That's Our Boz

If the Nats can extend Dunn for three years for close to $40 million, they should do it -- and fast. His defense may improve. If it doesn't, he's still a bargain because the stat lovers have probably overshot in their zeal for quantifying. It's the way of things. They themselves may be the new inefficiency in the market. Dunn's defense should slash his price, but not slaughter it.

While I think he's right in that the statheads are looking at a bunch of slivers of part-time play, adding them, and calling Dunn "Hitler with a Glove..."

Why would the Nats sign a player to more money than they were willing to commit to him a few seasons back when there's no real indication as to whether he can actually handle the position? 3/40 isn't a ton of money, but that's a ton of money to tie up to someone who, while very good, is not elite. He's not Pujols. He's not Teixeira. He's in that second tier of pretty good, but not superstar, players. Why lock it up when 1B is so easy to fill -- as we did two seasons ago when we plucked Dunn off the unemployment line?

If Dunn goes on the FA market, I bet he'd be looking at something much closer to the deal Pat Burrell got than what Boz is suggesting.

I'm as big an Adam Dunn fanboy as there is, but as I've said ad nauseum, the time to extend him was two seasons ago, when you could've had him on a long-term deal at a very nice rate. It's better to find the next 'bargain' and stick him at 1B than to overpay to re-sign the one we've got. I think this team's track record with extending its own players should show you how difficult a process that sometimes can be.