Anyone else concerned by this? (Hardy's future in Milwaukee)

[WisconsinSportsRule]

So, I think they should trade Escobar---possibly at the trading deadline for Roy Halladay...or after the season for something more long term...

So you would trade Escobar for a 32 year old pitcher who's pitched 1800+ innings in his career?

 

Halladay is a great pitcher, but how long does he have left at his age? If I'm trading Escobar, I want a young #2. Is that possible? I don't know...

[sbrylski]

"Of course, a little more risk in Escobar's bat than Hardy's. But given that Escobar derives so much of his value from his glove, and defense basically doesn't slump, the chances of him not being a good solution at a key position are slim. "

 

I see this mentioned all the time---Escobar might be better than JJ on defense (debatable) but that difference isn't going to cover 100 to 150 pts. of OPS...I know there's the idea that we are emotionally attached to JJ, but truthfully, I think JJ's going to be the better player for the next 5 years, and since we are clearly in the playoff window right now, that's how the brewers should approach it..

 

Note that I never said Escobar will be better than J.J., just that he should be a good solution.

 

Take the names and the history out of it. If you are offered the choice between a player with +15 run defense and a .710 OPS for $400k and 6 years of security or a player with +5 run defense and a .810 OPS for $15 million over 5 years, you should take the former every single time.

 

That extra $15 million can go towards adding another three win player, which is pretty significant. The only way you consider trading Escobar to lock in Hardy is if you believe Hardy is more than three wins better, and even then, Escobar still might be more attractive given that he would be under team control longer.

 

Illustration of a 3 win difference...

 

Taking my dirty estimates above, Hardy would be two wins better with the bat:

Hardy - .340 OBP * .470 SLG * 600 PA = 95 runs

Escobar - .330 OBP * .380 SLG * 600 PA = 75 runs

 

But Hardy gives one win back with the glove and only nets one win over Escobar. Just by swapping Hardy out for Escobar and using the money saved on a free agent or retaining a player we would otherwise lose, we pick up two wins. Add in the talent we get from a Hardy trade, another win or two. (Though you should be able to pick up that win or two regardless of which player you trade.) And we extend our security at SS back out to six years.

 

Even if you think a .710 and +15 run defense projection for Escobar is too optimistic, you would have to scale Escobar down to around a .660 OPS and defense equal to Hardy at around +5 runs before Hardy is three wins better.

 

Lastly, if you think its safer for the club to retain an already successful major leaguer in place of an unproven prospect, and that lower risk should be valued:

 

1) Like I said above, Escobar's defense provides much of his value, which greatly reduces his risk of being a complete failure.

 

2) If Escobar is a complete failure, we can at least discard him or shift him to a backup role and target a replacement. If we pay J.J. Hardy $15 million a year and he regresses, we are basically out of luck.

[Thurston Fluff]

Except that Hardy isn't under salary control by the Brewers beyond 2010, upon which time he can sign a huge contract at SS somewhere else & tell you to pound sand.

 

That is all the more reason to move him to third if a better defender is in house and ready for the majors. He's going ot tell us to pound the sand anyway. As soon as he sees the money he's gone.

He may not like being moved but if it helps the team and he won't be here anyway why not do what is best for the team and have his bat + Escobar's defense in the lineup? I don't really think Hardy is going to be a Brewer past 2010 anyway since he will command a bigger salary than the Brewers can realistically afford. Especially if they have a guy at his position ready and able to take over. We have to get used to a changing lineup as Brewer fans. The ones that will change the most ore the ones who have good players ready to take over. It makes no sense to me to have JJ here past 2010 when his replacement is ready to go at a fraction of the cost.

[TheCrew07]

An excellent summation of the situation by sbrylski06 as usual, just an excellent post. I don't think the chances of Hardy regressing are very high but if you can spin him for a top of the rotation talent and have Escobar the team is much better off in the long run. There's another prospect right behind Escobar in Brent Brewer that may factor into the situation before all is said and done as well. If JJ was going to be a centerpiece for Melvin to build around he would have been signed already ala Braun, it really is that simple. They tried to extend Hart and Fielder in addition to Braun, but never even discussed it with JJ... that to me has always been the most telling... JJ is replacable. It stinks for me personally, I always though of the 3 between Hardy, Fielder, and Weeks that Hardy would be the one to stick around. In the end maybe none of the 3 will have long careers as a Brewer... Fielder will be gone, Hardy will be gone, and Weeks hasn't lived up to the hype and is very replaceable.

