Dunn signs a two-year contract with the Nationals

[dps]

Finishing 4th in the NL East with Dunn is no better than finishing 4th in the NL East without him, and in fact is worse since you're committing $20 million dollars to do it.

It is if he puts butts in the seats, which I admit is a stretch--I don't thinik he's a big enough name (or talent) to actually draw a lot of additional fans.

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

Well, first I'll admit up front that I don't know what "stripping this down a lot" means, but if it means STFU, OK, I'll quit. I went overboard with Dickay earlier today, so maybe it's just a bad day for me.

It doesn't mean "STFU", I'm actually rather enjoying this debate. But I think you're focusing and putting far too much weight in the negatives.

But before I leave, I NEVER SAID Abreu > Dunn. Nowhere.

I think we misinterpreted each other here. I realize you didn't say that or insinuate it, and I didn't mean to insinuate that you did, but I could certainly see where I did.

I basically said exactly what you said, offensively they are a wash. But the Nats paid TWICE AS MUCH for Dunn. TWICE AS MUCH. Is Dunn twice as good as Abreu? Not in my opinion. Especially baserunning and fielding, although Abreu is deteriorating rapidly in the field.

And both signings are good for their respective teams. Abreu is a great .280/.400/.450 guy for a contending team like the Angels, especially at that price. Likewise, Dunn is great for the Nat's. Like I said earlier, the Nat's biggest Achilles heel ever since moving to Washington has been power production and getting on base, and Dunn remedies that instantaneously. I'm not sure about how they compare in terms of baserunning, but I highly doubt the gap is all that substantial, and Dunn is going to be playing 1B for the Nats while Abreu is going to DH and play the outfield, so the defense is essentially a moot point since they'll be playing different positions. It may be twice as much, but it still isn't that much, especially when Carlos Silva is getting 12 million a year to suck like a Hoover. And this also leads me into the next part.

Next year the Nats are going to face a couple of other decisions, in particular Zimmerman becomes arb eligible. So, IMO, again, $20 million for two years for a left handed batter that's not much better than another that signed the same day for $5 million, and isn't all that much better than the left handed first baseman they have now (though he is injury prone), and on a team that's going to probably finish in last place both years, or at the best next to last (given Florida's desire to spend nothing on ballplayers), and IMO they could do that well without Dunn.

It's only a two year deal. If they had signed him for anything more than two years, I wouldn't be nearly as adamant in defending the deal, but two years for a guy like Dunn isn't bad at all. Especially when you consider that, if things go according to plan and maybe a little better, they could be ready to compete three or four years from now and they'd be able to resign Dunn just in time for that to happen. That's very speculative and optimistic at this point, but just saying.

Finishing 4th in the NL East with Dunn is no better than finishing 4th in the NL East without him, and in fact is worse since you're committing $20 million dollars to do it.

Except that he could generate them a lot of revenue, and hell, who knows, maybe he can help them be reasonably competitive. I wouldn't go bet the bank on the Nationals, but I can see them being reasonably competitive now, certainly moreso than they would be without him. Plus if/when he walks at the end of the two years, they'll probably rake in some draft picks for him, or they can trade him for some solid prospects in year two of the deal.

And he's probably not even going to hit 30 HR's either year for the Nats, much less 40.

For what it's worth, the new Nationals Park is more or less a neutral park in terms of favoring pitchers vs. hitters.

(multi-year): Batting - 101, Pitching - 102
(one-year): Batting - 101, Pitching - 102
Over 100 favors batters, under 100 favors pitchers.

[200tang]

Really this signing isn't as bad as you think OFG, if anything needs to be worked on its roster construction. How many OF do you guys have now?



Even if you compared Abreu and Dunn at their prices and years, Dunn is entering his prime with Abreu on the decline. Abreu will not start as many games and is much more of a liability in the outfield than Dunn playing 1B. Also, as already pointed out, Dunn strikes out more, but does that matter when he hits for more power and projects to get on base just as much as Abreu?

[HoustonGM]

Perhaps Dunn doesn't want to DH and therefore didn't want to sign with an AL team.

Good point. That's a possibility. I don't recall seeing any statements from him or his agent about that, though (which, of course, doesn't mean it isn't true).

I'm not saying that every deal makes sense, but the people hired to be GM's are not stupid.

I think Steve Phillips is evidence against this.

Well, first I'll admit up front that I don't know what "stripping this down a lot" means, but if it means STFU, OK, I'll quit. I went overboard with Dickay earlier today, so maybe it's just a bad day for me.

I think he's just saying that you're really overthinking it and digging into it deep.

I basically said exactly what you said, offensively they are a wash. But the Nats paid TWICE AS MUCH for Dunn. TWICE AS MUCH. Is Dunn twice as good as Abreu? Not in my opinion. Especially baserunning and fielding, although Abreu is deteriorating rapidly in the field.

They are not a wash offensively. Abreu's OPS+ the last 4 years has ranged from 114 to 126. Dunn, from 114 to 141. Dunn had an off year in 2006, but those other 4 seasons were 129, 136, 141. Abreu's other 3 (besides his 114) were 120, 126, and 126. Then factor in that this is about projecting future value, and Dunn is easily ahead by a solid margin.

Abreu's walk rate is trending downward. His OBP's the last two years were .369 and .371. Dunn is better at getting on base and CRUSHES him in the power department.

Defensively, they're a wash. Slight edge to Abreu on the bases.

And he's probably not even going to hit 30 HR's either year for the Nats, much less 40.

Barring injury, yes, he will. The guy has phenomenal power.

