Should JJ Hardy get his starting job back once he's healthy?

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, backwardsk said:

Exactly, assuming Trumbo's back is not worse than first thought.

Hardy and Santander are expected back on the 18th.  Does Flaherty need to come back?  Can he be sent down?

As a five-year veteran, I do not believe Flaherty can be sent down without his consent.

[ORIOLE33]

9 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

I hope not... Beckham has proven he is not a ML starter. I have no idea why DD traded for him except he seems to be drawn to washed out former first round picks like a moth to a candle.

Please. He's hitting 260 with 12 HR's. You can do a whole lot worse.

I'd start the young guy. 

[backwardsk]

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

As a five-year veteran, I do not believe Flaherty can be sent down without his consent.

It's going to be difficult for those two weeks because that's 14 position players and six SPs.  Maybe they send Rickard down?

[AlbionHero]

15 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

I hope not... Beckham has proven he is not a ML starter. I have no idea why DD traded for him except he seems to be drawn to washed out former first round picks like a moth to a candle.

How has he proven he's not a ML starter? His first full year starting he was on pace for 2 WAR, the average for a ML starter. Not great, but not saying anything about his inability to be a starter either.

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

It's going to be difficult for those two weeks because that's 14 position players and six SPs.  Maybe they send Rickard down?

That's probably what I'd do.

[FlipTheBird]

35 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It depends how much better his glove is, and how much better Beckham's bat is.    It's not as simple as glove > bat just because they're shortstops.    

I'm sure Hardy will get his job back, and I hope he hits much better than .556 OPS when he returns.   His bat was showing minor signs of life (.838 OPS over 7 games) immediately before he got hurt.   For the record, if Hardy continues at a .556 pace, I do not think his glove justifies being played over Beckham.   

Agreed. I think Buck likes his guys too much not to give Hardy at least 50% of the starts upon his return... unless he comes back and is as bad or worse than he's been so far this year.

[webbrick2010]

14 minutes ago, ORIOLE33 said:

Please. He's hitting 260 with 12 HR's. You can do a whole lot worse.

I'd start the young guy. 

It's his defense and his low OBP that will keep him from being a ML starter. He just got dumped from a team in a pennant race, and now he is our SS of the future. PLEAAAAAASE

[AlbionHero]

9 minutes ago, FlipTheBird said:

Agreed. I think Buck likes his guys too much not to give Hardy at least 50% of the starts upon his return... unless he comes back and is as bad or worse than he's been so far this year.

The majority of teams in the league would have DFA'd a guy like Hardy in the final year of his contract playing like a struggling AAA player. Buck is a great manager but his one big fault is he is way too loyal to players. If veterans never have to worry about job security that makes them lax and at the same time it hurts the motivation of young players knowing that no matter how good they play, they won't start unless a guy gets injured or leaves.

A team should start the best 9 players, not the 9 players the manager has the best memories with.

 

11 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

It's his defense and his low OBP that will keep him from being a ML starter. He just got dumped from a team in a pennant race, and now he is our SS of the future. PLEAAAAAASE

Oh please, his OBP is higher then Hardys last few years and his defense rates as average at worst. He's an upgrade from Hardy and pretty much any other SS we could get without breaking the bank in free agency.

[webbrick2010]

1 minute ago, AlbionHero said:

The majority of teams in the league would have DFA'd a guy like Hardy in the final year of his contract playing like a struggling AAA player. Buck is a great manager but his one big fault is he is way too loyal to players. If veterans never have to worry about job security that makes them lax and at the same time it hurts the motivation of young players knowing that no matter how good they play, they won't start unless a guy gets injured or leaves.

A team should start the best 9 players, not the 9 players the manager has the best memories with.

 

Oh please, his OBP is higher then Hardys last few years and his defense rates as average at worst. He's an upgrade from Hardy and pretty much any other SS we could get without breaking the bank in free agency.

Fine we'll start Beckham at SS, Davis at 1B, Trumbo at DH, and bring in O'day to mop up

That's four guys on next years 25 man roster that aren't starters on a championship team, but I'm sorry the O's goal is second wild card or perhaps a non-losing season.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, webbrick2010 said:

It's his defense and his low OBP that will keep him from being a ML starter. He just got dumped from a team in a pennant race, and now he is our SS of the future. PLEAAAAAASE

The league OBP at SS is .315.   Beckham is at .316.    If he stays in that ballpark, he's fine so far as OBP is concerned.    He's improved a little each year so hopefully that trend continues.  

[interloper]

1 hour ago, webbrick2010 said:

It's his defense and his low OBP that will keep him from being a ML starter. He just got dumped from a team in a pennant race, and now he is our SS of the future. PLEAAAAAASE

You love to put words in people's mouths. I don't think anyone has said this guy is the SS of the future. I'm saying that he's a better SS than Hardy/Tejada/Flaherty/old guy FA next year is all. He's an option with a little upside. That's it, dude. Relax.

[TouchemAll]

Can't believe this thread still has legs anybody here who doesn't think Buck's not going to start Hardy when he comes off the DL is.... the only way he does not start is if he's not healthy.

[brianod]

This question just got more interesting with the addition of Beckham. Hardy looked washed up earlier. Was that because he was hurt?  I don't know.  Hardy won't be back next year unless he wants to hang on as a backup. So, I'm leaning towards Beckham. In 239 PA's, Hardy was hitting 211, 248, 308. That's below replacement level. Beckham is 262, 316, 411. That's an OPS 171 pts better.  Hard to bench him for Hardy.

[FlipTheBird]

23 minutes ago, interloper said:

You love to put words in people's mouths. I don't think anyone has said this guy is the SS of the future. I'm saying that he's a better SS than Hardy/Tejada/Flaherty/old guy FA next year is all. He's an option with a little upside. That's it, dude. Relax.

It's not worth engaging him.

[El Gordo]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

It depends how much better his glove is, and how much better Beckham's bat is.    It's not as simple as glove > bat just because they're shortstops.    

I'm sure Hardy will get his job back, and I hope he hits much better than .556 OPS when he returns.   His bat was showing minor signs of life (.838 OPS over 7 games) immediately before he got hurt.   For the record, if Hardy continues at a .556 pace, I do not think his glove justifies being played over Beckham.   

Keep in mind that TB has chosen to play a guy with .588 OPS and an  Rtot/yr of 1 over Beckham. That glove is not good and our IF is one of our strengths.