116 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

He played 129 games in 11 and 158 last year.

Not exactly Brian Roberts like.

And in 09 and 10, it was poor.

[Mackus]

Really driving that point home, huh SG?

[Kevin Ebert]

I do not agree with Lance on this one at all. I think Buck and DD are valuing Hardy appropriately. And it's some of the posters here that aren't valuing him correctly.

I don't trust gold gloves at all, but with Hardy - he's legitimately one of the 2 or 3 best defensive shortstops in the game. That has a ton of value and I wouldn't be surprised if he added more than 1 win on defense alone. Then you factor in that he's not a zero on offense. Yes, he had a low average and OBP last season but his BABIP was .253. It's very unlikely to be that low this season so you'll see his avg. and OPB come up. And he's hit over 20 home runs 4 times in his career now. He's one year removed from a 30 HR season. With the way that offense is depressed from the shortstop position around the league, his offense has a lot of value too.

I completely agree with Buck on this one, and I don't think it's just hyperbole. The Orioles should have to be blown away in order to trade Hardy.

[Mackus]

I do not agree with Lance on this one at all. I think Buck and DD are valuing Hardy appropriately. And it's some of the posters here that aren't valuing him correctly.

I don't trust gold gloves at all, but with Hardy - he's legitimately one of the 2 or 3 best defensive shortstops in the game. That has a ton of value and I wouldn't be surprised if he added more than 1 win on defense alone. Then you factor in that he's not a zero on offense. Yes, he had a low average and OBP last season but his BABIP was .253. It's very unlikely to be that low this season so you'll see his avg. and OPB come up. And he's hit over 20 home runs 4 times in his career now. He's one year removed from a 30 HR season. With the way that offense is depressed from the shortstop position around the league, his offense has a lot of value too.

I completely agree with Buck on this one, and I don't think it's just hyperbole. The Orioles should have to be blown away in order to trade Hardy.

From a performance standpoint, I generally agree. I don't see a ton of regression to the norm from his BABIP (career .275, so .253 isn't that far off from that), but other than that he's got a lot of power from a position that doesn't generally give you much. So that makes up a bit for his pathetic OBP, which hopefully can be back into the .300 range which would be very bad but acceptable for a high level defensive SS with power. A .282 OBP like last season is an embarrassment to the skill of hitting, but if he can improve upon that just a little to the range he's been the few years prior then it'll be ok.

I do think, that from a salary and need standpoint, that Hardy is tradeable. If Angelos is keeping the payroll down, which I believe he is, then you've got to at least consider moving your $7M-a-year SS when you've got a viable replacement in Machado who makes the league minimum. Not trade him no matter what, but consider what he could bring in return and make your decision based on that.

[Kevin Ebert]

From a performance standpoint, I generally agree. I don't see a ton of regression to the norm from his BABIP (career .275, so .253 isn't that far off from that), but other than that he's got a lot of power from a position that doesn't generally give you much. So that makes up a bit for his pathetic OBP, which hopefully can be back into the .300 range which would be very bad but acceptable for a high level defensive SS with power. A .282 OBP like last season is an embarrassment to the skill of hitting, but if he can improve upon that just a little to the range he's been the few years prior then it'll be ok.

I do think, that from a salary and need standpoint, that Hardy is tradeable. If Angelos is keeping the payroll down, which I believe he is, then you've got to at least consider moving your $7M-a-year SS when you've got a viable replacement in Machado who makes the league minimum. Not trade him no matter what, but consider what he could bring in return and make your decision based on that.

$7M a year for Hardy is insanely cheap. That values him at about 1.5 WAR. Even in a down year offensively last season, he was worth 3 wins and about $15M. If he has a better year on offense which could easily happen, he's a 4 win player at a cheap cost.

Yes, Angelos is holding the payroll down. But trading Hardy for Porcello and Peralta would raise payroll $3-4M not decrease it. It's not like they're pre-arb players who will make the MLB minimum this year. So trading Hardy doesn't free up any money to bring in anyone else. If it freed up money to say bring in a real 3B, then maybe it would make more sense.

