Shortstops available

[nate82]

Yankees often add pieces they don't really need. It would not be far fetched to see them trade for Hardy to spell Jeter a few times per week and I could even see them toying with having Hardy spell A-Rod at 3rd every now and then.

 

The Yankees have done some stupid things but this will not be one of them as their offense is perfectly fine and I don't see them adding or changing anything to their offense. Pitching is their biggest concern right now.

Seattle would be a prime landing spot for Hardy - especially given the Jack Z connection, don't know why you'd discount them so easily since they are also in need of offense and their current SS is Brendan Ryan. Rays are also in desperate need for help at SS.

Why would Seattle trade for Hardy and give up guys when they could just sign him in the off season and not give up any player in their current season? The Rays do not really need a SS as the two players they have right now are fine. The Rays will probably look at adding a piece to their bullpen rather than a SS. Oakland is not going to be in contention to be able to do a trade as they are going to be sellers rather than buyers. Teams normally do not work out a trade and then get an extension at the trade deadline maybe in a video game but not in reality. The Pirates are also not going to trade for Hardy as they are not really contenders.

There are ZERO obstacles for the Brewers to trade for Hardy other than the Orioles demands for prospects.

[The Truth]

All Hardy is doing is hitting .299 with an .886 OPS right now (wow hindsight is 20/20 but Gomez for Hardy = to quote Ken Harrelson "you gotta be bleeping me")... the Orioles would ask for one helluva lot to get him, I would think, especially if there is any chance of them extending him

[nate82]

All Hardy is doing is hitting .299 with an .886 OPS right now (wow hindsight is 20/20 but Gomez for Hardy = to quote Ken Harrelson "you gotta be bleeping me")... the Orioles would ask for one helluva lot to get him, I would think, especially if there is any chance of them extending him

There is zero chance that the Orioles get to extend Hardy. I don't see those negotiations going anywhere. I also don't see the Orioles getting a lot in return for Hardy as he is injury prone he will probably hit the DL one more time this year and go on a month long slump.

[ninja33]

why wouldn't they get to extend hardy? why wouldn't they get plenty in return for a good defensive SS that can also hit?

[nate82]

why wouldn't they get to extend hardy? why wouldn't they get plenty in return for a good defensive SS that can also hit?

Because it is only for half a season and Hardy isn't Reyes or a big name player who is going to get a huge return in a trade. The Orioles will probably get one or two B type prospects for Hardy but nothing more than that. Hardy if he is smart will test free agency as that is where he will get more value in return than resigning with the Orioles.

[ninja33]

The Orioles have money to spend, so even if Hardy tests the market there's no reason to think they can't make a very competitive offer and resign him. Also there are needs for a SS throughout the league amongst contending teams (brewers, reds, cardinals, giants all come to mind pretty quickly), so I think it will take more than 2 B type prospects. On top of that there's a pretty decent chance Hardy will be a type A free agent. So if the Orioles did try and fail to resign him they'll probably end up with a better haul than two middling prospects.

 

I'm not saying someone is going to have to sell the farm for Hardy, or that he's in the same stratosphere as what it would take to get Reyes.....but the Orioles aren't going to just give him up for some middling low upside prospects. He's going to be tough to acquire.

Also, as you mentioned Hardy's injury prone. If the Orioles made him a solid offer midseason, wouldn't it be a tough for a guy with an injury history to pass that up?

[kramnoj]

With the way Escobar hit in AAA there was really not much reason to expect him to outperform Hardy over the last two months of the season.

 

But Escobar did outhit Hardy, and was judged by scouts to be as good as, if not better defensively.

 

It was a clear manipulation of the arbitration clock, all so the club could net Carlos Gomez in the off-season.

 

It's hard to deny that service time was a motivation, but as Xellence notes, the move should have been made sooner. The Brewers had lost 8.5 games from their peak on June 30th until Aug 12, when Hardy was sent down. They were still only 6.5 back and had hopes of regaining the ground they had lost.

