Dunn was just a rental

[jojo]

I dunno. I tend to think that rooting against a guy and seeing how your team approaches him (and whether the approach is successful or not) might tend to offer a perspective that could alter some people's opinions.

[TRF]

If only Davey Johnson managed the Reds in 2001.

All the Dunn talk would be moot.

[Highlifeman21]

If only Davey Johnson managed the Reds in 2001.

All the Dunn talk would be moot.

I miss Davey Johnson

[SteelSD]

Let's start from Rick's post. He stated that he'd not heard of anyone stating Dunn's worth at over $15mill. I gave him an example of someone who did. It's not important who. I remembered it because I was amazed at the time that you thought Dunn's value was that high. I originally asked you a very simple question "What is Dunn worth to the Reds?" Your answer now is full of qualifiers such as the assumption that Dunn is worth overpaying. I came away from your comments with the impression that you now think $17-20mill is overpaying Dunn but you think the ends justify the means. That changes our focus point but OK.

Ray, the qualifiers were already present in my initial post (the one you cited). Let's look at it again, because you're insinuating that I've somehow waffled since:

SteelSD:

Given the window his presence would likely allow, at least 17M per season and potentially 20M per knowing how much revenue can be generated by a playoff-caliber team.

Nothing has changed and the original answer required an evaluation of circumstance rather than a simple response based off nothing but the worth of a player's Runs.

If that's the case then let's start with where we agree. Paying Dunn $17-20mill/yr is overpaying him.

If you're speaking only to a static assignment of dollars per Run or Win, then yes, both those figures are slight to medium overpayment amounts. That being said, especially when a team has a realistic contention window, consistent, high-value Run producers are geometrically more valuable than we often consider. They're always worth geometrically more than your general alternative but in the right situation, they're far more valuable as the most difficult Wins to get are those pushing a likely .500 club to an actual playoff contender.

Again, I'm going to reach back to your Cordero position when he was signed because it gives us insight into your thought process on the signing of a player who actually was dramatically overpaid based on his projected Run value. Let me show you Cordero's xFIP from 2004 to current:

2008: 4.08 xFIP
2007: 2.86
2006: 3.68 (TEX), 4.32 (MIL)
2005: 3.74
2004: 3.89

Here are the average MLB Reliever ERA numbers during that span:

2008: 4.07 ERA
2007: 4.17
2006: 4.20
2005: 4.08
2004: 4.14

Here's the number of Runs Cordero has been worth since 2004 based on his xFIP versus MLB average RP ERA over the same amount of Innings:

2008: -0.08 Runs
2007: +9.22 Runs
2006: +2.46 Runs
2005: +2.61 Runs
2004: +1.99 Runs

TOTAL: +16.19 Runs

Adam Dunn's offensive Runs Above Position:

2008: +18.4 RAP
2007: +25.5
2006: +8.9
2005: +29.1
2004: +32.2

TOTAL: +114.1 RAP

The latter player's salary was 13 million dollars in 2008. The former will be making 12 million on average per season during his deal. And Cordero has never been worth even a Win versus MLB average during that time span. In fact, Dunn was worth more than five seasons of Cordero just this year.

Is he worth overpaying? To me he's only worth overpaying if you feel Dunn adds wins to the Reds above his personal production. History has shown us that he doesn't, so no, he's not worth overpaying.

History doesn't show us anything of the sort.

IMO few offensive players are worth overpaying. Manny Ramirez is an exception. He really did help his team win games down the stretch so it wouldn't surprise me if the Dodgers end up overpaying him.

That's an interesting take considering that a really smart MLB club (the 2007 World Champions and all) moved Ramirez because he was a complete and total Milo. The guy's intangibles are completely awful and the reigning World Champs ran away from the guy even though they were in contention for the division. Think about that for a moment.

Manny Ramirez also produced a line of .396 BA/.489 OBP/.743 SLG (1.232 OPS) during his first 229 PA exposure to the National League. Those are unsustainable numbers, even for Manny in his prime, but over his 117 Outs, he produced a remarkable 37.4 Runs Above Position.

As of August 1st, 2008, the Dodgers had a +18 Run Differential (451 RS/433 RA). Then Manny came on board and produced 37.4 RAP. The Dodgers finished the season with a Run Diff of +52. Let's add 37.4 to 18...

55.4

Manny's sole contribution to the team was his own personal offense. After August 1st, the Dodgers got better offensively by about .34 Runs per game, which pretty much matches up with the offensive contribution from Ramirez only. Then we have the playoffs, where the Dodgers faced off against the BA-challenged, high-K, high-HR rate, mediocre rotation team represented by Philly.

Manny couldn't save them. Going forward, considering that Ramirez will be 37 years old next season, AND considering that he's a chronic character issue, he's exactly the kind of player no team should overpay.

[Sea Ray]

Ray, the qualifiers were already present in my initial post (the one you cited). Let's look at it again, because you're insinuating that I've somehow waffled since:

SteelSD:

Nothing has changed and the original answer required an evaluation of circumstance rather than a simple response based off nothing but the worth of a player's Runs.

