Master Index of Archived Threads


Mets get Burgos for Bannister

Johnny Dickshot Dec 05 2006 10:32 PM

According to Jon Heyman, this is a done deal. Burgos was the Royals closer last year, just 22 years old. Whiffs a guy an inning but gave up 17 HRs in 70-some innings. Miht break Iramets heart but Bannister ain't a huge loss IMO, especially with as many young starting candidates as we got. Amazinly, Burgos is the younger guy.

metirish Dec 05 2006 10:35 PM

Never heard of him...where does he fit in the pen,what do we know about him.....yeah Bannister is not a huge loss,still a starter for a pen guy,he better be good.

SteveJRogers Dec 05 2006 10:36 PM Re: Mets get Burgos for Bannister

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Burgos was the Royals closer last year Not saying much though =;)

metirish Dec 05 2006 10:37 PM Re: Mets get Burgos for Bannister

SteveJRogers wrote: ="Johnny Dickshot"] Burgos was the Royals closer last year Not saying much though =;) Well at least very few people saw him close out games..will be different in NY...

Johnny Dickshot Dec 05 2006 10:40 PM

Yes, see because baseball is dying in KC... btw, that's Ambiorix Burgos, and its 16 bombs in 73.1 IP. Our Ambiorix Factor is at an all-time high.

Nymr83 Dec 05 2006 10:44 PM

I said less than an hour ago that I'd trade Bannister for anything useful, this qualifies. we won't regret this deal.

Frayed Knot Dec 05 2006 10:51 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 05 2006 10:54 PM

[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/burgoam01.shtml]Ambiorix Burgos[/url] -- turns 23 next April Here's Baseball Prospectus' write-up (from a year ago): Has more in common with Armando Benitez than just his initials. He throws two pitches: an upper-90s fastball and a fall-off-the-table splitter. Once he was moved to the pen and encouraged to focus on those pitches, he was so dominant in AA that he was brought to KC before the end of April ('05). He weathered a strained shoulder and a brief return to AA quite well. Burgos will be challenging Bobby Jenks for the title of best young closer in the division before long. Keep in mind, he's 3 years younger than Jenks and not shaped like a beer barrel. That Armando comparison will simultaneously encourage and frighten Met fans.

metirish Dec 05 2006 10:53 PM

Fuck,I love him already....

Frayed Knot Dec 05 2006 10:55 PM

Gotta get those walks down.

Johnny Dickshot Dec 05 2006 10:57 PM

Don't overlook those WPs! Hey I like this dealie. Major young smokethrower.

SteveJRogers Dec 05 2006 10:59 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: That Armando comparison will simultaneously encourage and frighten Met fans. Heh, just as long as he stays AWAY from the 9th! =;)

SteveJRogers Dec 05 2006 11:03 PM

Welcome A-Board-ick! Well, lets hope that other fellow isn't welcoming him in a couple of months down in Port St Lucie! =;)

Edgy DC Dec 05 2006 11:24 PM

Touched by the hand of Lima. We should all be so blessed. This fills in the large loss on the right side of the pen from the signaways of Hernandez and Bradford and the possiblity that Duaner doesn't make it all the way back. Successful starter in a limited sample size moved for a reliever with nasty stuff who just needs some polish --- seems like Seo-for-Sanchez all over again, 11 months later.

Edgy DC Dec 05 2006 11:25 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: ="Frayed Knot"] That Armando comparison will simultaneously encourage and frighten Met fans. Heh, just as long as he stays AWAY from the 9th! =;) Yeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there.

soupcan Dec 05 2006 11:30 PM

Omar's a worker bee. He just pulls these deals out of his ass. You go get 'em O-Min.

Vic Sage Dec 05 2006 11:33 PM

bee-you-tee-ful!

SteveJRogers Dec 05 2006 11:36 PM

Edgy DC wrote: ="SteveJRogers"] ="Frayed Knot"] That Armando comparison will simultaneously encourage and frighten Met fans. Heh, just as long as he stays AWAY from the 9th! =;) Yeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there. =;) meant that was a joke based on FK's statement about the Benitez comparision.