[Funketown]

kramnoj wrote:

 

But Escobar did outhit Hardy, and was judged by scouts to be as good as, if not better defensively.

 

It's hard to deny that service time was a motivation, but as Xellence notes, the move should have been made sooner. The Brewers had lost 8.5 games from their peak on June 30th until Aug 12, when Hardy was sent down. They were still only 6.5 back and had hopes of regaining the ground they had lost.

Escobar only "outhit" Hardy because of his .346 BABIP, which was completely unsustainable for someone like Escobar (in his ML career his BABIP is .283).

 

Despite his struggles, Hardy still provided as much if not more value on the field than Escobar. I would be surprised if there is more than a couple cases where a player who fits all the following: (1) 3+ years as a starter, (2) 4+ WAR seasons in the previous two seasons, (3) still providing value to the ML team at the time of demotion.

 

If they had just sent him down for 15 days or so to get his swing back or whatever, I wouldn't say he got shafted. They deliberately kept a player who could still help the ML team in the minors for the minimum number of days to extend his arbitration clock one season. If you don't think that's clear manipulation of the arbitration clock then I'm not sure what to say.

[logan82]

If they had just sent him down for 15 days or so to get his swing back or whatever, I wouldn't say he got shafted. They deliberately kept a player who could still help the ML team in the minors for the minimum number of days to extend his arbitration clock one season. If you don't think that's clear manipulation of the arbitration clock then I'm not sure what to say.

Right and there was no reason to bring Hardy back up either. He hit poorly while he was down in AAA. He didn't play his way back.

[Invader3K]

I had no problem with Melvin manipulating Hardy's service time at that point. Sometimes you have to take every advantage you can get. It's not like MLB is working as a whole to do the Brewers any favors.

[Funketown]

logan3825]Right and there was no reason to bring Hardy back up either. He hit poorly while he was down in AAA. He didn't play his way back.

So because JJ Hardy, a 4+WAR shortstop for the previous two seasons, was unable to hit well in AAA over a span of 2 weeks, he didn't earn his way back? This is an organization that is still starting Yuniesky Betancourt, playing Mark Kotsay, and up until last week starting Casey McGehee.

[kramnoj]

If you don't think that's clear manipulation of the arbitration clock then I'm not sure what to say.

 

I'm curious if you actually took the time to read what I wrote. Because I wrote "It's hard to deny that service time was a motivation".

 

Now maybe that's not enough for you. Maybe you think I should be outraged that Hardy lost service time. I think Escobar deserved a shot, because of the reasons that I have provided.

Escobar only "outhit" Hardy because of his .346 BABIP, which was completely unsustainable for someone like Escobar (in his ML career his BABIP is .283).

 

Why did you put outhit in scare quotes? The point of taking a risk is that sometimes it pays off.

[logan82]

Right and there was no reason to bring Hardy back up either. He hit poorly while he was down in AAA. He didn't play his way back.

So because JJ Hardy, a 4+WAR shortstop for the previous two seasons, was unable to hit well in AAA over a span of 2 weeks, he didn't earn his way back? This is an organization that is still starting Yuniesky Betancourt, playing Mark Kotsay, and up until last week starting Casey McGehee.

He either should not have been sent down in the first place or should have been left down till he got things worked out. They did neither.

[Funketown]

If you don't think that's clear manipulation of the arbitration clock then I'm not sure what to say.

 

I'm curious if you actually took the time to read what I wrote. Because I wrote "It's hard to deny that service time was a motivation".

I read what you said. I'm arguing that if it weren't for service time, there is no way Hardy would have spent 21 days in the minors. I don't believe it was "a motivation", I believe it was essentially the sole motivation.

[RockCoCougars]

I can't believe people are still defending how the Brewers handled Hardy. First, no way Hardy would have even went to the minors had his service time not been on the fringe. It was a bush league move, that I can't imagine helped the Brewers rep in the eyes of the player's union- not to mention how word spreads amongst other players and agents. This also demonstrates why you don't put all your eggs in one basket with a prospect. Bando did the same thing by dumping Vina for nothing to clear a space for Ronnie Belliard. Escobar was pretty much steaming garbage here, and he's not looking any better this season. I will give Melvin credit for moving him before his value bottomed out. Wouldn't it be nice to have Hardy right now? He probably could have been extended last season for a decent rate.

