Ah hell, let's re-sign him

[Scrat1]

It's only one position on the field. I am comfortable that they could employ $15M and get more than 2 WAR out of it.

That being said, they could also pick up the option and trade him. If the market is as scarce as you suggest, then he'll likely have value there. So the O's could get assets + $15M to work with. They are in a good position.

Yeah, this. Or at least fine 2 WAR elsewhere. Not interested in that colossal option.

[allquixotic]

1. I want the Orioles to resign Markakis for 3-4 more years so he can possibly play his entire career with one team.

2. I don't want the Orioles to pay him $17 mil for next year or any remaining year in his career.

I'm fine with the team giving him a $2 mil tip to begin negotiations on a new contract. It'd be unfortunate if some other team overpays him. I think re-signing Hardy is much more important than retaining Markakis.

My preferred result: O's extend both Markakis and Hardy for 3 or more years each.

OK result: O's use Markakis' 2015 option, and give Hardy at least a 3 year contract.

Bad result: O's don't extend either of them, only electing the option on Markakis (or worst of all, letting him walk after 2014).

It really comes down to how much budget is available. Makes me wish we could dump the Jimenez salary ASAP. That's a big pile of coins that could go to some players who are actually making a positive contribution this year.

[HokieOs]

You must have missed Thorne's commentary last week when he talked about Nick and reported about asking him what he would do if he was a free agent...... and Nick stoically answered "play for the team that gives me the most money".

That directly contradicts what he said earlier this year. He mentioned that he already made plenty of money and it wasn't all about that. His agent probably had a talk with him.

I don't think the two statements necessarily contradict each other. It's possible that he might be willing to give the Os something of a hometown discount while at the same time, not caring who he signs with outside of Baltimore if he has to look around.

For what it's worth, while I would love to sign Nick to a 3/30 type deal instead of picking up the option this year, I don't think 3/30 is going to get it done. I'd actually be willing to do 4 years... and I think 4/48 could lock him up... and I think I'd be plenty OK with the deal. No, he isn't the greatest, but he is a very solid player who gives great effort and is a patient hitter. He has a career average of .292... and a career of OPS of almost .800.

Yes, even 4/48 is overpaying a tad. But he is usually a pretty safe bet to have an average year at worst. But only once in 9 seasons has he batted less than .284. Also only once has his OPS been less than .756. Oh, and he plays almost every night... playing more than 100 games each year... and fewer than 150 games twice (his first year and 2012 where he got hurt).

[tinamodotti]

I remember a really nice one he made at Texas a few years ago to save a game. I think Sherrill was pitching.

Yep, it was another bottom of the ninth catch with a runner in scoring position....

[atomic]

I'd pick up the 2015 option. That's probably where it would end for me.

Picking up the option makes perfect sense. It basically costs you 15 million and if he performs well next season than offer the extension. No risk.

[tinamodotti]

I remember a really nice one he made at Texas a few years ago to save a game. I think Sherrill was pitching.

And what a difference 5 years makes. Of our starting 9 for that Texas game... SEVEN of them are no longer on an MLB roster. That's how bad we were.

Roberts

Jones

Markakis

Huff

Wigginton

Scott

Zaun

Pie

Izturis

[25 Nuggets]

Picking up the option makes perfect sense. It basically costs you 15 million and if he performs well next season than offer the extension. No risk.

...except if you're dealing with a little over a hundred "marbles" as DD says.

$32 mil committed

$35.1 mil expected through arbitration

$31.5 mil if all options are exercised

$4 mil from all pre-arb players

-----

$100.6 mil total

That's without Hardy, Cruz, Miller or any other free agent. Pretty much right up against the artificial cap number, whatever it is.

Some money can be saved elsewhere. Matusz can be canned or traded, that'll save about $2.5 mil. Hundley's option can be declined, that'll save $5 mil. The team would be foolish not to pick up the $4.75 mil option on Chen or the $4.25 mil option on O'Day but it's possible.

If the team can save even $5 mil by declining Markakis' option, then resigning him to a multi-year deal, it would go a long way towards being able to resign Hardy or pursue a free agent or two.

[VeveJones007]

...except if you're dealing with a little over a hundred "marbles" as DD says.

$32 mil committed

$35.1 mil expected through arbitration

$31.5 mil if all options are exercised

$4 mil from all pre-arb players

-----

$100.6 mil total

That's without Hardy, Cruz, Miller or any other free agent. Pretty much right up against the artificial cap number, whatever it is.

