PDA

View Full Version : Dodgers might Trade Kemp for a slugger (Dunn mentioned)



redsfan4445
06-11-2008, 11:25 AM
Per Rosenthal:at mlb trade rumours.com

"Rosenthal believes the Dodgers would consider trading a young player (especially Matt Kemp) for a slugger. He discusses what it would take to get Jason Bay, Magglio Ordonez, Adam Dunn, or Matt Holliday. This all seems like a bad idea for the Dodgers. "

If the Reds can trade Dunn for Kemp I would be all for that!!!..

Kemp and Bruce is a great building start for outfield defense!! for the future..

pahster
06-11-2008, 11:26 AM
I'd do it without a second thought. But why would the Dodgers?

jmcclain19
06-11-2008, 12:12 PM
I'd do it without a second thought. But why would the Dodgers?

Ned Colletti hearts veterans

pahster
06-11-2008, 12:22 PM
Ned Colletti hearts veterans

But Dunn isn't terrible. :p:

Benihana
06-11-2008, 12:26 PM
This would be an ideal scenario for the Reds. Do it NOW!!!

Johnny Footstool
06-11-2008, 12:32 PM
I can't decide whether I prefer Kemp or Andre Ethier. Either one would be a good return for Dunn.

RedsManRick
06-11-2008, 12:37 PM
Do this. Do this now. Throw in David Weathers. Heck, I'd include Bailey if they'd throw back a low minors arm. Kemp fits both our need for a true CF and a RH bat.

Eithier strikes me as Matt Murton with maybe a touch more power. Kemp is Grady Sizemore Lite.

That said, I trust Ken Rosenthal rumors about as much as John Kruk analysis. The guy is certainly well connected, but a little too anxious to be the first one on any scoop, throwing just about everything against the wall.

Benihana
06-11-2008, 12:40 PM
After reading the actual article, Rosenthal states clearly that a two or three month rental of Dunn would not be enough to net Kemp. This is a problem I have with just including brief summaries like mlbtraderumors so often does.

I would offer Dunn, Bailey and Stubbs for Kemp, Hu, and LaRoche. That trade makes a lot more sense for both sides, especially because the Dodgers will probably re-sign Furcal.

Then, you're looking at a future lineup of:

SS Keppinger/Hu
LF Votto
RF Bruce
CF Kemp
1B Alonso
2B Phillips
3B Encarnacion/LaRoche
C Whoever

That's pretty impressive. And you have a lot of extra money to start looking at long term contracts down the line for this year's rookies.

Johnny Footstool
06-11-2008, 12:56 PM
Do this. Do this now. Throw in David Weathers. Heck, I'd include Bailey if they'd throw back a low minors arm. Kemp fits both our need for a true CF and a RH bat.

Eithier strikes me as Matt Murton with maybe a touch more power. Kemp is Grady Sizemore Lite.

That said, I trust Ken Rosenthal rumors about as much as John Kruk analysis. The guy is certainly well connected, but a little too anxious to be the first one on any scoop, throwing just about everything against the wall.

Kemp is Grady Sizemore without a batting eye. Granted, his upside is higher than Ethier's, but so is his potential for failure.

Regardless, I don't think the Dodgers give up Kemp unless Dunn agrees to a long-term deal.

NC Reds
06-11-2008, 01:38 PM
No thanks.

dfs
06-11-2008, 01:58 PM
Adam Dunn controls his fate about when/if he was traded. That was part and partial of getting his last long term contract done.

Now, why would Adam want to go to LA?
If he stays here he can continue to play with young Bruce and Oldster Junior and watch Volquez pitch every fifth day. Why move to LA? It's not like their post season chances are any better than the reds. They are a grand total of 1 game ahead of the reds in the wild card race. It's not like the press in cincy can be any worse to him.

blumj
06-11-2008, 02:07 PM
Adam Dunn controls his fate about when/if he was traded. That was part and partial of getting his last long term contract done.

Now, why would Adam want to go to LA?

The easy answer would be, they're offering him a contract extension as an incentive to waive his no trade clause at whatever money/years he's hoping to get as a free agent.

dougdirt
06-11-2008, 02:20 PM
Please make it happen Walt. Please.

flyer85
06-11-2008, 02:24 PM
Please make it happen Walt. Please.even the Dodgers aren't that stupid. Dunn would be nothing more than a minor piece in acquiring him.

REDREAD
06-11-2008, 02:35 PM
Now, why would Adam want to go to LA?
.

