Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: AdamKilgoreWP and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

About Adam Dunn and waivers

If you're worried about the Adam Dunn-placed-on-waivers thing, don't be. Really, the chances range between slim and none it changes anything about the relationship between Dunn and the Nationals.

The Nationals did not release Dunn. They placed him on revocable waivers, which means that if Dunn is claimed the Nationals can -- and surely will -- pull him back. The Nationals obviously aren't trying to dump him; they just resisted suitors for Dunn for the better part of a month.

They are trying to re-open the possibility for Dunn to be traded, which is a standard procedure. Chances are, some National League contender -- NL teams, in order of worst record to best record, have priority in putting claims on players -- will try to claim Dunn and the Nats will pull him back.

Even though it's a long shot, say Dunn does get through waivers. It would be another long shot for the Nationals to come to an agreement with a trading partner for two reasons:

1. Mike Rizzo was not satisfied with the potential returns for Dunn in a trade, and he was emphatic about that dissatisfaction. So why would a team, with the opportunity to trade the Nationals for less of Dunn's services, suddenly offer more? If an injury were to occur to a contending team's first baseman - say, if Aubrey Huff suddenly got hurt - then MAYBE that team would be motivated to offer the a piece that couldn't get the trade done before last weekend.

2. No matter the perception around baseball, the Nationals curried favor in their clubhouse and among their fan base by keeping Dunn. Turning around and trading him less than a week later would be a blow to both constituencies, and surely Rizzo understands that.

Hope that clears it up. Some useful links:

Buster Olney's twitter feed, which originally broke the news.

Craig Calcaterra's concise explanation of the waiver process over at Hardball Talk.

A post-July 31 examination of Dunn's possibilities by FanGraphs.com.

By Adam Kilgore  |  August 3, 2010; 6:12 PM ET
Categories:  Adam Dunn  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Today's lineup
Next: Stephen Strasburg scheduled for Tuesday return at Nationals Park

Comments

"Turning around and trading him less than a week later would be a blow to both constituencies, and surely Rizzo understands that."
-----------
Not so sure if Rizzo understands that.

And don't call me Surely.

Posted by: Juan-John1 | August 3, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

SOP

Posted by: joemktg1 | August 3, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Yada Yada Yada. (Oh I mentioned the bisque.)

Posted by: skins_fan_22 | August 3, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

BTW anyone see the pic of Dunn in the ESPN article? He's wearing a D-Backs hat. Nice. Hello???

Posted by: skins_fan_22 | August 3, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

"...the Nationals curried favor in their clubhouse and among their fan base by keeping Dunn."

Correction. That sentence should read, "By not trading Dunn, the Nats have - so far - avoided totally disgusting the fan base." They'll curry favor with us by signing him.

We can still be plenty disgusted if he ends up going FA.

Posted by: gilbertbp | August 3, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

And Livo was wearing a Mets caps in the scoreboard photo posted during last night's game. Both say more about the attention to detail of the persons posting the (old) photos than anything, imo.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | August 3, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Second that, gilbert (re. the currying and so forth). hmmm, curry sounds pretty good, actually. Must be time for dinner.

And thanks for talking us down, AK.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | August 3, 2010 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the explanation, but one thing I don't understand is "why" the Nationals put Dunn or other players on waivers? What's the purpose? Thanks for helping us relative newbies understand.

Posted by: Baldino | August 3, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

if it's standard operating procedure, what would be the purpose...still looking for a trading partner? sounds warm and fuzzy...i'm sure dunn was thrilled about that. as a fan i know that it lessens the chance of him being here after this year.

Posted by: joerutgens72 | August 3, 2010 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Folks: Every team in MLB 'floats' expiring contract players on the waiver-wire this time of year. As some others have pointed out, it's SOP; The only reason this is any kind of news is that Buster Olney (of the World-Wide Screeder) saw it, posted a tweet & spun it into a support of his premise that the Nats "are foolish not" to move Dunn.

I call BS on Olney, who I had some respect for previously. He'll likely be repeating this same pattern for Fielder in MIL & Gonzales in SD next year as well.

Posted by: BinM | August 3, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Hey Gang-nothing to say, per say, for the moment. But in keeping with my appreciation for you all, I came across a nice piece on Adam Dunn over at Fangraphs. In the comment section, there are some great comments from Souldrummer, who used to grace this blog regularly...so Soul-where you been? Come back to the Gang! (same for you, dove!)Here's the lik, in case you're interested:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/adam-dunn-what-now/
Go Nats!!!

