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

[atomic]

I think Schoop is the real deal and is worth sticking with him. With Schoop's defense and potential to be a 20-25 HR guy, if he can hit at a .250+ clip and become just a little more patient at the plate I don't see many as an upgrade. Let the kid develop his game before you put a roadblock in front of him. I think in another year or so we are going to really love Schoop.

Let him develop in the minors. His hitting was pretty awful last season. He had an OPS of .598. And an OBP of .246. Those are numbers that state he isn't ready to be in the majors.

[atomic]

I look at Nick like I looked at JJ last year. We can get the same thing for cheaper' date=' then 8 million of those dollars goes to upgrading the team elsewhere-Cruz. If we can get Nick's production for 8-10 million cheaper, then you spend that elsewhere, maybe Cruz again. No if we could get rid of the Ubaldo contract, we could really upgrade.[/quote']

Quality outfielders just don't grow on trees. We got Mclouth for next to nothing but he couldn't have played right field. His arm was way too weak and he suffered when playing a full season. You aren't going to get a Markakis quality player for much cheaper. You guys are so anti Markakis that you have no sense of reality.

[turtlebowl]

I'm sticking with the same theory I have had for the last five or so years. Even if it occasionally get me mocked.

I have noticed a small trickle of folks that now agree with me.

Just want to make sure I am understand. Is your theory that Nick was a steroid guy?? You may have posted that before and I missed it.

[Can_of_corn]

Quality outfielders just don't grow on trees. We got Mclouth for next to nothing but he couldn't have played right field. His arm was way too weak and he suffered when playing a full season. You aren't going to get a Markakis quality player for much cheaper. You guys are so anti Markakis that you have no sense of reality.

Right, we have no sense of reality.

What exactly did Nick do that caused us all to be so "anti-Markakis"?

Why would any of us have any sort of bias against him?

[Can_of_corn]

Just want to make sure I am understand. Is your theory that Nick was a steroid guy?? You may have posted that before and I missed it.

No.

My theory, which forgive me folks that have seen it a dozen times, is that Nick was a natural athlete that frankly never had to learn how to work hard to succeed. This led to him having more of an old school offseason then the work intensive offseason that most modern players put themselves through.

Not saying he didn't work at all folks, just that he doesn't put in the same work as his peer group.

And yes I have very little evidence.

[DrungoHazewood]

No.

My theory, which forgive me folks that have seen it a dozen times, is that Nick was a natural athlete that frankly never had to learn how to work hard to succeed. This led to him having more of an old school offseason then the work intensive offseason that most modern players put themselves through.

Not saying he didn't work at all folks, just that he doesn't put in the same work as his peer group.

And yes I have very little evidence.

I think that's plausible. But I also think it's equally likely that he's just one of those guys (see Cesar Cedeno, Freddy Lindstrom, Al Rosen, Steve Kemp, and hundreds of others) who peaked in their early 20s instead of their late 20s. For a variety of reasons or maybe no reason at all. Some people just mature and decline physically earlier than average, and some are later. Maybe Nick was one of those guys who stated shaving in the 5th grade.

[DrungoHazewood]

Quality outfielders just don't grow on trees. We got Mclouth for next to nothing but he couldn't have played right field. His arm was way too weak and he suffered when playing a full season. You aren't going to get a Markakis quality player for much cheaper. You guys are so anti Markakis that you have no sense of reality.

The Orioles may not be able to go out and acquire a player who's been worth 2ish wins six of the last seven years for a lot less than $10-12M this offseason. But there are dozens of outfielders who produced at a 2-win/150 game level who made less than $10M a year in 2014. And that's not even considering platoons or other part-time arrangements that would add up to 2 or more wins. Setting aside the unmeasurables, Nori Aoki will probably sign a contract for half of what we're discussing for Markakis and you'd be hard pressed to say he's much less valuable.

[Reboulet'sStache]

Quality outfielders just don't grow on trees. We got Mclouth for next to nothing but he couldn't have played right field. His arm was way too weak and he suffered when playing a full season. You aren't going to get a Markakis quality player for much cheaper. You guys are so anti Markakis that you have no sense of reality.

But the "anti Markakis" crowd isn't advocating going out and signing one player. Use a combination of players in a way that plays to their strengths, and you can get 2 WAR production for a much cheaper price, and invest that money into other positions where you will get much better bang for your buck.

[BergerKing]

For what its worth I put him at about 8 million a year. I am however perfectly ok with the 10-11 a million year range for the Oriole for life thing. I dont think those 2 or 3 million will stop us from really signing someone if we really wanted them.

[webbrick2010]

For what its worth I put him at about 8 million a year. I am however perfectly ok with the 10-11 a million year range for the Oriole for life thing. I dont think those 2 or 3 million will stop us from really signing someone if we really wanted them.

It's not about the money, it's about committing the roster spot and 700 PA a year to a player who many believe will be replacement level. No matter how badly he plays, Buck will start him almost every game.

[Dipper9]

It's not about the money, it's about committing the roster spot and 700 PA a year to a player who many believe will be replacement level. No matter how badly he plays, Buck will start him almost every game.

I love the confidence you all show in the AL Manager of the Year.

[DrungoHazewood]

No matter how badly he plays, Buck will start him almost every game.

That's been repeated here many times. Do you really believe that? I mean not as an exaggeration to make a point. You really believe that if Nick is hitting .220/.250/.275 on June 15th Buck will just keep running him out there for 5 PAs a game the rest of the year? I think that's crazy - it won't happen. They'll let us know that he fell down in the parking lot and really hurt his ankle.

[Can_of_corn]

That's been repeated here many times. Do you really believe that? I mean not as an exaggeration to make a point. You really believe that if Nick is hitting .220/.250/.275 on June 15th Buck will just keep running him out there for 5 PAs a game the rest of the year? I think that's crazy - it won't happen. They'll let us know that he fell down in the parking lot and really hurt his ankle.

He played 160 games in 2013.

[webbrick2010]

That's been repeated here many times. Do you really believe that? I mean not as an exaggeration to make a point. You really believe that if Nick is hitting .220/.250/.275 on June 15th Buck will just keep running him out there for 5 PAs a game the rest of the year? I think that's crazy - it won't happen. They'll let us know that he fell down in the parking lot and really hurt his ankle.

Yep, you don't devote 12 million dollars to a player and then bench him.

Perhaps his playing time is reduced in year two of his contract

Perhaps the O's even eat year 4.

But they will have at least 3 years of a lost roster spot, and 40 million dollars less to spend in other areas of need.

[DrungoHazewood]

Yep, you don't devote 12 million dollars to a player and then bench him.

Perhaps his playing time is reduced in year two of his contract

Perhaps the O's even eat year 4.

But they will have at least 3 years of a lost roster spot, and 40 million dollars less to spend in other areas of need.

I can't take someone seriously when they suggest the ridiculous. You can't really think Nick plays 160 games OPSing .500. Even last year he was over .700 a good part of the season.