PDA

View Full Version : JJ Hardy to AAA / Bill Hall DFA



Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:18 PM
What the hell? According to Brewers beat writer.

http://twitter.com/AdamMcCalvy/status/3267366304

Buy low?

They are still looking for a pitcher on the waiver wire. I'd offer Arroyo and Stubbs for Hardy as a starter.

FWIW, take it with the proverbial grain of salt, but here's a Brewers messageboard thread about this very topic started 10 days ago: http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=110&t=933744&start=30

Use the $8MM in savings to go after pitching (Webb or Davis + Myers).

CF Heisey/Dickerson
SS Hardy
1B Votto
3B Rolen
RF Bruce
2B Phillips
LF Balentien/Frazier
C Hanigan

fearofpopvol1
08-12-2009, 12:22 PM
I think that would be a pretty fair deal, but I'm betting the Brewers could get better from someone else.

RedLegSuperStar
08-12-2009, 12:28 PM
Unreal.. He'd have to slip through waivers and I'm sure the Red Sox would be all over that.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:28 PM
I think that would be a pretty fair deal, but I'm betting the Brewers could get better from someone else.

Perhaps, but it would certainly make sense for both clubs, save us money and fit in for the 2010 plan.

savafan
08-12-2009, 12:29 PM
Unreal.. He'd have to slip through waivers and I'm sure the Red Sox would be all over that.

But the Reds could claim him on waivers before Boston.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:29 PM
Unreal.. He'd have to slip through waivers and I'm sure the Red Sox would be all over that.

We could get him as a PTBNL and include cash in the deal to cover the remainder of his salary for 2009. We don't really need him for this year anyway. I hope Walt is awake (but doesn't trade Yonder for him.)

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:30 PM
But the Reds could claim him on waivers before Boston.

Good point. And we'd get him because we're in the NL.

RedLegSuperStar
08-12-2009, 12:31 PM
My guess is they want to see is Escobar is legit and can cut it in the bigs. If not might use him as bait in the offseason.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:32 PM
My guess is they want to see is Escobar is legit and can cut it in the bigs. If not might use him as bait in the offseason.

Nah, they could always play Escobar (or Hardy) at 2B. Hardy has fallen out of favor in Milwaukee. Now is the time to pounce.

BRM
08-12-2009, 12:32 PM
Good point. And we'd get him because we're in the NL.

Reverse order in the same league first, right? If that's the case, the Nats, Pirates and Padres would get a shot before the Reds.

RedLegSuperStar
08-12-2009, 12:34 PM
But the Reds could claim him on waivers before Boston.

True.. But if the Reds were to try to acquire him he would have to go through waivers is what I mention refering to the Arroyo / Stubbs deal.

Big Klu
08-12-2009, 12:35 PM
Good point. And we'd get him because we're in the NL.

The only clubs who would get priority over the Reds on a waiver claim for Hardy (assuming he has been put on waivers) are the Nationals, Pirates, and Padres (in that order).

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:35 PM
Reverse order in the same league first, right? If that's the case, the Nats, Pirates and Padres would get a shot before the Reds.

No chance any of them would claim him. Nats just put Guzman on waivers and Pirates and Padres are shedding salary by the second.

Maybe Hardy already is the PTBNL in the Weathers deal :cool:

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:40 PM
Bill Hall was DFA'd and they fired their pitching coach as well.

Doomsday in Milwaukee.

jojo
08-12-2009, 12:42 PM
Hardy was optioned to AAA.

There is no claiming him.

I view Hardy as the best case scenario given realistic "obtainable" options concerning shortstop for the Reds in 2010.

He was a guy that I had hope the Ms would get instead of Wilson. I doubt Hardy comes cheap.

TheNext44
08-12-2009, 12:43 PM
I really doubt the Reds need to add Stubbs to the deal. And if they did, it would not be a very fair deal. I actually think Stubbs is worth more than Hardy.

Hardy is a very good defender with a little power who has trouble finding firstbase. Lifetime .323 OBP, and only once has he been above .327.
Stubbs is a great defender with less power, but who can get on base and run the bases once he's on.

Add in that Hardy is expensive, $4.75M in 2009, and will be a free agent after next year, and I would much rather have Stubbs, even if he can't play SS.

Now Arroyo for Hardy is a good trade. Even if Hardy continues to hit around .700 OPS, his glove would be a nice addition to the Reds infield, and he would save the Reds around $7M this and next year combined.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:43 PM
Hardy was optioned to AAA.

There is no claiming him.

I view Hardy as the best case scenario given realistic options concerning shortstop for the Reds in '09.

He is still on the 40-man so he would have to clear waivers in order to be traded.

Big Klu
08-12-2009, 12:44 PM
Reverse order in the same league first, right? If that's the case, the Nats, Pirates and Padres would get a shot before the Reds.

Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but it doesn't work like a draft, where Washington has first shot at claiming Hardy, and if they pass then Pittsburgh is on the clock, and so on.

Actually, there might be 10-12 (or even all 29) waiver claims put in on him. Maybe the Red Sox, from the earlier post, do put in a claim. But if there is more than one claim put into the MLB office, then those claims are prioritized and put in order. On any NL player, the Reds have priority over everyone except for Washington, Pittsburgh, and San Diego.

BRM
08-12-2009, 12:45 PM
Hardy was optioned to AAA.

There is no claiming him.

I view Hardy as the best case scenario given realistic "obtainable" options concerning shortstop for the Reds in 2010.

He was a guy that I had hope the Ms would get instead of Wilson. I doubt Hardy comes cheap.

He would have to pass through waivers if the Brewers were to trade him right now. That's what the discussion was about. The Reds would be #4 in the pecking order for a waiver claim, IF Hardy were to be put on waivers.

BRM
08-12-2009, 12:46 PM
Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but it doesn't work like a draft, where Washington has first shot at claiming Hardy, and if they pass then Pittsburgh is on the clock, and so on.

Actually, there might be 10-12 (or even all 29) waiver claims put in on him. Maybe the Red Sox, from the earlier post, do put in a claim. But if there is more than one claim put into the MLB office, then those claims are prioritized and put in order. On any NL player, the Reds have priority over everyone except for Washington, Pittsburgh, and San Diego.

That's what I was saying, basically. Only three teams would be able to get Hardy over the Reds.

Big Klu
08-12-2009, 12:49 PM
That's what I was saying, basically. Only three teams would be able to get Hardy over the Reds.

OK, sorry about the misunderstanding. :)

BRM
08-12-2009, 12:51 PM
OK, sorry about the misunderstanding. :)

No problem. You said it much more clearly than I did anyway.

Caveat Emperor
08-12-2009, 12:57 PM
They could also make Hardy a PTBNL for any deal involving a Reds player who has already cleared waivers, and then complete the trade at the end of the season if he happens to be claimed.

redsmetz
08-12-2009, 12:57 PM
Wasn't their pitching coach the guy that Weathers said he was good pals with?

Scrap Irony
08-12-2009, 12:59 PM
Hardy = Brandon Phillips

Good player, not great. Much better option than the Reds currently have, but, fair warning, he's another hacker on a team filled with them.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 01:00 PM
Hardy = Brandon Phillips

Good player, not great. Much better option than the Reds currently have, but, fair warning, he's another hacker on a team filled with them.

He is better than Alex Gonzalez, is he not? ;)

If the Reds think that they can sign Orlando Hudson to a reasonable deal and move Phillips to SS, that's fine. If not, I'd trade for Hardy now while his value is low. There will be no better solution, especially with Frazier wasting his time in AA.

BRM
08-12-2009, 01:01 PM
He is better than Alex Gonzalez, is he not? ;)

Damning with faint praise, are we?

OldXOhio
08-12-2009, 01:07 PM
Damning with faint praise, are we?

True, but 2010 ought to be about upgrades at a number of positions. This would more than clear that hurdle.

lollipopcurve
08-12-2009, 01:07 PM
We're talking potentially having Hardy for one year only, at arbitration prices. And look at his numbers this year -- not good at all.

Unless you can sign him to an extension, I don't think he's an especially good target. If you can sign him, sure -- he's young with upside still.

HokieRed
08-12-2009, 01:10 PM
Hardy's current OPS: .667.

Scrap Irony
08-12-2009, 01:11 PM
He's an above average middle infielder both offensively and defensively. He's got upside. For those reasons, he's a great choice. Defensively, the Reds would probably become the best IF in baseball, were Hardy to slide to the Queen City. But Jocketty would have to find at least one league average or better starter even after grabbing Hardy if the Reds wanted to compete.

BRM
08-12-2009, 01:14 PM
Hardy's current OPS: .667.

Gonzalez current OPS: .572

Hardy's previous two seasons:

2007 - .786 OPS
2008 - .821 OPS

OldXOhio
08-12-2009, 01:16 PM
Hardy's current OPS: .667.


Cool, buy low...

Hardy's career OPS: .754
Hardy's 2008 OPS: .821
Hardy's 2007 OPS: .786

HokieRed
08-12-2009, 01:17 PM
Gonzalez current OPS: .572

Hardy's previous two seasons:

2007 - .786 OPS
2008 - .821 OPS

Just citing the facts. I don't want Gonzalez, never did, in fact.

jojo
08-12-2009, 01:22 PM
He is still on the 40-man so he would have to clear waivers in order to be traded.

Not this off season. I get the sense that Milwaukee isn't in a hurry with their young shortstop so they aren't in a hurry to jettison Hardy.

BRM
08-12-2009, 01:27 PM
Not this off season. I get the sense that Milwaukee isn't in a hurry with their young shortstop so they aren't in a hurry to jettison Hardy.

Depends on how badly they want to stay in the NL Central race this year. If dealing Hardy helps them fix their atrocious pitching, I think they consider it pretty strongly.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 01:28 PM
Not this off season. I get the sense that Milwaukee isn't in a hurry with their young shortstop so they aren't in a hurry to jettison Hardy.

But they might be in a hurry to acquire a starting pitcher for the stretch run. They did just get David Weathers a couple days ago. They're still clearly gunning for this year, and Hardy's not doing much for this year in AAA.

Escobar is clearly the future for them at SS. Their GM admitted yesterday they were very interested in Washburn last week, but didn't have the young pitching to pull it off. They do have a pricey veteran SS in the minors to pull off this acquisition. It just makes too much sense.

reds44
08-12-2009, 01:29 PM
I'd take Bill Hall once he becomes basically free.

