THE Official 2019-2020 Hot Stove Thread

[CanadianHalo]

 

[Stradling]

Just now, CanadianHalo said:

 

Holy shit.  Ok, then make it a package deal and include Rengifo.  

[Second Base]

13 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Well that's probably what it would cost. 

I mean who would you trade for Bundy?

Well in a Bundy trade you're making a gamble. You're gambling that Bundy will make some adjustments and make good on some of that upside and pedigree. Otherwise why pursue a starter that's likely going to have an ERA near 5? You can get that for cheap off the scrap heap. 

So when you ask me who I would trade, what you're really asking is how confident am I that Bundy will be much better in Anaheim than he was in Baltimore? 

My answer to that is only a little confident. The numbers are inflated by the AL East and he needs a change of scenery, but his struggles run significantly deeper than simply moving across country. Without change, those problems will follow him whenever he pitches.

I'm not willing to trade what I feel is going to be a starting corner infielder for him. Not even close. Furthermore, acquiring Bundy essentially means Canning goes back to AAA which is stupid.

So....I suppose my answer is, I wouldn't trade for him. Not unless this team plans on taking Andrew Heaney, which Fletcher has said they won't.

[CanadianHalo]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Holy shit.  Ok, then make it a package deal and include Rengifo.  

He was set to make 10.4 this year 

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, CanadianHalo said:

He was set to make 10.4 this year 

He was a 4 WAR player last year.

[totdprods]

2 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Furthermore, acquiring Bundy essentially means Canning goes back to AAA which is stupid.

You know as well as I and everyone else on this board that Canning, or any and all young SPs, starting at AAA means nothing because someone is going to be hurt or shitty probably before the season even starts. Eppler has been pretty quick to cut ties when his projects don’t work out. If the young guns start the year at SLC and stay there for a bulk of the season, it’s probably a sign of success above them. 

[Second Base]

16 minutes ago, totdprods said:

In a vacuum I wouldn’t either, but I believe this offseason does have a different sense of urgency to it - maybe not as extreme as Eppler’s job being on the line - but I think a difficult trade to accept will take place. Ever since Odorizzi took that QO, Eppler’s plans for the second arm behind a presumed Cole or Strasburg have been complicated. I don’t think Bundy is that second arm. I think he’s simply some insurance to give him flexibility on how that second arm market plays out. 

I think Cole is pretty much a shoe-in, but landing one of Wheeler, Ryu, Bumgarner, even Hamels, and the second-tier trade market are looking real competitive. By securing someone like Bundy, he won’t have to be in a position where he HAS to overpay via trade or FA for Wheeler, etc., and can rather wait that market out a bit (again, assuming they get Cole) and strike when they get a fair deal. Maybe it helps the Angels keep Marsh. And Angels maybe wind up with three arms after all. Or maybe they are left with Cole and Bundy, but have money to throw at pen, catcher, infield. Essentially it just gives him a lot more flexibility in determining how he proceeds this offseason. 

Dylan Bundy isn't the difference between overpaying for Zack Wheeler and not overpaying for Zack Wheeler. Dylan Bundy effectively moves Griffin Canning back to AAA. Griffin Canning is better than Dylan Bundy.

There's urgency, and then there's, "holy crap you just traded a starting 3B/1B and a #5 starter each with 6 years of control in return for a #5 starter with only 2 years of control."

That's not urgency, that's panic.

[Glen]

54 minutes ago, totdprods said:

We also have about three holes in the rotation and a bunch of kids who shouldn’t even be in the bigs yet with a collective ERA around 6. Two Heaneys would be better than one, based on how things currently stand. 

And I was wrong on the ERA - Bundy’s ERA against our AL West competition isn’t closer to 4 - nor is it closer to 5. It’s actually 2.97.

Bundy vs. the AL West, excluding the Angels, who have rocked him: 

• 20 GS/13 G, 108.1 IP, 100 hits, 26 BB, 119 K, and a 2.97 ERA.

Interesting info and I can see your point. It depends upon the cost.

[CanadianHalo]

Just now, Stradling said:

He was a 4 WAR player last year.

Yep. I’ve wanted Villar for a few years now. Swipes bags too. I was surprised to see them waive him but they’re obviously not trying to win and keep costs extremely minimal. 
 

Surprised they couldn’t find a taker for him despite the 10.4 price tag

[Second Base]

1 minute ago, totdprods said:

You know as well as I and everyone else on this board that Canning, or any and all young SPs, starting at AAA means nothing because someone is going to be hurt or shitty probably before the season even starts. Eppler has been pretty quick to cut ties when his projects don’t work out. If the young guns start the year at SLC and stay there for a bulk of the season, it’s probably a sign of success above them. 

We already have enough back end starters to last 5+ years. Bundy is a back end starter. They don't need to pay up for him. If a deal comes together for cheap, then sure, do it. But this team is not in a situation where they need to gamble big on Bundy.

The chances of Dylan Bundy being good in Anaheim are right equivalent to Sandoval. Why trade for him unless the price is cheap?

[tdawg87]

1 minute ago, Second Base said:

Well in a Bundy trade you're making a gamble. You're gambling that Bundy will make some adjustments and make good on some of that upside and pedigree. Otherwise why pursue a starter that's likely going to have an ERA near 5? You can get that for cheap off the scrap heap. 

So when you ask me who I would trade, what you're really asking is how confident am I that Bundy will be much better in Anaheim than he was in Baltimore? 

My answer to that is only a little confident. The numbers are inflated by the AL East and he needs a change of scenery, but his struggles run significantly deeper than simply moving across country. Without change, those problems will follow him whenever he pitches.

I'm not willing to trade what I feel is going to be a starting corner infielder for him. Not even close. Furthermore, acquiring Bundy essentially means Canning goes back to AAA which is stupid.

