Hardy extended

[Beeracuda]

I am happy about this, though it really doesn't make much sense on Hardy's end. He could have gotten a 3-year deal for possibly more money in free-agency and been able to choose his destination.

I'm thinking the same thing, Murph. I've been scratching my head trying to understand why Hardy would accept this deal. His value is about as high now as it probably will ever get, and he chooses to stay with a team who's future appears to be dismal, at best? I'm sure those in the Warehouse are jumping for joy about this deal, as they should be, since it's a very good deal for the team.

[Can_of_corn]

And Law is right.

I am sure Law thinks Hardy is a good player and I am sure he believes that Hardy will be worth the contract he got.

But none of that means that this was the best move for the Orioles.

Law thinks the O's should blow everything up, and throw replacement level guys out there until the pieces are in place to compete. With that being his viewpoint of course he isn't in favor of the Hardy deal.

For the record I agree with him except I have no faith in the O's being able to build it right from the ground up and I don't want to see replacement players for the next 10 years. Since the O's are not going to do it right they are better off hoping lighting strikes with the young pitching then doing their normal halfhearted rebuilds.

[jjnono]

Well, on the surface, this move appears to imply that we're not going to trade our highest value commodities (outside of the young starters and Wieters), i.e. Hardy, Jones, Guthrie, Markakis, Gregg, Uehara and Johnson. It appears to me that MacPhail may be attempting to 'go for it' in 2012. Maybe I'm reading too much into it...

Go for it???

When have the O's "gone for it" at any point in the past 15 years? Are you suggesting that McPhail is going to break open the bank, do whatever it takes to get a power-hitting free agent first baseman here, no matter what it costs; secures a TOTR Starter to a long term deal, no matter what it costs; get a lights-pout closer, no matter what it costs, sign a 4-tool left fielder, no matter what it costs, etc....?

Any three of those moves would be "going for it" in my opinion. But trotting out the core of this team with some minor patchwork adjustments is certainly not...

[TakebackOPACY]

If Hardy were somewhere else this season, and we traded a pending free agent this week for three plus years of Hardy at $22-ish million, we'd be happy. So I'll allow myself to be happy with this move.

The team as a whole? We're in a bad place. We don't have the minor league system. We don't have the premiere trade chips (pre-extension Hardy included).

As for Keith Law, maybe he's right or maybe he's wrong (absolutely right or wrong is silly anyway). But as good as he is at what he does, he always wants everyone to trade everyone.

[MrOrange82]

Very reasonable deal, even if a trade would've been better (I don't have strong feelings in either direction).

Unfortunately, since it's the O's doing the signing, Hardy's all but guaranteed to spend significant chunks of the next three seasons on the DL.

[olehippi]

I disagree with those who say we should have traded Hardy. This deal is very reasonable – less than what some people thought it would take. And IF he stays healthy, Hardy could be the perfect bridge to Manny Machado, who hopefully will be ready by the time Hardy's contract ends.

[fish113d]

If Hardy were somewhere else this season, and we traded a pending free agent this week for three plus years of Hardy at $22-ish million, we'd be happy. So I'll allow myself to be happy with this move.

The team as a whole? We're in a bad place. We don't have the minor league system. We don't have the premiere trade chips (pre-extension Hardy included).

As for Keith Law, maybe he's right or maybe he's wrong (absolutely right or wrong is silly anyway). But as good as he is at what he does, he always wants everyone to trade everyone.

I agree. I had my aprehensions when we brought in Hardy to be our everyday SS, but as long as he's healthy, he's a great BALLPLAYER. He goes balls-out every day on every play. He never half-asses a throw to 1B no matter how fast the runner is. Simply, for 3 years, we have a great ballplayer. If we can make a few moves, here is next year's lineup as I see it (that is IF we make a big move or two):

2B - Roberts (or a stop-gap if Roberts can't return to form)

SS - Markakis

CF - Jones

1B - Player to be named Later (Fielder possibly if Hardy can wine and dine him here and if we pony up the money)

C - Wieters

3B - Reynolds

DH/LF - Scott/Reimold (scott hits 5th against right handers moving Wieters to 6th and Reynolds to 7th)

SS - Hardy

LF - Reimold (if Scott DHs)

[Sparkwinder]

Well, the Orioles have put themselves in a tough place and it's only there doing. They have become what Billy Beane has always said is not a great place to be and that is you are either rebuilding or you are spending and going for it, and if your in the middle of those two directions it's not going to get you anywhere and right now I think the Orioles are in the middle.

