To Sell or Not To Sell?
First off, let me be the first to say that I'm excited about the overall play of the Nats this season. Even though their 8-3 loss to the Tigers Wednesday dropped them to 31-35 on the year, consider this:
- Through 66 games in 2009, the Nats were a dreadful 20-46 (.303 winning pct.), and that could have been worse had they not won games 64, 65, and 66 (including two in Yankee Stadium.... they would also win the next night to notch their longest winning streak of the first half at 4 games).
- Through 66 games in 2008, they were also a pretty pathetic 26-40 (.393).
Believe me when I say that 31-35 (.469) is a fantastic improvement that we should be celebrating. It's clear that the overall product that the Nats are putting on the field this season is leaps and bounds better than what we've seen in the recent past.
The road woes have come, however, and with them the familiar crawl back to last place in an extremely deep and talented NL East. Since taking two out of three in Citi Field from May 10 through May 12, the Nationals have gone a horrific 6-15 (.286) on the road. They've lost seven straight road series, and they've been indiscriminate in doing so.
- They've lost to teams they should struggle against (Colorado, St. Louis, Detroit)
- They've lost to teams they should have a decent shot at beating (San Diego, San Francisco)
- Finally, they've lost to teams that they should probably beat (Houston, Cleveland)
In the big picture, though, this may be the best thing for the team's long-term success. Why?
We now have six and a half weeks until MLB's non-waiver trade deadline. Roughly a month ago, rumors were flying about the Nationals trading in their recent selling shoes and becoming buyers, possibly going all out to acquire Roy Oswalt from the Astros. Don't get me wrong. I don't dislike Roy Oswalt. I think he's a fine (if expensive) pitcher who certainly has a few more years in the tank.
Would Oswalt have made this team better in 2010? Almost certainly. An argument could also be made that a successful veteran like Oswalt would have been beneficial to some of the young pitchers on the team, such as Stephen Strasburg, Jordan Zimmermann (when healthy) and Ross Detwiler (same). Veteran presence aside, Oswalt's likely value in the standings would have been that he'd help the team end up floating a few games closer to .500. Maybe in a perfect world he could even have helped them notch that magical 81-81 record that many of us would love to see.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but rooting for the Nationals to go all out to be a .500 team this year makes far less sense to me than hoping they use what they have to try and make themselves a legitimate contender within the next two or three years. Were the Nats to decide to sell off some useful parts to build for the future, it would obviously be the same old story to many of you (and me, though I'd be OK with it). However, there's a time when it makes sense and a time when it doesn't. As the deadline approaches, there is going to be a ton of pitching on the market. There don't figure to be as many bats available, however.
Regarding the starting pitching on the market:
- Oswalt's already out there. As teammate Wandy Rodriguez has just a year of arbitration left and a history of success (though not much this season), Rodriguez may become available as well.
- As Cliff Lee's agent has made it abundantly clear that he wants to test the free agent waters, Lee is likely to become available in the coming weeks.
- While Arizona continues to plummet in the standings, rumors have started to spread about the availability of Dan Haren.
- There are smaller names out there from non-contending teams as well: Kevin Millwood, Jeremy Guthrie, Jake Westbrook, Fausto Carmona, and Zach Duke are all names we could see on the move to a team hoping to catch lightning in a bottle.
Offensively, a lot less figures to come on the market:
- There's always the possibility that the Padres drop out of the race and put Adrian Gonzalez on the block.
- There's a legitimate chance that the Brewers realize that they're going to get more for Prince Fielder this season than they will next year. Ryan Howard's deal has probably changed his status from "difficult" to sign after 2011 to "darn near impossible" for a team with the Brewers payroll.
- Some of the usual suspects will surely get involved. David DeJesus has been rumored to be on the block for the Royals, which makes perfect sense. The White Sox will likely move Paul Konerko at some point, and try to move A.J. Pierzynski. The Indians may see if they can get someone to give anything up for a guy like Travis Hafner.
Still, until/unless there's actually news that Gonzalez or Fielder are on the block, is there a better power hitter than Adam Dunn who could be available this trade season? Not that I can see.
Yes, this post is about The Big Donkey. There are other players I think the Nats should put on the market as well (most notably Capps. I'd love to say Guzman, but I couldn't see anyone taking him), and it's possible (even likely) that I write a story or two about other guys that the Nats could or should trade in the coming weeks. It's unlikely that another bat like Dunn will become available in the next six weeks, however. Simply put, that's a market inefficiency that I feel Mike Rizzo can probably take advantage of.
Dunn is a free agent at the end of the season, and while both he and the Nats have made their token public statements that they'd be interested in inking another deal, there's no guarantee they'll get it done. Keeping him, offering him arbitration, and watching him sign elsewhere anyway wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Depending upon who signed him, it would likely result in either a first or second rounder and a pick in the supplemental (or sandwich) round next year. He figures to be a Type A Free Agent, and the Nats should feel fairly safe in offering him arbitration. As the Nats continue to improve their farm system, two extra (likely top 50) picks could be very useful in building the farm system.
Then again, acquiring a couple of young big league (or big-league ready minor league) players could still be the more efficient way to handle their veteran slugger's impending free agency. If both sides are really that committed to Dunn being in Washington next year, the Nats can always pursue him as a free agent. It certainly wouldn't be unprecedented (living in St. Louis, I could easily relate that the Blues dealt Keith Tkachuk to the Thrashers a few years ago, only to have him return to St. Louis as a free agent in the offseason).
Oddly enough, Dunn's contract status could be something that could actually be viewed as attractive to some trade partners (the one I think is the best fit in particular). Particularly in today's baseball economy, nobody wants to take on an albatross of a contract. While players such as Oswalt (due approximately $30 million if the team he's traded to buys him out of the final year of his contract) come with the caveat of being more than just rental players, they're players that are guaranteed to be eating into a team's payroll for the next few seasons as well. A team that wanted to go all in this year, but didn't want to take on a hefty salary for 2011, could view both the fact that Dunn isn't signed for next season and the fact that they'll likely end up with draft pick compensation next year for letting him walk as a bonus.
Among the primary teams that appear to be contenders to this point in the season, there are really only a few teams that look like they could really use Dunn's services. Based on my comments above, many of you probably already know where I think he could/should end up if the Nats decide to pursue trading him, but let's break them all down:
(Disclaimer: This is all speculation. There are no rumors here. If you're a fan of one of the other teams that just happens to read this, realize that I'm being optimistic and just throwing darts at the wall)
1) Tampa Bay Rays - The Rays easily appear to be the best fit should the Nationals decide to trade Dunn rather than attempt to re-sign him (or lose him as a free agent and take the draft picks). They've proven in the past that they draft and develop astutely, and could view losing him as a free agent next season as a big opportunity for them to load up on draft picks. Carl Crawford and Carlos Pena are set to become free agents at year's end as well. While there's certainly terrific depth in the Rays' system to replace them within the next few seasons, their current window to take a shot at winning it all is probably getting smaller. What's more, the Rays certainly have a hole that Dunn could fill quite nicely at DH. While Dunn has said repeatedly that he'd prefer not to DH, there's also the selling point that Pena is only signed through the end of this season as well, and the Rays could possibly retain him at 1b (though I'd think that would just be some politicking on both sides' part).
The Rays' organizational strengths certainly match up pretty well in a trade with the Nats as well. Their current crop of big league ready starters stands at six, and while it's a nice problem to have, not a single one of them will hit free agency until after the 2011 season (possibly the 2012 season. I'm uncertain on James Shields' service time). These six pitchers (listed by service time):
- James Shields
- Matt Garza
- Jeff Niemann
- David Price
- Wade Davis
- Jeremy Hellickson
It could (and should) be argued that Hellickson was the AAA starter more deserving of a promotion to the big leagues this season, but the spot went to Wade Davis. Davis is a year and a half older and had 211 AAA innings under his belt as opposed to Hellickson's 57. Hellickson outpitched Davis last season in Durham, and has been phenomenal again for the Bulls this season (8-2, 2.42 ERA, 1.11 WHIP, 84:20 K:BB ratio in 81+ IP). At 23 with a three-pitch mix, outstanding command, and a history of dominating the minors, it's difficult to argue that he wouldn't be starting for at least 25 major league teams (and probably 28 or 29, to be honest) right now. However, he's currently buried in AAA and blocked by five quality starting pitchers who remain under club control for at least another season and a half.
It's clear that both Davis and Hellickson have left one-time top prospect Jake McGee in the dust, but McGee has shown a little more improvement in his second season back from Tommy John surgery, and could have the chance to at least fill the depth chart down the line. They also have several strong arms coming up the pipeline in Alexander Torres, Matt Moore, and Nick Barnese. Surely, dealing a player that they have under club control for several years wouldn't really fit the Rays that we've come to know, but the depth of their system would allow for it.
