Buck wants J.J. Hardy out of the 2 hole

[weams]

"I would like to get J.J. out of the two hole. I would. I think it kind of takes away from his strengths, but it may not happen. We just didn't have anybody else who could bring what he brought. We'll see. We'll see if we do it or not. There are a lot of things we have to shake out in spring training."

"Matt liked it here and we liked him and we were able to get something we needed through him. I know Dan Duquette and them are still talking and we'll see how that works out. He had a good year last year all the way around and I'm sure he's going to have some offers to pick from."

"We like Joe. We traded for Joe and we'd like to keep him. It's another one of those things where you said what his agent was looking for, compared to what our guys feel comfortable with to ensure that we can continue to do the things we need to do. There's some separation there, but hopefully we can get closer. We'd like to have him on our staff. Everybody likes him."

"We've kicked the tires on all of them. We do. We go, 'Yeah, we could get this guy, for instance, and we'd have to give up Machado and Schoop and Bundy.' Well, of course you wouldn't do that. Those types of things. We kind of know who we are and who we're not. We spent well over $20 million to keep our players. Jim Johnson is going to be somewhere around $5 or $6 million in arbitration, and bless his heart, he earned every bit. We've got a lot of guys jumping up in arbitration, and instead of letting them walk. I think our payroll's going to be over $90 million, maybe more than that."

"I know from talking to Peter , if there's a deal there that everybody thinks works, we're going to go. Nobody's scared here. Nobody's afraid to make a deal here. Trust me. Trust me. It's just, we've got to get the right one. We have conversations every day. I'd like to say, 'Hey, here's what we talked about today. Weigh in on that.' Ninety-nine percent of it, you would go, 'Of course you wouldn't do that.' You've got to get cooperation."

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_roch/2013/01/showalter-on-hardy-lindstrom-and-trades.html

[Can_of_corn]

That is odd considering Buck was in the best position to move him out of the two hole last season and chose not to.

Did it take until the offseason to notice the sub 300 OBP and 21 GIDP?

[Can_of_corn]

Hardy is not a #2 hitter. Everyone agrees. The question is, did we really have a #2 hitter last year? This year, depending on the lineup, you could have McLouth #1 and Markakis #2 or vice versa. If Reimold is in the lineup you could have him #1 (like did last year) and Markakis #2.

Hardy was the 9th best choice out of the main lineup to bat #2. Even Andino got on base at a higher clip. Draw a name out of a hat, you got a better choice then Hardy in the #2 hole. That lineup position is too important to waste on someone with a 282 OBP.

(Yes I am exaggerating with Andino, but he did have a higher OBP)

[wildcard]

Buck has shown that he likes to alternate left, right through the order as much as possible. He didn't have anyone better than Hardy as a righty high in the order. Reimold fits the profile. Machado may at some point but probably not to start the season.

I hope that Buck buys into how important it is to have Markakis in the one or two hole. It may be counter to his left/right desire but Nick hits well against all kinds of pitching so he should be able to make that work.

[backwardsk]

I'd bat him 5th between Davis and Wieters.

Healthy years from Markakis, McClouth, and Reimold are important for the top of the order.

[Can_of_corn]

If you just want to play RotoStats and look at the final numbers, then yeah. However, most would agree that Mark Reynolds, Chris Davis, Matt Weters, Adam Jones, Wilson Betemit, Robert Andino, Ryan Flaherty, are not #2 hitters.

If the argument is that anyone could have gotten on base more than Hardy in the #2 spot, then that's a slam dunk. However, with Hardy coming off a career year hitting out of the #2 spot I don't think it's a slam dunk that there was a player that you can make a compelling argument for, for being an ideal #2 hitter on the team, ENOUGH that it's a slam dunk that Hardy should have been moved. This year, we should/could have more options at the top of the lineup with McLouth, Reimold, and Markakis in the mix. Casilla and Roberts are also possibilities if they hit.

The #2 hitter in the orders job is to get on base. Hardy failed at that. Even if you go with the "old school" idea of a #2 hitter Hardy failed, he is not a skilled sacrificer and he hit into too many double plays. He was rockin' a 262 OBP at the break, that is plenty big enough sample size to see he wasn't getting the job done.

Wildcard, I am not saying Hardy wasn't the best choice, I am saying he was the worst (arguably even over Andino). Any other RH bat would have been better.

[Can_of_corn]

I'd like to see something like this:

1 McLouth/Reimold

2 Markakis

3 Jones

4 Wieters

5 Davis

6 Betemit/RH platoon

7 Hardy

8 Machado

9 Casilla

Not bad but Jones is too important to the offense to be in the 3 hole, I would switch him and Wieters.

[backwardsk]

I'd like to see something like this:

1 McLouth/Reimold

2 Markakis

3 Jones

4 Wieters

5 Davis

6 Betemit/RH platoon

7 Hardy

8 Machado

9 Casilla

Mine was similar with Davis-hardy-Wieters 4th-6th and then Betemit/Reimold 7th.

