Ken Rosenthal's take of direction of the Reds

[buckeyenut]

What makes you thyink that any players the Reds woul dget for Dunn would help them more in the long term than Dunn could?

That's the thinking I don't get from the people who want to see Dunn dealt. He's young (26), and is a prodigious HR hitter who gets on base and stays healthy. Barring an unforseen injury, Dunn should be one of the most consistent and accomplished power hitters in all of baseball for the next decade. He is a force in the lineup who changes the way opposing teams pitch, and affects the outcome of games with regularity (28 win shares in 2005, 1st on the Reds, 5th for NL outfielders).

If Dunn is signed to a LTC, he WILL help the Reds in the long term, and that isn't even a debateable point. There's no question of prospects developing into serviceable players, or reaching their potential--with Dunn, we have a known commodity who is one of the elite players in the league, and young enough to be a part of the Reds plans for the forseeable future. I don't envision a way that the Reds are a better team--now, or 3 years from now--if they trade him.

I think that is the rub with any Dunn deal. Are they going to help you more short and longterm than Dunn does?

There are only 5-10 teams with the kind of talent that I can maybe say yes to that question. Out of those 5-10, you can eliminate at least half due to them being in a similar situation to CIN regarding $$ or needs. So the question is, can you get enough talent from the teams left to offset the risk of unproven talent and the certainty of Dunn's value? I honestly think only ANA and LA really fit the criteria completely and LA is iffy and ANA is, as mentioned, looking for a different profile guy.

[registerthis]

I am not saying I am for trading Dunn, but one thing to keep in mind is that players who are of his size don't have a great history once hitting 30. Yeah, I know, that is still 4 years away. However, what can this team realistically hope to accomplish in that time? If there is no realistic hope to compete for a league championship in that period, then Dunn should be dealt for a high return package.

If the Reds are going to be languishing in 5th place 4 years from now with no chance of competing for a pennant, then they have far larger problems to deal with than simply trading Dunn. The foundation for a competitive team is already in place, Krivsky's job is to find ways to fill the gaps (most noticeably in the rotation) that will allow the Reds to compete. Getting rid of your most productive offensive player--one who, like I previously mentioned, can be expected to remain productive for the forseeable future--for unproven talent will irreversibly set this franchise back years.

I would argue that the quickest way to ensure that the Reds aren't competitive 4 years from now is to trade Dunn for prospects.

[Willy]

Who said anything about waiting 3 years? I simply said that one good season does not show me that Lopez will CERTAINLY be good for the next 5 years or so and is thus worthy of a LTC. There were more than a handful on this board who, prior to last season, wanted the Reds to dump Lopez because the thought was that he would never amount to anything. Last season he proved he can play, this season he needs to prove that he can do it consistently. Another year like 2005, and I don't have any problems offering him a LTC. What I don't want is for the Reds to jump the gun, sign him to a 4 year deal now, then have him go all Cristian Guzman or Pokey Reese on them.

A great front office will know what players are worthly of a LTC, before they have 2 All Star years. That is what these guys are suppose to do. Lopez may be a bad example because trhe jury is still out. But even I knew Dunn was something special a few years back. That is when you offer a LTC, that is when you save the big money. If you wait until you prove it a couple of years, you missed the boat.

[kbrake]

A great front office will know what players are worthly of a LTC, before they have 2 All Star years. That is what these guys are suppose to do. Lopez may be a bad example because trhe jury is still out. But even I knew Dunn was something special a few years back. That is when you offer a LTC, that is when you save the big money. If you wait until you prove it a couple of years, you missed the boat.

I think most people have wanted Dunn signed to a LTC for a few years now. The fact that O'Brien was an idiot is just something we have to deal with. As far as Lopez, depending on just how much money we are talking I would not mind seeing the Reds try and sign him long term. While I fear that he could turn into a Pokey or Guzman, I fear much much more that another All-Star year and Boras will make sure he is priced out of Cincinnati.

[Krusty]

Here is the problem....you can't tie all your money into two players (Griffey, Dunn). Even the Minnesota Twins were able to spread the money around to lock several of their veterans to two, three year deals.

Now with Junior have a 10-5 rights and his history of injuries, the chances of trading him are slim unless you eat at least half of his contract. That would leave Dunn. If you sign Dunn to a longterm deal, then you have all your money tied to two players. You trade Dunn for three talent prospects, you accelerate the rebuilding process while gaining payroll flexibility.

I wonder if Krivsky offered Dunn to the Dodgers for a packaged of young talent headed by RHP pitching gem Chad Billingsley if the Dodgers would bite?

[RedsManRick]

The issue at hand is not is Dunn valuable at 12-14MM per year over the next 5 years. I think there's pretty much a consensus that he is worth that much money generally speaking. The real question is how do we maximize the value presented by Dunn given the circumstances.

