Twins sign Dylan Bundy

[Mike Sixel]

They didn't sign a great or good pitcher. Trading for one now makes no sense. One good pitcher isn't enough. Punt the season.

[h2oface]

10 hours ago, SwainZag said:

Santana was hardly a long term solution when the Twins dealt him.  He pitched very well in 88 games in the next 3 seasons and then his career was basically over.  Yes, they handled it poorly, but the Mets ate almost $80M over the last 4 years of that extension where Santana pitched in a grand total of 21 games.

I disagree. At the time he was dealt, he absolutely was a long term solution (and 3 years, for the Twins is also long term!). To assume that Santana would have had the same future if he wasn't traded is, well, ..... go ahead, but the future cannot be assumed to be the same in my world, butterfly effect and all...... "when the Twins dealt him", he definitely was a long term solution. Just as Toronto signing/extending Berrios to a contract that the Twins could have easily afforded, is a long term solution. If he gets hurt that will change, but right now, he is a long term solution - just to another team.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think this is a pretty good third signing for the rotation.

The problem is the front office forgot to sign the first two guys.

Especially in the wake of Stroman signing for only three years. Yuck. This front office had $50m to spend and has spent $5m of it while almost all the good players at positions of need are now off the board. Massive, colossal failure. 

[bighat]

I thought the same as most here: "Meh. Not bad for the price, typical bargain barrel shopping but hey, we'll take it".

Then I went and looked at Bundy's stats from last year. Holy.....wow. The guy pitched to a 6.78 ERA as a starter before getting relegated to the bullpen, still finished the year with an ERA over 6. The guy was just getting thrashed. Does he have upside? Sure. But so did Shoemaker and Happ.

Obviously the Twins have to take gambles on guys like this. We'll see what happens but Bundy needs major improvement.

[Otto von Ballpark]

This is a cheap contract, and Bundy still has some upside. But outside of 11 starts in 2020, he's never been much better than average by ERA or ERA predictors:

#	Season	Name	Team	G	GS	IP	ERA-	FIP-	xFIP-	K%	BB%	HR/FB
1	2016	Dylan Bundy	BAL	36	14	109.2	95	107	109	21.9%	8.9%	13.3%
2	2017	Dylan Bundy	BAL	28	28	169.2	95	96	109	21.8%	7.3%	11.5%
3	2018	Dylan Bundy	BAL	31	31	171.2	128	117	101	24.5%	7.2%	17.8%
4	2019	Dylan Bundy	BAL	30	30	161.2	102	97	100	23.1%	8.3%	16.4%
5	2020	Dylan Bundy	LAA	11	11	65.2	74	65	84	27.0%	6.4%	8.2%
6	2021	Dylan Bundy	LAA	23	19	90.2	139	126	109	21.2%	8.6%	19.2%

Also worth noting that, just like how Maeda exclusively faced bottom-third offenses in 2020 due to the all-central division schedule, Bundy managed to load up on weaker hitting opponents in 2020 too:

SEA 3
OAK 3
TEX 2
ARI 1
SFG 1
HOU 1

And this is 2020, when SFG and HOU were both mediocre in the regular season. That's 9 of his 11 starts vs below average run scoring teams; 10 of 11 vs below average HR hitting teams. Bundy completely missed the two best west division teams (Dodgers and Padres) and Colorado / Coors Field.

So I'd guess the realistic upside here is average, which is still plenty valuable even on the $11 mil team option, if Bundy manages to achieve it -- but still leaves something to be desired at the top of the rotation.

[Blyleven2011]

Does anyone see that the free agent signings the wiz kids make over the years are players that pitched for the angels .....

 

Parker , shoemaker  , robles and now bundy ....

 

Angels have had bad pitching problems for years  ....

 

Just other below average pitcher signed with a pulse ...

Ryan now is the number 3 starter in the rotation and ober now is 4th with bundy as the fifth  ... 

Shoemaker got what 3 million and bundy gets 5 million and a option ...

What a waste , no playoff wins for the 2022 twins  ....

We need studs , bulldogs and aces for starters and bullpen...

Spend the money pohlad and have fun  , you can't take it with you ... 

[Theo Tollefson]

Signing Dylan Bundy is better than signing no one before the lockout. Plus I think the bar for him right now is to be better than Happ and Shoemaker were last year. As long as he exceeds that by having an ERA below 5.00 for most of the season, I think it'll be a good signing for both parties. 

[Linus]

11 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

They didn't sign a great or good pitcher. Trading for one now makes no sense. One good pitcher isn't enough. Punt the season.

Plus why throw away prospect capital on an iffy season. I thought our farm system was our lifeblood. 

[joefish]

Maybe this will be our very own Lance Lynn miracle story. 

[nicksaviking]

14 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

They didn't sign a great or good pitcher. Trading for one now makes no sense. One good pitcher isn't enough. Punt the season.

