Dunn Traded To Diamondbacks; Sheffield's Mouth Roars Again

• Reds trade Adam Dunn to the Diamondbacks for three minor leaguers:

Critics can say what they want about Adam Dunn for what he isn't, but that shouldn't detract from what he is. Dunn is said not to hit in the clutch, but his numbers in the clutch

aren't that far off from what they are in other situations; they say he strikes out too much, but he also walks nearly as many times as he strikes out; they say he's a bad outfielder, but he's got a great arm and he's better out there than he's given credit for.
Dunn hits lefties well-enough to not be a platoon player. That he has such bad numbers with two outs and runners in scoring position can be accouted for by his increased on base percentage in those situations----teams don't want to pitch to him under those circumstances; he sees fewer pitches to hit; and the ones he swings at aren't good pitches, so he doesn't get hits on anything other than mistakes. The guy is a useful player who's capable of hitting ten homers in a week if he gets hot, and that's what the Diamondbacks need----a guy that can singlehandedly produce some runs. They won't do it, but I'd bat him leadoff; let him get up there to start the game, either homer, walk or strikeout and move on from there.
The Diamondbacks gave up three minor leaguers to the Reds to get him and two are to be

named later; one, Dallas Buck, doesn't have overwhelming minor league numbers in Single A. The thing about the Diamondbacks that would concern me is not only that they're gutting their farm system to get these veteran players like Dan Haren, Jon Rauch and Dunn, but that their results haven't been there no matter what they've done and even in retrospect four or five years from now, it's going to be very difficult to quibble with the deals that they've made for veteran help.
Early in the year, they looked like they were going to run away and hide in the NL West, but haven't been able to get any traction since even with the best 1-2 punch in baseball with Brandon Webb and Haren; one would think that since Randy Johnson

has been enjoying a renaissance lately that they would've gone on a hot streak, but they haven't. Are they missing Eric Byrnes that much that they can't win consistently without him?
Discounting their record, they have enough firepower in the offense even without Dunn or Byrnes to score enough runs for that pitching staff to work with. The back end of their rotation isn't great, but neither is anyone else's; Brandon Lyon isn't an ideal closer, but they have two other options in Rauch and Chad Qualls if it gets to the point that they have to try someone else. Their problem is hard to pinpoint and there's been speculation that perhaps manager Bob Melvin is it, but he won Manager of the

Year last year and went to the NLCS with a very young team for whom everything broke right. Maybe the absence of Byrnes, with his fiery temper and kamikaze attitude is what's missing. Changing the manager to someone who's going to start flipping over food spreads probably isn't going to do any good now.
If I were the Diamondbacks, my greatest concern would be that they haven't been able to take control of the division despite it's weakness; that they're letting the Dodgers hang around, get healthy, make bigger acquisitions in Manny Ramirez and Casey Blake and use Joe Torre's experience and reputation as a manager whose teams enjoy late season surges to stay within striking distance of first place. As things wind down, Torre isn't going to make the same mistake as Padres manager Bud Black did last season in using Jake Peavy to start on short rest because of his success against the Diamondbacks and make them angry enough to provide a fuse for an explosion; Byrnes was there with the match last September and whipped the entire team into a frenzy at the sheer audacity of the slight; now, without him, it looks like the team is taking on the personality of their laid back manager, and if that's the case, they're going to have to motivate themselves which, thus far, they've failed to do. They're running out of player moves that they can make; it's time to wake up and win some games.

• Gary Sheffield says something stupid? Gary Sheffield?!?

