PDA

View Full Version : Rosenthal on Dunn/Griffey



OnBaseMachine
04-29-2008, 02:20 PM
Adam Dunn/Ken Griffey Jr.: The Reds are sick of losing, or so they proclaimed when they fired Wayne Krivsky as general manager. Still, there is little point to them keeping Dunn and Griffey, both of whom will be free agents at the end of the season.

Even if the Reds mount a charge in the NL Central, they would be better off promoting center fielder Jay Bruce — one of the game's top prospects — and collecting more young talent in trades.

That means asking Griffey to waive his no-trade clause, possibly for a return to the Mariners, after he hits the three homers he needs for 600. It also means moving Dunn, who has full no-trade protection until June 15. After that, he can be sent to all but 10 clubs.

Dunn selected the teams on his limited no-trade list carefully, choosing mostly high-revenue clubs that could afford him. That way, he could gain a say — and leverage — in most discussions.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8086082?MSNHPHMA

Reds Nd2
04-29-2008, 02:31 PM
After that, he can be sent to all but 10 clubs.

Not true.

PuffyPig
04-29-2008, 02:42 PM
Not true.

And the truth is?

AmarilloRed
04-29-2008, 02:46 PM
And the truth is?

I have heard he can be sent to 10 teams of his choosing after June 15, not all but 10 clubs AKA (32-10)=22.

Reds Nd2
04-29-2008, 02:49 PM
And the truth is?

if club exercised 2008 option, Dunn receives full no-trade clause until 6/15/2008 & limited no-trade clause for the remainder of 2008 (allowing Dunn specify 10 clubs to which he would accept a trade)

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/cincinnati-reds_24.html

nate
04-29-2008, 02:49 PM
And the truth is?

I thought it was that he picked a list of ten clubs he would accept a trade to. Not that he could be sent to any club except a list of ten he chooses.

fearofpopvol1
04-29-2008, 02:56 PM
There really isn't much reason to keep Griffey much longer. I really do think Bruce could duplicate his numbers or come very close and obviously, his defense is going to be much better.

Dunn on the other hand is just such a puzzle. Seriously, what do you do with him? Unless he finishes this season with amazing stats (unlikely), I can't imagine he'll get a ton of money elsewhere. Who replaces Dunn for the Reds when if/when he leaves? I'd like the Reds to keep Dunn, but only if the contract is reasonable, which I can't imagine it to be.

Screwball
04-29-2008, 03:05 PM
Seriously, what do you do with him? Unless he finishes this season with amazing stats (unlikely)

I'm interested as to why you think it's unlikely. He's done nothing but put up great stats in the past, and at age 28 he's in his prime. Sure his numbers aren't very good right now, but I don't know of too many people who expect these struggles to continue for another 5 months.

Perhaps by amazing you mean 50 HRs, 1.000+ OPS, etc., which yes, is pretty unlikely. However, I don't think 40 HRs, 100 RBIs, .900+ OPS is either unlikely or anything to be scoffed at.

RedsManRick
04-29-2008, 03:11 PM
There really isn't much reason to keep Griffey much longer. I really do think Bruce could duplicate his numbers or come very close and obviously, his defense is going to be much better.

Dunn on the other hand is just such a puzzle. Seriously, what do you do with him? Unless he finishes this season with amazing stats (unlikely), I can't imagine he'll get a ton of money elsewhere. Who replaces Dunn for the Reds when if/when he leaves? I'd like the Reds to keep Dunn, but only if the contract is reasonable, which I can't imagine it to be.

I agree. The Dunn situation is a bit of a conundrum. He's basically getting paid what he's worth, but he doesn't merit an extremely long deal -- which he'll likely be expecting. However, the Reds don't have the bat in house to replace him and, going the FA route, the only comparable player in terms of production is Pat Burrell, who is basically Dunn with brown hair.

To me, the best option is to try and sign him to a short deal -- say 3 years at 15M per. If not, trade him for a decent return. If you can't get at least one A prospect, let him walk and take the draft picks. The worst things the Reds could do is either give him an albatross contract (say, 7/120) or trade him for a few marginal prospects, and eventually get nothing out of it.

That said, I hope the Reds appreciate that Dunn is significantly more productive than Junior and that they should not be treated as equivalents from the 2009 team construction perspective.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 03:13 PM
On the list I think Rosental is confused, IIRC, Dunn/agent can build of a list of 10 teams to which he can be traded without his approval. Which means they will build a list of non-contending low budget teams to submit to the Reds thus giving Dunn the leverage.


Dunn selected the teams on his limited no-trade list carefully, choosing mostly high-revenue clubs that could afford him. That way, he could gain a say — and leverage — in most discussions.which is exactly what I have been pointing out. He will make it so to be dealt he will have to waive his "no-trade" clause, giving him leverage in a deal.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 03:23 PM
Honestly I don't think either Jr or Dunn will bring much in a trade. The trend in recent years is to hang on to top prospects and deal at most middling prospects(if even that) for rent-a-players.

