Jump to content

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

Greg

By Greg
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

BradyBunch All-Star

BradyBunch

Posted
Posted
He would not have accepted. In the unlikely he did, it would not have been that big of a deal. I understand short term budgeting issues are more challenging but the risk-reward was totally on our side on this. We just disagree about this.

Risk-reward were on our side? Seriously? A 2 war player being paid $15m this year? What about next year and the year after that? At what point do you say this doesn't make sense? Cause each year the O's would have to tag him with a QO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
BradyBunch All-Star

BradyBunch

Posted
Posted
It's probably that Duquette saw Markakis's value at 8-9M per year and thought other teams would be in the same ballpark. He was afraid that Markakis might take a 1/16 QO. Simple as that. He may have miscalculated but I'm on board with the "better safe than sorry" approach in this case.

On the Braves side.. its probably somewhere in the $10m range with extra because it's young team and Nick will be expected to show the ropes to the younger hitters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CA-ORIOLE Hangout Grand Counsel

CA-ORIOLE

Posted
Posted
Risk-reward were on our side? Seriously? A 2 war player being paid $15m this year? What about next year and the year after that? At what point do you say this doesn't make sense? Cause each year the O's would have to tag him with a QO.

Not sure if I can explain it any more clearly. He would not have accepted and even if he did it would not have been that big of a deal. Paying a 2 WAR player (which is worth about 12 mil) 15 mil is the end of the world now ?

Has nothing to do with tagging him with QO the next year because

1. He would not have accepted this year.

2. Next year is dependent on next years market and other variables.

We have different ideas of the market and what would have happened and the risk-reward here, so why don't we just agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CA-ORIOLE Hangout Grand Counsel

CA-ORIOLE

Posted
Posted
Also didn't make sense to pay the buyout of $2.5 million, and then offer him $16m QO.. O's would have paid $1m more that way.

The buyout was 2 mil and was already a sunk cost (unless Markakis declined his part of the option). The Q.O. was 15.3 mil. The Q.O. was cheaper than picking up the 17.5 mil option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradyBunch All-Star

BradyBunch

Posted
Posted
Not sure if I can explain it any more clearly. He would not have accepted and even if he did it would not have been that big of a deal. Paying a 2 WAR player (which is worth about 12 mil) 15 mil is the end of the world now ?

Has nothing to do with tagging him with QO the next year because

1. He would have accepted this year.

2. Next year is dependent on next years market and other variables.

We have different ideas of the market and what would have happened and the risk-reward here, so why don't we just agree to disagree.

That's fine. He's gone, time to move on anyway. :scratchchinhmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yardball85 Hangout Veteran Council

Yardball85

Posted
Posted
Risk-reward were on our side? Seriously? A 2 war player being paid $15m this year? What about next year and the year after that? At what point do you say this doesn't make sense? Cause each year the O's would have to tag him with a QO.

BradyBunch, you would probably try to put a positive-ownership spin if the team traded Adam Jones for prospects. It's hard for anyone to take any of your posts seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yardball85 Hangout Veteran Council

Yardball85

Posted
Posted
So you'd been fine paying $15m to Nick for $10m worth of value? That's wasted $5m. Only Cruz justified the QO this year.

They absolutely should've QO'ed him. The "there is no such thing as a bad one year contract" rings true here. And he probably wouldn't have accepted anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradyBunch All-Star

BradyBunch

Posted
Posted
BradyBunch, you would probably try to put a positive-ownership spin if the team traded Adam Jones for prospects. It's hard for anyone to take any of your posts seriously.

Absolutely. Adam Jones while our guy has major flaws for what he's being paid.

End of the day Nick never developed into the player we hoped and if we are gonna pay a hitter to poke the ball, you can do it for a lot cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • vab
      Back to back 90 or more win seasons

      By vab · Posted

      Still with a chance to do this for the first time since 1982-83. Would be one more nice accomplishment for this organization. 
    • Frobby
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Frobby · Posted

      The weird thing about our bullpen is that they rarely blow leads.   They have a 69% save rate, 4th highest in baseball.  They make it scary, but generally, when they have the lead, they get the job done.   Where they are really bad is keeping games close when we’re down a run or two, last night being a classic example of that.   This year’s team has 32 comeback wins, compared to 48 last year.   Why is that?   Part of it is obviously on the offense, but part of it is that the bullpen doesn’t keep us in striking distance when we’re behind.   One way you can tell this is by the W/L records of the starters and the bullpen.  Last year, the starters were 57-40, this year they’re 60-49.   The starter got the decision 12 more times this year than last year, including 9 more losses (with 3 games to play).   That tells you that when the team is losing when the starter is pulled, they keep losing.  Meanwhile, the relievers were 44-21 last year, 28-22 now. They’re not picking up wins because they don’t give the offense a chance to catch up and get the win for the bullpen guy.    
    • atom_25
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By atom_25 · Posted

      I do not disagree with above posts.  Also I am pretty sure that this time last season, the Texas Rangers Hangout was saying the exact same things as the Rangers Pen.  Point being, you never know until you know.  The pen is shaky, but is capable of putting together a solid run from time to time.  
    • Just Regular
      DH - O'Hearn v. Kjerstad

      By Just Regular · Posted

      Roster Resource thinks it has tonight's lineup and Kjerstad on bench again. He is 7 AB shy of 130 MLB regular season AB with 3 games left, and if he ends up short some prospect list makers may still label him one.    If still with the Orioles, he will be 26 years old by Sarasota. I think the OP has its answer as it has been Cole and Lopez these two nights and the team is preparing for that intensity.
    • One eyed Bird
      We’re onto Minnesota

      By One eyed Bird · Posted

      I care I bet the over on 88 wins, looked like a lock now not so much, come on O’s, daddy needs some new shoes
    • LookitsPuck
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By LookitsPuck · Posted

      I’d have brought up Young immediately after DFAing Kimbrel. Baker has no place on this club this year. Would have been nice to see Young up here.
    • Roy Firestone
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Roy Firestone · Posted

      Yeah, but they could've brought him up a month ago and seen what they might have...And Im not "pining" for Brandon Young, just wondering if he's any better than some we have in the pen..

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...