[kramnoj]

It was a bush league move, that I can't imagine helped the Brewers rep in the eyes of the player's union- not to mention how word spreads amongst other players and agents.

 

That was a point that at least one poster here tried to make. Can you provide one example of how this has hurt the Brewers?

[Menace II Sobriety]

Sure this year Hardy would look great in a Brewers uni, however saying he would have been offered a contract extension after last year if the Brewers didn't manipulate his service time is far from a guarantee. He played in 115 and 101 games respectively the prior two seasons posting .229 .302 .357 .659 and .268 .320 .394 .714 ops . Also he gave credit for his bounce back season to his new hitting coach.

 

Also I understand that people dislike the way his service clock was manipulated but the guy has only played over 120 games twice in seven seasons he was hurt an awful lot over that time. It's a tough business and if you can manipulate a super two it might be worth your while to play with service time for a player that won't be back next year. It might not be right but it didn't hurt the team in the long wrong compared to the good will they have brought on over the last few years.

[RockCoCougars]

It was a bush league move, that I can't imagine helped the Brewers rep in the eyes of the player's union- not to mention how word spreads amongst other players and agents.

 

That was a point that at least one poster here tried to make. Can you provide one example of how this has hurt the Brewers?

It would be tough for me to be privy to specific info on that, but I know that a lot of guys have reportedly vetoed trades to Milwaukee in the past few years.

 

As for demoting Hardy, I think that another problem was that it forced Melvin's hand. Instead of letting him play out the string, and possibly go on a hitting tear, by demoting him, Melvin made it 100% clear that he would have to move Hardy in a trade. I actually think that despite the 'extra year' angle, this hurt Hardy's trade value.

[Menace II Sobriety]

It would be tough for me to be privy to specific info on that, but I

know that a lot of guys have reportedly vetoed trades to Milwaukee in

the past few years.

________

I will give you a handful but not a

lot, players like Halladay don't grow on trees and won't waive their no

trade unless they go to a top situation. Also that was a few years ago

and I think the culture has improved over the last few years to where

this is a destination to be now more than ever.

 

____________

As for demoting Hardy, I think that another problem was that it

forced Melvin's hand. Instead of letting him play out the string, and

possibly go on a hitting tear, by demoting him, Melvin made it 100%

clear that he would have to move Hardy in a trade. I actually think

that despite the 'extra year' angle, this hurt Hardy's trade value.

 

_____________

One of the two was getting traded, the payroll was tight and Escobar was a top 20 prospect it wasn't shocking news that Hardy was on the block. A lot of people are bringing up Hardy's 4 WAR value so it could be said that Melvin didn't make the right move to acquire Gomez. But to say that they should let a guy in a funk play out a bad string in a dead season instead of calling up the top prospect who was a given to take over the next season is a tough call to make.

[kramnoj]

It would be tough for me to be privy to specific info on that, but I know that a lot of guys have reportedly vetoed trades to Milwaukee in the past few years.

 

Why would that be private? If a player wanted to make a point about the Brewers handling of Hardy, they should actively say it. There is nothing preventing a player from stating a reason that he doesn't want to play somewhere, and doing so privately doesn't advance the union cause.

 

As for players vetoing trades, there is no reason to assume it's tied to Hardy. Some may prefer spring training in Florida. Some may have wanted to play with a team that had better playoff hopes. Some may just not want to live in Milwaukee.

 

Counter to this ephemeral conviction that the Brewers would be hurt by the handling of Hardy, three Brewers, who know exactly how the Brewers operate, have chose to extend their stay here.

 

 

I actually think that despite the 'extra year' angle, this hurt Hardy's trade value.

 

I would guess that the biggest thing that hurt is value is he was a bad hitter that year, and teams saw no reason to give up something good for a player coming off such a bad season.

