Are the Dodgers Dunn with Manny and Andruw?
You just gotta love that clever title, kids. That's why I make the big bucks.
In news certain to create a stir in Blue Country, Ned Colletti is reportedly on the horn in alternating 
conversations with Team Adam Dunn and Team Omar Minaya (commonly referred to in some circles as "the New York Mets"). The former set of calls would be to learn the interest (and price tag) Dunn has in playing left field for the Dodgers, a decision that would theoretically signal the end of a Manny Ramirez pursuit. While the Man Ram era's quick conclusion would likely disappoint many Dodger loyalists (and for those covering the squad, going from Manny to Dunn is certainly a "colorful" downsize), the Dodgers would be getting a decent consolation prize.
Granted, Dunn will never hit for Manny's average or clutch, and is a given to whiff at a rate that'll make Matt Kemp blush, but he's definitely capable of going yard. He's popped 40+ every season since 2004, a feat, as ESPN's Jayson Stark notes, no Dodger batter has notched over a full season during the same timespan. Again, he's no Manny (and all things being equal or possible, that's who I'd get), but the Blue could do considerably worse.
This news is also interesting coming on the heels of another Four Letter Network report -- this time from 
Buster Olney -- that Colletti is also burning up cellular minutes in an effort to make Andruw Jones a Met. What makes the scenario interesting isn't so much the monster dollar amount guaranteed to be eaten by the Dodgers -- if Colletti can get a transaction for less than 17 of the 22 mil apparently due to A.J., dude should win GM of the millennium ... in all sports -- but the "who" involved. New York would love to jettison a similarly overpaid (on a lesser scale for more years), underperforming Luis Castillo, but the Dodgers already have Blake DeWitt at second. Perhaps Omar Minaya is convinced David Wright has already peaked at 26, but I wouldn't count on it. Instead, just hope the Mets GM doesn't read the Yahoo! Sports page and learn that A.J.'s Dominican League stint with the Aguilas Cibaenas (and teammate Raffy Furcal) is yielding similar results to those in the Ravine.
As I said earlier, I really have no idea who the Mets would swap for Jones, but unless it's someone with a hefty contract running until 2027, the Dodgers would be wise to bite the bullet, then place said bullet in a gun and squeeze that trigger. Not that I doubt they'd handle it any differently, but just in case anybody in the front office is both on the fence and an avid Blue Notes reader ...
I'm not necessarily convinced that Jones is washed up (with a healthier knee, healthier mind-set and less healthy spring training waist, I suppose a rebound is possible), but I'm extremely skeptical this could happen in Blue. It took me less than two months last season to conclude that any progress would have to wait until 2009, when Jones could possibly enjoy enough time and distance from a campaign spent getting booed mercilessly upon every trip to the plate and about 95% of the ones back to the dugout. That'll do a serious tapdance on a hitter's psyche. Jones seemed completely uncomfortable as a Dodger, and unless he starts out next year seriously en fuego, I don't see that changing. And the longer he's around, the more this situation remains an issue, even if Jones is a good soldier about the whole mess. If the opportunity comes to cut bait, by all means, go for another fish. Even if it's a minnow.
Thoughts on Dunn over Manny (yay or nay) or saying goodbye to Jones (yay or ... I don't know ... double yay)?
AK
Photo of Dunn: (Don Lansu/WireImage.com)
Photo of Jones: (Ross D. Franklin/AP)
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
I figure if we can get a bag of balls for AJ we've done well. As you say bite the bullet and just pay the guy to be somewhere else. As for Dunn, I'm not crazy about him but you could definitely do a lot worse. However hopefully it's just Ned trying to start a fire under Boras to get some sort of Manny deal done. Still curious to see what our pitching plan is though. Randy Wolf doesn't exactly scream solid pitcher
Posted by: jukuren | December 29, 2008 at 05:38 PM
Funny, I always give credit for snappy heds to the editor.
Posted by: Rob McMillin | December 29, 2008 at 05:47 PM
I did cartwheels when I heard the rumor that FAJ was going to the Mets. but when I heard it was three years of Luis Castillo, I remained standing on my head. Even if there's money exchanged, what do the Dodgers need an overpaid second baseman for over the next three years. It would have made sense before the signing of the beard, but I don't see the point of standing in Blake Dewitt's progress.
Frankly, the Mets have two closers, and JJ Putz isn't going to be happy carrying K-Rod's glove. I'd see if there were a way to shoehorn him into the deal. But on the face of it, I don't care for it. Better to see what little you get from FAJ in2009, then outright him to the minor leagues if he continues to hit like a little girl.
