And, I posted this thought in another thread, I think there's one guy out there who could go a long way to replacing Dunn. And, I think that's Morgan Ensberg.
Adam Dunn BA/OBP/SLG/OPS: .234/.365/.490/.855
Morgan Ensberg BA/OBP/SLG/OPS: .235/.396/.463/.859
So, in 188 fewer plate appearances Morgan Ensberg walked 11 fewer times than Adam Dunn. And, in 174 fewer ABs, Ensberg had 17 fewer homers and 40 fewer hits.
Given their rates of performance, if you extrapolate Ensberg's performance out over the same number of PAs & ABs as Dunn had in 2006 (683/561), then Ensberg would have finished 2006 with 139 walks (27 more than Dunn) and 33 homers (7 fewer than Dunn).
I suspect that Esnberg's walk rate will decrease a bit next year and he's admittedly never been as consistently healthy as Dunn, but he does have advantages that Dunn does not. For example, Ensberg is a good defensive player, which is a benefit that Dunn clearly doesn't provide.
Now, granted, this is all purely speculative, but I don't think it's as difficult as commonly held to replace Dunn, which is why I think the Reds should try to deal him and Rheal Cormier to Houston for a package of Morgan Ensberg, Adam Everett, and a pitcher (Lidge? Wheeler? Qualls? Hirsh?).
Ensberg would go a long way towards replacing Dunn's production, Everett is the best defensive shortstop in baseball, and we could use a good reliever or a young pitching prospect.
When you look at the benefits from what we would add and how minimal the lost production would be, I think you can make a strong case for dealing Dunn. Not to mention, if third player in the deal is anyone but Lidge, then we'd be saving money.
But, even if the particulars of this specific deal don't work, I think given the right deal, trading Dunn can be done without too much damage done.
Any food for thought. Just my $.02.