Bundy for Justin Upton?

[brianod]

I love this board. I heard the discussion and the first 7 posters went NO WAY! Then, there were guys not afraid to say "wait a minute", I can see that. Very different then it used to be where people were afraid to state a contrary opinion. Anyway, given that we have Gausman and Bundy, I would definitely be looking to trade one of them for an impact bat. I'm skeptical of Upton as He seems to go up and down like a yoyo and I've heard stories about his partying in newport news. Anyway, I have no problem shopping Bundy for a stable stud in his prime if that deal exists. Those of you that have anointed him as the next Palmer may want to tamp down the expectations and be realistic about this team still needing offense more then pitching. Those of you hitting the point that Bundy is cheap, therfore very valuable have a very good point. Interesting.

[section18]

Bundy is not an untouchable and should be part of a deal for Giancarlo Stanton with the Marlins. We can afford to deal him for the right player and Stanton is the right player.

[brianod]

Bundy is not an untouchable and should be part of a deal for Giancarlo Stanton with the Marlins. We can afford to deal him for the right player and Stanton is the right player.

Upton provides speed and defense along with power. Stanton with Camden Yard's short porches could be a monster. That's why DD gets the big bucks:)

[theobird]

Bundy is not an untouchable and should be part of a deal for Giancarlo Stanton with the Marlins. We can afford to deal him for the right player and Stanton is the right player.

The problem is that Bundy is just the start of a package that would be required to get Stanton. IMO, Bundy gets Upton straight up. What we can't afford to do is unload the system for one player. I would prefer Bundy for Upton.

[Prayin4Reign]

A few years out of a 37 year old for a potential Hall of Famer with a 20 year career? I think not. (Talking about Dickey of coarse). The Upton trade is just rediculous.

I like Bundy too, but geez...c'mon let's not get carried away. He's a prospect!

[Ruzious]

Why is 3/38 such a bad deal for Upton? Compared to Jones, for instance, he's been worth 13.0 rWAR over the past four years compared to Jones 9.0; Jones is scheduled to be paid slightly less over the next three years (34.5) but then he's got the next three years at another 49M. And Upton is two years younger. I see him potentially being a bargain over the next three years at 3/38.

Which doesn't mean I trade Bundy for him, but it's not because of the price tag on the contract.

It's not that 3/38 is a bad deal. It's the difference between 3/38 and what Bundy will cost. Is this really a hard concept to understand? The O's have a limited budget. Keeping Bundy through his cheap years is likely going to be a huge competitive benefit.

[Ruzious]

I love this board. I heard the discussion and the first 7 posters went NO WAY! Then, there were guys not afraid to say "wait a minute", I can see that. Very different then it used to be where people were afraid to state a contrary opinion. Anyway, given that we have Gausman and Bundy, I would definitely be looking to trade one of them for an impact bat. I'm skeptical of Upton as He seems to go up and down like a yoyo and I've heard stories about his partying in newport news. Anyway, I have no problem shopping Bundy for a stable stud in his prime if that deal exists. Those of you that have anointed him as the next Palmer may want to tamp down the expectations and be realistic about this team still needing offense more then pitching. Those of you hitting the point that Bundy is cheap, therfore very valuable have a very good point. Interesting.

The team needs talent - whether it's pitchers or hitters. You want to talk about being realistic - Show me where in the wealth of pitching the O's have is a Cuellar, McNally AND Dobson? Then, maybe I'll agree with you.

[wildbillhiccup]

It's not that 3/38 is a bad deal. It's the difference between 3/38 and what Bundy will cost. Is this really a hard concept to understand? The O's have a limited budget. Keeping Bundy through his cheap years is likely going to be a huge competitive benefit.

And why do they have a limited budget? It's certainly not because of revenue. The MASN deal alone is lining the pockets of the owner. If you want to argue that they shouldn't trade a young prospect, that's fine, but bringing money into the equation, when we're talking about another young player who makes a very reasonable salary by today's standards (albeit not "Bundy" cheap) really bothers me.

I understand that the reality of the situation is Angelos won't spend the money, but I'm not willing to let him off the hook when it comes to making moves to improve the team. The fans flocked back to the stadium in droves last season. They bought tickets, ate food, drank beer, bought memorabilia and watched the games on MASN. For the owner to not be willing to return the favor and honor their support by not investing in the team is a slap in the face. I'm not saying they should be in the mix for every high priced free agent, but if there is someone on the market or avaliable via trade, who fits the master plan laid out for improving the team, then money should not dissuay them from signing or trading for that player.

[wildbillhiccup]

I'll preface this by saying that I like Dylan Bundy... a lot, but I think people really get overly enamored with prospects. I'm not saying I trade him for RA Dickey, or even Justin Upton, but I think folks need to remember that only about 25% of these highly touted prospects turn into the elite superstars you're hoping they become. There are more than 1 or 2 players I'd trade Dylan Bundy for. Probably closer to 30.

Truer words have never been spoken. Well put!

