Orioles Discussing Four-Year Deal With Nick Markakis (Signs w/ATL)

[DrungoHazewood]

If the O's sign him after not making a QO they will likely have paid more than they would have had to if they made the QO.

Over multiple years, sure, since the QO is just one year. But there's no way they're signing him to a contract with an average annual value north of $15.5M.

[Mayor McCheese]

Seeing the remarks in the Panda/Hanely thread about players being overpaid...

If Markakis wants a 4/48 deal... pass pass pass

[Frobby]

Seeing the remarks in the Panda/Hanely thread about players being overpaid...

If Markakis wants a 4/48 deal... pass pass pass

I'm not sure what the connection is that you're trying to make.

[Mayor McCheese]

i'm not sure what the connection is that you're trying to make.

overpaid

[webbrick2010]

Over multiple years, sure, since the QO is just one year. But there's no way they're signing him to a contract with an average annual value north of $15.5M.

The point is that if he has a QO tied to him, the other teams will bid less, thus the O's can offer less and still have the best offer.

There was no reason to not offer a QO unless:

DD has no intention of offering Nick a contract, and as a courtesy did not place the QO so that Nick could maximize his deal with another team, which costs the O's a draft pick

No matter what, It appears to be a sentimental nonsensical business decision.

[Frobby]

overpaid

I do think 4/$48 mm would be an overpay for Nick. But I don't think he will get that much.

[Mayor McCheese]

I do think 4/$48 mm would be an overpay for Nick. But I don't think he will get that much.

I'd give him a 3/30 (3rd year is a team option with a $1.5MM buyout)

If he wants more he can go elsewhere.

[mdbdotcom]

I'd give him a 3/30 (3rd year is a team option with a $1.5MM buyout)

If he wants more he can go elsewhere.

I may be wrong, but it strikes me that the longer this goes on, the less people here want to see Nick get paid.

[webbrick2010]

I may be wrong, but it strikes me that the longer this goes on, the less people here want to see Nick get paid.

LOL, some of us immediately didn't want to see Nick get paid (by the O's).

Should have made the QO, got the draft pick or just as good had Nick for one more (expensive) year.

[Frobby]

I'd give him a 3/30 (3rd year is a team option with a $1.5MM buyout)

If he wants more he can go elsewhere.

We don't know much, but we do know that the framework under discussion has been a four-year deal. I'm taking that as a given.

[waroriole]

We don't know much, but we do know that the framework under discussion has been a four-year deal. I'm taking that as a given.

I'm a big Nick fan, but I don't like 4 years at all, unless it's something like 4/36. I'd offer the 3/30 deal and tell him to test his market if that's not enough, with the assumption he lets us beat a higher offer. My guess is that something similar has happened.

[atomic]

I'd give him a 3/30 (3rd year is a team option with a $1.5MM buyout)

If he wants more he can go elsewhere.

Seems like a go elsewhere deal.

I think 3 year 36 million dollar deal would be fair to both sides.

[LoyalBirdFan]

There is a reason MLB has 'qualifying offers'.

Declining a players option (forcing him into free agency), paying him a buyout, and then offering him a QO that basically equals (counting the buyout) his original salary is not ethical. It's an abuse of the rule and attaches a draft pick to that player if any other team signs him. I have a feeling this scenerio will be addressed by the union. I'm glad that the Orioles did not stoop to such a tactic. If one doesn't see what the issue with this is, I don't know what to say.

If I was Nick and this had happened, I'd probably have taken the QO even though it might have been uncomfortable going forward.

More power to the Orioles and it's another reason a player may want to play in Baltimore.

That said, I hope the Orioles don't overpay for Nick.

[Guest]

Please Dan let him walk.

[CA-ORIOLE]

There is a reason MLB has 'qualifying offers'.

Declining a players option (forcing him into free agency), paying him a buyout, and then offering him a QO that basically equals (counting the buyout) his original salary is not ethical. It's an abuse of the rule and attaches a draft pick to that player if any other team signs him. I have a feeling this scenerio will be addressed by the union. I'm glad that the Orioles did not stoop to such a tactic. If one doesn't see what the issue with this is, I don't know what to say.

If I was Nick and this had happened, I'd probably have taken the QO even though it might have been uncomfortable going forward.

More power to the Orioles and it's another reason a player may want to play in Baltimore.

That said, I hope the Orioles don't overpay for Nick.

You have got to be kidding ?