PDA

View Full Version : Teams scouting Griffey/Dunn



Wheelhouse
05-01-2008, 02:45 PM
Per mlbtraderumors.com:

"Teams Scouting Griffey, Dunn
If the Reds slip out of contention in May, Walt Jocketty might begin to field offers for corner outfielders Ken Griffey Jr. and Adam Dunn. Both are paid well and have at least some control over trade destinations. According to MLB.com's Jim Molony, "a few teams are having their scouts keep an eye" on the pair in case they become available.

The standard speculation for Griffey is that he could be traded back to Seattle after he gets his 600th home run with the Reds. Junior might be a nice boost in right field for the Ms if Wladimir Balentien needs time to adjust. I doubt the Mariners would give up Jeff Clement for Griffey though. There's been some Chicago speculation, never mind that both the Cubs and Sox are set at the corner outfield positions.

Dunn would help the Padres, who are last in baseball in both OBP and SLG. The Jays, Mets, or Indians could also make sense."

OnBaseMachine
05-01-2008, 03:03 PM
I would love to have Jeff Clement for Griffey but I don't think even the big bald and dumb Bill Bavasi would make that trade. Griffey for Wlad Balentien? I'd do that.

I've long thought Dunn would be a great fit for the Padres. He's one of the few guys who could still hit 35-40 homeruns in that huge ballpark. Chase Headley and a prospect like Will Inman or Mat Latos for Dunn would be a solid start.

Unassisted
05-01-2008, 03:08 PM
Griffey for Wlad Balentien? I'd do that.
You're not reading carefully enough. :)

"...if Wladimir Balentien needs time to adjust."

Griffey would be a stopgap and likely a mentor until Wlad "adjusts" in Seattle. The M's are not looking to unload him.

jojo
05-01-2008, 03:13 PM
I would love to have Jeff Clement for Griffey but I don't think even the big bald and dumb Bill Bavasi would make that trade. Griffey for Wlad Balentien? I'd do that.

I've long thought Dunn would be a great fit for the Padres. He's one of the few guys who could still hit 35-40 homeruns in that huge ballpark. Chase Headley and a prospect like Will Inman or Mat Latos for Dunn would be a solid start.

Why would Seattle trade 6 yrs of their current starting RFer for a few hundred PA's of the Reds RFer? I'm sure they wouldn't mind unloading Sexson though.

Really even the San Diego idea is a bit of a reach.

Right now teams are scouting in order to determine how much cash they should ask the Reds to send along with either guy...... :cool:

OnBaseMachine
05-01-2008, 03:16 PM
Why would Seattle trade 6 yrs of their current starting RFer for a few hundred PA's of the Reds RFer? I'm sure they wouldn't mind unloading Sexson though.

Really even the San Diego idea is a bit of a reach.

Right now teams are scouting in order to determine how much cash they should ask the Reds to send along with either guy...... :cool:

Because it's Bill Bavasi? ;)

Why would he trade Asdrubal Cabrera for Eduardo Perez? ;)

Jpup
05-01-2008, 03:21 PM
Because it's Bill Bavasi? ;)

Why would he trade Asdrubal Cabrera for Eduardo Perez? ;)

Cabrera couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat? He's already got a better middle infield?

wheels
05-01-2008, 03:22 PM
Because it's Bill Bavasi? ;)

Why would he trade Asdrubal Cabrera for Eduardo Perez? ;)

:cool:

jojo
05-01-2008, 03:23 PM
Because it's Bill Bavasi? ;)

Why would he trade Asdrubal Cabrera for Eduardo Perez? ;)

Because his young middle infield was locked up for the next half decade.....

VR
05-01-2008, 03:29 PM
I think it's foolish to assume anyone would acquire Griff to play rightfield, unless they haven't seen him for about 4-5 years.

He could have a fantastic impact as DH.

RedsManRick
05-01-2008, 03:34 PM
Griffey trying to play RF in PETCO could get REALLY ugly. Might be an MLB record for triples.

OnBaseMachine
05-01-2008, 03:56 PM
Because his young middle infield was locked up for the next half decade.....

So that makes it OK to trade him for an old platoon player?

Benihana
05-01-2008, 04:14 PM
If you were to trade Griffey or Dunn in the next couple months, who would you realistically want/expect to get back (for either player)? Name names.

Benihana
05-01-2008, 04:16 PM
If they want to hang onto both Clement and Balentien, I'd ask them about Carlos Trunifiel. I mean, how much do you want your HOFer back? :cool:

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 04:20 PM
Could the Reds be putting out feelers that the two might be available?

jojo
05-01-2008, 04:30 PM
So that makes it OK to trade him for an old platoon player?

I'm not sure why you'd suggest that was the point.

Clearly I was suggesting Cabrera was traded because he was considered expendable (he had no future in Seattle)........ There was nothing foolish about trading AC at the time but obviously Bavasi undervalued Cabrera.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make-Wlad has no future in Seattle so Bavasi will ship him off at a discount?

jojo
05-01-2008, 04:31 PM
If they want to hang onto both Clement and Balentien, I'd ask them about Carlos Trunifiel. I mean, how much do you want your HOFer back? :cool:

They didn't want Bedard badly enough to part with CT. They don't even want Jr back. My guess is that they probably don't want to trade CT for Jr. :cool:

Benihana
05-01-2008, 04:33 PM
They didn't want Bedard badly enough to part with CT. They don't even want Jr back. My guess is that they probably don't want to trade CT for Jr. :cool:

Then sorry Ken, you're not going back to Seattle.

I thought that Adam Jones was a lot more valued than CT. The fact that they gave up Jones tells me that CT wasn't neccessarily untouchable, but maybe they didn't want to include him with Jones.

jojo
05-01-2008, 04:35 PM
Seattle doesn't have a well run FO in a lot of aspects but Bavasi isn't a moron. Rather he simply has some blind spots that more talented GMs can take advantage of when presented with the opportunity. Jr isn't one of them.

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 04:40 PM
You’re asking for some of us to risk getting tarred and feathered on RZ.
Oh well I need a new wardrobe.

I realistically think that the Reds could obtain contract, payroll relief, releasing those funds to become discretionary funds for Jocketty to utilize and also to get some token prospects back unless he sweetens the pot with some of the young pitching or a Jay Bruce.