Joseph
04-29-2008, 03:28 PM
I'm hazy on the specifics of this, but I heard on XM yesterday I believe, that Dunn would envoke his No-Trade to all the teams likely to want him such as the Angels, Yankees, Mets, Cubs, Dodgers, etc.....IE all the teams likely to be in a race and likely to have the young talent they are willing to give to 'rent' Dunn. The plan, if you believe the report, is to be sure he goes where he wants to go and signs the contract worth what he wants.

Basically Dunn is set up to get what he wants, where he wants, be it Cincinnati or elsewhere, and the Reds are not in much of a position to maximize his possible return.

That said, I do love Junior and Dunn as players, but I do think from both we've gotten the best we can get. Junior is clearly towards the end and if we can deal him for a couple AA arms, lets do it.

Dunn, and here is where I expect to be blasted soundly, I think he's as good as he's going to be. I don't think he's on the verge of breaking out and becoming a 50-150 guy. I also think he's likely already to start a decline, maybe a slow one, but one none-the-less.

Therefore, I think its time to deal Dunn this season as well, rather than letting him walk or paying him 15+ per over 4 or 5 years.

Thats obviously just my opinion, but one I think that could help make the Reds better moving ahead.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 03:31 PM
Basically Dunn is set up to get what he wants, where he wants, be it Cincinnati or elsewhere, and the Reds are not in much of a position to maximize his possible return.that pretty much nails it. Unless some team is really desperate(Dunn is the only real answer) I can't see Dunn bringing much in a deal, he may not get traded at all and just be allowed to walk at the end of the year.

RedsManRick
04-29-2008, 03:32 PM
Honestly I don't think either Jr or Dunn will bring much in a trade. The trend in recent years is to hang on to top prospects and deal at most middling prospects(if even that) for rent-a-players.

I think the difference now is that if you want high ceiling prospects, you have to go lower in the system, taking on greater risk in the process. You aren't likely to get that guy in AA or AAA ready to go. I think the biggest inefficiency in the market right now is with post-hype sleepers, if you'll allow me to rip off a fantasy baseball term. More specifically, it's those guys who were once great prospects, but where the bloom is off the rose a bit.

Take a guy like Dallas McPherson (prior to this year), Brandon Wood, even our own Homer Bailey. So much attention is being paid to the next great prospect, that I think teams are taking their eye off the guys who still have the talent but didn't succeed immediately. That's where I'd be targeting.

Could you trade Dunn (or Griffey) for Andy Marte, for example?

fearofpopvol1
04-29-2008, 03:37 PM
I'm interested as to why you think it's unlikely. He's done nothing but put up great stats in the past, and at age 28 he's in his prime. Sure his numbers aren't very good right now, but I don't know of too many people who expect these struggles to continue for another 5 months.

Perhaps by amazing you mean 50 HRs, 1.000+ OPS, etc., which yes, is pretty unlikely. However, I don't think 40 HRs, 100 RBIs, .900+ OPS is either unlikely or anything to be scoffed at.

I'm fully aware of what Dunn can do, it's what he can't do that's the problem. What I meant by amazing stats was, batting over 300, cutting the Ks down by half, and improving his defensive play. I'm not knocking Dunn for these things, but they are his weaker points.

Personally, I think $15 million a year for Dunn (especially for multiple years) is too steep. $15 million to me (particularly for a small market team) is elite player status. I just don't consider Dunn an elite player. He's a very good player and he is very valuable to the Reds, but I don't consider him elite.

I see Dunn being worth $10 million to the Reds, maybe $12 million per year. What many of us don't know is where the Reds will be 1 or 2 months from now and that probably plays a bigger part than anything else.

Screwball
04-29-2008, 03:55 PM
I'm fully aware of what Dunn can do, it's what he can't do that's the problem. What I meant by amazing stats was, batting over 300, cutting the Ks down by half, and improving his defensive play. I'm not knocking Dunn for these things, but they are his weaker points.


Gotcha. It just seems we have differing opinions on amazing.


Personally, I think $15 million a year for Dunn (especially for multiple years) is too steep. $15 million to me (particularly for a small market team) is elite player status. I just don't consider Dunn an elite player. He's a very good player and he is very valuable to the Reds, but I don't consider him elite.

I see Dunn being worth $10 million to the Reds, maybe $12 million per year. What many of us don't know is where the Reds will be 1 or 2 months from now and that probably plays a bigger part than anything else.

Personally, I don't mind overpaying a little for production - espeically when you don't have any viable in-house options to replace said production. Bruce can only fill so much of an offensive void left by a missing Dunn and Griffey. While it's not a perfect analogy, I liken the Dunn scenario to the Cordero situation. The Reds are probably overpaying FC at $46 mill for 4 years, but he fills a giant hole that we wouldn't otherwise be able to fill. Hence, it's a move I'm on board with as it's not money going to waste.

Nugget
04-29-2008, 04:17 PM
I thought it was that he picked a list of ten clubs he would accept a trade to. Not that he could be sent to any club except a list of ten he chooses.

I think the contract is that Dunn can nominate 19 teams to which he cannot be traded without his consent.

