to compare to players from this era. Except for McGwire, they all played when you were lucky to have 10 players hit more than 25 homers in a season in the majors, or have more than 10 hit .300. Now you usually have ten players hitting 40 homers in the majors each season (some years 50), and ten hit .320.
A number 2 starter now has a 4.50 ERA, and back in the 60's-80's, that would put you in the bullpen in long relief, if you made the team.
Totally different game.

Also, those guys were perennial All-Stars, all won MVP's and were constantly in the MVP voting nearly every year. Dunn has cracked the top 25 in MVP voting twice, and was an All-Star once.

Hal#23Fan
04-22-2008, 02:23 PM
Wow, Dunn only hits 40 HR's a year and drives in around 100 runs while walking a ton and playing average outfield. That is so very easy to replace. Lets look on the waiver wire and see who we could pick up to do that. OK, that's kind of thin right now, what about sitting on the bench of another team. No, not many 40/100 guys sitting on a bench. What about on the field for another team. Gosh, not many teams have a dependable 40/100 guy on the team at all. I'm shocked.

Dunn is a talent, but he is given very little credit.

You forgot to mention he strikes out a ton, is a below average outfielder, and has a lifetime BA of .248. I'll take Bruce in a New York second.

texasdave
04-22-2008, 02:44 PM
The Rangers would not have traded their best pitching prospect (plus an interesting low-minors arm) for one year of Adam Dunn. MLB-ready starters with minimal service time are incredibly valuable, and sometimes you have to give value to get value.

In July of 06, Texas traded 1 1/2 years of Francisco Cordero for 1/2 year of Carlos Lee, didn't they. Actually they traded a little more than that. I know Hamilton is young and cheap. He also carries some injury and drug-usage baggage. I think they might very well have jumped at native Texan Adam Dunn for Volquez and Herrera. Who knows? Maybe 1/2 a year for a team nominally in contention, is perceived as more valuable than a whole year for a team with questions about contending.

Fil3232
04-22-2008, 02:46 PM
Wow, Dunn only hits 40 HR's a year and drives in around 100 runs while walking a ton and playing average outfield. That is so very easy to replace. Lets look on the waiver wire and see who we could pick up to do that. OK, that's kind of thin right now, what about sitting on the bench of another team. No, not many 40/100 guys sitting on a bench. What about on the field for another team. Gosh, not many teams have a dependable 40/100 guy on the team at all. I'm shocked.

Dunn is a talent, but he is given very little credit.

It's amazing to me how often Dunn is bashed by Reds fans, yet so many then clamor to trade him for young pitching. Maybe only Reds fans, using their Pete Rose goggles can see through Dunn's immense production to his inner suck-i-tude.

:rolleyes:

Natty Redlocks
04-22-2008, 03:06 PM
Really? That's the tipping point for you?

Yep. He's clearly not a "gamer".

Actually I'm just irritated that I was at that game and left early because my kids were with me and I felt guilty letting them get rained on since neither of them like baseball. But I'm quite surprised and disappointed in how Dunn handled that play, and I hope he is too.

durl
04-22-2008, 03:40 PM
Offensive #'s from that era should not be used to compare to players from this era. Except for McGwire, they all played when you were lucky to have 10 players hit more than 25 homers in a season in the majors, or have more than 10 hit .300. Now you usually have ten players hitting 40 homers in the majors each season (some years 50), and ten hit .320.
A number 2 starter now has a 4.50 ERA, and back in the 60's-80's, that would put you in the bullpen in long relief, if you made the team.
Totally different game.

Also, those guys were perennial All-Stars, all won MVP's and were constantly in the MVP voting nearly every year. Dunn has cracked the top 25 in MVP voting twice, and was an All-Star once.

Good points. 30 years ago, 25 HR was like 35-40 today. How much juicing has to do with that is not understood.

I don't know if the MVP voting is really an indicator of how good a player is. It's not unusual for stats to be ignored for awards and MVP status. Harang could have legitimately won the Cy Young 2 years ago. Brandon Phillips deserved the Gold Glove last year. Ozzie Smith even started a lot of All Star games when he was not one of the best SS in the league. It can come down to name recognition and Dunn plays on a team that is below most people's radar.

