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

[MurphDogg]

They don't have to produce the offense that Markakis would. Lough is a far superior defender and I think Pearce is a bit better as well.

I would be very surprised if Pearce was better. It would seem highly unusual for an above average defensive outfielder to have played the plurality of his MLB defensive innings at first base through his age 31 season.

[Reboulet'sStache]

It does to me. Because I don't think it's as much of a guarantee as you do that Lough/Pearce produce the offense that Markakis will. Again, that's jmo. I guess the money saved on Nick could go towards the 4/45m or more it will take to sign Cruz or Martinez. Cause thats the only difference makers with the bats avaiable via FA.

Markakis isn't an offensive powerhouse. He's a pretty average offensive player. Having him isn't going to mean the offense is going to be great next year, not having him isn't going to mean the offense is going to be great next year. Markakis doesn't give us the luxury of not needing a lot of production from the DH spot. With or without him, we are going to need it.

[OFFNY]

The Orioles and Nick Markakis should stay paired up despite his name now appearing among the list of baseball's free agents. The two sides have been talking for weeks - I've heard that the framework involves a four-year deal - and I'd expect an agreement at some point in the not-too-distant future.

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2014/11/catching-up-on-hundley-and-markakis.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

What a mistake.

You do know how MLB Trade Rumors works, right? It is an aggregator of stories posted elsewhere. In this case, the MLBTR story in your original post stemmed solely from this very blog by Roch Kubatko. I don't know why you are getting upset again. It is the same information.

"I was watching a football game with my grandfather.

When they showed an instant replay, he thought that they scored another touchdown.

I was going to tell him, but then decided not to. I figured that the game that he was watching was better than the one that I was watching."

Steven Wright

[Can_of_corn]

I would be very surprised if Pearce was better. It would seem highly unusual for an above average defensive outfielder to have played the plurality of his MLB defensive innings at first base through his age 31 season.

I don't think you have to be above average to be better then Nick. (yes he was better this year then 2012-2013 but I am looking at the three year group as a whole)

[weams]

Really? Wow! Expect a low to mid 700 OPS and lot's of GIDP.

What I mean is I'm not overly worried about who DHs for us for the next four years. I am sure we will mix and match well.

[Dark Helmet]

They don't have to produce the offense that Markakis would. Lough is a far superior defender and I think Pearce is a bit better as well.

I agree lough is better defensively. I just don't think he's an everyday player. And I like Pearce, but I'm not sold on him after one year and part of another. I'd rather have a Lough/Pearce platoon in LF and keep Nick in RF.

[MurphDogg]

I don't think you have to be above average to be better then Nick. (yes he was better this year then 2012-2013 but I am looking at the three year group as a whole)

The point remains the same. Are there any players who played the plurality of their games at first base through age 31 who were serviceable outfielders later in their career? It doesn't pass the smell test to me.

[AdamK]

"I was watching a football game with my grandfather.

When they showed an instant replay, he thought that they scored another touchdown.

I was going to tell him, but then decided not to. I figured that the game that he was watching was better than the one that I was watching."

Steven Wright

Phone rep.

[Dark Helmet]

Markakis isn't an offensive powerhouse. He's a pretty average offensive player. Having him isn't going to mean the offense is going to be great next year' date=' not having him isn't going to mean the offense is going to be great next year. Markakis doesn't give us the luxury of not needing a lot of production from the DH spot. With or without him, we are going to need it.[/quote']

I didn't say Markakis was a powerhouse. But having depth is what carried the O's in 2014. Who plays 1B if Davis goes out or if we need Davis at 1B again? Like I said, I like having the security of a guy that will play 150 games and give you a .275/.340/.400 line. It allows the team to use Lough and Pearce as depth. Thus making us a stronger team. Not having that in 2014, and this team collapses.

[AlbionHero]

The point remains the same. Are there any players who played the plurality of their games at first base through age 31 who were serviceable outfielders later in their career? It doesn't pass the smell test to me.

TEchnically, Pearce has played more games in the OF than 1b (147 to 144). But he's always been an above average defender in the OF, with a career 3.5 UZR there.

[AlbionHero]

I didn't say Markakis was a powerhouse. But having depth is what carried the O's in 2014. Who plays 1B if Davis goes out or if we need Davis at 1B again? Like I said, I like having the security of a guy that will play 150 games and give you a .275/.340/.400 line. It allows the team to use Lough and Pearce as depth. Thus making us a stronger team. Not having that in 2014, and this team collapses.

Duquette always finds all of his bargain bin guys for depth. I'm not worried about keeping around expensive guys just for depth.

[Dark Helmet]

Duquette always finds all of his bargain bin guys for depth. I'm not worried about keeping around expensive guys just for depth.

Just a question. You ok bringing Cruz back at 4/50m?

[AlbionHero]

Just a question. You ok bringing Cruz back at 4/50m?

I'd be ecstatic to bring him back at that price. I'd be okay with 3/50 as well.

[Reboulet'sStache]

I didn't say Markakis was a powerhouse. But having depth is what carried the O's in 2014. Who plays 1B if Davis goes out or if we need Davis at 1B again? Like I said, I like having the security of a guy that will play 150 games and give you a .275/.340/.400 line. It allows the team to use Lough and Pearce as depth. Thus making us a stronger team. Not having that in 2014, and this team collapses.

Cruz played like an offensive powerhouse this year. You said if they don't sign Markakis, they better sign Cruz, or else they better be able to turn it into a 6 inning game. That doesn't imply merely "depth," that implies that without Markakis, they are really going to need production from the DH spot or else they are in trouble. But that just isn't true. They are really going to need production from the DH spot, regardless of Markakis. He isn't a difference maker, he is, at you alluded to, more of a "depth" player than anything else.

And you don't think De Aza, Lough, Pearce, and Jones aren't enough depth? And depth is all well and good, but it must come at the right price. Paying Markakis X amount of money for 4 years, because it provides "depth," doesn't make sense. De Aza is cheaper. Why not get he same depth for a much cheaper price?

[hoosiers]

We'll see where this ends up, but if the AAV gets much north of $10M, then it may have been a mistake to exercise the option and that we should have overpaid this year and seen Nick's production next year as a better basis from which to offer a contract.

It is pretty difficult to see the benefits of a four year deal. I hope the deal and Nick's production turn out well for the Orioles, but this has the makings of a real drag on payroll for several years almost as soon as it is signed.

I have posted for a while that Buck's loyalty combined with the organization's decisions regarding the major league team to always be improving it (as opposed to taking a step back at the major league level to benefit the farm system) are going to leave this organization with some dark days after his departure.

This is not a viable long term strategy to give up first round draft picks for guys like Norris and Ubaldo while extending declining 2 WAR guys like Nick into his mid-30s.