Can the Reds afford Adam Dunn?

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 10:40 AM EDT

Well, Daugherty has taken his message from Sports Talk last night and put it into print. What bothers me about his line of reasoning, besides the unnecessary shots at us numbers freaks, is that he doesn't even to stop to look at whether or not the Reds really can afford Dunn. He just assumes they can't. Well, I've done my best to look at it.

Here is next season's estimated payroll, based on my understanding of the contracts (thanks to MLB4U.com). I only listed people currently with the organization. All guaranteed money is on the 25-man roster (that's why Coffey and Castro are included). I left Hatteberg on the roster because even if the Reds don't pick up his option, they will likely sign someone at that money for the bench, unless they decide to go with Cantu. Most of the league minimum players are interchangeable, so don't worry too much about the fact that I picked EZ over Dumatrait. Financially they are no different. I believe BP and Belisle are the only arb eligible player that will likely be coming back. Their salaries are guesstimates.

SP Aaron Harang 6.75
SP Bronson Arroyo 6.45
SP Homer Bailey 0.38
SP Bobby Livingston 0.40
SP Elizardo Ramirez 0.40
RP Jon Coutlangus 0.40
RP Bill Bray 0.40
RP Mike Stanton 3.00
RP David Weathers 2.75
RP Todd Coffey 0.93
C David Ross 2.53
C Javier Valentin 1.30
1B Scott Hatteberg 1.85
1B Joey Votto 0.38
2B Brandon Phillips 2.00
3B Edwin Encarnacion 0.40
3B Jeff Keppinger 0.40
SS Alex Gonzalez 4.63
SS Juan Castro 0.98
OF Adam Dunn 13.00
OF Ryan Freel 3.00
OF Ken Griffey Jr 12.50
OF Josh Hamilton 0.40
OF Norris Hopper 0.40
-----
25-man roster 66.01

OTHERS
SP Matt Belisle 0.75
SP Phil Dumatrait 0.38
RP Jared Burton 0.40
RP Gary Majewski 0.40
RP Brad Salmon 0.40
RP Marcus McBeth 0.40
RP Eddie Guardado 3.00
IF Jorge Cantu 0.50

Based on my estimates, the Reds 2007 payroll is about $75M. With the 25-man roster that I estimated, the Reds still have around $9M to get back this season's level. Obviously if they increase payroll, they have a chance to spend even more.

Nine million is not a lot to fix what ails this team, but it's a start. They could likely get a couple of decent bullpen arms for that money, maybe a little more. But it's dependent on guys like Coutlangus, Bray, and McBeth (or Coffey or Magi or Salmon) picking up their game quite a bit. It is also dependent on Homer and the other young guys in the rotation being able to hold their own. Basically I'm saying there are still a lot of "ifs".

But I'm not so sure trading Dunn will make it all better as the money saved will likely be spent on a replacement for Lohse. Honestly, I don't think I'd prefer a league average pitcher at 4-years, $10M+ over one more season of Dunn. The only reason I'd be okay with trading Dunn is if (a) they got a can't miss prospect who will contribute next season and (b) the money saved would make them contenders for Carlos Zambrano. Anyone think either of those are likely?

Tweet Comment 81 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

No...

If you don't want to win any time in the near future. But if you plan on winning I think you've got to keep Dunn.

by DisplacedFan on Jul 31, 2007 10:49 AM EDT reply actions

Grrr...

The real question is whether Adam Dunn's .250/.360/.570 or so with 40 HR and 100 RBI is worth $13 million for a year. The new crazy money that came into the system this past offseason has to be taken into account. He is comparing Dunn's contract for next year to contracts that were signed two years ago. He should be comparing against the contracts that were signed in the 2007 offseason.

What are OF/1B with about the same VORP or RC making now?

I would take Dunn over Carlos Lee (6 yrs for $100 m) any day of the week.

I would take Dunn over JD Drew (5 years for $55 m) simply for Dunn's ability to stay on the field for 155 games a year.

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 10:52 AM EDT reply actions

i think drew is making 5/70

i would still take dunn for that.

you know who the reds need? lebron james.

by Charlie Scrabbles on Jul 31, 2007 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions

yeah

he opted out of the 5/55 contract and signed the 5/70 contract this off-season.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions

Ah.

Yes. That makes the case for Dunn even more compelling.

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions

The thing you probably didn't get a chance to say

Because the pigheaded moron didn't give you a chance to say it was that who is to say that a the Reds are limited to payroll status quo next year? Certainly even teams like the Kansas City Royals, with the Gil Meche signing, haven't been locked into payroll status quo.