As for who the Nats could try and pry from the Rays, Price would almost certainly be untouchable. I would suspect that they'd have a difficult time parting with Garza, though the fact that he's already in his arbitration years could make him available. I suspect that Shields would be the guy they'd be most likely to move, but he also might be the guy I'd least like to see the Nats acquire. Niemann is outperforming his peripherals right now, but looked like a solid middle of the rotation type in his first full season last year and won't hit arbitration for another year. I think the Rays would consider him a player that they could sell a bit high, and he'd be the arm I'd expect to be most likely to be dealt of this group in a Dunn deal. Honestly, if I had to pick an arm (other than Price) that I wanted from this group, it would be the one who has yet to throw a pitch in the majors... Hellickson. I just don't trust Davis as much. Any one of the six would pretty much instantly slot in as the Nats' #2 or #3 starter (when Jordan Zimmermann is healthy).
Yes, I'm being too ambitious and hopeful!
A big-league ready starter would obviously be the key to any type of deal, and dealing for any of these pitchers in particular would certainly eat up pretty much all of the value that the Nats could expect in return. There are always other players of interest, though, and going beyond any of the starting pitchers, I'll mention the slight abundance of middle infielders the Rays have. Oddly, as he gets closer to free agent status himself (and given that the other two formed a solid enough middle infield while he was out), I'd think that Jason Bartlett might be the most likely Rays' MI to be traded, but he'd be costly. I do like Sean Rodriguez as a power bat (but not much more) and Reid Brignac as a solid defensive infielder who can hit for average, and think that either of the two would give the Nats a nice young 2b as we see how Danny Espinosa develops. Guzman's obviously gone after this year, and (at present) it doesn't look like Adam Kennedy's option is really going to be worth picking up. On the positive side, Kennedy's option for next year is cheap enough so that he could be an affordable utility infielder. Though former #1 overall pick Tim Beckham hasn't lit the world on fire in the minors, Brignac (a natural SS who has mainly played 2b this season) really still figures to be more of a placeholder for them.
2) Los Angeles Angels - The Kendry Morales injury really changed things here. You could say that the Halos could possibly be in the market to upgrade with a bat before Morales' injury, but since the injury there's a definite need for a left-handed power bat. While the Angels have shifted things around a bit, even moving C Mike Napoli to 1b at times, a little middle of the order firepower would certainly help them. Dunn could even play 1b for them.... probably as well as Mike Napoli could (there aren't many players I can say that about, so I had to!).
Unfortunately, the high-end big league ready starting pitching that we see in the Rays' system isn't quite as readily available (which could stem from the fact that the Angels are typically deadline buyers). If the Nats were to target pitching, they'd almost certainly be looking for depth, rather than finding someone who would be able to help quickly and be at or near their peak in the next three years. Garrett Richards looks like an interesting arm for down the line, as does Trevor Reckling. Arguably their top young arm headed into last year (Jordan Walden) has been shifted to the bullpen due to injury problems last year, and it looks like that may be his future.
In the big leagues, most of the arms that the Nats could go after would be kind of counterproductive. Jered Weaver could provide some immediate help, but will be hitting free agency before the Nats are likely to be ready to contend. The same goes for Ervin Santana and Scott Kazmir. Plus, the Angels don't really have the depth to compensate for losing any of them (well... maybe the disappointing Kazmir) and would pretty much be creating a hole on their roster to fill a different one. While all three would be logical patchwork players who could fill a current need better, none of them would really improve the Nats' long term prospects unless they were re-signed.
There are some nice bats in the Angels' system, most notably OF Mike Trout. However, there's not really a snowball's chance that the Halos would include him as any part of a package. The next best bat in their system figures to play at a spot where the Nats have some depth already, C Hank Conger. A guy like OF Peter Bourjos could be an interesting addition to the outfield from a depth standpoint, but would be a huge disappointment if he were the primary player back in a deal for Dunn.
3) San Francisco Giants - Question this all you want. Their offense has improved quite a bit since they called up Buster Posey and shifted him to first base (and Aubrey Huff to the outfield). The fact remains that the Giants offense isn't all that spectacular, and part of the reason for that is the guy playing Posey's natural position. Dunn would give them an outstanding power bat with patience, two things a team with a .741 OPS could certainly use. Dunn could help push either Bengie Molina (.650 OPS) out of the lineup with Posey starting behind the plate and/or allow them to remove Aaron Rowand (.655 OPS) a little more often by shifting Andres Torres to CF.
As with the Angels, there's a bit of a caveat. There's not a lot of high end (possible big-league ready) talent in their system beyond Madison Bumgarner, who the Giants have been extremely careful with and almost certainly wouldn't trade. Most of their top young arms outside of Bumgarner seem to be relievers, and several of them are in the big leagues (or have been at some point this season) already, such as Dan Runzler and Waldis Joaquin. There would definitely have to be some interest in a nice young outfielder like Thomas Neal, but he wouldn't be enough for Rizzo to hang his hat on in a deal.
4) Atlanta Braves - As Chipper has continued to struggle this year, there would always be the possibility that the Braves could consider moving Troy Glaus back to third base and open up a hole at first base. Still, I don't think this is a realistic destination for Dunn. They have a ton of pitching in the low minors, particularly in High A Ball.
5) San Diego Padres - Another tough sell, the Padres would have to move Dunn back to the outfield. They've pretty much committed to building a team around their ballpark (pitching, defense, and speed offensively), but a second basher to go along with Adrian Gonzalez would never hurt. Of course, they'd hope that Kyle Blanks is that guy. Honestly, I got scared enough watching Dunn patrol left field in Nats Park last year, and couldn't imagine him doing so on a nightly basis in Petco.
Still, there's definitely some rotation depth for them to trade from as soon as Tim Stauffer (moved to the bullpen to start the year) is back from having his appendix removed (one of the cooler stories of the year, he was self-diagnosed and dead on about the problem). They surely consider Mat Latos untouchable, and the Nats' interest in a guy like Jon Garland or even Kevin Correia would be tempered a bit by age/service time. Clayton Richard's kind of an interesting young lefty who would be more obtainable (but also kind of a tough sell). Wade LeBlanc is someone I'd be awfully careful about trying to acquire. He's had success, but in a Lannan-like way, the numbers just don't really add up. While Stauffer himself certainly isn't a prospect (he's 28, though he'd still be under club control for quite a few years), he could be an interesting piece of a deal who could probably start right away. He couldn't be considered a huge part of any return, though.
There are a couple of nice young arms at AA in Simon Castro and Wynn Pelzer. The Pads also have some nice young positional prospects in OF Donovan Tate (unobtainable), OF Jaff Decker (probably more obtainable, and struggling in his first look at A+ ball), and 3b James Darnell.
Honestly, the best fit I could see (by a wide margin) would be the Rays. They have a strong need for a player with Dunn's talents and a spot to play him. They have a wealth of depth at the position that the Nats would most likely target. Furthermore, the depth that they have could possibly net the Nats a player or two who figure to be ready to contribute quickly. I'm probably just dreaming, but figured I'd share this dream with all of you.
144 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I vote no to being sellers
They are going through a rough spot, but it’s no reason to panic
For the fans and for their own morale, they should put the best team possible on the field.
If they sell and then go into a tailspin, all the good will they are starting to create would be lost.
They should resign Adam Dunn.
They should sit Nyjer Morgan down and make Roger Bernadina the regular CF and see if he can keep the job.
They should make Mickey Morse the regular RF and see if he can keep the job.
They should should cross their fingers and hope the Pudge stays healthy.
One would think that at least one of the pitchers coming off rehap will shore up the starting rotation,
Lannan will return to form i.e. a decent back of the rotation guy, and that Livo will be Livo i.e. Livo!
The bull pen is decent if not (verging on being) good.
With all that I think they should be okay until the end of the year at which time they should spend some money and to fill their holes.
I don’t think they need to actually play Morse to know that he can’t hold down the RF job
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions
The issue right now...
…is that Morse in right, especially against lefties, is probably better than Morgan in center. We shouldn’t be expecting him to torch the league or maintain his torrid pace. We just need him to show that he’s a viable platoon partner for Morgan or Bernadina, whichever one is struggling the most.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
The problem with selling on Dunn is that you have to be very, very sure Marrero will come up shortly behind him.
Otherwise, you have to go out and sign another 1B after this year anyways. And that may involve loss of draft picks.
They should be playing Kennedy because he might have value. Although, all we got for Belliard last year was Garate and that isn’t going to be a franchise alterting mood.
I’m for preparing to sell Capps. There you’ve got some leverage potentially. I don’t know what the recent market for moving closers have been but that’s to me a better possibility. We have bullpen options in the minors; we then have Clippard close.
Rizzo needs to politely inform Riggles that it would be most helpful to his long term job status for him to play potential minor selling pieces like Kennedy and Morse to convince teams that they have more than replacement level value.
Basically, this is Soriano redux. Trade the popular power hitter or risk losing him in exchange for the draft picks. FJB wrote the major argument for trading Soriano back in July ’09.
I was against the Soriano trade at the time because I felt, like Dunn, that power hitters and a respectable lineup are important when we’re trying to build the entertainment value of the team. Unlike Soriano, we have more reason to keep Dunn because there’s a good chance we’ll be able to resign him as well. I feel that he wants to stay here and he’s a good fit here.
