PDA

View Full Version : WaPo Boswell: Future Nats Lineup Probably Won't Include Dunn



redsmetz
09-12-2010, 10:16 AM
Fascinating piece by Boswell today on Dunn's future in DC. Interesting because it balances out all the intricacies of today's game and the accompanying arguments.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/08/AR2010090806582.html

Always Red
09-12-2010, 10:27 AM
Analyzing defense is still largely alchemy.

Boswell is a wonderful writer; that's pure gold right there. ;)

JaxRed
09-12-2010, 10:29 AM
Hard to believe there wouldn't be some AL team that would be a good fit for Dunn, as long as his salary demands aren't crazy.

redsmetz
09-12-2010, 10:32 AM
Hard to believe there wouldn't be some AL team that would be a good fit for Dunn, as long as his salary demands aren't crazy.

I think Dunn ultimately ends up in the AL, although I admire his desire to play both ways even though his defense is not that great.

I also agree with Boswell's personal take on the situation, that the Nats would do well to keep Dunn in tandem with Zimmerman and as a bridge towards some of their up and coming talent.

Johnny Footstool
09-12-2010, 12:08 PM
Seattle or Anaheim would be great places for Dunn to DH.

jojo
09-12-2010, 12:19 PM
Seattle or Anaheim would be great places for Dunn to DH.

Seattle is most likely going young next season which if true probably makes it unlikely they'd pursue Dunn.

jojo
09-12-2010, 12:25 PM
Boswell is a wonderful writer; that's pure gold right there. ;)

But it's in the context of him conceding Dunn's defense is a major liability so he largely agrees with the "alchemy".

kaldaniels
09-12-2010, 09:58 PM
But it's in the context of him conceding Dunn's defense is a major liability so he largely agrees with the "alchemy".

The alchemy remark was used within the realms of the author speaking of improving the Nat's team defense...not Dunn in specific. Not sure what your angle is but just realize....just b/c someone thinks Jonny Gomes (for ex.) is a poor defender....that doesn't mean they are in step with defensive metrics....some things are too obvious to misinterpret

corkedbat
09-12-2010, 10:20 PM
I think Dunn ultimately ends up in the AL, although I admire his desire to play both ways even though his defense is not that great.

I also agree with Boswell's personal take on the situation, that the Nats would do well to keep Dunn in tandem with Zimmerman and as a bridge towards some of their up and coming talent.

Saying he wants to play both ways may be admirable, but showing up in someone's camp at less than his listed 285 would make it more believeable. Even if I were to sign him as a DH, I would want him at at least 265-270 (preferrably 260) coming into camp if I were a GM.

jojo
09-13-2010, 03:08 AM
The alchemy remark was used within the realms of the author speaking of improving the Nat's team defense...not Dunn in specific. Not sure what your angle is but just realize....just b/c someone thinks Jonny Gomes (for ex.) is a poor defender....that doesn't mean they are in step with defensive metrics....some things are too obvious to misinterpret

My angle is very straightforward-he described defensive metrics as alchemy and proceeded to concede their conclusions. His argument for Dunn rests upon 1) Dunn being credibility salvation if prospects don't pan out and he doesn't age like most true three outcome players typically do and 2) one poor defender doesn't doom a defense.

kaldaniels
09-13-2010, 10:38 AM
My angle is very straightforward-he described defensive metrics as alchemy and proceeded to concede their conclusions. His argument for Dunn rests upon 1) Dunn being credibility salvation if prospects don't pan out and he doesn't age like most true three outcome players typically do and 2) one poor defender doesn't doom a defense.

It just seems to me you are looking to discredit the author simply because he dared to describe defensive metrics as "alchemy", because you are appearing to expose him as a hypocrite but for the life of me I don't see it. As I mentioned before just because in one instance the author and defensive metrics reach the same conclusion....what does that show? Lets say I start a system of ranking players' worth using RBI as the main data point..just b/c we would each view Votto as valuable doesn't mean you support my system.

lollipopcurve
09-13-2010, 10:41 AM
You know a car wreck when you see one. Same with a bad first baseman.

kaldaniels
09-13-2010, 10:45 AM
You know a car wreck when you see one. Same with a bad first baseman.

Bingo.

Chip R
09-13-2010, 11:04 AM
You know a car wreck when you see one. Same with a bad first baseman.