If the Reds are at payroll status quo, they can't afford Dunn. However, at payroll status quo, with the relative barrenness of the farm system, they probably can't afford to field a contending ballclub at the current rates of payroll inflation unless Homer Bailey turns into Josh Beckett, Johnny Cueto turns into Carlos Zambrano, Joey Votto turns into a lefty Albert Pujols and Jay Bruce turns into Griffey Junior (the early to mid 90s version).

Furthermore, the payroll inflexibility has been compounded by dumb moves Krivsky has made. Stanton and his fat butt are making $3 million. Juan Castro is eating up nearly $1 million to hit like Mendoza.

Grrr, Grrr and more Grrr...

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions

not a chance

its this kind of uninformed, half-soused, inane blather that daugherty is spouting that builds the pittsburgh pirates. the real shame is that people in a position of power and influence listen to and/or think like this guy. the more i think about it, the more i think the dunn situation is going to be waterloo (and im not talking about the ABBA song). we've got only 5 hours left to the deadline as i write this, and i get the sinking feeling that wayner is going to settle for the best offer he gets, just to make the deal.

you know who the reds need? lebron james.

by Charlie Scrabbles on Jul 31, 2007 10:53 AM EDT reply actions

He says..

"Simple economics dictates to all involved that Dunn should not be here by Opening Day next year."

Well yes, "simple economics" might dictate such.

Slyde, thanks for not being simple.

"This may be representative of my nature as a middle American jerk-off." ~Pops

by Fat Vegas Alan on Jul 31, 2007 11:03 AM EDT reply actions

I do not think it means what you think it means.

No, this isn't "simple economics," genius. Economists would pretty much all be SABRmetricians, you know...

I, for one, would focus on how you could improve a club on the margins. Would trading off Dunn for a cheaper outfielder and a mediocre arm yield a benefit to the team? I strongly doubt it.

by Gray on Jul 31, 2007 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions

And of course I know

that you didn't think that, FVA. I realize, looking back, that it may appear I was insulting you. But how could I do such a thing?

by Gray on Jul 31, 2007 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions

Is this sarcasm?

"This may be representative of my nature as a middle American jerk-off." ~Pops

by Fat Vegas Alan on Jul 31, 2007 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions

No

I meant to say I was insulting the other guy, not you.

by Gray on Jul 31, 2007 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions

Yeah. Gotcha.

I was making a reference back to the "sarcasm" discussion in one of the weekend's game threads.

(I thought it was you whose genuine and sincere sarcasm was questioned. Maybe not. Anywhooo...)

"This may be representative of my nature as a middle American jerk-off." ~Pops

by Fat Vegas Alan on Jul 31, 2007 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions

I don't get it....

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions

FVA is being racist.

by Gray on Jul 31, 2007 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions

Can't we all just get along?

"This may be representative of my nature as a middle American jerk-off." ~Pops

by Fat Vegas Alan on Jul 31, 2007 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions

FVA loves that race card

by ken on Jul 31, 2007 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Can the Reds afford Dunn?

My answer would be to look at all the wasted money. Dunn is a productive player. His detractors would say that although he is productive he is not worth 13 million. For 2007 the Reds spent the following (approximations):

Larue 3 million
Cormier 2.25 M
Wilson/Aurilia buyouts 1 M
Conine 2 M
Castro 1 M
Milton 9 M

That's over 18 million dollars for players that did nothing or hurt the team (one could argue that Conine hasn't been that bad, but his production could definitely been equaled by a young cheap player). Yes, Milton is the big fish, but just as much money was frittered away on the others.

This is what kills small market teams. Money for nothing. The problem isn't paying a productive player 13 million when you believe he might only be worth 10.

It's not the negativity. It's the misdirected negativity.

by Red Menace on Jul 31, 2007 11:12 AM EDT reply actions

and 3 million

for Stanton?

by Gray on Jul 31, 2007 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions

One thing I forgot to mention

was that if you look at that list above, the Reds aren't burden with any terrible contracts (like with Eric Milton). I'd say there is probably only about $5M that is truly poorly spent (Stanton, Coffey, and Castro - though I suppose it depends on your opinion of Gonzalez's contract and whether Griffey stays healthy). That gives me a little hope for next year, but there is still the off-season pickups that could be bad.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions

And chicks for free...

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions

Incidentally

I just compared Dunn and Jr., and its amazing how similar their seasons are so far. They're more or less identical in BA/OBP/SLG/OPS, with Jr. about 15 points higher in each. Dunn has 2 more HRs.

Interesting.

by Gray on Jul 31, 2007 11:15 AM EDT reply actions

And yet

It is Dunn's $13M that's killing the budget, not Jr's $16.5M (remember that $4M buyout). Especially considering Dunn's more likely to play much more than Jr. next year, and is much more likely to keep/increase his production.