*Ducks*

jojo
08-12-2009, 01:33 PM
If Jocketty isn't all over Hardy this off season, I'd capitulate to those who want to storm the castle.

There is slim pickens for those who want to upgrade at short. Quality prospects are exorbitantly priced-even ones like Brignac who is about to get chased out of his own system-and no veterans are available that wouldn't be clear, relatively expensive compromises. Meanwhile above average shortstops still under control aren't on the market.

Hardy is an elite defending shortstop with a league average bat.

He's valuable and next to Rolen, the Reds infield would be significantly upgraded in 2010.

jojo
08-12-2009, 01:35 PM
But they might be in a hurry to acquire a starting pitcher for the stretch run. They did just get David Weathers a couple days ago. They're still clearly gunning for this year, and Hardy's not doing much for this year in AAA.

Escobar is clearly the future for them at SS. Their GM admitted yesterday they were very interested in Washburn last week, but didn't have the young pitching to pull it off. They do have a pricey veteran SS in the minors to pull off this acquisition. It just makes too much sense.

They could have had Washburn or pre-injury Bedard. A trade with Seattle would've made perfect sense.

flyer85
08-12-2009, 01:36 PM
hall sure seems like one who may have had a PED induced surge to get the money

Benihana
08-12-2009, 01:36 PM
If Jocketty isn't all over Hardy this off season, I'd capitulate to those who want to storm the castle.

There is slim pickens for those who want to upgrade at short. Quality prospects are exorbitantly priced-even ones like Brignac who is about to get chased out of his own system-and no veterans are available that wouldn't be clear, relatively expensive compromises. Meanwhile above average shortstops still under control aren't on the market.

Hardy is an elite defending shortstop with a league average bat.

He's valuable and next to Rolen, the Reds infield would be significantly upgraded in 2010.

I agree, although I'd try to get him now while we could potentially have exclusive negotiating rights (via waivers) and not have to risk getting in a bidding war with the Red Sox or anyone else this offseason.

Hardy's value will never be lower, and Milwaukee will never have less leverage than right now. Plus, they want veteran starting pitching now.

Tom Servo
08-12-2009, 01:36 PM
I'd take Bill Hall once he becomes basically free.

*Ducks*
Same here. If we're paying the minimum I'd take a flyer on him and hope he just needs a change of scenery.

Highlifeman21
08-12-2009, 01:38 PM
So if Bill Hall's DFA'd, then who's gonna be the next Reds killer for the Brew Crew?

Benihana
08-12-2009, 01:40 PM
They could have had Washburn or pre-injury Bedard. A trade with Seattle would've made perfect sense.

Nope, not according to their GM:


The Brewers were interested in Jarrod Washburn at the deadline, but didn't have enough young pitching to complete a deal with the Mariners.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/08/brewers-gm-.html

Johnny Footstool
08-12-2009, 01:40 PM
Hardy should definitely be a target for the Reds.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 01:41 PM
So if Bill Hall's DFA'd, then who's gonna be the next Reds killer for the Brew Crew?

Matt LaPorta. Oh, wait...

jojo
08-12-2009, 01:44 PM
hall sure seems like one who may have had a PED induced surge to get the money

I think that's a bit of a stretch.

bucksfan2
08-12-2009, 01:47 PM
Let me get this straight, Hardy was optioned to AAA. It could be for a number of reasons. Milwaukee could have sent him to AAA to try to get his stroke back. The could have sent him to AAA to clear his head and to start playing better baseball. Just because they sent him to AAA doesn't mean they want to get rid of him.

flyer85
08-12-2009, 01:49 PM
I think that's a bit of a stretch.Adrian Beltre says :wave:

:D

Benihana
08-12-2009, 01:50 PM
Let me get this straight, Hardy was optioned to AAA. It could be for a number of reasons. Milwaukee could have sent him to AAA to try to get his stroke back. The could have sent him to AAA to clear his head and to start playing better baseball. Just because they sent him to AAA doesn't mean they want to get rid of him.

Short-term maybe, long-term he's gone.

Alcides Escobar is their SS of the future. The writing is definitely on the wall.

Come in and offer them the pitching they're looking for. Many on the Brewers board I referenced didn't even think Hardy was enough to fetch Arroyo in a one-for-one swap, and that was two weeks ago.

jojo
08-12-2009, 01:54 PM
I agree, although I'd try to get him now while we could potentially have exclusive negotiating rights (via waivers) and not have to risk getting in a bidding war with the Red Sox or anyone else this offseason.

Hardy's value will never be lower, and Milwaukee will never have less leverage than right now. Plus, they want veteran starting pitching now.

Melvin has to put Hardy on waivers first and I don't think the Brewers are in a hurry to trade Hardy before the off season.

I disagree about Hardy's trade value. It's a great market for a shortstop like Hardy. At least, I'll be surprised if the Brewers don't get something good in return.

Also, Melvin doesn't seem hot on Harang's trail. Arroyo would be a big stretch as an arm the Brewers would target if the goal is to make up 6.5 games with 50 left to go....

jojo
08-12-2009, 01:59 PM
Adrian Beltre says :wave:

:D

I actually misread your post and thought you were saying Hardy instead of Hall.

But a pox on you for mentioning Beltre in that context nonetheless.....

flyer85
08-12-2009, 02:01 PM
But a pox on you for mentioning Beltre in that context nonetheless.....I can feel the :luvu:

Brutus
08-12-2009, 02:41 PM
This is an ironic thread, as Hardy was being discussed in the Weathers deal thread. Granted, I don't think anyone thought he was actually a possibility, but if only he'd been sent down 3 days ago heh.

Let's see...

* Hardy is an above-average defensive shortstop
* Normally, he's a league average shortstop at worse
* He is turning 27 this month, meaning next year he'll be entering his "peak"
* Having a down year, he won't likely to do much in arbitration

I'd say he's a perfect solution for 2010 for the Reds. A defensive infield of Rolen-Hardy-Phillips-Votto-Hanigan would be about as ideal as one could expect.

jojo
08-12-2009, 03:02 PM
I'd say he's a perfect solution for 2010 for the Reds. A defensive infield of Rolen-Hardy-Phillips-Votto-Hanigan would be about as ideal as one could expect.

That's not a bad offensive infield either. I'd be pretty excited going into opening day.

Brutus
08-12-2009, 03:07 PM
That's not a bad offensive infield either. I'd be pretty excited going into opening day.

Agreed. I think RF and CF will be automatically a lot better next season. Jay Bruce should be better and I think Stubbs will wind up starting for the Reds. That means the Reds would have actually seen upgrades to four offensive positions. If the budget allows them to find a slugging LF....

This is a move Jocketty needs to get done, somehow.

jojo
08-12-2009, 03:08 PM
Here's another take on the motivation for optioning Hardy-increasing his trade value by manipulating service time:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/delaying_jjs_service_clock/


Rally said something interesting, in light of JJ Hardy being sent down:


He had 4 years of service exactly coming into 2009, so he would have been a free agent after the 2010 season. Looks like this will delay his free agency until after 2011, so if he rebounds to his excellent 2007-2008 level, he’s got a lot more trade value.

Yowza. A service year is 172 days. An MLB season has around 183 service days (and weirdly, the playoffs I don’t think even counts). So, if JJ is kept in the minor leagues until the minor league season is over, he could end up this year with only 171 service days. That would then keep him as a 4+ player this year.

This would be brilliant if true (though I think one might argue it gives Hardy the shaft).

Hardy is going to get traded this fall. The Reds really don't have a better option available. But what would he cost?

Brutus
08-12-2009, 03:11 PM
Here's another take on the motivation for optioning Hardy-increasing his trade value by manipulating service time:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/delaying_jjs_service_clock/



This would be brilliant if true.

Amazing. I would imagine it is definitely true, as this is something most organizations would be paying attention to. To have the foresight to think of it as a way of increasing the value is incredible. But that's a stroke of genius.

To miss 2011 FA by one day of service time? Ouch!

Danny Serafini
08-12-2009, 03:12 PM
Yowza. A service year is 172 days. An MLB season has around 183 service days (and weirdly, the playoffs I don’t think even counts). So, if JJ is kept in the minor leagues until the minor league season is over, he could end up this year with only 171 service days. That would then keep him as a 4+ player this year.

That's just screaming union grievance. Can't see that actually flying.

Caveat Emperor
08-12-2009, 03:17 PM
That's just screaming union grievance. Can't see that actually flying.

Didn't the Reds do something similar with Jay Bruce -- waiting to call him up until it was guaranteed he wouldn't get enough service time to be considered a "Super Two" player eligible for arbitration early?

osuceltic
08-12-2009, 03:18 PM
That's just screaming union grievance. Can't see that actually flying.

Same here. And it's not so "brilliant" when the other players in your organization (or potential acquisitions) see the way you treat the guy. And they will see it. Every agent will know what the Brewers did.

I'd love to see the Reds be beneficiaries, but this kind of behavior is slow death to an organization.

jojo
08-12-2009, 03:22 PM
Nope, not according to their GM:



http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/08/brewers-gm-.html

It's inconceivable that a Washburn deal wouldn't have focused upon Hardy so those comments either signify that the Brewers weren't open to trading Hardy for a Washburn/Bedard-type arm (and hence no way on an Arroyo one) or they refer to the days following the Ms trade for Wilson.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 03:34 PM
It's inconceivable that a Washburn deal wouldn't have focused upon Hardy so those comments either signify that the Brewers weren't open to trading Hardy for a Washburn/Bedard-type arm (and hence no way on an Arroyo one) or they refer to the days following the Ms trade for Wilson.

You answered your own question. Before the Wilson deal, the Brewers were reportedly in on Halladay and didn't know if Escobar would be part of that deal. Once the M's got Wilson, it was a moot point.

OnBaseMachine
08-12-2009, 03:45 PM
Hardy would be an excellent acquisition. I'll take back anything bad I've said about Jocketty if he can acquire Hardy.

1B Joey Votto
2B Brandon Phillips
SS JJ Hardy
3B Scott Rolen

That's a great defensive AND offensive infield.

Homer Bailey
08-12-2009, 03:47 PM
Hardy would be an excellent acquisition. I'll take back anything bad I've said about Jocketty if he can acquire Hardy.

