« Stan Kasten, Eternal Optimist. | Main | Adam Dunn: Masher of baseballs, straight-faced jokester. »

February 11, 2009


How is this a good signing? They lose a draft pick and are not close enough to contention that this even matters. This is the only article I've seen so far that gets it right: http://jakerake.wordpress.com/2009/02/11/dunn-decides-to-waste-two-years-of-his-prime/

Scott, you forgot to mention all the strikeouts!

I don't buy your argument that because an organization is "not close to contention" there's no reason to make upgrades to the current major league product. Among the many reasons that make this a good deal for the Nats, Dunn is an instant improvement to a lineup sorely in need of some pop. I'll take him for the next 2 years at a relative bargain over that draft pick 100 times out of 100.

That Jake Rake blog is ridiculous. He's just a Nationals hater. Great signing if you want to get better and help out your offense in every possible way.


Dunn was not offered arbitration by the D-Backs, so there is no draft pick cost to the signing. And even if the Nats won't be in the World Series next year, adding 40 HRs and 380 points of OBP to the middle of an anemic lineup is always a good idea. Please feel free to go play in traffic.

Best regards.

Arizona did not offer Dunn arbitration -- supposedly they couldn't afford to -- so the Nats don't lose a draft pick.

Yikes - I didn't bother to check if the D-backs had offered arbitration, just took Scott on his word. And for that, I'm the idiot!

Hendo, Nate, thanks for setting the record straight.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search the Natosphere