St Louis Post-Dispatch : Best Shortstop Fit for the Cardinals is JJ Hardy

[tntoriole]

Why does the second option not include any solution for ss or 3b? Is Baltimore only permitted to make one move this off-season?

"Permitted" and "absolutely forced to" are two different negotiating positions to be in as an organization. A Hardy trade forces them to answer those questions immediately this offseason by trade or free agent (which every other team and free agent also then becomes aware of as well.)

[Stotle]

I really do not care if the Cardinals upgrade at shortstop or not or if they win another World Series or not as I am sure they do not care about the Orioles either. I would just as soon keep Hardy than trade him for "value" that essentially removes any chance of contending in 2014 which is how I would view a straight up trade for Lance Lynn (with or without table scrap prospects and Lynn). If they don't want to deal for Hardy for premium value, then I respect that too and they can go to one of the many other Gold Glove, Silver Slugger inexpensive shortstop free agents out there or watch Kozmas play in 2014. I may have considered Lynn, Freese and a mid level prospect for Hardy (contingent on being extended) as a potentially workable trade, but now that is not possible and anything of any lesser value is not in the Orioles best interests IMHO.

Why couldn't Baltimore be better trading Hardy for "now" pitching and signing, say, Peralta? That would actually lock in talent at a more affordable rate for longer.

[Stotle]

"Permitted" and "absolutely forced to" are two different negotiating positions to be in as an organization. A Hardy trade forces them to answer those questions immediately this offseason by trade or free agent (which every other team and free agent also then becomes aware of as well.)

That's why teams work on more than one thing at a time.

[weams]

Is Baltimore only permitted to make one move this off-season?

Prolly

[tntoriole]

That's why teams work on more than one thing at a time.

I think it is more a timing question than disagreeing. If the Orioles sign Peralta as a prelude to a Hardy deal, then I might think a Hardy trade becomes safer. But if Hardy goes first, then does the Peralta price go up? Do other trades trying to fill the entire left side of the infield become more pricey or complicated? I guess I am just OK with retaining JJ Hardy for 2014 and letting Manny take over in 2015 and taking the draft pick when JJ walks in 2015 or try to extend him ourselves this winter, rather than trading him at this moment for Lance Lynn/prospect.

[Number5]

Posters act as if:

1. J.J. Hardy is the only SS upgrade available to the Cardinals

2. The Cardinals can't win a WS without unless they get a top SS

No, what is being said is if St. Louis is unwilling to pay the premium needed to get Hardy then, absolutely, they should seek out other options. Drew. Peralta. Furcal. Whoever.

The Orioles should not, in any case, simply trade Hardy for what is perceived as "equal value". That wouldn't help the Orioles to the next level, whereas keeping and potentially extending Hardy, combined with other moves just might. Creating a huge hole in our infield, while not really appreciably improving ourselves anywhere is a step backwards. We can find pitchers like Lynn elsewhere, if that is what we want, and keep Hardy.

The Cardinals themselves have made it clear that they are trying to upgrade at SS. Evidently, they aren't as certain as you seem to be that they will be winning the WS next year with Kozma at SS.

[Migrant Redbird]

Posters act as if:

1. J.J. Hardy is the only SS upgrade available to the Cardinals

2. The Cardinals can't win a WS without unless they get a top SS

This!

At some point, barring a rash of injuries, the Cardinals will be forced to cull their pitching to avoid losing them on the waiver wires. Any intelligent GM will do his culling from the bottom instead of giving away his blue chips in desperation trades.

A lot of Cardinals fans will be dismayed if the Cardinals trade away top prospect, Oscar Taveres. However, I think that a trade for Profar would probably be in the Cardinals best interest, even if Taveres has a much higher upside offensively. Taveres potentially blocks Craig from playing RF, and Adams is a much better defensive first baseman.

[Stotle]

This!

At some point, barring a rash of injuries, the Cardinals will be forced to cull their pitching to avoid losing them on the waiver wires. Any intelligent GM will do his culling from the bottom instead of giving away his blue chips in desperation trades.

A lot of Cardinals fans will be dismayed if the Cardinals trade away top prospect, Oscar Taveres. However, I think that a trade for Profar would probably be in the Cardinals best interest, even if Taveres has a much higher upside offensively. Taveres potentially blocks Craig from playing RF, and Adams is a much better defensive first baseman.

What does Texas gain trading for Taveras (I love Taveras)? They have Profar/Andrus up the middle for the foreseeable future and would be trading someone with whom they are intimately familiar for someone they've scouted a lot. I don't see the upside.

[Number5]

Oh sure it is. But the nature of pitching in today's game means you just aren't likely to get a cost-controlled potential front-end arm for 1 year of a very good, but flawed, 31 yr old shortstop. Certainly not from an org like the Cardinals.

I enjoy reading your posts, and I have a lot of respect for your knowledge and experience. I simply disagree with you on this issue, though.

I think DD and Mozeliak undoubtedly touched on these points and both realized that they weren't going to get the other one to make a bad trade and they have moved on. The Orioles have no reason to trade Hardy for "equal value" in this situation, IMO. All indications are that this is the case, and Mozeliak knows the door is still open should the Cardinals run out of options and find themselves willing to pay a premium to land Hardy. I've seen nothing to indicate otherwise, and by all appearances, both teams have moved on to other things.

[Stotle]

I enjoy reading your posts, and I have a lot of respect for your knowledge and experience. I simply disagree with you on this issue, though.