RFS62
04-29-2008, 04:44 PM
I don't think Jocketty will keep either of them.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 04:49 PM
I think the contract is that Dunn can nominate 19 teams to which he cannot be traded without his consent.and supposedly he and his agent have/will submitted a list of 10 teams that very likely will have zero interest in trading for him.

Spitball
04-29-2008, 04:56 PM
Honestly I don't think either Jr or Dunn will bring much in a trade. The trend in recent years is to hang on to top prospects and deal at most middling prospects(if even that) for rent-a-players.

I agree. Texas dealt Tiexiera with more than a year left in order to get the kind of return that used to be common for stretch run pennant drives. We see the same pattern with Bedard and (IIRC) Haren. The summer before the Brewers had to send one of their top outfield propsects with Carlos Lee in their trade with Texas.

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this on the Griffey to Seattle thread (I didn't read it), but Griffey to Seattle before he hits number 600 might be a good idea. It might improve his value.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 04:59 PM
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this on the Griffey to Seattle thread (I didn't read it), but Griffey to Seattle before he hits number 600 might be a good idea. It might improve his value.I expect that Seattle is one of the few places he would accept. I don't think the 600 thing has any impact. From last year it was obvious that the Seattle fans were ready to rekindle their love affair with Jr.

Kc61
04-29-2008, 05:01 PM
I agree that Dunn will be gone; not sure about Griffey.

In Dunn's case, it's simple economics. He will want about fifteen million a year for several years, and I just don't see the Reds doing it. Dunn makes much more sense for an AL team with the DH rule. The decision to hold onto Dunn until this year likely means a limited return -- a deadline deal for a prospect or two, or draft choices next year. That's what I expect to happen.

Griffey is more complicated. He might agree to stay for a reasonable number. Say $8million a year for two years. He continues to have star quality, still has a decent bat, and represents the team well. On the other hand, he has limited outfield range, is a high injury risk, and his numbers against lefties are poor. One could argue that he should be platooned in right field with a good righty hitter.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Griffey continue in a reduced role, at a reduced salary, after this year. I would be surprised if they re-signed Dunn.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 05:09 PM
The decision to hold onto Dunn until this year likely means a limited return -- a deadline deal for a prospect or two, or draft choices next year. That's what I expect to happen.not so sure, Dunn basically has the same ability as Jr, he can block almost any deal.

Seeing as Jrs MORP(PECOTA) for the next 2 years combined is $3.7M the Reds would be much better off paying the buyout and letting him go to the AL where he can chase 700 while DHing a considerable amount.

lollipopcurve
04-29-2008, 05:10 PM
If Dunn heats up at all, I think Big Bob will ink him. You can sell having Bruce replace Griffey, but dumping Dunn for unproven players (or draft picks) looks like capitulation, and that's not Castellini.

Benihana
04-29-2008, 05:12 PM
I would much rather keep Dunn than Jr. for so many reasons. But if Dunn wants more than 4 years, I can't see how that would be a beneficial move for the Reds. Either way, I'd like to see Jr. go back to Seattle and bring either Clement or Balentien in return. If Dunn can only bring a marginal return via trade, I'd rather keep him and take the picks.

Benihana
04-29-2008, 05:12 PM
If Dunn heats up at all, I think Big Bob will ink him. You can sell having Bruce replace Griffey, but dumping Dunn for unproven players (or draft picks) looks like capitulation, and that's not Castellini.

I agree. This is why I think Castellini will re-sign Dunn. Whether or not it will be on beneficial terms for the Reds is another story.

oneupper
04-29-2008, 05:14 PM
I don't think Jocketty will keep either of them.

I've gotta agree. He's looking at Bruce to substitute Griffey and a RH outfielder with pop for LF. Something along the lines of a Reggie Sanders or a Juan Encarnación.

That could still leave some money for other upgrades (and all the raises that will be going out).

flyer85
04-29-2008, 05:16 PM
I honestly think the entire money thing is overrated, its about production and where are you going to get it. BCast basically has an almost unlimited supply of $$$ and if he wants to throw down some extra cash to sign Dunn then I don't have a problem as long as it doesn't cause the Reds to let someone walk away in the future.

The issue the Reds have is how do you replace production in the current environment.

On the free agent side the Reds end up competing for middling free agents and that group is the one that gets way overpaid in terms of production.

Kc61
04-29-2008, 05:18 PM
not so sure, Dunn basically has the same ability as Jr, he can block almost any deal.

Seeing as Jrs MORP(PECOTA) for the next 2 years combined is $3.7M the Reds would be much better off paying the buyout and letting him go to the AL where he can chase 700 while DHing a considerable amount.

I don't disagree on Griffey, they may be better off letting him go. But I could see an arrangement there.