I think the negotiators on the other side will discount Griffey due to age, past injury and fielding. I think that the negotiators for the other side will discount Dunn on fielding, strikeouts, hitting with RISP. A reduction in performance numbers this year for both, and a potentially much higher salary next year for both than they're paid today, risk vs benefit analysis.

Just as Reds fans hold certain issues against Dunn and Griffey, I think that the market will hold those issues against them too. Severely discounting the return for them, maybe even asking the Reds to pay parts of their salaries.

If Jocketty could get the equivalents of a Volquez in return for them, that would be doing good IMHO.

dougdirt
05-01-2008, 04:58 PM
If either guy were to get traded I wouldn't honestly expect anyone better than a fringy 100-150 overall type prospect. Someone along the lines of maybe a Danny Dorn, Matt Maloney type. I just don't think there is a market for terrible fielding corner outfielders with very limited offensive skills with 3 or fewer months of time. Maybe I am misreading the market or something, but getting a player who would rank 10-15th in our system is about the best I would trade for either one of those guys if I were an opposing GM.

PuffyPig
05-01-2008, 05:01 PM
If either guy were to get traded I wouldn't honestly expect anyone better than a fringy 100-150 overall type prospect. Someone along the lines of maybe a Danny Dorn, Matt Maloney type. I just don't think there is a market for terrible fielding corner outfielders with very limited offensive skills with 3 or fewer months of time. Maybe I am misreading the market or something, but getting a player who would rank 10-15th in our system is about the best I would trade for either one of those guys if I were an opposing GM.

Limited offensive skills certainly doesn't describe Dunn, and probably doesn't even describe Griffey.

dougdirt
05-01-2008, 05:11 PM
Limited offensive skills certainly doesn't describe Dunn, and probably doesn't even describe Griffey.

Really?
Dunn can't hit lefties (he walks a lot, but doesn't HIT them too well). He hits for no average, and while thats only a part of the offensive game, teams still want guys to hit for some kind of average.

Griffey at the same time is no longer a slugger, he is just a guy with moderate power. He isn't going to hit for a high average anymore and he isn't likely to slug .500.

Those are limited offensive skills.

TRF
05-01-2008, 05:13 PM
Both guys obviosly have more value in the AL, but I can see a few teams needing a big bat that would give up FAR more than doug is suggesting. Kyle Lohse was worth Matt Maloney. Dunn is worth far more than that.

Benihana
05-01-2008, 05:13 PM
If either guy were to get traded I wouldn't honestly expect anyone better than a fringy 100-150 overall type prospect. Someone along the lines of maybe a Danny Dorn, Matt Maloney type. I just don't think there is a market for terrible fielding corner outfielders with very limited offensive skills with 3 or fewer months of time. Maybe I am misreading the market or something, but getting a player who would rank 10-15th in our system is about the best I would trade for either one of those guys if I were an opposing GM.

If that's all you get, then I'd definitely keep 'em and take the picks.

camisadelgolf
05-01-2008, 05:15 PM
For Dunn, I would expext the return to be the equivalent or more than whatever two first-round draft picks are worth. For example, for Dunn, I would expect to receive a minimum of Nick Noonan (http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=33652) and Madison Bumgarner (http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=18).

For Griffey, I would consider him to be addition by subtraction. It's nothing against Griffey--I just don't consider him to be worth anything near the $10mm that would be owed to him between July and December. If the Reds agree to pay a portion of the contract, then, obviously, the caliber of prospect I expect would depend on the amount of money sent to the other team.

As for Major League-ready players, I just don't see any team that needs a left-handed-, power-hitting outfielder having a surplus that fits the Reds needs.

Kc61
05-01-2008, 05:18 PM
Looking at the return is the wrong way to consider these deals. Dunn and Griffey have only a few months left on their contracts and both have no-trade protection. So they probably won't agree to a trade without a financial sweetener. If the new team agrees to pay the sweetener, then that team will likely be unwilling to give up much in player value. Plus, since these guys are free agents this year, it is a few months rental and neither is having a great year that will make them prime pickings for a rental.

The Reds will try to get financial relief and a few usable kids in return. I'd be surprised if they get even the return Doug suggests. Maybe, in a Dunn deal, they get one good prospect back.

The purpose of the trade(s) would be to open up playing time for young players and to relieve the Reds of the financial burden of carrying players who will be elsewhere next year.

If the Reds wanted a major return then they had to trade these guys awhile back. They may indeed wind up taking draft picks for one or both.

Strikes Out Looking
05-01-2008, 05:25 PM
I think trading Griffey before the year is out has the benefit of the Reds not having to buy him out of 2009 for $4 million. While the contract given to him by Linder and JimBo wasn't the worst contract of all time, the terms at the end are definitely not in the Reds favor and may very well speed his exit out of town if a suitable suitor is found (he is holding the trump card here as he can veto any trade).

fearofpopvol1
05-01-2008, 05:30 PM
I don't expect the Reds to get much of anything for Griffey other than maybe some sort of financial relief.

Dunn is a bit more interesting. I think the best case scenario is to hope that the team Dunn would go to is interested in a long term deal and would be willing to agree to one before being traded. If someone was interested in signing Dunn to a LTC, that will definitely help the return. I think even that is somewhat unlikely. I think most likely, waiting to see how Dunn fares this year is best. If he has a poor year, maybe it'll be cheaper for the Reds to re-sign him. If he has a good year, maybe you let him walk and take the picks.

KronoRed
05-01-2008, 05:52 PM
Don't expect much for either

GAC
05-01-2008, 05:55 PM
Just clearing away the payroll is a huge plus.

fearofpopvol1
05-01-2008, 05:57 PM
Just clearing away the payroll is a huge plus.

For a team that is supposedly in "win now" mode, it only is a huge plus if it brings in talent to exceed or at the very least replace it for cheaper, in my opinion.

Steve4192
05-01-2008, 06:06 PM
If that's all you get, then I'd definitely keep 'em and take the picks.

You have to offer 'em arbitration in order to get the picks.

What happens if they both pull a Greg Maddox and ACCEPT the arbitration offer? While I doubt a youg guy like Dunn would accept a one-year arbitrated contract over a long-term deal with a free spending team, I could definitely see an old fella like Griffey deciding to take the guarantee payday rather than trying to test the market.

