Pirates Promote Luis Munoz, Lose Bryan Bullington

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jul 10, 2008 3:18 PM EDT

The Pirates have promoted pitcher Luis Munoz and sent John Van Benschoten back to Indianapolis. Munoz had actually was demoted from Indianapolis to Altoona in June and hasn't pitched well at either level, so there's no particular reason to think things will get better in the big leagues. He's a starting pitcher, at least in the minors, but does anyone think he'll average more than three innings in the big leagues?

Also, in a surprise move, the Indians claimed Bryan Bullington. The Indians are a smart organization, but I'm baffled as to what they might see in him. The Pirates shouldn't miss him.

Tweet Comment 19 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Good luck, kid.

You’re gonna need it.

by Vlad on Jul 10, 2008 3:39 PM EDT reply actions

Bullington or Munoz?

Or both?!

Steve Z

by steve_z on Jul 10, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Both.

by Vlad on Jul 10, 2008 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions

With CC Sabathia gone,

I think the Indians just needed another starting pitcher with a (sort-of) alliterative name.

But seriously, I was hoping that JVB would follow BB on the DFA list, PDQ. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

by gonfalon on Jul 10, 2008 4:47 PM EDT reply actions

still too soon

like it or not, due to the lack of starting depth, jvb is still one or two rotation injuries/demotions from another shot, though he may have made that number 2 or 3 with his recent outings. better hope snell and dumatrait hold it together and gorzo finds his control sooner rather than later.

i bet you’ll see him go in the offseason when we can stock some more depth.

by johnnycuff on Jul 10, 2008 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions

I still think...

...that JVB could have value in the pen. He throws reasonably hard, he has a good breaking ball, and he used to close back in college. Sometimes, when you take a failed starter and tell him to just work on throwing real hard, you get good results (think LaTroy Hawkins, for example).

by Vlad on Jul 10, 2008 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I think this is what the team needs to do

with JVB, too.

All in all, I`m glad to see Bullington moving on and wish him the best of luck. It wasn`t his fault he was taken #1 overall, and I never heard anything other than that he tried his best during his years in the Pirates` organization. I hope he`s able to salvage at least a little something out of his years of hard work and overcoming the serious shoulder injury.

by patthatt on Jul 10, 2008 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions

Why not try Bullington in the pen then?

I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t matter, but it doesn’t seem like we really exhausted all possibilities with BB. If I’m not mistaken he was throwing at least 90 again (can anyone verify?). His K/9 and K/BB look pretty much like JVB’s this year. He did get smacked around more, but still… He hadn’t made a minor league relief appearance since 2003. And in two relief outings last year he was unscored upon. Small, almost non-sample, just sayin’.

by azibuck on Jul 10, 2008 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions

JVB's stuff is better

More velo on the FB, and better break on the breaking ball. His odds aren’t good, but Bullington’s are even worse.

by Vlad on Jul 10, 2008 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions

bullington - looking back five years

With the Bullington era ending, I did some googling to see how much of what we say now is 20-20 hindsight and came up with some interesting links. John Sickels view of the 2002 draft is consistent with my recollection that most people thought Upton was a better pick, but he is not critical of the pick and notes that “few scouts doubt that he’ll be a successful major-league pitcher.” Just seems like something went wrong with his arm very soon after we signed him.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/misc/1391123.html

In his assessment the next year of the Pirates system, Sickels states that he liked the Pirates 2002 draft, which ended up producing absolutely nothing. (Remember in looking at his description of the Pirates prospects that Ian Oquendo is really Ian Snell).

http://espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove2003/piratesminors.html

Finally, I stumbled on this site, which I’m not even sure what it is, but it includes 2003 Player Profiles by Wilbur, including very accurate assessments of who might be a real prospect in the Pirates system (with the exception of Matt Capps). Also, the site reports that Kevin Goldstein listed four Pirates among the top 58 prospects (Burnett, Castillo, Bullington, and JVB)

gearhard/scout03.html” target=”_blank”>http://www.mindspring.com/gearhard/scout03.html

by basmati on Jul 10, 2008 5:52 PM EDT reply actions

nice finds...

the Sickels stuff has the injury disclaimer; who knows how good Bullington might have been (a fastball at 96 mph?!) if not for injury?

by gonfalon on Jul 10, 2008 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions

trying again with that last link that didn't work

gearhard/scout03.html” target=”_blank”>http://www.mindspring.com/gearhard/scout03.html

by basmati on Jul 10, 2008 6:11 PM EDT reply actions

last try

URL begins with the http; I don’t know why extra stuff keeps getting added at the beginning

by basmati on Jul 10, 2008 6:16 PM EDT reply actions

fwiw

I can’t get any of these links to work…

http://www.mindspring.com/gearhard/scout03.html

by gonfalon on Jul 10, 2008 6:34 PM EDT up reply actions

The trouble’s coming from the site you’re linking to, not (I don’t think) from here.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Jul 10, 2008 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions

bad link

Sorry for the bad link. I don’t know what the problem is, but it is worth looking at. Try entering the following into google and it should come out as the first hit.

pirate scouting report bullington wilbur

by basmati on Jul 10, 2008 7:25 PM EDT reply actions

All you guys here

(was it here? I forget sometimes, I make the same arguments on several sites so probably made it here too but anyway …) who told me last winter, when I was arguing the Josh Fogg Theory, how easy it is to find a guy who can consistently put up a 94 ERA+, how those guys are a dime a dozen, so why pay $1 million for one?

If it’s that easy, why don’t we have one in the 5-spot now? Would it or would it not be worth $1 million to the team to be getting a 94 ERA+ 10-12 4.50 ERA out of the 5-hole, instead of the horror we’ve gotten or will get from Morris/JVB/Munoz etc.?

I know Josh has been bad and/or hurt this year, he’s making me look bad, but that doesn’t negate my point: He’s been as certain a 94 pitcher as you could want for five or six years, and we could have had 10 of him for what we pissed away on Matt Morris. How much of a different team would it be if we had a guy like that in the five-hole? Add up Morris and JVB and tell me.

This pisses me off. There’s was no excuse for it, other than we fired the GM a month too late. Even still, we could have junked Morris in spring training and signed a guy at a tenth the price who would have done much better-—maybe not Josh, as it turns out, but a Josh-type pitcher people assured me were all over the place.

Sorry, two-beer diatribe here.

by bucdaddy on Jul 11, 2008 1:40 AM EDT reply actions

You're overstating Fogg's case a bit.

He’s only managed a 94 ERA+ or better twice in six years (a 97 in both ‘02 and ‘07).

He’s better than his record this year, though. Cincy is just a terrible place to be a flyball guy who throws junk.

by Vlad on Jul 11, 2008 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, you're right

But I don’t imagine being a fly-ball pitcher in Colorado was much easier, and he did remarkably well there. Maybe they need a humidor in Cincy? Anyway, the plus side is, he’ll be a free agent again this winter and he’ll be a lot cheaper than $1 mil. I’d sure sign him to a make-good and bring him to camp, see if his problems this year might just be injury related and he can recover.

by bucdaddy on Jul 11, 2008 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions