Dunn placed on waivers

[daske17]

Link

 

If the Cubs were ambitious, they would try to make a trade for him because they're third in waiver claim process and sign him to a multi-year contract as part of the deal. That would avoid having Dunn as a type A FA at the end of the season if they wanted to sign him.

[erik316wttn]

I don't think this is really newsworthy. Lots of guys are placed on waivers after the deadline just to see if there's a market for them. The Nats can always pull him back.

[NCCubFan]

True. Undoubtedly the Cubs themselves have placed numerous players on waivers. Just being placed on waivers is a non-story.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I don't think this is really newsworthy. Lots of guys are placed on waivers after the deadline just to see if there's a market for them. The Nats can always pull him back.

Nearly every player is every year. It's only newsworthy because the Nats actively tried to trade him by the 31st but didn't.

[fromthestretch]

There's no chance he gets through to the point where the White Sox could claim him and try to work something out with the Nats.

[daske17]

Obviously everyone gets put on waivers. The only reason I posted it is because the Cubs would theoretically be in a position to make a move if they so desired.

[PrimeTime]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

[Banedon]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

[fromthestretch]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

 

Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either.

 

I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them.

[Banedon]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

 

Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either.

 

I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them.

 

My point really wasn't about waiver order. The Nats aren't just letting Dunn go...they're going to want something for him.

[daske17]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

 

Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either.

 

I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them.

 

My point really wasn't about waiver order. The Nats aren't just letting Dunn go...they're going to want something for him.

 

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

I'm delusional in thinking the Cubs will make Dunn a priority to replace Lee, but it's a happy world in which I live.

[fromthestretch]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

 

Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either.

 

I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them.

 

My point really wasn't about waiver order. The Nats aren't just letting Dunn go...they're going to want something for him.

 

Of course. This isn't an Alexis Rios situation.

[CubColtPacer]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

 

Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either.

 

I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them.

 

My point really wasn't about waiver order. The Nats aren't just letting Dunn go...they're going to want something for him.

 

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

I'm delusional in thinking the Cubs will make Dunn a priority to replace Lee, but it's a happy world in which I live.

 

 

But in terms of prospects, the Cubs would be better off waiting. Right now the Nats are going to demand more compensation then they will receive after the season. So they'll want value that exceeds a first rounder and a sandwich pick.

 

But if the Cubs sign him in the offseason, the only thing they'll lose is a second round pick. That's a lot less value then what the Nats will likely be demanding and then the Cubs also don't have the Lee problem to contend with.

[fromthestretch]

Get him and put him at 1st base and bye bye DLee

 

I'm sure that no other team will emply the old "get him" strategy. ;)

 

Well, the only two teams that get a say before the Cubs are Pittsburgh and Arizona, and I can't really see either of them putting in a claim. Then again, I don't see the Cubs putting in a claim either.

 

I do think the Giants should jump all over this if no one claims Dunn before them.

 

My point really wasn't about waiver order. The Nats aren't just letting Dunn go...they're going to want something for him.

 

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

I'm delusional in thinking the Cubs will make Dunn a priority to replace Lee, but it's a happy world in which I live.

 

I would imagine (hope) that if the Cubs by some chance make a claim AND work out a trade agreement, it would include a window of time to negotiate an extension with Dunn.

[dew1679666265]

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

As CCP said, our 1st round pick is protected so we'd only lose a second rounder for signing Dunn. Also, the Nats reportedly wanted Gordon Beckham for Dunn, I don't think they're going to take a lesser deal from the Cubs. We'd be looking, probably, at one of Vitters/Castro/B Jackson/Cashner being the key in a trade, I'd think. I'd rather give the second round pick.

[Backtobanks]

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

As CCP said, our 1st round pick is protected so we'd only lose a second rounder for signing Dunn. Also, the Nats reportedly wanted Gordon Beckham for Dunn, I don't think they're going to take a lesser deal from the Cubs. We'd be looking, probably, at one of Vitters/Castro/B Jackson/Cashner being the key in a trade, I'd think. I'd rather give the second round pick.

 

 

If the Nats wanted a 2B, it's a shame we got rid of Theriot. =D> =D> =D>

[dew1679666265]

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

As CCP said, our 1st round pick is protected so we'd only lose a second rounder for signing Dunn. Also, the Nats reportedly wanted Gordon Beckham for Dunn, I don't think they're going to take a lesser deal from the Cubs. We'd be looking, probably, at one of Vitters/Castro/B Jackson/Cashner being the key in a trade, I'd think. I'd rather give the second round pick.

 

 

If the Nats wanted a 2B, it's a shame we got rid of Theriot. =D> =D> =D>

 

Hey, we've still got Fontenot and Baker to give them. Barney too. :D

[SCCubbieFAN]

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

As CCP said, our 1st round pick is protected so we'd only lose a second rounder for signing Dunn. Also, the Nats reportedly wanted Gordon Beckham for Dunn, I don't think they're going to take a lesser deal from the Cubs. We'd be looking, probably, at one of Vitters/Castro/B Jackson/Cashner being the key in a trade, I'd think. I'd rather give the second round pick.

