Bundy traded to Angels for Isaac Mattson, Kyle Bradish, Zach Peek, and Kyle Brnovich

[Roll Tide]

39 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

First off, you are valuing him off his best season. He wasn't close to those numbers his first two years.  If that's his new norm there is value there.  No one is going to bet top prospects that that is his new norm. Also, offensive numbers across baseball were inflated last year so you have to take those numbers with a few grains of salt.  His best position is 1B and he's probably average at best there. If the Orioles are able to trade him and take back one prospect it's possible they might get one guy around a top 100 prospect.

Sadly I lost my post due to a work call

 

You can look at baseball Reference as well as I can. He had WAR of 2.3, .1, and 3.3. A dip in the sophomore year happens as the league adjusts. So 2.3 and 3.3 are reasonably close together despite your claim to the contrary.

Players in their prime typically tend to trend up. So even if they change the ball, have you seen anything from MLB discussing a change? I haven’t 

I don’t think we know what a GM will invest to add him now. Many here thought we’d get nothing from Bundy. We’re you in that group?

i know the level of prospect clearly want top 100. But that appears to be the type of deals that Elias is asking for.

Trade deals typically aren’t for 1 established player for 1 prospect. 
 

 

[NCRaven]

14 minutes ago, interloper said:

That's what's interesting though. Elias chose these guys. Eppler said "these were the guys they identified". To me, that says Elias cares and it gives me confidence because they hand-picked these players.

Fair point.

[Tony-OH]

57 minutes ago, interloper said:

It's absolutely baseless. I think it's baseless to say he doesn't care about a return. First of all, we can't know that. Second of all, he's clearly said otherwise, just look at his quotes after the Bundy trade. He's going to get the best possible deal for his players, that's his job. He wants talent. He studies these players. If he wanted to flip him for nobody, he would have done that last year. 

Of course he's going to try and get the best he can for his players, but he already has a precedence of dumping Villar for basically nothing, so there is some validity to saying he might take a lesser return to drop salary.

I don't think it attacks Elias' intelligence or the job he'd doing, but rather pointing out the fact that if a player's has zero projected value over his salary, he's not going to get much in return.

Givens is coming off his worse season and is will start to cost north of $3 million next year. Unless Elias thinks he can get more return for him at the trading deadline or in spring training, then it wouldn't not surprise me if ends up similar to the Villar trade.

At first glance, I like the Bundy return so Elias is not giving everyone away.

[DrungoHazewood]

27 minutes ago, interloper said:

I will be fascinated to see what Yaz does in 2020.

Especially if the ball is back closer to historical norms.  And San Francisco has a pretty huge outfield for a fringy CFer to cover.

[Tony-OH]

51 minutes ago, interloper said:

All you have to do is look at Elias' in-depth notes on the players he just acquired for Bundy. The guy knows the players who he is acquiring, ergo, he cares. To suggest otherwise is a complete leap. The guy who says he wants to have an elite pipeline of talent doesn't care who he acquires for his farm system? Ok... 

Again, in a rebuild you trade your players who are approaching free agency. That coincides with them making more money. Money is definitely a factor in these trades, obviously. But these aren't just salary dumps. Elias has scouted a lot of these guys himself. They were on his  draft board. To suggest that he'll take whatever schlub player in return is rubbish. What you're really saying is you're mad that our players aren't worth more, or you're mad because you want to see these players next year. 

I think you are reading too much into his comments. I don't think anyone is arguing that Elias doesn't care about adding as much talent as he can, just that the value of his trade chips may not be that high and that he may just take what he can get if he perceives it as the best value.

[weams]

A lot of comments from Elias here.

 

[interloper]

5 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I think you are reading too much into his comments. I don't think anyone is arguing that Elias doesn't care about adding as much talent as he can, just that the value of his trade chips may not be that high and that he may just take what he can get if he perceives it as the best value.

Well, sure. You're never going to get much of anything for Villar when the whole world knows you're about to non-tender him. But as I said, Elias was still able to get a guy he may have drafted himself. So yeah, slashing money is a huge part of these trades so far and I understand how that kind of sucks. But it's not like the guy isn't doing his best to get a decent return, at least IMO. 

He could have unloaded Cashner for some AAAA pitcher, for example, just to dump the salary. But he went deep into their international prospects to dig out a couple of guys he liked. So.. I dunno. His trade pieces kind of suck, but I just took issue with the "he doesn't care" comment was all. 

Villar is the most egregious case of salary slashing for sure. Givens I think he will be willing to go into the season with if he doesn't like the return. 

[LA2]

4 hours ago, weams said:

There are plenty of guys who outperform their ceilings. Many more who fall through their floors. Things happen. Strange things. 

Strange days have found us.

[Roll Tide]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

I said Mancini was an .800 type OPS player his first two years. That's a fact.  Frobby and now you have pointed out that his rookie here defined by other stats is closer to the 2019 season than the 2018 season. Kudos.

I didn't think we'd get much for Bundy. On paper, we didn't. 

How do you figure?

We got their #17 prospect, and front top 30, and 2  of their top 10 2019 draft selections.

Per @Tony-OH post Elias wanted a quantity deal . So I think saying we didn’t get much.

But let me ask.... When Elias bumbled the Villar situation and got 1 fringe prospect many here jumped to his defense.On this deal most said Bundy had no value.

How fo you grade the Villar deal and his trades so far?Personally I hated the Villar deal.

on the Bundy deal I would have preferred 2-3 of the Angels top 30 over the A level type quantity deal. But I’m not unsatisfied with the deal.
 

I said Elias might need to figure out Or not be good at the art of trading which pissed off a bunch of guys here. 
 

Either way ... I think I’d want 3 of a teams top 30 with one highly regarded guy for me to part with Mancini

A Givens deal probably is 3 guys that look similar to the Bundy deal

 

 

[Luke-OH]

I agree on the surface it doesn’t look like we got a ton for Bundy, I’m sure “higher rated” prospects were available. The pitchers acquired looked targeted to me, I mean I flat out guessed one (Peek) and Bradish and Brnovich were also names I thought made sense, I just didn’t think they’d get two 2019 draftees. 

I think these players were selected for specific reasons, rather than the “top prospects” they could get.

[interloper]

The trades Duquette made at the end of his tenure felt more "we'll take whatever" than these did. But Dan didn't really communicate much after acquiring guys, so it may have just seemed that way.

[LookinUp]

26 minutes ago, interloper said:

So yeah, slashing money is a huge part of these trades so far and I understand how that kind of sucks. ...

Villar is the most egregious case of salary slashing for sure. 

I'm not blind that the O's are saving money, but it's saving money from guys who won't be under control in the future and don't project to warrant high salaries in that future.

These deals are about trading expiring assets for future value. Getting something from what, if we don't act, will be nothing. 

10 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

When Elias bumbled the Villar situation and got 1 fringe prospect many here jumped to his defense.

I don't believe he bumbled it at all. Something for a future nothing.

[interloper]

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

I don't believe he bumbled it at all. Something for a future nothing.

I don't think bumbled is a fair characterization either. He's just working with the piece that he had.

[interloper]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

I certainly believe there is more scouting/analysis going on now.  Mostly the analysis.  

It would seem that way. Like Luke said, "targeted". 

[TouchemAll]

Hey you gotta pay for the .150 Davis average some how?