Nationals Unlikely To Re-Sign Dunn?

The Nationals are unlikely to re-sign slugger Adam Dunn, according to MASN's Ben Goessling.  Goessling's sources say GM Mike Rizzo and manager Jim Riggleman find Dunn's defense untenable, and the team will seek a better defensive first baseman like Carlos Pena.  Goessling also hears that outfielder Jayson Werth "could be a possibility" for the Nationals this offseason.    

On September 19th, Dunn told Adam Kilgore of the Washington Post that extension talks "have picked back up."  At that time Dunn expected to reach free agency in November, but still re-sign with Washington.

Dunn is known to be seeking four years but would be open to three with the Nationals.  Goessling expects the Nats to offer arbitration to the Type A free agent.  If they do, Dunn will have to decide whether to accept on November 30th.  As I mentioned earlier today, Dunn's low Elias number (projected at 75.000 currently) increases the chances of the Nationals failing to snag a first-round pick as part of the compensation.

39 Responses to Nationals Unlikely To Re-Sign Dunn? Leave a Reply

  1. It’s a mistake if they do not resign him.

  2. this is why you try to re-sign a player before the trade deadline… if you dont re-sign him or it doesn’t look promising, you trade him for a haul. now they’re only getting draft picks. good job, rizzo!

    • Agreed. Best to try and get present market value for a guy instead of future value. But don’t sneeze at draft picks, either. Cheaper, maybe a higher potential than what they were being offered, so it could be a good move to hang on to him in the long run.

      • i never sneeze at draft picks, but proven talent (or at least AA-AAA talent) would be better than a crap shoot in the draft.

      • alxn 5 years ago

        How exactly are draft picks cheaper? They would have to pay the signing bonuses, and they would have to pay the remainder of Dunn’s contract. To me it seems that trading for prospects would save the team money.

  3. bjsguess 5 years ago

    Come on Nats fans. You all told us that holding onto Dunn was a solid move.

    Since then your team has continued to suck it up – coming in a solid last place in the NL East. These comments don’t make it sound like they want to risk a 1/$15m type deal in the event he accepts arbitration.

    This was a huge screw-up then and it only looks worse now.

    • Piccamo 5 years ago

      I know that I was one of the people who disagreed that retaining Dunn was a total disaster. I’m not a Nationals fan; I’m an Orioles fan. My main point of contention was that if Rizzo wasn’t willing to get anything of value, he shouldn’t simply buckle just so that he could move Dunn. Doing so would net a lesser return and, if others saw that he would give in relatively easily, would weaken him in future negotiations. The value of a Type A free agent who you expect to decline arbitration was found to be ~$4MM plus whatever projected production he will providing, minus his remaining salary. If Rizzo did not value the offers to be near that value, he was right to hold on to them. If Rizzo did not expect to offer arbitration, you are correct.You are blowing the scale of the screw-up out of proportion. Your argument makes it seem like trading Dunn for anything that was being offered would have been preferable to keeping him on the team, which is certainly not the case.

      Edit: I misremembered the value of a Type A. I originally had it as ~$6MM, it should be between $3MM and $8MM.

      • alxn 5 years ago

        Is Daniel Hudson not enough of a return to pull the trigger on? He’s looking like an ace out in a hitter friendly ballpark. The chances the Nats draft a player who turns into what Hudson is and looks like he will be are extremely low.

        • Piccamo 5 years ago

          If Daniel Hudson (#66 prospect before the season) really was offered, Dunn should have been on the Chi Sox. According to Wang’s research, a 51 – 75 pitching prospect carries a value of $12.1MM. Dunn at best would have been worth $7.8MM for his pick, plus his production’s value (best possible projection could have been about $4MM worth for rest of season). So Dunn would have been worth under best possible circumstances about $12MM, while getting that value in return. That does not even account for the salary savings.

          If Hudson was indeed offered for Dunn, Rizzo made an awful move by not making the trade.

          • alxn 5 years ago

            Reports were that the White Sox traded Hudson for Jackson specifically so they could then swap Jackson for Dunn. So apparently they were willing to do it, although it could have just been a false report.

