FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. I think the signing’s a nice move for Baltimore.. as the article stated, he can be kept if they find a way to contend, or most likely easily dealt for prospects if not.

    Comment by Jake T — July 19, 2011 @ 11:08 am

  2. Six figures to Tex? Like $100,000?

    Comment by Paqs — July 19, 2011 @ 11:08 am

  3. Per day.

    Comment by twinsfan — July 19, 2011 @ 11:21 am

  4. Whether they can contend or not, they need to field a good team to keep the fans coming. They signed a very good SS for a very decent price. If only the Twins hadn’t dumped him for no reason…..This move is pretty much undebatable, isn’t it?

    Comment by mike wants wins — July 19, 2011 @ 11:22 am

  5. What an offer huh? No wonder the yankees managed to be the high bidders.

    Comment by Jim Lahey — July 19, 2011 @ 11:27 am

  6. I think it’s a great contract for the O’s and question why Hardy would sign it. It seems to me he could get this or more on the open market this summer and, if he wanted to return to the O’s, he’d have been able to do that.

    Comment by chuckb — July 19, 2011 @ 11:33 am

  7. The problem really isn’t signing Hardy, its losing out on the prospects by not trading him.

    Comment by Rob — July 19, 2011 @ 11:52 am

  8. Some multiple of three, sometimes I mix them up.


    Comment by Jack Moore — July 19, 2011 @ 11:57 am

  9. I’m admittedly ignorant when it comes to fielding statistics, but Hardy has a .994 fielding %b this season with just 2 errors. He may not have exceptional range, but he gets to a lot of balls and has been making great plays all season. I’d have to question any metric that grades him “below average.”

    Comment by Dave — July 19, 2011 @ 12:10 pm

  10. Damn. I was hoping he’d get dealt to the Reds or some other offensive juggernaut.

    Comment by kid — July 19, 2011 @ 12:17 pm

  11. it would seem they aren’t in a rush to see Machado in the big leagues soon. It certainly means they don’t have to rush him and if machado blossoms, they can get good trade value if hardy can stay relatively healthy (and somewhat productive).

    Comment by sen-baldacci — July 19, 2011 @ 12:23 pm

  12. Quoting fielding percentage around here won’t lend you any credibility.

    Comment by Shaggychild — July 19, 2011 @ 12:25 pm

  13. That’s my take on it, too. The O’s still have a good core of young players who are showing tangible signs of improvement and potential future growth. Every year there is a team that surprises – who’s to say the 2012 O’s won’t be the 2011 Tribe? Hardy can pay dividends to the club in a number of ways now that he has this contract… if not with on field production then as a tradeable commodity with an attractive contract.

    Comment by shibboleth — July 19, 2011 @ 1:34 pm

  14. Exactly. Machado is all of 19 with less than one hundred PA in high A ball. He’s still on the fast track and could make Hardy tradeable down the road, but he needs seasoning at the plate and time to improve his defense.

    Comment by shibboleth — July 19, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

  15. Plus, you need a SS, where else are they going to get one?

    Comment by mike wants wins — July 19, 2011 @ 2:06 pm

  16. Just because old standbys like batting average and fielding percentage are flawed doesn’t mean that they’re irrelevant. Too many young stats guys are irrationally prejudiced against any statistic the average fan would understand.

    Comment by jdbolick — July 19, 2011 @ 3:57 pm

  17. As an Orioles fan, I’m very happy about it. Not only does it provide quality at a scarce position, but Baltimore couldn’t just keep adding young players to the clubhouse and expect them to find their way. You need some veterans to provide stability and leadership, and it’s nice to see the front office make a modest commitment to getting above .500 sometime before I die.

    Comment by jdbolick — July 19, 2011 @ 3:59 pm

  18. Hardy’s injury history raises a few red flags, but I think is a good risk for a position that’s in such demand. As long as his stints on the DL are minimal, he’s definately movable when Machado is ready. Or, on the other hand, Hardy could change positions when Machado is ready.

    And this notion that the Orioles are a small market team is crazy. They’re in one of the better markets in the league, but has been stifled by a horrible owner and GM’s in constant rebuilding. They’ve basically lost the interest of a generation of fans through 14 years of losing, which doesn’t help their cause. Lets not forget they were the last team who outspent the Yankees before Angelos blew things up.

    Comment by Dave in GB — July 19, 2011 @ 4:11 pm

  19. It could also mean moving Hardy to second when Machado is ready.

    Comment by Milk Steak — July 19, 2011 @ 11:04 pm

  20. If only the Brewers hadn’t traded two major league shortstops in two years for the likes of Carlos Gomez and Yuni Betancourt… Yeesh.

    (I am aware that Escobar was the major piece to get Greinke).

    Comment by Dave M — July 20, 2011 @ 12:03 am

  21. His much reduced cost makes it much more likely they’ll realize a huge haul when they go to trade him. Unless there are some trade clauses included we don’t know about, this is a very team-friendly deal. Hardy will either be a great bridge to Manny Machado and/or bring significant value back in trade.

    Comment by JamesDaBear — July 20, 2011 @ 5:00 pm

  22. If a team went by the perception of average fans as the true measure of a player’s talent, they’d probably be a worse team than the Royals.

    Comment by Phillie697 — July 21, 2011 @ 4:07 pm

  23. The AL East says the O’s can’t be the 2011 Tribe, unless they’re/we’re counting on NYY and BOS to significantly underplay like DET and CWS did for the first half of the season (and the CWS continue to).

    The Indians 51 wins would put them in 4th place in the East … so maybe the 2012 O’s can be the 2011 Indians.

    The Central has 2 teams over .500, the East has 4. Big difference.

    Comment by CircleChange11 — July 22, 2011 @ 12:19 am

  24. They would still have had Escobar to trade even if they hadn’t traded Hardy. In fact, Escobar probably would have been more valuable as he would have been seen as a top prospect instead of a young shortstop with contact problems.

    Comment by Bill — July 22, 2011 @ 10:06 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Close this window.

0.108 Powered by WordPress