Don’t you wish that just once....

[interloper]

15 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I think Bundy has the better chance because he's a can command four pitches despite not having the blazing fastball of Gausman. This should be the year where he can hold up physically over 180+ innings. If he can do that then he'll be on the way, though he'll always be limited by the fact that he's a flyball pitcher in Camden Yards.

Gausman had some fine outings sprinkled here and there, but Bundy had some dominant ones, where the opposition just never had a chance. That's ace-level. He couldn't keep it up start-to-start, but I agree that he has the better chance. 

[Redskins Rick]

22 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I think Bundy has the better chance because he's a can command four pitches despite not having the blazing fastball of Gausman. This should be the year where he can hold up physically over 180+ innings. If he can do that then he'll be on the way, though he'll always be limited by the fact that he's a flyball pitcher in Camden Yards.

I think Bundy can, he has dominating stuff when he is on, he doesnt have that many big league starts under his belts.

Like I pointed out in another thread, sometime aces, dont become aces, until their 4th year of being a SP.

 

[LA2]

4 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Hader was the jewel of that trade from Houston's perspective. Hader had a much higher ceiling then anyone else in that trade, but was a long way away at the time with an injury risk due to his funky delivery. The Orioles did not want to give up Hader but were told it wasn't getting done without him so they gave in and moved him. In my opinion, as much as I liked Hader, it was worth it if the scouts felt Norris could be a solid starter for them for years to come. The problem is they only got one good year out of him so it looks bad to some.

I was fine with the trade at the time and Norris did help this team in 2014. If the Orioles don't run into the white hot Royals i think they end up winning the World Series that year and people would have no issues with the Norris or Miller trades. 2014 was the year Duquette should have gambled because that team was set up to win it all. 

My issues with Duquette's trades are in the years this team had no chance yet he gave away cheap talent for nothing (Davies mainly).

That we swept against the Tigers' trio of Cy Young winners and hung close to the Royals throughout the four games despite starting Flaherty at third due to Manny's injury and Davis being unable to reach the Mendoza line and then getting suspended (his replacement Steve Pearce went 1 for 17 against the Royals) bespeaks how strong the team was. That includes the pitching, including Bud Norris. It definitely was the right gamble by Duquette. We killed the division that year and had every right to believe the WS was within reach. So we went for it.

[Frobby]

On 12/18/2017 at 11:46 AM, interloper said:

Gausman had some fine outings sprinkled here and there, but Bundy had some dominant ones, where the opposition just never had a chance. That's ace-level. He couldn't keep it up start-to-start, but I agree that he has the better chance. 

Gausman’s top 6 game scores from last year: 82, 80, 75, 74, 73, 70.

Bundy: 95, 78, 73, 69, 67, 67.

Other than Bundy’s crazy August 29 complete game one-hitter, Gausman had more dominant outings than Bundy.    But he also had a lot more clunkers.    To me, Bundy’s advantage is that he has four pitches and only needs two of them on a given night to pitch a solid game, whereas Gausman only has three pitches and the third one is unreliable a lot of the time, making it easier for batters to focus on the other two.