Jump to content
MurphDogg

Bundy traded to Angels for Isaac Mattson, Kyle Bradish, Zach Peek, and Kyle Brnovich

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, weams said:

I completely disagree with you. I understand your not liking it. But I don't see error. I see his plan. Good or bad. Good for fans or bad. His plan. 

What do you disagree with? 
 

Question

1) Did he say he was under no pressure to deal anyone else after the deadline?

2) Did he go on record as saying he wasn’t going to tender him in the Sun in September 

3) Did he deal him just before the tender deadline for a fringe prospect 

Weams with all due respect these are all facts.

Whether you have a Negotiating, Sales, or similar background or not what I’m saying is really common sense.

If you don’t make a deal because your under no pressure to make a deal. Then you are forced to make a deal against a deadline since you are out of time. You have 0 leverage.

IMO .... that has nothing to do with the plan. I’m not arguing that we should have kept him here. I’m merely arguing facts about his departure and the return 

I think they are indisputable.

So I guess we can agree to disagree because I’m just a dumb poster.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Sounds like Elias built the deal and presented it to the Angels and they accepted vs having the Angles give him a list and he choose from there.

I like that they are targeting certain players. Time will tell if their system is working and these guys pan out.

Eppler said almost exactly what you're saying here.

Baltimore had a number of names in mind. Those are the players they had targeted. As we kind of worked through the deal, that is how it evolved.

“If their approach was quantity, we were open to that. If their approach would have been one player and aiming somewhere different, we would have entertained that too. We kind of worked through the deal and this was ultimately where it went. We didn’t have a target list of guys we wanted to utilize in this trade. Those guys are talented. Quite frankly, you give up players you just recently drafted, that can go in a number of directions. Every deal hurts. This one is no different.”

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

What do you disagree with? 
 

Question

1) Did he say he was under no pressure to deal anyone else after the deadline?

2) Did he go on record as saying he wasn’t going to tender him in the Sun in September 

3) Did he deal him just before the tender deadline for a fringe prospect 

Weams with all due respect these are all facts.

Whether you have a Negotiating, Sales, or similar background or not what I’m saying is really common sense.

If you don’t make a deal because your under no pressure to make a deal. Then you are forced to make a deal against a deadline since you are out of time. You have 0 leverage.

IMO .... that has nothing to do with the plan. I’m not arguing that we should have kept him here. I’m merely arguing facts about his departure and the return 

I think they are indisputable.

So I guess we can agree to disagree because I’m just a dumb poster.

He did not not make a deal because he was under no pressure to make a deal. He didn't make a deal because no one offered him future value for Villar.  He basically says that right in the quotes. Could he have done marginally better than what he eventually got. Maybe.  Common sense tells us it wasn't a significant difference. Elias knew he was eventually be up against a deadline.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eppler only has 1 year left to turn the Angels into a winner, or he's gone.  So he's essentially trading this years picks to improve the current roster.  Hopefully this works out well for both teams as I like both Bundy and Trout.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Every deal hurts?  Is Michael Stipe writing our GM's material?   

Michael Stipe is Their GM. A former Yankee!

Share this post


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

Michael Stipe is Their GM. A former Yankee!

Whoa, it's the end of their world as we know it. 

I feel fine. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Whoa, it's the end of their world as we know it. 

I feel fine. 

 

Every streetlight reveals the picture in reverse.
Still, it's so much clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

What do you disagree with? 
 

Question

1) Did he say he was under no pressure to deal anyone else after the deadline?

2) Did he go on record as saying he wasn’t going to tender him in the Sun in September 

3) Did he deal him just before the tender deadline for a fringe prospect 

Weams with all due respect these are all facts.

Whether you have a Negotiating, Sales, or similar background or not what I’m saying is really common sense.

If you don’t make a deal because your under no pressure to make a deal. Then you are forced to make a deal against a deadline since you are out of time. You have 0 leverage.

IMO .... that has nothing to do with the plan. I’m not arguing that we should have kept him here. I’m merely arguing facts about his departure and the return 

I think they are indisputable.

So I guess we can agree to disagree because I’m just a dumb poster.

I think you are making too much out of your assertion that Elias "let the cat out of the bag" regarding a possible non-tender of Villar.  With an estimated $10.4 million arb salary and free agency approaching next off-season, the fact that Villar was a non-tender candidate was pretty obvious. Paying Villar $10.4 million for 2020 certainly would not have brought the Orioles into contention.  Given the Orioles' situation, I would guess that just about every GM in baseball fully anticipated the non-tender.  If anything, it seems to me that Elias' actions leading up to the tender deadline probably pushed Miami into a trade offer, which enabled the Orioles to get something out of nothing.  In any event, I can't agree with your opinion that Elias somehow bumbled the situation.

  • Upvote 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Whoa, it's the end of their world as we know it. 

I feel fine. 

 

We should move our triple A team to Rockville. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Number5 said:

I think you are making too much out of your assertion that Elias "let the cat out of the bag" regarding a possible non-tender of Villar.  With an estimated $10.4 million arb salary and free agency approaching next off-season, the fact that Villar was a non-tender candidate was pretty obvious. Paying Villar $10.4 million for 2020 certainly would not have brought the Orioles into contention.  Given the Orioles' situation, I would guess that just about every GM in baseball fully anticipated the non-tender.  If anything, it seems to me that Elias' actions leading up to the tender deadline probably pushed Miami into a trade offer, which enabled the Orioles to get something out of nothing.  In any event, I can't agree with your opinion that Elias somehow bumbled the situation.