[TheCrew07]

This also demonstrates why you don't put all your eggs in one basket with a prospect. Bando did the same thing by dumping Vina for nothing to clear a space for Ronnie Belliard. Escobar was pretty much steaming garbage here, and he's not looking any better this season. I will give Melvin credit for moving him before his value bottomed out. Wouldn't it be nice to have Hardy right now? He probably could have been extended last season for a decent rate.

You still haven't supported this opinion at all and I'm losing count how many times you posted it.

 

Obvious issues with your post....

 

1) Escobar outperformed Hardy in 2009, there should be no debate over this.

 

2) Escobar already has a WAR over 1 by every measure, baseball-ref WAR has him at 1.6. Simple math puts him at 2 to 2.5 WAR for a full season, a WAR of 2 is exactly the definition of average unless something has changed in the last couple of years.

 

3) Escobar has been hot for over month and has pushed every slash in his line up 40 points or so and is still ascending early in July, he's not anywhere near as bad as you paint him to be. You may not like him, but he's not garbage, he's still young, and still very talented. I'm sorry his learning curve has not met your expectations, but I would qualify your hatred of him as "absurd".

 

4) Yes a certain percentage of prospects will fail, pitchers failing more often than hitters, which is why you need more of them, not less of them. Once again using the idea that prospects are prone to fail doesn't prove that veteran players will provide better value. How many hits has Melvin had in free agency? Furthermore every single established MLB player was once a prospect, and I've been around long enough that I remember people who wanted to trade Braun, Weeks, Fielder, and Gallardo for established MLB talent. How would those deals have looked with the benefit of historical perspective?

 

The simple truth is that a yearly influx of cheap/cost controlled talent is the only way to keep the Brewers competitive year in and year out. Prospects are the Brewer's lifeline, in the same way that they are the Packer's lifeline. Many of you have the logic completely backwards, wanting to avoid prospects all together, when the evidence from every angle actually suggests we need more of them. I would have thought that more people would have had their eyes opened to this concept given what happened with the super bowl champs, but I was mistaken, because it's mostly the same "buy, buy, buy" banter around this site.

 

5) Defensively with McGehee at 3B we needed a SS with Escobar's range in the same way that having Weeks helps lessen the impact of Fielder at 1B. It's never as simple as a player for player swap, there are always larger team and organizational issues to consider, which in my opinion tend to get overlooked unless the issues become completely obvious watching the games, and even then people will still argue in favor of players like Betancourt and McGehee for fear of the unknown.

 

6) Sure it would be nice to have Hardy in 2011... but did you want him as the every day SS in 2009 when Escobar outplayed him? What about in 2010 when he only played in 101 games and went .320/.394/.714 while not doing anything until July, slumping again in August, only to finish strong in Sept while earning $5.1 mil?

 

I agree that it was Busch league to send Hardy down for the minimum amount of time required to get another year of service out of him. It wasn't JJ's fault the organization called him up immediately following his shoulder surgery and it certainly wasn't his fault he suffered that horrible ankle injury.

[RockCoCougars]

1) Escobar outperformed Hardy in 2009, there should be no debate over this.

 

He may have, but what was the point? The team was already tanking, and hopelessly out of it, so why burn service time for this 'phenom'? He hit .300, but was nothing special.

 

2) Escobar already has a WAR over 1 by every measure, baseball-ref WAR has him at 1.6. Simple math puts him at 2 to 2.5 WAR for a full season, a WAR of 2 is exactly the definition of average unless something has changed in the last couple of years.

 

I've argued in the past that 'WAR' overvalues shortstops and center fielders. Escobar has been largely a black hole at the plate, and has barely outperformed Yuni at this point with less power and almost as many errors at shortstop.

 

3) Escobar has been hot for over month and has pushed every slash in his line up 40 points or so and is still ascending early in July, he's not anywhere near as bad as you paint him to be. You may not like him, but he's not garbage, he's still young, and still very talented. I'm sorry his learning curve has not met your expectations, but I would qualify your hatred of him as "absurd".

