Skip to content

Dunn will sign with White Sox

Dec 2, 2010, 10:09 PM EDT

Nationals fans (and players) who pleaded with club management to bring back Adam Dunn in 2011 won’t get their Christmas wish. The free agent first baseman has agreed to a four-year, $56 million contract with the White Sox, according to a source familiar with the deal.

The contract won’t be official until Dunn passes a physical tomorrow, but he’s effectively a member of the White Sox, a club that made a strong push to acquire him before the July 31 trade deadline but couldn’t pull off a deal with Nationals general manager Mike Rizzo.

Because the Nats offered Dunn (a Type A free agent) arbitration last week, they’ll be compensated with two 2011 draft picks. They’ll get Chicago’s first-round pick (23rd overall) as well as a “sandwich” pick between the first and second rounds.

Read my full story, with updates to come, at CSNwashington.com.

  1. The Great Unwashed - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:13 PM

    Easy come, easy go.

  2. dj in Fl - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:18 PM

    Sorry Jane for the lack of a birthday or Christmas gift.Well the pressure is really on the FO now. They got what they really wanted, a chance to find a defensive firstbaseman. Now the challenge will be to score enough runs to cover for our starting pitching, and for someone to offer cover for Zim at the plate.

  3. Bowdenball - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:19 PM

    It's heartbreaking because we've all come to love the big guy, but honestly it's for the best. That's simply too much money over too many years for an NL team to pay Dunn. The Nats are better off with the two picks, Pena and several million dollars in savings.One of the more disappointing things is that the White Sox were just in town in 2010, so we won't get a chance to salute the big fella for a long time. Thanks for the memories, Adam.

  4. JD - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:21 PM

    Just for fun; Laroche's WAR is consistently about 2; Dunn was a 4 last year; we are talking a difference of 2 wins a year. That's worth 4 years at 14 mil per? I don't think so.

  5. JayB - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:25 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:26 PM

    Another big plus with Dunn gone, the Lerners can save some money on their after-game smorgasbord expenses.

  7. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:35 PM

    I will miss him, but 4 years at $14million is too much for him. I'm hoping they will move Morse to 1B and sign a legitimate outfielder. I will be pissed if all they can come up with is a one year deal for LaRouche or Pena.

  8. Will - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:35 PM

    Let's hope that 23rd pick of the White Sox turns into Daniel Hudson by next year or Mike Rizzo made a huge f***ing mistake.

  9. Anonymous8 - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:36 PM

    Congrats to Dunn (ha ha). I guess it was ALL about the money and so much for "I want to stay in Washington". He can say it was about the length of the contract but personally I think it sucks.I can't see any way that the Nats increase payroll next season. Back To The Future, 2008 all over again!With no Stan Kasten talking to the press, what type of spin can they put on this?

  10. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:36 PM

    oh well, what are ya gonna do? Can't cry over spilled milk can we. The team had a hard enough time attracting fans to the park last year. I wonder what they will do to spark interest in the coming months….stay tuned because one of the magnets has been deactivated. "JT in SC"

  11. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:38 PM

    Dunn's parting gift to the Nats will be forcing them to make moves this offseason. Now it's pitching and offense. The Lerners can be stubborn and stingy, but surely they know they can't trot out the baseball team they currently have. This likely diminishes the chance of extending Zimmerman. Every choice has consequences. The Nats are face to face with that now. fpcsteve

  12. Will - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:39 PM

    Bowdenball, the Nats (owners) certainly are better off with the two picks, Pena and several million dollars in savings, but are the fans? Unless Pena's bat rebounds big time next year (that is, if we even sign him), I don't think so.

  13. JD - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:40 PM

    BTW; San Diego lost Garland and Torrealba and are about to lose Correja and have amassed 6 draft choices in the top 60. Do you think Jed Hoyer is an idiot or do you think he knows what he's doing by not overpaying for his players?

  14. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:42 PM

    Constant Reader here quoting Mark Zuckerman. September 29 at 5:55pm. He's really quite prescient. "Of course you have to draw the line somewhere. I probably wouldn't go to four years and $56 million guaranteed. The fourth guaranteed year would scare me as a GM/owner. But if that happens, you better have a Plan B in place that you're reasonably confident will work out."By the way Mark, what was the best offer the ChiSox made for Dunn? That's going to be the straight-up comparison. Are these two draft picks worth more than having Edwin Jackson next year? That's a tough call.