1.) Sign him to a long term market value deal such as described above
2.) Trade Dunn for a package of talents that POTENTIALLY could provide more talent than Dunn alone. Also gain the financial flexibility to add talent through FA or other trades.
3.) Wait and address the situation later, be it this summer, or next offseason as he enters his final year of Reds control.

Re #1: I personally don't believe Dunn wants to sign here long term. If he does sign with the Reds, it will cost us essentially market value. Given the Konerko contract, we're looking at something like 70MM over 5 years. While I think Dunn is worth that much, I don't think it's a wise distribution of the Reds payroll, particularly given the shallow state of talent in the organization as a whole. It's too many of our eggs in 1 basket. It's not a Dunn thing, it's percentage of payroll thing. Thus to me, Dunn is only an attractive option long term if we get a discount putting him in the 10-12MM range maximum. I'm not sure why he would do this, particularly as it doesn't really even make him much money in the next 2 years that he wouldn't be getting already through arbitration.

Re #2: If the Angels picked up the phone and said "we'll give you Wood or Kendrick, Sanata, and Kotchman for Dunn and Hudson/Hancock", I wouldn't hang up the phone until I knew papers were on their way. But barring a deal such as that, there's no reason to force a Dunn trade right now. I do NOT think it's likely the Angels would offer this.

Re #3: There will be a number of good windows over the next 18 months to trade him or get that advantageous long term deal. An unexpected playoff run could boost forward our payroll escalation calender and make Dunn more keen on staying here. But you need to put those feelers out now -- let teams start looking, imagining, salivating. If they know Dunn is an option, it opens doors. You don't want to decide you need to deal in July of '07 and lose all your leverage.

The fact is that there simply isn't enough talent in the organization to win right now. There are just 3 ways to get more talent, draft, trade, and sign. We're working the draft route, obviously. But development of draftees takes time and everybody is pulling from the same pool -- our development has been piss poor, so even gross improvement doesn't give us a competetive advantage. That leaves us with trades and FA. FA requires either astute signings of players who contribute more than the market prices them at (see Moneyball) or the ability to afford market prices on the talent needed. We can't afford the market price of the talent we need to add, and I have seen very little evidence of understanding regarding talent undervalued by the marketplace.

Which leaves us with trades. As you all know, you have to give talent to get talent. There are very few trades when you KNOW you're getting greater value in return, though these do happen, usually as deadline deals for mediocre talent that a playoff team thinks will put them over the top. The other way is to trade somebody at the peak of their value for a king's ransom (or trade your bust for somebody else's) and get lucky when nearly the full value of the ransom is recognized. Call this the AJ Pierzynski approach. (AJ for Nathan, Lirano, and Bosner)

The only way to build a talent poor franchise QUICKLY is through amazing drafts (Oakland) or through the AJ Pierzynksi approach. Standard draft gains and Joe Randa/Todd Jones deals help, but slowly. AJ Pierzynksi deals (or more similarly to us, Bartolo Colon deals) allow you to instantly get a influx of talent which places you in a very strong position. Of course, the problem is that it's risky. If you get the wrong pieces, or just they don't pan out, then you bottom out completely (see the Royals).

Given Castinelli's stated objectives and principals, a trade of Dunn or Junior seems to be the best way to right the ship. In Feb 1998, the Twins traded their best position player, 29 year old Chuck Knoblauch, to the Yankees for Brian Buchanan, Cristian Guzman, Eric Milton, Danny Mota, and cash. This was the beginning of their ascent to becoming a competetive force in the AL Central.

[Krusty]

The issue at hand is not is Dunn valuable at 12-14MM per year over the next 5 years. I think there's pretty much a consensus that he is worth that much money generally speaking. The real question is how do we maximize the value presented by Dunn given the circumstances.

1.) Sign him to a long term market value deal such as described above (I think we can all agree the Reds are not going to get a significant discount in a long term deal situation)
2.) Trade Dunn for a package of talents that POTENTIALLY could provide more talent than Dunn alone. Also gain the financial flexibility to add talent through FA or other trades.
3.) Wait and address the situation later, be it this summer, or next offseason as he enters his final year of Reds control.

Re #1: I personally don't believe Dunn wants to sign here long term. If he does sign with the Reds, it will cost us essentially market value. Given the Konerko contract, we're looking at something like 70MM over 5 years. While I think Dunn is worth that much, I don't think it's a wise distribution of the Reds payroll, particularly given the shallow state of talent in the organization as a whole. It's too many of our eggs in 1 basket. It's not a Dunn thing, it's percentage of payroll thing. Thus to me, Dunn is only an attractive option long term if we get a discount putting him in the 10-12MM range maximum. I'm not sure why he would do this, particularly as it doesn't really even make him much money in the next 2 years that he wouldn't be getting already through arbitration.