Ltlabner
05-01-2008, 06:08 PM
Don't expect much for Jr, I am sad to say, other than clearing some sallary off the books.

I predict that RZ will never be happy with any return Adam Dunn will provide. I don't care if Billy Freaking Beene mates with Walt Jocketty and produces a super smart mini-Scherholtz ingrafted with brains from that guy in Boston and that guy makes the deal. RZ will melt down the day Dunn is dealt.

Falls City Beer
05-01-2008, 06:12 PM
I predict that RZ will never be happy with any return Adam Dunn will provide. I don't care if Billy Freaking Beene mates with Walt Jocketty and produces a super smart mini-Scherholtz ingrafted with brains from that guy in Boston and that guy makes the deal. RZ will melt down the day Dunn is dealt.

I think this is probably bunk.

Falls City Beer
05-01-2008, 06:14 PM
I'd love to pick up Tim Hudson from Atlanta, but I'd guess there's no way Atlanta would throw in the towel on their season when they've got a better than decent shot of winning the division.

membengal
05-01-2008, 06:14 PM
I really like Dunn. I always have. But if the time comes to deal him, I won't melt down, but I will certainly hope the return is good for his value. I happen to think dealing him may be what's best for the team at this point...

Ltlabner
05-01-2008, 06:25 PM
I think this is probably bunk.

I guess you really haven't paid attention to all the controversy surrounding the big one over the past 5+ years then. He K's too much vs. K's are just another out. His defense stinks vs it's LF. He should be in LF vs DH vs 1B. He should batter higher in the line up vs lower in the line up. Why doesn't he bunt to defeat the shift. He's the anchor of the team vs he and his play-station is an anchor around the team. Ringing any bells?

One camp will say we didn't get enough, while the other camp will complain over which specific player we get in return. If he's extended via LTC the argument will be too much money/time vs we should have just traded him.

With Dunn I'll be stunned and amazed if his story ends to the general satisfaction of RZ.

KronoRed
05-01-2008, 06:26 PM
You have to offer 'em arbitration in order to get the picks.

What happens if they both pull a Greg Maddox and ACCEPT the arbitration offer? While I doubt a youg guy like Dunn would accept a one-year arbitrated contract over a long-term deal with a free spending team, I could definitely see an old fella like Griffey deciding to take the guarantee payday rather than trying to test the market.

I don't think it's a sure thing that JR will be eligible for compensatory picks.

Falls City Beer
05-01-2008, 06:27 PM
I guess you really haven't paid attention to all the controversy surrounding the big one over the past 5+ years then. He K's too much vs. K's are just another out. His defense stinks vs it's LF. He should be in LF vs DH vs 1B. He should batter higher in the line up vs lower in the line up. Why doesn't he bunt to defeat the shift. He's the anchor of the team vs he and his play-station is an anchor around the team. Ringing any bells?

One camp will say we didn't get enough, while the other camp will complain over which specific player we get in return. If he's extended via LTC the argument will be too much money/time vs we should have just traded him.

With Dunn I'll be stunned and amazed if his story ends to the general satisfaction of RZ.

You didn't say there'd be disagreement.

Ltlabner
05-01-2008, 06:30 PM
You didn't say there'd be disagreement.


I predict that RZ will never be happy with any return Adam Dunn will provide.

Actually I did, you just missed it the first time.

I can foresee threads rivaling those of "the trade" when Big Donkeys time to Cincy comes to a close. (For the record, I'd like to see him in a Reds uni for another couple of years, unless we can get a nice haul of semi-ready prospects for him).

Falls City Beer
05-01-2008, 06:32 PM
Actually I did, you just missed it the first time.

That implies consensus, if read in one way.

PuffyPig
05-01-2008, 06:41 PM
Really?
Dunn can't hit lefties (he walks a lot, but doesn't HIT them too well). He hits for no average, and while thats only a part of the offensive game, teams still want guys to hit for some kind of average.

.


Over 2005-2007, Dunn has a .823 OPS vs. lefties. That's not bad, when you add in a .950 OPS vs. RH pitchers.

Batting average? What is that strange stat you talk of? The last time I heard someone mention those words, it was in reference to the first baseman of the Bedrock Dinosaurs.

RedEye
05-01-2008, 08:07 PM
I would think that if Dunn makes it to free agency, he will be one of the more attractive commodities available. 29 year-olds with over 200 HR don't come around very often, and there must be a few teams out there aware of his value. His fielding is a minus, of course... but still...

Wouldn't there be some teams who would want to trade for Dunn before he hits the FA market?

Benihana
05-01-2008, 08:43 PM
I'm sorry, and I know I'm in the minority here, but I just can't possibly fathom how trading Dunn for little in return can possibly be good for this franchise. I guess I can come to terms with that kind of sendoff for Jr. because of the presence of Bruce.

But I've said it before and I'll say it again, some people around here are just too used to old habits when it comes to payroll. What good is payflex for the next twelve months? If this team has any intention on contending in the next two years, who exactly do you intend on spending that money on? I've posted the list of potential free agents this offseason many times before, and the it's pretty much agreed that the only realistic option that would come close to offering a Dunn-like contribution would be Pat Burrell, and he would cost at least as much as Dunn. I just don't get the idea of payflex with this team anymore. Castellini has shown he's willing to spend to win, and virtually every key player is locked up for at least the next four years at a fixed cost. So I'll ask you again, what good is payflex over the next twelve months? Long term maybe I understand, but if you are going to blow a large hole in the offense, please tell me why you do it in the name of short-term payflex?

jojo
05-01-2008, 08:54 PM
I'm sorry, and I know I'm in the minority here, but I just can't possibly fathom how trading Dunn for little in return can possibly be good for this franchise. I guess I can come to terms with that kind of sendoff for Jr. because of the presence of Bruce.

But I've said it before and I'll say it again, some people around here are just too used to old habits when it comes to payroll. What good is payflex for the next twelve months? If this team has any intention on contending in the next two years, who exactly do you intend on spending that money on? I've posted the list of potential free agents this offseason many times before, and the it's pretty much agreed that the only realistic option that would come close to offering a Dunn-like contribution would be Pat Burrell, and he would cost at least as much as Dunn. I just don't get the idea of payflex with this team anymore. Castellini has shown he's willing to spend to win, and virtually every key player is locked up for at least the next four years at a fixed cost. So I'll ask you again, what good is payflex over the next twelve months? Long term maybe I understand, but if you are going to blow a large hole in the offense, please tell me why you do it in the name of short-term payflex?

