AM: Teams had legit interest in Hardy

[Sports Guy]

How do we know that the package that might have been offered for Hardy was one we would have had to accept? Have we heard any specifics at all about what was offered?In my opinion, the Hardy contract is cheap. FG says he has been worth $25.8 mm from 2009-11, and that's without counting the 2.5 months remaining to play this season. The injured version of Hardy has been worth $6-9 mm a year even missing some time; the healthy version of Hardy is worth $15 mm+.

Look, my eyes are wide open here. We've seen what happened to BRob. We've seen Luke Scott's trade value plunge now that he is damaged goods. We know Hardy has missed significant time each of the last three seasons. To some extent, the Orioles are taking a gamble by signing Hardy and hoping they can get more for him later than they could get for him now (or, just hoping that he plays well for them and they benefit from it on the field). But to me, that is not a bad risk. I'd say the chances that he will be worth more next July than he is worth this July are about 70%.

We know teams had legit interest in him...We know the SS market is poor and we know that Hardy would have been one of the better bats on the market.

On top of that, you know that teams were going to have to put a deal on the table that was equal to or better than the value of 2 draft picks.

So, while we don't know specifics at this time, its pretty logical to say a good deal would have been out there, one that we couldn't have turned down.

[RavensNTerps]

Or trading him for the next AGon, a guy I wanted that many said would be no good.

It goes both ways. Sometimes they fail, sometimes they succeed.

Maybe you end up with the next John Smoltz or maybe you end up with the next Jeremy Hermida.

The odds of that happening are slim to none. How often do you discover or get lucky with a Smoltz, Ortiz, Hermida, or Gonzalez, let's be honest. Of all the trades the Orioles have made during this futile period of terribleness we've ended up with, what, 5 solid MLB players in return? Melvin Mora, Luke Scott, Adam Jones, Mark Reynolds, and JJ Hardy. 2 of them were this past offseason. 1 was pretty lucky.

[Sports Guy]

The odds of that happening are slim to none. How often do you discover or get lucky with a Smoltz, Ortiz, Hermida, or Gonzalez, let's be honest. Of all the trades the Orioles have made during this futile period of terribleness we've ended up with, what, 5 solid MLB players in return? Melvin Mora, Luke Scott, Adam Jones, Mark Reynolds, and JJ Hardy. 2 of them were this past offseason. 1 was pretty lucky.

But how often have the Orioles had a trade chip as good as Hardy?

Your plan comes back to one thing...you want them to tread water.

Nothing you are suggesting is anything but treading water. You just want them to keep everyone and hope for the best.

[nadecir]

Look, my eyes are wide open here. We've seen what happened to BRob. We've seen Luke Scott's trade value plunge now that he is damaged goods. We know Hardy has missed significant time each of the last three seasons. To some extent, the Orioles are taking a gamble by signing Hardy and hoping they can get more for him later than they could get for him now (or, just hoping that he plays well for them and they benefit from it on the field). But to me, that is not a bad risk. I'd say the chances that he will be worth more next July than he is worth this July are about 70%.

Maybe you are right, and Hardy will be worth more next July. But what would be the harm in waiting two weeks to determine what the best offer for Hardy might have been this year, and then determining whether to trade him or resign him? I am sure Hardy would have signed the same deal in two weeks.

For once, I think McPhail may have jumped the gun a bit and let the market play out for Hardy. Who knows a contending team may have had an injury at shortstop, and we could have gotten an arm and a leg for Hardy. At least let the trading deadline play out, and make a rational decision on whether to accept the best trade offer for Hardy, or resign him. We will never know what the best trade offer for Hardy would have been at this trade deadline. It may have really helped in rebuilding our system.

[LookinUp]

The problem is a simple one...we don't see a date on the calendar that anyone is building towards. If anything, we're building towards 2012 right now and that seems foolish.

When will we be good? 2014? 2015? How will Hardy help us get to that? How will Jones help us? How will anyone help us?

In this regard, I can be ok with Frobby's position here. There's more than one opportunity to trade an asset in exchange for someone who can really contribute on a winner. SG's also right that there is real risk in hoping to do that with Hardy.

My take...at least he's not as expensive as BRob. Hopefully AM will be gone this offseason and the new GM can actively start to build something. Unfortunately, with Buck as manager, I really do think the plan is to be better in 2012.