Yep. Defensive metrics can be useful when you are, for example, trying to tell the difference in defense between a couple of players like Janish and Cabrera. But saying Dunn is a bad defensive player doesn't mean you are consciously using defensive metrics to judge him. Subconsciously, you are - like Boswell is by saying other 1st basemen can get balls that Dunn can't - but not overtly.

jojo
09-13-2010, 12:14 PM
It just seems to me you are looking to discredit the author simply because he dared to describe defensive metrics as "alchemy", because you are appearing to expose him as a hypocrite but for the life of me I don't see it. As I mentioned before just because in one instance the author and defensive metrics reach the same conclusion....what does that show? Lets say I start a system of ranking players' worth using RBI as the main data point..just b/c we would each view Votto as valuable doesn't mean you support my system.

Again, I was pointing to the disconnect in his argument.

Sea Ray
09-13-2010, 03:59 PM
The Dunn debate really hasn't changed since he was such a hot topic here. What is a guaranteed 40 HR guy without a defensive position worth? Every team that's ever had him has decided that he's not worth $10mill/yr. It's fascinating, really

Always Red
09-13-2010, 04:39 PM
The Dunn debate really hasn't changed since he was such a hot topic here. What is a guaranteed 40 HR guy without a defensive position worth? Every team that's ever had him has decided that he's not worth $10mill/yr. It's fascinating, really

And yet someone keeps paying him that money.

It is fascinating and will be interesting to see who ponies it up this time.

I'd bet along with the rest of RZ that Dunner's days of playing defense, at least every day, are over.

bucksfan2
09-13-2010, 04:46 PM
I'd bet along with the rest of RZ that Dunner's days of playing defense, at least every day, are over.

The issue with Dunn is he still wants to play defense. If he would be ok with being a DH (and his numbers would stay the same) the market would be much larger. But as is his demand is much lower because he is an awful first baseman and a lot of the contending teams already have a 1b in position.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 04:58 PM
And yet someone keeps paying him that money.

It is fascinating and will be interesting to see who ponies it up this time.

I'd bet along with the rest of RZ that Dunner's days of playing defense, at least every day, are over.

I think the definition of "keeps" is a little overboard. Cincinnati did it only one year and traded him. Washington signed him to a 2-year contract, the first year for $8 million and the second for $12 million. They're now giving up on him, apparently.

I doubt he gets over $10 million again, if I'm being honest.

westofyou
09-13-2010, 05:01 PM
He'll get 10 million, for his bat

Sea Ray
09-13-2010, 05:22 PM
My point is after a team sees him play everyday and they have a decision to make they say no. Sure the Reds bought out a yr of free agency with a multiyear contract but when they had the chance to let him walk, they dumped him. Ditto for Arizona. Now it looks like Washington is doing the same.

Just like two years ago the question is this: Will Washington offer him arbitration? As is often the case with this guy, the answer will be fascinating

Always Red
09-13-2010, 05:22 PM
He'll get 10 million, for his bat

That was my point.

40HR and 100RBI a year out of your DH is worth 10 million.

bucksfan2
09-13-2010, 05:32 PM
That was my point.

40HR and 100RBI a year out of your DH is worth 10 million.

But so far in his career he doesn't want to DH. So his market value is much lower because of the plethora of better 1b's out there.

RedsManRick
09-13-2010, 05:45 PM
But so far in his career he doesn't want to DH. So his market value is much lower because of the plethora of better 1b's out there.

Plethora? His wOBA is 16th in MLB. He's a truly elite offensive player and as reliable in that regard as it gets. He's certainly no Doug Mientkiewicz at 1B defensively, but his footwork is much better and he's a massive target. He's not good, but he's definitely not the massive disaster he was in LF. If all we think of is in terms of good and bad, it's hard to appreciate the value of not being absolutely horrendous.

Even if you think he's 10 runs below replacement defensively, and that's pretty hard to do at 1B, he's a 3 win player and worth ~$12-15M in free agency.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 05:48 PM
Plethora? He's going to be a 4 win player as a full-time 1B in Washington. His wOBA is 16th in MLB. He's a truly elite offensive player. He's certainly no Doug Mientkiewicz at 1B defensively, but his footwork is much better and he's a massive target. He's definitely not the massive disaster he was in LF.