[phxMILWfan]

I think JJ is a great player. He's fun to watch, seems likeable. That said sbrylski06 is dead on correct. It will be sad to see JJ go but that is what should happen and what will happen. The Brewers have to follow the model of the A's and Twins in order to have long term success. Those teams repeatedly turn their young talent into more yount talent. If our prospects were at other positions maybe you pay JJ. Fact of the matter is there are 2 SS behind him that will give us value. You don't get as much value by trading a defensive SS prospect as you do by trading JJ. JJ is a luxury to have on your team and that is why a team like the Yankees, Dodgers, Angels will end up with him. Because they can afford to pay for that luxury.

All of that said, I don't blame JJ one bit for his comments, there's nothing wrong with what he said.

[Tbadder]

The answer here is quite simple. The Brewers can't afford Hardy. If a team has a replacement player who is in the same stratosphere, they have the use the money to fill real holes (places where they don't have near replacement value).

[joepepsi]

Most playoff caliber teams tend to have pretty shortstops though.

 

But my wife would argue that Hardy would be prettier. Sorry, had to do it.

D'oh! You got me there.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/embarassed.gif

 

The Brewers have to follow the model of the A's and Twins in order to have long term success. Those teams repeatedly turn their young talent into more young talent.

And they are never quite good enough to make the World Series. The wisdom of trading Escobar for a Halladay-type was questioned earlier. I would do this trade precisely because it's the kind of the move the Twins or A's would fear. Even if in the long run it hurts the team, getting a Halladay or Peavy type for a stretch drive or even a full season gives the Brewers a much better chance at the World Series. When a team makes it to the World Series, their fans forgive whatever costs incurred getting them there.

 

If Escobar is a stellar major league defensive ss who provides .710 OPS as was projected above, well, what are they out really? Slick fielding .700-ish ss are not that hard to find, nor are the terribly expensive. Renteria has a career OPS of .750; Orlando Cabrera, .720. Those guys are available every year.

[Invader3K]

Right. If it comes down to spending that money on Hardy, or possibly a starting pitcher in the future, a team like the Brewers will want that money for pitching. They seem to be pretty prospect rich, as far as position players. Not so much with their pitching.

[Thurston Fluff]

And they are never quite good enough to make the World Series.

 

I think any team that can make the playoffs is good enough to win it. The worst Cardinals team to make the playoffs was the only one to win the World Series. Does that mean it was the only one that was good enough to win it? Wouldn't you agree several of the Oakland and Minnesota teams were better than that particular St Louis team? I never bought into the they never won it all so their approach must be wrong argument.

 

If Escobar is a stellar major league defensive ss who provides .710 OPS as was projected above, well, what are they out really? Slick fielding .700-ish ss are not that hard to find, nor are the terribly expensive. Renteria has a career OPS of .750; Orlando Cabrera, .720. Those guys are available every year.

 

There is slick fielding and then there is extraordinary fielding. Ozzie Smith was extraordinary. Orlando Cabrera is not. I think most of the people who rave about Escobar think he has a chance to be in the extraordinary class. Many raved about Hardy's defensive ability, and rightfully so, but everyone seems to agree Escobar is more than marginally better.

[TheCrew07]

And they are never quite good enough to make the World Series. The wisdom of trading Escobar for a Halladay-type was questioned earlier. I would do this trade precisely because it's the kind of the move the Twins or A's would fear. Even if in the long run it hurts the team, getting a Halladay or Peavy type for a stretch drive or even a full season gives the Brewers a much better chance at the World Series. A when a team makes it to the World Series, there fans forgive whatever costs incurred getting them there.

 

If Escobar is a stellar major league defensive ss who provides .710 OPS as was projected above, well, what are they out really? Slick fielding .700-ish ss are not that hard to find, nor are the terribly expensive. Renteria has a career OPS of .750; Orlando Cabrera, .720. Those guys are available every year.