1B Joey Votto
2B Brandon Phillips
SS JJ Hardy
3B Scott Rolen

That's a great defensive AND offensive infield.

I wouldn't mortgage the farm for Hardy, but I'd take him. How much would it take to get it done? I'd give up Alonso for Yunel Escobar, but not Hardy.

Gallen5862
08-12-2009, 04:02 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/




J.J. Hardy And Free Agency

By Ben Nicholson-Smith [August 12 at 2:21pm CST]
The Brewers optioned J.J. Hardy to Triple A this morning and GM Doug Melvin tells Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the move isn't intended to put off the shortstop's free agency. If Hardy had stayed in the majors through this year and next, he would have become a free agent after the 2010 season.*

That's still possible for Hardy, but it depends on how long he spends in the minors. If he's down on the farm for less than 20 days, he'll still get credit for a full season of service time. If he misses more than 20 days, he won't have enough service time to become a free agent until after the 2011 season.

Danny Serafini
08-12-2009, 04:06 PM
Didn't the Reds do something similar with Jay Bruce -- waiting to call him up until it was guaranteed he wouldn't get enough service time to be considered a "Super Two" player eligible for arbitration early?

It's one thing to keep a kid in the minors a little longer, you can always make the legitimate claim that there was still some development work to do. It's another to take an established player in his 5th year and send him down at a suspicious time in regards to his service time. If the Brewers were really trying to do something like this they'll get a fair amount of outrage directed at them.

Will M
08-12-2009, 04:08 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/




J.J. Hardy And Free Agency

By Ben Nicholson-Smith [August 12 at 2:21pm CST]
The Brewers optioned J.J. Hardy to Triple A this morning and GM Doug Melvin tells Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the move isn't intended to put off the shortstop's free agency. If Hardy had stayed in the majors through this year and next, he would have become a free agent after the 2010 season.*

That's still possible for Hardy, but it depends on how long he spends in the minors. If he's down on the farm for less than 20 days, he'll still get credit for a full season of service time. If he misses more than 20 days, he won't have enough service time to become a free agent until after the 2011 season.

evil move by the Reds: trade for him then call him up after he has spent 21 days in AAA

jojo
08-12-2009, 04:14 PM
It's one thing to keep a kid in the minors a little longer, you can always make the legitimate claim that there was still some development work to do. It's another to take an established player in his 5th year and send him down at a suspicious time in regards to his service time. If the Brewers were really trying to do something like this they'll get a fair amount of outrage directed at them.

How is it that dramatically different than Boston DFAing Smoltz (presumably his roster incentives were a major deciding factor).

Benihana
08-12-2009, 04:24 PM
How is it that dramatically different than Boston DFAing Smoltz (presumably his roster incentives were a major deciding factor).

Because Smoltz was absolutely atrocious this year (8.33 ERA.) His DFA was strictly performance based.

jojo
08-12-2009, 04:30 PM
Because Smoltz was absolutely atrocious this year (8.33 ERA.) His DFA was strictly performance based.

Smoltz did this: K/9= 7.43; BB/9= 2.03, K/BB=3.67 with a FIP that was over half a run better than Arroyo's.

ERA was an excuse.

Danny Serafini
08-12-2009, 04:36 PM
You can toss out all the peripherals you want, but 8.33 is still 8.33. It's hard to argue that his DFA wasn't justified.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 04:36 PM
Smoltz did this: K/9= 7.43; BB/9= 2.03, K/BB=3.67 with a FIP that was over half a run better than Arroyo's.

ERA was an excuse.

The Red Sox are desperate for pitching. If they thought Smoltz could pitch, he'd still be on the team, period.

blumj
08-12-2009, 05:15 PM
How is it that dramatically different than Boston DFAing Smoltz (presumably his roster incentives were a major deciding factor).
Even you don't believe what you're saying.

fearofpopvol1
08-12-2009, 05:19 PM
Here's another take on the motivation for optioning Hardy-increasing his trade value by manipulating service time:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/delaying_jjs_service_clock/



This would be brilliant if true (though I think one might argue it gives Hardy the shaft).

Hardy is going to get traded this fall. The Reds really don't have a better option available. But what would he cost?

What do you think would be a fair and realistic swap?

I think Alonso is too much. I would think 1 of Heisey/Stubbs would be in the mix for sure. Maybe Frazier (too)? I don't think the Reds can really afford to give up much more pitching at this point. But I think any position player not named Alonso (and then some) would be fair game.

jojo
08-12-2009, 06:02 PM
Even you don't believe what you're saying.

I absolutely believe Smoltz's '09 era isn't indicative of his ability.

HokieRed
08-12-2009, 06:03 PM
I absolutely believe Smoltz's '09 era isn't indicative of his ability.


From what I've seen of him, I agree. If we could somehow get him, this looks to me like a chance worth taking. I think he'll come back yet one more time.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 06:04 PM
From what I've seen of him, I agree. If we could somehow get him, this looks to me like a chance worth taking. I think he'll come back yet one more time.

Not for a penny more than the league minimum. No way.

Team Clark
08-12-2009, 06:06 PM
I'd take Bill Hall once he becomes basically free.

*Ducks*

I would too. This season aside, I think he could fill a few roles for the Reds. (And stop killing them each time he faced the Reds)

Brutus
08-12-2009, 06:11 PM
I would too. This season aside, I think he could fill a few roles for the Reds. (And stop killing them each time he faced the Reds)

Instead of killing them when he faces the Reds, he'll simply kill them for the Reds.

I'm kidding, well, somewhat. I would not mind him as a depth flier, but he does strike me as a PED casualty.

CarolinaRedleg
08-12-2009, 06:19 PM
The only downside is Hall would no longer be facing Reds pitching.

blumj
08-12-2009, 06:34 PM
I absolutely believe Smoltz's '09 era isn't indicative of his ability.
Neither do I, and probably neither do they. It's not the money, though, it's the time and impatience with losing games and chewing up the bullpen waiting for better results.

jojo
08-12-2009, 06:47 PM
Neither do I, and probably neither do they. It's not the money, though, it's the time and impatience with losing games and chewing up the bullpen waiting for better results.

And that brings us back to the original point-how is DFAing Smoltz different than optioning Hardy?

Playing devil's advocate, the Brewers are making a "playoff charge". They have a hot shot shortstop in AAA and need a roster spot for him. They can't afford to have a roster spot reserved for a benched shortstop who is posting a BA of .229 and an OBP of .308.

In other words, it's tough to sustain a grievance if Hardy doesn't get enough service time this season.

Both guys are better than AAA level-in fact both guys are at least average major leaguers but probably have above average true skill levels. I'd argue both decisions had a significant "money" component.

TheNext44
08-12-2009, 07:39 PM
I absolutely believe Smoltz's '09 era isn't indicative of his ability.

I watched that game against the Yankees. I know it was only one game, but he looked done. He can still K people, hence the not terrible FIP, but batters were not fooled and crushing the ball when they did make contact.

8 HR's in his last 20 innings was why he was released.

Now I agree that there is little difference between his release and Hardy's demotion. .229 .300 .367 .667 is a decent enough reason to demote a SS, especially if he has had decent years in the past. He clearly needs to work on a few things, a luxury a contending team does not have.

mth123
08-13-2009, 04:03 AM
The Reds best chance to snag Hardy would be to take Hall's contract off Milwaukee's hands before the 10 days are up. The Brewers add Arroyo to the rotation for now and next year and relieve themselves of Halls' contract. Arroyo can help down the stretch and he would be an innings eater for 2010 for basically about 3 Million dollars after applying the Hall savings. That is probably well worth Hardy considering they have Escobar to take over.

For those desperate to dump Arroyo, this may be the best way. It would fill the SS hole (possibly for 2 years??). The Reds then need to work like heck to dump Willy T to save a bit of cash for 2010. Hall would be real expensive and the money would really not be any better with Hardy/Hall making basically what Arroyo will make, but it will possibly solve the SS problem and as bad as Hall has been, he's probably an upgrade on the Red's bench. Possibly the Reds could send Stubbs along to get the Brewers to cover a portion of Hall's deal in 2010. Cameron is a Free Agent and Stubbs may fit real well while the Brewers pass some of the Cameron savings onto the Reds.

The Brewers with Arroyo, Escobar and Stubbs lower the payroll in 2010 as compared to Hardy/Hall/Cameron even if they send say $3 Million the Reds way. The Reds fill the SS spot and take the $3 Million from this deal and the money that came with Rolen to try and sign a starting pitcher (I doubt they's get much of an upgrade though).

blumj
08-13-2009, 09:37 AM
And that brings us back to the original point-how is DFAing Smoltz different than optioning Hardy?

Playing devil's advocate, the Brewers are making a "playoff charge". They have a hot shot shortstop in AAA and need a roster spot for him. They can't afford to have a roster spot reserved for a benched shortstop who is posting a BA of .229 and an OBP of .308.

In other words, it's tough to sustain a grievance if Hardy doesn't get enough service time this season.

Both guys are better than AAA level-in fact both guys are at least average major leaguers but probably have above average true skill levels. I'd argue both decisions had a significant "money" component.
Smoltz chose to accept an incentive-based free agent contract, and chose to refuse a minor league assignment, guy has way more than enough service time accumulated to make his own choices all along the way. And, while we're not going to find out what would have happened to Smoltz if he'd accepted a minor league assignment when rosters expand on Sept. 1, we are going to with Hardy. If the Brewers need to leave him in AAA for the remainder of their season in order to prevent him from accumulating enough service time to reach free agency after '10, but will have plenty of additional roster spots to use between Sept. 1 and then, their intent will be pretty clear. And, maybe there's nothing wrong with it and that's exactly what they should be doing, and there's not a damn thing he can do about it, I don't know. But I sure wouldn't like it if I was him.

Benihana
08-13-2009, 09:58 AM
The Reds best chance to snag Hardy would be to take Hall's contract off Milwaukee's hands before the 10 days are up. The Brewers add Arroyo to the rotation for now and next year and relieve themselves of Halls' contract. Arroyo can help down the stretch and he would be an innings eater for 2010 for basically about 3 Million dollars after applying the Hall savings. That is probably well worth Hardy considering they have Escobar to take over.