[Tucker Blair]

I agree with you Kevin, on basically everything you said.

[Mackus]

$7M a year for Hardy is insanely cheap. That values him at about 1.5 WAR. Even in a down year offensively last season, he was worth 3 wins and about $15M. If he has a better year on offense which could easily happen, he's a 4 win player at a cheap cost.

Yes, Angelos is holding the payroll down. But trading Hardy for Porcello and Peralta would raise payroll $3-4M not decrease it. It's not like they're pre-arb players who will make the MLB minimum this year. So trading Hardy doesn't free up any money to bring in anyone else. If it freed up money to say bring in a real 3B, then maybe it would make more sense.

Hardy is certainly worth his salary, but I think there could be better uses for that $7M. I have zero interest in Peralta, but would be interested in Porcello. Not sure a straight up trade is the best we could do, nor do I think we can really move Hardy now that any solutions we could have had for 3B with Manny sliding to SS have probably signed elsewhere. Earlier in the offseason, it would have been a more feasible idea.

[Woody Ball]

It's really hard for me to argue with this roster composition with Hardy. We're looking at surplus value at 3B, SS, 1B, LF, CF, C, DH and several pitchers. In RF, we're probably paying about the right amount, assuming health. 2B is the only obvious exception.

Everyone's saying our luck will run out and we're going to regress to the mean, but I think that is an overly simplistic analysis of last year's team. They weren't at 0 or negative run differential over the last two months. To the contrary, our run differential changed dramatically. Many of the 1-run wins, which I agree cannot be sustained, occurred prior to August. In short, I think we're better than the lucky team that held on for the first few months of 2012.

Many teams can say what I'm about to say, but if things go right for the O's this year, this team could be really good as constructed today. Reimold is a huge if; a potential difference maker that we've all been hoping to trade for. The pitching, particularly the young starters, must sustain their success at least for long enough to allow the next 2-man cavalry to arrive. We could even be looking at our 2B of the future by August if this year pans out the right way.

So, yes, I agree with Buck. We'd have to be overwhelmed to to mix with the 2013 roster composition.

[Mackus]

It's really hard for me to argue with this roster composition with Hardy. We're looking at surplus value at 3B, SS, 1B, LF, CF, C, DH and several pitchers. In RF, we're probably paying about the right amount, assuming health. 2B is the only obvious exception.

Everyone's saying our luck will run out and we're going to regress to the mean, but I think that is an overly simplistic analysis of last year's team. They weren't at 0 or negative run differential over the last two months. To the contrary, our run differential changed dramatically. Many of the 1-run wins, which I agree cannot be sustained, occurred prior to August. In short, I think we're better than the lucky team that held on for the first few months of 2012.

Many teams can say what I'm about to say, but if things go right for the O's this year, this team could be really good as constructed today. Reimold is a huge if; a potential difference maker that we've all been hoping to trade for. The pitching, particularly the young starters, must sustain their success at least for long enough to allow the next 2-man cavalry to arrive. We could even be looking at our 2B of the future by August if this year pans out the right way.

So, yes, I agree with Buck. We'd have to be overwhelmed to to mix with the 2013 roster composition.

I think the offense will be improved from last season. I expect a small step back (~30 OPS points) from Jones and Davis, but we should get much better production overall from LF, 3B, and DH and could also see some improvement from 2B and SS.

The starting pitching is what I'm most worried about. I'll be shocked if we finish in the top half of the AL in either ERA or IP with the current guys we've got. I really think we need an addition. I don't see the out-of-nowhere guys like Tillman and Gonzalez matching what they did last year, nor do I think the under-productive young guys like Britton and Matusz will make major impacts. The bullpen will take a step back, too, but that will still be a strength of the team, just not likely the most impactful bullpen in the history of the sport, which we may have seen last year.

[SportsGuy]

Really driving that point home, huh SG?

LOL...Stupid slow go daddy board.