As for Dunn, if he won't allow a trade then the Reds will likely let him go for draft choices. He might agree to a deadline deal to a contender (if the Reds are out of it) if he's convinced he's leaving anyway. Play in the playoffs, get some exposure, then be a free agent.

blumj
04-29-2008, 05:21 PM
and supposedly he and his agent have/will submitted a list of 10 teams that very likely will have zero interest in trading for him.
It doesn't really matter. He'd likely agree to a trade as long as the team trading for him is offering a sufficient contract extension, unless he's absolutely committed to checking out free agency or the team is one he really wouldn't want to join for some reason.

fearofpopvol1
04-29-2008, 05:21 PM
I would much rather keep Dunn than Jr. for so many reasons. But if Dunn wants more than 4 years, I can't see how that would be a beneficial move for the Reds. Either way, I'd like to see Jr. go back to Seattle and bring either Clement or Balentien in return. If Dunn can only bring a marginal return via trade, I'd rather keep him and take the picks.

I'll never say never, but I'd say you're more likely to replace Jockety as the Reds GM than the Reds are of getting Clement or Blaentien (especially Clement) for Griffey.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 05:23 PM
supposedly Clement is about to be called up.

I guess his 397/.535/.692 line has finally got the mariners attention

Krusty
04-29-2008, 05:28 PM
Obviously everyone forgets that ownership wants to win now. Now if the team is out of contention by the June trading deadline, I could see moving them. But ownership didn't sign Cordero as part of a rebuilding plan.

This team will rebound......it has won its last three games. Send down Belisle and promote Bailey and go with the kids in the rotation along with Harang and Arroyo. Promote Bruce and stick him in center and shift Keppinger to the leadoff spot.

Like I said this team can rebound. It's only April.

flyer85
04-29-2008, 07:06 PM
from rotoworld


Former Reds GM Wayne Krivsky said Tuesday that there have been absolutely no contract talks between the team and Adam Dunn.
When Dunn's $13.5 million option for 2008 was exercised back in October, ownership came out and said that talks on a long-term deal would follow. Bowever, they never took place and possible terms have not been discussed. It's at least as likely as it's ever been that Dunn will be traded in July.

Benihana
04-29-2008, 07:18 PM
I'll never say never, but I'd say you're more likely to replace Jockety as the Reds GM than the Reds are of getting Clement or Blaentien (especially Clement) for Griffey.

It doesn't have to be straight up. I'd toss in Maloney and/or Francisco if it would pry loose either of those two. I still can't imagine the M's plan on keeping both Clement and Johjima for the next three years. And if they were willing to trade Jones, I think they would listen to offers for Balentien, who is/was an inferior prospect by comparison.

I doubt Jocketty is as high on Clement as we are, mainly because he has always preferred defensive-minded catchers. Balentien is kind of like a Matt Kemp, only one year behind on the developmental level. Ditto for Matt LaPorta, who may even be two years behind Kemp.

Those are three guys they need to be targeting if they are planning to move Jr. or Dunn. We need to replace their offensive production.

RedsManRick
04-29-2008, 07:23 PM
It doesn't have to be straight up. I'd toss in Maloney and/or Francisco if it would pry loose either of those two. I still can't imagine the M's plan on keeping both Clement and Johjima for the next three years. And if they were willing to trade Jones, I think they would listen to offers for Balentien, who is/was an inferior prospect by comparison.

I don't quite follow that logic. They traded Jones because they had Balentien. Does it follow that because we traded away Josh Hamilton that we're more likely to listen to offers for Bruce? If anything, it's the opposite.

fearofpopvol1
04-29-2008, 08:36 PM
It doesn't have to be straight up. I'd toss in Maloney and/or Francisco if it would pry loose either of those two. I still can't imagine the M's plan on keeping both Clement and Johjima for the next three years. And if they were willing to trade Jones, I think they would listen to offers for Balentien, who is/was an inferior prospect by comparison.

I doubt Jocketty is as high on Clement as we are, mainly because he has always preferred defensive-minded catchers. Balentien is kind of like a Matt Kemp, only one year behind on the developmental level. Ditto for Matt LaPorta, who may even be two years behind Kemp.

Those are three guys they need to be targeting if they are planning to move Jr. or Dunn. We need to replace their offensive production.

I think Clement's bat is age/bat/pre arb years are way too valuable for an aged (and expensive) Griffey and another throw in or 2. Clement is considered a very high prospect, so I think you'd have to come up with something better than that. Balentien maybe, but even then, I don't think what you suggested (above) would be enough.

OnBaseMachine
04-29-2008, 11:15 PM
I'm one of the biggest Dunn/Griffey fans that you will find, but I think the Reds to need to trade both of them for prospects. Griffey's bat is deteriorating and his defense is just beyond bad at this point. If the ball is not hit within 10 feet of him then he's not catching it. I'm tired of watching all these bloop hits fall in. It's killer to a pitching staff. Same with Dunn, I like his bat but his defense isn't improving and he doesn't like first base, so I'd look into dealing him for some prospects. The outfield defense needs a serious upgrade.

Benihana
04-29-2008, 11:27 PM
I don't quite follow that logic. They traded Jones because they had Balentien. Does it follow that because we traded away Josh Hamilton that we're more likely to listen to offers for Bruce? If anything, it's the opposite.

Well, after trading Tim Hudson Billy Beane didn't have any problems listening to offers for Mark Mulder (or Barry Zito for htat matter.) The bottom line is once a GM has shown that he has the cajones to move a top prospect, no prospect is off limits. I would guess that Bavasi would be willing to listen to any offer.