Keep Dunner. Trade Capps if things get worse.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
I’m assuming the Capps wants to remain a closer. Given that it’s unlikely that he will be the Nats closer for long and that he’s on a one year contract, if I had season tickets, I would not sell them if he were traded.
I think the bullpen has a good balance now. Long guys for when the starter sucks and then better pitchers. I also think removing Capps would kill the bullpen. Naturally, if the Nats are 15 games out at the end of July, trade him, but not now.
I'm basically assuming that we play slightly below .500 going forward when I say this.
Basically, Capps is probably the 3rd best of the 3 relievers we have, yet his value may be somewhat inflated because of the save statistic.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
If you sell, the Donkey, the fans know management has given up. Then the Strasburg bump is the only attendance.
Has anyone forgotten the long search to find someone like slugger Dunn to help Zim? Are the Nats an attractive destination for other FA sluggers yet?
How about that clubhouse presence???……..Gotta keep the Donkey.
Don't Be A "Crow", Bryce... - P.R., Draft Day 2010
"...eyeblack-oozing baseball cyborg"
by cat daddy3000 on Jun 17, 2010 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Buy low
Jake Fox. Might be nice to stash away.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Exactly.
This lineup would be horrid without Dunn. You can’t replace what he does for less than what we will pay Dunn.
We should sell at this rate, but not Dunn. Capps if we can get good return.
The market has changed from when we signed Dunn. And Dunn’s probably not going to sign for another 2/12
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions
That's because he's WORTH more than that
And the Nats should pay him what he’s worth.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Is he though? That’s not for sure, and that’s part of the point of this argument.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Is he worth it?
Of course he is. Albert Pujols, if he were on the market today, would merit $20M — based upon WAR Dunn is proportionately worth nearly $17M. Of course, the Cards will happily pay him the club option $16M next year — even at that bargain basement rate Dunn is worth $13.5M.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Great, let’s use WAR. Even though the guys at Fangraphs say that you need at least 3 years worth of data to get an accurate UZR. So based on 13% of what you need, you’re ready to say that Dunn is for sure a -0.9 UZR 1B? Or actually that’s not true. Should we add his 540 innings of -14.3 UZR at 1B from last year?
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
No, on second thought, let's not
the only thing that really proves is how shaky and unreliable UZR is. Dunn has been a pretty good defender this year, and he still manages a questionable negative UZR?
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
What?
The entire baseball industry is has moved past what you’re proposing. Well, except maybe the Royals.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions
No, it's true
UZR is shaky and unreliable. Too many people look at UZR like it’s beyond any question. I claim it is but another measure of quality, but it is unstable, and has only moderate predictive power.
To claim that “the entire baseball industry” has embraced UZR as an incontrovertible dictate on who can and cannot defend is totally absurd.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Yeah, like you. You just tried to tell us that Dunn is worth $17 million. I’m not saying the baseball industry has embraced UZR, but they’ve embraced what UZR stands for: valuing every facet of the game, in this case, a defensive contribution.
And I’m not saying UZR is worthless. Only you are. It has its problems, but just needs to be used carefully.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn't say UZR is worthless
I said it’s not worthy of it’s “be-all-end-all” status it’s attained in many people’s eyes.
It tells a story, but it’s only part of a complete story.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
You'll notice I claimed that Dunn has been a good defensive player this year
And I claimed it DESPITE what UZR says.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Sure, and I’d like to see how many people agree with you that Dunn is a good defensive player. But, you also claimed that Dunn is a 5 WAR player, and UZR is a component of WAR.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Ok, this is devolving to a place I don’t want to go, I’m going to stop here.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Baseball-reference, for one
Has Dunn’s Total Fielding Runs Above Average per 1200 Innings at 0. As in, his defense contribution has been league average, far above replacement level.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
If UZR is unreliable over 62 games, Rtot/yr is not? And by the way, in 1935 innings at 1B over his career, he’s at a -12.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
The prevailing notion is
that he’s become a much better 1B since he became a dedicated 1B.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Dunn at 1B
So you’ve gone from “good” to “league average” to “much better 1B since he became a dedicated 1B.” That’s a vote of confidence. And by the way, my eyeball analysis agrees with that last statement too.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
These are not mutually exclusive
I say he’s a pretty good defender, which makes him both league average and better than he was in the past.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Actually you said this:
“You’ll notice I claimed that Dunn has been a good defensive player this year”
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions
when he's one of the best hitters in the league?
Yea, its fine.
The saber-crowd would say
That this is a 70-75 win true talent team, and the Nats should trade Dunn. But, the Nats also probably have one of the weakest fanbases (of course this is different now with Strasburg), with the most potential to grow. So with that said, a Dunn trade would be very complicated, as these comments would suggest. He’s one of the most visible Nats, but we shouldn’t be giving him more than another 2 years, maybe 3. And I think he’s looking for more long-term security, and maybe more cash.
We have holes to fill, and perhaps that $12 million could be better spent somewhere else. If we’re talking just about biggest return, then I think Willingham would be the better trade option.
Also, Tampa might match up well, but they’re the team that is most likely to undervalue him.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 8:49 AM EDT up reply actions
As for Tampa undervaluing him......
I think there are probably three to four teams that would realize the importance of possible draft pick compensation more in the offseason. The fact that he’s not tied to a contract that they’d be stuck with next season (when they’ve said they intend to slash payroll a bit, rather than add to it) would also be something they’d look at as a positive. And there’s certainly a need for a bat like Dunn’s in Tampa.
Would they try and get him as cheaply as possible? Of course, but so would any of the other 29 teams that the Nats could trade him to. As I’ve stated below in another post, they’ve had issues filling the DH spot for a couple of years, and have overpaid on a couple of different occasions to try to fill it (unsuccessfully):
- The Rays dealt a quality, young (cheaper) big league starter in Edwin Jackson to the Detroit Tigers for OF Matt Joyce, who had seemingly shown that he could fill their DH role (or a corner outfield spot) adequately in a late trial with the Tigers. Two years later, Joyce has played in about 15 games for them and spent most of his time underachieving in AAA.
- They also signed Pat Burrell to their big-money contract, which certainly didn’t cost them anything in trade. Burrell was released a few weeks ago, as he was largely unproductive.
The Rays are currently in a dogfight with the Yankees (they’re now tied, I believe) and Red Sox (3 games back) for the AL East. With players such as Crawford and Pena hitting free agency (Desmond Jennings be damned), their future is now.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions
On second thought, you’re right on Tampa. The fact that Dunn’s contract ends after this season is important, as is the fact that they’re in the playoff race and adding a guy like Dunn would probably mean more to them than for some other teams.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Tampa's certainly a good fit if we are going to unload him.
You just wonder, though, if they are going to trade a young starter like you’re suggesting, wouldn’t they be more likely to address a longer term solution to their DH problem by trying to get another cost controlled long range piece?
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Willingham?
Then who plays left for the next couple years? We still have control of him next year and comparable corner outfielders are making killings on the free agency market.
I think Hammer and Dunn are untradable, but that's not because I don't think it's smart to trade them.
It’s because our system is trash for position players in the upper minors.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
It's certainly possible
That as an old Expos fan who doesn’t really have any ties to DC other than my fandom of the Nats (I live in the midwest), I see things differently. I realize the negative impact that dealing a bat like Dunn could have on the local fanbase, but I wouldn’t feel it quite as strongly as I don’t really have the opportunity to go to many of the games (I did attend both games here in St. Louis, but those are probably the only two Nats games I’ll have the chance to attend this season). As an outsider (locally), I like to see the team competitive, but feel that the value of being “competitive” (taking a shot at .500 or so) now is less important than working towards a bigger goal in the future.
My personal feeling is that if the Nats can use a player like Dunn to build a team that’s got a better shot at the ultimate goal some time down the road, the 3-4 marginal wins that Dunn could add this season are far less important.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Another thing is that if, through a trade, the Nats are able to get that 3-4 marginal wins back through Dunn’s replacement and (let’s just say) the pitcher or two they get back, it wouldn’t be as sexy as having one 3-4 win stud, but the Nats wouldn’t have gotten worse.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Two players whose marginal win value adds to 3-4
is not worth as much as one player whose marginal win value is 3-4.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
No argument there
In the short-term, at least. The assumption is that they’d acquire two players whose marginal win value for this year might be 3-4….. at least one of which is under club control for several years. The hope is that the two players they’d try to obtain add up to more than 3-4 wins (per season) in 2011-2015.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree with you bluelineswinger, but at the same time, without thinking about the future, for a team like the Nats, with holes to fill, I’d argue that 2 players at 3-4 wins, under club control could be worth more than Dunn’s 3-4 at $12 million/year.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
And those remaining 7,000-10,000 fans per game will be mighty happy with that in 2015...
Don't Be A "Crow", Bryce... - P.R., Draft Day 2010
"...eyeblack-oozing baseball cyborg"
by cat daddy3000 on Jun 17, 2010 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah:
9150, 8876, 9187, 9476, 40375, 9150, 8876, ….