Obvious to who? Assuming they would nontender a 4 WAR player. The team has taken heavy criticism all over baseball about putting him on waivers (false report). Many here including the big guy blasted them for being cheap, getting nothing for their best, player etc 

You dont tender Villar because he helps you win this year. You do it because your hoping for a better market later, it removes the negative leverage of the tender deadline, it costs you 3-5 million more than last season when your payroll is very low. And it gives the paying customer a good player in the meantime to watch that you are expecting to sell tickets to.

We agree to disagree on your last 4 sentences. There is no sense continuing 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Obvious to who? Assuming they would nontender a 4 WAR player. The team has taken heavy criticism all over baseball about putting him on waivers (false report). Many here including the big guy blasted them for being cheap, getting nothing for their best, player etc 

You dont tender Villar because he helps you win this year. You do it because your hoping for a better market later, it removes the negative leverage of the tender deadline, it costs you 3-5 million more than last season when your payroll is very low. And it gives the paying customer a good player in the meantime to watch that you are expecting to sell tickets to.

We agree to disagree on your last 4 sentences. There is no sense continuing 

 

You have to let go of the Villar deal. Every team in the league had a chance to claim him for just his salary. They all passed. Somehow then the Marlins gave us something. If there is one thing we know, and that is 100% what was Jonathan Villar’s 2020 value to MLB clubs. 

Edited by sportsfan8703
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sportsfan8703 said:

You have to let go of the Villar deal. Every team in the league had a chance to claim him for just his salary. They all passed. Somehow then the Marlins gave us something. If there is one thing we know, and that is 100% what was Jonathan Villar’s 2020 value to MLB clubs. 

Ok So ... Here is were you are completely wrong. Villar was never put on waivers. It was a false rumor. 
 

See Mewleskis info on the MASN site.

If he cleared waivers the Orioles couldn’t trade him as he would have been a free agent. They only would’ve retained negotiating rights if there were multiple waivers claims under that scenario. But again it’s irrelevant because he wasn’t placed on waivers

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

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • I could see Buck steering the ship for couple years while the Astros deal with the ramifications of this scandal. I think the last thing the Astros want to do here is go with an unknown quantity. 
    • I know it seems counterintuitive, since there are 27 outs in a game and only 4-5 runs scored on average, so that seems like more like .2 runs per out.    But have a look at this base-out matrix, which shows the expected number of runs scored in an inning depending on which bases are occupied and how many outs there are.   This matrix is based on actual game data, not theory.   https://www.google.com/amp/s/thebaseballscholar.com/2017/08/14/sabermetrics-101-re24/amp/ Let’s take the simplest example, the leadoff batter.    If he grounds out (so now it’s bases empty, one out), the expected runs in the inning are .243.    If he’s safe at first (so runner on first, nobody out), the expected runs are .831.    So, the increase in expected runs between making that play or not is .590.      There are other situations on the chart where the differential is higher or lower than that.    On the high side, let’s say you’ve got runners on 1st and 2nd and one out.    Make a play there to record an out and hold the runners, and the expected runs are only .343.    Fail to make that play and so it’s bases loaded and only one out, and the expected runs increase to 1.520. Anyway, someone did a weighted average of all these scenarios and came up with .6 for an average.    If I remember correctly.       
    • Connolly was and apparently still is literally Buck's PR man, so I'm not surprised by his thoughts on this matter. 
    • Dan Connolly has a good column in The Athletic about it.   He said that a few weeks ago, he would have thought the Astros were the LAST team that would ever consider hiring Buck for the reasons you give.   And that those reasons still exist.   But in terms of taking over leadership of a talented team in crisis, in terms of making sure no further cheating takes place and protecting the integrity moving forward, suddenly he MIGHT be the best guy they could bring in.   It's a good read.
    • I was single for a while in 2010.  4 different women made me watch "He's just not that into you" with them and 1 made me watch "Eat Pray Love".    And I even watched "Sex and the City 2" a couple of times.   Let me tell you Sex and City 2 is not a good movie by anyone's viewpoint.   If I could get through them a wife should be able to make it through a war movie here or there. 
    • I think there is one part of the comparison that is apt. The incident occurred in February, there was a minor penalty issued and no one thought that much more about it.   It wasn't until the VIDEO came out in September that public sentiment exploded and the NFL and the Ravens had to do more. What the Cowboy LB, and the Cincinnati RB when he played at Oklahoma, did was every bit as bad as what Rice did, but there hasn't been quite as much of a public outcry because there's no video of it.   That's not logical, that's emotional. And I think it seems similar with the buzzer thing.   I know a lot of people who were mildly upset when it was whistles and trash can banging, but see the buzzer as being somehow worse.   Logically it isn't any worse, it's basically the same thing, but it certainly seems to invoke a stronger emotional reaction. Human beings aren't always rational.
    • Want to see a really interesting documentary about scandal and cheating watch Icarus. The Russians are still trying to take out or get the Russian whistleblower back. The Russians just got banned again from the Olympics. It is on Netflix.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...