 

I'm not picking on you, but you continually ignore the financial ramifications of signing Hardy or any other FA for that matter. Halladay was mentioned, his contract is about what Hardy would make on the FA market, how could the team afford both even for only a year? Peavy is often talked about around here as well, but his contract starts escalating in hurry, all the way up over 20+ per in his last season. It was great to get Sabathia, but that shouldn't be the expectation or the goal going forward... just look how much acquiring Sabathia cost, only to get bounced in the first round. In fact, had the Mets not collapsed yet again the Brewers would have been on the outside looking in even after CC's excellent work. The idea here should be to keep a revolving door of high quality talent around some key pieces, there can only be so many high paid players with a 90 million payroll.

 

 

I can accept the fact that many Brewer fans just wanted to get into the post season again no matter what the cost, but there is simply no way the team can trade away prospects for rentals every year and remain competitive. Acquiring Sabathia meant that the team didn't have the ammunition left to acquire a more permanent solution to the rotation without giving up Hardy/Fielder (which many here are unwilling to do) or dumping 2-3 of our remaining prospects. The problem with dumping the prospects is that they will fill the remaining holes on the MLB roster almost perfectly at a very affordable salary. The Brewers are not and will not be players in the FA market… they can afford to sign average players, but the value per win just isn't there, the elite players will always price themselves out of what Milwaukee can afford. Mark A's net work isn't relative to this discussion, he does not and will not pay players out of his own pocket, the business pays all salaries, and like all businesses the Brewers have a budget they must work around.

 

 

I've yet to see anyone anywhere lay out a salary structure where the team can lockup Hardy, Fielder, and Hart to market contracts in addition to Braun's deal, plus lockup Yo and Parra, stay under 90 million per season, and remain competitive. Even if someone can find a way to make that work there's no high priced closer that people seem to want every year, no Halladay or Peavy type, everyone else has to bare bones MLB minimum cheap every season, especially as the escalators on the contracts kick in. Maybe in the future they'll get the players staggered somewhat so that they all won't be at their most expensive at the same time, but when players come up in groups together, their salaries will escalate together if they perform

 

edit. sorry for all the edits, took me a while to figure how to fix the weird font size issue that popped up at the end of the post.

[Invader3K]

Man, the more I read this thread, the more depressed I get. It seems like we're going to be doomed to having five year windows where we realistically contend for one or two seasons, and then the other three or four years are letting the youngsters mature before they inevitably leave.

[Thurston Fluff]

Man, the more I read this thread, the more depressed I get. It seems like we're going to be doomed to having five year windows where we realistically contend for one or two seasons, and then the other three or four years are letting the youngsters mature before they inevitably leave.

 

Guys like Escobar is exactly why Hardy leaving isn't the end of the world. By the time Hardy is in his 5th year Escobar may very well be banging the door down not just capable of learning on the job. By the time Hart is gone we might all be raving about Cain like we were Hart a few years ago. With a well run organization with good scouting and quality coaching in the minors there is no reason the next JJ Hardy and Prince Fielder can't be ready to step in without missing a beat. If they are sprinkled in. To me the Hardy debate is less about keeping the player we have but about keeping enough of the last core around to prevent wholesale changes every 5 or 6 years. Keep those who we can't replace and replace those whose production can be replaced in a more cost effective manner.

[mletto157]

1.) It's no longer 1985

2.) Yount couldn't make the throw from SS any longer.

 

I believe he was talking about Bill Hall.

 

His range doesn't really pass the eye-test though. I'm skeptical of any stat that says he has exceptional range.

 

This is exactly why they have stats & metrics. The "eye test" doesn't really tell people all that much. JJ Hardy DOES have exceptional range; and the reason you can't see it with the "eye test" is because that range doesn't come from flash or speed. JJ's range comes from his ridiculous reaction time. The ball is hit and JJ is moving well before anyone else on the team. JJ doesn't need to posess the speed or flash of some other SS's and still can the same or better range than most of them. Where some SS's make highlight reel plays that you see on SportsCenter, and think wow, that is great range - JJ would have made that same play, but it wouldn't be highlight reel because his reaction was so much faster that he got to the ball and made the play look easy.

[Thurston Fluff]

JJ would have made that same play, but it wouldn't be highlight reel because his reaction was so much faster that he got to the ball and made the play look easy.