To me the point of trading Dunn is to get something for other than 2-3 onths of meaningless production. Basically you trade him this season if you don't plan on resigning him and can get something reasonably expected to be better than the comp picks you'll get after he'd decline your arb offer. It's debatable whether they can get a return that would beat comp picks (I doubt they could but others might think otherwise).

M2
05-01-2008, 09:00 PM
If I couldn't get some I really liked for Dunn, then I wouldn't give an ounce of consideration to trading him.

As for Jr., it's May now, so he should start hitting. Yet I'd trade him for a modest return (or a high one if it's the Mariners, because Bill Bavasi can be and should be fleeced).

jojo
05-01-2008, 09:19 PM
If I couldn't get some I really liked for Dunn, then I wouldn't give an ounce of consideration to trading him.

As for Jr., it's May now, so he should start hitting. Yet I'd trade him for a modest return (or a high one if it's the Mariners, because Bill Bavasi can be and should be fleeced).

What do you think Bavasi would give for Jr?

M2
05-01-2008, 09:29 PM
What do you think Bavasi would give for Jr?

That's the beauty of Bavasi, you never know.

I'd figure that guy creates a constant source of dread for M's fans.

Highlifeman21
05-01-2008, 10:16 PM
I'm sorry, and I know I'm in the minority here, but I just can't possibly fathom how trading Dunn for little in return can possibly be good for this franchise. I guess I can come to terms with that kind of sendoff for Jr. because of the presence of Bruce.

If you're in the minority, then I hope there's room for another, b/c I completely agree with you. Trading Dunn for little in return equates to me as making a trade for the sake of making a trade.

I see 4 outcomes concerning Dunn, off the top of my head.

1. We get serious about a LTC with Dunn, and make it happen.
2. We get serious about trading Dunn, and only make a trade if it greatly benefits the franchise.
3. The LTC doesn't happen, a trade doesn't happen, and we offer Dunn arbitration (it's arbitration, right?) in order to secure draft pick compensation and Dunn accepts arbitration and stays a Red.
4. The LTC doesn't happen, a trade doesn't happen, we offer Dunn arbitration (again, I'm assuming it's arbitration) and he declines, and we get draft pick compensation.

The 1 outcome I absolutely don't see happening by any stretch of the imagination is we let Dunn walk and get absolutely zilch for him.


But I've said it before and I'll say it again, some people around here are just too used to old habits when it comes to payroll. What good is payflex for the next twelve months? If this team has any intention on contending in the next two years, who exactly do you intend on spending that money on? I've posted the list of potential free agents this offseason many times before, and the it's pretty much agreed that the only realistic option that would come close to offering a Dunn-like contribution would be Pat Burrell, and he would cost at least as much as Dunn. I just don't get the idea of payflex with this team anymore. Castellini has shown he's willing to spend to win, and virtually every key player is locked up for at least the next four years at a fixed cost. So I'll ask you again, what good is payflex over the next twelve months? Long term maybe I understand, but if you are going to blow a large hole in the offense, please tell me why you do it in the name of short-term payflex?

Payflex is horrible going into 2009 without Dunn, b/c in order to replace Dunn's production we'll have to most likely spend what it would have taken to keep Dunn for 2009, so why spend money on a potentially unknown commodity when we know what we have and what we'll get from Dunn?

Short-term payflex, to me, is an oxymoron.

RedsManRick
05-01-2008, 11:02 PM
Payflex is horrible going into 2009 without Dunn, b/c in order to replace Dunn's production we'll have to most likely spend what it would have taken to keep Dunn for 2009, so why spend money on a potentially unknown commodity when we know what we have and what we'll get from Dunn?

Short-term payflex, to me, is an oxymoron.

This has been my logic as well. The answer is, because the only terns to which Dunn will agree are ones which present an unacceptable long term risk (in the form of years). I don't think Dunn's production can be replaced through any financial investment. What it could potentially do is allow us to shift the location of that investment. For example, let's say the Reds could sign a SP to a 3 year, 40M deal who would replace Dunn's production. That done, the Reds felt comfortable trading Homer Bailey for Matt Kemp. Voila.

The problem of course is that it only makes sense if a scenario such as that is available -- and frankly, I don't see it happening -- not given the FA list and the uncertainty that goes along with trading.

Benihana
05-01-2008, 11:25 PM
The problem of course is that it only makes sense if a scenario such as that is available -- and frankly, I don't see it happening -- not given the FA list and the uncertainty that goes along with trading.

And this is exactly my point. People need to stop yearning for payflex. In this market, it's not much of a luxury. The Reds window to really contend runs now through 2011. They need to act accordingly.

Kc61
05-01-2008, 11:39 PM
And this is exactly my point. People need to stop yearning for payflex. In this market, it's not much of a luxury. The Reds window to really contend runs now through 2011. They need to act accordingly.


No, rather than payflex, let's pour some more money into contracts for the same players who have been on the losing Reds teams for seven or eight years. Sure.

Unlike the last few Reds GMs, who specialized in acquiring young prospects, the current GM has a track record of building major league rosters. He has done well trading at the major league level. Let's give him a few bucks to work with.

Who will Jocketty acquire? I have absolutely no idea. That's up to him. But he managed to find outfielders for the World Champion Cards a few years back, presumably he can find a few for the Reds if he puts his mind to it.

Benihana
05-01-2008, 11:51 PM
No, rather than payflex, let's pour some more money into contracts for the same players who have been on the losing Reds teams for seven or eight years. Sure.

Unlike the last few Reds GMs, who specialized in acquiring young prospects, the current GM has a track record of building major league rosters. He has done well trading at the major league level. Let's give him a few bucks to work with.

Who will Jocketty acquire? I have absolutely no idea. That's up to him. But he managed to find outfielders for the World Champion Cards a few years back, presumably he can find a few for the Reds if he puts his mind to it.

I'm so tired of hearing people whine and complain for new players when they don't provide specific suggestions. Also, I think Castellini has shown that he is so willing to win, he will increase the payroll for the right pieces (ie the Cordero signing) and even eat a contract or two (take your pick from the last six months.) Remember, we're not dealing with Carl Lindner and John Allen anymore.

