As mentioned by Phil in another comment thread, Joe Sheehan at Prospectus looks at a possible Dunn trade.  (I can’t tell what’s subscription and what’s not anymore).

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. 


About The Author

Related Posts

11 Responses

  1. Phil Rizzuto Parmesan

    It’s not so much that I can’t accept Dunn being traded, it’s that I have no faith that Krivsky can get equal value for him, particularly if we’re talking our favorite fungible commodity again.

    Our best hope is with the Twins or Angels. I would rather sell the Yanks on Junior.

    But it’s not like the Reds haven’t done this before. On 16 December, 1976, the following trade went down:

    The Cincinnati Reds traded Tony Perez and Will McEnaney to the Montreal Expos in exchange for Woodie Fryman and Dale Murray.

    Why this isn’t mentioned among the franchise’s worst trades ever is beyond me. Perez, at 34, was of course “too old” and blocking future star Dan Dreissen. Fryman was that Proven Veteranâ„¢ (going on 37) we had to have for the back end of our bullpen.

    Doggie had OPS+’s of 120, 119, 104, 109 and 121 the five seasons after he left. Fryman liked Cincy so much that he packed his bags at mid-season and retired to his Kentucky farm.

    More than one fan thought at the time that this trade cost us a chance at our third consecutive World Championship. I’m not sure they were wrong. I only hope that when Dunn is traded we won’t be looking back thinking what might have been (and i wish i could believe what I just typed).

  2. rickNmd

    The Reds had Driesssen waiting and felt he had to play, McEnaney was a coke head with serious problems and Fryman actually pitched pretty well. Murray was a promising reliever but didn’t pan out. It happens. But the issue was what to do about Perez vs. Driessen. At the time it was sort of a no-brainer because Driessen was really promising and Perez was getting up there.

  3. Y-City Jim

    Sparky said the Perez trade was the biggest mistake of his managerial career.

  4. Y-City Jim

    So what do we make of the trade demands of the Angels for Dunn? A starting pitcher and a starting 2B.

    The Angels had preliminary discussions with Cincinnati about acquiring Dunn, according to a baseball source, but those talks quickly ended when the Reds requested a proven major league starting pitcher, a major league infielder — preferably a second baseman — and a top prospect.

  5. greg

    Personally, I don’t think he’ll be traded. I remember hearing the same stuff last year. Krivsky is just seeing what he can get for him (probably not enough).

  6. Shawn

    “Doggie had OPS+’s of 120, 119, 104, 109 and 121 the five seasons after he left.”

    True dat. But Driessen had OPS+s of 124, 108, 102, 122, and 107 in those seasons, hardly a big difference. Bob Howsam did a bad job in getting return, but the deal was really made to get Driessen in the lineup, and that actually worked out fine.

  7. Shawn

    And re:Sparky, Sparky was full of it, as usual, though I love the guy. Perez was traded, the Reds stopped winning the World Series, therefore the reason the Reds stopped winning was that Perez was traded. Hogwash. The reasons were that the lineup got older, Joe Morgan stopped being Superman, and the pitching disintegrated further.

  8. Y-City Jim

    Brandon Watson extended his hitting streak to 40 games last night.

  9. Phil Rizzuto Parmesan


    You’re right, of course, but…

    Bob Howsam did a bad job in getting return

    is kind of the point. Driessen and Perez may have been a wash, but Tony wasn’t “too old”, which was evidenced by his next five seasons with the Expos and Red Sox. Once again, a position player was traded for an old reliever – one who gave up on the club halfway through the ’77 season.

    Dale Murray spent a season and a half in a Reds’ uni with ERA+’s of 80 and 86. McEnaney put up an ERA+ of 96 for Montreal in his only season there, so he was essentially league-average. What it comes down to is that the Reds traded Perez for essentially nothing or at the very least ,commodities which could have benn had off the waiver wire. In this way, it looks a whole lot like The Trade. If Krivsky thinks a closer for Dunner is a good idea, we could be going down this same road yet again.

  10. ChicagoRedsFan

    From different media/analyst reports, it sounds like Krivsky is asking for “too much” for Dunn. That’s at least promising.

  11. Shawn

    “Once again, a position player was traded for an old reliever – one who gave up on the club halfway through the ‘77 season.”

    Not exactly correct, PRP. Though I was a mere youth at the time, I remember the Perez trade well. The trade had two goals: make room in the lineup for Driessen, who had been tried at 3B and the OF and found wanting, and get some pitching. As Driessen was 25 in 1977, and Perez was 35, this was a sensible approach. And Driessen was a better player than Reds fans remember.

    In getting Fryman and Murray, the Reds got two of the three best Expos’ pitchers of 1976, for Perez, who was a repetitive part, and McEnaney, who’d had a lousy 1976. Meanwhile, Fryman at age 36 had gone 13-13 with an Expos’ team that lost 107 games, and posted a 3.37 ERA, with an ERA+ of 110. Murray was a righty reliever with a 13 saves and an ERA of 3.26 for that same terrible Expos team. Murray was supposed to be the big prize in that deal, a bullpen workhorse to help replace aging Clay Carroll and Pedro Borbon. He did pitch a lot in 1977, just not very well. He would see better days again.

    I think Howsam just made a deal that turned out bad. Sure, there were warning signs, but it was a lot of bad luck that both Fryman and Murray washed out in Cincy. Both would go on to more success elsewhere.