Fangraphs: Hardy's 2011 season was worth $21.3 mm...

[mweb]

True or false - Hardy's trade value is greater today than it was before he signed his extention? In my mind, it is undoubtedly true. A player who is signed for three years at a cheap price is more valuable than a player whose contract expires at the end of the year.

Now, will we trade him this offseason? I seriously doubt it. But he's worth more right now than he was in July.

Yep. Therefore, it doesn't make sense to say he should have been dealt this season when his trade value is higher now. Pretty simple conclusion.

I also doubt they'll deal him, but lets see who are the key decision makers and what path they want to take.

[LookitsPuck]

What are you talking about? I also consider that.

And your theory here is definitely true...But again, you have the NTC and health history to worry about.

Those 2 things are seemingly ignored by so many on here but they are obviously very important.

When trading a guy like Hardy, it's important to note his health history and the fact he started the season hurt for a bit. That certainly played a part in trade talks, IMHO, and if the return wasn't ideal, then I'm glad we didn't trade him. Ideally I'd like to know what was being offered, but we'll never know.

[Frobby]

What are you talking about? I also consider that.

And your theory here is definitely true...But again, you have the NTC and health history to worry about.

Those 2 things are seemingly ignored by so many on here but they are obviously very important.

I think his value is at its absolute apex right now, while he is still relatively young, coming off a career-best season, had a pretty healthy year, and has three cheap years on his contract. His value almost has to go down from this point.

That's still not necessarily a reason to trade him now. If you are giving up on the next two seasons, then he should be traded. Otherwise, I'd keep him, try to build up the rest of the team, and plan on trading him when Machado is ready (which definitely will be some time before Hardy's contract expires, and possibly as soon as next July, though more likely some time in 2013).

[DrungoHazewood]

Would you? (Just curious.)

No, I don't think I would. Until they fix the farm system and the scouting system and the whole organizational (lack of) approach I'm not sure flipping Hardy for a couple of kids in AA is going to do much good.

[GoldGlove21]

Who besides SF, MIL ,and STL needed a SS and had the pitching to trade for him? SF traded Wheeler for Belltran.

Right, would the Rays have been willing to trade Hardy for Wheeler straight up? I think they would have if they were still in a rebuilding mode. I think that Hardy's contract is easy to move, but there wasn't an infielder rumored to be traded that was on fire like JJ Hardy? His value may never be higher and I would imagine that the Giants targeting Beltran only happened after Hardy was extended.

This team is probably further than 2 years away from competing if things go right, so where does Hardy come into play in terms of helping this team win? I think his value to this club comes from what return we get when we decide to deal him. If Wheeler ends up being a star than the Orioles made a huge mistake IMO and based on Wheeler's value right now, they probably made the wrong decision. I will judge them based on the return they get for Hardy once they move him, how those prospects compare to Wheeler and if we do keep him, if he is a part of the next Orioles contender.

[GoldGlove21]

When trading a guy like Hardy, it's important to note his health history and the fact he started the season hurt for a bit. That certainly played a part in trade talks, IMHO, and if the return wasn't ideal, then I'm glad we didn't trade him. Ideally I'd like to know what was being offered, but we'll never know.

Beltran was traded for Wheeler after 2-3 years of being injured at some point during those seasons. I think Hardy nets us Wheeler and a quality lower level prospect or two. That and we save $22.5M over three years. I think the Orioles missed a quality opportunity to move a very good player that is having a career year for a top-30 type prospect and another part or two. Anytime you can move a 30-year old shortstop that is playing on a bad team for one of the better prospects in the game you do so. Factor in the 6 years of relatively inexpensive control and the team is not likely to spend much more than $22.5M over 6 years of Wheeler's contract verses 3 of Hardy's. If we were a quality organization than I would say that keeping Hardy made a great deal of sense, but for a team like Baltimore, it doesn't.

[Stotle]

I think his value is at its absolute apex right now, while he is still relatively young, coming off a career-best season, had a pretty healthy year, and has three cheap years on his contract. His value almost has to go down from this point.

That's still not necessarily a reason to trade him now. If you are giving up on the next two seasons, then he should be traded. Otherwise, I'd keep him, try to build up the rest of the team, and plan on trading him when Machado is ready (which definitely will be some time before Hardy's contract expires, and possibly as soon as next July, though more likely some time in 2013).

The problem with this is whether or not it's realistic to think that BAL is willing to trade anyone they signed to an extension three months earlier. Setting aside the specifics surrounding Hardy, what precedent does it set if you show players that your extension negotiations are potentially just efforts to heighten trade value?

I just can't imagine BAL even exploring trading Hardy. Maybe a year from now, which is fine if he has a healthy and solid 2012. But while is potential value is higher now (with this contract) than it was this summer, I think that value is almost entirely negated by the fact that it's HIGHLY unlikely Baltimore would move anyone they extend so close to finalizing that extension.

[mweb]

The problem with this is whether or not it's realistic to think that BAL is willing to trade anyone they signed to an extension three months earlier. Setting aside the specifics surrounding Hardy, what precedent does it set if you show players that your extension negotiations are potentially just efforts to heighten trade value?

I just can't imagine BAL even exploring trading Hardy. Maybe a year from now, which is fine if he has a healthy and solid 2012. But while is potential value is higher now (with this contract) than it was this summer, I think that value is almost entirely negated by the fact that it's HIGHLY unlikely Baltimore would move anyone they extend so close to finalizing that extension.