LA would probably break the bank to extend him. Give him a lot of money and years.

Longterm, if LA ever stops flushing money down the toilet, they will be competitive again. Eventually they will stop wasting money on Andruw Jones, Pierre, etc.

Here's the trade with a twist. Would you do Dunn for Kemp + one of LA's albotoss OFers (like Jones or Pierre?).. Maybe LA kicks in some money.
I would consider it. For example, if the Reds plan to let Jr and Dunn go, they could suffer through a year of Andruw Jones in RF if it meant getting Kemp in another OF slot.. It might be preferable to take on an albotross than to give up additional prospects to get Kemp..

flyer85
06-11-2008, 02:36 PM
Would you do Dunn for Kemp + one of LA's albotoss OFers (like Jones or Pierre?)no

LA is in bad shape for 2008, just like the Reds. Why give up something in a lost season(especially since Furcal is not progressing) when if you want you can sign the guy and not have to give up anything(other than a draft pick) in the off-season.

fearofpopvol1
06-11-2008, 02:43 PM
no

LA is in bad shape for 2008, just like the Reds. Why give up something in a lost season(especially since Furcal is not progressing) when if you want you can sign the guy and not have to give up anything(other than a draft pick) in the off-season.

Because really, LA isn't that far out of the race. The Dbacks have sucked for the last few weeks and have no longer run away with the division. LA could easily compete this season with a piece or two.

missionhockey21
06-11-2008, 02:44 PM
even the Dodgers aren't that stupid. Dunn would be nothing more than a minor piece in acquiring him.
Uh, waiter can I get a refill on this Adam Dunn extension? Thanks.

flyer85
06-11-2008, 02:45 PM
Because really, LA isn't that far out of the race. The Dbacks have sucked for the last few weeks and have no longer run away with the division. LA could easily compete this season with a piece or two.not without Furcal, they have too many average/poor OBP guys without him.

fearofpopvol1
06-11-2008, 02:50 PM
not without Furcal, they have too many average/poor OBP guys without him.

Not having Furcal is obviously a setback, but I think the pitching is the bigger question mark. They've got a lot of quality pitching, but whether it holds up or meshes together is another story.

flyer85
06-11-2008, 02:56 PM
Not having Furcal is obviously a setback, but I think the pitching is the bigger question mark. They've got a lot of quality pitching, but whether it holds up or meshes together is another story.that can be said of every team. Because as the Mets showed last year, the worm can turn in a hurry if the pitching goes south.

Jpup
06-11-2008, 03:04 PM
I would rather have Either, but I would rather have Dunn.

fearofpopvol1
06-11-2008, 03:05 PM
that can be said of every team. Because as the Mets showed last year, the worm can turn in a hurry if the pitching goes south.

True to a degree, but not always the case. The Dodgers have the pedigree of talent (unlike a lot of other teams). If they can add a piece or 2, they can definitely compete in the weak NL West.

flyer85
06-11-2008, 03:07 PM
True to a degree, but not always the case. The Dodgers have the pedigree of talent (unlike a lot of other teams). If they can add a piece or 2, they can definitely compete in the weak NL West.However, it is questionable how much an improvement it would be to move Kemp, put Dunn in LF and move Pierre to CF.

REDREAD
06-11-2008, 03:25 PM
no

LA is in bad shape for 2008, just like the Reds. Why give up something in a lost season(especially since Furcal is not progressing) when if you want you can sign the guy and not have to give up anything(other than a draft pick) in the off-season.


That's why you give them the incentive to get rid of Andrew Jones.
Also, in theory, a team that trades for Dunn now has the inside track to extend him. If LA waits, they run the risk that someone else trades for Dunn, extends him, and then Dunn never reaches FA..

Also, if LA waits for FA, then they are bidding against a bunch of other teams..

I see your point though. It all depends if LA thinks Dunn is a building block for their future.

jojo
06-11-2008, 03:29 PM
Too bad this isn't an actual rumor.

dfs
06-11-2008, 03:34 PM
The easy answer would be, they're offering him a contract extension as an incentive to waive his no trade clause at whatever money/years he's hoping to get as a free agent.

....You start looking at contracts and one of the things you see is how willing a "star" is to give some kind of discount to the club often depends on which contract this is.

Sure teams buy out arbitration years like what the reds have done with Phillips and that's a mutual things.

