Jump to content

Mets wanted Dylan Bundy for Daniel Murphy


ChaosLex

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I don't think it's laugable, per se. Murphy's already a pretty good player, and Bundy's yet to return from arm surgery (let alone establish himself in the big leagues).

That being said, I wouldn't trade Bundy for Murphy. I just won't kick the Mets for trying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you hear man, the Mets offered me Daniel Murphy for Dylan Bundy?

Really Dan? What did you tell them?

If they sent me a baggie full of what they were smoking i woulkd at least think it over.

Did they send it?

Sure did.

How was it?

It was good. I haven't been able to open my eyes completely or stop chuckling for two days now. It wasn't good enough though to get me to give up Bundy for Murphy though.

76080802-590x392.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from absurdity of the Mets request, I found this a very interesting read. Murphy really gives you insight into what goes on in a players head. Very honest and revealing statement about just how difficult this game is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's laugable, per se. Murphy's already a pretty good player, and Bundy's yet to return from arm surgery (let alone establish himself in the big leagues).

That being said, I wouldn't trade Bundy for Murphy. I just won't kick the Mets for trying.

Yeah it wouldn't be a terrible trade. We lack a second baseman he is a second baseman who can hit. Bundy might never come back to form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, let me get this straight. The Mets wanted Dylan Bundy, a blue chip prospect, for a 28 year old (soon to be 29 year old) second basemen who's been worth ~7 WAR over the last 4 years? You know, the same Murphy who will be making nearly $6 million in 2014 and will be making more in 2015. Oh, and who's a free agent in 2016.

So, we'd trade Dylan Bundy for 2 years of Daniel Murphy? Daniel Murphy's defense isn't anything to write home about. He is, however, a solid offensive second basemen. And while Bundy isn't a sure thing, I'm not so sure you go with trading your top pitching prospects for a near 30 year old second baseman who will end up making between ~$6m (2014) and ~$8m (2015, arbitration expectation). We're basically talking a 2 WAR player when taking into account offense and defense.

Ask yourself, do you want to trade a possible #1 for 2 WAR second basemen almost 30 years old who will be a free agent in 2016?

I wouldn't. It's not outlandish, but it's certainly not a good trade for the O's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering there were folks stating Hardy for Shelby Miller was a good deal for both sides, I wouldn't consider this trade THAT out there. I wouldn't pull the trigger, but it's an illustration of how teams (and fans) tend to value the familiar more than the unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering there were folks stating Hardy for Shelby Miller was a good deal for both sides, I wouldn't consider this trade THAT out there. I wouldn't pull the trigger, but it's an illustration of how teams (and fans) tend to value the familiar more than the unknown.

I agree with the sentiment, but I think (or at least hope) that most people talking about Hardy for Miller were hoping that it would be a deal the Cardinals would be inclined to do, rather than a deal that would necessarily be a good deal for them. I think anybody who thinks Hardy and Miller are remotely close in trade value (in a vacuum) is way off base. But, when you have a team who seems "one piece away" with alot of depth available to trade, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to think they would overpay to get a player that they covet. However, that was alot of speculation on the Orioles fans' and front offices' part that Miller was in that realm.

I do think the Orioles would have been able to get a very good deal from the Cards for Hardy for those reasons, but they value him very highly so they weren't able to come together. Pretty rational series of trade negotiations. In fact, you could say the Cardinals did end up overpaying by throwing a ton of money at Peralta and looking pretty silly in hindsight compared to if they had waited the market out (with Drew available and no real suitors).

Bundy for Murphy, I don't know how Alderson even thought that would be remotely considered, especially considering that the articles states the Mets were "shopping" him. There's no way any GM of a team in the Orioles' situation with two brain cells to rub together would consider that. I think our plan all along was to go with our internal options for a year to see if Flaherty could become a regular player and see how Schoop develops, and save the budget for our multiple other needs (which was the right call). I understand the idea of "there's no harm in asking," but really the Mets were just wasting everybody's time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...