Posted by: zendo | August 3, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Although the Twittersphere tarted up the rumors, this was so non-news at base.

Zim, Hammer, Bernie and many of the rest were probably also put on the wire. And will be pulled back. It's SOP, folks.

Posted by: Hendo1 | August 3, 2010 9:07 PM | Report abuse

AD will be a Nat next year.

Posted by: DCFanatic | August 3, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

I hope Mike Rizzo also understands that Dunn's value to the team is far more than what he produces statistically. He makes the players around him better because they get more good pitches to hit.

Ryan Zimmerman's walk-off homer on Saturday night is a prime example. There is no question (at least in my mind) that he would not have been given such a good pitch to hit if someone other than Dunn were on deck.

In addition, the players also believe this to be true. If the team loses Dunn, it will be a major blow to team morale, which will lead to more losses.

Finally, having Adam Dunn on the Nationals makes the game more exciting and sells more tickets.

There is only one right way to go here.

Posted by: mhs101255 | August 3, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse

I certainly know that this is SOP, it does not mean that the Nats are looking to move Dunn, and there is really nothing to worry about at this time. But if there is no intention of trading Dunn, why bother with this SOP and create this kind of panic?

Posted by: CapsNut | August 3, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

If you've just tried unsucessfully to trade Dunn and now you put him on waivers what does that say to the guy. The Nats are lucky that he is so laid back about this process. If I were him I would soak them for all it's worth in the free agent market.

My friend correctly tells me this isn't sport but a business. If Dunn isn't here next year then they can say good bye to my season tickets. The only things Rizzo and Lerner understand is money.

Posted by: marcrail1 | August 3, 2010 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Guys, come on...IT'S STANDARD. It gives other teams another opportunity to offer the Nats a proposal which they can't turn down. They would be complete idiots not to offer to improve the team by not placing him on waivers. The Nats have all of the leverage here, don't worry. If Rizzo doesn't get what he wants, he holds on to Dunn and we negotiate, and if that falls through we get draft picks.

He's staying here guys, unless we get blown away which I don't suspect will happen.

Posted by: jbfromfc | August 3, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

So it's just a coincidence that putting Dunn on waivers precedes the Nats' flattest game in a while. . . .

Don't understand the purpose either if it's all basically kabuki

Posted by: paulkp | August 3, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Always amazed at others perceptions. There is NO WAY the Nationals "tried" to trade Dunn!! They listened to offers but were not the aggressors here. None of the offers made any sense to Rizzo so he moved on. The waivers are the last piece of this and like jbfromfc said, they would do more damage by not placing him on waivers. Game tonight has nothing to do with waivers. There were so many people placed on waivers tonight from both teams, they probably are not even aware of it. It happens every year. Some of you are just looking for gloom and doom.

Go Nats

Posted by: sjm3091 | August 4, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Just read Mark Zuckerman's excellent piece explaining waivers even more and its worth reading over at Nationals Insider. Again, its no big deal and business as usual.

Posted by: sjm3091 | August 4, 2010 12:26 AM | Report abuse

OK. If it's just normal and has no implications for the player why don't they put Zim on waivers. He's real valuable. Maybe the Yankees will give the Nats half their team. If you do it for one and not for others it's not just business as usual.

Posted by: marcrail1 | August 4, 2010 4:06 AM | Report abuse

Finally, having Adam Dunn on the Nationals makes the game more exciting and sells more tickets.

There is only one right way to go here.


Posted by: mhs101255 | August 3, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse


Suppose some team offers two top-20 prospects, like the one we just got from Minnesota for Capps. That would be a trade worth considering.

Nats park is EMPTY when Stras is not pitching, whether Dunn plays or not. Angelos gets all the MASN money. That means the Nats cant BUY a contending team the way some "fans" demand. So they have to build through their farm system. The way to do that is by trading for prospects. They have to be prospects, of course, but this is how you build a winning team in MLB. (See: 1991-2004 Braves)

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 4, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Assume all you say is true... then why put him on waivers in the first place?

Sorry folks -- this is Alfonso Soriano all over again. Hope our Rule 5 draft picks pan out.

