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

[VeveJones007]

I get that this is the thinking of this board, but we don't know that it's the thinking of Orioles management. They seem to be raising payroll on a yearly basis since Buck arrived. DD doesn't seem to be shying away from spending some money. Is it going to be Yankee level? Of course not. But I think some people need to stop acting like it's 1998-2011 and take note that the payroll has risen $34 million since 2010.

The reason I think this is because it's what John Angelos thinks.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/145195-John-Angelos-Shared-this

[CA-ORIOLE]

Like many others have said, if we were signing "Nick Markakis" from another team people would be outraged by a 4/40+ contract.

[MurphDogg]

How do the people who believe that the Orioles are vastly overpaying and/or competing only against themselves explain Jon Heyman's projections?

[Teddy OBP]

Heyman takes a lot of (deserved) grief but his me, agent, GM were pretty close last year for most of the guys. 4/40 is on the low end of that range and 4/48 is not past the top end.

If we don't sign him for that, I think it 100% that someone else will. Maybe that FO will regret it too, but I don't have any doubt that someone will pay him that.

If we don't then we have to weigh the money saved and replacements vs known quantity, guy that loves and is loved by the team, and the impact on the clubhouse of keeping him or sending him packing.

I can't put a dollar amount on what that last one is worth, but I think it definitely impacts other guy's thoughts on whether they stay or go.

I also think they're considering what happens to the clubhouse if Nick, Wieters, and Davis are all gone in a two year span.

How do the people who believe that the Orioles are vastly overpaying and/or competing only against themselves explain Jon Heyman's projections?

Great question.

[wildcard]

The O's appear to want to sign both Nick and Nelson. But I think they feel they need to sign at least one of them. The alternatives on the market are not impressive.

DD has drawn a line in the sand on Nelson. He will not go more than 3 years. Someone may or may not go four years. If they do Nelson is probably gone.

Markakis at 4 years is more of a sure thing. They can negotiation over the deferred money but Nick is not likely to do much better. 4/40 with with 6m deferred gets to the 4/34 that we have heard. That is all guess work until he signs.

The O's have Pearce and Lough and Alvarez. Some combination of them can hold down the DH or RF spot if they miss on Nelson or even if Nick does not sign. But the O's don't want to lose both of them.

DD and Buck may be the smartest guys in the room but they are capable of making what a majority of fans would consider a mistake. They did that last off season. They signed Ubaldo for too much money. Yes, they needed a veteran starter but they could have signed Hammel for 1/6 and got similar production for a ton less money. That is hindsight. But it could happen with Nick whether the O's have a great management team or not.

I think the O's will be in line for a world series championship if they sign Nick and Nelson and get back Matt, Manny and Davis. So there is nothing to be too upset about here. They sound like they will replace Matusz, claim a Rule 5 guy and sign a half a dozen AAA guys. If they lose Nelson they may or may not sign a replacement.

If they sign both Nick and Nelson and make a few other moves the O's payroll is probably around 140M. After deferred money to Ubaldo, Hardy, Nick and Nelson it probably is around 130M. I never thought they would go that high. But maybe they will to get a ring. They are certainly positioned to give it a good shot in 2015.

Gausman is ready to take a shot at becoming an ace and Wallace/Chiti will continue to improve the pitching staff. If everything falls right the O's could win a 100 games and have a guy similar to Bumgarner in Gausman in the playoff. That is my guess at what Dan and Buck are thinking.

Buck called into 105.7 and they congratulated him on being named Manager of the Year. During the conversation Buck said he has one itch yet to scratch. That itch is winning the world series. 2015 may be his best shot.

[kaerts111]

Whatever the deal is. I will admit DD is a smarter baseball man than I. If he's comfortable with the deal, we all should be. We've been to the playoffs 2/3 years. Some will be ready to fire DD if the deal goes down.

I doubt that DD will be fired- but yeah, everyone likes Nick, the guy is a straight-up pro no doubt. But, 4/$48 is starting pitching money - right? 4/$48 is not for a 31 year old left fielder that has already seen his best days go by and will most likely never hit over .275 or have more than 15 home runs/season. Is 4/$48 smart spending? Will we be happy with an outfielder with no speed and hitting less than .230 four years from now - and paying $12 for this? I hope that Nick sticks with the club, but 3 year deal with an option year works far better.

[fearthenoodle]

Something doesn't make sense. One report had the O's opening offer at 8/34. Roch guesses the contract could be 4/40 or 4/48. There's no way the O's are starting at 4/34 and increasing their offer to 4/48. I can buy the 4/40 though. Of course, this assumes that the report of 4/34 was accurate but the oddness of the number would lead me to believe there's something to that report.

One thought I had is that the 4/34 that JDXM reported will end up being the non-deferred portion of the contract, and then there will be an additional $6-10MM deferred.

[Aglets]

Take this FWIW but on The Fan as I was driving in this morning Mickey and Ken were saying that the Orioles are 'closing in' on a 4/48 deal with Nick.

[tntoriole]

The O's appear to want to sign both Nick and Nelson. But I think they feel they need to sign at least one of them. The alternatives on the market are not impressive.

DD has drawn a line in the sand on Nelson. He will not go more than 3 years. Someone may or may not go four years. If they do Nelson is probably gone.

Markakis at 4 years is more of a sure thing. They can negotiation over the deferred money but Nick is not likely to do much better. 4/40 with with 6m deferred gets to the 4/34 that we have heard. That is all guess work until he signs.

The O's have Pearce and Lough and Alvarez. Some combination of them can hold down the DH or RF spot if they miss on Nelson or even if Nick does not sign. But the O's don't want to lose both of them.