I think DD and Mozeliak undoubtedly touched on these points and both realized that they weren't going to get the other one to make a bad trade and they have moved on. The Orioles have no reason to trade Hardy for "equal value" in this situation, IMO. All indications are that this is the case, and Mozeliak knows the door is still open should the Cardinals run out of options and find themselves willing to pay a premium to land Hardy. I've seen nothing to indicate otherwise, and by all appearances, both teams have moved on to other things.

I think in order to get the full picture you have to concede the possibility that Hardy on Baltimore next year might have zero value. It all depends on what other moves are being made. There's a spectrum from "rebuild" to "World Series favorite", and where a team views itself on that spectrum is a big part of how much a particular player/contract is valued. The closer you are to "rebuild", the less inherent value a one-year contract has.

If the Baltimore FO is legitimately pushing to be a strong potential playoff team, Hardy's value is significant in that he likely offers good value at a cheap price filling a difficult hole. If Baltimore is more in the "target mid-80s wins and look to catch a couple of breaks", Hardy just doesn't mean that much from a production standpoint. Now, there's the locker room consideration, as well. So if you are looking tomove Hardy, you've got to be able to sell it to long-term players that it is all in an effort to win a World Series as quickly as possible, while sustaining competitiveness.

The same, if the right moves aren't there to improve the team, you probably don't move Hardy "just to make a move". I'd probably look to trade him, along with Johnson, Wieters, and Chris Davis.

[tntoriole]

I think in order to get the full picture you have to concede the possibility that Hardy on Baltimore next year might have zero value. It all depends on what other moves are being made. There's a spectrum from "rebuild" to "World Series favorite", and where a team views itself on that spectrum is a big part of how much a particular player/contract is valued. The closer you are to "rebuild", the less inherent value a one-year contract has.

If the Baltimore FO is legitimately pushing to be a strong potential playoff team, Hardy's value is significant in that he likely offers good value at a cheap price filling a difficult hole. If Baltimore is more in the "target mid-80s wins and look to catch a couple of breaks", Hardy just doesn't mean that much from a production standpoint. Now, there's the locker room consideration, as well. So if you are looking tomove Hardy, you've got to be able to sell it to long-term players that it is all in an effort to win a World Series as quickly as possible, while sustaining competitiveness.

The same, if the right moves aren't there to improve the team, you probably don't move Hardy "just to make a move". I'd probably look to trade him, along with Johnson, Wieters, and Chris Davis.

Could we trade Potter too in that group? Lol.

[Stotle]

Could we trade Potter too in that group? Lol.

Barring any big changes in payroll, in two years they're all likely to be gone with Baltimore not having anything to show for 2014/2015. I try not to let quality resources go to waste. *Note: If BAL wants to get a little aggressive and really push short term, I'd be all for keeping them.

[Number5]

I think in order to get the full picture you have to concede the possibility that Hardy on Baltimore next year might have zero value. It all depends on what other moves are being made. There's a spectrum from "rebuild" to "World Series favorite", and where a team views itself on that spectrum is a big part of how much a particular player/contract is valued. The closer you are to "rebuild", the less inherent value a one-year contract has.

If the Baltimore FO is legitimately pushing to be a strong potential playoff team, Hardy's value is significant in that he likely offers good value at a cheap price filling a difficult hole. If Baltimore is more in the "target mid-80s wins and look to catch a couple of breaks", Hardy just doesn't mean that much from a production standpoint. Now, there's the locker room consideration, as well. So if you are looking tomove Hardy, you've got to be able to sell it to long-term players that it is all in an effort to win a World Series as quickly as possible, while sustaining competitiveness.

The same, if the right moves aren't there to improve the team, you probably don't move Hardy "just to make a move". I'd probably look to trade him, along with Johnson, Wieters, and Chris Davis.

Well, certainly not zero value, as he would receive a qualifying offer from Baltimore, in all likelihood, even if the Orioles failed to contend and failed to find a trade partner. If the Orioles contend, then Hardy has obvious value. If we extend him, then there is value. If we trade him, either between now and opening day, or at the deadline, I've got to think that we would be getting a decent premium for nim. He is a star player at a premium position. If we end up out of the race and with only the supplemental pick in our hands, that would be bad luck. While possible, I don't consider it very likely that we end up with zero.

[Stotle]

Well, certainly not zero value, as he would receive a qualifying offer from Baltimore, in all likelihood, even if the Orioles failed to contend and failed to find a trade partner. If the Orioles contend, then Hardy has obvious value. If we extend him, then there is value. If we trade him, either between now and opening day, or at the deadline, I've got to think that we would be getting a decent premium for nim. He is a star player at a premium position. If we end up out of the race and with only the supplemental pick in our hands, that would be bad luck. While possible, I don't consider it very likely that we end up with zero.

Or he could have a slightly down year/injury and 1) accept the qualifying offer to try and reestablish value, or 2) force Baltimore not to even make the qualifying offer. You could get something for three months of Hardy. I don't think it's anything impactful. There is indeed nominal value tied to exclusivity in negotiating an extension (though I wouldn't do an extension for anywhere near what he'll likely want unless I get more payroll room).

I don't consider Baltimore a legitimate playoff contender entering the off-season (I know, that's a funny thing to say eleven months out), so the idea of being in legit contention seems like a stretch that would involve a lot going right.

As always, perception is everything. If I thought this was a playoff team, I'd be all for keeping Hardy right where he is.

[tntoriole]

Barring any big changes in payroll, in two years they're all likely to be gone with Baltimore not having anything to show for 2014/2015. I try not to let quality resources go to waste. *Note: If BAL wants to get a little aggressive and really push short term, I'd be all for keeping them.

Unless of course, they get over the top in 2014 or 15.