Kc61
05-02-2008, 12:09 AM
I'm so tired of hearing people whine and complain for new players when they don't provide specific suggestions. Also, I think Castellini has shown that he is so willing to win, he will increase the payroll for the right pieces (ie the Cordero signing) and even eat a contract or two (take your pick from the last six months.) Remember, we're not dealing with Carl Lindner and John Allen anymore.

Some fans might just prefer $25 million of additional payroll room for rebuilding as compared with keeping the core players on a perpetual loser.

Let's see, a specific suggestion. Do the Reds have a pitcher like Rick Ankiel who can move to the outfield?

SteelSD
05-02-2008, 12:44 AM
No, rather than payflex, let's pour some more money into contracts for the same players who have been on the losing Reds teams for seven or eight years. Sure.

August 9th, 2008 will mark the fifth anniversary of Aaron Harang's first start for the Reds. For over four years, he's been one of those "same players" you're talking about.

Obviously expendable then, eh?

Look, if the Reds can't deal Griffey then they'll buy out the remaining option year. But Dunn? He's basically been for the offense what Harang has been for the pitching staff and durable .900 OPS Outfielders don't exactly fall out of trees. Bruce replaces Griffey, the CF options are currently awful and there's certainly no on internally who can replace Dunn's 100+ RC bat. There are absolutely zero Free Agent options and good luck finding Josh Hamilton version 2.0.

The past seven years haven't been lost because of what you consider to be the "core" offensive players (and Griffey hasn't been one of those for quite a while). They've been lost because of the freakin' pitching.

Like I said, the obvious move is to get rid of Harang, right? After all, he's been the "core" of that pitching staff for most of those seven years...;)

WVPacman
05-02-2008, 01:15 AM
I always like for the baseball season to start so I can watch my reds but its these things I can't stand.Every year this same subject comes up about Jr and exspecially Dunn.Its on all the messageboards on every sports channel and I just get sick of hearing it over and over and over.:rolleyes:

REDREAD
05-02-2008, 01:25 AM
If either guy were to get traded I wouldn't honestly expect anyone better than a fringy 100-150 overall type prospect. Someone along the lines of maybe a Danny Dorn, Matt Maloney type. I just don't think there is a market for terrible fielding corner outfielders with very limited offensive skills with 3 or fewer months of time. Maybe I am misreading the market or something, but getting a player who would rank 10-15th in our system is about the best I would trade for either one of those guys if I were an opposing GM.


I agree with your assessment.. although it would probably be a little bit better than a Malony type guy.. but it would not be anyone spectacular. The biggest problem with both Dunn and Jr is that they are rental players. Therefore, cross out anyone that isn't in contention.

Then there's the issue that Dunn will complain if he's not allowed to play LF. Scratch off some more teams.

Jr is also a short term fix, best suited for DH (and I don't know if he'd be happy in that role either) Jr might veto a deal that sets him up as a DH.

I think back a few years ago when no team was willing to ante up much for Soriano. Big rental bats really aren't that sought after. Carlos Lee is probably the only recent exceptiong, but there were many players in that deal, so that kind of muddies the water.. also the big return to the Brewers was another short term guy (Cordero) that the Rangers wanted to get rid of for whatever reason.

REDREAD
05-02-2008, 01:29 AM
I think trading Griffey before the year is out has the benefit of the Reds not having to buy him out of 2009 for $4 million. While the contract given to him by Linder and JimBo wasn't the worst contract of all time, the terms at the end are definitely not in the Reds favor and may very well speed his exit out of town if a suitable suitor is found (he is holding the trump card here as he can veto any trade).

I can't see Jr being amenable to any trade, the more I think about it.

He seems like the type that would veto a trade just because his buddies are in Cincy and he wouldn't want to deal with being a rental guy. Nothing wrong with that.. it's his right. The only exception I see is that maybe he accepts a trade to a bonafide contender, like Boston. Not a marginal contender, but a heavy favorite. Problem is that the heavy favorites don't need him.

blumj
05-02-2008, 01:29 AM
This has been my logic as well. The answer is, because the only terns to which Dunn will agree are ones which present an unacceptable long term risk (in the form of years).
I think that might be a real possibility, though. Some players around his age have been getting very lengthy deals on the free agent market. Why wouldn't he and his agent expect one, too?

REDREAD
05-02-2008, 01:33 AM
You have to offer 'em arbitration in order to get the picks.

What happens if they both pull a Greg Maddox and ACCEPT the arbitration offer? While I doubt a youg guy like Dunn would accept a one-year arbitrated contract over a long-term deal with a free spending team, I could definitely see an old fella like Griffey deciding to take the guarantee payday rather than trying to test the market.


Great point. Going to arb with Jr would probably cost more than picking up his option. IIRC, the Reds would have to pay him 4 million to buy out the option. Then they go to arb with him. Jr has a good shot of getting 12 million or more in arb. Whether he deserves it or not isn't the issue. The point is that it wouldn't be hard to convince an arbitrator that he deserves at least that much with comps.

Dunn seems pretty happy here too. He might accept arb if he feels his friends will still be around. He might not mind putting off FA for one more year if it means he can hang with Jr for another year.

Ravenlord
05-02-2008, 01:40 AM
That's the beauty of Bavasi, you never know.

I'd figure that guy creates a constant source of dread for M's fans.

Best to ask Raisor about that.

i think for Dunn you could get Betancourt, a top prospect and a lesser prospect. . . or Sean Green and two top prospects. maybe even twice as much prospect wise, this is the guy who gave Beltre that ungodly contract...

REDREAD
05-02-2008, 01:40 AM
If I couldn't get some I really liked for Dunn, then I wouldn't give an ounce of consideration to trading him.

As for Jr., it's May now, so he should start hitting. Yet I'd trade him for a modest return (or a high one if it's the Mariners, because Bill Bavasi can be and should be fleeced).

Agree on Dunn. In fact, I think if the team expects to improve over the next few years, they have little chioce but to resign him.