Even if you think he's 10 runs below replacement defensively, and that's pretty hard to do at 1B, he's a 3 win player and worth ~$12-15M in free agency.

Calculated worth and perceived worth on the market are very, very different. The 'stats' may say he's worth that, but he won't get that much.

In reality, he's only worth what teams think he's worth.

RedsManRick
09-13-2010, 05:50 PM
Calculated worth and perceived worth on the market are very, very different. The 'stats' may say he's worth that, but he won't get that much.

In reality, he's only worth what teams think he's worth.

A fair point. But I have a hard time seeing him getting less than $10M per. It only takes two interested teams to push a guy's salary up to reasonable market levels.

Rojo
09-13-2010, 05:53 PM
Burrell got a two-year, $16 million contract from TB. That's his ballpark.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 05:54 PM
A fair point. But I have a hard time seeing him getting less than $10M per. It only takes two interested teams to push a guy's salary up to reasonable market levels.

That's also true. But there was a consensus that the Nationals bid against themselves just to give him $20 million. I don't think his perceived worth has gotten any better. I'm just not sure teams will be bidding very hard for his services. I am expecting somewhere between $8-9 million personally. You're right that even two interested parties could push that higher, but I'm not sure there's a big market for him except for DH, and even then I don't see him getting a whole lot.

westofyou
09-13-2010, 05:58 PM
Burrell got a two-year, $16 million contract from TB. That's his ballpark.

He's a better hitter than Burrell though, always has been

bucksfan2
09-14-2010, 09:44 AM
Plethora? His wOBA is 16th in MLB. He's a truly elite offensive player and as reliable in that regard as it gets. He's certainly no Doug Mientkiewicz at 1B defensively, but his footwork is much better and he's a massive target. He's not good, but he's definitely not the massive disaster he was in LF. If all we think of is in terms of good and bad, it's hard to appreciate the value of not being absolutely horrendous.

Even if you think he's 10 runs below replacement defensively, and that's pretty hard to do at 1B, he's a 3 win player and worth ~$12-15M in free agency.

But the issue is you can throw out a number all you want based upon some kind of formula. But the reality is someone team has to offer him that amount of money for him to be "worth" it. The way I look at it he isn't getting a starting 1b gig over

Votto
Pujols
Cabrera
Howard
Youkilis
Texieria
Morneau
Fielder
Morales
Gonzales

You also have the new wave of 1b that I don't know enough about to comment on. They aren't better than Dunn is, but they are much cheaper and have a longer shelf life.

Also consider that with Fielder and Gonzales likely hitting the trade market this off season and Pujols' contract an issue right now what team in their right mind is going to pay Dunn that much money to play 1b? By the looks of it most contending teams are set at 1b with there being a few exceptions.

If Dunn wants to play the field there will always be a market for him. However that market is likely to be an outside looking in team. Although he would look good in San Francisco.

jojo
09-14-2010, 09:53 AM
He's a better hitter than Burrell though, always has been

FWIW concerning how major league teams valued each when hitting the market, Burrell was signed on 1/5/09 for 2 yr/$16M and Dunn was signed on 2/11/09 for 2 yr/$20M.

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 10:37 AM
Two years ago folks used stats to argue that Dunn was worth far more than he ended up getting with Washington. Some things never change...

BuckeyeRedleg
09-14-2010, 10:45 AM
I would love to have him in Cincinnati next year playing LF for $10M.

For all the crap he gets about his defense, he's better than Gomes out there.

jojo
09-14-2010, 10:49 AM
Two years ago folks used stats to argue that Dunn was worth far more than he ended up getting with Washington. Some things never change...

To be fair, the sands of the market weren't shifting favorably in the 2008-2009 offseason. Dunn would've fared much better just 12 months earlier. As it turns out his extension was beautifully calculated.

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 10:54 AM
To be fair, the sands of the market weren't shifting favorably in the 2008-2009 offseason. Dunn would've fared much better just 12 months earlier. As it turns out his extension was beautifully calculated.

You make it sound like we won't be hearing market excuses this year. I'm not so sure.

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 10:56 AM
I would love to have him in Cincinnati next year playing LF for $10M.

For all the crap he gets about his defense, he's better than Gomes out there.

