So... if we DO trade Bundy, next man up is...?

[Roll Tide]

2 hours ago, NCRaven said:

110?  That looks more and more generous to me as this post season progresses.

 

Yeah... - Villar , Bundy, and possibly Mancini and replacing them with A ball players and AAAA trash heap types will cost a considerably worse record. Imagine placing Mancini and Villar with 2 automatic outs like Martin was .... And trading Bundy out for another 7 ERA AAAA pitcher.

 

[weams]

2 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

And trading Bundy out for another 7 ERA AAAA pitcher.

 

There would not be too many wins different with that choice. 

[Roll Tide]

34 minutes ago, weams said:

There would not be too many wins different with that choice. 

I’d argue the other sign. Bundy could be counted on for 6 innings of 3 or less ball most days

The Brooks type got hammered and didn’t often survive 5

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

Yeah... - Villar , Bundy, and possibly Mancini and replacing them with A ball players and AAAA trash heap types will cost a considerably worse record. Imagine placing Mancini and Villar with 2 automatic outs like Martin was .... And trading Bundy out for another 7 ERA AAAA pitcher.

 

So is there position lower than last in their division? Or vying for the worst record in baseball? If not, then why does it matter? They're destined for last place with or without the Villars, Bundys, and Mancinis of the world. If you don't support this approach, that's fine, but this is how they're going about rebuilding the franchise. We're all going to need strong stomachs over the next few years. 

 

[weams]

50 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

I’d argue the other sign. Bundy could be counted on for 6 innings of 3 or less ball most days

The Brooks type got hammered and didn’t often survive 5

Dylan Bundy won seven games. Joe Replacement would probably win four or five with similar opportunity.

[Roll Tide]

14 minutes ago, weams said:

Dylan Bundy won seven games. Joe Replacement would probably win four or five with similar opportunity.

How many games did he leave that the pen squandered? There were nine starts were he had a no decision. He also had 9 starts where his run support was less than 2 runs. He lost all nine of those games with an ERA of 4.50. He won all of the games were he received 6 or more.

So I'd imagine that with better run support he'd have more wins?  How many of those runs/losses were the result of a crappy pen?

How many games Joe Replacement with the 7 ERA would not win when he got 6 runs or more?

So I doubt its just a couple game difference....For example the Tigers Jordan Zimmermann had a 6.91 ERA and won 1 game in just 22 strts.

I'm pretty sure its a bad idea to use Wins to to judge the value of your starting pitcher No?

 

 

 

[Frobby]

8 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

How many games did he leave that the pen squandered? There were nine starts were he had a no decision. He also had 9 starts where his run support was less than 2 runs. He lost all nine of those games with an ERA of 4.50. He won all of the games were he received 6 or more.

So I'd imagine that with better run support he'd have more wins?  How many of those runs/losses were the result of a crappy pen?

How many games Joe Replacement with the 7 ERA would not win when he got 6 runs or more?

So I doubt its just a couple game difference....For example the Tigers Jordan Zimmermann had a 6.91 ERA and won 1 game in just 22 strts.

I'm pretty sure its a bad idea to use Wins to to judge the value of your starting pitcher No?

Bundy started 30 games and the O’s won 10, exactly one-third.    They also won one-third of the games not started by Bundy.     

Let’s remove Means, Cashner and Cobb from the equation.   The O’s went 23-24 in their starts.     That means the team went 21-64 when anybody else started.    Essentially, those were all replacement level starts.    Apply that same winning percentage to the 30 games vacated by Bundy and it’s 7-8 wins instead of 10.     So, it seems like replacing Bundy with replacement level pitchers would cost 2-3 wins.     Of course, you might put some more stress on the bullpen too.    So maybe it’s 4-5.    

 

[Roll Tide]

22 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Bundy started 30 games and the O’s won 10, exactly one-third.    They also won one-third of the games not started by Bundy.     

Let’s remove Means, Cashner and Cobb from the equation.   The O’s went 23-24 in their starts.     That means the team went 21-64 when anybody else started.    Essentially, those were all replacement level starts.    Apply that same winning percentage to the 30 games vacated by Bundy and it’s 7-8 wins instead of 10.     So, it seems like replacing Bundy with replacement level pitchers would cost 2-3 wins.     Of course, you might put some more stress on the bullpen too.    So maybe it’s 4-5.    