Edgy DC Dec 05 2006 11:39 PM

Yeah, and I disagree with the apparent point of the joke.

patona314 Dec 05 2006 11:40 PM

from what i just saw on baseball-reference: strikes out plenty few walks beans plenty gives up a ton of homers. sounds like a cross between farnsworth and benitez, or, dare i say, mota's younger brother.

Frayed Knot Dec 05 2006 11:44 PM

68 BBs over 137 IPs is not a few walks. Looks like we got us an untamed colt. But it also sounds like he could be real good once broken in.

metirish Dec 05 2006 11:45 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: 68 BBs over 137 IPs is not a few walks. Looks like we got us an untamed colt. But it also sounds like he could be real good once broken in. can't wait for Peterson to ride him...go Rick go...

patona314 Dec 05 2006 11:50 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: 68 BBs over 137 IPs is not a few walks. Looks like we got us an untamed colt. But it also sounds like he could be real good once broken in. my comment came from his "06 numbers.but if you wanna go that way, more so (137) to ip (136.7). benitez could have done that. i think this guy could be a home run machine.

cleonjones11 Dec 05 2006 11:51 PM

Garbage in..Garbage out....He wasn't good enough for the Royals..Yikes.

patona314 Dec 05 2006 11:59 PM

now that i think about it, omar is making room for someone else. also, maybe he's not giving up on pelfrey/humber/perez. if it's a trade one of those 3 is gone.

Elster88 Dec 06 2006 12:18 AM

I feel bad for Bannister. Poor bastid.

iramets Dec 06 2006 03:04 AM Re: Mets get Burgos for Bannister

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Miht break Iramets heart but Bannister ain't a huge loss IMO. Well, I've got a heart. He might come to nothing, but I remember how thrilling he was at the start of '06, how many Mets fans were excited by his cool, his guts, his smarts, and maybe his luck in working his way out of self-inflicted jams. Even the way he worked his way out of the Mets' plans, by hurting his hammy, seemed to be a tease. I wish more pitchers would hurt themselves, if they've got to hurt themselves, by injuring parts of their bodies other than their arms. I was looking forward to seeing if he could develop into a rotation regular. Instead we went for the hired gun--the upside for Glavine, in the long run, is that his Met career will be a footnote on his Braves' career, if it's even remembered at all that he pitched for the Mets. As for Bannister, as I said last Friday, "I'll also get Brian Bannister the giant sized cannister of Vaseline, cuz it looks like he's going to need it." I said he'd go to Cleveland or to Hell after the Mets signed Glavine, but even I never imagined he'd go to KC. If I had the choice, I'll choose Hell myself.

Rotblatt Dec 06 2006 07:28 AM

]seems like Seo-for-Sanchez all over again, 11 months later Totally agree, Edgy. I like this deal a lot.

Johnny Dickshot Dec 06 2006 07:58 AM Re: Mets get Burgos for Bannister

iramets wrote: ="Johnny Dickshot"]Miht break Iramets heart but Bannister ain't a huge loss IMO. Well, I've got a heart. He might come to nothing, but I remember how thrilling he was at the start of '06, how many Mets fans were excited by his cool, his guts, his smarts, and maybe his luck in working his way out of self-inflicted jams. Even the way he worked his way out of the Mets' plans, by hurting his hammy, seemed to be a tease. I wish more pitchers would hurt themselves, if they've got to hurt themselves, by injuring parts of their bodies other than their arms. I was looking forward to seeing if he could develop into a rotation regular. Instead we went for the hired gun--the upside for Glavine, in the long run, is that his Met career will be a footnote on his Braves' career, if it's even remembered at all that he pitched for the Mets. As for Bannister, as I said last Friday, "I'll also get Brian Bannister the giant sized cannister of Vaseline, cuz it looks like he's going to need it." I said he'd go to Cleveland or to Hell after the Mets signed Glavine, but even I never imagined he'd go to KC. If I had the choice, I'll choose Hell myself. again, I don't think it's accurate to frame it as bannister vs. glavine. He'd still be up against it with regard to cracking the rotation even without Glavine. I also don't see how getting an opportunity in Kaycee vs. an almost assured summer in New Orleans is any way akin to taking it up the poopchute. You should be happy for the guy. I also admired how Bannister battled but sure didn't think it was a good thing for the team'c chances of competing over the long haul. not for nothing but I see Glavine often exhibits the same bulldoggish mentality, the difference being, age, for sure, but also talent.

smg58 Dec 06 2006 08:08 AM

Burgos has lots of upside, and it looked like the Mets were one reliever short. He'll have to earn his meaningful innings, but he was rushed in KC so that might be a good thing for him. Bannister had too many guys in his way here. He has a clear path to a starting job in KC, so good for him.