DD and Buck may be the smartest guys in the room but they are capable of making what a majority of fans would consider a mistake. They did that last off season. They signed Ubaldo for too much money. Yes, they needed a veteran starter but they could have signed Hammel for 1/6 and got similar production for a ton less money. That is hindsight. But it could happen with Nick whether the O's have a great management team or not.

I think the O's will be in line for a world series championship if they sign Nick and Nelson and get back Matt, Manny and Davis. So there is nothing to be too upset about here. They sound like they will replace Matusz, claim a Rule 5 guy and sign a half a dozen AAA guys. If they lose Nelson they may or may not sign a replacement.

If they sign both Nick and Nelson and make a few other moves the O's payroll is probably around 140M. After deferred money to Ubaldo, Hardy, Nick and Nelson it probably is around 130M. I never thought they would go that high. But maybe they will to get a ring. They are certainly positioned to give it a good shot in 2015.

Gausman is ready to take a shot at becoming an ace and Wallace/Chiti will continue to improve the pitching staff. If everything falls right the O's could win a 100 games and have a guy similar to Bumgarner in Gausman in the playoff. That is my guess at what Dan and Buck are thinking.

Buck called into 105.7 and they congratulated him on being named Manager of the Year. During the conversation Buck said he has one itch yet to scratch. That itch is winning the world series. 2015 may be his best shot.

I agree with most of the post. However, I think the seeming consensus that Gausman is going to become an ace in 2015 is not correct. I see him having an up and down course of adjustment when he becomes a full-time starter this year (just like most pitchers in their first full time starting year). Kershaw was 8-8 and 13-10 his first two full time years, Bumgarner was 7-6 and 13-13. Gausman could very well become an ace, but I don't believe it will be in 2015.

[tntoriole]

Take this FWIW but on The Fan as I was driving in this morning Mickey and Ken were saying that the Orioles are 'closing in' on a 4/48 deal with Nick.

Yuck. But it is not my money. It is Potter's money.

[weams]

Yuck. But it is not my money. It is Potter's money.

It sounds like there has been movement. Maybe on Nick's end.

[MurphDogg]

4/$48 is not for a 31 year old left fielder that has already seen his best days go by and will most likely never hit over .275 or have more than 15 home runs/season.

First, Nick plays right field. Second I think this overstates the way that hitters decline with age. Nick Markakis is a career .290 hitter who hit .276 last season with 14 home runs. It is not "most likely" that he never hits over .275 in a season or 15 home runs again. While it is perhaps reasonable to expect him to hit maybe .270 with no more than 45-50 home runs over the next four years, batting average especially is subject to luck and if someone's true skill level is .270 then it would be perfectly reasonable for him to hit anywhere from .255 to .285.

More generally though, you can't simply look at how a player did at age 30 and say that he is unlikely to do better in any statistical categories over the next four years because while players typically have a downward trajectory in their thirties it isn't a straight line, there can be many sharp peaks and valleys.

[DrungoHazewood]

First, Nick plays right field. Second I think this overstates the way that hitters decline with age. Nick Markakis is a career .290 hitter who hit .276 last season with 14 home runs. It is not "most likely" that he never hits over .275 in a season or 15 home runs again. While it is perhaps reasonable to expect him to hit maybe .270 with no more than 45-50 home runs over the next four years, batting average especially is subject to luck and if someone's true skill level is .270 then it would be perfectly reasonable for him to hit anywhere from .255 to .285.

More generally though, you can't simply look at how a player did at age 30 and say that he is unlikely to do better in any statistical categories over the next four years because while players typically have a downward trajectory in their thirties it isn't a straight line, there can be many sharp peaks and valleys.

Maybe kaerts111 didn't state this eloquently, but Nick certainly has some red flags. He doesn't look like a guy who's going to buck normal aging trends. His ISO and walk rate is down from his career marks, he just had his worst baserunning season, and his improvements over a very poor '13 were mostly tied to run context and a more favorable defensive rating. He could certainly do better than .275/15 in a given season, but you have to be concerned about his future. A typical player loses about 10% of their offensive production from 30-34, and even more in his ability to stay on the field. I hope not, but I really fear 4-year deal will include some years with 2012's games played combined with 2013's production.

[webbrick2010]

Maybe our only hope is for the medical staff to nix the deal.

The herniated disc in his neck is still there. It could flare up at any time causing Nick to miss considerable time

If they give him a 4 year contract it's going to be a big mistake.

[Aristotelian]

I tried to find some recent OF comps for Nick, but they are surprisingly few. There are the Hamilton/Ellsbury types who signed 100M+ deals at around Age 30, then there are role player types, but not much in between. A few that seem to be about comparable to Nick in terms of being ~1-2 WAR at Age 30:

Coco Crisp - lower SLG but similar OBP and better defense, capable of playing CF, signed with OAK in 2011 at Age 32 for 2 years/$14M.

Josh Willingham - higher SLG and OBP but worse defender, also signed with OAK at Age 33 in 2011 for 3 yrs/$21M.

Jason Bay - came off a -0.4 WAR year, but prior to that had three monster years of 4+ WAR. Signed with NYM at Age 31, 4 years $66M.

Milton Bradley - came off a monster year with .400 OBP, prior to that pretty comparable to Nick offensively and defensively, signed 2008 at Age 30 for 3 yrs/$30M.

Jason Kubel - higher SLG but worse defender, signed with MIN at Age 32 in 2011 for 2 years/$15M.

Only one four year contract on this list (Bay) and that turned out to be a mistake. Bradley seems to be a very good comp. You have to account for inflation but he was also probably a better player at the time. I would rather see the O's go for a slightly higher annual salary but keep it to three years. Don't want to be stuck with Jason Bay.