  15. JayB - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:45 PM

    He is living with cheap owners who are failing to grab the brass ring…they could be in the playoffs next year and for several more if they just resign what they got!JD are you related to the Lerners…you make no sense at all if Winning games if the point…profit…sure you have the right ideas.

  16. Section 105 - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:45 PM

    I haven't seen anyone yet mention one of the saddest aspects of this news – no more "In the Air Tonight" 2 or 3 times a game…

  17. JD - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:46 PM

    Will, It all depends how the money is deployed; if the payroll is lower than 2009 then the fans have cause for complaint but if it is spent more wisely then that's all we can ask Rizzo to do. I for one am not prepared to judge ahead of time; to me this is Rizzo's second full off season. Let's discuss in March.

  18. JayB - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:50 PM

    Ladson and others are getting Zim quotes and all I can say is bye bye Ryan…he is done…trade him now for some other JD Draft picks….that is how you make a profit right?

  19. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:50 PM

    Well, on the bright side….including Zimmerman…there isn't a player in baseball you can't do without.

  20. JD - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:50 PM

    JayB BS; they were not about to repeat what they did last year with or without Garland or Torrealba. What Hoyer is doing (as the Rays have for several years now) is he's building something that can be sustained for several years.

  21. Pilchard - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:51 PM

    Surprised that Dunn was able to get that contract. Congrats to Adam and his agent. As stated above, his game is more suited for the AL; wish him well in Chicago. The damage to the Nats will be on the PR front. Dunn was one of the few Nats that people were willing to pay to see. Pena or Laroche may result in roughly in the same amount of wins (plus the Nats get draft picks and save $$$ to hopefully spend elsewhere), but this franchise is in dire need of buzz with Stras gone for the year and with Harper developing on the farm. Barring a shocking free agent signing (Crawford), looks like the Nats will be playing in front of friends and family in 2011.

  22. JD - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:54 PM

    Zim is signed for 3 more year; I have better things to worry about than what he will do after 2013.

  23. Will - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:55 PM

    This is by no means scientific analysis, but just to give you an idea of the talent available with the #23 pick, from 2000-2007 (I neglected the more recent years because the jury is still out on those players), Nick Schmidt, Maxwell Sapp, Jacoby Ellsbury, Phil Hughes, Brandon Wood, Jeff Francoeur, John-Ford Griffen and David Espinosa were picked. Basically, 5 have had no negligible impact, one has been a replacement-level starter (Francoeur), one has become a legitimate above-average starting OF (Ellsbury), and one is a young(ish) SP (Hughes) yet to realize his potential.I think Jackson or Hudson would have been a much safer bet and would have had a much more immediate impact, and they would have saved around $4mil by not paying Dunn's salary for the last 2.5 months.

  24. phil dunn - Dec 2, 2010 at 10:56 PM

    The attendance projection for 2011 just dropped to 1.5 million. We're the Pirates of the NL East.

  25. phil dunn - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:00 PM

    XM is reporting that Ryan Zimmerman is extremely upset that Nats have not signed Dunn. Zim says Dunn would have signed for less with the Nats because he wanted to stay in Washington. This is not a pretty picture.

  26. JD - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:00 PM

    Will, I agree; I said all along that they should have traded Dunn for Hudson (Jackson not so much) but: This is an exceptional draft class and if we find a Phil Hughes I wouldn't complain.

  27. Stranded_in_Philly - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:03 PM

    23rd overall and a sandwich pick > 14 Million per year

  28. Will - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:12 PM

    Also, regarding Zimmerman, I don't think it's a coincidence he put up his best offensive seasons by far in the two years with Adam Dunn batting behind him.Anyone willing to take a bet that Zimmerman's offensive numbers decline (rather substantially) next year?

  29. swang - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:15 PM

    Boz said that the Nats offered him 3/36. I thought that was fair. I think 4/56 is too much for Dunn.

  30. Curly W - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:24 PM

    Does this picture get any clearer about the Nationals management?

  31. N. Cognito - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:42 PM

    Was Hudson for Dunn a legit offer or has that grown from a poster's dream?And don't telll me it's what Boswell was reporting last year. No sense ruining your cred.