You make it sound like we've got an extra $10mill laying around.

BuckeyeRedleg
09-14-2010, 10:57 AM
You make it sound like we've got an extra $10mill laying around.

Dump Cordero and we have more than that.

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 10:59 AM
No one wants to weigh in on whether Washington will offer him arbitration? I think it's a close call but I'm leaning towards thinking they will because it'd only be a one yr deal. If they decline then we know they're really down on Dunn because they'd be giving up the chance to pocket a couple high draft picks--exactly what a rebuilding team needs

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 11:01 AM
Dump Cordero and we have more than that.

I have no problem with that. Do you have a Goodwill store in mind for overpriced closers?

It's not as easy as saying "dump his salary"

BuckeyeRedleg
09-14-2010, 11:18 AM
I thought the discussion was about Dunn and how much he was worth.

He's worth every penny of $10M to play LF. Whether the Reds could afford it or not is beside the point.

Not that it changes anything regarding the point of the topic, but roughly $20M comes off the books if the Reds don't keep Lincoln, Rhodes, Cabrera, Harang, Gomes, Nix, Edmonds, and Cairo (and that doesn't include $10M if they let Arroyo walk).

Yes, Votto, Phillips, Cueto, etc. will be getting raises, but that will be offset by what is coming off the books. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a modest payroll increase anyway.

bucksfan2
09-14-2010, 11:24 AM
I thought the discussion was about Dunn and how much he was worth.

He's worth every penny of $10M to play LF. Whether the Reds could afford it or not is beside the point.

Not that it changes anything regarding the point of the topic, but roughly $20M comes off the books if the Reds don't keep Lincoln, Rhodes, Cabrera, Harang, Gomes, Nix, Edmonds, and Cairo (and that doesn't include $10M if they let Arroyo walk).

Yes, Votto, Phillips, Cueto, etc. will be getting raises, but that will be offset by what is coming off the books. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a modest payroll increase anyway.

At this stage in his career he isn't a LF. Sure if he could play LF his value would be much greater, but he can't play LF.

BuckeyeRedleg
09-14-2010, 11:29 AM
At this stage in his career he isn't a LF. Sure if he could play LF his value would be much greater, but he can't play LF.

True, but the point remains that the Reds currently have a worse defensive LF'er starting everyday.

Ron Madden
09-14-2010, 11:29 AM
At this stage in his career he isn't a LF. Sure if he could play LF his value would be much greater, but he can't play LF.

Neither can Gomes. ;)

Chip R
09-14-2010, 11:35 AM
I would love to have him in Cincinnati next year playing LF for $10M.

For all the crap he gets about his defense, he's better than Gomes out there.

I like Dunn and I don't believe that for a second.

BuckeyeRedleg
09-14-2010, 11:42 AM
I like Dunn and I don't believe that for a second.


That his D in LF is better?

It certainly was. Unless he's now incapable of running anymore, I don't see how two years playing first base has all of sudden made him worse than Gomes out there.

His career UZR in LF is better than Gomes.

Dunn -11.2 UZR/150
Gomes -21.0 UZR/150

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 11:51 AM
I thought the discussion was about Dunn and how much he was worth.

He's worth every penny of $10M to play LF. Whether the Reds could afford it or not is beside the point.

Not that it changes anything regarding the point of the topic, but roughly $20M comes off the books if the Reds don't keep Lincoln, Rhodes, Cabrera, Harang, Gomes, Nix, Edmonds, and Cairo (and that doesn't include $10M if they let Arroyo walk).

Yes, Votto, Phillips, Cueto, etc. will be getting raises, but that will be offset by what is coming off the books. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a modest payroll increase anyway.

You have a point about the discussion. I don't mean to derail it. My points are twofold

1) If we sign Dunn we have to cut somewhere else, like Arroyo

2) Maybe we can't afford him but a lot of other teams can't either and this all affects his value. He can't get much on the open market if the teams that have a place for him can't afford him

The Nats clearly disagree with you about his ability to play LF. I don't think there's a team in baseball that wants him as their everyday left fielder

Chip R
09-14-2010, 11:54 AM
That his D in LF is better?

It certainly was. Unless he's now incapable of running anymore, I don't see how two years playing first base has all of sudden made him worse than Gomes out there.

His career UZR in LF is better than Gomes.