Re #2: If the Angels picked up the phone and said "we'll give you Wood or Kendrick, Sanata, and Kotchman for Dunn and Hudson/Hancock", I wouldn't hang up the phone until I knew papers were on their way. But barring a deal such as that, there's no reason to force a Dunn trade right now.

Re #3: There will be a number of good windows over the next 18 months to trade him or get that advantageous long term deal. You need to put those feelers out now though -- let teams start looking, imagining, salivating. If they know Dunn is an option, it opens doors. You don't want to decide you need to deal in July of '07 and lose all your leverage.

The fact is that there simply isn't enough talent in the organization to win right now. There are just 3 ways to get more talent, draft, trade, and sign. We're working the draft route, obviously. But development of draftees takes time and everybody is pulling from the same pool -- our development has been piss poor, so even gross improvement doesn't give us a competetive advantage. That leaves us with trades and FA. FA requires either astute signings of players who contribute more than the market prices them at (see Moneyball) or the ability to afford market prices on the talent needed. We can't afford the market price of the talent we need to add, and I have seen very little evidence of understanding regarding talent undervalued by the marketplace.

Which leaves us with trades. As you all know, you have to give talent to get talent. There are very few trades when you KNOW you're getting greater value in return, though these do happen, usually as deadline deals for mediocre talent that a playoff team thinks will put them over the top. The other way is to trade somebody at the peak of their value for a king's ransom and get lucky when nearly the full value of the ransom is recognized. Call this the AJ Pierzynski approach.

The only way to build a franchise QUICKLY is through amazing drafts (Oakland) or through the AJ Pierzynksi approach. Standard drafts gains and Joe Randa deals help, but very slowly. AJ Pierzynksi deals (aka Bartolo Colon deals) allow you to instantly get a confluence of talent which places you in a very strong position. Of course, the problem is that it's risky. If you get the wrong pieces, or they don't pan out, then you bottom out completely (see the Royals).

Given Castinelli's stated objectives and principals, a trade of Dunn or Junior seems to be the best way to right the ship. In Feb 1998, the Twins traded their best position player, 29 year old Chuck Knoblauch, to the Yankees for Brian Buchanan, Cristian Guzman, Eric Milton, Danny Mota, and cash. This was the beginning of their ascent to becoming a competetive force in the AL Central.

Good post. As I mentioned keeping Dunn and locking him to a five year, 50+ million dollar deal has all the payroll tied up along with Junior's contract. And I don't see Junior going anywhere anytime soon.

Dunn is the most attractive player that could accelerate the rebuilding process. He could bring in three young players that would play an important role in the rebuilding process. Teams like the Astros, Dodgers and Angels (all deep in quality and pitching prospects) would inquire about trading for Dunn.

Trading Dunn would be painful. But like I said before it is about time the Reds get this rebuilding process right.

[KronoRed]

Good post. As I mentioned keeping Dunn and locking him to a five year, 50+ million dollar deal has all the payroll tied up along with Junior's contract. And I don't see Junior going anywhere anytime soon.

He's out of here after 2008, and right now we can afford both, back load the deal for Dunn so he goes up as JR goes off the payroll.

[registerthis]

Also, we have no idea where the reds payroll will stand in 2-3 years time. It's entirely possible that Castellini will raise payroll to $70-$80 mil, thus allowing for the signings of guys like Dunn to long-term deals.

[registerthis]

A great front office will know what players are worthly of a LTC, before they have 2 All Star years. That is what these guys are suppose to do. Lopez may be a bad example because trhe jury is still out. But even I knew Dunn was something special a few years back. That is when you offer a LTC, that is when you save the big money. If you wait until you prove it a couple of years, you missed the boat.

The Reds have a horrible history of offering big contracts to players who either don't deserve them or never play up to the amount they're being paid--just look at the recent past: Griffey, Casey, Graves, Milton, etc. And money that gets tied up into guys like that DOESN'T go to the players who truly DO deserve LT deals, such as Dunn.

Even if it costs them a little more, I'd prefer to give Lopez another season to prove himself of being consistently able to produce like he did in '05 before locking him up long term. Pokey Reese looked pretty good after the '99 season, luckily the Reds didn't bite.

[vaticanplum]

Here is the problem....you can't tie all your money into two players (Griffey, Dunn).

Dunn can fill Griffey's place on the payroll in a few years. That's why you sign him now and backload the contract.

edit: Ok, going to finish reading through threads before I post from now on.

[wolfboy]

The Reds have a horrible history of offering big contracts to players who either don't deserve them or never play up to the amount they're being paid--just look at the recent past: Griffey, Casey, Graves, Milton, etc. And money that gets tied up into guys like that DOESN'T go to the players who truly DO deserve LT deals, such as Dunn.

