Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

[A_K]

In the hypothetical world I said I have no problem ACQUIRING PORCELLO. Please show me where I said Castellanos. Better yet here's what I said and of course you didn't quote it:

"I have no problem acquiring Porcello. I have a problem trading Hardy or Jim Johnson. I also don't want Peralta who will be a free agent next season and I don't believe he is needed for a one year rental."

Sounds good.

[Seafordeagles]

This just in from MLB rumors:

When asked if the Orioles would have to be overwhelmed to trade shortstop J.J. Hardy, manager Buck Showalter responded "What word is above "overwhelmed?", tweets Roch Kubatko of MASNsports.com. The Tigers reportedly wanted Hardy in a three-way deal in order to ship Rick Porcello to the Cubs.

[ofahn]

When asked if the Orioles would have to be overwhelmed to trade shortstop J.J. Hardy, manager Buck Showalter responded "What word is above "overwhelmed?"

Buck sure knows how to build trade value, doesn't he?

[birdwatcher55]

Why are we anxious to help out a team we will likely have to deal with in a Wild Card situation this year?? So they want Hardy. People in hell want ice water too. This proposed deal makes ZERO sense to me as we give up a GG SS and 50-save reliever for a journeyman IF and a maybe prospect. If Syd Thrift was still running the show I would be in panic mood today. My guess is DD gets a big laugh at posts like this as he sips his morning coffee

[ofahn]

Why are we anxious to help out a team we will likely have to deal with in a Wild Card situation this year?? So they want Hardy. People in hell want ice water too. This proposed deal makes ZERO sense to me as we give up a GG SS and 50-save reliever for a journeyman IF and a maybe prospect. If Syd Thrift was still running the show I would be in panic mood today. My guess is DD gets a big laugh at posts like this as he sips his morning coffee

First, you're addressing the RUMOR; which is constantly misreported.

Second, the impression you give me is that you're willing to sacrifice the opportunity to build a perennial winner for the chance to MAYBE be a playoff team again this year. We'll have a winning team this year. It might not make the playoffs, but our pitching is too good and too deep to win less than 82 games. However, I still see too many question marks on that roster to make a big investment into it. Keeping Hardy and Johnson when they could be converted into future wins is an investment in THIS year.

IMO if we could trade Jim Johnson (easily replaceable with a minor drop in production) and JJ Hardy (replaceable with a somewhat bigger drop in OVERALL talent) for Rick Porcello, Nick Castellanos, and Peralta (a ONE year fill in) you HAVE TO make that trade for the future benefit of the team.

A GM would make that trade. A fan thinking ONLY about winning now might not.

[birdwatcher55]

Would Castellanos and Peralta for Jim Johnson and JJ Hardy be fair?

Is shooting fish in a bathtub fair???

[Jordan Tuwiner]

http://mlbbuzz.yardbarker.com/blog/mlbb ... o/12661444

The Baltimore Orioles aren’t interested in trading shortstop J.J. Hardy to Detroit for starter Rick Porcello.
They may be more willing to trade closer Jim Johnson.
At first blush, that seems odd. But there’s a sabermetric rationale behind it.
Johnson could have a superb 2013 season and still not approach what he accomplished last year: He led the majors with 51 saves, made his first All-Star appearance and was one of the most dominant relievers in baseball. He turns 30 this June, so he’s right in the middle of his prime.

[ofahn]

I posted this last night:

The Tigers have made a HUGE investment in this season and they know they can't afford to leave any weak link (position) on their roster. They'll end up overpaying for a closer because they can't afford to take a chance on an untested rookie. They KNOW they need a proven commodity and they've had talks with other teams dangling Porcello for a SS. If they can't find of those then they'll almost certainly focus on a proven closer.

[A_K]

Simple hypothetical. I realize things aren't this simple, but just as a thought exercise.

A) Sign Joe Saunders (let's say a two year deal), hold on to Jim Johnson.

B) Sign Matt Lidstrom (cheaper, one-year deal), trade Jim Johnson for Rick Porcello.

I realize we could make the Johnson-Porcello swap and still sign Saunders, or not sign Lidstrom, and you'd still be able to make a case for or against the trade. But given the current rumor mill, it seems like these might be two of the options presented to Duquette.

[Seafordeagles]

I know Jim Johnson's father-in-law. Matt Wieters is the Godfather of his child. Down deep I believe if the orioles trade Johnson than Wieters will walk as soon as he can. Just my personal belief and I have nothing to back that up other than I know that they are very close, and I know its a business decision.

Any trade has to go through Angelos desk when it involves a player like Jim Johnson. Personally I don't see Angelos allowing this trade. I guess time will tell.

[ofahn]

Down deep I believe if the orioles trade Johnson than Wieters will walk as soon as he can. Just my personal belief and I have nothing to back that up other than I know that they are very close, and I know its a business decision.

Personal feelings have an important part in this game, just like they do in any business; but I think that Scott Boras will have more influence on Wieter's decision than trading Jim Johnson. In fact, when Wieters is eligible for free agency at the end of 2015 Jim Johnson may not be an effective closer any longer because of his age.

As important as Wieters is to this team NO one player is more important than any other. We need to make decisions that will make the team better in the future before we worry about personal feelings. IMO if you asked Matt Wieters whether he would trade Jim Johnson TODAY if he thought it would allow him to go to a World Series with the Orioles before his contract was up, he would say YES.

[Jordan Tuwiner]

Any trade has to go through Angelos desk when it involves a player like Jim Johnson. Personally I don't see Angelos allowing this trade. I guess time will tell.

I wonder, too, if that would cause a problem.

I think of DD and Buck really believed in a deal that Angelos would let it go through.

[birdwatcher55]

No way Dan Duquette moves a 50 save reliever unless someone is SERIOUSLY overpaying

[ofahn]

No way Dan Duquette moves a 50 save reliever unless someone is SERIOUSLY overpaying

I respect that you see things that way, BUT you may be in the minority there.

[Jordan Tuwiner]

No way Dan Duquette moves a 50 save reliever unless someone is SERIOUSLY overpaying

Do you see saves as a good way to evaluate and determine a reliever's value?