Dunn -11.2 UZR/150
Gomes -21.0 UZR/150

Give me all the UZRs you want but Gomes makes catches and gets to balls Dunn couldn't - and more important, can't now.

redsmetz
09-14-2010, 12:24 PM
You have a point about the discussion. I don't mean to derail it. My points are twofold

1) If we sign Dunn we have to cut somewhere else, like Arroyo

2) Maybe we can't afford him but a lot of other teams can't either and this all affects his value. He can't get much on the open market if the teams that have a place for him can't afford him

The Nats clearly disagree with you about his ability to play LF. I don't think there's a team in baseball that wants him as their everyday left fielder

I think I'd lean back a bit more to the point of the article. I understand the direction taken here, but I doubt Adam Dunn ever plays for the Reds again.

I think Boswell's overall point is that the classic way of looking at a player like Dunn in today's baseball world would indicate that the Nationals will move on without him. Certainly Boswell understands that, but suggests that might not be the best thing for the Nats. I'm not sure he'd advocate for the 3 year deal Dunn probably woud see as his minimum time, but he certainly believes that other factors would suggest it would be a good move for Washington to retain him. I would concur with that even though the defensive metrics scream send him packing. But I think a three year deal for some amount to both the team's & Dunn's like would be judicious, his skills at first notwithstanding.

bucksfan2
09-14-2010, 12:31 PM
I think I'd lean back a bit more to the point of the article. I understand the direction taken here, but I doubt Adam Dunn ever plays for the Reds again.

I think Boswell's overall point is that the classic way of looking at a player like Dunn in today's baseball world would indicate that the Nationals will move on without him. Certainly Boswell understands that, but suggests that might not be the best thing for the Nats. I'm not sure he'd advocate for the 3 year deal Dunn probably woud see as his minimum time, but he certainly believes that other factors would suggest it would be a good move for Washington to retain him. I would concur with that even though the defensive metrics scream send him packing. But I think a three year deal for some amount to both the team's & Dunn's like would be judicious, his skills at first notwithstanding.

Had Strasburg not gotten hurt I think it would have been a smart move to reup Dunn in the off season. Now with 2011 looking as a lost season for the Nats it makes little sense to sign him to a long term contract. I would offer him arb, whats the worst that could happen? He accepts and becomes trade bait down the stretch of next season.

REDREAD
09-14-2010, 02:08 PM
I think it's a bad idea for Wash to offer him arbitration. A guy like Dunn is exactly the person you don't want to go to arb with. He's got the gaudy offensive numbers.. Easy to make a case to the arbitrator that he's one of the rare perennial 35-40 HR bats. Easy to make a case that Dunn is extremely durable.. Hard for the Nats to make the case that Dunn is a defensive liablity.. Remember, the arbitrators are not skilled in baseball.

I remember when Sean Casey won his arb case. His agent argued that other than ARod, Casey was the only player that hit at least 300 HR with X HR.. That is the talk that happens during arb.

The Nats either need to resign him or let him walk. A couple comp draft picks are not worth risking arb (and maybe a 15+ million dollar award from the arbitrator). If I was Dunn, I'd accept arbitration in a heartbeat, as he's going to get a lot more money that way.

Brutus
09-14-2010, 03:28 PM
Dump Cordero and we have more than that.

Unless you can find a willing trading partner, dumping Cordero does no good. If the Reds cut him, they would still have to pay him the remaining money on his contract. So there's nothing the Reds can do to get out from paying that money.

On the point about defense, I don't believe Gomes is a worse defender than Dunn. You used UZR to suggest he is, but the thing is, Gomes had only played a total of 500 innings in left prior to this season. He's still at a young 1,400 innings total. If three years of data is needed to judge a player's true defensive talent, that's not enough. By comparison, Dunn has played 8,000 innings in left in his career. That is enough to judge him (for however much one chooses to use UZR as their basis).

Offensively, without defense taking away from his value, I believe Dunn would be worth $10 million stand alone. But in the NL, since defense counts, I don't think he's worth that much. In fact, in 3 out of the last 4 seasons playing left, Dunn had a WAR of less than 2 wins... which is $6-7 million range on the open market. Actually, two of those seasons were right around 1 win, which is significantly less than that.