For those desperate to dump Arroyo, this may be the best way. It would fill the SS hole (possibly for 2 years??). The Reds then need to work like heck to dump Willy T to save a bit of cash for 2010. Hall would be real expensive and the money would really not be any better with Hardy/Hall making basically what Arroyo will make, but it will possibly solve the SS problem and as bad as Hall has been, he's probably an upgrade on the Red's bench. Possibly the Reds could send Stubbs along to get the Brewers to cover a portion of Hall's deal in 2010. Cameron is a Free Agent and Stubbs may fit real well while the Brewers pass some of the Cameron savings onto the Reds.

The Brewers with Arroyo, Escobar and Stubbs lower the payroll in 2010 as compared to Hardy/Hall/Cameron even if they send say $3 Million the Reds way. The Reds fill the SS spot and take the $3 Million from this deal and the money that came with Rolen to try and sign a starting pitcher (I doubt they's get much of an upgrade though).

I think the Brewers would have to send over some significant cash in that deal. IIRC, Hall + Hardy costs slightly more than Arroyo in 2010. We would have to replace Arroyo in the rotation, and it costs $$ to do that (unless we dump Cordero's contract and roll the dice with the pen.)

REDREAD
08-13-2009, 10:22 AM
The Reds best chance to snag Hardy would be to take Hall's contract off Milwaukee's hands before the 10 days are up. The Brewers add Arroyo to the rotation for now and next year and relieve themselves of Halls' contract. Arroyo can help down the stretch and he would be an innings eater for 2010 for basically about 3 Million dollars after applying the Hall savings. That is probably well worth Hardy considering they have Escobar to take over.


Nice idea, Mth.. I like it. Let's do it :)

Will M
08-13-2009, 11:44 AM
The Reds best chance to snag Hardy would be to take Hall's contract off Milwaukee's hands before the 10 days are up. The Brewers add Arroyo to the rotation for now and next year and relieve themselves of Halls' contract. Arroyo can help down the stretch and he would be an innings eater for 2010 for basically about 3 Million dollars after applying the Hall savings. That is probably well worth Hardy considering they have Escobar to take over.

For those desperate to dump Arroyo, this may be the best way. It would fill the SS hole (possibly for 2 years??). The Reds then need to work like heck to dump Willy T to save a bit of cash for 2010. Hall would be real expensive and the money would really not be any better with Hardy/Hall making basically what Arroyo will make, but it will possibly solve the SS problem and as bad as Hall has been, he's probably an upgrade on the Red's bench. Possibly the Reds could send Stubbs along to get the Brewers to cover a portion of Hall's deal in 2010. Cameron is a Free Agent and Stubbs may fit real well while the Brewers pass some of the Cameron savings onto the Reds.

The Brewers with Arroyo, Escobar and Stubbs lower the payroll in 2010 as compared to Hardy/Hall/Cameron even if they send say $3 Million the Reds way. The Reds fill the SS spot and take the $3 Million from this deal and the money that came with Rolen to try and sign a starting pitcher (I doubt they's get much of an upgrade though).

i don't like this idea. dumping Arroyo & upgrading his rotation spot on the cheap is a nice idea on the surface but who exactly are the Reds going to get who is cheaper and better than Arroyo on the free agent market?
plus we are stuff with Hall and his fat salary. he is terrible right now. just terrible.

i do feel the Reds & Brewers are a natural fit for a trade involving guys like Hardy, Arroyo, Stubbs,etc but I don't like the idea of this deal. we save $3M and get a SS but are left with a big void in the rotation. at least Arroyo can be counted on to give you 200+IP with an ERA ~5.00 .
great? - no.
horrible? - no.
decent BOR starter who eats innings? - yes.

mth123
08-13-2009, 08:29 PM
i don't like this idea. dumping Arroyo & upgrading his rotation spot on the cheap is a nice idea on the surface but who exactly are the Reds going to get who is cheaper and better than Arroyo on the free agent market?
plus we are stuff with Hall and his fat salary. he is terrible right now. just terrible.

i do feel the Reds & Brewers are a natural fit for a trade involving guys like Hardy, Arroyo, Stubbs,etc but I don't like the idea of this deal. we save $3M and get a SS but are left with a big void in the rotation. at least Arroyo can be counted on to give you 200+IP with an ERA ~5.00 .
great? - no.
horrible? - no.
decent BOR starter who eats innings? - yes.

I actually agree. I don't think the Reds can upgrade from Arroyo even if they dump him and use his entire salary on a replacement. But if the Reds want to deal with Milwaukee, I think the money needs to be pretty even. The Reds could pay part of Arroyo's salary or take a flyer on a guy like Hall who could rebound and be dealt mid-season for additional savings. I think the Reds would need to include a prospect to get Salary relief. A guy who could take over for a higher paid Brewer would probably be required simply to give the Brewers funds to pay it. That's why Stubbs makes sense as a guy to plug in for Cameron.

Maybe the Reds should keep Arroyo and try packaging prospects, but it seems Milwaukee's motivation is to add a starter.

Brutus
08-14-2009, 03:27 PM
The Brewers still have not placed Hardy on waivers.

I find that a bit interesting, personally.

CarolinaRedleg
08-14-2009, 03:29 PM
The Brewers still have not placed Hardy on waivers.

I find that a bit interesting, personally.

Thinking they'll wait until after the season to complete the Weathers trade?

jojo
08-14-2009, 03:31 PM
Thinking they'll wait until after the season to complete the Weathers trade?

There is no way Hardy will be included in the Weathers trade.

redsmetz
08-14-2009, 03:31 PM
Thinking they'll wait until after the season to complete the Weathers trade?

Perhaps I'm not understanding something about PTBNL, but I think once you've announced that, you have to abide by the rules. I don't believe Hardy is eligible to be the PTBNL in this transaction because he was on the Milwaukee roster at the time it occurred and he wouldn't be changing leagues.

Brutus
08-14-2009, 04:09 PM
He was on the roster for two days after the trade, so yes, he could not be included, barring some unknown exception existing. I meant though that it's just surprising they have not placed him on waivers yet, though I looked and apparently they would not have to waive him if he's going to be traded and placed directly on another team's minor league roster.

westofyou
08-14-2009, 04:24 PM
There is no way Hardy will be included in the Weathers trade.

The only Hardy the Reds would get in return for Weathers is this one:

http://www.thejudyroom.com/discography/discs/sndtrk/lovefinds.jpg

Big Klu
08-14-2009, 05:00 PM
The only Hardy the Reds would get in return for Weathers is this one:

http://www.thejudyroom.com/discography/discs/sndtrk/lovefinds.jpg

Or maybe this one:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/71/OliverHardycheeks.gif

Mario-Rijo
08-14-2009, 07:13 PM
Didn't notice this in this thread.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/


MLB.com's Mark Sheldon hears that the Reds have "some interest" in the recently-DFA'd Bill Hall.

Spring~Fields
08-14-2009, 07:21 PM
Hall is another guy that has trouble getting on base

Bill Hall Salary 2009: $6,925,000



BA OBP SLG OPS
2007 Mil .254 .315 .425 .740
2008 Mil .225 .293 .396 .689
2009 Mil .201 .265 .341 .606


.

Falls City Beer
08-14-2009, 07:23 PM
"No" to Bill Hall.

Patrick Bateman
08-14-2009, 07:33 PM
Let's see:

1. He can't hit
2. He can't field
3. He doesn't have a position


Well he passes the smell test. Go get him Walt!

reds44
08-14-2009, 07:48 PM
Hall is another guy that has trouble getting on base

Bill Hall Salary 2009: $6,925,000



BA OBP SLG OPS
2007 Mil .254 .315 .425 .740
2008 Mil .225 .293 .396 .689
2009 Mil .201 .265 .341 .606


.
Posting his salary is pointless, if the Reds are going to sign him it'd be for the league min.

Spring~Fields
08-14-2009, 07:52 PM
Posting his salary is pointless, if the Reds are going to sign him it'd be for the league min.

How about his hitting stats? Will they pay attention to those ? :)

Raisor
08-14-2009, 08:11 PM
Well with Gonzo gonzo, the Reds really need another sub 700 ops bat.

yippie?

jojo
08-14-2009, 08:11 PM
What do you think would be a fair and realistic swap?

It's going to depend upon whether Hardy will be controlled for one year or for two so right now I'm not sure.

Brutus
08-14-2009, 09:50 PM
Possibly a legal loophole?

I have been doing some research on MLB Rules documentation. I've looked through available documentation pertaining to the Rules of Professional Baseball and MLB Constitution. I came across something that pertains to the discussion we've had on J.J. Hardy.

In reading the rules, the actual rules on trades is that (paraphrasing):

"All transactions between clubs must be filed with and approved by the Commissioner in the form of a Transfer Agreement within 15 days of the transaction."

The transaction (i.e. a trade), is approved, but the actual date of the transfer agreement is the date of signing and submission to the commissioner.

Why is this key?

Because here is language on unnamed (PTBNL) players:

Transfer agreements may provide unnamed players provided...

A) the assignment (actual transfer of the unnamed player) is made within six (6) months of the agreement; and

B) the agreement stats a permitted cash settlement in lieu of the assignment; and

C) the player cannot be on an active MLB roster from the date of the agreement to the date of the assignment.

I might be grasping at straws, here. The other issue is whether the Brewers would actually consider trading Hardy (and I'm not suggesting that they would for Weathers).

But the reason this is interesting is that, if this language is accurate, the date of the signed agreement is not necessarily the day the trade was made. Hardy was optioned to AAA within a few days of the trade. If this were done before the transfer agreement was signed, then if my interpretation of this language is correct, he could at least be an eligible assignment as an unnamed player for the Reds.

Footnote: my common sense tells me the Brewers would not do this trade for just Weathers. But I still get a weird vibe about this whole thing - similar to the Micah Owings thing even though it was assumed the rule prohibited his inclusion in the Dunn trade.

jojo
08-15-2009, 07:05 AM
Footnote: my common sense tells me the Brewers would not do this trade for just Weathers. But I still get a weird vibe about this whole thing - similar to the Micah Owings thing even though it was assumed the rule prohibited his inclusion in the Dunn trade.

Fun stuff!

Here's my vibe on what the Brewers are doing with Hardy though-they are willfully trying to prevent service time accumulation for Hardy and don't desire to trade him until the off season.

