I can't say I agree with him. Non tendering Hardy would not be a good idea for the organization

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4613547&name=olney_buster

That's all kinds of dumb.

 Makes some sense, but I think it's unlikely.

The fact is, the Brewers' SS situation is wide open, and quite frankly, they have the ability to keep both Escobar and Hardy, using one as a bench player and one as a starter, or using both.

We like to think things are easily compartmentalized, with Hardy being traded and Escobar starting, but the fact is that Escobar and Hardy had crappy MLB seasons in 2009, and both could be on the MLB roster with some use for 2010. I tend to favor Escobar because of the advances he made in AAA during 2009 -- I think it's only a matter of time before he applies his advances at the MLB level -- but, even if you're convinced that Hardy is as good as gone, look at his career progression clearly, and tell me he wouldn't be a bench option at SS, if anything else.

I think Hardy is a trade throw in at best, Escobar is promising with some flaws in 2009 at the MLB level, and frankly, they should fight for the job throughout the season.

The Brewers go into next year not knowing for sure if Weeks will bounce back from his injury, nor do they know if McGehee or Gamel will do a good job at 3rd base.  Or if Escobar will hit a wall next year.  It would not be the worst decision in the world if the Brewers decided to keep Hardy to start the season out and then trade him later on if SS, 2nd and 3rd base are being adequately covered with Escobar, McGehee/Gamel and Weeks.  It would be a good insurance policy unless another team really wanted JJ and were willing to give up some pitching for him.   While JJ has stated he only wants to play SS, when push comes to shove he would rather being playing 2nd or 3rd base than sitting on the bench.  

SeattlePilot:

The Brewers go into next year not knowing for sure if Weeks will bounce back from his injury, nor do they know if McGehee or Gamel will do a good job at 3rd base.  Or if Escobar will hit a wall next year.  It would not be the worst decision in the world if the Brewers decided to keep Hardy to start the season out and then trade him later on if SS, 2nd and 3rd base are being adequately covered with Escobar, McGehee/Gamel and Weeks.  It would be a good insurance policy unless another team really wanted JJ and were willing to give up some pitching for him.   While JJ has stated he only wants to play SS, when push comes to shove he would rather being playing 2nd or 3rd base than sitting on the bench.  

I think it would be a monumental failure on Melvin's part if Hardy doesn't get traded this off-season.  It is crucial that they convert him into some form of pitching because beyond Hardy, the realistic assets to do so are slim.  Second, teams build their rosters during the off-season.  They're not going to wait until July to decide they need a ss of Hardy's level unless there was an injury.  You can't count on that market being there, though.  Right now there are a number of teams that could use him, and Melvin absolutely needs to turn this thing into a bidding war and make the most of it.

TheEraser:

SeattlePilot:

The Brewers go into next year not knowing for sure if Weeks will bounce back from his injury, nor do they know if McGehee or Gamel will do a good job at 3rd base.  Or if Escobar will hit a wall next year.  It would not be the worst decision in the world if the Brewers decided to keep Hardy to start the season out and then trade him later on if SS, 2nd and 3rd base are being adequately covered with Escobar, McGehee/Gamel and Weeks.  It would be a good insurance policy unless another team really wanted JJ and were willing to give up some pitching for him.   While JJ has stated he only wants to play SS, when push comes to shove he would rather being playing 2nd or 3rd base than sitting on the bench.  

I think it would be a monumental failure on Melvin's part if Hardy doesn't get traded this off-season.  It is crucial that they convert him into some form of pitching because beyond Hardy, the realistic assets to do so are slim.  Second, teams build their rosters during the off-season.  They're not going to wait until July to decide they need a ss of Hardy's level unless there was an injury.  You can't count on that market being there, though.  Right now there are a number of teams that could use him, and Melvin absolutely needs to turn this thing into a bidding war and make the most of it.

I tend to agree mostly with Eraser here. Hardy being flipped for pitching this offseason is probably vital to landing enough pitching to contend next year without giving some schlub a contract he doesn't deserve. I also can't see keeping Hardy around with the team at all next year. Too much has happened, he NEEDS a change of scenery and the team needs to move on, IMO.

I think Olney is probably getting fed this stuff from some large market GM/front office (*caugh* Boston *caugh*) with the motive of hoping some GM starts cutting loose players like Hardy so that they can scoop them up and be the benficiaries of another fiscal inequality. It's annoying as hell, but there really isn't any need to panic.