So....I suppose my answer is, I wouldn't trade for him. Not unless this team plans on taking Andrew Heaney, which Fletcher has said they won't.

God dammit Scotty I didn't ask whether you would or wouldn't. I asked who you would trade for Bundy if Thaiss is too much.

Honestly, I'd just non-tender Heaney. At least Bundy can almost guarantee the Angels 160+ innings. 

[tdawg87]

Just now, Second Base said:

We already have enough back end starters to last 5+ years. Bundy is a back end starter. They don't need to pay up for him. If a deal comes together for cheap, then sure, do it. But this team is not in a situation where they need to gamble big on Bundy.

The chances of Dylan Bundy being good in Anaheim are right equivalent to Sandoval. Why trade for him unless the price is cheap?

Thaiss for Bundy is Cheap. 

[Second Base]

1 minute ago, tdawg87 said:

God dammit Scotty I didn't ask whether you would or wouldn't. I asked who you would trade for Bundy if Thaiss is too much.

Honestly, I'd just non-tender Heaney. At least Bundy can almost guarantee the Angels 160+ innings. 

I would trade Andrew Heaney for Dylan Bundy. Or Kyle Bradish. Or Stiward Aquino. 

[Second Base]

2 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Thaiss for Bundy is Cheap. 

Thaiss for Bundy is an unnecessary expenditure and a risk that you don't need to take.

[kevinb]

2 hours ago, totdprods said:

Good teams acquire projects. 

2019 Angels say hello

[tdawg87]

2 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Thaiss for Bundy is an unnecessary expenditure and a risk that you don't need to take.

I'm not saying I want Bundy. I don't. But I think he's an upgrade over Heaney. 

[Second Base]

Look everybody, if the Angels needed a 5th starter than Dylan Bundy would be a great target. BUT THEY DON'T. They have Heaney, Canning, Sandoval, Pena, Barria and Suarez all in that role or in AAA or in long relief. 

The Angels don't need Dylan Bundy and since they don't need him, spending actual prospect currency for him isn't necessary.

The Angels need Gerrit Cole and Zack Wheeler. Spending on those guys changes this team.

[totdprods]

5 minutes ago, Second Base said:

There's urgency, and then there's, "holy crap you just traded a starting 3B/1B and a #5 starter each with 6 years of control in return for a #5 starter with only 2 years of control."

I think it could also be argued it’s trading two redundant prospects for a current need.

I get that Barria and Suarez and et al have upside, potential, control, but how long can the Angels wait for them to ascend to that? Especially if Eppler’s job is on the line. Barria arguably proved he was a #5 in 2018, and wound up taking a step back. Suarez didn’t do much in his audition for any of us here to feel he’s good to go as Opening Day #5. Sandoval made the best statement. Canning is better than a #5, and maybe that’s where he starts the year, which is great for the Angels, but again, like Barria, or Weaver or Lackey, he could regress for a year or two as he learns. Not to mention, I think it’s safe to say he’s an injury risk until he proves us otherwise. Peters, Pena, Gohara, soon Beasley, Bradish, Warren, Ortega could all be #5 options soon too.

The Angels have a million infielders with control on their roster currently and the FA market isn’t terrible for them. 

It’d sting, but they’d survive.

[Second Base]

Just now, tdawg87 said:

I'm not saying I want Bundy. I don't. But I think he's an upgrade over Heaney. 

Then trade Heaney and a lottery ticket for him. Don't trade your future starting 1B/3B for him.

[tdawg87]

1 minute ago, Second Base said:

Then trade Heaney and a lottery ticket for him. Don't trade your future starting 1B/3B for him.

That's debatable. 

[Second Base]

1 minute ago, totdprods said:

I think it could also be argued it’s trading two redundant prospects for a current need.

I get that Barria and Suarez and et al have upside, potential, control, but how long can the Angels wait for them to ascend to that? Especially if Eppler’s job is on the line. Barria arguably proved he was a #5 in 2018, and wound up taking a step back. Suarez didn’t do much in his audition for any of us here to feel he’s good to go as Opening Day #5. Sandoval made the best statement. Canning is better than a #5, and maybe that’s where he starts the year, which is great for the Angels, but again, like Barria, or Weaver or Lackey, he could regress for a year or two as he learns. Not to mention, I think it’s safe to say he’s an injury risk until he proves us otherwise. Peters, Pena, Gohara, soon Beasley, Bradish, Warren, Ortega could all be #5 options soon too.

The Angels have a million infielders with control on their roster currently and the FA market isn’t terrible for them. 

It’d sting, but they’d survive.

And Dylan Bundy's issues don't magically disappear just because he stands within 30 feet of Mickey Calloway. Calloway is just as likely to positively influence Canning, Heaney, Sandoval, Barria and Suarez than he is Dylan Bundy. 

The Angels have a million back end starters with potential. They would survive without gambling a piece of their future away for 2 years of Dylan Bundy.

[CanadianHalo]

 

[Second Base]

Just now, tdawg87 said:

That's debatable. 

Yes, @tdawg87 it is debatable. It's always debatable with prospects.

[tdawg87]

1 minute ago, Second Base said:

Yes, @tdawg87 it is debatable. It's always debatable with prospects.

I agree.

[Stradling]

14 minutes ago, Second Base said:

We already have enough back end starters to last 5+ years. Bundy is a back end starter. They don't need to pay up for him. If a deal comes together for cheap, then sure, do it. But this team is not in a situation where they need to gamble big on Bundy.

The chances of Dylan Bundy being good in Anaheim are right equivalent to Sandoval. Why trade for him unless the price is cheap?

No, we really don’t have enough back end starters.  If we did we wouldn’t have had starters average only 4.2 innings last year.