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Can he keep packing them in once the new wears off?
Don't Be A "Crow", Bryce... - P.R., Draft Day 2010
"...eyeblack-oozing baseball cyborg"
by cat daddy3000 on Jun 17, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
If the performance is there and he's working on a Cy Young season I believe so.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Yeah, this line of thinking does kind of forget the DC market.
You have to have star attractions or a winner to get fans in DC who are choosing between Caps season ticket, ‘Skins season tickets, and Nats season tickets. Strasburg plus .500 will get them some season tickets. Strasburg plus contention will get them major season tickets. I think they want to trust most of the core group to get them to .500 and believe in Rizzo’s drafting abilities to get them over the contention hump.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
The Nationals can afford to keep Dunn and Willingham, and to sign Harper
They are in a position to add payroll even as they excise albatross contracts like Guzman’s.
No one is untradeable, but Dunn is a highly important piece of the Nats’ puzzle right now — not just for his on-field contributions (which have exceeded most people’s expectations). The fact that he’ll be soon chasing 400 HRs is worthy of interest. If you sell him you are probably “selling high” and you definitely NEED to get big names in return — probably bigger than the Rays are willing to give up. Also, getting compensation picks for him will help the team in 4 or 5 years — the Nats want to compete much sooner than that.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Well, yeah Rob
“Also, getting compensation picks for him will help the team in 4 or 5 years — the Nats want to compete much sooner than that.”
That’s sort of my point. Draft picks likely help the team in 4 to 5 years. Young players acquired via a trade have gone through some (or most) developmental time already, and would be able to contribute much more quickly. I understand the ability to add payroll, something both the size of the market and the fact that they’ll have some bad contracts (particularly Guzman, and while it’s early to say that Marquis’ signing was a complete failure, he accounts for $15 million over the next two years), but question whether signing free agents will be the better way to go.
Dunn is definitely a huge piece of the Nats. While Hammer was brought up in the comments and instantly drew a “What do we do with LF if we trade him?” comment, the fact that Marrero certainly isn’t ready means that Willingham would likely move to 1b if Dunn were to be traded.
As for what the Rays might be willing to give up, they’ve proven that they’re willing to possibly overpay for a DH/OF within the past two years. Albeit, that experiment looks largely like a failure to this point, and it was for a young (cheap) player. They did trade an established young starter (Edwin Jackson) for Matt Joyce in the 2008-09 offseason.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
We still have control of him next year and comparable corner outfielders are making killings on the free agency market.
That’s why he’d get more than a half year rental on Dunn. The Nats need to decide who’s part of the future, and who can be traded. So you’re saying just trade Capps? That’s fine, but then what, play the free agent market?
Hmm?
Well yeah, the Nats will (and should) listen to any trade offer.
Re: Capps, I don’t see why we would have to hit the free agent market to replace him. We have a closer-in-waiting in Drew Storen.
Oops, this should be a reply to the above
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Sure there are lots of holes on this team.
One of the holes is 2B. They believe that Espinosa will eventually be a cheap answer to that problem. Outside of that it’s about filling out your rotation and the problem here, as it is with many of these discussions, is that we have no idea what we have in our rotation. Zimmermann, Detwiler, Wang, Marquis, and Lannan could hit as the back end of a Strasburg rotation next year with Zimmermann, Detwiler, Lannan, and somebody in our system (maybe Meyers?) being 5 starters. If we’ve got the starters, we’re close enough that we want to keep Hammer and Dunn while they are in the window to contribute.
If we don’t have the starters, then we need to be honest with ourselves and try to flip these guys into controllable starting pitching. The Giants and Padres are showing that it’s possible to have a viable team with lineup questions if you’ve got a top to bottom rotation.
But with all of these arguments, I feel that it’s very important to realize that the probably the weakest asset we have in the minors right now is power at corner spots until Harper comes up.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
As I have stated many times before...
each time this argument comes up: not trading Dunn will be a mistake. the only reason to not trade Dunn is if you can’t get fair value for him. Dunn is a below-average fielder with skills that age poorly. he’s currently hitting 40 points higher than his lifetime average. sell high!
this team, as constructed, is not a playoff-caliber team. on any give night there are 3-5 below average bats in the lineup. there is too much redundancy on the active roster (Morgan, Bernadina and Harris are all the same player—left-handed slap-hitting outfielders; rotation full of P2C 5th starter types) and not nearly enough power top to bottom, despite having arguably the top 3-4-5 hitting group in the NL.
Capps HAS to be traded. the only reason a 74-win team signs a closer to a one-year deal is to trade him mid-summer when his value is as high as it will get. the Nats hit the jackpot on him performance-wise and they HAVE TO turn him into assets. HAVE TO.
In my humble opinion.
Your voice of doom and gloom. Read more at natsnewsnetwork.blogspot.com
by Dave at District Sports Page on Jun 17, 2010 11:04 AM EDT reply actions
Agree very much
The Nats can’t get into the high-80, 90 win range by paying market value for a win either. They need good, young, cheap players. I like Dunn a lot, but not for the Nats.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
The Nats can afford to get to 90 wins by paying market value
They have several players (Desmond, Zimmerman, Zimmermann, Strasburg, Bernadina, Storen, …) who are going to be vastly underpaid next year. And they can easily afford a $90M payroll.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Awesome
Let’s grab Cliff Lee, Carl Crawford, Jose Reyes, resign Dunn and Mariano Rivera. Do you think I missed anyone?
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Definite pass on
Reyes and Rivera.
Or were you being facetious?
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
Yeah I was. Unfairly so though, you are right that the Nats have money to spend, but playing the free agent market for top-tier talent to take us into the 90 win region would mean lots of dollars and lots of years. That might be fine in the next year or two (if we can even sign some of these guys), but it could blow up on us as they get old.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
One or Two Contracts is an acceptable risk
But yes, building from within is generally the way to go. The problem is that the minor league talent level for position players isn’t generally good, and so the team is going to have to fill in through free agency what the minors can’t produce.
Unless, of course, you’re for losing 100+ games a couple more years until Harper and the rest of the cavalry shows up. I just hope that there’s a wagon train left to rescue at that point.
The problem is that the minor league talent level for position players isn’t generally good
And this is where a trade could/would help
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Depends on what you can get
We have marginal, AAAA players out the wazoo. I’m not against trading Dunn if the team can really get something for him. If you get a true prospect that is, or is nearly, major league ready – especially one that can play 1b, 2b or OF – then you pull the trigger. Warm bodies and decent, hard-working AAAA players, no thanks.
Precisely
The problem is that the minor league talent level for position players isn’t generally good
And this is where a trade could/would help
Typically a trade from a seller’s standpoint is being used to fill organizational holes and (ideally) find a player or two with the upside to be a bigger contributor down the road. In the case of the Nats, I’d argue that (with or without Dunn) they’re a lot closer than many of us thought before the season, and a little closer than the national media still recognizes even today.
Several of the pieces are certainly in place, both for now and going forward:
C – Pudge through next year, with the (albeit fading) hope that Flores can get and stay healthy as well… Norris on the way
1b – Without Dunn, Willingham would be the most likely candidate
2b – The AK/Guzman hybrid for this season…. A likely Desmond move to 2b when Espinosa is ready
SS – Desmond in the present, possibly Espinosa in the future. I wouldn’t see adding a young, solid MI type (I mentioned Brignac in the post) who could handle one of the positions either as an intermediary (if Espinosa develops as planned) who could move to a Utility role down the road or a decent starter if Espinosa doesn’t pan out as a quality starter.
3b – Zimm…. now and in the future
LF – Probably where it gets the trickiest. Morse has been terrific so far, but I see him as a platoon type in the long run. Even finding an adequate left-handed hitting LF who crushes RHP could work in the short-term. This could be where moving Capps comes in later
CF – Bernadina/Morgan
RF – Bernadina/Morgan… Harper as the long-term solution, but I’d be surprised to see him before late 2012
OK…. The whole outfield is truly killing me a bit if the Hammer were to move to 1b sans Dunn. I honestly kind of like what Bernadina brings to the table. Good speed guy with a little gap power. Much more disciplined than Morgan. Really nice glove in RF, and probably a touch above average with the glove in CF. While neither Bernadina (26) nor Morgan (about to be 30…. and oddly enough, while checking that, I realize that he and I share a birthday) really figure to be players who are likely to improve much, they’re both better than replacement level players who are adequate enough while the Nats try and develop some guys on the farm. Morse (28) is in the same boat.
SP – Strasburg
SP – Zimmermann
SP – Detwiler
SP – Lannan? Olsen? OK… I’m pretty much done with the starting pitching, which is one of my points.
RP – Clippard
RP – Storen
RP – Burnett’s solid enough and under club control for a while yet
In my perfect world (and the rest of the scenarios aren’t as well thought out):
- Move Dunn to Tampa for one of their young starters (Niemann/Hellickson) and Brignac. Take on some of the money if you have to in order to get the positional player back.
