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

[Roll Tide]

4 minutes ago, weams said:

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. 

What do you disagree with? 
 

Question

1) Did he say he was under no pressure to deal anyone else after the deadline?

2) Did he go on record as saying he wasn’t going to tender him in the Sun in September 

3) Did he deal him just before the tender deadline for a fringe prospect 

Weams with all due respect these are all facts.

Whether you have a Negotiating, Sales, or similar background or not what I’m saying is really common sense.

If you don’t make a deal because your under no pressure to make a deal. Then you are forced to make a deal against a deadline since you are out of time. You have 0 leverage.

IMO .... that has nothing to do with the plan. I’m not arguing that we should have kept him here. I’m merely arguing facts about his departure and the return 

I think they are indisputable.

So I guess we can agree to disagree because I’m just a dumb poster.

[7Mo]

24 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

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.

Eppler said almost exactly what you're saying here.

Baltimore had a number of names in mind. Those are the players they had targeted. As we kind of worked through the deal, that is how it evolved.

“If their approach was quantity, we were open to that. If their approach would have been one player and aiming somewhere different, we would have entertained that too. We kind of worked through the deal and this was ultimately where it went. We didn’t have a target list of guys we wanted to utilize in this trade. Those guys are talented. Quite frankly, you give up players you just recently drafted, that can go in a number of directions. Every deal hurts. This one is no different.”

[Ruzious]

Every deal hurts?  Is Michael Stipe writing our GM's material?   

[interloper]

1 minute ago, Ruzious said:

Every deal hurts?  Is Michael Stipe writing our GM's material?   

That's the Angel's GM...

[Wish]

Eppler only has 1 year left to turn the Angels into a winner, or he's gone.  So he's essentially trading this years picks to improve the current roster.  Hopefully this works out well for both teams as I like both Bundy and Trout.  

[Ruzious]

2 minutes ago, interloper said:

That's the Angel's GM...

That's a relief.  No offense to REM fans. 

[weams]

5 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Every deal hurts?  Is Michael Stipe writing our GM's material?   

Michael Stipe is Their GM. A former Yankee!

[Ruzious]

1 minute ago, weams said:

Michael Stipe is Their GM. A former Yankee!

Whoa, it's the end of their world as we know it. 

I feel fine. 

 

[weams]

4 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Whoa, it's the end of their world as we know it. 

I feel fine. 

 

Every streetlight reveals the picture in reverse.
Still, it's so much clearer.

[Number5]

30 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

What do you disagree with? 
 

Question

1) Did he say he was under no pressure to deal anyone else after the deadline?

2) Did he go on record as saying he wasn’t going to tender him in the Sun in September 

3) Did he deal him just before the tender deadline for a fringe prospect 

Weams with all due respect these are all facts.

Whether you have a Negotiating, Sales, or similar background or not what I’m saying is really common sense.

If you don’t make a deal because your under no pressure to make a deal. Then you are forced to make a deal against a deadline since you are out of time. You have 0 leverage.

IMO .... that has nothing to do with the plan. I’m not arguing that we should have kept him here. I’m merely arguing facts about his departure and the return 

I think they are indisputable.

So I guess we can agree to disagree because I’m just a dumb poster.

I think you are making too much out of your assertion that Elias "let the cat out of the bag" regarding a possible non-tender of Villar.  With an estimated $10.4 million arb salary and free agency approaching next off-season, the fact that Villar was a non-tender candidate was pretty obvious. Paying Villar $10.4 million for 2020 certainly would not have brought the Orioles into contention.  Given the Orioles' situation, I would guess that just about every GM in baseball fully anticipated the non-tender.  If anything, it seems to me that Elias' actions leading up to the tender deadline probably pushed Miami into a trade offer, which enabled the Orioles to get something out of nothing.  In any event, I can't agree with your opinion that Elias somehow bumbled the situation.

[atomic]

32 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Whoa, it's the end of their world as we know it. 

I feel fine. 

 

We should move our triple A team to Rockville. 

[Roll Tide]

Just now, Number5 said:

I think you are making too much out of your assertion that Elias "let the cat out of the bag" regarding a possible non-tender of Villar.  With an estimated $10.4 million arb salary and free agency approaching next off-season, the fact that Villar was a non-tender candidate was pretty obvious. Paying Villar $10.4 million for 2020 certainly would not have brought the Orioles into contention.  Given the Orioles' situation, I would guess that just about every GM in baseball fully anticipated the non-tender.  If anything, it seems to me that Elias' actions leading up to the tender deadline probably pushed Miami into a trade offer, which enabled the Orioles to get something out of nothing.  In any event, I can't agree with your opinion that Elias somehow bumbled the situation.

Obvious to who? Assuming they would nontender a 4 WAR player. The team has taken heavy criticism all over baseball about putting him on waivers (false report). Many here including the big guy blasted them for being cheap, getting nothing for their best, player etc 

You dont tender Villar because he helps you win this year. You do it because your hoping for a better market later, it removes the negative leverage of the tender deadline, it costs you 3-5 million more than last season when your payroll is very low. And it gives the paying customer a good player in the meantime to watch that you are expecting to sell tickets to.

We agree to disagree on your last 4 sentences. There is no sense continuing 

 

[sportsfan8703]

3 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Obvious to who? Assuming they would nontender a 4 WAR player. The team has taken heavy criticism all over baseball about putting him on waivers (false report). Many here including the big guy blasted them for being cheap, getting nothing for their best, player etc 

You dont tender Villar because he helps you win this year. You do it because your hoping for a better market later, it removes the negative leverage of the tender deadline, it costs you 3-5 million more than last season when your payroll is very low. And it gives the paying customer a good player in the meantime to watch that you are expecting to sell tickets to.

We agree to disagree on your last 4 sentences. There is no sense continuing 

 

You have to let go of the Villar deal. Every team in the league had a chance to claim him for just his salary. They all passed. Somehow then the Marlins gave us something. If there is one thing we know, and that is 100% what was Jonathan Villar’s 2020 value to MLB clubs. 

Edited December 5, 2019 by sportsfan8703

[Roll Tide]

1 minute ago, sportsfan8703 said:

You have to let go of the Villar deal. Every team in the league had a chance to claim him for just his salary. They all passed. Somehow then the Marlins gave us something. If there is one thing we know, and that is 100% what was Jonathan Villar’s 2020 value to MLB clubs. 

Ok So ... Here is were you are completely wrong. Villar was never put on waivers. It was a false rumor. 
 

See Mewleskis info on the MASN site.

If he cleared waivers the Orioles couldn’t trade him as he would have been a free agent. They only would’ve retained negotiating rights if there were multiple waivers claims under that scenario. But again it’s irrelevant because he wasn’t placed on waivers

[sportsfan8703]

7 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Ok So ... Here is were you are completely wrong. Villar was never put on waivers. It was a false rumor. 
 

See Mewleskis info on the MASN site.

If he cleared waivers the Orioles couldn’t trade him as he would have been a free agent. They only would’ve retained negotiating rights if there were multiple waivers claims under that scenario. But again it’s irrelevant because he wasn’t placed on waivers

Good point out on the waivers issue. I had not seen that officially. Even with that sad, I still think we know what Villar’s value was.