Oh, and by the way, Dunn's SLG is higher than Jr's.

just....wow.

by sidnancy on Jul 31, 2007 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions

Absolutely

The Reds can afford Dunn. Pretty easily too given the cost certainty of Harang and Arroyo. And frankly, if the Reds are to be believed as to the near-MLB readiness of Votto, Bruce, and Bailey, they have all the more reason to need to afford Adam Dunn. At that point, the team will be cheap in just about every area offensively. When Griffey's buyout hits (unless he's dealt), the Reds will receive another open payroll slot.

I did a cost analysis at another site and let's just say that not only can the Reds "afford" an Adam Dunn in 2008, but they can also afford him at 15-16M past 2008. And the way this club is set up, the window is right around 2009-2010.

Daugherty's playing the old "too expensive" card without contextual consideration (projected payroll increases, Run Diff hit, market value, etc.). He's pandering to the masses and the masses already think every ballplayer is too expensive. Gee, way to go out on a limb there, Paul.

What he should be focusing on is not paying non-projectible "support" pieces millions of dollars rather than demanding there's no way to pay a consistent high-value performer the going rate. If the Reds are going to hit a window that's possibly opening a couple years from now, they need to think and act as if they are the anti-Daugherty. Pay your performers. Stop wasting money in the middle.

I'll trade anyone for the right pieces. But if you're not looking at a Jason Bay/Oliver Perez type return for Dunn, you pay him because he's what you need.

by Reds123 on Jul 31, 2007 11:29 AM EDT reply actions

well said

This is exactly what I was getting at.

It's not the negativity. It's the misdirected negativity.

by Red Menace on Jul 31, 2007 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh and...

Nice of him to take a shot at you with the "Reds can't afford Adam Dunn" line when you can't respond to it. Maybe try calling in and saying you're not wearing yer shert?

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 11:29 AM EDT reply actions

Email

pdaugherty@enquirer.com

It's one thing to make knee-jerk statements. It's another thing to use facts to back them up.

by bobestes on Jul 31, 2007 11:31 AM EDT reply actions

Facts?

Who needs facts? For example, Daugherty appears to think that if the Reds exercise Dunn's 2008 option, then he'll be traded by next April.

Anyone see any potential "fact" issues with that?

by Reds123 on Jul 31, 2007 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions

Nice

I wish we could switch NoHo's and Mike Stantons Salarys around though!

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 11:42 AM EDT reply actions

Yeah.

So we could have an overpaid 4th outfielder and bitch about him instead.

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions

Well he has done more to help the team

than Stanton has

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Payroll

I have made this comment before but I believe that if the management thinks Bruce will be ready for the big leagues next spring then either Dunn or Jr should go. This frees up 9-13 million, depending on which one goes, that can be used on pitching.

I really believe Bruce will give us 75-80% of the offense that either of these guys would provide next year. Defensively he will be an upgrade over both Dunn and Jr. If you replace Jr with Bruce I believe you may see a 100% production return when you figure in injuries and probably decline in production.

Personally I would trade Jr in the offseason for whatever pitching prospect we could get, turn the saving for Jr into more pitching, and give Bruce the RF job.

by CamIam on Jul 31, 2007 11:45 AM EDT reply actions

Yep on Jr.

If the Reds need to move salary, Griffey is the guy to move. I love the fact that he's found his bat again, but there's just no way to count on him for more than 100-110 games per season.

This team does look to have a window if it plays it's cards right. Considering that most young players don't just hit the ground running, making room for Bruce and Votto makes plenty of sense. But they have to move the right guy. That's just not Dunn as he projects to actually assist with hitting he window I'm talking about.

by Reds123 on Jul 31, 2007 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Also

I used 9 million for Jr because I believe thats the real value for next year when you take into account the deffered money on the contract. I may be incorrect about that. Either way I still think he is the guy to trade. Hopefully he'll get to 600 this year and we can move him to an AL team in the offseason.

by CamIam on Jul 31, 2007 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions

A whole 9 M!

Maybe we can get Eric Byrnes! or get another catcher!

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 12:08 PM EDT reply actions

Those payroll numbers are a little off.

Griffey deffered some of his contract. I think he really makes like 6 or 7 million this year. Forgive me if that number is off too.

by redlegrulers on Jul 31, 2007 12:18 PM EDT reply actions

the thing is

The Reds have always counted Griffey's deferred money toward each year's payroll. So when they say the payroll is 70 million or whatever they've counting Griffey at 12.5.