- Move Capps for a young OF who could be considered a bit of a fringe type at this point… The key would be that he’s left-handed enough to handle a platoon role and/or has enough potential upside so that the Nats would feel OK platooning Morse with Bernadina/Morgan. It’s obviously a little late to the party on a Delmon Young type, but his performance the past couple of years is a good indicator of what they could get. I don’t see anyone giving up a premium prospect for Capps.
- Move Guzman for a bag of baseballs…. Or kick in the rest of his salary and see if we can pick up a mid-level relief prospect or something.
- Keep the Hammer or move him in Dunn’s stead. The remaining arbitration year could be viewed as very attractive to some clubs in need of a bat, but I still don’t think he gets the respect around the league that Dunn does, and think Dunn would net the Nats more in a trade.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem is ...
The other team has to want Dunn enough to give up what you want to get. We’ve done the “bag of baseballs” trade with Belliard and others, and that’s OK. Premium prospects have been hard to get for anyone short of Cliff Lee in the past couple of trade deadline cycles, because the recession has reinforced the economic value of young talent.
The theory is nice … I just question how realistic it is, and therefore want to curb expectations on a trade.
It's not just a theory
Why wouldn’t an AL team value him? Offensively, he’s a middle of the lineup type guy, he’s playing very well this year, the team that acquires him is only on the hook for the rest of the year. And, his value increases if the Nats are willing to eat some/most of his remaining salary post-trade. Neimann/Hellickson and Brignac might be a little optimistic, but it’s not like this is a crazy proposal. I have an extremely hard time believing that the Nats wouldn’t get competitive proposals for Dunn as the trade deadline nears.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions
And yes
I said in the post itself that hoping for Niemann/Hellickson plus Brignac was entirely too ambitious
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think it’s entirely too ambitious, just a little bit. If the bidding gets hot, this could happen.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Dunn's not at the level of a Matt Holliday, but I'll use a couple of Cardinals trades to show what a buying team might be willing to give up....... Each from the 2009 season
I don’t think I could even really try to argue that he is. The Cardinals sent the A’s Brett Wallace (their top hitting prospect, generally considered a Top 15 prospect in baseball right now, and not far from that at the time of the deal), RHP Clayton Mortensen (fits more in the Stammen/Atilano/Martin range, as do most of the Cardinals minor league pitchers) who started a game for the A’s a week later, and Shane Peterson (a mid-level OF prospect expected to reach the majors by next season).
For Mark DeRosa, the Cardinals sent big-league ready reliever Chris Perez to Cleveland. You could say that Perez had fallen out of favor in St. Louis a bit, but he immediately went to Cleveland with the closer of the future tag, was a dominant reliever for the Tribe in the second half (didn’t allow a run from early July through the middle of September), and was moderately effective this season (moreso than Kerry Wood has been) handling the closing duties while FA-to-be Kerry Wood was on the disabled list earlier this season.
No…. Dunn’s not Holliday (though his value increases significantly if you DH him), but DeRosa certainly isn’t Dunn
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
+1 Excellent point of comparison.
You know your stuff.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Have we become Mets fans???????
That’s how they talk
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Mets fans tend to bash their favorite players in a perverse form of love.
We may love our guys too much. I prefer our style myself.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
I'm not saying "don't trade Dunn"
I’m saying, “it’s not likely you’ll get good value for Dunn in trade.” Dunn will be heading towards 400 HRs next year, which is the sort of thing that draws fans beyond his skills. His defense is much better than advertised, certainly better than you give him credit for here. He is headed towards a 5 WAR year this year, among the top ten in the NL. If they trade him, they’ve got to get a stud who’ll be ready next year. Nobody wants to trade away such a player.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
So we’re back to using WAR and thus the unreliable UZR
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Nope - not me, anyway
I’m not for moving Dunn just to move him. Even if we lose him to free agency there is some value to getting one or two high picks for him, and he adds to this team right now both in a baseball sense (he’s a top bat measured by OPS, and my eyes tell me he’s an improving – though not yet “good” – fielder) and from a business standpoint. Fans dig the long ball and Dunn hits them, and the lineup without him is VERY different from what it is with him.
And that is another aspect of his value down the road. The team has pushed fans away hard over the past few years. Another 100+ loss season and dealing away popular players for magic beans runs the risk of us sharing a very sad fate with the Orioles.
Hmm
I’m not for moving Dunn just to move him. Even if we lose him to free agency there is some value to getting one or two high picks for him, and he adds to this team right now both in a baseball sense (he’s a top bat measured by OPS, and my eyes tell me he’s an improving – though not yet "good" – fielder) and from a business standpoint. Fans dig the long ball and Dunn hits them, and the lineup without him is VERY different from what it is with him.
And that is another aspect of his value down the road. The team has pushed fans away hard over the past few years. Another 100+ loss season and dealing away popular players for magic beans runs the risk of us sharing a very sad fate with the Orioles.
I certainly don’t think that at any point in the post I was saying that they should move him for the sake of moving him. I was implying that it makes perfect sense to move him if the Nats can make themselves better down the road by doing so. Unfortunately, there was really only one great scenario I could find. Moreover, it’s a scenario that I pointed out in the post itself seemed a bit too ambitious.
From the Rays standpoint, the only way that trading a topflight young starter like Niemann OR a top-flight pitching prospect like Hellickson and include a useful young infielder like Brignac is if I feel like Dunn is the missing link that’s going to help the Rays win the World Series. For a team like Tampa with a relatively short window (two other big ticket free agents leaving this offseason, leading the AL East), that could be realistic. However, the Rays have proven to be an extremely shrewd organization, and likely wouldn’t be willing to go so far.
While there’s certainly some talent that other teams on the market may be willing to move, it’s not at the level it would be with Tampa Bay.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
What is the worst-case scenario?
DC Guy says it’s trading him for less than his full value. For me, it’s signing him to a long-term contract (say, 4 years). I think if the Nats don’t trade him, there is a very high probability that they re-sign him, and a fairly low possibility that they let him walk away for draft picks.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm starting to feel that this is some kind of perverse attempt to get me to root for the Rays to fall out of the wildcard.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Actually, I'm using baseball-reference for its version of WAR
which doesn’t use UZR.
Dunn’s offensive contribution is undeniable. His defense is better than any ‘batted-ball-zone-fielding’ measure can detect. He’s been VERY good at saving errors from Zim and Desmond on wild throws this year. In any case, I would claim that Dunn’s defense has not been a detractor from his overall performance this year.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
I've seen at least one play where Kennedy for Dunn hurt the team in late innings
Where a throw that Dunn would’ve reached got past Kennedy and down the RF line for a game-turning error. I think that Riggleman has realized that benching Dunn whenever possible isn’t always his best play – I’ve seen him on the field in late innings more as the season goes on, and others have DH’d from time to time in the AL parks.
And I've seen a play where Dunn was unable to dig out a throw
And was charged with an error.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
guys, fwiw isolated incidents aren't good scouting
Dunn is decent around the bag, but still has trouble on low throws. he has very little lateral movement and no ability to go back on balls over his head. can’t we just agree that he is defensively limited and go on from there?
Your voice of doom and gloom. Read more at natsnewsnetwork.blogspot.com
by Dave at District Sports Page on Jun 17, 2010 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
You don't typically just claim he's "defensively limited"
You claim is a below-average defender. I claim that he’s pretty good at some aspects of defense, and is overall an average defender.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
I am ecstatic that balls are not clanking off Dunn's glove with such regularity...
…that we scream to get him back into LF because we have to play him somewhere……..which ruins Hammer and other things roster-wise…
Don't Be A "Crow", Bryce... - P.R., Draft Day 2010
"...eyeblack-oozing baseball cyborg"
by cat daddy3000 on Jun 17, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
LOL!
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
I'm not scouting based on that one play, Dave
I’m noting that the overall picture on Dunn isn’t unredeemably terrible, just mediocre to below average defensively. Hence the larger point about how Riggleman is using Dunn, suggesting that his opinion having watched all season is that the team is occasionally better served by having Dunn in the field.
Are you just using it because it says Dunn is league average?
The same small-sample size warning applies to all of these defensive metrics, especially after only 60-something games.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
No
I’m using it because I like BBR more than FanGraphs.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
I have no problem with that
But how can you acknowledge the limitations of UZR and not of the BBR metric?
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
As I tried to say elsewhere
My own eyes, watching every game this year, tell me that Dunn is not a liability on defense. This means that BBR’s value of WAR, which has him defense-neutral, is a reasonable measure for me.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
This is exactly where we differ
You are sure he is not a liability on defense and therefore use the BBR metric. I say, based on my eyes, and on UZR and on this BBR metric, that I’m not sure. He switched positions, he says he’s been working on his 1B defense, and in the grand scheme of things, hasn’t played that many innings at the position.
You say he’s a 5 WAR player, and I say I’m not sure. And that has repercussions in both his trade value and what he could be re-signed for.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Basically, you're trying to turn us into the Giants.