But not good enough. Ugh.

[El Gordo]

Trading Hardy makes no more sense than extending him, if that's all you do. If you trade Hardy you have to be willing to move Jones, Guthrie and maybe Reynolds, and go all in. If not it makes at least as much sense to extend him. If we hadn't, and we needed FA SS next year Hardy would have been my first choice among Reyes, Furcal, and Rollins, but he would have cost more in money and years, IMO.

[GoldGlove21]

This discussion is mind numbing to me folks. Where is the actually debate in terms of pros and cons? Hardy HAD to be traded off of a VERY BAD Orioles team. I hear people saying that the Rays built their team with prospects, but where has that really gotten them? Well, they have a payroll of about $43M and are only 8 games out of first and 6.5 out of the wild card. Do you think the Rays could find 8-10 more wins with an additional $40M-$50M of payroll? Yeah, me too. The Ray get it folks, they let Crawford and Pena walk for draft picks and will add to their top-7 farm system while saving upwards of $30M.

Once again, does a good player on a losing team have more value than that same player on a winning team? Two top 100 prospects, that is what you could have gotten for Hardy. You are not likely to get a top-25 guy and a top-60 guy, but a top-50 guy and a top-75 guy in addition to a low level prospect would have been possible. We would have saved $7.5M in the process and while I know we would have needed a shortstop in 2012, why would we really need a star? What is he going to do to take us from 25+ games under .500 team with him to a 10+ game over .500 to have a chance in the AL? Keep in mind that that same player was on the exact same team that finished last in the AL East even though he was having a great year!

Pros:

Hardy contributes to the next Orioles winner

He continues this pace and the Orioles deal him next year in a market that is as weak as this years in middle infield talent.

He gets his own T-Shirt Tuesday and Bobblehead in 2012

Cons:

He accounts for $7.5M of the 2012 payroll

He can not net us two draft picks

He is an injury risk

He played for the 2011 Orioles who will run out mostly the same core of talent in 2012 and they finished last

Not trading Hardy provides a ripple affect as the Orioles not only have to pay him his money over the next 3 seasons, but they do not get the 2-3 young players that would be controlled at inexpensive prices over the next 5-6 years.

Let's just use a made-up trade for example. Hardy is traded to the Reds for Alonso and Billy Hamilton. Alonso was the #78 ranked prospect in 2011 per Baseball America and Hamilton was #50. You get a guy who could be a legit bat while playing 1B/LF and you get your next UTI and a replacement for Brian Roberts if you would ever prefer him to hit as a DH verses play the field. The rest of the lineup would be good enough to allow a guy like Roberts to DH as needed. Now we do not need to overpay for a quality UTI/Future second baseman or for an offensive upgrade at 1B/LF. So maybe this one move saves $20M+ from the 2012+ payroll.

[GoldGlove21]

Trading Hardy makes no more sense than extending him, if that's all you do. If you trade Hardy you have to be willing to move Jones, Guthrie and maybe Reynolds, and go all in. If not it makes at least as much sende to extend him. If we hadn't, and we needed FA SS next year Hardy would have been my first choice among Reyes, Furcal, and Rollins, but he would have cost more in money and years, IMO.

It still makes more sense to deal a guy than keep him if you are going to go young. Hardy is a good player, not a great one and there is a risk of injury with him. The numbers show that his fielding has declined from his Brewer days. Like Jones, I do not put a lot of stock in defensive numbers when it comes to Hardy. The Orioles could always trade him next offseason, but he would likely have been the guy this year verses being one of the guys in following years. Him being controlled for 2012-2014 means that he may have additional value, but there are just too many variable to bank on. You had an opportunity to bring in multiple quality prospects by moving him while saving $22.5M over the next few years. This was yet another example of this team not getting in and not picking an actually path. We are not a young inexpensive team and we are not a built to win now club. We are an inexpensive product that equates to net losses.

This is the lowest point for me as I think the plan was the right thing to do, but organizationally, we do not do the things that good clubs do to better themsleves. I think a new Risk-Reward model needs to be put in place.

