If only Elias hadn't traded the 11th best player in baseball (Bundy) for next to nothing

[Rojo13]

Let me start by saying I'm happy with the way the current season is going and by saying that I like Elias. 

But the way things are viewed on here drives me nuts. People act like Elias is some new age genius and have totally forgotten what Dan Duquette did for us. It does seem that the development work they are doing in Bowie and the analytics the pitchers/hitters have is a help but can we not at least pause for a moment and appreciate Dan Duquette? The dude was pretty good at what he did.

People talk about the increased depth of our minor league system but it seems to me that virtually all of the Orioles current players that everyone is excited about were brought in by Duquette: Mountcastle, Hays, Santander, Mullins, Kremer, Scott, Akin, Harvey,  Rodriguez, Means. Heck can't we even count Rutschman as a Duquette guy since Duquette gave us that awful year that resulted us in taking Rutschman as the consenus #1 overall pick? 

Plus last time I checked Duquette didn't trade the 11th best player in baseball away for almost nothing. 

I haven't seen much talk on here about Dylan Bundy. Is anyone besides me upset he's not on the team or that we didn't get way more for him in a trade?

Do people forget that he was the #4 overall pick in the draft and we traded him away for basically nothing? His 1.9 WAR is 11th best in baseball this year. Imagine if he was starting for us this year. I don't get why anyone would trade him  for what we got - other than to save money (and saving money and tanking this year is probably would be what I would have done as the GM as well). But if we're going to blame the trade on money,, do you not think Dan wanted to have more of an international presence? He was dealing with budgetary constraints as well.

But if the new management gets all the credit for the way things are going now, can we at least give them a little blame? They clearly could get A LOT more for Bundyu now.  It just seems to me that to trade Bundy when we did (unless ordered to by management) was not good.  Does anyone remember what we gave up to get Andy Miller for a 3-month rental? Imagine how much value Bundy would have now in a trade. Or imagine how much better our record would be if he was starting for us.

Now, in a normal year, the playoffs would be unfathomable for us and one might not have thought last winter that paying him say $3 million before we traded him near the deadline would result in an extra player worth at least $3 million but I do think it's interesting to think about. Clearly, analyzing the deal right now it looks horrific.

I'm not sure what the overall point of my post is. I guess it's mainly that I just want everyone to acknowledge that DD did a very good job for us. I thought about titling this topic "Can we all admit that Dan Duquette was a very good GM?" but went with the slightly more negative headline just to remind people of Bundy. I think Elias is good as well but don't like how so many people view things as either / or .

It's like Manny. I think he was a great player for the Orioles but I'm glad we didn't sign him for an extension.  I feel like fans should be able to appreciate both Duquette and Elias but it seems like many seem to think it's one or the other.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[OFFNY]

1 hour ago, Rojo13 said:

 

Let me start by saying I'm happy with the way the current season is going and by saying that I like Elias. 

But the way things are viewed on here drives me nuts. People act like Elias is some new age genius and have totally forgotten what Dan Duquette did for us. It does seem that the development work they are doing in Bowie and the analytics the pitchers/hitters have is a help, but can we not at least pause for a moment and appreciate Dan Duquette? The dude was pretty good at what he did.

People talk about the increased depth of our Minor League system, but it seems to me that virtually all of the Orioles current players that everyone is excited about were brought in by Duquette: Mountcastle, Hays, Santander, Mullins, Kremer, Scott, Akin, Harvey, Rodriguez, Means. Heck, can't we even count Rutschman as a Duquette guy, since Duquette gave us that awful year that resulted us in taking Rutschman as the consenus #1 overall pick? 

Plus, last time I checked, Duquette didn't trade the 11th-best player in baseball away for almost nothing. 

I haven't seen much talk on here about Dylan Bundy. Is anyone besides me upset that he's not on the team, or that we didn't get way more for him in a trade?

Do people forget that he was the #4 overall pick in the draft, and that we traded him away for basically nothing? His 1.9 WAR is 11th-best in baseball this year. Imagine if he was starting for us this year. I don't get why anyone would trade him for what we got - other than to save money (and saving money and tanking this year is probably would be what I would have done as the GM as well.) But if we're going to blame the trade on money, do you not think Dan wanted to have more of an international presence? He was dealing with budgetary constraints, as well.

But if the new management gets all the credit for the way things are going now, can we at least give them a little blame? They clearly could get A LOT more for Bundy now. It just seems to me that to trade Bundy when we did (unless ordered to by management) was not good. Does anyone remember what we gave up to get Andy Miller for a 3-month rental? Imagine how much value Bundy would have now in a trade. Or imagine how much better our record would be if he was starting for us.

Now in a normal year, the playoffs would be unfathomable for us, and one might not have thought last winter that paying him say $3 Million before we traded him near the deadline would result in an extra player worth at least $3 Million, but I do think that it's interesting to think about. Clearly, analyzing the deal right now it looks horrific.

I'm not sure what the overall point of my post is. I guess it's mainly that I just want everyone to acknowledge that DD did a very good job for us. I thought about titling this topic to "Can we all admit that Dan Duquette was a very good GM?", but went with the slightly-more negative headline just to remind people of Bundy. I think that Elias is good as well, but don't like how so many people view things as an either /or situation.

 

It's like Manny Machado. I think that he was a great player for the Orioles, but I'm glad that we didn't sign him for an extension. I feel like fans should be able to appreciate both Duquette and Elias, but it seems like many seem to think that it's one or the other.

 

o

 

Some here also felt similarly about MacPhail and Duquette ........ that it was one or the other who deserved the lion's share of the credit for the return of winning Orioles baseball between 2012 and 2016.

I happened to like both of them, a lot. In my rat's ass of an opinion, the hiring of MacPhail in June of 2007 was a major turning point for a franchise that was mired in a very long string of consecutive losing seasons ........ and I felt that Duquette took the nucleus that MacPhail had (largely) built during his tenure and added to it, taking it to the next level. I also feel that both GM's did excellent jobs with other teams prior to taking over the Orioles (MacPhail with the Twins and the Cubs, and Duquette with the Red Sox.)

 

o

[wildcard]

Dan Duquette was a good GM for the O's.  There is that what you are looking for?   Dan had a tough job.   Peter Angelos was not easy to work for and did not give Dan a free hand to do what he wanted.   Peter sometimes directed player signings.  And Buck didn't not report to Dan.  Buck could go around Dan any time he wanted to the owner.   So the two butted heads at times.  It was a different time and a different organizational structure and in spite of that Dan was Executive of the Year in 2014 for getting the O's deep into the playoffs.

Elias acknowledges that many of the players now with the O's where drafted by Dan.  Elias is not trying to take credit for that.   However Dan never had the  player development system that Elias has built nor the analytics.    That is probably not Dan's fault because the money went for players not infrastructure under Peter Angelos.  But acknowledge what Elias is doing.

I am happy for Dylan Bundy but trading him was the right thing to do in a rebuild.  Dylan's fastball was 96+ in his early years.  Injuries took there toll.  His fastball now averages 90 now according to Brook Baseball.  He is not same pitcher he was and probably not good match for Camden Yards and its 318 down the right field line and 365 to left center.  Angels Park is 350 down the right field line and 390 to left center.  Most of the other parks in the AL East are small also.

Dylan pitched 5 times at home.  Twice in Oakland and once Seattle.  All much larger parks than in the AL East.  And in those 8 starts Dylan has given up 4 homers.   In 2018 for the O's Dylan gave up 41 homers in 31 games.  Its hard to win that way.

And I don't know how you can say that Dylan was traded for nothing.   Maybe your scouting ability is really good but three of the players received were 22 and 23 years old.  Elias puts them into his player development system and who knows how good they will be.  I think Elias probably scouted some of those players for the draft.

So Dan was good, Elias is good and Dylan is doing well.  And all is right with the world.

[sportsfan8703]

I don’t think that Bundy was going to be that guy here right now. It’s a perfect storm for him... Short Season, bigger ballparks, AL West. 
 

The beef with Elias should be just not cutting Chris Davis and not calling up Mountcastle sooner. We’re 19-21. Maybe we’re 21-19 with those moves. Maybe we don’t trade Milone for nothing. Maybe we keep Givens and Castro till the offseason.

[Can_of_corn]

Good thing the OP put Bundy in the title or I would have thought this was a thread about Mike Yastrzemski.

[Roll Tide]

I didn’t like the return for Bundy....Everyone is rushing to give credit to the stadium and lineup differences but there is information that shoes he’s made adjustments in his pitch selection. It’s disappointing that those changes weren’t made here.

[ChuckS]

I didn’t like the trade.  Felt like a situation where we were trading away a potentially valuable asset just for the sake of trading him away.  If the market isn’t there, hold onto him and see if he can increase his value the following season.

With that said, Bundy would likely not be a 1.9 WAR player at this point had he stayed in Baltimore with the smaller parks and heavier hitting lineups. He was always bound to put up better numbers pitching in LAA.

On Elias, it’s still too soon to evaluate him as a GM. Hasn’t had enough time but I mostly have liked what I’ve seen so far the Bundy trade withstanding. 

[Frobby]

I have no idea if I like the return we got for Bundy, considering none of the four have pitched this year.   

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Frobby said:

I have no idea if I like the return we got for Bundy, considering none of the four have pitched this year.   

Are you telling me you've been on the internet this long and haven't mastered the art of having an opinion without relying on data?

[Ripken]

Hey, Gausman looked really good last night.  

[Rojo13]

50 minutes ago, ChuckS said:

 

With that said, Bundy would likely not be a 1.9 WAR player at this point had he stayed in Baltimore with the smaller parks and heavier hitting lineups. He was always bound to put up better numbers pitching in LAA.

 

It shouldn't matter whether he would put up the numbers here or not. If Bundy has the talent to put up the 11th best WAR in baseball in any stadium, the GM should be able to get a significant value for that. Of course, I assume there were big budgetary concerns this year.

I get why we did it. Save money, get a few lottery tickets and help maybe even help us tank a l ittle this year. But I just brought it up to show that no GM is perfect.

As for people being upset that we haven't cut Davis, I totally defend him on that. The contract is so bad you are hoping a) maybe he'll somehow turn it around b) get so embarrassed that agrees to let you pay him less than what he's owe so he doesnt have go out there every day and embarrass himself. The moment you cut him, you owe him $40 million +. 

I'm wondering if we saved $12 million by having him on the team this year. Since 2/3rds of hte season was cancelled. he's only going to make about $6 million this year instead of $17. If we had cut him prior to Covid-19, would we have owed him the whole 17 mil for this year or would the team have been able to argue that no one got paid their whole salary this year so why should he?

 

 

[Roll Tide]

52 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I have no idea if I like the return we got for Bundy, considering none of the four have pitched this year.   

Well one player of the 4 resides in our top 30, Bradish is #29. None of the other 3 are fringe top 30 guys according to this January list.

https://www.prospects1500.com/al-east/baltimore-orioles-2020-top-50-prospects/

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Well one player of the 4 resides in our top 30, Bradish is #29. None of the other 3 are fringe top 30 guys according to this January list.

https://www.prospects1500.com/al-east/baltimore-orioles-2020-top-50-prospects/

I'm sure Elias saw something that he can fix.

[Frobby]

44 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Are you telling me you've been on the internet this long and haven't mastered the art of having an opinion without relying on data?

I mean, people can have opinions based on where these pitchers were ranked in the Angels’ system or whatever.    But two of them (Zach Peek and Kyle Brnovich) were drafted in 2019 and didn’t even pitch in the minors because the Angels don’t have their draftees pitch short season ball.   They’ve literally never thrown a pitch in a competitive professional game.   Another (Kyle Bradish) was drafted in 2018, and pitched one season at A+ in 2019 and did well enough to earn a 60-man roster spot.   The fourth (Isaac Mattson) has made it to AAA with pretty good success as a reliever and is on our 60 man roster.    People can have their impressions of what we got, but we won’t really know for at least a couple of years.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Frobby said:

I mean, people can have opinions based on where these pitchers were ranked in the Angels’ system or whatever.    But two of them (Zach Peek and Kyle Brnovich) were drafted in 2019 and didn’t even pitch in the minors because the Angels don’t have their draftees pitch short season ball.   They’ve literally never thrown a pitch in a competitive professional game.   Another (Kyle Bradish) was drafted in 2018, and pitched one season at A+ in 2019 and did well enough to earn a 60-man roster spot.   The fourth (Isaac Mattson) has made it to AAA with pretty good success as a reliever and is on our 60 man roster.    People can have their impressions of what we got, but we won’t really know for at least a couple of years.

Sorry, should have been using the green font for that one.  My apologies.