BuckeyeRedleg
09-14-2010, 03:50 PM
Unless you can find a willing trading partner, dumping Cordero does no good. If the Reds cut him, they would still have to pay him the remaining money on his contract. So there's nothing the Reds can do to get out from paying that money.

By "dump" I was meaning dump him off on another team for PTBNL or scrub prospect. Maybe eat a little of his contract in the process, but dump him off in a trade.

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 03:56 PM
I think I'd lean back a bit more to the point of the article. I understand the direction taken here, but I doubt Adam Dunn ever plays for the Reds again.

I think Boswell's overall point is that the classic way of looking at a player like Dunn in today's baseball world would indicate that the Nationals will move on without him. Certainly Boswell understands that, but suggests that might not be the best thing for the Nats. I'm not sure he'd advocate for the 3 year deal Dunn probably woud see as his minimum time, but he certainly believes that other factors would suggest it would be a good move for Washington to retain him. I would concur with that even though the defensive metrics scream send him packing. But I think a three year deal for some amount to both the team's & Dunn's like would be judicious, his skills at first notwithstanding.

I'd say the point of the article was that after considering the entire Dunn package, the Nats have decided he's not worth re-signing long term

Brutus
09-14-2010, 04:05 PM
By "dump" I was meaning dump him off on another team for PTBNL or scrub prospect. Maybe eat a little of his contract in the process, but dump him off in a trade.

Oh OK. Well yeah that would help if it could be done.

redsmetz
09-14-2010, 04:32 PM
I'd say the point of the article was that after considering the entire Dunn package, the Nats have decided he's not worth re-signing long term

That certainly was part of the column, but it wasn't the entirety, but that's probably just quibbling.

TRF
09-14-2010, 04:55 PM
From the article, I'd say Dunn doesn't want arb., and wants a 4 year deal. He said he doesn't want a 2 year deal.

Since becoming a full time starter in 2002, Dunn has played in less that 152 games 1 time, 2003. I blame Bob Boone for that. :) He's durable. He plays hurt. He averages 40 HR per 162 games played. He's an elite hitter with a career .903 OPS. He's top 10 in 2 triple crown categories this year, and if he were on a better team, it'd be top 5.

Remember all the talk of how Votto should move to LF to make room for Alonso? From all accounts, Yonder is not close to being a plus defender at 1B, and he's been shaky at LF. But that scenario was bandied about a lot. I'd rather have Dunn in LF than Yonder or Gomes.

I see him in Houston. Bret Wallace ain't the answer. Houston can afford him. 4 years $45 mil.

westofyou
09-14-2010, 05:09 PM
I see him in Houston. Bret Wallace ain't the answer. Houston can afford him. 4 years $45 mil.

Wallace is young, and they already have Lee eating up salary

Sea Ray
09-14-2010, 05:12 PM
I was under the impression that the whole reason they acquired Wallace was to save money. I don't think they're of the mind to start doling out 8 figure multiyear contracts but I have no inside knowledge of their situation

TRF
09-14-2010, 05:13 PM
Wallace is young, and they already have Lee eating up salary

True but they also have a very large metro area, and Berkman and Oswalt are off the books. And Wallace wasn't that good in the minors.

Plus Dunn is local. It's a pretty good fit.

westofyou
09-14-2010, 05:15 PM
True but they also have a very large metro area, and Berkman and Oswalt are off the books. And Wallace wasn't that good in the minors.

Plus Dunn is local. It's a pretty good fit.

.304/.375/.487

1200 ab's

Not bad

TRF
09-14-2010, 05:25 PM
.304/.375/.487

1200 ab's

Not bad

In the PCL. And he just turned 24 and made his major league debut 39 games ago this year. In a division that features Pujols, Votto, and Fielder with an owner like Drayton, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. Like you said, Dunn will get 10mil for his bat. And he will be on a 25 man roster next year, and probably not in WAS. Atlanta? Won't be Cleveland. Minnesota isn't a good fit. Chi Sox? Cubs?

oneupper
09-14-2010, 05:43 PM
Anaheim. They have the money and need his bat.
NL teams don't want him on the field.

TRF
09-14-2010, 05:50 PM
Anaheim. They have the money and need his bat.
NL teams don't want him on the field.

yet in his 10 year career he's only played in the NL.

