Keith Law: "O's Mishandling Bundy"

[The Rick]

Is there a precedent for how the Os are handling Bundy?

When I think of the best, fastest moving HS pitchers in the past 25+ years, I think of Dwight Gooden, Steve Avery, Josh Beckett, Todd Van Poppel, Felix Hernandez, Rick Porcello, etc and juco arms like Loewen, Zito, etc. IMO, it certainly sounds like Bundy belongs in this elite group. Perhaps I could use a refresher, but I don't recall any of them being developed in this manner.

Young prospects should be at levels that they should succeed and develop confidence, but I also like to see a prospect somewhat challenged in a league relative to his skill level. That's not happening here. Bundy is in the same rotation as Tim Berry and a level below Simon and Wright.

I try to give the Os the benefit of the doubt for their logic in instances like this, but IMO their handling of Bundy leaves them open to legit criticism of the kind being leveled by Law.

What makes criticism legitimate? That there isn't a precedent for it? To me, legitimate cricism is presenting sound logic to support your (not your's, but Law's in this instance) take. His whole take is really around the fact that 3 IP is no way to develop a starting pitcher.

That's logical, but he does nothing to address the logic of wanting your top pitching prospect, who is going to be capped at 120 IP this year to last the majority of the season, not reach that limit by July.

Peterson has always been unconventional. Even if it doesn't have precedent, I trust him a hell of a lot more than I do Keith Law. It's not that Law's criticism is illegitimate, but he's certainly off base by matter of factly stating that he's being mishandled.

[MurphDogg]

Is there a precedent for how the Os are handling Bundy?

When I think of the best, fastest moving HS pitchers in the past 25+ years, I think of Dwight Gooden, Steve Avery, Josh Beckett, Todd Van Poppel, Felix Hernandez, Rick Porcello, etc and juco arms like Loewen, Zito, etc. IMO, it certainly sounds like Bundy belongs in this elite group. Perhaps I could use a refresher, but I don't recall any of them being developed in this manner.

Young prospects should be at levels that they should succeed and develop confidence, but I also like to see a prospect somewhat challenged in a league relative to his skill level. That's not happening here. Bundy is in the same rotation as Tim Berry and a level below Simon and Wright.

I try to give the Os the benefit of the doubt for their logic in instances like this, but IMO their handling of Bundy leaves them open to legit criticism of the kind being leveled by Law.

Beckett for one was 6 months older than Bundy and started his first season at low-A (same as Bundy) with a four-inning start, suffered from tendinitis and was shut down for two months before pitching the rest of the season in low-A, totaling 59 innings. He then threw 164 innings in 2001 between the Majors and the minors.

I would like to see Bundy remain healthy and pitch through the month of August. If his innings cap is 120 this year, then he would be on pace to ramp up to a full six month MLB season with minimal innings restrictions in 2014.

[jamalshw]

While I am fine with Bundy pitching 3-innings at a time (and 4-innings starting his next outing), I do think low A was way too low for him. I do agree with Law on that. I would like to see Bundy have at least a little challenge. Would Frederick really be that bad? It's doesn't need to be Bowie, but Delmarva is not challenging him at all.

[SoBo]

Seriously? A month at Low-A ball is going to hurt his development? Just silliness.

[jamalshw]

Seriously? A month at Low-A ball is going to hurt his development? Just silliness.

Is it going to hurt? No. But may it delay his arrival to the big leagues by, let's just say, a month? Possibly.

While Law's argument may not be great, the basis of it (at least the level part) is legit. It may not be hurting Bundy, but is it helping him? That's my question. If it's not helping, it's pointless and a waste of time.

[SoBo]

Is it going to hurt? No. But may it delay his arrival to the big leagues by, let's just say, a month? Possibly.

While Law's argument may not be great, the basis of it (at least the level part) is legit. It may not be hurting Bundy, but is it helping him? That's my question. If it's not helping, it's pointless and a waste of time.

The orioles have all but stated they know the competition is below him and they just want him to get used to life as a pro ball player. Let him mow down inferior batters while he does his own laundry for the first time in his life. This is not a big deal.