The first free agent contract is rarely the big one. Players seem to be willing to sign a slightly below value contract "for the good of the team" or in order to "make things happen." Despite protests to the contrary, this is the contract Adam is on right now.

But that second big contract...that's usually where they are ready to test the waters. That's .....well, not to be a dork about it, that's PAYDAY. You've put in your time. You've had your good-guy-for-the-team contract. It's time.

Now, I suppose Vlad could get it back together and the angels not pick up the option, but that's a stretch. Most likely Adam is going to go into the off season as the best hitter available. More than the best hitter available, Adam has very consistantly took the field demonstrating he's not an injury hound AND he'll only be 29 next year so a 6-7 year contract may look real good to both sides.

That's a darn good place to be. I don't see Adam giving that up, unless the offer is coming from a marquis franchise that is competing today, meaning either Boston or the yankees.

jojo
06-11-2008, 03:38 PM
Even though there is no real reason to think the Dodgers are interested in Dunn, I've always thought of Dunn as an LA kind of guy....loving the beaches, the traffic, the fast life etc..... :cool:

RedsManRick
06-11-2008, 03:41 PM
Even though there is no real reason to think the Dodgers are interested in Dunn, I've always thought of Dunn as an LA kind of guy....loving the beaches, the traffic, the fast life etc..... :cool:

I'd love to see a deer stand in Hollywood.

flyer85
06-11-2008, 03:41 PM
I've always thought of Dunn as an LA kind of guy.I didn't know there were lots of fishin' holes in LA.

Benihana
06-11-2008, 03:42 PM
LA would probably break the bank to extend him. Give him a lot of money and years.

Longterm, if LA ever stops flushing money down the toilet, they will be competitive again. Eventually they will stop wasting money on Andruw Jones, Pierre, etc.

Here's the trade with a twist. Would you do Dunn for Kemp + one of LA's albotoss OFers (like Jones or Pierre?).. Maybe LA kicks in some money.
I would consider it. For example, if the Reds plan to let Jr and Dunn go, they could suffer through a year of Andruw Jones in RF if it meant getting Kemp in another OF slot.. It might be preferable to take on an albotross than to give up additional prospects to get Kemp..

Absolutely. Dunn for Kemp and all we have to bear is one year of paying Jones to play LF? Then Jones walks after '09, Votto moves to LF and either Alonso or Frazier are ready to step in and man 1B. Sign me up!

fearofpopvol1
06-11-2008, 03:57 PM
However, it is questionable how much an improvement it would be to move Kemp, put Dunn in LF and move Pierre to CF.

I agree that I don't think Dunn alone would be enough. But Dunn + another piece (from the Reds or another team) very well could be.

blumj
06-11-2008, 04:55 PM
....You start looking at contracts and one of the things you see is how willing a "star" is to give some kind of discount to the club often depends on which contract this is.

Sure teams buy out arbitration years like what the reds have done with Phillips and that's a mutual things.

The first free agent contract is rarely the big one. Players seem to be willing to sign a slightly below value contract "for the good of the team" or in order to "make things happen." Despite protests to the contrary, this is the contract Adam is on right now.

But that second big contract...that's usually where they are ready to test the waters. That's .....well, not to be a dork about it, that's PAYDAY. You've put in your time. You've had your good-guy-for-the-team contract. It's time.

Now, I suppose Vlad could get it back together and the angels not pick up the option, but that's a stretch. Most likely Adam is going to go into the off season as the best hitter available. More than the best hitter available, Adam has very consistantly took the field demonstrating he's not an injury hound AND he'll only be 29 next year so a 6-7 year contract may look real good to both sides.

That's a darn good place to be. I don't see Adam giving that up, unless the offer is coming from a marquis franchise that is competing today, meaning either Boston or the yankees.
Oh, sure, they'd have to pay up, big time, to keep him off the market.

red-in-la
06-11-2008, 06:33 PM
....You start looking at contracts and one of the things you see is how willing a "star" is to give some kind of discount to the club often depends on which contract this is.

The first free agent contract is rarely the big one. Players seem to be willing to sign a slightly below value contract "for the good of the team" or in order to "make things happen." Despite protests to the contrary, this is the contract Adam is on right now.

I agree with the statement but not the reason. Players usually sign that first multi-year deal to get their name associated with multi-millions of dollars. As they say, take that one to the bank.

Once you go from arbitration year after year to 3-5 years at so and so millions of GUARENTEED dollars, you suddenly have Milbern Drysdale chasing you all over the place.