MFS62 Dec 06 2006 08:52 AM

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Our Ambiorix Factor is at an all-time high. Along with young outfielder Ambiorix Concepcion, the Mets now have two of them. What's the plural of Ambiorix? Ambiorexes? Ambiori? Just wonderin'. Maybe Soupy was right. Later

Edgy DC Dec 06 2006 08:57 AM

Rotblatt wrote: ]seems like Seo-for-Sanchez all over again, 11 months later Totally agree, Edgy. I like this deal a lot. Well, I can frame it that way, but it won't come close to guaranteeing the outcome. As usual, I'm down on trades generally, but I guess the Mets made this one for similar reasons as the Seochez one, and that one flew. The plural is Ambiorices.

seawolf17 Dec 06 2006 09:55 AM

Yeah, it be Ambiorices. (Like "matrices.") I like the deal too. I soured on Bannister when we saw him walk about fourteen Norwich Navigators in three innings two summers ago. (That's him below, warming up before the game.) No great loss, and if you can get a young power arm, you go get him. Nice move.

Frayed Knot Dec 06 2006 10:19 AM

The thing about Bannister is that he was never really considered hot prospect material despite getting lumped in with the rest of "the kids" in the minds of some fans. Only a 7th round draft pick - and as a college senior at that - he made some nice progress thru the minor league system and, I think, surprised mgmt by getting as far as he got so quickly. I just don't get the idea that anyone ever thought his ceiling was all that high. Would have been nice to see what he could have done if not injured last year. Maybe he would have settled down and got hisself a full-time spot in the rotation - or, instead, maybe fallen on his face and made us burn someone else in this trade.

Edgy DC Dec 06 2006 11:27 AM

The thing about Burgos: He opened the season at the Royals closer and converted on just 18 of his 30 save chances, matching a club record with 12 blown saves.

attgig Dec 06 2006 12:39 PM

Edgy DC wrote: The thing about Burgos: He opened the season at the Royals closer and converted on just 18 of his 30 save chances, matching a club record with 12 blown saves. so, he's not ready to be a closer yet. he still has nasty stuff, and he's real young.

metirish Dec 06 2006 12:45 PM

Watching the Tigers this post-season and seeing those young hard throwers come in from the pen makes me excited about this kid...not saying he's got their stuff but it's exciting.

heep Dec 06 2006 12:50 PM

Bannister was probably not going to earn a rotation spot this year, with the surplus of arms we have, so although he is moving from a powerhouse to a losing team, he might of caught a huge break to play and perform, much like Keppinger. They will have more chances in KC, so all the best to them.

Frayed Knot Dec 06 2006 04:40 PM

Rany Jazayeli, Baseball Prospectus's resident Royals fan, [url=http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=53]weighs in on the trade[/url] with the kind of exasperation one might expect from a KC fan of this era.

metirish Dec 06 2006 04:42 PM

] Did I mention that Burgos is more than 3 years younger than Bannister? Or that he’s moving to the inferior league? Or that the scouting impression of Bannister is that of a #4/#5 starter at best? inferior league?........

OlerudOwned Dec 06 2006 04:51 PM

Mets have Ambiorixia. I have bad puns.

cleonjones11 Dec 06 2006 07:01 PM

metirish wrote: ] Did I mention that Burgos is more than 3 years younger than Bannister? Or that he’s moving to the inferior league? Or that the scouting impression of Bannister is that of a #4/#5 starter at best? inferior league?........ We don't have a 4th or 5th starter

Willets Point Dec 06 2006 07:41 PM

cleonjones11 wrote: ="metirish"] ] Did I mention that Burgos is more than 3 years younger than Bannister? Or that he’s moving to the inferior league? Or that the scouting impression of Bannister is that of a #4/#5 starter at best? inferior league?........ We don't have a 4th or 5th starter Correction, we have nothing but 4th and 5th starters.