  32. natsfan1a - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:43 PM

    Crud. Will certainly miss his bat in the lineup.From the random synapse firing department: if Dunn really wanted to be here, he'd still be here, but…cha-ching!! Maybe it's just me, but concerns as to whether $14 million a year is more "fair" than $12 million per year rings a bit hollow in this economy. Um, no pun intended. Wonder whether they promised Dunn he could play 1B, as he's said he didn't want to DH.

  33. natsfan1a - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:45 PM

    Oh, and the "fair" allusion was to quotes from the Z-Man as attributed on Nats Journal and elsewhere.

  34. BinM - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:46 PM

    Looks like Dunn got his 4-year deal – good for him, bad for Nats fans. The likely fallout from this will be someone like Carlos Pena (ugh) manning 1B in 2011 on a 1yr/$6M contract, and one more year of "building through the draft". The Agents for Pudge, Willingham, & even Ryan Zimmerman should be mapping out future stratigies right now; It's becoming ever clearer that the Lerner group will never sign a player contract for more than $10M AAV (Average Annual Value). Home attendance at Nationals park in 2011 could start looking more like the Marlins 'crowds', save for the fact that Phillies & Mets fans can get to DC easier than they can to Florida, so they'll get at least 18 games of 40k+.

  35. Anonymous - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:54 PM

    I harbor no ill will for Adam, baseball is a business and he made the best decision for the long term. I think it was always about the 4th contract year and the Nats unwillingness to go ore than 3 years over the last 6 months helped him make up his mind. What is next at 1b for the Nats? Konerko, Pena, LaRoche, Marerro???

  36. Anonymous8 - Dec 2, 2010 at 11:59 PM

    "Knowing that we had one of the three top free agents on our team and we didn't want to re-sign him, it's frustrating for us as players," Zimmerman said.WE DIDN'T WANT TO RE-SIGN HIM….What's the real story? I think anything short of getting Cliff Lee or Carl Crawford makes this a horrible off-season.2008 was a tough and boring season. No pitching and no offense and 100+ losses.

  37. Sunderland - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:08 AM

    JD:I don't understand how San Diego has received 6 draft choices? Can you explain please?

  38. Steveospeak - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:13 AM

    A couple of things:1. Are we really shocked? Dunn was a better fit for the A.L. anyways. And we knew Chicago wanted him this summer. 2. I think this has zero effect on Zimmerman, I'm sure he is disappointed, but I'm sure even he knew it was a realistic for Dunn to be on another team. The Nationals need to be smart and build a quality team around Zimmerman so they can keep him.3. We should be happy he signed with the White Sox and are getting a first round pick (we also need to hope they don't sign any other Type A's). A number of potential options would have given us a 2nd round pick or potentially later. 4. The Nationals will miss Dunn but they can still have a good offseason if they make smart decisions and trades.Look this obviously isn't a good day for the Nationals, but it isn't the end of the world. I'm going to miss Dunn and his power as well, but the Nats do have other options.

  39. Will - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:17 AM

    N. Cognito, Hudson was definitely a real offer. Kenny Williams, the Sox GM, even went out of his way to trade Hudson for Jackson, whom the Nats coveted, because he was so desperate to get his hands on Dunn.Hudson was the 66th best prospect going into 2010. The Sox also dealt their 2009 2nd round pick to get Jackson, so conceivably the Nats could have at least gotten him (David Holmberg) in addition to Hudson for Dunn.

  40. JaneB - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:20 AM

    I truly cannot believe they let this happen. What move could they possibly make that would make this up to the fans and to Zimm?1?!? I agree with whomever said that Zimm's production, which improved with Dunn behind him, is likely to sink. No more reclamation projects and cheap buys. I am now on the JayB mad-at-the-Lerners team. These owners have got to buy some actual talent. Talent that can play in 2011, not "maybe someday." If I'm this crushed, I can only imagine how the remaining players must feel. Any one else they put at 1B is a trade down. Off to down a bottle of scotch and snatch myself bald. And cancel my Nats baseball gear Christmas present order.

  41. BQ - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:23 AM

    I am glad the situation is resolved. I could not have survived the winter knowing whether Dunn is signing or not. Now we can concentrate on some main issues, that is starting pitching and so on.Best of luck to Adam. I hope he does really well in AL.

  42. JaneB - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:28 AM

    Steveospeak wrote:"2. I think this has zero effect on Zimmerman, I'm sure he is disappointed, but I'm sure even he knew it was a realistic for Dunn to be on another team. The Nationals need to be smart and build a quality team around Zimmerman so they can keep him."WHEN EXACTLY do you see them doing this? Seriously. They've made small moves except for Harper and Strasburg. They DID have one of the top three free agents on their club and they didn't sign him. By the time the baby players they get with their two #$%# draft picks grow up enough to play, and IF they make it through the gauntlet to the big leagues, Zimmerman is signed with some team that actually IS building a team, and actually shows some progress. We are building players for somebody else's team.If I were Adam Dunn, I'd be glad to be gone, given how little respect he got here from the owners, and how utterly impossible it will be for the Nats to see October from any vantage point but vacation, for years to come.

  43. natsfan1a - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:32 AM

    I'm also glad it's resolved, though I'd hoped for a different outcome. Good luck to Dunn with the Sox. I trust that this signing will be as successful for them as Soriano's was with the Cubs. Oh, wait. Okay, that was a little petty. At least Dunn didn't end up with the O's. Okay, that was a little petty, too. I'll still keep my season ticket plan, though, because I'm a sucker for baseball. Oh, wait. I don't have a season ticket plan. Well, I'll keep cobbling together my own micro plan. 'cause, it's, you know, baseball and all…

  44. SpringfieldFan - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:36 AM

    I'm disappointed, and I had to sigh as I wrote CWS next to Dunn's name in the big board. I do think that 4/$56 is too much, though, and Rizzo's moves seem to work out, even if they're perplexing to me at the time. I'm going to try to reserve judgment for now. And at least we gave him a sendoff that he won't forget.

  45. Sunderland - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:44 AM

    So the Nats now have all the money they need to land Crawford. Glad this didn't drag out. Rizzo should announce the Crawford signing by Monday.

  46. Natman - Dec 3, 2010 at 12:49 AM

    As I said, now we'll hear the same words "value" and "savings." Also now we get to hear about how bad Dunn is and how "greedy" he is. Kettle calling the pot black, eh? Do you know where the Lerner's will spend their "savings"? On more tour buses for the Cro-magnum's from Philly that drunkenly stumble into Nats stadium and piss on parked cars in DC. That's a good "investment" to the Lerners.

  47. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:04 AM

    Money quote from AK's article on the WaPo, "He was a modern day Frank Howard, a behemoth whose presence lent credibility and drew fan support even for a team that specialized in losing." The team is still specializing in that department.

  48. raymitten - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:13 AM

    I am more depressed and angry at any time since MLB closed the trailers in 2004, Dunn's contract with the White Sox is reasonable and should have been offered by Rizzo in December 2009. I don't believe they are trying to win. I don't care what happens from this opoint forward, this is a disasterous off season. They will lose 100 games or more in 2011. Guaranteed. I don't know whether to blame Mike Rizzo or the Lerners. But as a full season ticket holder since day one who attends every game, watches all the road games every night and lives and dies by this team, I feel betrayed. Thanks Nats.

  49. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:13 AM

    JaneB please come back from the ledge. It's ok. The sun is still gonna come up tomorrow.natsfan1a I couldn't agree with you more. If Dunn really wanted to stay he would have stayed. I guess 45 million just wasn't enough. Before we all blame Rizzo and the Lerners, I think the Dunn camp shares the blame as well. Maybe even more.I know it's disappointing but remember in the two years Dunn was here the Nationals lost 103 and 93 games. He was just another Bowden guy that is now gone.So what do we get now? Maybe Adam Laroche? He is nearly the same player as Dunn with less homers, walks and strikeouts. They are both lefthanded and 31. Dunn played 158 games last year with 558 at bats. Laroche played 151 games and 560 at bats. Dunn had 145 hits and Laroche had 146. Dunn had 103 RBI even with all the homeruns while Laroche had 100. Dunn's average was .260 while Laroche hit .261. And Laroche is looked upon as a better fielder than Dunn.I think in the end Dunn will be like Soriano. Fond memories but we are better off he is gone.Mike

  50. Les in NC - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:17 AM

    C'est-la-vie, I guess…..The ONLY way this works for me is that the Morse/Willingham/Pena or whoever experiment at first base works out. Otherwise, JayB has been right all along and the Lerners have finally shown their true colors to the rest of us.

  51. raymitten - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:20 AM

    I'd rather have Morse than LaRoche. Whatever the statistics say, LaRoche is a boring player that has bounced around from one also ran to the next . Maybe they can sign Adam Kennedy to play first base.

  52. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:21 AM

    Mike and the rest, When you lose 100 games, the season just grinds on you. Seeing homeruns at a stadium just feels like its a small victory somehow. Well at least my guy hit it 400 ft. And if this team was going to win, then yeah, Dunn's loss is not so bad. 2005 is a good example of that. Winning games always trumps homeruns. But they are not going to win games in 2011. Does anyone on here think they will be competitive? Have you looked at the pitching staff? They are going to lose 90 next year at the least. So a couple more big bombs would be exciting. A reason to show up and root for the big fella. Now, we get less excitement and the same losing. What is the reason to go to the stadium now? Zim's and Espinosa's defense, maybe. What else? That is what is depressing, ok?

  53. Feel Wood - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:41 AM

    "I'd rather have Morse than LaRoche."You know, it's entirely possible you could have both. Unless of course you were referring to Samuel F. B. Morse. That ain't happening.

  54. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:42 AM

    Rizzo screwed this up big time. He could have Daniel Hudson for Dunn last season. Hudson is going to be a number 2 or 3 starter for the next 5 to 7 years. Instead we get more draft picks. Well done Mike. I am really getting tired of this National leadership.

  55. dcdingo - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:45 AM

    Where’s the fun without Dunn? That’s my question.I’m disappointed in him and the Nationals. I understand the well-expressed arguments here about not overpaying for what may be a declining talent. But the Nationals weren’t even in a position to take that risk after years of mismanagement/poor ownership that placed us in a position where we don’t need the services of a big bopper because our one ace pitcher is injured and our other deficits are so great.I hope the team surprises me at the hot stove but I’m not hopeful.I’m sure I will go to some games next year but I will not give the Lerners a blank check by renewing my season membership. I will go to the games when they show me they have something worth watching. It is the only leverage I have as a fan.Yours disgusted, Bethesda.

  56. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:45 AM

    You know, it's entirely possible that this is all a nefarious hoax perpetrated by Wil Nieves to mute the raucous celebrations that would otherwise have erupted when his non-tendering is announced later today.

  57. NatinBeantown - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:50 AM

    I have to resist the urge to judge this until the rest of the offseason pans out. The lineup can live without Dunn, but they've got to find another power lefty OF or 1B out there. The really interesting thing will be if the ChiSox resign Konerko. If they don't, then we'll really know that Dunn wanted that 4th year so bad he's willing to play 100 games at DH.

  58. NatinBeantown - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:55 AM

    Oh, but I should add that the fanboy in me will miss Dunn a lot. Sabermetrics and armchair-General Managing has made me a more informed baseball fan, but it's so hard to really be a fan of a team with a rotating lineup. Other than Zim and Livo, this team has had no core to really be the heart of the team. Dunn really was a big reason a lot of fans watched games.

  59. David - Dec 3, 2010 at 2:06 AM

    i won't be mad about this offseason until it's over and we're in spring training camp. there's still time to make a splash with Crawford, or a trade for Greinke. i think (and praying) something big will happen. i'm pretty Rizzo is too smart of a baseball fan to not realize they'll lose the fans without making a bold move.

  60. Wally - Dec 3, 2010 at 2:09 AM

    From the comments, it seems like people really didn't believe the signs that we were seeing all along. He wanted the biggest contract he could get, and Rizzo didn't really want him back. I am happy for Dunn that he got the contract he wanted, he genuinely seems like a good guy but I am disappointed that he isn't coming back.So what happens to us fans? No panic for me yet – I am going to give them the rest of the offseason to see what happens. I'll be fine with this move if they improve the team overall in other ways. But i admit that i am skeptical and am more in JayB's camp than others right now. If this is essentially the team that goes into 2011, that will be supremely disappointing and no way I am buying tickets. but they still have time to do something.I would have taken Hudson over the picks too, but this worked out as almost as good for the picks as possible, SO LONG AS the CWS do not sign another Type A. Then it drops to a 2d round pick, which will suck.

  61. Wally - Dec 3, 2010 at 2:53 AM

    The other comment I have is that, based on the contracts that everyone is signing so far, I think Rizzo misjudged the price escalation going on around baseball. I doubt, for instance, that Pena is available for 1/$5m or so, like I bet he figured. even the reclamation projects like Webb will likely get fairly big $$, like $5m or more guaranteed. Still time to do something, but they will have to adjust their thinking.

