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

[weams]

If he thinks that is low balling, I welcome him to find a better deal elsewhere. He's not getting 14m a year.

The Orioles evidently did.

[atomic]

Because only six or seven teams would entertain the type of contract that is desired, and they try to make it seem like there is a bidding war. They make up mystery teams and float rumors. But it is really a game of musical chairs and at this point there is no advantage to signing quickly. Until some of the chairs get filled.

Well that strategy didn't work out well for Cruz and Morales last season. Sign when everyone has money to spend.

[weams]

Well that strategy didn't work out well for Cruz and Morales last season. Sign when everyone has money to spend.

Sign before the chairs are all filled. That's all. Unlike last year.

[theobird]

I am one of the people that really wants Nick back, but I want it to be on a fair contract for a good but not great player. When the Orioles signed him to his last contract they thought he was going to be a great player, and he was overpaid by quite a bit. I don't have an issue with a 4 year deal for Nick, I really value his all around game. But he is not a star player and should not be paid as one. I think 4/36 is a good place for him, but he is used to getting paid a lot more and that is the issue.

[Frobby]

I think 4/36 is a good place for him, but he is used to getting paid a lot more and that is the issue.

If his agent is any good at all, Nick must have known he was headed for a significant pay cut. I think this is simple: Nick wants to stay with the. Orioles, but he wants to get as much as he can from them. The Orioles want to keep Nick, but they want to pay as little as possible. Eventually, they will come to terms.

[birdcrazy]

Too bad salary is not like rollover minutes. Then they could use some of the $17m they overpaid him the last 2 years towards his new contract.

The problem the Orioles have is Markakis not only never turned into the player they projected when he signed the first contract, and in some ways he has regressed. They don't want to get two years in, and the new deal look as terrible as the first one.

[Brooks The Great]

I might be oversimplifying things, but the longer Markakis waits, the less he'll get. This is good for the Orioles.

I really don't think there's any team out there desperate enough, stupid enough, or rich/careless enough to swoop in and offer Markakis more than he's worth. The Orioles know what Markakis is worth (and might be willing to pay a tad extra out of loyalty), and Nick wants to stay in Baltimore. That translates to a reasonable contract from the Orioles' perspective. Certainly well below $14 million per.

[webbrick2010]

< Sigh of relief> The O's have still not signed Nick Markakis

Okay Nick show me the money, get a valid offer from another team and then we talk.

I don't think anyone in baseball will go 4yrs and 40+ million dollars

and how about that home team discount for the team you supposedly want to end your career with, and a team that you already overcharged for your prior 6 year contract.

[clapdiddy]

< Sigh of relief> The O's have still not signed Nick Markakis

Okay Nick show me the money, get a valid offer from another team and then we talk.

I don't think anyone in baseball will go 4yrs and 40+ million dollars

and how about that home team discount for the team you supposedly want to end your career with, and a team that you already overcharged for your prior 6 year contract.

I might agree that Nick was "overpaid", but no one put a gun to management's head to negotiate that contract.

[gmelson26]

I have been following the thread, but not posting as the points I would make have largely been made by the detractors to signing Markakis. However, for the record I just wanted to state my opinion.

I think we've seen Markakis declining (almost alarmingly) given his age, and I suspect this will continue, although not at the rate over the last couple of years. I think Pearce/Lough/ed Aza/Cruz LF/RF would cover Markakis' potential WAR contribution. I also think that his first couple of years would be stomach-able; and we will be regretting the last 2 years assuming a 4 year deal.

I suspect he's coming back, and I hope (because he's not THAT old) that we see a nice uptick in production. Here's hoping...

[Guest]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Happy Birthday, Nick Markakis! Retweet to wish him a great day. <a href="http://t.co/K44uURtQVV">pic.twitter.com/K44uURtQVV</a></p>— Baltimore Orioles (@Orioles) <a href="

">November 17, 2014</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[birrman54]

I have been following the thread, but not posting as the points I would make have largely been made by the detractors to signing Markakis. However, for the record I just wanted to state my opinion.