Posted by: guest1 | August 4, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Finally, having Adam Dunn on the Nationals makes the game more exciting and sells more tickets.

There is only one right way to go here.


Posted by: mhs101255 | August 3, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse


Suppose some team offers two top-20 prospects, like the one we just got from Minnesota for Capps. That would be a trade worth considering.

Nats park is EMPTY when Stras is not pitching, whether Dunn plays or not. Angelos gets all the MASN money. That means the Nats cant BUY a contending team the way some "fans" demand. So they have to build through their farm system. The way to do that is by trading for prospects. They have to be prospects, of course, but this is how you build a winning team in MLB. (See: 1991-2004 Braves)

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 4, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Finally, having Adam Dunn on the Nationals makes the game more exciting and sells more tickets.

There is only one right way to go here.


Posted by: mhs101255 | August 3, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse


Suppose some team offers two top-20 prospects, like the one we just got from Minnesota for Capps. That would be a trade worth considering.

Nats park is EMPTY when Stras is not pitching, whether Dunn plays or not. Angelos gets all the MASN money. That means the Nats cant BUY a contending team the way some "fans" demand. So they have to build through their farm system. The way to do that is by trading for prospects. They have to be prospects, of course, but this is how you build a winning team in MLB. (See: 1991-2004 Braves)

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 4, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

The idea that Angelos gets all the money is simply nonsense. The Nationals are guaranteed money from the TV contract (the only thing Angelos gets money from). Right now, with no fans, the Nats are getting paid far more than they could on their own network. Remember, nobody's watching.

Posted by: bflorhodes | August 4, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I certainly know that this is SOP, it does not mean that the Nats are looking to move Dunn, and there is really nothing to worry about at this time. But if there is no intention of trading Dunn, why bother with this SOP and create this kind of panic?

Posted by: CapsNut | August 3, 2010 9:28 PM

-------------------------------------

The Nats' front office is staffed with professional baseball guys who conduct business the way professional baseball guys do. They're not responsible for fan "panic" based on lack of knowledge of how these things go, and ginned up by an ESPN employee who's trying to prove a point.

Posted by: js_edit | August 4, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

People need to stop assuming they placed him on waivers without talking to him (these are the Nats not the Redskins). He's a pro he knows this is part of the game. Every news outlet (with any intelligence) is reporting that he'll be back.

Posted by: HanMy | August 4, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

The idea that Angelos gets all the money is simply nonsense. The Nationals are guaranteed money from the TV contract (the only thing Angelos gets money from). Right now, with no fans, the Nats are getting paid far more than they could on their own network. Remember, nobody's watching.

Posted by: bflorhodes | August 4, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse


All the MORE reason to get used to the Nats' style of building a team- through the farm system, NOT free-agency.

Posted by: jboogie1 | August 4, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Not mentioned is the fact that it is possible, and even likely that Dunn would be back in DC next year even if he is traded.

Posted by: kieran2001 | August 5, 2010 7:37 AM | Report abuse

Just cut the crap and give him a 4 year deal.

Posted by: thegraneys | August 5, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

@zendo
Basically, I got frustrated with the WaPo interface. There's no threads, there's no real profiles for users, there's no interaction from Kilgore, and there's not too much of a way to control trolls.

The simple reply features of mlbtraderumors.com and the like feature for comments leads me to their comments some times. The reply features of fangraphs.com leads me there. Natsfarm.com attracts more of a niche/hardcore audience so I check the comments there as well. I spend most of my time at federalbaseball.com and I actually write some pieces for them and comment over there a bunch. When someone at one of the sites I read more links back here, I'll check out WaPo but even then the comment interface makes me feel that I'm launching random missiles in the dark half of the time.

Posted by: souldrummer | August 6, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Sign Big Bad Dunn as soon as possible. Give him whatever he wants. Guys like him are rare. Slugger, good in the clubhouse and just an overall nice guy. The team is getting there. A few more peices to the puzzle are needed. And got to cut down on the errors big time!!

Posted by: exexpofan | August 8, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

mlbtraderumors announced on Aug 5th that an unnamed team had put a claim on Dunn. If that is correct then the Nats had 2 days to work a deal with that team, correct. Since we have not heard anything about a deal and Dunn played last night I assume he will be a Nat for at least the rest of the year.

Where is the WP reporting on this?!?!?!

Posted by: CoachD1 | August 9, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company