 

If this was true he would be making as many highlight plays as any other but they would be even deeper in the hole and would only be more of a highlight simply because he got to one that others simply couldn't make. He may get to some balls quicker than others but he would still make as many plays that looked cool. They'd just be cooler because he went further.

[TheCrew07]

How does changing out talent limit the team's playoff aspirations? Adding a couple of kids per year, even if they struggle a little bit would they hit worse than Kendall or pitch worse than Suppan last year? A yearly influx of youthful talent is a good thing, not a negative, and doesn't mean the team is perpetually building towards a 2 year window to be competitive. Some prospects will hit the ground running, some will struggle... last year's roster was hardly perfect, this year's is less perfect... even if a prospect will struggle you can have holes in your lineup and still be a playoff team.

 

Is swapping Cameron for Cain that big of a deal? Gamel for 3B platoon? Salome/Lucroy for Kendall? Maybe Green for 3B and Gamel to 1B? Green over Weeks? Lawrie over Weeks? Escobar for Hardy? I guess I just don't see how the world ends by moving Hardy or Fielder for pieces needed elsewhere like the starting rotation. Many of those moves hold the status quo with good or better defense and upgrade the offense with much more productive players. The only downgrades offensively would be at 1B (inevitable) and SS (maybe temporary), with upgrades at the other positions. Defensively Gamel and Salome I'm not so sure on today, but they have time to get it straightened out. Lucroy is the full package and only a level behind Salome, either player is a huge upgrade over Kendall offensively and Lucroy is as good defensively. Cain is an excellent defender, Gamel or anyone really would be an upgrade defensively at 1B, Green would be a solid 3B/2B, Escobar is the real deal at SS, it remains to be seen how well Lawrie will play defense but he's such a good athlete I have confidence in him as well.

 

The way I see it this is only a big deal because we grow attached to the players we have and many people around here don't care to follow the minors or prospects. We've grown especially attached to the initial group of players because they delivered and got us to the promised land for the first time since '82. This was always inevitable, it's the way baseball works for small markets. Our competitive advantage lies in the draft and selling our players to the larger markets for more prospects. The large markets competitive advantage lies in the FA market, where they can afford to pay the Arods, Fielders, Teixeiras, Sabathias, and so on. They don't rely on development, they sign the cream of crop as their skills are beginning to decline, but they know exactly what they are getting. Even with the Yankees advantage while they've been competitive, they've sure had some collasal flops on the FA market.

 

I think being a fan of small market teams means that you sort of have to be a fan of prospects and be willing to jump into the unknown as they are our lifeblood. Established marquee type MLB players aren't really our concern, our concern is maximizing value on the dollar and making all our pieces fit. To say the Brewers will fail because the Twins never got over the hump doesn't really hold up, they done well developing sound players, but only a few players good enough to be stars, and not all together. They've have good pitching and a decent offense, this year they may have great pitching and really surprise people like the Rays last year. The Twins haven't failed, they just haven't put enough talent together at one time to make it work, we've already done that, and the team can be better than last year's team going forward.

[Invader3K]

Guys like Escobar is exactly why Hardy leaving isn't the end of the world. By the time Hardy is in his 5th year Escobar may very well be banging the door down not just capable of learning on the job. By the time Hart is gone we might all be raving about Cain like we were Hart a few years ago. With a well run organization with good scouting and quality coaching in the minors there is no reason the next JJ Hardy and Prince Fielder can't be ready to step in without missing a beat. If they are sprinkled in. To me the Hardy debate is less about keeping the player we have but about keeping enough of the last core around to prevent wholesale changes every 5 or 6 years. Keep those who we can't replace and replace those whose production can be replaced in a more cost effective manner.

Backupcatchers, hopefully you are right. It's just a big risk to always assume the young guys are going to step in and immediately perform like that. I think the Brewers have been very fortunate to see so many successful young guys come up. Maybe that points to better scouting, or maybe it's lucky, or probably some of both. Other than Rickie Weeks (who is arguable), the Brewers haven't really had any "bust" prospects come up in the last few years.

[Thurston Fluff]

Other than Rickie Weeks (who is arguable), the Brewers haven't really had any "bust" prospects come up in the last few years.

