Photo

Orioles Leading Team Interested in Jeff Smardzija


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#1 PatrickDougherty

PatrickDougherty

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,204 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:06 AM

CBSChicago: http://chicago.cbslo...-in-samardzija/

 

This reporter seems to think Bundy would be involved, but has no support for that notion and is probably wrong.


@pjd0014
I'm trying to be better about sharing code for reuse: Github

#2 SammyBirdland

SammyBirdland

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,019 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:08 AM

Ooh, very curious to hear everyone's thoughts on giving up Bundy.


¡Hasta la vista, pelota!

#3 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,449 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:14 AM

Samardjiza would make sense. He's under contract for two years which is as long as we have Davis and Wieters so that makes sense. Samardjiza, Tillman, Jimenez, Chen and Gausman (soon enough).

 

I think they'd have to take Norris. We'd have no spot in the rotation for him and would need the savings. Is Bundy, Norris and Wright enough? I doubt it.  



#4 Coker

Coker

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,421 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:16 AM

Ooh, very curious to hear everyone's thoughts on giving up Bundy.



I'd.be fine giving up Bundy in the right deal. I don't think trading him for Shark is the right deal though.

Now if the Cubbies want Eduardo Rodriguez....
  • JeffLong and 1970 like this

#5 PatrickDougherty

PatrickDougherty

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,204 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:21 AM

I'd.be fine giving up Bundy in the right deal. I don't think trading him for Shark is the right deal though.

Now if the Cubbies want Eduardo Rodriguez....

I'm with you. Smardzhsdgg is good but he's not under-2.00-ERA-for-the-rest-of-his-career good. I'd offer Rodriguez first and make the Cubs work for Bundy.

 

FWIW, Shmardzifdhkjdf is making $5.345M this year, is Arb-3 next year, and a FA in 2016. A trade now would be a minimum of a year and a half of a good pitcher with the opportunity to buy out FA years before anyone else gets to him.


  • SammyBirdland and fishteacher like this
@pjd0014
I'm trying to be better about sharing code for reuse: Github

#6 BSLSeanJester

BSLSeanJester

    BSL Restaurant / Travel Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,355 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:27 AM

Not ready to trade Bundy yet but I know his value took a hit with TJ surgery. I don't think subtracting our best SP (Norris unfortunately) to add another SP does us any good. We'd still have a hole in the rotation and one less option to fill it. That leaves us only Gausman and he'd better not miss.

#7 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    SportsGuy's Muse

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,191 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:32 AM

Can they take Chen far away from me?
  • 1970 and Markus like this

There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#8 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,449 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:36 AM

I'm with you. Smardzhsdgg is good but he's not under-2.00-ERA-for-the-rest-of-his-career good. I'd offer Rodriguez first and make the Cubs work for Bundy.

 

FWIW, Shmardzifdhkjdf is making $5.345M this year, is Arb-3 next year, and a FA in 2016. A trade now would be a minimum of a year and a half of a good pitcher with the opportunity to buy out FA years before anyone else gets to him.

 

He's stated in interviews with Chicago newspapers that he feels an obligation to future players to earn as much money as possible in order to raise their comparables. The Os won't be able to buy out FA years.

 

They want more for Samardjdfaferwq then they did for Garza. Makes sense because he's better and you get him for a year and a half. The Cubs got an excellent relieving prospect (Ramirez), a top prospect (Edwards), a promising reliever (Grimm) and a guy that was a top prospect in Olt that had dropped in value due to eye issues.

 

I'd say the Cubs would want Bundy, Rodriguez and another two pieces (Norris and a C- prospect).



#9 PatrickDougherty

PatrickDougherty

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,204 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:39 AM

He's stated in interviews with Chicago newspapers that he feels an obligation to future players to earn as much money as possible in order to raise their comparables. The Os won't be able to buy out FA years.

 

They want more for Samardjdfaferwq then they did for Garza. Makes sense because he's better and you get him for a year and a half. The Cubs got an excellent relieving prospect (Ramirez), a top prospect (Edwards), a promising reliever (Grimm) and a guy that was a top prospect in Olt that had dropped in value due to eye issues.

 

I'd say the Cubs would want Bundy, Rodriguez and another two pieces (Norris and a C- prospect).

Interesting outlook from Shark Week. I had no idea.

