As with Roberts' deal, Hardy's deal increases the need to take advantage of his presence on the team. Useful complementary pieces will need to be acquired to make any sense of this signing. Hardy making a 70 win team into a 73 win team means little and likely is counterproductive. Him being part of a larger effort to improve the team would make sense. However, I think the only way this team becomes competitive is with about 30-40 MM extra in signings as the team does not have overwhelming sources of young talent.
What I was going to write about was the Reds and Yonder Alonso as well as the Giants and a long odds dream about Brandon Belt. That conversation is now worth less in having. As such, I will go on record being for trading J.J. Hardy for someone like Alonso and being quite mildly against an extension for J.J. Hardy.
I just have doubts when it comes to devoting resources in an oft-injured older shortstop who does not display amazing amounts of athleticism and is having a career year at the plate while the team is struggling to be within 10 games of five hundred ball. I do not believe it is an efficient use of funds. I hope I am wrong.
I think I'm in the same camp WRT Hardy. It was a good deal in terms of years and money, but would the better deal have been trading him for someone like Alonso or Belt (the Giants, after all, have a... well, giant hole at SS). My main concern is that players who are often injured in their 20s are often injured in their 30s as well, which we're seeing with Brian Roberts the last two years.
ReplyDeleteIf Hardy plays ~130 games a year, I don't doubt he'll be worth the money. His defense and a league-average offensive performance would be worth it. I just wonder if the Orioles couldn't have flipped him for a good prospect or two.