I agree, and I'm not saying they should punt because I've thrown up my hands and given up, they NEED to see the young arms and they need to see them regularly. 

I mostly dislike the Bundy signing because this is the one kind of pitcher they should have avoided. This was not the year to do a lotto ticket type since they already have so much uncertainty with the young guys. Bundy would have been an OK gamble if your rotation was Berrios, Maeda, Odorizzi and Pineda. This year they should have either gone big and signed three big time arms to compete, or just signed one big time arm to lead the rotation for a year while they vet the prospects. 

It's too late, there's not enough quality on the free agent market to compete with Chicago next year. And if they sell off their prospects for arms instead of paying the reasonable free agent prices, then we need new ownership. That would be completely unacceptable.

[Mike Sixel]

38 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

I agree, and I'm not saying they should punt because I've thrown up my hands and given up, they NEED to see the young arms and they need to see the regularly. 

I mostly dislike the Bundy signing because this is the one kind of pitcher they should have avoided. This was not the year to do a lotto ticket type since they already have so much uncertainty with the young guys. Bundy would have been a OK gamble if your rotation was Berrios, Maeda, Odorizzi and Pineda. This year they should have either gone big and signed three big time arms to compete, or just signed one big time arm to lead the rotation for a year while they vet the prospects. 

It's too late, there's not enough quality on the free agent market to compete with Chicago next year. And if they sell off their prospects for arms instead of paying the reasonable free agent prices, then we need new ownership. That would be completely unacceptable.

I'd quadruple like this post if I could...

They need a healthy veteran to mentor the starters....we aren't sure Bundy is even that. I'm really confused that they don't have one good starting veteran at this point. 

And, trading anyone other than Arraez or a corner player makes no sense. They have shown, again this year, they are too cheap to sign legit players to long deals, so they NEED their other prospects to compete in the future.

[Brandon]

19 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

A #5 starter for $5 million can't hurt. The patience should be shorter than what we saw with Shoemaker.

This is fine. Now the Twins need three better starting pitchers.

Shoemaker had a longer.leash because our number 6,7,8,9 starters were all injured and there was no one else ready to step in.  He was gone as soon as there was.

[Brandon]

2 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

I agree, and I'm not saying they should punt because I've thrown up my hands and given up, they NEED to see the young arms and they need to see them regularly. 

I mostly dislike the Bundy signing because this is the one kind of pitcher they should have avoided. This was not the year to do a lotto ticket type since they already have so much uncertainty with the young guys. Bundy would have been an OK gamble if your rotation was Berrios, Maeda, Odorizzi and Pineda. This year they should have either gone big and signed three big time arms to compete, or just signed one big time arm to lead the rotation for a year while they vet the prospects. 

It's too late, there's not enough quality on the free agent market to compete with Chicago next year. And if they sell off their prospects for arms instead of paying the reasonable free agent prices, then we need new ownership. That would be completely unacceptable.

I think it depends on how close you think at least 2 of the starters are to being ready for a tryout at the MLB level.  If you think an 8 to 10 starts for Bundy then give Winder a chance.....

I say 2 starters because if Ryan shows he needs a breather in AAA then is Duran ready for his chance.  Or if someone gets hurt...

At what point is Balazovich or Sands or.... Ready?  All Star Break maybe?

I am not defending the Bundy signing but I do get it.  I do wish we would have signed Pineda to a 2 year deal.  I do think that is a perfect contract with all the minor league depth we have.  

[nicksaviking]

On 12/2/2021 at 3:36 PM, Brandon said:

I think it depends on how close you think at least 2 of the starters are to being ready for a tryout at the MLB level.  If you think an 8 to 10 starts for Bundy then give Winder a chance.....

I say 2 starters because if Ryan shows he needs a breather in AAA then is Duran ready for his chance.  Or if someone gets hurt...

At what point is Balazovich or Sands or.... Ready?  All Star Break maybe?

I am not defending the Bundy signing but I do get it.  I do wish we would have signed Pineda to a 2 year deal.  I do think that is a perfect contract with all the minor league depth we have.  

If the Twins aren't going to compete this year, I don't need the pitching prospects to be "ready". Almost all of them are going to struggle at the MLB level regardless of how much prep time they get at AAA. Let them work out the kinks at the MLB level so we get a better evaluation and they get with the organization's best pitching coach.

[Linus]

I think they should sign two more fliers as I don’t see how 2022 matters anymore. Flip all three if they come thru or release any that don’t and one of the young arms show they are ready. 

[Mike Sixel]

1 hour ago, Brandon said:

Shoemaker had a longer.leash because our number 6,7,8,9 starters were all injured and there was no one else ready to step in.  He was gone as soon as there was.

