The Dunn market...and the Krivsky market...

[Spitball]

Originally Posted by KronoRed

I don't see Wayne as a guy who cares about PR, he probably leaves that all to Bob, if he signs off on it I can Dunn being shipped out for a less then stellar return

Except I doubt a general manager can ever afford not to care about PR if the fans stop coming to games. Remember, there really isn't an urgency to trading Dunn. They signed him to that contract with every intention of keeping him, or they wouldn't have included the void option in event of a trade. The Reds can hold onto Dunn if they can't get a decent return.

[KoryMac5]

Originally Posted by Spitball

Except I doubt a general manager can ever afford not to care about PR if the fans stop coming to games. Remember, there really isn't an urgency to trading Dunn. They signed him to that contract with every intention of keeping him, or they wouldn't have included the void option in event of a trade. The Reds can hold onto Dunn if they can't get a decent return.

Olney was on Espn today discussing Dunn. He said the contract continues to be the biggest obstacle in trading Dunn even with his recent play being sooo good. Teams like the Angels and Dodgers don't want to give up three players for a guy who can opt out at the end of the year. Plus his K's are a concern for many of these teams, they just don't know how much he can inject into their offense.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by KoryMac5

they just don't know how much he can inject into their offense.

generally guys in the top 10 in the league in OPS don't inject much in the offense.

I honestly think if he gets dealt it will be the A's. Beane is one of the few GMs who understands what Dunn is and what he isn't. He also knows what other GMs want(and is the master of the three way deal) and at some point I think krivsky will bite the bullet and take a bad deal from someone. The Dodgers are the most logical trading partner but they are the wrong organization.

[M2]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Kearns looks more like pyrite then gold at this juncture.

That's an issue for the Nats, not the Reds. He stopped being an issue for the Reds on the day he was traded (for far less than he should have been).

If the franchise gets as little from a Dunn trade as it did the Kearns/Lopez deal, you can turn off the lights on this decade.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Originally Posted by KoryMac5

Olney was on Espn today discussing Dunn. He said the contract continues to be the biggest obstacle in trading Dunn even with his recent play being sooo good. Teams like the Angels and Dodgers don't want to give up three players for a guy who can opt out at the end of the year. Plus his K's are a concern for many of these teams, they just don't know how much he can inject into their offense.

Another example of why last year's mirage set this club back.

If they indeed want to deal him and have been planning on doing it for sometime, 2006 would have been the time to do it. The contract looks a heck of a lot better for the team acquiring him and gives them a full year to work on an extension.

The Reds, in turn, get better return. If they deal him now, they get way less.

2006 set this organization back a few years.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg

Another example of why last year's mirage set this club back.

This organization has still not bought in to the need to tear it down to build it back up. For the last decade a year by year inability to admit they are not a contender just sets them back further. If they could admit to themselves they weren't a contender this year and won't be next year there are a number of trades that need to be made BEFORE you get around to dealing Dunn and Jr. You unload the flotsam and jetsam and see what kind you get before you trade the valuable property.

[paulrichjr]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg

Another example of why last year's mirage set this club back.

If they indeed want to deal him and have been planning on doing it for sometime, 2006 would have been the time to do it. The contract looks a heck of a lot better for the team acquiring him and gives them a full year to work on an extension.

The Reds, in turn, get better return. If they deal him now, they get way less.

2006 set this organization back a few years.

True... I agree 100%. I know this sounds weird to say but just hanging on over the last few years has been one of the worst things that this club could do. They would win a few games and get within 5 or 6 back in a weak division and then they wouldn't make trades for the future but instead make them for a pie in the sky present. Tear it down and build it up quick would have been better than chinese torture which is what I think we are in now. That being said I am not so sure that Dunn's contract will make him that hard to move. Everyone says that stuff but it isn't the end of the deadline yet. At the end I can see someone "overpaying" for him.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by M2

If the franchise gets as little from a Dunn trade as it did the Kearns/Lopez deal, you can turn off the lights on this decade.

Yep, might as well fall on the sword if that occurs.

I'm also all for dealing Griffey, his value is at a peak after quite awhile... time to cash in those chips.

Speaking of Mirages, this year has been a delightful way to celebrate the ten year anniversary of the arrival of Chris Stynes and Jon Nunnelly.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by westofyou

I'm also all for dealing Griffey, his value is at a peak after quite awhile... time to cash in those chips.

and Lohse, and Weathers, and Conine, and Hatteberg

[Johnny Footstool]

Originally Posted by M2

If the franchise gets as little from a Dunn trade as it did the Kearns/Lopez deal, you can turn off the lights on this decade.

Reminds me of the "return" the Royals got for Jermaine Dye, Johnny Damon, and Carlos Beltran.

Angel Berroa? AJ Hinch?

But hey, John Buck is having a decent season (finally). And Mark Teahen is, well, replacement-level talent.

[Reds1]

Man, this all makes me so nervous. We already have a team full of prospects and to trade the production Dunn can do for the hope one or two works out just scares the hell out of me. Now, if we could get the trade done and pre-work a deal for Dunn to come back next year as a free agent I would be all for it. LOL Didn't this happen with Kent Merker? Well, I know it wasn't pre-planned, but he came back to the reds shortly after being traded.

[Chip R]

I'm wondering why all of a sudden renting a player has become a bad thing?

Also, I'm sure you all are familiar with the saying, "The customer is always right." Just playing devil's advocate here but it seems to me that the majority of customers (Reds Fans who go to games) want Dunn traded. Some may want more for him than others but the general consensus is that they want him gone. So, if the customer is always right, should Wayne trade Dunn? Obviously even the most avid Dunn hater would like something in return but if the fans want him gone, should Wayne trade him and get the best deal he can for him?

[Reds1]

Originally Posted by Chip R

I'm wondering why all of a sudden renting a player has become a bad thing?

Also, I'm sure you all are familiar with the saying, "The customer is always right." Just playing devil's advocate here but it seems to me that the majority of customers (Reds Fans who go to games) want Dunn traded. Some may want more for him than others but the general consensus is that they want him gone. So, if the customer is always right, should Wayne trade Dunn? Obviously even the most avid Dunn hater would like something in return but if the fans want him gone, should Wayne trade him and get the best deal he can for him?

The problem is you can't get a concensus.(sp) I don't want him gone, but for the right deal I might. Trading him just to trade him for crap would make me as a fan not go to the ballpark. Now, I'm a huge fan and would watch on tv, but well - you get the point.

Love him or hate him, but when Dunn comes to bat people stay in their seat in hopes to see a 500 ft HR. He has what 215HRs.

[RedEye]

I agree with Reds1. Don't trade him unless you can get a good return. I don't think there's going to be a $13.5 million way to replace Dunn's production during the offseason. I think we're losing sight of that.

[Sea Ray]

If we can't get value for Dunn now I keep him and move him in the off season after we pick up his $13mill option. From what I've read we still would have about 11 teams eligible to trade him to according to his contract. That's a decent number. WK can't be of the mindset that he has to deal Dunn now. I don't want to see a Dave Williams coming back our way...