  62. John O'Connor - Dec 3, 2010 at 2:59 AM

    I wonder if Rizzo really coveted the draft picks, thinking that stockpiling some picks would free him up to deal away some of our current prospects for a front-line starter. If next seasonm starts and we have lost, say, Dunn, Desmond, Norris, and one other prospect not named Zimmermann, and add, say, Pena, Greinke or Garza, and the two draft picks, I would take that. Or, Mark Lerner could be rolling around nude in the money he saves while waiting for the Nats to become good before he spends any money on payroll.One or the other.

  63. JayB - Dec 3, 2010 at 3:05 AM

    Mark,Why no quotes from Nats Front Office…..Are the hiding out….not even a no comment or will get back to you on that….Nothing at all?

  64. Sec3MySofa - Dec 3, 2010 at 3:07 AM

    Mark, or someone, chime in and correct me please if need be, but I think the White Sox would have to sign a Type A from a team with a worse record than the Nationals for Washington's pick to drop to the next round, no?As always, I'm too lazy to look it up…

  65. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 3:09 AM

    No. A better ranked free agent.

  66. Carl from Georgetown - Dec 3, 2010 at 3:25 AM

    The people who are right are the ones who say this is mainly a PR problem. Even Dunn would not have guaranteed a winning record in 2011; 38 HRs and 100 RBIs were great. But think how he played first and those 199 K's.Adam LaRoche looks, on paper at least, like a decent replacement: 100 RBIs, though fewer HRs, and much better in the field. Significantly better, at least last year, than Pena. More RBIs, Higher OPS, .64 higher BA and better fielder!

  67. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 3:32 AM

    "Why no quotes from Nats Front Office…..Are the hiding out….not even a no comment or will get back to you on that….Nothing at all?"Is it typical to have comments from a front office when a player leaves by free agency? I don't think so. Where were the comments from the Red Sox FO when VMart signed with DET? Where were the comments from the SD FO when Garland signed with LAD? Where were the comments from the Yankees FO when Vazquez signed with FLA? There were none. Why then should there be comments from the Nats FO because Dunn signed elsewhere? The comment will come via the signing or trading for his replacement. And Rizzo has already commented actually. He said months ago that if they lost Dunn's bat they would have to replace it. And so they will. Stay tuned to find out how.

  68. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 3:33 AM

    Bob Shaefer did say the club is improving without winning. He's a natural for this club, talking out of both sides of his mouth. Here's some nuggets for you Bob: The club is signing impact free agents that weren't universally ranked as an impact free agent. The club is getting its front line pitcher but don't pay attention to the injury history.The club is competitive with a 90+ loss season.Riggleman is a good manager.

  69. N. Cognito - Dec 3, 2010 at 4:11 AM

    Congrats to Dunn for fleecing the Pale Sox. As always, it's about money and with that amount he'll enjoy DHing.

  70. N. Cognito - Dec 3, 2010 at 4:16 AM

    Will said… "Hudson was definitely a real offer. Kenny Williams, the Sox GM, even went out of his way to trade Hudson for Jackson, whom the Nats coveted, because he was so desperate to get his hands on Dunn."According to whom?

  71. ChicagoNatsGirl - Dec 3, 2010 at 4:22 AM

    So I am a Washington DC ex-pat living in the Chicago area. My sister comes over for our book group/excuse to drink a lot of wine on a weeknight and says "So you've heard the news, right, Adam Dunn to the Sox." Well, I hadn't . . . Being a Nats fan first and a Sox fan a distant second, I was heartbroken but at least I get him on my second team now. And at least I got to drink a lot of wine on a weeknight. But a bad decision by the Nats in my view. It could be another long year . . .

  72. Phil dunn - Dec 3, 2010 at 4:48 AM

    Is there another team in MLB that has done absolutely nothing so far during this off season? Rizzo will be busy in Feb signing garbage to fill the holes. Maybe he will give Pete Orr another shot. How about Ryan Langerhans or Ryan Church? Nick Johnson might come cheap & there's always Felipe Lopez.

