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

[mdbdotcom]

I think Mickigjt get 5/50.

Easy for you to say.

[stomperspc]

Comparing a potential 4/$48 deal for Nick with Ryan Howard’s contract with the Phillies is borderline absurd.

If the Orioles give Nick that contract, they are roughly paying him market value if he performs at his 2014 (age 30) level over the next four years. It is unlikely he does so they will likely being overpaying him a bit for at least a portion of the contract. If the Orioles get up to a $120 m payroll this year (which is likely) stay steady at that level over the following 3 seasons, Nick will account for about 10% of total payroll. Between 2012 and 2014, Howard accounted for 11.7%, 12.6%, and 14.1% of Philly’s total payroll. That is significantly higher than the hypothetical Markakis scenario, particularly when looking at Howard’s 2013 & 2014 %’s. In other words, Philly is significantly more hamstrung by Howard’s contract than the O’s would with Nick since Howard accounts for more of Philly’s total payroll than Nick would of the O’s.

Beyond that, there is the fact that Philadelphia signed Howard to the extension when he still had two years left on his contract. They paid above average market prices while locking him up two years before they had to! That’s insane. There is nothing close to comparable to that going on here.

If the Orioles sign Nick to a 4/$48 deal, there is a solid chance they are paying him market value for the next two seasons and overpaying him in 2017 & 2018. That’s it. It would be “normal” over payment. The Howard contract was a head-scratching and mind-boggling move from day #1. There is a world of difference between the two.

I think 4/$48 is a definite over payment for Nick, particularly on the out years. I think most will agree. Don’t need to resort to hyperbole and ridiculous comparisons to make that point.

[25 Nuggets]

I disliked the move then and I still don't like it, but that's not my point. Even if you think some of those moves were good ones, it still shows a willingness to deal assets for short term gains. Flags fly forever and all that. But in terms of the longterm health of the franchise, you can't continually make that exchange.

Depends on the asset. Those guys are likely going to be no more valuable than cheap depth. Which, incidentally, DD has been excellent at stocking in ways other than the amateur draft. Arrieta is a special case of a player who already busted out in Baltimore and needed a change of scenery.

[AlbionHero]

I would do the Miller trade every time.

He is the type of player that can move the dial in the playoffs.

I don't think the Miller trade really impacted much. We won the division by 10+ games and swept the Tigers. Would not having Miller have changed those things?

And we gave up a good prospect for him.

[Can_of_corn]

The point is a 4/48 deal for Markakis could be equally damaging to the O's long term health as the Howard deal. The Phillies are not in their current situation because of the Howard deal, he is just a cog in the great automaton of failure they built.

If Nick continues his decline then the O's will have an unmovable drain of 12 million a year (reported) on their payroll. It will be like the Roberts deal again.

[Can_of_corn]

I don't think the Miller trade really impacted much. We won the division by 10+ games and swept the Tigers. Would not having Miller have changed those things?

And we gave up a good prospect for him.

Considering that the O's beat out the Tigers for Miller's services yes, it would have changed things.

Also, the prospect was having a down year until he got traded. Boston made some tweaks that the O's might not have.

[osfan83]

I disagreed with some of those moves and others I was fine with. You'll notice you haven't seen me on here complaining about them, because, as you said, they were all, considering the context, at least somewhat justifiable. It isn't until the rumored Markakis deal that I've brought all those past deals up. The previous deals I can understand, but all those deals along with a 4/48 deal for Markakis (if it happens) shows, to me, a recklessness with assets that a mid market team can not afford beyond a couple years.

Dan can be as reckless as he want as long as it results in playoff appearances. I'd rather be reckless and in the post season than safe and hoping for .500.

[weams]

I think Mickigjt get 5/50.

Ah, now. What did that really mean? Nick. 5/50? Might get?

[mdbdotcom]

Ah, now. What did that really mean? Nick. 5/50? Might get?

I liked it better when I didn't understand it.

[NCRaven]

I would do the Miller trade every time.

He is the type of player that can move the dial in the playoffs.

I'd do the Norris trade too. We will never miss Delmonico. And, I'm not convinced that Arrieta was ever going to win as an Oriole, i.e., a team that actually expects to win in a tough division/league.

[cacavolante]

Considering that the O's beat out the Tigers for Miller's services yes, it would have changed things.

Also, the prospect was having a down year until he got traded. Boston made some tweaks that the O's might not have.

It probably would've made the Tigers series more difficult but as great as Miller was I'm not sure it would 've changed the ultimate outcome. I'm one of the few who didn't like the trade though.

[NCRaven]

The point is a 4/48 deal for Markakis could be equally damaging to the O's long term health as the Howard deal. The Phillies are not in their current situation because of the Howard deal, he is just a cog in the great automaton of failure they built.

If Nick continues his decline then the O's will have an unmovable drain of 12 million a year (reported) on their payroll. It will be like the Roberts deal again.

You just made the counter point. "The Phillies are not in their current situation because of the Howard deal, he is just a cog in the great automaton of failure they built."

Likewise, over-paying Nick will not cause the demise of the Orioles. It only becomes a problem if they make a bunch of bad deals, as the Phillies did, and at least one of those deals would have to be significantly worse than a slight overpayment for Nick Markakis, which I don't see happening. Unless Duquette makes a habit of such contracts, I really don't see a problem and think this is much ado about nothing.

[cacavolante]

I'd do the Norris trade too. We will never miss Delmonico. And, I'm not convinced that Arrieta was ever going to win as an Oriole, i.e., a team that actually expects to win in a tough division/league.

Well we'll find out about Arrieta this year because I imagine the Cubs are going to expect to at least compete in a tough division.

[Can_of_corn]

You just made the counter point. "The Phillies are not in their current situation because of the Howard deal, he is just a cog in the great automaton of failure they built."

Likewise, over-paying Nick will not cause the demise of the Orioles. It only becomes a problem if they make a bunch of bad deals, as the Phillies did, and at least one of those deals would have to be significantly worse than a slight overpayment for Nick Markakis, which I don't see happening. Unless Duquette makes a habit of such contracts, I really don't see a problem and think this is much ado about nothing.

Well there is the Ubaldo contract...

I don't think that a current lack of bad contracts make knowingly signing one acceptable.

[lovetoaster]

I'm very calm thanks.

Calmer than you are.