I agree it normally wouldn't set a good precedent, but if they were to actually go outside of the organization for the new GM, I think that would provide a valid excuse for dealing him.

[Stotle]

I agree it normally wouldn't set a good precedent, but if they were to actually go outside of the organization for the new GM, I think that would provide a valid excuse for dealing him.

Good point. Hadn't considered that. Provided the ultimate decision-maker was not involved in the decision to extend Hardy, it's defensible from MLBPA's viewpoint, I imagine.

[GoldGlove21]

You have to think that a players trade value is also tied to the other players at the same position that are availble. I can't remember any player of Hardy's ability being available and the market for middle infielders was as thin as it had been in years. If there were three teams looking for a shortstop and you had the #1 target than you held the upper hand. This is especially true if other teams knew that he was considering signing a contract with the Orioles. Hardy's value may be higher now due to the 3 year deal he signed and how he finsihed off the year with the Orioles, but don't teams know what Hardy brings to the table by now? There is risk and reward with him and we see that as long as he is healthy the reward is high. That being said, we can't say that his value is higher because we do not know what teams will need a shortstop and will also do not know what middle infielders other teams will make available. Let's say that Hanley Ramirez is put on the block by the Marlins? I would imagine that every team in baseball will put all of their eggs in the Ramirez basket and Hardy would be the second option that wouldn't be traded until that situation was resolved.

I for one, do not think that Hardy's value will be as high as it was during last years trade deadline. If the Orioles decided to trade him before the start of the season than maybe they would have a chance, but if Hardy gets hurt again than his value takes another downward dive IMO.

[hoosiers]

I use it because it's available. It is probably inflated in terms of what Hardy would get on the open market. Bu he is worth way, way more than $7.5 mm a year, so long as he's relatively healthy.

At the end of the day, IMO, this is the bottom line. We have a quality, capable middle infielder close to the prime of his career in Hardy signed to a likely bargain contract. He's the best SS in the toughest division in baseball. That's not so bad, is it?

We certainly will need a number of quality pre-FA and pre-arb guys on the field to be supplemented by FAs and vets like Hardy in order to compete in this division and and we certainly missed an opportunity to move Hardy for one or more of those pre-arb guys. There is Brett Lawrie like opportunity in those prospects just like there is Josh Bell-like risk.

Anyway, the potential bargain nature of the contract could still combine with Hardy's good health to produce a good trade during the contract. There are bigger fish to fry/discuss with the future composition of our Orioles than this, IMO.

[Sports Guy]

At the end of the day, IMO, this is the bottom line. We have a quality, capable middle infielder close to the prime of his career in Hardy signed to a likely bargain contract. He's the best SS in the toughest division in baseball. That's not so bad, is it?We certainly will need a number of quality pre-FA and pre-arb guys on the field to be supplemented by FAs and vets like Hardy in order to compete in this division and and we certainly missed an opportunity to move Hardy for one or more of those pre-arb guys. There is Brett Lawrie like opportunity in those prospects just like there is Josh Bell-like risk.

Anyway, the potential bargain nature of the contract could still combine with Hardy's good health to produce a good trade during the contract. There are bigger fish to fry/discuss with the future composition of our Orioles than this, IMO.

But he is also the best SS in a tough division who happens to be on the worst team in that division...by far.

Its also a team that needs a whole hell of a lot more than the best SS in the division.

The contract is fine....its a bargain.

That has nothing to do with whether he should be dealt or not.

[TonySoprano]

But he is also the best SS in a tough division who happens to be on the worst team in that division...by far.

Its also a team that needs a whole hell of a lot more than the best SS in the division.

The contract is fine....its a bargain.

That has nothing to do with whether he should be dealt or not.

Is there anyone that you would build around and not trade? You could probably get more in trade value for Machado. Would you deal Machado or wait until you see what we have there? I'd hang on to Hardy until that happens.

[Sports Guy]

Is there anyone that you would build around and not trade? You could probably get more in trade value for Machado. Would you deal Machado or wait until you see what we have there? I'd hang on to Hardy until that happens.

This team is so awful and so shallow in talent, that everyone in the organization should be available for the right price.

I would trade Machado in a heartbeat but the return would have to be special.

Hardy, WHEN HEALTHY, is an elite level SS. But the when healthy is the key issue.

Its great that we have a nice bridge to Machado but I would rather have a lot more than that.

BTW Hooisers, Escobar is the best SS in the division, not Hardy..although its close.

[allstar1579]

Is there anyone that you would build around and not trade? You could probably get more in trade value for Machado. Would you deal Machado or wait until you see what we have there? I'd hang on to Hardy until that happens.

Depends on how close you think you can be to competition. If you think Hardy, Wieters, Markakis, Jones, Reynolds, Davis, Guthrie, Britton, Hunter, Matusz can be supplemented into a contending team, I think you need all of them you can get. If that nucleus isn't going to cut it, then you look to deal players by how close they are to FA.

My gut feeling is that we need a big time hitter at 1st/3rd, since Reynolds is better at 1st I'd say look into Wright as a salary move form the Mess. Then, when our middle infield makes it up from the minors we could have a competition level offense. The pitching is going to take longer to fix though...there's a super premium on SP so trading for them seems ineffective, and waiting for Bundy and the rest to get back on track might not sync up with the offensive guys getting to FA.