 

That’s assumed the replacement is a 0 WAR guy right? 

Also I appreciate the answer but 

How many losses were a result of the bullpen squandering leads. It was a terrible fir sure 

Also he lost 9 due to no run support. If he got 4 or 5 runs he probably wins at least half? 

 

[weams]

32 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Bundy started 30 games and the O’s won 10, exactly one-third.    They also won one-third of the games not started by Bundy.     

Let’s remove Means, Cashner and Cobb from the equation.   The O’s went 23-24 in their starts.     That means the team went 21-64 when anybody else started.    Essentially, those were all replacement level starts.    Apply that same winning percentage to the 30 games vacated by Bundy and it’s 7-8 wins instead of 10.     So, it seems like replacing Bundy with replacement level pitchers would cost 2-3 wins.     Of course, you might put some more stress on the bullpen too.    So maybe it’s 4-5.    

 

Or maybe not even.  But it might be enough to grab that number one pick. 

[weams]

9 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

That’s assumed the replacement is a 0 WAR guy right? 

Also I appreciate the answer but 

How many losses were a result of the bullpen squandering leads. It was a terrible fir sure 

Also he lost 9 due to no run support. If he got 4 or 5 runs he probably wins at least half? 

 

A Jake Arrieta type. Yes. 

[Frobby]

41 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

That’s assumed the replacement is a 0 WAR guy right? 

Also I appreciate the answer but 

How many losses were a result of the bullpen squandering leads. It was a terrible fir sure 

Also he lost 9 due to no run support. If he got 4 or 5 runs he probably wins at least half? 

First, understand that I’m a big Bundy fan.   He pitched better than reflected by either his personal W-L record or the team’s record in his starts.    

I’m not really assuming a 0 win guy replaces Bundy.    I’m not using WAR for my analysis, just looking at how the team did when anyone other than Bundy, Means, Cashner or Cobb started.   So, I’m assuming the O’s can find pitchers of that quality.    

I don’t think the number of times the bullpen blew a lead for Bundy is really relevant to the question of how many more losses we’d have if Bundy were gone.   However, to answer your question, Bundy left with the lead 12 times, and the bullpen blew 3 of those.   The team also won 1 game that Bundy departed while they were losing.    

As to the effect of the offense, Bundy was basically an average pitcher (99 ERA+), and if he’d had average run support, you’d expect his record to be about .500.    But the O’s weren’t an average offensive team.    They averaged 4.60 runs/game in Bundy’s starts, which actually was slightly better than their overall performance (4.50 runs/game) but well below league average (4.88).    

[Dale]

20 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

He had a pretty awful year in the PCL 6.49 ERA. But he hasn't gotten more than a few innings in 3 years at the MLB level. So if you think he's a change of scenery guy then maybe.

As you are aware, Rob is not on the 40 man roster so he has little chance to break with the ML team.  My guess is that he.is a strong candidate for a spot in Norfolk's rotation ... and we'll see where it goes from there.  For reference, the team era for OKC was 5.83 in 2019. 

[NCRaven]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Bundy started 30 games and the O’s won 10, exactly one-third.    They also won one-third of the games not started by Bundy.     

Let’s remove Means, Cashner and Cobb from the equation.   The O’s went 23-24 in their starts.     That means the team went 21-64 when anybody else started.    Essentially, those were all replacement level starts.    Apply that same winning percentage to the 30 games vacated by Bundy and it’s 7-8 wins instead of 10.     So, it seems like replacing Bundy with replacement level pitchers would cost 2-3 wins.     Of course, you might put some more stress on the bullpen too.    So maybe it’s 4-5.    

 

Now remove Villar from the line up and put another Richie Martin type bat at 2B.

[Roll Tide]

3 minutes ago, Dale said:

As you are aware, Rob is not on the 40 man roster so he has little chance to break with the ML team.  My guess is that he.is a strong candidate for a spot in Norfolk's rotation ... and we'll see where it goes from there.  For reference, the team era for OKC was 5.83 in 2019. 

For Norfolk great! He's probably a couple of runs better away from the PCL

[mdbdotcom]

8 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

Now remove Villar from the line up and put another Richie Martin type bat at 2B.

And play Hays and Mountcastle all year instead of Dwight Smith Jr and Stevie Wilkerson.