I've defended Gary Sheffield in the past because I truly believe that front office people have

used Sheffield's reputation as a loose cannon to lie to him and try to make him look foolish with some of his off-the-wall statements, but now that he's playing for a manager in Jim Leyland who has done nothing but defend him as a great player and a good guy, one has to question how much Sheffield thinks before he says some of the things he says.
Sheffield is complaining about his perceived role as a platoon player and that he doesn't feel comfortable DH-ing full time----ESPN Story. Leyland and Tigers GM Dave Dombrowski appear puzzled by the allegations; Dombrowski probably halfway expected some kind of Sheffield blowup when he acquired him no matter how much money he was paid or how well he was treated; but

Leyland values reciprocal honesty and loyalty above all with his players and is probably more offended than anything else at Sheffield's rant. For a guy who has defended Sheffield since he first managed him with the Marlins in 1997, Leyland must see this as borderline spitting in his face.
It can't come as a shock to those who have watched Gary Sheffield----a Hall of Fame player who's playing on his seventh team partially because of his mouth----as he begins the process of a divorce from another organization; but as his skills decline and his injuries mount, one has to wonder who's going to take a chance on Sheffield if the Tigers try to dump him, as they most certainly will, after the season. Because he'll still be able to hit and hit for power if he's healthy, he'll be able to play for someone who needs a right-handed bat prone to hot streaks in which no one can get him out; but Sheffield isn't likely to accept a reduced role or that the new team isn't going to

give him a new, long-term contract; or he may agree to accept it, as he did with the Tigers and change his mind or conveniently forget about it when the issue starts nagging away at him and the seed is placed into his perception that the agreement is somehow unfair. It may be that Gary Sheffield just sees things through a prism that only he and his surrounding enablers see as reality and, even as he ages and his career comes to a close, that's never going to change no matter whom he's playing for and how much they defend him.
Just as "Manny being Manny" has become part of the baseball lexicon and was seen as a term of endearment for Manny Ramirez until "Manny being Manny" became too much of a case of diminishing returns for the Red Sox to keep him around, teammates, managers and GMs held a similar view of Gary Sheffield with the lesser known appellation of "Sheff being Sheff" with the same head shake and shrug, it's possible that he too is going to wear out his welcome in another venue; but his production isn't going to make it worthwhile for the majority of teams to put up with "Sheff being Sheff" as he turns 40; then maybe he'll realize his mistake. He'll never admit it, but he'll know that he probably alienated some people who truly had his interests in mind and the giant chip he carries on his shoulder is becoming heavier and heavier by the day; too heavy for a player at his age and with the wear on his body to lug somewhere else and get away with it.

The "Boost" From A Managerial Change

• Is it the new manager or is it the stability?

The Mets have played and looked much better and more relaxed under Jerry Manuel than

they did under Willie Randolph since at least the middle of last season and Manuel is going to receive credit for that with his different take on running his ballclub, but is that fair? Is the improvement a function of the new manager or is it that the players wanted some finality and an end to answering the non-stop questions about the manager's job security if they lose one or two games?
There have been many cases where a team just wanted a manager out of their sight because they couldn't stand him and subsequently went on a tear. It happened twice with former Astros and Blue Jays manager Jimy Williams; with the Marlins when they dumped Jeff Torborg; and with the Red Sox when they fired John McNamara. While it's easy to give credit to the successors----Cito Gaston and Phil Garner replacing Williams;

Jack McKeon replacing Torborg; and Joe Morgan (the veteran New Englander, not the inept broadcaster) in replacing McNamara----it's not that easy to automatically think that the new manager was the reason things turned around.
The perception of playing for a manager's job on a nightly basis can't be easy. Most managerial changes don't just come out of the blue; there's usually a series of leaks to the newspapers mentioning that it's possible (sometimes that's done to gauge the temperature of the situation, the fans and the players and see how they're going to react); many times management wants to get a feel as to whether or not the change is actually going to do any good on the field.
Amid all of that, even the Mets players who didn't particularly like Randolph or pitching coach Rick Peterson and wouldn't have minded them being gone don't want to be seen as responsible for getting the manager and pitching coach fired. It wasn't necessarily that the

players had simply stopped performing for Randolph on purpose, but it can't be easy for a reliever to come jogging in from the bullpen with runners on base and a one-run lead and all the factors he has to worry about in that situation to be thinking that if he doesn't do the job, he's getting someone fired as well. It gets to a point where even the wins are tinged with the repeated questions about the status of the manager; once the idea of a change is in the air, it's going to be there and fall on the players until the matter is resolved.
There's no question that Randolph had lost his effectiveness as a manager, and if the team turns things around Manuel is going to get the credit, but it might have little to do with what he does as the manager and more to do with the players not having to worry about every loss possibly resulting in the manager getting fired.