Steel, why do you insist on always putting "qualifiers" in your answers? Did I ask for qualifiers in my question? Why couldn't you just answer the question directly? Now we're forced to discuss your qualifiers rather than the original question. I'd rather discuss how much Adam Dunn is worth, instead you spend thousands of words debating:

1) Whether Dunn is "the difference" in making the playoffs

2) Whether he is worth overpaying

Those are much more subjective because we likely won't agree on those two things.

Dunn never led the Reds to a winning year so I doubt that would change in 2009 so I don't see how you think overpaying him in 2009 puts the Reds in the post season which is what your argument is based on. He had a great chance to put the D-Backs over the top and they actually regressed.

But if you feel Dunn or anyone else "puts you over the top" then yes, it is justifiable to overpay him but he's never played on a winning team so he hardly has that winning edge that guys like Manny and Pete Rose had.

As for Manny, the Bosox had to get rid of him. He literally quit on them. He turned it on again in LA and he was a difference maker, unlike Dunn in Az. No one thinks the Dodgers would have made the post season w/o Manny. What he did for that team in 2 months was incredible and it's something Dunn has never done.

As for the future, I agree it's a big risk for LA or anyone else to sign him longterm. He has a history of pouting and who knows how long he'll be motivated to perform. I used him as an example of difference making because you don't seem to recognize it when you see it. You seem to think Adam Dunn has made a difference in winning/losing for his team and the record does not show that. The record shows that Dunn's teams lose with or without him.

[jojo]

Folly is demanding absolutes in the face of unknowns.

[blumj]

That's an interesting take considering that a really smart MLB club (the 2007 World Champions and all) moved Ramirez because he was a complete and total Milo. The guy's intangibles are completely awful and the reigning World Champs ran away from the guy even though they were in contention for the division. Think about that for a moment.

Um, you mean the same "smart MLB club" that proved quite willing to overpay for what Manny Ramirez provides for 7.5 seasons? Until he provoked his teammates into voting him off the island by continually threatening to quit on them? The same "smart MLB club" that still didn't trade him until, in the last moments before the non-waiver deadline, they were able to put together a deal that brought very reasonable baseball value in return? That "smart MLB club"? I would say that their actions demonstrate quite clearly what they believe the value of Manny Ramirez is to a baseball team, considering they're the team that has already proved willing to spend $20M a year while putting up with all his other crap to have it.

[flyer85]

The entire Manny episode was a Red SOx PR stunt to turn the fans against Manny so they wouldn't wonder "what in the hell is the front office doing?"

Manny had always been Manny and will always be Manny. They won 2 world series with Manny because he is a difference maker. Manny didn't want the Red Sox to pick up his options but he has been dogging it in the OF and not running out ground balls for years, what happened it July 2008 was nothing new.

The entire episode just proves how easily the public can be manipulated into a certain line of thinking.

[REDREAD]

Manny had always been Manny and will always be Manny.

The entire episode just proves how easily the public can be manipulated into a certain line of thinking.

Yes, I agree with that. Part of signing Manny is dealing with his quirks. The same can be said for any ballplayer. No one is perfect. I agree with you that the Red Sox PR machine worked against Manny and blew things out of proportion to avoid the fan backlash of dumping him.

All teams do it. Think about how Mercker was painted as a liar/traitor after he left as a FA to sign with the Cards. After Hamilton was traded, the press no longer treats him as a feel good story, but a ticking time bomb that was causing club house tension. There's been other examples from other teams about how a guy was a "bad egg" after he was not resigned, which is hillarious because often the club was desperately negotiating to bring the guy back just weeks earlier.

And I agree, it's funny that people fall for it.

[TRF]

After Hamilton was traded, the press no longer treats him as a feel good story, but a ticking time bomb that was causing club house tension.

I didn't see that at all. I saw some stories where BP complained saying the Reds were more than Josh Hamilton's feel good story, but if the 2008 baseball season as a whole were summed up in 10 stories, one of them would have been Josh Hamilton.

[blumj]

The entire Manny episode was a Red SOx PR stunt to turn the fans against Manny so they wouldn't wonder "what in the hell is the front office doing?"

Manny had always been Manny and will always be Manny. They won 2 world series with Manny because he is a difference maker. Manny didn't want the Red Sox to pick up his options but he has been dogging it in the OF and not running out ground balls for years, what happened it July 2008 was nothing new.

The entire episode just proves how easily the public can be manipulated into a certain line of thinking.

Nothing changed about my perception of Manny Ramirez after the Red Sox traded him. The way the Boston media portrayed him did not change. It was obvious he was willing to make a pain of himself to get what he wanted from before he ever got to Boston, and it certainly was crystal clear from his very first season in Boston. The only things that changed were that his contract was expiring, so his behavior may have worsened in response to that and the option issue, and the Red Sox were able to finally trade him for value. And that his teammates and manager were no longer willing to back him publically was more than enough for me. Terry Francona doesn't quit on players over quirks, and he's not a good liar.

[Spring~Fields]

Folly is demanding absolutes in the face of unknowns.

Why do you think I ask instead of demanding an answer?

[Sea Ray]

The truth is Manny did literally quit on the Bosox. He was sitting out games because he said he was injured and in one in particular he was sent up to pinch hit he purposely took three pitches down the middle and walked back to the bench. The Dodgers saw none of that Manny.