Jump to content

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


Greg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Yeah. I heard that. I also said that Nick doesn't average 152 games a year. For his career. I still think that unless you go all Delmon on Nick you can't move his needle. Only he can.

Nick last 4 years means more that his career.

2011- 160 games

2012 - 104 games

2013 - 160 games

2014 - 155 games (mostly because the the O's rested him after they clinched)

So unless he is hurt or the O's clinch early Nick has played 160 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick last 4 years means more that his career.

2011- 160 games

2012 - 104 games

2013 - 160 games

2014 - 155 games (mostly because the the O's rested him after they clinched)

So unless he is hurt or the O's clinch early Nick has played 160 games.

No. His last four years, or his whole career, he doesn't play 160. Honest friend. There is no magic to those four other days off you want. His bulging disc will take care of that. Or more. You have a fun theory. It just would not matter. At all. De Aza would suffer those extra games that he faces Sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't take being heckled very well. That's for sure. I don't recall any personal issues with us.
I remember a game where some fans in RF were heckling Belle. He responded by doing a rude (X-rated) gesture toward the RF fans, some who had children at the game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were you on the board when the Orioles were negotiating with Mark Teixeira many years ago? This is child's play compared to then.

Yes I was. If I remember correctly there were 3 100 page threads. My favorite post of all time was Clerence's post that dubbed the movie with Hitler about the Tex fiasco. I laughed so hard!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm late to this discussion. I'm not even sure what we're discussing. I'll chime in anyway. Markakis has played 160 games or more 5 times in his 9 major league seasons, including 160 in 2013. He played 147 in his rookie season. In the seasons he didn't play 160, he played 157 (of 161) in 2008, 155 in 2014, and 104 in 2012.

In 2014 he played in all of the first 141 games.

In 2012 when he played 104 games, he played in the first 50 games. He then missed the next 35 games. When he came back he played in the next 54 games. Then he got hit with the pitch and missed the rest of the season.

So, when Wilcard says, unless he was injured or the Orioles clinched early, Markakis played 160 games is pretty darn accurate. Markakis does not get rested during the season. At least, he never has. If the Orioles hadn't clinched until the last day of the season, Markakis would have played 160 this year. If he hadn't been hurt in 2012, all signs point to him having played 160 that year.

Sounds right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with wildcard that, if Nick returns, it would be prudent to rest him more often. I don't agree he needs to avoid certain tough pitchers. But he needs a blow once in a while, especially in the dog days. The O's regulars have a great mentality and work ethic, but Buck needs to rein them in sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with wildcard that, if Nick returns, it would be prudent to rest him more often. I don't agree he needs to avoid certain tough pitchers. But he needs a blow once in a while, especially in the dog days. The O's regulars have a great mentality and work ethic, but Buck needs to rein them in sometimes.

My thought is that if the O's want to improve Markakis' 927 OPS the most likely way for that to happen is if he rest against pitchers he does not hit well. Not rest against pitchers he hits well. I would think that is what Buck would do if he buy into resting Markakis more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought is that if the O's want to improve Markakis' 927 OPS the most likely way for that to happen is if he rest against pitchers he does not hit well. Not rest against pitchers he hits well. I would think that is what Buck would do if he buy into resting Markakis more.

How big a sample do you need to be confident that Nick has trouble with a particular pitcher? I count 11 active starting pitchers who Nick has faced 25 times with a sub-.700 OPS. 25 PA is a pretty low number on which to base a conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How big a sample do you need to be confident that Nick has trouble with a particular pitcher? I count 11 active starting pitchers who Nick has faced 25 times with a sub-.700 OPS. 25 PA is a pretty low number on which to base a conclusion.

But Buck does that all the time. During the season he would say Young, Flaherty, De Aza were in the lineup because they did better against pitcher X.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
    • Not bad, but Mullins needs to be at Centerfield for his range, glove, and defensive ability. Top teir premium defense cannot be underestimated. Kjerstad will be on the bench. I think the question is whether Slater or Cowser plays. I would prefer Ramirez over Slater if they need another right handed bat. Sig needs to look at Adleys recent sample sizes vs LHP before making him DH. McCann is catching for Burnes and hitting the left handed pitcher. He's also on a hot streak.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...