• Brewers 7-Orioles 3:

The Brewers turnaround has a great deal to do with Prince Fielder finally hitting some home runs, but it also has a lot to do with Salomon Torres taking over as the closer and not coughing up the games as Eric Gagne was. Russell Branyan has provided a big boost as well, but he's only been back in the big leagues for three weeks; time will tell whether this is

just an opportune hot streak for a veteran professional player or if he's found his niche in Milwaukee. If I had to guess, I'd say Branyan's going to come back to earth sooner rather than later.
The Brewers took a reasonable chance on Gagne last winter signing him to a one-year deal hoping that a return to the National League would revert the pitcher into what he was with the Dodgers and with the Rangers early last season. Instead, they got the pitcher who imploded for the Red Sox on a nightly basis. They turned to the quirky veteran Torres out of desperation more than anything else and, in a prime example of how finding a successful closer is a flip of the coin, Torres has been excellent. For a guy who was a closer off-and-on for the past few seasons and lost the job as a member of the woeful Pirates last year and also had some bizarre incidents in his career (walking away from the game for five years, etc.), Torres might be remembered as the man who saved the Brewers from 78-win season and a major restructuring. The Brewers are still within striking distance of the NL Central and right in the middle of the Wild Card race. If they hit as they're capable, Ben Sheets stays healthy and Torres continues to perform as he has, they could hang around in both races for the duration and that's a far cry from scanning the want-ads for a closer who wouldn't blow games they should be winning.

• Twins 5-Diamondbacks 3:

The expectations for the Diamondbacks were at least as high as that of the Mets this season, but they find themselves with an almost identical record and saved by the unexpected wasteland that the NL West has become. With a starting rotation fronted by two

legitimate aces; a deep and diverse bullpen; and a lineup that, despite it's youth, should be a force, the Diamondbacks find themselves at 39-37 and stumbling along despite hanging onto first place.
Brandon Webb has been getting raked around so regularly that I would be concerned about the pitcher's health; granted it would've been impossible for him to continue pitching shutouts every night, but he's gotten knocked around in three of his last five starts; it could be a mid-season slump, but it's not something to ignore out of hand. Their rotation, which was supposed to be a strength, is looking short. Dan Haren has been everything advertised, but Micah Owings got off to a great start and has been pretty much terrible since late April; Randy Johnson has been more bad than good; and Doug Davis, for all the courage he's shown in coming back from thyroid cancer, is a back of the rotation starter who can't be counted on to pick up for the top of the rotation.
Out of the Moneyball school, Josh Byrnes is probably the closest GM to Billy Beane in

terms of temperament, playing his cards close to the vest and making decisive moves. Even though they're in first place, this could mean one of two things: 1) Bob Melvin might be in trouble if they continue sleepwalking; or 2) a big trade is going to be made to shake things up. I don't think Melvin deserves to be fired (for what that's worth), so I would think that Byrnes is scouring the trade market and other teams in need to make a quick and decisive strike to loosen the cobwebs.

• Tigers 5-Padres 3:

I'm aware of the payroll disparity between the Padres and the Mariners and why the Mariners are a laughingstock because they look like they're going to lose 100 games after being a trendy pick to win the AL West, but the Padres expectations were higher in many

circles than the Mariners; the payroll shouldn't factor in if the Padres were taking credit for being smart and frugal while being almost as bad. No one seems to be flogging the Padres with a similar enthusiasm as they are the Mariners. There's even talk of the Padres crawling back into the race for the division. They're not crawling into any race; the race is tumbling to them and it's not going to last. The Dodgers and Diamondbacks are going to right their ships enough to bury the Padres, but will anyone notice, or will they continue to protect the "smart" Padres management team, which may not be all that smart after all?