Another example: The Reds may trade BOTH Dunn and Griffey (which is the whole premise of this thread.)

I agree that an offer of Jr., Maloney and Francisco may not be enough to pry Balentien, but it certainly wouldn't hurt to try.

AmarilloRed
04-30-2008, 12:45 AM
I have also been a huge backer of getting Dunn a LTC; as it always made a lot of sense. We do not seem to have a lot of good starting outfielders in the upper levels of the minors(with the exception of Bruce), Dunn would seem to be the class of the 2009 OF free agents, and I always believed he was open to signing with the Reds. I have always valued the consistant production he gave the reds(40 HR and 90-100 RBI), 80+ walks, and a high OBP. I have always realized he had some flaws in the strikeouts, low BA, and mediocre(some would say bad) defense. I always felt his production was more valuable than any runs he might give up with his defense. He really seems to be going into a sharp downward spiral so far this year, and I have to concede for the first time it might be best to trade Adam Dunn. I hope he is only in a slump and that his defense will improve, but it will certainly be something to keep an eye on the rest of the year.

IslandRed
04-30-2008, 10:29 AM
If Dunn heats up at all, I think Big Bob will ink him. You can sell having Bruce replace Griffey, but dumping Dunn for unproven players (or draft picks) looks like capitulation, and that's not Castellini.

If Castellini trusts Jocketty as much as he appears to, I'd like to think he'd follow Walt's lead. If Jocketty says, "Look, that's a lot of cash to re-sign him. I can do better," then Bob will probably give him a chance. Keep in mind the problem can be solved via trade and not just the free-agent market.

But no, I would not expect an in-season trade if the Reds are remotely in contention.

REDREAD
04-30-2008, 10:39 AM
Personally, I don't mind overpaying a little for production - espeically when you don't have any viable in-house options to replace said production. Bruce can only fill so much of an offensive void left by a missing Dunn and Griffey.

If the Reds want to win in the near future, they almost have no choice but to ante up for Dunn.

Even if the Reds prefered Burell, it's no slam dunk that he would come here or that we'd win a bidding war for him..

So then, we have to trade for a bat to replace Dunn, and frankly we don't have a lot of excess talent laying around to do that. I'd much rather see whatever trade bait we have used to address other areas of need.

As crazy as this sounds, I'd be tempted to pick up Jr's option if he has a solid season this year as well. Put Bruce in CF.. It's not ideal but this team doesn't have that much depth in position players.

If nothing else, picking up Jr's option buys the team another year to figure out what the future of the OF is.

REDREAD
04-30-2008, 10:43 AM
from rotoworld

Former Reds GM Wayne Krivsky said Tuesday that there have been absolutely no contract talks between the team and Adam Dunn.
When Dunn's $13.5 million option for 2008 was exercised back in October, ownership came out and said that talks on a long-term deal would follow. Bowever, they never took place and possible terms have not been discussed. It's at least as likely as it's ever been that Dunn will be traded in July.



I'm always a little suspicious of information like this. Perhaps the Reds and Dunn don't want it publicized that negotiations were started. As soon as word leaks out that the Reds are talking to Dunn, there will be one group wondering why the Reds can't just "get it done".. In other words, as soon as word leaks out that the Reds are talking to Dunn, the immeidate expectation is that he'll be signed and be around. Then if Dunn is traded or walks, that disappoints a lot of people who built up expectations.


As an example, remember when Mercker was a starting pitcher, and said he'd take less to come back to the Reds? Well, he went to the Cards and a lot of people got upset about it based on Mercker saying he'd "Take less". Bowden even rubbed it in his face a bit.. I'm sure Dunn doesn't want that to happen to him. Of course, Mercker also later said he went to St Louis because they had a better shot of winning, and that didn't endear him to the fans either.

HokieRed
04-30-2008, 09:50 PM
Any way we could get back the guy we traded. He now has 32 RBI's, is rapidly becoming perhaps the best outfielder, if not the best player, in the major leagues. Meanwhile we have Griffey hitting 3rd and Dunn 5th.

*BaseClogger*
04-30-2008, 09:55 PM
Any way we could get back the guy we traded. He now has 32 RBI's, is rapidly becoming perhaps the best outfielder, if not the best player, in the major leagues. Meanwhile we have Griffey hitting 3rd and Dunn 5th.

"You gotta give up something to get something." Volquez's stats are pretty good too...

Highlifeman21
04-30-2008, 09:59 PM
I'm one of the biggest Dunn/Griffey fans that you will find, but I think the Reds to need to trade both of them for prospects. Griffey's bat is deteriorating and his defense is just beyond bad at this point. If the ball is not hit within 10 feet of him then he's not catching it. I'm tired of watching all these bloop hits fall in. It's killer to a pitching staff. Same with Dunn, I like his bat but his defense isn't improving and he doesn't like first base, so I'd look into dealing him for some prospects. The outfield defense needs a serious upgrade.