Why?
1) they'll try to leverage him for something really valuable

2) they don't want to trade Hardy until they are sure they know what they've got in their young stud-i.e. is he ready to start next April or will it be mid season?

The return for Hardy would likely be fairly similar be it for two full seasons or for a season and a half. If they were hot to trade Hardy, Boston and Seattle would have been all over him and certainly the Reds would've been calling too.

Highlifeman21
08-15-2009, 09:52 AM
Fun stuff!

Here's my vibe on what the Brewers are doing with Hardy though-they are willfully trying to prevent service time accumulation for Hardy and don't desire to trade him until the off season.

Why?
1) they'll try to leverage him for something really valuable

2) they don't want to trade Hardy until they are sure they know what they've got in their young stud-i.e. is he ready to start next April or will it be mid season?

The return for Hardy would likely be fairly similar be it for two full seasons or for a season and a half. If they were hot to trade Hardy, Boston and Seattle would have been all over him and certainly the Reds would've been calling too.

Given that Gonzo is now a Red Sox, I'm surprised the Red Sox didn't pry Hardy from the Brew Crew before July 31st.

If Hardy truly is available, then I'd imagine the Red Sox would want Hardy before Gonzo.

But maybe Hardy isn't available (for now at least), and that's why they got Gonzo?

RANDY IN INDY
08-15-2009, 09:55 AM
I'd be very surprised if Hardy is in a Reds uniform any time soon. I guess stranger things have happened.

mth123
08-15-2009, 11:32 AM
Reality check. I really hoped that the Reds would target Hardy even last winter when Escobar emerged as the SS of the future for the Brewers, but there is some reason to be cautious.

Hardy in 2009: .229/.300/.367/.667. He has some pop with decent numbers (even good for a SS) in 2007 and 2008, but the previous two years look a lot like 2009 does. His K % is only up a little and his Walks per K are about the same as 2008. His LD Rate has dropped every year since he debuted in the big leagues. Hardy would probably be the best SS the Reds have had since Larkin's decline began, but he is hardly a sure thing and already a little pricey ($4.65 Million in 2009 with at least an offer of $3.72 Million in 2010). He's also beginning to reach the age where the range drops off just a little. He has value and is certainly worth more than a few weeks of David Weathers, but he should not be so hard to obtain that a team should have to part a ton of top talent. I would think an offer built around Stubbs, and a couple of decent but not stud pitching prospects would be pretty fair. He could easily follow the Bobby Crosby or Kahlil Greene path as much as he could be an answer for some one.

Benihana
08-18-2009, 05:42 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/08/deal-for-bill-hall-in-the-works.html

Bronson Arroyo for Bill Hall and JJ Hardy? We better start looking for some pitching...

jojo
08-18-2009, 05:50 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/08/deal-for-bill-hall-in-the-works.html

Bronson Arroyo for Bill Hall and JJ Hardy? We better start looking for some pitching...

Arroyo for Hall maybe but no way they include Hardy.

I'll add this too, if Hall is the only Brewer the Reds try to get it would be about as puzzling as if the Brewers sent Hall and Hardy to the Reds for Arroyo.

lollipopcurve
08-18-2009, 06:01 PM
Arroyo for Hall maybe but no way they include Hardy.

JJ Hardy has fallen off a cliff this year. And there's no way the Reds trade Arroyo for Bill Hall, given Hall's contract.

I would not be surprised if this thing produces a trade of substance between the Reds and Brewers. A lot of smoke, including George Grande wondering, upon Hardy's demotion, whether the Weathers deal might be expanded, at a later date, to include Hardy. He talked about how close Jocketty and Melvin are and how often they talk. I don't know, I've listened to a TON of Grande, and he very rarely speculates with that kind of specificity. Just reading tea leaves here......

Unassisted
08-18-2009, 06:57 PM
http://brewersbeat.mlblogs.com/archives/2009/08/melvin_working_on_something_fo.html


Melvin "working on something" for Bill Hall

The Brewers have until Friday to settle Bill Hall's future, but a resolution could come sooner.

The slumping Hall was designated for assignment by Milwaukee on Aug. 12, giving the team 10 days to trade Hall or release him and eat the more than $10 million left on his contract. That window expires on Friday.

"I'm working on something," Brewers general manager Doug Melvin said, an indication that he had found a team willing to trade for Hall. "I've gotten some interest. I don't want to say which teams have called or what we're working on, though."

A trade would require Melvin to either take on an equally bulky contract or to include cash to cover some or all of Hall's remaining salary. Hall is making $6.8 million this year, is due $8.4 million in 2010 and will get a $500,000 buyout if a team isn't willing to exercise his $9.25 million club option for 2011.

The Reds have been mentioned as one potential suitor for Hall, who has bashed Cincinnati pitching through the years. Cincinnati happens to have two pitchers -- Aaron Harang and Bronson Arroyo -- nearing the end of big contracts who have been mentioned in trade rumors this summer, but Melvin wouldn't say whether that team was a match.

GoReds
08-18-2009, 07:07 PM
Hall is not a difference maker. If the Reds trade for him and give up anything for that lousy contract, they deserve to be bottom tier for the next several years.

If they offer to take Hall and a piece of the contract and include Hardy in the deal, then that could be worth discussing. Brewers want out of that awful contract, they'll have to include something nice with it.

jojo
08-18-2009, 08:01 PM
Bill Hall is owed roughly $2-3M for the rest of this season, $8.4M in 2010 and his 2011 option can be bought out for $500K so he's owed roughly $12M.

Arroyo is owed roughly $15M over the same period assuming his 2011 option is bought out.

Adding Hardy to the mix dramatically tilts things in the Reds favor in terms of value/money especially assuming he's be a PTBNL with two years of control remaining.

Basically that trade proposal is tantamount to a fleecing of the Brewers.

mth123
08-18-2009, 08:58 PM
Bill Hall is owed roughly $2-3M for the rest of this season, $8.4M in 2010 and his 2011 option can be bought out for $500K so he's owed roughly $12M.

Arroyo is owed roughly $15M over the same period assuming his 2011 option is bought out.

Adding Hardy to the mix dramatically tilts things in the Reds favor in terms of value/money especially assuming he's be a PTBNL with two years of control remaining.

Basically that trade proposal is tantamount to a fleecing of the Brewers.


Unless the Brewers get something else as well. Stubbs?? Cameron is a free agent.

jojo
08-18-2009, 09:00 PM
Unless the Brewers get something else as well. Stubbs?? Cameron is a free agent.

I think you're right that the deal would have to be expanded for the Reds to get Hardy too.

RedEye
08-18-2009, 10:11 PM
The only reason I can think of that the Reds would trade for Bill Hall would be to get rid of Bronson's contract. Hall can't field any positions and he can't really hit either. I just don't see how he helps this team other than part of a glorified salary sawp/dump. OTOH, if JJ Hardy is part of the deal, then it starts to make some sense for the Reds. But, as others have already pointed out, the Brew Crew would need another piece for that to make some sense for them, too.

Scrap Irony
08-18-2009, 10:51 PM
While Bill Hall hits well against the Reds, he's certainly not someone any team should target. Especially for a league average pitcher who's making just about the same cash per year. ($3 million or so, after buy-outs.)

Hall's OPS+ hasn't been over 100 for four years (and not close either) and he can't play either middle infield position defensively. At all.

Arroyo's at a 94 ERA+ right now and has quietly had a really solid second half after a putrid first half.

If Hall's all that's coming back, just say no. If Hardy is a part of it, I still have a hard time getting rid of Arroyo.

Chip R
08-18-2009, 10:58 PM
From Hal's blog:

http://tinyurl.com/rxxutd

AND THE Reds and Giants aren’t just competing this week for wins and losses. Insiders say it is down to the Reds and the Giants over who might get outfielder Bill Hall, let go by the Milwaukee Brewers.

The Brewers would like to have Aaron Harang, which would make the salary switch about equal and give both players a new lease on their baseball life.

Spring~Fields
08-18-2009, 11:03 PM
From Hal's blog:

http://tinyurl.com/rxxutd

AND THE Reds and Giants aren’t just competing this week for wins and losses. Insiders say it is down to the Reds and the Giants over who might get outfielder Bill Hall, let go by the Milwaukee Brewers.

The Brewers would like to have Aaron Harang, which would make the salary switch about equal and give both players a new lease on their baseball life.

Surely this is not serious, Harang for Bill Hall ?

Bill Hall Age 29 Salary 2009: $6,925,000
2007 MIL .254 .315 .425 .740
2008 MIL .225 .293 .396 .689
2009 MIL .201 .265 .341 .606


2009 splits
vs. Left .244 .276 .415 .691
vs. Right .174 .259 .295 .554
2008 splits
vs. Left .306 .371 .522 .893
vs. Right .174 .242 .316 .558
2007 splits
vs. Left .270 .335 .459 .794
vs. Right .247 .305 .408 .713

reds44
08-18-2009, 11:04 PM
Harang for Hall and Hardy?

corkedbat
08-18-2009, 11:05 PM
Trading Harang for Bill Hall with his contract and miserable production would be a moronicthing to do, which is why I expect it to be announced tomorrow morning (after Walty throws in a prospect - Stubbs sounds about right). At least Hardy would fit a position of desaparate need.

corkedbat
08-18-2009, 11:06 PM
Harang for Hall and Hardy?

Only if you can turn around and flip Hall to the Giants.

HokieRed
08-18-2009, 11:10 PM
Only if you can turn around and flip Hall to the Giants.


Interesting idea. Any notion what the Giants might be inclined to pay or what we might be trying to get from them? Or what the Brewers might be looking for from them?

Tom Servo
08-18-2009, 11:15 PM
Oh my god, trading Harang or Arroyo for Hall is such a terrible idea. They may not be worth the money they make but they are legitimate starting pitchers and have some value. Bill Hall hasn't been any good since 2006 and right now isn't close to being a legitimate major league hitter.

RedEye
08-18-2009, 11:25 PM
When they traded for Rolen I was thinking about heading for the proverbial ledge. If they trade Arroyo for Hall, I'll be on it. And if they trade Harang for Hall, I'll be off it.

RedEye
08-18-2009, 11:26 PM
This sounds exactly likes something Sabean would do. Let him do it, Walt! Let him do it!

corkedbat
08-18-2009, 11:27 PM
Interesting idea. Any notion what the Giants might be inclined to pay or what we might be trying to get from them? Or what the Brewers might be looking for from them?