This is the correct response to the news. It'd be a perfectly legitimate signing if we were on the cusp. But we aren't. Without an exceptional 2 or a solid 3 of our young cavalry pitching sticking as major league starters, you can write off the next 5-6 years as losing as well. Hardy is the perfect sort of corporate signing though: straight laced guy, good but not great player, low key. He'll help to sell the Orioles as pretend contenders. And really, that's all the Front office a la the Angelos in the sky is trying to do: Sell us the appearance of a contender without developing or paying for one.

[carolinaoriole]

This is great news A good fair deal for the player and the team. I see this as the Orioles could have made a trade for potential and gotten back 3 top prospects and ended up with another Felix Pie,Chris Tillman,and Josh Bell who were all at one time considered top prospects that we traded for.

[LA2]

I agree. I had my aprehensions when we brought in Hardy to be our everyday SS, but as long as he's healthy, he's a great BALLPLAYER. He goes balls-out every day on every play. He never half-asses a throw to 1B no matter how fast the runner is. Simply, for 3 years, we have a great ballplayer. If we can make a few moves, here is next year's lineup as I see it (that is IF we make a big move or two):

2B - Roberts (or a stop-gap if Roberts can't return to form)

SS - Markakis

CF - Jones

1B - Player to be named Later (Fielder possibly if Hardy can wine and dine him here and if we pony up the money)

C - Wieters

3B - Reynolds

DH/LF - Scott/Reimold (scott hits 5th against right handers moving Wieters to 6th and Reynolds to 7th)

SS - Hardy

LF - Reimold (if Scott DHs)

This seems very unstable to me. Roberts and Scott are big question marks (whether they can hit and field as in the past), Reynolds has yet to prove that he can play an acceptable third base, and Reimold is a smaller question mark (I have more faith in him than a lot of other fans and apparently Buck do). I see no real reason why Fielder would be inspired to come to the O's. And all of this, of course, is secondary to the huge Q of whether the starting rotation can be successful.

[eddie83]

Law thinks the O's should blow everything up, and throw replacement level guys out there until the pieces are in place to compete. With that being his viewpoint of course he isn't in favor of the Hardy deal.

For the record I agree with him except I have no faith in the O's being able to build it right from the ground up and I don't want to see replacement players for the next 10 years. Since the O's are not going to do it right they are better off hoping lighting strikes with the young pitching then doing their normal halfhearted rebuilds.

They have 5 players ages 25-28 in Hardy Markakis, Wieters, Jones and Reynolds. It isn't like they have a bunch of over the hill 30 year olds. The FA contracts have been 1 yr deals.

I understand his point but they outside of Guthrie they have a bunch of 23-25 year olds in the rotation, isn't that what everyone wanted. Did people expect the young guys to all work out right away at the same time in this division?

If you still believe in Britton, Arrieta and Matusz you should try to put your best team out there.

[Enjoy Terror]

When (if) Machado comes to Baltimore, Hardy will be Roberts replacement. Although I have a feeling that Roberts already needs replacing.

[GoldGlove21]

And Law is right.

I am sure Law thinks Hardy is a good player and I am sure he believes that Hardy will be worth the contract he got.

But none of that means that this was the best move for the Orioles.

I heard Law mention this on 105.7 The Fan yesterday afternoon before the deal broke this afternoon. He was spot on IMO. He stated that the Orioles have drafted some guys that other organizations would love to have added to their system in the past and that Andy MacPhail should be looking into why so many of the young pitchers are getting hurt, losing velocity and performing poorly. He also said that bad teams should trade away parts that are not likely to be a part of their next contender for young guys with upside that are controlled at a reasonable price.

When asked if he thought the Orioles would extend Hardy he said that he thought that would, but that doesn't mean it is the best move for the team. He said that he knew many clubs who thought that the losing has driven a guy like Markakis into the ground and that dealing him could be better for both him and the Orioles moving forward.

One thing that really got me interested in the Q&A was that Law stated that the Orioles could lure premium talent to Baltimore. The issue was tied to dollars because a player who wants to win is not going to come here. He said that signing a guy like Fielder and having your young guys falter would only increase this team by 5-6 wins. He said Baltimore should build with prospects until they get near .500 and then starting adding those expensive, high WAR players.

I like Hardy, but watching a good player in Hardy play for a bad Orioles team in 2012 is not going to help me think that a 3/$23M deal was good for us at that time. Having Hardy get hurt again is not going to help us and Hardy getting older doesn't help us either. We could still trade him moving forward into 2012, 2013 and 2014 seasons, but due to his quality performance, Type-A status and lack of options at middle infield, I do not feel that there would have ever been a better time to trade him.

[GoldGlove21]

When (if) Machado comes to Baltimore, Hardy will be Roberts replacement. Although I have a feeling that Roberts already needs replacing.

Not unless we extend him again, because Machado isn't likely to be the starting SS until late 2012 or the start of the 2014 season.

[MurphDogg]

This is the correct response to the news.

Message boards are the best.