Will Markakis sign with the O's before the FA signing begin? (Option Declined)

[Babypowder]

It boils down to risk. David Lough could be a 2 WAR player, or he could have negative offensive value. Nick, with the notable exception of 2013, has been a pretty steady 2+ WAR player. We each have our own opinions about Lough's potential, but the opinions that matter are Dan's and Buck's.

Lough has been in the league for 2 years, both partial seasons, and has totaled 4.3 WAR. He finished this season at 1.9 despite little playing time. I have very little doubt he's a ~2 win player on his glove alone. Even with his horrid start this year, he still ended up around league average with the bat (wRC+ of 95). Couple that with excellent defense and plus baserunning and you have a pretty decent player. If both of them played full time next year, I think it's a coin flip who is more valuable. With De Aza, I think his odds of outWARing Markakis are just as good and he's still cheaper too. I just don't see the need to spend real money here.

[Frobby]

Lough has been in the league for 2 years, both partial seasons, and has totaled 4.3 WAR. He finished this season at 1.9 despite little playing time. I have very little doubt he's a ~2 win player on his glove alone. Even with his horrid start this year, he still ended up around league average with the bat (wRC+ of 95). Couple that with excellent defense and plus baserunning and you have a pretty decent player. If both of them played full time next year, I think it's a coin flip who is more valuable. With De Aza, I think his odds of outWARing Markakis are just as good and he's still cheaper too. I just don't see the need to spend real money here.

I don't share your opinion, nor do I think WAR is always an accurate measure of how two different players would fill a specific role. For example, Lough was used almost strictly against RHP and as a defensive replacement, putting up a .250 OPS vs. LHP. What happens if he gets 200 PA vs. LHP, as Markakis did last year? And if pitchers see a lot more of him, does his effectiveness go down, or does it cut the other way as he gains experience? These are the types of things the Orioles have to judge.

[Redskins Rick]

I dont understand the reasoning behind the belief that Lough was in the doghouse of Buck's?

Lough was on the post season playoff roster.

When Buck mentioned Lough in interviews, it was always with praise and kind words.

DD had the chance to buy low with De Aza and pulled the trigger.

[wildcard]

I dont understand the reasoning behind the belief that Lough was in the doghouse of Buck's?

Lough was on the post season playoff roster.

When Buck mentioned Lough in interviews, it was always with praise and kind words.

DD had the chance to buy low with De Aza and pulled the trigger.

Buck appears to have a lot of faith in Lough as a defensive replacement and pinch runner. Buck has not shown that he believes that Lough is an everyday player.

De Aza was acquired and put in leftfield against most righthanded pitchers. He responded well to the opportunity given to him by Buck.

[mdbdotcom]

Who's judgment would you trust more, Nick's or Lough's?

To me, Nick seems to have a very good idea of what he is capable of doing and rarely makes mistakes, while Lough seems to try to do more than he can which leads to extra outs on the bases and regrettable fielding decisions. Maybe it's just a matter of maturity.

That said, I have two concerns about re-signing Nick for more than two years, and both relate to his lack of speed:

1) How much is his range likely to diminish?

2) Whether he is re-signed or not, someone else needs to lead off. His OBP is fine, but once he's on it takes two hits to knock him in.

[Redskins Rick]

Who's judgment would you trust more, Nick's or Lough's?

To me, Nick seems to have a very good idea of what he is capable of doing and rarely makes mistakes, while Lough seems to try to do more than he can which leads to extra outs on the bases and regrettable fielding decisions. Maybe it's just a matter of maturity.

That said, I have two concerns about re-signing Nick for more than two years, and both relate to his lack of speed:

1) How much is his range likely to diminish?

2) Whether he is re-signed or not, someone else needs to lead off. His OBP is fine, but once he's on it takes two hits to knock him in.

Considering he scored 81 runs, the team must be doing something right.

Nick is not your prototype leadoff hitter, true.

But, on this team, in 2014, he was their best option, and it worked for this team.