Probably something that offsets Hall's salary

Tom Servo
08-18-2009, 11:33 PM
When they traded for Rolen I was thinking about heading for the proverbial ledge. If they trade Arroyo for Hall, I'll be on it. And if they trade Harang for Hall, I'll be off it.
Exactly. Arroyo for Hall itself is a very questionable deal, Harang for Hall is downright insanity.

HokieRed
08-18-2009, 11:39 PM
Exactly. Arroyo for Hall itself is a very questionable deal, Harang for Hall is downright insanity.

Maybe not if we can flip Hall to the Giants for something useful. You get the salary relief you want and something to fill in one of our needs. Maybe we're trying to get in the in-between role in this deal. Brewers need an arm, we need salary relief and Giants want Hall but are in no position to give up an arm for him. Might work.

Tom Servo
08-18-2009, 11:43 PM
Maybe not if we can flip Hall to the Giants for something useful. You get the salary relief you want and something to fill in one of our needs. Maybe we're trying to get in the in-between role in this deal. Brewers need an arm, we need salary relief and Giants want Hall but are in no position to give up an arm for him. Might work.
I think you're giving the Reds too much credit though, or at least the benefit of the doubt. There's nothing to me that suggests that they would try and acquire Hall only to flip him.

Homer Bailey
08-18-2009, 11:49 PM
If the Reds trade Harang for Bill Hall, I will literally be done as a Reds fan. Literally. That is my promise.

BrooklynRedz
08-19-2009, 12:13 AM
Sounds like the Reds are feeding info to a local beat writer, doing everything they can to drum up a market for Arroyo and Harang. Angels and Brewers have now been mentioned.

redsfandan
08-19-2009, 05:19 AM
Harang for Hall and Hardy?


Only if you can turn around and flip Hall to the Giants.
A 3 team deal with the Brewers and Giants would make some sense. BUT... after the last deal Walt would probably find a way to overpay.

lollipopcurve
08-19-2009, 08:03 AM
It won't be Arroyo or Harang for Bill Hall -- no chance. Hall's in the gutter with an overblown contract. Arroyo and Harang are still pitching solid ballgames often enough and are durable. Now, I could see something happening that includes Hardy.

HokieRed
08-19-2009, 09:43 AM
It won't be Arroyo or Harang for Bill Hall -- no chance. Hall's in the gutter with an overblown contract. Arroyo and Harang are still pitching solid ballgames often enough and are durable. Now, I could see something happening that includes Hardy.


How about one of the two for Hall and Hardy. Hall to the Giants for something or other, maybe just cash. We get Hardy plus salary relief. Giants get Hall. Brewers get an arm. We use the cash to replace Arroyo or Harang. Giants want Hall, according to Hal, but certainly can't spare a starter. Hardy obviously doesn't figure prominently in the Brewers' thinking right now. Big question mark for me in the whole thing is why anybody would want Hall.

lollipopcurve
08-19-2009, 09:58 AM
Big question mark for me in the whole thing is why anybody would want Hall.

There are 2 main possibilities.

1. As part of a contract swap (this is where Arroyo/Harang enter the picture). This does not mean the deal would not include other players.

2. As a utility guy, if Milwaukee is willing to eat almost all of the salary.

bucksfan2
08-19-2009, 10:01 AM
Hall was DFA right? Once he clears waivers then he is free to sign with anyone else, right? If he clears waivers and signs with someone else, the Brewers are still on the hook, right?

Falls City Beer
08-19-2009, 10:14 AM
2. As a utility guy, if Milwaukee is willing to eat almost all of the salary.

The Reds have only three true starters among their position players: Votto, Rolen, and Phillips. They've got nothing but utility/platoon guys among the other 9/10 players on the roster. I don't think Bill Hall works toward solving that problem.

HokieRed
08-19-2009, 10:32 AM
The Reds have only three true starters among their position players: Votto, Rolen, and Phillips. They've got nothing but utility/platoon guys among the other 9/10 players on the roster. I don't think Bill Hall works toward solving that problem.

Agree. I want Hall if and only if we're buying him a ticket to SF. Even Hardy is suspect but worth taking a chance on.

Benihana
08-19-2009, 11:07 AM
When they traded for Rolen I was thinking about heading for the proverbial ledge. If they trade Arroyo for Hall, I'll be on it. And if they trade Harang for Hall, I'll be off it.

Well said.

Benihana
08-19-2009, 11:09 AM
The Reds have only three true starters among their position players: Votto, Rolen, and Phillips. They've got nothing but utility/platoon guys among the other 9/10 players on the roster. I don't think Bill Hall works toward solving that problem.

Agreed (although Bruce is a true starter.) And their drafting history with the current regime seems to indicate many more utility/platoon guys are on the way!! :rolleyes:

Mario-Rijo
08-19-2009, 11:09 AM
The Reds have only three true starters among their position players: Votto, Rolen, and Phillips. They've got nothing but utility/platoon guys among the other 9/10 players on the roster. I don't think Bill Hall works toward solving that problem.

Well that is what happens when the one guiding your choices of whom to covet is Dusty Baker. He figures he can fix any guy if he is at least aggressive by nature at the plate.

lollipopcurve
08-19-2009, 11:41 AM
Agree. I want Hall if and only if we're buying him a ticket to SF. Even Hardy is suspect but worth taking a chance on.

So, if they'll give up Hardy ONLY if you take back Hall, do you still pull the trigger on a deal that sends Arroyo or Harang to Milwaukee?

Personally, I think it would be very high risk for the Reds to do that deal. If you can get 2 years out of Hardy, it might make sense, particularly if you're giving up Arroyo. But 1 year of Hardy, given how he has hit this year? Sounds desperate to me. A young SS who can hit (maybe) who's a year or two from FA is not a building block unless you can extend him.

Benihana
08-19-2009, 12:01 PM
So, if they'll give up Hardy ONLY if you take back Hall, do you still pull the trigger on a deal that sends Arroyo or Harang to Milwaukee?

Personally, I think it would be very high risk for the Reds to do that deal. If you can get 2 years out of Hardy, it might make sense, particularly if you're giving up Arroyo. But 1 year of Hardy, given how he has hit this year? Sounds desperate to me. A young SS who can hit (maybe) who's a year or two from FA is not a building block unless you can extend him.

For Arroyo perhaps. For Harang no.

Without saving any money, I'd be very concerned as to how we're going to replenish the pitching staff.

HokieRed
08-19-2009, 12:55 PM
So, if they'll give up Hardy ONLY if you take back Hall, do you still pull the trigger on a deal that sends Arroyo or Harang to Milwaukee?

Personally, I think it would be very high risk for the Reds to do that deal. If you can get 2 years out of Hardy, it might make sense, particularly if you're giving up Arroyo. But 1 year of Hardy, given how he has hit this year? Sounds desperate to me. A young SS who can hit (maybe) who's a year or two from FA is not a building block unless you can extend him.

Is this two year/one year difference why they've sent him to AAA--i.e. that it affects his service time and thus trade value? I don't know the service time rules well enough to know but seems possible.

lollipopcurve
08-19-2009, 01:47 PM
Is this two year/one year difference why they've sent him to AAA--i.e. that it affects his service time and thus trade value? I don't know the service time rules well enough to know but seems possible.

It does appear to be the reason they've sent him down.

bucksfan2
08-19-2009, 01:50 PM
It does appear to be the reason they've sent him down.

That will be the union's argument. But never let good facts get in the way of unions. Hardy this season sits at .229/.300/.367 OPS .667. Not really a good line considering Milwaukee has a good SS prospect in the waiting.

Benihana
08-19-2009, 02:03 PM
Alex Gordon is in a similar situation in KC

Will M
09-14-2009, 06:41 PM
one thing i have not seen mentioned anywhere is that Hardy is not signed to a LTC. he is arbitration eligible for 2010. i believe there is a limit to how much a player's salary can be cut. he made $4.65M in 2009. so he will make say $3.75-$4M in 2010 unless he is non tendered. with his poor 2009 why would any team want to pay him that much for 2010? he seems a prime candidate to be non tendered after the Brewers find no one who wants him in trade.

jojo
09-14-2009, 06:46 PM
one thing i have not seen mentioned anywhere is that Hardy is not signed to a LTC. he is arbitration eligible for 2010. i believe there is a limit to how much a player's salary can be cut. he made $4.65M in 2009. so he will make say $3.75-$4M in 2010 unless he is non tendered. with his poor 2009 why would any team want to pay him that much for 2010? he seems a prime candidate to be non tendered after the Brewers find no one who wants him in trade.

Someone will trade for him. He's been a 4+ win/yr player in his first couple full seasons before this year and he's yet to turn 27.

Chip R
09-14-2009, 06:53 PM
one thing i have not seen mentioned anywhere is that Hardy is not signed to a LTC. he is arbitration eligible for 2010. i believe there is a limit to how much a player's salary can be cut. he made $4.65M in 2009. so he will make say $3.75-$4M in 2010 unless he is non tendered. with his poor 2009 why would any team want to pay him that much for 2010? he seems a prime candidate to be non tendered after the Brewers find no one who wants him in trade.

If he's non-tendered, he can be signed by anyone for any amount over the league minimum. A team can only can cut their own player(s) salaries a maximum of 20%. If the Brewers non-tendered Hardy, he would be a free agent and could sign with the highest or lowest bidder. MIL would be silly to non-tender him. They could tender him then trade him and let another team decide what to do with him.

Will M
09-14-2009, 07:04 PM
Someone will trade for him. He's been a 4+ win/yr player in his first couple full seasons before this year and he's yet to turn 27.

not so sure. the US economy is not in good shape. unemployment is 10% and is expected to remain there throughout 2010. this does NOT count the people who are still employed but whose hours have been cut. the 'real' unemployment could be as high as 17%. certain parts of the country are in really really bad shape. i suspect teams won't be on a spending spree this winter. we could see a lot of guys non tendered

plus is Hardy really THAT good?
2005 119 games .711 ops
2006 32 games .693 ops
2007 149 games .786 ops
2008 145 games .821 ops
2009 107 games .651 ops

His career OPS is .750 , combine that with the fact that he may really be a second baseman instead of a SS (defensively) and i just don't see tons of teams lined up to give up talent via trade to then pay him $4M

would i want the Reds to snatch him up if he is non tendered? heck yeh! but would I want the Reds to give up decent minor league talent for him then have to pay him $4M? not as clear cut.