I think we've seen Markakis declining (almost alarmingly) given his age, and I suspect this will continue, although not at the rate over the last couple of years. I think Pearce/Lough/ed Aza/Cruz LF/RF would cover Markakis' potential WAR contribution. I also think that his first couple of years would be stomach-able; and we will be regretting the last 2 years assuming a 4 year deal.

I suspect he's coming back, and I hope (because he's not THAT old) that we see a nice uptick in production. Here's hoping...

I'm against signing Nick (obviously depending on years/dollars), but it's not at all fair to describe him as "declining (almost alarmingly)".

Going back all the way to 2009, his wRC+ has been very stable, with the exception of the 2013 post-wrist surgery year : 107, 116, 105, 126, 88, 106

His career wRC is 112 so he's basically right around that mark still.

[ScottieBaseball]

I'm against signing Nick (obviously depending on years/dollars), but it's not at all fair to describe him as "declining (almost alarmingly)".

Going back all the way to 2009, his wRC+ has been very stable, with the exception of the 2013 post-wrist surgery year : 107, 116, 105, 126, 88, 106

His career wRC is 112 so he's basically right around that mark still.

I'm in total agreement with this position. I'm just hopeful the Orioles' next offer isn't akin to a player taking a hometown discount. In other words, I don't want to see them offer Nick more than what he's really worth simply because he's a long-time casual fan favorite.

[droper]

I think most, not all but most of us are of two minds about the whole thing.

I want Nick back. I want Nick to be there when this team wins it all. He's a likable guy and he's a homegrown regular that I like cheering for.

I also want better production from RF. I want 20+ HRs and 80+ RBI out of my corner OFs.

I want a real lead off hitter than can work a walk then steal a base or two and advance on a sacrifice fly to score a run when the lineup can't buy a hit.

In my head I know Nick isn't either of those guys but I still believe that this team can be built to win with him on it. The added power from Adam Jones and Hardy (if it returns) helps when CF and SS aren't typical power positions but if he doesn't come back I'll understand. I'll also most likely pull for Nick where ever he goes, unless its to the Bronx.

[gmelson26]

I'm against signing Nick (obviously depending on years/dollars), but it's not at all fair to describe him as "declining (almost alarmingly)".

Going back all the way to 2009, his wRC+ has been very stable, with the exception of the 2013 post-wrist surgery year : 107, 116, 105, 126, 88, 106

His career wRC is 112 so he's basically right around that mark still.

I understand this point of view.. I do. However, I feel as though you're wordsmithing here with me. He's been declining over the last 3 years. If 2013 is a magical "post-wrist surgery year," then I'm concerned going forward. He had more runs, rbi, and less Ks in his down year than he had in 2014. Doubles and HRs were up a tick, but basically the same as 2013; and they're down drastically from his young years (~40 doubles, 20 HRs). So typically, we can project upticks or at least a form of stasis in terms of his production going into his prime years 27-30, and instead we're seeing decline. For me, that's alarming when I think about signing him to a 4 year deal.. 1 or 2 more years.. eh.

Over the last 3 years, Markakis has averaged per year about 26 doubles, 13 HRs, 2 steals, 76 runs scored. These aren't the worst stats in the world. To be fair to him, he gets on base at an above average clip (though I fear this is declining in his prime); he plays everyday barring a bone breaking injury. He will not cost the team with gaffes and he has a very good arm. He's the current Mr. Oriole, and the players want him back.. he's also (understandably) a fan favorite given the effort and promise he's shown. Buck loves him, which is an excellent sign, and will probably have him leading off for the foreseeable future (which is unforunate in my opinion given his lack of speed on the bases). He will probably be a 1.5 to 2 WAR player going forward.

I'm not against resigning him, but I would want no more than a 3 year deal, and I want him to get paid based on the production we reasonably expect to see from him.