  4. Perhaps they just wait a year with a stopgap (Lance Berkman/Aubrey Huff/etc…) at first base and then make a move for Prince/Gonzo/Pujols if/when any of them hit free agency after 2011…

  5. aaron b 5 years ago

    Paging Tom Ricketts………Your 2011-2014 First Baseman is on line 1

    • BlueCatuli 5 years ago

      He would wear the right field bleachers out.

    • Bob George 5 years ago

      If Hendry even thinks about signing Dunn he should be fired. He can’t play defense, he strikes out a million times a year, and he’s as slow as a snail. He’s a DH. No National League team has any business putting Dunn in the lineup.

      • aaron b 5 years ago

        You might very well be right. Hendry has shown an affinity for much shittier hitters that run well and look good in a baseball uniform.

        Hence why this is a 140 Million dollar 70 game winner.

        Maybe we can get a first baseman who can play small ball and bunt runners over instead?

        • alxn 5 years ago

          Dunn could very well continue mashing for the next several years, but it just doesn’t make sense for a mediocre team with that much payroll already to try and fix things by spending even more money.

          • aaron b 5 years ago

            How exactly do we go about improving the team? Rostering fans from the bleachers? Using pinch hitters from the 3rd row?

          • alxn 5 years ago


          • aaron b 5 years ago

            In the current economic structure. You will (Nor SHOULD YOU) never see the Cubs do a Pirates/Marlins like Rebuild.

            Do the Yankees rebuild? Do the Red Sox?

            It would be a slap to the fan base to not maintain a certain level of payroll. No way Ricketts risks his Cubs investment on a hairbrained “rebuild without any prospects”.

            I never understand this new “The cubs screwed up with Free Agent X. So lets not ever sign free agents again.” attitude. This thing has been running rampant on the message boards. My theory is most of these folks weren’t around for pre 2003 penny pinching Cubdom?

          • alxn 5 years ago

            I never said they should go the route of the Marlins or Pirates.

            However, they have enough horrible contracts and enough holes that spending all that money on one aging player is a recipe for disaster. If the Cubs had their payroll under control then signing Dunn wouldn’t be that bad. If they sign Dunn and he starts to decline then they are stuck with yet another bad contract and find themselves in the same situation they are in now.

            I’m not saying the Cubs should spend less money, but they need to at least clear all these bad contracts before they start handing out more of them.

          • aaron b 5 years ago

            I’m not advocating giving Dunn an 8 year blank check. However I don’t see how adding a 900+ career hitter to our lineup for his age 31-34 seasons could be a bad thing.

            We’ve already cleared the payroll down to the 100-115 range for 2011. We have another 30 million coming off the books next off season. How low do we need to go exactly?

            Surely you aren’t suggesting we tank until Soriano is off the payroll?

          • alxn 5 years ago

            I’m suggesting the Cubs develop their own talent to sign instead of constantly signing aging veterans. You said yourself why signing Dunn could be a bad thing. He’s heading into his 30’s with a body that could potentially break down. That chances that he doesn’t decline are extremely low.

            It’s not like the Cubs will get Dunn for a discount. If they can that they would be a great move, but chances are it will require a significant contract to sign him.

          • aaron b 5 years ago

            I agree that the Cubs need to have a better farm system. However the reality is that they don’t have any impact bats in the system. Even if they drafted Adam Dunn 2.0 in 2011. The kid wouldn’t be ready until 2014ish anyways. By then Dunn would probably be looking for his next contract.

            Dunn has been remarkably consistent. Has never had a disclosed injury. Has never missed any game time with injury. I’d argue he is probably the safest Free Agent pickup you could possibly make.

            The fact that the “stone age” crowd doesn’t like him, do to lack of tools and love of baseball. Likely means that you get him for much less than a true market value.

            In an age where Ryan Howard makes 25 and Fielder and Adrian Gonzalez are asking for 20 Million. The idea of getting Dunn for 12-14 Million dollars per year should be a slam dunk.

            I really don’t understand how people can talk themselves out of this idea?