It's not the negativity. It's the misdirected negativity.

by Red Menace on Jul 31, 2007 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions

That's why I've quoted the $12.5M

Every year he's been here, they've put the full amount toward that year's payroll - at least in any list that I've seen.

The question becomes, once he's gone will they turn around and put the deferred money on the payroll budget too? Any accountants on the site? Is that a way to make your numbers look better or worse?

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Also

if they don't count the deferred money toward the payroll, that just means even more that they can afford Dunn. Then they'd have another 3-4M to work with.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions

My bad.

Espn lists it at $8,446,647.

by redlegrulers on Jul 31, 2007 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions

If the Reds infact do trade Dunn...

I hope they pick up Aarron Rowland or Eric Byrnes To fill in his spot....not nearly as much power or gives you the OBPs , but the reds would still be decent with their offense then, plus I don't know what they are worth in the market but you would think they are a little cheaper than Dunn as well. Just Saying.

Joe Nathan Would be a dream pick up in the offseason, Is he worst 9M alone?

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 12:27 PM EDT reply actions

ROWLAND WOULD BE A GREAT PICK UP

but I don't see Philly letting him leave town

Hope Springs Eternal! Go Reds

by Caleb on Jul 31, 2007 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Rowland

Do you think she'd bring Beyonce with her?

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Adam Dunn couldn't hit that

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions

That's the problem

Rowand and Byrnes are probably looking at 4-5 year deals up near $10 million per year. When you realize that, doesn't it make even more sense to keep Dunn?

by Geki on Jul 31, 2007 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions

IF that is true than ofcourse it does.

But Rowland has Gold Glove Worth Defense and you can hit him anywhere

Byrnes is scrappy and solid and should of been an All-Star if you ask me.

I would pay 6-7M for one of them but I think Joe Nathan would have to be the the first guy the reds go for

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions

I wouldn't overpay for a "closer"

There is closer material to be had for much cheaper.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions

"Closer"

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions

Gary Matthews Jr.

signed for 5/$50mm last winter. And he had that awesome catch!

by ken on Jul 31, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions

heh

he took away another homer the other night. It was fairly pedestrian and robbed homers go. But I think it was Steve Phillips said that it was "Shades of that catch he made last year." He's going to live off that catch for a couple of years.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Right

These guys are having career years at the perfect time and will be well into their 30s at the end of a multi-year deal. Not a risk I want to take.

by ken on Jul 31, 2007 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions

RIght, im just saying if they trade Dunn

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions

You're not getting it.

They could not be had for $6-7 mil for 5 years, let alone one or two. When Juan Pierre is getting $9 mil for 5 years, Rowand and Byrnes are gonna be making big money. And neither is anywhere near worth big money. Rowand had an OPS+ easily below 100 each of the two years before this one. Same with Byrnes. Rowand's a plus defender, Byrnes is an overrated web gem maker.

by Geki on Jul 31, 2007 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Should also note...

Dealing Griffey would also get the Reds out from under his $4M buyout. The cost savings would realistically be in the 16M range.

by Reds123 on Jul 31, 2007 12:27 PM EDT reply actions

Why make

the Reds can't afford Adam Dunn argument and treat it like an "Adam Dunn doesn't have the desire to win" argument? I mean this is precisely where the numbers absoultely matter. And the people willing to crunch the numbers.

If Bob Castellini is not willing to pay $13 million to keep the Reds' best offensive player, even if he has to up payroll $4-5 million to do it, then the "we're here to win" rhetoric when he took over the team was just that.

"Two Dunn's enter, but only one Dunn will leave...unless neither do because they decide to play cards, drink beer, golf, and fish."--SlydeFrog

by Man Mountain on Jul 31, 2007 1:39 PM EDT reply actions

Nice

Thanks for doing this--when I read Daugherty's column this morning, I thought I was going to have to dedicate my evening to assembling payroll numbers to show how absolutely baseless it was. I'm so glad I didn't have to do this.

I love that Daugherty's $100 million claim is approximately $25 million MORE than the Reds payroll would be even IF they keep Dunn. Marvelous.

How is it that sports journalism can have integrity standards that are SO much lower than any other branch of journalism? Why is it that there is absolutely no culture that puts value on actually checking one's facts? This is the Cincinnati Enquirer, not the National Enquirer, right?
-j

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Jul 31, 2007 2:30 PM EDT reply actions

Because it's easy to read i guess

no average fan wants to look at a bunch of stats and used them as a reference to their own reasoning, they want something that they can easily understand.

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions

You don't need stats

I'm not asking for net win share values here.

