If the Cubs were sellers right now

[Little Slide Rooter]

Pena has now hit 14 bombs and is on pace for 30. Any chance we can steal a top 100 prospect at the deadline?

 

If we could find that team who was in contention and in desperate need of a 1B, maybe. Too bad The Mets aren't in contention. However, if The Nats can keep up their insane hot streak, the could be an option with LaRoche out for the season. The Twins could also be an option. I don't know when Morneu is due back, but if he might be better off DHng when he returns. We could also make a deal with The Devil and see how bad The Cards want a new 1B.

[CubColtPacer]

Pena has now hit 14 bombs and is on pace for 30. Any chance we can steal a top 100 prospect at the deadline?

 

Hendry's best move this year. So much for all of the wannabe GMs here who were begging for Adam Dunn.

 

You're kidding, right? You're going to sit there and pretend that ANYONE predicted that Dunn would fall off a cliff this season?

 

 

I thought he was going to put up monster power numbers in the Cell and I think most people felt the same way. His sudden fall off is really shocking. Anyone who says they foresaw this is almost certainly a liar. The guy had been the model of consistency for years.

 

I was not in favor of signing him to a multiyear deal, but I thought he was absolutely going to be productive offensively.

 

I would say it's surprising but not shocking. Players with Dunn's skills have fallen off suddenly before. And Dunn's BB/K ratio did get much worse last season which is a warning sign. But I tend to believe he's out of rhythm after his appendectomy, and even if he doesn't turn it around this season he has at least one very good season left in him.

[Sammy Sofa]

Pena has now hit 14 bombs and is on pace for 30. Any chance we can steal a top 100 prospect at the deadline?

 

Hendry's best move this year. So much for all of the wannabe GMs here who were begging for Adam Dunn.

 

You're kidding, right? You're going to sit there and pretend that ANYONE predicted that Dunn would fall off a cliff this season?

Many folks argued that signing Dunn would be a mistake, given his age, skillset, price, years, etc.

 

Being right about that doesn't require that one correctly predicted he would fall off a cliff this season.

 

Actually it does. If someone was arguing they didn't want him for a long term deal because they thought he was going to decline too dramatically down the line they're not right when he inexplicably slumps this badly for half a season at only age 31. Basically anyone claiming they were "right" about Dunn based on what he's done with the Sox so far is delusional and would essentially be making the same caliber of argument if they claimed his appendix surgery proved them "right," too. Nobody here, not a one, was predicting what's happened so far.

[Guest]

The Giants might be ready to give up on Huff, and Belt hasn't hit and isn't 35 years old.

 

The Indians might be willing to move LaPorta to LF to get Kearns out of the lineup.

 

The Angels might not want to count on Mark Trumbo to man 1B for the stretch run.

[davearm2]

Pena has now hit 14 bombs and is on pace for 30. Any chance we can steal a top 100 prospect at the deadline?

 

Hendry's best move this year. So much for all of the wannabe GMs here who were begging for Adam Dunn.

 

You're kidding, right? You're going to sit there and pretend that ANYONE predicted that Dunn would fall off a cliff this season?

Many folks argued that signing Dunn would be a mistake, given his age, skillset, price, years, etc.

 

Being right about that doesn't require that one correctly predicted he would fall off a cliff this season.

 

Actually it does. If someone was arguing they didn't want him for a long term deal because they thought he was going to decline too dramatically down the line they're not right when he inexplicably slumps this badly for half a season at only age 31. Basically anyone claiming they were "right" about Dunn based on what he's done with the Sox so far is delusional and would essentially be making the same caliber of argument if they claimed his appendix surgery proved them "right," too. Nobody here, not a one, was predicting what's happened so far.

Look as we stand here today, the Dunn signing looks like it was a mistake. Go ahead and argue against that point if you wish; I'm sure it would be quite entertaining.

 

Ergo, the folks that didn't want the Cubs to sign Dunn turned out to be right, and the ones that did want the Cubs to sign Dunn turned out to be wrong. You can try and spin it as "lucky" or whatever, I'll just stick with "right".

[XZero771679666304]

Pena has now hit 14 bombs and is on pace for 30. Any chance we can steal a top 100 prospect at the deadline?

