Is Hardy's FA delayed a year?

[Brawndo the Thirst Mutilat]

Ash is quoted "What you're describing is an unintended byproduct of this," Ash said. "The driving factor is performance."

Between Melvin playing dumb at the press conference and Ash saying this today, I think it's fairly clear that they are at least kicking around the idea of delaying Hardy's FA. They have a few weeks to decide. He could help them out by getting injured or by continuing to fail to hit worth a windy spit in AAA.

 

Also, Dave Cameron at fangraphs has a post about this situation. He basically calls shenanigans, and is not pleased.

[Diskono]

Were the Brewers sticking it to Ryan Braun by waiting a month or two before calling him up in his rookie season? Its really the same thing, just being done a bit later. If anything, Hardy gets the better end of the deal since he'll end up with another arbitration year instead of another league minimum year. This happens all the time, and every team does it.

[MJLiverock]

If the player's union complained about the Brewer's delaying Hardy's service time couldn't the Brewers counter that they are starting Escobar's early? And doesn't it really then just come back to the argument of performance? It wasn't like Hardy was going great and they sent him down despite his prowess at the plate and brought up some scrub at another position just to screw Hardy over. He wasn't playing well, his replacement was playing well. They very well may have lost a year of Escobar's time and gained a year of Hardy's time but that should be a wash to the union who should be looking out for all players, in this case one guy's payday may be delayed, another guy's accelerated. Hardy's going to Arby eligible so it isn't like he is going to get stuck with a $400,000 salary instead of multi millions.

[logan82]

The service time Escobar gets this year are not likely to matter much. He already had a month from last year.

[Invader3K]

Were the Brewers sticking it to Ryan Braun by waiting a month or two before calling him up in his rookie season? Its really the same thing, just being done a bit later. If anything, Hardy gets the better end of the deal since he'll end up with another arbitration year instead of another league minimum year. This happens all the time, and every team does it.

I agree. Every other team has pulled stuff like this before. It's not like we're the Pittsburgh Pirates anymore. If they can do something to benefit the team long term, it has to happen. I'll be very disappointed if they call Hardy back up early just as some meaningless empty gesture.

[Never Outhustled]

The Twins refused to call up Francisco Liriano last year to delay his free agency, and he was actually pitching well. Hardy has hit like crap. He needs 3 weeks in AAA. I hope he gets red hot down there, and I hope they keep him there until the AAA season is over. Then I hope he comes up and finishes red hot here.

[kramnoj]

Thanks for the link, Brawndo. I had considered the extra year of service time when I was driving and initially heard the news, but Cameron brings up something that I don't remember seeing here, that Hardy will be due less of a raise this offseason if he is a 4+ year player as opposed to a 5 year ST player. I don't know how much of an impact that actually will have but it's obviously something that Hardy and his agent will care about.

[Fatter than Joey]

That is just not very good business reasoning at all. He hasn't played well, and has basically had two good seasons out of five. It's not like he has a really strong track record that will have pundits screaming at the Brewers to bring him back early.

 

I really appreciate and understand your point Invader and you make it well, but in the spirit of debate.... I think this topic is intriguing

 

I don't know how on one hand you can point out JJ has had "only 2 good years out of 5", and then claim that there is going to be a ton of value in that extra year of team control. If this was Prince -- It would be easy to see that value. I know Prince signed an extension -- but Prince is building up for a serious long-term payday, unlike JJ who at this rate, is going to be quite affordable for just about any potential trade partner.

 

JJ is making $4.65 this year -- He will probably make close to that, if not a little more for 2010 -- say $5M -- the worst he can do is 80% of 2009. If he plays crappy(ish) in 2010 -- With an Arby year, he is going to get about $5M, in the FA market, probably less than that.

 

The bottom line, is that I don't think teams are going to view JJ as unaffordable in 2011 at this point. I don't see a good reason to upset the player's union for JJ.

[kramnoj]

I don't think an extra year of service is worth a ton more value, but 2 years of control is better than 1. If the Brewers can get an extra year of service while giving Escobar a 3 week audition, that sounds like a win-win to me. If Hardy was performing better, this wouldn't be an issue.

 

I don't see a good reason to upset the player's union for JJ.

 

I think this is overblown. Hardy has earned this demotion with his poor offense. If the players union files a grievance, what is the worst that can happen, Hardy gets those weeks awarded to him? Is there a precedent for that? The union isn't going to have FA boycott the Brewers, they want their players to get the best deal possible, and if the Brewers are offering the best deal, that's what they should take.

[Diskono]

Yeah. I don't understand why JJ Hardy is exempt from getting sent down due to poor performance, and why he should automatically be entitled to a roster spot no matter what. Every other baseball player needs to perform in order to stay in the majors, so why not Hardy? If other players get sent down to the minors for a significant period of time, they will have the same service time issues. The Brewers aren't picking on him or being unfair, that's just the way it works.

[Invader3K]

FtJ, you make a good point...but I just have to believe teams will be more interested if they know they will control him for two years instead of just one.

 

Let's just say, for example, the Baltimore Orioles want to trade for him. Don't you think they'd be willing to give up more to get him for two years, instead of only one...and knowing that after next season there's a chance a team like the Red Sox could swoop him and offer him a bigger deal than the Orioles will want to match?

[Fear The Chorizo]

and knowing that after next season there's a chance a team like the Red Sox could swoop him and offer him a bigger deal than the Orioles will want to match?

 

After the 2008 season that Hardy's had, I don't see a team like the Red Sox swooping in anytime soon to overpay for Hardy...I think that while Hardy had very good seasons in 2006 and 2007 for a shortstop, his lack of athleticism will force him off that position as he ages, and his inconsistent offense is really going to have an impact on how much he can expect to earn in free agency. I used to be a proponent of playing Hardy at 3rd once Escobar was up, but Hardy's offense isn't good enough to play there everyday.

 

Regardless of what the Brewers intent was to send him to the minors (and I think it was strictly performance-based, and to see if he can straighten himself out), it's never a positive to have a guy approaching his free agent year get demoted to the minors - I don't think an extra year of control will offset Hardy's lost value based on his 2008 performance.

[Fatter than Joey]

Yeah. I don't understand why JJ Hardy is exempt from getting sent down due to poor performance, and why he should automatically be entitled to a roster spot no matter what.

 

I agree with this 100%. If JJ is/was not in the top 25 Brewers -- send him down to AAA.

 

I just don't think sending him down for the sake of saving a year of control is a good idea.... If sending him down is primarily performance based, I am with you.

[Fatter than Joey]

Don't you think they'd be willing to give up more to get him for two years, instead of only one...

 

No. Nothing substantial at least.

[Never Outhustled]

The biggest flaw with the current setup of the Brewers is the complete lack of pitching prospects. If you are going to make a statement like this you need to put the blame squarely on Jack Z and not Melvin.

historically, the trade value of a player with 2 years of control is way more than players with just 1 year. Also, this puts the Brewers in a leverage situation where they don't have to trade him.

[Postseason2006]

The biggest problem I have with the whole fiasco was JJ still starting when Gamel was up. I can understand the logic of playing Counsell at the time, but move him to short.

 

Why have your top prospect riding the pine with JJ struggling to touch the ball swinging? I fault Ken for not playing him and Doug bringing him up not to play.