There's a great article in The Hardball Times annual analyzing the results of the Hit Tracker tool, which measures various attributes of player home runs, such as distance, wind, ballpark, etc. Dunn had 6 home runs of 450+ feet, more than anybody else. His average "standard distance" on his home runs was 412.2. Standard distance is how far the homer would travel if hit in 70 degree calm weather at sea level.

Using the tool, they then projected how many home runs Dunn would hit in 2009 given each home park (they did the same for Manny Ramirez and Jason Bay). His 2009 projection in Washington is 44 home runs. His lowest projection is 36 with the Mets, most is 49 with the Dodgers. Dunn is a legit 40 home run power, regardless of park. There is absolutely no way he hits under 30 home runs in each of his two years with the Nationals, barring injury.

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

Really this signing isn't as bad as you think OFG, if anything needs to be worked on its roster construction. How many OF do you guys have now?

LOL. That's certainly true.

Even if you compared Abreu and Dunn at their prices and years, Dunn is entering his prime with Abreu on the decline. Abreu will not start as many games and is much more of a liability in the outfield than Dunn playing 1B. Also, as already pointed out, Dunn strikes out more, but does that matter when he hits for more power and projects to get on base just as much as Abreu?

Exactly. They're a wash in almost every way, until you factor in that Dunn is entering/in his prime and Abreu is in the twilight of his career.

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

I think he's just saying that you're really overthinking it and digging into it deep.

Something like that yeah.

Barring injury, yes, he will. The guy has phenomenal power.

There's a great article in The Hardball Times annual analyzing the results of the Hit Tracker tool, which measures various attributes of player home runs, such as distance, wind, ballpark, etc. Dunn had 6 home runs of 450+ feet, more than anybody else. His average "standard distance" on his home runs was 412.2. Standard distance is how far the homer would travel if hit in 70 degree calm weather at sea level.

Using the tool, they then projected how many home runs Dunn would hit in 2009 given each home park (they did the same for Manny Ramirez and Jason Bay). His 2009 projection in Washington is 44 home runs. His lowest projection is 36 with the Mets, most is 49 with the Dodgers. Dunn is a legit 40 home run power, regardless of park. There is absolutely no way he hits under 30 home runs in each of his two years with the Nationals, barring injury.

I didn't know anything about that projection or tool, but it makes plenty of sense. Very few of Dunn's homers and squeakers that just make it over the fence, and a good portion of them are jaw-dropping shots.

[HoustonGM]

The projection is a weighted average of his home runs the last 3 years, and then adjusted for the factors of each park and climate.

[Jeffy25]

seems like this gives them a surplus of power hitters...pena, milage, dunn...seems, to me on paper, like a lot of guys with plenty of pop, but who is going to get on? you can't win consistently by hitting solo's all year.

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

seems like this gives them a surplus of power hitters...pena, milage, dunn...seems, to me on paper, like a lot of guys with plenty of pop, but who is going to get on? you can't win consistently by hitting solo's all year.

They have like no power outside of Dunn.....

• 117 homers last season - 15th out of 16 teams in the NL last season
• .373 team slugging percent - Last in the NL
• Leading home run hitters were Ryan Zimmerman and Lastings Milledge with 14
• The only other players with double digit homers were Willie Harris (13), Ron Belliard (11), and Elijah Dukes (13), and there's no way Harris duplicates his performance from last year, and I'd bet against Belliard duplicating his as well. Zimmerman, Dukes, and Milledge should get better, but still not much power there.

[kenny1234]

See, the funny thing is, I never said I thought or felt that way, so I don't know how you got the impression that I did.

Sorry, that part of my comment wasn't actually directed at you - it was more of a general statement. The Every time any decision is made, or in the case of Dunn not made, people criticize the GM's by implying that they are stupid, don't understand the "new" statistics, and can't make a decent decision to save their life. And I just think that is arrogant. Do I agree with every decision by any GM? Of course not. But they have the job they have because they can convince people of their ability to put together a team that either wins or makes money. And that takes a combination of intellectual ability and baseball knowledge that I'm guessing no one on this forum has.

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

Sorry, that part of my comment wasn't actually directed at you - it was more of a general statement. The Every time any decision is made, or in the case of Dunn not made, people criticize the GM's by implying that they are stupid, don't understand the "new" statistics, and can't make a decent decision to save their life. And I just think that is arrogant. Do I agree with every decision by any GM? Of course not. But they have the job they have because they can convince people of their ability to put together a team that either wins or makes money. And that takes a combination of intellectual ability and baseball knowledge that I'm guessing no one on this forum has.

No worries.

[200tang]

also who said Pena was starting? There OF to me looks like Willingham, Milledge, Dukes and Kearns?

[YEAH DAAAAWG]

also who said Pena was starting? There OF to me looks like Willingham, Milledge, Dukes and Kearns?

Hopefully Willingham, Milledge, and Dukes. It's pretty apparent to me that Kearns is not capable of hitting well enough to be a major league regular.

[oriole^]

Pretty much, or they found someone else.....

Bowden has basically given the Nationals real tools to survive. He refitted them, and while painful, in the long run they should look good. If Peter Angelos dies...

...I'm leading the parade down Charles Street.

Would I have wanted Dunn for the O's? Heck yes. But I do see OFG's point on one thing: $10m is probably too much money, and it's the one reason I would see that most AL GMs didn't bite. (I'm hopeful that this means the O's are seriously considering extending Brian Roberts and building around him, but I don't know if that'll be the case.)

[boomboom]

. I'm not saying that every deal makes sense, but the people hired to be GM's are not stupid.

I have looked at Bowden moves and I am not sure how he got a job after Cinci, his moves were bad, and I also think that he gets out smarted. Now I also think that no GM is worse than Bill Bavasi, I mean seriously Jose Vidro!!!