 

If we could find that team who was in contention and in desperate need of a 1B, maybe. Too bad The Mets aren't in contention. However, if The Nats can keep up their insane hot streak, the could be an option with LaRoche out for the season. The Twins could also be an option. I don't know when Morneu is due back, but if he might be better off DHng when he returns. We could also make a deal with The Devil and see how bad The Cards want a new 1B.

 

 

If they both stay in contention, Arizona and Cleveland might be likely partners.

[Sammy Sofa]

Look as we stand here today, the Dunn signing looks like it was a mistake. Go ahead and argue against that point if you wish; I'm sure it would be quite entertaining.

 

You're conflating this with the idea that people who didn't want him have been proven right. Those are two very different things. Yes, the Cubs were lucky in hindsight they didn't sign Dunn (so far) and so far it's been a mistake for the Sox, but for different reasons than what anyone was arguing against him with here (and it's not like we can write him off as being done). Absolutely nobody predicted he would be this wretched in his age 31 season. Nobody. It's like if I said you were going to die after today and then a year from now the Space Shuttle crashes into your home and then me claiming that it made me some kind of all-seeing prognosticator.

 

Ergo, the folks that didn't want the Cubs to sign Dunn turned out to be right, and the ones that did want the Cubs to sign Dunn turned out to be wrong. You can try and spin it as "lucky" or whatever, I'll just stick with "right".

 

So if Dunn comes back next year (or even the second half of the season) as a monster again they're suddenly not right? How do you not see the pitfalls of declaring anyone right or wrong over this two and a half months into the first season of his contract?

[Little Slide Rooter]

Pena has now hit 14 bombs and is on pace for 30. Any chance we can steal a top 100 prospect at the deadline?

 

If we could find that team who was in contention and in desperate need of a 1B, maybe. Too bad The Mets aren't in contention. However, if The Nats can keep up their insane hot streak, the could be an option with LaRoche out for the season. The Twins could also be an option. I don't know when Morneu is due back, but if he might be better off DHng when he returns. We could also make a deal with The Devil and see how bad The Cards want a new 1B.

 

 

If they both stay in contention, Arizona and Cleveland might be likely partners.

 

If theres any chance that Miggy can go back to 3B, Detroits also an option.

[davearm2]

Look as we stand here today, the Dunn signing looks like it was a mistake. Go ahead and argue against that point if you wish; I'm sure it would be quite entertaining.

 

You're conflating this with the idea that people who didn't want him have been proven right. Those are two very different things. Yes, the Cubs were lucky in hindsight they didn't sign Dunn (so far) and so far it's been a mistake for the Sox, but for different reasons than what anyone was arguing against him with here (and it's not like we can write him off as being done). Absolutely nobody predicted he would be this wretched in his age 31 season. Nobody. It's like if I said you were going to die after today and then a year from now the Space Shuttle crashes into your home and then me claiming that it made me some kind of all-seeing prognosticator.

 

Ergo, the folks that didn't want the Cubs to sign Dunn turned out to be right, and the ones that did want the Cubs to sign Dunn turned out to be wrong. You can try and spin it as "lucky" or whatever, I'll just stick with "right".

 

So if Dunn comes back next year (or even the second half of the season) as a monster again they're suddenly not right? How do you not see the pitfalls of declaring anyone right or wrong over this two and a half months into the first season of his contract?

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2014, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

[davearm2]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Knowing what we know as of this morning, do you think Dunn will be worth his contract? Yes or no.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Personally, when it comes do Dunn, it should have been a big red flag that he'd said all along that he didn't want to go to the AL and be a DH, but Kenny Williams didn't care, he just wanted his guy.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Wait, what? GM's make their decisions only if they can definitely know if a player is going to be worth all of (or exceed) the contract being offered?

 

Knowing what we know as of this morning, do you think Dunn will be worth his contract? Yes or no.

 

I have no idea, and it would be stupid to claim otherwise. Yes, I think he will likely be worth within the acceptable vicinity of his contract, but I don't know. He could just flame out and it's a complete bust. There's always an inherent risk along those lines.

 

Look at it this way: I think it's all but impossible that either Pujols or Fielder will be worth the full amount or exceed the value of the contracts they'll get after this offseason. Unless a team develops the player through their farm system they're going to have to almost overpay for an impact player, so making it this black and white thing of "do you think they'll be worth their contract, yes or no and no other considerations" just seems like a gigantic oversimplification.