 

And good point about comparing a possible trade to Garza. I immediately jumped to Wieters being a part of the deal, but maybe that's just my bias showing through. I would consider a Wieters/Rodiguez/+ for Smardjzziksdgia

 

EDIT: Primary Cubs catcher Welington Castillo (a great mix of lacrosse first name and baseball last name) has been worth 0.6 fWAR this season, 11th out of 12 qualifying catchers


@pjd0014
I'm trying to be better about sharing code for reuse: Github

#10 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    Sr. Orioles Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 64,014 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:45 AM

Cant trade Gaus or Bundy for him IMO.

 

He isn't good enough.

 

Although, if you think Gaus is never going to make it as a starter or Bundy isn't going to be healthy, you think harder about it.

 

Would rather trade them for a better player with my control though.


  • 1970 likes this
@BSLRobShields

#11 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:53 AM

I like Smaerdgha, but I don't get the upgrade now at the expense of one of your top pitching prospects.

 

It causes you to lose all value of a guy like Norris or Miguel Gonzalez when you replace them and put them in the pen and for a team that doesn't have draft picks this year and doesn't seem to know how to add young players.....how can they compete after 2015 with no real plan to acquire players.

 

I'd rather build a deal around a guy like Tillman, give the Cubs the cost and service control and take the better certainty out of that spot today.....use him as a bridge to Harvey......and take the draft pick after the 2015 season.

 

If we're looking at the Cubs.....I'd want to consider Mike Olt and International Pool slots in the package.



#12 Coker

Coker

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,421 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 08:57 AM

We're built for the next two years, and I definitely think a trade for that guy would help. However, we can't punt the future since we have a pretty big void of prospects outside of Bundy, Gausman, Harvey and Rodriguez. 

With Markakis, Wieters, Davis, Cruz coming off the books within the next 1-2 years, we could certainly afford Smardijasijzza - but would the O's FO be willing to give a(nother) big contract to a 31 year old pitcher? In good news, he certainly doesn't have the wear and tear on his arm like others. 

 



#13 bnickle

bnickle

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,378 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:01 AM

I'm ready to trade Bundy. Shop him and take the best deal that helps you for now and the future.

If its JS, I'm fine with that.

#14 Matt_P

Matt_P

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,449 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:04 AM

The other thing is that at the moment we're likely to offer a QO to Cruz and Hardy and will likely get picks for both of them. We may not be getting many picks this year but we'll be able to add a good bit of talent in next years draft.



#15 SammyBirdland

SammyBirdland

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,019 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:07 AM

I wonder if the O's still consider Bundy to be untouchable, now that he is post-TJ surgery.   I don't know if they came out and said it before, but he's been untouchable to this point.

 

My gut tells me Samargeezuh is not the right guy to leverage Bundy for.  


¡Hasta la vista, pelota!

#16 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 88,651 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:08 AM

There is no way I'd consider giving up Bundy's years of future control for 1.5 year's of JS.


  • Greg Pappas and JeffLong like this

#17 Russ

Russ

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,405 posts
  • LocationThe BQ

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:08 AM

The other thing is that at the moment we're likely to offer a QO to Cruz and Hardy and will likely get picks for both of them. We may not be getting many picks this year but we'll be able to add a good bit of talent in next years draft.

I'll say yes to Cruz, and a maybe to Hardy for QOs. I'm concerned about this team going forward. After 2015, we have Jones and Manny, hopefully Bundy and Gausman, and a bunch of bit players. 2016-2018 might be a rebuild. Might as well go for it now.

#18 bnickle

bnickle

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,378 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:12 AM

There is no way I'd consider giving up Bundy's years of future control for 1.5 year's of JS.

Bundy now has injury concerns.

You do your homework on his value. If he can be a frontline piece fir a Stanton you'd be better off using him there.If JS is his value, you pull the trigger.

#19 SammyBirdland

SammyBirdland

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,019 posts

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:15 AM

There is no way I'd consider giving up Bundy's years of future control for 1.5 year's of JS.

 

Hypothetically, would you trade Bundy for 5 years of Smiracha?


¡Hasta la vista, pelota!

#20 Ricker Says

Ricker Says

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,503 posts
  • LocationGermantown, MD

Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:18 AM

There is no way I'd consider giving up Bundy's years of future control for 1.5 year's of JS.
Bundy now has injury concerns.


You do your homework on his value. If he can be a frontline piece fir a Stanton you'd be better off using him there.If JS is his value, you pull the trigger.


He's gotten his "injury concern" addressed. It's not like he has shoulder issues. With pitchers these days, Tommy John is more a matter of when, not if. So I don't think this is a particularly fair summation of Bundy. And it'd be selling low on a legit prospect. I'd obviously do it for Stanton, but not a guy like JS.
@0TheRick0 (AKA The Rick)
"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all." ~ The Earl of Baltimore




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Sponsors