1. Why both of them?

2. Why does LF D matter?

3. Given that Dunn won't play 1B, why do we need to move him?

4. What can we expect for each of them, and what can we expect for both of them?

OnBaseMachine
04-30-2008, 10:12 PM
As I said before, I'm probably the biggest Adam Dunn fan on here but I don't think the Reds should pay him the close to 20 million that it's going to take to keep him in Cincy. I would be in favor of a three or four year deal worth around 12 million a year but that's most likely not going to happen. I just wouldn't feel comfortable giving him more money than that considering his defense sometimes inconsistent bat. He's worth 15+ million if he puts up 2004 or 2007 type numbers, but who's to say he won't put up 2003 (.819 OPS) or 2006 (.855 OPS) numbers? And that's not worth it. It pains me to say that because I love the guy as a player.

Kc61
04-30-2008, 11:26 PM
1. Why both of them?

2. Why does LF D matter?

3. Given that Dunn won't play 1B, why do we need to move him?

4. What can we expect for each of them, and what can we expect for both of them?

1. Because they have been with the team for 8 and 7 years, respectively, the team does nothing but lose, and it is time for a new formula.

2. Because a lot of balls are hit out there.

3. Because there is no DH rule in the National League.

4. It doesn't matter what the return is. These two are paid $25 million or more of annual payroll. I trust Walt Jocketty to put that money to good use. And if you can get a couple of good prospects or even draft choices for them, that's fine.

mth123
04-30-2008, 11:45 PM
1. Because they have been with the team for 8 and 7 years, respectively, the team does nothing but lose, and it is time for a new formula.

2. Because a lot of balls are hit out there.

3. Because there is no DH rule in the National League.

4. It doesn't matter what the return is. These two are paid $25 million or more of annual payroll. I trust Walt Jocketty to put that money to good use. And if you can get a couple of good prospects or even draft choices for them, that's fine.


I understand the premise and don't totally disagree but....

Bruce should be able to equal or exceed Griffey's production and the transition can't happen soon enough for me. The 2 step range in RF is easily the worst OF defense I've seen in my years of watching baseball. He may not be as poor from a technique standpoint as many others, but from an effectiveness standpoint there is simply no one as bad. IMO a Bruce for Griffey substitution should make the Reds a better over-all team unless Bruce is a massive flop.

Dunn, OTOH, provides a lot of production and I just don't see anyone out there on the market to give the money to that would provide any better. I suppose you could try to combine the Dunn and Griffey money and throw it at Manny Ramirez, but he probably wouldn't play in Cincy at any price and I doubt that Boston would let him walk. Looking at the Free Agent list, who else? Pat Burrell? He may fill the hole somewhat, but his defense is even worse than Dunn's, he's not really a style change, and while its true that he's a RH bat that may balance the line-up a bit, he's a clear step down from Dunn from a production standpoint IMO and he's three years older. I just don't see any way to use the money saved from letting Dunn walk to improve the team. I really am skeptical of a trade bringing back any type of necessary return under Dunn's current contract situation. They may get something useful, but nothing that would qualify as a core piece IMO and if Dunn is subtracted, a core piece needs to be added to replace him.

Kc61
05-01-2008, 12:10 AM
I understand the premise and don't totally disagree but....


Dunn, OTOH, provides a lot of production and I just don't see anyone out there on the market to give the money to that would provide any better. I suppose you could try to combine the Dunn and Griffey money and throw it at Manny Ramirez, but he probably wouldn't play in Cincy at any price and I doubt that Boston would let him walk. Looking at the Free Agent list, who else? Pat Burrell? He may fill the hole somewhat, but his defense is even worse than Dunn's, he's not really a style change, and while its true that he's a RH bat that may balance the line-up a bit, he's a clear step down from Dunn from a production standpoint IMO and he's three years older. I just don't see any way to use the money saved from letting Dunn walk to improve the team. I really am skeptical of a trade bringing back any type of necessary return under Dunn's current contract situation. They may get something useful, but nothing that would qualify as a core piece IMO and if Dunn is subtracted, a core piece needs to be added to replace him.

I would take my chances that a good GM can find a replacement for Dunn who is either a better all around player or a young player who is significantly cheaper. We may not be able to identify such a guy immediately, but the Reds shouldn't just say "Dunn is the best we'll get, so we might as well pay him what he wants." I'd put the Griffey/Dunn money in Walt's hands and see what talent he can obtain.

I would feel differently if the Reds appeared to be close to a championship. I wouldn't want to move an important offensive player under those circumstances without a ready replacement. But for now, the decision is a financial one and at this point it seems doubtful that the team should devote so much of its resources to this one player.

There's no doubt that whichever way this goes there are risks.

*BaseClogger*
05-01-2008, 12:11 AM
I would take my chances that a good GM can find a replacement for Dunn who is either a better all around player or a young player who is significantly cheaper. We may not be able to identify such a guy immediately, but the Reds shouldn't just say "Dunn is the best we'll get, so we might as well pay him what he wants." I'd put the Griffey/Dunn money in Walt's hands and see what talent he can obtain.

I would feel differently if the Reds appeared to be close to a championship. I wouldn't want to move an important offensive player under those circumstances without a ready replacement. But for now, the decision is a financial one and at this point it seems doubtful that the team should devote so much of its resources to this one player.

