Jump to content

#14 Prospect - Bobby Bundy


Tony-OH

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Why would one be irritated when the post above acknowledges nothing - ZERO - about the actual talent of the player in question? Shouldn't that count for something? What if the player in question was Clayton Kershaw or Porcello or Cy Young himself?

Regarding the EL award, JJohnson won the Carolina League award nd we are hoping he might be a decent set-up type. Bergesen is still young and he might pick up a few MPH or sharpen his pitches, but his current stats do not translate into anything more than a back-end of the rotation/bp guy - best case.

My issue is Bundy should be over Britton, Hernandez and maybe Erbe.

The 2 injured pitchers and the big 3 are fine to be in front of Bundy.

But if you are going to rank high because of talent and ceiling, then he should be higher than those who look more like BP arms than starters.

In terms of pure talent, of course Bundy should be in front of BB.

It just seems like the ranking of Bundy here is a little inconsistent with the other ways players were ranked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issue is Bundy should be over Britton, Hernandez and maybe Erbe.

The 2 injured pitchers and the big 3 are fine to be in front of Bundy.

But if you are going to rank high because of talent and ceiling, then he should be higher than those who look more like BP arms than starters.

In terms of pure talent, of course Bundy should be in front of BB.

It just seems like the ranking of Bundy here is a little inconsistent with the other ways players were ranked.

SG - it's still upside discounted by probability. It's not purely one or the other. So, because we've actually seen quality MiL performance (and at a level higher than the GCL), it's understandable that Bundy is as low as he is. He's a bit of a wildcard - but one with extreme upside.

I think this is just about right for Bundy. I'd probably put him ahead of Hoes - but that's only because I likely overly-discount the GCL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SG - it's still upside discounted by probability. It's not purely one or the other. So, because we've actually seen quality MiL performance (and at a level higher than the GCL), it's understandable that Bundy is as low as he is. He's a bit of a wildcard - but one with extreme upside.

I think this is just about right for Bundy. I'd probably put him ahead of Hoes - but that's only because I likely overly-discount the GCL.

Yes and no....How are you ranking guys?

Are you using pure talent and upside?

Perormance in the minors?

Closeness to majors?

I don't have a problem with him at this spot....And I don't have an issue with him in front of a guy like BB but since ceiling and talent is why he is here, I believe that means he should be higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and no....How are you ranking guys?

Are you using pure talent and upside?

Perormance in the minors?

Closeness to majors?

I don't have a problem with him at this spot....And I don't have an issue with him in front of a guy like BB but since ceiling and talent is why he is here, I believe that means he should be higher.

That's my point. You don't use pure talent and upside. Talent and upside are the prime component, however - and the probability is determined, at least in part, by performance at the minor-league level.

You have to think along two separate metrics. There's the reward. And the risk.

Thus, say, a 1:5 chance of winning $500 is worth a $100. And a 1:5000 chance of winning $500,000 is worth $100. These are equal values, with wildly different "upsides." All you need to do is tweak the numbers a bit and you can see why Bundy's upside doesn't trump the probabilistic issues with his value.

All we're saying is that right now, the unknown (and hence the risk) is too large with Bundy to put him ahead of more known quantities who still possess the upside to be mid-rotation (or better) ML starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kudos, Tony. A very good pick. I was blown away by Bundy's FB command and his CB has the potential to be a plus-plus 2-planer. Really nothing I don't like about the kid, and no offense at all to Bergesen but I'd take one Bundy over two BBs.

Thanks. As you can see what I did with the list is after the obvious top four, I went with guys who I feel have a good chance at being everyday big leaguers or starters followed by guys with good arms who may profile as back of the bullpen guys with a few wild card injury guys mixed in due to their ceilings as big league starters.

Now it's time to go with the inexperienced high ceiling guys because the rest of the guys all profile as 5th starters, relievers, 4th outfielders, utility guys, platoon players, or are are too inexperienced without the pedigree or have some injury concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's my point. You don't use pure talent and upside. Talent and upside are the prime component, however - and the probability is determined, at least in part, by performance at the minor-league level.

You have to think along two separate metrics. There's the reward. And the risk.

Thus, say, a 1:5 chance of winning $500 is worth a $100. And a 1:5000 chance of winning $500,000 is worth $100. These are equal values, with wildly different "upsides." All you need to do is tweak the numbers a bit and you can see why Bundy's upside doesn't trump the probabilistic issues with his value.

All we're saying is that right now, the unknown (and hence the risk) is too large with Bundy to put him ahead of more known quantities who still possess the upside to be mid-rotation (or better) ML starters.

But BB's upside is this.

And btw, let me say that I did the same exact thing in my top 30....I believe I had Bundy 15th based solely on his talent but low because he didn't pitch.

But when I think about it, I should have had him higher based on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. As you can see what I did with the list is after the obvious top four, I went with guys who I feel have a good chance at being everyday big leaguers or starters followed by guys with good arms who may profile as back of the bullpen guys with a few wild card injury guys mixed in due to their ceilings as big league starters.

Now it's time to go with the inexperienced high ceiling guys because the rest of the guys all profile as 5th starters, relievers, 4th outfielders, utility guys, platoon players, or are are too inexperienced without the pedigree or have some injury concerns.

But doesn't DH profile as a reliever? I know that is what you think.

So, using DH as an example, why him over Bundy?(and again, i did the same thing...but thinking about it, i shouldn't have)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one irritates me. Bundy has barely thrown a professional pitch, and has proven nothing. Bergesen jumped past Frederick into Bowie and was EL Pitcher of the Year. I'm sure Bundy has a lot of upside but I just can't justify putting him over a guy who accomplished so much this year.

Frobbyy, I'm really surprised at how much you are "irritated" over this and I also don't understand the love from you for Bergesen. You of all people love to look into the numbers and I'm not sure why you don't see that Bergesen has a K rate that does not translate well to the major leagues, even for a sinkerballer and Double-A lefthanders hit over .300 off him.

So, are you telling me if you were only able to have one guy in your system, you'd take a possible 5th starter/bullpen guy over a kid who had the pedigree to be a first round pick before his leg injury and who has a very high ceiling?

Sorry it irritates you so much, but Bergesen doesn't have the stuff or the numbers at Double-A that would make me want him over a Bundy regardless of Bundy's lack of experience.

This reminds me of your previous mancrush on Fiorentino. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SG - it's still upside discounted by probability. It's not purely one or the other. So, because we've actually seen quality MiL performance (and at a level higher than the GCL), it's understandable that Bundy is as low as he is. He's a bit of a wildcard - but one with extreme upside.

I think this is just about right for Bundy. I'd probably put him ahead of Hoes - but that's only because I likely overly-discount the GCL.

Thank you. It just amazes me how some people look at everything as black and white, either or, this or that.

Back end of the bullpen guys like Erbe and Hernandez have more value than 5th starter/reliever types in my opinion and no matter what Bundy's ceiling might be, I can't put him over guys with similar arms who have already had success in the minors, even if they profile as back of the bullpen guys.

Three years from now, we may be saying the same thing about Bundy, we just don't know so for me, this is a good place on the list for these guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not in any way irritated by the pick. :) Howevuh, Bundy wouldn't have been my choice over Bergesen. I think there are just too many questions too put him over Bergy (if i may call him Bergy). 88-90 MPH fastball doesn't excite me. The caveat is that it would have been higher if he wasn't forced to wear the knee brace. But... isn't that a red flag - that he had to wear a knee brace at 17 years old? Just my amateur thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not in any way irritated by the pick. :) Howevuh, Bundy wouldn't have been my choice over Bergesen. I think there are just too many questions too put him over Bergy (if i may call him Bergy). 88-90 MPH fastball doesn't excite me. The caveat is that it would have been higher if he wasn't forced to wear the knee brace. But... isn't that a red flag - that he had to wear a knee brace at 17 years old? Just my amateur thoughts.

He was throwing 91-94 after the brace came off and was sitting 91-93 in the GCL league. That 88-90 number was just show why he dropped a little as well as signability. The Orioles also had him in a pre draft workout and saw the velocity as well as his curve and change were back. As for the knee brace, he was wearing that because he had ACL surgery in December before his Senior year. As someone who had ACL surgery in May, I can't imagine pitching on it just four months later so I can understand why some thought he rushed back and his stuff wasn't as good. It was a great job by the Orioles to stay on him and once the brace came off they saw that his stuff, which was once considered 1st round talent, was back.

The one thing I remember when talking with Joe Jordan a few days after his draft was him telling me he was "going to sign" Bundy no matter what. He really likes the kid's make up as well is his pitchability and he was an absolute priority sign.

Obviously he has a long way to go, but considering his upside, I like him at this juncture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not in any way irritated by the pick. :) Howevuh, Bundy wouldn't have been my choice over Bergesen. I think there are just too many questions too put him over Bergy (if i may call him Bergy). 88-90 MPH fastball doesn't excite me. The caveat is that it would have been higher if he wasn't forced to wear the knee brace. But... isn't that a red flag - that he had to wear a knee brace at 17 years old? Just my amateur thoughts.

He wore a knee brace because he came back from ACL surgery a couple of months early. The brace actually smoothed out a bouncy twitch he had in his motion and will benefit him, long term. Everything I've seen indicates doctors expect a full recovery.

He has no arm or shoulder issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SG - it's still upside discounted by probability. It's not purely one or the other. So, because we've actually seen quality MiL performance (and at a level higher than the GCL), it's understandable that Bundy is as low as he is. He's a bit of a wildcard - but one with extreme upside.

I think this is just about right for Bundy. I'd probably put him ahead of Hoes - but that's only because I likely overly-discount the GCL.

That's my point. You don't use pure talent and upside. Talent and upside are the prime component, however - and the probability is determined, at least in part, by performance at the minor-league level.

You have to think along two separate metrics. There's the reward. And the risk.

Thus, say, a 1:5 chance of winning $500 is worth a $100. And a 1:5000 chance of winning $500,000 is worth $100. These are equal values, with wildly different "upsides." All you need to do is tweak the numbers a bit and you can see why Bundy's upside doesn't trump the probabilistic issues with his value.

All we're saying is that right now, the unknown (and hence the risk) is too large with Bundy to put him ahead of more known quantities who still possess the upside to be mid-rotation (or better) ML starters.

Back-to-back great posts. Very well put.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...