I’m thoroughly exhausted with this topic, but here are the main points:
- Dunn is a valuable player, but “a lightning rod for criticism in Cincinnati.” “Criticism of his defense and conditioning–justified to some extent–has taken on a piling-on feel.”
- Krivsky should not be fooling around trying to get a closer in a Dunn trade: “A closer, even a very good one, isn’t going to make a difference to this team, and it’s a role that can be filled accidentally when the Reds are ready to contend.”
- Sheehan sees five suitors for Dunn, in reverse order of likelihood: 5. Oakland (only makes sense if they bench Kendall and catch Piazza); 4. San Diego (ballpark may diminish Dunn’s value, on both offense and defense — I actually disagree about the offense part); 3. Yankees (Cashman hasn’t been active about trading top prospects lately); 2. Angels (Stoneman never trades prospects); and
1. Minnesota Twins (They haven’t developed a hitting prospect since Mauer, but they have lots of arms. . . and Krivsky still thinks he needs arms).
As is, Adam Dunn is going somewhere, and that somewhere is probably a contending team in the American League.. . . Dunn is a legitimate three- or four-win player across a half-season, and each of the five teams above has a replacement-level player they can excise from their lineup upon Dunn’s arrival. Normally, a midseason pickup is overrated; in this case, it truly could be the difference between playing 162 games and playing many more.
I’m slowly resigning myself to the fact that Dunn will probably be traded, but I’m not happy about the idea.