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

[Prayin4Reign]

Is there no one that thinks Nick Markakis is an Oriole and the Orioles should lock him up through the end of his career? I don't want to break the bank, but I don't mind giving him something with a lot of years to make sure he's an Orioles lifer.

I agree man. But I haven't said a word on this thread. We live in the world of sabermetrics, WAR, and whatever else is around the corner. I'm all for the Orioles being fiscally responsible, prudent, etc. Sometimes a team's fan base can be their own player's harshest critics. Especially today. I think it's easy not to appreciate what you have. We can be pretty prone to taking something for granted, when it's not there only then you start to appreciate some of its finer qualities.

[Prayin4Reign]

I agree in theory, but we have tried this before and its hurt the team. The days of the Cal's and Brooks' only work if the player is great for 20 years. It doesn't work well in today's economic market when a player wants $40 million and is only slightly above replacement level.

But yes, I like Nick and would love to see him be an Oriole lifer.

Today's fan would have ushered Brooks out and called for his head the instant he finished the '75 season hitting .201.

[AlbionHero]

I agree man. But I haven't said a word on this thread. We live in the world of sabermetrics, WAR, and whatever else is around the corner. I'm all for the Orioles being fiscally responsible, prudent, etc. Sometimes a team's fan base can be their own player's harshest critics. Especially today. I think it's easy not to appreciate what you have. We can be pretty prone to taking something for granted, when it's not there only then you start to appreciate some of its finer qualities.

The problem is that when you keep a guy around long term just because of what he's done in the past and the fans wanting him to stay, you get a Derek Jeter whos been arguably the worst SS in baseball the last couple of years but he plays regardless. I don't want to get into a situation where we're forced to have a guy play only because he's a long time Oriole whos popular.

[MurphDogg]

Today's fan would have ushered Brooks out and called for his head the instant he finished the '75 season hitting .201.

Actually they would have pointed to his 1969 season as the beginning of the end as he only managed an OPS+ of 92. Plus he was positively ancient at the age of 32 so his defense would likely begin slipping soon if it hadn't already. His .298 OBP is only going to get worse so it is best to trade him now while he still had some value.

[Frobby]

Today's fan would have ushered Brooks out and called for his head the instant he finished the '75 season hitting .201.

The problem is that when you keep a guy around long term just because of what he's done in the past and the fans wanting him to stay, you get a Derek Jeter whos been arguably the worst SS in baseball the last couple of years but he plays regardless. I don't want to get into a situation where we're forced to have a guy play only because he's a long time Oriole whos popular.

Actually they would have pointed to his 1969 season as the beginning of the end as he only managed an OPS+ of 92. Plus he was positively ancient at the age of 32 so his defense would likely begin slipping soon if it hadn't already. His .298 OBP is only going to get worse so it is best to trade him now while he still had some value.

There's a lot of truth on both sides of this discussion. I think organizations benefit by showing some loyalty to long time employees even when they are no longer quite at the top of their game. That helps the morale, performance and teamwork of other employees. But you can only take it so far.

[DrungoHazewood]

Actually they would have pointed to his 1969 season as the beginning of the end as he only managed an OPS+ of 92. Plus he was positively ancient at the age of 32 so his defense would likely begin slipping soon if it hadn't already. His .298 OBP is only going to get worse so it is best to trade him now while he still had some value.

Between 1959, when he was a part-time player, and 1975, his last as a regular, his lowest rWAR total was 2.8. In '69, despite his OPS+ of 92, he was about as valuable as Adam Jones was this past season. I'm pretty sure today's fans would have been pretty ok with that. Not that we wouldn't have had 17-page threads about how defensive metrics suck and we needed to trade Brooks and a package of prospects for Harmon Killebrew and if they don't they're just a bunch of na?ve Brooks fanboys.

[weams]

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.

They are bench players/part timers. Who were filling in for someone less effective, or part timers themselves. Not a marquee player.

[weams]

Between 1959, when he was a part-time player, and 1975, his last as a regular, his lowest rWAR total was 2.8. In '69, despite his OPS+ of 92, he was about as valuable as Adam Jones was this past season. I'm pretty sure today's fans would have been pretty ok with that. Not that we wouldn't have had 17-page threads about how defensive metrics suck and we needed to trade Brooks and a package of prospects for Harmon Killebrew and if they don't they're just a bunch of na?ve Brooks fanboys.

Naive Brooks Fan Boys. Classic.

[VeveJones007]

Your last sentence I agree with, but I don't really see why I should treat a human being as a commodity :scratchchinhmm:

"Treat?" If you agree with the last part, then you understand that there is no actual connection between you and an Orioles player. In such a situation, you can't possibly "treat" them like anything. It's like saying I treat aliens with disdain.

[wildcard]

They are bench players/part timers. Who were filling in for someone less effective, or part timers themselves. Not a marquee player.

How marquee is a 729 OPS?

[mdbdotcom]

Was listening to Casey Stearns on Sirius XM's Inside Pitch: Nick Markakis is his pick for "biggest bang for the buck" free agent outfielder. He loves Nick. Thinks he was vastly overrated early in his career and is now vastly underrated.

[blid]

"Treat?" If you agree with the last part, then you understand that there is no actual connection between you and an Orioles player. In such a situation, you can't possibly "treat" them like anything. It's like saying I treat aliens with disdain.

Nice snark but I am talking about the Orioles organization and what we argue the organization should do. The org. does have a relationship with the players.

[24fps]

Was listening to Casey Stearns on Sirius XM's Inside Pitch: Nick Markakis is his pick for "biggest bang for the buck" free agent outfielder. He loves Nick. Thinks he was vastly overrated early in his career and is now vastly underrated.

3.5 cumulative WAR over the 3 most recent seasons will tend to lower expectations about a player. Nick may be underrated at this point, but hardly "vastly". I'm also skeptical about Casey Stearn's "biggest bang for the buck" notion. I still believe Nick is more likely to get a bigger, and possibly longer, contract than he deserves, and it will be from the Orioles.

[fearthenoodle]

3.5 cumulative WAR over the 3 most recent seasons will tend to lower expectations about a player.

This all depends on whether you are willing to throw out 2013, when he was coming back from thumb and wrist injuries. He was very good in 2012, and pretty good in 2014.

If you look at his last 6 seasons, he's been extremely consistent, with 2013 being the one outlier.

[UpstateNYfan]

Players are usually underpaid early in their careers (don't mention bonuses). Was Britton or Pearce and others paid their worth last year? Also, most are overpaid the last few. The O's have a choice at this point, the player had no choice early in his career. Frankly, I am more worried about how Nick will handle his possible role change in a couple years or will he just be given RF even if a better player arrives.