[Stotle]

It's not that 3/38 is a bad deal. It's the difference between 3/38 and what Bundy will cost. Is this really a hard concept to understand? The O's have a limited budget. Keeping Bundy through his cheap years is likely going to be a huge competitive benefit.

True, but keep in mind it may mean you are more likely to be building a competitive team, say 2015-2017 than 2013 and maybe 2014.

[weams]

The team needs talent - whether it's pitchers or hitters. You want to talk about being realistic - Show me where in the wealth of pitching the O's have is a Cuellar, McNally AND Dobson? Then, maybe I'll agree with you.

Cuellar and Dobson were guys that other teams gave up on. McNally was a crafty lefty.

[wildbillhiccup]

True, but keep in mind it may mean you are more likely to be building a competitive team, say 2015-2017 than 2013 and maybe 2014.

So we're just supposed to ignore the success they had last season and settle for 2 more years of mediocrity?

[DrinkinWithFermi]

Cuellar and Dobson were guys that other teams gave up on. McNally was a crafty lefty.

Sooooo...Hammel and MGon are Cuellar and Dobson, and Chen is McNally?

Wait. I'm confused.

Who are you men, and where is my soup?

[Stotle]

So we're just supposed to ignore the success they had last season and settle for 2 more years of mediocrity?

I'm saying part of what makes running a baseball team difficult is...the realities of running a baseball team. When your organization is not flush with impact talent on the farm, and the recent success of the MLB club is highly dependent on factors that are most likely going to be difficult to replicate, your options are limited.

If the focus is winning now, moving someone like Bundy makes sense, even if it means you are likely giving up "overall value". The reason is that "later value" is worth less to you than "now value".

If the focus is building a cost controlled foundation to try and set-up a competitive team on a fixed budget (let's call it $100MM), then, yeah, it might mean hanging your short term hopes on guys like Machado, Bundy, Gausman having immediate impacts, and guys like Chen, Hammel, Gonzalez, the entire bullpen, etc. giving you better performance than you expected.

If you want to do both, it's likely the only reasonable way to do it is to decide you are upping spending in the short term by a not insignificant amount.

[andrewrickli]

The remaining money on the Upton contract really isn't that bad of a deal. The guys described how 3 at about 13 million a piece really isn't that much for a team looking for a RH power hitting OF'er. Not to mention when you factor in that Upton is ONLY 25. He still has his prime ahead of him, and he still has the tools to be a 30/30 player.

Not only is he a plus defender, he hits for power. In the last two seasons he has managed to hit 48 HR, and drive in 155 runs while averaging a .285 AVG/ .362 OBP/ .470 SLG, which is a 2 year average of and .832 OPS. While his career OPS is also .832.

I find there no reason to believe that his stats can't get better coming to Camden Yards, and closer to home (Norfolk, VA). All offseason DD has said that he wants a MOO hitter, and Upton may be just that. He hits for power, and he gets on base (career .352 OBP). Also since 2009 he averages around 20 SB a season. Backing up my MOO argument I should point out that Upton in a 3 year average (2009-2012) had a .907 OPS with 2 outs and runners in scoring position. He can hit in the clutch AND get on base, which is something that we desperately lacked last year, and really, for quite some time. The next best guy for that description would be Markakis.

All things considered, lets take his averages and put them together. I would expect Upton to hit AT LEAST .285/.352/.470 (.822) with 20 SB--with the potential for more, that's just the base of what he could do next season in Baltimore IMO.

Uptons numbers against the AL the past 3 years? Yes its a SSS but worth a look:

BOS .300/.462/.700 1.162

CHW .600/.583/.700 1.283

CLE .273/.333/.545 .878

DET .360/.429/.360 .789

HOU .291/.381/.564 .945

KC .350/.417/.450 .867

LAA .333/.333/.333 .666

MIN .000/.154/.000 .154

NYY .583/.643/.1.167 1.810

OAK .283/.385/.333 .718

SEA .250/.213/.500 .731

TB .556/.667/1.000 1.667

TEX .308/.308/.308 .616

TOR .500/.538/.583 1.121

Getting Upton allows you to move Reimold to DH and slot McLouth in the 4th OF spot, and really allows for interchangeable parts. LF has been a revolving door for us, for sometime. Getting a 25 year old rising superstar/5 tool player, really could set us up for some big things. I mean, this guy is better than Adam Jones was at this age. He steals more, gets on base more, etc. These two next to eachother in the OF could be quite a treat for Baltimore.

At this point, you could do a one for one. Bundy for Upton, and you COULD argue that Upton is more valuable than Bundy. Upton although more expensive, has already proven that he can steal at least 20 bases, hit 30 HR, get on base, and most importantly, stay healthy for an ENTIRE year. Bundy, hasn't done ANY of that. Not to mention even if Bundy can pitch to a 3.4ish ERA, and pitch around 200 innings, he will only be in 30 of the 162 games. IMO, 150 games of Upton and his already proven ML talent, mixed with his MVP-type potential excites me to no end.

Maybe I am wrong for feelings this way, but so be it. Let me know what you think.