[commish]

What makes criticism legitimate? That there isn't a precedent for it? To me, legitimate cricism is presenting sound logic to support your (not your's, but Law's in this instance) take. His whole take is really around the fact that 3 IP is no way to develop a starting pitcher.

That's logical, but he does nothing to address the logic of wanting your top pitching prospect, who is going to be capped at 120 IP this year to last the majority of the season, not reach that limit by July.

Peterson has always been unconventional. Even if it doesn't have precedent, I trust him a hell of a lot more than I do Keith Law. It's not that Law's criticism is illegitimate, but he's certainly off base by matter of factly stating that he's being mishandled.

Do we have confirmation that Bundy's plan is a Peterson idea?

[The Rick]

Do we have confirmation that Bundy's plan is a Peterson idea?

Rick Peterson - Director of Pitching Development. So if it's not his idea, he at least signed off on it.

They didn't bring in and pay Rick Peterson to become the Director of Pitching Development for him not to focus on Dylan Bundy, I can promise you that much.

[GoldGlove21]

I am not going to fault the Orioles for sending Bundy to the Delmarva, but he should have started in high A ball IMO. I just do not uderstand the need to rush a high school kid, but I think that where you start a kid could do just as much for his confidence as how he does at a lower level. In Bundy's case he is just doing his thing and I think that he will be fine. He is our ace to start the season in 2014 and he should be the best pitching prospect in the game by the time that happens.

If the O's compete in 2013 than they could always call him up to help the big club. What I do not like is for a starter to be treated as a long reliever through his first 3 outings. Let this kid move up and throw 7 innings. If the Orioles were to let him pitch I think that he could throw a no-hitter at some point this season. This kid is the closest thing I have seen to an ace since Mussina was an Oriole (I never thought of Bedard as an ace).

[Lucky Jim]

This is a case where selective aggression makes sense. Be patient, let him get his feet wet, and then move him as quickly as his skills dictate. Also: Law is just searching for hits, and chits, and twits.

A smart guy. A complete clown.

[seak05]

Dylan Bundy has now pitched 9 innings this season that have done little for his development as a pitcher. Those innings could have been spent dealing with hitters who had a chance at making him work, or going through a line-up for a second time. At the end of the day is it really a big deal? probably not. But if he's going to pitch 120 innings this year, he has already thrown 8% of his innings and gotten very little from them.

Oh, and what he didn't have to do his own laundry in instructs last fall? or spring training?

[hoosiers]

It's a month of short stints in Delmarva vs. a month on the beach in August after he gets shut down. I'd prefer the first option.

These might be your two options ... I find neither of them palatable.

I will grant that it is a very small window of time, but what folks believe he is learning at DelMarva (besides, per above, learning to do his own laundry) is beyond me.

If folks want to give the Os brass the benefit of the doubt, that's fine. I find explanations given for this novel treatment to be insufficient.

[Tony-OH]

The Orioles plan is to get Bundy 125 innings this season ans they want to stretch that over a whole season and not have to shut him down in August. I fail to see him starting him off on three innings stints is such a bad idea. He'll pitch a 4-inning start then move to five by May when he'll probably be moved to Frederick.

[seak05]

Ah yes the Orioles (and Pirates) are the only smart teams in baseball, every other team developing a top pitching prospect is doing it wrong.

Two of the biggest things that a starting P has to learn are how to deal with adjustments the 2nd (and 3rd) time through a line-up and pacing yourself. In three inning stints Bundy learns neither of these things. He's also not being challenged by the hitters in any way. Right now these innings are essentially pointless.

What is the advantage of having him pitch deeper into August rather than deeper into games? It is the same number of innings regardless. Or not having him do these innings at an appropriate developmental level for his skill set?

[glenn__davis]

What is the advantage of having him pitch deeper into August rather than deeper into games? It is the same number of innings regardless.

Well he'll be pitching those innings and going deeper into games against much better competition. Thus, the adjustments he needs to make will be more severe, the learning curve will be steeper, and hopefully his development will be more efficient. He's not going to learn much by blowing through a low-A line-up a second time now.

At least, that's what I'd assume the O's would answer.

I have no problem with how they're handling Bundy. Probably not what I would do, but I don't think they're mishandling him at all. Law is just looking for hits.