 

The reason for my 'hatred' of Escobar was that he was brutal in pretty much every aspect of the game last year. How many games did he cost the team with crucial errors or mistakes on the basepaths, not even mentioning his anemic bat? He's not that young either, this is his 24 year old season. Hardy was an all star at that point with roughly the same or less MLB experience.

 

4) Yes a certain percentage of prospects will fail, pitchers failing more often than hitters, which is why you need more of them, not less of them. Once again using the idea that prospects are prone to fail doesn't prove that veteran players will provide better value. How many hits has Melvin had in free agency? Furthermore every single established MLB player was once a prospect, and I've been around long enough that I remember people who wanted to trade Braun, Weeks, Fielder, and Gallardo for established MLB talent. How would those deals have looked with the benefit of historical perspective?

 

The simple truth is that a yearly influx of cheap/cost controlled talent is the only way to keep the Brewers competitive year in and year out. Prospects are the Brewer's lifeline, in the same way that they are the Packer's lifeline. Many of you have the logic completely backwards, wanting to avoid prospects all together, when the evidence from every angle actually suggests we need more of them. I would have thought that more people would have had their eyes opened to this concept given what happened with the super bowl champs, but I was mistaken, because it's mostly the same "buy, buy, buy" banter around this site.

 

Not much to say here, but I'd rather have people complaining about a former Cy Young striking out over 11.5 per 9 than watching guys like Braden Looper, Doug Davis and Mike Burns starting games. But hey, with some guys pitching lights out in the Southern League. i

 

5) Defensively with McGehee at 3B we needed a SS with Escobar's range in the same way that having Weeks helps lessen the impact of Fielder at 1B. It's never as simple as a player for player swap, there are always larger team and organizational issues to consider, which in my opinion tend to get overlooked unless the issues become completely obvious watching the games, and even then people will still argue in favor of players like Betancourt and McGehee for fear of the unknown.

 

I'd guess that shortstops who make 'rangy' plays to their right are mostly turning singles into infield hits. That will save you a few runs here and there but like I said, Escobar was largely an automatic out last season. By looking at the stats, he has a much higher rate of assists per game than Yuni, so no doubt he is getting to more balls. That has to be tempered mostly by the fact that Brewer pitchers are letting fewer balls hit into play. They have about 150 more strikeouts as a staff than K.C.

 

6) Sure it would be nice to have Hardy in 2011... but did you want him as the every day SS in 2009 when Escobar outplayed him? What about in 2010 when he only played in 101 games and went .320/.394/.714 while not doing anything until July, slumping again in August, only to finish strong in Sept while earning $5.1 mil?

 

Agreed in hindsight keeping Hardy was the move. Interesting enough, Hardy outperformed both Escobar and Yuni in OPS during his 'horrible' 2009 which supposedly was bad enough to demote him to Nashville. Last year he was hurt a good chunk of the season, but still nearly outdid Escobar in extra base hits, runs and RBI with Escobar playing nearly every game.

 

I agree that it was Busch league to send Hardy down for the minimum amount of time required to get another year of service out of him. It wasn't JJ's fault the organization called him up immediately following his shoulder surgery and it certainly wasn't his fault he suffered that horrible ankle injury.

 

Agreed.

[markedman5]

How about Jeff Keppinger? I can't imagine it would take all that much to get him and he would be a nice improvement over Yuni.

[yoshii8]

I'd like Keppinger as a replacement for Josh Wilson, but he's not a very good defensive SS. I'd be more interested in Clint Barmes who I believe is much better defensively and will give you an OPS right around .700.

[JohnBriggs12]

Escobar since June 1st is hitting .314/.349/.449. In his last 24 games he's hitting .360/.415/.547.

 

It's taken him a little while, but he's going to be a better than average offensive SS when all is said and done and he may well be right now. The Brewers were absolutely right in choosing him over Hardy. Unfortunately, they gave him up for a pitcher with an ERA over 5. Now that was the big mistake.