Even if it costs them a little more, I'd prefer to give Lopez another season to prove himself of being consistently able to produce like he did in '05 before locking him up long term. Pokey Reese looked pretty good after the '99 season, luckily the Reds didn't bite.

I don't think it's fair to include Griffey in that group. I don't think there was an indicaiton that Griffey would fall apart the way he did after signing that contract. At least Griffey had put up numbers in the past that justified the money he was signed for. He was also likely to do so in the future. Casey, Milton, and Graves never gave any indication that they were worth the contracts they signed.

[registerthis]

I don't think it's fair to include Griffey in that group. I don't think there was an indicaiton that Griffey would fall apart the way he did after signing that contract. At least Griffey had put up numbers in the past that justified the money he was signed for. He was also likely to do so in the future. Casey, Milton, and Graves never gave any indication that they were worth the contracts they signed.

The Reds have a horrible history of offering big contracts to players who either don't deserve them or never play up to the amount they're being paid

I think Griffey fits in very well with that.

[MikeS21]

I hope that I am dead wrong, but here's my take:

I believe some of us are jumping to a conclusion, thinking that money is the only thing preventing Dunn from signing a LTC. I'm of the opinion that Adam Dunn would not sign if they offered him five years at $100 million. Why? Because after the 2007 season, he can sign as a FA with the Astros (for a hometown discount) and play for the hometown crowd.

IMO, the hold-up right now is over length of contract. The Reds probably want to tie Dunn up 4-6 years, but Dunn has no plans on being here past 2007. So Dunn wants a one year deal. he might be willing for two year deal, but nothing more. The Reds are trying to draw out negotiations until the last minute - wanting a long term deal. They will eventually, cave in and sign Dunn to a one year deal at Dunn's price moments before the arbitration hearing.

Dunn knows that as long as he does not commit himself past 2007, he is a free agent to go where he pleases. And he is aware that unless he signs a LTC, not too many teams are willing to part with top prospects for a guy who won't commit long-term - which hurts his trade value. (Would you trade your top three or four prospects for a guy who you can't control for more than two years?) And the Reds are less likely to move him for inferior prospects. I think he is mentally counting the days before he can play for the hometown team.

It only makes sense that Castellini has stepped in these last 2-3 weeks, trying to get a deal done, so I imagine Dunn has seem some better-than-market figures thrown at him for a long-term deal. So why hasn't he signed? Because he does not want to commit past 2007.

It's very difficult to build your team around a guy who is planning on playing elsewhere in two years.

As I said, I hope I am wrong.

[RedsManRick]

I hope that I am dead wrong, but here's my take:

I believe some of us are jumping to a conclusion, thinking that money is the only thing preventing Dunn from signing a LTC. I'm of the opinion that Adam Dunn would not sign if they offered him five years at $100 million. Why? Because after the 2007 season, he can sign as a FA with the Astros (for a hometown discount) and play for the hometown crowd.

IMO, the hold-up right now is over length of contract. The Reds probably want to tie Dunn up 4-6 years, but Dunn has no plans on being here past 2007. So Dunn wants a one year deal. he might be willing for two year deal, but nothing more. The Reds are trying to draw out negotiations until the last minute - wanting a long term deal. They will eventually, cave in and sign Dunn to a one year deal at Dunn's price moments before the arbitration hearing.

Dunn knows that as long as he does not commit himself past 2007, he is a free agent to go where he pleases. And he is aware that unless he signs a LTC, not too many teams are willing to part with top prospects for a guy who won't commit long-term - which hurts his trade value. (Would you trade your top three or four prospects for a guy who you can't control for more than two years?) And the Reds are less likely to move him for inferior prospects. I think he is mentally counting the days before he can play for the hometown team.

It only makes sense that Castellini has stepped in these last 2-3 weeks, trying to get a deal done, so I imagine Dunn has seem some better-than-market figures thrown at him for a long-term deal. So why hasn't he signed? Because he does not want to commit past 2007.

It's very difficult to build your team around a guy who is planning on playing elsewhere in two years.

As I said, I hope I am wrong.

My thoughts exactly Mike. Though do keep in mind the value the Brewers got for Richie Sexson. Dunn is basically Sexson but 3 years ahead of schedule and even more willing to take a walk.

December 1, 2003: Traded by the Milwaukee Brewers with a player to be named later and Shane Nance to the Arizona Diamondbacks for Junior Spivey, Craig Counsell, Lyle Overbay, Chad Moeller, Chris Capuano, and Jorge de la Rosa. The Milwaukee Brewers sent Noochie Varner (minors) (December 15, 2003) to the Arizona Diamondbacks to complete the trade.

Now most people thought the D-Backs overpaid, but the point is that there are deals to be made. I'll be the first to tell you that every trade situation is unique and just because Sexson was dealt doesn't mean there's a suitor for Dunn. But still...