 

Look at it this way: say Dunn just sucks through the entire year. But then for the next 3 years he comes back strong and is an offensive force to be reckoned with. Is the contract a bust because of the one bad year?

[XZero771679666304]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Wait, what? GM's make their decisions only if they can definitely know if a player is going to be worth all of (or exceed) the contract being offered?

 

Knowing what we know as of this morning, do you think Dunn will be worth his contract? Yes or no.

 

I have no idea, and it would be stupid to claim otherwise. Yes, I think he will likely be worth within the acceptable vicinity of his contract, but I don't know. He could just flame out and it's a complete bust. There's always an inherent risk along those lines.

 

He was coming off 8 consecutive years of being a .900 OPS hitter, and moved to one of the most power friendly parks in the game. It's really hard to imagine he won't be worth an 14MM AAV contract over the next few years, particularly when you factor out his defense. The way he is playing right now is hard to wrap your head around.

 

It's possible his contract will prove to be a huge burden, but no one will have seen it coming.

Edited June 23, 2011 by XZero77

[MSG T]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Knowing what we know as of this morning, do you think Dunn will be worth his contract? Yes or no.

 

 

To be honest, probably not. But, the league is full of guys that earned their current contract prior to signing it and not while they are playing under that contract. I mean, has ARod been worth the $250-300 he will have earned? No, but he's been worth a whole lot more than 99% of ballplayers. It's relative. Will Fielder be worth the $20 mil per or so he signs for? Doubtful. But he could very likely be worth more than the previous $20 mil per year player. Same with Dunn. So maybe he doesn't end up worth the money he signed for, was it worth if if he's worth $50 mil over the life of that contract?

 

Besides, you can't look at it as "they earned their money", you have to look at it as "does this guy give me something I can't get some other way?". If the answer is yes, then you decide if giving them X amount is worth it. Fielder might be worth $20 to the Cubs, but only $17 to the Yankees or Red Sox. Even if he doesn't "earn" his money over the next 5-8 years, if he provides the performance the Cubs needed then he was worth the $20 mil per year, even if his hard stats say he didn't "earn" his money.

[davearm2]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Wait, what? GM's make their decisions only if they can definitely know if a player is going to be worth all of (or exceed) the contract being offered?

 

You keep refusing to answer a very simple, direct yes-or-no question on the grounds that you can't predict the future.

 

Well guess what. GMs can't predict the future when they're offering free agent contracts, either.

 

I thought that was obvious but you managed to butcher the interpretation anyway.

 

Not that I expected a straightforward answer from you anyway. You can't say "yes, I expect Dunn will turn out to have been worth 4/56" because that'd be kinda foolish knowing what we know now, and you can't say "no, I don't expect Dunn will turn out to have been worth 4/56" because that would prove my point: the folks that were against signing him look like they were right.

 

So just keep on obfuscating and evading with some more "look at it this ways". They're fascinating, even if tangential.

[davearm2]

say Dunn just sucks through the entire year. But then for the next 3 years he comes back strong and is an offensive force to be reckoned with. Is the contract a bust because of the one bad year?

Is that your prediction?

[davearm2]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Knowing what we know as of this morning, do you think Dunn will be worth his contract? Yes or no.

 

 

To be honest, probably not. But, the league is full of guys that earned their current contract prior to signing it and not while they are playing under that contract. I mean, has ARod been worth the $250-300 he will have earned? No, but he's been worth a whole lot more than 99% of ballplayers. It's relative. Will Fielder be worth the $20 mil per or so he signs for? Doubtful. But he could very likely be worth more than the previous $20 mil per year player. Same with Dunn. So maybe he doesn't end up worth the money he signed for, was it worth if if he's worth $50 mil over the life of that contract?

 

Besides, you can't look at it as "they earned their money", you have to look at it as "does this guy give me something I can't get some other way?". If the answer is yes, then you decide if giving them X amount is worth it. Fielder might be worth $20 to the Cubs, but only $17 to the Yankees or Red Sox. Even if he doesn't "earn" his money over the next 5-8 years, if he provides the performance the Cubs needed then he was worth the $20 mil per year, even if his hard stats say he didn't "earn" his money.

All good points, and I totally get where you're coming from.

 

Really the bottom-line, yes-or-no question I'm asking is: will the White Sox look back three years from now and be happy they made this signing?