  73. Mjames 1 - Dec 3, 2010 at 4:58 AM

    Rizzo will complete the following to revamp the Nats(1) Sign Crawford as FA(2) Trade Stamen, Desmond and Willingham to the Rays for Matt Garza(3) Sign Pena as a FA.

  74. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 4:59 AM

    Unfortunately the lineup will look something like this next year, barring any big moves..Morgan CFDesmond SSZimmerman 3BWillingham LFMorse RF______ 1BRodriguez/Ramos CEspinosa 2B____ PImagine what it will look like on those day games after a night game…oy vey to the max!!!!!Now that the Dunn shoe has dropped we need to sing Crawford or Worth and a 1st baseman to have any hope of winning more than 60 games. :(

  75. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 5:24 AM

    The Lerners are disgusting lowlifes. City builds them a ballpark, they don't pay the rent. Fans pay top dollar for tickets, they field a minor league team. They say it's about "youth", but then we see Kevin Mench, Willie Harris, and Adam Kennedy. They won't spend money on a real manager and GM, so we get pathetic, unqualified boot lickers like Riggleman and Rizzo. Then they top it off by hiring people in the press like Phil Wood as mouthpieces to try and put some sprinkles on the sh, I mean garbage they feed fans.Awful people running an awful organization. 110 losses and 8,000 a night in 2011. Expect it.

  76. Anonymous - Dec 3, 2010 at 7:38 AM

    Dunn is now going where he and Chris Marerro belong: in the American League where the DH is part of the game. He is probably going to be able to help his team far more there. Let's let the drama continue to unfold. Give Mike Rizzo a chance to build his team of young, athletic speedster position players, and power pitchers. And then judge.

  77. Another_Sam - Dec 3, 2010 at 9:48 AM

    I'm not a GM; I couldn't even play one on TV. I'm just a fan in the stands. So there's lots about buildng a club that I don't understand. To the naive fan like me it seems like a no brainer that Dunn was one step to building a team — keep the fans and the clubhouse on board while rolling the dice with prospects. But I'm not a GM.As I've said before — I'm happy for Dunn. He works for the man just like I do and he's entitled to work the best deal he can.

  78. Richard - Dec 3, 2010 at 1:07 PM

    A sad day for a sad, joyless franchise. The "faces" of this franchise belong to Rizzo, fat and doughy, mouthing garbage about how he hopes Dunn will be a Nat next year while offering him a below market contract, and the blank Lerner faces, a group that spends their time in the back room combing over the ledgers and the fine print on their contracts, which at this time of year brings to mind the Scrooge family. The fans are the Cratchits I suppose.

  79. Tcostant - Dec 3, 2010 at 2:22 PM

    Very sad to see Dunn go, look for Zimm and Hammers stats to go down with him gone and they walks to go up.If this season ends with no major FA addition (likely), then some of the savings must be spent now on a Troy Tulowitzki like extension. Let’s lock Ryan Zimmerman up now before he is tempted to go elsewhere. It will end of saving them money or losing him, in the long run.

Archives

NL EAST STANDINGS

W L GB
WASHINGTON 57 46 --
ATLANTA 58 48 0.5
MIAMI 52 53 6.0
NEW YORK 51 55 7.5
PHILADELPHIA 46 60 12.5
Through Monday's games

UPCOMING SCHEDULE
TUE: Nats at Marlins, 7:10 p.m.
WED: Nats at Marlins, 12:40 p.m.
THU: Phillies at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
FRI: Phillies at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
SAT: Phillies at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
SUN: Phillies at Nats, 1:35 p.m.
MON: Orioles at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
Full season schedule

Mark joins Rob Carlin and Joe Orsulak every Thursday at 4 p.m. on Comcast SportsNet for a half-hour show on the Nats, Orioles and rest of MLB. Re-airs Thursdays at 11:30 p.m., Saturdays at 9 a.m. and Sundays at 11:30 a.m.

ON THE RADIO

As ESPN-980 AM's Nats Insider, Mark makes daily appearances on the station's various shows. Here's the 2014 schedule (subject to change)...

MON: 12:45 p.m.
TUE: 2:30 p.m.
WED: 4:30 p.m.
THU: 2:30 p.m.
FRI: 1:30 p.m., 5:30 p.m.
SAT: 10:30 a.m.

*All times Eastern. You can also listen to the station on 94.3 FM, 92.7 FM and online at ESPN980.com. Click here for past audio clips.

Follow us on Twitter