I'm just asking that he identify a) the current total payroll, b) what salaries are leaving, and c) what players are set to receive raises. Nothing more than what Slyde did in this post. It's a very simple bit of math, and certainly falls within the minimal effort that should be expected of a professional newspaper writer. -j

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Jul 31, 2007 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Dude Speak English

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions

C'mon Zach

He's making a valid point. He's not saying that you need deep statistical analysis to write a proper article. All I did was look up player contract information - stuff that is freely available information - and I found that the Reds have no reason to be desperate to get rid of Dunn's salary.

Daugherty chose to go the hyperbolic and personal attack route on Dunn. What sucks is that he's got no reason to not do that because there is no way for him to be stopped. The standards of sports journalism are much too low.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions

is Rowland

your favorite player? I can't find any stats on him.

"Two Dunn's enter, but only one Dunn will leave...unless neither do because they decide to play cards, drink beer, golf, and fish."--SlydeFrog

by Man Mountain on Jul 31, 2007 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions

How that fails to qualify as English is beyond me.

n/t

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Jul 31, 2007 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Properly...

English predicates should be ended with "haha"

j/k Zach

It's not the negativity. It's the misdirected negativity.

by Red Menace on Jul 31, 2007 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions

Needs...

MORE CAPS...and ELLIPSIS...

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions

my response to this comment

was originally much nastier than these others. unless it was just bad sarcasm, please don't make fun of people because they know more than you.

Marty may have a shirt on, but Billy Beane just ripped his off and is squeezing his nipples. - Brendan's ukkah

by boobs on Jul 31, 2007 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Guys

I think it's (gasp) tongue in cheek.

Everybody's a jerk. You. Me. This jerk.

by andromache on Jul 31, 2007 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions

I didn't get it...

But I can see what you mean. Reading this again, I think Zach was trying to make fun of the average uninformed sports fan.

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions

dang gone social skills...

If that's the case, my apologies to Zach for my slightly snarky response above. :) -j

On Baseball and the Reds

by JinAZ on Jul 31, 2007 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions

more fact checking

As someone else alluded to above...how could the Reds trade him in April if they exercise his option? He has a no trade clause until June 15.

by omnired on Jul 31, 2007 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah

that's another thing I meant to catch him on during Sports Talk yesterday. He was talking about it before the segment I was on, but by the time I got on the air, I had forgotten to mention it and he never made the proposal again.

I'm a numbers freak, numbers freak. I'm numbers freaky, ow.

by Slyde on Jul 31, 2007 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions

that would have brought dead silence

"Two Dunn's enter, but only one Dunn will leave...unless neither do because they decide to play cards, drink beer, golf, and fish."--SlydeFrog

by Man Mountain on Jul 31, 2007 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Daugherty

Really had no intelligent rejoinders or reactions to what Slyde had to say.

I think the "Reds can't afford Dunn" thing is the best he could do.

Please don't trade Adam Dunn.

by Paul Householder on Jul 31, 2007 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions

yes

as I said yesterday, I thought that was an unfair fallback position. If you say the Reds have to trade Adam Dunn, but base that necessity on an unknowable circumstance i.e. the Reds payroll for next season, then there's really nothing for Slyde to argue about with any conviction.

And what suprised me about the callers was that they missed the implication of Daugherty's argument--if the Reds can't afford to pay a slugger like Adam Dunn what he's worth on the market, then they aren't planning on being real contenders, certainly not contenders who will "do whatever it takes to win." That should have pissed the regular Reds fan off more than the stat geek stuff. Talk about blinded by hatred.

"Two Dunn's enter, but only one Dunn will leave...unless neither do because they decide to play cards, drink beer, golf, and fish."--SlydeFrog

by Man Mountain on Jul 31, 2007 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Its good not to hear the old:

Small market whine. If it were possible to get out from under Jr.'s contract I would opt to do it. If someone has to go better Jr. than Adam.

They say it is all over in the blink of an eye. Don't Blink.

by Madville on Jul 31, 2007 2:53 PM EDT reply actions

I agree

Than Rowland and Byrnes are ours for the taken!!!

And the best part is we could still get a good pitcher or two!

"Always root for the winner. That way you won't be disappointed." -Tug McGraw

by Zach K on Jul 31, 2007 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions

I wouldnt

want either guy on the Reds. I think if you trade Dunn or Jr it is because you are opening up a spot for Bruce. Hamilton is fine in centerfield and Bruce is more than capable in right. The reds need to spend any available money on finding pitching. They have enough offense on the team or close to the majors now (Bruce, Votto, Cantu, Dickerson). This team needs to go out and find a capable closer and a middle of the rotation stater.

by CamIam on Jul 31, 2007 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions