203 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

I don’t mind this trade.

It’s not great but it has potential in it and guys in this deal could help you within a few years.

I could see Bundy pitching well inAnaheim...he needed to go to a better flyball Park.

I find it hard to believe they would have gotten much better than this at any point.

The only thing I wonder is could have gotten 1 or 2 players that have more upside? I would hope Elias would take a deal like that instead of what they did though.

[NewMarketSean]

Basically got two MiL players and two extra draft picks retroactive to the 2019 draft.

[dude]

It's another meaningless trade.

 

We're 3 for 3 on meaningless trades.

 

....and it has nothing to do whether any of these guys ever sees a ML inning or not.  Zero of these guys are unique to creating future success.  They aren't drivers.  Even if they become drivers, because we somehow know something or are incredibly great at development, it still is stupid because you can get these guys from those teams for nothing.  These guys aren't special talent....they're routine guys you can get everywhere.

 

Yes, he's now "packing the minors" because he's adding guys that don't require decisions for 4-7 years.  Great. Still meaningless. 

[mdrunning]

I don't see how a guy with a career 4.67 ERA is going to create future success, either. 

Still, I wish Bundy well with the Angels. At least now he gets to see Mike Trout play every day.

[russsnyder]

I don't see how a guy with a career 4.67 ERA is going to create future success, either.

Still, I wish Bundy well with the Angels. At least now he gets to see Mike Trout play every day.

Exactly.

I'll gladly take the gamble that one of these young pitchers is part of a decent O Orioles team for Bundy.

Furher, I think the return the Orioles received was reasonable for Bundy. He's a back of the rotation type of pitcher.

[Dr. FLK]

I'm bothered by the quote. I believe Elias is going to be successful, but the idea that there is only one way to do things is absurd.

 

If he means that the one way is to add talent/depth to every level of the organization, than I find it hard to disagree with him.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

It's another meaningless trade.

 

We're 3 for 3 on meaningless trades.

 

....and it has nothing to do whether any of these guys ever sees a ML inning or not.  Zero of these guys are unique to creating future success.  They aren't drivers.  Even if they become drivers, because we somehow know something or are incredibly great at development, it still is stupid because you can get these guys from those teams for nothing.  These guys aren't special talent....they're routine guys you can get everywhere.

 

Yes, he's now "packing the minors" because he's adding guys that don't require decisions for 4-7 years.  Great. Still meaningless. 

I don't think anybody would disagree with that. But personally I don't think Bundy was going to bring back any guy "unique to creating future success."  We got about what I figured. Not much but some chance a guy or two could contribute.

[bmore_ken]

I don't think anybody would disagree with that. But personally I don't think Bundy was going to bring back any guy "unique to creating future success."  We got about what I figured. Not much but some chance a guy or two could contribute.

The only possible way that could have happened would have been to keep him and hope he had a better season than last year and drew some interest based on his performance. The likelihood that would have went that way seems close to zero though. It's possible all four flame out, but if any of them ends up giving you more than Bundy, it's a win. Despite what dude thinks, 

[Mackus]

We traded not much and we got not much.  In all 3 deals.

 

When you only have meaningless players to trade, you can only make meaningless deals.  

 

Mancini is the only needle mover we have.  If we trade Mancini for day 2 draft picks and outside top-500 prospects, that will be a move worth judging harshly on it's own.  For now, I think it's fair to harshly criticize the collective efforts of Elias and ownership of failing to put an MLB caliber product on the field, but there is not really any reason to harshly criticize any of these trades on their own.  

[Slidemaster]

When you have nothing to trade I'm not sure how you can expect to get big pieces back.

They are trading for guys they believe could have a high ceiling and are sticking the farm system with them. If even 3 or 4 out of the 12-15 they have acquired wind up hitting, that's a win.

[Slidemaster]

We traded not much and we got not much. In all 3 deals.

When you only have meaningless players to trade, you can only make meaningless deals.

Mancini is the only needle mover we have. If we trade Mancini for day 2 draft picks and outside top-500 prospects, that will be a move worth judging harshly on it's own. For now, I think it's fair to harshly criticize the collective efforts of Elias and ownership of failing to put an MLB caliber product on the field, but there is not really any reason to harshly criticize any of these trades on their own.

Yes. Nobody else was going to do any better.

[BSLChrisStoner]

If he means that the one way is to add talent/depth to every level of the organization, than I find it hard to disagree with him.

 

https://www.baltimor...uotes/?p=849222

[Mackus]

They are trading for guys they believe could have a high ceiling and are sticking the farm system with them. 

 

Eh, I don't think they think any of these guys have a high ceiling.  Fringe major leaguer is probably the best hope for all of them. 
 

These trades so far are clearly more about saving money than acquiring talent.  They got back the best they could, or at least what they considered the best of what they could have gotten.  But the #1 goal is to shed payroll.  If that wasn't the main objective, then they would've paid everything due to Cashner in order to increase the return (they did pitch in some) or held on to Villar and Bundy and hope they could eat some money and trade them for more later on.

[You Play to Win the Game]

No one thinks they should have gotten more. So why trade them at all? To maximize profits and make the on field product as bad as possible for the remaining fans. Nothing they've done this offseason has moved the needle for the longterm. These moves have only made the Angelos family richer.

[Mike B]

Eh, I don't think they think any of these guys have a high ceiling.  Fringe major leaguer is probably the best hope for all of them. 
 

These trades so far are clearly more about saving money than acquiring talent.  They got back the best they could, or at least what they considered the best of what they could have gotten.  But the #1 goal is to shed payroll.  If that wasn't the main objective, then they would've paid everything due to Cashner in order to increase the return (they did pitch in some) or held on to Villar and Bundy and hope they could eat some money and trade them for more later on.

This is pretty close to where I am.   Although, I probably think higher of the 3 players the Orioles traded then you 

The total disregard for the next couple of years, is just not something I can get on board with.  Frankly, I do not think it is worth fielding an embarrassing, inferior product for 3-5 years, in the hopes that, just maybe, we will be good circa. 2023.  I view the ownership of a sports team as a public trust, and IMO, they owe fans the best product possible, and the businesses around the facility depend on that.

Tanking, and IMO, that is exactly what the organization is doing, betrays all of the above.  

[Mike B]

Frankly in viewing the trades, I am not sure the Orioles got one piece that moves the organization and the rebuilding efforts forward.  I hope I am wrong.

[SportsGuy]

No one thinks they should have gotten more. So why trade them at all? To maximize profits and make the on field product as bad as possible for the remaining fans. Nothing they've done this offseason has moved the needle for the longterm. These moves have only made the Angelos family richer.

Well if you feel he is going to lose value and he isn’t part of the long term plan, it makes perfect sense to deal him.

[Mike in STL]

I don’t feel like Villar is “not much”. Salary dump for a no one. He would have been a nice asset to have.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Well if you feel he is going to lose value and he isn’t part of the long term plan, it makes perfect sense to deal him.

What value? This was a nothing deal.

[SBTarheel]

This is literally exactly what we should be doing, and exactly what Elias said he was going to do. everyone knew this was going to take a while, and the on field product was going to be awful at the Major League Level. His whole goal was to acquire as much as he could and develop them the way he wanted to. We know this because he said exactly this 100 times. Getting 4 pitchers with little to no experience to "groom" so to speak is perfect. 

 

Maybe all 4 become major league All Stars. Maybe all 4 don't pitch above Double A, who knows. But the exciting thing now is to follow the development of all the newer guys. 

 

Yes, we're going to lose 110+ games next season. We might have "only" lost 105 with Villar and Bundy. 

 

Some of the reaction on here boggles my mind, with all due respect.