There isn't next year either. Even with him, Jax and Thorpe and Dobnak are on the roster....who else is ready in AAA?

Especially who is ready if there isn't much spring training?

[nicksaviking]

2 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

 

Especially who is ready if there isn't much spring training?

Yeah, good point. 
 

Because of the free agency inaction, I want the rookies, ready or not. If we have an abbreviated spring training, we will probably end up with a couple more yawn inducing low priced vets and a trade I’ll resent.

 

[PseudoSABR]

20 hours ago, h2oface said:

I disagree. At the time he was dealt, he absolutely was a long term solution (and 3 years, for the Twins is also long term!). To assume that Santana would have had the same future if he wasn't traded is, well, ..... go ahead, but the future cannot be assumed to be the same in my world, butterfly effect and all...... "when the Twins dealt him", he definitely was a long term solution. Just as Toronto signing/extending Berrios to a contract that the Twins could have easily afforded, is a long term solution. If he gets hurt that will change, but right now, he is a long term solution - just to another team.

Why the heck are we still talking about the Johan Santana trade?  The premise of this post in this thread is just totally phony.  It's been 13 years.  A different regime and a different owner.   

To restate, the Johan Santana trade has nothing to do with whether signing Dylan Bundy was a good idea.    

[AceWrigley]

29 minutes ago, PseudoSABR said:

Why the heck are we still talking about the Johan Santana trade?  The premise of this post in this thread is just totally phony.  It's been 13 years.  A different regime and a different owner.

Because we know eventually someone's head will explode and who doesn't like a good head explosion occasionally?

[h2oface]

1 hour ago, PseudoSABR said:

Why the heck are we still talking about the Johan Santana trade?  The premise of this post in this thread is just totally phony.  It's been 13 years.  A different regime and a different owner.   

To restate, the Johan Santana trade has nothing to do with whether signing Dylan Bundy was a good idea.    

We? Well, I wasn't talking to you but you can be we if you like ......... part of the conversation about long-term solutions and the lack of them. I was answering a reply, right? Why don't you call the premise of the posts talking about Jax and Thorpe and Shoemaker and Happ and Dobnak and Thorpe and Odorizzi and Pineda and Robles and Parker (I'm sure I missed some) in this thread phony too, as they also have nothing to do with whether signing Dylan Bundy was a good idea, but are an aside in the conversations here. May as well get it all out if that makes you feel good.

[PseudoSABR]

34 minutes ago, h2oface said:

We? Well, I wasn't talking to you but you can be we if you like ......... part of the conversation about long-term solutions and the lack of them. I was answering a reply, right? Why don't you call the premise of the posts talking about Jax and Thorpe and Shoemaker and Happ and Dobnak and Thorpe and Odorizzi and Pineda and Robles and Parker (I'm sure I missed some) in this thread phony too, as they also have nothing to do with whether signing Dylan Bundy was a good idea, but are an aside in the conversations here. May as well get it all out if that makes you feel good.

'We' is the grievance this time? Evidently this guy thinks he can have a public conversation with himself.  

There will be relevant topics to complain about the dearth of starting pitching, but this just isn't one of them.  Bundy is a good low risk, back end signing.  

Suggesting that signing Bundy will be the FOs only move or that it's akin to the most historic Twins errors of the past (or as you do here, just throw in all the minor ones too), is just disingenuous (if you find 'phony' uncomfortable).  

[Brandon]

18 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

There isn't next year either. Even with him, Jax and Thorpe and Dobnak are on the roster....who else is ready in AAA?

Especially who is ready if there isn't much spring training?

I think the minor leaguers are unaffected by the lockout and should have a normal spring.... Right.....

[a-wan]

13 hours ago, h2oface said:

We? Well, I wasn't talking to you but you can be we if you like ......... part of the conversation about long-term solutions and the lack of them. I was answering a reply, right? Why don't you call the premise of the posts talking about Jax and Thorpe and Shoemaker and Happ and Dobnak and Thorpe and Odorizzi and Pineda and Robles and Parker (I'm sure I missed some) in this thread phony too, as they also have nothing to do with whether signing Dylan Bundy was a good idea, but are an aside in the conversations here. May as well get it all out if that makes you feel good.

Long term solutions? Almost no team has long term solutions, thus the big deals for FA pitchers.

[Major League Ready]

On 12/2/2021 at 4:48 PM, Mike Sixel said:

There isn't next year either. Even with him, Jax and Thorpe and Dobnak are on the roster....who else is ready in AAA?

Especially who is ready if there isn't much spring training?

Minor leaguers will have spring training but you still ask an interesting question.  I am guessing they are thinking Winder is ready.  Ober was a bit of a surprise.  Do they have someone else in mind?  I doubt they rely on AAA guys right out of the gate.  We will see more SPs signed.   Don't ask me who but they are surely not done.