[Woody Ball]

I don't disagree, but the O's are certainly hoping the strides made last year are cemented this offseason. Besides, what the starting pitching lacks in pedigree it might just make up in depth.

Hammell, Chen, Tillman, Britton, Gonzalez, Arrieta, Hunter, Matusz, Johnson, Wada and maybe Saunders. Bundy and Gausman perhaps mid-late season.

None will be as good as Sabathia, but coupled with the bullpen this is a rotation that should keep us in a lot of games. I don't see a ton of 8-2 deficits after 4 innings from these guys.

I think spring training will tell DD and Buck what they need to know about this team. There's a high enough probability up and down the roster to allow them to be patient on any deal. I certainly wouldn't break this mix up for anything but a very strong upgrade in a trade.

[RichardZ]

I'm sure Buck values Hardy very much. However, this is just "own manager spin" about being above overwhelmed.

[SportsGuy]

$7M a year for Hardy is insanely cheap. That values him at about 1.5 WAR. Even in a down year offensively last season, he was worth 3 wins and about $15M. If he has a better year on offense which could easily happen, he's a 4 win player at a cheap cost.

Yes, Angelos is holding the payroll down. But trading Hardy for Porcello and Peralta would raise payroll $3-4M not decrease it. It's not like they're pre-arb players who will make the MLB minimum this year. So trading Hardy doesn't free up any money to bring in anyone else. If it freed up money to say bring in a real 3B, then maybe it would make more sense.

But you are adding 2 players, not just one...and you are upgrading the rotation for a lot less than say, Saunders will cost you.

The real key there is how good do you think Porcello is going to be. For me, I think he is going to be very good and would much rather have him than Hardy.

As for hardy value. I agree he is very valuable. I had this discussion with all Star earlier in the offseason and felt that he had a lot of value. BUT, to say you have to be OVERWHELMED? Unless your definition of overwhelmed is different than mine, that is placing way too much value on him.

[fan4life]

I'll side with professionals that have impressive resumes as to how to handle the roster management, and / or the Media.

Except... they shouldn't have let Reynolds walk... so maybe you'r right.

[SportsGuy]

I'll side with professionals that have impressive resumes as to how to handle the roster management, and / or the Media.

Except... they shouldn't have let Reynolds walk... so maybe you'r right.

Good to know you won't allow yourself to have an opinion of your own.

[fan4life]

Good to know you won't allow yourself to have an opinion of your own.

Well, actually its just that my opinion agrees with theirs.... if they were looking to move Hardy, I'd be adding his name to the end of every "shouldn't have let Reynolds walk comment". So to really answer your question, no I don't think they are over-valuing Hardy in light of letting Reynolds walk. Had they kept Mark, or actually replaced him with someone better, then perhaps I'd see it differently. I don't see Morse as being a big upgrade if he ends up being the guy.

[SportsGuy]

Well, actually its just that my opinion agrees with theirs.... if they were looking to move Hardy, I'd be adding his name to the end of every "shouldn't have let Reynolds walk comment". So to really answer your question, no I don't think they are over-valuing Hardy in light of letting Reynolds walk. Had they kept Mark, or actually replaced him with someone better, then perhaps I'd see it differently. I don't see Morse as being a big upgrade if he ends up being the guy.

Dont see what Reynolds has to do with Hardy.

[Woody Ball]

But you are adding 2 players, not just one...and you are upgrading the rotation for a lot less than say, Saunders will cost you.

If Porcello turns out to be a stud, you're right.

If he's another #3/4 starter type, you've just downgraded the left side of your infield for a small, if any, upgrade.

I'd like the idea more if the O's had a better answer at 3B than Peralta.

[SportsGuy]

If Porcello turns out to be a stud, you're right.

If he's another #3/4 starter type, you've just downgraded the left side of your infield for a small, if any, upgrade.

I'd like the idea more if the O's had a better answer at 3B than Peralta.

Well sure but Peralta will likely be a league average or better third baseman.

[JeremyStrain]

Well sure but Peralta will likely be a league average or better third baseman.

Still dont believe that