Degenerate39
04-22-2008, 03:47 PM
Texas kepting calling about Hamilton not Dunn and the Rangers need a Centerfielder more than a left fielder so the Reds couldn't have traded Dunn for Volquez.

bgwilly31
04-22-2008, 04:05 PM
i think this team is missing hamilton right now.

Avg .305
Hrs. 4
7 dbles
19 RBI's

and only 10 SO out of 82 AB's.

Im pretty sure that would qualify for best on the team right now.

He did the same all through pre-season as well.

dsmith421
04-22-2008, 04:29 PM
It's amazing to me how often Dunn is bashed by Reds fans, yet so many then clamor to trade him for young pitching.

Exactly. On this very thread there are posts that (a) say Dunn basically sucks, and then (b) wonder why the Rangers wouldn't trade a top starting prospect for him.

dsmith421
04-22-2008, 10:36 PM
Frankly, if Hamilton stays healthy and productive, and Volquez is the kind of pitcher he's shown thus far, this has the potential to be one of the great win-win trades of all time.

AdamDunn
04-22-2008, 10:49 PM
I don't know if anyone said this or not, but if I remember correctly, the Ranger's didn't want Dunn's $13 million.

AmarilloRed
04-23-2008, 12:47 AM
Quite frankly, once you get past Bruce we have very little starting outfielder depth. Patterson has not shown us a whole lot, so it is debatable whether he could be considered a starting outfielder. Hamilton is traded, Dunn is in his option year, and we most likely will not pick up Griffey's option. There are not a whole lot of quality starting outfielders available in free agency the next 3 years. I just think there is no alternative to not extending Dunn.

Gunner44
04-23-2008, 12:58 AM
the dunn bashers on this board still amaze me. once everyone runs dunn out of town he will be sorely missed(least by this reds fan.

mroby85
04-23-2008, 10:41 AM
Hamilton was a much more complete player than Dunn, however i'm glad they got Volquez anyway.

big boy
04-23-2008, 11:29 AM
To answer the original question: If the Rangers would have taken Dunn, Kriv would have pulled the trigger immediately.

freestyle55
04-24-2008, 08:42 AM
How about this trade idea...

Pat Burrell for Homer Bailey...?

flash
04-24-2008, 09:10 AM
I heard the Reds tried to do it, but the Rangers insisted on Hamilton. They knew they could out bid the Reds a year later and get Dun anyway. Why not get both Dunn and Hamilton.

freestyle55
04-24-2008, 10:40 AM
My point exactly...for all the people who keep thinking, oh we could have given them Dunn for Volquez...would you have made the trade I proposed...I certainly wouldn't...

It's essentially the same thing that Dunn/Volquez was proposing...low average sluggers who walk a lot and strike out a lot (although Dunn a bit more) who can't field (although if you look at numbers, Dunn actually appears to be better than Burrell) and have big contracts...

Don't get me wrong, I think Adam Dunn is a great player, I just don't think he would have gotten us Volquez (a top starting pitching prospect basically MLB ready at the time) when he's in a walk year...

Ahhhorsepoo
04-24-2008, 10:46 AM
I know there is some serious man love for Dunn on here, but i have never seen the results on the field. Yeah, Dunn gives you 40 HR's and 90+ RBIs, but plays lazy defense, has a terrible arm, strikes out on average around 150 times per year, and has a .248 career BA.

Sorry.....i just don't see it.

Here's to the minority:beerme:

try a average 182 k's per 162 games played in his career..

I wish that trade would have happened anyday.. and unfortunately I think now that krivsky is fired.. dunn will get a LTD..

zakthemack
04-24-2008, 11:00 AM
At this point if you can get a starting pitcher for Dunn I'd take that in a second.

Hondo
04-24-2008, 11:38 AM
Wait. No one new Volquez would be this good and it is only 4 starts. I love this guy, and I also thought it was a crappy trade when Hamilton was dealt for him. I admit that. I am so far wrong.

But trading a 40 homer 100 rbi, 100 run guy for Volquez last year with his Major League Stats> Please what are u smoking?

When he is gone, everyone is going to wish he was still here.