Brutus
09-14-2010, 05:51 PM
Anaheim. They have the money and need his bat.
NL teams don't want him on the field.

My guess is the White Sox

CTA513
09-14-2010, 06:01 PM
They should have traded him to the White Sox when they had the chance if they don't want to bring him back.

Ron Madden
09-15-2010, 05:49 AM
Call me crazy but I'd rather pay Adam Dunn millions of dollars than spend millions of dollars on someone like Francisco Cordero.

I'll duck and cover now.:runawaycr

kaldaniels
09-15-2010, 08:51 AM
Call me crazy but I'd rather pay Adam Dunn millions of dollars than spend millions of dollars on someone like Francisco Cordero.

I'll duck and cover now.:runawaycr

Nothing controversial with that remark. It's true.

bucksfan2
09-15-2010, 09:20 AM
Anaheim. They have the money and need his bat.
NL teams don't want him on the field.

They have Morales at 1b who is a good young cheap bat. Don't really see a reason to replace him with Dunn.

I am still operating under the belief that Dunn will refuse to be a full time DH.

lollipopcurve
09-15-2010, 09:27 AM
It'll be the Cubs, I think.

oneupper
09-15-2010, 09:33 AM
They have Morales at 1b who is a good young cheap bat. Don't really see a reason to replace him with Dunn.

I am still operating under the belief that Dunn will refuse to be a full time DH.

Dunn refused to be a first-baseman also. He had to suck it up and put on the mitt.

Dunn will have to pay if he wants to play in the field. Literally.

redsmetz
09-20-2010, 12:45 PM
An update from yesterday's Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/19/AR2010091903958.html

Sea Ray
09-20-2010, 02:49 PM
...Dunn had "his best defensive game of the season," Manager Jim Riggleman said. He has shown progress this year, but most advanced defensive statistics place him near the bottom of the league among first basemen. He feels as if he has made strides and, at 30, will continue to improve.

Very few players improve defensively after age 30. I doubt they buy into that

flyer85
09-20-2010, 03:10 PM
Dunns UZR/150 is -2.3 for the season. It puts him ahead of Prince Fielder, Ryan Howard, Paul Konerko, Garrett Jones, Mark Teixiera, Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Pena. One would think the Nats will offer him a contract just maybe not for as much much money as he is expecting.

From my point of view they really isn't any difference between $10M and $15M a year

bucksfan2
09-20-2010, 03:21 PM
Dunns UZR/150 is -2.3 for the season. It puts him ahead of Prince Fielder, Ryan Howard, Paul Konerko, Garrett Jones, Mark Teixiera, Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Pena. One would think the Nats will offer him a contract just maybe not for as much much money as he is expecting.

From my point of view they really isn't any difference between $10M and $15M a year

With Strasburg's TJ injury 2011 in all likelihood is a lost season for the Nats. With Strasburg healthy and a return of Zimmerman to the rotation I think the Nats could have been a fringe contender. The issue becomes is it financially prudent to pay Dunn $10-$15M for a lost season and then rely on his overall output to continue to maintain as he ages.

The Nats are in a predicament if you ask me. As a fan I would be upset at throwing another year away, but at the same time there are better ways to spend $10-15M on a lost season than paying a soon to be FA that.

Ron Madden
09-20-2010, 04:08 PM
I'd rather pay $10M for someone who is offensively productive than pay $5M for someone who isn't.

IslandRed
09-21-2010, 12:36 AM
With Strasburg's TJ injury 2011 in all likelihood is a lost season for the Nats. With Strasburg healthy and a return of Zimmerman to the rotation I think the Nats could have been a fringe contender. The issue becomes is it financially prudent to pay Dunn $10-$15M for a lost season and then rely on his overall output to continue to maintain as he ages.

Yeah. I don't see any way Washington contends next year. Nor does Dunn seem to be a box-office draw, and we've already seen (twice) that he's not going to command a king's ransom as a July trading chip. So I'm not sure what the purpose would be of spending $10 million or more on something that isn't going to be around by the time they have a chance to do something. Put it into more creative ventures. Someone can use him, I just don't think it's the Nationals.

TRF
09-21-2010, 10:25 AM
Very few players improve defensively after age 30. I doubt they buy into that

True, but he's not playing the OF. I'd expect a bit better defense next year, though he'll never be great.