Guys who are better all around players than Adam Dunn are NOT available...

Kc61
05-01-2008, 12:19 AM
Guys who are better all around players than Adam Dunn are NOT available...

Really? I seem to recall that Ken Griffey, Jr., as a pretty young all star player, became available. I recall that Alex Rodriguez at one point became available. Manny Ramirez became available and moved to Boston. David Ortiz became available and changed teams. Frank Robinson once was available and then won a triple crown.

Great players become available all the time. Sometimes, in the right deal, a great very young player becomes available. I recall a Mr. Volquez becoming available last winter.

The trick, of course, is to have a front office that is able to identify these players and to figure out how to get them. I wouldn't assume that Jocketty is incapable of doing so. Some of his former players looked pretty good whipping the Reds the last two days.

And while Dunn is a good player, he is not a perennial all star, not an MVP type. Certainly not someone who cannot be replaced by an astute GM with dollars to spend.

mth123
05-01-2008, 12:30 AM
I would take my chances that a good GM can find a replacement for Dunn who is either a better all around player or a young player who is significantly cheaper. We may not be able to identify such a guy immediately, but the Reds shouldn't just say "Dunn is the best we'll get, so we might as well pay him what he wants." I'd put the Griffey/Dunn money in Walt's hands and see what talent he can obtain.

I would feel differently if the Reds appeared to be close to a championship. I wouldn't want to move an important offensive player under those circumstances without a ready replacement. But for now, the decision is a financial one and at this point it seems doubtful that the team should devote so much of its resources to this one player.

There's no doubt that whichever way this goes there are risks.

I guess where we differ is I do think they are close starting in 2009. I'm thinking that by then Bailey will be a viable starter who makes the rotation 5 deep in quality arms and I really think people don't realize the huge improvement this team will make by getting Griffey out of RF. Bruce should be an all around upgrade immediately even if his offense at this point is only a break even or a slight downgrade from the current version of Griffey. I also think Votto will be a monster next year. EdE may be turning into one now. Add a plethora of pen pitchers to sort through who should be ready to contribute like Roenicke, Fisher, Pelland, Viola etc. to go with Cordero et al and they should be able to piece together a solid bullpen. I don't think its time to cut loose a 100 Run, 100 RBI, 40 HR, 900+ OPS bat without a plan for replacing the production.

*BaseClogger*
05-01-2008, 12:32 AM
Really? I seem to recall that Ken Griffey, Jr., as a pretty young all star player, became available. I recall that Alex Rodriguez at one point became available. Manny Ramirez became available and moved to Boston. David Ortiz became available and changed teams. Frank Robinson once was available and then won a triple crown.

Great players become available all the time. Sometimes, in the right deal, a great very young player becomes available. I recall a Mr. Volquez becoming available last winter.

The trick, of course, is to have a front office that is able to identify these players and to figure out how to get them. I wouldn't assume that Jocketty is incapable of doing so. Some of his former players looked pretty good whipping the Reds the last two days.

And while Dunn is a good player, he is not a perennial all star, not an MVP type. Certainly not someone who cannot be replaced by an astute GM with dollars to spend.

Other than Mark Teixeira, my point still stands, unless you want to give Manny Ramirez even more money than Adam Dunn is expected to get. Players like Ortiz and Volquez were acquired before they became superstars, thus, I don't consider them to be reasonable examples. The Reds would likely have to pay too high of a price to get a superstar in a trade (such as Griffey or ARod) and would subtract too much from their core. At this point, holding on to Dunn seems the most logical, IMO, as long as the contract does not exceed four years. This superstar you are looking for may very well end up coming from within the organization: Mr. Jay Bruce...

flyer85
05-01-2008, 12:32 AM
Reds have a bunch of holes to fix for 2009

Screwball
05-01-2008, 12:44 AM
Any way we could get back the guy we traded. He now has 32 RBI's, is rapidly becoming perhaps the best outfielder, if not the best player, in the major leagues.

You got me curious, so I looked up the rest of his stats. Good Lord.

.336/.386/.582/.968 (162 OPS+) with 5 HRs and 28 RBIs coming into tonight's game, and tonight he hit a grand slam against Kansas City.

Unfortunately, we had to give up that much talent to get a pitcher who's also immenely talented. For instance, Edinson's ERA+ is 349 right now. That'll certainly come down, but yeah, 349 is stupid good. Walter Johnson's career best ERA+ is 249. Bob Gibson's is 258. Pedro Martinez had 291 in 2000. Like I said, Edinson's ERA+ will come down and certainly won't rival these guys, but he's been pretty darn productive himsef.

flyer85
05-01-2008, 10:37 AM
Steve Phillips was bashing the Rangers for dealing Young and then Volquez without getting any young pitching in return because he stated no top free agent would even consider signing on with the Rangers.

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 10:41 AM
.336/.386/.582/.968 (162 OPS+) with 5 HRs and 28 RBIs coming into tonight's game, and tonight he hit a grand slam against Kansas City.