[mdbdotcom]

Considering he scored 81 runs, the team must be doing something right.

Nick is not your prototype leadoff hitter, true.

But, on this team, in 2014, he was their best option, and it worked for this team.

As I wrote on page 7 in this thread:

Nick's stats as a leadoff hitter can be a little deceptive. Among AL leadoff hitters with at least 400 plate appearances (PA), he ranked 3rd in both OBP (.339) and runs scored (78). But Nick also had more PA (681) than any other leadoff hitter. In terms of PA, Nick scored less frequently than of the other AL leadoff hitters with at least 400 PA with the exception of Shin-Soo Choo.

The following shows how many PA each leadoff hitter averaged between runs scored (PA/R). The lower the number the better.

Markakis - 8.73

Reyes - 6.94

Eaton - 7.07

Crisp - 7.95

Gardner - 7.22

Calhoun - 5.69

Bourn - 8.49

Aoki - 8.58

Holt - 6.85

Choo - 9.53

Nick no longer hits doubles and he doesn't steal bases. Though he gets on base, it takes two more successful AB to drive him in. If they do re-sign him, IMO it should not be to lead off.

The fact that they had no better leadoff option this season doesn't mean he should bat leadoff next season. These results indicate that he should not.

[wildcard]

Considering he scored 81 runs, the team must be doing something right.

Nick is not your prototype leadoff hitter, true.

But, on this team, in 2014, he was their best option, and it worked for this team.

81 runs scored in 710 plate appearances is not a high number for a leadoff hitter. However, I don't know how much of that is because of Nick and how much is because the hitters behind him did not knock him in.

[Redskins Rick]

As I wrote on page 7 in this thread:

The fact that they had no better leadoff option this season doesn't mean he should bat leadoff next season. These results indicate that he should not.

With De Aza on board, and with a full ST to play with the lineup, I wouldn't be surprise if Buck doesn't try some different combinations.

[Redskins Rick]

81 runs scored in 710 plate appearances is not a high number for a leadoff hitter. However, I don't know how much of that is because of Nick and how much is because the hitters behind him did not knock him in.

He isn't the idea leadoff guy, I willingly admit that.

[Babypowder]

I don't share your opinion, nor do I think WAR is always an accurate measure of how two different players would fill a specific role. For example, Lough was used almost strictly against RHP and as a defensive replacement, putting up a .250 OPS vs. LHP. What happens if he gets 200 PA vs. LHP, as Markakis did last year? And if pitchers see a lot more of him, does his effectiveness go down, or does it cut the other way as he gains experience? These are the types of things the Orioles have to judge.

I believe him being in the field 9 innings every day will more than make up for his shortcomings at the plate when compared to Markakis.

[Redskins Rick]

I believe him being in the field 9 innings every day will more than make up for his shortcomings at the plate when compared to Markakis.

I like to think Buck is smart enough to put the best players on the field, and I dont buy that crap, that he loves his veterans too much.

[Babypowder]

I like to think Buck is smart enough to put the best players on the field, and I dont buy that crap, that he loves his veterans too much.

You're right, Buck does no wrong. When they were hell bent on keeping Young in the lineup and getting rid of Pearce, that was especially brilliant.

[Redskins Rick]

You're right, Buck does no wrong. When they were hell bent on keeping Young in the lineup and getting rid of Pearce, that was especially brilliant.

Pearce wasn't playing very well at the time, granted limited ABs. Nobody, and nobody expected Pearce to be the stud that he was, when he came back from the DFA when Davis was hurt.

Young in the lineup?

I recall game 2, in the ALDS, where that bat of Young won the darn game.

[Babypowder]

Pearce wasn't playing very well at the time, granted limited ABs. Nobody, and nobody expected Pearce to be the stud that he was, when he came back from the DFA when Davis was hurt.

Young in the lineup?

I recall game 2, in the ALDS, where that bat of Young won the darn game.

Which player was more valuable in 2014: Delmon Young or Steve Pearce?