Nick Markakis or JJ Hardy?

[webbrick2010]

I was thinking last night as I watched Nick get another big hit for Atlanta...

If before the extension to JJ, we would have been given the choice of signing JJ for 3/38 or Nick for 4/48 which would you have rather had.

I have been vehemently against the JJ signing, as I felt it was too much money for a 33 yo SS who I predicted would be very lucky to play 120 games a year and is to me anyway in a pretty obvious decline already

I was also against signing Nick, and am glad that we didn't, but if I had the choice I would have signed Nick over JJ. Nick provided solid defense and the good OBP that we get from no one else in the lineup (especially with Cruz also gone).

Anyway if it was a choice between JJ and Nick who would you have kept?

[Crazysilver03]

JJ easily. Markakis was more easily replaceable.

[Frobby]

Hardy -- and Nick was my favorite player on the team. I'm glad he is healthy and playing decently for Atlanta so far (but, by the way, he has a .564 OPS to this point, not exactly what you'd want to see over 162 games).

By the way, Hardy is 32, not 33.

[PaulFolk]

Hardy. He plays the more valuable position and is a lot better at doing so. He's also a better hitter relative to his position than Markakis is to his.

[zxlkho]

We already have exactly 2 other Markakis clones with de Aza and Snider.

Markakis was not that good people. He was pretty much a league average corner OF.

[Reboulet'sStache]

If between the two, it's Hardy and it isn't even close.

[Redskins Rick]

I was thinking last night as I watched Nick get another big hit for Atlanta...

If before the extension to JJ, we would have been given the choice of signing JJ for 3/38 or Nick for 4/48 which would you have rather had.

I have been vehemently against the JJ signing, as I felt it was too much money for a 33 yo SS who I predicted would be very lucky to play 120 games a year and is to me anyway in a pretty obvious decline already

I was also against signing Nick, and am glad that we didn't, but if I had the choice I would have signed Nick over JJ. Nick provided solid defense and the good OBP that we get from no one else in the lineup (especially with Cruz also gone).

Anyway if it was a choice between JJ and Nick who would you have kept?

This is a no brainer.

JJ is a gold glove and above plus defender at SS, and probably one of the top 3 gloves in MLB currently at SS.

I love Nick, but he isn't one of top 3 gloves in the OF.

[Palmoripken]

Hardy. Nick's off to a nice start in Atlanta and Hardy hasn't played a game yet but all the same, it's a lot harder to replace a good hitting, good fielding SS than it is a right fielder and it's not like we have lacked hitting from Nick's replacements. De Aza/Snider have been fine.

[webbrick2010]

JJ easily. Markakis was more easily replaceable.

Well we shall see, not that hard to replace the production of a guy who isn't on the field.

and yeah he is 32, turns 33 on Aug 19th, which I know makes him officially 32 for this year but not by much. At the end of his 3 year contract he will be a 35 yo SS

I would have let them both go, and traded Norris, Weiters, and Davis. I was the only poster who predicted a below .500 season and I think the O's made a critical mistake in not re-tooling now when they could have gotten something. Weiters, Davis, and Norris will be worthless (in a trade) by the end of this year. It remains to be seen if they provide any value to the O's in 2015. I'm not expecting much.

[Redskins Rick]

Hardy. Nick's off to a nice start in Atlanta and Hardy hasn't played a game yet but all the same, it's a lot harder to replace a good hitting, good fielding SS than it is a right fielder and it's not like we have lacked hitting from Nick's replacements. De Aza/Snider have been fine.

Nick is batting .231 and not what I would call a nice start.

[Reboulet'sStache]

Well we shall see, not that hard to replace the production of a guy who isn't on the field.

and yeah he is 32, turns 33 on Aug 19th, which I know makes him officially 32 for this year but not by much. At the end of his 3 year contract he will be a 35 yo SS

I would have let them both go, and traded Norris, Weiters, and Davis. I was the only poster who predicted a below .500 season and I think the O's made a critical mistake in not re-tooling now when they could have gotten something. Weiters, Davis, and Norris will be worthless (in a trade) by the end of this year. It remains to be seen if they provide any value to the O's in 2015. I'm not expecting much.

Weiters and Davis would have been worthless in a trade at the end of last year too. Norris may have had value, but I'm not sure teams are going to give up much for one year of a fairly average pitcher. Our best bet was to keep all of them and hope they perform well enough to earn QOs at the end of the year.

[PaulFolk]

Well we shall see, not that hard to replace the production of a guy who isn't on the field.

I thought the question was, "Which one would you rather sign to a long-term extension?", not "Which one would you rather sign for the first week of 2015?"

[Crazysilver03]

Well we shall see, not that hard to replace the production of a guy who isn't on the field.

and yeah he is 32, turns 33 on Aug 19th, which I know makes him officially 32 for this year but not by much. At the end of his 3 year contract he will be a 35 yo SS

I would have let them both go, and traded Norris, Weiters, and Davis. I was the only poster who predicted a below .500 season and I think the O's made a critical mistake in not re-tooling now when they could have gotten something. Weiters, Davis, and Norris will be worthless (in a trade) by the end of this year. It remains to be seen if they provide any value to the O's in 2015. I'm not expecting much.

What kind of value would you get in trades for Davis and Wieters after last yesr? It isn't and wasn't logical.

[weams]

I was thinking last night as I watched Nick get another big hit for Atlanta...

If before the extension to JJ, we would have been given the choice of signing JJ for 3/38 or Nick for 4/48 which would you have rather had.

I have been vehemently against the JJ signing, as I felt it was too much money for a 33 yo SS who I predicted would be very lucky to play 120 games a year and is to me anyway in a pretty obvious decline already

I was also against signing Nick, and am glad that we didn't, but if I had the choice I would have signed Nick over JJ. Nick provided solid defense and the good OBP that we get from no one else in the lineup (especially with Cruz also gone).

Anyway if it was a choice between JJ and Nick who would you have kept?

At this point? Maybe neither. J.J. would have netted a pick. I hindsight I would have given Nick a Qualifying Offer.

[Crazysilver03]

I thought the question was, "Which one would you rather sign to a long-term extension?", not "Which one would you rather sign for the first week of 2015?"

I am slightly surprised someone hasn't mentioned that we signed Cabrera and he can handle SS. But you know, he wasn't a free agent until he was nontendered and still can't replace Hardy completely.