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

[mcgraw238]

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.

I'm not a doctor, but don't herniated discs heal? I wasn't aware that they stay herniated forever. I'm not saying it should not be a concern, but I don't think it is accurate to say it is still there.

[Aristotelian]

I'm not a doctor, but don't herniated discs heal? I wasn't aware that they stay herniated forever. I'm not saying it should not be a concern, but I don't think it is accurate to say it is still there.

Yes and no. There are different degrees of disc problems that all go under the label of herniated, slipped, etc. Some people never notice any symptoms, some heal, and some (like me) experience chronic pain that never goes away completely. Disc problems are also degenerative - although the symptoms may come and go, the actual disc gets worse, never better.

[webbrick2010]

Yes and no. There are different degrees of disc problems that all go under the label of herniated, slipped, etc. Some people never notice any symptoms, some heal, and some (like me) experience chronic pain that never goes away completely. Disc problems are also degenerative - although the symptoms may come and go, the actual disc gets worse, never better.

Yes, the key is exactly what the extent of Nicks disc issue is. I just hope that the medical staff is allowed to do a complete exam and gets to weigh in on the medical soundness of a 4 year contract. He has already aged poorly (as measured by decline in baseball skills) from 25 to 30. I think he is likely to continue to decline at a rate worse than average for his age group.

[Frobby]

Yes, the key is exactly what the extent of Nicks disc issue is. I just hope that the medical staff is allowed to do a complete exam and gets to weigh in on the medical soundness of a 4 year contract. He has already aged poorly (as measured by decline in baseball skills) from 25 to 30. I think he is likely to continue to decline at a rate worse than average for his age group.

Nick has played 315 of a possible 324 games in the last two years, and has had one season in his entire career when he went on the DL, and that was due to broken bones in his wrist and thumb. I don't think medical soundness is going to be any kind of issue whatsoever. Indeed, Nick's durability is part of his value. You don't want to sign him, and that's fine, but let's not invent reasons that aren't there. All players have injury risk, and players who are 31-34 have a higher injury risk than when they were younger. But Nick's track record shows he is able to stay on the field. If anything, Buck keeps him on the field a little too much.

[Guest rochester]

You keep thinking he is 34-35 because that is the age he basically plays at right now.

excellent point

[Guest rochester]

Benching Markakis is not even close to the same thing as sending Jimenez to the bullpen.

... and leaving him off the playoff roster? I know DD to be adamant about looking at the merit of adding/subtracting from the roster, but this was a tough one - basically telling your owner you spent $11M on a guy that is not good enough to be on your playoff roster. This, and the Jim Johnson deal gives me a level of comfort that Nick will be handled fairly, but on merit.

[weams]

Nick has played 315 of a possible 324 games in the last two years, and has had one season in his entire career when he went on the DL, and that was due to broken bones in his wrist and thumb. I don't think medical soundness is going to be any kind of issue whatsoever. Indeed, Nick's durability is part of his value. You don't want to sign him, and that's fine, but let's not invent reasons that aren't there. All players have injury risk, and players who are 31-34 have a higher injury risk than when they were younger. But Nick's track record shows he is able to stay on the field. If anything, Buck keeps him on the field a little too much.

I am of the opinion that he will be a forever Oriole, and be signed through age 35 by this time next week. At a reasonable deal that is close to a 1/3 reduction from his previous AAV. Opinion.

[weams]

... and leaving him off the playoff roster? I know DD to be adamant about looking at the merit of adding/subtracting from the roster, but this was a tough one - basically telling your owner you spent $11M on a guy that is not good enough to be on your playoff roster. This, and the Jim Johnson deal gives me a level of comfort that Nick will be handled fairly, but on merit.

Do you think that Dan consulted ownership? I don't. And all GMs do that. They just don't all make the playoffs.

[DrungoHazewood]

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.

Bradley's main difference with Nick was that he was certifiably insane, whereas Nick is preternaturally calm and unremarkable.

[Guest rochester]

Do you think that Dan consulted ownership? I don't. And all GMs do that. They just don't all make the playoffs.

Don't understand the bolded

I don't think he consulted with ownership then but I can't imagine he didn't think about what ownership when he took their $11M+ investment and essentially, for this year at least, was throwing money away. I don't have evidence but I would have a hard time believing that another GM wouldn't at least put the name on the roster, but I digress...

[O's84]

Bradley's main difference with Nick was that he was certifiably insane, whereas Nick is preternaturally calm and unremarkable.

Are we talking about the guy who invented all those board games?

[Scrat1]

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.

For Christ's sake! 4/48? How is this in any way justifiable? If this happens it will seriously undermine my confidence in the front office. If these are the sorts of decisions DD is going to make, then I'll be forced to wonder how much of our recent success is the result of MacPhail's prudence, restraint and trade acumen rather than DD's contribution, which in the context of a 4/48 extension for Markakis, will seem more and more like luck, because paying 4/48 for a 1-2 WAR outfielder on the wrong side of 30 is not the decision a shrewd front office makes. Neither Friedman or Beane would indulge in this sort of sentimental pandering.

This is the sort of idiocy that has gotten the Phillies where they are. Much more of this and our competitive window will be quickly closing. Better enjoy the next two or three years because we'll be absolutely irrelevant in four or five.

[Going Underground]

I am of the opinion that he will be a forever Oriole, and be signed through age 35 by this time next week. At a reasonable deal that is close to a 1/3 reduction from his previous AAV. Opinion.

So you sort of agree with Dan C. I think he signs around Thanksgiving or that Monday before.

How much deferred? 8 or 10 mil?

There is a lot more speculation and confusion concerning right fielder Nick Markakis and a new Orioles contract. It seems to me that several national writers jumped the gun in their characterizations of talks at the general managers' meetings. My sense is the two sides aren’t really closer than they were last week. But they weren’t far apart last week. And they are talking again. Bottom line: I still think it gets done. But I’m not predicting exactly when.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bal-thoughts-on-cruz-jones-and-markakis-20141113-story.html

[Can_of_corn]

For Christ's sake! 4/48? How is this in any way justifiable? If this happens it will seriously undermine my confidence in the front office. If these are the sorts of decisions DD is going to make, then I'll be forced to wonder how much of our recent success is the result of MacPhail's prudence, restraint and trade acumen rather than DD's contribution, which in the context of a 4/48 extension for Markakis, will seem more and more like luck, because paying 4/48 for a 1-2 WAR outfielder on the wrong side of 30 is not the decision a shrewd front office makes. Neither Friedman or Beane would indulge in this sort of sentimental pandering.

This is the sort of idiocy that has gotten the Phillies where they are. Much more of this and our competitive window will be quickly closing. Better enjoy the next two or three years because we'll be absolutely irrelevant in four or five.

What's another two million a year for a fan favorite?

[DrungoHazewood]

Neither Friedman or Beane would indulge in this sort of sentimental pandering.

I suppose we'll see what kind of sentimental pandering Friedman can do now that his available budget went from $3.75 to $500M.

This is the sort of idiocy that has gotten the Phillies where they are. Much more of this and our competitive window will be quickly closing. Better enjoy the next two or three years because we'll be absolutely irrelevant in four or five.

I'm not a fan of a 4/48 deal for Markakis. But there's a significant difference between a 3- or 4-year deal at $10-12M per, and committing over $120M to a declining guy like Ryan Howard. Obviously there will be problems and risks if the plan is just to re-up all of the O's current players until they're 35 or 40. But let's actually get a signature on the Markakis contract before we declare the franchise dead.