 

There is a whole line of prep pitchers who have not panned out. Brad Nelson is 26 and fighting for a reserve job. I agree we did get a lot of good ones in a relatively short period of time. I'd argue that high a success rate is not as necessary now than when the current crop of players got drafted. The farm was so completely devastated, or more accurately Bandoed, that a total overhaul was needed. Now we just have to find guys to fill in the holes as they appear. A job made easier by having good players who will return either high draft picks or prospects in the future. Then again I am such a hopeless optimist that I may be viewing things with too brewered of glasses.

[mletto157]

If this was true he would be making as many highlight plays as any other but they would be even deeper in the hole and would only be more of a highlight simply because he got to one that others simply couldn't make. He may get to some balls quicker than others but he would still make as many plays that looked cool. They'd just be cooler because he went further.

 

Well, as others and I have said; JJ doesn't have that speed and flash. The plays he doesn't get to, he just plain doesn't get to. He doesn't have the speed to go along with his reaction time that others have had. He doesn't have the flash to make highlight reel plays that he shouldn't have gotten to. He has exceptional reaction time which enables him to have great range, as most metrics would prove.

 

Escobar has the flash, and the speed that JJ doesn't have and he may even have the reaction time. This is why he is a ONCE in a generation type defensive player.

[Baldkin]

There's a long list of prospects who went bust, mostly on the pitching side... up until last year, Parra would've been included amongst them, as he just couldn't stay healthy.

What the Brewers need to do is maximize their win values per dollar spent, unlike other higher payroll teams, who are simply maximizing their win values by spending more.

 

If JJ is worth 4 wins, and makes 15 million a year in free agency, we can pay Escobar 400k a year and get 3 wins out of him... well, the choice for the Brewers has to be Escobar. The extra 14 million can be better spent improving the club eslewhere.

 

And, really, why isn't JJ taking more heat for refusing to even entertain the idea of switching positions? Imagine if Hall would've said that after his monster 2006 year. I can't even begin to fathom how much this board would've blown up.

[saxyman1004]

I'd rather not talk about this. I don't want to imagine a life without seeing JJ's dreamy eyes, eyes that see into my very soul, everyday. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/frown.gif

 

I know it's coming one day, but....just let me live in blissful delusion until then.

[joepepsi]

And they are never quite good enough to make the World Series. The wisdom of trading Escobar for a Halladay-type was questioned earlier. I would do this trade precisely because it's the kind of the move the Twins or A's would fear. Even if in the long run it hurts the team, getting a Halladay or Peavy type for a stretch drive or even a full season gives the Brewers a much better chance at the World Series. A when a team makes it to the World Series, there fans forgive whatever costs incurred getting them there......

I'm not picking on you, but you continually ignore the financial ramifications of signing Hardy or any other FA for that matter. Halladay was mentioned, his contract is about what Hardy would make on the FA market, how could the team afford both even for only a year? ....I can accept the fact that many Brewer fans just wanted to get into the post season again no matter what the cost, but there is simply no way the team can trade away prospects for rentals every year and remain competitive. … they can afford to sign average players, but the value per win just isn't there, the elite players will always price themselves out of what Milwaukee can afford. ...

 

I don't think you're picking on me. This is an fun discussion; it's been a long time since Brewer fans could debate over how to deal with depth at an important position.

 

If Escobar is ready after a full season in AAA this year, I have faith Doug will make the best decision for the future of the team. If that means trading JJ and giving the job to Escobar, so be it. I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate for a couple reasons: 1) there's a culture Brewer fans have learned in the last 15 years that says everytime a player gets good they must be traded. I'm trying to help break that thinking. 2) It's dangerous to assume a prospect is a guarantee to adequately replace a star. Billy Beane let Tejada walk, because he had a wonderful prospect, Bobby Crosby, ready in the minors. Well that didn't work out so well, though Beane did save money ditching Tejada.

