View Full Version : Fay - SEVERAL teams put a Claim in for Dunn; Arroyo Quote

08-12-2008, 05:24 PM
John Fay's notes on Dunn trade
Diamondbacks not only team to claim #44
By John Fay • jfay@enquirer.com • August 12, 2008

If the trade deadline was July 31, then how were the Reds able to trade Adam Dunn on Aug. 11?
The answer: July 31 is the "non-waiver" trade deadline.

After that deadline, teams can still trade players, but they must do so using the waiver process. Players who are put on waivers must stay there for 47 business hours. Any team can submit a claim during that time for the player, who may not even know they are on waivers.

That's what happened with Dunn. He was placed on trade waivers and claimed by several teams, including the Arizona Diamondbacks, said Reds assistant general manager Bob Miller .

Arizona had first rights because it had the worst record of the teams claiming Dunn.

The teams then had two days to reach a deal. Had no deal been reached, the Reds could have pulled Dunn back off waivers. He then could not have been placed on waivers for another 30 days.

"Most teams put on almost everyone they have on trade waivers," Miller said. "It's sort of like fishing. You throw bait in the water. That's the only way I can explain. Teams claim players. Teams block to try to keep someone away from somebody else."

The Reds could have kept Dunn for the rest of the year and gotten draft picks had he left the team as a free agent.

But in order for that to happen, the Reds would have had to offer Dunn arbitration. In that instance, Dunn could have accepted the Reds' offer and he would have been back on the roster, and eligible for a big one-year contract.

Miller said the Dunn trade to Arizona was preferable because the Reds got the players they wanted.

"We felt this was a good deal," Miller said. "We got three quality players."


So Arizona wasn't the ONLY team to claim him - just the one with the worse record.

So, that leaves these teams as ones that may have claimed him:


I'm guessing only those with * can be rule out, since they don't need to make a move. The others surely could have. My best guess would be the Yankees and Mets both did.

Also from Fay:
Bronson Arroyo is always gives you an honest answer. When asked if he suprised by the Adam Dunn trade, he said:

"A little bit because it came after the deadline. But he was going to be moved no matter what. I don't know if he told (the media) but he made it was no secret to us that he was looking for $100 to $120 million contract. I don't think this franchise is going to give out that kind of contract."


SO, piecing two and two together, we SURELY were looking at him NOT accepting arbitration, so we were assured of Two Comp picks if what Arroyo says is true.
AND, the quote about "we got the 3 guys we wanted", we should be getting more than most DB fans think we are.



08-12-2008, 05:27 PM
Didn't Adam Dunn give the Reds a list of 10 teams that he would accept a trade to? I wonder if Arizona was on that list? Or maybe Adam just wanted the heck out of Dodge.

08-12-2008, 06:23 PM
I am a little surprised that Houston didn't put in a claim for him. There is still talk down here of making a run for the Wild Card (however unrealistic that might be). And he would fill the shoes of Carlos Lee quite nicely. The Astros' farm system is a train wreck right now, so if Houston offered him arbitration and he signed elsewhere they would pick up the two comp picks to help re-seed the farm. And lastly, he is a home town boy and might help fill some seats down the stretch. It wouldn't be the worst move in the world.