64 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

I didn't mean that Greinke will get a 9 year contract. But the past has shown us that he'll likely get a 6-7 contract for 20+ and a team like the O's will have to pay on the high end in term of years and money.

We'll see. He's a unique case with factors that should lower his price tag.

[SportsGuy]

We'll see. He's a unique case with factors that should lower his price tag.

If Texas trades for him, I think they will throw a big contract at him in the offseason(assuming he plays well)

[Oriole85]

While I'd say no as well, it's close... but getting Felix isn't like getting Greinke or Hamels, as we'd have him for two more years after this season... his prime years.

That's also figuring they'd be able to compete the next two years, else it would be pretty pointless paying that kind of $$$. Even though they've been playing much better than expected, all logic tells you they should NOT be in the position they are in.

[RichardZ]

We'll see. He's a unique case with factors that should lower his price tag.

Because he left camp 5-6 years ago and hasn't had any problems since? You think that will lower or significantly lower his price tag. Cole Hamels just got 6/144 to keep him off the market. Greinke gets 6/120 easy and probably more.

[JeremyStrain]

Because he left camp 5-6 years ago and hasn't had any problems since? You think that will lower or significantly lower his price tag. Cole Hamels just got 6/144 to keep him off the market. Greinke gets 6/120 easy and probably more.

He hasn't had any issues since because he has managed it, and part of the management is staying out of high-stress media markets.

We will see at the end of the day, $$$ talks, but I think the desire to stay out of the major markets is legit.

[Mackus]

Because he left camp 5-6 years ago and hasn't had any problems since? You think that will lower or significantly lower his price tag. Cole Hamels just got 6/144 to keep him off the market. Greinke gets 6/120 easy and probably more.

I think the 6/$120M you mention is basically a slightly lowered price tag.

I was comfortable with 5 years and $22-24M per. To get it done, you probably need to go six years, which pushes the upper limits on comfort, but at some point we're gonna have to make a big splash. A contract in between Cain's and Hamels' would be ok with me, assuming that we aren't going to be limited to a $90M payroll as a maximum.

[Greg Pappas]

The OP asked if you would trade Bundy and any other two prospects outside of Machado and Schoop for Felix Hernandez, and my reply was that while tempting - I wouldn't do it.

A better question is:

Would you deal Bundy for Felix straight up?

After careful consideration, I still wouldn't do it. Would the exclusion of those two prospects change your view at all?

[dpsmith22]

Straight-up? I would be on the phone with MLB getting it approved.

Bundy is a prospect, Hernandez is a top 5 pitcher in baseball.

[Zwolfe0]

I wouldn't trade Bundy for anything anytime soon. I think this team/city desperately needs a home grown talent similar to Mike Mussina or Cal Ripken.

[JeremyStrain]

Straight-up? I would be on the phone with MLB getting it approved.

Bundy is a prospect, Hernandez is a top 5 pitcher in baseball.

Bundy WILL be a top 5 pitcher in all of baseball for another 5-10 years, Hernandez will start to fall off a bit soon.

[Greg Pappas]

Bundy WILL be a top 5 pitcher in all of baseball for another 5-10 years, Hernandez will start to fall off a bit soon.

Though "just a prospect", Bundy is going to be a BEAST! I brought up this thread as a conversation starter, but while loving Felix Hernandez, no way the O's would (nor should) deal Bundy.

[RichardZ]

Bundy WILL be a top 5 pitcher in all of baseball for another 5-10 years, Hernandez will start to fall off a bit soon.

I'm sure you think so, but we all know that it's far from a sure thing.

[SportsGuy]

I'm sure you think so, but we all know that it's far from a sure thing.

Right...Wieters WAS going to be Mauer with power. We saw how that worked out.

[Mackus]

I'm sure you think so, but we all know that it's far from a sure thing.

Exactly. He's not a better prospect than Wieters was, and look what he's turned into. A nice player, but not one of the 5 or so best catchers in the game (although he still could get there).

Not saying I'd trade him (although I'm one of the yes votes, I was under the impression Felix had like 4 years left on his deal, not just 2), but it's too presumptuous to simply assume that Bundy will be a top-5 starting pitching in the game for any one year, yet alone most of the next decade.

[Greg Pappas]

Guys, you just gotta go to this post... viewtopic.php?p=41770#p41770

[JeremyStrain]

That negative "oh yeah, sure he looks great but he's probably going to bust" attitude is terrible. After 5 bad games people were labeling Wieters a bust, and ready to do the same before Bundy throws a pitch.

[Mackus]

That negative "oh yeah, sure he looks great but he's probably going to bust" attitude is terrible. After 5 bad games people were labeling Wieters a bust, and ready to do the same before Bundy throws a pitch.

I don't understand who this is directed at or even really what it means.

[JeremyStrain]

I don't understand who this is directed at or even really what it means.

If people feel strongly enough in their ability to say whether a prospect has a good chance of making it or not, I wish they would actually come out and put themselves out there about it. Most message board fans will agree with or take whatever the national guys say as gospel, but then be completely pessimistic about it at the same time. If you feel strongly enough to be pessimistic about a prospect, back it up with your opinion why or why not.

It's just a negative attitude brought on by all the failure around here, but it's really easy to throw stones when someone makes a prediction or evaluation of a guy when you don't offer anything up yourself you know.

(Speaking in generalities about the boards)

[Greg Pappas]

Exactly. He's not a better prospect than Wieters was, and look what he's turned into. A nice player, but not one of the 5 or so best catchers in the game (although he still could get there).

Not saying I'd trade him (although I'm one of the yes votes, I was under the impression Felix had like 4 years left on his deal, not just 2), but it's too presumptuous to simply assume that Bundy will be a top-5 starting pitching in the game for any one year, yet alone most of the next decade.

Yeah, if Felix had been signed for four years (through 2016), that would likely sway some votes.

[Mackus]

I think saying a prospect will make it or not is dangerous in general, even for people like you who do a lot of scouting.

So much changes with these guys. Sometimes guys that look like completely can't miss studs in AA or AAA end up busting in the majors or, more often, simply not living up to that hype. Wieters is a good example of that. If he wasn't so widely regarded as Mike Piazza with solid defense when he was coming up, then people wouldn't have the disappointed opinions of him. It's not that his numbers are bad, it's just that he was supposed to be incredible or great and instead he's just very good, and sometimes doesn't even look like that (current slump which has dropped his OPS ~40 points in a week).

I'm not a scout, but I tend to think of these guys in terms of various levels they could reach, and then what is the odds they reach each of those levels. So perhaps Bundy has a 15% chance of being an ace, a 25% chance of being a mid-rotation guy, a 20% chance of being a back-end starter, a 25% chance of being a reliever and a 15% chance of not making it. And then say a 30% chance across the board of blowing out his arm and missing a season and having a struggle-filled bounce back year along the way. All odds very, very roughly guessed at for this example.

It's obviously not the quick-and-dirty analysis that sometimes is more convenient and simple to understand, but it could possibly paint a better picture of all the uncertainty you deal with in terms of prospects, pitching prospects in particular.