Rank the order of importance for re-signing the following free-agents...

[ShoelesJoe]

How about 4/10 for Nick, 3/8 for Hardy, and 3/11 for Cruz?

How about 4/10 for Markakis, 4/14 for Hardy, and 4/16 for Cruz? I think that's where the market will start for each, and possibly go up depending on how many other teams express interest.

[gmelson26]

Still coming up with me list, but I will caution this- I want Cruz back, but we should not pay him based mostly on just this year. Look at Davis- who also led the majors in bombs- last year. He could just as easily bat .230/.300/.400 with 22 HRs next year.

[webbrick2010]

They are all likely to decline over the next three years

I can see signing one of the three, and it will probably be Nick

Hardy will get a 4/60 deal from a big market team, and the O's shouldn't even consider that neighborhood.

I think the O's will gladly give Cruz a QO and take the pick.

[TheDirtyBird]

Hardy

Nick

Cruz

It pains me to imagine hardy or Nick in another Jersey, I just can't see it at all. Cruz on the other hand, I can invision him in a ton of places

[Frobby]

How about 4/10 for Markakis, 4/14 for Hardy, and 4/16 for Cruz? I think that's where the market will start for each, and possibly go up depending on how many other teams express interest.

I seriously doubt Cruz gets 4/16, covering ages 34-37. By the way, he'll be an "old 34" next year, because his birthday is July 1, the day after the cutoff to be considered 35 next year for "baseball age" purposes.

[Section84]

All three showed their value tonight.

- Cruz with the early two run bomb

- Markakis with two good plays in RF and two tone-setting hits, including one resulting from a really good at bat in the 7th right after we lost our lead.

- Hardy with the game winning hit and two really nice defensive plays, including the game-ender.

Would love to keep all three if we can afford it.

I think Cruz offers more value than just his bat. I'm talking about the obvious chemistry/affection that's there between him, Manny, and Schoop. To me, Cruz plays the part of mentor and big brother to those two. I'm worried that if Cruz walks, it may impact the performance of Manny and Schoop going forward.

[Rick_Schu]

Hardy, Nick, Nellie, but really all three please. They all deserve to get paid like major league starters, but we are not talking about Cano contracts here. Weits, Davis, Miller too for that matter, lock everyone up for a few years. If we can give Ubaldo that kind of contract, it would be a smack in the face not to pay these guys.

[DrungoHazewood]

How about 4/10 for Markakis, 4/14 for Hardy, and 4/16 for Cruz? I think that's where the market will start for each, and possibly go up depending on how many other teams express interest.

There is no way I commit $160M to three pretty good players in their 30s. $40M is the far upper limit of what I'd pay for Markakis, I'd look and think long and hard for other options before paying Hardy $14M a year for age 32-35. And I'd just walk away before paying Cruz $16M a year for each of his age 34-37 seasons (and he's actually already into age 34 - he just, by hours, missed the cutoff for 2014 being his "baseball age" 34 season).

If Cruz has a decent September he'll have had his career year as a 33/34 year old DH in a walk year. For me that sets off all kinds of sirens, claxons, flashing lights, and calls for evacuation.

[DrungoHazewood]

I think Cruz offers more value than just his bat. I'm talking about the obvious chemistry/affection that's there between him, Manny, and Schoop. To me, Cruz plays the part of mentor and big brother to those two. I'm worried that if Cruz walks, it may impact the performance of Manny and Schoop going forward.

I would offer him an extra $2500 for those services. Ok, maybe I'd go $4 grand.

In all seriousness, if you start convincing yourself that mentoring and chemistry are worth all kinds of money and performance risk then you've entered Ruben Amaro Land. And no good can come of that.

[wildcard]

Hardy 4/52 - O's give him a QO to slow down other teams. He signs with the O's but the Yankees run up the contract.

Cruz 3/45 - The O's make a 1/15 quality offer but will not go three years. He signs elsewhere.

Markakis 2/17 with a club option with the O's - Not a lot of interest in a RF that hits for a 732 OPS.

Miller 4/20 - Which is more than the O's will do. He signs elsewhere.

Young 2/6 - He may be back

Kelly Johnson 1/3 - He's gone.

Saunders - minor league contract with someone else with ST invite.

Santana - minor league contract with a make good clause. Not with the O's.

[Spy Fox]

Agree with the general sentiment that bringing Hardy back is very important, bringing Nick back is less important but still something I'd like the O's to do, and bringing Cruz back is probably not worth the investment it will take.

Just for some numbers, since joining the Orioles, Hardy is #4 in MLB for fWAR by Shortstops. And regardless of what stats you use it's not hard to make the argument that he's a top 5 SS in the majors over the past four seasons. Yes he'll be in his decline years but you simply can't make any claim like that for Cruz and Markakis.

Cruz and Markakis have been good players over that time span for sure but they probably aren't much higher than a top 40 or 50 OF in terms of production over that time span.

[Frobby]

Markakis 2/17 with a club option with the O's - Not a lot of interest in a RF that hits for a 732 OPS.

I think you might be surprised here. The average OPS in RF is only .733 this year, and .728 in LF. So, Nick is average. But, there are 11 teams who have a sub-.700 OPS in RF, and 10 with a sub-.700 OPS in LF. There are not a lot of good corner OF's on the market. So, this is a good year to be a free agent corner OF.

That said, Nick has been slumping lately, posting a .515 OPS in his last 20 games, after being red hot the first half of August. His numbers could sink or rebound in the final 23 games, and where he finishes will have some impact on his market value.

[markdublya]

Hardy

Nick

Cruz

Factoring in expected costs

[Scrat1]

As others have said, it's Hardy and it isn't close. Hardy is the best player of the three and he's playing at a position of scarcity. Even a year ago I was in favor of letting Hardy walk and moving Machado over to shortstop, partially because it would get the best value out of Machado but also because most of the reports on Schoop's 2B defense were mixed and I thought he was going to have to slide over to third. Now that Schoop has proven himself to be an above average second baseman and Machado continues to have knee issues, I think you have to leave them where they are. Obviously that means we have a hole at shortstop. We need to hang onto Hardy. There's also the fact that there is a very real possibility he winds up with the Yankees if we don't extend him. After watching Koji pitch for the Red Sox for the past couple of years, I'm just not sure I could handle watching Hardy club home runs to left field in pinstripes.

I think you hit both Markakis and Cruz with qualifying offers and try to extend Hardy. I'd put a 3/33 offer on the table tomorrow, but I'd be happy with another Roberts contract, considering Hardy doesn't hit himself in the head with bats or have a propensity to slide head first.

As much as I love Markakis, I think it's probably prudent to let him walk. He's still a productive player, and obviously he's meant a lot to Baltimore over the years, but the Orioles have limited funds and it isn't smart to tie up a lot of them to a 2 WAR outfielder. de Aza has actually been similarly productive over the past three years and could be a decent stop gap for 2015. Between Jones, Pearce, Lough and de Aza I don't think the Orioles have to keep Markakis around. It'll be a loss, for sure, but one much easier to absorb than if Hardy leaves. In many ways Hardy, along with Jones, has been the backbone of the resurgent Orioles.

[Scrat1]

Gotta resign Hardy, gotta do two years I guess. I wouldn't do three.

Then you're not getting Hardy, unless you're talking 2/40 or something like that. Three years is the bare minimum with four being more likely.