That’s what I see this as. You don’t really have a 1B (or OF for Willingham) option that would replace Dunn. You would like us to get some more pitching prospects I think. I’m kind of “In Rizzo We Trust”. I love seeing the bombs and it is certainly more fun to go to games with him in the lineup. On the other hand, I am being subjected to Chinese Water Torture watching marginal PTC pitching prospect tease and torment us. If we get a cost controlled 2 starter for Dunn you have to do that, but I don’t see us doing that and I don’t see them mucking with a fragile fan base.
Remember my friends, the Lerners like their pocketbooks and Strasburg and the Strasburgettes, even for just 2011, will be a rather tough sell for the fan base.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Agreed on dealing Capps
If Rizzo still lived in my building, when I bumped into him I’d absolutely advise him to deal Capps even though it runs the risk of disrupting the part of the team that has been working the best of late. The Nats should listen to offers for Dunn, but the trick is getting “fair value.”
It always cracks me up when sports talk radio fans make “virtual trades” (let’s deal Dunn for Pujols!) and/or blast teams for making trades that the fans think should have been made (I can’t believe the ‘Skins only got a 2011 4th for Campbell! They should have held out for a 2nd round pick!) when in fact no one was offering what the fan thinks the departing player was worth. There’s a lot of revisionist and fabricated history that goes into analyzing trades that should have been made.
Bottom line, I have no problem if the Nats are able to really get something in return for Dunn (remember they dealt Livo, then re-signed him when he became a free agent). But if there isn’t a real prospect offered, moving him just to move him for whatever they can get isn’t cost effective. The team has lost 100+ games two years in a row. Having the team collapse and going three-for-three would be devastating to a fan base that is just starting to come around.
at 11-20 in their last 31 games
the collapse has already started. what would be more demoralizing, playing .350 ball with Dunn or without?
Your voice of doom and gloom. Read more at natsnewsnetwork.blogspot.com
by Dave at District Sports Page on Jun 17, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Agree again
Someone get Dave a microphone and let’s turn it up!
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Slice the stats as you see fit.
During that bad run, they are 7-4 at home. They are playing .600 ball overall at home, and have 51 games left there (45 on the road). Continuing that pace has them finishing 4 games under 500, which is pretty darn good.
And, while “11-20 over their last 31” sounds purely awful, “16-21 over their last 37” is not nearly as bad, is it?
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
And here is the rub.
You are a season ticket holder (and I go to a lot of games) who would probably like to see onward and upward with some of the names we’ve grown to love. How can we trade Dunner with his current production after MissB adapts the Dunn-Key Kong graphic?
As long as they are going to play .500-.600 ball at home and entertain the masses, there’s a lot to be said for them being competent and banking on Harper, Norris, Espinosa, (Marerro/Burgess?) and back end guys in the low minors to be the calvary that pushes them over to contention. But if this group stinks then they have to sell soon and I think a lot of what they really are depends on the pitchers that we haven’t seen yet.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
You're Assuming a False Equivalency
Because if the team is playing .350 ball with Dunn, then they’re playing .300 ball without him, and are 6-8 Strasburg wins away from true utter Orioles level irrelevancy. You’re kicking the middle of a 3-4-5 in the order that has been the main offensive engine for the team all year. Who’s going to replace that? Willie Harris?
My mental goal for the team throughout the year has been 75 wins; to me, that would be a successful season coming from where they were. To get there they’d have to finish 44-52, a .458 pace, slightly off their current .470 pace. Assuming the collapse Nats is the true team*, playing .350 baseball from here out would get them to 64-98 or 65-97, which would be disappointing. Playing .300 baseball has them finishing at 60-102 – right back where they were last year. And THAT is the “three-for-three” (59-102, 59-103, 60-102 seasons) that would be utterly devastating for the long term future of the franchise.
Trading Dunn just to trade him makes no sense. Listen to offers, yes – and if someone comes with a true prospect that is nearly major-league ready, take it and run like a thief in the night. But don’t send the team back to the 100+ loss bottom of the “eternal rebuild” unless you want to start drawing 8-10,000 a night.
- Which I don’t, btw – they’re a flawed team that sucks on the road, but that’s not news. I don’t assume that the team is an 11-20 team, any more than I assumed that they were a 20-15 team when they were riding high.
And, by the way
Striving for .500 this year means a huge jump in season ticket sales next year. Accepting a .350 finish this year means a decline in season ticket sales, which are already very low, next year. This makes their ability to compete in the near future even smaller, and could, one might imagine, spell the end of the road for baseball in Washington.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
This year is a research project. I keep trying to tell people that.
The whole deal is that they are going to probably stand pat and see what they have in the pitching prospects. It would be really, really helpful for these discussion if we had a better sense of what Detwiler was going to do beyond 2 rehab starts. If Detwiler is a bust (and he could be a bust), then we have far graver pitching issues, especially with Meyers perpetually DL bound. If Detwiler is not a bust, then we are certainly closer than we were this year with Detwiler and Zimmermann young pieces who cannot possibly be worse than the young back end junk we have now.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
wasnt the argument to sell high last season?
When he finished with a BA 16 points higher than career? No 16 isn’t 40, but it’s not peanuts either. Also, batting average?
Obviously Dunn isn’t going to slug 590 this season, but the point is that when great hitters catch fire this is what they can do.
If you sell Adam Dunn, then, inevitably, you are getting ripped off. What we have here is a tremendously underatted bat, who is never going to bring you what you would expect to get. If you can replace Dunn in this lineup, or get some guys who will meaningfully impact the rotation, then fine. I dont think either of those things will happen. If Adam Dunn goes away for a a few mid level hitters this team is dead.
If we trade Dunn
I just don’t see us having a major league caliber lineup next year
Aim for the head baby Jesus
Any lineup with Ryan Zimmerman is major league caliber
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Wasn't 2008 the year Zim got hurt?
2009 the lineup was actually pretty good and they might have been acceptable without Dunn in the same way that they are acceptable with the 1-2 hold stinkitude that they are getting now with Morgan-Guzman instead of hot-Morgan plus Nick Johnson.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
It was. Zimm played in just 106 games in 2008
And he wasn’t the only one who was hurt that year. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, every starting position player other than Milledge and Guzman hit the DL in 2008.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 18, 2010 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions
2008 it was bad luck that led us to stink in part.
2009 it was very, very, very bad roster makeup and Bowden’s delusions.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:21 AM EDT up reply actions
too valuable
The Nats are still growing, I would hope they’d consider keeping him around until they can say stay above .500 for a few consecutive months. Dunn keeps the offense going, it’s sad some of his followers can’t do the same. I think we need him for this year, and maybe next. After that, fine, use the $$, but for now…let him help our team grow.
Now if they sign Dunn for more than 3 years they are fools.
I’d prefer to overpay for 2 myself than sign for 3 actually.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Dunn should already have been resigned.
1. We were going to get a discount. 2. Zimm’s average will drop 15-20 points. 3.This team should have been built to win in 2011.
I have enjoyed watching the team grow over the last 2 years. But the 20-15 start spoiled me. It should have spoiled everyone. STRAS is here. DEZ is here. JZIMM will be here. Detwiller will be here. Oswalt should have been here (next month). Gentleman…….It’s time to win.
1+
For everything you said except saying Zimm’s average would decrease. Zimm has been getting better over the past few years. His average increase is also credited to his reached potential.
The Shanahan era is going to bring the Redskins back to Glory! Great QB and an actual O-line.
by Horcasitas4 on Jun 17, 2010 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't really have a problem with them waiting.
We were either going to do it before the season or do it later into the season or after the season. Dunn’s defensive history did not suggest playing 1B roulette by signing him before we’d seen at least 30 games with him at 1B would be a good move.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 17, 2010 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Selling now "sends the wrong message" to the local fans
I know some stat guys think that building towards the future at the expense of the present is an obvious tactic, but nobody seems to take into account the fickleness of the local fan base. The loss of those fans is VERY DIFFICULT to overcome — even if they start winning at some point in the future. That loss will hamstring the organization and will make it that much more difficult to become a winning franchise in the future. The end result is either a Pirates-like team in DC, or a team that moves somewhere else.
The Nats cannot be perceived as outright sellers right now.
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
The Nats are not the Pirates
The Pirates turned over their entire club and lacked star power for a number of years. They were a good team for a number of years and then fell off a cliff in the ‘90s. If you want to talk about “stat guys” gutting a roster for the future, look at Pittsburgh the past 3 or 4 years. The Nats haven’t been in DC that long, and are still building their fan base, but don’t tell me that winning isn’t going to bring the fans. Trading Dunn isn’t the same as turning over your entire 25 man roster. We still have Strasburg, Z and Harper’s on the way. People will embrace this team when they begin winning.
by docholliday3 on Jun 17, 2010 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Tell that to the Rays' ownership
Rob
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
—Connie Mack
This isn't the Rays market or the Pirates market.
Young with disposal income and rabid fan bases for the ‘Skins and Capitals. Miami has had to get gimmicky to get people to come to Dolphins games and the Heat aren’t a major draw. I suppose Tampa Bay Buccaneers are decent but they aren’t the Redskins.
People will certainly come back if they win at any time.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
I'm surprised this is even a question.
