I'd be on board with that if we hadn't already signed Gonzalez.  I'm not sure what the Brewers are thinking with signing Counsel and moving Hall to left.  Hall was considered a good defensive SS/2B, and his bat is obviously much more valuable there than in the OF.  Plus they now have a log jam in LF/RF, with Hall, Jenkins, Hart, and Mench.  

It's easy to get down on our team, but at least we're not the Brewers.

but we really don't need starting pitching. 2006 ERA+ of our rotation:

Harang     128
Arroyo     146
Milton      93
Lohse      105
Ramirez/Claussen/Belisle/Bailey ??

It should be mentioned that although 100 ERA+ is league average, it's above average for starters because relievers skew the stats. I expect Arroyo to come back to earth a little and I don't really know what we'll get from Lohse. Still, looking at all aspects of the team, this has to be considered the strength. We even have enough depth so that we shouldn't have to turn to the likes of Michalak/Kim/Mays when injuries come. Off the top of my head San Diego and LA had better staffs in the NL last year, but apart from them I don't know who had us beat.

You have to be a crackhead to even think about Guzman.  You obviously haven't had to watch him play on a regular basis.

and get a closer and right handed hitter.  Where in your lineup would the right handed hitter play?  If you are talking about someone to split time with Hatteberg, then you just wasted Dunn in my opinion.  And if that is all you get for Dunn, next year the offense will have trouble scoring 670 runs next year.  That means, to come close to a .500 season, the pitching staff would have to allow about 130 fewer runs.  So far, all the Reds have done is improve the defense over last season and they haven't made up 130 runs worth with that.

Trading Dunn is a bad idea.  I don't understand why people want to trade him.  For the past 3 seasons he has been the first or second most productive hitter on the Reds and the offense is no longer a strength like it used to be.  If you trade Dunn, it will be a serious weakness.

1. Dunn's contract makes him twice as valuable to the Reds as he is to any other team.  The Reds have a team option for 2008 at $13mil that voids if he is traded.  The Reds have two seasons of Dunn at below-market rates, any team trading for him gets only one season of Dunn before he hits free agency.  Thus, the Reds cannot expect to replace Dunn's value on the trade market.
2. Dunn makes $10.5 million this season.  Players who have been getting similar money on the free agent market include a 32-year old who was playing on a minor league deal as recently as 2004, and has exactly one season above league average, and a slap hitting CF who is seen as a leadoff guy despite the fact that he can't take a walk, often gets caught stealing, and routinely leads the league in outs.  People who are close to Dunn's production level are getting $17 million in the free agent market.  Thus, the Reds cannot expect to replace Dunn's value on the free agent maket.
3. Given (1) and (2), the only way it would possibly make sense to trade Dunn is if his production came in an area that was a huge surplus to the Reds, or if a competent replacement was being blocked by Dunn's presence.  The Reds, after The Trade, were 2nd to last in the league in runs, thus no surplus of offense exists.  The other corner outfield spot is scheduled to be manned by either Bubba Crosby, Chris Denorfia or Norris Hopper.  Thus, there is no competent replacement being blocked by Dunn's presence.

What possible sense does it make to trade Dunn when you can't get proper value in a trade, can't replace his production at a similar price in free agency, and have no surplus offense to deal or competent replacements if you deal him?

But it's not really plausible with Dunn in LF and signing him is a PR nightmare regardless of the fact that it would bring fans in. He's still a great player, though, and I don't really care if a guy is roiding up or not as long as he performs on the field and doesn't get suspended.

is because i want to see him end his career in a giants uniform, because there is something inherently romantic in the teams that the legends represent.  50 years from now, when we look back, what team will a-rod be associated with (given that his picture isn't even on the yankees website, i don't think he'll be there too many more years.)  or how about soriano, if he indeed is able to mimic 2006 for several more years?  or curt shilling, who's been to the WS with three different teams?  or randy johnson?

yeah, i know that babe ruth played his last games with the boston braves, and that pete rose broke the NL hit record in a traitor's uniform, and that bonds himself spent his first years with pitifulsburgh, but barry bonds singlehandedly saved baseball in san francisco, and he's a giant in my mind and always will be.

and neither has any chance of happening.

I bet if one of the GMs runs to his seat at a conference table, Krivsky's gonna be looking to deal Dunn for someone on that guy's team.  When the GM sprints out to his place, it sets a tone for the rest of the organization.  Screw any GM who has the gall to walk to his chair.