As far as Jr, I just can't see trading him for another Jung Bong. Let him finish out the year and if you don't want him back, decline the option.
Jr sacrificed millions of dollars to come here. Even if Jr didn't have a no trade clause, I'd let him finish this meaningless season out in dignity (which means not platooning with Bruce). I know this is a business, but Jr is a special case. Keeping Bruce in AAA all year will not hurt him one bit, although if the Reds call him up to play CF, I'm fine with that.

*BaseClogger*
05-02-2008, 01:43 AM
What it could potentially do is allow us to shift the location of that investment. For example, let's say the Reds could sign a SP to a 3 year, 40M deal who would replace Dunn's production. That done, the Reds felt comfortable trading Homer Bailey for Matt Kemp. Voila.

The problem of course is that it only makes sense if a scenario such as that is available -- and frankly, I don't see it happening -- not given the FA list and the uncertainty that goes along with trading.

Derek Lowe for 3/$45M? Bailey/Francisco for Kemp, voila? Sounds good to me...

RedsManRick
05-02-2008, 01:57 AM
Derek Lowe for 3/$45M? Bailey/Francisco for Kemp, voila? Sounds good to me...

I do that in a heartbeat -- even if you had to substitute Stubbs for Francisco.

VR
05-02-2008, 02:06 AM
This has been my logic as well. The answer is, because the only terns to which Dunn will agree are ones which present an unacceptable long term risk (in the form of years). I don't think Dunn's production can be replaced through any financial investment. What it could potentially do is allow us to shift the location of that investment. For example, let's say the Reds could sign a SP to a 3 year, 40M deal who would replace Dunn's production. That done, the Reds felt comfortable trading Homer Bailey for Matt Kemp. Voila.

The problem of course is that it only makes sense if a scenario such as that is available -- and frankly, I don't see it happening -- not given the FA list and the uncertainty that goes along with trading.

Back to my original thought, Dunn and Bailey for Kemp.

FA list is weak, but the times they are a changin' for MLB trades. Teams are willing to dump quality, highly compensated players to teams willing to take the salary off their hands....not holding them hostage for equal talent. It changed the NBA and the NFL, it is a certainty for MLB as salaries rocket for marginal talent.

fearofpopvol1
05-02-2008, 02:14 AM
Back to my original thought, Dunn and Bailey for Kemp.

FA list is weak, but the times they are a changin' for MLB trades. Teams are willing to dump quality, highly compensated players to teams willing to take the salary off their hands....not holding them hostage for equal talent. It changed the NBA and the NFL, it is a certainty for MLB as salaries rocket for marginal talent.

I know Dunn doesn't have much time left on his current contract (though I think Dodgers would be in a good position to resign Dunn), but I'd seriously hope that the Reds would be getting something else back besides Kemp in your proposed deal.

*BaseClogger*
05-02-2008, 02:15 AM
Back to my original thought, Dunn and Bailey for Kemp.

FA list is weak, but the times they are a changin' for MLB trades. Teams are willing to dump quality, highly compensated players to teams willing to take the salary off their hands....not holding them hostage for equal talent. It changed the NBA and the NFL, it is a certainty for MLB as salaries rocket for marginal talent.

Yeah, I forgot about that trade idea that you have thrown out several times. It is an excellent idea. I think it is realistic because LA needs some offense, have the available financial resources, and Dunn would provide an immediate replacement for Kemp. Hell, they can have Francisco too. Whatever gets us Kemp. The only problem is, what are the chances Derek Lowe or a FA equivalent sign in Cincinnati?

AmarilloRed
05-02-2008, 02:27 AM
Yeah, I forgot about that trade idea that you have thrown out several times. It is an excellent idea. I think it is realistic because LA needs some offense, have the available financial resources, and Dunn would provide an immediate replacement for Kemp. Hell, they can have Francisco too. Whatever gets us Kemp. The only problem is, what are the chances Derek Lowe or a FA equivalent sign in Cincinnati?

It all depends on whether we will have the money to spend on a big-name free agent next year. It might be necessary to trade both Dunn and Griffey to have the money to go after a big name free agent like Derek Lowe.

OnBaseMachine
05-02-2008, 02:52 AM
Inside Pitch: Whither Griffey and Dunn?
With solid core of youngsters, Reds may deal veteran sluggers
By Jim Molony / MLB.com

A few teams are having their scouts keep an eye on Cincinnati in case the Reds decide to shop Adam Dunn and/or Ken Griffey Jr. before the July 31 trade deadline.

The Reds aren't shopping either player at the moment, and new general manager Walt Jocketty is in the process of evaluating organizational talent. But it doesn't hurt to be ready in case the Reds, 12-17 and in fifth place in the National League Central Division, decide to build for the future by unloading some of the more attractive veterans on the roster.

"They've got a good nucleus of young talent in [Joey] Votto, [Edwin] Encarnacion, [Brandon] Phillips, [Edinson] Volquez and [Johnny] Cueto, and more on the way like [outfielder Jay) Bruce and [pitcher Homer] Bailey," a veteran scout said. "They could get very good very quickly with a few more players. If they don't get going soon they'd be crazy not to try to move [Dunn and Griffey] for guys that could help them down the road, especially if both are going to be gone anyway when the season's over."

Dunn is making $13 million for this season and could earn $16 million with award incentives. He can be a free agent after the season, and while the Reds haven't ruled out re-signing Dunn, insiders say it is unlikely he will re-sign with Cincinnati if he hits the free agent market.

Dunn has a full no-trade clause through June 15. After that he has a limited no-trade clause that allows Dunn to specify 10 clubs to which he would accept a trade.

Griffey is making $12.5 million this year and the Reds hold the option on his 2009 contract worth $16.5 million or a $4 million buyout. As a 10-and-five player, Griffey has full no-trade rights.

Griffey is within three homers of 600 for his career, a milestone the Reds would love to see him reach in Cincinnati. But Griffey, 38, has never appeared in a World Series and hasn't been on a playoff team since 1997. If that isn't happening in Cincinnati this year, there would be sentiment to give the future Hall of Famer a chance to get a ring with Seattle, the team that drafted Griffey with the first pick of the 1987 First-Year Player Draft. His left-handed bat would also fit well in either Chicago lineup or perhaps in the Mets' outfield if Moises Alou is unable to play.

Likewise, Dunn could potentially help a contending team, though his .210 batting average obviously doesn't help his chances of changing addresses this summer.

