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

[atomic]

57 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

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.

I see no reason to hold on to Givens.  The team is going to be terrible so why pay an Ok reliever $3 million.   Might as well just have a guy who can go multiple innings in his place as I don't think we are going to get too many 5 inning starts this season.  

[Roll Tide]

4 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

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. 

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

We can agree to disagree 

I can’t believe nobody puts any merit in the points in the other thread that included 3 Baltimore Sun interviews.

1) Told the universe he was under no pressure to deal anyone else since he had no pending free agents

2) Miscalculation on where he was with Villar if he he planned to nontender him. Which is essentially the same as him being a free agent 

3) Announced that he had no intention of tendering him September When he was trying to trade him.

Frobby asked me for sources and to his credit thanked me for doing so. The other guys that were adamant about it having nothing to do with effecting his value were quiet.

You could hear the crickets chirping 

 

[Tony-OH]

49 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

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

 

 

Just to be clear here, I said it "looks like" Elias went for quantity, not that I have any insights into his thinking for his deal.

[Roll Tide]

Just now, RZNJ said:

It's funny but I never did see the "announcement" that he was non-tendering him back in September.  What problem do you have with 1)?  It's the opposite of what you accuse him of in 3).

It’s posted in the Villar trade thread...likely still on the last page.I had two posts and they contain all three articles.

Tony posted the article from the Sun about the Tender announcement and all I did was insert it.

i encourage you to read both posts. 
 

1) We will never know what he passed on based on the fact they he had felt no pressure to deal him. If he knew That he wasn’t going to tender Villar he should’ve had some urgency to deal him

i suspect that he passed on more than he got Monday based on that statement.

3) He announced to opposing GMs that he wasn’t going to tender him. Effectively showing his cards at the poker table. Why would any GM give anything of real value on a player they could sign without giving up assets when he could have him by simply waiting

The Marlins despite this decided to throw a fringe prospect in order to avoid competition in the free agent market.

As I’ve mentioned in my other posts , it’s negotiating 101

Thanks 

 

[Tony-OH]

39 minutes ago, interloper said:

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.

Yet seven of the players he got in those trades are in our current Top 30 and only Britton and O'day, who were resigned, remain with the teams we traded them for.

Without those trades, the Orioles farm system is not as strong.

[Roll Tide]

2 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Just to be clear here, I said it "looks like" Elias went for quantity, not that I have any insights into his thinking for his deal.

Ok but I seem to recall hearing a clip on 105.7 also about the subject.

The Angels GM said that the players sent were ones that Elias was targeting. And that’s the path that they went down in developing the deal.

i appreciate the you clarifying 

[sportsfan8703]

44 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

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.

I think people get caught up in rankings too much.  The more advanced level a player is at, generally means that player is more highly ranked.  Just by climbing the ladder and being closer to the bigs.  We don't want players in AAA/AA.  They come with 40 man roster issues, and by the time they reach AAA/AA, everyone pretty much knows what they are.  I like that we went out and got recent draftees, that we did our homework on, and won't present 40 man issues for a couple years.  

[Tony-OH]

1 minute ago, Roll Tide said:

Ok but I seem to recall hearing a clip on 105.7 also about the subject.

The Angels GM said that the players sent were ones that Elias was targeting. And that’s the path that they went down in developing the deal.

i appreciate the you clarifying 

Sounds like Elias built the deal and presented it to the Angels and they accepted vs having the Angles give him a list and he choose from there.

I like that they are targeting certain players. Time will tell if their system is working and these guys pan out.

[interloper]

2 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Yet seven of the players he got in those trades are in our current Top 30 and only Britton and O'day, who were resigned, remain with the teams we traded them for.

Without those trades, the Orioles farm system is not as strong.

100%. It was absolutely necessary. It also shows the weakness of our farm system. But I think Dan is very smart and just doesn't communicate with details like Elias. I think Dan assumed fans were pretty dumb based on how he communicated haha.

[Tony-OH]

2 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I think people get caught up in rankings too much.  The more advanced level a player is at, generally means that player is more highly ranked.  Just by climbing the ladder and being closer to the bigs.  We don't want players in AAA/AA.  They come with 40 man roster issues, and by the time they reach AAA/AA, everyone pretty much knows what they are.  I like that we went out and got recent draftees, that we did our homework on, and won't present 40 man issues for a couple years.  

Only if they present the same FV does the player's advancement in the minors determine his higher ranking.

[Roll Tide]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

You say you are a negotiator, right?  When Elias said he was under no pressure to deal these guys he was trying to give the impression that he wasn't desperate. lol

Have you ever heard the phrase "GM speak"?

Yes .... and perhaps it was 

But it was inconsequential whether you acknowledge it or not

The interview was after the deadline. He couldn’t be dealt until the season was over.
 

Early in the offseason came the interview with the Sun where he said he wasn’t going to tender him.

Which do you think had more effect?

My point on the “GM Speak” is that it did nothing to help him. That’s if it was indeed GM Speak. I’m not so sure it wasn’t a miscalculation by a rookie GM

[weams]

8 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Yet seven of the players he got in those trades are in our current Top 30 and only Britton and O'day, who were resigned, remain with the teams we traded them for.

Without those trades, the Orioles farm system is not as strong.

Both Britton and O'Day on free agent contracts, not part of the value we sold them. 

[weams]

3 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Yes .... and perhaps it was 

But it was inconsequential whether you acknowledge it or not

The interview was after the deadline. He couldn’t be dealt until the season was over.
 

Early in the offseason came the interview with the Sun where he said he wasn’t going to tender him.

Which do you think had more effect?

My point on the “GM Speak” is that it did nothing to help him. That’s if it was indeed GM Speak. I’m not so sure it wasn’t a miscalculation by a rookie GM

I completely disagree with you. I understand your not liking it. But I don't see error. I see his plan. Good or bad. Good for fans or bad. His plan. 

[Tony-OH]

1 minute ago, interloper said:

100%. It was absolutely necessary. It also shows the weakness of our farm system. But I think Dan is very smart and just doesn't communicate with details like Elias. I think Dan assumed fans were pretty dumb based on how he communicated haha.

Dan was an awful communicator, no doubt. I'm 100% happy Elias is now running the show, but I'm not going to just bash everything about Duquette because he made some good moves and kept this team competitive for most of his tenor here.

He worked under very difficult circumstances with Buck and Brady having direct access to Peter Angelos and with no clear cut "chain of command."

Only Machado was a strong trading chip and the return he got was pretty decent.

Either way, Elias is in charge now and he's trading from a different place for the most part. Elias doesn't have a great trading chip though Bundy probably was his best outside of Mancini, who may or may not be on the block. 

I don't think Givens will bring a ton back.

[interloper]

9 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Dan was an awful communicator, no doubt. I'm 100% happy Elias is now running the show, but I'm not going to just bash everything about Duquette because he made some good moves and kept this team competitive for most of his tenor here.

He worked under very difficult circumstances with Buck and Brady having direct access to Peter Angelos and with no clear cut "chain of command."

Only Machado was a strong trading chip and the return he got was pretty decent.

Either way, Elias is in charge now and he's trading from a different place for the most part. Elias doesn't have a great trading chip though Bundy probably was his best outside of Mancini, who may or may not be on the block. 

I don't think Givens will bring a ton back.

Yeah Dan did not have the luxury of ownership telling him to go nuts building his own infrastructure. He just had to slot in and do his best, and he did a great job for the most part. I was glad to see him make the Sox HOF the other day. I would hate to just have him be a forgotten baseball guy.