Some money can be saved elsewhere. Matusz can be canned or traded, that'll save about $2.5 mil. Hundley's option can be declined, that'll save $5 mil. The team would be foolish not to pick up the $4.75 mil option on Chen or the $4.25 mil option on O'Day but it's possible.

If the team can save even $5 mil by declining Markakis' option, then resigning him to a multi-year deal, it would go a long way towards being able to resign Hardy or pursue a free agent or two.

Good stuff. I assumed that the salary breakdown of the roster would look something like this. $15M on this budget is a LOT to pay for a 2 WAR player (if that).

[atomic]

...except if you're dealing with a little over a hundred "marbles" as DD says.

$32 mil committed

$35.1 mil expected through arbitration

$31.5 mil if all options are exercised

$4 mil from all pre-arb players

-----

$100.6 mil total

That's without Hardy, Cruz, Miller or any other free agent. Pretty much right up against the artificial cap number, whatever it is.

Some money can be saved elsewhere. Matusz can be canned or traded, that'll save about $2.5 mil. Hundley's option can be declined, that'll save $5 mil. The team would be foolish not to pick up the $4.75 mil option on Chen or the $4.25 mil option on O'Day but it's possible.

If the team can save even $5 mil by declining Markakis' option, then resigning him to a multi-year deal, it would go a long way towards being able to resign Hardy or pursue a free agent or two.

Don't offer Davis arbitration. We have Walker in the wings.

[Goosgo]

You must have missed Thorne's commentary last week when he talked about Nick and reported about asking him what he would do if he was a free agent...... and Nick stoically answered "play for the team that gives me the most money".

I remember Thorne saying that about Teixeira during the Yankee series. Never about Nick.

[AlbionHero]

I don't want to pay him the 17.5 million option. He's a solid player, but not a star. If he agrees to like 4 years/40 million I'd be all for it though.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I also don't give much credit to defensive metrics, I think you could put Trout in CF or RF in Camden Yards for a season and his defensive value would plummet, I just think the dimensions are just not conducive to however/whatever stats they use to judge OF defense. Every time I see another RF play off the out of town scoreboard in OPACY I realize how precise Markakis is at playing a hit off of it.

This has been discussed quite a bit in the past, particularly in detail when El Gordo contacted Bill James and the Fielding Bible people awhiie back.

I recall getting a few things of those conversations:

1. Nick did have some home/away split differential, being more adverse at home.

2. Nick's predecessor in RF, Jay Gibbons did not have any such differential.

3. Players from other teams playing RF at OPACY did not have adverse fielding splits (on aggregate) as compared to their home parks.

4. While Nick did (at the time) have more favorable away splits, he also plays/played OPACY quite differently than he does other parks, playing far more to the gap and leaving the line more open.

5. Nick holds base runners and has more assists than average, particularly at OPACY, but OPACY itself suppresses base runners due to the short RF. The metrics make allowances for that.

Now, i don't rule out unusual dimensions like a short/high RF wall "playing with the statistics", but a lot of the above points don't really make sense when you think about it. If he supposedly is so great (which I don't think he is), then why aren't the stats saying that? I know Nick is "comfortable" playing the gap at OPACY and he makes plays that "look good" but that doesn't necessarily mean he is playing RF in OPACY optimally. I guess the team has internals on this though, has had discussions with Nick about it, and maybe he'd be worse playing it more straight up based on his skill set. I don't really know. Nick does a lot of things well out there, certainly suppressing base runners and not making mistakes. That said, one thing I do know is that far more balls than average have been finding the grass out there in RF year after year for quite a few years now .... and quite frankly he looks the part in that regard.

I'll also add Nicks overall fielding numbers aren't terrible or even really bad most years, just below average and while below average (but reliable) is commendable, it certainly shouldn't be considered gold glove caliber .... at least not imo. .

[CA-ORIOLE]

I remember Thorne saying that about Teixeira during the Yankee series. Never about Nick.

I don't remember who they were playing, but i thought it was Nick. But maybe you are right.

[CA-ORIOLE]

On a side note, is there anybody more emotionless than Nick? Not a knock. Just saying. The guy never even cracks a smile. I'm fine with it, he does his job. Not needed to be a good clubhouse guy or anything.

Guy is just a robot.

[Frobby]

On a side note, is there anybody more emotionless than Nick? Not a knock. Just saying. The guy never even cracks a smile. I'm fine with it, he does his job. Not needed to be a good clubhouse guy or anything. U

Guy is just a robot.

I'd say, "stoic." And I love that. But if you watch his eyes, you can see the passion.