Unless the Reds and Jocketty decide otherwise, Dunn and Griffey will remain Reds, leaving other interested teams to watch and wait.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080501&content_id=2621320&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

jojo
05-02-2008, 08:00 AM
Best to ask Raisor about that.

i think for Dunn you could get Betancourt, a top prospect and a lesser prospect. . . or Sean Green and two top prospects. maybe even twice as much prospect wise, this is the guy who gave Beltre that ungodly contract...

C'mon people...others read these comments you know......

And BTW, Beltre's contract has been just fine. It's a plus in Bavasi's favor.

jojo
05-02-2008, 08:13 AM
It all depends on whether we will have the money to spend on a big-name free agent next year. It might be necessary to trade both Dunn and Griffey to have the money to go after a big name free agent like Derek Lowe.

At this point, trading Dunn and Jr doesn't save a tremendous amount of money. It's mostly about getting something back in exchange for giving up meaningless production..

The Reds probably aren't willing to concede their production will be meaningless at this point.......

Raisor
05-02-2008, 10:00 AM
Best to ask Raisor about that.



I don't really follow the M's anymore. Distance and the lack of a MarinersZone has killed my interest.

I can name probably five players on the team at this point.

*BaseClogger*
05-02-2008, 10:51 AM
At this point, trading Dunn and Jr doesn't save a tremendous amount of money. It's mostly about getting something back in exchange for giving up meaningless production..

The Reds probably aren't willing to concede their production will be meaningless at this point.......

In isolation, how does trading Dunn and Jr. not save a tremendous amount of money?

Benihana
05-02-2008, 10:55 AM
Great point. Going to arb with Jr would probably cost more than picking up his option. IIRC, the Reds would have to pay him 4 million to buy out the option. Then they go to arb with him. Jr has a good shot of getting 12 million or more in arb. Whether he deserves it or not isn't the issue. The point is that it wouldn't be hard to convince an arbitrator that he deserves at least that much with comps.

Dunn seems pretty happy here too. He might accept arb if he feels his friends will still be around. He might not mind putting off FA for one more year if it means he can hang with Jr for another year.

I agree about Jr., but if Dunn accepted arbitration I wouldn't consider that a problem at all. In fact, it may just be a best case scenario!

Benihana
05-02-2008, 10:57 AM
Yeah, I forgot about that trade idea that you have thrown out several times. It is an excellent idea. I think it is realistic because LA needs some offense, have the available financial resources, and Dunn would provide an immediate replacement for Kemp. Hell, they can have Francisco too. Whatever gets us Kemp. The only problem is, what are the chances Derek Lowe or a FA equivalent sign in Cincinnati?

I think LA would be a little hesitant with a guy like Dunn after the Juan Pierre and Andruw Jones debacles. I guess you never know though.

And FWIW, I think that's entirely too much to give up for Matt Kemp alone. While I do think Kemp will be a much better player, shades of Wily Mo flash in my brain. That said, I'd still like to see him in Red, just not for Dunn and Bailey.

*BaseClogger*
05-02-2008, 11:15 AM
Haven't we been discussing how the Reds won't get much for Dunn, but yet throwing him in to seal the deal for Kemp is overpaying?

Kc61
05-02-2008, 11:27 AM
I wouldn't trade Bailey for Kemp. I still think pitching is the key and I wouldn't trade Cueto, Volquez, or Bailey right now. Unless I was offered a perennial all-star player, which won't happen and whom the Reds probably wouldn't want to pay.

But I agree with BaseClogger about Dunn's value. Frankly, with free agency and a no-trade clause, it's hard to imagine what leverage the Reds would have in any trade. "Hey Dodgers -- you want a 40 home run, high OBP hitter who is not a good defender, strikes out a lot, is a free agent after the season, who could earn $16 million this year, and will demand more to waive his no-trade?"

*BaseClogger*
05-02-2008, 11:29 AM
I wouldn't trade Bailey for Kemp. I still think pitching is the key and I wouldn't trade Cueto, Volquez, or Bailey right now. Unless I was offered a perennial all-star player, which won't happen and whom the Reds probably wouldn't want to pay.

My thoughts are expressed in my sig. At this point, Kemp is a safer bet to produce at the big league level than Bailey IMO...

Benihana
05-02-2008, 11:36 AM
Haven't we been discussing how the Reds won't get much for Dunn, but yet throwing him in to seal the deal for Kemp is overpaying?

And I'm on record saying that there's no way I would trade Dunn unless there is a sizeable return. I'm not sure that I'd trade Bailey straight up for Kemp. In my opinion, there are four deals that have been made in the last couple of years that would be similar to this deal:

Texas trading Edinson Volquez for Josh Hamilton
Boston trading Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena

Would you want Texas or Boston's side in either of those deals? I wouldn't(and I say that knowing that Hamilton is currently leading the AL in RBI.)

Florida trading Josh Beckett for Hanley Ramirez

This is one that I'd do, although Bailey clearly doesn't have the value that Beckett did at the time. And Kemp isn't a shortstop.

Minnesota trading Matt Garza for Delmon Young

The jury's still out on this one, although Young has been very unimpressive so far.

I look at the two deals that Krivsky made, and I wouldn't be psyched about potentially undoing that. I'm not saying I would rule out trading Bailey for Kemp, but I certainly wouldn't even consider trading Dunn and Bailey for an unproven hitter, no question about it. And I like Kemp. (I also like Matt LaPorta, and would target him especially if he came considerably cheaper.)

jojo
05-02-2008, 11:36 AM
My thoughts are expressed in my sig. At this point, Kemp is a safer bet to produce at the big league level than Bailey IMO...

Bailey for Kemp straight up? I'd do that.

HokieRed
05-02-2008, 01:06 PM
If you'd trade Bailey for Kemp, would you have traded Volquez for Hamilton? If so, then didn't Texas get the better part of that deal?

RedsManRick
05-02-2008, 01:14 PM
If you'd trade Bailey for Kemp, would you have traded Volquez for Hamilton? If so, then didn't Texas get the better part of that deal?

The reasons to trade Hamilton had as much to do with cashing in on a highly volatile asset as it did as the specific return we got for him. While the upside of Josh Hamilton is massive, the risk is huge as well. Turning that risk into a top pitching prospect was a smart move at the time and remains one -- independent of anything else which happens.