Brutus
09-14-2009, 07:10 PM
not so sure. the US economy is not in good shape. unemployment is 10% and is expected to remain there throughout 2010. this does NOT count the people who are still employed but whose hours have been cut. the 'real' unemployment could be as high as 17%. certain parts of the country are in really really bad shape. i suspect teams won't be on a spending spree this winter. we could see a lot of guys non tendered

plus is Hardy really THAT good?
2005 119 games .711 ops
2006 32 games .693 ops
2007 149 games .786 ops
2008 145 games .821 ops
2009 107 games .651 ops

His career OPS is .750 , combine that with the fact that he may really be a second baseman instead of a SS (defensively) and i just don't see tons of teams lined up to give up talent via trade to then pay him $4M

would i want the Reds to snatch him up if he is non tendered? heck yeh! but would I want the Reds to give up decent minor league talent for him then have to pay him $4M? not as clear cut.

Not sure the economy is going to be as much of a factor as that. It might keep teams from paying premier dollars for free agents, but not to the extreme that someone like Hardy, making $4 mil, is going to have a tough time finding work. That's taking things a bit overboard.

Personally, the economic factors, other than on a general basis, probably don't belong in the discussion.

jojo
09-14-2009, 07:11 PM
not so sure. the US economy is not in good shape. unemployment is 10% and is expected to remain there throughout 2010. this does NOT count the people who are still employed but whose hours have been cut. the 'real' unemployment could be as high as 17%. certain parts of the country are in really really bad shape. i suspect teams won't be on a spending spree this winter. we could see a lot of guys non tendered

plus is Hardy really THAT good?
2005 119 games .711 ops
2006 32 games .693 ops
2007 149 games .786 ops
2008 145 games .821 ops
2009 107 games .651 ops

His career OPS is .750 , combine that with the fact that he may really be a second baseman instead of a SS (defensively) and i just don't see tons of teams lined up to give up talent via trade to then pay him $4M

would i want the Reds to snatch him up if he is non tendered? heck yeh! but would I want the Reds to give up decent minor league talent for him then have to pay him $4M? not as clear cut.

Hardy is an excellent defensive shortstop and coupled to an OPS of .750, that's a valuable player.

Chip is right. The Brewers manipulated his service time to increase his value. They aren't likely to give him away.

Will M
09-14-2009, 07:29 PM
Hardy is an excellent defensive shortstop


ESPN fielding stats:
2009 Hardy 9th/24 in range factor & 4th/24 in fielding percentage.
2008 Hardy 8th/18 in range factor & 8th/18 in fielding percentage.
2007 Hardy 7th/24 in range factor & 24th (dead last)/24 in fielding percentage.

these stats actually don't look as bad as i thought they would.
he may be a decent defender but these stats don't backup your statement that he is an 'excellent defensive shortstop'.

Patrick Bateman
09-14-2009, 07:35 PM
ESPN fielding stats:
2009 Hardy 9th/24 in range factor & 4th/24 in fielding percentage.
2008 Hardy 8th/18 in range factor & 8th/18 in fielding percentage.
2007 Hardy 7th/24 in range factor & 24th (dead last)/24 in fielding percentage.

these stats actually don't look as bad as i thought they would.
he may be a decent defender but these stats don't backup your statement that he is an 'excellent defensive shortstop'.

Well that's probably because your using archaic fielding stats.

jojo
09-14-2009, 07:36 PM
ESPN fielding stats:
2009 Hardy 9th/24 in range factor & 4th/24 in fielding percentage.
2008 Hardy 8th/18 in range factor & 8th/18 in fielding percentage.
2007 Hardy 7th/24 in range factor & 24th (dead last)/24 in fielding percentage.

these stats actually don't look as bad as i thought they would.
he may be a decent defender but these stats don't backup your statement that he is an 'excellent defensive shortstop'.

He's been grouped in the top 5 since he's become a starter based upon play by play metrics like UZR.

Brutus
09-14-2009, 07:41 PM
He's been grouped in the top 5 since he's become a starter based upon play by play metrics like UZR.

You know you may have just unleashed the demons. Right?

:beerme:

TheNext44
09-14-2009, 08:03 PM
not so sure. the US economy is not in good shape. unemployment is 10% and is expected to remain there throughout 2010. this does NOT count the people who are still employed but whose hours have been cut. the 'real' unemployment could be as high as 17%. certain parts of the country are in really really bad shape. i suspect teams won't be on a spending spree this winter. we could see a lot of guys non tendered

plus is Hardy really THAT good?
2005 119 games .711 ops
2006 32 games .693 ops
2007 149 games .786 ops
2008 145 games .821 ops
2009 107 games .651 ops

His career OPS is .750 , combine that with the fact that he may really be a second baseman instead of a SS (defensively) and i just don't see tons of teams lined up to give up talent via trade to then pay him $4M

would i want the Reds to snatch him up if he is non tendered? heck yeh! but would I want the Reds to give up decent minor league talent for him then have to pay him $4M? not as clear cut.



Hardy is an excellent defensive shortstop and coupled to an OPS of .750, that's a valuable player.

Chip is right. The Brewers manipulated his service time to increase his value. They aren't likely to give him away.

This is the dilemma with Hardy. His overall career numbers say he is a league average hitter, 750 OPS. But if you go year by year, he's been all over the place, from very good, to lousy to average, and most important, his current season, which should be the biggest indicator, is his worse.

Is he a 750 OPS hitter, as his career stats suggest, or a .651 OPS hitter as this year suggests, or a .821 OPS hitter as his career year suggests.

I don't think anyone knows, which makes his acquisition a risky one.

kpresidente
09-14-2009, 08:20 PM
Is he a 750 OPS hitter, as his career stats suggest, or a .651 OPS hitter as this year suggests, or a .821 OPS hitter as his career year suggests.


Not really all over the place, more like a young guy trending upward, then set back this season by a .250 BABiP.

I say it's a fantastic buy low.

jojo
09-14-2009, 08:25 PM
This is the dilemma with Hardy. His overall career numbers say he is a league average hitter, 750 OPS. But if you go year by year, he's been all over the place, from very good, to lousy to average, and most important, his current season, which should be the biggest indicator, is his worse.

Is he a 750 OPS hitter, as his career stats suggest, or a .651 OPS hitter as this year suggests, or a .821 OPS hitter as his career year suggests.

I don't think anyone knows, which makes his acquisition a risky one.

I think you take his last three seasons and regress them. I'd suggest he's likely to be a league average (wOBA=.330 or OPS=.740) with upside.

Will M
09-14-2009, 08:31 PM
Not really all over the place, more like a young guy trending upward, then set back this season by a .250 BABiP.

I say it's a fantastic buy low.

is this the same BABiP that said Matt Belisle was a good pitcher who was just unlucky year after year after year or is this some new improved BABiP?

i'm starting to think people can just pull some new stat out of their you know what every time they want to argue some point.

TheNext44
09-14-2009, 08:33 PM
Not really all over the place, more like a young guy trending upward, then set back this season by a .250 BABiP.

I say it's a fantastic buy low.

You're correct, it is a trend upward, with a big drop this year, thanks for correct me. But I'm not sure it's attributable to his BABIP.

His career BABIP is .278, and this year it's .257. You adjust his current numbers to include a .278 BABIP and assume all his extra hits are doubles, and his OPS is .701. That is still a big drop from his upward trend and his career averages.

He could very will rebound next year with a .750 OPS or higher. I think there is just enough evidence to suggest that this year is an anomaly, but there also is enough to suggest he is starting to trend downward.

Nugget
09-14-2009, 08:46 PM
The Hardy (or Janish for that matter) call really depends on what the Reds and fans are looking for in the shortstop. If they are not looking for the next coming of Barry Larkin then the reds could end up with a great defensive shortstop who is useful in the bottom half of the order.

mth123
09-14-2009, 09:19 PM
I like Hardy and he's on the top of my wish list, but Will has a point. Hardy is a $4 Million plus player in real dollars who crashed and burned in 2009 and was banished for it. The Brewers may find trading him at his dollar cost may mean the talent return won't be so much. Kahlil Greene and Bobby Crosby have to be fresh on everyone's mind.

bucksfan2
09-15-2009, 09:52 AM
I like Hardy and he's on the top of my wish list, but Will has a point. Hardy is a $4 Million plus player in real dollars who crashed and burned in 2009 and was banished for it. The Brewers may find trading him at his dollar cost may mean the talent return won't be so much. Kahlil Greene and Bobby Crosby have to be fresh on everyone's mind.

I don't get the allure of Hardy. What I do see is that Milwaukee sent him to AAA in the middle of a pennant race because he couldn't hack it. I get that it saves him a year free agency wise, but do you really thin Milwaukee sends him to AAA if he could help the big league club? If Milwaukee thought Hardy was ready for a bounce back 2nd half, would they have sent him to AAA? There is a reason he is in AAA, and the reason has more to do with his performance on the diamond than it does anything else.

jojo
09-15-2009, 10:01 AM
I don't get the allure of Hardy. What I do see is that Milwaukee sent him to AAA in the middle of a pennant race because he couldn't hack it. I get that it saves him a year free agency wise, but do you really thin Milwaukee sends him to AAA if he could help the big league club? If Milwaukee thought Hardy was ready for a bounce back 2nd half, would they have sent him to AAA? There is a reason he is in AAA, and the reason has more to do with his performance on the diamond than it does anything else.

I think they are gushing over Escobar and convinced themselves that he is their guy for now and the future. Once they got there it's a matter of how to gt the most return for Hardy. Given he was in the middle of an off year offensively, they realized that the best way would be to manipulate his service time and try this off season.

Sea Ray
09-15-2009, 10:04 AM
The Reds need more offense in 2010. What positions can be upgraded? The way I see it they are CF, LF, SS and C. I think we have a plethora of CF candidates so my guess is we'll go in house there. I'd be open to an upgrade in LF but we have candidates for that too. I don't think there are many good hitting catching candidates out there although I would like to see them re-sign Ramon Hernandez to an incentive laden contract. That kind of leaves SS. I don't think they can afford to leave Janish there for 150 games and have him flirt with the Mendoza line all year. He's hitting .212 in front of Votto. Think what he'd hit if he was in front of the pitcher where he really should be?