          • Hendry screwed up by not signing Dunn in the first place instead of Milton Bradley. I would have advocated for him then and I will continue to do so now. The Cubs still need run production. I don’t see how anyone can argue against signing a lifetime 900+ OPS hitter. The guy flat out knows how to mash the ball. Does he strike out and play poor defense? Yes. Can I live with some of those things in light of our other free agent busts (Soriano, Bradley)? Yes.

            Now that Lee is finally gone Dunn will have a spot at 1B open for him. The guy likes Wrigley Field and will fit in great. I will welcome Hendry finally getting some proven production on the north side and so should every sensible Cub fan.

          • clark182 5 years ago

            Exactly. If Dunn is the missing piece to an existing playoff team than I’d say it’s worth the risk. But the Cubs have a number of missing pieces and their hoping their biggest current piece(Ramirez) has a bounce back year. With 1B options like Pujols, Gonzalez, and Fielder available as free agents after 2011, why commit to Dunn when you can look at a 1 year option to get by at first base while you see how the young guys progress and if Ramirez bounces back. If by some miracle the stars align and the Cubs are in contention, then they can add that missing piece at the trade deadline.

      • thegrayrace 5 years ago

        Out of curiosity, why are strikeouts or sluggish baserunning worse from a 1B than a DH?

        Defense is a solid point, but I fail to see how the other two points make a difference. The DH doesn’t have somebody else running the bases for them, nor or do their strikeouts not count as outs…

        • aaron b 5 years ago

          Not to mention his defense hasn’t been terrible at 1st. Just a shade below average.

          He ain’t no Xavier Nady though…..

  6. The_Porcupine 5 years ago

    If the management felt so strongly about Dunn’s defense, they should have traded him at the deadline.

    If they were content with Dunn’s offensive game (power, low average), than they should consider Carlos Pena (a touch less power, low average). Still I’d like them to sign Dunn. It gives them credibility and he seems to really make their lineup click when he is hitting well.

    • $4555515 5 years ago

      “”If the management felt so strongly about Dunn’s defense, they should have traded him at the deadline.””

      agree 110% i was one of the people who said trading dunn would be a mistake unless it looks like he wont resign with the team

      now it looks even worse cause the team doesnt want 2 sign dunn so then why the heck would you not trade him at the deadline

  7. monkeyspanked 5 years ago

    I want Dunn to play on the Angels!

  8. RealityGM 5 years ago

    Why do the Nats want Pena?

    • alxn 5 years ago

      It was outlined in the piece. Better defense and less money.

  9. The_Silver_Stacker 5 years ago

    I’m going to take a wild guess and predict the White Sox picking Dunn up this winter

  10. $4555515 5 years ago

    i personally dont like pena even though he’s better defensivly he only had 1 good year in his career

    how do i know he wasnt pulling a brady anderson or was on the roids or something that year???

    furthermore he’s struggled to stay healthy hasnt he??? if that the case thats the last thing this team needs its the same reason we let nick johnson walk

  11. RedSoxDynasty 5 years ago

    Dunns gonna end up in Boston for 4/50. He’ll play first for one year while Youk moves to third and next year Dunn becomes the DH when Big Papi leaves and Sox sign one of AGonz, Pujols, or Fielder to take over first. This scenario makes all the sense in the world imo!

    • The_Silver_Stacker 5 years ago

      Pujols should not be even mentioned, even the yankees couldn’t afford him and the Sox payroll is high already before you would factor in Dunn’s salary. Fielder would be more realistic as I believe his going to be in for a shock that he is not worth Teixera money

  12. Doubleday 5 years ago

    I certainly don’t have a lot of sources but my inside connection to the Nationals says the report about the Nats not wanting Dunn is not correct.

    The Nats have made phone calls to season ticket holders and the feedback has been that if Dunn isn’t resigned, most won’t renew. Who in gawd’s name is going to pay money to see Morse, Bernadina, Morgan, Desmond, Espinosa, et al.? The lineup will be Zim, Willingham, and six kids with no impressive track recrod of producing.

    Zim may well be thinking now that when his contract is up, he’s out of there too. Lerner’s a tightwas and Rizzo way overrated.

  13. stovin 5 years ago

    Please sign with the O’s we need your power.

  14. The_Silver_Stacker 5 years ago

    no that is not a rebuild, thats what you call reloading

Leave a Reply