 

but in free agency, the Cubs will have to bid for Dunn against every other team that wants/needs him. If they can get him via a waiver claim, they and they only will have the opportunity to work out a deal with the Nats. If they want him that bad, that sounds like a more ideal situation to acquire him.

[KaiserCesar]

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

As CCP said, our 1st round pick is protected so we'd only lose a second rounder for signing Dunn. Also, the Nats reportedly wanted Gordon Beckham for Dunn, I don't think they're going to take a lesser deal from the Cubs. We'd be looking, probably, at one of Vitters/Castro/B Jackson/Cashner being the key in a trade, I'd think. I'd rather give the second round pick.

 

but in free agency, the Cubs will have to bid for Dunn against every other team that wants/needs him. If they can get him via a waiver claim, they and they only will have the opportunity to work out a deal with the Nats. If they want him that bad, that sounds like a more ideal situation to acquire him.

 

In addition, he is more valued by American league teams who don't have to deal as much with his negative defense, meaning you are going to overpay relative to his value, unless Dunn is against DHing a majority of the time (which I think I've heard before, but I'm not sure). I'd rather trade for Gonzalez who is 2 1/2 years younger, a comparable hitter and better defender (although Dunn's metrics this year are actually near average, how reliable is that for a long-term deal?).

[Backtobanks]

Exactly. Better to trade any over-valued prospects we have than losing draft picks by signing him in the off-season.

 

As CCP said, our 1st round pick is protected so we'd only lose a second rounder for signing Dunn. Also, the Nats reportedly wanted Gordon Beckham for Dunn, I don't think they're going to take a lesser deal from the Cubs. We'd be looking, probably, at one of Vitters/Castro/B Jackson/Cashner being the key in a trade, I'd think. I'd rather give the second round pick.

 

but in free agency, the Cubs will have to bid for Dunn against every other team that wants/needs him. If they can get him via a waiver claim, they and they only will have the opportunity to work out a deal with the Nats. If they want him that bad, that sounds like a more ideal situation to acquire him.

 

In addition, he is more valued by American league teams who don't have to deal as much with his negative defense, meaning you are going to overpay relative to his value, unless Dunn is against DHing a majority of the time (which I think I've heard before, but I'm not sure). I'd rather trade for Gonzalez who is 2 1/2 years younger, a comparable hitter and better defender (although Dunn's metrics this year are actually near average, how reliable is that for a long-term deal?).

 

Gonzalez is going to cost you a ton in young players and prospects, especially after the Padres got a taste of winning.

[dew1679666265]

but in free agency, the Cubs will have to bid for Dunn against every other team that wants/needs him. If they can get him via a waiver claim, they and they only will have the opportunity to work out a deal with the Nats. If they want him that bad, that sounds like a more ideal situation to acquire him.

 

If we could just claim him and get him, I have no problem with that, but that's not happening. We'll have to make a trade with them and if their demands don't drop significantly, I'm not considering giving up any of our top young players for Dunn.

 

I'd rather pay more money than save a few bucks and lose Cashner or Castro or Brett Jackson or Vitters.

[dew1679666265]

In addition, he is more valued by American league teams who don't have to deal as much with his negative defense, meaning you are going to overpay relative to his value, unless Dunn is against DHing a majority of the time (which I think I've heard before, but I'm not sure). I'd rather trade for Gonzalez who is 2 1/2 years younger, a comparable hitter and better defender (although Dunn's metrics this year are actually near average, how reliable is that for a long-term deal?).

 

I'm not advocating bringing Dunn in at this point. I'm just responding to whether it'd be better to pay more in money or trade the system's equivalent to Gordon Beckham (if that's still their demand). My response is that it's without question to spend more money or not sign him at all.

 

Dunn has said, however, that he doesn't have an interest in DHing long term. He'd be willing to do it if he's traded to an AL contender this year, but doesn't want to do it beyond the year.

[dew1679666265]

Gonzalez is going to cost you a ton in young players and prospects, especially after the Padres got a taste of winning.

 

If we're going to trade for one of the two, I'd much rather trade for Gonzalez, especially if the Nats' demands are as high as they sound.

[Backtobanks]

Gonzalez is going to cost you a ton in young players and prospects, especially after the Padres got a taste of winning.

 

If we're going to trade for one of the two, I'd much rather trade for Gonzalez, especially if the Nats' demands are as high as they sound.

 

I think Gonzalez is going to cost more (in prospects) than Dunn.

[TruffleShuffle]

Gonzalez is going to cost you a ton in young players and prospects, especially after the Padres got a taste of winning.

 

If we're going to trade for one of the two, I'd much rather trade for Gonzalez, especially if the Nats' demands are as high as they sound.

 

I think Gonzalez is going to cost more (in prospects) than Dunn.

 

of course he is.

 

there is no reason to consider trading for dunn now. if you want him, just sign him in the offseason.