Jump to content
JohnD

Would you trade Bundy and Gausman for Hamels?

Recommended Posts

Not sure at this point the Phillies would, but would you?

I'd say yes, knowing it would solve one of the big holes this team has.

Makes getting an impact bat that much harder though. Still think even with Reimold they need to find an upgrade for RF. Someone with power and at least a decent average. One of those pitchers would have to be part of a deal to get an impact bat. Ship them both to Philly and it becomes that much harder. But Hamels is everything you HOPE the other two can be, though there isn't anything certain about that happening.

Edited by weams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a heck of an idea if you are a convert of the Rays/Nats/Atros guide to building a contender. The O's need two of Bundy/Gausman/Harvey to hit in order weather the departure of the impending free agents.

Actually to use their process you have to be bottom three for six out of seven years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No way we could fleece Phillies that badly anyway but of course anybody in their right mind would if money wasn't an issue. I personally don't think either Gausman or Bundy are going to pan out as major league starters. This is a no brainer but Angelos would never pay for Hamels. No way - no how!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No way we could fleece Phillies that badly anyway but of course anybody in their right mind would if money wasn't an issue. I personally don't think either Gausman or Bundy are going to pan out as major league starters. This is a no brainer but Angelos would never pay for Hamels. No way - no how!

This is a no brainer for the Orioles?

Laughing-Thunderbirds.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been slowly coming around to the idea that stud pitchers with a lot of innings under their belt fail more then they succeed when they go elsewhere. I admit, I'm going off the top of my head, but rarely are they worth it. Trading our best young pitchers for a 32 year old pitcher in the non steroid era is a complete non-starter for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2021 Minor League Depth Chart

2021 Prospect Power Rankings

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • It's a snapshot after a single season. No doubt Gunnar could be above Mayo next year just based on Gunnar's performance alone. That kid could be special. He did have an up and down season though, both at the plate and in the field.  If he's like some of the kids I know, the offseason can be used to really clean up the game. Not sure that applies as they get older, but there's nothing stopping Gunnar from being our #1 prospect next year. It might not be likely, but it's possible.
    • Little too aggressive for me.   I have Cowser, Henderson and Hall ahead of Mayo.   I will have to seen more of Mayo before I rank him that high.   I am not real sure yet if he ranks ahead of Stowers and Kjerstad as a right fielder.
    • 65, 65, 60. Awesome. Ceilings of 75, 75, 65. Not sure where Cowser, Henderson and Hall will fall on future grades, but I know their ceilings will be high. That's a nice top of the list. Really interested to see where a couple of the international guys fall too. Next year I'm expecting to see a name (or 2-4) really shoot up the lists like Mayo did this year, and I'm not just thinking about the #1 overall pick.
    • Hey, if Tony thinks he's a better prospect than Cowser is, that's a good thing, because Cowser is - relatively speaking - a known quantity.  
    • It's Cowser, IMO, and those are 5 good players on that list. I'm thinking Markakis at the plate. Better range, less arm, in the outfield. Low risk, but pretty high upside player with high probability to start for Baltimore relatively soon and for a long time. He's here because his upside is comparable to the other guys but he has less risk. In fact, I'd wager that Tony's rankings of Henderson, Hall and Stowers will depend on how he views their risk as much as their upside, with Stowers' upside a tick behind the other two and thus probably the last of them to show on the list, IMO. 
    • I have Gunnar Henderson #3 because he projects to play the more premium defensive position, and despite having less raw power than Mayo, showed some plate discipline at all levels that he played at this past season, which bodes well for Gunnar's ability to be a complete hitter. I like Tony's #3 ranking for Mayo, though. Never seen an O's prospect in my lifetime with this kind of raw power at such an early age. Most of the big publications will be lazy and rank Hall #3, but his injury risk profile and risk to be a reliever place him behind Gunnar, Mayo, and Cowser for me.
    • The more I read about Brook Lee - I worry he's another Austin Martin (no definitive position and average hitting). He's only worth the 1st pick if he stays at SS (with decent defense) or hits for power at 3rd/2nd. My concerns: He hit 10 hrs his junior year, less power than Martin at the same age and his defense has been considered average at best. Also, he's not super athletic or has a rocket arm.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...