If you're asking me if I'd trade Bailey and Hamilton for Volquez and Kemp, I'd do that in a second.

GAC
05-02-2008, 08:03 PM
For a team that is supposedly in "win now" mode, it only is a huge plus if it brings in talent to exceed or at the very least replace it for cheaper, in my opinion.

I agree. Lets hope that is what Jocketty does with it. But you have to have the money to work with first.

*BaseClogger*
05-02-2008, 10:25 PM
If you're asking me if I'd trade Bailey and Hamilton for Volquez and Kemp, I'd do that in a second.

Ahoy! :thumbup:

(Oh, and Dunn at the deadline when out of the race...)

Unassisted
05-11-2008, 01:39 PM
The Mets' manager seems to like Griffey.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/2008/05/11/2008-05-11_junior_achievements_wow_willie-1.html


Junior achievements wow Willie

BY ANTHONY MCCARRON
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Sunday, May 11th 2008, 12:11 AM

Ken Griffey Jr. needs just three home runs to become the sixth member of the 600-home run club and Willie Randolph, for one, believes that we'd be talking about even more significant dinger milestones had Griffey's career not been slowed by injury.

Randolph said there's "no doubt about it" that Griffey would be chasing the all-time home run record had he not been on the disabled list 13 times in his 20-year career.

"You always felt that Griffey was going to be the king because his swing was so perfect for it," Randolph said before the first game. "A-Rod is a great hitter, but he doesn't have that. He just attacks the ball. He has that beautiful swing, also, but Griffey has that natural loop. Barry (Bonds) was never like that with the way he chokes up.

"You felt if he stayed healthy, (Griffey) would be the guy. I still think he's had a phenomenal career, obviously."

Griffey has struggled to stay healthy his entire career. He could have played 3,115 games over his career if he had played every game of every season he's been in the majors, including this one. But he's only played in 2,414, or 77.5%. He's missed 701 games, or more than four full seasons. Still, he's hit 597 homers.

He nearly had No. 598 in the eighth inning of the first game when he hit a ball off the wall in right, but he wound up with a double. On the day, he was 4-for-9 with three RBI.

Randolph knew Junior before he was a pro player, having played with Ken Griffey Sr. on the Yankees. "It's been special to watch," Randolph said.

Jpup
05-11-2008, 05:07 PM
Jr. for Pelphrey would be something I would be in favor of. I doubt the Mets would though.

reds44
05-11-2008, 05:18 PM
Why would any NL team want Griffey?

He's a DH playing RF.

Falls City Beer
05-11-2008, 05:59 PM
Why would any NL team want Griffey?

He's a DH playing RF.

He's a DH who can no longer run the bases playing RF. My guess is that not even AL teams will touch him with a ten-foot pole next season.

Matt700wlw
05-11-2008, 06:00 PM
Problem is, I don't think he realizes that.

He's not a fan of being a DH...

*BaseClogger*
05-11-2008, 08:55 PM
Will Griffey even find a job as a DH next season, as better hitters such as Bonds and Piazza sit at home?

Krusty
05-11-2008, 09:04 PM
What the Reds need to do is send $4 million to Seattle with Griffey. To get rid of Griffey will cost them $4 million in a buyout or they or some other team will be obligated for $16 million in 2009. If the Mariners portion of his contract in 2009 is 12 million, then I think it might be acceptable to them.

By doing that, the Reds might have a better return in players from Seattle.

reds44
05-11-2008, 10:13 PM
What the Reds need to do is send $4 million to Seattle with Griffey. To get rid of Griffey will cost them $4 million in a buyout or they or some other team will be obligated for $16 million in 2009. If the Mariners portion of his contract in 2009 is 12 million, then I think it might be acceptable to them.

By doing that, the Reds might have a better return in players from Seattle.
Griffey's option automatically gets picked up if he is traded.

jojo
05-11-2008, 10:23 PM
Griffey's option automatically gets picked up if he is traded.

I don't think that is true. Do you have a link to something verifying that?

reds44
05-11-2008, 10:37 PM
I don't think that is true. Do you have a link to something verifying that?
I remember reading it in an article recently, I'll try to find it.

redsmetz
05-11-2008, 11:17 PM
I remember reading it in an article recently, I'll try to find it.

Cot's web page doesn't show any such provision. I've never heard that implied. I know lots of people report that he has a "no trade" clause, when techinically he has veto power from being a 10 & 5 player.

Here's Cot's entry


# 00-08:$12.5M/year, 09:$16.5M club option ($4M buyout)
# $57.5M in salary deferred at 4% interest, to be paid 2009-2024, reducing contract's present-day value at time of signing to between $9.2M and $9.3M annually, according to Reds management sources

* $5.5M of 2000 salary deferred

* $6.5M/year of 2001-2008 salaries deferred
* signed 2/2000, replacing final year of previous contract

AmarilloRed
05-11-2008, 11:30 PM
I remember reading it in an article recently, I'll try to find it.


The Griffey Watch: Junior Griffey told USA Today he expects the Reds to ask him to waive his no-trade clause after he hits his 600th homer. But an official of one club that would like to upgrade its outfield is skeptical that there's a real fit for Griffey -- even in Seattle -- because of contract issues.

"The option year [at $16.5 million for 2009] is going to be a big issue," he said. "You know he's going to want that option picked up if he's going to waive that clause. I would assume that if it's a team he wants to go to, he would waive it, if it's a team that puts him in a position to win. But I'm not sure there's a team out there, that fits all his criteria, that would pick up that option."

In the past, Griffey has expressed interest in going to only three cities: Atlanta, Seattle and Chicago. Seattle is the only place on that list where you could envision any level of interest in paying Griffey $16.5 million next year. But can the Mariners put him in a better position to win this year? Not unless they get on a big roll over the next two months.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=3386182&campaign=rsssrch&source=jayson_stark

A trade of Griffey would seem to require that Seattle get in a position to make the playoffs before the trade deadline.

reds44
05-11-2008, 11:35 PM
Thanks Amarillo, so it's not in his contract but it's something he can request as a condition to waive his no trade clause.

Heath
05-11-2008, 11:41 PM
Adam Dunn is an enigma.

He'll never be good enough for the masses, yet the day he is traded, "Frank Robinson-like" will be used to describe it.