 

Or even more relevant to us: will the Cubs look back three years from now and kick themselves for not making this signing?

[MSG T]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Wait, what? GM's make their decisions only if they can definitely know if a player is going to be worth all of (or exceed) the contract being offered?

 

You keep refusing to answer a very simple, direct yes-or-no question on the grounds that you can't predict the future.

 

Well guess what. GMs can't predict the future when they're offering free agent contracts, either.

 

I thought that was obvious but you managed to butcher the interpretation anyway.

 

Not that I expected a straightforward answer from you anyway. You can't say "yes, I expect Dunn will turn out to have been worth 4/56" because that'd be kinda foolish knowing what we know now, and you can't say "no, I don't expect Dunn will turn out to have been worth 4/56" because that would prove my point: the folks that were against signing him look like they were right.

 

So just keep on obfuscating and evading with some more "look at it this ways". They're fascinating, even if tangential.

 

 

That's not what GMs have to worry about, though. They have to worry about whether the player is worth the gamble to sign him to a big contract, not is he worth that money.

 

Will Dunn be worth 4/$56? No, probably not. Was he worth the gamble to sign him to that contract? Absolutely. Why? Because even if he didn't earn every dime, he was still worthy of giving a large contract to, given the numbers he'd put up in his career.

 

As I alluded to earlier, the Cubs need a 1B in the offseason. Will Prince or Albert be worth the contracts the sign? Very doubtful. Would it be worth the risk, for the Cubs, to give Prince $18-20 per or Albert $25-30 per? Considering the other options, yes, it would most likely be worth the risk. Just because a player doesn't earn every dollar in his contract doesn't mean he isn't worth signing to that contract. If that was the case, and people looked at the $$$ value of the players, no one would ever sign a single player to a huge contract. Guess what, there is more value there than just the $$$.

[davearm2]

That's not what GMs have to worry about, though. They have to worry about whether the player is worth the gamble to sign him to a big contract, not is he worth that money.

 

Will Dunn be worth 4/$56? No, probably not. Was he worth the gamble to sign him to that contract? Absolutely. Why? Because even if he didn't earn every dime, he was still worthy of giving a large contract to, given the numbers he'd put up in his career.

 

As I alluded to earlier, the Cubs need a 1B in the offseason. Will Prince or Albert be worth the contracts the sign? Very doubtful. Would it be worth the risk, for the Cubs, to give Prince $18-20 per or Albert $25-30 per? Considering the other options, yes, it would most likely be worth the risk. Just because a player doesn't earn every dollar in his contract doesn't mean he isn't worth signing to that contract. If that was the case, and people looked at the $$$ value of the players, no one would ever sign a single player to a huge contract. Guess what, there is more value there than just the $$$.

Don't get hung up on the dollars. That's not really what I'm asking. See my previous post.

[Sammy Sofa]

That's not what GMs have to worry about, though. They have to worry about whether the player is worth the gamble to sign him to a big contract, not is he worth that money.

 

Will Dunn be worth 4/$56? No, probably not. Was he worth the gamble to sign him to that contract? Absolutely. Why? Because even if he didn't earn every dime, he was still worthy of giving a large contract to, given the numbers he'd put up in his career.

 

As I alluded to earlier, the Cubs need a 1B in the offseason. Will Prince or Albert be worth the contracts the sign? Very doubtful. Would it be worth the risk, for the Cubs, to give Prince $18-20 per or Albert $25-30 per? Considering the other options, yes, it would most likely be worth the risk. Just because a player doesn't earn every dollar in his contract doesn't mean he isn't worth signing to that contract. If that was the case, and people looked at the $$$ value of the players, no one would ever sign a single player to a huge contract. Guess what, there is more value there than just the $$$.

 

Exactly. This guy keeps acting like I'm dancing around an obvious answer when there isn't one. He wants this boiled down to people already being declared right or wrong when we're 2.5 months into Dunn's current contract.

 

My "prediction" is exactly along the lines of what MSG T is spelling out; no, Dunn will likely not be worth the precise dollar amount he's being paid, but I do think he will be worth the contract.

[MSG T]

I'm asking right now, as you think about it today, do you anticipate that by the end of 2015, Dunn will have been worth $56M for 4 years?

 

Yes or no.

