Jump to content
wildcard

Time to DFA Nunez and bring (Fill in the blank) up?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

Hey, I never called for Nunez to be DFA'd.  I asked the question if he should be.  Go back as read the OP.

Ok, yes, thanks for the suggestion--I went back and read it. I know you were just raising the question, but saying that even if we lost him on waivers we weren't losing anything was, I felt, an overreaction to, at that point, a less than two-week old slump. Tony had already presented pretty remarkable Statcast figures for him--ones which I felt deserved a lot more patience than stirring the pot about letting him go. And yes, we have other DH options, but it's no sure bet that they would do as well as the good Nunez. Davis might be plugged in due to that stupid contract and Trumbo in order to showcase him for a late-season trade. Hays, Sisco, Stewart, and Mullins? All have had disappointing or less-than-good-Nunez tryouts. Nunez's barrelling and EV's are impressive--giving him long trials is fine. And he seems comfortable in the clean-up slot.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LA2 said:

Ok, yes, thanks for the suggestion--I went back and read it. I know you were just raising the question, but saying that even if we lost him on waivers we weren't losing anything was, I felt, an overreaction. Tony had already presented pretty remarkable Statcast figures for him--ones which I felt deserved a lot more patience than stirring the pot about letting him go. And yes, we have other DH options, but it's no sure bet that they would do as well as the good Nunez. Davis might be plugged in due to that stupid contract and Trumbo in order to showcase him for a late-season trade. Hays, Sisco, Stewart, and Mullins? All have had disappointing or less-than-good-Nunez tryouts. Nunez's barrelling and EV's are impressive--giving him long trials is fine. And he seems comfortable in the clean-up slot.

Another question.   If the O's put Nunez on the trade market right now, what do you think the O's would get in turn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Another question.   If the O's put Nunez on the trade market right now, what do you think the O's would get in turn?

Not much.    His lack of defensive value and low OBP limits his value.    Maybe a B prospect and a C prospect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frobby said:

Not much.    His lack of defensive value and low OBP limits his value.    Maybe a B prospect and a C prospect?

I wouldn't give up a B for Nunez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I wouldn't give up a B for Nunez.

Maybe we are defining a B prospect differently.    Not that I would do this given our team’s current configuration, but I was thinking of Alex Wells as an example of a B prospect.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frobby said:

Maybe we are defining a B prospect differently.    Not that I would do this given our team’s current configuration, but I was thinking of Alex Wells as an example of a B prospect.   

Quote

Grade B prospects have a good chance to enjoy successful careers. Some will develop into stars, some will not. Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.

https://www.facebook.com/MinorLeagueBall/posts/top-20-baltimore-orioles-top-prospects-for-2019the-list-and-grades-are-a-blendin/1987002024668666/

I would rate Wells a C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I’ve followed Sickels for years, but my own grading system is a bit different from his.   To me, a B prospect is a guy who has a shot at a decent major league career but isn’t a shoe in.    A C prospect is a guy who may get a cup of coffee but who is unlikely to have a sustained career.    

As to Wells, I see him as a B- type. But I’m always a sucker for guys like that.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I’ve followed Sickels for years, but my own grading system is a bit different from his.   To me, a B prospect is a guy who has a shot at a decent major league career but isn’t a shoe in.    A C prospect is a guy who may get a cup of coffee but who is unlikely to have a sustained career.    

As to Wells, I see him as a B- type. But I’m always a sucker for guys like that.   

So you would have a lot more guys rated at "A"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we all have our favorites and our hatreds. But we can all be wrong. 

I was always a proponent of getting rid of awful Don Hart and look at him now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Not much.    His lack of defensive value and low OBP limits his value.    Maybe a B prospect and a C prospect?

So if Nunez is worth a B or C prospect in trade now he was probably worth less than that when he was in the middle of his  of his slump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wildcard said:

So if Nunez is worth a B or C prospect in trade now he was probably worth less than that when he was in the middle of his  of his slump.

I don't think teams put anywhere near as much stock in performance over a short period of time that you seem to think they do.

These aren't rubes fresh off the farms running these teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think teams put anywhere near as much stock in performance over a short period of time that you seem to think they do.

These aren't rubes fresh off the farms running these teams.

We will just have to disagree on that.

I don't think many teams would give much for Nunez when he  had a 632 OPS.   Just like I think that Givens would be under valued if he was traded now after a few weeks on pitching poorly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wildcard said:

We will just have to disagree on that.

I don't think many teams would give much for Nunez when he  had a 632 OPS.   Just like I think that Givens would be under valued if he was traded now after a few weeks on pitching poorly.

Seriously, what makes you think, based off of all that you know, that teams are going to react to small sample sizes in performance?

I'm honestly curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I’ve followed Sickels for years, but my own grading system is a bit different from his.   To me, a B prospect is a guy who has a shot at a decent major league career but isn’t a shoe in.    A C prospect is a guy who may get a cup of coffee but who is unlikely to have a sustained career.    

As to Wells, I see him as a B- type. But I’m always a sucker for guys like that.   

51P9XBP-a5L._SX342_.jpg

12 minutes ago, wildcard said:

We will just have to disagree on that.

I don't think many teams would give much for Nunez when he  had a 632 OPS.   Just like I think that Givens would be under valued if he was traded now after a few weeks on pitching poorly.

Yeah, I'm curious, too.  I don't understand the logic here.  Givens career has been what it's been, he's got a solid (not spectacular) performance history.  

I think with Nunez you might be correct, but only because he doesn't have a large body of work to draw from.  But even then, we know he's not a good defender and not a good OBP guy.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Spring Training Stats

Baseball Savant Stats

Minor League Stats







×
×
  • Create New...