Dunn over Manny? Absolutely. He'll come at half the price, and he's more than half the player Manny is. Not nearly as good, but younger and a better clubhouse guy over the long season. Plus you have to save some of that money to sign a stud pitcher. An incentive-laden deal for Ben Sheets is looking better every day. But Derek Lowe is still out there.
Posted by: SaMo | December 29, 2008 at 05:56 PM
Unlike reporters, bloggers write their own heds, doncha know? :)
Posted by: Jon Weisman | December 29, 2008 at 06:05 PM
THAT'S RIGHT, JON WEISMAN! YOU KNOW HOW WE DO IT!!!
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | December 29, 2008 at 06:09 PM
Dont like Dunn all that much. Don't like anything on the Mets trade block. Do like getting rid of FAJ.
Posted by: SteelMohawk | December 29, 2008 at 06:09 PM
So does Manny go the way of Barry if we sign Dunn?
Posted by: DBrim | December 29, 2008 at 06:17 PM
I like that Ned is turning up the pressure on Borass to make a freakin' counter-offer already...
The only way you rid yourself of your particular baseball headache is to assume somebody else's baseball headache instead. It is what it is. So is bad infield depth better than bad outfield depth? Maybe, since Castillo becomes a viable late-inning defensive replacement, which Loretta is most certainly not.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | December 29, 2008 at 06:54 PM
Dunn/Manny...eh. Tradeoffs are ultimately probably equal, but from a marketing/souvenir/fun standpoint... I'd rather have the Manny and a little fire in the belly.
Posted by: benzojones | December 29, 2008 at 07:07 PM
I don't like Dunn at all, so I hope this is a way to get Boras to at least call. I am pleased at any prospects of getting rid of Jones but I do not see any use for Castillo. Certainly I don't like to give away money, but I really believe that the Blue would be better off to just cut Jones loose and eat the loss. As others have stated, I am concerned about the pitching but I do have high hopes for our young guys. Personally based on what is out there, I feel like we should still try to resign Lowe. I know all of the reports that he does not want to be here, but since he has found out that there is not a great demand for his services, he may have changed his attitude. IMO he is better than anything else on the market at this point.
Posted by: Carl Creasman | December 29, 2008 at 07:17 PM
NAY NAY NAY on Dunn over Manny! Now Dunn, as a CONSOLATION prize, I say YAY. But, the best hitter out there is still available, of course they have to try and keep him.
As unpopular as this sounds, I would rather give Jones a shot at making a comeback and being the 4th OF... than sending him to another team and paying him to make a comeback. Bite the bullet Ned, "dance with the date you brought". Now if a viable trade surfaces, I'm all for it, but not at a cost of $20 mil. At that price, you have to try and see if your investment pays off. Guess it's wishful thinking anyway, since the trade with the Mess was one of those leftover WM rumors....
http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081229&content_id=3729835&vkey=news_la&fext=.jsp&c_id=la
Now Pierre... he's gotta go.
Posted by: Jesse from SC | December 29, 2008 at 07:29 PM
Why do some people have the impression that this deal involves the Dodgers taking on Castillo's $18 million over the next three years? In his article on the subject (see link below) Buster Olney states that "...it's unlikely that the Dodgers would have interest in Castillo, because they have a young second baseman in Blake DeWitt, and Castillo does not play a lot of different positions."
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3798671
Trading Jones for Castillo would make no sense, and would save the Dodgers very little in salary ($22 million for one year vs. $18 million over 3 years). Castillo has bad knees and is no longer the player he was with the Marlins. I could only see the Dodgers taking him on if the Mets paid ALL of Jones' contract and ate a significant portion of Castillo's. Then the Dodgers could send Castillo elsewhere, or they would be able to afford to eat what remained of his contract over the next three years.
Not only is Dunn being rumored to be possibly heading to the Dodgers, but so is Bobby Abreu. Until something actually happens, I won't even begin to speculate, except to say, it could just as easily be Manny. I'm guessing something could break between now and the end of next week.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | December 29, 2008 at 07:44 PM
Benzo, you misunderestimate the marketing potential for Adam Dunn.
The Dodgers can sell those spritzer fans with Dunn's picture on it, in celebration of all the times he fans. They can sell blue oxes (Dodger blue, of course) to go with his Paul Bunyan biceps. And instead of margaritas, they can sell lemon drops to go with all the fly balls that drop in front of his feet.
C'mon, Dodger marketing staff. Use your imagination. Bats shaped like 2x4s, for his lumbering speed. And as AK has so ably demonstrated, his name alone is ripe for pun-ishment, (Sorry to pun on pun).
Posted by: SaMo | December 29, 2008 at 07:45 PM
Even though I support the idea of signing Manny Ramirez, I also see the positives of signing Adam Dunn as an alternative.