 

I've yet to see anyone anywhere lay out a salary structure where the team can lockup Hardy, Fielder, and Hart to market contracts in addition to Braun's deal, plus lockup Yo and Parra, stay under 90 million per season, and remain competitive. Even if someone can find a way to make that work there's no high priced closer that people seem to want every year, no Halladay or Peavy type, everyone else has to bare bones MLB minimum cheap every season, especially as the escalators on the contracts kick in. Maybe in the future they'll get the players staggered somewhat so that they all won't be at their most expensive at the same time, but when players come up in groups together, their salaries will escalate together if they perform

You're right. The Brewers can't keep everyone. That's why I suggested Hart and Fielder would be gone in a couple years. Maybe it makes most sense to let Hardy go too, especially if Escobar truly is the Real Deal. Personally, I think Hardy may be the best player on the team. If I had to build a team around one Brewer player, it'd be him. From today's perspective the best way the Brewers compete for the playoffs over the next 5 years is to build the team around Braun, Hardy, Gallardo, and Parra.

 

Backupcatchers wrote:

I think any team that can make the playoffs is good enough to win it. The worst Cardinals team to make the playoffs was the only one to win the World Series. Does that mean it was the only one that was good enough to win it? Wouldn't you agree several of the Oakland and Minnesota teams were better than that particular St Louis team? I never bought into the they never won it all so their approach must be wrong argument.

I agree. There's a lot of luck involved in the playoffs. I thought that 2006 Twins team was the best in the league. But, Shannon Stewart aside, the Twins are notorious for standing pat. The team they field on Opening Day is pretty much the team on the last day of the season. Maybe if they had addressed the holes in the offense at the deadline, or tried harder to replace Liriano after he was shut down, they would have fared better than a first round elimination.

 

It's great to have your team win around 85-90 games a year, but it's better to have them go for it with a vengeance once in a while, the future be damned. If the Brewers had to use Escobar to get a pitcher like Halladay, and if that brought them a World Series, I'm OK with that. Even if it means two years from now the team has no Halladay and nobody to play ss. To me that beats a 3 year scenario of 85 wins where one by one the current core players are dumped, prospects take their place, and we cheer learn to accept a constant rebuilding phase.

[pogokat]

an addendum:

 

1. The brewers will likely sign one more of their players long term...I just don't see a scenario where the team trades all of their mid 20 something players sans braun

 

2. I seriously doubt escobar's defense will be a full win better than hardy's

 

3. Hardy has not necessarily peaked

 

4. in this economy, hardy's not getting 15 million a year on the free agent market

 

5. there are many, many questions about escobar's offensive potential

 

Alcides has a high ceiling, but his actual value will likely never reach hardy...in fact, i think it's much more likely that the brwers can cheaply replace fieldr and hart in house...with closer to their producion numbers...therefore, i think hardy is the one who should be signed long term..

 

of course, i am assuming the brewers intend to sign another of their young guys long term...if they are gonna trade everyone but Braun, then this conversation is moot.

[strawbossisevil]

Who exactly replaces Fielder?

 

Gamel profiles as a guy who might hit 20-25 HRs (something that profiles much better at 3B or RF rather than at 1B). He is not a good option at 1B IMO.

 

After that who is there to replace him in house?

 

Chris Errecart?

[fondybrewfan]

Who exactly replaces Fielder?

 

Gamel profiles as a guy who might hit 20-25 HRs (something that profiles much better at 3B or RF rather than at 1B). He is not a good option at 1B IMO.

 

After that who is there to replace him in house?

 

Chris Errecart?

Brad Nelson?

[brewizard]

And, really, why isn't JJ taking more heat for refusing to even entertain the idea of switching positions? Imagine if Hall would've said that after his monster 2006 year. I can't even begin to fathom how much this board would've blown up.

 

JJ has put up several solid seasons now - something Billy Hall has never seemed to do.

 

JJ plays the most solid defense on the team.

 

JJ was the only everyday player not to offensively slump in crunch time last season.

 

JJ has never been overpaid.

 

JJ doesn't employ Scott Boras.

 

JJ always leaves his game on the field. He has never once embarrassed the organization or created any off-field controversy -- which means:

 

JJ is a fan favorite. He brings people to the ballpark.

 

JJ has established himself as one of the top shortstops in the game and

 

JJ hasn't even peaked yet.

 

 

Hmm... I guess we have no reason to blow up at JJ Hardy. I think he's earned the right to say he wants to keep the SS job. If our fans and front office don't agree, I hope he gets traded to somebody who will appreciate him.