Where have we been where we can think “sell if we aren’t a playoff team?” We were horrible the past two years and now we are at least respectable. We have a relatively young lineup and now we are considering getting rid of the players that have helped prevent another 100 loss season. We are lucky to have Dunn, Zimmerman and WIllingham and we will be lucky if we can keep them all long term. We aren’t the Wizards, this isn’t a one year thing where we invest all our resources to win it all now, and then fail only to trade away all our players. We are entering our “future,” and we are still building. No need to abandon ship. It will be stupid if we do.
The Shanahan era is going to bring the Redskins back to Glory! Great QB and an actual O-line.
No.... This certainly isn't a one year thing
However, we have to consider the fact that (at present) Adam Dunn himself is a one year thing. Dunn is under contract through the end of this season. While the argument can certainly be made that the Nats are entering the future, how quickly do you really think a rotation of Strasburg, Zimmermann, maybe Detwiler, and (fill in the blank) is going to elevate the team to a level beyond hoping to play .500 ball? If you’re satisfied with the Nats trying to be a team that shoots for the .500 mark (heck… maybe even 82-85 wins!) for at least the next 3-4 years, I apologize.
There are a handful of other starters currently in the organization who could fill that rotation out…. possibly even fill it out fairly well.
- Scott Olsen is 26 with a history of looking like he could be above league average in Florida. He looked to be on his way to a nice campaign this year. That said, he missed much of last season with a torn labrum in his throwing shoulder. He’s currently out (and has been started and stopped on a rehab program) with another shoulder injury. Though Olsen is under six years of service time, I believe that the fact that the Nats didn’t offer him arbitration and signed him to a one year deal has ended his arbitration years. Regardless, a pitcher who missed most of last season with a shoulder injury and then suffered another shoulder injury this season could have some long-term problems.
- We don’t know what we’re going to get out of Wang, who I believe is just signed through this season anyway. He could be part of the future if he gets healthy, but if he proves he’s back at his pre-injury level, he could price himself out of the Nats’ range as a free agent in the coming offseason.
- Marquis has had a slew of seasons where he’s hovered from slightly below league average to slightly above league average. He’s signed through next season at $15 million total (not sure if it was front-loaded/back-loaded, or $7.5 per). He’s currently injured, and looked terrible prior to hitting the DL. I disliked the signing when they made it, and I like it even less now.
- Atilano is up and down, as are many rookies. There are certainly a lot of question marks regarding whether he has the pure “stuff” to succeed long-term, though. The same would go for J.D. Martin and Craig Stammen. The same would likely go for Shairon Martis as well.
- There’s the possibility that one of the arms in the lower levels of the system can come through in the next couple of years. Based on his success last season and the fact that he’d been doing pretty well at Harrisburg (before going back on the shelf), I’d put a guy like Brad Meyers in that camp. Meyers has only thrown about 70 innings above A+ ball, though, so a quick ascent is unlikely. They’d hoped that Aaron Thompson could be a guy who might move fairly quickly, but he’s been a trainwreck at AA. Josh Smoker hasn’t panned out thus far.
Honestly, from an organizational standpoint, the Nats have one ace (Strasburg), another guy who could be a front-line starter (Zimmermann), a young guy who looks like he has a shot to be a middle of the rotation type (Detwiler), a veteran who generally gets by on a bunch of junk (Livan… and I can respect that, but how long can he continue?) and a bunch of maybes. Their backup plans in the high minors are fringe types, and the guys at the lower levels of the system generally aren’t doing well enough to warrant a promotion anytime soon (to the high minors… not the majors… and many of them are fringe types as well). The current injured big leaguers are surrounded by question marks.
Dunn will turn 31 this offseason, and his body type/skill set is that of a player who typically doesn’t age particularly well. I can understand the desire to keep him in Washington for another year or two, but signing him to anything more than a two year deal would (most likely) be buying into a declining market. After signing a two year deal last time around, he’s going to want to sign a contract that locks him up until he’s at least 35. I neither blame him nor begrudge him for that. I just don’t see the wisdom in it from the Nats’ perspective (and, again, I’ll reiterate that the option will likely always be there to try and sign him back in the offseason anyway. That’s where Dunn’s contract status is likely headed regardless of whether they trade him or not).
IF the Nats have one of the better sluggers in the game right now
IF that player appears to be the best hitter that could come on the open market before the trade deadline
And
IF they can get a package of players that would likely prove to be more beneficial than Dunn in 2011 and 2012 (and possibly beyond)
They would HAVE TO take it. If they can’t get value, try to re-sign him to a short-term deal or take the draft picks. It would make no sense not to see what they could get for him, though.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions
They shoudn't force a trade just because he MAYBE will decline heavily in the next few years.
If they can put together a trade, including Dunn, to get another Ace quality pitcher or a few real good pitchers, then fine, but don’t trade away a fan favorite/slugging machine on a (currently) small market franchise if you can’t get anything great out of it. Yes, we do have two sluggers in our farm system(including Harper) that will most likely be on our team within the next two years, and they look like they’re going to be really good, so losing a slugger now wouldn’t hurt THAT bad, but lets remember who exactly WE are right now and who we have been since the Nationals moved back to D.C. Lets not sell sell sell and end up turning into the Royals.
Getting rid of Dunn means that resigning Willingham is a must. How much extra we would have to pay Willingham, and maybe even Harper, factors into the equation.
The Shanahan era is going to bring the Redskins back to Glory! Great QB and an actual O-line.
by Horcasitas4 on Jun 17, 2010 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Who is this mysterious second slugger you are talking about?
Are you saying Norris? Banking on Norris and Harper to be sluggers at this point is still presumptuous. I’m as close to all-in on Norris as I can be because I like his walk rates and I think his power will come back with his health. At last report, though, his defense doesn’t play at catcher.
With Harper, it’s way, way, way too soon to know what we should be counting him for and with what time line. He isn’t even signed yet. I think he will be good and he’s certainly a top 3 prospect in the organiztion once he signs, but we don’t know whether it will take 1.5, 2, or 3 years for him to be major league ready.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 17, 2010 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I am talking about Norris.
Norris isn’t a new prospect, he has been with us for a while, and he has been really good. Rizzo said at most Norris will still be in the minors for 2 years. Harper is being moved to OF so he can come up in 2 years, at which he will be 19. Very young yes, but he already has elite power. I’m banking on them almost as much as I banked in on Strasburg(in terms of not being a bust). So my opinion is based on something you may think is a leap of faith.
The Shanahan era is going to bring the Redskins back to Glory! Great QB and an actual O-line.
by Horcasitas4 on Jun 17, 2010 11:33 PM EDT up reply actions
He's been with us a little while.
But his reputation as a top 5 prospect in the organization is based on one year when he made a mockery of the SALLIE league. Injuries have cost him a year of development. When did Rizzo say “two years”? He’s lost about half of this year with the hamate bone injury at the start and the beaning later. He’s got to conquer the Carolina League offensively and defensively and conquer the Eastern League. Sounds to me like he’s ’12 at the earliest.
Harper’s very much a wildcard about when and what kind of player he’ll be until we have some kind of information on how he performs in the minors.
Sean Hill, John Patterson, Chris Marrero and even Milledge/Dukes have me in the see data and health first and then bank later.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:24 AM EDT up reply actions
BTW nicely put together counter-argument
The Shanahan era is going to bring the Redskins back to Glory! Great QB and an actual O-line.
by Horcasitas4 on Jun 17, 2010 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions
FYI, here's the info on Wang.
Because Wang has fewer than five years of Major League service time, the Nationals control his rights through the 2011 season. Even though they only signed Wang to a one-year contract, he will be eligible for arbitration after the season, unless he is non-tendered or signed to an extension.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 17, 2010 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I like it!
And wasn’t really sure, since he was a non-tendered free agent. It would stand to follow that the same could be said of Scott Olsen then. Olsen was called up in August of 2005 by the Marlins, making five starts. He pitched with the Fish for three seasons after that, and is now in his second season in Washington. I can’t say that with 100% accuracy, but it would fit logically.
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess. I'm not really going to bother looking that up because anything we get from Olsen is a bonus.
With Wang, I think they got him knowing that it was really for the 2nd year of team control that they were most interested in him. He pitches well for them next year and he becomes a serious, serious flippable deadline piece. Likewise Marquis in the unlikely event he pitches himself to something greater than 5th starter innings eater and gets healthy.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions
What a discussion thread!
This may be one of the most passionate that I’ve seen in this area. Bluelineswinger really brought the heat. I tend to side with RobBob for the most part given what I know of the other DC teams, although I think he may be a little bit too dire on some of the predictions. If they had another ace in the rotation then they’d be in a Cain/Lincecum situation where everybody knows that they could bust out at any time if they just got a little lucky with offensive prospects.
I’d like to see how Rizzo drafts for two years before I start going beyond the organization for trade solutions. Draft and moderate free agents.