If I'm Walt I target SS as my #1 position to upgrade in 2010.

bucksfan2
09-15-2009, 10:28 AM
I think they are gushing over Escobar and convinced themselves that he is their guy for now and the future. Once they got there it's a matter of how to gt the most return for Hardy. Given he was in the middle of an off year offensively, they realized that the best way would be to manipulate his service time and try this off season.

Hardy is making ~$4.5M this season no matter where he plays. The Brewers also lost Rickie Weeks early on in the season. Escobar is also having a less than stellar season with the Brewers.

I just don't see a team give up on a player like Hardy unless they think he is finished. To me you aren't maximizing his trade value if you send him to AAA, in reality you are degrading his trade value and they likely won't get much in a trade. They are paying Hardy ~$2M for absolutely no production what so ever. I may be wrong, but if Hardy could help this club, he would be in Milwaukee.

jojo
09-15-2009, 10:48 AM
Hardy is making ~$4.5M this season no matter where he plays. The Brewers also lost Rickie Weeks early on in the season. Escobar is also having a less than stellar season with the Brewers.

I just don't see a team give up on a player like Hardy unless they think he is finished. To me you aren't maximizing his trade value if you send him to AAA, in reality you are degrading his trade value and they likely won't get much in a trade. They are paying Hardy ~$2M for absolutely no production what so ever. I may be wrong, but if Hardy could help this club, he would be in Milwaukee.

They maximized his value n the sense that by sending him to AAA they effectively manipulated his service time so that he remains under control for 2 seasons rather than 1.

Bumstead
09-15-2009, 10:59 AM
IMHO, it seems unlikely that Milwaukee would deal Hardy within the division. But, if they would, he would be a significant upgrade over Janish. Other possibilities could be: Brignac, Brandon Wood, and maybe Yunel Escobar. None of them will come cheap, but are certainly worth inquiring about.

Bum

Sea Ray
09-15-2009, 02:24 PM
IMHO, it seems unlikely that Milwaukee would deal Hardy within the division. But, if they would, he would be a significant upgrade over Janish. Other possibilities could be: Brignac, Brandon Wood, and maybe Yunel Escobar. None of them will come cheap, but are certainly worth inquiring about.

Bum

Have we gotten the PBNL in the David Weathers deal? If I missed it I apologize

Brutus
09-15-2009, 03:02 PM
Have we gotten the PBNL in the David Weathers deal? If I missed it I apologize

No. But any loophole there may have been for Hardy was closed up when he was called back to the majors.

The PTBNL is still out there.

lollipopcurve
09-15-2009, 03:02 PM
Have we gotten the PBNL in the David Weathers deal? If I missed it I apologize

No -- they have till October 15. And it may end up being cash anyway.

Sea Ray
09-16-2009, 09:36 AM
No. But any loophole there may have been for Hardy was closed up when he was called back to the majors.

The PTBNL is still out there.

I doubt the PTBNL is Hardy but why would his being recalled preclude him from being the player?

Brutus
09-16-2009, 02:19 PM
I doubt the PTBNL is Hardy but why would his being recalled preclude him from being the player?

Since he got called up. The rule states once the transfer agreement is submitted to the commissioner's office (no more than 15 days after the time of the trade), a PTBNL cannot be active on the club's roster from that time to the time of the finalization of the trade. So because Hardy has been back up on the roster for the last few weeks, he cannot be a PTBNL in the Reds' trade.

blumj
09-16-2009, 05:21 PM
They maximized his value n the sense that by sending him to AAA they effectively manipulated his service time so that he remains under control for 2 seasons rather than 1.

My understanding was that, since they recalled him on Sept. 1, he'll still have enough service time for free agency after next season as he would have if he'd never been sent down, that they really were just using the 25 man roster spot until rosters expanded.

jojo
09-16-2009, 05:26 PM
My understanding was that, since they recalled him on Sept. 1, he'll still have enough service time for free agency after next season as he would have if he'd never been sent down, that they really were just using the 25 man roster spot until rosters expanded.

He was in the minors for long enough to delay his free agency.

blumj
09-16-2009, 05:29 PM
He was in the minors for long enough to delay his free agency.
Okay, my mistake then.

jojo
09-16-2009, 05:58 PM
Okay, my mistake then.

It's complicated and this case in particular is a bit distasteful to think about anyway (at least for me).

:beerme:

Sea Ray
09-16-2009, 08:55 PM
Since he got called up. The rule states once the transfer agreement is submitted to the commissioner's office (no more than 15 days after the time of the trade), a PTBNL cannot be active on the club's roster from that time to the time of the finalization of the trade. So because Hardy has been back up on the roster for the last few weeks, he cannot be a PTBNL in the Reds' trade.


I had no idea there was such a rule. Are you sure about that? In 1995 the Reds traded for David Wells and the Tigers got a PTBNL. That player ended up to be Mark Lewis who played with the Reds throughout the Sept and into the post season. I was not under the impression that a PTBNL could not come off of an active roster

jojo
09-16-2009, 09:05 PM
I had no idea there was such a rule. Are you sure about that? In 1995 the Reds traded for David Wells and the Tigers got a PTBNL. That player ended up to be Mark Lewis who played with the Reds throughout the Sept and into the post season. I was not under the impression that a PTBNL could not come off of an active roster

Alot of this stuff is collectively bargained (i.e. look for the latest CBA).

Brutus
09-16-2009, 09:13 PM
I had no idea there was such a rule. Are you sure about that? In 1995 the Reds traded for David Wells and the Tigers got a PTBNL. That player ended up to be Mark Lewis who played with the Reds throughout the Sept and into the post season. I was not under the impression that a PTBNL could not come off of an active roster

It may have been put in at a later date, but it's definitely a rule.

BTW, jojo, it's actually not listed in the CBA. This rule is found in the "professional rules of baseball" document that lists about 60 sections of various rules above and beyond those governed in the CBA.

Though the actual document is pretty hard to get a hold of (as MLB does not really like to publicize it), some people that have seen it before have transcribed the general rules.

Here is the section on trades:

Rule 12 – Transfer Agreements (Trades)
________________________________________
Rule 12 outlines the rules for Transfer Agreements between clubs, generally in the form of trades or contract purchases between two teams. Generally, teams can trade players for whatever consideration they deem fit, but all such transactions must be approved by the Commissioner. Accordingly, Rule 12 is largely a procedural rule outlining the process for approval.

• All transactions between clubs must be filed with and approved by the Commissioner in the form of a Transfer Agreement within 15 days of the transaction.
• Penalties may be imposed if the Transfer Agreement does not fully and accurately state the terms and consideration of the transaction
• Assignment Agreements shall also be executed whenever title to a player’s contract changes from one club to another. The player, league, and the Commissioner shall be notified of all such transfers.
• Any payments for transfers will be made at the time that the transfer agreement is signed unless agreed otherwise; payments may not be deferred for more than one year.
• Every transfer agreement shall express the consideration for the transfer in definite terms. A Transfer Agreement may provide for the trade of an unnamed player, provided that: (a) the assignment must be made within six months of the agreement; (b) the agreement permits a stated cash consideration in lieu of the assignment; and (c) the player cannot be on an active MLB roster from the date of the agreement to the date of the assignment.
• The death, permanent incapacitation, retirement, enrollment in the armed service, or failure to report of a player prior to reporting to his new club does not void a transfer unless the Transfer Agreement provides otherwise.
• If a player is transferred to a club whose season has not yet started, and his previous club’s season has already started, he must be paid his agreed upon salary at his previous level until the season of the team to which he is transferred begins.
• The assigning club is responsible for immediately paying for the player’s transportation to his new city, and the assignee club shall later reimburse those expenses.

Sea Ray
09-16-2009, 09:13 PM
Alot of this stuff is collectively bargained (i.e. look for the latest CBA).

I understand but I've never read anywhere that a PTBNL can't be on the active roster.

Sea Ray
09-16-2009, 09:16 PM
• All transactions between clubs must be filed with and approved by the Commissioner in the form of a Transfer Agreement within 15 days of the transaction.


Thanks Brutus :thumbup:

I guess this rule has changed since the Mark Lewis trade...

jojo
09-16-2009, 09:18 PM
I understand but I've never read anywhere that a PTBNL can't be on the active roster.

hat tip to Brutus above....

Brutus
09-16-2009, 09:24 PM
hat tip to Brutus above....

:beerme:

What's interesting about that, is that Hardy, though he never would have likely been the unnamed player in the Weathers trade, could have technically been eligible assuming only two things:

1) the actual transfer agreement was not filed with the commissioner's office until after three days (as that was how long Hardy was still with the Brewers before being optioned), and,

2) Hardy had never been recalled from Triple-A.

Of course, we know that No. 2 did end up happening, so Hardy is definitely not the player in the trade, if there was any doubt, as he's now back on an Active MLB roster. However, had that not been the case, by rule, Hardy would have been an eligible player if No. 1 were true.

LoganBuck
09-16-2009, 09:43 PM
Has anyone else noticed that Angel Salome has not been called up to the Brewers even though he is on the 40 man roster? They only have two catchers on the roster. I would think that they would have called him up just to have the luxury of having three.

Hmmmm........

mth123
09-16-2009, 09:53 PM
Has anyone else noticed that Angel Salome has not been called up to the Brewers even though he is on the 40 man roster? They only have two catchers on the roster. I would think that they would have called him up just to have the luxury of having three.

Hmmmm........

I'm thinking along the same lines, but the catcher I'm hoping for Jonathon Lucroy. He and Hanigan could share the catching spot for cheap with Chris Denove at AAA. It sounds like a lot of youth, but Hanigan is pushing 30 and fits the vet role IMO.

Salome may have trouble sticking behind the plate.

TheNext44
09-16-2009, 10:05 PM
I had no idea there was such a rule. Are you sure about that? In 1995 the Reds traded for David Wells and the Tigers got a PTBNL. That player ended up to be Mark Lewis who played with the Reds throughout the Sept and into the post season. I was not under the impression that a PTBNL could not come off of an active roster

Very good memory. I believe that that very transaction was the impetus for that rule change.

Basically it really was unfair that the Reds could use both Wells and Lewis in their drive for the playoffs, when they were only able to get Wells by offering Lewis. I believe that is why that rule was added.