More photos » Evan Vucci - AP

8 months ago: Washington Nationals' Adam Dunn sits on the bench after the Nationals were swept by the Philadelphia Phillies 8-6 on Sunday, May 17, 2009, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Browse more photos »

According to MLB.com, Nationals GM Mike Rizzo said he would not trade Adam Dunn before the trade deadline:

"We are not trading Adam Dunn," Rizzo said during an appearance on ESPN 980 in Washington, D.C. "That's as definitive as I can be."

Yes, yes it is Mike. 

Dunn is a nice player.  Despite his horrible defense, he has averaged exactly 2 wins above replacement from 06-08, and he has been worth 0.8 wins in a half a season so far this year.  Really you know what you are going to get from him; league average production.  Assuming that is a correct valuation, here is why it would make sense for the Nationals to trade him:

• The Nationals are terrible.  There not as bad as their record, but they are still likely the worst team in the league.  They have some good young players, but realistically, they don't project to be competitive any time in the next couple of years. 
  
• Dunn is only signed for 1 more year, meaning he won't help the Nationals that much.  He is basically the difference between them being a 60 win team vs. a 58 win team next year.  
  
• Dunn is owed 12 million dollars next year, which is a significant overpayment going by the 4.5 million per win standard.  That's not even considering that really bad teams should not pay market value per win, as those wins don't help them reach the playoffs nearly as much as they do better teams. 
  
• The Nationals have a glut of outfielders who are cost controlled and of equal or better value to Dunn, including Josh Willingham, Nyger Morgan and Elijah Dukes.   

Really, Dunn is overpaid and has no future on the team.  Given that the Nationals won't be good for at least a couple of years, it pays to trade him for young players that could help them when they are good.  So why does Mike Rizzo want to keep Dunn?

"it's my job to listen to any and all offers that teams bring to us," he also said, "By no means is Adam Dunn on the trading block. We do not want to move Adam Dunn. We acquired him to keep him in the long-term. He's having an All-Star type of first half, he's a leader in the clubhouse and he's the anchor of the middle of our lineup."

That doesn't make sense at all.  First off, saying that Dunn is having an all star first half shows that Rizzo has no idea how to properly value players.  Secondly the fact that he is only signed for 1 more year does not lend credence to Rizzo's statement that they "acquired him to keep him in the long term".  Of course, he mentions that Dunn is a leader, but as devil fingers observed earlier this year, that notion is likely due to his terrible defense.  Even if Dunn does possess great leadership qualities, that won't make the Nationals any less terrible.  

It appears that Rizzo has an emotional attachment to Dunn.  His reasons for keeping Dunn are not based on logic, or any tangible effects he has on the present or future success of their team.  The Nationals have been a crappy team for awhile, and if their FO keeps making decision like this, I don't see how they are going to get much better.  Stephen Strasburg better be really damn good.