[El Gordo]

It still makes more sense to deal a guy than keep him if you are going to go young. Hardy is a good player, not a great one and there is a risk of injury with him. The numbers show that his fielding has declined from his Brewer days. Like Jones, I do not put a lot of stock in defensive numbers when it comes to Hardy. The Orioles could always trade him next offseason, but he would likely have been the guy this year verses being one of the guys in following years. Him being controlled for 2012-2014 means that he may have additional value, but there are just too many variable to bank on. You had an opportunity to bring in multiple quality prospects by moving him while saving $22.5M over the next few years. This was yet another example of this team not getting in and not picking an actually path. We are not a young inexpensive team and we are not a built to win now club. We are an inexpensive product that equates to net losses.

This is the lowest point for me as I think the plan was the right thing to do, but organizationally, we do not do the things that good clubs do to better themsleves. I think a new Risk-Reward model needs to be put in place.

What's the best you could get for Hardy in trade? Probably not Zach Wheeler, but lets just say you did. How much better would the team be with Wheeler in Norfolk, and Andino at SS? We would need to sign one of Hardy, Rollins, Reyes, and, Furcal in the fall, cutting in to money we would need to spend else where. To me that is just treading water. Now if yoU traded Hardy, Jones, and Guthrie, for say Beachy, Minor, Wheeler, Wood, Alonso, and Simmons you'd be in business.

[Sports Guy]

What's the best you could get for Hardy in trade? Probably not Zach Wheeler, but lets just say you did. How much better would the team be with Wheeler in Norfolk, and Andino at SS? We would need to sign one of Hardy, Rollins, Reyes, and, Furcal in the fall, cutting in to money we would need to spend else where. To me that is just treading water. Now if yoU traded Hardy, Jones, and Guthrie, for say Beachy, Minor, Wheeler, Wood, Alonso, and Simmons you'd be in business.

What if you get Cozart in a Guthrie deal and get Wheeler for Hardy?

Cozart represents a guy who should give you very solid defense and enough of a bat to be a league average SS.

[clapdiddy]

What's the best you could get for Hardy in trade? Probably not Zach Wheeler, but lets just say you did. How much better would the team be with Wheeler in Norfolk, and Andino at SS? We would need to sign one of Hardy, Rollins, Reyes, and, Furcal in the fall, cutting in to money we would need to spend else where. To me that is just treading water. Now if yoU traded Hardy, Jones, and Guthrie, for say Beachy, Minor, Wheeler, Wood, Alonso, and Simmons you'd be in business.

I get the feeling if we dealt Hardy, it would have been the start of a set of moves.

But, I'd certainly would have traded Hardy for Wheeler if the deal was presented. This season means nothing right now, and having a prospect like Wheeler in our system and under our control for the foreseeable future would be worth it.

[El Gordo]

What if you get Cozart in a Guthrie deal and get Wheeler for Hardy?

Cozart represents a guy who should give you very solid defense and enough of a bat to be a league average SS.

You are obviously not following this thread closely.

[El Gordo]

I get the feeling if we dealt Hardy, it would have been the start of a set of moves.

But, I'd certainly would have traded Hardy for Wheeler if the deal was presented. This season means nothing right now, and having a prospect like Wheeler in our system and under our control for the foreseeable future would be worth it.

I am not talking about just this season. If you got Wheeler,and did nothing else you would have a good young SP in AAA, ready to come up in ST, and no SS. Six of one half dozen of the other.

[RavensNTerps]

If we trade Guthrie for Cozart and Hardy for Wheeler we may have possibly upgraded one spot in the rotation in 2012/2013 (who knows, Matusz was as close to a sure thing as pitchers get) and we'd massively downgrade at SS. How does that make the team better? And even if Wheeler is a massive upgrade over Guthrie we still have three rotation spots to fill which is exacerbated without Guthrie. So how is that not simply re-shuffling the deck chairs?

[Beeracuda]

But what would be the harm in waiting two weeks to determine what the best offer for Hardy might have been this year, and then determining whether to trade him or resign him? I am sure Hardy would have signed the same deal in two weeks.

I agree with this. If the FO is satisfied with either extending him, or trading him, then it would've been in the Orioles best interest to dangle him as trade bait until the end of July. Usually in the 11th hour is when you get the best value for your trades, that is, if you're the one selling. After the deadline you can sign him to the extension if you didn't like any of the trade offers. Most likely you'll get someone willing to give you more than they normally would when the deadline is almost upon you.

I'm happy that we have Hardy for the next 3 years, and I would've been happy with a decent trade too. I just think the signing happened sooner than it needed to be.