Here's why:
1) Draft picks. Losing Manny means the Dodgers add two first round picks, while signing Dunn won't cost the Dodgers a pick. I like the idea of the Dodgers adding a legitimate slugger AND strengthening the farm system by allowing Logan White to work his magic. (Hopefully he won't pick a dud like Preston Mattingly.)
2) Payroll. Dunn is possibly looking for a four-year deal at roughly $60 million. If he thinks he can't get that, he could settle for a one-year deal with the hope he can rack up a long-term deal next season. Either way, he will be a significant decrease in payroll for the Dodgers as opposed to signing Manny. That money could perhaps go to signing Ben Sheets, who surprisingly is still on the market. So, let's say the Dodgers sign Dunn to a $15 million-a-year contract, and sign Sheets to a possible two-year, $30 million deal. That total comes out to about $30 million, while signing Manny alone would only save about $7 million. Dunn could be a steal at $15 million a year. Ditto for Sheets if he's healthy. (His elbow was "sore" late last season, so it's possible he's not quite as damaged goods as it may seem.)
3) Pitching. I'm not sure how wise it is to spend so much on a bat when the Dodgers' starting rotation is weak in the back end. As stated above, the Dodgers could use some extra cash to land a pitcher by choosing Dunn over Manny. And that goes for 2010 as much as 2009.
4) Left-handed power-hitter. Of all the Dodger young bats, Matt Kemp has the most potential to be a legitimate power-hitter. So, since he's right-handed, it may be wise for the Dodgers to add a left-handed power-hitter.
5) First base option. This is a power position, and the Dodgers, who in recent years have been weak in home run power, could use a lift at such a position. Perhaps Joe Torre could move Dunn to first, which means Ned Colletti could shop James Loney for a similarly talented player at another position. It's a thought. Meanwhile, Manny can only play right field, and who knows for how long since he's entering his late 30s. Both Dunn and Manny are poor defensively, but Dunn is only 29, while Manny is 36. Also, this could help the idea of keeping Juan Pierre if there isn't a suitable trade option for the Dodgers.
6) Dunn surrounded by the other Dodger bats. A great power-hitter like Dunn might thrive with the bats around him that the Dodgers have: Kemp, Loney, Russell Martin, Andre Ethier, and Casey Blake. Those players generally hit for a good average, but lack help from a huge slugger in the cleanup spot. Dunn might be a perfect fit to be sandwiched by those players. Adding a player who has a low batting average but puts up huge power numbers might be a great trade-off if he has the right bats around him.
7) Very consistent, probably not a steroid-user, and in his prime. It's safe to say that Dunn is perhaps the most consistent power-hitter in the Majors. He's hit literally 40 homers a year for the past four seasons, and hit 46 in the season before that. Was that due to a small ballpark? Nope. In the past three seasons he hit 62 homers at home and 58 homers away. Steroids didn't play a part in the Majors in 2007 and 2008 season, so the fact that Dunn performed the same as previous season says a lot about him. Also, Dunn is only 29, he's 6'6, not injury-prone, and a decent athlete if he was a former quarterback at the University of Texas.
Here's a comparison between Dunn's road stats and Ryan Howard's road stats over the past three seasons:
Howard: 75 HRs, 225 RBI, .278 BA, 46 doubles, .587 Slugging, 307 SOs
Dunn: 58 HRs, 134 RBI, .244 BA, 43 doubles, .516 Slugging. 266 SOs
Howard has the better stats, but Dunn is right there with him on doubles and slugging percentage, and he struck out less than Howard.
Are the Dodgers better off with Dunn or Manny next season? Certainly Manny. But there's more to the Dodgers' future than just one or two seasons.
And should the Dodgers sign Dunn, and therefore not sign Manny, Dodger fans shouldn't be disappointed based on the reasons I stated above.
Posted by: Bobby | December 29, 2008 at 07:56 PM
THE DODGERS DO NOT NEED ADAM DUNN!!! Just another FAJ. You think the Dodgers would have to overpay to get Manny. Putting Adam Dunn in the outfield is like another Jones. He is not decent, AK!!! I told you about Betemit, I told you about Andy LaRoche, I told you about Grady and now I'm telling you about Adam Dunn. He is NG! Dunn being "Capable" is not good enough.
Package
Posted by: Package | December 29, 2008 at 08:18 PM
If we pick up Castillo, does that free up Dewitt for a trade for a starter?
Posted by: Eddie | December 29, 2008 at 09:01 PM
Mannywood
Mannyville
Mannyworld
Just do it - get it done.
Manny - Mr. Ultimo
Posted by: 68elcamino427 | December 29, 2008 at 09:22 PM
Package--if you could provide some statistical evidence to back up your far-reaching claims, your words would carry significantly more credibility. If you want to talk intangibles, I have a tough time seeing how a big, slow, subdued Texan in his prime "is another" fast-talking, smug, overweight Curacaoian (sic?) on the decline.
I like anyone who has an OBP north of .370 and hits 40 bombs a year. Sure things are really, really, really... good.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | December 29, 2008 at 09:26 PM
Oh, and...
Eddie: I like the way you're thinking.
elcamino: at any price? You're a Borass operative, and I will summarily ignore your commentary.
SaMo: I know you were being sarcastic, but if the Mariners could successfully market Big Richie, I don't think LA should have much trouble selling Da-Da-Dunn.
Bobby: I can't tell you how happy it makes me to see someone else thinking through all the rational considerations here. Well done, sir. Two minor points: Isn't Dunn still 28? And Manny 37 before opening day? Second, throw in OBP to your analysis of Howard v. Dunn. Then consider that big lean guys have a lot more staying power than big fat guys. And, of course, the cost of Howard. In the end, I prefer Howard. But in any event, great sum-up, homes. I especially like your inclusion of our complete and total need for a consistent slugger in the middle of all those young, power-wanting bats. Good bid, brojo. Let's hope Ned sees the same light.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | December 29, 2008 at 09:43 PM
Package,
Stating that Dunn is "Just another FAJ" simply cannot be defended. We all know that Dunn hits for a low average and strikes out a lot. But he also has prodigious power, is an on base machine, and drives in lots of runs. In the last five years Dunn has done the following:
HRs = 46, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40
RBIs = 102, 101, 92, 106, 100
OBP = .388, .387, .365, .386, .386
Like you I would prefer Manny. However, that doesn't mean a strong case can't be made for the much younger Dunn. As I've stated before, I'm not sold on Dunn, since I've never had the opportunity to see him play on a regular basis. I worry that he may be overly passive at the plate, and would drive me nuts taking called third strikes with regularity, much like J.D. Drew. If the Dodgers end up signing Dunn I will welcome the addition of his power, but will reserve my judgment on the full package (no pun intended) until I can observe him everyday.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | December 29, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Re: Price
Of course there's going to be a price.
What would you pay for a career OPS+ 155?
3 years $75,000,000.00?
Sans Schmidt and Young's contracts would this even be a topic of discussion?
I'm sure Boras is feverishly doing everything he possibly can to create a bidder's war for Manny - so far that's not happening.
Posted by: 68elcamino427 | December 29, 2008 at 10:56 PM
Correction - JONES not Young.
Posted by: 68elcamino427 | December 29, 2008 at 10:59 PM
This deal is not to be Dunn
I also wouldn't trade FAJ, as much as I hated his last year performance, for Luis Castillo.
Posted by: K T | December 30, 2008 at 12:29 AM
SaMo well said... all we need is lumberjack pancakes from denny's served in concession stands and a blue-crew ox plush toy to seal the deal.
While i would love to see FAJ and JP go, it still concerns me that we are picking up a 5th OF. We should dump one before we sign another, otherwise it makes us look desperate (not that we are not already).
I agree with the Dunn folks and the Manny folks the points are valid, but i would rather have Manny. Marketing Dunn is like Greg Oden, or selling a pet rock. MONGO sure can smash and get on base enough, but MONGO cant propel a team. He never made the playoffs in Cincinati, nor his brief stint in Arizona. Manny on the other hand has been the best playoff hitter of this generation, granted he has been on better teams, but part of that is that he makes entire teams better. David Ortiz was crap until he hit in front of Manny, and now he is back to an average hitter now that Manny is gone. People still pitch to Dunn because he still strikes out, and the svelte Dunn is not a quick runner, so walking him doesn't always strike fear in a pitcher to have him on base, If they are not afraid of him, that doesn't mean any better pitches for Ethier or Kemp to hit. You have to admit Ethier was on fire because he got a lot more to hit last year because of Manny. I can't say the same for people batting in front of Dunn or Abreu.
Posted by: poppinfresh | December 30, 2008 at 07:41 AM
Package:
Exactly what did you tell us about Grady? Do you know how many more games the Dodgers won with Joe Torre in 2008 than they did with Grady Little in 2007?
Two.
Torre is no magician, and Grady was no fool. I didn't care for a lot of the moves he made, but give Joe Torre Bret Tomko and Mark Hendrickson two of every five days, and I don't see him winning more than 82 games either.
The Dodgers will stand or fall on the strength of their pitching. Signing Manny means there's no money left for a pitcher. Signing Adam Dunn means two draft picks and a carload of cash still available for a front-end starter or a closer.
Posted by: SaMo | December 30, 2008 at 07:57 AM