Isn't it Texas that has an outstanding hitting coach, one that is to hitting as Duncan is to pitching? Coaches that really make a difference?

fearofpopvol1
05-01-2008, 01:34 PM
I'd still do the Volquez deal 8 days a week for Hamilton.

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 01:55 PM
I would take my chances that a good GM can find a replacement for Dunn who is either a better all around player or a young player who is significantly cheaper. I'd put the Griffey/Dunn money in Walt's hands and see what talent he can obtain.



I think that Jocketty will have to use the inventory of assets/resources at hand for him to improve the team which could include using the funds from moving Griffey and Dunn coupled with an increase in the teams budget, trading off/packaging some of the Reds current fodder along with some minor league talent to achieve his personnel objectives/goals. Unless he is some kind of magician.

Also I don’t think that Jocketty will have a personal bias toward Griffey and Dunn, one way or the other like we have here at RZ.

I think that he will be leaning toward agreeing with you. “I would take my chances that a good GM can find a replacement for Dunn who is either a better all around player or a young player who is significantly cheaper.”

RedsManRick
05-01-2008, 02:02 PM
I would take my chances that a good GM can find a replacement for Dunn who is either a better all around player or a young player who is significantly cheaper. We may not be able to identify such a guy immediately, but the Reds shouldn't just say "Dunn is the best we'll get, so we might as well pay him what he wants." I'd put the Griffey/Dunn money in Walt's hands and see what talent he can obtain.

I would feel differently if the Reds appeared to be close to a championship. I wouldn't want to move an important offensive player under those circumstances without a ready replacement. But for now, the decision is a financial one and at this point it seems doubtful that the team should devote so much of its resources to this one player.

There's no doubt that whichever way this goes there are risks.

This is a fair approach KC. I just hope you realize that the guy who is an all around better player than Dunn is not available in FA. We would HAVE to trade for him. Frankly, I'm not averse to that approach at all, but the it's important to realize that we could not simply take Dunn's salary and convert it directly in to a different flavor of Dunn-level production. It would require a significant series of events.

My big concern is that the Reds really are set up for a competitive window of 2009-2011 and that losing Dunn's production without replacing it would be borderline crippling. If, through some series of events there is a plan to replace that production for 2009, by all means.

lollipopcurve
05-01-2008, 02:28 PM
My big concern is that the Reds really are set up for a competitive window of 2009-2011 and that losing Dunn's production without replacing it would be borderline crippling.

But you could say Bruce replaces Dunn's production and whoever is found to replace Griffey (a platoon?) will replace Griffey's production. Meanwhile, if Dunn can be moved to upgrade production elsewhere (catcher?), you're already on the road to improvement.

Kc61
05-01-2008, 02:43 PM
This is a fair approach KC. I just hope you realize that the guy who is an all around better player than Dunn is not available in FA. We would HAVE to trade for him. Frankly, I'm not averse to that approach at all, but the it's important to realize that we could not simply take Dunn's salary and convert it directly in to a different flavor of Dunn-level production. It would require a significant series of events.

My big concern is that the Reds really are set up for a competitive window of 2009-2011 and that losing Dunn's production without replacing it would be borderline crippling. If, through some series of events there is a plan to replace that production for 2009, by all means.

If Dunn leaves then, even with Bruce, I agree that the Reds will need to add at least one serious bat and the identity of that person is not obvious at this stage. Fully agree. And also fully agree that the Reds offense will be even worse without Dunn, until some reinforcements come in.

But I'm not wedded to the concept of a single Dunn replacement who hits tons of home runs. There are a number of ways to reinforce the outfield with different kinds of players. Maybe the Reds add should drop the current centerfield group and add two outfielders, each 25 homer types instead of one great bat. Outfield of Bruce, Mr.X and Mr.Y.

Look, I recognize Dunn's value. I appreciate that he plays every single game. And, contrary to some, I have no doubt that he gives his all. He has good on base skills and obviously hits for great power. But his contract is up and the Reds have some choices to make and, after losing for so many years, my guess is they will go in a different direction.

GAC
05-01-2008, 06:43 PM
I don't think Jocketty will keep either of them.

Yep. They're history IMO. They'll pay Jr his 4 mil buyout and say bye-bye. If Jocketty can work a trade from a team that Dunn will accept a trade to then that is a possibility; but if not, he'll let him walk at season's end for the draft picks. The payroll savings from these two alone will be phenomenal. Which Jocketty will prize.

Ltlabner
05-01-2008, 06:47 PM
My big concern is that the Reds really are set up for a competitive window of 2009-2011 and that losing Dunn's production without replacing it would be borderline crippling. If, through some series of events there is a plan to replace that production for 2009, by all means.

Two words: Jim Edmonds.

KronoRed
05-01-2008, 06:56 PM
Two words: Jim Edmonds.

The Horror.

WebScorpion
05-03-2008, 12:21 PM
Can you imagine the outrage that would have occurred here at RedsZone if we'd traded Dunn for Volquez instead of Hamilton??
:eek:
Can you imagine the team we'd have now if we had?
:eek:

Hindsight is 20/20, but it would sure be nice to have Hammy AND Volquez...