 

Why would I answer definitively yes or no when I don't know? What if I said no, but ultimately based on his production he was worth something like $48 million?

Because these are the conditions under which GMs make free agent decisions.

 

Knowing what we know as of this morning, do you think Dunn will be worth his contract? Yes or no.

 

 

To be honest, probably not. But, the league is full of guys that earned their current contract prior to signing it and not while they are playing under that contract. I mean, has ARod been worth the $250-300 he will have earned? No, but he's been worth a whole lot more than 99% of ballplayers. It's relative. Will Fielder be worth the $20 mil per or so he signs for? Doubtful. But he could very likely be worth more than the previous $20 mil per year player. Same with Dunn. So maybe he doesn't end up worth the money he signed for, was it worth if if he's worth $50 mil over the life of that contract?

 

Besides, you can't look at it as "they earned their money", you have to look at it as "does this guy give me something I can't get some other way?". If the answer is yes, then you decide if giving them X amount is worth it. Fielder might be worth $20 to the Cubs, but only $17 to the Yankees or Red Sox. Even if he doesn't "earn" his money over the next 5-8 years, if he provides the performance the Cubs needed then he was worth the $20 mil per year, even if his hard stats say he didn't "earn" his money.

All good points, and I totally get where you're coming from.

 

Really the bottom-line, yes-or-no question I'm asking is: will the White Sox look back three years from now and be happy they made this signing?

 

Or even more relevant to us: will the Cubs look back three years from now and kick themselves for not making this signing?

 

 

It depends. If they acquire Prince or Albert and win the WS with them in the next three years, they'd look back and say "hey, we made the right call in not signing Dunn". If both of those guys end up elsewhere and they end up with Lyle Overbay at $10 mil per year, they should want to commit Harakiri.

 

And yes, I think in three years the Sox will most likely look back and say "he wasn't worth the $56 mil, but he was a heck of a player for us".

[Sammy Sofa]

Really the bottom-line, yes-or-no question I'm asking is: will the White Sox look back three years from now and be happy they made this signing?

 

Probably.

 

Or even more relevant to us: will the Cubs look back three years from now and kick themselves for not making this signing?

 

Hopefully not, since that likely means they didn't get Pujols or Fielder, or they got one of them while Dunn rebounded back to classic Dunn and the Cubs' signing turned into an absolute disaster right off the bat and never got better.

[davearm2]

Exactly. This guy keeps acting like I'm dancing around an obvious answer when there isn't one. He wants this boiled down to people already being declared right or wrong when we're 2.5 months into Dunn's current contract.

 

My "prediction" is exactly along the lines of what MSG T is spelling out; no, Dunn will likely not be worth the precise dollar amount he's being paid, but I do think he will be worth the contract.

Do you wish the Cubs had signed Dunn for 4/56?

Edited June 23, 2011 by davearm2

[MSG T]

That's not what GMs have to worry about, though. They have to worry about whether the player is worth the gamble to sign him to a big contract, not is he worth that money.

 

Will Dunn be worth 4/$56? No, probably not. Was he worth the gamble to sign him to that contract? Absolutely. Why? Because even if he didn't earn every dime, he was still worthy of giving a large contract to, given the numbers he'd put up in his career.

 

As I alluded to earlier, the Cubs need a 1B in the offseason. Will Prince or Albert be worth the contracts the sign? Very doubtful. Would it be worth the risk, for the Cubs, to give Prince $18-20 per or Albert $25-30 per? Considering the other options, yes, it would most likely be worth the risk. Just because a player doesn't earn every dollar in his contract doesn't mean he isn't worth signing to that contract. If that was the case, and people looked at the $$$ value of the players, no one would ever sign a single player to a huge contract. Guess what, there is more value there than just the $$$.

Don't get hung up on the dollars. That's not really what I'm asking. See my previous post.

 

 

Just using the $$$ for comparison purposes. The money definitely comes into play, it's just a different amount for different players. Signing Ryan Theriot to a 4/$56 is insane, Dunn? Not so much. Would anyone give Dunn the same amount as Pujols or Fielder? I'd hope not. But, would you prefer Dunn (looking at him this past offseason) 4/$56 or Prince 5/$100? Some may prefer Fielder, and I'd understand that, some may prefer Dunn because of the shorter, cheaper contract.

 

You don't need to hang on the money, but you can't ignore it.