[Can_of_corn]

Mark Reynolds would have been a batter #2 hitter on basis of OBP. However, you then take Reynolds out of a better RBI spot in the #6 hole or whatever and replace him with the slumping Hardy there. There is also a team dynamic to think about. The question is, was the benefit so great by removing Hardy and putting Reynolds, Andino, or someone else there? Since most stat guys argue that lineup makeup makes little difference to begin with, I'd say the benefit is far from a no brainer. No one is arguing that any othe hitter would have statistically gotten on base more. Would the Orioles have scored signficantly more runs by having Andino in the #2 hole and Hardy lower in the lineup? Without a good #2 option the answer is, who cares!

Go ahead and find me proof of the impact of the "team dynamic".

Of course the impact is minimal, that doesn't excuse using a terrible option all season then lamenting about it in the offseason as if your hands were tied.

[wildcard]

The #2 hitter in the orders job is to get on base. Hardy failed at that. Even if you go with the "old school" idea of a #2 hitter Hardy failed, he is not a skilled sacrificer and he hit into too many double plays. He was rockin' a 262 OBP at the break, that is plenty big enough sample size to see he wasn't getting the job done.

Wildcard, I am not saying Hardy wasn't the best choice, I am saying he was the worst (arguably even over Andino). Any other RH bat would have been better.

As it turned out, I see your point. .282 OBP is really bad in the #2 hole. Buck probably thought Hardy would come back to his 310 OBP he did in 2011. But Hardy didn't.

As far as some other righthanded hitter being better. Reimold was on the DL most of the season and hit #1 to start the season. Jones and Wieters were in the middle of the order and Buck was not going to move them to the #2 hole. Some would say Buck should have put Reynolds in the 2 hole. Not me. Reynolds is a run producer. Andino maybe but Robert is not the hitter that Hardy is. So bottom line there was not a good righthanded choice and that is what Buck was looking for.

I could see two of Markakis, Reimold, McLouth or Roberts in the leadoff and two hole with Jones batting third this year. I don't know if Buck will do that. Buck may tend toward Roberts. Reimold, then Markakis which is exactly what I don't want to see. Markakis needs to be in the one or two spot.

[Frobby]

That is odd considering Buck was in the best position to move him out of the two hole last season and chose not to.

Did it take until the offseason to notice the sub 300 OBP and 21 GIDP?

The answer is pretty clear: he didn't like his other options. But now that he trusts McLouth, and if BRob, Reimold and Markakis are all healthy, he's got a lot of options.

I'm not making excuses for Buck, because I agree he left Hardy in the 2-hole way too long. I'm just glad he seems to have other plans this time.

[Can_of_corn]

As it turned out, I see your point. .282 OBP is really bad in the #2 hole. Buck probably thought Hardy would come back to his 310 OBP he did in 2011. But Hardy didn't.

As far as some other righthanded hitter being better. Reimold was on the DL most of the season and hit #1 to start the season. Jones and Wieters were in the middle of the order and Buck was not going to move them to the #2 hole. Some would say Buck should have put Reynolds in the 2 hole. Not me. Reynolds is a run producer. Andino maybe but Robert is not the hitter that Hardy is. So bottom line there was not a good righthanded choice and that is what Buck was looking for.

I could see two of Markakis, Reimold, McLouth or Roberts in the leadoff and two hole with Jones batting third this year. I don't know if Buck will do that. Buck may tend toward Roberts. Reimold, then Markakis which is exactly what I don't want to see. Markakis needs to be in the one or two spot.

I would have preferred to give more at bats to Reynolds then Hardy.

[wildcard]

I'd like to see something like this:

1 McLouth/Reimold

2 Markakis

3 Jones

4 Wieters

5 Davis

6 Betemit/RH platoon

7 Hardy

8 Machado

9 Casilla

I like it a lot. Its what I would do. Minor adjustment to put Machado batting 9th. Can't have three lefties in a row and Roberts would bat for Casilla some of the time. Maybe most of the time early in the season.

[El Gordo]

Obviously Buck doesn't think OBP is the sole factor in choosing a #2 hitter. Old school ideal would be someone like Nelly Fox. Good bat handler, bunter, plate dicipline , good contact rate, decent BA. Nick would be a good fit. I like McLouth leading off and Nick batting #2, even if it is two lefties in a row. Someday in the not too distant future Machado migh be that guy.

[CA-ORIOLE]

The best solution would have been to alternate Hardy (against LHP) and a LHB (against RHP) in the order last year. Unfortunately, Buck is not a big believer in this type of strategy, especially with the top of the order. I guess he likes to alternate L/R/L or feels its important for guys to know their position/role. He undoubtedly thinks Hardy's contact skills are important.