To me there are two unknowns: 1) What does Dunn really want? Will he accept two with a 20% raise? 2) Will he accept three at a 10% raise? 3) Or is it 4 years are bust? If he wants 4 years, find out now and trade him for good value. 4 years is bad news anyway you shake it and heading into Soriano territory.
2) How close are our pitching prospects? Will Marquis and Wang (who I believe our both under our control for next year) be back end options better than Lannan? Will Lannan figure it out? Will Detwiler figure it out? Will Zimmermann come back healthy? Are some of the young bullpen contributors in AAA (Severino, Wilkie, Garate, English) going to be guys who can add innings? If the answer to enough of these questions are yes, then our currently awful pitching will be better enough inhouse that we don’t have to sacrifice fan favorites and core pieces to move forward.
I don’t mind slightly overpaying for Dunn in his next contract after he overperformed for this last contract. Not the greatest business I understand in a cruel, calculating world, but it might be a good message to send to fans and other players on the roster.
And as always, please consult Zimmerman to make sure that he’s happy with how things are progressing and understands what we’re trying to do.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
Regarding Soriano
Since you brought him up both in this most recent comment as well as earlier when this discussion was still in diapers. I’m absolutely amazed that not a single person (unless I missed it) has brought up that Jordan Zimmermann was selected with one of the picks the Nats acquired when the Cubs signed Soriano. The Nats used the sandwich pick from Soriano’s signing to select Josh Smoker with the first pick of the supplemental round. They took Jordan Zimmermann with the third pick of the second round, which was the other compensatory pick from the Cubs.
Would that same lightning strike twice? It’s doubtful… The only other player second rounder from 2007 who has reached the bigs to this point is the Marlins’ Mike Stanton (boy, did some people miss the boat there… he went 76th overall…. oops. Danny Worth has made it to the bigs in Detroit, too). Still, it’s a possibility.
The past few drafts have gone quite well (we think…. it’s hard to really know for at least 4-5 years), but taking the draft picks instead of players further along in their development (note: who we’ve actually seen have some success as a professional) is far less volatile.
Re-signing him is both a possibility and an option, but if there’s no certainty that it will get done, we can’t put too much faith in this turning out as well as the Soriano situation eventually did. Even the most successful drafts are going to produce far more busts than booms. As it’s been just three years, it’s too early to call Smoker or Michael Burgess (also selected in the supplemental round) busts, but they clearly haven’t had as much success early in their careers as Zimmermann (who they selected later).
by bluelineswinger on Jun 17, 2010 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Confused by this...
The past few drafts have gone quite well (we think…. it’s hard to really know for at least 4-5 years), but taking the draft picks instead of players further along in their development (note: who we’ve actually seen have some success as a professional) is far less volatile.
Don’t you mean taking players further along is less volatile and more predictable?
Smoker is getting close to bust status because from what I’ve heard health and stuff are issues. Until McGeary needed Tommy John, I was far less willing than some folks to give up on him because it seemed like he had some plus stuff and was struggling with command. That’s probably a good question to refer to Sue Dinem at www.nationalsprospects.com because she can shed some light on eyewitness reports and what is actually causing his numbers to stink so.
You’re kind of with the majority of people in thinking correctly that not trading Soriano was bad process good results. (which is where the FJB post I linked to goes) I argue that there were some irrational reasons for keeping him (He was the only thing I could bear watching in an unwatchable lineup that had been garbage since ‘05; had slight hope of resigning; might hit the lotto on the picks). But I know that’s my inner fan speaking and I can say that I didn’t want Soriano to be traded but I would understand and adjust if he did get traded. I am pleased as punch that Soriano (the one Nats T-Shirt I’ve ever bought) turned into Zimmerman(n) which has strong odds of being the second T-shirt or jersey I buy should my fortunes improve. I am also rational enough to understand it was dumb luck or genius scouting rarely exhibited before or since under the Bowden administration.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions
You're right
EDIT FAIL ON MY PART!!!!!!!!!!!
The past few drafts have gone quite well (we think…. it’s hard to really know for at least 4-5 years), but taking the draft picks instead of players further along in their development (note: who we’ve actually seen have some success as a professional) is far less volatile.
Don’t you mean taking players further along is less volatile and more predictable?
by bluelineswinger on Jun 18, 2010 12:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Your edit fail complete undermines the credibility of your arguments.
Therefore, Dunn will stay. ;-)
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions
As for part 2 of your post
That’s pretty much exactly my point. You bring up question mark after question mark after question mark…… I’ll again add Olsen, who is another (?). Of the group you listed, the only true long-term solutions would appear to be Zimmermann, Detwiler, and (perhaps) Lannan. Marquis could be a quick fix, and would almost certainly be in the rotation next year (or at least the bullpen) given his $7.5 million salary (to answer your question, he is under our control. Marquis was signed to a 2 year/$15 million deal this past offseason). Wang has a history of success before his injuries. As he’s 30 years old and coming off of several injuries in the past few years, it’s impossible to think he can improve. It’s more a question of how close he can come to being as good as he was with the Yankees early in his career.
Barring Marquis (who is actually currently injured) and Lannan (who is underperforming…. or perhaps performing more like many statheads would have expected [here comes another kick to the teeth]), every single pitcher you mentioned (plus Olsen, who missed most of last year with a shoulder problem and is currently on the DL with [you guessed it] a shoulder problem) has a dangerously checkered injury history.
- Zimmermann is returning from Tommy John surgery, which has become a process that usually turns out just fine. There’s no guarantee, though. Ask Scott Mathieson, Chris Capuano, and (a pitcher who recently made his debut against the Nats) Brad Lincoln. It’s my understanding that each of them has undergone the surgery twice.
- Detwiler pitched just 8 games in the minors in 2008, and is currently rehabbing from a hip injury that will end up costing him the entire first half. For a pitcher drafted in 2007, that’s an awful lot of time spent on the DL to this point. Furthermore, I keep proclaiming him as the third starter, which would imply how confident I feel in our other starters…. but that’s just my opinion.
- Wang has pitched in 27 games since the start of 2008 and is coming back from shoulder surgery.
Anyway, I appreciate the comment about bringing the heat. I knew there would be a healthy split of people who agreed and disagreed with me, and I figured this could at least get some discussion going. I tried to shed light on some of the positive and negative aspects, but admittedly had a slant towards the “trade him if you can get value” end. The scenarios I presented were optimistic in regards to the possible return, but as docholliday pointed out, I don’t think they’re so out of the realm of possibility that the Nats couldn’t get something close to them if enough buyers were interested in creating a bidding war.
In regards to how close our pitching prospects are, that question can generally be answered by your response to this question: How do you feel about Shairon Martis, Craig Stammen, Luis Atilano, and J.D. Martin? Again, I brought up Brad Meyers (7 day DL in Harrisburg, the organizational pitcher of the year in 2009) earlier. Aaron Thompson is currently sporting a 6.68 ERA with a 35:21 strikeout to walk ratio in 66 innings at Harrisburg. The starter who has been best in AAA so far this year (that hasn’t hit the majors at some point) is probably 27-year-old minor league veteran Andrew Kown. In short…. not close
by bluelineswinger on Jun 18, 2010 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions
I bought Baseball Prospectus 2010 today.
You won’t have me to kick around with your superior knowledge of other team’s rosters anymore! [coincidental that I bought it today before I read this post]
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions
The thing is for me...
…at least I’ve got question marks that are better than this year’s rotation. That’s an improvement over prior years when we were basically praying to the heavens that every other team in baseball was too stupid to pick up the scrap heap guys that only Bowden wanted. What are you going to do to replace Dunn’s offense if he leaves?
The bullpen improvement is kind of strength in numbers. What happens if Capps stinks? What happens if Bruney stinks? What happens if Walker stinks? Yes, all those guys are not going to pan out. But all of them aren’t going to fail either. And I’m going to have Slaten and Peralta to back things up if things get totally totally ugly. Strength in options gives you hope that something will pan out.
I kind of believe that strength in numbers will pan out in the rotation. Personally, I think 3.5 guys are going to work out next year from the current crop. I think Strasburg, Zimmermann or Detwiler, Marquis or Wang, and Lannan or one of the pitch to contact guys will pan out. That will be probably at least 1.5 pitchers better than we have this year and I’m okay with that improvement in the rotation if the bullpen can remain strong and we see progression from the prospects.
Give me the hope that the chasm will fill from the question marks I name rather than surety that there will be a chasm in left or 1B if we move Dunn.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Given you have interests in St. Louis....
…I am curious about your thoughts on the Halak trade.
Cool Hand Lannan has carried the mail in anonymity for two years. He'll carry the mail for at least two more! Give the man some defense and he'll give you the world. MOAR GROUNDERZ! MOAR DOUBLE PLAYZ!
by souldrummer on Jun 18, 2010 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Yea, Right!!....LOLOLOL,
…If you think the Padres are giving up Simon Castro or Clayton Richard, for Adam Dunn, I suggest checking into your nearest detox, dude…..The Pads would have to be completely blown away to give up Castro/Richard….and I doubt very seriously that they’d give up Pelzer, either…

by 


