If worst comes to worst and some team is unwilling to trade for Hardy because of the money issues, then you just hold off trading him until after you've made a deal/gone to arby with him. Then you can trade him to a team with cost certainty and even pick up some small part of the contract if that is what it takes to make a deal.

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

Einsteinhood:

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Hardy's agent tries to argue for a raise of any kind.  Outside of having one more year of service, the man doesn't deserve much of anything over what he got last year.  That should be the only reason why he doesn't actually lose money off of his contract.

TheDude:

Einsteinhood:

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Hardy's agent tries to argue for a raise of any kind.  Outside of having one more year of service, the man doesn't deserve much of anything over what he got last year.  That should be the only reason why he doesn't actually lose money off of his contract.

 

As I've stated many times before, it is very, very, very rare for a player to stay at the same salary or to take a paycut once he's in the arbitration stage.

brewguru:

TheDude:

Einsteinhood:

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Hardy's agent tries to argue for a raise of any kind.  Outside of having one more year of service, the man doesn't deserve much of anything over what he got last year.  That should be the only reason why he doesn't actually lose money off of his contract.

 

As I've stated many times before, it is very, very, very rare for a player to stay at the same salary or to take a paycut once he's in the arbitration stage.

Doesn't mean he deserves to get a raise.

 

TheDude:

Einsteinhood:

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Hardy's agent tries to argue for a raise of any kind.  Outside of having one more year of service, the man doesn't deserve much of anything over what he got last year.  That should be the only reason why he doesn't actually lose money off of his contract.

Well, the arby system is set up to pay players based in large part on service time, which is how he'll land the raise. That, and he'll argue based on the 07-08 numbers too, though that isn't going to carry as much weight as the simple fact he's a year deeper into arby.

TheDude:

brewguru:

TheDude:

Einsteinhood:

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Hardy's agent tries to argue for a raise of any kind.  Outside of having one more year of service, the man doesn't deserve much of anything over what he got last year.  That should be the only reason why he doesn't actually lose money off of his contract.

As I've stated many times before, it is very, very, very rare for a player to stay at the same salary or to take a paycut once he's in the arbitration stage.

Doesn't mean he deserves to get a raise.

One could argue that he deserves a raise now based on the fact that the system kept him from making more than he did in 2008-09 coming off of the years he had each of the years before. In the end, he'll still make a lot less overall than he would have gotten had he been free to sell his services for market value in 2008 and 2009, so it's hard for me to go back now and say he doesn't "deserve" money now.

Oh, and in case you're thinking about complaining about this system, just remember that it keeps salaries down and helps the Brewers compete overall.

TheDude:

brewguru:

TheDude:

Einsteinhood:

FWIW, I don't see Hardy getting anything like a 7 million dollar arby settlement (a raise of over 2 million over last season). He'll probably get a smallish raise, but nothing more than to around say 5 million.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Hardy's agent tries to argue for a raise of any kind.  Outside of having one more year of service, the man doesn't deserve much of anything over what he got last year.  That should be the only reason why he doesn't actually lose money off of his contract.

 

As I've stated many times before, it is very, very, very rare for a player to stay at the same salary or to take a paycut once he's in the arbitration stage.

Doesn't mean he deserves to get a raise.

 

 

Nobody said he deserves one, just that he'll get one.

Einsteinhood:

Well, the arby system is set up to pay players based in large part on service time, which is how he'll land the raise. That, and he'll argue based on the 07-08 numbers too, though that isn't going to carry as much weight as the simple fact he's a year deeper into arby.

I don't have the Insider, so I wasn't able to read the whole article, but isn't this the whole point of the article?  That players can get more money with arby because they can suck it up one year (like Hardy did) and still get a raise?

The point about hearing the argument for a raise meant I just wanted to hear the agent completely dismiss the horrid season, which is rather ludicrous.

Einsteinhood:

Oh, and in case you're thinking about complaining about this system,

Wasn't Olney doing this?  Oh, and I haven't mentioned the system. 

brewguru:

Nobody said he deserves one, just that he'll get one.

I wasn't originally countering anyone that did say he deserves one.  Although, you could make that argument because we know his agent will say he deserves one.  Which, was the whole point of my post - he doesn't actually deserve one, but he probably will anyway.